Wow. Below is an identity theft article which almost has it all. The criminal activity in this case included check forgery, ACH fraud (automated clearing house – using the checking account number electronically), new account fraud, true name fraud-banking, utility identity theft, elderly abuse, and minor identity theft. Perpetrators of identity theft have a longer run in their business of fraud when they do not leave such an easy trail. This perpetrator made the investigative case very easy. All too often, amateur criminals find the path to criminal activity a very easy one but, like this girl, don’t believe that their apprehension is possible.
The successful identity thief does not use the same identity for very long, trading an identity they successfully used for another identity or just moving on to the next victim. Extended cases of fraud, one perpetrator using one victim’s information repeatedly, rarely occurs when the both the victim and perpetrator live within the same jurisdiction and know each other. Now, it is not uncommon at all that the victim knows the perpetrator. Most victims of identity theft do not know how their identities were compromised. But of those victims who knew who the perpetrator was, in 48% of the cases the perpetrator is someone the victim knows or trusts. This is a sad commentary.
In this story below, the perpetrator made a victim not only of an elderly patient who was in her charge and probably incapable of knowing what was happening but also victimized her child and a “boyfriend”. In the case of the “boyfriend”, I would venture to guess that he had a difficult time claiming that he was victimized. The perpetrator’s fraud was such that he appeared to benefit from the fraud. A fraud investigator would see that the boyfriend’s name was added to a fraudulent checking account and his debts were paid through the agency of stolen money. What was purchased with that fraudulent account? Did he benefit from that money? I have seen plenty of fraud claims declined for less. The most frequent fraud claim declined by industry fraud investigators in my experience is the fraudulently opened cellular telephone account where the fraudulent cell phone number called the home or cell phone number of the victim. Another victim of the identity theft perpetrator, her unborn child, may be a teenager before his/her mother will be released from prison.
A former nursing home employee accused of stealing from a 75-year-old patient's checking account to pay her and a boyfriend's bills, has pleaded guilty to identity theft.
A year ago, the 28-year-old Conshohocken defendant, Jennifer Ann Antonelli, worked as a nursing assistant at Andorra Woods Health Care Center, at 9209 Ridge Pike, in Lafayette Hill, when she began fraudulently drawing on the man's Commerce Bank checking account to pay Comcast Cable, PECO Energy and Cavalier Telephone and credit card bills, according to court papers.
Antonelli admitted spending a total of $17,090.17 during the fraud scheme while working at the nursing home between Jan. 16, 2007 and Nov. 14, 2007.
"She took advantage of a patient in a nursing home," said Montgomery County Assistant District Attorney Bob Sander, who heads up the DA's Economic Crimes unit.
An investigation into the fraudulent bank withdrawals discovered that the defendant opened a Capitol One and Credit One credit card accounts on the Internet using the patient's bank information.
One of the credit cards was opened in her daughter's name. The girl is a minor.
An investigation revealed that the woman paid Comcast with four fraudulent checks from a checking account she opened in her "boyfriend's name," James Brewer Jr., according to Sander.
Brewer's name also appears as a Capitol One accountholder. Besides paying her own bills, Antonelli also made payments to her boyfriend's PECO account, according to the affidavit.
Fraudulent Internet purchases were made to Uniform Unlimited, too, using the elderly man's checking account.
When investigators questioned the nursing assistant in April, she admitted stealing the patient's information to paying bills.
Antonelli, who is eight months pregnant, was arraigned and released on bail to await sentencing. Sander said she faces seven to 14 years in prison.
Since this is the week corresponding to the Torah reading of Toldos, it is appropriate to look at ties between Toldos and last week’s Torah reading of Chayei Sara. Looking forward, we can bring in to the discussion Rachel and Yaakov. There are indeed connecting themes between all of these in Bereshis/Genesis.
What can we learn from Rivka/Rebecca? Rivka lived in a home of Besuel and Lavan and yet demonstrated the type of good characteristics and mannerisms fit to become a matriarch of Israel. Her family did not share with her those same good characteristics. How does a Rivka come from the home of a Besuel and Lavan?
From Rivka we learn that a Jew has an obligation not just to maintain a proper yiddishkeit perspective, but to elevate herself nonetheless, blocking out those negative images (its so easy just to get along – but not the Torah thing to do) and to ascend in new heights of Torah and mitzvos, even if she finds herself in a society dominated by derech Lavan (mannerisms of a Lavan.
This week in the portion of Toldos, Rivka, now almost a mother is having a difficult pregnancy. A spiritual battle of immense proportions is taking place inside her womb. Yaakov and Esav are engaged in a struggle for domination. After Yaakov and Esav are born and begin maturing, it is very clear that these two sons of Yitchak/Isaac and Rivka are growing into two very different people. Yaakov is a student of Torah and Esav a deceiver and killer. The question is now the opposite of the one above, how does an Esav come from the home of an Yitchak?
There are no guarantees in life and Hakadosh Baruch Hu does not promise any Jew absolute success in all of their endeavors to grow into a thoughtful, kind and Torah observant Jew. It takes work and nothing can be taken for granted. A good home environment is important but that is no guarantee. An Esav can grow up in the home of Yitchak and Rivka.
And what of Rachel and Yaakov? Now we have come full circle. Rachel and her sister Leah grew up with a Lavan as their father yet both managed to become matriarchs of Israel, not by following in the crooked ways of their father Lavan, but by seeing that the society in which they lived was in desperate need not of their father’s corruption but of the Torah of Yaakov.
So here we are. Every Jew must face these challenges and everyone here today must strive to grow in Torah and Mitzvos observance. That’s a pretty big challenge. But it is a challenge that even the least observant Jew can meet through dedication and hard work. Jews have a spark of G-d inside them which pulls the soul to its source. That inner soul is often overlooked and more often repressed in favor of its stronger partner, the physical life force. But while the physical has natural limitations in time and space, the inner more spiritual soul is far less restrained and can soar to greater heights. This is the challenge for the Jew. The example of success in overcoming all the obstacles to our spiritual growth is the inheritance left to us by our patriarchs and matriarchs.
Imagine a foreign diplomat claiming that the only measure holding up world economic recovery is American politics? What if for instance, it was said that the election season in the United States was the primary reason for failure to secure a new agreement to stop Somali pirates (AKA Islamic ship jacking: see Jefferson and the Barbarians as background)?
I cannot say I am surprised given Ms. Rice's lack of success in diplomacy that she would have the audacity to lay blame for the administration's perceived failure to secure a "peace treaty" between the Arabians and Israel on the Jews. Perceived, meaning, success would have been worse.
Ms. Rice has consistently ignored the facts on the ground and the realities of what a successful conclusion to her talks would look like. Like all power crazed politicians determined to establish a favorable legacy, somehow, just somehow, she has managed to miss the point that the barbarians she is negotiating with are still determined to at the very least undermine the security of the Jews with which she is insisting that an agreement be had. Forget selling her the reality, that they, the barbarians, have never given up the kill factor.
We have been there before. A democratic and non-threatening "Palestine", like a drug induced vision held by professional diplomats who believe all evil can be conquered by the suffrage of the ballot box, is just as much a fantasy as it was when first envisioned as a means to make the Jews trust their Edomite supervisors and would be Yishmaelite masters. What the next four years holds only HaKadosh Baruch Hu can say. We have gone from bad to worse - the instrument in his hands has been forged. Will the children of Israel, the goy kadosh, listen to his words before Edom swings the axe? It will indeed be a great test to blunt the axe before it swings with more political obstruction in the form of a new nationalist government in Israel.
Nov. 23, 2008 Hilary Leila Krieger and AP , THE JERUSALEM POST The fact that Israel and the Palestinians have not reached a peace agreement and will likely fail to do so by the end of 2008 is "largely due to" political turmoil in Israel, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said Sunday night.
"Even though there was not an agreement by the end of the year, it is really largely because of the political situation in Israel," Rice told reporters.
Still, she tried to remain upbeat about the peace process, adding, "It's in pretty good shape."
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert arrived in Washington Sunday, and was set to meet with Deputy National Security Adviser Elliott Abrams later in the day to kick off his farewell visit with US President George W. Bush.
The parley with Abrams was one of a number of preparatory meetings before a working meeting and private dinner with Bush that Olmert will hold Monday night.
Iran, Syria and the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations are expected to dominate the conversations, as Olmert looks to secure policies and priorities worked out with the Bush administration before both he and the US president leave office at the beginning of the next year.
While Bush and Olmert have enjoyed good relations and have seen eye-to-eye on many issues, they have struck different postures when it has come to negotiating with Syria, which Israel has been doing indirectly for many months.
"The prime minister wants to generate a final tailwind for the Syrian track," one of the PM's aides said, as quoted in Reuters ahead of the visit.
Olmert Spokesman Ya'akov Galanti told The Jerusalem Post that was in keeping with Olmert's efforts to continue pressing on these issues until he leaves office when Israeli elections are held in February.
The Oval Office meeting also presents an opportunity for the two leaders to leave a blueprint for fulfilling their ambitious but unrealized Israeli-Palestinian peace agendas. Paving the way for a smooth and productive transition is also an important aim of the visit.
Just a year ago, Olmert and the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, proudly announced the resumption of peace talks after a seven-year hiatus at a summit hosted by Bush in Annapolis, Maryland. The three set a target of wrapping up a final peace deal by the end of 2008.
Despite frequent negotiating sessions, two trips to the region by Bush and eight more by Rice, the sides have little to show for their efforts and have acknowledged the year-end target will not be met.
With his time in power running out, Olmert has become increasingly candid, saying Israel will have to withdraw from almost all the West Bank and parts of east Jerusalem to make peace with the Palestinians. Talk of such concessions was virtually unheard of just a few years ago.
"I know that Mr. Olmert wants to leave to whomever is elected as the next prime minister the peace process in the best shape possible," spokesman Mark Regev said.
Bush, who spent the weekend in Peru at a meeting of Pacific Rim nations, invited Olmert to Washington as part of his final round of talks with world leaders before he leaves office January 20.
Olmert often speaks of the close personal friendship he has developed with Bush over the past three years. When Bush visited Israel in May, Olmert showered the president with praise, saying, "You're a great person, you're a great leader, and you're a great friend." Though largely unpopular internationally, Bush is loved in Israel, where he is seen as a staunch defender of the US ally.
"It's a farewell, a double farewell," said Danny Ayalon, a former Israeli ambassador to Washington. "They will try to sum up a period and cement all the understandings and agreements between the US and Israel over the last eight years."
After Monday's meeting, Olmert and his wife, Aliza, will dine with the president and first lady Laura Bush at the White House.
The two leaders probably also will discuss the global financial crisis and the future of arms and aircraft deals with Israel.
During his visit to Washington, Olmert also planned to meet with Rice, Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Stephen Hadley, and congressional and Jewish leaders.
Bush leaves office on January 20. Olmert, who announced plans to resign in September amid corruption charges, will step down after a successor is chosen February 10.
Rahm Emanuel, appointed Chief of Staff to President elect Barack Hussein Obama has been touted as a sign of the future President's closeness to the Jewish people. The applause came from many corners. For some reason, there is a sense of pride that a Jew born into a family which fought for Israel's Independence can descend to Edom and ride his accomplishments to the White House. Pitch forks have come out from every corner too. AntiJews question his loyalty while Israel supporters have a vision of the political reality called "distancing" - don't expect too much from him. Others, fence riders and eternal optimists see a favorable voice for Israel in the White House. Some find his religious affiliation to be comforting.
But alas, Rahm has lost touch. Electoral politics rounds the edges of harsh, stark reality.
Rahm Emanuel's father, an Irgun veteran had some very real things to say about his son, "obviously he'll influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn't he? What is he, an Arab? He's not going to be mopping floors at the White House." Is this sentiment really so hard to believe?
Now, what is wrong with this? Rahm Emanuel is clearly no Arab. He had/has Israeli citizenship. In Israel, there is an on-going question just how loyal much of the Arab citizenry is and whose side they are on. Benjamin Emanuel's comment is acceptable and accurate coming from a perspective of someone who understands Israel and her interests.
Now we come to the problem. What is best for Israel? Rahm Emanuel's background in the Clinton White House means he believes that Oslo and withdrawal from Yosh is in Israel's best interest. I, and many others differ strongly with that proposal. This argument is the main point of contention now for all Jewry let alone the political scene in Israel. So how does that play out behind closed doors in the White House? The "friends of Israel" understanding is the most likely to transpire. Emanuel will continue to advocate for Israeli concessions in land for agreements with the barbarians to continue changing their ways from pure terrorist to democro-terrorist.
Watch the Rebbe handle this question in 1989:
The American political environment, we are told is different. Loyal Arabian-Americans in the political arena, like Jews, have their own respective constituencies. Benjamin Emanuel's comment does not work in the American political context and his son, with un-paralleled access to the soon to be leader of the Free World was stuck between his Israeli - Jewish roots and his American current reality. Rahm had to make a choice between his father's reality and his political necessity. In so doing, he must now not be "pro-Israel" at least observably, and play by the rules as defined below.
Political maneuvering disguised as ethnic sensitivity is a rule of American politics. The Arabian-Americans utilize the rule regularly. For what other reason do anti-semites (for instance) have to claim "unfair" after being rightly labeled anti-semitic than to secure their claim to a sense of self-righteousness and credibility? Do Arabian-Americans really believe that Israel's security is based upon Israel surrendering Yosh? Mute point. How about America's national interest - better off without Israel? With "Palestine" in addition to or instead of Israel - chas v'shalom?
The current Arabian-American political least common denominator is to reduce the security of Israel as an issue by way of the political arena in the US in order to benefit their barbarian cousins which, in turn, aids their effort to destroy Israel. Not a pretty way to package this up in political correctness campaign talk but it is reality. See below and other links at those websites. Advocacy for "Palestine" is by default anti-Israel.
All of this talk is framed within that great American concept of "fairness" mis-applied by liberals and lefties as a function of outcome. These associations are supposedly the main stream, CAIR and Islam specific organizations not included.
Does Rahm actually believe what his father said? Who knows? Did he respect his father enough to explain the difference between the realities of Israel and the US in terms of what is "acceptable talk"? No. To say, as he is quoted "These are not the values upon which I was raised or those of my family," he is dis-respecting his father (although his mother, according to Wikipedia was a union organizer and civil rights activist) and one could easily question his honesty for saying so but again only Rahm Emanuel can answer that question.
Israel would not exist today without the strength of commitment and courage defined as internal fortitude by the men and women of Benjamin Emanuel's generation. If Rahm and his Edomized balancing act of political correctness vs. reality were around instead of his father's sense of purpose in the middle of the 20th century, Israel today would look very different albeit even existing at all.
Emanuel 'sorry' for dad's Arab remarks- JPost Nov. 14, 2008 Associated Press , THE JERUSALEM POST US President-elect Barack Obama's White House chief of staff apologized to the Arab-American community on Thursday for remarks his Israeli-born father made to Ma'ariv.
Last week, Benjamin Emanuel talked about his son Rahm Emanuel's new job and told the Israeli daily that "obviously he'll influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn't he? What is he, an Arab? He's not going to be mopping floors at the White House."
That prompted an outcry from the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, which called on Rahm Emanuel, a former Israeli citizen, to condemn the "unacceptable smear."
On Thursday, Rahm Emanuel called the group's president, Mary Rose Oakar, to apologize on behalf of his family.
"These are not the values upon which I was raised or those of my family," the group quoted him as saying. Oakar said the apology was accepted.
Emanuel spokesman Nick Papas confirmed the phone call and said Emanuel "offered to meet with representatives of the Arab-American community at an appropriate time in the future."
We rallied to put Yerushalayim on the MONOPOLY Here & Now: The World Edition. Now, is it indeed time to rally once again by voting for the great natural wonder of the Dead Sea? The Dead Sea has been nominated for inclusion as one of the New 7 Wonders. The voting process requires registering an email address and voting. You have 7 votes all of which must be different (can't vote for the Dead Sea 7 times). Also in the voting is Ein Gedi, Rosh HaNikra and the Red Sea.
Now, the bad news. Since the Dead Sea is officially a "multi-national" nominee and does not have the support of all the parties, your votes may not matter. The competition rules require an OSC - {This is a multi-national nominee that needs all countries to officially support it. WITHOUT AN OFFICIAL SUPPORTING COMMITTEE FROM EACH COUNTRY IT MAY BE ELIMINATED FROM THE FINALIST SELECTION. }.
Jordan is one of those countries. Okay, so barf time, guess who the other "country" is? Sit down, take a deep breath, ready? yep - them - the barbarians who call themselves Palestinians. So in other words, the Dead Sea, which deservedly should be called a natural wonder by any accounting will probably not be a finalist, eliminated by a set of rules which requires a terrorist entity to form a supporting committee in order that the "sea" (which by historic rights belongs to and is associated with the people the terrorists seek to kill) be "official".
Well, my advice is to do your part and let Der Aibishter do his. Those who's opinions count know the truth.
The Dead Sea has been nominated in the international competition for one of the world's New Seven Wonders - and is in the top 20 in worldwide voting.
Currently #18 in the voting, the Dead Sea is still not yet assured of its place as one of the 77 finalists for New World Wonder. This is because not all of the three entities that it borders - Israel, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority - have yet formed an official supporting committee. The rules laid out by the New7Wonders Foundation, which is behind the New7Wonders campaign, state that this can disqualify it from being included among the finalists.
But this has not stopped Israel's Megillot Regional Council, whose towns border the Dead Sea, from nominating it as Israel's choice for New Wonder of the World. Every country is allowed to have one nominated wonder in the final voting, in addition to wonders that it shares with other countries. The final voting will begin next July.
Lowest and Saltiest Megillot Council head Mordechai Dehan says the Dead Sea holds two worlds records: "It is the lowest place on earth, and the saltiest. It is truly one of the wonders of the world, and I hope that we will also receive confirmation from the world's population on this."
The shores of the Dead Sea, at 420 meters below sea level, are the lowest point on Earth on dry land. With 30% salinity, it is 8.6 times saltier than the ocean, and approximately three times more saline than Great Salt Lake in Utah.
This coming Chanukah, on Dec. 27, a mass bicycle ride will be held around the Israeli shores of the Dead Sea, as part of the campaign calling to "Save the Dead Sea!" The Sea has been shrinking drastically in recent years, losing approximately a meter of height each year. This is largely due to heavy consumption of water from the Jordan River, the source of the Dead Sea.
To vote in the international competition for the Seven New Wonders of the World, visit New 7 Wonders Voting.
The Red Sea Reef Just ahead of the Dead Sea in the worldwide voting is the Red Sea Reef, shared as a nominee by no fewer than eight countries: Israel, Egypt, Jordan, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. It, too, has not yet been finally approved for the finalist selection, apparently because no country has yet formed an official supporting committee.
Despite this, voters from around the world have placed the Red Sea in 17th place worldwide. A rich and diverse ecosystem, more than 1,100 species of fish have been recorded there, including about 110 found nowhere else. The rich diversity is in part due to the 1,240 miles of coral reef extending along its coastline, which form platforms and lagoons along the coast.
Barack Hussein Obama proves yet again he is the most dangerous candidate for President ever to run as a candidate in one of the two main parties. Obama is willing to destroy the coal industry with its promise of contributing heavily to American energy independance. He advocates in the audio (and transcript below) a radical environmentalist agenda that will do significant damage to American industry and families. Please share this story. It is a message of warning to all industries which do not meet the leftist agenda. These industries face oppressive restrictions, taxation and regulation during an Obama presidency.
Let me sort of describe my overall policy.
What I've said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else's out there.
I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.
Children's Poetry Booklet Recalled After Arabs Complain (Israeli censorship kowtows to Arabs. When Will We Tell The Truth Without Fear)
(IsraelNN.com 7 Sivan 5768/June 10, '08) Ynet's web site and Arab complaints against a ten-year-old boy's poem about terrorists has resulted in the recall of all of the Nes Ziona municipality's children's poetry booklets.
Ynet boasts that its coverage of the poem resulted in its being recalled.
The text of the poem (Ynet's translation):
Ahmed's bunker has surprises galore: Grenades, rifles are hung on the wall. Ahmed is planning another bombing!What a bunker Ahmed has, who causes daily harm.Ahmed knows how to make a bomb. Ahmed is Ahmed, that's who he is, so don't forget to be careful of him.We get blasted while they have a blast!Ahmed and his friends could be wealthy and sunny, if only they wouldn't buy rockets with all their money.
Poetry competition director Marika Berkowitz, who published the booklet, was surprised at the protests and told Ynet: "This is the boy's creation and this is what he wanted to express. Of course there should be a limit, but I think the there is no racism here. 'Ahmed' is a general term for the enemy. These are the murmurings of an innocent child."
The Education Ministry told Ynet: "The local authority that published the booklet should have guided the students in a more correct manner through the schools. The district will investigate the issue with the local authorities."
The Bare Basic Facts of the History of Palestine. Louis Rene Beres - Feb 21, 2009 The Jewish Press President Barack Obama has already placed the Middle East at the very top of his foreign policy agenda. There is nothing inherently wrong with this - quite the contrary. The problem, however, is that the new administration's ambitious negotiations remain structured upon altogether erroneous assumptions. In this connection, the gravest continuing misrepresentation of all is that there are Arab lands under an Israeli occupation.
Today, as always, words matter. Over the years, a notably durable Arab patience in building Palestine upon whole mountains of Jewish corpses has drawn directly upon a prior linguistic victory. Yet, the still generally unchallenged language referring provocatively to an Israeli occupation always overlooks the pertinent and logically incontestable history of the West Bank (Judea/Samaria) and Gaza.
Perhaps the most evident omission still concerns the precise and unwitting manner in which these Territories fell into Israel's hands in the first place. Here it is simply and widely disregarded that occupation followed the multi-state Arab state aggression of 1967. Egypt Syria or Jordan, of course, never disguised this aggression.
A sovereign state of Palestine did not exist before 1967 or 1948. Nor, did UN Security Council Resolution 242 ever promise a state of Palestine. Contrary to popular understanding, a state of Palestine has never existed. Never. Even as a non-state legal entity Palestine ceased to exist m 1948 when Great Britain relinquished its League of Nations mandate. During the 1948-49 Israeli War of Independence (a war of survival fought because the entire Arab world had rejected the authoritative United Nations resolution creating a Jewish State), the West Bank and Gaza came under flagrantly illegal control of Jordan and Egypt, respectively. These Arab conquests did not put an end to an already-existing state or to an ongoing trust territory. What these aggressions did accomplish was the effective prevention, sui generis, (Being the only example of its kind; unique) of a state of Palestine.
Let us return to an earlier history. From the Biblical Period (ca 1350 BCE to 586 BCE) to the British Mandate (1918 - 1948), the land, named by the Romans after the ancient Philistines was controlled only by non-Palestinian elements. Significantly, however, a continuous chain of Jewish possession of the land was legally recognized after World War I at the San Remo Peace Conference of April 1920. There, a binding treaty was signed in which Great Britain was given mandatory authority over Palestine (the area had been ruled by the Ottoman Turks since 1516) to prepare it to become the national home for the Jewish People. Palestine, according to the Treaty comprised territories encompassing what are now the Jordan and Israel, including the West Bank and Gaza.
Present day Israel comprises only 22 percent of Palestine as defined and ratified at the San Remo Peace Conference. In 1922, Great Britain unilaterally and without any lawful authority split off 78 percent of the lands promised to the Jews - all of Palestine east of the Jordan - and gave it to Abdullah, the non-Palestinian son of the Sharif of Mecca. Eastern-Palestine now took the name Transjordan, which it retained until April 1949, when it was renamed as Jordan. From the moment of its creation, Transjordan was closed to all Jewish migration and settlement - a clear betrayal of the British promise in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, and a patent contravention of its Mandatory obligations under international law.
On July 20, 1951, a Palestinian Arab assassinated King Abdullah for the latter's hostility to Palestinian aspirations and concerns. Regarding these aspirations, Jordan's moderate King Hussein - 19 years later, during September 1970 - brutally murdered thousands of defenseless Palestinians under his jurisdiction. In 1947, several years prior to Abdullah's killing, the newly-formed United Nations, rather than designate the entire land west of the Jordan River as the long-promised Jewish national homeland, enacted a second partition. Curiously, because this second fission again gave complete advantage to Arab interests, Jewish leaders accepted the painful judgment.
As readers of The Jewish Press already know all too well, the Arab states did not. On May 15, 1948, exactly 24 hours after the State of Israel came into existence, Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League, declared to a tiny new country founded upon the ashes of the Holocaust: This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre. This unambiguous declaration of genocide has been at the core of all subsequent Arab orientations toward Imoderate' Fatah. Even, by the strict legal standards of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Arab actions and attitudes toward the microscopic Jewish state in their midst, has remained patently devoted to the annhilation of Israel. For some reason, this persistence has repeatedly been made to appear benign. However, President Obama and Senator Mitchell now have a clear obligation to look behind these propagandistic appearances.
In 1967, almost 20 years alter Israel's entry into the community of states, the Jewish state, as a result of its unexpected military victory over Arab aggressor states, gained unintended control over West Bank and Gaza. Although the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war is properly codified in the UN Charter, there existed no authoritative sovereign to whom the Territories could be returned. Israel could hardly have been expected to transfer them back to Jordan and Egypt, which had exercised unauthorized and terribly cruel control since the Arab-initiated war of extermination in 1948-49. Moreover, the idea of Palestinian self-determination had only just begun to emerge after the Six-Day War, and, significantly, had not even been included in UN Security Council Resolution 242 which was adopted on November 22, 1967.
For their part, the Arab states convened a summit in Khartoum in August 1967, concluding "no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it." The Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) was formed three years earlier, in 1964, before there were any Israeli Occupied Territories. Exactly what was it, therefore that the PLO sought to liberate between 1964 and 1967? This critical question should now be considered by Barack Obama's special envoy to the region, Senator George Mitchell.
This has been a very brief account of essential historic reasons why the so-called Palestinian Territories are not occupied by Israel. Several other equally valid reasons stem from Israel's intrinsic legal right to security and self-defense. As I have said so often in this column, international law is not a suicide pact. Because a Palestinian state would severely threaten the very existence of Israel- a fact that remains altogether unhidden even in the Arab media and governments - the Jewish State is under no binding obligation to-end a falsely alleged occupation. No state, not even a Jewish one, can ever be required to accept complicity in its own dismemberment.
No doubt, both President Obama and Senator Mitchell want to be fair and evenhanded in their developing plans for the Middle East. To meet this obligation, however, it is essential that they first build all pertinent negotiations upon a firm foundation of historical accuracy and ethical truth. This means, at a minimum, the aspiring US peacemakers must familiarize themselves with correct history, and not simply allow themselves to be swallowed up with their many predecessors in ritualistic dogma and empty platitudes.
LOUIS RENE BERES was educated at Princeton (Ph D, 1971) and is a long-time expert in international relations and international law.
Posts
