Liberty Star
07-28-2009, 12:54 PM
There have some interesting developements ongoing on holy land settlements showdown between Obama and Israeli extemists. Who will prevail in the end?
NO, you can't
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/rids/20090727/i/r3661657603.jpg
Holy land rally walk photo on Drudge calling Obama "racist"
YES, I can
http://www.haaretz.com/hasite/images/iht_daily/D240709/rabbi.jpg
Photo of FBI sponsored walk of Israeli settler linked Rabbis in NY/NJ from few days ago after their massive money laundery ring was busted
NYT:
Telling Israel No: Obama's Bold Move
July 28, 2009
PARIS — President Barack Obama, who vowed to revive the Arab-Israeli peace process at the start of his term, has begun with a direct and public challenge to Israel’s latest plan to build new settlements in East Jerusalem.
It’s a risky move that has already provoked a sharp rebuke from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But it is hard to see how the peace process could move forward if Washington had remained silent.
Mr. Obama picked a small but symbolic issue, a 20-unit housing project on the site of the former Shepherd Hotel, sparking a full-blown diplomatic standoff. Just days after the United States objected to the project, the European Union, Russia and France did the same.
This gambit puts the settlement issue at the center of the table, even before the next round of Arab-Israeli negotiations starts — if it ever does. The downside is that it might only serve to harden Israel’s stance, without softening Arab positions.
The stalemate in the Middle East needs a new approach. By opening the most sensitive dossier first, Mr. Obama has delivered to Israel its first dose of tough love since the administration of President George H.W. Bush.
There can be no so-called two-state solution that doesn’t take into account the famous “facts on the ground,” created by Israel over international objections. At issue is the fate of about 300,000 Israeli settlers now living in the West Bank, and 190,000 in East Jerusalem.
Neither the United States nor the rest of the world has ever recognized Israel’s claim to the territories — including East Jerusalem, which is mostly Arab — that it captured after its victory in the 1967 Middle East war. By international standards, that makes housing projects for Jewish residents in those areas “settlements.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/world/europe/29iht-letter.html
Ironically this all is happening at the same time notorious pro apartheid group CUFI is holding a rally in Washington to support settlets.
If Obama prevailed , would these settler fanatics be sent back to Russia, Brooklyn or wherever they were imported from?
Does this mean that within the democratic party radical elements of Israel lobby are getting beaten down by moderates? Or is this all smoke screen?
NO, you can't
http://d.yimg.com/a/p/rids/20090727/i/r3661657603.jpg
Holy land rally walk photo on Drudge calling Obama "racist"
YES, I can
http://www.haaretz.com/hasite/images/iht_daily/D240709/rabbi.jpg
Photo of FBI sponsored walk of Israeli settler linked Rabbis in NY/NJ from few days ago after their massive money laundery ring was busted
NYT:
Telling Israel No: Obama's Bold Move
July 28, 2009
PARIS — President Barack Obama, who vowed to revive the Arab-Israeli peace process at the start of his term, has begun with a direct and public challenge to Israel’s latest plan to build new settlements in East Jerusalem.
It’s a risky move that has already provoked a sharp rebuke from Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. But it is hard to see how the peace process could move forward if Washington had remained silent.
Mr. Obama picked a small but symbolic issue, a 20-unit housing project on the site of the former Shepherd Hotel, sparking a full-blown diplomatic standoff. Just days after the United States objected to the project, the European Union, Russia and France did the same.
This gambit puts the settlement issue at the center of the table, even before the next round of Arab-Israeli negotiations starts — if it ever does. The downside is that it might only serve to harden Israel’s stance, without softening Arab positions.
The stalemate in the Middle East needs a new approach. By opening the most sensitive dossier first, Mr. Obama has delivered to Israel its first dose of tough love since the administration of President George H.W. Bush.
There can be no so-called two-state solution that doesn’t take into account the famous “facts on the ground,” created by Israel over international objections. At issue is the fate of about 300,000 Israeli settlers now living in the West Bank, and 190,000 in East Jerusalem.
Neither the United States nor the rest of the world has ever recognized Israel’s claim to the territories — including East Jerusalem, which is mostly Arab — that it captured after its victory in the 1967 Middle East war. By international standards, that makes housing projects for Jewish residents in those areas “settlements.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/07/29/world/europe/29iht-letter.html
Ironically this all is happening at the same time notorious pro apartheid group CUFI is holding a rally in Washington to support settlets.
If Obama prevailed , would these settler fanatics be sent back to Russia, Brooklyn or wherever they were imported from?
Does this mean that within the democratic party radical elements of Israel lobby are getting beaten down by moderates? Or is this all smoke screen?