Adonis Diaries

Posts Tagged ‘goyim

Slow and steady transfer policies of Palestinians in Israel: To where again?

Over the past several weeks the veil has fallen off almost completely on the firm decision of Israel to completely transfer Palestinians in the occupied territories. If you want to understand what’s really going on, here are a few things you need to read.

Stephen M. Walt published in Foreign Policy this July 12, 2012 under “What’s going on in Israel?“:

“One of the more enduring myths in the perennial debate on the Israel-Palestine conflict is the claim that:

1.  Israel has always been interested in a fair and just peace,

2. and that the only thing standing in the way of a deal is the Palestinians’ commitment to Israel’s destruction.

This notion has been endlessly recycled by Israeli diplomats and by Israel’s defenders in the United States and elsewhere.

Fair-minded analysts of the conflict have long known that this pernicious narrative was bogus. They knew that:

1.  Former Yitzhak Rabin PM (who signed the Oslo Accords) never favored creating a viable Palestinian State (indeed, he explicitly said that a future Palestinian entity would be “less than a state.”)

2. The Palestinians’ errors notwithstanding, they also understood that former Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s offers at Camp David in 2000 — though more generous than his predecessors’ — still fell well short of a genuine two-State deal.

But the idea that Israel sought peace above all else but lacked a genuine “partner for peace” has remained an enduring “explanation” for Oslo’s failure.

Over the past several weeks, however, the veil has fallen off almost completely. If you want to understand what’s really going on, here are a few things you need to read.

Start with Akiva Eldar’s cover article in The National Interest, entitled “Israel’s New Politics and the Fate of Palestine.” Eldar is the chief political columnist for the Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz, and his article provides a succinct account for why the two-State vision is at best on life support and is unlikely to be resuscitated. Money quotation:

“The Palestinian leadership, as far back as 1988, made a strategic decision favoring the two-state solution, presented in the Algiers declaration of the Palestinian National Council. The Arab League, for its part, voted in favor of a peace initiative that would recognize the state of Israel and set the terms for a comprehensive Middle East settlement.

Meanwhile, various bodies of the international community reasserted partition of the land as their formal policy. But Israel, which signed the Oslo accords nearly two decades ago, has been moving in a different direction.”

Eldar goes on to describe in detail the demographic and political trends that have made the two-State solution an increasingly remote prospect, undermining Israeli democracy in the process and leading to a deepening policy of “separation.”

Eldar avoids the politically loaded term apartheid, but here is how he describes the current reality:

“To exercise control over the land without giving up its Jewish identity, Israel has embraced various policies of “separation”. Israel has separate legal systems for traditional Israeli territory and for the territory it occupies:

1. Israel divides those who reside in occupied lands based on ethnic identity;

2.  it has retained control over occupied lands but evaded responsibility for the people living there;

3. and it has created a conceptual distinction between its democratic principles and its actual practices in the occupied territories.

These separations have allowed Israel to manage the occupation for 45 years while maintaining its identity and international status. No other state in the twenty-first century has been able to get away with this, but it works for Israel, which has little incentive to change it.”

It works, of course, because the Israel lobby makes it virtually impossible for U.S. leaders to put any meaningful pressure on Israel to change its behavior, much of which is now antithetical to core American values. (This is another bogus argument: It is the US policies which encourage apartheid system in Israel…and denying a homeland for the Palestinians…since 1967)

To grasp what Eldar is talking about, check out former Netanyahu aide Michael Freund’s June 20 column from the Jerusalem Post, entitled “Kiss the Green Line Goodbye.” 

Unlike Eldar’s requiem for the end of the two-state vision, Freund’s column is a proud declaration that the settlement project has succeeded in making “greater Israel” a permanent reality.

Freund wrote:  “…The Green Line (the 1967 borders) is dead and buried. . . it is no longer of any relevance, politically or otherwise. You had better get used to Judea and Samaria because the Jewish people are here to stay.” This is not a wild-eyed assertion by some extremist settler, by the way, but a revealing glimpse at an increasingly mainstream view.

To see the on-the-ground consequences of these developments:

1. Check out Nir Hasson’s piece on how residents of East Jerusalem (illegally annexed by Israel following the 1967 war) face increasingly erratic water supplies.

2. And give a listen or a read to NPR reporter Lourdes Garcia-Navarro’s report on how home demolitions in East Jerusalem have increased dramatically over the past year, with about 1100 people — half of them children — displaced.

Israeli officials claim that this is merely an appropriate response to “illegal” construction, but as a recent U.N. report documents, over 90% of Palestinian applications for building permits are denied, even as Israel continues to build housing settlements for Jews in various east Jerusalem neighborhoods.

What is going on is slow-motion ethnic cleansing. Instead of driving Palestinians out by force — as was done in 1948 and 1967 — the goal is simply to make life increasingly untenable over time, so that they will gradually leave their ancestral homelands of their own accord.

Finally, make sure you read up on the recent Levy Commission report — excerpted here. (A good place to start is Matt Duss’s summary here.)

This commission, appointed by Netanyahu PM, has concluded that:

1.  Israel’s presence in the West Bank isn’t really an “occupation,” so the 4th Geneva Convention regarding protection of the local population doesn’t apply.

2. It sees no legal barrier to Israel transferring as many of its citizens as it wants into the territory,

3.  and it therefore recommends that the government retroactively authorize dozens of illegal settlements.

Never mind that no other country in the world — including the United States — agrees with this dubious legal interpretation, and neither does the United Nations or any other recognized juridical body outside Israel.

Needless to say, anyone who has visited the West Bank and seen the “matrix of control” imposed there will quickly understand that the Commission’s members were smoking something, and even a staunch defender of Israel like Jeffrey Goldberg had problems with the commission’s Alice-in-Wonderland line of argument.

A wide array of commentators (including the New York Times editorial board and former U.S. ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer) have already denounced these claims, albeit in a typically qualified fashion. The Times’ expresses the hope that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will “drive U.S. concerns home” when she visits Israel this month. As if that’s going to do any good at this point.

The veil slipped a long time ago, and now it has been torn away almost completely. But once you grasp what’s really happening here, you have to completely rethink your views about who the real friends of Israel are and who are the ones threatening its future.

Israel’s true friends may or may not be emotionally committed to it, but they are the ones who understand that the settlement enterprise has been a disaster and that only concerted and principled action by the United States, the EU, and others can avert this future train wreck.

Israel’s true friends are the ones who understand that it is Israel’s actions in Lebanon, in Gaza, in the West Bank, in Dubai, in Iran, etc. that are slowly squandering the legitimacy and support it once enjoyed, including support within the diaspora.

When Israel ends up tied with North Korea (!) in a 2012 BBC survey on which countries have the “most negative” global influence (and ahead of only Iran and Pakistan), you know there’s a problem.

Israel’s true friends are also among those who fear that Israel’s conduct and the smear tactics employed by some of its defenders have no place in American political life, and might eventually cost it the support it has long enjoyed here in the United States.

By contrast, Israel’s loudest defenders (and those in the middle who are cowed by them) are the ones whose short-sighted focus has allowed the occupation to persist and deepen over time. Their unthinking loyalty has helped squander genuine opportunities for peace, empowered extremists on both sides, and prolonged a long and bitter conflict.

The question to ask is simple: Where do they think this is headed?

And the same principle applies to American interests and U.S. policy.

Given the current “special relationship” between the U.S. and Israel, America’s standing in the region and in the world is inevitably tarnished as long as Israel persists on the course described in the articles cited above.

This situation forces U.S. leaders to adopt contorted and hypocritical positions on human rights, non-proliferation, democracy promotion, and the legitimacy of military force.

It makes U.S. leaders look impotent whenever they repeatedly term Israel’s actions “regrettable” or an “obstacle to peace” but then do nothing about them.

It forces US politicians of both parties to devote an inordinate amount of attention to one small country, to the neglect of many others.

Worst of all, U.S. policy ends up undermining the reasonable people in Israel and the Arab world — including moderate Palestinians — those who are genuinely interested in a peaceful solution and to coexistence among the people of the region.

Instead, we unwittingly aid the various extremists who gain power from the prolonged stalemate and the sowing of hatred. This bipartisan practice may not be the most dysfunctional policy in the history of U.S. foreign policy, but it’s got to be damned close.

Note: And why Israel thinks that this is an ideal period to execute its long dream of vacating the “Land of Israel” from goyim?

1. Israel is spreading this bogus assumption that all the Arab people who deposed their dictator regimes will be focusing on their internal instabilities and seeking financial resources to keep the little people satisfied…As if there are no direct interrelationship between the difficulties of the Arab people and the creation of the State of Israel…

2. That as long as Saudi Arabia has classified Iran as the main enemy and care less about the Palestinian problems, then there could be no major roadblocks into vacating the land from the goyim…As if Saudi Arabia ever cared about the Palestinian problem…

3. That for the last two years, the Obama administration has relegated Palestine to the bottom of the list of Hot Issues to tend to…

4. That even if Obama is re-elected President, he will be impotent to exercise any pressures on Israel because the Senate and Congress are in the hands of the Republicans…

So many of such minorities…? Only in Israel counting is a sacred business…

“Liberal” Zionists have acquired this tendency of glorifying the apartheid nature of Israel by avoiding the occupation policies and the ever expansion of illegal settlements in the Palestinian Territories, and putting forth the “imaginary threats that Israel is facing or might be facing, without reminding the readers that these threats are the results of Zionism ideology of supremacy and heaping indignities on the “goyim” everywhere the Zionists are in majority and in control… This following article is an example.

AARON DAVID MILLER published on August 14, 2012 In the New York Times under “Preserving Israel’s Uncertain Status Quo”:

“If someone asked me to sum up in a sentence where Israel will be a decade from now, I’d paraphrase Dickens: It will be neither the best nor worst of times. The Israelis will prosper and keep their state, but the Arabs and Iranians will never let them completely enjoy it.

What drives many Israelis and the successive governments is not a Scrooge-like Christmas Eve glimpse of a terrifying future, but a strange mix of accomplishment, comfort and anxiety that reinforces the desire to maintain the status quo, particularly on the Palestinian issue.

And that attitude is not going to change anytime soon.

Mitt Romney’s stumble on the Palestinian question highlighted just how comfortable many Israelis are, and the sheer magnitude of what they have accomplished. Romney mistakenly lowballed Israel’s per capita G.D.P. (about $31,000 in 2011, according to the World Bank, rather than his misstated $21,000).

Israel has serious worries:

1. The gaps between rich and poor are growing.

2. The military conscription issue highlights the resentment toward the ultra Orthodox, their unemployment rate (60 percent for men) and the drain they place on state resources.

3. The country’s demographics look bad — too many ultra-Orthodox Jews, Palestinians and Israeli Arabs and not enough secular Jews.

4. The frequent mass demonstrations that have been organized for a year now by Israelis young and old protesting the extremes in wealth and poverty and the squeeze on the middle class were stunning reminders of the extent of general disaffection.

Still the demonstrations weren’t sustainable. Most likely, it’s because — all in all — times are just not that bad. Indeed, along with all the forecasting of gloom and doom there’s this: Per capita Israel gives rise to more startups than any other country in the world.

On the U.N.’s 2011 Human Development Index, Israel — a country of seven-and-a-half million people — stands 17th out of 187 nations. The discoveries of natural gas in the Mediterranean will not only take care of Israel’s needs but by 2017 make it a significant exporter.

As for the Palestinian issue that threatens to undermine Israel’s future as a Jewish, democratic State, the dangers seem mitigated by the current situation.

The Palestinian Authority’s state-building enterprise and the security cooperation between Israeli and Palestinian services have generated more than a manageable status quo and all but eliminated terrorism.

The Arab Spring has left the Hamas leadership with few options and no real desire to wrangle with the Israelis militarily. And the approaching demise of the Assad regime in Syria will weaken Hezbollah.

If economic prosperity and a tolerable Palestinian problem seem to reinforce the status quo, the disquiet caused by instability elsewhere in the region validates Israel’s caution in not wanting to change it.

Israel seems bookended by two major worries that have all but subordinated the Palestinian issue to the back burner: Egypt’s future and Iran’s centrifuges.

The Israelis may have gotten over the shock of Hosni Mubarak’s ouster and the immediate fear that a Muslim Brotherhood president was going to abrogate the peace treaty. The Egyptian military and Cairo’s need for Western support will prevent that.

Yet the range of problems from security in the Sinai to support for Hamas in Gaza will introduce new uncertainty into Israel’s most important relationship with any Arab state and the only one based on the exchange of significant territory for the promise of normalized relations. Should that relationship deteriorate, the chances of a deal with the Palestinians on the same basis will recede.

The Iranian nuclear issue presents an even greater challenge and strategic priority. Israel is seeing its worst fears now realized. Sanctions hurt but won’t retard Iran’s enrichment of uranium, and negotiations aren’t capable now of producing a deal to stop that process at bomb-grade levels.

The fall of Bashar al-Assad’s regime in Syria will help weaken Iran. But it could also serve to accelerate the Iranian nuclear program out of Tehran’s fear of Sunni encirclement.

One of the biggest losers from the Iranian nuclear program may well be the Palestinians. The Israelis never bought the argument that solving the Palestinian issue would weaken Iranian influence in the region.

For this Israeli government, Iran is a much bigger priority. And if there is an Iranian-Israeli conflict or one involving the United States, the resulting turmoil would make Israeli-Palestinian negotiations almost impossible.

Given the uncertainties in the region, the odds of resolving its most complex problems — Palestine, the Iranian nuclear issue, the Arab quest for representative government — seem very long indeed.

Even under more enlightened governments than the current one, the issue has never been about comprehensive solutions. Instead, Israel traditionally looks to buy time, pre-empt and prevent on the military side when necessary, and take calculated risks in pursuit of peace when possible.

It’s not an ideal strategy — and one not always well-suited to the Silicon Valley of the Middle East and to a country that wants a more peaceful and prosperous future. But it’s kept a small country living on knife’s edge alive and in remarkably good shape. And that’s got to count for something…”

Philip Wiess replied: “Search for these phrases in the New York Times: Too many blacks in Alabama. Too many Jews in New York City.
Obama’s friend Eric Yoffie, a liberal Zionist, has used the same phrase, “too many Arabs.”  You don’t pay a price for such rhetoric in the U.S. No; you get into the New York Times!”

Aaron David Miller is a public policy scholar at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the author of “The Much Too Promised Land: America’s Elusive Search for Arab-Israeli Peace.”

A version of this op-ed appeared in print on August 15, 2012, in The International Herald Tribune.

This is no baby: Case dismissed


1.  We are a compassionate nation. We adopt babies from all over the World;

From Latvia, Estonia, Romania, Bosnia, and Bulgaria;

We even expanded our affection to Africa and the Far East Asia.

Arab babies are off limit; off the media.

Arab babies are no babies: case dismissed.

There is no Arab baby.  No Arab youth.  Just Arabs.  Bad.  Arabs.


2.  The Jewish American rapist is socially dysfunctional.  The genuine rapist is Arab.

The Jewish American Baruch, of the Hebron mosque massacre, is a madman.

A nerve snapped.

Arabs nerves can’t snap: made of stainless steel, tightly wired,

For mischief.


The Maryland Jewish murderer chopped a human head.  He is a juvenile delinquent.

A particular psychotic case. 

Arabs youth are born, adult criminals.


3.  The peace makers with Israel are Egyptians, Jordanians, or Moroccans.

Mostly their leaders. 

That is beside the point.

The enemies of Israel are Arabs.  Mostly their leaders.

We have high hope in their people.


The criminals of the Oklahoma City bombing

Should have been Arabs. 

Exceptions do occur.  Human nature you know. 


4.  Sirhan Sirhan assassinated Robert Kennedy.  He is no Palestinian.

No motives.  Just bad Arabs attitude.

If push comes to shove, if a motive is needed,

Why Sirhan is a hatemonger of the defenders of Civil Rights.


5.   The most famous heart surgeon, Michael Debaky,

The poet of “The Prophet” and much more, Gebran Khalil Gebran

The founder of St. Jude hospital, for children with cancer, Danny Thomas

Said that they are Arab Lebanese. 

The media beg to differ:

They are all, at best, of Lebanese descendents.


The bombers of the World Trade Tower are Arabs.

The perpetrators of the Achilles Loro are Arabs.


6.   Literature, Nobel Prize winner, Nagib Mahfouz,

Says he is Arab.  Ask him.

The media insist that he is just Egyptian.

Those who shoot down commercial airplanes are Arabs.

Israel strikes Arab refugee camps.

Israel retaliates for Arab suicide bombings.


Israel lodges a cannon shell, inadvertently, on a UN compound in Qana Lebanon..

About three hundred Arabs died.  Give or take fifty Arabs.

Apology to the UN.


7.  Arabs were massacred in the Palestinian refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila.

Israel was just controlling the exits and entrances of the camps in Beirut.

Arabs killing Arabs.  Goyims killing goyims.  Israel could care less.

How dare you blame Israel Defense Force!

They happened to be there.


8.   There are no Arab babies.  There are no Arab youths.

Just Arabs.  Bad.  Arabs.

Definitely, there is no Palestinian baby, no Palestinian child.

There is no Palestinian youth.

They are Arabs. Bad Arabs.




March 2023

Blog Stats

  • 1,518,879 hits

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by

Join 764 other subscribers
%d bloggers like this: