This is believable for me. Remember that a few weeks ago UTJ amended its platform to allow for removal of some settlements and I suggested that Bibi must have asked them to. I believe that Bibi wants to be able to cut a deal with Abbas, or at least to offer one, where Israel keeps all the settlement blocs and E1 and gives up on much of the rest. Since that has no chance of being accepted, I am concerned that Bibi will show good faith by abandoning some settlements in advance. God forbid.
Representatives of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told Chairman Yair Lapid of the Yesh Atid party, Thursday, that if he agrees to join the government without Habayit Hayehudi (Jewish Home-New National Religious Party), he will get progress in diplomatic talks, according to sources involved in coalition talks, cited Friday by the Yediot Acharonot daily. Lapid and Chairman Naftali Bennett of Habayit Hayehudi have said that the coalition must take both parties or neither one of them.
Representatives of Likud-Beyteinu told Yesh Atid representatives, “You have to give up Bennett, because [until] then we cannot advance the peace process and evacuate communities [in Judea and Samaria (Shomron) -ed].” Referring to the fact that Habayit Hayehudi is not yet in the government, the Yesh Atid representatives responded by asking, “Have you evacuated communities until now?”
Ted Belman
Sources in Yesh Atid told Maariv Likud promised to tear down Jewish communities in coalition deal.
Sources in Yesh Atid told Maariv’s Ze’ev Kam that Likud promised the party’s representatives to tear down Jewish communities in Israel’s Biblical heartland if Yesh Atid joins its coalition independently of Bayit Yehudi.
The Likud negotiators reportedly gave “a promise that the next government would act forcefully to tear down isolated communities in Judea and Samaria.” However, they said, Yesh Atid would have to abandon its pact with Bayit Yehudi and join the government without the religious Zionist party.
Likud denied the report.
“It’s a complete lie,” Likud sources were quoted as telling Maariv. “It never happened. No excuse can explain why the Bayit Yehudi has refrained thus far from joining a government with a majority for the nationalist camp. This contradicts what they promised their voters – that they would strengthen Likud from the right.”
If the report is true, it would confirm Bayit Yehudi’s contention, that Likud wants a coalition with leftists and hareidim, and only the agreement between Yesh Atid and Bayit Yehudi not to enter a coalition independently is preventing that from happening.
The report is also carried by Yediot Aharonot, which quotes “elements involved in the negotiations” as saying that the deal was placed on the table in Thursday’s meeting between the ruling Likud and Yesh Atid, a leftist-centrist party headed by Yair Lapid, a former television anchorman and columnist for Yediot.
“You need to give up Bennett, because otherwise we will not be able to advance a diplomatic process and evict communities,” the negotiators reportedly said.
C.R. Said:
Immigration of unskilled labor served the purpose of providing competiton to american labor and thus keeping US labor costs down giving more profits to business owners. Now immigration also serves political purposes: demcrats looking for votes from the poor and the Republicans get votes from the original cuban immigrations.
C.R. Said:
I think this depends on your perspective. many in the world view the US as an imposing bully meddling in everyones affairs.
C.R. Said:
What was your support for this statement?
@ yamit82:
Actually the Europeans who became Americans–were and are the legitimate owners of the land–notwithstanding the legitimate place of the Indian who were genocidally removed by some, but not the majority.
The world has been greatly blessed by America–more so than any other nation in human history; this would never have happened with the Indian or the Mexican.
Manifest Destiny–was not a Christian concept–but rather a political concept.
There is no such thing as historical payback.
The hoards of evil Mexicans coming into America–are doing so because of the Marxist democrat party’s desire for voters who are stupid and immoral enough to vote for them.
Your foolish remarks about Marxism–show an ignorance of just how much harm has been done in the world by Marxism, specifically America, Europe and in Israel; much of the anti-Semitism, the sexual immorality, the embracing of Muslims with the mass immigration of Muslims into Europe and now America and so much more–is a direct result of Cultural Marxism!
@ C.R.:
One thing is for sure you Gringos were never the legitimate owners of the lands. Christian concept of manifest Destiny,(Empire) superior technology and overwhelming firepower and brutality made it right! The American way? One might say all those Mexicans crossing the border is only historical payback and a kind of belated Justice. Aprender a hablar español. I wonder how many of them are Marxists? Naw!!! 🙂
@ yamit82:
This is a faulty analogy and very much untrue as the Catholic Mexicans were never in legitimate possession of the land.
A lot of pointless arguments here. The bottom line is, God gave Israel to the Jewish nation and the murdering Muslim Arab dogs have no legitimate place in Israel!
The Jews are a separate entity (different planet). What everybody may do, is not permitted to the Jews who consider themselves and are considered by others to be “different”!
We pay a double price. We cannot allow others to decide for us.
@ yamit82:
Spanish conquerors stole Mexico from the Aztecs.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Apply your fairness principles to the American Indian.
After doing that, what should be the result?
Apply your fairness Principles to Mexicans after America stole most of what are Lands from Texas to California?
Why should we listen to the advice of those who today are enjoying the fruits of their country’s perfidy much worse than anything they accuse we Jews of doing to those poor vermin you cal Palis?
my comment 9 to curious american in moderation, i have no idea why
CuriousAmerican Said:
this article is about Jews and you are trying to re focus discussion on arabs. I dont care about the arabs. when they care about the jews i will care about them. they would push jews into the sea and not even provide a boat to escape. I would bus them all to the border, providing transportation, which is more than the Jews in arab lands got. I would not spend an ounce of energy on them because the jews need that focus, time and energy spent on them. The whole muslim and arab world is focused on their needs, the whole of the west is focused on their needs, they are focused on their needs: What the hell is wrong with the Jews?
The most important thing is to settle jews in YS, if this is done the arab problem will naturally disappear. When Israel stops trying to please everyone else and focuses on the Jews then everything else will flow theerfrom naturally. I am tired of the red herrings used to distract Jews from themselves.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_demolition_in_the_Israeli%E2%80%93Palestinian_conflict#Statistics_for_Jerusalem
I consider demolition the same process. Demolishing a house is effectually evicting someone from the house.
That being said: You know I am not in favor of a two-state solution.
But evictions over legalities are being used to assist Israel’s claim to all of Jerusalem.
My solution is to claim all of Jerusalem for Israel, but let the Arabs have permits.
What I consider Arab land is Arab private property and commonly held municipal farmlands in Arab villages.
I do NOT consider anything West of the Jordan under Arab sovereignty, but the Arabs should have reasonable access to permits even in Areas B&C.
Arabs are regularly refused permits. Therir master plans are denied. This encourages illegal building. Jewish illegal building is often backward approved.
I am not opposed to a unified Israel, but the permit issue has to be dealt with fairly. I provided a link to the Wikipedia article.
CuriousAmerican Said:
Substantiate both parts of this quote. What studies do you have that affirms this. Arabs are only evicted from homes that were built illegally and for which demolition orders have been given. But for the last two years even this has not been happening.
What do you consider “Arab land” and why?
This discussion about this eviction or that eviction of Jews is all sheep dip.
We all know two things:
A) That Israel does NOT evict Jews at the rate that it evicts Arabs; nowhere near the same. Arab land is confiscated all the time.
B) That the two-state solution is dead; if it was ever seriously entertained, which I doubt. Personally I think it was a delaying tactic, which allowed Jewish settlements to expand, under less criticism, because the official line was that they were negotiating.
The minimum that Arabs would accept is more than Israel could give. For ex: Israel would never have surrendered the riparian control of water on the Arab side of the Green Line. The Arabs could not have agreed to forego water. The Arabs would have been impelled to refuse, and then Israel could claim – a bit disingenuously – that the Arabs were being difficult.
Israel had no intention of surrending anything of importance to the Arabs. They wanted to be able to cut off electricity, water, media, phones, etc. should the Arabs get difficult. The Arabs could not accept that. Israel would never surrender control of any portion of Judea and Samaria. Independence means Israel would have to surrender control. It was never going to happen.
So this is a straw man. We all know that much weeping, crying about surrending to Arab pressure – which almost never really happens as a rule – talking about Kadosh HaEretz, and in the end the Jews will stay. I suspect half of it is to put on show about how the Israeli Jews are suffering with the intent of influencing the press.
I am not in favor of a two state solution. It will not work. Neither side (Israeli or Arab) is willing to make the concessions necessary to make it work. Israel will NOT give open borders to a Palestinian state; and the Arabs will NOT surrender the right of return to Palestinians.
I just advocate one or two things:
A) Israel starts the process of enfranchising those Arabs in Judea and Samaria. You can implement a national service requirement, and a sixth grade level facility in Hebrew. They can be required to declare to Israel. Not necessarily to a Jewish state.
Caroline Glick has noted that enfranchising the Arabs would still leave a Jewish majority in Israel.
B) OR IF THIS IS NOT ACCEPTABLE – pay them to move as Moshe Feiglin suggested. Probably South America since Arab states will not accept them. Is MK Feiglin anti-semitic for offering to pay them (Click Here)?
My position is not hostile to Israel. I am not opposed to Israel keeping her patrimony.
But if you want to annex the land, you have to deal with the Arabs on it.
It is that simple.
It is cheaper than war.
I know many of you want blood. I know most here would prefer to ethnically cleanse the Arabs.
But why not choose a win-win for everybody rather than war.
Likud is every bit the unprincipled sell-outs the Republicans are.
Shy Guy Said:
I agree with him re: Pollard.
I don’t agree with him re: IDF and Haredim.
I agree with his position re: Ultimate aims of the Palis but not that it’s a Tempest in a Teapot and that nothing will come of it.
It’s the difference between understanding what is strategic and what is tactical. Ignoring the tactical and not answering the tactical challenges properly and in a timely manner advances the Palis and the other enemies of Israel and the Jews that much closer to their goals. with the concurrent unnecessary pain and anguish we impose on our own.
Pollard and the End of Days
“The sages state that there will be no son of David “until the petty government has ceased from Israel,” until the arrogant, the idol worshippers, hypocrites and idolatrous judges [gazirpatai] will disappear.” Until that happens, “distress shall come like a river.” “If you see a generation upon which numerous troubles come like a river, expect the messiah” (Sanhedrin 98a on Isaiah 59).”
“A war of complete independence remains to be fought. The sages state, “if the Jewish people repent they will be redeemed” and if they do not repent on their own, since the Eternal One has vowed that He will redeem them and never annul His covenant with them “He will appoint over them a king whose decrees are as Haman’s and the Jewish people then will repent” (Sanhedrin 97a).”
“the face of the generation will be like the face of a dog,” shameless, insolent and brazen, particularly its leaders, the very situation Moshiach comes to rectify.”
NormanF Said:
Get serious!
More here on why Naftali Bennett chose to team up with Yair Lapid:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/165771#.UTCCGICRaF4
The bottom line is Netanyahu cannot be trusted to either advance social reforms or to safeguard the Land Of Israel. The only way to protect Zionism from the Left and the haredim was for Bayit Yehudit and Yesh Atid to form a solid bloc. This way their mutual interests are protected in a future government. This is exactly what Netanyahu has sought to thwart.
Bayit Yehudi will not be party to another Wye or a repeat of the disastrous Disengagement.
If this is the path Netanyahu intends to follow, it will sit proudly in the opposition.
The Likud can form a government of the Left and the haredim if this is what it really wants.
That is its affair.