Monday, September 26, 2011

Palestinian Bid for full UN membership likely to fail

Picture borrowed from Black Agenda Report
"How can one make peace with a state that claims the right to adjust its borders according to its own whims?"

Reporting from Australia

The US will veto the Palestinian bid for full UN membership. A Middle East peace plan supported by key international players will be offered instead.

BEN KNIGHT, REPORTER: On the same day the UN assembly was opening in New York, the bulldozers were rolling in the West Bank. This security wall, when it's finished, will almost completely enclose the Palestinian village of al-Walaja, near Bethlehem. Some of the land here was declared by Israel to be part of the city of Jerusalem. Then, Jewish homes began appearing on and they've been going up ever since.

Atta Al Araj lives here with his family. He shows me where a new section of the wall is being built on what was Arab farmland.

ATTA AL ARAJ, AL-WALAJA RESIDENT: But I can't go to the other side of this foundation.

BEN KNIGHT: This is the foundation of the wall ...


BEN KNIGHT: ... and you are not allowed to cross it?

ATTA AL ARAJ: I'm not allowed. I need a special permit to be in the other side.

BEN KNIGHT: Settlements are illegal under international law. Even the United States disapproves. And the Palestinians say there will be no peace talks until the building stops.

The Palestinians point is a basically this: that for years they've been sitting on hills like this in the West Bank, looking over at the city of Jerusalem and watching it expand while their own homes have been under demolition order. And then over the years, the Jewish homes have got closer and closer, until now, after 20 years of negotiations, here is the wall being built right on their doorstep. What they say is the point of negotiations if this is what they get?

What is the point of negotiating for the Palestinians? Negotiating equals loss.

"If Palestine is recognised as a state, or even if it's just made an observer member, it would then have the power to refer Israel to the International Criminal Court for war crimes, including the charge of building settlements on occupied land. "

Other war crimes would include the blockade of Gaza?

"The other immediate impact of the change in Palestine's status at the UN would be on Israel's national morale."

"The country is feeling ever more isolated and vilified in world opinion."

Because Israel is all alone in the world? Feeling isolated? Etc., etc.,

Of course that isn't anywhere near the truth.
Not even close. Israel is not alone because they have their best friend and partner in crime always beside them. The US.
Not to mention Canada. France. Britain. Turkey. Germany. Saudi Arabia. Jordan.
Shall I go on? Australia.....
Israel is not isolated despite the spin presented in this narrative from an Australian "journalist"
As for the "vilified" comment. Used to evoke sympathy. Where no sympathy is necessary.

What about the impact on the Palestinian's national morale?

What about the fact, not the spin, that the Palestinians are isolated. Having their land stolen. Being starved. Being denied basic human rights and needs?
Not surprising those facts don't even get mentioned in the spin version of what passes as news.
I won't quote anymore from the article, because it is the usual western drivel.
Hamas bad. Israel has tried to make peace for years. blah blah blah...

Ok wait, there is one more bit I want to quote-

"The risks for the Palestinians are significant. Israel has threatened consequences, which could include cutting off all ties or withholding the tax money that it regularly transfers to the Palestinian Government. The United States or Europe could cut back or cut off their funding. But perhaps the most dangerous of all: Mahmoud Abbas has created very high hopes."

Will there be retaliation on the part of the Western powers and Israel?
What more can they do? They are already contributing in every way shape and form to the erasing of a country and it's people.
That last sentence is just mind boggling. Dangerous to have high hopes?
What kind of sick writing is that?
How come it wasn't "dangerous" for the followers of Judaism to hope for a state of their own?
No, it was courageous and justified after WW2.
But, for the Palestinians after 60 years of oppression, starvation and killing. It is dangerous to have hope?


  1. Apropos that Palestinian chap asking what the point of negotiating with Israelis is, for mine the only thing that counts is that the Israelis always negotiate in bad faith. They never stick to a deal. For them, there is no deal. All there is is what they want and the rest of it is just lies to get that.

    They're the people of the Talmud. Never tell the truth is at the heart of their metaphoric DNA. That's all anyone needs to know.

  2. Nobby is exactly right. And it has been the same down through history with the British and the American governments as well.

    To my knowledge, they, along with the israelis, have NEVER honoured ANY of their treaties. These three countries are run by the same nasty group and it probably has always been thus for at least the last two to three hundred years.

    Shaking hands on a deal with someone who will shoot you in the back as soon as you turn away is worse than a waste of time.

    There is absolutely nothing to gain in negotiating with a liar. It is beyond ludicrous

    In the best of historical outcomes, the oppression just mutated from overt military oppression to covert economic oppression which was there all along.

    So negotiating for peace and justice demonstrably doesn't work.

    Armed resistance can work but it is rarely successful for two reasons. One, the oppressors have far more and far better guns. You are fighting them with their weapon of choice. Not an especially smart thing to do.

    And secondly, if an armed revolt is ever successful, the people then find themselves ruled by yet another clique that believes violence is the way to rule with the result that there is almost always more violence to follow.

    There has to be a better way. And i suspect it starts with recognising and shunning all psychopaths on all sides and finding ways around them.

    Finding ways to isolate them and exclude them from all social, political and economic discourse.
    Finding solutions that don't require their co-operation in any way.
    Finding solutions that don't require hierarchies and centralisation which are open invitations to psychopaths to exploit us.

  3. Hey nobody;

    It was quite appropriate to ask what is the point of negotiating.

    Because, what exactly is the point?
    Worse then never sticking to a deal, even worse, The Israeli gov., has never negotiated anything remotely resembling a PEACE treaty, or a compromise borne out of fairness, nothing!
    Therefore they make deals that are always beneficial to themselves and that is never enough, so they break them.

  4. james

    "Finding solutions that don't require hierarchies and centralisation which are open invitations to psychopaths to exploit us."

    this reminds me of a conversation, where that old adage was repeated

    "people need leaders"

    My reply, was people don't need "leaders" Leaders have gotten people into a major mess.

    People do NOT need to be lead.
    Unless they wish to follow the path of their own destruction.

    People need to be proactive, to lead themselves. To act cooperatively and in an accountable fashion.

    Will things get messy if this was the case? Sure.
    But aren't things just a hell of a mess now, with all the great "leaders" we supposedly have?