Jimmy Carter Misrepresents Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Former President Jimmy Carter Lectures at the House of Lords. Copyright House of Lords 2016 / Photography by Roger Harris.

Former President Jimmy Carter Lectures at the House of Lords. Copyright House of Lords 2016. Photo: Roger Harris.

An Op-Ed by former President Jimmy Carter that appeared in the November 29, 2016 issue of the New York Times, “America Must Recognize Palestine” misrepresented the facts related to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Carter calls on the Obama administration to recognize the state of Palestine and for the Security Council to pass a resolution imposing terms for resolving the conflict. The article written, below, by The Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA), lays out the complete case as to how Carter misrepresents the Israel-Palestinian conflict and why “Carter advocates a dangerous policy.”

The CAMERA article follows:

November 30, 2016

by Tamar Sternthal,
Director, Israel Office
CAMERA

Former President Jimmy Carter Misrepresents Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in The New York Times

Wrong on Military Rule, Population

Carter errs on military rule in the West Bank, stating: “Over 4.5 million Palestinians live in these occupied territories, but are not citizens of Israel. Most live under Israeli military rule, and do not vote in Israel’s national elections.” (Emphasis added.)Continue Reading …

AJIRI #54: The UN General Assembly as Sponsor of the One-State Solution

February 2, 2016

The United States is committed to a two-state solution of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. It is clear that a majority of Israelis would agree to such a solution if they can be assured of provisions for security in keeping with UN Security Council Resolution 242.

What is not well known is that Fatah, which leads the Palestinian Authority (PA), has the same ultimate objective: the liquidation of Israel and creation of an Arab State “from the River to the Sea.”

That Hamas rejects that solution and seeks to destroy the State of Israel is well known. What is not well known is that Fatah, which leads the Palestinian Authority (PA), has the same ultimate objective: the liquidation of Israel and creation of an Arab State “from the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] Sea.” Rather than engaging in warfare against Israel to attain that result, Fatah is engaged in major efforts to maintain the support of the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) for its claim. As UNGA resolutions are advisory only, the PA expects ultimately to succeed with the next step: having the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) order Israel to recognize the “right of return”, with the United States not exercising its veto power to prevent this destructive action.Continue Reading …

A “Heads Up” for the Pro-Israel Community: Our Next Major Challenge after the Pending Nuclear Agreement

Dear Friends:

We all are aware of the grave dangers to the security of Israel and the world inherent in the ongoing negotiations toward a nuclear agreement with Iran.

However, there is another major challenge looming on the horizon which is not yet fully  understood by the pro-Israel community, but to which we must respond.

The use of the United Nations to damage Israel on the international scene is longstanding and well-known. However, there is a new undertaking that can do far more damage than has been done before, unless we take action to stop it.

…a proposal to engage the U.N. Security Council in an effort to impose a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.

It is a proposal to engage the U.N. Security Council in an effort to impose a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. This agreement would be heavily slanted against Israel.

Moreover, it would be expressly designed to replace the United States as the principal mediator between the parties. In other words, the U.N. would be in charge of the peace process, minimizing the protection that the U.S. can offer Israel in the international arena.Continue Reading …

AJIRI #51: The Fatah Goal at the UN Security Council: Recognition of the Claim of a “Right of Return”

What do the latest Palestinian moves at the UN really mean?  AJIRI’s latest report “The Fatah Goal at the UN Security Council: Recognition of the Claim of a “Right of Return” spells it out.

Letter: Parents of Israeli Child Daniel Tregerman to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon

Text of a letter sent by Gila and Doron Tregerman, parents of 4 year-old Daniel, who was murdered during a mortar attack on his home, to UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon.

By Israel News Agency Staff

For UN Secretary-General, Mr. Ban Ki-moon

Dear Sir,

My name is Gila, I am an Israeli citizen, and I am a resident of Kibbutz Nahal Oz, near the border with Gaza.A week ago, we lost our eldest son, Daniel 4.5 years old, when he was killed by a mortar shell fired from Gaza into Israel.I address you after your announcement to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, to establish an international investigation Committee to investigate “Israel’s crime” in the recent fighting in Gaza.

About us: Doron and I were married five years ago and we have three amazing kids: Daniel 4.5 yrs, Yoval 3.5 yrs and Uri 4 months old. We were a happy family. We lived in Kibbutz Nahal Oz near Gaza, and found ourselves constantly debating whether not to abandon Nahal Oz and move to another location, quieter, safer, far from rocket fire from Gaza, and far away from the alarms.

Then came the threat of terrorist tunnels, which Hamas members dug from Gaza to Israel under our home to hurt us. At night we heard noises and voices digging beneath us. Thus, in the last six months our children slept with the window closed and locked. We were afraid that they will be kidnapped from us.

Can you imagine our life, Mr. Secretary-General? How do you live in constant fear of mortar shell and terrorists emerging from tunnels?

US State Dept: August 19 Cease Fire Rockets Came From Gaza

US State Department confirms that the rocket fire that broke the cease fire on August 19, 2014 came from Gaza.  At the press briefing on 8/19/2014 the State Department Spokesperson stated: 
    
“[I]t is our understanding that an extension[of the cease fire] was agreed to, but that since has been broken. We are very concerned about today’s developments, condemn the renewed rocket fire, and as we have said, Israel has a right to defend itself against such attacks. We call for an immediate end to rocket fire and hostilities and a return to cease-fire talks. It [the rocket fire] came from Gaza. And the – and Hamas has security responsibility for Gaza. So it did come from Gaza.”

AJIRI #50: The UN’s latest Anti-Israel Project: The War Crimes Charge

After ignoring the continuing Hamas attacks against Israel for years, the UN Human Rights Council convened 15 days after the start of the most recent military activities between Israel and Gaza. It spent a few hours listening to speeches attacking Israel and, without further investigation, adopted a pre-cooked resolution that found Israel guilty of a series of war crimes. The Council then arranged for the creation of a commission that was assigned the task of collecting the evidence that would retroactively prove that the Council was right in issuing its guilty verdict against Israel. The Council also called upon the Commission to come up with the names of Israeli officials against whom war crimes charges are to be brought.

Major Anti-Israel U.N. Effort May Be Coming

by Richard Schifter

Published in the Washington Jewish Week, January 2, 2014

As the year 2014 begins, the Israeli/Palestinian peace negotiations sponsored by the United States have been underway for five months. Under the current schedule they are to conclude at the end of April. It is clear that Israel is prepared to agree to a two-state solution. The Palestinians, by contrast, continue to insist on their claim of a so-called “right of return”, the migration to Israel of more than 5,000,000 persons of Palestinian descent, 1% of whom are refugees of the 1948 war and 99% of whom are the descendants of refugees. That wave of migrants would end the existence of Israel as a majority Jewish state and is thus clearly unacceptable to Israel. Peace can be brought about only if that demand is dropped, as President Clinton proposed at the end of the Camp David talks of 2000.

If no agreement is reached, the Palestinians are expected to step up their anti-Israel campaign at the United Nations. Statements made on behalf of Fatah suggest that consideration is being given to proposing a resolution similar to the one adopted by the General Assembly in 1981 against South Africa, calling “upon all States … to impose comprehensive mandatory sanctions … [and] … strongly urging all States… to cease forthwith, individually and collectively, all dealings with [South Africa] in order to isolate it politically, economically, militarily, and culturally.”Continue Reading …

Question of Palestine: Telling the Truth is a Revolutionary Act

Address to the United Nations General Assembly, Agenda Item 18

By Ambassador Ron Prosor, Israel’s Permanent Representative at the United Nations

November 25, 2013

Ambassador Ron Prosor

Photo By Public1london, via Wikimedia Commons

Thank you Mr. President,

John Fitzgerald Kennedy said, “The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie… but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic.”

This is the third year that I am standing before this Assembly to address this agenda item and once again, I experience a sense of déjà vu as I listen to a distortion of history. The greatest legends of Greek mythology cannot rival the fables and fabrications that have come to be associated with this debate.

This debate may take place only once a year, but anti-Israel bias pervades the UN system all year round. In 2012, this Assembly found the time to pass 22 resolutions condemning Israel – compared with only four that single out other nations.Continue Reading …

Washington’s Failure to Rein in UNRWA :: Middle East Quarterly

by Asaf Romirowsky
Middle East Quarterly, Fall 2012, pp. 53-60

General Assembly resolution 194 of December 11, 1948,[1] offers two options, repatriation and resettlement, to achieve the reintegration of the Palestinian Arab refugees “into the economic life of the Near East.”[2] Yet, U.S. Department of State documents from 1949 through the early 1950s reveal that despite the lip service paid to repatriation, Washington and its allies effectively equated reintegration with the resettlement of the refugees in the neighboring Arab states.Continue Reading …