Uncensored Israel News, Jewish news, National Israeli news

palestinian refugees

Obama did not make up his mind on the right of return

Boy in GazaThe US Senate is preparing to vote on a bill that requires the State Department to collect demographic information for Palestinian refugee camps: how many of the people there are the original refugees and how many are their descendants.

The bill would inject some common sense into the current situation, in which Palestinians receive subsidies for living in their own towns in Lebanon and Syria merely because their grandparents left Israel 65 years ago.

What is noteworthy is the White House’s demand to omit the provision which would differentiate refugees based on their origin, either from Smaller Israel or the West bank and Gaza. Obama thus leaves on the table the option for the Palestinians to return to the Jewish state.

Leading presidential candidate ignores Camp David treaty

Amr Moussa has declared the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty dead. While he would not (indeed, cannot) denounce the treaty, Moussa promised to abide first by the terms of the Arab League peace initiative, which requires Israel to withdraw to the 1948 armistice line, surrender Jerusalem, and allow Palestinianrefugees’ to return.

Moussa lied when he said that the treaty was conditioned on the creation of a Palestinian state; there are many memoirs that show how irrelevant that issue was for Sadat.

Amr Moussa

03 May 2012 Posted in Egypt

The EU has selective regard for property rights

The EU missions, the UN, and other international organizations condemned Israel’s eviction of sixty-seven Palestinianrefugees” from their homes.

Refugees’? Their grandparents were displaced sixty-five years ago.

‘Their homes’? The houses in Beit Hanina were purchased by Jews long ago, and the court battle dragged on for eight years. Compare that to the few weeks it took an Israeli court to evict a Jewish family from their house in Hebron recently because of minor irregularities in the sale documents.

An anti-Palestinian Syria is a better Syria

Syrian troops clashed with Palestinianrefugees” in Latakia. The Palestinians deployed heavy machine guns, RPGs, and anti-tank rockets.

Coupled with Meshaal’s betrayal—after years of Syrian support he decided to move to Cairo when riots erupted against Assad—the new Palestinian stance ensures Assad’s change of heart toward them. That would not be the first time the Syrians have turned on the Palestinians: in fact, under Bashar’s father they killed more Palestinians in a single battle than Israel has in the course of her entire existence.

Syria: back to uncertainty

Bashar AssadAfter Assad seemed to prevail against the rebels, fighting broke out in northern Syria. The Muslim Brotherhood and some Kurds have joined the army deserters who have realized that they have little chance of being forgiven by Assad. The bands staged several provocations against government troops, including an ambush which killed 120 soldiers.

Assad’s response so far has been measured. Only a few dozen people have been killed in the rebel towns. Given the very low number of casualties, Assad’s tanks and helicopters are evidently engaged in urban battles rather than the wholesale slaughter of civilians.

The Syrian regime does not appear to be in danger. Even if the rumors, reported by Debka, of a Turkish invasion of northern Syria are true, the incursion will be limited to a narrow border area so that refugee camps can be set up in Syria rather than Turkey. This, by the way, shows Israel what normal countries do to stem the flow of illegal immigrants. Israel, however, lacks the guts to set up refugee camps for Africans in Sinai, and even entertains the idea of allowing Palestinian refugees into the Jewish state.

The Turkish invasion of Syria was probably coordinated with Assad, who only profits by preventing a widely publicized exodus of his citizens, and can also count on the Turks to disrupt the rebels’ movements. Erdogan is probably not so crazy as to comply with Obama’s bidding and send his troops into Syria against Assad’s wishes; the consequence of such an action could well be Syrian missile strikes on Turkey and a pretext for Iran to send troops into Syria.

Right of return tops the agenda

Palestinian refugees in 1948For decades, the Israeli right and ultra-left have agreed on one point: no right of return. Conservatives denounced it for ideological reasons, while leftists simply hated the low-class Arabs.

As we have long predicted, the right of return inevitably found its way back to the negotiating table because of the policy of piecemeal concessions. At this time, everything else, including withdrawal from the Temple Mount, is agreed upon, and the Arabs lose nothing by pressing for the return of refugees’ descendants.

The Israeli plan to let them return to the West Bank won’t work: the PA government would never allow that, as the influx would break its civil society. Besides, the relatively affluent West Bankers hate the refugees and drove them away when Sharon attempted to relocate some of them from Gaza.

Also as we predicted, the Arabs have resorted to marching civilians across the Israeli border. The next action will include tens of thousands of people, and they might put women and children at the front. Israel lacks the skills to break up large-scale riots, though we still have two weeks to study the excellent tactics used by the Iranian police during the 2009 Tehran riots. Setting extensive minefields is one option; that way, at least, we won’t need Jewish soldiers to shoot Arab women.

A word of truth from the Palestinians

Saeb ErekatPalestinian negotiator Erekat remarked that peace negotiations in Israel are over. It testifies to Jewish madness that he spoke at a conference in Tel Aviv. Indeed, on that same day Israel sent the PA $100 million in tax transfers.

Erekat is definitely right. Everyone knows the conditions for peace for each side, and they are irreconcilable: The Palestinians cannot forfeit their ‘right of return,’ and we Israelis cannot accept it. Everything else is settled: the Israeli government has agreed to abandon the Temple Mount and outlying settlements, and the PA agreed to leave three settlement blocs to the Jews.

Given the situation, a Palestinian declaration of statehood is the most logical course of action. It simply avoids the problem. The Palestinian government is fine with de facto abandonment of the right of return. The one problem the PA faces with statehood is that refugees would be able to move from Lebanon and Syria into the West Bank, breaking the fledgling state. The Palestinians would love for Israel to continue guarding their borders.

A de jure Palestinian state is not bad at all for Israel, the only better alternative being to expel the Arabs from Judea and Samaria.

Why is Assange alive?

Al Jazeera has finished killing the Palestinian government, which may or may not survive the series of damning revelations regarding its cooperation with Israel on security matters and refugees’ return. Not that the revelations are surprising, but coming from a respected TV channel they become more important than when they were trumpeted by rival Hamas.

The question is, if Israel so badly needs the Fatah government that our soldiers defend it from Hamas, why wasn’t the WikiLeaks editor liquidated to stop the publication of these revelations? Why is his life more important than the lives of Jewish soldiers and their Hamas targets?

The pro-Western Lebanese PM called Israel’s loyalty oath ‘racist.’ Never mind that scores of states favor their core ethnic groups in their constitutions.

Lebanon bars Palestinian refugees from over 80 occupations. But that, of course, is not racism.

Palestinian refugees are unlike Jewish

Olmert continues to release piecemeal information about his offer to Abbas. Now he claims that the United States has agreed to accept 100,000 Palestinian refugees as a part of the deal. In practice, that would obligate the US to absorb up to a million refugees as new immigrants sponsor their relatives through family reunion schemes.

Not even 20,000 Jews were admitted into the United States during the Holocaust.

Olmert also confirmed that he had offered our Palestinian enemies a contiguous state, meaning that the Jewish state would be cut in half by a Palestinian road from Fatahstan to Hamastan.

PA has Hamas’ agenda for peace

Palestinian negotiator Erekat has said that Hamas can join the peace talks if core issues are resolved.

For Hamas, the core issues include full control over the Temple Mount, unrestricted return of the descendants of Palestinian refugees to Israel, the complete dismantling of Jewish settlement blocs, and possibly also autonomy for Arab communities in Israel.

The Palestinian Authority has to embrace those demands in order to win approval from Hamas and from foreign Arabs for its agreement with Israel. Hamas and Fatah thus have a similar negotiating platform.

Meanwhile, Fatah has a trouble selling the peace process to its own population. Polls indicate that just 50-55% of West Bank Palestinians support a two-state solution.

Netanyahu starts the end of Israel

The Israeli government has agreed to indirect talks with the PLO, which will include the final-status issues: Jerusalem and refugees (Arab refugees from Israel, not Jewish refugees from Arab countries, mind you).

Even the Rabin-Peres government refused to discuss Jerusalem, and even Olmert refused to discuss the refugees beyond a token number.

There is really nothing to discuss with the Arabs about Jerusalem: they want it all, including the Temple Mount. At most, Jews will continue wailing at the Western Wall as we did in the Middle Ages. The Temple Mount is negotiable for atheistic Jews, but not for good Muslims.

Netanyahu’s decision to discuss the refugees’ right-of-return will be fateful. No Palestinian leader can give up on his people’s right of return. As the return will remain the last stumbling block in the peace talks, the Israeli government will come under tremendous pressure to admit the refugees. Many voices will claim that a few hundred thousand Arabs won’t change Israel’s demographics— ignoring the fact that those are the worst Arab criminals and terrorists, fourth-generation welfare recipients, brainwashed with Jew-hatred. If Israel agrees to discuss the refugees, she would likely admit them.

Netanyahu made Mitchell an offer. Abbas refused.

After a completely futile meeting last week, Mitchell will again meet Netanyahu on Sunday. Never mind the humiliation: Obama walked out of a meeting with Bibi, but he must meet Obama’s lowly rep on demand.

The repeat visit means that Netanyahu passed through Mitchell some alternative offers to Hussein and Mahmoud. The offers must have been important—Dan Shapiro, Obama’s shadow rep behind Mitchell, extended his stay in Israel for a week.

So far, Israel has been unable to satisfy Obama’s demands, which echo the most radical demands of Syria and the PLO. Obama insists that Israel abandon Jerusalem (including the Temple Mount and most settlements), cut her territory in half by allowing a Palestinian corridor from Gaza to the West Bank, and allow many refugees back into Israel.

But Abbas has already refused both renewed negotiations with Israel and Netanyahu’s cunning offer of a Palestinian state within temporary borders—which, of course, would have become permanent.

The only question remaining is, why do we send tax transfers to a government which refuses even to conduct peace negotiations with us?

US can afford to lose Israeli-Palestinian peace process

As Obama’s envoy Mitchell is due to arrive in Israel to begin shuttling between Jerusalem and Ramallah for the indirect peace talks, Israeli media predict that his involvement will intensify American pressure on Israel because Obama cannot afford to lose once his administration is involved directly. Wrong. Obama has lost on many issues, and his loss on this one will, at most, result in a few I-told-you-so’s in the State Department, while remaining entirely irrelevant to common Americans.

The talks are utterly senseless. Abbas rejected Olmert’s offer on Jerusalem and refugees, saying that the “gaps are too wide,” yet Netanyahu offers even less than Olmert did.

Netanyahu is also demanding Palestinian security guarantees, which Abbas cannot deliver. Besides, security is impossible in a situation in which, for example, a plane landing in Palestine could attack Tel Aviv 9/11 style within about three minutes. By the time IAF recognized that the pilot did not err, it would be too late to shoot down the plane.

Palestinian peace plan: War

Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat has revealed that Olmert made him an offer to resettle 1,000 Palestinian refugees in five years. A token favor, indeed.

Erekat voiced Abbas’ “minimum” demands for restarting the peace talks. Israel must agree to admit any refugees who want to return to their long-gone grandparents’ homes, potentially doubling the Arab presence in Israel. Israel must also agree to dismantle all settlement blocs and give away Jerusalem.

Neither Abbas nor any other Palestinian leader can sign a peace treaty with Israel that forfeits the refugees’ right of return or does not include Jerusalem. There is simply no basis for peace talks with Palestinian Arabs.

Are we mad to subsidize the PA?

Jewish politician embraces Hamas

David Martin AbrahamsDavid Martin Abrahams, a UK businessman whose political donations have created not a few scandals, met in Hebron with Dwaik, Hamas’ speaker in the Palestinian parliament.

Typically of peace mavens, Abrahams grew dissatisfied with Fatah over Arafat’s unwillingness to implement the Oslo Accords, but drew the wrong conclusions. Instead of pronouncing the peace process dead, he turned to Hamas for its implementation.

Sensitive to Western media, Dweik announced that Hamas is ready to recognize Israel and renounce the provisions in its charter calling for our extermination. As if the divinely sanctioned Jewish state needs recognition from terrorists. Dweik forgot to say that this recognition would only follow Israel’ abandonment of Jerusalem and acceptance of millions of Palestinian refugees.

Obama’s new peace plan: Hilarious

The Hussein has found a miraculously simple solution which will bring the Palestinian state into being within two years. Within eight months of the construction moratorium, Israel and the PLO must agree on borders, and in the following years they must  partition Jerusalem and Israel must admit refugees.

So simple. So idiotic.

Netanyahu’s government cannot agree to dismantle the settlement blocs. Abbas cannot agree to let them stay.

Sephardi refugees: Legalese instead of Torah

In preliminary reading, the Knesset approved a draft which would recognize Sephardi Jewish emigrants from Muslim countries as refugees. Theoretically, this bill might allow Israel to treat the Palestinian exodus in 1947-48 as an exchange of population.

Nonsense. The Palestinians fled Israel before the Jews left the Muslim countries, so Israel will be guilty of provoking the “exchange.” The Jews fled third countries rather than Palestine, so there is no exchange.

The Torah’s solution is straightforward: the Arabs must be expelled, no exchange is necessary.

The bill is a sweet pill to Israel’s Sephardic voters, giving them a faint hope of restitution for their abandoned property.

Everyone has his own reason against peace

Notorious ultra-left Jew and former US ambassador to Israel Indyk said that Abbas refused Olmert’s peace offer after Livni suggested that he distance hhimself from the soon-to-be-indicted PM. Clearly, Livni expected to succeed Olmert and wanted the peacemaker’s laurels all to herself.

Livni claims she rejected Olmert’s peace offer because it would “flood” Israel with Palestinian refugees—a mere 2% increase in the number of Israeli Arabs. Livni also claims to oppose the internationalization of Jerusalem, which is odd coming from someone who supports giving up Jerusalem to the Palestinians.

Abbas did not sign Olmert’s draft because IDF withdrawal from the West bank would result in Hamas toppling Abbas in a matter of weeks.

Defeatists in Shabak

Gideon Ezra—a former chief of Israel’s powerful General Security Service, which deals with Palestinian terror—became yet another leftist to publicly support the release of Marwan Barghouti, the arch-terrorist leader of Tanzim imprisoned in Israeli for consecutive life terms.

A decade ago, Mubarak lamented in a Newsweek interview: what can poor Arafat do with such terrible people around him as Barghouti?

The Israeli left developed a rapport with Barghouti while he was in jail. Many other high-profile jailed terrorists rose to a similar cult-status among the Left, who were able to associate with them almost daily and were deeply impressed by the terrorists’ determination, which contrasted with their own nihilistic post-Zionism.

Three years ago, Barghouti laid out his vision for peace with Israel, which is no different from Hamas’s: 1967 borders, Jerusalem, and the return of the refugees. Israelis fail to recognize that Palestinian public figures are popular but powerless. Just as Arafat was a symbol of the Intifada but could not quench it, so Barghouti cannot push Palestinian terrorist factions to accept a peace settlement. Worse, unlike even Abbas, he is a lone man without significant institutional support, and his Tanzim group is only a marginal terrorist organization.

With the usual Arab gall, Fatah demanded that Israel release Barghouti “for the sake of the peace process”—that is, despite Fatah’s rejection of any sensible peace with Israel just days ago.