Why be so coy?

As you know, Israeli govt officials admit Apartheid:

Shulamit Aloni is the former Education Minister of Israel. She has been awarded both the Israel Prize and the Emil Grunzweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

http://www.counterpunch.org/aloni01082007.html

Yes, There is Apartheid in Israel

By SHULAMIT ALONI

Jewish self-righteousness is taken for granted among ourselves to such an extent that we fail to see what's right in front of our eyes. It's simply inconceivable that the ultimate victims, the Jews, can carry out evil deeds. Nevertheless, the state of Israel practises its own, quite violent, form of Apartheid with the native Palestinian population.

The US Jewish Establishment's onslaught on former President Jimmy Carter is based on him daring to tell the truth which is known to all: through its army, the government of Israel practises a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp. All this is done in order to keep an eye on the population's movements and to make its life difficult. Israel even imposes a total curfew whenever the settlers, who have illegally usurped the Palestinians' land, celebrate their holidays or conduct their parades.

If that were not enough, the generals commanding the region frequently issue further orders, regulations, instructions and rules (let us not forget: they are the lords of the land). By now they have requisitioned further lands for the purpose of constructing "Jewish only" roads. Wonderful roads, wide roads, well-paved roads, brightly lit at night--all that on stolen land. When a Palestinian drives on such a road, his vehicle is confiscated and he is sent on his way.

On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. "Why?" I asked the soldier. "It's an order--this is a Jews-only road", he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. "It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?"

Indeed Apartheid does exist here. And our army is not "the most moral army in the world" as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention centre and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved 'for Jews only', on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an "ingenious proposal".

Humanitarian activists cannot transport Palestinians either.

Major-General Naveh, renowned for his superior patriotism, has issued a new order. Coming into affect on 19 January, it prohibits the conveyance of Palestinians without a permit. The order determines that Israelis are not allowed to transport Palestinians in an Israeli vehicle (one registered in Israel regardless of what kind of numberplate it carries) unless they have received explicit permission to do so. The permit relates to both the driver and the Palestinian passenger. Of course none of this applies to those whose labour serves the settlers. They and their employers will naturally receive the required permits so they can continue to serve the lords of the land, the settlers.

Did man of peace President Carter truly err in concluding that Israel is creating Apartheid? Did he exaggerate? Don't the US Jewish community leaders recognise the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966, to which Israel is a signatory? Are the US Jews who launched the loud and abusive campaign against Carter for supposedly maligning Israel's character and its democratic and humanist nature unfamiliar with the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 30 November 1973? Apartheid is defined therein as an international crime that among other things includes using different legal instruments to rule over different racial groups, thus depriving people of their human rights. Isn't freedom of travel one of these rights?

In the past, the US Jewish community leaders were quite familiar with the meaning of those conventions. For some reason, however, they are convinced that Israel is allowed to contravene them. It's OK to kill civilians, women and children, old people and parents with their children, deliberately or otherwise without accepting any responsibility. It's permissible to rob people of their lands, destroy their crops, and cage them up like animals in the zoo. From now on, Israelis and International humanitarian organisations' volunteers are prohibited from assisting a woman in labour by taking her to the hospital. [Israeli human rights group] Yesh Din volunteers cannot take a robbed and beaten-up Palestinian to the police station to lodge a complaint. (Police stations are located at the heart of the settlements.) Is there anyone who believes that this is not Apartheid?

Jimmy Carter does not need me to defend his reputation that has been sullied by Israelophile community officials. The trouble is that their love of Israel distorts their judgment and blinds them from seeing what's in front of them. Israel is an occupying power that for 40 years has been oppressing an indigenous people, which is entitled to a sovereign and independent existence while living in peace with us. We should remember that we too used very violent terror against foreign rule because we wanted our own state. And the list of victims of terror is quite long and extensive.

We do limit ourselves to denying the [Palestinian] people human rights. We not only rob of them of their freedom, land and water. We apply collective punishment to millions of people and even, in revenge-driven frenzy, destroy the electricity supply for one and half million civilians. Let them "sit in the darkness" and "starve".

Employees cannot be paid their wages because Israel is holding 500 million shekels that belong to the Palestinians. And after all that we remain "pure as the driven snow". There are no moral blemishes on our actions. There is no racial separation. There is no Apartheid. It's an invention of the enemies of Israel. Hooray for our brothers and sisters in the US! Your devotion is very much appreciated. You have truly removed a nasty stain from us. Now there can be an extra spring in our step as we confidently abuse the Palestinian population, using the "most moral army in the world".

[Translated by Sol Salbe]

Shulamit Aloni is the former Education Minister of Israel. She has been awarded both the Israel Prize and the Emil Grunzweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

But Israel is NOT a democracy!

from the NYTimes:

.

"Israel is simultaneously running three systems of government. The first is full democracy toward its Jewish citizens — ethnocracy. The second is racial discrimination toward the Palestinian minority — creeping Jim Crowism. And the third is occupation of the Palestinian territories with one set of laws for Palestinians and another for Jewish settlers — apartheid."

Op-Ed Contributor
A Harsh Reality for Palestinians
By AHMAD TIBI

Published: April 6, 2009

JERUSALEM — The right-wing coalition of the new Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, does not bode well for Palestinians in Israel. With the appointment of Avigdor Lieberman as foreign minister, the extremists are going after the indigenous population and threatening us with loyalty tests and the possibility of “transfer” into an area nominally controlled by the Palestinian Authority.
Netanyahu’s intransigence vis-à-vis Palestinians in the occupied territories is certainly cause for concern. No less concerning is what the Netanyahu-Lieberman combination may mean to Palestinian citizens of Israel.
This government, particularly with Lieberman as foreign minister, should be boycotted by the international community, just as it once boycotted Jörg Haider, the late Austrian far-right politician who won global notoriety for his anti-immigrant views.
Lieberman, in one of many outrageous comments, declared in May 2004 that 90 percent of Israel’s Palestinian citizens “have no place here. They can take their bundles and get lost.”
But my family and I were on this land centuries before Lieberman arrived here in 1978 from Moldova. We are among the minority who managed to remain when some 700,000 Palestinians were forced out by Israel in 1948.
Today, Lieberman stokes anti-Palestinian sentiment with his threat of “transfer” — a euphemism for renewed ethnic cleansing. Henry Kissinger, too, has called for a territorial swap, and Lieberman cites Kissinger to give his noxious idea a more sophisticated sheen. Lieberman and Kissinger envision exchanging a portion of Israel for a portion of the occupied West Bank seized illegally by Jewish settlers.
But Israel has no legal right to any of the occupied Palestinian territories. And Lieberman has no right to offer the land my home is on in exchange for incorporating Jewish settlers into newly defined Israeli state borders. We are citizens of the state of Israel and do not want to exchange our second-class citizenship in our homeland — subject as we are to numerous laws that discriminate against us — for life in a Palestinian Bantustan.
We take our citizenship seriously and struggle daily to improve our lot and overcome discriminatory laws and practices.
We face discrimination in all fields of life. Arab citizens are 20 percent of the population, but only 6 percent of the employees in the public sector. Not one Arab employee is working in the central bank of Israel. Imagine if there was not one African-American citizen employed in the central bank of the United States.
Israel is simultaneously running three systems of government. The first is full democracy toward its Jewish citizens — ethnocracy. The second is racial discrimination toward the Palestinian minority — creeping Jim Crowism. And the third is occupation of the Palestinian territories with one set of laws for Palestinians and another for Jewish settlers — apartheid.
A few weeks ago, Lieberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu Party led the charge in the Israeli Knesset to ban my party — the Arab Movement for Renewal — from participating in the elections. Netanyahu’s Likud also supported the action. The Supreme Court overturned the maneuvers of the politicians. But their attempt to ban our participation should expose Israel’s democracy to the world as fraudulent.
Lieberman’s inveighing against Palestinian citizens of Israel is not new. Less than three years ago, he called for my death and the death of some of my Palestinian Knesset colleagues for daring to meet with democratically elected Palestinian leaders. Speaking before the Knesset plenum, Lieberman stated: “World War II ended with the Nuremberg trials. The heads of the Nazi regime, along with their collaborators, were executed. I hope this will be the fate of the collaborators in this house.” Lieberman now has the power to put his vile views into practice.
We call for more attention from the Obama administration toward the Palestinian minority in Israel. It is a repressed minority suffering from inadequately shared state resources. The enormous annual American aid package to Israel fails almost entirely to reach our community.
Between Netanyahu and Lieberman, the Obama administration will have its hands full. Make no mistake that Netanyahu and Lieberman will press the new administration hard to accept Israeli actions in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem — as well as discriminatory anti-Palestinian actions in Israel itself. Settlements will grow and discrimination deepen. American backbone will be crucial in the months ahead.
Ahmad Tibi is a Palestinian citizen of Israel and a member of the Knesset, Israel’s Parliament

Oh please pick me! pick me! I had my hand up! I know the solution!!!

EASY: Stop funding the war criminal IDF and then the Israelis may have an iota of incentive to make a deal for peace.

So long as they can carry out cluster bomb raids on Palestinian children with impunity (eg. no reaction to the Goldstone Report...) to affect collective punishment there will be no peace.

See what this Jewish knighted member of Parliament says:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGuYjt6CP8

I.

This point goes back to the old "If a tree falls..." existentialism.

If "leverage" against Israel is too politically costly from a domestic electoral standpoint to use, is it really "leverage."

And then there's the notion of "credibility." Like as some might in this world to think, the majority of Arabs aren't retarded. They understand full-well that the United States stands squarely in the corner of Israel. At best what some Arabs do is ask the US to plead some sensibility into its best friend's otherwise clinically insane behavior.

------
II.

A wise man once said "True friends aren't the ones that are always making you laugh. True friends sometimes make you cry, when it is most necessary."

------
III.

"Shared Values"

I suppose the proper thing to ask is which Americans share these supposed values?

I've spoken to many an American ranging from different races, different creeds, different socio-economic backgrounds coming from different geographical regions of the US. Now I no way claim that my experience should be indicative of a "fair sampling." But the only truth that jumps out to me over and over again, is that while Americans are troubled by what goes on in Israel, they vote with their wallets and what their local political concerns are.

Thism, whereas there is a critical body of extremely biased Americans who are, essentially, single issue voters. The issue? America's largely unquestioned support of Israel. From my understanding, a typical member of AIPAC is willing to write a hefty check to the PAC of a Congressional candidate half-way across the country, simply because his opponent has the chutzpah to freely speak his mind on our relations with Israel. This is behavior, while absolutely legal, that the average American voter doesn't engage in, much less even know is a possibility. The supporters of Israel in America are willing to fund the campaign of individuals, even if that candidates social views and policy views domestically might not be savory to the donor, simply because s/he is an ardent supporter of "letting Israel do whatever it wants."

Can we honestly and objectively say that if tommorrow, every single registered voter was to be educated by a neutral source about the history of this conflict and the perdicament of Holocaust survivors on the one hand, and the sad history of disenfranchisement of Palestinians on the other, that the role of the US in this dispute would be altered drastically?

Which is an other issue. We lack a wide consensus as what we can regard as a 'neutral' and 'unbiased' history-telling. If the said history leads to a view that is different from ours, it is definitively dismissed as biased.

It's weird that you seem to have no problem with a potential future Palestinian state this is ethnically cleansed of Jews, but shed crocodile tears over Israel becoming an 'apartheid' state. What's up with that?

No one would dare write a vision of future Palestine.

Most likely 'cause we know what would happen - another ill advised war started by certain elements in Palestine ending up with Little Satan re-capturing turf won fair and square in the first place.

Miller was working under Dennis Ross. I would like to give both of them a grade of 'F" for thier work on the peace process.

Miller was working under Dennis Ross. I would like to give both of them a grade of 'F" for thier work on the peace process.

Miller was working for Ross for most of the 90's. They both get an "F" for thier effort in the peace process. They both should be out of work for their poor performance. if any perform like that at thier job, I bet they will be out of work in no time. Profossor Walt: what grade u would give Miller for his essay
I read his essay and there are nothing new. its same old same.

"Telling President Obama to stand aside now is irresponsible advice."

Yet this is the advice Senator Schumer (D-NY) has been offering lately.

BTW, did you say fawning speech by Gen James Jones? The same Gen Jones who, after spending years on the West Bank, could not tell the President what Gen Petraeus told the President about the Palestine-Israel conflict hurting US military/diplomatic efforts in the region? Oh, my!

Here is a CBS 60 minutes segment on how the Israeli "Defense" Forces behave:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4752349n

Of course, the Goldstone report also implicates the IDF as war criminals.

Our support of Israel encourages them not to compromise with their neighbors. I never understood what we get back for our support of Israel besides terrorism?

Israel has flouted more than 70 UN resolutions -- it is a pariah state. Here is a _partial_ list of the UN resolutions Israel has scoffed at:

UN resolution No. 237 -- 14 June 1967 Calls upon the Government of Israel to ensure the safety, welfare and security of the inhabitants, facilitate the return of those inhabitants who have fled the areas since the outbreak of the hostilities and recommends the scrupulous respect of the humanitarian principles contained in the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949.

No. 242 -- 22 Nov 1967 Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include: withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict; and termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.

No. 248 -- 24 Mar 1968 Deplores the loss of life and heavy damage to property. Condemns the military action launched by Israel in flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter and the cease-fire resolution. Calls upon Israel to desist from acts or activities in contravention of resolution 237 (1967). (This was an attack against Karameh, Jordan.)

No. 250 27 Apr 1968 Calls upon Israel to refrain from holding the military parade in Jerusalem which is contemplated for 2 May 1968.

251 2 May 1968 Deeply deplores the holding by Israel of the military parade in Jerusalem on 2 May 1968 in disregard of the unanimous decision adopted by the Council on 27 April 1968.

252 21 May 1968 Deplores the failure of Israel to comply with General Assembly resolutions 2253 (ES-V) and 2254 (ES-V) of 4 and 14 July 1967. Considers that all legislative and administrative measures taken by Israel, including the expropriation of land and properties thereon, which tend to change the legal status of Jerusalem, are invalid and cannot change the status. Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures taken and to desist from further actions changing the status of Jerusalem.

259 27 Sept 1968 Deplores the delay in implementation of resolution 237 (1967) because of the conditions still being set by Israel for receiving a Special Representative of the Secretary-General. Requests the Secretary-General to urgently dispatch a Special Representative to the Arab territories under military occupation by Israel following the hostilities of 5 June 1967 and to report on the implementation of resolution 237 (1967).

267 3 Jul 1969 Reaffirms the established principle that the acquisition of territory by military conquest is inadmissible. Deplores the failure of Israel to show any regard for the resolutions of the General Assembly and the Security Council. Censures in the strongest terms all measures taken to change the status of the city of Jerusalem. Urgently calls once more on Israel to rescind all measures taken by it to change the status of Jerusalem and in the future to refrain from all actions likely to have such an effect

271 15 Sep 1969 Grieved at the extensive damage caused by arson to the Holy Al Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem on 21 August 1969 under the military occupation of Israel; calls upon Israel to scrupulously observe the provisions of the Geneva Conventions and international law governing military occupation.
298 25 Sep 1971 Deplores the failure of Israel to respect previous U.N. resolutions concerning measures and actions by Israel purporting to affect the status of the city of Jerusalem. Confirms that all legislative and administrative actions taken by Israel … are totally invalid and cannot change that status. Urgently calls upon Israel to rescind all such measures….

338 22 Oct 1973 Calls for an immediate cease-fire and termination of all military activity. Calls upon the parties concerned to start immediately after the cease-fire the implementation of Security Council resolution 242 (1967) in all of its parts....

339 23 Oct 1973 Refers to resolution 338 (1973); confirms its decision on immediate cessation of all military actions; and requests the Secretary-General to take measures for immediate dispatch of U.N. observers to supervise observance of the cease-fire.

381 30 Nov 1975 Expresses concern over the continued state of tension in the area. Decides to reconvene on 12 January 1976 to continue the debate on the Middle East problem including the Palestinian question, taking into account all relevant U.N. resolutions.

425 19 Mar 978 Calls for the strict respect for the territorial integrity, sovereignty and political independence of Lebanon. Calls upon Israel immediately to cease its military action against Lebanese territorial integrity and withdraw forthwith its forces from all Lebanese territory. Decides to establish immediately under its authority a United Nations Interim Force in Southern Lebanon (UNIFIL).

446 22 Mar 1979 Determines that the policy and practices of Israel in establishing settlements in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967 have no legal validity and constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Calls once more upon Israel, as the occupying power, to abide scrupulously by the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, to rescind its previous measures and to desist from taking any action which would result in changing the legal status and geographical nature and materially affecting the demographic composition of the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, and in particular, not to transfer parts of its own civilian population into the occupied Arab territories.

452 20 Jul 1979 Calls upon the government and people of Israel to cease, on an urgent basis, the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem.

465 1 Mar 1980 Determines that all measures taken by Israel to change the physical character, composition, institutional structure or status of the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem, or any part thereof, have no legal validity and that Israel's policy and practices of settling parts of its population and new immigrants in those territories constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention and also constitute a serious obstruction to achieving a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East. Strongly deplores the continuation and persistence of Israel in pursuing those policies and practices. Calls upon the government and people of Israel to rescind those measures, to dismantle the existing settlements and in particular to cease, on an urgent basis, the establishment, construction and planning of settlements in the Arab territories occupied since 1967, including Jerusalem. Calls upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connection with settlements in the occupied territories; and requests the Commission to continue examining the situation relating to settlements, to investigate the reported serious depletion of natural resources, particularly water, with a view to ensuring protection of those important natural resources of the territories under occupation.

468 8 May 1980 Recalling the Geneva Convention of 1949 and expressing deep concern at the expulsion by the Israeli military occupation authorities of the Mayors of Hebron and Halhoul and of the Sharia Judge of Hebron, calls upon Israel as occupying Power to rescind these illegal measures and to facilitate the immediate return of the expelled Palestinian leaders.

469 20 May 1980 Strongly deplores the failure of Israel to implement resolution 468 (1968). Calls again upon the Government of Israel, as occupying Power, to rescind the illegal measures taken by the Israeli military occupation authorities in expelling the Mayors of Hebron and Halhoul and the Sharia Judge of Hebron.

471 5 June 1980 Expresses deep concern that the Jewish settlers in the occupied Arab territories are allowed to carry arms thus enabling them to perpetrate crimes against the civilian population. Calls for the immediate apprehension and prosecution of the perpetrators of these crimes and condemns the assassination attempts on the lives of the Mayors of Nablus, Ramallah and Al-Bireh. Expresses deep concern that Israel, as occupying Power, has failed to provide adequate protection to the civilian population in the occupied territories in conformity with the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Calls again upon the Government of Israel to respect and comply with the provisions of the Convention as well as with the resolutions of the Council, calls once again upon all States not to provide Israel with any assistance to be used specifically in connection with settlements in the occupied territories. Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem.

476 30 June 1980 Reaffirms the overriding necessity to end the prolonged occupation of Arab territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. Strongly deplores the continued refusal of Israel, the occupying Power, to comply with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council and the General Assembly. Reiterates that all measures taken by Israel which have altered the geographic, demographic and historical character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem are null and void and must be rescinded in compliance with the relevant resolutions of the Security Council. Reaffirms that all such measures and actions constitute a flagrant violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Reaffirms its determination in the event of non-compliance by Israel to examine practical ways and means in accordance with relevant provisions of the U.N. Charter to secure full implementation of this resolution.

478 20 Aug 1980 Censures in the strongest terms the enactment by Israel of the "basic law" on Jerusalem and the refusal to comply with relevant Security Council resolutions. Affirms that the enactment of the "basic law" by Israel constitutes a violation of international law and does not affect the continued application of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 12 August 1949 in the Palestinian and other Arab territories occupied since June 1967, including Jerusalem. Determines that all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and the status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular, the recent "basic law" on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith. Decides not to recognize the "basic law" and such other actions by Israel that, as a result of this law, seek to alter the character and status of Jerusalem. Calls upon all members of the United Nations (a) to accept this decision, (b) and upon those States that have established diplomatic Missions in Jerusalem to withdraw such Missions from the Holy City.

484 19 Dec 1980 Expressing grave concern at the expulsion by Israel of the Mayor of Hebron and the Mayor of Halhoul, calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to adhere to the provisions of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Declares it imperative that they be enabled to return to their homes and resume their responsibilities.

508 5 June 1982 Calls upon the parties to the conflict to cease immediately and simultaneously all military activities within Lebanon and across the Lebanese-Israeli border. Requests all Member States which are in a position to do so to bring their influence to bear upon those concerned so that the cessation of hostilities declared by Security Council resolution 490 (1981) can be respected. (Beginning of the Israeli invasion of Lebanon.)

509 6 June 1982 Demands that Israel withdraw all its military forces forthwith and unconditionally to the internationally recognized boundaries of Lebanon and demands that all parties observe strictly the terms of paragraph 1 of resolution 508 (1982).

512 19 June 1982 Expressing deep concern at the suffering of the Lebanese and Palestinian civilian populations, calls upon all the parties to the conflict to respect the rights of the civilian populations, to refrain from all acts of violence against those populations and to take all appropriate measures to alleviate the suffering caused by the conflict.

513 4 Jul 1982 Expressing alarm at the continued sufferings of the Lebanese and Palestinian civilian populations in southern Lebanon and in west Beirut, calls for respect for the rights of the civilian populations without any discrimination and repudiates all acts of violence against those populations. Calls further for the restoration of the normal supply of vital facilities such as water, electricity, food and medical provisions, particularly in Beirut.

515 29 Jul 1982 Demands that the government of Israel lift immediately the blockade of the city of Beirut in order to permit the dispatch of supplies to meet the urgent needs of the civilian population.

516 1 Aug 1982 Confirms its previous resolutions and authorizes the Secretary-General to deploy immediately, on the request of the Government of Lebanon, U.N. observers to monitor the situation in and around Beirut.

517 4 Aug 1982 Confirms once again its demand for an immediate cease-fire and withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon. Censures Israel for its failure to comply with the above resolutions. Takes note of the decision of the Palestine Liberation Organization to move the Palestinian armed forces from Beirut and authorizes the Secretary-General to increase the number of U.N. observers in and around Beirut.

518 12 Aug 1982 Demands that Israel and all parties to the conflict observe strictly the terms of Security Council resolutions relevant to the immediate cessation of all military activities within Lebanon and, particularly, in and around Beirut. Demands the immediate lifting of all restrictions on the city of Beirut

520 17 Sep 1982 Condemns the recent Israeli incursions into Beirut in violation of the cease-fire agreements and of Security Council resolutions. Demands an immediate return to the positions occupied by Israel before 15 September 1982, as a first step towards the full implementation of Security Council resolutions.

521 19 Sep 1982 Condemns the criminal massacre of Palestinian civilians in Beirut; reaffirms its resolutions 512 (1982) and 513 (1982), which call for respect for the rights of the civilian populations without any discrimination, and repudiates all acts of violence against those populations. Requests the Secretary-General, as a matter of urgency, to initiate appropriate consultations and, in particular, consultations with the Government of Lebanon on additional steps which the Security Council might take, including the possible deployment of United Nations forces, to assist that government in ensuring full protection for the civilian populations in and around Beirut. (Massacre of Sabra and Shattilla refugee camps while eastern Beirut was under Israeli military occupation.)

573 4 Oct 1985 Condemns vigorously the act of armed aggression perpetrated by Israel against Tunisian territory in flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter, international law and norms of conduct; and demands that Israel refrain from perpetrating such acts of aggression or from threatening to do so. (Israeli raid against PLO Headquarters in Hammam Al-Shut)

592 8 Dec 1986 Strongly deplores the opening of fire by the Israeli army resulting in the death and the wounding of defenseless students at Bir Zeit University. Calls upon Israel to abide immediately and scrupulously by the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949. Calls upon Israel to release any person or persons detained as a result of the recent events at Bir Zeit University.

605 22 Dec 1987 Strongly deplores those policies and practices of Israel, the occupying Power, which violate the human rights of the Palestinian people in the occupied territories, particularly the opening of fire by the Israeli army, resulting in the killing and wounding of defenseless Palestinian civilians. Calls once again upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide immediately and scrupulously by the Fourth Geneva Convention.

607 5 Jan 1988 Calls upon Israel to refrain from deporting any Palestinian civilians from the occupied territories; and strongly requests it to abide by its obligations arising from the Fourth Geneva Convention.

608 14 Jan 1988 Reaffirming resolution 607 (1988) of 5 January 1988, deeply regrets that Israel, the occupying Power, in defiance of U.N. resolutions, has deported Palestinian civilians. Calls upon Israel to rescind the orders and to desist from forthwith deporting any other Palestinian civilians from the occupied territories.

611 25 Apr 1988 Having noted with concern that the aggression perpetrated on 16 April 1988 in the locality of Sidi Bou Said (Tunisia) has caused loss of human life, particularly the assassination of Mr. Khalil Al-Wazir, condemns vigorously the aggression perpetrated against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Tunisia in flagrant violation of the U.N. Charter; and urges Member States to take measures to prevent such acts against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all States. (Al-Wazir (Abu-Jihad) was the Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Palestine Liberation Organization.)

636 6 Jul 1989 Deeply regrets the continuing deportation by Israel, the occupying Power, of Palestinian civilians. Calls upon Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied Palestinian territories of those deported and to desist forthwith from deporting any other Palestinian civilians. Reaffirms that the Fourth Geneva Convention is applicable to the Palestinian territories, occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and to the other occupied Arab territories.

641 30 Aug 1989 Deplores Israel's continuing deportation of Palestinian civilians. Calls upon Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied Palestinian territories of those deported and to desist forthwith from deporting any other Palestinian civilians. Reaffirms that the Fourth Geneva Convention is applicable to the Palestinian territories, occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem, and to the other occupied Arab territories.

672 12 Oct 1990 Reaffirming that a just and lasting solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict must be based on its resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) through an active negotiating process which takes into account the right to security for all States in the region, including Israel, as well as the legitimate political rights of the Palestinian people. Expresses alarm at the violence which took place on 8 October at Al-Haram Al-Sharif and other Holy Places of Jerusalem, resulting in over twenty Palestinian deaths and the injury of more than one hundred and fifty people, including Palestinian civilians and innocent worshippers. Condemns especially the acts of violence committed by the Israeli security forces, resulting in injuries and loss of human life. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention.

673 24 Oct 1990 Deplores the refusal of the Israeli Government to receive the mission of the Secretary-General to the region in violation of resolution 672 (1990).

681 20 Dec 1990 Expresses its grave concern over the rejection by Israel of its resolutions 672 (1990) and 673 (1990). Deplores the decision by the Government of Israel, the occupying Power, to resume the deportation of Palestinian civilians in the occupied territories. Urges the Government of Israel to accept the de jure applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to all the territories occupied by Israel since 1967

694 24 May 1991 Declares that the action of the Israeli authorities of deporting four Palestinians on 18 May is in violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which is applicable to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. Deplores this action and reiterates that Israel refrain from deporting any Palestinian civilian from the occupied territories and ensure the safe and immediate return of all those deported.

726 6 Jan 1992 Strongly condemns the decision of Israel, the occupying Power, to resume deportation of Palestinian civilians. Reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. Requests Israel to ensure the safe and immediate return of all those deported.

799 18 Dec 1992 Strongly condemns the action taken by Israel, the occupying Power, to deport hundreds of Palestinian civilians (on 17 December 1992). Expresses its firm opposition to any such deportations by Israel. Reaffirms the applicability of the Fourth Geneva Convention to all the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since 1967, including Jerusalem. Demands that Israel ensure the safe and immediate return to the occupied territories of all those deported.

904 18 Mar 1994 Strongly condemns the massacre in Hebron committed against Palestinian worshippers in Al-Ibrahimi Mosque, on 25 February 1994, during the holy month of Ramadan, and its aftermath which took the lives of more than 50 Palestinian civilians and injured several hundred others. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to continue to take and implement measures, including, inter alia, confiscation of arms, with the aim of preventing illegal acts of violence by Israeli settlers. Calls for measures to be taken to guarantee the safety and protection of the Palestinian civilians throughout the occupied territory, including, inter alia, a temporary international or foreign presence, which was provided for in the Declaration of Principles, within the context of the ongoing peace process.

1073 28 Sep 1996 Expresses its deep concern about the tragic events in Jerusalem and the areas of Nablus, Ramallah, Bethlehem and the Gaza Strip, which resulted in a high number of deaths and injuries among the Palestinian civilians. Calls for the immediate cessation and reversal of all acts which have resulted in the aggravation of the situation and which have negative implications for the Middle East peace process. Calls for the safety and protection of Palestinian civilians to be ensured. Calls for the immediate resumption of negotiations within the Middle East peace process on its agreed basis and the timely implementation of the agreements reached. (The draft resolution was issued officially as a presidential text, which normally indicates unanimity prior to the vote.)

1322 7 Oct 2000 Reaffirms that a just and lasting solution to the Arab and Israeli conflict must be based on its resolutions 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967 and 338 (1973) of 22 October 1973, through an active negotiating process. Deplores the provocation carried out at Al-Haram Al-Sharif in Jerusalem on 28 September 2000, and the subsequent violence there and at other Holy Places, as well as in other areas throughout the territories occupied by Israel since 1968, resulting in over 80 Palestinian deaths and many other casualties. Condemns acts of violence, especially the excessive use of force against Palestinians, resulting in injury and loss of human life. Calls upon Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and its responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva. Calls for the immediate cessation of violence, and for all necessary steps to be taken to ensure that violence ceases, that new provocative actions are avoided, and that the situation returns to normality. Stresses the importance of establishing a mechanism for a speedy and objective inquiry into the tragic events of the last few days with the aim of preventing their repetition.

Perhaps we should first explore what "shared values" Washington and Tel Aviv have in common. Dr. Walt thinks that America stands for one thing, such as one-man-one-vote, whereas Israel has gone off on a tangent with its long-term occupation of the West Bank, which he apparently regards as some kind of aberration. But is it an aberration? Could it perhaps be the natural evolution and fulfillment of Zionism?

Note that Washington has gone off on a tangent too, starting with the Spanish-American War. We were a republic; we are now a quasi-empire. I'm afraid that Tel Aviv and Washington share the same values of subjugation, double-talk, and self-delusion. With the ongoing, self-destructive and self-fulfilling "war of civilizations" Tel Aviv and Washington are in bed together. Indeed, thanks to JINSA, the U.S. military is following the lead of the IDF in terms of tactics and strategy.

In any event, is does not matter what Miller or Walt thinks U.S. policy should be at this point. The fact is, Tel Aviv is in the driver's seat, as it has been from the start. Why should the gentlemen in Tel Aviv change tactics now, in view of their success to date? The Zionists established a beachhead in Palestine using the British in the aftermath of WWI. Then they conquered a good chunk of Palestine in the aftermath of WWII, and got the UN and the major powers to recognize that neocolonial conquest in a post-colonial world. Now the Zionists, led by Likud, are taking over the rest of the area in the aftermath of the 1967 war, and are making the Palestinians helots in their own land, while the EU and Washington watch from the sidelines or aid in the project.

Clearly and probably correctly, the Zionists must feel that they have the situation well in hand with their enormous concrete walls, barb wire, assassinations, confiscations, and mass imprisonment of those under military occupation who dare to resist. What is it about all of this that professor Walt and David Miller do not understand?

Germanicus
=========

Since the early 20th century, Zionists have waged a relentless campaign to equate their political movement with the Jewish religion.

They have largely succeeded; in the eyes of many, Zionism and Judaism are one and the same, and opposition to Zionism becomes opposition to Judaism.

But that doesn't change the fact that the two are antithetical.

I am a Jew, and I know from my religious education that if the Jewish people are to attain the Holy Land, it will be through the Messiah, and not with guns.

Jews are taught to heal the world ("tikkun olam"), not to displace families, create refugee camps, and practice collective punishment such as that used against Jews in the past.

So long as this confounding of Zionism with Judaism continues, it will sow anti-Semitism. But, in the end, anti-Semitism serves the Zionist ideology.

The ONLY solution is now the one-state solution.

Thank you, Professor Walt (and professor Mearsheimer too),
for your brave, insightful, and national-interest-serving comments
on this extraordinarily sensitive issue,
here and over the years.

Follow, impose, and apply the UN Partition Plan of Palestine to the fullest extent or boycott Israel till this beast of Apartheid reforms itself as South Africa of yore.

Merely killing, assassinating, torturing, arresting Muslims of all forms, shades and colours won't do. And neither would bulldozing their houses, cutting down their 1000 year old olive trees, attacking civilians with US supplied attack helicopters and jets and illegally partitioning their land with an Apartheid Wall, and Jew only roads would.

Wake up it's the 21st century. All your antics are seen by all and the old double talk, group think, propaganda and spin work no more in this era.

Follow the UN Partition Plan of Palestine or BOYCOTT Israel.

Israel came into existence in a mood of great romantic hope. It seemed then that, starting with a clean slate, Israel would demonstrate to the world how a 20th century state should be run. By 1971, when I first visited the region, there were clear signs these hopes had feet of clay; I particularly recall the fairly new problem of rowdy gangs of Arab and other ethnic youths, the product of being denied the educational and social opportunities available to European-type Jews. The disillusion among many British intellectuals became tangible, it was not just Israel itself that was slipping from grace before their eyes but a great social dream, nurtured in post-war hopes, was bleeding to death. These people are largely gone now but some, like the journalist James Cameron, never really got over it. It is perhaps as well he did not live to see what Israel has become today. My hope is that a tide of world opinion, rooted in humanitarian conviction and fed by modern communications, will so work on enough governments that we will live to see one state with, if it prove absolutely necessary, an autonomous Jewish region.

(1) As the way things go, EU is seeking independence from the United States on economic and political issues. Under that premises, EU could be more helpful this time around on this matter, while knowing EU and Israel do not have the best of relations possible and that Israel depends heavily on trade with EU to maintain a healthy economy.

And that is also a test of will for US, EU and Israel, as well.

(2) US needs to clarify her position on Israel, not on the front that Israel needs to survive, just like the Palestinians, but on the front that Israel was and perhaps still is viewed by many as a state installed in the mid-east to protect American interests, and thus allowing them to strike wherever and whenever US interests in the mid-east is threatened or hurt, while US interests are tied to that of the Israel's in the region.

If that position is still true, then the chance of a two-state solution is slim, and the reasons are obvious.

Appreciate the use of the language of a dead empire though, very appropriate. Perhaps we should all just stand back and watch the zionist experiment collapse under the weight of its hubris and its denial of the simple laws of demographics. Then we can all sing,
Requiem aeternam dona eis, Domine, et lux perpetua luceat eis. Te decet hymnus, Deus, in Sion, et tibi reddetur votum in Jerusalem: exaudi orationem meam, ad te omnis caro veniet. Requiem aeternam dona eis.