Dagens stora internationella nyhet!

Inte att Iran vägrar lyda Obama och  tar stormsteg mot den första atombomben samtidigt som de bygger fler och fler missiler.

Inte att Nordkorea häromdagen sände iväg en stor laddning missiler, en stor nog att nå Alaska.

Inte att Hamas fortsätter oförhindrat att importera vapen.

Det är Israel som ska attackeras eftersom det är roten till allt ont. Bara Israel slutar bygga dass och barnhem på Västbanken så blir det lugn och ro i Iran och Nordkorea. Bara inte Israel får för sej att bygga ett hus i sin huvudstad, Jerusalem. Det är ju bara araber som får göra det, även om det är på judisk privat mark! Araber må tillåtas bygga illegalt överallt, de är ju fattiga.

Obama, Mr O (som i Noll) har kallat upp den israeliska ambassadören och skällt ut honom. Netanyahu sa självklart att nu har Obama passerat en skarpt markerad röd linje. Kommer du ihåg vad som hänt i Jerusalem på sistone? Före 1948 accepterade judarna i Säkerhetsrådet Jerusalem som internationell stad under FN, därefter attackerade jordanierna under ledning av engelsmannen Glubb, förstörde alla 58 synagogorna i gamla Jerusalem, drev ut eller dödade varenda jude, använde deras gravstenar som vägbeläggning – FN sa inte ett dyft. ETT land erkände Jordaniens annektering av Jerusalem – Pakistan.

Världen hade fått den enda chansen att göra Jerusalem till en internationell stad efter att ha varit judarnas huvudstad i 3500 år – mer än dubbelt så länge som islam har existerat. Obama vill permanenta dessa 19 år av illegal ockupation…..     1948 talade Israels första president, Weizmann, i Jerusalem:

Israel Claims Jerusalem, Address by President Weizmann in Jerusalem, 1 December 1948:

On 1 December 1948, the President of Israel’s Provisional State Council, Dr. Chaim Weizmann, visited Jerusalem and addressed the city’s Advisory Council. He emphasised that it was inconceivable that the Jewish city could be placed under foreign rule. Here are his words:

It is with a sense of humility and sorrow that I rise to speak here among you who have suffered so much and wrought so much during this great and tragic year. Jerusalem holds a unique place in the heart of every Jew. Jerusalem is to us the quintessence of the Palestine idea. Its restoration symbolises the redemption of Israel. Rome was to the Italians the emblem of their military conquests and political organisation. Athens embodies for the Greeks the noblest their genius had wrought in art and thought. To us Jerusalem has both a spiritual and a temporal significance. It is the City of God, the seat of our ancient sanctuary. But it is also the capital of David and Solomon, the City of the Great King, the metropolis of our ancient commonwealth.

To the followers of the two other great monotheistic religions, Jerusalem is a site of sacred associations and holy memories. To us it is that and more than that. It is the centre of our ancient national glory. It was our lodestar in all our wanderings. It embodies all that is noblest in our hopes for the future. Jerusalem is the eternal mother of the Jewish people, precious and beloved even in its desolation. When David made Jerusalem the capital of Judea, on that day there began the Jewish Commonwealth. When Titus destroyed it on the 9th of Ab, on that day there ended the Jewish Commonwealth. But even though our Commonwealth was destroyed, we never gave up Jerusalem.

An almost unbroken chain of Jewish settlement connects the Jerusalem of our day with the Holy City of antiquity. To countless generations of Jews in every land of their dispersion the ascent to Jerusalem was the highest that life could offer. In every generation new groups of Jews from one part or another of our far-flung Diaspora came to settle here. For over a hundred years we have formed the majority of its population. And now that, by the will of God, a Jewish Commonwealth has been re-established, is it to be conceived that Jerusalem – Jerusalem of all places – should be out of it?

Ten years ago the question first came up in connection with the Report of the Royal Commission. And in the great debate which took place on that subject in the British House of Lords the then Archbishop of Canterbury said these memorable words:

It seems to me extremely difficult to justify fulfilling the ideals of Zionism by excluding them from any place in Zion. How is it possible for us not to sympathise in this matter with the Jews? We all remember their age long resolve, lament and longing.

“If I forget thee, 0 Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning.

They cannot forget Jerusalem

…

The Archbishop spoke the truth. We cannot forget Jerusalem. And if that was true then, it is all the more true today, for in this last year we have sealed afresh our covenant with our ancient mother-city with the blood of our sons and daughters. In addition to our historical unbroken chain of Jewish settlement in this city, the fact of our numerical preponderance among its inhabitants, a new link has been forged – your heroic defence of Jerusalem in this past year. It gives us the right to claim that Jerusalem is and should remain ours.

Where were all those who indulged in such fine phrases about the spiritual associations of Jerusalem for the whole civilised world? Did they lift a finger to protect Jerusalem, its men and women and children, its homes and houses of prayer, against the Arab shrapnel which rained death day and night on your homes for months on end? Did they make the slightest move when the Jewish Quarters of the Old City with their ancient synagogues were reduced to rubble by Arab gunfire, and were desecrated and defiled after the surrender? Did they utter one word of protest against the Jews being denied, for now over a year, access to the Wailing Wall, which is our holiest shrine? Do not worry, my friends The ancient synagogues will be rebuilt, the road to the Wailing Wall will be opened.

You have renewed the ancient covenant with your blood and your sacrifices. Jerusalem is ours by virtue of the blood that was shed by your sons in its defence. You suffered hunger and thirst in the broiling heat of the summer and defended Jerusalem against surrender and destruction. Not only the soldiers. The ordinary men and women, yea, and the little children, who went about your work while the bullets flew around you and many of you fell victims to the deadly missiles. All of you have had a share in this defence.

When I say that Jerusalem is ours, I am fully conscious of the sacred associations which Jerusalem has for others than ourselves. We respect these associations. When you defended Jerusalem against havoc and destruction, you fought not only for your own people but for civilisation.

Had it not been for your heroic defence, who knows what would have remained of its non-Jewish values. We are anxious to see these values effectively protected and we are agreeable that special arrangements be made for the Old City with its Holy Places. We would like to see this sacred zone beautified, so that worshippers coming from all parts of the world to Jerusalem will derive joy and inspiration from their pilgrimage.

There would, however, appear to be no reason why such special arrangements for the Old City should extend also to the New City outside the Walls, which has no such sacred associations. This New City has sprung up during the past hundred years essentially as a result of Jewish effort. It has become during the last thirty years the administrative and spiritual capital of the new Jewish Palestine.

It houses our central national institutions, the Jewish Agency, the Jewish National Fund, the Keren Hayesod, the Chief Rabbinate, the Hebrew University, the Hebrew National Library, the Jewish Medical Centre and numerous learned and communal bodies. It is now also the seat of the Supreme Court. It seems utterly inconceivable that this Jewish city should be placed under foreign rule. It seems inconceivable that the establishment of a Jewish State in Palestine should be accompanied by the detachment from it of its spiritual centre and historical capital.

Men and women of Jerusalem, fear not for the future of your city – of our city! The words of our national hymn Hatikvah will yet come true:

To be a free people in our own land -

The land of Zion and Jerusalem.

FN gjorde alltså inte ett skvatt 1948-67 för att återställa gamla Jerusalem som internationell stad.

1967 anföll arabvärlden åter igen Israel, och judarna återförenade Jerusalem för alltid, eftersom de råkade vinna emot floden av araber som galopperade in. Plötsligt blev det ett sjudundrande liv i FN och hos de flesta andra: “FÅR man göra så???” Säkerhetsrådet kläckte ur sej den ökända §242, ej bindande utan enbart rekommendation, som bl.a. säger i annex 1:

Emphasizing the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war and the need to work for a just and lasting peace in which every State in the area lives in security;

Det vill säga, arabiska anfallskrig (1948) är ok, men judiska försvarskrig (1967) strider emot allt som är heligt.

TT klämmer i med att “Israels annektering av sin huvudstad är olaglig” för att lura svenskarna. Säkerhetsrådet kom upp med en icke bindande resolution §478, som världen utom USA (som fegade ut och inte vågade säja bu eller bä) tyckte kunde vara ok. De hade visserligen inte godkänt Jordaniens anfallskrig och ockupation av Jerusalem, men att låta judarna återfå sin gamla huvudstad så lätt var inte så bra, eftersom araberna har olja.

TT-”nyheten” är rätt kul, det var länge sen Aftonbladet var så USA-vänligt.

Det hade varit intressant att se hur många israeliska araber köper hus och lägenheter i judiska områden – många gör det i Jerusalem.

Mr O bjuder in “judarna”

En utvald grupp amerikanska judar, var inbjudna för en – uh – diskussion, på exakt samma sätt som EU etc. betalar vänsterextremistgrupper i Israel för att vara språkrör, så att blaskorna här därefter kan säja att “en israelisk grupp sa….” Där finns många nog judar i USA som bara är det till namnet, som inte skulle få för sej att besöka Israel förrän de blir tvungna (konstigt att det påminner om Tyskland på trettiotalet). Fenomenet självhatande jude är alltför vanligt, hur obegripligt det än är. Nå, han bjöd in de judar han visste han kunde lita på: Vilket uteslöt de israelvänliga grupperna: sionister och CAMERA, vilket är en kommitté som granskar media och påpekar antisemitiska lögner och vinklingar. Här en rapport om mötet:

[07.15.2009]

Obama Clarifies: Israel Is The Problem Not The Palestinians

President Obama invited a very select group of Jewish leaders to the White House. Like all his events, Obama made sure that his supporters dominated the room. Flanked by staffers Rahm Emanuel and David Axelrod, Obama overloaded the guest list with left leaning American Jews. Groups like Peace Now, The National Jewish Democrat Council, and J Street, all of whom oppose the the elected government of Benjamin Netanyahu, were included among the typical “major Jewish organizations.”  Obama made sure that groups supporting the right wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu were a distinct minority.

From a few published reports and other sources, One Jerusalem has pieced together a picture of what took place at this meeting. In short, Obama made it clear that he feels Israel must be pushed to make a deal with the Palestinians – which means that Obama is planning to force Israel to compromise on Jerusalem, settlements, the West Bank, and possibly the right of return.  He will not be dissuaded by facts on the ground (more on this later), and he sees a moral equivalency between the plight of the Palestinians and the needs of the State of Israel.

When Malcolm Hoenlein of the Conference of Major Organizations made the case that progress on the Palestinian front comes when there is “no daylight” between the policies of the United States and Israel, Obama responded that despite overwhelming support by President Bush no progress was made. When Hoenlein pointed out that under Bush, Israel took the momentous step of withdrawing from Gaza (One Jerusalem opposed this action) and previously under other friendly Administrations went the extra mile, like adopting The Road Map, Obama refused to let these facts change his mind.

Our friend Rick Richman does a superb job responding to Obama:

The following would be my summary of the progress over the past eight years — which Obama apparently ignored in his response to the group:

After the Palestinians rejected an offer of a state at Camp David in 2000, rejected the Clinton Parameters in 2001, and conducted a terror war against Israeli civilians from September 2000-2002, Israel nevertheless agreed in 2003 to the “Performance-Based Roadmap” for the creation of a Palestinian state, despite reservations about the manner in which that plan would actually be implemented.

In 2003 and thereafter, Israel ceased all settlement activity — as it understood that Phase I Roadmap obligation (no new settlements; no building outside settlement boundaries; no financial incentives for Israelis to move to settlements) — and believed American officials agreed with its interpretation of that obligation.

In 2004, after the Palestinian Authority failed to meet its own Phase I Roadmap obligation (sustained efforts to dismantle terrorist groups and infrastructure), Israel nevertheless proposed to dismantle every existing settlement in Gaza (not just “outposts”), remove every Israeli soldier, and turn over the entire area to the Palestinian Authority — in exchange for a written American commitment to defensible borders and retention of the major settlement blocs necessary to insure them.

In 2005, after receiving the American commitment, Israel proceeded to carry out the Gaza disengagement, despite the political and social upheaval within Israel it caused, including the break-up of the ruling party and nationwide demonstrations, and – at State Department insistence – further dismantled four settlements (not just “outposts”) in the West Bank as well, to demonstrate the disengagement would be “Gaza First,” not “Gaza Last.”

In 2006, after the Palestinians elected their premier terrorist group to control their government, Israelis nevertheless re-elected Kadima on a platform of “convergence” (the new name for withdrawal from the West Bank), and would have carried it out but for the attacks by Hamas from Gaza and Hezbollah from Lebanon that caused two wars and finally convinced Israelis further withdrawals were insane.

In 2007, despite the Palestinian failure to carry out its Phase I dismantlement obligation, and its categorical rejection of Phase II (a state with provisional sovereignty before Phase III final status negotiations), Israel agreed to proceed immediately to final status negotiations once again under the “Annapolis Process.”

Throughout 2008, Israel negotiated with its “peace partner” under the accelerated process, and offered 100 percent of the West Bank (after land swaps) for a state, with concessions on other major issues, all of which were rejected.

During this eight-year period, the Palestinian concessions (aka reciprocal “progress”) can be enumerated more briefly:  zero.

But Obama reiterated his commitment to forcing Israel to give Palestinians what they want. In other words he does not want to be deterred from his prejudices by the facts.

One Jerusalem has been warning Israel’s supporters that the Obama Administration is dead set on using all its power to force Israel to capitulate even if it means dividing Jerusalem and weakening its defenses.  We must continue to recruit people in the campaign to defend Israel and Jerusalem.  Signing our Jerusalem petition is a sure fire way to stay informed about important news that you will probably not get anywhere else and to learn insider analysis.

As Obama’s troubles at home multiply, look for him to show leadership by beating up on Israel. We need to be prepared to fight back.

En annan länk om mötet här.

Netanyahu kallar självklart Mr O:s påfund att judar må icke bygga i sin huvudstad, för rasistiskt.

Det ser definitivt inte bra ut att världens starkaste land håller på att underminera sin egen styrka och samtidigt den hos dess hitintills trogna vänner.

“Tvåstatslösningen“

Mr. O tjafsar om tvåstatslösningen. I princip vill han sända alla israeliska araber till de palestinska områdena, vilket inte en enda vill.  Men just den aspekten berör varken han eller hans cirkel av folk med tindrande ögon.  Han har givit Abbas en väldig massa råg i ryggen, påstår utåt att han också pressar palestinaaraberna på att uppfylla sina löften, inget av det har vi sett. Abbas har ju Fatahs Stadgar i ryggen som säger att varhelst du har en jude, det må vara på Västbanken, i de områdena Jordanien illegalt ockuperade i Jerusalem 1948-67, eller i Tel Aviv, alla är illegala bosättningar. Se t.ex. denna artikel. Abbas gubbar kvittrar: “det är land som Israel ockuperade 1967″……   Att de inte “ockuperade” det 1948-67 och araberna därefter mangrant anföll, spelar ju liksom ingen roll och behöver inte påpekas. De har väl lärt sej från Aftonbladet.

.

DN346 AB498 AB330 GP977 Kr KvP ND SvD097 |

.

...