PRESSURE MOUNTS TO RELEASE JONATHAN POLLARD BY: FERN SIDMAN The Voice of Israel government radio has reported that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu addressed the Knesset on Tuesday evening, January 4th at which time he publicly read the much anticipated missive that he has personally penned to President Barack Obama requesting the release of Jonathan Jay Pollard. A former United States Navy intelligence analyst, Pollard has been incarcerated in the U.S. for 25 years on charges stemming from the passage of classified information to Israel. Pollard is presently in deterioriating health in a North Carolina federal prison and an orchestrated campaign amongst his supporters is underway to seek his freedom. In an unprecedented public appeal to the United States requesting clemency for Pollard, Prime Minister Netanyahu became the first prime minister to formally and publicly request his release. "Since Jonathan Pollard has now spent 25 years in prison, I believe that a new request for clemency is highly appropriate," Netanyahu wrote Obama in the letter. "I know that the United States is a country based on fairness, justice and mercy. For all these reasons, I respectfully ask that you favorably consider this request for clemency. The people of Israel will be eternally grateful." In the letter, Netanyahu apologized for using an agent to spy on the United States and pledged that it would never happen again. "Israel's actions were wrong and totally unacceptable," he wrote. Netanyahu has made previous attempts to trade Pollard for pliancy in Middle East peace negotiations, in the hope that his release would appease conservatives in the Israeli government. He also made Pollard's case a bargaining point with the Palestinians at the Wye Plantation talks in 1998. Most recently, in September of 2010, Israeli officials tried to float a deal in which they would extend a temporary moratorium on settlement construction in Judea and Samaria, a Palestinian condition for negotiations, in exchange for the release of Pollard. "Israel will continue to abide by its commitment that such wrongful actions will never be repeated", said Netanyahu. In a personal message to Pollard, Netanyahu then added in his speech that he should "continue to be strong," and told him that the entire nation was behind him and vowed that "you will be here soon." Opposition leader Tzipi Livni called the Pollard case "perhaps only the issue that everyone here in the Knesset could agree on." Previously, Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin had sent a letter from the Knesset to U.S. President Barack Obama, Congress, and the U.S. Attorney General, pleading for the release of Jonathan Pollard.The letter was signed by a leader in every party except for those known as Arab parties, representing a total of 109 out of the 120 Knesset Members. In dispatching the letter, Rivlin stated that it represents the opinion of the overwhelming majority of the Israeli public in supporting Pollard’s urgent release. “As Speaker of the Knesset,” he wrote in an introductory note, “I see it as my obligation to bring this letter to your attention.” Pollard recently made a personal request for a public appeal for his release. The request was relayed in writing by Mr. Pollard’s wife, Esther, who personally met with Mr. Netanyahu on Monday. The prime minister’s office said he made the decision after a series of talks and contacts with senior administration officials in recent months. Accompanying Mrs. Pollard to the meeting held on Monday with Netanyahu was Lawrence J. Korb, assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration, and who supports clemency for Pollard. Mr. Korb told reporters that he had told the prime minister that to “get the ball rolling" he advised Netanyahu to ask for Mr. Pollard’s release publicly and “not as a quid pro quo, but as a matter of justice.” In addition, Mr. Korb said, Israel should acknowledge that it was wrong to have recruited a spy against its closest ally and should say that it is willing to cooperate fully with the Americans to bring the chapter to a close. Meanwhile, in the US, officials continued to come out on Tuesday with statements calling for Pollard's release. Donald Levy, a former US Navy cryptologist who participated in the damage assessment of Pollard's purported espionage, added his name to the long list of senators, congressmen and senior American officials urging Obama to commute Pollard's sentence. "There was nothing to indicate that Pollard gave information to any country but Israel," Levy said. "Further, the information consisted primarily of daily operational intelligence summaries, information that is extremely perishable. It did not appear that the information he gave Israel should have resulted in a life sentence." According to a December 22nd article by Lee Rennert that appeared on the American Thinker web site, he asserts that Pollard has been "the victim of a CIA cover-up of a massive intelligence failure, with the agency blaming Pollard for the damage caused by a real "mole" inside the CIA who passed to Moscow the names of more than a dozen U.S. informants in the Soviet Union -- namely Aldrich Ames, the head of CIA's Soviet-Eastern Europe division, who fingered Pollard to keep the CIA from discovering his own treachery. The CIA did not discover Ames' role until well after Pollard was behind bars and it still isn't willing to acknowledge its mistake in blaming Pollard for Ames's crimes." The genesis of the Pollard imbroglio began in 1983, when Pollard who based in Washington, DC at the time, discovered that information vital to Israel’s security was being deliberately withheld by certain elements within the US national security establishment. Israel was legally entitled to this security information according to a 1983 Memorandum of Understanding between the two countries. The information being withheld from Israel included Syrian, Iraqi, Libyan and Iranian nuclear, chemical and biological warfare capabilities - being developed for use against Israel. It also included information on ballistic missile development by these countries and information on planned terrorist attacks against Israeli civilian targets. When Pollard questioned his superiors as to why this information was not being disclosed to Israel as had been promised he was told to mind his business. Subsequently, he learned that the objective of suppressing this information to Israel was to severely curtail Israel’s ability to act independently in defense of her own enemies. Pollard did everything in his power to have the legal flow of information to Israel restored. When his efforts met no success, he began to give the information to Israel directly. Pollard was an ideologue, not a mercenary. The FBI concluded after nine months of polygraphing that Pollard acted for ideological reasons only, not for profit. This fact was recognized by the sentencing judge who declined to fine Pollard.In 1985, Jonathan Pollard was arrested by the FBI but was never afforded a trial. At the request of both the US and Israeli governments, he entered into a plea agreement, which spared both governments a long, difficult, expensive and potentially embarrassing trial. Pollard fulfilled his end of the plea agreement, cooperating fully with the prosecution. Nevertheless, Pollard received a life sentence and a recommendation that he never be paroled - in complete violation of the plea agreement he had reached with the government. Pollard was never indicted for harming the United States, nor was he indicted for compromising codes, agents or war plans and he was never charged with treason. He was indicted on only one charge of passing classified information to an ally without intent to harm the United States. A broad-based interfaith coalition comprised of more than 500 members of the clergy and community leaders also sent a letter to Obama on Tuesday, January 4th in which they called for Pollard's release.The signatories on the letter include prominent religious and communal leaders from a wide array of Christian and Jewish communities, including representatives of Alliance for Jewish Renewal, American Values, Amit, Association of Reform Zionists of America, B'nai B'rith International, Central Conference of American Rabbis, Christians United for Israel, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, EMUNAH of America, Florida Council of Churches, Hebrew Union College, Hillel, JCC's of North America, Jewish Women International, National Council of Young Israel, New York Board of Rabbis, ORT America, Inc., Orthodox Union, Rabbinical Council of America, Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, Religious Zionists of America-Mizrachi, Simon Wiesenthal Center, Union for Reform Judaism, Yeshiva University, and the Zionist Organization of America.
 Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon's dressing down of the Turkish ambassador in Jerusalem last week was in the air but not directly referred to during Defense Minister Ehud Barak's time in Ankara on Sunday. Instead, the 12-hour visit was characterized by pleasantries and long conversations, in a clear attempt by both countries to broadcast that the past was behind them. The Turks viewBarak as someone they can work with and believe that he can have the impact on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu that they are hoping for. The Turkish media highlighted this point by making a distinction between Barak, whom they described as the leader of the left-wing Labor Party, and Ayalon, who, some papers wrote, was a member of the "far-right" Israel Beiteinu Party. The last time Barak visited Ankara was in February 2008, the same day that Hizbullah military commander Imad Mughniyeh was assassinated in Damascus, an operation attributed by some to the Mossad. The killing came half a year after Israel bombed a nuclear reactor in northwest Syria. Then, Israeli-Syrian relations were at an all-time low. Soon after, though, Jerusalem and Damascus launched indirect peace talks with Turkish mediation. Barak's visit at the time likely had something to do with that. On Sunday, Barak's hosts pressed him on the Syrian issue, identifying him correctly as the Israeli cabinet member most supportive of peace talks. Whether or not such negotiations will take place is not up to Barak, though. Netanyahu will have to decide. Barak was trailed throughout his visit by a crowd of Turkish press. At the airport, journalists and cameramen lined the runway with satellite hookups reporting his arrival live. At the mausoleum of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, he was again met by a pool of reporters. After the minister laid a wreath on the tomb of the republic's first president, and as he signed the visitors' book with a plea for a "safe and secure region," one ofBarak's senior advisers marveled at the size and grandeur of the monument while noting what a great leader Atatürk was. Israel will likely have to keep on hoping for a new secular leader like Atatürk. While Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's Islamic party is predicted to get only 33 percent of the vote in the 2011 elections - more than 10% less than his party received in 2005 - he is still likely to come out first and win a third term. Within the Turkish cabinet, there are believed to be a number of ministers favorable to Israel. Defense Minister Vecdi Gonul, Barak's official host on Sunday, who called the Israeli Embassy on Friday and asked how to translate some Turkish words into Hebrew, is perceived in Jerusalem as the "Israel lobbyist" in the Turkish government. He has tried over the past year, unsuccessfully, to restore warm and full diplomatic and military ties, one of the goals ofBarak's visit. His other meeting, with Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, lasted three-and-a-half-hours, more than double the time originally allotted. Davutoglu is the foreign policy architect within theTurkish cabinet, and is a close associate of Erdogan. Members of Barak's delegation said they believe Erdogan will tone down his criticism of Israel. While he is unlikely to begin supporting Israel, the officials said that the countries could maintain good working relations regardless. The Turkish dailies Sunday were filled with articles about Barak's visit. One column in Today's Zaman, an English-language paper affiliated with the Islamists, said that Israel could no longer rely on maintaining ties with Turkey just on adefense level, and could no longer depend on American-Jewish groups like AIPAC to influence the US Congress. Instead, the column recommended that Israel renew peace talks with Syria and work to improve the humanitarian situation in the Gaza Strip. The hope in Ankara is that Barak will be able to deliver the goods. This is also the understanding within Israel. As long as Erdogan is prime minister, the most Israel can hope for are lukewarm ties. "The moment there are peace talks, this will change," explained one Israeli official. The only question left is whether Netanyahu will agree to hold those talks. JPost 
 The failure of the six key powers at the UN to levy new sanctions on Iran was hailed on Monday by Iran as a sign of increased rationality in the discussion over its disputed nuclear program. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki told reporters in a press conference that the lack of a decision over new sanctions means that Iran can continue working with the international community to allay concerns over the program. Iran is "hopeful and ready to contribute to this rationality so that it will move in the right direction and reach the appropriate results," he said. Mottaki added that "we now observe narrow stripes of rationality" by the foreign powers over the nuclear issue. Iran argues that its nuclear program is aimed at creating a peaceful energy network to serve its growing population. The US and other nations believe the goal of theprogram is to create weapons. The five members of the security council - the US, Britain, France, China and Russia - as well as Germany met on Saturday, but could not agree on levying a fourth round ofsanctions on Iran. Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki delivers a speech at a conference on the Persian Gulf, in Teheran, Monday.
The United States and its Western allies have been pushing for the new sanctions. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Monday warned that Iran will face new sanctions if it doesn't change tune on its nuclear program. But Russia, and especially China, are skeptical of any new sanctions and have been holding out for further talks with Iran. As a result, the six powers have had to tread carefully to preserve a unified position. The US and its allies are concerned at Iran's lack of cooperation with the UN nuclear agency and with its response to a resolution adopted by the agency's board of governors on November 27 which demanded that Teheran immediately stop building a secret uranium enrichment plant in Qom and halt further enrichment efforts. The six nations are also concerned "at Iran's failure to take up the IAEA proposed agreement" to ship most of its uranium - up to 2,600 pounds (1,200 kilograms) - abroad. The uranium would then be enriched to higher levels in Russia, turned into fuel rods in France and returned to power a research reactor in Teheran that produces medical isotopes. The material in the fuel rods cannot be enriched to higher levels, denyingIran the ability to use it to make weapons. JPost
 Hamas and Hizbullah proclaim they will fight until Israel is destroyed, without causing an international furor.In spite of Israel's ongoing dialogue with the United States to search for the right formula for the resumption of talks, the position taken by the Obama administration, and the unfair pressure exerted by the European Union, have brought down the fragile structure which had previously made negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians possible. Though these negotiations did not bring about the desired peace, they did constitute an agreed channel for discussions between the two parties and brought about, for instance, the Olmert government's agreement to an American proposal to train Palestinian forces in Jordan under the supervision of Gen. Keith Dayton, thus paving the way for the creation of a regular Palestinian fighting force trained with Western methods. This was a major concession and a risky one. This force is intended to keep order in Judea and Samaria, but who is to say that it would not turn againstIsrael under different circumstances? Israel has shown a greater willingness in the past year to meet the Palestinians halfway, as exemplified by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's Bar-Ilan speech recognizing the two-state principle. Then there was the 10-month freeze on West Bank settlements. HOWEVER, BUOYED by US President Barack Obama's intense wooing of the Muslim world, the Palestinian Authority has chosen the opposite course, refusing to come back to the negotiation table and launching an all-out diplomatic, media and legal war against the Jewish state. The EU is ratcheting up the pressure, and has issued a declaration calling for a withdrawal to the 1967 borders and for Jerusalem to become the capital of both countries. This would, in effect, rendernegotiations useless by determining their outcome from the outset. It is as if the world has forgotten that Israel already made the most extraordinary concessions at Camp David and in Taba. Yasser Arafat not only turned down the Israeli proposals, he did not make any counter-proposition. The same scenario played out at Annapolis in 2008. According to a lengthy Al-Jazeera interview with Saeb Erekat on March 27, prime minister Ehud Olmert made even greater concessions, but that was not enough for PA President Mahmoud Abbas: He walked out when Olmert suggested a jointadministration of the Temple Mount. Erekat also said that when US president Bill Clinton told Arafat at Camp David that he would be the first president of a Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capital, but that he had to recognize the fact that vestigesof the Temple were buried under the Aksa Mosque and there would have to be joint administration of the Temple Mount, Arafat put an end to the negotiations. THERE WAS no Israeli denial following these revelations, and recent interviews by Abbas and Olmert support Erekat's version - though the latest round ofnegotiations carried out by Olmert and foreign minister Tzipi Livni enjoyed a degree of secrecy rarely seen here. As such, the extent of the concessions the two leaders had been ready to make was kept under wraps - perhaps for fear of the impact on the coming elections. That was a colossal miscalculation. The Knesset, the country and the world should have been told that the extremely generous terms offered to the Palestinians had been turned down, putting the blame squarely on Abbas. Such a step would have gone a long way to defuse the situation with Obama and his advisers. It seems that the new government led by Netanyahu had not been fully conversant with the details of the failednegotiations and was thus ill prepared to deal with the accusations leveled against it. Then came the Goldstone Report. The main message there is not so much the totally unfounded accusations of war crimes but an attempt to limit the extent to whichIsrael is "allowed" to use force to defend itself against terrorist organizations. Such a move was not totally unexpected coming from the UN, especially from the Committee on Human Rights, where Islamic and Arab countries have a decisive voice. What was not expected was that it would lead, for instance, to the White House asking for "clarifications" following a recent operation in Nablus. (In a confrontation with Israeli security forces, three terrorists who had murdered a father of seven were killed.) This demand, made at the request of the Palestinian Authority, constitutes a dangerous precedent. Coupled with the Goldstone Report, it tends to present a difficult dilemma to the government and to the security forces when contemplating military intervention. AT THE same time, terrorist organizations, at the behest of some Arab countries, will be able to keep attacking our citizens while sheltering behind their civilians, in hospitals, in schools and in mosques. Hamas and Hizbullah proclaim on every available channel that they will never recognizeIsrael and will fight until it has disappeared - without causing an international furor. In fact, Arab organizations, supported by leftist Western groups, are busy getting arrest warrants issued in European countries having relevant legislation against Israeli leaders and army officers for "war crimes," calling for boycotting Israeli products and demonstrating their support for Gaza. In each and every successive confrontation, Arab states and Palestinian movements have been defeated. Now they are seeking other ways to harassIsrael . They are waging an all-out media war to blacken its image and ultimately delegitimize its very existence. They are helped in this endeavor by hundreds of leftist organizations and civil society movements in the West. For them Israel is a neo-colonial power, as is the US. But Israel is easier prey because of its size and isolation. Anti-Semitism is also at work here. Palestinian and Arab media, with the full support of the Islamic establishment in Arab countries, use every anti-Semitic cliché in the book, and some of that leached into the West where it led to a renewal of classic European anti-Semitism. More at JPost
 ISRAEL will build a security fence along the length of its border with Egypt, stretching across the Sinai desert from the Red Sea to the Mediterranean Sea. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu approved the $500 million fence on Thursday with the aim of thwarting drugs and people-smuggling rackets that operate across the border. ''In the end, there will be no choice but to close off the state of Israel by a fence on all sides,'' Mr Netanyahu was quoted as telling his cabinet. ''The state has to be fenced off completely on all sides. Why? Because Israel is the only country in the First World to which people can walk on foot from Third World countries and Africa,'' Mr Netanyahu said. ''If we don't fence ourselves off, Israel will be flooded by hundreds of thousands of foreign workers and illegal residents,'' he said. Israel's borders with Syria and Lebanon are already sealed with fences and concrete walls and wire fences surround the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The border with Egypt however has been relatively porous. According to the new plan to seal the border, the barrier will consist of two parallel barbed-wire fences designed to delay anyone trying to cross it until the arrival of border police. The fences will be built along either side of a 180-kilometre stretch of natural barrier that separates Israel and Egypt. Radar systems and other detection devices will be installed along the border to warn of potential infiltrators, along with increased border patrols. Construction of the fence is expected to take about two years. Egyptian security officials were reported as saying that Israel had not notified Cairo of its plan to build a fence between the two countries. Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit was expected to issue a statement today. Meanwhile, violence around the Gaza Strip was escalating last night as Palestinian militants continued to fire mortar shells and home-made Qassam rockets at targets in southern Israel. Since last Friday, Palestinians have fired about 30 mortar shells and Qassam rockets into Israeli territory. All landed in open territory, causing no damage or injury. On Sunday, the Israeli air force attacked several targets in Gaza on Sunday, killing three Palestinian fighters believed to be members of the extremist Islamic Jihad group. The three were said to be engaged in preparations for firing a rocket or mortar shells at Israel. Islamic Jihad issued a statement claiming two of the operatives as its members. The third was believed to have been a member of Hamas. Israeli military officials said last night that Israel had spotted the Palestinians in the act of preparing to fire rockets at Israel. ''The air force spotted, in two different instances and just moments before launch, terrorist cells firing rockets and took advantage of that in order to attack,'' a military spokesman said. ''We have no intention of using restraint in response to launches of any kind. ''Any attempt to harm the civilians of the state of Israel or IDF troops will receive a clear response. They had better not think that we're blinking,'' the spokesman said. The Age H/T: J.R.
 Israeli officials on Sunday tried to downplay tensions looming with the United States after George Mitchell, the Obama administration's Middle East envoy, suggested in a PBS interview that the US could consider withholding support for loan guarantees for Israel. Israel's finance minister, Yuval Steinitz, said on Sunday that Israel has "no indication that there is any intention to pressure us through the guarantees ... only a few months ago we reached an agreement with the US treasury and state departments on the extension of their guarantees." However, he also said that Israel could do without the guarantees, if necessary. "We don't have to use those guarantees. We are doing very well without them," Mr. Steinitz said Sunday. He added in his comments that Israel late last year agreed with the US on the guarantees for 2010 and 2011, and no conditions were placed on Israel at that time.
Israeli Education Minister Gideon Sa'ar also addressed Mr. Mitchell's remark at Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday, saying that Israel would act in its own interests and not according to external pressures.
"The American administration knows that those who are holding up the negotiations are the Palestinians," said Sa'ar. "Israel made many concessions while the Palestinians didn't do a thing."
From the Israeli point of view, Netanyahu's offer of a ten-month freeze in settlement construction back in November was a peace-making gesture that has not been met by Palestinian willingness to come back to the negotiating table.
But from the Palestinian viewpoint, President Mahmoud Abbas is finally "standing up" to Western pressure to return to negotiations by insisting on a full moratorium on building of Israeli settlements, including in East Jerusalem.
The Palestinians see the eastern half of the city – under Jordanian control until 1967 -- as their future capital, but Israel annexed the territory and does not consider East Jerusalem neighborhoods as settlements. US backing for Israel's loan guarantees has been a hot issue in the past, most pointedly in the early 1990s when the administration of George H. W. Bush faced a head-on collision with the Likud premier, Yitzhak Shamir, who refused to curtail settlement building in the West Bank.
Ultimately, the Bush administration decided it would subtract equivalent amounts of money from the $10 billion in loan guarantees for every dollar Israel spent building settlements in the occupied territories. The outcome of the spat was a low-point in US-Israel relations.
"Theoretically of course, the withdrawal of loan guarantees could be an act of pressure, but Israel doesn’t really need loan guarantees," says Peter Medding, an expert on US-Israel relations at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. "But if they try to do it, as they did very unsuccessfully in the early 1990s, it would have to come from the White House. I don't think it's Obama's style, and I don't think it fits the circumstances.
If anything, they've been trying to persuade Abbas to come to the party, and are still waiting for him. " More at CSM
 By KHALED ABU TOAMEH Hardly a day passes when Mahmoud Abbas does not reiterate his refusal to return to the negotiating table with Israel unless certain conditions are fulfilled. This has been Abbas's position since US President Barack Obama entered office earlier this year. By setting conditions for resuming the peace talks, Abbas appears to have climbed a very high tree - one that he finds too difficult to climb down from. Abbas and his top aides point the finger of blame at Obama. They point out that almost immediately after he entered the White House, he demanded from Israel a freeze of settlement construction. In an interview published this week in the London-based Asharq al-Awsat, Abbas explained that he could not afford a situation in which Obama appears more Palestinian than the Palestinians. "Obama laid down the condition of halting the settlements completely," he noted. "What was I supposed to say to him? Should I say this is too much?" Responding to criticism that he had never made such a demand before Obama was elected, Abbas said, "Halting the settlements is the second article of the road map and it's something I want. At the end they blame me, and they say that the condition of halting settlement construction was not on offer during the negotiations with former prime minister Ehud Olmert. Bear in mind that at every meeting with Olmert, the issue of the settlements was discussed." ABBAS SEEMS to be more worried about his credibility than the construction in the settlements. In the past year, his standing among his constituents was severely undermined because of his policy of zigzagging. First, Abbas told the Palestinians that he would never meet with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu unless he recognized the two-state solution and halted all settlement construction in the West Bank. However, under pressure from Obama,Abbas was forced to sit with Netanyahu at UN headquarters in New York. Second, Abbas's failure to back a resolution endorsing the Goldstone report on Operation Cast Lead drew strong condemnations from many Palestinians, including some belonging to his Fatah faction. As the outcry in the PA territories and the Arab and Islamic countries intensified,Abbas rescinded his decision and decided to back the resolution that was brought before the UN Human Rights Council. But as far as his critics and enemies are concerned, it was too little and too late. Third, Abbas's frequent threats to resign or not run in a new election are no longer taken seriously, not even by some of his top advisers. As one aide put it, "Abbas has threatened to resign at least 40 times in the past few months alone." Abbas's empty threats and zigzagging have hurt his reputation so badly that now he's being forced to play tough with Israel and the US. To demonstrate this uncompromising approach, Abbas most recently came up with a new condition for resuming the talks: That Israel and the international community recognize beforehand the 1967 boundaries as the official and final borders of the future Palestinian state. Abbas's aides in Ramallah say that he needs a "major concession" from Israel before he returns to the negotiations. "President Abbas does not want to repeat the mistakes of the past," explained one aide. "If he succumbs and resumes the talks with Israel unconditionally, our people will throw him out." According to one of his advisers, Abbas has reached the conclusion that there's nothing to talk about with the Netanyahu government, especially when ministers like Avigdor Lieberman, Moshe Ya'alon and Bennie Begin are among the prime minister's inner circle. To support his argument that there's no peace partner inIsrael, Abbas shows visitors a copy of an article written by journalist Gideon Levy in Haaretz, entitled: "Netanyahu should admit Israel doesn't want peace." Abbas also appears to be very disappointed with the Obama administration, on which he was pinning high hopes in the beginning. The Palestinian leadership in Ramallah was seriously hoping that Obama would forceIsrael not only to freeze settlement construction, but to pull back to the pre-1967 borders, including the entire eastern part of Jerusalem. But now Abbas and his officials are accusing Obama of "caving in to pressure from the Jewish lobby" by endorsing Netanyahu's stance. In this regard, the PA officials say, Obama has shown that his policy toward the Middle East is almost the same as that of his predecessor, George W. Bush. Abbas is now hoping that the Europeans will counterbalance the US "bias" in favor of Israel by supporting the Palestinian leadership's demands. As one official put it, "The Americans can be on Israel's side, while the Europeans will be on our side. Let's turn it into a conflict between the Europeans and Americans." It's hard to predict Abbas's next move as the man has been anything but consistent in his statements.
Yet the question that many Palestinians have been asking themselves is not whether the talks withIsrael would be resumed or not, but if there's anything left to negotiate about.
And a growing number of Palestinians have long been wondering whether the man who is often referred to as the "governor of the West Bank," and whose term in office expired about a year ago, really has a mandate to negotiate on their behalf. JPost
 Israel's prime minister says he is traveling to Egypt this week to meet with President Hosni Mubarak. The declared objective of Tuesday's trip is to discuss Mideast peacemaking.
But Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is also expected to discuss negotiations to swap hundreds of Palestinians imprisoned in Israel for an Israeli soldier captured by Gaza militants in 2006. Egypt and Germany have been mediating those talks. Through the mediators, Israel has forwarded its latest proposal to Gaza's Islamic Hamas rulers. They have not responded. A Netanyahu ally quoted the Israeli leader as telling Cabinet ministers that "it's not clear there will be a deal." Netanyahu said the deadly shooting of an Israeli settler last week highlighted the risks of a deal. FoxNews
 The Lebanese Defense Minister has made official what Israel long has charged, saying that Hizbullah will help defend the country even though United Nations resolutions call for disarming the terrorist organization. Defense Minister Elias Murr told the official government National News Agency Tuesday, "The role of the army is to cooperate with the UNIFIL in order to implement the resolution 1701, which calls for disarming Hizbullah." Murr then added, “The Lebanese army will defend the country against any Israeli aggression, the resistance [Hizbullah] will do that too; everyone has the right to defend the country." His statement further entrenches Hizbullah as a dominant force in the government, in which it already holds two portfolios out of 30 and together with pro-Syrian allies has veto power over major Cabinet decisions. Murr’s declaration goes further than previous statements that Lebanon will allow Hizbullah to remain armed, a foregone conclusion since UNIFIL officers said at the outset of the ceasefire resolution in 2006 that they would not carry out the mandate to disarm the terrorist group. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu warned last month that Hizbullah in effect is Lebanon’s army, stating that "the Lebanese government and Hizbullah are becoming interwoven in each other.” The government has a diplomatic excuse for ostensibly defying the U.N. resolution, which forbids arms to all "foreign armies” not authorized by the government. Formally adopting Hizbullah as a defense force effectively neutralizes the resolution at the same time Beirut promises to enforce it. Lebanon has concentrated on Israel’s obligations in the resolution, particularly the prohibition against surveillance flights that search out Hizbullah activity in southern Lebanon. INN
 Benjamin Netanyahu is much more serious about Middle East peace than most Americans realize. With U.S. diplomacy on the brink of a surprising success, it's time for the Palestinians to step up. For a year or two at an early stage in his career, I commuted to and from our adjacent offices each morning and evening with Martin Indyk, later a top peace-process official of the Clinton administration atthe Camp David negotiations and now vice president for foreign policy at the Brookings Institution.
I had just left the Rand Corporation to work at AIPAC,the main pro-Israel lobbying organization in Washington. Even in those pre-Oslo days of 1982 to 1983,Martin was a True Believer in the idea of a grand land-for-peace bargain between Israel and moderate Palestinians. Reviewing each day the latest installments in the Middle East epic as we rolled down Rock Creek Parkway, weargued all the way.
I heaped scorn on any solution that required Israel totrust Palestinian intentions, and I held that Israel's security could only bebased on a qualitative military edge and the balance of power. I told Martinthat he and our mutual friends Dennis Ross, Aaron Miller, and Dan Kurtzer,though with the noblest of intentions, were pursuing an illusion. Martin emphatically thought I was wrongabout the Middle East, and he also thought I was blind to an enduring reality in Washington. He said that Democratic and Republican administrations of the left and right may come and go, and some presidents will have less confidence in Middle East peacemaking than others, but no U.S. president will be able to sustain a policy of benign neglect of the peace process for long.
The American people, the United States' European allies, and U.S. friends in the Arab world allneed to have a ray of hope. They need to believe that active diplomacy under U.S.leadership is bringing closer a resolution of the conflict between Israelis andPalestinians, because it is a conflict that roils other American interests anddestabilizes U.S. relations in the region and throughout the world. Martin often cited our friend, the late Peter Rodman, who taught us that U.S. policyin the Middle East is a bicycle. You can keep your balance if you roll forwardeven at a snail's pace, but if you try to stand still you will fall off. Martin never did succeed in convertingme to the peace camp, but over time I saw the undeniable evidence that he wasright about the imperatives of U.S. foreign policy. Sooner or later, every presidentturns to the peace process, and the Mideast advisors who move to the president'sinner circle are the ones he thinks have the best ideas about how to moveforward toward a contractual peace between Israelis and Palestinians. I think Benjamin Netanyahu has gone through a personal evolution a little like my own. He continues to be profoundly skeptical that signing a piece of paper can put an end to this conflict. He is a fierce advocate of defensible borders and military strength as the true guarantors of Israel's security.
Nevertheless, he has come back to a second term as prime minister with a deeper appreciation of the reality thathis relations with the United States, Europe, and moderate Arab neighbors dependon the perception that he can be a partner in the search for diplomaticprogress with the Palestinians. And he certainly knows that many harbor doubtsabout him. That is why Bibi agreed to do somethingunprecedented, something that six previous Israeli prime ministers since the1993 Oslo Accords (Rabin, Peres, Barak, Sharon, Olmert, and Netanyahu himselfin his previous term) refused to do. Very much against the will of his partyand coalition, Netanyahu consented to putting a freeze on "natural growth"of settlements. He has drastically curtailed the volume of construction starts,even in the "consensus" settlement blocs that he believes wereconceded to Ariel Sharon by George W. Bush. Now, below the radar, Netanyahu is making a series of additional concessions to Barack Obama and his Mideast peaceenvoy, George Mitchell. Their current priority is negotiating "terms of reference"to permit the resumption of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations (TORs in negotiators' vernacular).
Dismissed by some as mere "talking about talking," TORs are in fact vital elements to create the parameters for serious negotiations.For example, then-Secretary of State James Baker shuttled around the region for eight months to negotiate the TORs that made the 1991 Madrid conference possible.
All that was done just to phrase a letter of invitation that allsides could accept. The result was far from trivial; it was a framework thatopened the way to all the direct negotiations that followed over the ensuingtwo decades. More at Foreign Policy
 Another deadline for "zero hour" has been passed as rumors, leaks and more talks drown out the silence of kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit, whose condition still remains unknown. The saga may linger on for several more days, if not more. Israel has refused to divulge details of the proposed trade of approximately 1,000 terrorists for the soldier, who was kidnapped three and a half years ago.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and the other six ministers of the mini-Cabinet, whom he trusts to honor a gag order on dicussions, have delivered their unpublished decision to German negotiator Ernst Uhrlau, who has postponed for another day a meeting with Hamas officials. Most estimates are that the sticking point in the proposal deal is the prospective destination of “heavy-duty” terrorists with “blood on their hands.” The general assumption is that the Prime Minister and at least half of the other members of the mini-Cabinet insist that they be deported outside of Judea and Samaria, a condition Hamas does not accept. As with previous negotiations, Hamas has floated various and contradictory rumors while top Israeli officials have measured their words. “Our top priority is to bring Gilad home," said Defense Minister Ehud Barak. "Not at any price, but in every possible and appropriate way." He is considered to be in favor of freeing terrorists who were convicted for involvement in murderous attacks, including the Park Hotel Passover bombing in 2002 that left 30 Jews dead and scores more wounded. Prime Minister Netanyahu declared there is a “need to retrieve captives and the need to protect Israeli citizens from future harm." The proposed deal has left Israeli in a virtual no-win position of risking Shalit’s life by rejecting a deal but also risking the lives of Israelis if the terrorists who might be freed follow previous patterns of returning to attack Israelis. Nearly 180 Jews have been murdered in recent years by terrorists who were freed after promising not to return to acts of violence. Defense Minister Barak admitted that Israel has slipped into a pattern of being forced into releasing terrorists either for political purposes or for kidnapped Israelis, some of whom have been returned home in coffins. “The Israeli government must change its policies on such deals,” he said, while adding that the current government inherited a situation from the previous government. Shalit was kidnapped while Ehud Olmert was Prime Minister. Immediately after the abduction, Olmert announced he would not conduct negotiations with terrorists and later vowed not to resume diplomatic talks with Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas until Shalit was returned. As time went on, he relinquished both positions, leading to off-and-on mediated talks for more than two years.
INN
 THE moment is fast approaching when Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu may have to make the most difficult decision of his career -- whether to launch a military strike against Iran's nuclear facilities and risk triggering a conflagration that could spread across the Middle East. Israeli experts believe the point of no return may be only six months away when Iran's nuclear program will have -- if it has not already -- metastasised into a multitude of smaller, difficult-to-trace facilities in deserts and mountains, while its main reactor at Bushehr will be online, and bombing it would send a radioactive cloud over the Gulf nations. Mr Netanyahu has consistently called Iran the most serious threat that Israel faces. Its President, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, has called for Israel to be obliterated, and his Revolutionary Guards supply training, money and weapons to both Hezbollah in Lebanon, on Israel's northern border, and to Hamas in the Gaza Strip, whose missiles are believed to be capable of reaching Tel Aviv. With the Iranian threat at the front of his strategic thinking, Mr Netanyahu has surrounded himself with old comrades from Israel's most prestigious military unit, the Sayeret Matkal, or General Staff Reconnaissance. Mr Netanyahu served in the elite unit in the 1970s under Ehud Barak, who went on to become Israel's most decorated soldier and later prime minister. When Mr Netanyahu came to power, he made great efforts to recruit his former commander as defence minister. Mr Barak serves with another former leader of the unit, Deputy Prime Minister Moshe "Bogie" Yaalon. The Israeli Prime Minister has hard-wired his core cabinet with so much military experience for a good reason. Striking Iran's nuclear facilities will be a huge military and political gamble. Although Russia has delayed supplying Iran with S300 anti-aircraft missiles, which could weaken any Israeli attack, the air force would have to mount one of its largest long-range attacks to have a chance of disabling Iran's nuclear installations. Earlier this year a report by Anthony Cordesman of the Centre for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, warned that "a military strike by Israel against Iranian nuclear facilities is possible . . . (but) would be complex and high-risk and would lack any assurances that the overall mission will have a high success rate". In 2007, in what is often seen as a trial run for an attack on Iran, an Israeli squadron flew undetected through Turkish airspace and over Syria's border to destroy what was thought to be a nuclear facility under construction with Iranian and North Korean support. In June last year, the air force staged exercises over the Mediterranean, with dozens of fighters, bombers and refuelling tankers flying roughly the same distance as between Israel and Iran. Earlier this year, Israeli jets again carried out a long-range bombing mission, hitting trucks in Sudan that were believed to be bringing Iranian weapons to Hamas via Egypt. In the immediate term, the threat of a strike has receded. Israel is satisfied that Iran's hostile stance towards the international community has increased the chances of serious, crippling sanctions. Officials noted that for the first time Russia seemed to be serious about isolating Tehran. But that international front could easily crack, and then Mr Netanyahu would be faced with the decision on whether to order his bombers into action. Iran has already threatened to bomb Israel's cities with its long-range missiles should its nuclear facilities come under attack, but that is only one of its many options. It could also, in stages, order Hezbollah to launch rockets across the northern border. Or both sides may choose to do nothing. Some analysts believe that Israel might tolerate Iran as a "threshold nuclear state", capable of building a bomb but not testing it. Iran could well opt for the path chosen by Syria in 2007, if Israel strikes at isolated facilities far from an urban areas, where the only casualties would be technicians and guards. After a similar strike against Syria, neither side admitted what had happened, thereby avoiding a war and saving face. The Australian
 By Aaron Klein JERUSALEM – A group of hundreds of prominent Israeli rabbis here today slammed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's decision to freeze Jewish West Bank construction as an "irresponsible move that will only cause bloodshed in the region." "This move not only jeopardizes the residents of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) but will ultimately endanger every Jew in every part of Israel," read a statement from by the Rabbinical Congress for Peace, a coalition of more than 300 Israeli rabbinic leaders and pulpit rabbis, including some of the most respected rabbis in Israel. The leaders of the Congress asked for an immediate meeting with Netanyahu to "point out his suicidal actions and present to him Jewish law rulings regarding a true and durable peace for the Jewish nation and stability in the region as well." "There is a clear ruling in the Jewish Code of Law [Orach Chaim Chapter 329] that warns against giving up land to foreigners," the rabbis statement read. Netanyahu last week announced in a national address that his government had approved a 10-month halt to the construction of new Jewish homes in the West Bank as a bid to restart talks with the Palestinians. He said Israel would not stop construction in eastern Jerusalem and would still allow the building of West Bank synagogues, kindergartens and necessary municipal structures. Describing the decision as a "painful step," Netanyahu said he was "taking the issue out of broad national security considerations with the goal of renewing negotiations to achieve peace with our neighbors, the Palestinians." The Palestinian Authority, however, immediately rejected the freeze and demanded more. Nabil Abu Rudaineh, a top aide to PA President Mahmoud Abbas, told reporters the Palestinians "reject returning to peace talks without the complete cessation of settlement activities in the West Bank and Jerusalem." Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat urged the U.S. to pressure Israel to freeze all construction activity completely in both Jerusalem and the West Bank. Fatah's strongman Mohammed Dahlan stated Netanyahu's offer "proves once again that Israel is interested not in peace, but in creating facts on the ground" and stated that "overlooking ongoing construction in Jerusalem will put the peace process in jeopardy." Never in the history of regional talks here did restarting Israeli-Palestinian negotiations depend on any freeze of Jewish construction. The issue largely began after President Obama demanded Jewish construction be halted in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, leading to a hardening of the PA's bargaining position. WND
 Quartet envoy to the Middle East Tony Blair portrayed Sunday a harsh picture of the region without a Palestinian state. "The alternative to a two-state solution is a one-state solution and that will, I assure you, be a hell of fight," he said in an interview to the CNN network. According to Blair, the next month "will be completely critical and fundamental" in the efforts to resume direct negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. The former British prime minister noted that it was essential for the sides to sit down and talk "as quickly as possible". "I've just spent some time with the Israeli prime minister, Mr. Netanyahu," Blair said, "and I think he is genuine and serious in wanting the negotiation to start." He said he believed that "the majority of people, both Israelis and Palestinians, want to see a two-state solution." According to Blair, the Israelis want to know that their security is going to be protected, while the Palestinians want to know that the negotiations will really end the occupation and lead to a Palestinian state. He added that he thinks "the Palestinians have made significant progress on security and the Israelis are prepared to change significantly their posture on the West Bank." Blair, who served as British premier during the peace talks with Northern Ireland, which were led by US Senator George Mitchell, defended American President Barack Obama and his special Mideast envoy Mitchell, following a New York Times article accusing them of having no strategy. "I have worked with Senator George Mitchell together very closely. He is, in my view, one of the most skilled and strategic negotiators I've ever come across… I think President Obama and Secretary (of State Hillary) Clinton are completely committed to doing this… I went through situations in times in the Northern Ireland process where people were convinced that the thing was going to fail, where even at times I found it difficult to see a way through. But the thing is there is a way through here, because in fact both parties want to achieve a two-state solution." More at YNet
 RAMALLAH, West Bank — Palestinians appealed to the United States on Thursday to raise pressure on Israel, saying an Israeli plan to halt new construction in the West Bank was insincere. Yasser Abed Rabbo, a top presidential adviser, said he hopes U.S. envoy George Mitchell can bring about what he called "a real peace process" that would halt all settlement construction. Mitchell is expected in the region soon in his latest attempt to bring the sides back to the negotiating table. On Wednesday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced a 10-month halt to new construction in West Bank settlements as a step toward restarting Mideast peace negotiations. The Palestinians swiftly rejected the plan because it did not include a building freeze in Jewish neighborhoods in east Jerusalem, the sector of the city they want as the capital of a future state, and because it would not apply to some 3,000 homes already under construction. "Netanyahu's declaration yesterday doesn't signal any intention of Israel to go through a genuine and serious peace process because it doesn't include a serious settlement freeze," Abed Rabbo said. He said a "genuine peace process" must include a complete settlement freeze and guarantees that future borders be based on the lines that existed before Israel captured the West Bank and east Jerusalem in the 1967 Mideast war. Netanyahu says such matters must be resolved in negotiations. "We believe that Mitchell can continue his efforts to have a real peace process," he said. More at FoxNews
 The security cabinet approved Wednesday evening Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's proposal to halt construction in the West Bank settlements for a period of 10 months. Eleven ministers voted in favor of the plan, while Infrastructure Minister Uzi Landau opposed the initiative, which was coordinated with the US in an effort to jumpstart the Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. Interior Minister Eli Yishai (Shas) and Housing and Construction Minister Ariel Atias were absent from the vote. Shortly after the vote Netanyahu told a televised press conference at his Jerusalem office that the step was designed to "encourage resumption of peace talks with our Palestinian neighbors." "It's not an easy step and we are taking it out of broad national considerations," he said, adding, "I hope that the Palestinians and the Arab world will be wise enough to take this opportunity to move forward in the path of peace," he said. Netanyahu stressed that the settlement freeze would not be implemented in east Jerusalem. "We do not put any restrictions on building in our sovereign capital," the prime minister said. "Now is the time to begin negotiations, now is the time to move forward towards peace. Israel today has taken a far-reaching step toward peace; it is time for the Palestinians to do the same," he added. "Israel's government has made an important step toward peace today, let us make peace together." Netanyahu further told reporters, "As soon as the suspension period concludes, my government will resume the West Bank construction policy of previous governments." "I have promised to allow our 300,000 brothers residing in the West Bank to continue to lead normal lives, and therefore construction that is already underway will not ne halted. We will continue to build synagogues, schools and kindergartens," he said. Among those who backed the initiative were hardliners Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and Ministers Moshe Yaalon and Benny Begin. Industry, Trade and Labor Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer (Labor) said after the vote, "It’s an important and historic decision, one of the most important decisions this government has made. The decision will leave the Palestinians with only one choice – join the political negotiations. They have no reason to stall anymore." Earlier, a US official said the United States hopes Netanyahu's proposal can help revive Middle East talks, "We're hoping this will in some way contribute to the resumption of negotiations" between the Israelis and Palestinians, the official told AFP on condition of anonymity. Israel has been under heavy international pressure to halt its construction in settlements built on captured lands claimed by the Palestinians. Some 300,000 Israelis live in the West Bank, in addition to about 180,000 people living in Jewish neighborhoods in east Jerusalem. Netanyahu earlier floated the idea of suspending construction in existing settlements. Wednesday's offer was the first time he has given a firm timeline for how long he is willing to stop the building. Palestinians already rejected the move before the announcement because the freeze does not include construction in Jewish neighborhoods in east Jerusalem, which the Palestinians want as the capital of their future state. Israel captured east Jerusalem from Jordan in the 1967 Arab-Israeli war and annexed it soon after. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has demanded a total halt to settlement construction before peace talks can resume. On Wednesday, chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said there was nothing new in Netanyahu's announcement, pointing to the 3,000 new housing units under construction in the West Bank. "This is not a moratorium. Unfortunately, we hoped he would commit to a real settlement freeze so we can resume negotiations and he had a choice between settlements and peace and he chose settlements." Palestinian presidential adviser Nabil Abu Rdeneh said the proposed freeze would be unacceptable if it didn't include east Jerusalem. "Any Israeli offer that doesn't include Jerusalem will be rejected immediately," he said in a phone interview from Argentina, where he was traveling with President Abbas. "No Palestinian, no Arab can cross this line." Netanyahu, a traditional ally of the settler movement, has argued that some construction should be permitted to allow for "natural growth" in their communities. His latest offer applies only to "new construction permits", meaning that some 3,000 homes already approved for construction would not be affected. YNet
 Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu refused to address recent reports indicating progress on a prisoner swap with Hamas that would see captive soldier Gilad Shalit returned to Israel, saying a deal with the Islamist group has yet to be finalized. During a Likud faction meeting on Monday, the PM said any prisoner exchange agreement would be discussed by the Knesset and would require the cabinet's approval. "I cannot say yet whether a deal will in fact be struck. It is not only up to us. There is hesitancy on the part of the other side as well," he said. "It is still unclear what will happen – what will be offered and to what we will agree to." During the meeting, Netanyahu spoke of the dilemma Israel is facing. "On the one hand, we want to look after our soldiers and bring them back home - a value that our nation and Jewish tradition hold in the highest regard - but on the other hand we want to avoid future kidnappings." A delegation from Hamas, which controls Gaza, crossed into Egypt for a meeting with Egyptian security officials in Cairo to discuss the deal that Egypt and Germany have been mediating. According to a member of the delegation, which is headed by Mahmoud al-Zahar and consists of senior Hamas figures from Gaza and Damascus, the Islamist group insists that Israel release imprisoned Arab-Israelis and residents of east Jerusalem as part of the deal. Israel has so far refused to include them in any prisoner swap. A Hamas source told Ynet that the talks in Cairo are also focusing on Israel's demand that some of the Palestinian prisoners be exiled and forbidden from returning to their homes in the West Bank. More at YNet
 JERUSALEM – In defiance of President Obama's demands that Israel cease building in sections of Jerusalem and the West Bank, New York state assemblyman Dov Hikind laid the cornerstone for the second phase of a new Jewish construction project in the Nof Tzion neighborhood in eastern Jerusalem.. Together with Knesset Member Danny Danon, a member of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, Hikind spoke with reporters about the Jewish right to build in Israel's capital city. Hikind, a Democrat, asserted banning Jews from building in neighborhoods was segregation. He expressed wonder that an African-American president would endorse such a policy in the 21st century. Speaking with the media, Hikind blamed Obama for stalling the peace process. According to the assemblyman, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has latched onto Obama's calls for a settlement freeze as an excuse not to negotiate with Israel. According to Hikind, a Jew cannot even build a bathroom in Jerusalem without international condemnation. Israel recently announced the construction of several hundred housing units in Jerusalem's Gilo neighborhood to the chagrin of the American administration.
Danon told WND that Gilo, a neighborhood of 40,000 Jews within the municipal boundaries of Jerusalem, is completely within the Israeli consensus, stating that even Tzipi Livni, opposition leader of the Kadima party, was behind the expansion. Hikind was in Israel leading a solidarity mission of 50 American Jews. During the past week the group met with leaders of Israel's settlement enterprise and national camp. The purpose of the mission was to strengthen Israeli sovereignty over the West Bank and Jerusalem by acquiring property in the disputed areas. Hikind himself expressed interest in buying an apartment in Nof Tzion. A representative of the Ateret Kohanim organization, which reclaims Jewish land in Jerusalem, accompanied the group to Nof Tzion, explaining the history of the disputed areas. The Americans were amazed to learn that such predominantly Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem as Silwan were historically Jewish. Silwan was a Yemenite Jewish community until it was evacuated and turned over to Arabs by the British, following Arab pogroms in the late 1930s. During the cornerstone laying and subsequent press conference, a small group of demonstrators from the extremist Peace Now organization stood nearby calling for the division of Jerusalem. One demonstrator, a Jew from Britain, held a sign which stated, "Hikind – you're a shame to your party." As Hikind attempted to leave, he was accosted by the demonstrator. The assemblyman gave the young man his telephone number, offering to take him out to dinner to speak about the issues in a less charged setting. WND
 |
|
|
Copyright Muslims Against Sharia 2008. All rights reserved.
E-mail: info AT ReformIslam.org
|
|
|
Posts
