Monday, December 27, 2010 1:39:08 AM
The drums of war are heard again in Israel
by Ilan Pappe on December 26, 2010
The drums of war are heard again in Israel and they are sounded because once more Israel's invincibility in is question. Despite the triumphant rhetoric in the various media commemorative reports, two years after 'Cast Lead', the sense is that that campaign was as much of a failure as was the second Lebanon war of 2006. Unfortunately, leaders, generals and the public at large in the Jewish State know only one way of dealing with military debacles and fiascos. They can be redeemed only by another successful operation or war but one which has to be carried out with more force and be more ruthless than the previous one with the hope for better results in the next round.
Force and might, so explained leading commentators in the local media (parroting what they hear from the generals in the army), is needed in order to 'deter', to 'teach a lesson' and to 'weaken' the enemy. There is no new plan for Gaza – there is no real desire to occupy it and put in under direct Israeli rule. What is suggested is to pound the Strip and its people once more, but with more brutality and for a shorter time. One might ask, why would this bear different fruits than the 'Cast Lead Operation'? But this is the wrong question. The right question is what else can the present political and military elite of Israel (which includes the government and the main opposition parties) do?
They have known now for years what to do in the West Bank – colonize, ethnically cleanse and bisect the area to death, while remaining publicly loyal to the futile discourse of peace or rather the 'peace process'. The end result is expected to be a docile Palestinian Authority within a heavily Judaized West Bank. But they are at a total loss about how to manage the situation in the Gaza Strip, ever since Ariel Sharon 'disengaged' from it. The unwillingness of the people of Gaza to be disengaged from the West Bank, and the World, seems to be more difficult to defeat, even after the horrible human toll the Gazans paid in December 2008 for their resistance and defiance.
The scenario for the next round is unfolding in front of our eyes and it resembles depressingly the same deterioration that preceded the massacre of Gaza two years ago: daily bombardment on the Strip and a policy that tries to provoke Hamas so that more expanded assaults would be justified. As one general explained, there is now a need to take into account the damaging effect of the Goldstone report: namely the next major attack should look more plausible than the 2009 one (but this concern may not be that crucial to this particular government; nor would it serve as an obstacle).
As always in this part of the world, other scenarios are possible – less bloody and maybe more hopeful. But it is hard to see who can generate a different short term future: the perfidious Obama administration? The helpless Arab regimes? timid Europe or the handicapped UN? The steadfastness of the people of Gaza and that of the Palestinian people in general means that the grand Israeli strategy to wither them away - as the founder of the Zionist movement, Theodore Herzl, hoped to do to the indigenous people of Palestine already in the very end of the nineteenth century - will not work. But the price may yet rise and it is time for all those who voiced a powerful and effective voice AFTER the Gaza massacre two years ago, to do it NOW, and try and avert the next one.
This voice is described in Israel as the attempt to 'delegitimize' the Jewish State. It is the only voice that seems to concern seriously the government and the intellectual elite of Israel (far more annoying to them than any soft condemnation by Hillary Clinton or the EU). The first attempt to counter this voice was to claim that delegitimization was anti-Semitism in disguise. This seems to have backfired since Israel demanded to know who in the world supports its policies; well it transpired that the only enthusiastic supporters of Israeli policy in the Western world nowadays are extreme right wing, traditionally anti-Semitic, organizations and politicians The second attempt is to try and argue that these attempts in the form of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, would make Israel more determined to continue and be a rogue state. However, this is a vacuous threat: Israeli policies are not generated by this moral and decent voice; on the contrary, this voice is one of the few factors that restrain the aggressive policy, and who knows when, if in the future western governments would joined their publics as they did eventually in the case of Apartheid South Africa, it may even bring an end to these policies and enable Jews and Arabs alike to live in peace in Israel and Palestine.
This voice is effective because is shows clearly the link between the racist character of the state and the criminal nature of its policies towards the Palestinians. The voice turned recently into an organized and clearly defined campaign with a clear message: Israel will remain a pariah state as long as its constitution, laws and the policies will continue to violate the basic human and civil rights of the Palestinians, wherever they are, including the right to live and exist.
What is needed now is for the noble but totally futile energy invested by the Israeli peace camp and its like in the west in the concept of 'co-existence' and the projects of 'dialogue' to be reinvested in the attempt to prevent another genocidal chapter in the history of Israel's war against the Palestinians, before it is too late.
Ilan Pappé is the coauthor with Noam Chomsky of Gaza in Crisis: Reflections on Israel's War Against the Palestinians (Haymarket Books).
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/12/the-drums-of-war-are-heard-again-in-israel.html#more-32012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoMzzXMUof8
What would happen if Palestinians unilaterally declared statehood?
In founding state, the Palestinians, would free both themselves and Israel of the burden of occupation.
By Shlomo Avineri .. Latest update 09:13 19.04.10
Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad recently announced that his government intends to declare an independent Palestinian state in the summer of 2011, even if no agreement is reached with Israel. This statement obviously generated unease in Israel, and not only among supporters of Benjamin Netanyahu's government - especially as it was accompanied by hints that European countries, and even the European Union itself, would recognize such a unilateral declaration of independence.
The unease and the concomitant apprehensions are understandable, but they may well be fundamentally misplaced. After all, anyone with eyes in his head, unless he is a prisoner of empty slogans or committed to political correctness, must admit that even if negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians resume, the prospects for an agreement are nil. And this is not due solely to the positions of the Netanyahu government: Its predecessor, led by Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni, negotiated with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas for two whole years and made him very generous offers, but still never managed to reach an agreement.
The reasons are clear: On the core issues - borders, Jerusalem, refugees - the gaps between even the most moderate positions on both sides are so wide that no rhetoric, and no assertive American involvement, is capable of bridging them. Anyone who thinks otherwise is indulging in pipe dreams.
Therefore, we should seriously consider what would happen if the Palestinians were indeed to declare a state and win relatively broad international recognition. First of all, it is clear that Israel would announce that this unilateral declaration nullifies all prior agreements between it and the Palestinians, from Oslo on; that it is released from all the obligations it has undertaken, including the economic ones; and that it will henceforth relate to the areas under Palestinian control as foreign territory. It is also clear that all Israeli obligations arising from its military control of the territories would be abrogated under both Israeli and international law. Not everyone would accept this argument, but it would not be possible to ignore it.
A unilateral Palestinian declaration would not change the situation on the ground. By itself, such a declaration could not bring about the evacuation of the settlements, regardless of whether the Palestinians say they accept the settlers as citizens of their state or continue to claim that the settlements are illegal. The same of course goes for East Jerusalem, which the Palestinians would presumably say they see as their capital.
What a unilateral declaration of independence would generate, however, is a fundamental change in the nature of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Instead of a dispute between Israeli occupiers and occupied Palestinians, it would become a dispute between two states. An independent Palestine would undoubtedly claim that Israel is occupying its territories, but so does Syria.
Moreover, if Palestine were independent, Israel would have no responsibility for the Gaza Strip, and the Israel-Gaza border would become an international border like that between Egypt and Gaza. Hence Israel would not be obligated, inter alia, to allow passage between its territory and Palestinian territory, just as there is no such passage between Israel and Syria.
Of course the matter is not that simple, but any measure that would make the Israeli-Palestinian dispute more "normal" - that is to say, a dispute between states - would also advance the prospect for negotiations: It would be far easier to conduct negotiations on borders, the future of the settlements, territorial exchanges, Jerusalem and other issues between states.
One must hope that this scenario does not deter members of the Palestinian leadership and make them change their minds. On the contrary, they should take their destiny into their own hands and stand up to Israel as a full-fledged state. In so doing, they would free both themselves and us of the occupation and do what they have not managed to do since 1948, and what we have not managed to do since 1967. This is the only way to realize the vision of two states for two peoples.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/what-would-happen-if-palestinians-unilaterally-declared-statehood-1.284513
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMZlB7p3kpw
Benjamin Ben-Eliezer warns of fallout over stalled Middle East peace talks
* James Hider .. * The Times .. * December 27, 2010
THE US may throw its weight behind growing support for a unilateral Palestinian declaration
of statehood if Israel does not resume Middle East peace talks, an Israeli minister has warned.
In the first admission by a senior Israeli official that a rift with its key ally threatened a shift in US policy, Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, the Trade and Industry Minister, urged the resumption of talks with the Palestinians - even if it meant bowing to their demands for a renewed freeze on settlement construction in the West Bank.
"We must do everything possible to get to dialogue with the Palestinians, even if it costs us a settlement freeze for a few months," Mr Ben-Eliezer, a doyen of the Labour Party, the junior partner in the governing coalition, told a Cabinet meeting in Jerusalem.
COMMENT: The above "even if it costs us a settlement freeze for a few months" says mountains.
"I wouldn't be surprised if within one year the whole world supports a Palestinian
state, including the United States. Then we'll ask where we were and what we were doing."
Related Coverage
* Middle East peace 'impossible' - Minister Adelaide Now, 8 hours ago
* Palestinian dead join the land-claim cause The Australian, 6 days ago
* US urged to recognise Palestine The Australian, 9 Dec 2010
* Israeli PM 'didn't want to rule West Bank' The Australian, 1 Dec 2010 .. WHAT??? .. anyway ..
* Palestinians must act on their dream The Australian, 23 Nov 2010
In recent weeks, four Latin American states, led by Brazil, have officially recognised a Palestinian state inside the borders which were in place before the 1967 Six Day war, during which Israel took control of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Some European nations have upgraded diplomatic relations with the Palestinians.
Later this year, Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian Prime Minister, is expected to complete his two-year plan of building a de facto state inside the West Bank, although Gaza remains under Hamas control.
The Palestinian leadership walked out of peace talks revived by the US three months ago in anger at Israel's refusal to extend a halt on building in the communities, which are viewed as illegal by the international community. The Palestinians have said that if there is no renewed negotiation effort they will go to the UN Security Council with a unilateral declaration of statehood.
Since the collapse of the peace talks and Israel's refusal to renew the settlement building moratorium, settlers have laid foundations for hundreds of new homes, according to the Israeli anti-settlement group Peace Now. The Palestinians have responded by preparing a UN draft resolution condemning the settlements, which in the West Bank are home to 300,000 Israelis, with 200,000 living in East Jerusalem.
Israeli diplomats have been rushing to ascertain the possible response of key countries to such a resolution amid fears that President Obama, having been thwarted in his peace efforts, might concentrate on other regions for the remaining two years of his term. So far Washington has said that it would not back the anti-settlement resolution, but other countries which have become increasingly frustrated by the deadlock in talks and the continued rate of settlement expansion - Britain among them - may offer some support.
Mr Ben-Eliezer's warning is also likely to increase tensions in the Israeli coalition as Binyamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, strives to satisfy hardliners and pro-talks factions.
Amid the political tensions there were fresh clashes in and around Gaza on the eve of the second anniversary of the Israeli offensive to smash Hamas and stop militants firing rockets into southern Israel, an operation dubbed Cast Lead by the Israeli Army.
With both sides talking up the chances of another war in the south, Israeli tanks and helicopter gunships opened fire on Islamic Jihad members who were trying to plant bombs close to the Israeli-controlled border fence with Gaza, killing two people. More rockets were fired out of the Gaza Strip into Israel, despite some of the heaviest air strikes since the 2008 month-long war by Israeli forces last week.
The increased rocket fire has ramped up tensions, especially after Israel admitted that one of its tanks had been hit by an advanced, Russian-made anti-tank missile that had been smuggled into the besieged strip by Hamas.
"I hope there is no need for another operation like Cast Lead," the Israeli Deputy Prime Minister, Silvan Shalom, said. "But if this situation continues then obviously we will have to respond and respond with all our force."
Abu Obeidah, a Hamas military spokesman, said his forces were also ready for another bout of bloodletting. "If there is any Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip we will respond strongly," he said. "We are completely ready to answer any Israeli aggression."
In a possible reference to the Kornet anti-tank missiles deployed recently, he added: "Our weapons are few compared to those of the Israeli occupation, but we have something that will worry the occupation."
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/benjamin-ben-eliezer-warns-of-fallout-over-stalled-middle-east-peace-talks/story-e6frg6so-1225976596679
Not sure why, but decided to include the three in their entirety here .. the maps should always be about ..
by Ilan Pappe on December 26, 2010
The drums of war are heard again in Israel and they are sounded because once more Israel's invincibility in is question. Despite the triumphant rhetoric in the various media commemorative reports, two years after 'Cast Lead', the sense is that that campaign was as much of a failure as was the second Lebanon war of 2006. Unfortunately, leaders, generals and the public at large in the Jewish State know only one way of dealing with military debacles and fiascos. They can be redeemed only by another successful operation or war but one which has to be carried out with more force and be more ruthless than the previous one with the hope for better results in the next round.
Force and might, so explained leading commentators in the local media (parroting what they hear from the generals in the army), is needed in order to 'deter', to 'teach a lesson' and to 'weaken' the enemy. There is no new plan for Gaza – there is no real desire to occupy it and put in under direct Israeli rule. What is suggested is to pound the Strip and its people once more, but with more brutality and for a shorter time. One might ask, why would this bear different fruits than the 'Cast Lead Operation'? But this is the wrong question. The right question is what else can the present political and military elite of Israel (which includes the government and the main opposition parties) do?
They have known now for years what to do in the West Bank – colonize, ethnically cleanse and bisect the area to death, while remaining publicly loyal to the futile discourse of peace or rather the 'peace process'. The end result is expected to be a docile Palestinian Authority within a heavily Judaized West Bank. But they are at a total loss about how to manage the situation in the Gaza Strip, ever since Ariel Sharon 'disengaged' from it. The unwillingness of the people of Gaza to be disengaged from the West Bank, and the World, seems to be more difficult to defeat, even after the horrible human toll the Gazans paid in December 2008 for their resistance and defiance.
The scenario for the next round is unfolding in front of our eyes and it resembles depressingly the same deterioration that preceded the massacre of Gaza two years ago: daily bombardment on the Strip and a policy that tries to provoke Hamas so that more expanded assaults would be justified. As one general explained, there is now a need to take into account the damaging effect of the Goldstone report: namely the next major attack should look more plausible than the 2009 one (but this concern may not be that crucial to this particular government; nor would it serve as an obstacle).
As always in this part of the world, other scenarios are possible – less bloody and maybe more hopeful. But it is hard to see who can generate a different short term future: the perfidious Obama administration? The helpless Arab regimes? timid Europe or the handicapped UN? The steadfastness of the people of Gaza and that of the Palestinian people in general means that the grand Israeli strategy to wither them away - as the founder of the Zionist movement, Theodore Herzl, hoped to do to the indigenous people of Palestine already in the very end of the nineteenth century - will not work. But the price may yet rise and it is time for all those who voiced a powerful and effective voice AFTER the Gaza massacre two years ago, to do it NOW, and try and avert the next one.
This voice is described in Israel as the attempt to 'delegitimize' the Jewish State. It is the only voice that seems to concern seriously the government and the intellectual elite of Israel (far more annoying to them than any soft condemnation by Hillary Clinton or the EU). The first attempt to counter this voice was to claim that delegitimization was anti-Semitism in disguise. This seems to have backfired since Israel demanded to know who in the world supports its policies; well it transpired that the only enthusiastic supporters of Israeli policy in the Western world nowadays are extreme right wing, traditionally anti-Semitic, organizations and politicians The second attempt is to try and argue that these attempts in the form of Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions, would make Israel more determined to continue and be a rogue state. However, this is a vacuous threat: Israeli policies are not generated by this moral and decent voice; on the contrary, this voice is one of the few factors that restrain the aggressive policy, and who knows when, if in the future western governments would joined their publics as they did eventually in the case of Apartheid South Africa, it may even bring an end to these policies and enable Jews and Arabs alike to live in peace in Israel and Palestine.
This voice is effective because is shows clearly the link between the racist character of the state and the criminal nature of its policies towards the Palestinians. The voice turned recently into an organized and clearly defined campaign with a clear message: Israel will remain a pariah state as long as its constitution, laws and the policies will continue to violate the basic human and civil rights of the Palestinians, wherever they are, including the right to live and exist.
What is needed now is for the noble but totally futile energy invested by the Israeli peace camp and its like in the west in the concept of 'co-existence' and the projects of 'dialogue' to be reinvested in the attempt to prevent another genocidal chapter in the history of Israel's war against the Palestinians, before it is too late.
Ilan Pappé is the coauthor with Noam Chomsky of Gaza in Crisis: Reflections on Israel's War Against the Palestinians (Haymarket Books).
http://mondoweiss.net/2010/12/the-drums-of-war-are-heard-again-in-israel.html#more-32012
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DoMzzXMUof8
What would happen if Palestinians unilaterally declared statehood?
In founding state, the Palestinians, would free both themselves and Israel of the burden of occupation.
By Shlomo Avineri .. Latest update 09:13 19.04.10
Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad recently announced that his government intends to declare an independent Palestinian state in the summer of 2011, even if no agreement is reached with Israel. This statement obviously generated unease in Israel, and not only among supporters of Benjamin Netanyahu's government - especially as it was accompanied by hints that European countries, and even the European Union itself, would recognize such a unilateral declaration of independence.
The unease and the concomitant apprehensions are understandable, but they may well be fundamentally misplaced. After all, anyone with eyes in his head, unless he is a prisoner of empty slogans or committed to political correctness, must admit that even if negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians resume, the prospects for an agreement are nil. And this is not due solely to the positions of the Netanyahu government: Its predecessor, led by Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni, negotiated with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas for two whole years and made him very generous offers, but still never managed to reach an agreement.
The reasons are clear: On the core issues - borders, Jerusalem, refugees - the gaps between even the most moderate positions on both sides are so wide that no rhetoric, and no assertive American involvement, is capable of bridging them. Anyone who thinks otherwise is indulging in pipe dreams.
Therefore, we should seriously consider what would happen if the Palestinians were indeed to declare a state and win relatively broad international recognition. First of all, it is clear that Israel would announce that this unilateral declaration nullifies all prior agreements between it and the Palestinians, from Oslo on; that it is released from all the obligations it has undertaken, including the economic ones; and that it will henceforth relate to the areas under Palestinian control as foreign territory. It is also clear that all Israeli obligations arising from its military control of the territories would be abrogated under both Israeli and international law. Not everyone would accept this argument, but it would not be possible to ignore it.
A unilateral Palestinian declaration would not change the situation on the ground. By itself, such a declaration could not bring about the evacuation of the settlements, regardless of whether the Palestinians say they accept the settlers as citizens of their state or continue to claim that the settlements are illegal. The same of course goes for East Jerusalem, which the Palestinians would presumably say they see as their capital.
What a unilateral declaration of independence would generate, however, is a fundamental change in the nature of the Israeli-Palestinian dispute. Instead of a dispute between Israeli occupiers and occupied Palestinians, it would become a dispute between two states. An independent Palestine would undoubtedly claim that Israel is occupying its territories, but so does Syria.
Moreover, if Palestine were independent, Israel would have no responsibility for the Gaza Strip, and the Israel-Gaza border would become an international border like that between Egypt and Gaza. Hence Israel would not be obligated, inter alia, to allow passage between its territory and Palestinian territory, just as there is no such passage between Israel and Syria.
Of course the matter is not that simple, but any measure that would make the Israeli-Palestinian dispute more "normal" - that is to say, a dispute between states - would also advance the prospect for negotiations: It would be far easier to conduct negotiations on borders, the future of the settlements, territorial exchanges, Jerusalem and other issues between states.
One must hope that this scenario does not deter members of the Palestinian leadership and make them change their minds. On the contrary, they should take their destiny into their own hands and stand up to Israel as a full-fledged state. In so doing, they would free both themselves and us of the occupation and do what they have not managed to do since 1948, and what we have not managed to do since 1967. This is the only way to realize the vision of two states for two peoples.
http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/what-would-happen-if-palestinians-unilaterally-declared-statehood-1.284513
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YMZlB7p3kpw
Benjamin Ben-Eliezer warns of fallout over stalled Middle East peace talks
* James Hider .. * The Times .. * December 27, 2010
THE US may throw its weight behind growing support for a unilateral Palestinian declaration
of statehood if Israel does not resume Middle East peace talks, an Israeli minister has warned.
In the first admission by a senior Israeli official that a rift with its key ally threatened a shift in US policy, Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, the Trade and Industry Minister, urged the resumption of talks with the Palestinians - even if it meant bowing to their demands for a renewed freeze on settlement construction in the West Bank.
"We must do everything possible to get to dialogue with the Palestinians, even if it costs us a settlement freeze for a few months," Mr Ben-Eliezer, a doyen of the Labour Party, the junior partner in the governing coalition, told a Cabinet meeting in Jerusalem.
COMMENT: The above "even if it costs us a settlement freeze for a few months" says mountains.
"I wouldn't be surprised if within one year the whole world supports a Palestinian
state, including the United States. Then we'll ask where we were and what we were doing."
Related Coverage
* Middle East peace 'impossible' - Minister Adelaide Now, 8 hours ago
* Palestinian dead join the land-claim cause The Australian, 6 days ago
* US urged to recognise Palestine The Australian, 9 Dec 2010
* Israeli PM 'didn't want to rule West Bank' The Australian, 1 Dec 2010 .. WHAT??? .. anyway ..
* Palestinians must act on their dream The Australian, 23 Nov 2010
In recent weeks, four Latin American states, led by Brazil, have officially recognised a Palestinian state inside the borders which were in place before the 1967 Six Day war, during which Israel took control of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. Some European nations have upgraded diplomatic relations with the Palestinians.
Later this year, Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian Prime Minister, is expected to complete his two-year plan of building a de facto state inside the West Bank, although Gaza remains under Hamas control.
The Palestinian leadership walked out of peace talks revived by the US three months ago in anger at Israel's refusal to extend a halt on building in the communities, which are viewed as illegal by the international community. The Palestinians have said that if there is no renewed negotiation effort they will go to the UN Security Council with a unilateral declaration of statehood.
Since the collapse of the peace talks and Israel's refusal to renew the settlement building moratorium, settlers have laid foundations for hundreds of new homes, according to the Israeli anti-settlement group Peace Now. The Palestinians have responded by preparing a UN draft resolution condemning the settlements, which in the West Bank are home to 300,000 Israelis, with 200,000 living in East Jerusalem.
Israeli diplomats have been rushing to ascertain the possible response of key countries to such a resolution amid fears that President Obama, having been thwarted in his peace efforts, might concentrate on other regions for the remaining two years of his term. So far Washington has said that it would not back the anti-settlement resolution, but other countries which have become increasingly frustrated by the deadlock in talks and the continued rate of settlement expansion - Britain among them - may offer some support.
Mr Ben-Eliezer's warning is also likely to increase tensions in the Israeli coalition as Binyamin Netanyahu, the Prime Minister, strives to satisfy hardliners and pro-talks factions.
Amid the political tensions there were fresh clashes in and around Gaza on the eve of the second anniversary of the Israeli offensive to smash Hamas and stop militants firing rockets into southern Israel, an operation dubbed Cast Lead by the Israeli Army.
With both sides talking up the chances of another war in the south, Israeli tanks and helicopter gunships opened fire on Islamic Jihad members who were trying to plant bombs close to the Israeli-controlled border fence with Gaza, killing two people. More rockets were fired out of the Gaza Strip into Israel, despite some of the heaviest air strikes since the 2008 month-long war by Israeli forces last week.
The increased rocket fire has ramped up tensions, especially after Israel admitted that one of its tanks had been hit by an advanced, Russian-made anti-tank missile that had been smuggled into the besieged strip by Hamas.
"I hope there is no need for another operation like Cast Lead," the Israeli Deputy Prime Minister, Silvan Shalom, said. "But if this situation continues then obviously we will have to respond and respond with all our force."
Abu Obeidah, a Hamas military spokesman, said his forces were also ready for another bout of bloodletting. "If there is any Israeli aggression on the Gaza Strip we will respond strongly," he said. "We are completely ready to answer any Israeli aggression."
In a possible reference to the Kornet anti-tank missiles deployed recently, he added: "Our weapons are few compared to those of the Israeli occupation, but we have something that will worry the occupation."
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/world/benjamin-ben-eliezer-warns-of-fallout-over-stalled-middle-east-peace-talks/story-e6frg6so-1225976596679
Not sure why, but decided to include the three in their entirety here .. the maps should always be about ..
Jonathan Swift said, "May you live all the days of your life!"
Join the InvestorsHub Community
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
