Hello Friends,
I had planned to post yesterday with some very interesting videos but for some reason I decided not to for a variety of reasons. Gut instinct told me to wait till the fraud B Hussein makes his speech and to see how far he'll go with his Islamic agenda. He didn't disappoint me in the least and this speech which is a natural continuation of his infamous Cairo speech 2 years ago shows a few interesting but obviously incorrect points (MSM and all the progressive left will "adore" it) but most of all the simple fact that he threw Israel under the bus. This is not an exaggeration but a simple fact that anyone who can read a map will understand.
Here's a short history lesson for you. When the Brits who were in charge of the Palestinian mandate signed an agreement in 1917 portioning the area under their control the "Israel" that was agreed upon then included what is today Jordan. They later reneged on that agreement (in 1922 I believe) and later on renewed it at a later date. The only problem was that in order to appease the Arabs they "created" Trans Jordan under the Hashemite clan with their first king Abdullah. So the area left for Israel was much smaller but no one complained about that fact. The area that was included in the State of Israel included all of Judea, Samaria, Benjamin, Gaza and all of Jerusalem. The Arabs also were offered an Arab state but they refused. During the war of Independence in 1948 Israel of course won as we all know but in the process lost control of Judea and Sameria and the old city in Jerusalem to Jordan and the Gaza strip to Egypt. In order to obfuscate the Jordanians "changed" the historic names Judea and Samaria to the "west bank".
Here's an interesting thought for you. While these so called Palestinians were under the rule of Jordan in the west bank and Egypt in Gaza you never heard a peep out of them for a Palestinian state. Quite the opposite in fact. All the camps were started during that "benevilant" period of being ruled by their Muslim brethren. No housing very little education and living in near poverty. They were subjugated to the authoritarian rule of Jordan and Egypt under terrible conditions. The UN came in and tried to help but to no avail. The terrorist organizations were then formed terrorizing Israel and not the Muslim oppressors of the time. BTW, the worst camps were and still are in Jordan proper.
In 1967 during the 6 day war Israel reunified Jerusalem and took back the west bank namely Judea, Sameria and the reunification of Jerusalem from the Jordanians and the Gaza Strip from Egypt. So, there were never any demands for a Palestinian state then and in fact there were no Palestinian "people". Israel before the declaration of the State of Israel was Palestine. The Jewish people prior to 1948 were called Palestinians but who remembers that aside from historical fact. Need I remind you that Palestine is the name the Romans gave the area when they occupied Israel.
Yesterday when B Hussein made his latest incorrect and infamous speech he came out and said the peace talks should define the borders of the Palestinian state prior to sitting down at the negotiating table and then he proceeded say in it should be based on the pre 1967 borders. This is as he very well knows a declaration of suicide were Israel to accept his proposal. These are borders that are virtually impossible to defend when you consider the armaments now in the hands of the PA and Hamas. And yes Hamas who continues to clearly state their intentions to destroy Israel and kill all the Jews is now part of the PA government after the latest agreement between the PA and Hamas. For those that forgot Hamas is an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and in their charter they unequivocally declare the destruction of Israel. They are considered to be a terrorist organization internationally including the United States.
So, yes the great pretender and fraud B Hussein threw Israel under the bus with his latest speech.
In regard to the Spring in the Muslin world just some more hogwash, lies, duplicity (Taqiyya?) and stupidity. Egypt will soon be under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood and will become another Iran. Oh yeah, he's gonna give them a billion $ too. Gotta love his largess don't you? Not knowing what sort of government will rise to power and he's already handing out your tax $ to them. In Libya he doesn't even know who the protesters are and he's supporting them. Not to say that Kadaffi is anyone's cup of tea but how can you support groups some of whom are know al Qaeda forces and other terrorist organizations? Yep, you guessed it another Iran. Syria? The fraud B Hussein really slapped him on the wrist didn't he? Tunisia might come out ok but i doubt it and Yemen will be yet another Iran in the end. B Hussein's ineptitude in regard to Iran is so well documented that it really doesn't need to be mentioned again.
Don't forget that Iran is backing all the uprisings and supporting the terrorist groups in these countries with the exception of Syria where they are taking an active part of the massacres with their Hezbollah clients. So yeah, Iran's hand is in all the hot spots and are being sponsored by them with active support arms and more.
Do you really think this is Springtime in the Muslim world or the direct descent into the furnaces of h*ell with more and more Irans popping up throughout African and the Middle East? B Hussein's Islamic agenda is working according to plan my friends and he is pleased at the outcome as you can all see but not for the sake of Democracy and freedom but for the sake of his beloved Caliphate.
Just one more thing, the fraud B Hussein showed his intentions in this speech with his opening statement that Hillary will go down in history as one of the best Secretaries of State ever. When you start a major speech with a lie then you know what to expect from the rest of the speech. Taqiyya at its best.
Shalom,
Peter
By HILARY LEILA KRIEGER AND HERB KEINON 05/20/2011 00:40 "Those borders are not defensible," PM rages as he flies off to Washington; Palestinian state must not come "at Israel’s expense"; US President urges resumed talks, focused on territory, security.
A day before their scheduled meeting in Washington, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama staked out dramatically conflicting positions Thursday as to the path for resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Netanyahu issued a quick, bitter response on Thursday night to Obama’s landmark Middle East speech, saying that the establishment of a Palestinian state could not come “at Israel’s expense.”
RELATED:
Analysis: PM finds more jarring, than pleasing, in Obama’s speech
Right wing MKs: Obama is the new Arafat
“The Palestinians, and not only the US, must recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people,” he said.
Obama, in his address earlier in the day on the changes sweeping the Middle East, called for a demilitarized Palestinian state along the 1967 lines with agreed upon land swaps.
While thanking Obama for his commitment to peace, Netanyahu said he “expects to hear from President Obama a reconfirmation of commitments to Israel from 2004 that received wide support in both houses of Congress.” This was a reference to a letter from president
George W. Bush to prime minister Ariel Sharon that did not call for a return to the 1967 lines, and that recognized that any agreement would take into account the changed realities on the ground – a line interpreted by Israel to mean a recognition that it would hold on to the large settlement blocs.
The Bush commitments, said Netanyahu, “
deal with Israel not being asked to withdraw to the 1967 lines, which are not defensible, and which place large population centers in Judea and Samaria outside of these borders.”
Netanyahu’s statement also said that the Bush letter made clear that Palestinian refugees would be absorbed in a future Palestinian state, something that was not explicitly mentioned in Obama’s speech.
“Without a solution to the refugee issue by settling them outside of Israel, no territorial concessions will end the conflict,” the statement read.
In a wide-ranging address at the State Department, Obama devoted considerable attention to the Israeli-Palestinian issue, whose peaceful resolution he called “more urgent than ever,” and pushed back against those who have said the current tumult precluded a serious peace process.
“While the core issues of the conflict must be negotiated, the basis of those negotiations is clear: a viable Palestine, a secure Israel,” the president declared. “We believe the borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.”
Though he stressed that the United States can’t impose a solution, “what America and the international community can do is to state frankly what everyone knows – a lasting peace will involve two states for two peoples: Israel as a Jewish state and the homeland for the Jewish people, and the state of Palestine as the homeland for the Palestinian people.”
Obama fleshed that out further by saying that Palestinians should have “a sovereign, nonmilitarized state” and that there must be provisions for stopping terrorism and weapons smuggling, and ensuring border security. He called for a “full and phased withdrawal” of the IDF to be coordinated with the Palestinians during a transition period with a clear duration and demonstrated security effectiveness.
“These principles provide a foundation for negotiations,” Obama said. “Palestinians should know the territorial outlines of their state; Israelis should know that their basic security concerns will be met.”
He pointedly skipped making any prescriptions on the “wrenching and emotional” issues of Jerusalem and Palestinian refugees but argued that “moving forward now on the basis of territory and security provides a foundation to resolve those two issues in a way that is just and fair.”
Obama’s comments codify long-standing American policy in a more explicit and detailed format than his predecessors offered. George W. Bush was the first to call for a Palestinian state, and later referred to “mutually agreed changes” to the 1949 armistice lines as its basis, in the 2004 letter to Sharon.
The greater significance of Obama’s comments is likely to come in how they are perceived by both parties, as well as what they indicate about the United States’ intentions on shepherding the peace process.
Though the US has not been engaged in active diplomacy since the Palestinians left the talks last year, this could signal an effort to raise the profile of US involvement in the issue.
It comes at a time when the Palestinians are threatening to go to the UN with a unilateral declaration of statehood, a move that concerns Israel and is sure to be a subject of discussion when Netanyahu arrives at the White House on Friday.
Obama strongly rebuked the Palestinians for this tactic on Thursday, saying, “Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won’t create an independent state.”
He warned Palestinians that “efforts to delegitimize Israel will end in failure” and that they would “never realize their independence by denying the right of Israel to exist.”
He chastised both sides for taking steps that don’t help the peace process.
“Israeli settlement
activity continues. Palestinians have walked away from talks,” Obama said. “The world looks at a conflict that has grinded on and on and on, and sees nothing but stalemate.”
Israel has expressed doubt that any progress toward negotiations can be made for the time being with the recent announcement of a Palestinian unity government that will include Hamas.
Obama acknowledged these concerns when he referred to the unity deal as raising “profound and legitimate questions for Israel” and emphasized that “in the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question.”
Elsewhere, he said, “Palestinian leaders will not achieve peace or prosperity if Hamas insists on a path of terror and rejection.”
He stressed American support for Israel: “Our friendship is rooted deeply in a shared history and shared values. Our commitment to Israel’s security is unshakeable. And we will stand against attempts to single it out for criticism in international forums.”
He continued, “But precisely because of our friendship, it’s important that we tell the truth: The status quo is unsustainable, and Israel too must act boldly to advance a lasting peace.”
Obama added, “The dream of a Jewish and democratic state cannot be fulfilled with permanent occupation.”
Referring to Obama’s statement about Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people, the Prime Minister’s Office said the Palestinians and not only the US need to recognize that as a fact.
Netanyahu also said that he will make clear in his meeting with Obama that Israel will need to remain on the Jordan River, and that he was disappointed by Fatah’s reconciliation with Hamas.
While Obama noted the emotive nature of the Palestinian issue for the broader Arab world, he also criticized dictators for deflecting attention from their autocratic rule by focusing on Israel.
“Antagonism toward Israel became the only acceptable outlet for political expression,” he said.
His speech was delivered in response to the Arab uprisings against these autocracies, and Obama pledged American support for those who sought democracy and freedom.
“There must be no doubt that the
United States of America welcomes change that advances self-determination and opportunity,” he said.
“Yes, there will be perils that accompany this moment of promise. But after decades of accepting the world as it is in the region, we have a chance to pursue the world as it should be.”
He stressed, “The status quo is not sustainable. Societies held together by
fear and repression may offer the illusion of stability for a time, but they are built upon fault lines that will eventually tear asunder.”
Obama criticized Syrian leader Bashar Assad for firing on his own citizens, who have taken to the streets to demand such self-determination.
But he didn’t refer to Assad as illegitimate, much less call on him to go, as he has with other Arab leaders in similar positions, as some had speculated he would before the speech.
Instead, Obama said, “
President Assad now has a choice: He can lead that transition, or get out of the way. The Syrian government must stop shooting demonstrators, and allow peaceful protests.”
He also called on Assad to “start a serious dialogue to advance a democratic transition,” warning that “otherwise, President Assad and his regime will continue to be challenged from within and will continue to be isolated abroad.”
He spoke of significant American aid to help Egypt and Tunisia reach democracy, and spoke of the need for religious freedom and rights for women throughout the Arab world.
Obama concluded with his comments on the peace process, and used the experience of bereaved Israelis and Palestinians who chose to seek reconciliation rather than violence as a message for the greater region.
“That is the choice that must be made – not simply in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but across the entire region – a choice between hate and hope; between the shackles of the past and the promise of the future,” he said. “It’s a choice that must be made by leaders and by the people, and it’s a choice that will define the future of a region that served as the cradle of civilization and a crucible of strife.”