Doc's Talk: ‘Circumstances Changing Rapidly in Our Favor,’ Iran's President Says Amid Obama’s ‘Engagement’ Efforts

Wednesday, May 06, 2009

‘Circumstances Changing Rapidly in Our Favor,’ Iran's President Says Amid Obama’s ‘Engagement’ Efforts

Wednesday, May 06, 2009
By Patrick Goodenough, International Editor

(CNSNews.com) – A United States envoy was due to hold talks with Syrian officials on Wednesday, amid a flurry of regional diplomatic activity as governments and other parties stake their positions in the face of the Obama administration’s new engagement policies. The visit by Acting Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs Jeffrey Feltman comes a day after Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met with his Syrian counterpart in Damascus to underscore a relationship that previous U.S. administrations have tried, without success, to prise apart.

“Issues of mutual and regional concern” will be on the agenda when Feltman, accompanied by National Security Council senior director Daniel Shapiro, pays his second visit to Syria in two months, the State Department announced.

The Syrian-Iranian axis has long been viewed as dangerous by the U.S. and Israel.

The two regimes support Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and other violent Palestinian factions fighting Israel, and have both been accused of facilitating anti-coalition terrorism in Iraq. Their leading roles as sponsors of terror were reaffirmed in the latest State Department annual terrorism report, released last week.

The Obama administration wants to engage both Iran and Syria, in an effort to resolve issues ranging from the dispute over Iran’s nuclear activities to instability in Lebanon and the Syrian-Israeli peace track.

At a joint press conference with Syrian President Bashar Assad Tuesday, Ahmadinejad boasted that “those who one day called Iran and Syria part of the axis of evil now want to develop relations with Iran and Syria.”

“Circumstances are changing rapidly in our favor,” Arab media quoted him as saying. “We are on the road to victory.”

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad meets with Hamas political leader Khaled Mashaal in Damascus, Syria on Tuesday, May 5, 2009. (Photo: Iranian presidency)
The Iranian leader also reiterated Iranian-Syrian support for “Palestinian resistance,” calling Israelis “destructive microbes” and saying that U.S. forces in Afghanistan were uninvited, unwelcome visitors who should withdraw.

Assad hailed the strategic bilateral alliance, saying it was based on shared principles and interests.

While Sunni Arab regimes tend to be wary of Shi’ite, non-Arab Iran, Syria’s ruling family – members of the Shi’ite Allawite sect – has nurtured close ties with Iran since the 1979 Islamic revolution, splitting with the rest of the Arab world by backing Iran in its long war against Iraq during the 1980s.

President Obama’s stated desire to engage Tehran has triggered anxiety in Arab capitals suspicious of Iran’s regional ambitions, particularly amid reports of Iranian attempts to expand its influence in Egypt, Lebanon and elsewhere.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates, seen here accompanied by U.S. Air Force Maj. Gen. Paul "Dutch" Van Sickle and Saudi officials, arrives in Riyadh on Tuesday May 5, 2009. (AP Photo/DOD)
Defense Secretary Robert Gates, visiting Cairo on Tuesday, said the U.S. was not planning to secretly develop a “grand bargain” with Iran and then spring it on its Arab friends and allies.

Speaking to reporters after talks with President Hosni Mubarak, he said there appeared to be “some exaggerated concern” in the region. He pledged that the administration would be transparent in its dealings with Tehran, and conceded that the U.S. outreach so far had not elicited a particularly encouraging response.

From Egypt Gates went on to Saudi Arabia – another historical rival of Iran – where he was expected to deliver the same assurance. Late last month, the administration’s special advisor on Iran, Dennis Ross, took a similar message to Egypt, Saudi Arabia and neighboring Gulf States.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, characterizing Iran as a threat to both Israel and the Arab world, has begun stressing what he calls an unprecedented opportunity for Jews and Arabs to unite against “the common danger.”

U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee chairman Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) suggested Tuesday that the Iran factor could be a catalyst for Mideast peace.

“Arab leaders in Cairo, Amman and Riyadh are actually more worried about Iran today than they are about Israel,” he told the annual conference of the American-Israel Public Affairs Committee in Washington.

Terrorists want attention too

Other players in the Middle East are also vying for attention.

Damascus-based political leader Khaled Mashaal in a New York Times interview published Tuesday, sent the Obama administration a message that Hamas was ready to be “part of the solution.”

While repeating Hamas’ refusal to recognize “the enemy” Israel, Mashaal said the group was prepared to accept a “two-state” solution – an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel based on 1967 borders – and a truce with Israel lasting ten years. (Israel during the June 1967 Six Day War captured disputed territory including the West Bank, then being occupied by Jordan, and the Egyptian-controlled Gaza Strip.)

Obama is being urged by some U.S. foreign policy veterans and Mideast experts to drop his predecessor’s refusal to deal with both Hamas and Hezbollah.

Assad added his voice to those calls on Sunday, telling a French television network that he was willing to broker contacts between Washington and the two organizations.

“Politics is when you deal with reality,” he said, saying Hamas and Hezbollah were influential and could not be ignored.

The State Department designates both groups as foreign terrorist organizations. The formal U.S. position, reiterated on Monday by State Department spokesman Robert Wood, is that the U.S. will not deal with the two until they “renounce violence and be a productive player in the region.” He urged Syria to use its influence to change their behavior.

Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip and has offices in Damascus, is engaged in ongoing unity talks with rival Palestinian faction, Fatah. It refuses to meet Mideast Quartet demands to recognize Israel and renounce violence, and its sustained campaign of rocket attacks against Israeli towns triggered a major Israeli military offensive last winter.

Hezbollah, blamed for numerous deadly terror attacks include bombings targeting Americans and others, has become an increasingly important political player in Lebanon.

It leads the parliamentary opposition and, with its campaign reportedly generously funded by Iran, is anticipated together with its allies to do well in elections in one month’s time.

Hezbollah has recently made diplomatic breakthroughs in Europe, although Washington has so far not followed the European trend of distinguishing between political and military “wings” and agreeing to deal with the former.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk