The U.N. "Palestinian" Statehood bid thread *Merged*

[raptureholic]

The Palestinians have no choice??? Really???

I'm looking forward to the day when Jesus will claim what is rightfully His, and I will for one be with Him to claim what is His.

Palestinians say they may have no choice but to take Israel to Hague court

(Reuters) - The Palestinians declared Wednesday that they will have no choice but to complain about Israel to the International Criminal Court if the Jewish state proceeds with plans to build housing on land the Palestinians want for a future state.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...90M1EX20130123

[OnlyHIM!]

Posted on Bibi's Facebook page yesterday:

The Cabinet, yesterday (Sunday, 27 January 2013), by a vote of 16-3-1, approved Minister Benny Begin's recommendations on formalizing the status of Bedouin settlement in the Negev.

Minister Begin's recommendations were formulated in the wake of unprecedented consultations he held among Negev Bedouin, during which he and the Construction and Housing Ministry Authority on Formalizing the Status of Bedouin Settlement in the Negev officials met with over 1,000 Negev Bedouin, as well as their relevant groups and organizations.

In its decision, the Cabinet adopted the recommendations of the commission, chaired by retired Supreme Court Judge Eliezer Goldberg, in which it was proposed, "to recognize – as much as possible – each of the unrecognized villages in which there is a minimal mass of residents, such as will be determined, and which will be able to bear municipal status, and on the condition that such recognition will not contravene the district master plan." The assessment is that after the implementation of the outline, most Bedouin living in communities the planning of which is not formalized, will be able to continue living on site after the planning is formalized.

Regarding ownership claims, it was decided – inter alia – that compensation, in land or money, will be given for all of the area in question (and not just half, as determined by a decision of the previous government).

The Cabinet approved draft legislation that sets a binding framework, and allocates time, according to which if one seeking ownership will not – within five years – agree to the proffered compromise, his ownership claim will no longer have any value and the land will be registered as state land.

The plan significantly strengthens enforcement authorities in the field.

The plan accepted by the Cabinet will be submitted to the 19th Knesset as soon as a new government is established.

The Cabinet will also invest an unprecedented approximately NIS 1.2 billion in a five-year plan to...

[Ovicula]

Op-ed: Israel must separate from the Palestinians to preserve country's Jewish, democratic character


Gilead Sher Published: 01.29.13, 11:09 / Israel Opinion

In about a month and a half Israel's 33rd government will be sworn in, and, regardless of the make-up of the next coalition, it must succeed in determining the country's borders.

The campaigns have ended, so the truth can be said: The issue of Israel's borders is the most important of all. Israel must separate itself from the Palestinians and determine borders that will secure a democratic, egalitarian, legitimate and just state that will maintain a Jewish majority for generations to come.

It does not matter if we are convinced of our right to control the territories. This is an existential matter, because in order to preserve the state that was established here before us we must first determine the geographic borders, and then address the rest of the pressing issues: Morality, equal share of the burden, basic rights, separation of religion and state and rule of law. We will not have welfare, education, equality or national resilience until we separate from the Palestinians.

Sixty-five years after its inception, Israel still does not have a constitution or recognized borders for all of its territory - both of which are crucial for securing its identity in the spirit of the Declaration of Independence. The demographic reality that is taking shape in the area west of the Jordan River jeopardizes our national identity and internal solidarity, which were strong during Israel's early years.


Unilateral steps are fine

From a geopolitical perspective, the status quo is as dynamic as ever, and it is enough to mention the Iranian nuclear threat and the rise of political Islam alongside the extremism and collapse of regimes in the Arab world. If we continue to be dragged along the path of lack of initiative, the likelihood of ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on the basis of two states for two peoples will be reduced even more. In the meantime, we will become more and more isolated in the world, until the international community, hypocritical and self-righteous as it may be, will eventually disassociate itself from us entirely.

The outline for a peace agreement has been known to us all for more than 12 years, since the days of Bill Clinton and his plan for two states for two peoples. The core issues of the conflict – Jerusalem, refugees, borders, security – will not dissipate on their own just because we are ignoring them and dragging our feet on the way to a solution.

On the contrary, these problems will intensify and will become more difficult to resolve. Eleven years have passed since the Arab League presented its peace initiative, but to this day Israel's governments have not fond the time to discuss it. Now, in light of the developments in the Arab world, Israel should signal that it is willing to consider regional negotiations with the tumultuous and bleeding Arab world.

If it is established, a Palestinian state will be demilitarized, will not be allowed to have and army or form military alliances; its airspace will be controlled by Israel, and international forces will help the sides keep the peace. It is safe to assume that by that time Israel will have a multi-layered rocket and missile defense shield in place that will thwart attacks from any range.

The conflict with the Palestinians can be solved, but even if I'm wrong, we must still strive to achieve it, because the stalemate is a dangerous illusion.

Apart from engaging in peace negotiations, Israel must independently prepare to separate itself from the Palestinians and gradually create two nation states. True, we will have to evacuate settlements while preserving the large settlement blocs, which contain 80% of the settler population, and we must absorb those settlers who will return to Israel – some 100,000 – regardless of whether a peace agreement is reached. The IDF will remain in the territory until the security responsibility will be handed over to an element that is acceptable to us (we learned this lesson in the aftermath of the Gaza disengagement of 2005.)

No one will be glad to see settlers evicted from their homes, but it will be necessary for preserving Israel's future as a democratic state with a Jewish majority; as a legitimate and moral state that's existence is not dependent on controlling another nation. If the government acts responsibly and with integrity, the evacuation of settlers may even unite the people of Israel.

Unilateral steps are legitimate as long as they advance a two-state solution and are fully coordinated with the US.


Attorney Gilead Sher is co-chairman of the Blue White Future movement and a senior research fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...338374,00.html


Isaiah 28:15
You boast, “We have entered into a covenant with death, with the realm of the dead we have made an agreement. When an overwhelming scourge sweeps by, it cannot touch us, for we have made a lie our refuge and falsehood our hiding place.”


Isaiah 28:18
Your covenant with death will be annulled; your agreement with the realm of the dead will not stand. When the overwhelming scourge sweeps by, you will be beaten down by it.

[Allan3]

Wow they are messing with God again and again. I guess we will see some wars really quickly.

God is Good.

[raptureholic]

Wow! Hamas, if this is true, has agreed for the first time to a two-state solution. This is getting very exciting for us believers for our time here is running out!

Report: Mashaal agreed to 2-state solution

Jordanian sources claim King Abdullah II set to inform US President Obama of Hamas' willingness to accept two-state solution

Hamas Politburo chief Khaled Mashaal has asked Jordan's King Abdullah II to inform US President Barack Obama that Hamas accepts the principle of a two-state solution, Saudi Arabia's al-Sharq newspaper reported.

According to the report, which quoted Jordanian sources, Mashaal expressed willingness to stand behind a solution that will see a Palestinian state being established on the 1967 borders during a meeting with the king on Monday.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7...339225,00.html

[LightOfMyLife]

I am of Joel 3:1-2 I so want to go home!

[CarlaL48]

I don't think Hamas has changed their stripes. They still want to see Israel destroyed, but they'll "pose" for the world as accepting 2 states as long as it's the '67 borders - fuhgeddaboutit! Also doubtful we'll ever hear Hamas acknowledge Israel as a "Jewish state."

The emperor is still naked; he's just changed his external illusions.

[Ovicula]

I don't think Hamas has changed their stripes. They still want to see Israel destroyed, but they'll "pose" for the world as accepting 2 states as long as it's the '67 borders - fuhgeddaboutit! Also doubtful we'll ever hear Hamas acknowledge Israel as a "Jewish state."

The emperor is still naked; he's just changed his external illusions.

Exactly!

Hamas: Mashaal did not accept the two-state solution

By Khaled Abu Toameh 01/31/2013 15:49


"We will never agree to giving the Zionist state one inch of the land of Palestine," senior Hamas official says.

Hamas denied Thursday that its leader, Khaled Mashaal, had declared his acceptance of the two-state solution.

The denial came following a report in a Saudi-owned newspaper that claimed Mashaal had authorized Jordan’s King Abdullah to notify the US administration that Hamas had accepted the twostate solution.

Mashaal met with Abdullah in Amman earlier this week and discussed with him Jordan’s efforts to revive the peace process and ways of ending the Hamas-Fatah dispute.

“These claims are baseless,” said Izzat al-Risheq, a senior Hamas official. “The two-state solution issue was not discussed during the meeting between brother Mashaal and King Abdullah.”

Yehya Musa, another senior Hamas official, claimed that international parties have been trying to create confusion among Hamas’s ranks by saying that the Islamist movement has accepted the two-state solution.

Hamas, he stressed, does not accept the two-state solution “under any circumstances.”

Musa said that this solution was totally unacceptable “and we will never agree to giving the Zionist state one inch of the land of Palestine.”

He reiterated Hamas’s commitment to the “liberation of Palestine, from the river to the sea.”

Accepting a Palestinian state within the pre-1967 lines does not mean that Hamas would ever recognize Israel’s right to the rest of the land, he explained.

Hamas legislator Salah Bardaweel also denied that his movement was prepared to accept the two-state solution.

“Hamas’s political program can’t change overnight,” he said. He too said that there was a difference between accepting a Palestinian state on the 1967 territories and recognizing Israel’s right to exist –something which, he added, Hamas would never do.

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=301680

[Steve53]

No "two state" solution based on the '67 borders will be suitable to Israel.

[raptureholic]

Exactly!

Hamas: Mashaal did not accept the two-state solution

By Khaled Abu Toameh 01/31/2013 15:49


"We will never agree to giving the Zionist state one inch of the land of Palestine," senior Hamas official says.


http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=301680

Thank you Ovicula for this article. I figured it wasn't true that Hamas agreed to a two-state solution. Sometimes its hard to tell when one article says one things then another article says something else.