T. Belman. Jonathan Tobin, COMMENTARY, asks, Insult Or An Excuse for Betrayal?
The NYT article below adds to the assault.
The New York Times in an unusual move, has called on the United Nations Security Council to set the parameters for a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians.
“The best idea under discussion now would be to have the United Nations Security Council, in an official resolution, lay down guidelines for a peace agreement covering such issues as Israel’s security, the future of Jerusalem, the fate of Palestinian refugees and borders for both states,” the paper’s Editorial Board stated.
The paper’s editorial, published Thursday, further called on US President Barack Obama to led the charge at the UNSC.
“The most plausible pressure would come from Mr. Obama’s leading the Security Council to put its authority behind a resolution to support a two-state solution and offer the outlines of what that could be.
“That may seem like a bureaucratic response unlikely to change anything, but it is the kind of political pressure Mr. Netanyahu abhors and has been working assiduously to prevent,” the New York Times wrote.
It issued its editorial just one week, before the United Nations Security Council on October 14th is due to hold a public debate, known as an Arria Formula meeting, on Israeli settlement activity in the West Bank and Jewish building in east Jerusalem.
The Palestinian Authority asked the Security Council to hold that meeting, in hopes that it would spur UNSC action on the matter. It has also attempted without success, to push the UN Security Council members to issue a resolution, such as the one described in the New York Times Editorial.
The United States and Israel have opposed any UNSC efforts to dictate the terms of a two-state solution, preferring instead a directly negotiated agreement between the Israel and the Palestinians parties.
With an eye to the changing US administration in January, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already met with both American presidential candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, to urge them to oppose such unilateral moves at the UN.
On Wednesday, in Washington, US State Department spokesman Mark Toner reiterated the Obama administration’s long standing position to oppose biased and one-sided resolution UN resolutions against Israel.
“With regard to the UN Security Council and any action at the UN, our position hasn’t changed. We’re always concerned, frankly, about one-sided resolutions or other actions that could be taken within the UN, and we’re always going to oppose those kinds of resolutions that we believe delegitimize Israel’s – Israel and undermine its security,” Toner said.
As one of five countries on the UNSC with veto power, the US has blocked Palestinian led attempts by that body to issue condemnations or resolutions against Israel, particularly with regard to the settlements.
But speculation is high that US President Barack Obama might change his position with regard to UNSC and Israel, in the two months that remain after the November election and before he leaves office in January.
During Wednesday’s press briefing with reporters, Toner hinted that the US position on this matter could change. “We’re going to carefully consider our future engagement, if and when we reach that point, and determine how to most effectively pursue and advance the objective that we all at least claim to share, which is that of achieving a negotiated two-state solution,” Toner said.
The question about a UNSC resolution was raised by reporters, in the wake of a strongly worded US condemnation of the advancement of plans to build a new neighborhood of the Shiloh settlement.
The plans for the 98 new settler homes, has yet to be permitted, although it is expected that the approvals will be forthcoming.
Although the neighborhood, of what would eventually be 300 new homes, is within the community’s boundaries, the US and the Palestinians spoke of the homes as if they were a new settlement.
The Palestinians have insisted that settlement activity is the obstacle to the creation of a two-state solution. It has refused to hold direct talks with Israel until such time as Israel halts settlement activity in the West Bank and Jewish building in east Jerusalem.
Israel has repeatedly called on the Palestinians to hold such talks without pre-conditions. Israel has said that the Palestinians refuse to negotiate is the stumbling bloc to the peace process.
For the American dummies & NYT:
Hillary is a MAJOR danger for America interests & future. The engine of her actions (through her entire life) is a limitless GREED for Power and Wealth.
Nothing will stop her and several individuals may have paid with their lives when trying to interfere!
She was an enabler of Bill predatory sexual conduct and the Mass Media are enabling this megalomaniac woman whose foreign policy has ALREADY significantly damaged the interests of this country.
Now her speeches to WS (US oligarchs) confirm her CONTEMPT for the middle and lower classes. She is NO Catherine II of Russia, She is NOT Margaret Thatcher NOT even Lady May. She is more and more a future American Putin. Putin knows already how to deal with his clones
She is conspiring with the US oligarchs (WS) and the mass media for creating in the US a Putin system.
What the Hilary campaign is showing is her ways of defending America interests!!! This is below appalling. America needs to wake UP! These are the characteristics of Incompetence and Ineptitude! Her conduct is a REBUTTAL of Obama doctrine and EIGHT years “accomplishments”!
Hillary has NOTHING to offer to the American people! A TRAGEDY! A WASTE for the NATION.
For the left of the world, what matters is controlling POWER!
The leaders of the world must be laughing if this is the future Pr. of the US!!!
funny you should mention Pravda. From a book review in the NY Times, ironically, enough:
NYT/US Pravda has NEVER been pro-IL!
What betrayal?
Betrayal is nothing for new for the Times:
http://www.thejewishweek.com/news/new-york-news/telling-it-it-wasnt
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buried_by_the_Times
https://www.amazon.com/Buried-Times-Holocaust-Important-Newspaper/dp/0521607825
Take a look at the many articles on CAMERA’s NY Times Page:
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=2&x_outlet=35
And CAMERA’s billboard ad against the Times
http://www.camera.org/nytimes/
“NY TIMES LAUNCHES ITS JEW-TRACKER [UPDATED]
The New York Times today offers up a table examining the Democratic (but not Republican) Senators and House members opposed to Obama’s Iran agreement, noting whether they are Jewish and the proportion of Jewish constituents in their state or district. Like this:
[I can’t copy the chart. You have to go to the site. SZ]
Nice that they use yellow highlight for this feature. Only thing missing is the Star of David in place of an asterisk.”
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2015/09/ny-times-launches-its-jew-tracker.php
This is just enabling the Palestinians to ignore the Oslo Accord and get everything they want without offering any concessions.
I am very worried that Obama may replace Moon, he is a complete and utter waste of space.
The New York Times has done the seemingly impossible: it has hit a new low. Its new motto is “all the lies unfit to print.”
The NYT’s Sulzberger always opposed Jewish Statehood and the idea of a Jewish Nation even during and after the Holocaust.
Arthur Sulzberger, in fact, supported a bi-national State under Arab sovereignty. So this is all par for the course.
/The US Pravda longs for the days of the USSR PC dictating to people what they must do.
We have already witnessed a piece of Obama/Socialist tyranny! That is ENOUGH for me!
What about having the UNSC set the parameters of the END of the conflict between the Sushies!!!
The smart-ass at the US Pravda never thought about THAT!!!
Normally I would be exercised about the NYT continuing anti-Israel acts, but they no longer count.
Yes, because the UN and Obama are doing such a great job. I know that Obama will become the next Secretary General of the UN so he might as well start with the UN’s favorite country, Israel.