Shalom

[Dan Ben Noah]

Shalom

[Secularbeliever]

I have to admit that I was wrong about Bibi.  I did not expect greatness from him but expected him to be at least marginally better than Olmert or Livni.  I thought men like Begin, Yaalon and a woman like Hotoveli would push him in the right direction.  All have failed miserably.  They keep making huge concessions and then say they are not really as bad as they seem.  All credibility on that is destroyed when inspectors are out in droves invading the Jewish communities and fining anyone with a bulldozer.  I think the best thing would be to get the Arabs, Communists, and self hating Jews jacked up about Jews living on land formerly owned by Arabs in Jaffa, Tel Aviv, Haifa etc.  Let the left wing Jews understand that they will not be spared when the Jew haters have their night of long knives.

[Kahane-Was-Right BT]

I have to admit that I was wrong about Bibi.  I did not expect greatness from him but expected him to be at least marginally better than Olmert or Livni. 

This is the problem with so-called "secular Jewish nationalists" like Bibi, and Rabbi Kahane pointed out and lamented this problem in the national camp many years ago.   They will always bend with the wind and ready to compromise at the drop of a hat.   They don't have a real ideology.

[Secularbeliever]

I have to admit that I was wrong about Bibi.  I did not expect greatness from him but expected him to be at least marginally better than Olmert or Livni. 

This is the problem with so-called "secular Jewish nationalists" like Bibi, and Rabbi Kahane pointed out and lamented this problem in the national camp many years ago.   They will always bend with the wind and ready to compromise at the drop of a hat.   They don't have a real ideology.

Perhaps that is true, but have the religious parties really been any better?  Does Shas impress anyone?  They are always for sale to the highest bidder.  The leader of United Torah Judaism called for money for the people hurt by the building freeze.  What a jerk.  Is that the answer to pay Jews to give up the land of Israel?  Hershkowitz's party is a joke.  Only the National Union is worth anything and they have great religious people like Katzaleh as well as great secular people like Aryeh Eldad.  The Irgun, Lechi and of course the Haganah and Palmach were all led by secular people.

There are times when the secular people have provided the leadership and there are times for the religious people to do so.  I would love to see the religious leaders show greatness at this point.  Perhaps Feiglin, perhaps others.  In any case I think it is more important to have unity between secular and religious nationalists than to argue for one vs the other.

[Christian Zionist]

Chaim is right again:  The Israeli "right" is worse than the Israeli "left"

Netanyahu is positioning himself left of Rabin
By Ari Shavit
Tags: Israel news, Yitzhak Rabin

Benjamin Netanyahu made history twice. The first time was when he adopted the two-state solution in his Bar-Ilan speech, and the second was when he decided last week to freeze settlement construction. The Palestinians dismiss his steps and the Europeans say they're not enough. The skeptics are skeptical and the cynics are cynical. But the truth is that Netanyahu circa 2009 is situating himself to the left of Yitzhak Rabin circa 1995.

Unlike Rabin, Netanyahu now accepts the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian state. Unlike Rabin, he is issuing orders prohibiting construction throughout the Jewish West Bank. Netanyahu has crossed the Rubicon, on both ideological and practical levels, and reinvented himself as a centrist.

At the beginning of this decade, Ariel Sharon underwent a similar process, with the road map his equivalent of Netanyahu's Bar-Ilan speech. The road map expressed his support for the two-state concept, while insisting that essential basic conditions be fulfilled before the establishment of a Palestinian state.
   Advertisement
But a short time after accepting the road map, Sharon revealed that its trails led to a dead end. No Palestinians met the basic conditions, no Palestinians were capable of signing a final-status agreement, no Palestinians had the power to implement peace. When the father of the settlements finally came out in favor of dividing the land, it turned out that there were no Palestinian leaders likewise committed to dividing the land.

Thus was the disengagement born. Although Sharon was aware of its flaws, he realized that disengagement was the only plan of action a centrist Israeli leader could advance without a real partner for real peace.

Six years later, Netanyahu has reached the exact same point. He accepts the principle of two states, and receives no response. He suspends construction in the settlements, and is rejected. He courts Mahmoud Abbas, and is disparaged. The son of Ze'ev Jabotinsky's personal secretary wants a historic reconciliation with the Palestinians, and the Palestinians are slamming the door. He is offering the Palestinian national movement negotiations over the establishment of a Palestinian nation-state, and has found that there's no one to talk to and nothing to talk about. Zilch. A brick wall.

Few people are close to the prime minister, but among the few who are, some say he has indeed undergone a turnabout. Israel's might, not the settlements or the settlers, is his top priority. Therefore, had there been a proposal on the table assuring Israel's security in exchange for a painful withdrawal, Netanyahu would not hesitate. The tragedy is that there is no such offer - and no such table. Negotiations haven't even begun. Abbas isn't giving Netanyahu anything he can use to put the centrist worldview he has adopted into action.

Under such circumstances, Netanyahu has two options. One is Shaul Mofaz's plan: the establishment of a Palestinian state with temporary borders. The second is Disengagement II: the evacuation of about 20 West Bank settlements and their transfer to the Fayyad government. The Mofaz plan has major advantages, but it makes Netanyahu fear unlimited and unrestrained Palestinian sovereignty. This means he might be forced to seriously consider the other option. We can't rule out that in 2010 Netanyahu will find himself pushing a limited withdrawal, just as Sharon did in 2004 and 2005.

Disengagement II will have to be completely different from its predecessor. It will have to be coordinated with the Palestinian Authority and granted European support, and it will have to turn the evacuated area into an economic prosperity zone. It will need to prevent Palestinians from smuggling in weapons and increasing their military might, and must assure Israel's right to self-defense. Such a plan would have to be part of an overall strategic outlook that pushes both peoples toward peace through measured, circumspect and coordinated unilateral steps. A second disengagement would have to be an improved version of the first, a plan with a political dimension and an economic depth that would strengthen the moderates - Palestinians as well as Israelis.

If the prime minister dares to go forward with Disengagement II, things would be easier for Israel on all fronts. It would help Netanyahu in domestic politics, just as the first disengagement helped Sharon, and it would turn the prime minister into the new leader of the Israeli center.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1132436.html

[Irish Zionist]

Great video 5***** and on favourites. Btw how do you promote videos?

[Every Jew AK47]

The guy is good at getting laid, but he sucks at keeping promises. I am fed up with all the lying, cheating, Jew hating leaders that are running Israel.  Moshe Feiglin was Israel's only hope. I  am sad to say, but Israelis will have to suffer at the hands of muslims severly until they wake up and realize that the country is being runned by a bunch of buffoons who don't give a sH*t about the Jewish people.  The only thing Bibi cares about is his popularity, his mistresses and his pockets.   

This is disgusting!  When will Israel have a real leader?!!!!!  Time is drawing near!

[eb22]

Dan,    thanks to you and RCH with your efforts with this video.


Yesterday,   I came across an article that was disturbing on multiple fronts.      At least part of the article directly ties into Chaim's commentary and helps reinforce what he mentioned about the danger of Benjamin Netanyahu as Prime Minister of Israel.    I'll post the link to the article and highlight the part of the article that directly relates to Chaim's commentary.    If the poll in the article is even close to being a reflecting of reality,    it's alarming to read that 69 % of Israel's approve the way  Netanyahu handles security issues:   



http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1209/30442.html

Only 36% view Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as honest, but he's vastly preferred on the handling of security issues, with 69% of Israeli's approving of him in that area.


The surveys authors, who support robust Israeli and American engagement in the peace process, said in an analysis accompanying the poll’s findings that the numbers are encouraging, and that the responses leave Netanyahu room to maneuver toward peace, and Obama sufficient support to demand it.


“When presented with a comprehensive American final status proposal that the U.S. asks Israelis and Palestinians to sign – including a final border with land swaps, Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem becoming part of the new Palestinian state, and allowing some Palestinian refugees to live in Israel – a national referendum to ratify the agreement passes by 8 points (53 to 45 percent),” the analysis says.


“If Prime Minister Netanyahu were to reject this agreement, citing Israeli security concerns and the division of Jerusalem, the public is evenly divided (48 percent each) over whether to support or oppose the Prime Minister’s decision.”