"Censored!"

Arlene Kushner

I try mightily to maintain a professional standard as I write these postings. It is for this reason that I must censor myself with regard to what I'd like to say about South African jurist Richard Goldstone. Those who understand, will understand.

Goldstone, in an interview with the AP, let it be known that he does not intend to seek retraction or nullification of his report on our operation in Gaza.

In his interview, Goldstone said:

"Further information as a result of domestic investigations could lead to further reconsideration, but as presently advised I have no reason to believe any part of the report needs to be reconsidered at this time." (Emphasis added) How can he say this, when he just said last week that if he had known when he wrote the report what he knows now, it would have been a different report? When he admitted that, even though the report charged Israel with the war crime of targeting civilians, he now recognizes that this was not the case?

He can say this because he's a man beyond scruples, beyond shame. A shill for anti-Semites.

My own guess is that someone or several someones got to him. You're messing us up, he was undoubtedly told. Fix it! So (I was going to write "to his everlasting shame" but I just acknowledged that he has no shame), he fixed it.

A pox on him.

~~~~~~~~~~

Meanwhile, a whole lot of people are angry with Interior Minister Eli Yishai (Yisrael Beitenu), who called Goldstone, expressed appreciation for his "courageous" change of stance, and invited him to come to Israel to tour the south, which has been suffering rocket attacks for years.

It is being said that Yishai should have consulted with the government first. He claims he was speaking only for himself in tending that invitation. Most certainly, this would not have created the flack it has if it were not for Goldstone's retraction of his retraction.

But consider this:

Yishai says that Goldstone promised him he would take additional steps to change the status of the report. Danny Gillerman, a former Israeli ambassador to the UN, participated in this phone conversation and agrees that what Yishai claims is so. Says Gillerman, Goldstone indicated he wanted to "wait for the dust to settle."

Yet Goldstone, in his AP interview, insisted that, "There was absolutely no discussion about the Goldstone report on the call [with Yishai]." No discussion -- even though Yishai called to congratulate him for changing his stance? Does Goldstone understand how foolish this makes him look?

Obviously, the someones got to him between the call from Yishai and the subsequent AP interview.

~~~~~~~~~~

Goldstone did say Yishai invited him to Israel, but that he cannot make it until July. Should he have the nerve to come after all that has transpired, I know a lot of people will be waiting at the airport to hiss and boo him into the country.

Goldstone's parting shot in that AP interview: "I ended the conversation by expressing my love for Israel." Doesn't that just tear you up?

~~~~~~~~~~

Well, Peres had his meeting with Obama. And subsequently, Obama, in the words of the JPost, "urged Israel to forge a peace in the Middle East..." As if one nation might "forge a peace" by itself.

Said Obama's statement: "With the winds of change blowing through the Arab world, it's more urgent than ever that we try to seize the opportunity to create a peaceful solution between the Palestinians and the Israelis."

I apologize here to my readers for the repetition. I find it as tiresome as you must, but my task is to report upon and respond to the nonsense being spouted.

Should we be surprised that this is what Obama said? Of course not. But he never packs it in.

First, I ask, WHAT opportunity? Has the president not noticed that the PA has renounced negotiations in favor of the UN gambit? Has it eluded his attention, that Abbas says he'll come to the table again only if Israel first agrees to all his terms, such as a Palestinian state within the '67 lines?

Or...is the president suggesting that we give Abbas whatever he wants, just so the negotiations progress?

~~~~~~~~~~

The current diplomatic idea "du jour" is that the unrest in the Middle East makes it all the more important that we settle things with the Palestinian Arabs now. But this is wrong, wrong, wrong. It would be unwise to advance on this front, even if it were possible, until, as was said above, "the dust settles."

There are several reasons why it behooves us to hold tight now especially:

With current regional instability, and the possibility that Jordan might fall to Islamists, it becomes increasingly important for us to maintain that presence in the Jordan Valley (continue to control the valley, actually) and to sustain strategic depth.

It is also increasingly obvious that an accord with the PA would not be worth the paper it was written on; this is something that has always been clear to those willing to see -- it's just MORE clear now. For the PA itself may be overthrown by Islamists, too, And if that were the case after an accord, we would be more vulnerable because we would have pulled back to make room for that state.

Lastly, there is radicalism in the air, not moderation, and the spine of the PA leaders is stiffened as they tilt towards that radical stance. This is not a time to talk with them. They are not going to moderate on nothing, no how. They wouldn't dare.

And yet, with great sagacity, a host of know-nothings persist in the suggestion that now is the time for "peace." I am sorry to note that Abe Foxman of ADL is among them.

~~~~~~~~~~

Then we have this, which is part of the same thinking, except more so:

EU Foreign Affairs Representative Catherine Ashton put out a statement today that:

"I am deeply disappointed by the approval of 942 new housing units in the Israeli settlement of Gilo....These plans may further damage an already fragile political environment. I reiterate that the EU considers that settlement activities in the West Bank, including east Jerusalem, are illegal under international law, undermine trust between the parties and constitute an obstacle to peace."

And with this, I'm prepared, finally, to relinquish my professional stance and simply say what needs to be said: Damn them all.

"The settlement of Gilo?" This so raises ire. For Gilo is built on Jewish land and is in every way one might imagine solidly and totally a neighborhood of Jewish Jerusalem. Even if there were (G-d forbid) negotiations in which we relinquished part of Jerusalem, I assure, we would hold on to Gilo. It's a non-issue.

I believe we have rights in all of Judea and Samaria. But I can accept, in principle, that someone might argue that it's wrong to establish caravan communities on hilltops in Samaria that do not have government approval.

But for people like Ashton, there's no room for differentiation between that cluster of caravans on a hilltop and Gilo, which is totally establishment, totally government sanctioned. The common denominator, you see, is they're both past the Green Line.

That is what makes Gilo a "settlement." What this actually means, of course, is that it is past the place where the temporary ceasefire line was drawn in 1949 when the fighting between Israel and Jordan came to a halt. There is no sanctity to that line, not legally, not diplomatically, except in the distorted minds of people like Ashton.

Let it be stated here, for the millionth time: Building past the Green Line is not illegal.

~~~~~~~~~~

As to it "undermining trust" and being "an obstacle to peace," I can only ask, once again, where Ashton and her ilk are when Fatah names city squares for terrorists? This doesn't undermine trust and create a peace obstacle? When has she came out with a statement with regard to PA praise of terrorists? Or insisted that PA textbooks stop promoting jihad?

~~~~~~~~~~

Then to further exacerbate the issue, Ashton has this to say:

"If there is to be a genuine peace, a way must be found to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the future capital of two states."

There we have it again, a determination by an outside party of what "must" be. The Oslo Accords and all pertinent UN Security Council resolutions call for the outstanding issues to be resolved via negotiations between Israel and the PA. Last time I looked, we hadn't had those negotiations.

Of course, Ashton is totally incapable of perceiving that were we to give half of Jerusalem to the Palestinian Arabs we still wouldn't have peace. So let's leave that for the moment.

The offense here is that Ashton deigns to declare now not only that the city of Jerusalem must be divided, but that it must be divided along the Green Line -- so that we are undermining the possibility of peace by building in a place like Gilo.

And why would this be so? Because the Palestinian Arabs have said so. That's why.

The EU is morally bankrupt and totally without credibility.

~~~~~~~~~~

But let's take a quick look at the people with whom we are supposed to "make peace":

A poll has been conducted by the Harry S. Truman Research Institute for the Advancement of Peace at the Hebrew University and the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah. According to its results, one third of Palestinian Arabs located within the PA areas support the terrorist slaughter of the Fogel family last month.

While a report released today by Human Rights Watch indicates that the Palestinian Authority routinely harasses and abuses journalists. The report contained testimonies of journalists who were beaten, arrested for no reason, or had their equipment confiscated. HRW says this is PA policy.

What is it we hear, about moderate, democracy-seeking Palestinian Arabs?

~~~~~~~~~~

Amos Gilad -- who is the head of the defense ministry's Diplomatic-Security Bureau and has long served as the Israeli interlocutor with Egypt -- has praised Egypt's Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. It "embodies" the best of Egypt, he said, and deserves the "full support of the world."

Gilad said that because of "smart and sophisticated use of power in [the] face of unprecedented events," Mohamed Tantawi, who is de facto head of the country, has achieved stability. Gilad noted that the Supreme Council was committed to sustaining Egypt's peace agreement with Egypt, and is honoring the agreement to supply Israel with gas, as well.

All of this is a welcome perspective.

~~~~~~~~~~

Recently, I've had considerable unease because of Egypt's declaration that it would be reviewing its relationship with Iran.

But I've since been reassured for several reasons. One savvy individual I spoke with seemed to think that a certain degree of posturing was prudent for the generals -- in order to give an appearance of flexibility, but that in real terms this meant nothing. And, indeed, this is basically what Gilad has now indicated as well -- implying that there will be many words but that policy is what we must watch.

Gilad said the Egyptians have a "deep understanding" of the true nature of Iran.

Additionally, the generals met yesterday with Egypt's news agency and editors, in order to indicate that they would not let an extremist Islamist group take over.

At present, this is the very best we could hope for in Egypt. May it continue.

~~~~~~~~~~

Hmm...

The foreign minister of Sudan has charged that Israel is responsible for a strike by air on a car near Port Sudan last night, which killed two.

Israel has no comment.

There have been terrorists and weaponry tracked from Sudan that were headed to Gaza in the past. If we did this, I am confident it was with good reason.

~~~~~~~~~~

I'm going to close with something that was a heartwarmer for me.

Eran Davidi, an Israeli who has been studying law in New York City, has written a piece on "Why I choose to return."

Life is comfortable where he is, Davidi explains. And were he to stay, he could make much more than he will in Israel.

"So why will I be returning to Israel? It’s precisely the stay here that made me realize that we have no other place except our country. I now understand that Israel is the only place in the world where I’ll truly feel at home. I understand that despite my reserve service and all the wars, I nonetheless feel the safest in Israel. I realize that Israel is the only place where my identity as a Jew won’t stop me from at least dreaming to reach as far as possible.

"I also understand that it’s important for me to take part in these historical moments where the Jewish people returned to its homeland after 2,000 years of exile. Mostly, my stay here made me realize that in the era of human rights the Jewish people has no future without tiny Israel. And this future is dear to me.

"People who moved overseas tend to say that they did it because of the quality of life. However, quality of life is not only measured by the size of your house or the view from the window; it is also not measured by the amount of money you make or its color.

"Quality of life is measured first and foremost by the meaning of the life you live and is derived from the sense of belonging to the people around you, the wholeness of your identity, and the knowledge that by living in our state you are part of something bigger; bigger than you, and sometimes bigger than logic.

"...something in my Israeli character doesn’t allow me to despair; I am unwilling to give up when faced with a fateful mission unlike no other. Perhaps it’s the age, or the stage in life, but many members of my generation and myself - all proud descendents of the Zionist movement - are still hopeful about Israel’s future, and mostly feel that everything still depends on us."

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4052836,00.html

Baruch Hashem!

~~~~~~~~~~

© Arlene Kushner. This material is produced by Arlene Kushner, functioning as an independent journalist. Permission is granted for it to be reproduced only with proper attribution.