Envoy to UN: Pullout should end UN hostility toward Israel

[caitlyn]

Envoy to UN: Pullout should end UN hostility toward Israel
By Reuters

The Gaza pullout should mark an end to UN hostility against Israel, UN Ambassador Dan Gillerman said on Monday, urging the world body to support the withdrawal as a historic move toward peace.

The comments echoed previous calls by Israel and the United States to halt the litany of anti-Israel resolutions passed by the UN General Assembly each year and dismantle the extensive bureaucracy built up around the Palestinian cause.

"It is time for the United Nations to acknowledge Israel's actions," Gillerman told a news conference. "We hope that in the United Nations there will be no more business as usual as far as the Middle East is concerned ... No more Israel-bashing, no more ongoing resolutions which keep repeating themselves time after time."

For the full article visit Ha'aretz, Israel's progressive newspaper's website.

[Caleb]

1. I doubt it

[caitlyn]

2. Me too...

...but at least Israel wants to participate in the world community. I can't say the same for many right-wing Republicans in the U.S.

[H5N1]

3. " Sharon is a brutal thug and land-grabber."

"With Ariel Sharon, by contrast, what you see is what you get. He has always been in the destruction business, not the construction business. As minister of defence in 1982, Sharon preferred to destroy the settlement town of Yamit in Sinai rather than hand it to Egypt as a reward for signing a peace treaty with Israel. George Bush once described his friend Sharon as "a man of peace". In truth, Sharon is a brutal thug and land-grabber.

Sharon is also the unilateralist par excellence. The road map issued by the quartet (US, UN, EU and Russia) in the aftermath of the Iraq war envisaged three stages leading to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel by the end of 2005. Sharon wrecked the road map, notably by continuing to expand Jewish settlements on the West Bank and building an illegal wall that cuts deep into Palestinian territory."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1511702,00.html

This is all smoke and mirrors. Sharon is giving nothing and taking everything he can steal.

[Caleb]

5. This is exactly the kind of attitude

the original article was talking about.

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Violet_Crumble]

11. Why are you repeating the same bullshit about the Roadmap?

The very first step, to be taken by the Palestinians, was to end terrorism.

I'll make the assumption that you 'missed' reading my post where I posted Phase One of the Roadmap in its entirety the last time you made the false claim that the first step was for the Palestinians to end terrorism before anything else happened. Here's a link to the post. Please take the time to read and digest it..

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x98176#98219

[caitlyn]

15. At the outset of Phase I: I have read the roadmap.

Let me quote the relevant points. Thanks for the link, BTW...

At the outset of Phase I:


* Palestinian leadership issues unequivocal statement reiterating Israel’s right to exist in peace and security and calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere. All official Palestinian institutions end incitement against Israel.

That is the very beginning. None of the above has happened yet. Not even one step has been taken. As far as Israel's reciprocal responsibilities are concerned, let's again go to the next paragraph in the text you so graciously provided:

* Israeli leadership issues unequivocal statement affirming its commitment to the two-state vision of an independent, viable, sovereign Palestinian state living in peace and security alongside Israel, as expressed by President Bush,

Prime Minister Sharon has repeatedly met this condition.

and calling for an immediate end to violence against Palestinians everywhere.

Prime Minister Sharon has repeatedly stated that if Palestinian terrorism ends, as called for above, so will all Israeli military action.

All official Israeli institutions end incitement against Palestinians.

I am not aware of such an institution. I am aware of Israel arresting extremists who incite violence against Palestinians and would gladly post links of news stories where this has repeatedly happened.

So... tell me again how I am misrepresenting the roadmap?

[Violet_Crumble]

21. I posted Phase One in its entirety...

There was NO nonsense about waiting for one point to happen before others were to happen in descending order. The fact is that both Israel and the Palestinians didn't implement some of the steps. Anyone who has the ability to comprehend the document and doesn't feel the need to blame one side while making out the other is blameless can easily see that, and some might even be able to see the flaws that are inherent in the Roadmap itself. That is how you are misrepresenting the roadmap - by falsely claiming that there was only one first step when there was in reality a lot more to Phase One than just one step. Trying to put yr own spin on what Israel should have done (eg making a call for an immediate end to violence everywhere was not dependent on something else happening first, and if it was, feel free to point out the text of the roadmap that says so) is no different than someone trying to spin 'Palestinian leadership issues unequivocal statement reiterating Israel’s right to exist in peace and security and calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere' by saying that they're waiting for Israel to end the violence against Palestinians before they call for an end to the violence...

Violet...

[Coastie for Truth]

9. Sharon is the personification of 5.6 Million people?

If you really believe that Sharon exemplifies and personifies 5.6 Million people - life is too short to waste on such Genesis XXXVIII, verses 8-10 games.

[Violet_Crumble]

12. I don't know what post yr reading, Coastie...

but the poster never claimed anything of the sort, and neither did Avi Shlaim, who's the author he's quoting...

[DixieDem]

4. It depresses me that the world...

isn't seeing this as a historic event.

Sure, it's a token gesture. I agree that Israel continues to expand on the West Bank.

But still, the Gaza stip WAS a big sacrifice on Israel's behalf. If we want this world to change, we've gotta give credit where credit is due. Israel deserves a big pat on the back for this effort.

[caitlyn]

7. Ending occupation for 1.4 million Palestinians...

...without any reciprocal action, without any Palestinian concessions, can hardly be seen as a token gesture. Considering the political cost and risks taken by Prime Minister Sharon I believe he has to be very serious about this. The Times of London did a wonderful little analysis on this. I should find it and post it.

Anyway, other than that I agree with your wholeheartedly.

[DixieDem]

8. OOPS!

By token gesture, I meant 8,000 settlers compared to 140,000 settlers.

I only point this out because some people are looking just at the numbers. I KNOW that the Gaza Strip was a huge sacrifice for Israel, and it's not just in numbers that were relocated.

[Violet_Crumble]

13. Why is Gaza a huge sacrifice for Israel?

n/t

[caitlyn]

16. When Egypt controlled Gaza...

...it was used as a base of attack against Israel. The fear is that it will be so again. Gaza, by air, is less than two minutes from Tel Aviv.

Gaza is part of the promised land. This is an issue to the religious community. (No, I am not religious, but I am Jewish and I understand why this would be an issue.)

Finally, you are aware, of course, that there were Jews in Gaza prior to 1948 for centuries. I can tell you where to find the ruins of the synagogue in Gaza City if you like. Why can the Arabs not tolerate even a single Jew returning?

[Violet_Crumble]

22. I didn't think Gaza had any religious significance at all...

As for yr last comment - there's places in what's now Israel where Palestinians had lived for centuries prior to 1948, and there's plenty of razed villages. What's the difference between that and what you spoke of? The Palestinian population have had Jews living amongst them peacefully, so why are you trying to make out that Israel dismantling the settlements, which were illegal under international law, is in fact down to Palestinian hatred of Jews and nothing at all to do with an illegal occupation?

Violet...

[barb162]

10. It is very brave on Sharon's part

but I doubt if it will cool things down

http://www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mpl/world/3309532

[caitlyn]

17. I agree with you. It won't help, but withdrawing is the right thing to do

[bribri16]

14. Yes, if they pull out from all occupied territories. But not until then.

The "settlements" are illegal and are really just occupied territories and not "settlements." The US turns a blind eye to the continuous building of new "settlements." I fear that the US will be paying for its support of this illegal and immoral ME policy that violates universal justice and human dignity. Calling Sharon a "Nazi" demonstrates the irrational hate and unenlightenment of these Israelis.

[caitlyn]

18. Disputed territories...

...rather than occupied. There has never been any agreement on where the borders of Israel should be. The last such treaty, a 1919 agreement between the British, King Feisal of Transjordan and Iraq, and Chaim Wiezmann representing the Zionists of the day, set the border at the Jordan River. That made all of Gaza and the West Bank part of the future Jewish state.

In 1947 the U.N., in its wisdom, wanted to partition British Palestine based on demographics. The Jews accepted this. The Arabs did not. Jerusalem, including the eastern part, was never to be part of an Arab state. It was supposed to be international, with both parties providing members to the council that would administer the city. The day Israel was created it was attacked by 10 Arab nations.

From 1949 until 1967 the West Bank and Gaza were occupied by Jordan and Egypt respectively. There was not one word of protest by the Palestinians. The PLO was created during this time in Egypt. It was only concerned with "liberating" Israel as it existed when there was no Israeli occupied territory.

In 1967, at the end of the Six Day War, Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol offered to return all captured land in exchange for peace and diplomatic recognition of Israel by the Arabs. The Arab League, meeting in Khartoum, rejected the offer.

Also in 1967 the U.N. passed Resolution 242, calling for Israeli withdrawal from captured territory to "secure and defensible borders", not the 1949 armistice line. Those borders were to be determined by negotiation, not by anything that had gone before. British ambassador and one of the principle authors of 242, Lord Caradon, stated repeatedly in interviews that the 1949 armistice line is not an acceptable border precisely because it is neither secure nor defensible. Ditto the 1947 partition lines.

In the aftermath of the 1973 Yom Kippur War the U.N. reaffirmed Resolution 242 with Resolution 338. At Oslo in 1993 both sides agreed that these resolutions should be the basis for a peace agreement.

So... where are Israels real borders? Nobody can answer that one. Are "settlements" merely Jewish towns within Israel or part of a future Palestinian state? Again, nobody can answer that one completely, but I think most rational people would agree the answer is a bit of both: many settlements will have to be uprooted but some will stay. It is also distinctly possible, as Ehud Barak proposed at Taba, that the Palestinians will get some compensatory land from within Israel's pre-1967 borders.

[Coastie for Truth]

19. Failed policy is our crack cocaine dependence on Saudi Oil.

We had a wake up call - and Reagan ignored it (after all, it was "Morning In America"), and oil man George H. Bush just drew us closer to the House of Saud, and Clinton couldn't fight the American petroleum Institute, the North American Automobile Manufacturers Association, and the UAW, and George W. Bush - forget it.

Our over dependence on the Riyadh Oil Cartel is as disastrous as our dependence on the Cali Drug Cartel - or our wink and nod on the Kabul Heroin Cartel.

What is particularly dangerous about the Riyadh Oil Cartel is that at $67+/bbl, the "monopoly rents" are not going to starving Muslims in Niger (except for mere pennies) or to establishing an entrepreneurial infrastructure in Gaza (once you get past Prince Talal's King Holdings Ltd - that's it from the Riyadh Oil Cartel, and Talal is on the outs with the Riyadh Oil Cartel). The "monopoly rents" are going to Wahabi Madrassas, to terrorists, and the terrorist associated "charities" - but not to Seeds of peace or Kingdom Holdings.

Even worse, the Riyadh Oil Cartel is stealing the mineral birth right of the Saudi proletariat - and spending it on bordellos, race horses, casinos, and "extravagances" - but not on "the people" (Saudi proletariat). That is Marie Antoinette and Czar Nicholas II style thinking. And that is who we support in the ME -- and that is who AlQaida is trying to unseat.

Oil and the Riyadh Oil Cartel constitute our failed ME policy.

The absence of an energy policy beyond "drill, drill, drill" and "tax cut, tax cut, tax cut" and "kiss King Abdullah's butt" is our failed ME policy.

On a relative scale, compared to the Riyadh Oil Cartel (and our support) - israel wouldn't (to use an old Coast Guard expression) make a good pimple on a Bosun's Mate's left butt cheek.

[Darranar]

20. Get the guards out of the prison, then lock the doors...

and advertise one's supposed benevolence.