Palestinian leader lies to United Nations

Palestinian leader lies to United Nations

By Alan Stein

Published in the Waterbury Republican-American October 2, 2024

An expanded version is available on the Times of Israel blog as The Mendacity of Mahmoud Abbas in His UN Speech.

When a person or an organization points to Israel and proclaims "j'accuse," the accusation is almost invariably false but, almost as invariably, would be true if it was directed at the Palestinian Arabs. This has occurred with increasing frequency since the horrendous, barbaric terror attack perpetrated last Oct. 7, primarily by Hamas but with the assistance of other terror groups in Gaza and thousands of ordinary Gaza "civilians," with weapons, expertise and financing largely provided by Iran and Qatar.

A graphic example is provided each year when Mahmoud Abbas, in the 20th year of his four-year term as head of the Palestinian Authority, addresses the United Nations General Assembly as "His Excellency, Mahmoud Abbas, President of the (non-existent) State of Palestine."

Here's just a small sample of the lies and cultural appropriation which permeated Abbas' speech Sept. 26.

He began by proclaiming "Palestine is our homeland, it is the land of our fathers, our grandfathers, it will remain ours" and closed by proclaiming "Our people will live on the land of their fathers and grandfathers as they have done for more than 6,000 years."

It was not 6,000 years, but merely 1,400 years ago when Arabs first began arriving, as settler colonialists, in the Land of Israel, fully half a millennium after an earlier groups of settler colonialists, the Romans, ethnically cleansed what was then called Judea of most of its indigenous Jewish residents and renamed the area Syria Palaestina. Most of those now calling themselves Palestinians come from families that migrated to the Land of Israel far more recently and only adopted the identity of Palestinian in the 1960s.

Abbas appropriated the historical connection of the Jewish people to their holiest site, the Temple Mount, and falsely accused Israel of changing its status quo when it has been the Palestinians who have repeatedly done so.

He said "the al Aqsa mosque and its surroundings, ladies and gentlemen, is the exclusive property of Muslims." The al Aqsa mosque was deliberately built on the ruins of the Jewish Temple 1,600 years after King Solomon built the First Temple there. It is, by far, the holiest site in the world for the Jewish people. For Sunni Muslims, it is a distant third to Mecca and Medina and has no religious significance for Shiite Muslims.

Related to Abbas' lies about the Temple Mount is his assertion that Israel does not deserve to be a member of the U.N., claiming it has violated a commitment to adhere to UN Resolutions 181 and 194.

UN Resolution 181 was the Partition Plan, which called for giving the Arabs nearly 90% of Palestine. While the Zionists accepted the proposal, the Arabs not only rejected it, but launched a genocidal war aimed at destroying Israel the day after David Ben Gurion declared the reestablishment of Jewish sovereignty in a small portion of the Land of Israel.

Resolution 194 did have a provision calling for the repatriation of "refugees wishing to return to their homes." But that was contingent on their willingness to "live in peace." Not only were the actual refugees never willing to meet that condition, but on Oct. 7 their descendants barbarically demonstrated their continued rejection of that requirement.

Resolution 194 also insisted that "religious buildings and sites in Palestine should be protected and free access to them assured."

Jordan allowed Jews absolutely no access to the Temple Mount during the nineteen years it occupied the eastern portion of Jerusalem.

Israel has also violated the free access provision since it reconquered the Old City after Jordan attacked again in 1967. Subject to unavoidable security precautions, it provides free access to the Temple Mount for Arabs, but severely and increasingly restricts access for Jews. When I first visited Jerusalem in 1980, I was able to enter both the al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock. That is no longer allowed. While Muslims have unfettered, 24/7 access to the entire Temple Mount through ten gates, Jews have access only a few hours a day, a few days a week, through just one gate, are greatly restricted as to where on the Temple Mount they may go and are prohibited from praying.

Meanwhile, whereas in 1967 there was just one mosque on the Temple Mount, since then the Muslim Waqf has, illegally, built four more.

Mahmoud Abbas inverted that truth by referring to Jerusalem as "our eternal capital al-Quds" and saying it "is being subjected to entrenched campaigns to change its nature, to Judaize it, and to agress it and its holy sites and landmarks, to change its historic and legal status."

Disturbingly sobering is the way the mendacious Mahmoud Abbas received a standing ovation when he finished his litany of lies, while the next day many diplomats made a show of walking out of the chamber when the prime minister of Israel came and did something rarely done in the United Nations, speaking truthfully.

Alan Stein, Ph.D., is a former longtime resident of Waterbury. He and his wife Marsha currently split their time between Netanya in Israel and Natick, Mass. He is president emeritus of PRIMER-Connecticut (Promoting Responsibility in Middle East Reporting) and the founder of PRIMER-Massachusetts and PRIMER-Israel.

October 7 provided a brief moment of clarity

An abridged version of the following appeared as an op-ed in the Waterbury Republican-American on February 21, 2024 

How soon we forget

October 7 provided a brief moment of clarity

By Alan Stein

The October 7 Massacre led by Hamas provided a fleeting moment of clarity.

Peace-loving Israelis were disabused of the misconception that it was possible to live next to a de facto terror state ruled by Hamas. They realized providing food, fuel, water and power and transferring massive amounts of goods and providing well-paying jobs for thousands of Gazans would never moderate Hamas.

Israelis realized there is no alternative to rendering Hamas incapable of keeping its leaders' pledge to repeat the October 7 massacre again and again.

Israelis recognized the need for good to prevail over evil.

Most leaders of democratic nations also understood their need for Israel to prevail.

President Biden quickly became the first president ever to travel to Israel during a war, asserted Hamas must be eliminated and pledged to stand with Israel forever.

We have since learned the barbarity of the Gaza terrorists was far worse than initially realized. Unfortunately, memories fade, support has waned and Israel is under increasing pressure to stop short of victory and let Hamas survive.

Early on, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby praised Israel for the lengths it was going to minimize civilian casualties in Gaza, doing more than even America would.

This is borne out by the historically low proportion of civilian casualties. The United Nations expects nine non-combatant deaths for every enemy combatant killed in urban warfare. The ratio in Gaza has been less than a quarter of that norm.

Hamas' network of tunnels is more extensive than the New York City subway system and cost Hamas a billion dollars. The underground labyrinth presents a challenge no other military in history has faced. Military academies will study and learn from the innovative methods Israel developed to deal with it.

Thousands of entrance shafts are deliberately located inside homes, schools, mosques and hospitals in order to make it impossible for Israel to defend against Hamas without Gaza's infrastructure being damaged and civilians getting killed. It's called Hamas' "dead baby strategy." 

Here are two examples.

A woman pushing a baby carriage called out to Israeli soldiers for help. As a soldier came to help, she signaled a terrorist, who emerged from a nearby shaft, shot and killed the soldier, and escaped down the shaft.

A boy asked an Israeli soldier for water. As the soldier approached with the water, the boy detonated the suicide belt he was wearing. The soldier was fortunate. Although seriously injured, he survived. The boy who blew himself up is now counted among those children Hamas claims were killed by Israel.

John Spencer, the Chair of Urban Studies Warfare at the Modern War Institute at West Point and one of the world's leading experts on urban warfare, recently wrote "Israel has taken more measures to avoid needless civilian harm than virtually any other nation that's fought an urban war" and "Israel has taken precautionary measures even the United States did not do during its recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan." (Israel Implemented More Measures to Prevent Civilian Casualties Than Any Other Nation in History, Newsweek, January 31, 2024)

Despite those facts, Hamas' "dead baby strategy" has been effective in subverting support for Israel. Secretary of State Antony Blinken now keeps repeating the mantra "far too many Palestinians have died and Israel must do a better job."

During his generally positive speech in Israel on October 18, Biden announced he had prevailed on Israel to agree to the delivery of humanitarian assistance to Gaza, even though Hamas has traditionally stolen much of the aid delivered to Gaza. Hamas used stolen aid to build its underground network of tunnels. Recognizing this, President Biden said "Let me be clear: If Hamas diverts or steals the assistance, they will have demonstrated once again that they have no concern for the welfare of the Palestinian people and it will end."

Sixty percent of that aid has been stolen by Hamas. Yet rather than ending the aid, as he said he would if Hamas stole it, President Biden keeps pressuring Israel to allow even more.

The world quickly loses interest in most wars.

Not so when Israel is attacked. The world is losing interest in the 134 innocent Israelis still being held. Many of those not already murdered are being brutalized by Hamas, but many obsesses over the plight of the people in Gaza even though 98% say they're more proud of being Palestinian after the October 7 Massacre!

Kfir Bibas was nine months old when he was kidnapped by Hamas, along with his four year old brother Ariel and their parents, Shiri and Yarden. Shiri's parents were murdered. Kfir is now thirteen months old and nobody has any idea of whether he and his brother and parents are dead or alive.

How many people who obsess about the suffering of Gazans ever think about the Bibas family?

That Israel is fighting against evil hasn't changed, even as memories have faded.

For good to prevail over evil, Israel must render render Hamas and the other terror groups in Gaza incapable of resurrecting themselves and repeating their barbaric slaughter.

This remains a necessity for America as well.

Responding to Screeds: A Case Study

This is a long entry, but it provides a case study in responding to biased, misleading, anti-Israel screeds in newspapers.

Included below are screeds by Jamilah Rasheed and Mazin Qumsiyeh, published in The New Haven Register January 8 and January 10, 2008, an op-ed drafted by Ed Berns and submitted to The New Haven Register, and a much condensed version of Berns' op-ed, finally published by The New Haven Register as a letter on January 19.

In addition to being an example of an excellent response to the screeds, the publication of the letter demonstrates the importance of perseverance and contacting those responsible for the editorial page if a letter or op-ed is not immediately accepted.

The four items are in reverse order.

---

Published January 19:

Pity party for Arabs must end

The Register published recently two pro-Palestinian, anti-Israel Forum pieces in the span of three days.

One indicted Israel and the United States "because of disdain for Muslims and Islam" resulting from the mistrial in the terrorism case against The Holy Land Foundation. Indignantly, the author said millions of dollars raised by the foundation provided financial assistance only for orphans and widows.

This is a different world since Sept. 11. The United States identified the foundation as a terrorist organization that masquerades as a charity, with its primary purpose to fund Hamas. Although a federal jury deadlocked, it does not mean the defendants were acquitted. Federal prosecutors have indicated they will likely retry the case. To argue that a failed prosecution equates to "maligning Islam and Muslims" is to utterly fail to appreciate that this nation embraces all religions.

Notably, the founder, president and treasurer of another Islamic charity, Care International Inc., were convicted of duping the government into awarding it tax-exempt status by hiding the group's pro-jihad status. They were found guilty by a federal jury. The mission of that fund also was to help orphans and widows.

The other piece declared President Bush's Middle East trip "form over substance." The piece was less about American intent to broker peace than it was the writer's oft-repeated litany of big, bad, Israel and the injustice-suffering native people. If anything, it epitomized form over substance.

These writers always paint Israelis as the bad guys. I must have missed where they condemned the drive-by shooting recently of two young Israeli hikers by gunmen affiliated with the Palestinian Authority. I must have missed where they denounced the daily Palestinian rocket attacks. And I must have missed where they urged the Palestinians to repudiate the horror of homicide bombings.

It's time to put a stop to this one-sided Palestinian pity party and bring some balance to the table.

Edward J. Berns
North Haven

---

The original op-ed as it was submitted:

Last week was an exceptional week for the New Haven Register in its on-going anti-Israel agenda. How else could it justify publishing not one, but two, pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel pieces under its Forum banner in the span of two days?

First, on January 8th,the Register published the piece by the coordinator of the Connecticut Islamic Speakers Bureau indicting not only Israel but the U.S. as being against Islamic charity because of disdain for Muslims and Islam an argument solely arising from the mistrial declared in the government's terrorism case against The Holy Land Foundation. Indignantly, the author recited that the millions of dollars raised by the HLF provided financial assistance only for orphans and widows who had been systematically terrorized by the Israeli government.

A response to this patently fallacious if not downright ridiculous argument is required. We all know this is a different world since the terrorist attacks of 9/11. As part of its response to those events, the U.S. has identified HLF as an organization that masquerades as a charity with its primary purpose to fund Hamas, identified by the government as a terrorist organization. When shut down by the U.S. , Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill declared it one of a number of Hamas-controlled organizations that finance terror. Although a federal jury declared itself deadlocked it is important to recognize the HLF defendants were not acquitted. In fact, federal prosecutors have indicated they will likely retry the case. For the writer to posit that a failed prosecution equates to maligning Islam and Muslims is to utterly fail to appreciate that this nation embraces all religions and irresponsible repudiation of the fundamental tenet of American justice that all are equal before the law.

To further undermine the writer's thesis, if any is necessary, just last week the leaders of another Islamic charity, Care International Inc., were convicted of duping the government into awarding it tax-exempt status by hiding the group's pro-jihad status. After a two-month trial the organization's founder, president, and treasurer were found guilty by a federal jury on virtually all counts. Is anyone surprised that the stated mission of that fund, too, was to help orphans and widows?

Like the result in the HLF case or not, it is an example of the inherent fairness of American jurisprudence. Jurisprudence, it is fair to add, that is singularly distinctive from the Muslim system of justice, sharia, examples of which we have seen demonstrated viciously in recent weeks. A volunteer teacher from the UK in Sudan was imprisoned for allowing the children of her class to name a teddy bear Mohammad. A 19 year-old Saudi woman who was a victim of a gang rape was sentenced to six months in jail and 200 lashes because she was with an unrelated male when she was attacked. And, in Iran this week, the amputation of the right hand and left foot of five convicted criminals. These writers should give thanks every day that they live in America ; the same America they rail against. Would the sharia system permit, if not actually encourage, anti-government freedom of speech? We all know the answer.

As if the first piece wasn't sufficiently irresponsible, on January 10th the Register published another of its regular cadre of Israel bashers in the Forum section. Professing to declare President Bush's Middle East trip as form over substance, the thrust of the piece is less about American intent to broker peace in the region than it is the writer's same old, tired, litany of big, bad, oppressive Israel and the injustice-suffering native people that the Register has published so many times before. If anything, it was this editorial that epitomized form over substance.

As always, these writers paint the Israelis solely as the bad guys. I must have missed the part where the writers denounce the daily rocket attacks against Israeli civilians. I must have missed the part where they urge the Palestinians to repudiate the horror of homicide bombings. I must have missed the part where they condemn the drive-by shooting recently of two young Israeli hikers by Palestinians (who, I might add, turned themselves in to the Palestinian Authority when they heard the Israelis were about to apprehend them). And, I must have missed, too, the writers advocating release of Israeli soldiers kidnapped and held for ransom in the name of the Palestinian cause.

To the writers who despise Israel so much I have some suggestions. I would remind them that they have many tangible ways to demonstrate their disdain 'Ä' and I encourage their strong consideration. For starters, they can haul out their old Underwoods to type their propaganda. Why? Because they'll need to unplug their computers and toss them out the window in protest of the fact that most of the Windows operating systems were developed by Microsoft-Israel. If that isn't sufficient reason, I'm sure they wouldn't be able to bear to use Pentium NMX Chip technology, the Pentium 4 microprocessor, and the Centrum processor all of which were entirely designed, developed, and produced in Israel . Imagine their frustration being trapped in a technological stone age knowing that in our contemporary, computer-dependent world they'll have the impossible task of avoiding Israeli technology. One last point, to add insult to injury, before they disconnect for good and give their microprocessors the old heave-ho is to know that the AOL Instant Messenger they use to chat with their friends was developed by young Israelis.

Similarly, the writers will want to start saving their quarters for when they travel. Why? Because they'll have no option but to use pay phones for their communication needs when on the road as cell phone technology was developed in Israel by Motorola. The company has its biggest development center in Israel . In fact, most of the latest technology in mobile phones was developed by Israeli scientists.

Finally, these writers should hope they don't fall ill, but if they do they shouldn't mind a longer recovery 'Ä' if at all. Why? Because Teva, an Israeli pharmaceutical company, is the largest generic drug maker in the world and likely the source of what would be their prescription medication. Speaking of health, I'm not sure they'll want to remember that two Israelis received the 2004 Nobel Prize in Chemistry for research and discovery of one of the human cells most important cyclical processes that will lead the way to DNA repair, control of newly produced proteins, and immune defense systems.

Bottom line: Its time to put a stop to this tedious, unilateral pro-Palestinian pity party and bring some balance to the table.

Edward Berns
North Haven, CT

---

Qumsiyeh screed, published January 10:

FORUM

Bush trip a triumph of form over substance

Mazin B. Qumsiyeh

Mazin Qumsiyeh of Orange is a Christian Palestinian-American who served on the faculty of both Duke and Yale universities. He is author of "Sharing the Land of Canaan: Human Rights and the Israeli/Palestinian Struggle." Readers may write him in care of the Register, 40 Sargent Drive, New Haven 06511. E-mail: qumsi001@hotmail.com.

PRESIDENT Bush's visit to the Middle East this week shows once and for all that status quo lives on under the attempt to validate the old saying that an ounce of image is worth a pound of performance. In this case, the image came seven years too late.

In public appearances, the Bush administration claims it supports the road map for peace. In 2,218 words, that map lacks any mention of human rights and international law.

But even with this shortcoming, it calls for a total freeze on settlement activities, including so-called "natural growth." Israel simply refuses to abide by this. Bush sent a letter to assure Israel that some settlements will be exempt, since they would stay with Israel under any final deal. In so doing, Bush undermined his own "road map." It is not surprising that U.S. policy evolved from describing settlements as illegal to "obstacles" to "unhelpful" and finally to Jewish neighborhoods that will remain part of the Jewish state.

The U.S. government's claimed interest in advancing democracy is recognized around the world as the biggest breeding ground for promoting dictators, violence and terrorism, whether that practiced by individuals or the more deadly state terrorism. For example, Hamas was elected in the occupied Palestinian areas in a vote this administration pushed for. Rather than pressuring Israel to comply with international law - an action that would have truly built up moderate forces in Palestine - Bush chose to pressure the Palestinian Authority to take Hamas on militarily and thus increase the already high antagonism to the United States and its client state of Israel.

Continuing in this policy, when Bush visits Ramallah to meet with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the city will be under virtual martial law, according to instructions given to Palestinian police. Bush's security detail demanded no visible demonstrations. Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, daughter of the terrorist who oversaw the bombing of the King David Hotel, will jovially agree with Bush on fighting "Islamic terrorism." Bush will look out from that same hotel to see a wall that the International Court of Justice ruled illegal.

Many of the U.S. officials accompanying Bush were handpicked from lobbyists and pundits who support Israel, so he will not hear the history of that hotel.

Considering the above, the photo opportunities in Jerusalem will not accomplish any more than they did in Annapolis, not even the hope of a changed policy after Bush leaves office. Thus, the decline in the U.S. ability to influence events around the world is becoming more visible. There is an obvious and more honest route to peace, security and economic prosperity for all: international law and human rights.

Israel is the only country that gives members of a particular religion, including converts, automatic rights (citizenship, land, homes, subsidies), while denying citizenship to native Christians and Muslims who were ethnically cleansed.

World leaders who are freed from the pressures of the Israel lobby have recognized this system for what it is: apartheid. Israelis use the word hafrada (segregation) to describe their program. Archbishop Desmond Tutu wrote: "In our struggle for justice and peace in South Africa, we had to learn to speak and listen to hard truths. ... My visits to the Holy Land remind me so much of South Africa: apartheid is back, complete with the Separation Wall and Bantustans. History, it seems, repeats itself." A growing international movement of boycotts, divestment and sanctions coupled with truth-telling is building. It will succeed as did the cutting of U.S. support for apartheid South Africa.

Israel will then evolve into a democracy with equality for all - Jews, Christians, Muslims and others - that implements international law, including allowing the refugees to return to their homes and lands. This is the only way to allow a functioning Hebrew and Israeli culture to remain while remedying the injustice committed against the native people.

---

Screed written by Jamilah Rasheed, published January 8:

FORUM

Shutdown of Muslim charity hurts U.S. cause

By Jamilah Rasheed

Jamilah Rasheed of New Haven is coordinator of the Connecticut Islamic Speakers Bureau. Readers may write her at the New Haven Register. Her email address is in4truth@comcast.net.

ONE of the fundamentals of Islam is charity. It can be in the form of money, food, clothing or physical assistance.

Prophet Muhammad said even a smile is charity. An individual can contribute to any one person or organization that is meant to alleviate the hardship of those who unable to provide for themselves. Charity is characteristic of all faith-based organizations.

When the Bush administration decided to target Islamic charities, its aim was to shut them down, based on false claims of funding terrorism, because of disdain for Muslims and Islam.

The Holy Land Foundation was one such charity. It was founded in 1989 as the Occupied Land Fund. It had become the largest Islamic charity in the United States. Its main objective was "to find and implement practical solutions for human suffering through humanitarian programs that impact the lives of the disadvantaged, disinherited and displaced peoples suffering from man-made and natural disasters."

Its main recipients were hospitals, schools and food foundations in occupied Palestine. It attempted to offset the inhumane conditions that Palestinians had existed under since their occupation and brutal treatment by the Israeli government.

In 2001, it raised $57 million for the oppressed in the West Bank and Gaza. It was shut down by the Bush administration in December 2001 based on false claims that it was taking donations that were funneled into the hands of terrorists. In truth, the organization was providing financial assistance for orphans and widows who had been systematically terrorized by the Israeli government.

After Sept. 11, the assets of Holy Land Foundation were frozen. After an indictment was handed down in 2004 on 42 counts, the foundation went bankrupt in its effort to defend itself.

The trial on the charges began last July 23 in Dallas. The United States government became an agent for the Israeli government during this trial by bringing in a chief witness who was an Israeli Zionist Shin Bet counterterrorism official, testifying under the pseudonym "Avi." This is the same tactic that was used in the Sami Al-Arian case, in which foreign nationals are brought in as witnesses with emotional testimony for the sole purpose of swaying the jury with fear.

A mistrial was declared Oct. 22. The jury acquitted on some accounts and was deadlocked on the charges of tax violations and providing material support for terrorists. One Texas lawyer who observed the case, Matthew Orwig, said, "this is a message, a two by four in the middle of the forehead" for the government. Millions of tax money was spent to no avail.

It is the third case the government has lost against a Muslim or an Islamic organization.

Sami Al-Arian stills languishes in prison after being acquitted in 2006 of false claims that he helped finance terrorism in Palestine. He even agreed to leave the United States as part of his plea bargain. His work in the United States was to educate the American public about Islam and he spoke directly with then-candidate-for-president George W. Bush in 2000 about the government's use of secret evidence in deportation proceedings against terrorism susupects.

There has been a failed attempt on the part of this administration to justify its willingness to bankrupt this country by saying it is protecting America with its invasion and occupation of countries populated by Muslims. Instead of restricting the millions that are flowing for this unjust war, we succumb to attacking Islamic charities.

By maligning Islam and Muslims and viewing them as suspect in all that is wrong, we only strengthen the terrorism carried out by the state of Israel on the Palestinians, which in turn continues to impoverish those who are in need.

UN Human Rights Council Fights to Lower Its Credibility

Apparently believing its credibility isn't already about as low as it could possibly be, the discredited United Nations Human Rights Council is holding another kangaroo court session next week. The following Associated Press article, with bracketed comments added, was published by the Jerusalem Post.

UNHRC calls emergency talks on Israel

The UN Human Rights Council will hold an emergency meeting next week to examine whether Israel is committing abuses in the Palestinian territories, officials said Friday.

[The Human Rights Council apparently believes it is an abuse for Israel to discourage the wanton murder of its people by Arab terrorists.]

The special session of the 47-member council was called after a petition was submitted by Syria and Pakistan, on behalf of Arab and Islamic countries, according to a UN memo obtained by The Associated Press.

The move, which was supported by 20 other countries, came as Israel blocked vital supplies from entering the Gaza Strip and launched air strikes against Hamas positions and other institutions, killing one operative and two civilians.

[For twenty years, Egypt and Jordan blocked "vital supplies" from entering Israel not only from the Gaza Strip, but also from the West Bank, from Jordan and from Egypt. Lebanon and Syria continue to block "vital supplies" from entering Israel. There is no record of the Human Rights Council holding any emergency meetings to examine whether those countries committed, and are continuing to commit, abuses in the Israeli territories.]

Palestinian Kassam rockets continued to be fired into southern Israel, including one that damaged a day care center Friday.

[For the Human Rights Council, it is not an abuse to try to murder Israeli pre-schoolers.]

The council session, scheduled for Wednesday, will "consider and take action on human rights violations emanating from Israeli military incursions in the occupied Palestinian territory, including the recent ones in occupied Gaza and the West Bank town of Nablus," the memo said.

[The Human Rights Council is apparently unaware that Israel pulled completely out of Gaza more than two years ago. It is also apparently unaware that Nablus is under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority.]

Israel's ambassador to the UN in Geneva expressed disappointment.

"I don't think that this is very helpful now for the peace process in the Middle East," Itzhak Levanon said.

The council, which lacks enforcement powers, was created in March 2006 to replace the widely discredited and highly politicized Human Rights Commission. The new body has suffered from similar criticism, including that it spends an excessive amount of time focusing on Israel, which it has denounced in a series of resolutions.

The US Senate voted in September to cut off funding to the council, accusing it of bias.

[The Human Rights Council is fast surpassing the dismal record of the Human Rights Commission and has become one of the world's leading proponents of the abuse of human rights.]

A Study in Contrasts: The Deaths of Rachel Corrie and Andres Muscara Chavez

On March 16, 2003, a woman who had gone to the Gaza Strip to support Hamas in its terror war against Israel was killed when she apparently slipped, fell behind a pile of rocks and was accidentally crushed as a bulldozer was clearing debris.

On January 14, 2008, a young man who had gone to Israel to volunteer on a kibbutz was murdered by a sniper as he worked in a potato field.

The woman was Rachel Corrie, one of numerous Americans and other foreigners who have died in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Her death differed from almost all the others in two significant ways: her death was an accident and, although indirectly, her death came from an Israeli action.

The man was Andres Muscara Chavez. His death, unlike Corrie's, was in the category of most of the others: it was deliberate and it came at the hands of Palestinian Arab terrorists.

Corrie's accidental death instigated an avalanche of anti-Israel propaganda. Her diary and other writings have been published and a propaganda play produced and run in London, New York and other venues.

In contrast, it's unlikely the death of Andres Muscara Chavev will attract much more attention than the deaths of Rachel Charhi, Rachel Gavish, Rachel Levi, Rachel Levy, Rachel Shabo and Rachel Thaler.

Most people know the name Rachel Corrie, but hardly anyone knows about any of these other Rachels.

Rachel Charhi was blown up by a Palestinian Arab terrorist while sitting an a cafe. Her three young children are now orphans.

Rachel Gavish was killed with her husband, son and father while celebrating Passover.

Rachel Kol was 53 when she and her husband were murdered by Palestinian Arab terrorists.

Rachel Levi was just 19 when she was shot while waiting for a bus.

Rachel Levy was just 17 when she was blown up by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in a grocery store.

Rachel Shabo was murdered along with her three young sons by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in her own home.

Some may argue the murders of those Rachels didn't attract as much attention because they were Israeli.

Rachel Thaler was a British citizen, born in London, who was just 16 years old when she was blown up by a Palestinian Arab terrorist February 16, 2002 at a pizzeria.

Some may argue Rachel Thaler's murder didn't attract as much attention here because she wasn't American.

There have also been dozens of American citizens, including some from Connecticut, murdered by Palestinian Arab terrorists while in Israel; none of them have attracted a fraction of the attention here as has the accidental death of Rachel Corrie.

Unlike Rachel Corrie, Andres Muscara Chavez did not burn American flags at Hamas rallies.

Unlike Rachel Corrie, Andres Muscara Chavez did not promote the transfer of weapons and explosives to terrorist groups.

Unlike Rachel Corrie, Andres Muscara Chavez did not lie to immigration officials to get into Israel under false pretenses.

Unlike Rachel Corrie, Andres Muscara Chavez was helping to bring life into the world when he was deliberately murdered in cold blood by a Palestinian Arab sniper.

Rachel Corrie's life was glorified by those seeking to make propaganda hay of her accidental death.

I did not know Andres Muscara Chavez and have no idea of whether, in his too short life, he did anything worth glorifying.

One can only hope we learn from his death and recognize the difference between those like the Israelis who choose life and those who glorify death.

One can only hope some people understand why there has been so much hullabaloo about he accidental death of someone who was helping the very terrorists who took credit for the murder of Andres Muscara Chavez and so much silence about the murders of Andres Muscara Chavez, all those other Rachels, countless Israelis and dozens of Americans.

And one can only hope the parents of Andres Muscara Chavez learn to live with the grief from which no parent should ever suffer.

Israel-PLO agreements contain no prohibition whatsoever on the building or expansion of settlements

This comes from the Israeli Israel Ministry of Foreign Affair. It's a reminder there's nothing illegal about Jews living in the disputed territories and the issue of "illegal settlements" is really an internal, Israeli affair, since they are only illegal in the sense of not being formally authorized by the government.

Whether or not Jews, like Arabs, are building homes in the disputed territories is not a legitimate issue for discussion. Protests by the Palestinian Authority and appeasement of those protests by the American government only sidetract everyone from the core issues, primarily the continued unwillingness of the Palestinian Arabs to accept the reality of Israel.

Israeli settlements in the West Bank are legal both under international law and the agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. Claims to the contrary are mere attempts to distort the law for political purposes. Yet whatever the status of the settlements, their existence should never be used to justify terrorism.

The Palestinians often claim that settlement activity is illegal and call on Israel to dismantle every settlement. In effect, they are demanding that every Jew leave the West Bank, a form of ethnic cleansing. By contrast, within Israel, Arabs and Jews live side-by-side; indeed, Israeli Arabs, who account for approximately 20% of Israel's population, are citizens of Israel with equal rights.

The Palestinian call to remove all Jewish presence from the disputed territories is not only discriminatory and morally reprehensible; it has no basis either in law or in the agreements between Israel and the Palestinians.

The various agreements reached between Israel and the Palestinians since 1993 contain no prohibitions on the building or expansion of settlements. On the contrary, they specifically provide that the issue of settlements is reserved for permanent status negotiations, which are to take place in the concluding stage of the peace talks. The parties expressly agreed that the Palestinian Authority has no jurisdiction or control over settlements or Israelis, pending the conclusion of a permanent status agreement.

It has been charged that the provision contained in the Israel-Palestinian Interim Agreement prohibiting unilateral steps that alter the status of the West Bank implies a ban on settlement activity. This position is disingenuous. The prohibition on unilateral measures was designed to ensure that neither side take steps that would change the legal status of this territory (such as by annexation or a unilateral declaration of statehood), pending the outcome of permanent status talks. The building of homes has no effect on the final permanent status of the area as a whole. Were this prohibition to be applied to building, it would lead to the unreasonable interpretation that neither side is permitted to build houses to accommodate the needs of their respective communities.

As the Israeli claim to these territories is legally valid, it is just as legitimate for Israelis to build their communities as it is for the Palestinians to build theirs. Yet in the spirit of compromise, successive Israeli governments have indicated their willingness to negotiate the issue and have adopted a voluntary freeze on the building of new settlements as a confidence-building measure.

What They Really Want

As If We Didn't Know

This is something posted on the "End Israel Apartheid" web site. It again demonstrates the anti-Israel forces aren't interested in peace but are motivated by a desire to eliminate Israel. The bracketed annotations are not from their web site but have been added for this blog entry.

Israel Apartheid Week 2008

February 3 – 10
60 Years of Nakba: End Israeli Apartheid

[For the Israel-haters, the real source of their passion is the re-establishment of Israel.]

Dear Friends:

We invite you to take part in the global week of activities, Israeli Apartheid Week, to be held on campuses across the world from 3 - 10 February 2008. Israeli Apartheid Week will be taking place for the fourth consecutive year. It will be a week-long series of events held concurrently in Canada, the U.S, U.K, South Africa, and Palestine.

The past few years have seen an explosion of literature and analysis that has placed Israel alongside other settler-colonial states like South Africa, arguing that Israel is in fact an apartheid state, not just a belligerent occupying power.

[Israel, of course, is neither, having been re-established by descendants of people who were there far before the Palestinian Arabs came there. Israel is the only state in the region that gives all its citizens equal rights. The equality it affords its citizens stands in sharp contrast to the Palestinian Authority, for which selling land to Jews is a capital crime.

The Palestinian Authority aspires to something even worse than an apartheid state; it aspires to being a state totally judenrein.

Making false accusations against Israel, indeed, falsely accusing Israel of sins of which the Palestinian Arabs themselves are guilty, is standard operating procedure for the Israel-haters.]

Prominent Palestinians, Israeli anti-Zionists, and South Africans have been at the forefront of these efforts. At the same time, an international divestment campaign has gained momentum in response to a statement issued in July 2005 by over 170 Palestinian grassroots and civil society organizations calling for boycotts, divestments and sanctions against Israel. Important gains have recently been made in this global campaign.

The aim of Israeli Apartheid Week is to push forward the analysis of Israel as an apartheid state and to bolster support for the boycott, divestment, and sanctions campaign in accordance with the demands outlined in the July 2005 Statement: full equality for Arab citizens of Israel, an end to the occupation and colonization of the West Bank and Gaza, and the implementation of the right of return and compensation for Palestinian refugees pursuant to UN resolution 194.

[Israel's Arab citizens already have full legal rights.

There is no "colonization" of the disputed territories and the end to any so-called "occupation" awaits the willingness of the Palestinian Arabs to agree to a division of the disputed territories. Israel cannot determine their disposition by itself.

There is no "right of return" and the compensation for refugees, Jewish and Arab, must be agreed upon as part of a peace agreement, something Israel's Arab enemies continue to refuse.]

Israeli Apartheid Week began with these objectives in Toronto almost 4 years ago. It was a big success that received the attention of media worldwide. Last year, several other university campuses across Canada and the UK joined together and organized a coordinated Israeli Apartheid Week. This year, still more campuses have pledged to participate.

The analysis of apartheid put forward during Israeli Apartheid Week in previous years has played an important role in raising awareness and disseminating information about Zionism, the Palestinian liberation struggle, and its similarities and differences with the indigenous sovereignty struggle in North America and the South African anti-Apartheid movement.

Our events are united by an analysis of Israel as an apartheid state, commitment to the Palestinian right of return, opposition to all forms of racism, and solidarity with oppressed people across the globe. In North America (Turtle Island), we have attempted to highlight the central importance of solidarity with indigenous people of the continent. The simultaneous events across the globe make a powerful statement against Israeli apartheid.

[Their entire project is an exercise in racism.]

The 2008 Israeli Apartheid Week takes place on the 60th Anniversary of Al Nakba; 60 years of ethnic cleansing and exile for Palestinians.

[They don't refer to forty years, but sixty years; it's not anything Israel has done which they oppose, but the fact that Israel exists.]

For the first time IAW will also be occurring at universities in the West Bank. Activities vary from campus to campus, consisting of guest lectures, demonstrations, cultural events and film nights.

We would like to invite your organization to participate in IAW by organizing an event or series of activities for IAW 2008. It can be as little as one lecture or as much as a full week's activities. The events will be listed on the IAW website, endisraeliapartheid.net Please contact us at.. if you would like to be part of these activities, tell us a little bit about your organization and what type of event(s) you might organize between 3 February - 10 February.

Join us in making 2008 a year of resistance to Israeli apartheid.
The refugees will return!

[There are today perhaps a few thousand refugees left from those who left Israel when it was invaded by the surrounding Arab states. The youngest of them are sixty years old and have no recollection of ever living in Israel.

I suspect Israel would readily agree to the immigration any of the remaining refugees, provided they were willing to become loyal citizens of Israel.

The writer, however, is not referring only to refugees, but is referring to descendants of refugees and no state is going to the immigration of millions of hostile strangers.]

Contact: saia@riseup.net.

[I wouldn't bother. This was posted just as a reminder of with whom and what Israel and its supporters have to deal.]

Let's Talk About What's Really Unhelpful

Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon have ganged up on Israel for having the audacity to build housing for its citizens in its capital, with both falsely calling it "unhelpful."

According to a Reuters article Rice chides Israel on new home-building plan:

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice warned Israel on Friday its plan to build 300 housing units in east Jerusalem threatened US-backed efforts to reach peace with Palestinians.

"We are in a time when the goal is to build maximum confidence with the parties and this doesn't help to build confidence," she said in rare US criticism of Israel.

"There should not be anything which might prejudge final-status negotiations," Rice said after talks with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni on the sidelines of a NATO meeting.

In an Agence France-Presse story UN chief: Israel's settlement expansion plan 'not helpful', the UN Secretary General further piled it on the Middle East's only democracy.

UN chief Ban Ki-moon on Thursday said Israel's decision to expand a Jewish settlement in east Jerusalem was "not helpful" and he would discuss the matter with his partners in the diplomatic Quartet for Middle East peace.

"The UN position on the illegality of settlements is well known," he told reporters.

"This new tender for 300 new homes in east Jerusalem so soon after this Annapolis Middle East peace conference, I think, is not helpful," he added, referring to a recent US-hosted peace summit.

"I will be discussing this matter with my Quartet partners."

But the Palestine Liberation Organization's powerful executive committee issued a statement in which it blasted the expansion project as a "serious violation" and called on the United States and the UN Security Council to put pressure on Israel.

I'd like to mention a few things that really are unhelpful.

• Pandering to Arab extremism is unhelpful.
  
  Criticizing Israel for building homes in its capital is pandering to Arab extremism and is most unhelpful.
  
  There is clearly zero probability that Har Homa and other Jewish neighborhoods would be given to the Palestinian Arabs. Pretending otherwise only feeds absurdly unrealistic hopes to the contrary and lowers the probability of the Arabs accepting the existence of Israel, which is the major requirement needed for peace.
• The showering of Israeli towns, particularly Sderot, with thousands of Kassam missiles is unhelpful.
  
  If the interlocutors which to be truly helpful, they might work on civilizing Hamas, although they might have a slightly easier job starting with Fatah.
• Pressuring one side to freeze construction in the disputed territories while turning a blind eye to the other side carrying on massive construction is unhelpful.
  
  Connected to this is:
• Ignoring the seminal United Nations Resolutions and agreements between the parties.
  
  The Armistice Agreements signed in 1949 specifically stated the Green Line was not to prejudice negotiations over permanent borders. United Nations Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338 call for negotiations to determine secure borders.
  
  Acting as if the Green Line should be the basis of any negotiations subverts both the letter and intent of both. If nothing else, it lessens confidence that any future agreements will be honored. (Of course, since the Palestinian Arabs have yet to honor any of their agreements, that confidence can't get much lower anyway.)
• Pretending Mahmoud Abbas, aka Abu Mazen, is a moderate interested in peace is not helpful.
  
  He may wear a suit, but the Holocaust denier who serves as leader of the Palestinian Authority has shown no inclination to compromise, a prerequisite for peace. Both the PLO and Fatah, Abu Mazen's PLO faction, continue to call for the destruction of Israel is their charters.

The list could go on and on.

The major point is everyone is pressuring the wrong side.

The Palestinian Arabs don't need their confidence raised; they need it to be lowered. They already know that they'll get their own independent state in most of the disputed territory whenever they choose to join the civilized world; the need is to get them to finally believe continuing their quest to destroy Israel will be counterproductive.

On the other hand, Israel has no basis for confidence in the Palestinian Arabs adhering to any agreement they make. It is also the Palestinian Arabs who continue with unhelpful actions, of which terrorism is just the beginning. The various interlocutors ought to start pressuring the Palestinian Arabs to make some confidence building gestures.

Open Letter From a Hamas "Senior Political Advisor" to Condoleezza Rice

The following is excerpted from a letter which may be found in full in Haaretz and which originally appeared in The Palestine Chronicle.

The writer is described as "a Senior Political Advisor at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Gaza" and "the top advisor to deposed Palestinian Prime Minister Ismail Hanyieh."

Appropriately sarcastic comments are interspersed, in brackets, with the excerpts.

Open letter to the Secretary of State

Dr. Ahmad Yousuf - Senior Political Advisor
Ministry of Foreign Affairs - Gaza

The Honourable Secretary of State
Ms. Condoleezza Rice
U.S. Department of State
2201 C Street NW
Washington, DC 20520

Dear Secretary Rice,

I am writing to you in light of the conference in Annapolis to fulfill our obligations to the Palestinian voters who have overwhelmingly legitimized our governance. Your administration cannot want peace more than the Palestinian people want and need peace.

[The fact that the Palestinian Arabs in the disputed territories overwhelmingly elected the terrorist Hamas group into office demonstrates they have little interest in peace.]


However, peace initiatives and conferences are ineffectual if the basic ingredients for success are not present.

[True enough. Until the Palestinian Arabs decide they want peace, the most basic ingredient will be missing and any peace initiatives and conferences will be ineffectual, if not downright counterproductive.]

Meaningful steps toward a resolution cannot take place while the legitimacy of the elected government in Palestine continues to be ignored by your administration.

[Nor can they be made when the elected government of the Palestinian Arabs continues to strive for the destruction of Israel.]

Not only is the policy to isolate Hamas unethical it is ineffectual as well.

[Yousuf is half-right: the policy to isolate Hamas has been half-hearted, so though it is certainly ethical it has been relatively ineffectual.]

Your administration ignores the realities on the ground. The Change and Reform Party, the name of the new political party we formed for the Palestinian elections, won an overwhelming majority in the occupied territories. To pretend otherwise is not only futile but detrimental to US interests in the region for many years to come and likely to add to the anti-American sentiment throughout the Middle East and the Muslim world. You cannot preach about exporting democracy in Iraq and Afghanistan and ignore the democratic process in Palestine.

[Part of the democratic process is to take responsibility for the results. If voters elect a collection of terrorists, they cannot expect to be treated the same way they would be if they elect reasonable leaders.]

Many people make the mistake of presuming that we have some ideological aversion to making peace.

[From the Hamas Charter: "[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement." "There is no solution to the Palestinian problem except by Jihad."]

Quite the opposite; we have consistently offered dialogue with the U.S. and the E.U. to try and resolve the very issues that you are trying to deal with in Annapolis.

[They might try offering dialog rather than Kassams to the people of Israel.]

Our conflict with the Israelis is a grievance-based conflict.

[True enough; their basic grievance is that Israel exists.]

We want to end the occupation of our land and the systematic human rights abuses that our people suffer from daily.

[From 1967 until the outbreak of the first "intifada," the Palestinian Arabs in teh disputed territories had more freedom and more rights than Arabs anywhere else in the Middle East except for those living as citizens of Israel. They continued to have more rights that their brethren elsewhere in the Middle East until most of the areas they lived in were turned over to the Palestinian Authority.]

We do not have any ideological problems with living side by side with Christians and Jews.

[From the Hamas Charter: "Under the shadow of Islam it is possible for the members of the three religions: Islam, Christianity and Judaism to coexist in safety and security. Safety and security can only prevail under the shadow of Islam, and recent and ancient history is the best witness to that effect. The members of other religions must desist from struggling against Islam over sovereignty in this region."]

When we have not been occupied we have successfully done this for thousands of years. However, they can not live in peace and security in a land that was usurped. Indeed if you asked a Jewish person where they would have been safest to live over the last two millennia, with Arabs or Europeans, the answer would be obvious. Nor do we have any ideological arguments with the West. We are not anti-American, anti-European or anti-anyone. The root of the problem which neither Israel nor the US is willing to acknowledge, let alone address, is the dispossession of the Palestinian people upon the creation in their homeland of Israel in 1948.

[For Hamas, the disputed territories are not the issue; the issue is the mere existence of Israel. Hamas is willing to live in peace without Israel, but not with Israel.]

It would come as no surprise to us if this letter were to be met with dismissal, in keeping with this administration?s policy of not dealing with "terrorists," despite the fact that we entered the democratic process and held a unilateral ceasefire of our own for over two years.

[The Hamas concept of a cease fire is highly an interesting one: Israel is to cease defending its civilians while Hamas keeps firing at them.]

Meanwhile the entire Palestinian people are being punished for having the temerity to hold a free and fair election and choosing us as their government.

[See above. The Palestinian Arabs have the right to choose terrorists as their leaders, but when they do not have the right to expect to be free of the consequences.]

It is hard to get across the appalling level of privation that the Palestinian people and in particular the 1.3 million Palestinians who live in Gaza currently suffer from.

[The Palestinian Arabs have indeed suffered the consequences of their war against Israel. It's unfortunate they continue to choose war over peace, desperation over prosperity. It's difficult for normal human beings to understand why, nearly sixty years after a few hundred thousand Arabs left their homes as part of the drive to destroy Israel, millions are still forced to live in squalid refugee camps, not only by their Arab brethren but by their own elected government.]

Our isolation is complete, confining us in a ghetto (worse than the Jewish ghettos of Warsaw) where our sewage, power and water systems have been destroyed, all normal supplies constrained and even humanitarian aid withheld.

[Humanitarian aid to the Palestinian Arabs has actually increased since they elected Hamas.]

Many people have not been paid for nearly two years, over 75% are unemployed and now the Israelis are threatening to cut off fuel and power supplies and to invade us once again.

[Hamas has launched thousands of Kassam missiles at Israeli towns, yet expects Israel to continue to supply the energy needed to manufacture them!]

You have made it a precondition to any engagement with us that we accept certain conditions. Yet you don't apply the same preconditions to the Israelis. You don't require of them recognition of Palestinian rights or a renunciation of the terrible violence that they daily invoke on us. Nor do you require that they comply with previous agreements or the settlement building would long since have stopped.

[To a degree, he is correct. There is no comparison between demands that Hamas stop murdering people and demands that Israel stop providing needed housing for its people. The fact that the American government even considers pressuring Israel to restrict where its citizens are allowed to live is testament to how successful Arab terrorism and rejectionism has been.

Still, there is little reason not to talk to Hamas, although there will be virtually nothing to talk about unless Hamas completely changes its character. Talking can be done while still physically isolating Hamas, something that should be done with more vigor than has been heretofore.

One slight inconvenience is that the talking must be via electronic means, since everyone in Hamas is a wanted terrorist who we would have to imprison if they left Gaza.]

Your predecessor General Collin Powell stated that the U.S. has to find a way to engage with Hamas because it won the Palestinian elections and it continues to enjoy support among a large portion of the Palestinian people. He did not make that statement because he is less of an American or less committed to the service of America. He simply practiced at home what you are preaching about democracy abroad.

[See above. Engage (in talks) and isolate.]

If you were even-handed in this conflict, if you engaged with us openly then the chances of peace would dramatically increase.

[Quite true. It's time we stopped pandering to Arab terrorism. We should demand of the Arabs as much as we demand of the Israelis. Here's one place to start: if we insist Israel should not build in the disputed territories, we should tell the same thing to the Arabs. Their continuing expansion of settlements in the disputed territories prejudices any future negotiations, in violation of the principles of Oslo.]

In the meantime, the people will hold steadfast to their rights and national constants. The internationally sanctioned resistance will not be quashed until the occupier packs its bags and leaves.

[See the Hamas Charter again. He is not speaking about leaving Gaza - Israel completely left Gaza in 2005. He is not speaking about leaving Judea and Samaria - Israel long ago gave to the Palestinian Authority the areas where most Palestinian Arabs reside. He is talking about leaving Israel.]

And the aspiration of a free and independent Palestinian state is realized.

[Those aspirations could have been realized at any time in the last sixty years, had the Arabs felt such a state was more important to them than the destruction of Israel.]

No surprise: Fatah again demonstrates it wants to destroy Israel

This isn't really a surprise, but again shows how so many people put their heads in the sand.

Fatah, remember, is Mahmoud Abbas' faction of the PLO. It was founded two years before the disputed territories fell under Israel's administrative control. Its goal has always been the destruction of Israel and had no interest in establishing an independent Palestinian Arab state in the currently disputed territories when they were under Arab control.

The following is excerpted from an article in the Jerusalem Post.

In Fatah map all of Israel is Palestine

By Khaled Abu Toameh
Fatah is planning to mark its 43rd anniversary this year with a new poster that presents all of Israel as Palestine.

Designed specifically for the occasion by Abdel Mun'em Ibrahim, the poster features a map of Israel that is entirely draped with a Palestinian keffiyeh scarf.

It also carries a drawing of a rifle as a symbol of the "armed struggle" against Israel.The poster, which has been endorsed by the Fatah leadership, has already been posted on a number of Fatah-affiliated Web sites.

The underlying message of the poster is that Fatah, like Hamas, does not recognize Israel's existence.

The emblem is in violation of Fatah's declared policy, which envisions an independent Palestinian state alongside, and not instead of, Israel.

By including a rifle in the poster, Fatah is sending a message to the Palestinian public that it has not abandoned the option of "armed resistance," despite current peace talks with Israel.

Mahmoud Abbas Then and Now

Part of A Conversation with Mahmoud Abbas published in The Washington Post September 30, 2007.

Question: Is the U.S. policy of squeezing and isolating Hamas a mistake, or do you think it's the right policy?

Answer: In the beginning, I believed that they were mistaken, but now we are in the same position. I am against Hamas.

We can expect Abbas to be against Hamas unless he manages to come to another devil's agreement with them. In that case, he will once again condemn Israel for policies which are really in his own best interest.

The real lesson is the world has to learn to ignore whatever the Palestinian Arab leadership says, since it almost always talks out of both sides of its mouth. This is one case where one must suspect that, at the same time Abbas was condemning Israel for trying to isolate Hamas, he was secretly praying Israel was successful.

Meanwhile, as reported in WorldNet Daily, Eiman Abu Eita, Fatah's representative in the Bethlehem satellite town of Beit Sahour, has admitted that the "Nativity Siege" was pre-orchestrated by the Palestinian Authority.

The article recalls "Israel was widely criticized ... for laying siege to the Nativity Church [in 2002] ... after dozens of Bethlehem-area gunmen, including wanted senior Hamas, Tanzim and the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terrorists, stormed the structure and refused to come out."

According to Abu Eita, "The conspiracy was to make a siege and put all the fighters inside the church so Israel would make the siege. People from the Palestinian Authority collaborated with this conspiracy."

The siege ended after thirty-nine days with the agreement that thirteen of the terrorists would be deported to European countries. Currently, Israel is under pressure to let them return to the disputed territories. This is just another example of the worthlessness of assurances given to Israel in return for concessions.

Better Late Than Never

With the takeover of Gaza by Hamas, Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas has done something he previously vowed he'd never do. He has banned Hamas militias.

The key provision of the Quartet's Road Map was the dismantling of the terror infrastructure built up by the Palestinian Authority since it took over administration of much of the disputed territories.

Israel accepted the Road Map with some well reasoned reservations; the Palestinian Arabs said they accepted it but made it caduc by refusing to adhere to the first and most important provisions while simultaneously, and typically hypocritically, criticizing Israel for its reservations.

Had Abbas adhered to the provisions, Gaza would not now be Hamastan and the Palestinian Arabs would be well on their way to a prosperous state of their own.

As Abba Eban said, the Palestinian Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. Someday they may realize the Israelis are their best friends. Already, nearly half have indicated in a poll they would prefer to go back to the pre-Oslo situation, i.e. the so-called Israeli occupation which improved their lives for two decades until the intifada started reversing that progress and the Palestinian Authority brought them chaos, insecurity and general disaster.

About David Ignatius Oped "End Diplomatic Isolation"

Ignatius reveals his bias as soon as he touches upone the Arab-Israeli conflict, when he writes: "A second diplomatic path for Rice involves the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the long-festering wound that has afflicted the Middle East for 40 years."

The Arab-Israeli conflict, which spawned the conflict between the Palestinian Arabs and Israelis, has of course been going on for nearly two decades longer than that. Ignatius falsely implies that the root of the "Israeli-Palestinian conflict" is the so-called occupation, rather then being rooted in the continuing refusal of the surrounding Arabs nations to live in peace.

Ignatius further misleads when he writes: "Indeed, in her effort to regain an honest-broker role, she has been willing to meet with Palestinian officials despite Israeli objections."

It was the Quartet, not Israel, that prepared the minimal conditions for dealing with the Palestinian Authority led by Hamas. It is the conditions America set which Rice is undermining.

Ignatius: "Rice took a small step this week by meeting with Salam Fayyad, the finance minister of the Palestinian 'unity government' that is dominated by the militant group Hamas. She appears hopeful that ways can be found to resume U.S. financial aid to the Palestinians through Fayyad, in his role as a representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization, despite a formal ban on assistance to the Hamas-led government."

Ignatius falsely implies that the United States ended financial aid to the Palestinian Arabs. American assistance has continued virtually unabated; it has just been funneled more directly to the people. Indeed, assistance to the Palestinian Arabs has actually increased substantially since they voted Hamas into power.

Ignatius: "Israel had argued strenuously against such contacts. But Rice decided she would meet with Palestinian ministers if their past statements accepted Israel's right to exist in peace. Meanwhile, Rice continues a dual-track diplomatic negotiation she describes with the somewhat nebulous phrase of 'the political horizon.' In practice, that has meant pushing Israelis and Palestinians to discuss details for administering the Palestinian state everyone says they want in principle."

There is no need to demonstrate a "political horizon;" the Palestinian Arabs have long known all they need to do in order to establish another independent state is to say yes to peace. It was the Palestinian Arabs who have spurned all opportunities for a "political horizon."

In pushing for negotiations now, Rice is undermining the "road map" the American government has repeatedly insisted was the only game in town. She is also encouraging the belief among Arab extremists that they can safely ignore any American conditions, even conditions as innocuous as those in the road map which essentially just call upon the Palestinian Arabs to adhere to some of their prior commitments, with the confidence that if they continue their intransigence the United States will just pressure Israel to make more concessions.

Ignatius: "A promising new Arab initiative is broadening this path out of the Israeli-Palestinian wilderness. With Rice's encouragement, Arab countries this week agreed to establish a working group to present details of Saudi King Abdullah's 2002 peace plan to the Israelis. So far, the group includes only Jordan and Egypt, two countries that already have diplomatic relations with Israel."

Ignatius distorts the thrust of the "working group;" rather than showing a willingness to meet with Israel, the Arab nations which continue to refuse to recognize Israel also refused to meet with Israel. They emphasized their one-sided "peace plan" was an ultimatum, not a basis for negotiation.

Ignatius: "But there's hope the group will expand if negotiations over the Palestinian 'horizon' gather momentum."

See the earlier remarks regarding a "political horizon." It is not the Palestinian Arabs who need assurance that there is hope for their future, since they are the ones who are blocking their own futures. The Arabs need to demonstrate the willingness to live together with Israel in peace, by sitting down with Israel and demonstrating a willingness to negotiate in good faith and to compromise. After fifty-nine years of bellicosity, intransigence and ultimatums, it is long past time for some good will gestures from the Arab side.