“Why would you expect Israel to cooperate in its intended lynching?” former New York Mayor asks British Prime Minister.
Former New York Mayor Ed Koch has sent a letter to British Prime Minister David Cameron, asking him why his country chose to criticize Israel for approving new construction in Judea and Samaria.
Koch pointed out in the letter that the Israeli presence in Judea and Samaria is essential to ensuring Israel’s security, especially in the wake of recent comments by Hamas chief Khaled Mashaal.
Mashaal, who visited Gaza for the first time last month, said in a public speech that the terror group reserves the right to use “resistance” – the Arab term for terrorism – to “liberate Palestine”.
“Israel and the Palestinian Authority have not agreed to final borders and the Gaza government has said – the speech of Khaled Meshal is set forth in my commentary – that it will never recognize the legitimacy of the state of Israel and will continue to pursue violence against that state including the kidnapping of its soldiers,” Koch wrote Cameron.
“The official head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, has refused for the last two years to come to the peace table to negotiate without preconditions,” he added.
“You ask Israel to cease building settlements on the West Bank, which are intended not only to house Israelis, but to provide a defense bulwark when the Islamist armies of the surrounding states, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Syria – Assad or his opponents – and Iraq, again try militarily to crush Israel,” wrote Koch.
“Will Britain come to Israel’s aid? I recall when in one of those wars, Britain declined to deliver to Israel tanks it had purchased from your country. Britain under Chamberlain participated in the Munich sellout of Czechoslovakia. What you and your European colleagues are doing now is repeating the sellout, this time of Israel. The Czech Republic, mindful of what happened to it, is the only European country to vote no to Palestinian statehood. When one of your predecessors told the world that he offered ‘peace in our time,’ he wrote himself into history as a disgrace. How will history on this issue recall you?
“Why would you expect Israel to cooperate in its intended lynching?”
Israel recently approved the construction of homes in Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and said it would promote construction in the area known as E1, which connects between Jerusalem and Maaleh Adumim.
The move caused outrage among Western countries which were quick to condemn Israel. Europe’s four member states in the UN Security Council, Britain included, said they were “extremely concerned by and strongly oppose” Israel’s construction plans.
“Israel’s announcements to accelerate the construction of settlements send a negative message and are undermining faith in its willingness to negotiate,” the four said.
“The viability of the two-state solution, that is key for Israel’s long-term security is threatened by the systematic expansion of settlements. Settlements are illegal under international law and detrimental to any international efforts to restart peace negotiations and secure a two-state solution…. We call on the Israeli government to rescind these plans and recall that we will not recognize any changes to the pre-1967 borders, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties,” it continued.
Britain also summoned Israel’s ambassador to London for clarifications following the construction approval.
@ yamit82:
Rubbing alchol will take the stinging off you skin, Cowboy taught me that. Y’all need to raise green chili in Israel, you have the land and climate for it.
Dr Honey Bee Ph.D Said:
Sorry: Government of Israel
@ Bernard Ross:
@ dweller:
Exposing yourself in public is against the law and it could land you back in the clink.
@ Dr Honey Bee Ph.D:
No problem.
@ Dr Honey Bee Ph.D:
Dr Honey Bee Ph.D Said:
I know. 😉
Reminds me the other day I almost gas myself to death. Was making a western Omelet and I was frying sup some hot peppers with the window closed.
The fumes almost did me in permanently.
@ yamit82:
Thank-you Yamit, my Ph.D has not quite taken.
@ Dr Honey Bee Ph.D:
Gov. of Israel
@ Bernard Ross:
If I may ask,what is the GOI?
@ yamit82:
English por favor your Spanish is furblugent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Was at the flea market today,warm fresh air,full of the pungent smell of roasting green chili.
@ Ted Belman:
If David tells me where the “laying on Hands” ceremony is being held,I shall invite you.
dweller Said:
Generally I agree with this comment wrt an actual case or likelihood of a case. The problem here is that nations are prosecuting in the public forum. They are accusing Israel of breaking the law, which in my mind is slander and libel. I do not know whether they can be successfully sued for libel and on whom the burden would fall in such a case to prove legality or non proof of illegality. At the very least the ambassadors should be called in and demanded that they cease the libel and that it is viewed as a hostile act. Nations accuse Israel and Israel says and does nothing. They do not even counter verbally declaring that the settlement is legal. In the end it always comes down to the negligence and incompetence of the Jews and the GOI. Jewish institutions spend more money on defending muslims than securing Jewish global rights; Adelson spends 100 million to buy romney; GOI allows Israel and the Jews to be repeatedly libeled on a continuing bases saying and doing nothing.
@ Dr. Honey Bee Ph.D:
decirlo de otra manera
yamit82 Said:
Except for the Jews. Israel acquired the land and held on to it through power but is always talking about giving it up. Its the one time you hope a politician is lying through his teeth.
yamit82 Said:
ROF. you always have great links. thanks for the laugh.
@ yamit82:
Quien es “dicen”
@ Dr. Honey Bee Ph.D:
Que hice?
dicen que de una manera diferente
@ yamit82:
you wrote I say the other time, Englisia chico!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@ yamit82:
como se diche
@ Dr. Honey Bee Ph.D:
You mean like arguments?
@ Dr. Honey Bee Ph.D:
digo otra vez
@ Bernard Ross:
Yes, very likely so — but let them commit themselves by saying so; THEN — after they’ve made their claims — attack them.
Of course — but not until THEY have FIRST asserted the bases for their claims (of ‘international illegality’).
— That is, be PREPARED to state why & how Geneva IV is inapplicable here, but I wouldn’t actually declare and argue it UNTIL the opposition had first answered the question, “How do the communities violate intl law?”
And THEN, having demolished the Geneva claims, I’d promptly ask, “Okay, what else you got?”
I’d hold in reserve the “relevant treaties” to which you refer
— for an encounter where they could do the most good.
Never expose more of yourself (or your position) in a fight than you HAVE to at any given time.
@ yamit82:
Iam alway glad when you and cowboy agree with me,it saves us all so many problems.
@ yamit82:
Malito gingo, porque echare los palabras colorosos a todos.
My comment is in moderation. Explain this one?
@ Michael Dar:
National rights are a consequence of the Bal of Power. There is no legal or historical rights that trump the power to acquire land and hold it against all enemies who seek to reverse that consequence or result. There are hundreds of deserving ethnicity’s who are deserving of national sovereignty but are denied for lack of will and or power. Ask the American Indians, the Basques and etc. about historical and legal rights.
@ Dr. Honey Bee Ph.D:
Estoy de acuerdo.
Here’s to all you bleeding hearts.
@ Bernard Ross:
For want of a righteous man the nation was lost
“And I sought of them a man who puts up a wall and stands in the breach before Me, for the sake of the land that it not be destroyed, but I did not find.” Ezek 22:30
“What a piece of work is a man! how Noble in
Reason! how infinite in faculty! in form and moving
how express and admirable! in Action, how like an Angel!
in apprehension, how like a God?”
Shakespeare’s Hamlet’s most famous part of Act 2, Scene 2 monologue
@ yamit82:
Ah Yamit Darlin, sad but true. Soy me acuede
Why not? Jews have cooperated in their own lynching for the past 2 millennia and the State of Israel has not demonstrated conclusively that Jews have changed. Certainly American Jews haven’t. If there is any hope for the Jews future it is with us here in Israel.
Bernard Ross Said:
In the same way that Jews, and the GOI, are negligent and incompetent in lawfare they are also negligent and incompetent in diplomacy. There is no effective advocate for global jewish interests west of the Jordan river. Israel has seen the problems solely as political and military and has neglected the legal and diplomatic paths. If Israel and/or jewish organizations put a massive effort into these paths they could accomplish a paradigm shift. They should use the same offensive tactics as in war. It has been a great disappointment to see Jews dwarfed in the mental arena as a result of their own negligence. This was the arena which historically was successful for Jews. The legal and diplomatic war is part of the PR war whereby one does not necessarily have to win battles to win the war. Israel has lost the PR and diplomatic war because they have not recognized the efficacy of the legal war in furthering the diplomatic and PR war. It’s time for a change.
Dr Honey Bee Ph.D Said:
The internationals always make diplomatic demands which can be ignored, respected, rejected,etc. One doesn’t have to back up a diplomatic demand; its’ purpose is to make a point. Israel never does this. In the same way they summon Israels ambassadors to say the settlements are illegal so should Israel should summon theirs. It makes it clear as to how Israel views these libelous statements of illegality. Furthermore, the legal obligation of the states claiming illegal jewish settlement is to “encourage” jewish settlement west of the jordan river. This obligation did not expire,was not canceled or rescinded; it was forgotten! The obligations are expressed in san remo treaty, LON mandate and UN charter art 80.
Have you ever heard Israel state this to these countries in a clear manner? Shouldn’t the Jews reasonably expect these nations to honor the commitments they made and the treaties they signed? Has Israel, or any jewish organization, ever asked them to do this? If no one asks,or in diplomatic speak, demands that they fulfill their obligations then why should they not continue to ignore those legal obligations?
If a con artist/swindler owes you money and does not pay, what do you think his behavior will be if you never make a demand for that obligation. First, he will not pay you; second he will think you are an idiot/mark/sucker/dunce asking to be conned and swindled again. This is the current view of the internationals who are led by the europeans.
BTW, congratulations on receiving your degree: looks great in the address line.
@ Ted Belman:
Can we say durn fool. Note: I did not say damn, Decorum,don’t you know!,now I need to learn to spell.
@ Michael Dar:
O h Darlin,thank you for your commnt. Negotiation come only after victory.
@ Ted Belman:
Are you saying I talk to much and to fast? I shall amend my behavior, now that David Sternlight has give me a Ph.D,
@ Dr Honey Bee Ph.D:
I don’t know how much leverage Israel actually has to back up her “demands” but the problem is that Israel never even demands what she is historically, morally and legally entitled to nor does she seriously challenges de misconceptions, falshoods, tendentious opinions and the onesided misguided international politics imposed upon her. Israel should initiate and attack not remain on the defensive trying timidly to limit the damage when it’s to late.
@ C.R.:
You sure use he word “evil” a lot. A person is not evil just because he is a Marxist or voted for Obama. You show yourself to be an extremist when you make such attacks.
@ Dr Honey Bee Ph.D:
You will end up in moderation if you comment right after having commented. If comments come in rapid succession they are caught by the spammer.
Mazel tov on your PhD.
@ Bernard Ross:
I am always being modified,especially since I received my Ph.D. How can Israel make demands, they don’t have the power to back up those demands. Correct me if I am mistaken.
KOch’s argument ignores legal and historical rights of settlement west of jordan river. Repeatedly ignoring, and not re-stating those rights whenever ignored by others,has led to the current position where the only argument the internationals accept is that of security. They will solve the security issue with worthless guarantees and then blame Israel for not withdrawing. Every time Jewish rights are ignored and let pass another nail is hammered into the coffin.
Israel must summon foreign ambassadors and demand their fulfillment of international agreements regarding jewish settlement. It must also declare that declarations of illegal settlement are libelous, hostile acts which delegitimize jewish and Israeli rights. Foreign govts should be placed under direct bilateral diplomatic attack, on a one to one basis. No one knows Israel position: “ambiguity” is not advantageous to jewish rights as it is in the nuclear issues.
reply 9 to dweller in moderation (there is nothing contentious in my post, it is short so why this perpetual moderation) Ted, why not adjust the software settings to be less annoying.
dweller Said:
I believe they are arguing under the Geneva Conventions on occupation. However, Israel needs to state, as does Levy report that the conventions do not apply in this instance. That Israel claims the lands under the relevant treaties,historical rights, etc.
Perhaps Israel should be summoning those ambassadors, whose nations declare the settlements illegal. Israel should inform them that the settlements are legal, “encouraged” in international treaties,are a legal obligation of the GOI to encourage the settlement, etc. Further it should state that it views the claims of illegality to be libelous and displaying an un-diplomatic, hostile double standard behaviour. It should demand of those govts which signed san remo, LON Mandate, UN Charter that they fulfill their duties under those documents to the Jewish people.
Security is of course an important factor to take into consideration, but Israel’s right to the land is what should be the main argument. Israel does not owe the Arabs anything. I wonder why our various and successive leaderships never force international community to deal with historic and legal facts of the conflict..we make life much to easy for those Jew haters.
Let this meddlesome quartet cite with specificity the particular “international law” they have in mind
— and let them demonstrate precisely how the Jewish developments ‘violate’ it.
They are the accusing party.
The burden of proof rests therefore on them to make their case (or otherwise STFU).
Only after the EU-Four show us what’s ‘illegal’ about those plans.
Not until.
Not unless.
@ Laura:
Miss Laura, the Falklands argument is not relevant.
Ed Koch–is an evil man and was a corrupt politician–as a Marxist and supporter of Barack Obama–he is not a genuine supporter of Israel–but rather he is an enemy of Israel!
Meanwhile the hypocritical Brits still occupy the Falkland Islands, thousands of miles from their shores, and refuse to return them to Argentina.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-people-of-the-falklands-are-british-says-foreign-office-as-david-cameron-rebuffs-argentina-over-colonialism-attack-8436250.html
@ Eric R.:
No, but they should be asserted anyway. If we are playing defense at least we should use the cards we have. I am not advocating asking or seeking permission. Build and let them refute the facts
David Chase Said:
Do you expect Europeans, who are inherently frothing, irrational, genocidal Jew-haters, to listen to them?
Why don’t these ambassadors who are called on the carpet in places such as London state simply, clearly and directly to the assertion that settlements are “illegal” under international law with all the evidence in the law that we have to the contrary. The world was also once flat.