Wednesday, June 14, 2017

My Conclusions To Date. Why Abbas Rejects Two States. Anyone Seeking To Serve In Government Is Nuts! Who Wants To Swim In A Swamp?


(I wrote this before the shooting in Virginia and note what I said in "f" below.)

After listening to Comey, Sessions and doing a lot of reading and listening to the likes of Krauthammer, Professor Turley etc. I have come to these conclusions:

a) Unless something truly startling is revealed the Democrats, who have been charging collusion and cover up, have egg on their face

b) Were I Putin, I would be giving myself a lot of high fives because:
   1. It seems to me, though he would have been more delighted with Clinton, because she
       was easier pickings and proved that as Sec. of State, he got Trump and Trump has been an easy           target for Democrats to attack and a divided America is a positive for Putin.
  2. Putin accomplished another goal of not only penetrating our election process but also actually             wound up accomplishing something more powerful, ie. he got Americans to distrust each
      other.(See 1 below.)

c) The intelligence agencies of our nation have shown they are not to be trusted, have it in for Trump.
Comey, who might possibly be behind a lot of the leaks, accomplished his goal of getting back at Trump by having Mueller selected as an independent counsel.

d) The Republicans better pass some meaningful legislation so they can have something to go before the voters with  to justify their re-election.

e) In typical Republican fashion , Sen. Feinstein gave them a lay up and  Republicans seem to have blown it in that she said former AG Lynch should be hauled before the Intelligence Committee and questioned and I see no evidence they are going to do so.

f) The attacks on Trump and those close to him by deranged liberals convince me that anyone who chooses to go to D.C and serve in government are nuts! (Prager on Democrat hysteria. See 1a below.)

Why, in God's name, would any sane person want to risk their reputation at the hands of hypocrites and power seekers who will stop at nothing to win?

I never swim in water where I cannot see my feet. Why would anyone want to swim in a swamp?

g) Until Trump cleans out government of Obama holdovers and other assorted anti-Trumpers he will never be able to execute his agenda. They conform the sand that is in his gears.
Dershowitz examines why Abbas rejects a two state solution. (See 2 below.)

US finally begins to call a spade a spade. (See 2 below.)
I just posted a comment about a previous review of a book pertaining to the issue of young adolescent girls and their problems with the sexual revolution.

Apparently Islamist approach the matter differently..

Daughter Tells of Father's Sexual Demands; Reaction Is Unbelievable++++++++++++++++++

Pressed by Megyn Kelly on his ties to President Trump, an exasperated Vladimir Putin blurted out, “We had no relationship at all. … I never met him. … Have you all lost your senses over there?”
Yes, Vlad, we have.
Consider the questions that have convulsed this city since the Trump triumph, and raised talk of impeachment.
Did Trump collude with Russians to hack the DNC emails and move the goods to WikiLeaks, thus revealing the state secret that DNC chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz was putting the screws to poor Bernie Sanders?
If not Trump himself, did campaign aides collude with the KGB?
Now, given that our NSA and CIA seemingly intercept everything Russians say to Americans, why is our fabled FBI, having investigated for a year, unable to give us a definitive yes or no?
The snail’s pace of the FBI investigation explains Trump’s frustration. What explains the FBI’s torpor? If J. Edgar Hoover had moved at this pace, John Dillinger would have died of old age.
We hear daily on cable TV of the “Trump-Russia” scandal. Yet, no one has been charged with collusion, and every intelligence official, past or present, who has spoken out has echoed ex-acting CIA Director Mike Morrell:
“On the question of the Trump campaign conspiring with the Russians here, th here, there is smoke, but there is no fire, at all. … There’s no little campfire, there’s no little candle, there’s no spark.”

1a) What Happened to the Hysteria About Trump-Induced Anti-Semitism?
Dennis Prager
By Dennis Prager

What Happened to the Hysteria About Trump-Induced Anti-Semitism?
Article Tools
As I document in my book "Still the Best Hope: Why the World Needs American Values to Triumph," which is an explanation of Americanism, leftism and Islamism, hysteria is a major tactic of the left.

If you think about it, there is never an extended period of time — one year, let's say — during which society is not engulfed by a hysteria induced by the left. The mother of them all is global warming, or "climate change," as the left has come to call it (because the warming was not quite enough to induce widespread panic). Hysterics like billionaires Al Gore and Tom Steyer, along with virtually all the Western news media, warn us that the existence of life on Earth is threatened by carbon emissions.

But in its longevity, global warming is almost unique among left-wing hysterias. In general, left-wing hysterias last for much less time, from a few months to a year or two. And when they end — because the hysteria is widely recognized as fraudulent — they're immediately dropped and completely forgotten. The left never pays a price for its hysteria.

Take, for example, the hysteria the left created by charging President Trump's election with the unleashing of unprecedented amounts of anti-Semitism and racism in America.

Being attuned to the left's use of hysteria, I knew it was hysteria at the time. In the March 7, 2017, issue of the Jewish Journal, I wrote a column titled "There Is No Wave of Trump-Induced anti-Semitism or Racism."

It was all a lie. That's why you hardly hear anything now about an alleged wave of racism or anti-Semitism in the country.

What rankles those who have a passion for justice is that the mendacious fomenters of the hysteria have gotten away with it.

So, as a Jew who understands how much damage left-wing Jews have done to the real fight against anti-Semitism, some of these people are worth mentioning.

Perhaps the individual who most spread the lie of Trump-induced anti-Semitism was a previously unknown man named Steven Goldstein, executive director of the previously unknown Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect in New York.

They became famous for a few months when the media had to trot out a Jew with an official title — and no Jewish title is as sacrosanct as one with the name Anne Frank on it.

Goldstein has publicly commented on "the cancer of Antisemitism that has infected his own Administration." He said: "Make no mistake: The Antisemitism coming out of this Administration is the worst we have ever seen from any Administration."

And he said to Trump, "The most vicious anti-Semites in America are looking at you and your administration as a nationalistic movement granting them permission to attack Jews, Jewish institutions and sacred Jewish sites."

Almost as hysterical about anti-Semitism in America was Jonathan Greenblatt, the CEO of a considerably more significant Jewish institution, the Anti-Defamation League, or ADL.
As reported by the Israeli newspaper Haaretz in December, "Anti-Semitic rhetoric in the United States has reached levels unprecedented since 1930s Germany, Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt warned a gathering of Israeli lawmakers in Jerusalem on Monday.

"'Anti-Semitism has wound its way into mainstream conversations in a manner that many Jews who lived through Nazi Germany find terrifying,' he said at the Knesset meeting, which was convened to discuss the plight of American Jewry under the incoming Trump administration."
(Note Haaretz's inflammatory description, "the plight of American Jewry under the incoming Trump administration," made six weeks before there was a Trump administration!)

Aside from fomenting hysteria about an almost nonexistent outbreak of anti-Semitism, all Greenblatt's allusion to Nazi Germany did was diminish the evil of Nazism and the Holocaust.
In December, Greenblatt told NPR, "we found it so deeply problematic when some of the images and some of the rhetoric seemed to evoke longstanding anti-Semitic conspiracies."

And Greenblatt repeated this charge in February in an op-ed he wrote for the Washington Post. He said: "Trump could have said he condemns anti-Semitism and takes incidents, such as the dozens of threats made to Jewish Community Centers, seriously. But instead, he lashed out against those asking the question. ... Last year, we watched as the Trump campaign repeatedly tweeted and shared anti-Semitic imagery and language, allowing this poison to move from the margins into the mainstream of the public conversation."

Well, guess what. It turned out that President Trump was entirely right: There was no eruption of anti-Semitism in America, let alone one emanating from the White House. Furthermore, "those asking the question" did indeed deserve to be "lashed out" against.

And why aren't we hearing any more about Trump-induced anti-Semitism in America? Because law enforcement officials reported that a disturbed Israeli-American Jewish teenager in Israel was the source of nearly all the threats against Jewish community centers. And that a handful of other threats to them came from an angry, obsessive black radical trying to frame an ex-girlfriend.

Will any of those who spread the lie and hysteria about Trump-induced anti-Semitism now apologize?

I wrote the answer to that question about 35 years ago: "Being on the left means never have to say, 'I'm sorry.'"

But the greatest lesson is this: Next time the left gets hysterical, just assume the hysteria is fraudulent. There has been no exception to this rule in my lifetime. And that includes the hysteria about Trump campaign "collusion" with Russia.
2)Alan Dershowitz: Why won't Mahmoud Abbas accept 'two states for two peoples'?

There is a widespread but false belief that Mahmoud Abbas is finally prepared to accept the two-state solution proposed by the U.N. in November 1947 when it divided mandatory Palestine into two areas: one for the Jewish People; the other for the Arab People. The Jews of Palestine accepted the compromise division and declared a nation state for the Jewish people to be called by its historic name: Israel. The Arabs of Palestine, on the other hand, rejected the division and declared that they would never accept a state for the Jewish people and statehood for the Palestinian people.
They wanted for there not to be a state for the Jewish people more than for there to be a state for their own people. Accordingly, they joined the surrounding Arab armies in trying to destroy Israel and drive its Jewish residents into the sea. They failed back then, but over the years, and to the current day, they continue to want no state for the Jewish people more than they want a state for Palestinian Arabs.
That is why Abbas refuses to say that he would ever accept the U.N. principle of two states for two peoples. I know, because I have personally asked him on several occasions.
In a few months, Israel will be celebrating the 70th anniversary of the historic U.N. compromise, but the leaders of the Palestinian Authority still refuse to accept the principle of that resolution: two states for two peoples.
President Trump, for his part, has expressed an eagerness to make "the ultimate deal" between the Israelis and the Palestinians. This has propelled discussions about the dormant peace-process back into the spotlight. Shortly before traveling to the Middle East – where he met with Prime Minister Netanyahu in Israel and President Abbas in Bethlehem – Trump invited the Palestinian leader to the White House. Abbas was last at the White House in March 2014 shortly before the Obama administration's shuttle diplomacy efforts fell apart (led by Secretary of State John Kerry).
Leading up to his meeting with Trump in Washington, Abbas said to a German publication: "We're ready to collaborate with him and meet the Israeli prime minister under his [Trump's] auspices to build peace." He then went on to voice his support for a two-state solution, saying, "It's high time to work on the requirements for it."
This was interpreted as a willingness on Abbas' part to accept the idea of a state for the Jewish people. Generally speaking, the international community supports the idea of resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict with two-states for two-peoples: a state for the Jewish people alongside a state for the Palestinians. Yet presenting Mahmoud Abbas as a supporter of the two-states for two people formulation is to deny truth. The general idea of a two-state solution – which Abbas has nominally supported – does not specify that one state would be for the Jewish people and the other one for the Arabs. Over the years President Abbas has expressed a commitment to a two-state solution – stating that he supports an Arab state along the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital – but has so far refused to accept the legitimacy of a nation state for the Jews existing by its side.
Consider President Abbas' own words. In a 2003 interview he said: "I've said it before, and I'll say it again: I will never recognize the Jewishness of the state, or a 'Jewish state.'" When asked about Israel being the nation state of the Jewish people (in the context of Ehud Olmert's generous peace proposal in 2008) the PA leader said: "From a historical perspective, there are two states: Israel and Palestine. In Israel, there are Jews and others living there. This we are willing to recognize, nothing else." And in a later interview with the Al-Quds newspaper Abbas reiterated this refusal to recognize that Israel is the nation state of the Jewish people:
"We're not talking about a Jewish state and we won't talk about one. For us, there is the state of Israel and we won't recognize Israel as a Jewish state. I told them that this is their business and that they are free to call themselves whatever they want. But [I told them] you can't expect us to accept this."
The list of such pronouncements from the man at the head of the Palestinian Authority goes on and on. Not only has Abbas refused to accept the formulation "Jewish state," he adamantly refuses to accept the more descriptive formulation "nation state of the Jewish people."
Abbas is of course committed to Palestine being a Muslim state under Sharia Law, despite the reality that Christian Palestinians constitute a significant (if forcibly shrinking) percentage of Palestinian Arabs. Article 4 of the Palestinian Basic Law states that:
1. Islam is the official religion in Palestine. Respect and sanctity of all other heavenly religions shall be maintained.
2. The principles of Islamic Shari'a shall be the main source of legislation.
Writing for the New York Times on the advent of the 50th anniversary of the Six Day War, Israel's former Ambassador to Israel, Michael Oren said: "The conflict is not about the territory Israel captured in 1967. It is about whether a Jewish state has a right to exist in the Middle East in the first place. As Mr. Abbas has publicly stated, 'I will never accept a Jewish state.'"
Oren argues that until Abbas and other Palestinian leaders can say the words "two states for two peoples," no reasonable resolution will be reached.
The Palestinian leader's conditional support for a peaceful resolution is also undermined by his own actions. For years, the Palestinian Authority– first under the leadership of Yasser Arafat and now under the 82-year-old Abbas – has perpetuated a vile policy of making payments to terrorists and their families.
According to the official PA budget, in 2016 the Palestinian Authority directed $174 million of its total budget in payments to families of so-called "martyrs," and an additional $128 million for security prisoners -- terrorists in Israeli prisons.
Abbas claims to be a man of peace yet in reality he incentivizes, rewards and incites terrorism.
Some of the blame rests on the shoulders of Barack Obama. By applying pressure only to the Israeli side, not to the Palestinians, Obama consistently disincentivized Abbas from embracing the two-states for two-peoples paradigm. This came to a head in December when Obama allowed the U.S. not to veto the inane U.N. Resolution, under which the Western Wall and other historically Jewish sites are not recognized as part of Israel. (Recall that U.N. Resolution 181 mandated a "special international regime for the city of Jerusalem," and Jordan captured it illegally. Israel liberated Jerusalem in 1967, and allowed everybody to go to the Western Wall.)

It is a tragedy that the international community – headed by the U.N. – encourages the Palestinian Authority's rejectionism, rather than pushing it to make the painful compromises that will be needed from both sides in reaching a negotiated two-state outcome. Indeed, just a few days ago the U.N. once again demonstrated that it is a barrier to the peace-process. In his address at the U.N. General Assembly marking the 50thanniversary of the Six Day War and Israel's "occupation" of the West Bank, U.N. Secretary General, Antonio Guterres said:
"In 1947, on the basis of United Nations General Assembly resolution 181, the world recognized the two-state solution and called for the emergence of 'independent Arab and Jewish states.' On 14 May 1948, the State of Israel was born. Almost seven decades later, the world still awaits the birth of an independent Palestinian state."
Guterres failed to acknowledge that "the reason the world still awaits the birth of an independent Palestinian state" is because the Arabs rejected the U.N. partition plan, which would have given them their own state, committing instead to seven decades of undermining Israel's legitimacy.
When the Palestinian leadership and people want their own state more than they want there not to be a state for the Jewish people, the goal of the 1947 U.N. Resolution – two states for two peoples – will be achieved. A good beginning would be for Abbas finally to agree with the U.N. Resolution and say the following words: "I accept the 1947 U.N. Resolution that calls for two states for two peoples." It's not too much to ask from a leader seeking to establish a Palestinian Muslim state.
Alan Dershowitz (@AlanDersh) is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus, at Harvard Law School and author of "Taking the Stand: My Life in the Law" and "Electile Dysfunction: A Guide for the Unaroused Voter." This article was previously published by the Gatestone Institute.


US places onus on Hamas for Gaza crisis
US State Department officials says "no one should lose sight of the fact, of this fact, that Hamas bears the greatest responsibility for the current situation in Gaza.”

Hamas is responsible for the humanitarian crisis, the Trump administration said as 2 million Palestinian in Gaza struggle to live on four hours a day of electricity.

“We do remain deeply concerned about the humanitarian situation there,” US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert told reporters in Washington on Tuesday.

“We continue to underscore the need for international support for Gaza’s recovery and humanitarian assistance to the Palestinian people,” she said. 

“But no one should lose sight of the fact, of this fact, that Hamas bears the greatest responsibility for the current situation in Gaza,” Nauert added.

She did not comment on Israel’s Security Cabinet decision to cede to the Palestinian Authority’s request to reduce the electricity its supplies to Gaza, a move that would give the Palestinians living there only some two to three hours of power a day.

It’s part of the measures the PA is taking to regain control of the Strip, a decade after Hamas ousted Fatah in a bloody coup. The PA has told Israel that it would only pay NIS 25 million of its NIS 40 million monthly bill, explaining that Hamas could pay the remainder with tax fees it collects.

Liberman told Israel's Kan Radio on Wednesday morning that Hamas has the funds to pay the electricity bill, but is diverting that money into a military buildup, particularly the construction of tunnels that it plans to use to attack Israel.

Hamas collects hundreds of millions of shekels in tax fees from Gaza residents and in addition receives millions more from Iran and other extremists groups.

The cabinet decided that it was “crazy” to take Israeli tax payers' money to pay for Gaza electricity, when Hamas refuses to do so, Liberman said.

He dismissed reports of a humanitarian crisis in Gaza.

“It’s not Switzerland, but every day hundreds of trucks cross through Kerem Shalom” filled with goods, Liberman said.

A check of social media photographs will show how Gaza has stores, markets and restaurants, Liberman said.

For the last few months the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Maj.-Gen. Yoav Mordechai has asked the international community to provide money for Gaza's electricity.

At present, Israel is the main supplier of electricity for the Strip, providing 125 MGW out of the necessary 450 to 500 MGW needed for round the clock power.

Gaza’s power plant, which provided between 90 to 120 MGW, shut down in April after the PA imposed an onerous tax on the diesel fuel needed to run the plan. 

The UN humanitarian coordinator for the Palestinian territories Robert Piper warned against any further reductions in Gaza electricity on Wednesday.

He called on the PA, Hamas and Israel to take all necessary steps to increase rather than decrease the power to Gaza.

“The UN has already appealed to the international community to support its limited humanitarian efforts to prevent the collapse of vital life-saving, health, water, sanitation and municipal services,” Piper’s office said.

“Hospitals, water supply, waste water treatment and sanitation services have already been dramatically curtailed since mid-April and depend almost exclusively on a UN emergency fuel operation,” his office said.

“A further increase in the length of blackouts is likely to lead to a total collapse of basic services, including critical functions in the health, water and sanitation sectors,” Piper said. “The people in Gaza should not be held hostage to this longstanding internal Palestinian dispute,” he added.

No comments: