Gil

Savlanut, savlanut

Who is fulminating and jumping up and down?
I spell things out as they are.

Yet you misinterpret what I had clearly said in one of my previous posts and in you own words admit that twenty years of negotiations have gone nowhere.

On top of all that you seem to have enormous faith that Obama will do something constructive.
He will, in your own words issue the so called Palestinian Arabs with a “red card if they don’t play by the rules”!

As I have said repeatedly, these people have never been brought to account nor have they suffered any consequences for breaching agreements and you talk about them being “red carded”.

Gil

If the Palestinian Arabs are not prepared to play by the rules – then they will be red carded. The referee (President Obama) sent a clear message to Abbas from Jerusalem that the PLO will be sent packing if Abbas doesn’t change his intransigent stance by returning to the negotiating table to discuss the credible proposals contained in President Bush’s letter to Ariel Sharon dated 14 April 2004.

This may all seem deadly boring and a complete waste of time and effort – but whilst it remains the view of the American President – jumping up and down will get you nowhere.

Twenty years of negotiations have gone nowhere. Another few months trying to re-start them on the clear basis outlined at Annapolis six years ago is what this American President appears to want – and it is apparently going to happen despite your fulmination.

You totally misinterpreted what I was referring to by not reading the line directly below. It should have been crystal clear to anyone who read my post carefully, that the threat of “legal consequences” for the likes of Mahmoud Abbas & Co. don’t mean squat. These are the people I was referring to and I stand by that comment.

In your own words legal consequences are “the guiding principles by which democratic countries maintain law and order.” The operative word here is democratic. Unfortunately, the PA is not running a country and as far as I am concerned is a terrorist organisation which, like all terrorist organisations is not democratic, not remotely interested in reading law books and certainly not in fear of legal consequences. Why should they be? They have never been made to bear any responsibility for their disregard of past commitments.

I repeat, for the second time:
“legal consequences (to the Palestinian Arabs) mean squat.
These people only understand and respect the power that comes out of the barrel of a gun.”

I hope this post will end any further confusion.

Gil

You make an excellent case as to why Israel should declare the Oslo Accords and the Roadmap no longer binding or of any force because of the repeated violations of their provisions by the PLO and the Palestinian Authority

The Arabs have certainly done enough to have hung themselves ten times over – yet Israel has not yet made that unilateral declaration to terminate Oslo and the Roadmap for reasons best known to its Government.

My own opinion is that it is due to American pressure and the desire to not see the proposals of an American President consigned to the dustbin of history if there is the slightest hope that proposal might possibly succeed.

However the continuing intransigence of Abbas and the Arab League is clearly straining even Obama’s patience as his speech has so clearly signalled.

Legal consequences don’t mean squat. They are the guiding principles by which democratic countries maintain law and order.

Abandon them at your peril.

Sam

Yours is a very perceptive comment on one notable omission in Obama’s speech.

The mass exodus of Jews from Arab countries to Israel and their successful rehabilitation and
Redemption remains one of the world’s best kept secrets.

Perhaps Obama may be too embarrassed to mention the Jewish approach to extending its hand to Displaced Jews as contrasted to the disgraceful way the Arabs have treated Palestinian Arabs displaced as a result of the Jewish-Arab conflict.

You still go back to reciting agreements and who said or wrote what to whom and when. You say the Arabs should “heed President Obama’s reference to Annapolis and the credible proposals made by Ehud Olmert at Annapolis or suffer the consequences” etc. I’m sure this legal jargon should make these people tremble in their boots.

They have violated every agreement they ever signed.
The Camp David Accords mean nothing to them.
The Oslo Accords mean nothing to them.
The letter from George Bush dated 2004 means nothing to them.
The Annapolis proposals of 2007 means nothing to them.

Olmert offered them everything at Annapolis and still they didn’t accept.

Later Arabs wanted a settlement freeze. Not just a freeze on expansion of settlement boundaries but building within a settlement, like an additional room in a house to accommodate the birth of a new child. Netanyahu obliged them for one year and still Abbas did not return to the negotiating table.

This same Abbas still condones the teaching of Arab children that Jews are the offspring of pigs and apes and yet Israel still considers sitting down with this Jew hater with no preconditions!

Israel held nearly all the cards once, a long long time ago, but now they have let themselves be reduced to this, virtually being dictated to by these people!
This is what happens when you make concession after concession to terrorists and there are no consequences every time one of the agreements instrumental in the granting of the concession are violated.

As I said in my earlier piece, the Arab world never want this issue to be resolved. Their intention is to bleed Israel to death by concession after concession. They want the lot. Resolution of this issue may draw attention to the misery that goes on in their world at large and they never want this to happen, hence they will put up proposal after proposal knowing if Israel ever accepted them it would be committing suicide.

Legal consequences mean squat.
These people only understand and respect the power that comes out of the barrel of a gun.

It’s time for world Jewry to wake up out of our coma.

The disunity of Jews in biblical times had a lot to do with the fall of the Second Temple.
Considering the political disunity (in some cases outright treason expressed) going on inside Israel today and the chaos of opinions in the diaspora, we should pay attention.

Gil

Sorry if I sound over legalistic – but there is an internationally recognised process underway that is designed to resolve the Jewish- Arab conflict.

When Obama harks back to Annapolis it is a very significant development in the ongoing framework that comprises the process – namely UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, the Oslo Accords, the Bush Roadmap, the letter from President Bush to Ariel Sharon dated 14 April 2004 and Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza.

The Arabs can choose to ignore the process or seek to go outside it at their risk and engage in
unilateralism. Such actions will eventually bring the carefully designed process crashing down on their heads.

President Obama made that clear in his speech.

The Arabs are at the cross roads – heed President Obama’s reference to Annapolis and the “credible proposals” made by Ehud Olmert at Annapolis or suffer the consequences that will follow their refusal to negotiate for the outcomes proposed by President Bush and now President Obama.