You knew it was coming. The concerted push to put a smiley face on the incoming far right Israeli government has begun on the front page of The New York Times.
In addition to making Netanyahu's future government seem more palatable to Times readership, the article ignores or elides the actual platform Netanyahu supports. In the past week Netanyahu has supported loyalty oaths for Israeli citizens and told US Jewish leaders that he opposes a sovereign Palestinian state. Bronner puts this opposition forward simply as an alternative plan:
Is it really that "far from clear"? This is clearly the same Israeli plan to make the occupation permanent that Palestinians have been resisting for at least the last decade, not the creativity of a "flexible opportunist."For Mr. Netanyahu, that has meant accepting that much of the West Bank will be part of a future Palestinian state, but with Israel keeping control of the borders, airspace and electromagnetic frequencies. The state would also have no military, by his reckoning.
Whether such a deal would ever be acceptable to the Palestinians is far from clear.
It all looks like a well thought out (probably Gaza-related) propaganda campaign in which the New York Times has been enmeshed.
Consider the analysis below of a recent HDS Greenway op-ed published in the Boston Globe, which is owned by the NY Times.
Greenway used to be a lot better than the content of this piece indications.
Decent Muslims versus Evil Jews
International [Jewish Zionist Shyster] Law
by Joachim Martillo (ThorsProvoni@aol.com)
On February 10 H.D.S. Greenway published an exceptionally dishonest op-ed column entitled The rise of extremism in London – The Boston Globe. He wrote:
The situations of Muslims after 9/11 or 7/11 and of Jews after the Zionist rampage in Gaza are not comparable.
No statistic of Muslims anywhere showed significant Muslim support for either attack. Yet the ADL published ADL Survey Shows American Jews Overwhelmingly Supported Israel's Gaza Action on its website.
This article reports:
The American Jewish community is dominated by evil Jewish Nazis, who support the slaughter of women and children.
The UK Jewish community is probably even more Nazi.
By the standards generally pushed by Jewish intellectuals since WW2, decent people have a categorical imperative to hate Jews failing to reject the Jewish community and refusing to condemn the State of Israel unequivocally.
Despite Zionist propaganda asserting Israel's general responsibility or obligation to protect its citizens, international law confers no such duties and even restricts the use of such assertions as disproof of allegations of committing crimes against humanity.
[Note that Israel has never made efforts, whether lawful or not, to protect its non-Jewish citizens.]
Under Nuremberg Law, which the USA helped create, Israel has no right of self-defense in the face of resistance acts by the occupied or ethnically cleansed Palestinian refugee population.
Jewish Zionists in academia and in the government have desperately been trying to reinterpret post-Nuremberg International Law to render irreversible the Zionist theft and ethnic cleansing of the native Palestinian population.
This sort of intended or practical shyster lawyering has characterized the Zionist program since the first Zionist Conference at Basel.
Because Zionist manipulation of International Law would be far more obvious to lay observers if Zionism were properly identified as ethnic Ashkenazi Nazism and as the exact equivalent of German Nazism with the obvious ethnic substitutions, Jewish Zionists invariably freak out at the correct conclusion that Israel is a Nazi state and try to equate this patently obvious observation with the most vicious sort of anti-Semitism.
In fact, not only is it dishonest to deny Israel's Nazi nature, but it is also racist, for characterizing one ethnic group as incapable of developing its own form of Nazism is simply a belief in that group's racial superiority in politics and ethics.
It is almost needless to say that the vast majority of Jews do have such a racist belief, and nowadays except for tiny groups of dissenters Judaism is no longer a genuine religion dedicated to serving God but consists of a combination of ethnic narcissism, Holocaust obsession, and worship of the State of Israel.
As with any leader that has the best interests of his country at heart, Netanyahu will attempt to make a deal that is advantageous for Israel.
As for the remaning part of the Palestinian region, it would be better for it top be absorbed by Jordan, rename the country Jordania Palestinia (after all, it's other 2 names only lasted less than 100 years). There is enough room and Saudi money to relocate the over population of Arabs in the western region.
Not just Bonner. I discuss a recent Globe Greenway op-ed here. The Globe is a NY Times paper.
"As for the remaining part of the Palestinian region, it would be better for it top be absorbed by Jordan, rename the country Jordania Palestinia (after all, it's other 2 names only lasted less than 100 years). There is enough room and Saudi money to relocate the over population of Arabs in the western region."
The Saudis can also finance a tunnel to link Gaza to Jordania
Palestinia.
The Pals probably could become more economically stable if incorporated into Jordan.
I guess the question is would Jordan want them???
As Jordan is 70%, population wise, Palestinian, and as the queen is a palestinian, and as the heir to the thrown is Palestinian, it would seem that if a vote were taken, the Jordanians would open their arms to their brother Palestinians.
At least that's what would happen in a just world.
How convenient. Mere lebensraum fur Israel. What's not to like?
"much of the West Bank will be part of a future Palestinian state, but with Israel keeping control of the borders, airspace and electromagnetic frequencies."
In other words, a larger version of Gaza, without the economy of Jerusalem or the water resources of Ariel. Not exactly the 2 state solution, certainly not viable, although no doubt it will be sold as such.
Chris Berel, the Israelis don't want the West Bank to become part of Jordan, since in their eyes that will be a security problem. Put another way, Israel wants to control the Jordan river and Dead Sea. On the other hand, Israel would like the West Bank Palestinians to all move to Jordan.
Thanks, Adam. Terrible "actual-news" about distortions from the corporate-NYTimes "fake-news"–that never told us in the Bush-Clinton-Bush years that they themselves or "our" leaders were Zionists.
The fact that the Times wants to paint any Israeli government–no matter how extreme–as one of us, is truly frightening.
(Phil and Adam, I've learned from you that we need to start asking for "full disclosure" statements from every reporter: that is, "Full disclosure: I was raised _____and [if apt] converted to ____."
How sad that we've [long ago] reached the point where "reporters'" prejudices censor what they [don't] "report"–till the "story" is simply a fairy tale.)
Well done, Adam.
I've learned from you that we need to start asking for "full disclosure" statements from every reporter: that is, "Full disclosure: I was raised _____and [if apt] converted to ____."
Why not just a yellow star? You must be living in the nazi heartland to use your real name and make that unabashed comment. Also to be so close-minded about who exactly supports Israel. (Hint: it's everybody except the fringe left/fringe right/pro-Islamist triad.
Too bad for you that most people have a good idea of how deceptive and disinterested in peace the Palestinians are.
You'll just have to live with the knowledge that you are soooooo much smarter and better than the rest of us. NOT!
Right on the mark Mr. Weiss. The process to turn Mr. Netanyahu palatable to the American public opinion has begun.
S'vet gornisht helfen.
Next up, talking more about how the ever expanding settlements
kills the peace process.
Except that Jordan abrogated all claims in 1988, in favor of the PLO's "Declaration of Independence."
If the Palestinians are peaceful, a West Bank entity or state will have trade with Jordan, and from there Lebanon/Syria, and unrestricted access to Jerusalem as in 1967-87. Viability is dependent on peace, not subject to the vicissitudes of Jihad. Apparently Netanyahu feels that since the peace of 1993 was a Trojan Horse for the uprising of '96, and the negotiations at Camp David a Trojan Horse for the Second Intifada, the present situation is preferable.
Yes, of course, you can't withdraw from the West Bank until it's peaceful. On the other hand, as Netanyahu argues, there's no point in withdrawing from the Golan because it's peaceful. And indeed when the West Bank was peaceful, you argued that this proved that everybody was happy with the occupation and there was no need to withdraw. Beyond chutzpah indeed.
Actually, Eurosabra, the Trojan horse was built and stocked by Israel, with the aid of Clinton and his
zionist team. Israel negotiators got to screen USA proposal items before Clinton & team carried them to Arafat. The reverse was not allowed to happen. IN short, the USA was not an honest broker. It's been the same ever since regarding any USA "affirmative" action regarding the I-P situation.
And, Suzanne, why not a yellow star? So, it's better to wear a little usa flag pin on one's lapel? All the while,
advancing Israel interests under the pin's cover?
BUT REMEMBER THE HOLOCAUST!!11one
DA JOOS
HITLER
NAZIS
BAGELS
NEVER FORGIVE, NEVER FORGET
NO ONE MESSES WITH THE ZOHAN!!11
LD – a walking advertisement for Phil's Phools.
By the way, The Golan, like Jerusalem, was annexed into Israel, regardless of how you feel about it.
Different than the west bank and Gaza.
Thanks, Citizen.
I'm sorry that I didn't make myself clear. I actually think that "identity politics" is sadly destructive–needlessly limiting–for none of us is only in one group. As a friend of mine once asked, "If I'm a Jewish, Lesbian, one-armed, single parent, must I only identify with other Jewish, Lesbian, one-armed, single parents?"
So, no, I'm as sickened by the idea of yellow stars as I am by the identification numbers written by Israeli soldiers on the foreheads and forearms of Palestinian prisoners.
But I also am coming to believe that we all need to name our biases whenever we can. Such disclaimers help us refrain from generalizing our priorities onto others.
Here are just a few of Ethan Bronner's alarmingly deceptive claims about Netanyahu:
**"To many here, it is increasingly likely that Mr. Netanyahu’s government will consist exclusively of parties from the right, which oppose a Palestinian state and favor expanding Israeli settlements in the West Bank, making it much harder for him to exercise his pragmatic penchant."
Bronner neglects to describe how very reactionary are the positions of those parties, including the effort to ban Arab parties from participating in the election; the demand that Arab citizens take a loyalty oath to a state without fixed borders–that hasn't yet explained how any state can be "both Jewish and democratic."
**"He opposed Israel’s withdrawal in 2005 from Gaza, saying it would lead to Hamas rockets on Israel, which it did. Like other dark predictions of his, that has led Israelis to see him as a reliable guide to the region."
Bronner refuses to acknowledge that the killing siege led to the rockets, not any mythical "withdrawal." Bronner also doesn't remind readers when facing a partial blockade, Israel started the 1967 war.
**"Today, he says stopping Iran from going nuclear is a much more important issue than whether a Palestinian state is established. He has made clear that the Iranian challenge is an existential one that could well lead to military action."
Bronner neglects to challenge the assumption that Iran matters more than a Palestinian state or ask, "To whom?"
More, Bronner phrases the oft-proved myth that even a nuclear-armed Iran poses an "existential" threat to Israel as if that tragic delusion were an undisputed fact.
Nor does Bronner mention Israel's own 200 nuclear bombs.
Wouldn't some sort of disclaimer help readers see the gaps in what Bronner states as "fact," as well as the many facts he leaves out? Don't most of us routinely tell our own histories, so that our friends and others can take them into account when evaluating our views?
Again with the "Give it to Jordan" red herring.
Fragmented bantustans which are, in all relevant respects, controlled by Israel are no more feasible as a part of Jordan than they are as a Palestinian state.
Give it to Jordan? Don't you think that might be illegal, Koshiro?
Why don't you let the Palestinians and the Jordanians vote and allow the majority to decide?
Or perhaps you don't believe in democracy?
"Why don't you let the Palestinians and the Jordanians vote and allow the majority to decide?"
You? Give Palestinians the vote? On what happens with the West Bank? What a wonderful idea.
I would actually be all for it. Of course, for this to be a proper vote, there would need to be more than one option. For example, "No thanks, I'd rather have a sovereign Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and I mean right now".
Of course, as you, as a proper democrat will surely agree, the Palestinians should also vote on other things. Settlements (conducted fairly – the settlers also get to vote), water rights, roadblocks, military presence etc. etc.
Yeah, sounds like a plan. I'd implement it tomorrow, if it were up to me.
Susie
I can see where you are coming from with your disclosure point. Muslim and Arab commenters and reporters are almost invariably identified as such by virtue of their names, and who, not matter what they write, become targets of right-wing and Zionists who assert that they can never be impartial. Whereas we are expected to accept that Jewish or Christian reporters are always impartial (unless of course they report anything remotely critical of Israel!)
Silence of The Lambs.
Where the Senator's daughter is down in the pit and Buffalo Bill's prancing around above her, wearing the skin of a previous victim, and "conversing" with her.
And she can't get out.
That sadism, plus the gender back and forth of Suzanne/Chris Berel.
But mostly that sadism.
Just on and on.
Sorry, Roy. I'd love to let Phil's Phools converse back and forth on how the Jews have ruined their lives,own all the banks, run all the papers, so forth and so on, but what's the fun in that?
Here's an interesting perspective from a Palestinian on the subject of absorbing Palestinians into Jordan. I found it on an Israeli discussion forum. Please note that the original post was taken from the archives of another blog called Good neighbors blog–and that link is provided at the site.
Please study carefully how moderates on both sides are able to hold a productive discussion without descending into ideological kaka:
I am a supporter of a future Palestinian-Jordanian confederation, I will tell you why :
I don’t believe that a Divorce took place between the two nations, what took place was a Separation and not due to a conflict but due to a changement in the geopolitical map. If palestinians wanted the Jordanian forces to leave the westbank in the early 70’s , it’s due to the defeat of the 1967 War… don’t forget black september that came a few years later! Anyways, why do i defend the confederation ?
It’s not a secret that Both Jordan and Palestine share a lot demographically, economically, socially and politically. It’s also not a secret that Jordan never totally cut it ties with the Palestinian people due to very clear interdependencies, Mostly economic! Now come to think of it, when King Hussein decided to give up on the westbank, it was a political decision in order to allow the PLO to finally have an authority and a kind of independence, but the idea was always that After the creation of the palestinian State, a jordanian-Palestinian union was inevitable! ( Check out the 7th chapter of the Jordanian Charter).
Geographically and Politically :
Both the West Bank and Gaza are very important : Gaza has Land borders with Egypt and has natural Gas as well as an opening on the Mediterranean sea ( i wouldn’t give this up) .
The Westbank is a different story : It has all the Water that Jordan lacks, it’s relatively greener than Jordan, touristically, it’s very important, Religiously, it holds a lot of meanings etc….
The most important part : Hundreds of thousands( if not more) in the westbank hold Also Jordanian Nationalities ( more commonly called the Yellow Cards). Strategically, if this union is created, the current jordanian regime will control both sides of the Jordan river ( very important) as well as a major part of the Dead Sea ( Tourism, Potassium, Salt….) and will have wider frontiers with israel etc…
Jordan and Israel already have a peace treaty, if a confederation is created, this peace treaty will surely become stronger and will give moderates a much bigger mandate to rule over this part of the world, The Hashemites will surely not be nice to Hamas and will be very close to Fatah , they both share a very important thing : Both accept israel’s presence and both have signed a Peace treaty with it, both are secular and both have the same enemies…
And now, lets face it, a Palestinian State is never going to be viable on the long run unless one of the countries around it “Adopt it”! Israel will never do so and we really don’t want it to, Egypt has no reasons to do it … The only side that has a huge interest in this ( and this interest is shared) is Jordan! I know both countries very well , most of the palestinians i talked to were not against the idea, they had some fears ( will the Army control us again ? …) but at the end, when i explained what a confederation meant, they Agreed warmly! …as for the Jordanians, they were much more welcoming from the very Highly educated to the Taxi driver, there was a huge ” YES” with a smile on their faces! I even talked to a Bedouin in Wadi Rum, he was like ” Yes, if we both respect each other , Yes, we are Brothers after all” ….
Now , What do i think personally :
I have no problem with being ruled by King Abdallah ! Why is that ? well, i find him Legitimate , his wife is Palestinian, so are his children, and in the future, the next king will most probably be Half Jordanian and Half Palestinian. King Abdallah , with his young age and his ” very little experience in the field ” managed to rule and to lead Jordan towards an international success story! So I really don’t have any problem with having him as a leader!
Economically : it will be a shared interest : who are amongst the Richest jordanians ? I will give you an answer : the Shomans ( Arab Bank) , The Masris ( Paltel, Palmedia, Paltrade, Movenpick)… ( and some others ..) Both happen to be also Palestinians and the Arab Bank never gave up his Palestinian Identity as for Al Masri , Munib al Masri who is a prominent palestinian political figure , was also a Jordanian Deputy before 1988. Take a drive in Amman and try to see who owns the biggest stores and hotels… most of them are palestinians!…Take a Taxi and open the subject with him, he will also happen to be a Palestinian! Now i will give you a few names of places and companies owned partially or fully by palestinians : Pharmacy One ( biggest pharmacy chain in Jordan , Like SuperPharm in israel) , Cozmo , Movenpick Aqaba and Dead Sea, Arab Bank, Intercontinental Hotel, Salad House, Whispers, Popeyes….
Millions of palestinians are Land Owners in Jordan too, eventhough a new Law prohibits palestinians from owning lands in the kingdom, most palestinians have lands somewhere in Jordan , around Amman most of the time…
And now, i personally believe that together we can achieve much more than each one alone on his side! the Westbank is nothing ( sizewise) compared to Jordan and most of it’s residents will easily be loyal to the regime as for the others, they will have no other choice than to adhere! while i might not be for a total union where Jordan controls us, i am for a confederation where everyone will have his Parliement and where everyone will have a certain extent of self rule, while we all share one currency, one economy, one Land, eventually One king, one language, one dialect, One army and why not, one bi national dream…. It seems to me that such a union is nothing but a step that will come ” when the time is right” and that whether we are with it or we oppose it , it will happen , because the Old ” one Nation one land ” idea is slowly disappearing on a worldwide scale…
Here is the link: link to olehgirl.com
rel=”nofollow”>Palestinians commentary
I do happen to think that one of the big components the leftist wingdings miss, in their zeal to point a finger at an oppressor–is that the Palestinians are disorganized and infrastructurally weak.
You can throw all sorts of money at them but they are too fractionalized, disorganized, infrastructurally challenged to get it together on their own.
Israel could disappear tomorrow and these folks would still be a mess for 2 more centuries.
They can't make it as a state. It's probably wishful thinking. Certainly my own wishful thinking.
When I was an idealist, I pretty much sided with them. Not like a zealot, but I certainly bought the anti-Zionist crap.
No more. I'm a realist. A rational thinker. Not a pipe dreamer.
Annexation = Illegal occupation one hopes to get away with.
Relocation or Transfer = Ethnic cleansing
Excellent piece, Adam. Would that someone could get this post to Bonner and the NYT.
Jesus, what idiotic comments. No knowledge of their history. None.
Some people are more interested in their own proxy war against Jews than betterment and stability for Palestinians.
But anybody with a brain already knew that. :-)
MRW–tomorrow you will go back to whining about disenfranchised Palestinians…the moment it suits your advantage. You talk out of both sides of your mouth and therefore can't be taken seriously in any discussion.
Suzanne, you silly, silly person, I think his point was that they were able to build this despite their disenfranchisement, depsite the oppression, despite the occupation, despite the roadblocks. I'm not sure what the Israelis could have built without this:
Benefits to Israel of U.S. Aid
Since 1949 (As of November 1, 1997)
Foreign Aid Grants and Loans
$74,157,600,000
Other U.S. Aid (12.2% of Foreign Aid)
$9,047,227,200
Interest to Israel from Advanced Payments
$1,650,000,000
Grand Total
$84,854,827,200
Total Benefits per Israeli
$14,630
Cost to U.S. Taxpayers of U.S. Aid to Israel
Grand Total
$84,854,827,200
Interest Costs Borne by U.S.
$49,936,680,000
Total Cost to U.S. Taxpayers
$134,791,507,200
Total US Taxpayer Cost per Israeli
$23,240
Over 60 years. So you're saying that the cost is only $400 per year? Peanuts. Maybe not to the chronically unemployed like Philip, but peanuts to me and mine.
Great analysis, Adam.
Ethan Bronner's piece is but one among many others proving that Bronner has lost his critical thinking and writing abilities due to his pro-Israel bias. That he remains the chief NYT correspondent for Israel/Palestine while remaining deep in the pocket of the Lobby relects extremely poorly on the NYT.
Keep on exposing his flawed, tainted, and ideologically-slanted writing.
"Here's an interesting perspective from a Palestinian on the subject of absorbing Palestinians into Jordan."
Look, we just went through this:
Fragmented bantustans which are, in all relevant respects, controlled by Israel are no more feasible as a part of Jordan than they are as a Palestinian state.
… less feasible, actually. A sufficiently subdued PA might someday agree to the charade of calling a rag-tag collection of reservations a "state", but an established, independent state like Jordan just won't. Look at what Bibi says, just one example: Control of borders. Do you seriously expect Jordan to let the IDF patrol their internal borders?
"Confederation with Jordan" is just a red herring, because it does not answer any of the important questions – about territorial sovereignty, water rights, settlements and perceived Israeli security needs. When advocated by the likes of John Bolton it is most likely intended to offload responsibility for (but not meaningful control of) the Palestinian bantustans to someone else than Israel.
Absorbtion by Jordan will amswer those questions.
Nice, chris, then Israel will get what it wants–natural gas and lots more water-without having to
defend itself against international humanist agencies charges. BTW: what is "absorbtion?" Your version of even more Israeli lebensraum?"
Israel gives scant notice to such organizations that refuse to acknowledge the truth. As for absorbtion, the 'west bank' becomes part of Jordan, again.
Funny that you can't even rest your antisemitism to ask a simple question.
@ chris berel
"As with any leader that has the best interests of his country at heart, Netanyahu will attempt to make a deal that is advantageous for Israel."
Netanyahu will attempt to make a deal that he thinks is advantageous to Israel. The cost to the paestinians, and the cost to gentile USA is just how his chips fall. He's an Israel Firster. We should be American Firsters. Major difference, despite the protstitute congressional USA chorus singing N's song the interests are the same.
"As for the remaning part of the Palestinian region, it would be better for it top be absorbed by Jordan, rename the country Jordania Palestinia (after all, it's other 2 names only lasted less than 100 years). There is enough room and Saudi money to relocate the over population of Arabs in the western region."
This represents the lastest Hasbara talking point, also echoed by Suzanne: The Pals should be happy
with no land of their own, where they are self-governing. By analogy, if the Apaches wanted their own
land, not the land of the (pick any other native American tribe), they are being irrational. Conveniently,
if the Pals were absorbed by Jordan, Israeli jews would have even more of Palestinian they've already taken. Of course, whatever the proposal says to give Israel yet more land, the USA taxpayers would be on the hook directly and indirectly. So what's not to like?