By Ted Belman
PM Begin and daughter Leah in Yamit
As a result of the ’67 War Israel came into possession of the “territories” which included Judea and Samaria, Sinai including Gaza and the Golan. UNSC Res 242 provided that Israel should withdraw from territories, specifically not the territories or all territories, at such time as she had secure and recognized borders.
Israel accepted this resolution because she didn’t want to keep all the land with its Arab inhabitants, preferring to keep only some of the land. The Arab countries rejected the Resolution because they wanted 100% of the land to be returned to them, i.e. Egypt, Jordan and Syria. No one contemplated the creation of another Arab state in Judea and Samaria.
In 1970 the US abandoned this resolution and embraced the Arab demand that Israel retreat from 100% of the territories. This was reflected in the Rogers Plan that Nixon authorized. Nevertheless Israel began to build settlements on these lands for security purposes. One such settlement was Yamit which was set up just south of Gaza in the Sinai. I remember when Yamit was being promoted to potential Olim. I was attracted to the idea and though it would be fun to participate in the development of this town. Other considerations kept me rooted in Toronto.
Pamela Schrieber , was not deterred by other considerations and made aliya from the U.S. and was among the first to sign up. She loved being part of this growing community and felt betrayed when, as part of the Camp David Accords in 1978, PM Begin agreed to vacate every inch of the land including Yamit. She was devastated and, when the time came to evacuate, returned to the U.S.
I just finished reading her book, Love and Betrayal, about her experience and enjoyed it thoroughly.
In it she quotes a speech from PM Begin to the residents of Yamit:
“I believe that the Jewish people have the inalienable right to our land which includes Judea, Samaria and the Sinai. But the leader of the free world believes differently. He is convinced that in order to have peace with Egypt, Israel must return every centimeter of the land gained in 1967 no matter how important it is to our defense and religious beliefs. Since there was no possibility of our returning Judea and Samaria which would usher in negotiations for Jerusalem, the only bargaining chip we had was Sinai.
“My partner in peace, President Sadat, was adamant on the return of the Sinai, including the evacuation of all our settlements. President Carter was in absolute agreement. Since I entered negotiations knowing that Pres. Carter had made the statement that the Palestinian refugees needed a homeland, I was not shocked at the intransigence of the American president.
“[..] Although I cannot prove it, at the time of negotiations, I had the distinct impression that there was collusion between the Americans and Egypt. If not collusion, then a bias towards the Egyptian demands. For though I bared my soul to the American President, Mr Carter was intractable…..This was a man who clearly had his mind made up before he went into negotiations. This was a man who clearly cares nothing about the survival of our state.”
Plus ca change, plus la meme chose. I couldn’t help but see a parallel in President Obama’s position on the current peace process; but more about this below.
I remember thinking at the time, that though Israel giving up all this land and the oil that she had discovered there, that it was worth it as Sadat was breaking the mold of Arab rejectionism and that others would follow. Little did I realize how cold the peace would be.
I remember also that Sadat and Carter pressed Begin to sign a second agreement in which Israel would agree to create a Palestinian State within five years in Judea and Samaria. Begin was adamant in his refusal and would agree only to giving them autonomy. That agreement was never signed. Begin was wrong in his belief that there was no “possibility of our returning Judea and Samaria”. The US thought otherwise.
When the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993 and 1995, Israel didn’t commit to creating a Palestinian state or giving over 100% or the land or stopping settlement construction. She felt she could enter these agreements because she was in the driver’s seat and could press her demands. Arafat, on the other hand, accepted these terms because he was not in a strong bargaining position and besides, he and many of his fellow terrorists were to be admitted into Judea and Samaria as part of the deal. What Israel didn’t anticipate was that America and Europe would side with Arafat, strengthening his position as they did with Sadat. In hindsight this was a grave mistake. They also didn’t anticipate that Arafat would never abide by the Accords.
Ever since the oil embargo in the seventies, the Saudis made it clear to successive US administrations that they required that “the political struggle [between Israel and the Arabs] is [be] settled in [a] manner satisfactory to [the] Arabs.” By the time Pres George Bush was inaugurated in 2000, this meant the creation of a Palestinian state.
Prince Bandar told Bush a week or two before 9-11, “Starting today, you go your way and we will go our way. From then on, the Saudis would look out for their own national interests.” It seemed the United States had made a strategic decision to adopt Sharon’s policy as American policy.
Within thirty-six hours, Bandar was on his way to Riyadh with a conciliatory response from Bush.
Because of this pressure, Bush agreed to do it but 9-11 intervened. It wasn’t until 2002 that he made his speech in which he envisaged a Palestinian state. Saudi Arabia announced the Saudi Plan, which I believe the State Department drew up, requiring 100% withdrawal. Bush, in subservience to the Saudis put it into the Roadmap which was being drafted in 2002 and 2003. It was tabled a week after the invasion of Iraq. Sharon objected to its inclusion to no avail.
In 2004, PM Sharon announce his Disengagement Plan from 100% of Gaza. The best he could get out of Bush was a letter which said “In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing major Israeli populations centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949…”. This was far from a commitment. Even so the Saudis screamed blue murder and Bush backed off.
What makes this cow towing all the more shocking was that Bush knew that Saudis were very much behind the 9-11 attacks due to the report he commissioned. He chose to cover up their culpability and conduct business as usual with them.
I did not know all this when the Disengagement Plan was being debated. While I liked the idea that Israel was getting rid of the responsibility for 1.4 million Gazans, I was against giving up every inch. It was a continuation of the Camp David Accords precedent. I favoured keeping the northern 5 miles of the strip where the Jewish settlements of Gush Katif were for two reasons, 1) it would set a new precedent and 2) we would not have to uproot 8,000 Israelis. I also favoured staying in the Philadelphi Corridor to prevent smuggling into Gaza. Secretary Rice intervened and forced Israel out of the corridor.
President Obama, on taking office rejected the Bush letter saying it was not binding. He particularly wanted to void this commitment contained in it, “The United States will do its utmost to prevent any attempt by anyone to impose any other plan” than the Roadmap. He wanted to impose a solution if necessary. Like Carter he supported the Arab position requiring negotiations to be based on ’67 lines plus swaps. Obama also rejected our security demands. Like Carter, he is “a man who clearly cares nothing about the survival of our state.”
After writing this article I wrote to the author about the speech and she said “That was creative license. I used my own research to construct something to what I think he should have said or could have said.” Nevertheless Carter and Obama have much in common and in my opinion, the alleged speech nails it.
@ honeybee:
Some do.
For a while. (See bolded item, just above.)
Why? — it’s HIS problem, not yours.
@ honeybee:
He’s both frog AND scorpion.
@ yamit82:
I’m NOT AT ALL ‘confused’ — notwithstanding your current attempt (along w/ your recurring attempts) to confuse me.
What the comment figure means is that I’m the only one so far who has had the nerve to note that the article’s author has allowed his enthusiasm for the book to overwhelm his presence of mind (and journalistic duty) to make clear from the outset that the subject of his critique was a novel, not a memoir.
That’s the SOURCE of the problem here
— but it’s easier to blame somebody you’re already INCLINED to blame than to go to the heart of the matter. Especially when the article’s author just happens to be the owner & administrator of the blogsite where the hits & comments are MADE.
I repeat: Your outrage is misdirected. I did not write Ted’s essay. HE wrote it. Take up your beef with him — if you have the stones to match your bluster.
“Grabbing hold” of what?
What self-serving twaddle. There was, and is, nothing to “climb down” FROM
— because I never ‘climbed UP’ to make my remarks in the first place.
My comments were uncluttered with superfluous body-english (a proposition you seem to find inconceivable from your OWN vantage point of projection); I have shot perfectly STRAIGHT on this matter throughout the thread. I drew the only logical conclusion from Ted’s essay. If you find it unacceptable, take it up with him.
Oh, the conclusion is INDEED obvious.
The obvious conclusion is that you play the numbers game (what a surprise!) — same game the Inquisition played with Galileo.
(Yet I wonder how swelled their numbers would’ve been had HE been throwing the barbecue party that night, and THEY been the guests of honor…)
So much for truth.
Nu, so tell me, shmendrick: How did that tired, old, “minority-must-be-wrong” line work on the professors who graded you on a bell-shaped curve?
@ yamit82:
And you STILL haven’t answered my question.
More to the point:
Even in a novel, creative license always applies to minor details. A speech from the PM delivered to the Yamit community over a matter of existential significance — and which never in fact occurred — may hardly qualify as ‘minor.’ It goes too much to the settlement’s history, to GOI’s changing policies, to Begin’s character — even if offered only as backdrop to a fictional narrative.
Just to satisfy you, eh?
‘Wrong’ about WHAT exactly? — about concluding that the work was non-fiction? Wrong as to what? — specify.
Why shouldn’t I shoot from the hip? — my track record from that is demonstrably better (by a country mile) than your record even when you take dead aim.
As it happens, however, in THIS instance, I took Ted’s essay at face value; I didn’t shoot from the hip but read the piece carefully (as you apparently did not).
You just can’t put yourself — can you — in the shoes of somebody previously unfamiliar with the Yamit specifics, picking up the article sight-unseen, and arriving at the obvious conclusion. You probably aren’t very good at giving street directions either (just can’t conceive of why a stranger wouldn’t be able to follow ’em just as you gave ’em; right?).
You are effectively saying that I shouldn’t have taken the essay as written. (Yet you don’t say WHY.)
— But if that’s the case, then I suggest you take that up with TED.
yamit82 Said:
Whose’s the scorpion ?????????
dweller Said:
That’s why the Ladies love him.
dweller Said:
Tell me about it.
dweller Said:
Be still my Heart !!!!!!!
@ pschieber:
Is it true the Yamit82 has alluring beautiful blue eyes ????????
@ yamit82:
Dear yamit,
You did indeed hit the bull’s eye… I confess, I was projecting.
In fact, the author herself set the record straight, by saying:
I have been mulling over almost obsessively the last part of your comment:
I keep wondering about the ‘stalwart minority’…
I hope to God, that indeed there IS such a thing.
I may be über naive, but, is that so secretive that no signs of their existence are yet apparent? Surely, it cannot be only the ‘price tag’ graffiti artists?
On the “if you win / lose..” Thread you posted two satirical articles which… As seen from afar…are an ACURATE depiction of the events.
Forgive me for being a bit pessimistic, but, as I have said numerous times, it seems that we are all preaching to the choir!
Sadly, I think normanF summed it up on another thread:
pschieber Said:
Mine too!
Nice dog.
@ Ted Belman: I want to thank Yamit82 for defendig my novel. I purposely didn’t write a memoir. Yamit82- We bought butcher block because we knew it would last. It lasted longer than our marriage.
dweller Said:
dweller Said:
dweller Said:
dweller Said:
Just say you were wrong and shot as per your MO from the hip without even showing the min curiosity to check your assumptions before commenting. As you can see: this thread so far has had over 700 hits and 40 comments and YOU seem to be the only one confused and the only one to raise any criticism…. Conclusions on your part should be obvious. I think they are to any reading the comments on this thread especially yours. I supplied you with a ladder to climb down with some dignity but your sick inflated ego prevents you from grabbing hold…. Aesop Fables “The Frog and the scorpion”
The Scorpion and the Frog
A scorpion and a frog meet on the bank of a stream and the
scorpion asks the frog to carry him across on its back. The
frog asks, “How do I know you won’t sting me?” The scorpion
says, “Because if I do, I will die too.”
The frog is satisfied, and they set out, but in midstream,
the scorpion stings the frog. The frog feels the onset of
paralysis and starts to sink, knowing they both will drown,
but has just enough time to gasp “Why?”
Replies the scorpion: “Its my nature…”
@ yamit82:
Well, that’s news to ME. And news, as well — I quite assure you — to lots of other readers of Ted’s essay [above].
They don’t. But this — your comment [#20, above] — is the first written inkling on this blog that the book was offered as fiction.
Ted’s article gives no indication WHATSOEVER to that effect.
— That’s WHY the end comment — “I wrote to the author about the speech and she said ‘That was creative license” — is so jarring. Whether intended so or otherwise, there is no way of taking the article to mean that the book was fiction.
You’re so fullovit, yamit; always angling for the opportunity for a dig. You are as disingenuous as the day is long.
I read Ted’s article. From the article, there is simply no reason to conclude that the book was intended as anything other than a memoir.
Re-read the essay yourself — and put aside (if you can) what you already knew about the events and about the book. I drew the only rational conclusion from the article. If you can’t see that, then go soak your swollen head.
Told you before, and I’ll tell you again
— You have a serious obsession, boychik, and it’s not getting better; get help.
What reason would I have had for doing THAT (unless I wanted to order the book)?
Are you suggesting I shouldn’t have taken Ted’s article for a reasonable representation of the book’s intent? — that I should have suspected that it was actually a novel? Why? What would have prompted such a suspicion? There is nothing evident (let alone, ‘obvious’) about that in the piece.
How is it stupid or argumentative? (or do you just get off on making such bald, unsupported allegations?)
It’s clear enough that the only “sick personal needs” that are being addressed in this exchange are your own, and we both know it.
For what exactly?
As I said earlier — when I still thought it was a memoir — even a NOVEL would not normally presume to take such liberties as to hold that such a speech was delivered to the Yamit community when it wasn’t.
That’s why I didn’t use any in this discussion.
@ yamit82:
The picture does not help. I knew what he looked like; that’s WHY I asked the question.
From the angle shown in the clip, it could’ve been he.
Do you KNOW for a fact that it wasn’t?
@ yamit82:
I am going to ask the Lady, who wrote the book, if it is that your blue eyes are legendary.
honeybee Said:
That too.
yamit82 Said:
The smell of Vaseline???????????
@ honeybee:
Yea, I guess you’re right… 😉
yamit82 Said:
But, Sugar Darlin, don’t you live in Dimona ??????? Just those atomic blue eyes of yours alone are enough to set of” sky rockets in the afternoon” in Dimona !!!!!!!!!!
honeybee Said:
Yea, guess I’m in what they call the eye of the storm.
Nothing exciting ever happens in Dimona, YAWN !!!! 🙁
@ yamit82:
Are you safe from the rockets??????????
Yamit Last day
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvFYYWLnDDk
honeybee Said:
Now hopefully a response will be forth coming.
@ yamit82:
” Neither a borrower or a lender be”.
@ pschieber:
Congratulations on your book!!!!
P.S I still have your butcher-block table, Mel’s telescope.
bernard ross Said:
Amen, I was horrified watching the IDF , young Jewish men, attacking the settlers.
Where is that very force wills used when it come to the kidnapped schoolboys?????
bernard ross Said:
When I first posted this question at number 1 it was merely to determine a fact and not a judgement. The book was obviously NOT non fiction
Both the Begin quotation, Ted’s article, Yamit’s chronology have demonstrated to me that there is an ongoing betrayal of
successive US govs and of successive Israeli govs.
If the Israeli gov had decided to change mid stream because they suddenly decided it was worth a peace deal then they had a moral obligation to deal with the yamit residents in an honest manner on ALL levels:
1- they should not have employed their usual deceptive tactics of media disinformation that delegitimizes and scandalizes the settlers in order to turn public opinion against them.
2- they should have recognized the residents as FULL PATRIOTS OF ISRAEL WHO HAD ANSWERED THE CALL OF THEIR NATION!
3- They should have come to these patriots with their hats in their hands, eating humble pie, for springing this turnaround on them at the same time accepting all blame and responsibility for any damages.
4- They should have offered compensations of multiple times the “value” of the real estate as recognition of the PATRIOTS role on behalf of the state of Israel and of their suffering for the state of Israel.
Instead the Israeli gov. operates like a bunch of serial, chronic SCHNORERS using the most despicable tactics of defamation towards these PATRIOTS.
Today these SCHNORERS are engaged in the same deceptive defamation practices and evade their responsibility.
Much more than the turnaround of policy, which is ugly enough, is the complete crooked schnorer tactics employed against these innocent patriots who answered the call of the Jewish state and the Jewish people.
I have not been burned like this but spending a few years on Israpundit and being exposed to the seedy underside of Israeli govs and leaders has left me with an empty feeling.
honeybee Said:
It is difficult to reconcile with ones tribe or family in circumstances like these. These are more than political actions done with honesty, these are disloyalties, betrayals, deceptions and these same behaviors continue today
I believe that these betrayals and disloyalties, whether from left, right, religious, Israeli or diaspora are rotting away the glue that holds together the jewish people. BB’s recent speech asking the Jewish media to combat anti semitism NEVER ONCE mentioned the greatest contributing cause to the latest form: the canard of illegal or illegitimate Jewish settlement in the land of Israel. BB asks for help to combat anti semitism but withholds the biggest tool: the TRUTH! How can the diaspora counter these lies when the GOI never counters them and by its omission allows the anti semitism to fester and grow. The truth must be proclaimed and taught to all Jews and the GOI must lead this campaign.
the Jews have contracted a case of fleas whether from lying down with dogs or from elsewhere.
Yamit82 is right begin should have told us but he didn’t. My book was fiction based on time and place. And I wasn’t an idealist, but I was a lost soul. yamit82:
@ Ted Belman:
I would like to defend myself and I thank both Ted and Yamit82. Love and Betrayal is a novel. I purposely didn’t write a memoir. My nephew asked about the handsome doctor love interest and I told him the same thing.
yamit82 Said:
Don’t give up you’re day job !!!!!!!!!! Sugar
dweller Said:
Racist expletives are not in order or germane to this discussion.
@ dweller:
A click of your mouse would have shown you this: http://www.amazon.com/Love-Betrayal-Pamela-Schieber/dp/1475979398#reader_1475979398 Rendering your criticism as stupid, and argumentative for your own sick personal needs. I think you should apologize. 😛
dweller Said:
The Book is fiction set against a real historical background and some events.
Since when do the details in any fictional account need to be all true and factual?
It’s not a non fictional book.
Since when in a fictional or semi-fictional work must the author conform to events without injecting any artistic license in the way she tells her story?????
You are prone to always confuse history and fiction, real historical characters from mythical ones and take literally most of what any 5 year old would acknowledge as allegory and metaphor.
No dweller, there is no real Santa Claus, no Easter Bunny or this guy: but there might have been a real Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck. I realize that in demented minds some might find it hard to tell the difference.
dweller Said:
Nope!!!!
dweller Said:
Nope!!!!
@ yamit82:
Was that Elyakim Ha’etzni at 2:11?
@ yamit82:
Paying, perhaps, for his myopia.
Paying, perhaps, for his letting hope & desire overcome his prudence & patience.
Paying, perhaps, for the fact that he’d never played as much poker as he’d played chess.
But paying for ‘weakness’? ‘betrayal’? or ‘perfidy’?
Don’t think so.
“Weakness, betrayal, and perfidy” are ALWAYS your stock evaluation of any leader who doesn’t come across for you. Life is typically more textured than that, even at the top of the heap.
He neither looks NOR sounds like a ‘supplicant’; let alone, a ‘pathetic’ one. Quite the contrary, he comes across as poised, grounded, and confident — and substantially MORE so than either of the two nervous stick figures to his right.
You may wish to argue that, under the circumstances, Begin SHOULDN’T have been so composed. (And I might even agree with you in that regard.) But the fact is that in the clip as shown, the PM does not come off as anything remotely approximating a ‘supplicant.’ No way.
@ yamit82:
Why don’t YOU stuff it? What I said was right on the money.
Don’t need help in calling a spade “a spade.”
No; actually I’ve no idea what you’re talking about. Suppose you tell me
— right after you climb down off of your hobby horse; it’s obviously making you dizzy up there.
@ Ted Belman:
I acknowledged that.
However, the truth & reality which her words did NOT reflect is the fantasy that he delivered that ‘speech’ to the residents of Yamit.
He didn’t. Never happened.
@ yamit82:
A terrible cruel loss and a great betrayal for nothing in return. When Sharon destroyed Gaza my neighbor could not understand why Jews would do this to their own. I only stood mute.
honeybee Said:
No.
Yamit would have become the crown Jewel in terms of Location, climate and modern Urban planning. No internal vehicular traffic, parking in each section outside of the internal communal living areas. All infrastructure like telephone and electric lines underground including central cables for radio and TV. Nothing above ground to spoil the view or appearance.
Yamit was less than a 100 yards from the beach with the most beautiful pristine white sand and unpolluted med Sea. Between Yamit and the Sea were groves of date Palms.
FOLLOWING IS a short chronology of the founding and demolition of Yamit:
December 1972 — Moshe Dayan says Yamit is necessary to put a wedge between the populated area of the Gaza ***** and the Sinai Peninsula.
“When we dsit down at the peace table with the Arabs, we must bear in mind with whom we are dealing,” he says.
May 1974 — Foundations laid for first permanent housing units in town. Plans call for eventual population of 250,000.
October 1974 — Defense minister Shimon Peres: Ministry will provide jobs for Yamit settlers.
September 1975 — First residents move into Yamit.
March 1976 — First birth, a girl, named Yamit.
November 1976 — Prime minister Yitzhak Rabin: “Yamit must be absorbed into the borders of the State of Israel in order tensure defensible boundaries.”
July 1977 — Yamit has 1,000 residents.
November 1977 — Egyptian president Anwar Sadat flies to Jerusalem, addresses the Knesset.
December 1977 — Peace talks begin between Israel and Egypt. Talk of giving Sinai back to Egypt begins.
January 1978 — Public opinion builds that Yamit should not stand in the way of peace. New settlements started to beef up Jewish presence before peace deal. Absorption minister David Levy: “Yamit… will never be abandoned by the Israeli government.”
September 17, 1978 — Camp David Accords call for giving Sinai back to Egypt. Yamit residents begin protests against giveback. Others wait thear what compensation packages will be offered for leaving.
March 1979 — Despair over turnover to Egypt; Yamit businesses slump, but residents can’t leave for risk of losing compensation benefits. Resident Haim Feifel: “We came here to build a city, not watch a town die.”
August 1979 — Construction minister David Levy says Yamit residents should move to new neighborhood in Ashdod.
October 1981 — Yamit’s sixth anniversary draws local residents, no government officials.
March 1982 — National poll shows 59 percent favor evacuating Yamit. Settler activists begin moving to town, but predictions of massive turnouts don’t occur. In the end, about 200 hard-core activists, most not from town, are in Yamit at the end.
April 1982 — Last residents leave with sadness and bitterness. Resident Lucy Brenner: “Who came to Yamit? People who wanted to build a new, to change their lives. People who wanted to work. That gives character to a city. We built a new society, a young society, a good society. There were Yemenites and Russians and everything else. There were the religious and the secular. If only I could tell you what Eretz Yisrael has lost here.”
Demolition of Yamit approved by prime minister Menachem Begin at the recommendation of Ariel Sharon.
Mid-April 1982 — Students and a few families are the last holdouts. About 200 soldiers clash with 200 protesters barricaded on roofs. Protesters use bags of sand. Firefighters use foam sprays. Gunshots fired over protesters’ heads. Troops fight protesters with clubs. Some soldiers receive injuries requiring hospitalization.
Protester: “Our message is that you cannot lightly give up a piece of earth you have redeemed and made flourish, even if this means a confrontation with soldiers, in other words, a confrontation with ourselves.”
Sharon: “The ruins of Yamit will bear eternal proof that we have done over and above human imagination to meet (our obligations) under the peace treaty so that our children will not point an accusing finger at us and tell us we have missed the opportunity. No Arab army has succeeded — and never will succeed — in demolishing an Israeli town. Only we, with our own hands, were forced to destroy Yamit. We were compelled to erase her from the face of the earth to implement the peace agreement on time without spilling Jewish blood.”
April 23, 1982 — Demolition of Yamit completed.
@ yamit82:
Was that you’re home and family? A beautiful city, looks like Roswell, NM. I can understand your anger.
the phoenix Said:
Don’t try to justify your own ideological shortcomings in the failures of others.
Would Moses Make Aliyah Today?
50 Reasons to Make Aliyah
The Question for all Jews today is:
“Are we to be numbered with he weak majority, or with the stalwart minority?”
– Cecil Roth, A History of the Jews
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0eVMfNQskWc
See photo taken by air of Yamit before it was depopulated and wrecked (Ethnically cleansed) by Begin (Spit)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/he/3/36/Yamit.jpg
Listen to this pathetic Kike supplicant.
My stomach still churns and my bile burns when ever I hear or see his voice or image.
We are paying even today for his Weakness betrayal and perfidy. My his soul rot for all eternity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SYkIAnf_bzM
@ Ted Belman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtKtECW2sZ4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VvjO760tgz4
@ Ted Belman:
Herein lies the problem, I believe, Ted.
I believe that there are not too many things in life worse than actually the feeling of being BETRAYED by the very one(s) whom it would be unthinkable to even consider that such an act would be possible. A the time, you, yourself, had ‘other considerations that kept you in Toronto’.
Easily understood.
Yet, a point in time came , when the balance tipped and you made Aliyah.
We all have our own personal circumstances that keep us or move us.
I understand Pamela schreiber’s return to the U.S. very well.
She came as an idealist, only to realize that she was kind of chasing a mirage.
Posting all the threads in your blog and LIVING right there where everything ‘happens’, I am sure you are feeling this sense of ‘betrayal’ by the government, coupled with disbelief in what Jews can and DO to other Jews….
I know I would feel as disillusioned as Pamela.
How do you deal with this, if I may ask…
dweller Said:
Stuff it Barbie where the sun don’t shine. You need help…You should call the hot line. You know the one.
“In it she quotes a speech from PM Begin to the residents of Yamit:”
Begin defends Camp David Accords to critics
Pretty much all that Pam attributes to Begin is either a direct quote taken from his interviews, many speeches and what others attributed to him in private. It’s not too far of a stretch to consider her version to a fairly accurate description of what Begin would have said to Yamit residents. The truth is he never spoke with us as a community or to our residents representatives after returning to Israel from Camp David. That piece of shit never had the guts to face us in person.
Here are excerpts from:
Defending the Holy Land: A Critical Analysis of Israel’s Security & Foreign …
By Zeev Maoz Pages 435-441
A Gamble for Peace – Negotiating the Camp David Accords
@ dweller:
You are too hard on her. Yes she put words in Begin’s mouth but the words were intended to reflect truth and reality.
Translation:
She lied, she created a ‘Begin speech’ out of whole cloth.
She could have simply said, ‘this is what I believe to be the rationale for happened, and here’s how I arrived at these conclusions: . . . .’
Instead she falsely augmented her own credibility by deliberately concocting a phantom speech which she proceeded to place in the PM’s mouth.
And she explains this away as “creative license”?
— Even a historical novelist wouldn’t have had such presumption, such brass-bound gall.
There is no record of the speech. Pamela simply imagined what he might have said based on her research.
Ted, are you saying that NONE of that quoted Begin speech actually happened?