Netanyahu: Anti-Semitism, not settlements, preventing two-state solution

[Jefferson23]

PM addresses Jewish Federations' General Assembly.



WASHINGTON – A refusal to accept the Jewish state’s right to exist, alongside the right for a Palestinian state, is preventing peace between Israel and the Palestinians, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Tuesday at the Jewish Federations of North America conference in Washington.

Fresh off a positive Oval Office meeting with US President Barack Obama a day earlier, the premier, in a wide-ranging speech, recommitted his government to the two-state solution.

But he denied that settlement activity is at the root of the conflict.


“The truth is, the reason we don’t have peace yet with the Palestinians is not because of the settlements or territorial disputes,” Netanyahu told the annual gathering of the JFNA, noting that settlement construction in the West Bank began several decades after the conflict began.

“The reason there isn’t peace is the persistent Palestinian refusal to recognize the Jewish state in any boundaries.”
http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/WATCH-LIVE-Netanyahu-addresses-General-Assembly-of-Jewish-Federations-432572

[geek tragedy]

1. Excuses won't save Israel from its dissolution via the one-state solution

At this point, virtually everyone in the US has pretty much shrugged their shoulders and is playing the short-term politics game. Long-term the story has already been written, its ending inevitable, there's no sense in trying to save people who don't want to be saved.

Future generations of Israelis will wonder why this generation stole Israel's future from them. But that's really not our problem, it's theirs.

So be it.

[Jefferson23]

6. His rhetoric hurts Jews worldwide, imo. He is a despicable man. n/t

[geek tragedy]

7. I don't know what effect he has on Jews worldwide. That's

outside my jurisdiction. The general consensus on him amongst Jews in the US is generally positive.

[Jefferson23]

8. His rhetoric adds to the presumption Jews condone what he and his government have

done to the Palestinians...he does not speak for all Jews in the US nor
outside it.

[King_David]

11. Agree somewhat ...

The general consensus is not positive but "dirty laundry is not aired in public "..

It's also outside the Jurisdiction of half the people posting in this group and that doesn't stop them... But that's the difference between you and them .( that's a compliment from me to you)

[karynnj]

14. I would question that -- and I have lived both in the NYC area and now Vermont

I don't know very very few Jews who is really positive about Netanyahu and many who feel he is a disaster -- and I have been active in my communities.

[geek tragedy]

17. I go strictly by polling.

I would testify to having similar experience as you, but I don't talk politics very much with religious Jews, so that would skew my data set.

[shira]

16. Most of the same people who hate Bibi also hated Rabin who they see as no better....

It's not about Bibi.

From Mondoweiss to the BDS'ers, anti-Zionists, neo-Nazis, and Hamas - Rabin is just as reviled as Bibi.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

29. I wonder how much his actions have inspired the world

to hate Israel in the same way that Bush IIs actions caused the world to hate the USA.

The one problem is that the next Israeli PM will undoubtably be far worse than Netanyahu. There are no liberal voices that anybody will vote for...IMHO.

[shira]

15. Pretending the conflict is about settlements & occupation won't solve it....

....or lead to peace. The conflict between Jews and Palestinians preceded settlements, occupation (and alleged Apartheid) by decades.

How can there be a peaceful settlement that doesn't address the real reasons behind the conflict?

[Jefferson23]

18. The Likud line. n/t

[shira]

19. Yes, it's all Bibi's fault, from the 1929 Hebron Massacre to the '67 war....

All of which was before any such thing as settlements, occupation, apartheid nonsense....

The conflict can only be settled by dealing with reality - in the real world - not pretending it's all Israel's fault and that Palestinians cannot be blamed or condemned for anything the past 80 years. That won't lead to peace.

You want peace, right?

[Jefferson23]

20. The Likud line. n/t

[shira]

21. You deflect when you can't argue against the facts. n/t

[Jefferson23]

22. Those are the Likud line facts. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

30. A page taken right out of one of Bibi's speeches.

From a so-called liberal.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

2. ...

Priceless.

That's like some stooge posting about how wonderful some shock jock is since he hates BDS and then finding out that they are bigoted racists that condone genocide.

If the USA give this moron any more $$ then our electeds are as guilty as he is.

[azurnoir]

3. but wait a minute I was told it was all about the temple mount

or was that like all last week?

[geek tragedy]

4. The Mufti made him change his mind nt

[Jefferson23]

5. It's hard to keep up with the guy. n/t

[oberliner]

9. Actually he says Palestinians not recognizing a Jewish state is the reason

Weird headline - doesn't exactly match the content of what he says.

He says that Palestinians not being willing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state is what is preventing the two-state solution (as your excerpt explicitly states).

Then he goes on to talk about anti-semitism being the reason why Israel is judged differently from other countries.

[Jefferson23]

10. Do you think you're being funny when you say things like that in his defense?

In his speech, as he has in the past, Netanyahu outlined his theory for this “persistent refusal” – a stubborn hatred of the Jewish people, now manifested in anti-Zionism.

[oberliner]

12. Did you actually read the speech or are you just going by the Jerusalem Post paraphrasing of it?

I'm guessing you haven't read it.

The phrase "anti-Zionism" does not appear in the speech.

Nor does the phrase "a stubborn hatred of the Jewish people".

Here's what does appear:

The truth is that the reason that there isn’t peace between Israelis and Palestinians is the persistent Palestinian refusal to recognize the Jewish state in any boundary. That’s the truth. If you recognize the problem, you’ll be able to get to its solution.

And here’s another simple truth: The truth is that Israel seeks peace. The truth is that I seek peace. And when Israel, the people of Israel, the governments of Israel, met Arab leaders who wanted peace equally, like Egypt’s Anwar Sadat and Jordan’s King Hussein, Israel made peace. We could do so when you meet an Arab leader who essentially says we’re burying the past. We’re seizing the future. We have no more demands of the Jewish state.

And when Israel will face a Palestinian leadership that seeks peace, that is willing to bury the past, that will make no more demands on the State of Israel – not get a state next to Israel in order to displace Israel, not get a state next to Israel in order to flood the adjoining State of Israel with millions of Palestinian descendants; when we meet a leader who actually is willing to recognize finally the Jewish state, we will have peace and that is the first requirement, the most essential requirement.

I remain committed to a vision of two states for two peoples where a demilitarized Palestinian state recognizes the Jewish state, and Israel will continue to work for peace in the hope that what is not achievable today might be achievable tomorrow.

[Jefferson23]

13. They quote him, JPost not known for trying to frame Bibi.

The excerpt you posted does not change the JPost meaning

The sequence: But he denied that settlement activity is at the root of the conflict.


“The truth is, the reason we don’t have peace yet with the Palestinians is not because of the settlements or territorial disputes,” Netanyahu told the annual gathering of the JFNA, noting that settlement construction in the West Bank began several decades after the conflict began.

“The reason there isn’t peace is the persistent Palestinian refusal to recognize the Jewish state in any boundaries.”

The PLO recognized the State of Israel in 1993. But the Palestinian Authority, an organ of the PLO, still calls for Palestinian refugees’ “right of return” to within the Green Line, in addition to the creation of an independent state for the Palestinian people, raising fears in Israel that the organization seeks two Palestinian states.

In his speech, as he has in the past, Netanyahu outlined his theory for this “persistent refusal” – a stubborn hatred of the Jewish people, now manifested in anti-Zionism.

“The lies leveled against the Jewish people, are now leveled against the Jewish state,” he told the confab.

Are you trying to say JPost is also wrong when they state, ...as he has in the past.....

[oberliner]

25. He doesn't say that Anti-Semitism is preventing a two-state solution

So I don't think the headline is accurate.

Also, the line in the JPost article that reads: "In his speech, as he has in the past, Netanyahu outlined his theory for this “persistent refusal” – a stubborn hatred of the Jewish people, now manifested in anti-Zionism" is not an accurate representation of his remarks either, in my opinion.

He says that Palestinian leaders unwillingness to accept a Jewish state is what is preventing a two-state solution.

He also says that anti-semitism causes Israel to be judged differently than other countries.

I am not expressing agreement with him on either of these points - I am just suggesting that the JPost headline and article do not present his points accurately.

[Jefferson23]

26. I would agree headlines are not always accurate to reflect content. In this case

his history of using that reasoning and his meaning in this speech are
reflective of his intent.

[oberliner]

27. Fair enough

Reasonable points.

[Little Tich]

23. I wonder if future generations in Israel will thank Netanyahu for the binational state of Israel

or if they will fault him for it.

[Jefferson23]

24. Good question. n/t

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

28. This is nothing more than Netanbooboo's "Mufti" argument

all over again.

"It's not us. It's somebody else."

[aranthus]

31. Not one substantive response to this OP

One poster calls it "excuses." Most others dismiss it because it's the "Likud Line" or because it was said by Netanyahu. And okay, Netanyahu is wrong to say that settlements and the Occupation are not any cause of the current conflict. But Palestinian rejectionism is the ROOT cause. It is what led to the Occupation and ultimately the settlements, and it is still the root cause, still a big reason why Israel maintains the Occupation. Will there be peace if Palestinians accept the Jewish state and Israel does not withdraw? Of course not. Will there be peace if Israel withdraws and the Palestinians don't accept the Jewish state. No way. So why are so many on this board so intent on seeing only one side of this? Why are they so intent on pretending that Palestinian rejectionism isn't a factor? Why don't they make the argument that Israel should withdraw despite Palestinian rejectionism? It exists. There are reasonable arguments for it. These people just seem uninterested in making them. Do they realize that the obvious conclusion from their statements ignoring the obvious is that they are biased, one sided, and unfair? That it looks as if they just don't care that the Palestinians reject the Jewish state?

[Jefferson23]

32. Your opinion is the Palestinian's lack of submission is the root cause and feel the responses

in the thread have no substance. lol

[aranthus]

33. So accepting that the Jews have a right to a state is submission?

You've made my point. You really don't care. You really are one sided, unfair and biased.

[Jefferson23]

34. Abbas did this long ago. You ever read the Likud charter before you spew nonsense like this?

I'm unfair and biased? maybe. Clueless, you wish I were.

[aranthus]

35. Not even good deflection.

Not only has Abbas not ever accepted the right of a Jewish state, he's expressly rejected it. https://www.rt.com/news/210099-abbas-recognize-israel-state/ Second, even if he ever agreed to it, so what? Hamas continues its rejectionist stance, and they have far more legitimacy than Abbas. Third, it's ridiculous to compare the platform of a political party with the PLO Charter which purports to be that of an entire people. Fourth, the issue isn't what Abbas said. It's what you believe, and what you care about. You've already confirmed that you don't care about Palestinian rejectionism by claiming that it would be submission if they abandon it. If you were fair, unbiased, intellectually honest, or just gave Israeli Jews the benefit of the doubt about being human beings with real concerns, then you wouldn't be making these kinds of ludicrous claims.

[Jefferson23]

36. Your statement was the following:

So accepting that the Jews have a right to a state is submission?

You've made my point. You really don't care. You really are one sided, unfair and biased.

1) You now moved the goal post to a recognition to a Jewish State ( Abbas would be nuts to recognize Israel as
Jewish State ) The US has never demanded he do so.

How Many Times Must the Palestinians Recognize Israel?

Netanyahu’s new 'Jewish state' mantra negates the fact that Palestinians recognized Israel more than twenty years ago. They’re still waiting for Israel to recognize Palestine
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.579701


2) Then you decide, so what, even if he did b/c of Hamas!

Hamas: *Prime Minister Ismail Haniya, told Israel's most prestigious newspaper, Ha'aretz: "If Israel withdraws to the 1967 borders, peace will prevail and we will implement a cease-fire [hudna] for many years."

A hudna is more than just a "cease-fire." An erudite article in the Encyclopedia of Islam tells us that "hudna in Islamic law is equivalent to 'international treaty' in modern terminology. Its object is to suspend the legal effects of hostilities and to provide the prerequisite conditions of peace between Muslims and non-Muslims, without the latter's territory becoming part of dar al-Islam.'"
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0531-23.htm

2006 Hamas: We’ll recognize Israel within '67 borders

Faction's spokesman at Palestinian parliament voices pragmatic, surprising declarations during Ramallah conference; 'we, Hamas, are committed to calm up to this moment,' he says
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3249568,00.html

Haniyeh: Hamas Willing to Accept Palestinian State With 1967 Borders 2008
http://www.haaretz.com/news/haniyeh-hamas-willing-to-accept-palestinian-state-with-1967-borders-1.256915

But, so what? Right?

3) YOU: Third, it's ridiculous to compare the platform of a political party with the PLO Charter which purports to be that of an entire people. ( end )

I'm guessing you looked up the Likud Charter, probably for the first time in your life and discovered, oooh,
they do not envision ANY State of Palestine. So now you're stuck and somehow or another you have
decided that it's time for you to declare another, so what?

4) YOU: Fourth, the issue isn't what Abbas said. It's what you believe, and what you care about. You've already confirmed that you don't care about Palestinian rejectionism by claiming that it would be submission if they abandon it. ( end )


I've made no claims that are false, as the links indicate.

The Palestinians imo, should be given what is legally theirs, EJ as their capital, the West Bank, all of it..a viable state.
A negotiated RoR number that Abbas already agreed would never be excessive and compensation
for the remainder.

They are being asked to submit to a bantustan at best and there will NEVER be peace by
denying them a viable state. The road Bibi is on now will be a bi-national state, one way or another
with possibly much more blood spilled before its over.

BUT SO WHAT, am I right?

YOU: If you were fair, unbiased, intellectually honest, or just gave Israeli Jews the benefit of the doubt about being human beings with real concerns, then you wouldn't be making these kinds of ludicrous claims. ( end )

You're right, I'm not giving Israel the benefit of the doubt, no.

Human Rights Watch accuses Israel of war crimes in Gaza



http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/09/11/us-mideast-gaza-war-idUSKBN0H60XZ20140911

[aranthus]

37. Thank you for again proving my point.

"You're right, I'm not giving Israel the benefit of the doubt, no."

Everything else in your post is just BS and propaganda.

[Jefferson23]

39. No links to refute, I can see your dilemma. n/t

[oberliner]

38. Hamas: We Will Never Recognize Israel

Hamas Leader in Gaza Vows Group Will Never Recognize Israel

http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/hamas-leader-in-gaza-vows-group-will-never-recognize-israel-1.330593

Hamas: We will never recognize Israel

http://estudies.alarabiya.net/content/hamas-we-will-never-recognize-israel

Hamas leader vows never to recognize Israel

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/12/08/us-palestinians-hamas-speech-idUSBRE8B708L20121208

[Jefferson23]

40. Your own link:

However, some Hamas leaders have said that while they will not recognize Israel, they are prepared to accept a temporary solution based on establishing an independent Palestinian state on the territories occupied by Israel in 1967, with East Jerusalem as its capital and without settlements.

THAT is what international law requires, and THAT is what they're entitled to.

The Hamas meme is bullshit. They're stupid to imagine they can defeat Israel
militarily and they know it..they're also a desperate people doing desperate things
but they have lived up to agreements in the past with Israel and received minimal
to nothing in return. No one has clean hands in this conflict, best for Israel to
follow the law.

The occupier holds all the cards.

[oberliner]

41. Scary that complete control of the West Bank including all of E Jerusalem is a "temporary solution"

Underlines the point that even if Israel was to withdraw completely from all of the West Bank, removing all settlements - and withdraws completely from all of E Jerusalem (including the Jewish Quarter) - that this still would not be enough for a permanent peace agreement or for recognition of Israel.

One has to wonder what Israel would need to do for the solution not to be considered temporary.

[Jefferson23]

42. Nonsense, it would be a step forward. Keep in mind Israel has offered nothing

that would ensure a viable state. I get how invested pro-bantustan supporters
are in the Hamas is the obstacle to peace meme.

[Shaktimaan]

43. Wow.

That's an incredibly shitty deal. Basically, SOME (some?!) Hamas leaders have said that in exchange for 100% of their demands, (a huge commitment on Israel's part in demolishing all their settlements and relocating everyone, and turning their most significant religious and historical sites over to Palestinian control), they would agree to a "temporary solution."

This perfectly demonstrates the problem outlined earlier in the thread. There's no desire at all for a comprehensive, permanent peace from the Palestinian side.

THAT is what international law requires, and THAT is what they're entitled to.

I'm pretty sure that's not true at all. What law are you talking about? Regardless, why in the world would Israel agree to anything with anyone who openly refuses to the very basics... recognition of their right to exist; a desire for peace; etc.

they're also a desperate people doing desperate things
but they have lived up to agreements in the past with Israel and received minimal
to nothing in return.

The last time Israel made large concessions; ie: (pulling out of Gaza), Hamas began firing rockets immediately following the withdrawal.