Israel Says Peace Will Not Come Through UN; The Next Stop for Palestinians Could Be Global Court

Israel's U.N. Ambassador Ron Prosor says the only way to achieve peace between Israel and the Palestinians is through agreements between the parties, not through the United Nations. Speaking Thursday before a General Assembly vote that would grant the Palestinians nonmember state observer status at the U.N., Prosor said the U.N. can't break the 4,000-year-old bond between the people of Israel and land of Israel. He accused Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of ignoring history. - The Associated Press, November 29, 2012

US urges Palestinians, Israel to resume peace talks

Reuters 
November 30, 2012

Hamas's leader in exile Khaled Meshaal said on Monday Israel must take the first step if it wants a truce in the conflict in Gaza.

UNITED NATIONS - The United States called on the Palestinians and Israelis on Thursday to resume peace talks after the UN General Assembly overwhelmingly approved a resolution that implicitly recognised a Palestinian state.

"The United States calls upon both the parties to resume direct talks, without preconditions, on all the issues that divide them and we pledge that the United States will be there to support the parties vigorously in such efforts," US Ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice said.  

"The United States will continue to urge all parties to avoid any further provocative actions in the region, in New York or elsewhere," she said after voting against the resolution.

Analysis: The next stop for Palestinians could be global courts

Reuters
November 30, 2012

The U.N. General Assembly's overwhelming vote to recognize Palestine as a non-member state offers little prospect for greater clout in world politics but it could make a difference in the international courts.

The formal recognition of statehood, even without full U.N. membership, could be enough for the Palestinians to achieve membership at the Hague-based International Criminal Court (ICC), where member states have the power to refer for investigation alleged war crimes or crimes against humanity.

With its upgraded status at the U.N., the Palestinians may now seek to apply to the ICC for membership and authority to file war-crimes charges against the Israeli government and its officials.

That threat of so-called "lawfare" has already prevented some Israeli civilian and military leaders from traveling abroad out of fear they'd be arrested as war criminals.

"Israelis are afraid of being hauled to The Hague," said Robert Malley, the Middle East program director for the International Crisis Group.

The Palestinians have long planned to use non-membership statehood at the U.N., once obtained, as a way to enter the ICC. One Palestinian negotiator, in talking to the International Crisis Group, called the strategy a "legal or diplomatic intifada" against Israel.

When Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas addressed the United Nations in September he specifically accused Israel of committing war crimes.Israeli officials have said the country's armed forces strictly adhere to international law and argue the true aim of Palestinians' accusations is to isolate Israel.

Last spring, the ICC's former chief prosecutor turned down a 2009 Palestinian request for prosecution of Israel's actions in the 2008-2009 Gaza war with Hamas, specifically noting that Palestine was only a U.N. observer entity.

In September, the new ICC prosecutor, Fatou Bensouda, said a General Assembly vote could make the difference.

"What we have also done is to leave the door open and to say that if this -- if Palestine is able to pass over that (statehood) hurdle, of course, under the General Assembly, then we will revisit what the ICC can do," Bensouda said during a talk in New York.

The Hague-based ICC is the one international venue where individuals can be criminally charged. All 117 countries that ratified the Rome Statute, which created the court, are bound to turn over suspects.

The United States and Israel have not joined the Rome Statute, but that would not prevent the Palestinians from pursing cases under the treaty. ICC arrest warrants and rulings carry geopolitical weight even when they can't be enforced. An indictment of Libya's Moammar Gadhafi last year helped mobilize international support for the rebels who opposed him.

Of course, if the Palestinians enter the legal battlefield, they, too, risk being accused and prosecuted in the venues where they'd try to target Israelis.

There is no guarantee for either side that the ICC prosecutor would follow through on charges. The ICC has procedural obstacles that could head off any prosecution there.

Some commentators argue that, like lawyers in any legal fight, both the Palestinians and Israelis have exaggerated the stakes in what's more of a political and public-relations drama.

"The concern that something dramatic would change is overblown," said Rosa Brooks, a professor of international law at Georgetown University who has also served in policy roles at the State and Defense departments.

And it's important to remember that the ICC is a political organization as much as a legal one -- cases are initiated by member governments and the U.N. Security Council -- so geopolitical considerations can trump a strictly legal case.

Israel says U.N. vote won't hasten Palestinian state

Reuters
November 30, 2012

A U.N. General Assembly vote on Thursday recognizing a Palestinian state will do nothing to make it a reality, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said.

Israel had fiercely opposed the Palestinian bid to become a "non-member state" at the United Nations, but had been unable to prevent wide international support for the initiative, notably among its European allies.

"This is a meaningless resolution that won't change anything on the ground. No Palestinian state will arise without an arrangement ensuring the security of Israeli citizens," Netanyahu said in a statement issued by his office shortly before the U.N. vote was to be held.

Netanyahu accused the Palestinians of violating agreements with Israel by going to the U.N. unilaterally.

"Israel will act accordingly," Netanyahu said. "The way to peace between Jerusalem and Ramallah is through direct negotiations without preconditions, not unilateral decisions at the U.N."

Peace talks collapsed in 2010 in a dispute over Jewish settlement building on territory Palestinians seek for a state.

The Israeli leader used unusually strong language to denounce a speech to the General Assembly by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas - who had singled out an Israeli offensive in Gaza last week in which at least 170 Palestinians were killed. Six Israelis died in rocket fire from Gaza.

Abbas's comments were "hostile and poisonous", and full of "false propaganda", a statement released by Netanyahu's office said. "These are not the words of a man who wants peace."

Israel had mounted an intensive campaign, supported by the United States, to dissuade European governments from backing the Palestinian move in the 193-nation U.N. General Assembly, long sympathetic to the Palestinians.

The vote took place on a date burned into collective memory - the Assembly voted on November 29, 1947 for Resolution 181 to partition British-ruled Palestine into two states, one Arab, one Jewish. Arab rulers rejected it and, after bitter fighting, Israel alone was recognized as a state six months later.

"No matter how many hands are raised against us," Netanyahu said during a visit to a museum in Jerusalem ahead of the U.N. vote, "there is no power on earth that will cause me to compromise on Israel's security."

Israel, which has occupied the West Bank and East Jerusalem since 1967, says a Palestinian state must be the product of direct negotiations and a peace deal that imposes security measures and charts borders that pose no danger to Israelis.

PUNITIVE MEASURES?

Netanyahu, while hinting Israel may seek to retaliate, made no specific mention of punitive measures, in a shift in tone after eight days of fighting around the Gaza Strip.

Netanyahu is running for re-election in a January 22 national ballot and has been accused by critics of harming Israel's international standing through his Palestinian policies.

Israeli officials said Israel will wait and see what the Palestinians do after the vote, which will allow them access to the International Criminal Court where they could seek action against Israel for alleged war crimes.

The Palestinians have signaled they are no hurry to join the ICC, and pledged in their draft resolution to relaunch the peace process immediately after the vote. Recognition by the General Assembly falls short of the legal weight of a similar move by the U.N. Security Council. A U.S. veto on that body ensures that Palestinians have little immediate prospect there.

Just two weeks ago, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman said the U.N. Assembly's approval of the Palestinian resolution would "elicit an extreme response from us".

Another member of Netanyahu's right-wing cabinet, Environment Minister Gilad Erdan, said three years ago that Israeli counter-measures could include annexing some of the 120 settlements in the West Bank.

But in the past week, Israeli officials have retreated from such talk, retrenching after European countries, which had been largely supportive of Israel's November 14-21 Gaza offensive, started showing their backing for Abbas's U.N. move.

Israel is now threatening only one measure: the withholding of $200 million from the monthly transfers of duties that Israel collects on the Palestinian Authority's behalf. It says it will cover the PA's debt to the Israel Electric Corporation.

The deduction, equal to two months' worth of Palestinian tax receipts, would be painful for Abbas's cash-strapped government in Ramallah. But it would stop short of a formal suspension of transfers vital to the economy in the occupied West Bank.

Israel has previously frozen payments to the PA during times of heightened security and diplomatic tensions, provoking strong international criticism, such as when the U.N. cultural body UNESCO granted the Palestinians full membership a year ago.

UN Vote for Palestine is Far More Than Symbolic - It Could Give Palestinians Leverage in Future Border Talks; Netanyahu Rejects the 1967 Borders

Palestinians Hope to Gain Leverage from UN Bid

The Associated Press
November 28, 2012

The expected U.N. vote Thursday to recognize a state of Palestine will be far more than symbolic — it could give the Palestinians leverage in future border talks with Israel and open the way for possible war crimes charges against the Jewish state.

The Palestinians want the 193-member General Assembly to accept "Palestine," on the lands Israel occupied in 1967, as a non-member observer state. They anticipate broad support.

For Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the U.N. bid is a last-ditch attempt to stay relevant as a leader after years of failed peace talks with Israel, at a time when his Islamic militant Hamas rivals are gaining ground.

The U.S. and Israel have tried to block the quest for U.N. recognition of Palestine, saying it's an attempt to bypass Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that broke down four years ago.

The U.S. deputy secretary of state, William Burns, met with Abbas in New York on Wednesday, asking Abbas again to drop the idea and promising that President Barack Obama would re-engage as a mediator in 2013, said Abbas aide Saeb Erekat. Abbas told Burns it was too late.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said U.N. recognition of an independent Palestine won't help to reach a lasting two-state peace agreement and stressed that the "path to a two-state solution that fulfills the aspirations of the Palestinian people is through Jerusalem and Ramallah, not New York."

Israel, meanwhile, appeared to back away from threats of drastic measures if the Palestinians get U.N. approval, with officials suggesting the government would take steps only if the Palestinians use their new status to act against Israel.

The Palestinians say they need U.N. recognition of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, the lands Israel captured in 1967, to be able to resume negotiations with Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's predecessors accepted the 1967 lines as a basis for border talks, with modifications to be negotiated, including land swaps that would enable Israel to annex some of the largest Jewish settlements. Those talks did not produce a deal, and the sides remained apart on other key issues.

Netanyahu rejects the 1967 lines as starting point while pressing ahead with settlement construction, leaving Abbas little incentive to resume negotiations. Israel goes to elections in January, and polls indicate Netanyahu has a strong chance of winning.

Israel argues that Abbas is trying to dictate the outcome of border talks by going to the U.N., though the recognition request presented to the world body calls for a quick resumption of negotiations on all core issues of the conflict, including borders.

It's not clear if negotiations could resume even if Obama, freed from the constraints of his re-election campaign, can turn his attention to the Mideast conflict.

Abbas aides have given conflicting accounts of whether Abbas, once armed with global backing for the 1967 borders, will return to negotiations without an Israeli settlement freeze. About half a million Israelis have settled on war-won land.

A construction stop is unlikely, even more so after hawks in Netanyahu's Likud Party scored major gains in primaries this week.

Israel has said it is willing to resume talks without preconditions.

Government spokesman Mark Regev affirmed the position on Wednesday. Regev said that by going to the U.N., the Palestinians violate "both the spirit and the word of signed agreements to solve issues through negotiations."

Palestinian officials countered that their historic U.N. bid is meant to salvage a peace deal they say is being sabotaged by Israeli settlement expansion. 

"It is a last-ditch effort because we believe the two-state solution is in jeopardy as a result of these actions," Hanan Ashrawi, a senior Palestinian official, told reporters in Ramallah on Wednesday.

The Palestinians expect that at least two-thirds of the 193 member states in the General Assembly will support them on Thursday, including a number of European countries, among them France, Spain, Norway, Denmark and Switzerland.

Those opposed or abstaining include the U.S., Israel, Germany, Canada, the Netherlands and Australia. Ashrawi urged the U.S. to at least abstain, saying that voting no "would be seen as being really pathetic by the rest of the world" and hurt American interests in the Middle East.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Wednesday that "in the long term, this region can only find peace through negotiations to resolve the Middle East conflict," but she did not say whether her country would abstain or vote against.

"Nothing will really be gained either by unilateral Palestinian initiatives at the United Nations which aim for recognition nor by Israel's continued building of settlements," she said.

The vote comes at an important time domestically for Abbas. His Hamas rivals, who control Gaza, have gained popularity after holding their own during an Israeli offensive there earlier this month, aimed at stopping frequent Gaza rocket fire on Israel.

During the Gaza offensive, Abbas was sidelined in his compound in the West Bank, underscoring international concerns that the deadlock in peace efforts is weakening Palestinian pragmatists. Hamas, which seized Gaza from Abbas in 2007, argues that negotiations with Israel are a waste of time, but Hamas leaders have come out in support of the U.N. bid in recent days.

Other than creating leverage in negotiations, U.N. recognition would also allow the Palestinians to seek membership in U.N. agencies and international bodies, for example making them eligible for loans from the International Monetary Fund.

Perhaps most significantly, it could open the door to a new attempt to join the International Criminal Court and seek an investigation into alleged war crimes by Israel in the occupied territories.

Abbas' self-rule government, the Palestinian Authority, unilaterally recognized the court's jurisdiction in 2009 and pressed prosecutors to open an investigation into Israel's previous Gaza offensive. Prosecutors noted at the time that the court's founding treaty, the Rome Statute, is only open to states. Israel has not signed the statute and does not recognize the court's jurisdiction.

Ashrawi on Wednesday avoided explicit threats to take Israel to court, but suggested it's an option. 

"If Israel refrains from settlement activities ... there is no immediate pressing need to go," she said, adding that this could change if "Israel persists in its violations."

Israel would respond "forcefully" if the Palestinians try to pursue war crimes charges against Israel at the ICC, said an Israeli government official who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss policy considerations.

If the Palestinians use their upgraded international status "as a tool to confront Israel in the international arena, there will be a response," he said.

Until then, he said, Israel will be bound by its obligations to the Palestinians under existing peace agreements, but won't necessarily go beyond them. Earlier there was talk of Israel retaliating by canceling partial peace accords dating back to the 1990s.

In the West Bank, the view of Abbas' quest for recognition was mixed. Many were bitter, saying they've heard too many promises that statehood is near and don't believe a nod from the U.N. will make a difference.

"Nothing will come of it," said Arwa Abu Helo, a 23-year-old student in Ramallah. "It's just a way of misleading the public."

Yousef Mohammed, a bank teller, said Abbas was trying to "gain the spotlight after Hamas said it won in Gaza."

Hurriyeh Abdel Karim, 65, said she was willing to give Abbas a chance. "If he succeeds, maybe our life improves," she said.

Palestinians Win Implicit U.N. Recognition of Sovereign State

U.N. General Assembly Votes to Grant Palestine 'Non-member State' U.N. Observer Status

November 29, 2012

Reuters - The 193-nation U.N. General Assembly overwhelmingly approved a resolution today to upgrade the Palestinian Authority's observer status at the United Nations from "entity" to "non-member state," implicitly recognizing a Palestinian state. There were 138 votes in favor, nine against and 41 abstentions.

UN vote is a boost to Palestinian statehood hopes

November 29, 2012

AP - The expected admission of Palestine as a nonmember state in the United Nations is far more than a symbolic vote. For the Palestinians, the move gives them an important boost of international legitimacy in their quest for independence. For Israel and its key ally, the United States, it is a diplomatic setback with potentially grave implications.

Here is a look at how key players are affected by the vote on November 29th:

PALESTINIANS:

The vote benefits the Palestinians on many levels. Domestically, it gives embattled President Mahmoud Abbas a boost in his rivalry with the Hamas militant group. As peace efforts have flagged, Abbas has steadily lost popularity with the Palestinian public, while Hamas is riding high after battling Israel during an eight-day flare-up in the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip this month.

Internationally, it puts Abbas and the Palestinian agenda back at center stage. The vote grants Abbas an overwhelming international endorsement for his key position: establishment of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem, the territories captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war. With Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu opposed to a pullback to the 1967 lines, this should strengthen Abbas' hand if peace talks resume.

It also opens the door to the Palestinians joining U.N. agencies, most critically the International Criminal Court, where they could use their newfound status to press for war crimes charges against Israel for military operations and construction of Jewish settlements on occupied territories. On the downside, the vote does not change the situation on the ground — a point Israelis have repeatedly stressed in an effort to blunt any appearance of defeat.

ISRAEL:

The vote amounts to a massive international show of displeasure with Israel, particularly over its continued construction of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem. While Israel is used to lopsided U.N. resolutions against it, even key allies are expected to abandon it this time around. Germany, Italy, France and Australia are among the Israeli allies expected to abstain or vote with the Palestinians.

Moving forward, the resolution could weaken Israeli claims to keeping parts of the West Bank and east Jerusalem, the section of the holy city claimed by both sides for their capitals. After four years of deadlock in peace efforts, the world seems to be laying the blame on Israel. If opinion polls are correct and Netanyahu, backed by hard-line, pro-settler allies, cruises to victory in upcoming parliamentary elections, he could find himself facing stiff international pressure to make concessions to get peace talks back on track.

US:

The expected vote appears to reflect the world's frustration over President Barack Obama's failure to get Israel and the Palestinians to start talking. During his first term, Obama initially spoke out strongly against Israeli settlements and even coaxed Netanyahu into a partial freeze on settlement construction. But after that freeze expired, Netanyahu rejected Obama's calls to extend it and Obama dropped the matter.

The mixed messages ended up alienating both Israel and the Palestinians, leaving peace efforts in tatters. After failing to persuade the Palestinians to abandon their push at the U.N., Obama will likely face international pressure to make another diplomatic push in the region.

HAMAS:

The Islamic militant group, which rules the Gaza Strip, has been emboldened by the performance of its forces in fighting against Israel this month and its growing acceptance among the new Islamist rulers rising in the fast-changing Middle East. Since capturing Gaza from Abbas in 2007, both sides have largely resisted attempts to reconcile.

Thursday's vote is an important reminder that Abbas is still the main address for the international community, and could put pressure on Hamas to reconcile. Perhaps sensing this changing constellation, Hamas lined up behind Abbas' U.N. bid, after earlier criticizing it.

Abbas urges U.N. to issue "birth certificate" for Palestine

November 29, 2012

Reuters - Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Thursday urged the U.N. General Assembly to grant de facto recognition to a sovereign state of Palestine by upgrading the U.N. observer status of the Palestinian Authority from "entity" to "non-member state."

"Sixty-five years ago on this day, the United Nations General Assembly adopted resolution 181, which partitioned the land of historic Palestine into two states and became the birth certificate for Israel," Abbas told the 193-nation assembly after receiving a standing ovation.

"The General Assembly is called upon today to issue a birth certificate of the reality of the State of Palestine," he said.

The assembly is expected to approve a resolution shortly that implicitly recognizes Palestinian statehood, despite threats by the United States and Israel to punish the Palestinians by withholding funds for the West Bank government.

The move would lift the Palestinian Authority's U.N. observer status from "entity" to "non-member state," like the Vatican. It is expected to pass easily in the 193-nation General Assembly. At least 15 European states plan to vote for it.

Israel, the United States and a handful of other members are set to vote against what they see as a largely symbolic and counterproductive move by the Palestinians, which takes place on the anniversary of the assembly's adoption of resolution 181 on the partition of Palestine into Jewish and Arab states.

Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman is in New York, but did not address the assembly. Israeli U.N. Ambassador Ron Prosor spoke after Abbas, reiterating the Jewish state's desire for peace with Palestinians, but opposing the resolution.

"It doesn't enhance peace," Prosor said ahead of the vote on the resolution. "It pushes it backwards."

"No decision by the U.N. can break the 4,000-year-old bond between the people of Israel and the land of Israel," he said.

Granting Palestinians the title of "non-member observer state" falls short of full U.N. membership - something the Palestinians failed to achieve last year. But it would allow them access to the International Criminal Court (ICC) and other international bodies, should they choose to join them.

"The ICC issue is what the Israelis are really worried about," a U.N. official said on condition of anonymity. "They know this whole process isn't really symbolic, except for that."

ISRAEL TONES DOWN THREATS

Abbas has been leading the campaign to win support for the resolution, which follows an eight-day conflict this month between Israel and Islamists in the Gaza Strip, who are pledged to Israel's destruction and oppose a negotiated peace.

The U.S. State Department made a last-ditch effort to get Abbas to reconsider, but the Palestinian Authority, which exercises limited self-rule in the Israeli-occupied West Bank, refused to turn back.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton repeated to reporters in Washington on Wednesday the U.S. view that "the path to a two-state solution that fulfills the aspirations of the Palestinian people is through Jerusalem and Ramallah, not New York."

The U.S. State Department has repeatedly warned that the U.N. status change could lead to a reduction of U.S. economic support for the Palestinians. The Israelis have also warned they might take significant deductions out of monthly transfers of duties that Israel collects on the Palestinians' behalf.

Despite its fierce opposition, Israel seems concerned not to find itself diplomatically isolated. It has recently toned down threats of retaliation in the face of wide international support for the initiative, notably among its European allies.

But U.N. diplomats say Israel's reaction might not be so measured if the Palestinians seek ICC action against Israel on charges of war crimes, crimes against humanity or other crimes the court would have jurisdiction over.

The European Union, a key donor for the Palestinians, has made clear it will not curtail aid after Thursday's vote.

Flag-waving Palestinians thronged the squares of the West Bank and Gaza Strip before Thursday's vote. In a rare show of unity, Abbas's Islamist rivals, Hamas, who have ruled Gaza since a brief civil war in 2007, let backers of the president's Fatah movement hold demonstrations.

Peace talks have been stalled for two years, mainly over Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which have expanded despite being deemed illegal by most of the world. There are 4.3 million Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza.

In the draft resolution, the Palestinians have pledged to relaunch the peace process immediately following the U.N. vote.

With strong support from the developing world that makes up the majority of U.N. members, it is virtually assured of securing more than the requisite simple majority. Palestinian officials hope for more than 130 yes votes.

Abbas has focused on securing as many votes as possible from Europe, and his efforts appear to have paid off.

Austria, Denmark, Norway, Finland, France, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Malta, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and Switzerland all pledged to support the resolution. Britain said it was prepared to vote yes, but only if the Palestinians fulfilled certain conditions.

The fiercely pro-Israel Czech Republic was planning to vote against the move, dashing European hopes of avoiding any no votes that would create a three-way split on the continent into supporters, abstainers and opponents.

It was unclear whether some of the many undecided Europeans would join the Czechs. Germany, Hungary, the Netherlands, Estonia and Lithuania plan to abstain.

Palestinians are Certain to Win U.N. Recognition as a State

Palestinians certain to win recognition as a state

The Associated Press
November 29, 2012

The Palestinians are certain to win U.N. recognition as a state Thursday but success could exact a high price: Israel and the United States warn it could delay hopes of achieving an independent Palestinian state through peace talks with Israel.

The United States, Israel's closest ally, mounted an aggressive campaign to head off the General Assembly vote. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu defiantly declared Thursday that the Palestinians would have to back down from long-held positions if they ever hope to gain independence.

Ahead of Thursday's vote, thousands of Palestinians from rival factions celebrated in the streets of the West Bank. Although the initiative will not immediately bring about independence, the Palestinians view it as a historic step in their quest for global recognition.

In a last-ditch move Wednesday, U.S. Deputy Secretary of State William Burns made a personal appeal to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas promising that President Barack Obama would re-engage as a mediator in 2013 if Abbas abandoned the effort to seek statehood. The Palestinian leader refused, said Abbas aide Saeb Erekat.

With most of the 193 General Assembly member states sympathetic to the Palestinians, the vote is certain to succeed. Several key countries, including France, have recently announced they would support the move to elevate the Palestinians from the status of U.N. observer to nonmember observer state. However, a country's vote in favor of the status change does not automatically imply its individual recognition of a Palestine state, something that must be done bilaterally.

The Palestinians say they need U.N. recognition of a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Gaza and east Jerusalem, the lands Israel captured in 1967, to be able to resume negotiations with Israel. They say global recognition of the 1967 lines as the borders of Palestine is meant to salvage a peace deal, not sabotage it, as Israel claims.

The non-member observer state status could also open the way for possible war crimes charges against the Jewish state at the International Criminal Court.

Netanyahu warned the Palestinians Thursday that they would not win their hoped-for state until they recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland, declare an end to their conflict with the Jewish state and agree to security arrangements that protect Israel.

"The resolution in the U.N. today won't change anything on the ground," Netanyahu declared. "It won't advance the establishment of a Palestinian state, but rather, put it further off."

While Israel argues that Abbas is trying to dictate the outcome of border talks by going to the U.N., the recognition request presented to the world body in fact calls for a quick resumption of negotiations on all core issues of the conflict, including borders.

Netanyahu's predecessors accepted the 1967 lines as a basis for border talks. Netanyahu has rejected the idea, while pressing ahead with Jewish settlement building on war-won land, giving Abbas little incentive to negotiate.

For Abbas, the U.N. bid is crucial if he wants to maintain his leadership and relevance, especially following the recent conflict between his Hamas rivals in Gaza and Israel. The conflict saw the Islamic militant group claim victory and raise its standing in the Arab world, while Abbas' Fatah movement was sidelined and marginalized.

In a departure from previous opposition, the Hamas militant group, which rules the Gaza Strip, said it wouldn't interfere with the U.N. bid, and its supporters joined some of the celebrations Thursday.

In the West Bank city of Hebron, some in a crowd of several thousand raised green Hamas flags, while in the city of Ramallah, senior figures of Hamas and Islamic Jihad, two militant groups normally opposed to Abbas, addressed the crowd.

"It's the right step in the right direction," Nasser al-Shaer, a former deputy prime minister from Hamas, said of the U.N. bid.

The Palestinians chose the "International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People" for the vote. Before it takes place, there will be a morning of speeches by supporters focusing on the rights of the Palestinians. Abbas is scheduled to speak at that meeting, and again in the afternoon when he will present the case for Palestinian statehood in the General Assembly.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton warned Wednesday that the U.N. vote will not fulfill the goal of independent Palestinian and Israeli states living side by side in peace, which the U.S. strongly supports because that requires direct negotiations.

"We need an environment conducive to that," she told reporters in Washington. "And we've urged both parties to refrain from actions that might in any way make a return to meaningful negotiations that focus on getting to a resolution more difficult."

The U.S. Congress has threatened financial sanctions if the Palestinians improve their status at the United Nations.

Ahead of the vote, Republican Sen. Orrin Hatch filed an amendment to a defense bill Wednesday that would eliminate funding for the United Nations if the General Assembly changes Palestine's status.

Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev said that by going to the U.N., the Palestinians violate "both the spirit and the word of signed agreements to solve issues through negotiations," which broke down four years ago.

But Israeli officials appeared to back away from threats of drastic measures if the Palestinians get U.N. approval, with officials suggesting the government would take steps only if the Palestinians use their new status to act against Israel.

Regev, meanwhile, affirmed that Israel is willing to resume talks without preconditions.

U.N. diplomats said they will be listening closely to Abbas' speech to the General Assembly on Thursday afternoon before the vote to see if he makes an offer of fresh negotiations with no strings, which could lead to new talks. The Palestinians have been demanding a freeze on Israeli settlements as a precondition.

As a sign of the importance Israel attaches to the vote, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman flew to New York and was scheduled to meet Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon before the vote.

Unlike the Security Council, there are no vetoes in the General Assembly and the resolution to raise the Palestinian status from an observer to a nonmember observer state only requires a majority vote for approval. To date, 132 countries — over two-thirds of the U.N. member states — have recognized the state of Palestine.

The Palestinians have been courting Western nations, especially the Europeans, seen as critical to enhancing their international standing. A number have announced they will vote "yes" including France, Italy, Spain, Norway, Denmark and Switzerland. Those opposed or abstaining include the U.S., Israel, Germany, Canada, the Netherlands and Australia.

The Palestinians turned to the General Assembly after the United States announced it would veto their bid last fall for full U.N. membership until there is a peace deal with Israel.

Following last year's move by the Palestinians to join the U.N. cultural agency UNESCO, the U.S. withheld funds from the organization, which amount to 22 percent of its budget. The U.S. also withheld money from the Palestinians.

Read More...

How Wall Street & London Manufacture Tragedy to Sell War & Regime Change

Atrocities Made to Order

By Tony Cartalucci, Land Destroyer
May 29, 2012

In the wake of the Houla massacre in Syria, and evidence exposing the West’s initial narrative of Syrian troops “shelling to death” around 100 people to be categorically false, people are struggling to understand just what happened. The Guardian has chosen to post unverified witness accounts produced by the Free Syrian Army, seemingly custom tailored to refute evidence brought by Russia to the UN Security Council. The BBC has admitted that only “most” of the accounts they’ve received implicated what they “believe” were Syrian troops, or pro-government militias – and by doing so, imply that some did not and have told a different account.

As the window of opportunity closes for the West to exploit the bloodshed at Houla, the Western media is increasingly backpedaling, retracting, and being caught in a crossfire of their own lies and propagandizing. BBC was caught initially using years’ old photos from Iraq for their Houla coverage, while papers and networks across the board have had to adjust their narratives entirely as each new piece of verified evidence emerges.

What is known is that Syrian troops were engaged with armed militants of the “Free Syrian Army” (FSA) in and around Houla. Syrian troops, as they have been doing throughout the conflict, were using artillery and tanks to target heavily fortified rebel positions from a distance. During or shortly after this exchange, militants began entering homes and killing families with knives and small arms fire. The FSA and Syrian opposition claim the militants were pro-government militias while the government claims they were foreign-backed Al Qaeda terrorists, known to be operating throughout the country. What they weren’t, by all accounts, were Syrian troops.

A recent “editorial” out of the Globe and Mail claims that Russia’s position that opposition forces were involved in the massacre is “laughable.” However, this is divorced from not only reality, but also from a complete understanding of modern 4th generation warfare. From Venezuela to Thailand, Western backed opposition groups have triggered unrest and used it as cover to pick off members of their own movement, to then blame on the targeted government and compound any given conflict until a critical mass is reached, and a targeted government is toppled.

A Historical Example: Bangkok, Thailand 2010

Wall Street-backed former-Thai Prime Minsiter Thaksin Shinawatra, a close associate of the Bush family with connections ranging from before, during, and after his term in office, was ousted from power in 2006 by nationalist forces for abuses of power. Thaksin had worked as a Carlyle Group adviser, sent Thai troops to aid in Bush’s invasion of Iraq, attempted to implement a free trade agreement with Wall Street’s Fortune 500 without parliamentary approval, hosted CIA torture facilities, and prosecuted a “war on drugs” that saw some 2,500 Thais extra-legally executed in the streets, most of whom were later determined to have nothing to do with the drug trade.

Since his ousting in 2006, he has received support from a myriad of prominent US lobbying firms including fellow Carlyle member James Baker and Baker Botts, Bush administration warmonger Robert Blackwill of Barbour Griffith & Rogers, and Neo-Conservative PNAC signatory Kenneth Adelman of Edelman.

With this backing, Thaksin has led an increasingly violent bid to return to power through a “red” color revolution constituting of a large political machine operating in Thailand’s northeast provinces and a personality cult called the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD).

In April of 2010, Thaksin mobilized thousands of UDD members to paralyze Thailand’s capital of Bangkok in retaliation to a court seizure of billions of his ill-gotten assets. On the night of April 10, 2010, when riot troops moved in to disperse the protesters, militants clad in black opened fire on Thai troops.

Page 62 of Human Rights Watch’s “Descent into Chaos (.pdf)” report stated:

“As the army attempted to move on the camp, they were confronted by well-armed men who fired M16 and AK-47 assault rifles at them, particularly at the Khok Wua intersection on Rajdamnoen Road. They also fired grenades from M79s and threw M67 hand grenades at the soldiers. News footage and videos taken by protesters and tourists show several soldiers lying unconscious and bleeding on the ground, as well as armed men operating with a high degree of coordination and military skills.”

HRW, an otherwise dubious organization, only conceded to this a full year after the events unfolded and only in the face of irrefutable photographic and video evidence captured and broadcasted by both professional and amateurs local and foreign journalists. This included videos and photos of militants armed with both AK-47′s and M-16′s. Previously, Thaksin’s Western backers and his opposition leaders had tried to blame all deaths resulting from the M-16′s 5.56mm rounds squarely on the Thai military, including the high-profile death of Reuters cameraman Hiro Muramoto. With proof that opposition militants were also firing 5.56mm rounds, this political leverage was negated.

However, the most chilling aspect of the April 10, 2010 violence was an incident involving the premeditated murder of a pro-Thaksin protester by Thaksin’s own mercenaries – recorded on tape and extensively photographed, then shamelessly and relentlessly used as propaganda to this very day. The incident took place on April 10, 2010, the same night Reuters cameraman Hiro Muramoto was killed, and gives us immense insight into how Western-backed unrest will take advantage of chaos it itself creates to then purposefully kill both protesters and government troops to escalate tensions and violence while undermining the legitimacy of a targeted government.

In a YouTube video (WARNING: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC) recorded by Thaksin propagandists, protesters can be seen facing off against troops to the left of the screen with other protesters seeking cover as fire is exchanged between militants and troops. In the center of the frame, a very conspicuous man is seen carrying a tall red flag with his attention fixated on men directing him into position. He moves in steps, almost as if posing for a picture with his attention focused on the men directing him. Behind him, with his hat turned backwards, appears to be a spotter shadowing the flagman’s moves and flashing a series of hand signals to the men on the left directing the flagman.

Images: Frames taken from the video with annotations describe the events that unfolded shortly before and directly after Thaksin mercenaries intentionally killed one of their own protesters. The final image eventually made it onto the cover of Thaksin propaganda magazine, “Voice of Taksin.” (click images to enlarge)

….

Men in the upper left of the screen can be seen waving the flagman into position as they tell other protesters to “get down” before a shot is fired taking off the top of the man’s skull. As protesters panic and run off camera, the spotter moving with the flagman calmly stands above the dead man and waves in a photographer who takes the infamous pictures that would soon be featured on the cover of Thaksin’s propaganda publication, the “Voice of Taksin.” It must be remembered that the video camera was fixated on this otherwise insignificant flagman the entire time leading up to the gruesome event, to specifically capture the entire, premeditated murder.

Image: A censored version of the very explicit “special” cover of Thaksin propaganda magazine, “Voice of Taksin,” featuring a man killed not even a minute ago. The flag he was conspicuously waving just moments before lays across his chest and was most likely handed to him to aid mercenary snipers in targeting him. The original cover with translations can be found here. (WARNING: EXTREMELY GRAPHIC.) The editor of “Voice of Taksin” has since been arrested and imprisoned for his role in the 2010 violence – however Western “human rights” fronts including US-funded Prachatai maintain that he is a “political prisoner” and a “human rights activist.” Note: on the bottom of the magazine cover a “free” CD is offered featuring video of the gruesome staged murder of this unfortunate man.

….

This horrific, cold-blooded demonstration of the callous, murderous nature of these so-called “pro-democracy” movements sowing chaos from Tunisia to Thailand, and certainly including Syria, illustrates the full depths of depravity from which the global elite and their proxies operate. Behind the thin veneer of revolutionary “singing tomorrows” is a heartless, craven killing machine as eager to dispose of its most adamant supporters as it is inclined to eliminate its most reviled opponents. What was just described has played out not only repeatedly in Thailand, but all across North Africa and the Middle East as well as during previous attempts by the West to oust Hugo Chavez in Venezuela.

Back to Syria

The Free Syrian Army has been regularly engaging in armed combat with government troops and now more than ever, are better equipped with communication equipment, weapons, cash and logistical support from the West and the Gulf States. Just as Thaksin’s gunmen were able to draw Thai troops into a conflict used as cover to commit manufactured atrocities to be used as propaganda against the Thai government, militants in Syria have already demonstratively employed similar tactics. In 2011, “mystery gunmen” would regularly start firefights during protest rallies identical to the one in Bangkok, firing on both Syrian troops and protesters, with both sides describing elusive “rooftop snipers.”

Houla appears to simply be on a much larger scale, involving militants most likely not affiliated with local FSA fighters or the Syrian government, but foreign elements just as the Syrian government has claimed. Just as in Bangkok where protesters were taken as much by surprise as Thai troops at the arrival of Thaksin’s militants, FSA fighters, Houla residents, and Syrian troops all seem baffled as to who exactly committed the atrocities.

And amongst all the finger pointing, it is the politically-motivated haste by the US, UK, France, Israel, and the Muslim Brotherhood to condemn the massacre, baselessly blame the Syrian government, and cry in unison for military intervention that is by far the most incriminating evidence yet as to who was really behind the bloodbath. Cui Bono? To whose benefit? NATO and its Middle Eastern proxies have made it abundantly clear it was to their benefit.

Clearly there is the distinct possibility that a third party took advantage of a prolonged engagement between the FSA and government troops in Houla, to manufacture a very real atrocity. With so few facts in hand, it would be the height of irresponsibility to lay blame on anyone so squarely that punitive actions are leveled. So while the Globe and Mail berates Russia for suggesting that “the blame must be determined objectively,” it is by far, without debate, the most sensible course of action to take. If the West laments the distrust it now suffers, it has only itself, and its long history of running death squads in exactly this manner, to blame.

Antichrist Must Come First and Sit in the Temple Claiming to be God, Causing a Great Falling Away from the Christian Faith

The Amazing Parallels of End Time Scriptures (Excerpt)
By John Aggson Sr., Liberty To The Captives

AntiChrist will come before Christ returns and he will sit in the rebuilt temple in Jerusalem claiming to be God. Why is it that people can never see the blindness and sin in their OWN GENERATION? Why can we look back to the past and see the sins of others in the Bible down through time, but do not even suspect that today, we are doing the same thing the Pharisees of old did? Why can we not see the “blindness” and “callousness” in our own hearts?

Many folks have gotten fed up over “arguing:” over this subject, and say that “they refuse to even discuss it anymore!” I have seen brethren almost come to blows and scream and yell at each other over this topic! The devil gets really angry when it is brought up, because it is exposing one of his GREATEST DECEITS THAT HE IS FOISTING UPON GOD’S UNSUSPECTING CHURCH IN THE END TIME! It is certainly wrong to get ANGRY over anything and get mad at each other, but it is not wrong to discuss such a serious and important matter as this!? Satan just loves that feint! That “cop out!” He knows that then every one will be afraid to bring the subject up after that for fear of starting a “hullabullo,” and will just not talk about it. Then folks go on teaching their perverted and distorted view to the flock of God’s Church! He is so clever! First of all, it is NOT a light thing, and will have very dramatic negative effects on God’s Church when things do not transpire as folks have been taught they will!

Most folks teaching this “pre-trib” view are doing it in ignorance; just “parroting” what they have been taught since they got saved, without having ever taken the time to study it all out carefully, and prayerfully. The Lord is very merciful, and understanding, and patient. He is trying to get folks to “see the light” on this, but it is very difficult. “As the branch bends, so grows the tree!?” And once a person is grounded deeply in this false belief system, it seems to be very hard to convince them otherwise, or to even get them to LOOK AT THE FACTS surrounding all this, and read Scriptures like the ones in this study.

Most will “stubbornly” cling to this false view, until it becomes apparent that it is wrong, and then they will say, “Oh WHY, didn’t we see this plain and simple truth laid out in the Scriptures?” “WHY couldn’t we see what Jesus warned SO CLEARLY of concerning all this?” Suddenly the “blinders” will be “ripped off” and they will clearly see; but too late to alter the effects of what it will cause on “the Body!” Those who are “strong” in the Lord will survive, but sadly, it will not go so good for those who “follow afar off; who will begin to question their FAITH, and the LORD, and to become very confused!” Many may just “give up!?”

This is something that should be brought out into the open and discussed above almost all else, after Salvation and other basics of the Faith! People say that it is just “causing division.” The TRUTH always causes division among those who resent hearing it! Jesus’s Words caused division. Paul’s words caused division, and Paul ARGUED with the Pharisees and “contended” and “disputed” with them for 3 years in the Book of Acts, before getting fed up with them and telling them he’d had it with them and was now going to the Gentiles! So it is not wrong to “contend” for the Truth!

Many Christians will support the antiChrist when he comes, thinking that he couldn’t possibly be the antiChrist or they would have been raptured out already!? He’s not coming with “horns and hoofs” and a “pitchfork!?” He will appear as “AN ANGEL OF LIGHT!” He will appear to be a very righteous and Godly man, a great man of peace, who will be championing the cause of Israel in the world courts, demanding that they be given the right to rebuild their temple, (which he plans to sit in and rule from) and that they should be given the right to re-start their animal sacrifices once again.

Folks will think he’s the greatest man of peace and friend of Israel to ever come along!? He’s going to fool nearly EVERYONE! DON’T YOU BE DECEIVED! Read these Scriptures again and pray over them, asking the Lord if these things are really the truth!? Satan is setting the entire church system up for the greatest “sucker punch” he’s ever given them; knocking their faith out by total surprise and shock, when things do not turn out the way folks have been taught! He’s lulled almost the entire church to sleep. Wake up and see what’s coming! He just LOVES this method of catching folks off guard by total surprise, and causing the greatest amount of fear possible in an instant! It causes such great confusion, and he is the “author of confusion.” He wants to totally KNOCK OUT THE CHURCH IN ONE PUNCH!!!

Like a great commanding general who studies out his war strategies long in advance, Satan sat back and looked over this “end time” scenario centuries ago. He knew he would have to put the Church to sleep to be able to catch them by surprise in this fashion. He began to enter the Church with false “sleepy” doctrines.

Pre-trib rapture teaching is part of Satan’s long term strategy to get the Church right where he wants us so he can wreak the most havoc and cause the greatest amount of confusion and damage possible when his man, the “beast” or “antiChrist” comes to power!? The Church will “rock and reel” under the fiery darts of the one who will “speak great words against the Most High,” and “wear out the Saints of the Most High;” who will “make war with the Saints and PREVAIL against them!?” And when the “guillotines begin to fall,” and people begin to lose their heads for refusing to deny their Faith in Jesus Christ, many may begin to “jump off the boat” like “scared men fleeing a sinking ship!?”

Instead of a “pre-tribulation rapture,” many are going to be “yanked” out of their beds in the middle of the night, by complete surprise; by “jackbooted” storm troopers, brandishing sub-machine guns, and dressed in black S.W.A.T. gear; and hauled off to PRISON CAMPS, that have already been set up all over America, under a program first designed by Lt. Colonel Oliver North, in the days of President Ronald Reagan, called “REX 84!” This was even exposed in Congress by Congressman Jack Brooks, who publicly challenged Oliver North about it and was told to “shut up” as it was a matter of national security! Although originally designed to “house” American gun-owners and patriots who refuse to go along with a “new world order” takeover — complete with a massive “gun confiscation program” — as well as other “dissidents;” this same program in the hands of a future administration may be used to lock up even other “Christian dissidents” who, although “peaceful” and non-violent, do not “believe” the way they are supposed to (ie: folks who dare to expose America and Israel’s sins!). Daniel the Prophet also spoke of this same event over and over; of a GREAT PERSECUTION of God’s Saints in the END TIME TRIBULATION PERIOD, under the TERRIFYING REIGN OF THE ANTICHRIST.

Many may support the antiChrist thinking he’s a good man, and not suspecting him at all because they have been taught they will be “raptured out” first before he comes!? Wake up America! YOU ARE the “MIGHTY AND THE HOLY PEOPLE!” spoken of by Daniel the prophet. The American churches are going to feel the main brunt of this persecution, along with the tiny nation of Israel!

The “indignation” spoken of by Daniel is “God’s indignation” against the nation of Israel for “trying to take their kingdom back in the flesh” without going through the proper “doorway” of JESUS CHRIST His Son, (as per John 10) and winning the world through His love, instead of considering themselves better than everyone else (God is no respecter of persons) and mowing them down with machine guns, bombs and bullets, to take back what they consider “rightfully theirs,” — but is NOT since the Lord drove them out 2,000 years ago. And also because they are willing to accept “one who comes in his own name” to get this great advantage and blessing, instead of having accepted Him who came “in the name of His Father,” Jesus Christ! This “indignation of God” is also against the duped American church system for “aiding and abbetting” them in this great end time “fiasco!”

Both the American church system and the modern nation of so-called “Israel” are going to be PURGED AND PURIFIED AND MADE WHITE HERE to get them straightened out on this issue! When they finally realize all this — under the antiChrist’s relentless attacks and his actual “winning” against them and subduing and destroying them — AND THEY REPENT (as per Zechariah 13), then the “Lord will come and fight against those nations that have come against them, and He will return in all His glory to fight for His people and deliver them from their STRONG OPPRESSOR!” (as per Zechariah 14).

This is another “great lie” that has entered the “corrupt and compromised American church system” that the Lord is going to expose before all, before the great day of His Coming! Jesus said in John chapters 8 & 10, to the Pharisees, that they were not going to be saved and blessed by God merely because they were “flesh sons of Abraham,” and that they had to go through “HIM, the ‘DOOR’, to get into the kingdom!?” Now, 2,000 years later the same bunch with the same mindset have returned to foist this same belief on the followers of Christ, and most have warmly received it with open arms, no questions asked, and would support them to the death, fighting to get their land back for them — thinking that they are “doing God service!?” But don’t worry! God is going to “straighten everyone out on this” before the Lord returns! It will be made very plain!

As both America and Israel “rock and reel” under the antiChrist’s future attacks, and coming terrorist attacks — and natural disasters like famines, earthquakes, weather related disasters, disease, and ill health — many will TURN HARD to the Lord and begin questioning, “why is all this coming upon us?”

Most Churches are turning their people into “MODERN PHARISEES” instead of loving followers of Christ, like the early disciples were. And then they are built on the false foundation of these other modern “comfortable” teachings that put them TOTALLY TO SLEEP, concerning the totally serious and sometimes “horrifying” end time events that are coming; and make them into “self-righteous judges” of today’s “wicked sinners” and “publicans and harlots,” who condemn folks to hell with their tongues, instead of loving them into the kingdom. The TRIBULATION is the time period in which the antiChrist tries to stamp out all other religions, and mainly Christianity; and to foist upon the world the worship of himself as God. During the tribulation, 1/3rd of everything is destroyed by the Lord’s “selective judgments,” while we are protected miraculously by the Lord right here on the earth.

Israeli Debate About Whether to Go to War Against Iran Intensifies

Iran Steps Up Nuclear Warhead Work, Israel Media Report

Reuters
August 12, 2012

Iran has stepped up work to develop a nuclear warhead, Israeli newspapers said on Sunday, citing officials in Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government and leaked U.S. intelligence.

The front-page reports in the liberal Haaretz, a frequent Netanyahu critic, and in the conservative, pro-government Israel Hayom could intensify Israeli debate about whether to go to war against Iran - and soon - over its disputed atomic projects.

Doing so would defy appeals by U.S. President Barack Obama, seeking re-election in November, to allow more time for international diplomacy. Tehran says its nuclear ambitions are peaceful and has threatened wide-ranging reprisals if attacked.

Citing an unnamed senior Israeli official, Haaretz said a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) compiled by the Obama administration included a "last-minute update" about significant Iranian progress in the development of a nuclear warhead "far beyond the scope known" to U.N. inspectors.

Israel Hayom reported NIE findings that Iran had "boosted efforts" to advance its nuclear program, including work to develop ballistic missile warheads, and said U.S. and Israeli assessments largely tallied on this intelligence.

Neither daily newspaper provided direct quotes or detailed evidence. For Haaretz, it was the second report since Thursday purporting to draw on a new NIE.

Israeli government spokesmen had no immediate comment. Asked about the reports in an Israel Radio interview, Cabinet Secretary Zvi Hauser suggested they be taken at face value.

"There is too much attribution of manipulation, which does not exist, to this or that official," Hauser said. "There are a great many things that are just as they are, for better or worse."

Washington has not commented on whether such an NIE exists. But its officials say the U.S. intelligence assessment remains that the Islamic republic is undecided on whether to build a bomb and is years away from any such nuclear capability.

DOMESTIC DIVIDE

Israel, widely reputed to have the region's sole atomic arsenal, sees a nuclear-armed Iran as a mortal menace and has long threatened to attack its arch-foe preemptively.

The war talk is meant, in part, to stiffen sanctions on Tehran by conflict-wary world powers. Israel and the United States have publicly sought to play down their differences.

Much of the media scrutiny has been on opposition to the war option within the Israeli cabinet, military and public, given the tactical and strategic risks involved. But opinion polls suggest support for an attack is growing.

Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper suggested on Friday that a destabilizing Israeli attack on Iran before November could undermine Obama, a Democrat whose ties with Netanyahu have been testy, and help Republican rival Mitt Romney, who casts himself as a better friend of the Jewish state.

But a senior Israeli official quoted in a separate Haaretz story spoke of the question of who would head the next U.S. administration as largely irrelevant regarding Iran given Israel's belief that "we cannot place our fate in the hands of others" and "in statesmanship there are no future contracts".

That official was described by Haaretz as a "decision-maker" and veteran security figure who owns a grand piano - strong signals it was Ehud Barak, Israel's longtime, centrist defense minister. Ex-general Barak is also an accomplished pianist who has recently briefed media in his Tel Aviv penthouse.

Though the Obama administration has refused to rule out a U.S. war of last resort to deny Iran the means to make a bomb, the Israeli official quoted by Haaretz said "expectation of such a binding American assurance now is not serious".

"And if Mitt Romney is elected, history shows that presidents do not undertake dramatic operations in their first year in office unless forced to," the Israeli official said.

U.S., Israel at Odds Over Iran Nuke Program Intelligence

U.S., Israel at Odds Over Iran Nuke Program Intelligence

By Olivier Knox, The Ticket
August 11, 2012

The White House expressed confidence Friday that American intelligence will know if Iran escalates its nuclear program in a sprint to build an atomic bomb—a day after Israel's defense minister warned that the allies might not know "in time" to prevent it.

"We have eyes, we have visibility into the program," press secretary Jay Carney told reporters at his daily briefing. "We feel confident that we would be able to detect a break-out move by Iran towards the acquisition of a nuclear weapon."

"We believe there continues to be the time and space to pursue this course," Carney said, referring to punishing American and international economic sanctions on the Islamic republic. "It is the best course of action to ensure that Iran does not obtain a nuclear weapon. We take no options off the table, and we consult with our allies all the time about the situation in Iran with regards to this program."

But Carney's professed confidence about the quality of the information regarding Iran's nuclear program, widely seen by American and Israeli officials as an attempt to acquire the ability to build a nuclear weapon, appeared to conflict sharply with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak's just a day earlier.

Barak told Israel Radio that news reports of a new American intelligence assessment that Iran has made surprising progress towards a nuclear weapon makes it "less clear and certain that we will know everything in time about their steady progress toward military nuclear capability."

Israel has warned that it views a nuclear-armed Iran as a threat to its very existence and reserves the right to use military force against Tehran's atomic program. Carney's reference to taking "no options off the table" is diplo-speak for the same thing—but where Israeli officials have been ramping up their public warnings about possible military action, their American counterparts have steadfastly insisted that there is time yet to tighten the economic vise further on Iran in hopes of a diplomatic breakthrough.

"We work very closely with our Israeli counterparts on this issue. We share information as a matter of course, and we share an assessment of where Iran is, and what its capacities are, and what the timelines look like," Carney said Friday. He noted that "international inspectors" from the U.N. nuclear watchdog agency have had access to key atomic sites in Iran.

"It is our firm belief that there is time and space to pursue the diplomatic option that includes an extremely, and increasingly, aggressive sanctions, includes diplomatic isolation, and international condemnation," he said.

Mitt Romney has repeatedly accused Obama of being weak in the face of Iran's defiance of international pressure—but has not spelled out a policy that differs in any meaningful way from the incumbent's approach. Still, aides to the president are mindful of the potential political dimension in attacks claiming that there is daylight between the United States and Israel.

On Thursday, Israel's Haaretz newspaper reported that Obama had received a new National Intelligence Estimate (NIE)—the consensus assessment of the American intelligence community—that "Iran has made surprising, notable progress in the research and development of key components of its military nuclear program." The daily cited unnamed "Western diplomats and Israeli officials."

Carney declined to comment on the news report, but some American officials bristled at what they saw as a naked Israeli effort to pressure Washington into taking a more hawkish line.

If the Haaretz report is correct, the new NIE would be yet another shift in American intelligence agencies' assessment of just what Tehran is doing—though nothing so momentous as an NIE compiled in 2007. That report said Iran had halted its military nuclear program in 2003 and that there was no clear evidence that those efforts had resumed. The NIE came in the aftermath of the Iraq War intelligence debacle, in which the United States incorrectly insisted Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Iran flatly denies that it seeks nuclear weapons and insists that it aims only to bolster its ability to produce energy for civilian purposes.

Some American officials say that Iran wants the ability to build a nuclear weapon, not necessarily to actually acquire an atomic arsenal.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper told the Senate Intelligence Committee in January that:

"We assess Iran is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons, in part by developing various nuclear capabilities that better position it to produce such weapons, should it choose to do so. We do not know, however, if Iran will eventually decide to build nuclear weapons."

He underlined that Iran was guided by a rational "cost-benefit" approach that he said gave the international community leverage to shape Tehran's decision.

While Republicans have accused Obama of shortchanging the security of Israel—thought to be the region's only, and undeclared, nuclear power—they have also loudly complained about national security disclosures regarding an unprecedented cyberwar effort by the Obama administration to sabotage Iran's atomic program.

Israel Media Talk of Imminent Iran War Push

Reuters
August 10, 2012

Israel's prime minister and defense minister would like to attack Iran's nuclear sites before the U.S. election in November but lack crucial support within their cabinet and military, an Israeli newspaper said on Friday.

The front-page report in the biggest-selling daily Yedioth Ahronoth came amid mounting speculation - fuelled by media leaks from both the government and its detractors at home and abroad - that war with Iran could be imminent even though it might rupture the bedrock ties between Israel and the United States.

"Were it up to Benjamin Netanyahu and Ehud Barak, an Israeli military strike on the nuclear facilities in Iran would take place in the coming autumn months, before the November election in the United States," Yedioth said in the article by its two senior commentators, which appeared to draw on discussions with the defense minister but included no direct quotes.

Spokesmen for Prime Minister Netanyahu and Barak declined to comment.

Yedioth said the top Israeli leaders had failed to win over other security cabinet ministers for a strike on Iran now, against a backdrop of objections by the armed forces given the big tactical and strategic hurdles such an operation would face.

"The respect which in the past formed a halo around prime ministers and defense ministers and helped them muster a majority for military decisions, is gone, no more," Yedioth said. "Either the people are different, or the reality is different."

Israel has long threatened to attack its arch-foe, seeing a mortal menace in Iranian nuclear advances and dwindling opportunities to deal them a blow with its limited military clout. Washington has urged Israel to give diplomacy more time.

The war talk is meant, in part, to stiffen sanctions on Tehran - which denies seeking the bomb and says its nuclear program is for peaceful purposes - by conflict-wary world powers. Israel and the United States have publicly sought to play down their differences, the latter saying military force would be a last-ditch option against Iran.

A Reuters survey in March found that most Americans would support such action, by their government or Israel's, should there be evidence Iran was building nuclear weapons - even if the result was a rise in gas prices.

BOMB, BALLOT

But U.S. President Barack Obama, seeking re-election in November, has counseled against what he would deem premature Israeli unilateralism. He recently sent top officials to try to close ranks with the conservative Netanyahu.

Obama's Republican challenger, Mitt Romney, an old friend of Netanyahu who casts himself as a more reliable bulwark for Israeli security, also visited Jerusalem last month.

The Yedioth article said, without citing sources, that some government advisers in Israel and the United States believed a pre-November strike might "embarrass Obama and contribute to Romney‮‮‮‮‮‮'‬‬‬‬‬‬‎s chances of being elected."

Yedioth said the aim of an initial Israeli attack on Iran would be to trigger an escalation that would draw in superior U.S. forces - but described Barak as dismissive of this theory.

"He believes that America will not go to war, but will do everything in its power to stop it. It will give Israel the keys to its emergency (munitions) stores, which were set up in Israel in the past. Israel needs no more than this," Yedioth said.

Netanyahu, apparently trying to avoid being seen as meddling in U.S. politics, has voiced gratitude for cross-partisan support of Israel in Washington, while insisting his country remains responsible for its own security.

Haaretz, an influential liberal Israeli newspaper, quoted an unnamed senior official in the Netanyahu government as saying the Jewish state - widely assumed to have the region's only atomic arsenal - potentially faced a greater danger from Iran than on the eve of its 1967 war with several Arab neighbors.

That thinking seems to be gaining ground domestically.

A poll published on Friday by the mass-circulation Maariv daily found that 41 percent of Israelis saw no chance of non-military pressure on Iran succeeding, versus 22 percent who thought diplomacy could work.

While 39 percent of Maariv's respondents said dealing with Iran should be left to the United States and other world powers, 35 percent said they would support Israel going it alone as a last resort - up from previous polls that found around 20 percent support for the unilateral option.

Palestine's Bid for Statehood Status Would Find Majority Support in the United Nations

Of all the obstacles blocking the way to peace between the Palestinians and Israelis, the status of Jerusalem is arguably the most intractable. For Israelis, all of the city, including East Jerusalem and its West Bank suburbs captured in 1967, is their "eternal and indivisible" capital, the home the Jews dreamed of through 2,000 years of exile, and the site of their revered Western Wall. For Palestinians, there can be no peace until Israel cedes them control over East Jerusalem, a symbol of their national struggle and home to Islam's third holiest site, al-Aqsa mosque and the glittering Dome of the Rock.

In the absence of a deal, or even meaningful negotiations, Israel has been busy developing the holy city, building impressive, stone-clad neighbourhoods across the annexed land in defiance of constant international criticism. Israeli officials are also pushing to expand the nearby settlements of Gilo and Har Homa, thereby building a broad, concrete crescent just north of the hilltop town of Bethlehem.

Some 35 percent of Palestinian economic activity is centered on a line that stretches from Bethlehem through East Jerusalem and on to Ramallah, the West Bank's administrative centre, north of Jerusalem. Critics say the southern settlements will snap this link.

"It is like putting a ribbon around a finger and pulling tighter and tighter until all the blood is cut off," said Ashraf Khatib, a Palestinian activist from East Jerusalem.

"But it is not just in the south. The Israelis are creating facts on the ground across the eastern city," he added.

A proud exponent of that policy is Aryeh King, the founder of the Israeli Land Fund whose stated mission is to "reclaim the land of Israel for the people of Israel".

"We are locating property in all of East Jerusalem. In Jerusalem, every piece of land is important. All the plots put together can change the reality," said King."The reality we don't want to see happen is one that we think would lead to catastrophe - the division of the city."

Jews, from Biblical kings such as David and Solomon to present day Israelis, see Jerusalem as the home of their religion and as a national capital fit for their people. Most Israelis dismiss accusations their presence in East Jerusalem is illegal and bridle at the term "settlement" to describe what they refer to as Jewish neighbourhoods.[Source]

Israel Sees UN Majority for Palestine Status Upgrade

Reuters
August 5, 2012

The Palestinians' bid to upgrade their status at the United Nations would find majority support there but would not bring them closer to statehood and peace with Israel, Israel's U.N. envoy said on Sunday.

Citing stalled peacemaking and Israeli settlement-building on occupied West Bank land where they seek sovereign independence, the Palestinians said on Saturday they would renew a bid to win U.N. recognition as a state.

Ron Prosor, the Israeli ambassador to the United Nations, accused the Palestinians of trying to recapture international attention that has shifted to crises in Iran, Egypt and Syria.

"There is an attempt (by the Palestinians) to make unilateral moves in order to internationalize the conflict," Prosor told Israel Radio in a telephone interview.

"But beyond what are perhaps the feelings of frustration, it is important to remember that the path to peace really is through the negotiating table with Israel."

The Palestinians want to found a state in the West Bank, East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, which Israel captured in the 1967 war. Though Israel quit Gaza in 2005, it claims East Jerusalem as its capital - a move not recognized abroad - and says it would keep swathes of West Bank settlements under any peace deal. The United Nations deems the settlements illegal.

Full U.N. membership for Palestine would require approval by the Security Council, where Israel's ally, the United States, would likely wield its veto given its demand the Palestinians set up their state in agreement with the Jewish state.

So the Palestinians, in what they describe as an interim move, plan to ask the U.N. General Assembly next month to accord them non-member observer status, which would allow them to join a number of U.N. agencies and the International Criminal Court.

The Palestinians are currently a U.N. observer "entity" with no voting rights. A similar statehood upgrade drive last year proved short-lived amid financial sanctions and diplomatic counter-lobbying by Israel and the United States.

Prosor said the Palestinians have a "guaranteed majority" in the 193-member General Assembly - enough to bestow non-member observer status, which the envoy predicted would be used "to hurt us (Israel)" in various international forums.

Israel has accused Western-backed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas of going to the United Nations to evade negotiations that would entail both territorial compromise and that he reassert control over Gaza, which he lost in a 2007 civil war to Hamas Islamists hostile to the Jewish state.

"In essence, Abu Mazen (Abbas) today has zero control in Gaza," Prosor said in separate remarks to Israel's Army Radio, adding that the Palestinians' U.N. campaign "will change nothing on the ground".

Palestinians have made a freeze on Israeli settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem a condition for returning to peace talks. Israel cites biblical and historical ties to the areas and says the settlement issue should be decided in negotiations.

Related:

• The Importance of Jerusalem and the Third Temple Being Built for Anti-christ
• Five Steps of the Plan to Produce Antichrist
• Obama Favors Arab Sovereignty Over the Temple Mount
• After the Third World War, the New Temple Will Be Rebuilt for Antichrist, Not Jesus Christ
• Fervent Masonic Desire to Rebuild Solomon's Temple
• Zionism vs. Peace in the Middle East
• The Age to Come: 'The Kingdom Age' vs. 'The Eternal Age'
• In the Age to Come, We Shall Have Eternal Life
• The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
• The Battle Over the Temple Mount
• Fatah-Hamas Pact and the Third Intifada
• The Fourth and Final Kingdom
• A Fourth and Final Global Empire Will Arise Out of Chaos, Just as the Third Reich Arose from Chaos for Hitler
• Barren National Israel Has Been Replaced By Fruitful Spiritual Israel