Netanyahu reaffirms that Israel is the Jewish State

[Published 12 March 2019]


It is amazing that Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu still needs to reaffirm to Israelis that Israel is the Jewish State.

Yet Netanyahu was required to do just that after fashion model, actress and TV presenter Rotem Sela instagrammed:

“When in hell will anyone in this government tell the public that Israel is a state of all its citizens, and all human beings were born equal. And the Arabs, God forbid, are human beings. As are the Druze. And the homosexuals too, by the way, and the lesbians and also … what a shock … the leftists.”

Netanyahu’s response was swift:

“Dear Rotem, important correction: Israel is not a state of all its citizens. According to the Basic Law we have passed, Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people — and only them.

As you wrote, there is no problem with the Arab citizens of Israel — they enjoy equal rights like all of us, and the Likud government invested more in the Arab sector than any other government.”

Netanyahu elaborated on his statement at last Sunday’s cabinet meeting:

“I would like to clarify a point that, apparently, is not clear to slightly confused people in the Israeli public. Israel is a Jewish, democratic state. This means that it is the national state of the Jewish people alone. Of course it respects the individual rights of all its citizens — Jews and non-Jews alike, but it is the national state, not of all its citizens, but only of the Jewish people.

Other peoples, other nationalities and other minorities — have national representation in other states. The national representation of the Jewish people is in the State of Israel. Israel is the national state of the Jewish people and of it alone.”

David Ben-Gurion and Yitzchak Rabin expressed much the same sentiments decades ago.

Ben-Gurion presciently defined the term “Jewish State” during his evidence before the United Nations Special Committee on Palestine on 7 July 1947:

“What is the meaning of a Jewish State? As I told you before, a Jewish State does not mean one has to be a Jew. It means merely a State - where the Jews are in the majority, otherwise all the citizens have the same status. If the State were called by the name “Palestine” — I said if - then all would be Palestinian citizens If the State would be given, another name — I think it would be given another name — because Palestine is neither a Jewish nor an Arab name. As far as the Arabs are concerned, and we have the evidence of the Arab historian, Jew, that there was no such a thing as “Palestine” at all: Palestine is not an Arab name.

Palestine is also not a Jewish name. When the Greeks were our enemies, in order not to annoy the Jews, they gave different names to the streets. So, maybe the name of Palestine will be changed. But whatever the name of the country, every citizen of the country will be a citizen. This is what we mean. This is what we have to mean. We cannot conceive that in a State where we are not in a minority, where we have the main responsibilities as the majority of the country, there should be the slightest discrimination between a Jew and a non-Jew.”

Rabin stated in 1992:

“I don’t want to make Israel a bi-national state. I would like to keep Israel a Jewish democratic state. By that, I mean at least 80% of its population Jewish”.

Peace will only come when the PLO, Hamas and the UN General Assembly recognize that Israel is the Jewish State.

Netanyahu could still be Israel's next Prime Minister

[Published 6 March 2019]


The cards have certainly been stacked against Benjamin Netanyahu being Israel’s next Prime Minister after three recent major developments — but he is by no means down and out.

Those developments are:

1. Israeli Attorney-General Avichai Mandelblit’s decision to pursue Netanyahu for alleged criminal offences — explained by Elena Chachko as follows:

“Mandelblit only announced that he is considering indicting Netanyahu. In other words, the announcement does not mean that Netanyahu would necessarily be indicted. This is not specific to Netanyahu’s case, but rather a feature of the Israeli justice system: Netanyahu, like most criminal defendants in Israel who face serious charges, will get a hearing before a final decision is made. Based on news reports and past precedents, the hearing will take place several months from now, after the April elections. This process is governed by the guidelines of the state attorney — the official subordinate to the attorney general who directs prosecutions — for notification and hearing in criminal proceedings.”

2. Three political parties coalescing into the Blue and White Party - promising that two of the three previous leaders — former Chief of Staff Benny Gantz and Yesh Atid’s Yair Lapid — will each be Prime Minister for half of the next Government’s term of office.

3. Netanyahu’s role in precipitating a marriage of convenience between Jewish Home, National Union and an extreme right wing party Otzma Yehudit with alleged links to the assassinated Rabbi Meir Kahane’s banned political party Kach — which has caused consternation and anger in Israel, America and Australia.

It remains to be seen whether these three developments translate into Netanyahu not being Israel’s next Prime Minister.

Bret Stephens - one of Netanyahu’s most trenchant critics - penned an op-ed article in the New York Times “Netanyahu must go” in which even he grudgingly admits:

“As I noted last year, in matters of policy and execution, Netanyahu has been a remarkably effective prime minister. On his watch, Israel’s economy has thrived, its diplomatic horizons have widened, its borders have been defended and its enemies humiliated. Thanks to Donald Trump, whom he cultivated astutely and assiduously, he got his way on the Iran deal, brought the American Embassy to Jerusalem and pursued openings with the Arab world without making irreversible concessions to the Palestinians.

Israel’s critics may like none of this, but from an Israeli standpoint they are considerable successes.”

Noted jurists Alan Dershowitz and Avi Bell - Professor of Law at Bar Ilan University and the University of San Diego - have criticized Mandelblit’s decision.

President Trump and Vladimir Putin’s relationships with Netanyahu are not enjoyed by any other candidates.

A spirited defence distinguishing Otzma Yehudit’s policies from those of the Kach Party has been made by Otzma candidate — Itamar Ben Gvir.

The 2015 election results provide a useful guide as to the likely impact these three developments might have on Netanyahu’s chances:

1. the Likud Party only received 23.4% of the vote — hardly a ringing endorsement for Netanyahu and

2. 72% of those eligible voted — very high when compared to America’s 58.1%.

Likud’s low supporter-base seems unlikely to desert Netanyahu.

Voter turnout would have to increase dramatically or huge swings away from other right-wing parties would be needed to give Blue and White the nod needed to be invited by President Rivlin to form a coalition Government ahead of Netanyahu.

The unknown elephants in the room are the number of terrorist attacks and international political developments affecting Israel in the next five weeks that will concentrate voters’ minds — when actually casting their votes - on who can best safeguard their personal safety and Israel’s security.

Netanyahu is certainly not out of the race.

Israel elections should send clear message to Trump, PLO, EU and UN

[Published 26 February 2019]


Israeli voters at the forthcoming elections on 9 April should be given the opportunity to send President Trump, the PLO, EU and UN a clear message on what they want to see happening in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza – the last 5% of the territory comprised in the Mandate for Palestine where sovereignty remains unresolved between Jews and Arabs (“disputed territories”).

For this to happen - all political parties need to state in clear and unambiguous terms what their policies in relation to the disputed territories will be if they form part of the next Government.

The options and the choices are many – and include:

1. Continuing to press for a negotiated “two-state solution” – the creation of an Arab State – in addition to Jordan – in all or part of the disputed territories

2. Annexing all or part of the disputed territories

3. Creating Jordanian enclaves in all or part of the disputed territories

4. Maintaining the status quo without any further negotiations

5. Redrawing the international borders between Israel, Jordan and Egypt

Co-head of the front runner Blue and White Party - Benny Gantz – needs to do better than stating:

“The main question is that of security. It [the Government] needs to ensure the State of Israel’s security. Now, there’s a question of interest here. We — and Netanyahu said this in his Bar-Ilan speech (a 2009 address in which the prime minister backed Palestinian statehood) — are not looking to control anyone else. We need to find a way in which we’re not controlling other people.”

Is Gantz talking about the Arab populations in the disputed territories? 95% of the Arab population in Judea and Samaria is under PLO control. 100% of Gaza’s Arabs-only population is under Hamas control. East Jerusalem Arabs are under Israel’s control.

Gantz must articulate his plan for ending what he sees as Israel’s control of other people.

Gantz’s partner Yair Lapid expressed the following view in 2008:

“The greatest tragedy of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that everyone knows how it will end. We will divide up the region. Israel will return most of the West Bank, and the Palestinian flag will fly on public buildings in East Jerusalem. The only unanswered question is how many more people will have to die along the way. And so we will fight against the extremists on both sides, including our extremists, the settlers. When you look at the history of wars, they ultimately revolve around one claim: “My god is better than yours.”

Is this still Lapid’s view in 2019? He - like Gantz – owes it to the electorate to spell out his party’s position should it be in the next Government.

Netanyahu needs to state what the Likud Party’s policy is right now – not what it might have been in 2009 or at any time since. All political parties seeking election must do likewise.

Views held in 2008 or 2009 are irrelevant – raking over old coals is counter-productive.

Gantz is right in recognizing that security is the main question at this election – as it always has been.

All the promises and allure of a better and more prosperous society, equality and justice for all - even going to the moon and back – count for nought if those voting are murdered, injured or traumatized to not enjoy the benefits.

President Trump needs to know what outcomes the Israelis want for the disputed territories before issuing his long-anticipated “deal of the century” very soon after the elections. The PLO, EU and UN need to also listen, digest and respond.

The time for straight-talking on the disputed territories is right now.

Israel jettisons PLO as negotiating partner on Trump peace plan

[Published 21 February 2019]


Israel’s decision to withhold US$138 million dollars in tax revenues collected for the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) - equaling the estimated annual payments made to Palestinian Arabs (or their families) carrying out random and indiscriminate attacks against Israeli civilians — marks a watershed in Israel-PLO relations.

Israel’s action will see the PLO being finally jettisoned as a possible negotiating partner on President Trump’s long-delayed peace plan — deferred yet again until after the Israeli elections in April.

The release of the Trump plan could now be further postponed as the President continues his so far unsuccessful search to find other Arab negotiators willing to replace the PLO — which had already rejected having anything to do with Trump’s plan well before Israel’s latest decision.

The law authorizing the freezing of these PLO funds was passed by the Israeli parliament in July 2018 — three months after similar legislation - the Taylor Force Act - passed by the US Congress - was signed into law by President Trump.

Israel’s Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked stressed the funds withheld would be used to pay“fat salaries to murderers who are in prison”. They would also be used to pay Palestinian Arabs imprisoned in Israeli jails for lesser crimes.

Israel’s action follows the discovery of the body of 19-year-old Ori Ansbacher in the Jerusalem Forest on February 7. Channel 12 news reported that investigators from the Shin Bet security service and Israel Police hoped to indict Arafat Irfaiya, a 29-year-old Hebron resident, for murder in the context of a terrorist act in addition to a charge of rape.

Israel is clearly not prepared to allow this continuing wave of terror to be condoned and rewarded financially by the PLO.

Al Jazeera reported the PLO took a very different view of Israel’s freeze:

“The Palestinians have accused the Israeli government of piracy, of coordinating this with the United States to add pressure ahead of the publication of the Trump peace plan.”

The PLO had, however, been unceremoniously consigned to the diplomatic scrap heap by Trump well before Israel’s tax-revenue freeze.

Trump had been given the thumbs down by the PLO after Trump had:

1. Recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and moving the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem

2. Stopped America’s annual payment of US$350 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency

3. Shut down the PLO offices in Washington.

4. Cancelled more than $200m in aid for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip and West Bank.

Chairman Mahmoud Abbas had already dismissed any further involvement with Trump on January 5, 2019:

“We are dealing with three issues that we can not accept: the situation with the US, the situation with Israel and the situation with Hamas. The doors are closed to the US. As long as it does not retract its decisions against the Palestinian people, no Palestinian should meet with the American leadership, no matter what their role is.”

Paying murderers and felons who kill and maim Jews has finally become the PLO’s political downfall.

Ori Ansbacher’s murder was the final tipping point for Israel to dump the PLO as a future negotiating partner after thousands of well documented random terror attacks on Israel’s civilian population over the last four years - perpetrated by individuals, many very young, inspired by vicious incitement in Palestinian social and traditional media and rewarded financially by the Palestinian leadership.

The days of “pay for slay” and fruitless negotiations with the PLO that have gone nowhere over the last 25 years are over.

Israel has well and truly closed the door on the PLO and it should remain locked and bolted.

USA and EU embroiled in Hamas and PFLP plans to destroy Israel

[Published 6 February 2019]

Israel’s Ministry of Strategic Affairs has issued a 79 page report exposing a network of members of Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) embedded in Pro-Palestinian non-Government organisations (NGOs) based outside Israel that openly operate in the USA and European Union (EU).

The Report — “Terrorists in suits” — is a must-read - detailing:

“How terrorists came to hold key positions in NGOs promoting the Boycott Divestment and Sanction (BDS) campaign against the State of Israel; and how, through these NGOs, they exploit Western governmental funding, philanthropic foundations, financial platforms and civil society to advance their goal of dismantling the State of Israel.”

The PFLP was designated a terrorist organization by Israel in 1986, the USA (1997) and the European Union (2002) — as was Hamas by Israel (1989), the USA (1997) and the European Union (2014).

Both Hamas and PFLP Charters openly seek the elimination of the State of Israel and use NGOs to influence public opinion against Israel in furtherance of this heinous objective.

The Report names and shames the following NGO’s, identifies their areas of operation, their ties to Hamas and the PFLP and outs Hamas and PFLP members — many of them convicted terrorists — who are or have been actively involved in these organisations’ campaigns aimed at denigrating and delegitimising Israel:

1. The Palestinian BDS National Committee
2. Samidoun
3. Addameer
4. Al-Haq
5. Defense For Children International — Palestine
6. The European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine
7. Palestinian Center For Human Rights
8. The Palestinian Return Centre
9. The Palestine Solidarity Campaign
10.Friends of Al-Aqsa
11.American Muslims For Palestine
12.Hamas Operatives active in NGOs in the UK: Muhammad Sawalha and Zaher Birawi

A look at just one organisation — Al-Haq —headquartered in Ramallah and operating in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), the Netherlands, France, and Northern Europe - indicates the modus operandi that similarly exist in the others.

Al-Haq (established in 1979):

1. Has Governmental Sponsors: European Union, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Ireland

2. Received Grants from Governmental Sources, 2014-2018: Over $3 million

3. Published with a group of French NGOs a report in March 2017 entitled “The Dangerous Liaisons of French Banks with the Israeli Colonization”.

4. Leads the legal effort to delegitimize Israel at the International Criminal Court in The Hague

5. Shawan Jabarin, General Director of Al-Haq since 2006, served as a senior PFLP official in the past and at least until recently maintained close ties with PFLP operatives in Judea and Samaria. Jabarin was tried and convicted for his military activity in the PFLP and has served multiple prison sentences.

Jabarin was described in a 2007 Israeli Supreme Court case by the presiding judge as:

“Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Some of his time is spent in conducting a human rights organization, and some as an operative in an organization which has no qualms regarding murder and attempted murder, which have no relation whatsoever to rights. Quite the opposite, they reject the most basic right of all, without which there are no other rights, that is, the right to life.”

6. Three other PFLP members arrested by Israel are also identified as working or having worked for Al-Haq: Ziyad Hmeidan, Zahi Jaradat and Majed Abbadi.

European and American funding of these organisations should be banned, their offices in the USA and EU closed - and those identified as Hamas and PFLP members deported.

Terrorists in suits denigrating and delegitimising Israel in slick racist and ongoing deceptive public relations campaigns of lies and half-truths - can be just as dangerous as terrorists armed to the teeth.

The EU and America must stop being played for suckers by these Jew-hating organisations.

Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones” - one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Trump Or Clinton Victory Could Depend On Non-Voters

[This article was submitted for publication to Canada Free Press on 4 November 2016 but was never published.

When I enquired as to reason why - I received the following response:

CFP-Copy
09/11/2016

Dear David,

Apologies.

I just site searched the article and found it in our spam folder. For some reason unknown to us, a few of our writers — in the last week— had their submissions arrive in spam.

Not sure why this happened, but sorry it did

Brian and Judi

Russian conspiracy theorists - here is something for you to go ballistic about.]



It would indeed be ironic if the next President of the United States was determined by the number of previous voters who this time did not exercise the most fundamental right bequeathed to them by their forefathers - the inalienable right to vote.

An increase in this class of non-voters has become more likely with the release of a Washington Post-ABC News poll - which found 46% of likely voters saying Trump is more honest and deserving of trust as against 38% for Clinton. That is seen as a wide lead for Trump since both he and Clinton were tied when the same question was asked by the Washington Post-ABC poll in September.

Clinton's decline comes amidst some extraordinary events:

1. the FBI reopening an investigation into Clinton’s private email server, having found more emails on the private computer of her senior aide Huma Abedin.

2.Interim Democratic National Committee Chairperson Donna Brazile being caught out - whilst a contributor at CNN - feeding two questions to the Clinton camp likely to be asked in a Democrat debate without the knowledge of her Presidential opponent Bernie Sanders.

3. An undercover video surfacing that tied Robert Creamer - a White House visitor on 340 occasions meeting with President Obama 45 times - to plans to incite brawls at Trump rallies and illegally bus voters to polling stations.

These latest developments could influence many previous voters - both democrats and disenchanted republicans intending to vote for Clinton - into not voting.

Bernie Sanders supporters are no doubt outraged by the treatment accorded to him by two Democratic National Committee Chairpersons.

Brazile's predecessor Senator Debbie Wasserman Schultz had been forced to resign that position after hacked emails revealed a plot to embarrass and undermine Sanders in the Democratic primaries as the Democratic Party nominee.

Brazile survives - defiant, unrepentant and unscathed.

Many other Democrats might not be prepared to vote for a candidate who could be embroiled in a lengthy FBI investigation extending well into her Presidency - that could both hamstring her administration and impact on her decision making capacity.

Republican voters - such as the Bush family - affronted and publicly distancing themselves from Trump's policies and his sometimes irrational and explosive behaviour not to mention his alleged sexual indiscretions - will now reflect on voting for Clinton in the face of these latest developments but decide they still cannot vote for Trump. They could opt to vote for neither.

The crowds flocking to Trump's rallies are far larger than Clinton's. One can reasonably conclude that the enthusiasm of Trumps's supporters far outweighs that of Clinton's - and that the likelihood of Trump voters turning out to vote will probably not diminish no matter what happens in the next few days.

Voter turnout dipped from 62.3% of eligible citizens voting in 2008 to an estimated 57.5% in 2012.

The low 2012 turnout could be explained by the fact that President Barack Obama was running for his second term whilst enjoying a high popularity rating.

It would therefore be more circumspect to accept the figure of 62.3% as setting the bar that both Trump and Clinton should be watching closely as the votes are being counted.

If the voter turnout is less than 62.3% - then Trump is more likely to win. If higher than 62.3% - then Clinton is more likely to win.

There is no doubt that this has been the most volatile Presidential election campaign ever and that the popularity of both Trump and Clinton is very low.

Hopefully dedicated past voters choosing to not vote in 2016 will never again be faced with this difficult choice of rejecting both the Republican and Democratic parties nominees.


[PS:I received the following reply from Fox News pollster Larry Sabato on 10 November 2016 after I sent him this article:

David,

It’s an excellent piece. I am going to share it with my entire team; I want every one of them to read it.

I appreciate your kind words. Most people wrote to suggest an early retirement — or a firing squad! So I salute your humanity.

Best wishes,

Larry

Dr. Larry J. Sabato
Director, Center for Politics
University Professor of Politics
University of Virginia
sabato@virginia.edu]

Israel, PLO, Jordan, EU and UN must agree on boundaries of Palestine

[Published 13 February 2019]

Ending the Arab-Jewish conflict over the territory called “historic Palestine” has little chance of success until its territorial boundaries are first agreed between Israel, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), Jordan, the European Union (EU) and the United Nations (UN).

Rima Najjar — a retired professor of English literature at Al-Quds University - claims in a recent article that the territory of “historic Palestine” has been subdivided into Israel, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip but is effectively controlled by the Jewish State.

The following facts contradict her assertions:

1. Jordan comprises 78% of the territory of Palestine under the League of Nations 1922 Mandate for Palestine - and Jews were denied the right to reconstitute the Jewish National Home in any part of that area of Palestine under article 25 of the Mandate

2. The Old Testament records that two and a half of the twelve tribes of Israel settled in Jordan and cities of refuge were established by the Israelites in Golan, Ramoth, and Bosor - on the eastern side of the Jordan River - and Kedesh, Nablus, and Hebron - on the western side.

3. Jordan, Israel, the West Bank and Gaza form one indivisible territorial unit under Article 2 of the PLO Charter.

4. Under the 1993 Oslo Accords and following Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Gaza in 2006 - the PLO effectively controls 40% of the West Bank and Hamas effectively controls all of Gaza.

5. Many leading PLO, Jordanian, Arab and Israeli leaders have acknowledged that Jordan formed part of Palestine and that Jordanians and Palestinians are one people — not two.

Najjar’s intention is clear: to misleadingly and deceptively allege that Israel effectively controls 100% of historic Palestine - when Jordan effectively controls 78%.

In fact:

1. Israel currently exercises sovereignty in only 17% of historic Palestine whilst Jordan exercises sovereignty in 78% - leaving competing Arab and Jewish claims to sovereignty in the remaining 5% of historic Palestine — the West Bank and Gaza - to be resolved.

2. The Palestinian Arabs already have their own State in 78% of historic Palestine where not one Jew lives.

Najjar has claimed in an earlier article:

“How deep is the historical illiteracy of Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic Party and Donald Trump and his party?

It is so deep, they are even immune to déjà vu, also known as “cryptomnesia”, which is where history is forgotten but nevertheless stored in the brain.”

Najjar, the UN, EU, even Mahmoud Abbas, are the historical illiterates suffering from cryptomnesia when it comes to determining the boundaries of historic Palestine - having written off the biblical history of “Eretz Yisrael” and the modern day history of “Palestine” between 1917 and 1947.

Najjar has form — having falsely stated in 2017:

“Israel now has sovereignty over all of mandate Palestine.”

Najjar also uttered her historic Palestine canard when calling for Israel’s elimination in 2018:

“The Palestinians have never held the bargaining chips in their tragedy and might as well go for broke — ending the Apartheid Zionist colonial regime in all of historic Palestine.”

Najjar lamented in 2017:

“I don’t know what it means to be Palestinian Jordanian, which is how I began my life ...”

Najjar’s identity crisis disappears once she recognizes that Jordan is 78% of historic Palestine.

Until Israel, the PLO, Jordan, the UN and EU all agree on the boundaries of historic Palestine — any hope for ending the 100-years conflict between Arabs and Jews remains a mirage.

Author’s note: The cartoon—commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog