EDITOR: Lying for Zionism…
In a brilliant piece below, Akiva Eldar analyses Netanyahu’s behaviour as a system rather than an abberation, quoting also other lying Israeli PM. Very accurate, of course, but one should remember that the whole Zionist project was based on a crucial lie – Ever since Herzl, Zionists pretended that they wanted to divide the country with its inhabitants, but behind the scenes, always planned to get rid of every single Arab Palestinian. Herzl had his ‘transfer plan’ hidden well within his diary, while in public he would never admit to it. Every Zionist and Israeli leader since then was of the same mold – planning and preparing for transfer, while pretending some kind of agreement will be struck soon, maybe not today or tomorrow, or next year, but soon… At the heart of the matter, the problem is not Netanyahu, but Zionism. Netanyahu is just a more revolting example of the rule, but also more honest sometimes, as he does not care what non-Jews think, anyway!
Why should anyone believe Netanyahu?: Haaretz
How many politicians, media people and ordinary citizens believe Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is sincerely interested in reaching a peace agreement with the Palestinians?
By Akiva Eldar
If the law enabled putting leaders on trial for serial defrauding of the public and obtaining support through deception, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would be keeping company with Moshe Katsav in prison. The former president has been convicted of raping women who were his subordinates and misuse of his authority. Netanyahu is having his nefarious way with Israeli democracy and using his status in order to lead Israeli society astray, all the way to diplomatic and economic isolation. From there it is but a short way to regional war and apartheid – the only question is which will come first. Yet nevertheless, a whole country is continuing to give in willingly to a liar who does not cease to harass and endanger it.
Have I exaggerated? How many politicians, media people and ordinary citizens believe Netanyahu is sincerely interested in reaching a peace agreement with the Palestinians? The reference, of course, is not to an agreement that will include Israeli control over the Jordan Valley for 40 years, as Netanyahu proposed recently to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
During the course of a condolence visit to one of the Jewish settlements at the end of the 1990s, Netanyahu bragged that he had succeeded in deceiving the Clinton administration during his first term as prime minister, in order to destroy the Oslo Accords. Believing the microphones and cameras had been turned off, Netanyahu related how he had extorted from the Clinton administration, in exchange for the Hebron agreement, a promise that Israel would be the sole entity entitled to define what the “military sites” are that will remain under its control. With a sly smile spread across his face, Bibi added: “I said that as far as I am concerned the entire Jordan Valley is a defined military site,” and explained: “Why is this important? Because from that moment I stopped the Oslo Accords.”
Yitzhak Shamir, Netanyahu’s predecessor in the Likud leadership, put this in simple words: “For the Land of Israel it is permissible to lie.” Netanyahu, a student of conservative American media advisor Arthur Finkelstein, has a more sophisticated formulation. In a lecture at a Likud conference in Eilat in July 2001, Bibi instructed the activists: “It doesn’t matter if justice is on your side. You have to depict your position as just.”
Eventually he gave this procedure the broadest possible interpretation. Though in all likelihood he had not forgotten when he came into this world (October 21, 1949 ), he was able to recount a formative encounter with British soldiers near his childhood home, even though the Mandate had ended well before his birth.
The things French President Nicolas Sarkozy told United States President Barack Obama sum up the reputation he has acquired abroad. The microphone that had been left open by mistake pulled away the diplomatic mask and revealed the two important leaders’ opinion of the prime minister of Israel. This was preceded by a meeting between Sarkozy and President Shimon Peres at the beginning of 2010 at the Elysee Palace, during the course of which the French president said: “I don’t understand where Netanyahu is going and what he wants.”
An equally important European leader, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, also joined the club of people affected by Netanyahu’s lies. Her opinion of the prime minister’s peace declarations did not make its way to the microphones, but according to a report by Barak Ravid in Haaretz in February, Merkel told Netanyahu in a phone conversation: “You have disappointed us. You have not taken a single step to advance peace.”
On the eve of the most recent meeting between Netanyahu and Obama in New York, it was leaked to The New York Times that Obama had told his advisors he didn’t believe Netanyahu would ever be prepared to carry out compromises leading to a peace agreement. Prior to that Steven Simon, Senior Director for Middle East and North Africa at the White House, revealed in a conference call with Jewish community leaders in the United States that the Palestinians had agreed to renew the negotiations on the basis of Obama’s outline (the 1967 lines and agreed exchanges of territories ) and that the ball was now in Netanyahu’s court.
As is known, Bibi depicts President Abbas as refusing to enter negotiations. With a trove of lies like this, is Bibi expecting “the world” to believe he intends to attack Iran’s nuclear installations and tighten the sanctions on Iran? Why shouldn’t they suspect that maybe all the ruckus about the bomb is intended only to distance the threat of peace, and therefore not lift a finger against the Iranian threat?
Rafeef Ziadah recites her amazing poem on western ‘sensitivities’ and the Gaza Massacre – Not to be missed!
Israeli leaders choosing personal interests over law: Haaretz Editorial
Rather than protecting these landowners, whose land the state has already admitted to the High Court was taken by force, the state attorneys are continuing their foot-dragging.
Late last week, another mark of disgrace was stamped on the foreheads of Israel’s decision-makers and law enforcement authorities. The response that the state submitted to a High Court of Justice petition filed by Palestinian farmers demanding the return of their land, on which the settlement of Amona was built, is still more evidence of an incredibly serious phenomenon – the government and prosecution’s collaboration with thieves and lawbreakers.
Rather than protecting these landowners, whose land the state has already admitted to the High Court was taken by force, the state attorneys are continuing their foot-dragging. This time, they asked the High Court to delay the razing of the structures for no less than 14 months.
At the same time, ministers and MKs from the right, led by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, are working to delay the evacuation of Givat Assaf, which was also built on private Palestinian land – despite the fact that the state undertook before the High Court to evacuate the outpost by the end of the year.
All this was preceded by Netanyahu’s initiative to appoint a panel of jurists to suggest ways to legalize outposts built on private Palestinian land. The government is also expected to debate a bill designed to restrict the activities of organizations such as Peace Now and Yesh Din, which help the Palestinians reclaim their stolen property. The Ministerial Committee for Legislation approved the measure Sunday.
The government said recently that it welcomed the Middle East Quartet’s draft proposal from September, which is based on, inter alia, the Road Map of 2003. Netanyahu was a senior member of the government that adopted the Road Map, which includes a commitment to “immediately dismantle” outposts that were erected after March 2001.
At worst, the government’s behavior with regard to the outposts, particularly those erected on privately owned land, demonstrates that a small group of criminals can terrorize Israel’s elected public officials. Even worse, we see that the worldview and/or the personal interests of people in the political leadership can overcome the rule of law, natural justice and the national interests of the State of Israel.
Either way, when the political echelons give refuge to lawbreakers and ridicule High Court rulings, it is incumbent on Attorney General Yehuda Weinstein to put a stop to it.