"Pilgrim and Sojourner." - 1 Peter 2:11
| Secret Obama deal for Palestinian state?|
[b]Secret Obama deal for Palestinian state?[/b]
The U.S. is considering adopting a unilateral Palestinian declaration of independence in the West Bank and Jerusalem regardless of negotiations with the Jewish state, according to Israeli sources speaking to Israel's Haaretz newspaper.
WND first reported in September that according to a top Palestinian Authority official, the Obama administration has largely adopted the positions of the PA to create a Palestinian state within two years based on the pre-1967 borders, meaning Israel would retreat from most of the West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem.
WND reported that the White House had accepted the positions of Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, who had quietly called for a state on the pre-1967 borders within two years. ...
read more: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203917304574410672271269390.html
SI Moderator - Greg Gordon
| 2009/11/9 12:20||Profile|
| Re: Secret Obama deal for Palestinian state?|
no.....tell me this is some bizarre web rumor/myth floating around.....I'm going to dig around.
| 2009/11/9 12:23|
"Pilgrim and Sojourner." - 1 Peter 2:11
| Re: |
If this is true the ramifications are severe spiritually.
Oh the times we are living in.
SI Moderator - Greg Gordon
| 2009/11/9 12:26||Profile|
| Re: Secret Obama deal for Palestinian state?|
its a disinfo campaign coming staright from Euro-arabs, and since WND doesnt like the President, and would do anything it could to get Jews in America, on the 'we hate obama' tea wagon.
here's an editorial from the Jerusalem Post:
Nov. 8, 2009
, THE JERUSALEM POST
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is scheduled to be the keynote speaker this morning at the UJC/Jewish Federations of North America 2009 General Assembly.
As Netanyahu made his way to Washington, there were those bent on exacerbating tensions between our premier and President Barack Obama. The Economist, for instance, taunted: "Is Israel too strong for Barack Obama?" illustrating its story with a cartoon depicting Netanyahu driving a bulldozer straight at the American leader.
Much was made of the fact that even as he embarked on his journey Netanyahu still did not have a firm appointment to see the president. One US Jewish leader described Obama as leaving Netanyahu to "twist in the wind."
We do not know if ineptitude in Netanyahu's bureau or political machinations in the White House precipitated this unnecessary storm.
The president's schedule was anyway torn asunder in the aftermath of the terror attack at Fort Hood, Texas. His appearance at the GA was canceled so that he could attend a memorial service in Texas tomorrow.
COMINGS and goings aside, the administration has been fundamentally misreading the situation here on the ground, allowing its own initial poor judgment to be reinforced by unrepresentative voices in Israel and on the margins of the American Jewish community.
Thus the White House insisted on an unconditional settlement freeze everywhere over the Green Line - a demand with which Israel could not possibly comply. This trapped Mahmoud Abbas in an untenable position: he could not resume talks with Israel without appearing "softer" than Obama. When Secretary of State Hillary Clinton tried to reverse out of this dead end, asserting the US remained opposed to all settlement activity, but that a freeze should not be a precondition for resumption of talks, Abbas was left aggrieved.
Now he's bogged down by his own bluster and Obama's miscalculations. The Palestinian leader has called for elections on January 24 though Hamas, which controls Gaza, adamantly refuses. When his empty threat to resign failed to get much of a rise out of anyone, his advisers began talking about dismantling the Palestinian Authority and declaring a virtual Palestinian state - a-la their November 15, 1988, declaration of independence made in Algiers; the one the UN General Assembly "acknowledged" decades ago.
Arab sources, with a little help in Europe, are now engaged in a disinformation campaign claiming Obama is party to a "secret deal" that would see the US recognize a new declaration of Palestinian independence and jettison Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338. In other words, rather than negotiate with Israel, the Palestinians are still fantasizing that Obama will impose a solution and deliver Israel on bended knee.
Another obstacle to peace is the mendacious Goldstone Report, which poisons the political environment. On Friday, only 17 out of 192 countries stood with the Jewish state in the UN General Assembly as it essentially codified robbing Israel of its practical right to self-defense. While the US did not abandon Israel, neither did it offer overwhelming moral support. US Ambassador to the UN Susan Rice did not even attend.
WHICH BRINGS us to the doors of the White House. From Eisenhower to Bush II, past administrations have intermittently cold-shouldered Israel or sought to drive a wedge between the Jewish state and its supporters in the United States. In this regard, the Obama administration is breaking no new ground.
Nevertheless, if Obama buys into the insidious canard, as Thomas Friedman promotes it, that the Palestinian leadership "wants a deal with Israel without any negotiations" while Israel's leadership "wants negotiations with the Palestinians without any deal," he will invariably spend the remainder of his term veering from one dead end to another.
Through a multitude of blunders - failure to dismantle illegal outposts among them - successive Israeli governments have empowered the West Bank Palestinian leadership to frame the current stalemate as resulting from Israel's preference for settlements over peace. In reality, it is persistent Palestinian intransigence combined with the fragmentation of their polity that has made progress impossible.
No one wants peace more than Israel. Most Israelis support a demilitarized Palestine living side-by-side with the Jewish state of Israel - the very vision articulated by Netanyahu in his seminal June 14 Bar-Ilan address.
Rather than giving Netanyahu a cold shoulder, Obama should warmly embrace this viable blueprint for peace.
| 2009/11/9 12:41|
| Re: brother Greg|
I've only found two sources that have reported on the "secret" plan, one is an organ called "Press TV" and the other is WND, Press TV is really a front for the Islamic Republic of Iran, and as we all know WND is no fan of the President's, so this is just a disinfo campaign, if my read counts for anything.
Do you realize how tightly bound both the American and Israeli defense establishment's are?
here's the links:
[url=http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=110732§ionid=351020202]Press TV disinfo[/url]
I looked thru the whole site of Ha'aretz, which both attribute this "story" to, and I cant find anything on Ha'aretz...nothing to that effect.
so, its kind of disturbing and disconcerting to me when you have those foul iranian mini-hitlers in iran making up tales, and WND picks it up and runs with it? what is that?
I dont want to say what I really feel, but like him or not, remember that President Obama's Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel is a VERY VERY strong supporter of Israel.
and let me tell you one more thing, Ahmadinejad signed his own death warrant a few years back when he threatened that Iran was going to "burn the 'Zionist entity'(that's what this hell bound cur calls Israel) with fire"....signed his own death warrant, watch.
| 2009/11/9 13:40|
| here's something with 'meat'|
read between the lines, and it says: (to me at least: PA leader Abbas was a short sighted fool, he's resigning, Hamas fills the void, UN condemns Israel, US and Israel stand alone, Israel attacks Iranian nuke infrastructure, Arab street goes rabid"=new era")
November 10, 2009
Collapse Feared for Palestinian Authority if Abbas Resigns
By ETHAN BRONNER
RAMALLAH, West Bank The prospect that the Palestinian Authority, the government in the West Bank, might fall apart loomed on Monday, as those close to its president, Mahmoud Abbas, said that he intended to resign and forecast that others would follow.
I think he is realizing that he came all this way with the peace process in order to create a Palestinian state but he sees no state coming, Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian peace negotiator, said in an interview. So he really doesnt think there is a need to be president or to have an Authority. This is not about who is going to replace him. This is about our leaving our posts. You think anybody will stay after he leaves?
Mr. Abbas warned last week that he would not participate in elections he called for January. But many viewed that as a ploy by a Hamlet-like leader upset over Israeli and American policy, and noted that the vote might not actually be held, given the Palestinian political fracture and the unwillingness of Hamas, which controls Gaza, to participate.
In the days since, however, his colleagues have come to believe he is not bluffing. If that is the case, they say, the Palestinian Authority could be endangered.
Four top officials made the same point in separate interviews. Mr. Abbas, they say, feels at a total impasse in negotiations with the Israeli government of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has declined to commit to a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders including East Jerusalem. Mr. Netanyahu favors negotiations without preconditions.
Azam al-Ahmad, head of the Fatah bloc in the Palestinian Legislative Council, said he spoke with Mr. Abbas on Saturday and that he was likely to resign in the next month or so. Nobody will accept to be president under this situation, Mr. Ahmad said. We could witness the collapse of the Palestinian Authority.
Ali Jarbawi, the Minister of Planning, spoke in similar terms in an interview, asking, Why do we need anybody to take his place if the whole process is failing? If the authority is going to go on forever, who needs it? But he suggested that the crisis was aimed at persuading the United States and Europe to become more actively involved in bringing about a two-state solution.
What a collapse of the Palestinian Authority would mean is far from clear. All legal definitions in Palestinian politics have grown fuzzy since the 2007 split between the Fatah-dominated West Bank and Hamas-run Gaza. What is clear is that Mr. Abbas and those who work closely with him were shocked when the United States backpedaled on a demand that Israel freeze settlement building in the West Bank.
Mr. Netanyahu was due to meet President Obama in Washington on Monday night, and Mr. Abbass threat was expected to be a part of their talks. When Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton was in Jerusalem last week, she asked Mr. Netanyahu to include in negotiating guidelines specific references to the creation of a Palestinian state within the 1967 borders and Jerusalem. He declined. President Obama took his time before granting the prime ministers request for a meeting.
Mr. Abbas, who is 74, is not only the president of the Palestinian Authority but the chairman of the Palestine Liberation Organization and the chairman of the Fatah political movement. Known as Abu Mazen, he took over from Yasir Arafat upon his death five years ago and was hailed by Israeli and American leaders as a very different man.
Rather than military fatigues, Mr. Abbas wore suits. He made a point of condemning Palestinian military actions against Israel as terrorism and saying that the Palestinian uprising that began in late 2000 was wrong. He gained the confidence of former hardliners like Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert and he was widely admired on the Israeli left, some of whom now worry deeply about his decision, blaming the government.
As Ephraim Sneh, a former liberal cabinet minister, wrote in an opinion article in the daily Haaretz on Sunday, The conduct of Abbas, the most courageous partner we have had, is in large measure a byproduct of our missed opportunities.
As Mr. Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said of Mr. Abbas, He has invested more patience into this process than anyone else. His name should be Mahmoud Patience. But he has come to the realization that it is over and there is no point in continuing.
Not everyone regrets his expected departure, saying his problem is not Mr. Netanyahu but the fact that he does not control Gaza and has no way of gaining control of it. Those critics, even moderate Israelis, say that a year agoEhud Olmert, while still Israels prime minister, offered Mr. Abbas a deal that included nearly all of the West Bank, land swaps for limited settlement blocks and shared sovereignty over Jerusalem. But Mr. Abbas turned it down.
Then after first agreeing not to press the United Nations report led by Judge Richard Goldstone that assailed Israels behavior in the recent Gaza war, he reversed position, first upsetting Palestinians, then ruffling Israelis.
Abbass tenure as Arafats successor has proved an unmitigated disaster, David Horovitz, center-right editor of The Jerusalem Post, wrote on Friday . He lost the Palestinian parliamentary elections to Hamas in 2006. He lost Gaza physically to Hamas in the coup of 2007. He lost much of Israel in spurning Olmert, and even more of Israel, right now, in leading the calls for the Goldstone-facilitated international prosecution of Israel over Operation Cast Lead. And with quite spectacular ineptitude, he has managed to simultaneously doom himself among the Palestinians over the self-same issue, for the crime of initially agreeing not to champion Goldstones viciously skewed indictment.
Mr. Abbas misunderstood the political significance of the Goldstone report, some who know him say, because like the Israelis and Americans he actually has little faith in international bodies like the United Nations. He then felt blindsided when attacked over this by some of his own aides and Arab leaders and switched positions.
Given the split with Hamas, the accusations of being an Israeli collaborator and the American reversal on a settlement freeze, the aides said, Mr. Abbas had simply lost any appetite for staying in power.
He feels betrayed on all sides, said Nasser al-Qidwa, a former Palestinian foreign minister.
But while aides and colleagues say they understand, they also fear his departure and many have been urging him to stay. Some thousands turned out to urge him to change his mind when he made a public appearance in Hebron and Bethlehem on Sunday. The maneuvers of the coming weeks will be complicated, and for Mr. Abbas to change his mind there will have to be clear gains.
He understands that this is not a game where he can lose the argument and retain the position, said Ziad J. Asali, a friend of Mr. Abbass and president of The American Task Force on Palestine , a nonprofit group in Washington. We have to very carefully assess the significance of this political move on the state building project which is a very real project and should continue.
But Martin Indyk, vice president of the Brookings Institution and an adviser to George J. Mitchell, the administrations envoy to the Middle East, was not optimistic.
At the end of the day, I fear that the United States, Israel and the Arabs will fall short of meeting Abu Mazens requirements for staying on. More than likely, we are entering a new era.
| 2009/11/9 13:57|