Slew of politicians visit Ynet’s new studio for its debut broadcast; Tibi: ‘Holding onto bodies amounts to necrophilia’; Lieberman: ‘Gov’t has no clear policies’; Lapid: Build Gaza port and destroy tunnels when we learn of them.’
By Attila Somfalvi, Moran Azulay, Alexandra Lukash, YNET
“We’ve already separated from the Palestinians, they’re governing themselves,” the Bayit Yehudi leader said at the new Ynet studio’s debut broadcast. “My plan is to actually give the Palestinians a sort of autonomy on steroids in Areas A and B, while in Area C, we gradually start applying our sovereignty. Let’s start with Gush Etzion. We need to start advancing this.”
“I think the government has done a lot,” Bennett said about the ongoing wave of violence. “I remind you there was a very intensive wave of terror attacks in Jerusalem and with the help of the government, this wave has definitely abated, and moved from Jerusalem to the Hebron-Gush Etzion area, where were are currently in the midst of an ongoing wave of terrorism. Look, we’ve been dealing with terrorism in Israel for 120 years, long before the state was founded, long before the Six-Day War. We’ve overcome this before.”
Joint List MK Ahmad Tibi also discussed the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, declaring that “We, the Joint List, do not represent the Zionist narrative; we are not a part of that game. You need to get used to the fact that we are 20 percent of the country and another people, but we want co-citizenship for Jews and Arabs.”
Tibi, who did not participate in a recent meeting of Arab MKs with families of terrorists, said it was “legitimate and humanitarian. In Islam, one must bury the deceased immediately. What the Israeli government is doing amounts to necrophilia.”
Tibi also discussed the rightward turn of the Labor Party and its head, Isaac Herzog: “Our opinion regarding the two state solution is solid. The policies of Benjamin Netanyahu’s government are closing the door on it and Herzog is supposed to provide an alternative, but he is not doing that. Thus, we are criticizing him and we will continue to do so on this issue and socioeconomic issues.”
Herzog, on his part, attempted to draw clear differences between his and Netanyahu’s policies vis-à-vis the Palestinians: “The difference between me and Bibi is clear. I want to separate from the Palestinians and Netanyahu is not ready to do anything that will change the status quo. I am taking steps to change the status quo.”
Minister of Culture and Sport Miri Regev spoke about her efforts to halt funding to some cultural institutions. “The Culture Ministry is not an ATM. It is not acceptable that I can transfer funds to a cultural organization, but I cannot cut off those funds after a given organization undertakes anti-Israel activity,” she said.
“There is no connection between freedom of speech and freedom of funding. Freedom of speech is a part of the DNA of the Israeli society. Everyone can say and write what they want, but the moment we need to fund someone, that is something else.”
Yisrael Beytenu leader Avigdor Lieberman, who served as the foreign minister in Prime Minister Netanyahu’s previous government but was left in the opposition this term, argued that the current government does not have clear policies. “The problem with this government is that there is a lack of policy. One day the IDF Chief of Staff tells us that the existential threat facing Israel is Hezbollah and he sees opportunities in the agreement with Iran. The day after, the defense minister says that Iran is the greatest threat.”
Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid, who was the finance minister in Netanyahu’s previous government and like Lieberman found himself in the opposition this term, also voiced strong critiques of the current government. “Israeli foreign policy has completely fallen apart. The Foreign Ministry has been divided between six ministers and public diplomacy has been divided between six ministries. People here do not understand the extent of the foreign policy crisis and implications of it for our national security,” he said.
Interviewed from the Gaza border, Lapid also talked about the situation on the southern border a year and a half after Operation Protective Edge. “We need to a stick and carrot policy. On the one hand, we need to partake in the major process of building a Gaza port, which would guarantee seven to eight years of quiet for the Israelis living in this area. On the other hand, we need to destroy tunnels the minute they are uncovered and not wait for the next Operation Protective Edge.“
Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon expressed his reservations about a biannual budget. The Kulanu leader said, “There are major challenges in the bi-annual budget and I oppose it for that reason.” However, he said that he and the prime ,inister are trying to reach a compromise: “I am committed to a coalition agreement and we are trying to find a way to resolve this issue.”
@ CuriousAmerican:
This is the middle east. We are the only people who have not indiscriminately slaughtered our enemies when we have the capability.
You pretending to talk to Jews from the presumptive heights of some moral authority actually is sad. You must be bored again as you periodically come back to Israpundit to try and stir up the “conservative Jews” Apparently you have no real meaning in your life?
Buying them out has not been working because those that sell are under penalty of death by the PA and Hamas. This has had been tried numerous times now sometimes publicly and sometimes not. So perhaps if a war gets serious enough they will be expelled. I for one advocate today getting rid of all terrorists and their families and supporters. After this perhaps it will be possible to buy out those who wish to leave peacefully and do fall into the terrorist or supporter class.
@ bernard ross:
Yes I agree with you Israel does not need to declare on Areas A/B unless the Palestinians agree to it and forego any other claims which they will not agree to.
CuriousAmerican Said:
again, irrelevant… the goal intended does not lessen the efficacy of the method….. Stick only until completely broken, then perhaps a carrot…. to get whatever is desired. You give no evidence or support for your statements, as usual.
CuriousAmerican Said:
you dont get it, its not who… its the method. Carrot and stick does not work in circumstances of dealing with a vanquished enemy. We have two excellent examples which worked to change the enemy… not because of goals, not because of the people… because of the methods… the method worked successfully… you keep saying it wont work in other cases but you give no support or evidence for that assertion. It matters not the intent or goals…what matters is how you break and retrain a vanquished enemy. You never dealt with the issue.
CuriousAmerican Said:
sorry, you keep getting lost….the issue was about the carrot and stick method on enemy vanquished populations…… something to which you never answered. If you are unable to remember the subject of my statement upon which you commented it might be best to stay silent.
Because the goal of the occupation of Japanese and Germany was not to destroy Japan and Germany as future fully independent nation states.
But the goal of many here is that a future fully independent nation state of Palestine [the Palestine controlled areas + Gaza] be made impossible.
The general opinion here is that the “Palestinian” areas should NEVER become a fully independent, nation state with control over their airspace, borders, water, and minerals. Israel deems these necessary for Israel’s survival; and even were that not so, a majority here feel that the Torah and Tenach forbid surrendering the land. At best, a very limited autonomous reservation/Bantustan would be offered to them.
It is this critical difference that distinguishes the analogy of Japan and Germany from the “Palestinians.”
You answers to my very relevant points – which replies of yours were actually evasions on your part – did not address my points but rather speciously avoided them.
The fact is: The situation of the return of the Jewish people, after 1800 years, is unique enough that precedents are impossible to apply.
You may consider that irrelevant, but it is central to the whole conflict.
If you want to expel them, then expel them; but do not deny what you are doing as you do it.
@ Bear Klein:
I agree with what you say and add that there is no reason why the vacant land in C should go to those who neither owned nor had soveriegnty prior… especially when those lands were legally designated for Jewish settlement. I think they should annex C and continue to dispute A & B unless the pals come to an autonomy agreement on a & b only. Israel can annex C unilaterally without committing on A, B or gaza. In the future when the hashemites fall and the pals take over jordan an opportunity can arise to drive the intransigents over the river. in the same way Israel unilaterally left gaza it should unilaterally annex C.
Israelis living past the green line are approximately 750,000 (10% of the population). 400,000 of these Jewish Israelis live in Area C. There are maybe 50,000 Arabs there.
Area C also contains all the heights of Samaria, Jordan Valley and open spaces. Area C is needed for security and the future of the state of Israel. Giving area C to the Palestinians would endanger the state. Since they are enemy aliens for 100 years and nothing is changed who cares what they want.
They should take what Bennett is talking about autonomy on steroids in Areas A/B and live as neighbors. Highly unlikely that they will do this.
We should do what Bennett suggests annex Area C and make the offer of autonomy in A/B. If they do not agree drive them out. There are now lot of buildings to fix in Syria and many of these Palestinians have building experience. A win win they get work and we get rid of them.
@ CuriousAmerican:
it was al-malki who i said should be arrested, but abbas should be assasinated for klinghoffer and more.
CuriousAmerican Said:
not at all, no evidence for you absurd position. first give the stick until they are decimated and then you can do what you want.
CuriousAmerican Said:
take a course in basic logic… being unique in certain specific characteristics does not exclude analogy in other characteristics. there is no evidence for this fantasy thinking.
CuriousAmerican Said:
but you never show how a returning conqueror cannot do what the americans did to Japan and germany.. therefore irrelevant without evidence
CuriousAmerican Said:
again, another non sequitur…. it does not follow that a unique situation prevents comparison. Read up on logical fallacies.
CuriousAmerican Said:
you keep repeating this but there is no evidence for this statement and it does not follow logically from any of your assertions… again read up on logical reasoning and fallacies.
CuriousAmerican Said:
no appeal to precedent… examples given to support my argument of stick first fully… before offering carrots. Israel is always giving carrots before first completely destroying their lives, economy and culture… this approach has no support in fact and mine has two of the best examples… you gave no examples in fact to show why mine does not work.
CuriousAmerican Said:
if only you could actually support a single one of your points rather than simply posting irrelevant statements without any support in evidence or history to rebut mine. rebut mine with evidence.. dont just say its different or unique… all non sequiturs.
Although your presentation and logic were childish and fallacious I took the time to answer to each point to give you an example of proper debate showing relevance and support. Granted you are undeserving of this consideration because you have so often proven to be dishonest in your posts…. but dont say I did not give you a chance to change your despicable ways.
CuriousAmerican Said:
no relevance to my assertion. Show relevance.
CuriousAmerican Said:
the soviets fell apart, this is irrelevant. you show no relevance to my assertion. In fact, you reinforce my assertion because Israel fails because it attempts to use carrots before fully beating them into zero with the stick as they did to Japan.
CuriousAmerican Said:
they control it because they were allowed to… because they became peaceful and non threatening…. after having been severely beaten, humiliated, given unconditional surrender with NO negotiations. Once beaten to a humiliated pulp you will have to accept anything given.. which is what the huns and japs did.
CuriousAmerican Said:
irrelevant and not analogous because the north and south were already one people before the war and the war was over separating…. the south lost and had to remain as part of the union.
(continued on next post)
CuriousAmerican Said:
you did not establish any support as to why the differences you mentioned render my assertion on sticks only, to start, invalid. all you did was say there were differences so what I said doesnt apply… but you never showed why. The reason is that none of those differences have any effect on my original assertion:CuriousAmerican Said:
wrong… annexation has an ultimate agenda has no effect on the efficacy of using a stick only to first demolish and humiliate as a precedent to carrots. Its a basis psychology whereby you replace the entire culture of your vanquished. This is why they keep going wrong… they are trying to change the rabid jew killing culture without first totally demolshing their existing culture in unquestioned capitulation. This means that they should first be brought to a point of total humiliation to begin again to be rebuilt. Look to the Japanese… you cant fill the cup with new ideas until you first empty it
CuriousAmerican Said:
you show no support for how annexation would lessen the effectiveness of the stick only method I advised. Keep in mind that germany was not destroyed to the extent of japan.. in any case annexation has no effect on first using a big stick.
CuriousAmerican Said:
On the contrary, the military and political occupations were complete… how else do you beleive that the Japanese ended up playing baseball after living on hara kiri like the pals? You make statements with no support or examples.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Germany was divided into two totally opposing political systems and culture so that when reunited they were as two different cultures. Had they been destroyed and decimated like Japan they would have been playing baseball in west berlin. You have not shown how settling with a large foreign population makes a complete demolishing and humiliation less effective… in fact it should make it more effective.
(continued in next post)
note that i am answering specifically to each of your assertions rather than ignoring them and moving on as you have always done.
Abbas may be despicable, but he is tolerated because he is your prat boy, and any successor would be worse, and you know it.
The Palestinians consider him a collaborator.
The Palestinians would like to get rid of him, because they think he is not defiant enough.
Half of his “offensive” statements are made to appease a growing Palestinian rage at their perception of his “collaboration.” If he did not make the statements, he would be killed.
Like him or hate him, he is the best of the worst.
See pic: CLICK HERE
Apples and Oranges, Mister Ross. Apples and Oranges.
1) The USA was not planning to annex neither Germany nor Japan. Ultimately, eventually TOTAL INDEPENEDENCE WAS IN ORDER!
Bennett is planning to annex large swathes of what the Palestinians consider their home turf. Completely different modus operandi.
2) The USA did not annex Bavaria. Nor did England annex Hamburg.
3) Nor did the USA, England, France, nor even Russia settle Germany or Japan with large foreign speaking populations, controlling water and mineral rights.
4) While there was a confiscation of Silesia and East Prussia/Danzig/Memel/Konigsberg==>Kalinigrad, the vast majority of Germany remained contiguously in German hands.
What Israel has done is bisect the contiguity of Palestinian areas purposefully. Not even the Soviets did that to East Germany. There is no comparison to Germany.
5) The East Germans revolted violently in 1953, they protested in 1988.
6) Finally, the Soviet left East Germany in 1988, after 40 years. Israeli effectual control of the “Palestinian” areas is increasing, going on its 49th year, with more community building.
7) Germany, and Japan now control their own airspace and borders.
In order to apply the WWII scenario, Israel would have to eventually evacuate all of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza.
Will never happen.
7) If you want to apply the Civil War scenario, within one year after the America Civil War, Southerners were admitted into the Union and given the vote. The Federal Army was removed after 12 years.
So unless you are going to enfranchise every Palestinian, you have severe problems with that analogy.
THE REASON THE PALESTINIAN PROBLEM IS SO INTRACTABLE IS BECAUSE IT IS SO UNIQUE AVOIDING ANALOGY
Uniqueness.
1) NO ONE returns after 1800 years of exile. No one. The English are not going back to Denmark, and Hamburg, from whence they left 1600 years ago, nor would the Germans and Danes permit it.
The Croats are not going back to Persia, from whence the Croats/South Slavs left 1500 years ago, nor would the Iranians permit it.
Hungarians are not returning to Mongolia.
The Norman French will not be returning to Norway.
The British aristocracy will not be returning to Normandy or Germany from whence they came about 1000 years ago, and 300 years ago respectively.
Parisians are not going back to the Frankish domains of Germany.
Northern Italians are not going back to Gothland in Sweden.
Asturian Spanish (north coast) are not going back to Swabia in Germany.
The return of the Jews is so unique in history that it presents with problems avoiding comparison.
The only comparison that is valid is that the Germanic, Hunnic, and Slavic migrants mixed with the Latins and Celts, and though loathe to admit it, so did the Jewish migrants mix which is why blue eyes is more common in returning Ashkenazi Jews than with Yemeni Jews.
But these Germanic, Hunnic, and Slavic mixtures will not be returning from Spain,France, Italy, Sicily, Croatia, etc. to Sweden, Iran, Norway and Mongolia == So that equals no problem. The Jews however did return.
The Jewish return is absolutely unique and defies precedent to follow.
2) The only other option is enfranchisement which would be suicidal to the Zionist project.
THEREFORE APPEALING TO PRECEDENT IS NOT APPROPOS.
He is thinking outside the box, which is the only way to navigate this situation.
You should try thinking outside the box yourself, rather than spouting tired Shibboleths which do not apply.
shouldnt he be arrested and put in detention on his return…. and what about Abbas who is with him?
such youngsters are not historians and speculate with no supporting evidence. the most successful turning of existential enemies into allies is the WWII utter demolishing of Germany and Japan…. only after they were totally humiliated and destroyed did the Marshal plan operate and they completely controlled those nations culture for decades afterwards. Japan was A bombed twice and today plays baseball and is one of the most peaceful and reliable allies.
No carrot… only the stick until they are completely BROKEN…..not PC to say but definitely the winning hand.
gosh, he seeks only eight years of quiet for allowing them a port?