RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12915/jerusalem-arabs-election-boycott

Palestinian leaders do not want to see any improvement in the lives of the Arabs in Jerusalem so that they can continue to incite against Israel and accuse it of discriminating against its Arab population.

Palestinian leaders and their religious clerics do not want to see Arabs live a comfortable life under Israel. They are afraid that the world would see that Arabs can have a good life under Israeli sovereignty.

They are also afraid that Palestinians living under the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip will start envying the Arabs living in Israel — and then demand from their leaders similar conditions.

Ramadan Dabash wants to help the residents of his village of Sur Baher in particular, and east Jerusalem in general, improve their living conditions. He wants them to receive better services from the Jerusalem Municipality. The 52-year-old businessman and social activist, however, has been facing a campaign of threats by several Palestinian leaders and administrative bodies over his decision to run in the municipal election, slated for October 2018.

Recently, Dabash announced his decision to run in the upcoming election at the head of an Arab list called Jerusalem for Jerusalemites. He has repeatedly made it clear this summer that his decision is not politically motivated and that his only intention is to seek improved municipal services for the Arab residents of Jerusalem. Dabash has also called on Arab voters to end their boycott of the municipal election because they are the only ones who stand to lose from such a move.

Facing threats and pressure from various Palestinian factions and leaders, most of the Arab residents of Jerusalem have been boycotting the municipal election under the pretext that participation in the vote was tantamount to recognizing Israeli sovereignty over east Jerusalem, which was annexed to Israel in 1980. This boycott has hurt the Arab residents themselves, who were left without representatives in the municipal council, someone who would fight for their rights. The Jerusalem Municipality has, despite the absence of Arab representatives, continued to provide various and basic services to the Arab residents of the city.

TEL AVIV — In mid-July, by a vote of 62-55, with two abstentions, the Knesset passed the Basic Law on Israel as the Nation-State of the Jewish People. The legislation — Basic Laws in Israel enjoy constitutional status although only a simple parliamentary majority is needed to pass or repeal them — reaffirmed principles set forth in the country’s May 1948 Declaration of Independence. Nevertheless, the nation-state law has occasioned bitter controversy here. With a nationalist-infused populism roiling the United States, Britain, and Europe, the Israeli debate over the aspiration, inscribed in the country’s founding, to combine nationalism and liberal democracy has implications that transcend the Jewish state.

On Aug. 13, Haaretz contributor Uzi Baram excoriated the new law and its architects. “The nation-state law is not only an unnecessary law, it is an abhorrent law,” he stated, speaking for many on the left. It “was the product of an ultranationalist government, led by the religious right,” and was intended “to divide the public, exclude minorities and undermine the Arabic language.”

On Aug. 16 in Haaretz, Haim Ramon, a man of the center-left, published a sharp reply that gave expression to a Zionist sensibility that extends beyond Israel’s center-right. A former vice prime minister and minister of justice, he emphasized that Israel’s 1992 Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty “granted equal rights to every person in the state of Israel in the spirit of Israel’s values as a Jewish and democratic state.” But it was incomplete: “whereas the law on human dignity and liberty elaborated the individual’s rights in a democratic state, it did not elaborate the practical significance of the state’s Jewish character.” The nation-state law remedies that deficiency. It “does not come to bury the Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty but to complete it.”

Whatever the actual legislative intentions and legal implications, the new Basic Law aggravated a sense of second-class citizenship among Israel’s minorities. This month Arabs, who constitute a little over 20 percent of the citizenry and who rarely serve in the army, and Druze, who represent about 1.5 percent and generally serve, attracted tens of thousands of protesters to separate political rallies in downtown Tel Aviv’s Rabin Square — the country’s premier venue for demonstrations— to decry the law.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271162/trump-cuts-palestinian-funding-joseph-klein

The Trump administration will not continue subsidizing the so-called “moderate,” “non-violent” Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership clique in the vain hope that throwing more good money after bad will help bring about real peace or provide genuine help for the Palestinian people. This clique is made up of lying hypocrites, who fund and glorify terrorists while corruptly diverting aid money and donations to their own personal benefit.

Last Friday, a State Department official announced to reporters that it would redirect U.S. financial assistance of more than $200 million originally intended for the Palestinian Authority and projects in the West Bank and Gaza. This cut in bilateral aid is on top of the previously announced cut of nearly $300 million in U.S. financial support for the discredited UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) denounced the Trump administration’s latest funding cut decision. “The rights of the Palestinian people are not for sale,” PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi said in a statement. “There is no glory in constantly bullying and punishing a people under occupation” through what she characterized as “economic meanness.”

http://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/wave-the-national-flag-for-zion/

This column proudly displays Israel’s national flag. The same flag will appear in the same place on every edition of Israel Hayom from this day forward. That will be our way of saluting the nation-state law, which, among other things, confirms this flag’s central and important role in the State of Israel.

Since you, our readers, naturally do not have a problem reading a newspaper that is openly patriotic, you should wonder about the controversy and antagonism that this law has generated within the Israeli public and among its politicians.

The State of Israel gave itself a very nice gift for its 70th birthday: the nation-state law – a law that defines Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. Israel is proud of this important Zionist legislation, despite the many futile attempts to make it appear hurtful, racist or discriminatory. The law is a true source of pride for the state. I am still waiting for someone, anyone, to point to a single clause in this law that contradicts in any way the values of democracy and equality.

I would like to ask the opponents of this law: What about it upsets you? Is it the clause that talks about Israel being the historical homeland of the Jewish people, where the State of Israel was established? Or perhaps is it the clause that decisively concludes that unified Jerusalem is the capital of Israel? Could it be the one that burns into our psyche that Hebrew is the official language of this state, and the Hatikvah is its national anthem?

http://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/a-deception-called-peace/

A deception called peace

Twenty-five years ago, PLO head Yasser Arafat’s triumphant return to areas under Israeli control was accompanied by live broadcasts, with cameras filming every angle of this “gala event.” Only one photo was missing – a photo of the arch-terrorists Arafat was hiding in his car.

The Shin Bet security agency knew about these individuals and strongly opposed letting these terrorists into the country. The Rabin government also knew about the smuggling but kept mum. The public was not notified. Why destroy a pretty fantasy? That is when the strategy of deception began.

Before his return, Arafat was politically and militarily irrelevant and had been banished to faraway Tunis. He was brought back to life by the Israeli messiahs of peace. The Israeli peace camp naively believed that, because of his weak standing, he would agree to become their partner.

Despite the promise that the initial stage of the 1994 Gaza-Jericho Agreement was merely an experiment, the leaders of Israel’s government continued making concessions while deceiving the public. The peace camp’s Palestinian obsession did not let up, even when it became glaringly obvious that there was no partner.

Even when it was revealed, after Arafat’s speech in South Africa in 1994, that when addressing an Arabic-speaking audience Arafat confessed that the peace overtures were just a stage in a plan to destroy Israel, the Israeli peace camp still clung to the plan. Even when the Second Intifada erupted in September 2000 under the auspices of the Palestinian Authority and with the help of Palestinian police officers using weapons supplied by Israel, they still held on to the dream – even when the price became a national nightmare with more than 1,000 Jews murdered.

http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2018/08/david-singer-trump-anoints-jordan-to.html

The three-day visit to Israel this week by President Trump’s National Security Advisor – John Bolton – indicates Jordan will replace the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) in concluding negotiations with Israel to resolve territorial sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), East Jerusalem and Gaza (”the disputed territories”) under Trump’s peace plan.

Bolton’s visit follows a former Jordanian ambassador – Walid Sadi – last week signalling Jordan is ready to fill the diplomatic void following the breakdown of Israel-PLO negotiations unsuccessfully conducted during the last 25 years. The PLO refuses to negotiate on Trump’s plan.

Walid resurrected Jordan’s long-dormant claims to sovereignty in the disputed territories that completely undermine those of the PLO:

“First of all, the unity of the West Bank with the East Bank was officially and constitutionally adopted on 24 of April 1950. No one disputes this fact. The Constitution of the country at the time was the 1952 Constitution, which stipulated in no uncertain terms that no part of the Kingdom shall be ceded, period. This provision makes the 1988 decision to cut off all legal and administrative relations between the two banks stopping short of ceding the West Bank to any side whatsoever. Any other interpretation of the 1988 political decision is absolutely untenable constitutionally.”

Bolton himself has supported Israel-Jordan negotiations over the West Bank since 2009.

General Omar Bradley, the first Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs-of-Staff, said in July, 1950, in the aftermath of Israel’s War of Independence: “The Israeli army would be the most effective force south of Turkey, which could be utilized for delaying action [extending the strategic hand of the USA]….” General Bradley’s assessment was rejected by the State Department and the Pentagon, which opposed the 1948 establishment of the Jewish State, contending that it would be decimated by the Arabs, a burden upon the US and probably an ally of the USSR.
Presidential candidate Ronald Reagan wrote in the Washington Post, on August 15, 1979: “The fall of [the Shah of] Iran has increased Israel’s value as perhaps the only remaining strategic asset in the region, on which the US can only rely….Only by full appreciation of the critical role the State of Israel plays in our strategic calculus can we build the foundation for thwarting Moscow’s designs on territories and resources vital to our security and our national wellbeing…. Israel is not a client but a very reliable friend…. American policy-makers downgrade Israel’s geopolitical importance as a stabilizing force, as a deterrent to radical hegemony and as military offset to the Soviet Union….”

In 2018, General Bradley’s and President Reagan’s assessments are vindicated, as the pro-US Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait and Oman, as well as Jordan and Egypt, seek further strategic ties with Israel. They view Israel as a most effective ally in the face of lethal threats posed by the anti-US Ayatollahs, ISIS and Muslim Brotherhood terrorists, irrespective of the unresolved Palestinian issue – which they never considered a crown jewel – and their fundamental reservations about the existence of an “infidel” Jewish State in “the abode of Islam.”