RUTHFULLY YOURS

NO URL: E-PAL DAVID SINGER IS AN EMINENT INTERNATIONAL LAWYER IN AUSTRALIA
President Obama has dramatically lowered his support for Israel over the past four years when one compares his latest response to a questionnaire from the American Jewish Committee to the answers he provided before the 2008 elections.

President Obama’s 2012 response is both vague and essentially directionless:

Last year, I stood before the United Nations General Assembly to address the Palestinian bid for U.N. recognition of statehood.I believe now, as I did then, that the Palestinian people deserve a state of their own.However, I continue to believe that lasting peace will only come from direct negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians themselves and not from unilateral Palestinian actions at the United Nations.That is why I made it clear that there can be no short-cuts to peace, and called on the world to recognize the legitimacy of Israel and its security concerns as a Jewish, democratic state.

We cannot impose peace or any final status details on the Israelis and Palestinians.Ultimately, it is up to the two parties to take action. Final status issues can only be resolved by the Israelis and Palestinians themselves.What we can do is state frankly what is widely known: that a lasting peace will involve two sovereign, independent states.And I am convinced that the majority of Israelis and Palestinians would rather look to the future than be trapped in the past.However, my Administration has made it clear that Israelis cannot be expected to negotiate with a partner that refuses to recognize its right to exist.That’s why it’s imperative that Hamas abides by the Quartet conditions to renounce violence, recognize Israel’s right to exist, and abide by past agreements.

His response was far more direct four years ago – indicating the parameters of the two-state solution he then envisaged should be the outcome of negotiations between Israel and the Palestine Liberation Organization through it’s agreed negotiating entity – the Palestinian Authority (PA) .

The United States cannot dictate the terms of a final status agreement. We should support the parties as they negotiate these difficult issues, but they will have to reach agreements that they can live with. In general terms, Israel clearly must emerge in a final status agreement with secure borders. Jerusalem will remain Israel’s capital, and no one should want or expect it to be re-divided. As for refugees, the Palestinians will need to reinterpret the notion of a right of return in such a way that will preserve Israel as a Jewish state, while Israel would likely contribute to international compensation for the refugees.

But these details are for the parties to decide. While negotiations are ongoing, both sides should take steps to improve conditions on the ground, so that people believe they have a stake in the process.

The following differences between Obama 2008 and Obama 2012 are starkly evident:

President Obama would find it virtually impossible to criticize the PA acquiring “a state of its own” by demanding as a necessary condition that all 5000000 Jews living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem be expelled from their homes and businesses.

The Palestinian Arabs deserved right to a state is timeless – no matter how many offers made by Israel are rejected by the PA. With that kind of Presidential mind set – Arab rejectionism of such a state – first proposed in 1937 and rejected on many occasions since then – is bound to continue without fear of any political consequences from America.
Whilst direct negotiations still remain the pathway to create any such Palestinian State – the President is apparently prepared to allow those negotiations to continue to be stalled indefintely without any express policy being proposed by him as a possible circuit breaker. Such Presidential inertia can only encourage the PA to prolong the resumption of negotiations until its demands to return to the negotiating table are first agreed on by Israel.
Whilst President Obama states that he has called on the world to recognise the legitimacy of Israel and its security concerns as a Jewish democratic State – he makes no similar direct call on the Palestinian Arabs.
Gone are the 2008 pronouncements on secure borders, Jerusalem, and refugees – positions agreed on in an exchange of letters in 2004 between Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and President George W Bush. President Obama’s abandonment of his predecessor’s commitments will only embolden the PA to maintain its rejectionist stance on each of these issues.

http://pjmedia.com/spengler/2012/10/25/its-the-obonomy-stupid/

“Business investment in the US has ground to a halt” is the lead story on MarketWatch this morning. The site reports, “For the first quarter since late 2009, shipments of U.S.-made capital investment goods declined, falling at a 4.9% annual rate, according to Census Bureau data released on Thursday.”

There’s an investors’ strike underway of proportions we have never seen before. Corporations are hoarding $2 trillion worth of cash. Private equity funds have $1 trillion of unused commitments. Pension funds and life insurance companies are gasping for returns. Yet Americans refuse to take risk on other Americans. Households, corporations, and institutional investors would rather keep money under the figurative mattress in ultra-safe investments than invest in future productivity.

This isn’t like the Great Depression. During the Great Depression, to be sure, investment collapsed, but no-one had money to invest. Now everyone has money to invest (and the Federal Reserve keeps shoving new money into the system by purchasing securities from the open market), yet no-one wants to invest.

There’s no textbook description for this condition, so we’ll give it a name: the Obonomy. The anti-business toxicity in Washington is so intense that that no-one will take risks.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203897404578078803373321988.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion “What’s welling up in America’s ruling Democrats is not yet a full-throated scream of desperation,” observes commentator Neil Macdonald, who is Canadian and therefore a neutral observer. “But as Samuel Johnson famously remarked, the prospect of being hanged in a fortnight concentrates the mind wonderfully.” True, as Macdonald says, “for the most part, Barack […]

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/european-parliament-delegations-trip-to-iran-a-despicable-visit?f=puball#ixzz2AOl75ro6 Once again the oppressed Iranian people were shocked to hear that European Parliament (EP) will soon be embarking on an official visit of their lawmakers to Iran. The visit is scheduled from October 27 to November 02, 2012. The question on every Iranian mind is: “How can they even think of going to Tehran […]

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/economy-obama-project-weakness Despite President Obama’s snarky jabs at Mitt Romney in Monday night’s debate, claiming command of international affairs, the truth is that after nearly four years the emperor’s foreign and national security policy still has no clothes.First, there’s no denying the Middle East is a mess. The Arab Spring released hard-line Islamist forces, not moderate […]

Britain’s historic responsibilities for the Israel-Palestine conflict:
starting an honest conversation

0930-1700 Friday November 2nd 2012

Quaker Meeting House, 7 Victoria Terrace, Edinburgh EH1 2JL

Space in the hall is limited, 3 places still available at 25 Oct.

The Balfour Project, in association with the Church of Scotland, is organising a one-day conference on the British involvement in Palestine in the first half of the last century. This is a first step in exploring how to mark the centenary of the Balfour Declaration in exactly five years on 2nd November 2017.

The Balfour Project has been created by a group of academics and activists who believe that this anniversary should not pass unremarked. Mindful of Britain’s responsibility for what has come to pass in the Middle East, the Balfour Project will encourage understanding of what led to the Balfour Declaration, and what flowed from it. Through our website, we plan to facilitate a network of educational, political, religious and humanitarian groups who share this conviction. We aim to stimulate conferences, cultural exchanges and the production of multimedia resources. Above all, we believe that the search for the truth of what took place, and the acknowledgement of wrong-doing, can contribute to justice, peace and reconciliation in the Middle East.

In the morning Dr Mary Embleton, whose special interest is Britain’s involvement in the Middle East, will outline the contradictory promises Britain made to Arabs and Jews, and their consequences for all parties before and during the British Mandate in Palestine. This will be followed by keynote papers from Rev Dr Stephen Sizer, who will talk about the ideas that shaped this period, Professor Mary Grey will talk about the main players and Dr Imad Karam will talk about the consequences for Palestinians today. In the afternoon John Bond OAM, former Secretary of Australia’s Sorry Day campaign, will use the 2008 national apology to Aboriginal Australians to discuss the impact of acknowledgement and apology.

This will be followed by workshops where you can both interact further with the main speakers and pool ideas on how we move forward. How can we create a momentum over the next 5 years towards an acknowledgement of our responsibilities? Can there be a cascade of events, not centrally organised, but all working to the same ends?

Registration is £20 which includes lunch and refreshments. Space is limited so please book your place on the attached registration form. We hope you will find it an informative and stimulating day.

http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/2012/10/angling-for-apology-britons-battling.html
Angling For An Apology: Britons Battling The Balfour Declaration

“With the Balfour Declaration of 2nd November 1917 Britain unleashed a series of events in Palestine that have not only caused enormous suffering and loss to the Palestinian people but also unleashed recurrent waves of terrorism affecting many parts of the world to this day. The British Government must accept its historic responsibility and issue an apology.”

So runs a silly doomed-for-the-dustbin e-petition to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office concocted last year by an anti-Israel activist. Tweeted at intervals by its framer, who also happens to head a small Palestine Solidarity Campaign branch somewhere in the British boondocks, the e-petition closed in August this year, having attracted just 155 signatures.

The idea behind the petition, however, has evidently stirred independently in other breasts.

Step forward the Steering Committee of an initiative calling itself The Balfour Project:

Dr Mary Embleton, Historian
Professor Mary Grey, Theologian, writer and activist.
Dr Imad Karam, Academic and film maker
Peter Riddell. Peace activist
Dr Monica Spooner, Medical Doctor
Professor Roger L Spooner OBE, Scientist
Rev Dr Stephen Sizer Anglican vicar and author

http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1919/jewish_settlement_in_the_west_bank_is_not_the_issue Palestinian Authority leaders pay a great deal of lip service to their desire to create a state of their own, even turning to the United Nations to try to achieve some kind of unprecedented observer status for their as yet nonexistent state. At the same time the Palestinians, their friends, and even elements of […]

http://campaign.r20.constantcontact.com/render?llr=e6zyq5bab&v=0015qcJ7P_42YgKkXk9gM0LkccrwZXidwa_yye0QrqpHmSL74HZPRXEbW-6kbencIRKDWtEZ4PwRr1Vk_nW7I7Pq6FbT0QbBTlBr_AScPwif_8%3D The decision to award this year’s Nobel Peace Prize to the European Union – announced as the EU edges ever closer to disintegration is no mere foolishness. It reflects a worldview that is largely responsible for Israel’s marginalization in the international community. The decision to award this year’s Nobel Peace Prize to the European […]

Another Tack: When the darling departs Israel’s agenda-driven pundits are strict mono-measurers with no other political yardstick but how any hullabaloo impacts on the Likud – or, more specifically, on its headliner Binyamin Netanyahu. They cheer whatever damages the Likud or diminishes Netanyahu. Look at how the second coming of Shas’s Arye Deri’s was greeted. Regardless […]