International News
See other International News Articles
Title: Trump to US Jews: I won’t give Palestinians aid until they make deal with Israel
Source:
The Times of Israel
URL Source: https://www.timesofisrael.com/trump ... erm=0_adb46cec92-c9b8930014-56
Published: Sep 7, 2018
Author: Tom Staff
Post Date: 2018-09-07 09:36:50 by IbJensen
Keywords: None
Views: 5732
Comments: 55
In call to mark Rosh Hashanah, president also says Iranians have ‘lost their mojo’ since he quit the nuclear deal, and are now ‘fighting for their own survival’ US President Donald Trump told Jewish leaders Thursday that the US would not give aid to the Palestinians until they reach an agreement with Israel. He also said the Iranian regime had “lost their mojo” since he withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal, and was now fighting for its survival. In quitting the deal, he said, he had done “a great thing for Israel.” In a conference call with several dozen American Jewish leaders ahead of Rosh Hashanah, Trump noted that he had recently slashed immense amounts of US aid to the Palestinians — a reference to the administration’s recent cuts in overall aid to the Palestinian Authority and its complete defunding of the UN’s Palestinian refugee agency UNRWA. The US would resume funding, he said, but only if the Palestinians reached a deal with Israel. “What I will tell you is I stopped massive amounts of money that we were paying to the Palestinians and the Palestinian leaders,” Trump said to the Jewish leaders. “The United States was paying them tremendous amounts of money. And I say, ‘You’ll get money, but we’re not paying until you make a deal. If you don’t make a deal, we’re not paying.'” “I don’t think it’s disrespectful at all” for US aid to be utilized as a bargaining chip, the president added. Rather, “I think it’s disrespectful when people don’t come to the table.” Also in the call, the US president expressed confidence that an Israeli- Palestinian deal would be done. Asked by Prof. Alan Dershowitz: “Should the Jewish community be optimistic that you can help bring about a peaceful resolution of the conflict that we all pray for all the time?,” the president replied: “The answer to that is a very strong yes — you should be. It is, as I said before, really considered to be one of the toughest deals to make of any kind. I don’t kind what kind of a deal you’re talking about. If you look at Israel and the Palestinians, it’s always top of everybody’s list in terms of levels of difficulty.” Trump also said that he had removed the first obstacle to a deal: Jerusalem — which Trump last December recognized as Israel’s capital and where in May he moved his embassy. Further ahead, Israel would have to do something for the Palestinians, he said, without specifying. “The fact is that I took something off the table,” said Trump. “If you go back and look at your negotiations with the Palestinians over the years, the first thing was Jerusalem and moving the embassy to Jerusalem, thereby making it the capital. And I will tell you, we’ve taken that off the table.” He added: “Now, does that mean Israel is going to do something that will (inaudible) for the Palestinians? Yes. What is it going to be? I can’t tell you. But I can tell you that by doing what I did, Alan, we took the biggest bone of contention, a point that nobody ever got beyond for the second dilemma — for the second problem — they never got beyond it. We took it off the table. And I think it’s actually going to help a lot in making a deal, as we say, with the Palestinians. “Now, most people think just the opposite. They said, “Oh, you did a mistake.” Well, I disagree. I disagree. So I think that we have a very good chance of doing it.” On dealings with Iran, Trump said that when he came into office, the question was when Iran would take over the Middle East, probably including Israel. Now, however, since he withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal, he said, the Israelis were feeling more safe. He also said he believed the Iranians would be in touch soon about a new deal. “From the day I did it [quit the 2015 deal], they’ve lost their mojo… The day before I took over as president, Iran — it was not a question of how big and how strong they were; it was a question of when will they take over the entire Middle East. And that probably includes Israel, in the mind of a lot of people,” he said. “And if you look at them today, they’re not looking at the Mediterranean any longer,” said Trump. “They’re not looking at places that they were going to routinely take over. And I think Israel feels a lot safer than they’ve felt in many, many years. “Iran is fighting for their own survival,” he went on. “They’ve got demonstrations in every city. This is far worse than it was years ago when President Obama could’ve maybe crushed Iran if all they needed was a positive statement — the people that were demonstrating. Well, these demonstrations are larger, but they’re more widespread. They’re all over the country. “So Iran is no longer the same country. I would imagine that they’ll be calling in the not-too-distant future to try and make a deal. If we can make a real deal, we’ll do it. If they don’t call, that’s okay too. Eventually, they’re going to have no choice… “I can only say from the standpoint of Israel, what I did was a great thing for Israel. And what I did was also a very good thing for world peace, because everywhere we went — especially in the Middle East — where there was a problem, Iran stood behind that problem.” In summation, said Trump, “I terminated the deal, like I said I would during the campaign. It turned out to have a much bigger impact than I thought. I did it primarily because of nuclear, but I knew it wouldn’t be great for their economy. I had no idea how devastating it would be… That is not the same country that was in existence when I took over as president of the United States.” At the start of the call, which was hosted by his son-in-law Jared Kushner, Trump spoke of his own links to the Jewish people: “My connection to Judaism is also personal. I am the very proud father of a Jewish daughter, Ivanka, and my son-in-law, who I’m very proud of also — I will say that very loudly — Jared, and my several Jewish grandchildren, namely three beautiful Jewish grandchild that I love.” US Ambassador David Friedman, who was also on the call, meanwhile, said that the US Embassy in Jerusalem would be double its current size by next summer. “We have a beautiful campus. We have continuously operated our embassy since May 14th. We have about 150 people working there already. We’re beginning phase two of the construction period, which is beginning in a week or two. And we will roughly double the size by June of 2019. After that, we’ll consider what final steps to make to complete the transition,” said Friedman. “We are looking for a site, and we have — we think we have that site located for the Ambassador’s Residence — something near and dear to my heart. And we’ll have further announcements on that. “But I would tell you that the embassy in Jerusalem has become a major tourist site in Israel. People — I’m there almost every day, and people just pull up their cars to the front of the embassy, they get out, they take pictures,” said the ambassador. “I’ve seen some people praying there. I’ve actually seen many people crying there.”
Poster Comment: At first I wondered what Chuckie Schumer thought of this, but then I remembered that he, like Lieberman, Shiff, et al, aren't Jews; they're Satanists. Brilliant President Trump! Why couldn't previous Presidents have done this???
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-15) not displayed.
.
.
.
#16. To: A K A Stone, misterwhite (#14)
We wouldn't have a country an longer. TRUE. 100%. He is mostly an idiot that gets it right on occasion. Here I'd thought he got it right about 75% of the time. (Oh wait -- he NEVER ANSWERED MY QUESTION AS TO WHETHER HERE WAS AN ONGOING COUP AGAINST THE PRESIDENT. Which means...he doesn't). His Pali-vs Israel position is a HUGE bit of STUPID. It exposes MW as...A Statist-GLOBALIST.
What part did I get wrong? "But...but...I thought you were anti- Outlaw??" You're correct. I am anti-outlaw. But you need to examine who's the "outlaw" here. Israel was told time and time again not to transfer civilians into territory taken in a war in accordance with the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 49, sixth paragraph which provides: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” Yet it continues to this day to do so. That's not some UN rule. That's in the Fourth Geneva Convention which Israel voluntarily signed. Who's the outlaw?
A rare day when we agree.
Actually, they have no incentive to make peace. They will claim they want peace, but they don't want it, because peace means compromise which Israel does not want to do with anyone. Negotiations are fine with Israel, as long as they make it look like Israel is trying, and as long as they don't go anywhere. Yes, "wiping them off the map" is okay for Palestinians, but anti-semitic terrorism when mentioned about Israel. It's hypocritical.
Seriously?? You're correct. I am anti-outlaw. But you need to examine who's the "outlaw" here. That part is crystal clear. I'm shocked you're confused on this issue. Israel was told time and time again not to transfer civilians into territory taken in a war in accordance with the Fourth Geneva Convention, Article 49, sixth paragraph which provides: “The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.” Does that stipulation still apply...even though Israel has been invaded in '48, '56, '67, and '73?? Or...as so-called Palis launch 24/7 Intifada/Jihad against Israel? And btw -- this is NOT "occupied territory"; It's WON via war spoils. OR if we're honest, the original UN madate allocated FAR more land to Israel...before the UN Mobsters reduced Israel's land to a sliver...THEN hung out Israel to dry, denying it arms to defend itself as Muzzie-Arabs invaded it in '48 (And really?? You're citing the UN as some kind of standard-bearer of "Law"??)
I agree. Which is why they wish to have their own state.
You DO understand that Trans-Jordan was a YUGE land mass allocation for Muzzies, RIGHT?? Then why haven't the Muzzie bros and sistah give the Palis THAT land?? Moreover...the land sliver Israeli was given was mostly barren...UNTIL they made it green. And then and ONLY then did the so-called "Palis" want to hijack it. They are THIEVES. As Mr. Law & Order you don't recognize this Plan as Day fact.
Of course. Why wouldn't it? "And btw -- this is NOT "occupied territory"; It's WON via war spoils." Talk about ignorant! What does that have to do with anything? Israel signed the Fourth Geneva Convention agreeing NOT to transfer civilians to territory taken in a war. Yet they did anyways and continue to do so to this very day. "OR if we're honest, the original UN madat madate madate allocated FAR more land to Israel...before the UN Mobsters reduced Israel's land to a sliver..." Ah. Now this is where I can learn something so next time I'm not called ignorant -- What original mandate are you referring to?
If they were permitted their own state, there would exist an central authority to which Palestinians would need to answer, and an entity that would have an incentive to maintain agreements with Israel and punish rogue Palestinians that undermine that interest. It would allow Palestinians to thrive much better economically and give these people something to live for instead of poverty conditions for which they blame Israel, and not unreasonably so. But somehow, no, they are expected to suffer abuses far in excess of what the American colonies suffered at the hands of England for which the Revolutionary war was started, and do so with happy smiles on their faces.
Trans-Jordan (later Jordan) was payback by the British to the Sharif of Mecca (Hussein ibn Ali al-Hashimi) who, along with "Lawrence of Arabia", defeated the Ottomans in WWI. It had nothing to do with the Palestinians west of the Jordan river.
Firstly, "rogue" Palis = 90% of them. They are...tools for a much bigger cause that transcends the geo-political SNAFU presented for the last 50 years. But somehow, no, they are expected to suffer abuses far in excess of what the American colonies suffered at the hands of England for which the Revolutionary war was started, and do so with happy smiles on their faces. Wow. Not close to analogous. Maybe THIS link will help address the notion of a historical "Palestine" http://markhumphrys.com/palestine.invented.html Please consider other perspectives... I understand that you're both going at this intellectually and pragmatically...but at the same time presuming the current narrative is legit. This issue has been an absolute illusion AND lie that's been promelgated and advanced by NWO/Secular Humanist elements. Remember -- FOLLOW THE MONEY. (It leads straight to the UN and Leftist Academia.) Many also undrstandably miss the mark in that this is NOT about any sovereignty of an alleged "Palestine," and never was. This conundrum need be presented by the Elites through a geo-political lens...because that's a problem and matter most people can handle. THE Truth and Big Picture: A deep dive exposes a conspiracy that pits the God of the Bible against the NWO-Humanists who believe THEY are "god" of this world. That's right -- I'm asserting that this has been a Spiritual matter and battle...this "Pali Nation!" crusade has ALWAYS been one more Elite-Atheist driven hoax. Hence whom do we see as the antagonists against the NWO? Yup: Israel and a Christian America/West. (This entire issue is purposely convoluted and complicated and would take way too long to explain.) Bottom Line: Look far past THE Establishment Narrative.
Jordan took in 2 million Palestinian refugees. Those refugees have been waiting 70 years to return to their homes and lands taken from them by the Israelis.
The land they were given by UN 181 in 1948, or the land they stole following the 1948 and 1967 wars? The "Palis" only want the land they were promised by UN 181 in 1948. If Israel chose to develop land that wasn't theirs, how is that the fault of the Palestinians?
WHERE did I assert that the Trans-Jordan land allocation included land for/as "Palestinian" interests? I don't know the source(s) of your understanding of the Balfour Declaration and background and original proposals of UN Res 181, but even as Arab states agreed to establish "Israel", the The Fix was in. First on having Israel's original land area tactically reduced dramatically...then of course, a well-coordinated invasion of Israel that would make its state an academic footnote. An already corrupt and hijacked PTB cabal, led by POS Britain and France AND the US (allied with the surrounding Arabs) "knew" Israel would be slaughtered immediately before the ink on that UN agreement was dry. They criminally and purposely denied Israel planes, armor, armaments. WERE YOU AWARE OF ANY OF THIS?? How Israel was able to defend itself is...miraculous. yes, DIVINE. Real history. It exists. And the truth of the matter whether 1948 or 2018. To be fair, you're not alone in getting duped Big Time. The Left and Globalists have (and still) controlled political narratives since the mid-19th century.
Then why are you saying the Jordanians have some obligation to give land to the Palestinians? "First on having Israel's original land area tactically reduced dramatically..." Second request. Where are you getting that information?
Trailer of 'Above and Beyond' -- miraculous explanation of how mostly Jewish-American pilots used smuggled junk-yard WW2 planes to repel and save Israel from imminent slaughter. Because of an embargo imposed by the Truman administration, Americans risked losing their citizenship by joining the fight. Produced by Nancy Spielberg, younger sister to Steven, this film celebrates the pilots who laid the foundation for the Israeli Air Force. It combines extraordinary archival footage and interviews with scholars, survivors and their descendants. Interviewees range from Shimon Perez to Paul Reubens (aka Pee Wee Herman), whose father Milton Rubenfeld flew combat missions. The bravery of these volunteers was incredible. The only aircraft available to them were American and German jets junked after the war, constantly liable to deadly mechanical failure. Amenities were equally scarce (many had to make do with discarded Nazi flight suits.) Despite their shoddy equipment, they exercised enough skill and trickery to persuade the invaders that their small squadron posed a far bigger threat than it really did, helping turn the tide of the war.
Would the conclusion be that the Palestinians simply materialized out of thin air? Would it be that they are not human? That they have no ancestry? Perhaps they have no souls, allowing them to be treated as something other than human and not bothering to evangelize into Christians? My impression is that most modern day Israeli Jews are actually of European or central Asian origin. Afterall, after WW2, Jews fled there from Europe and elsewhere to form their own state. And what I find ironic is the distinct possibility --given ancient Israelites inhabited the region as long as they did -- that between the 2 groups, it's the Palestinians who might carry more blood of ancient Israelis in them than the present day Israeli Jews. After all, is it really reasonable to believe that an indigenous culture would not intermarry with neighboring cultures? Or that any expulsion of a people from an area would be a 100% clean sweep, or anything close to that, especially after 1000 years or so of association with other peoples? One might think that Jews would about never intermarry with Muslims. However, Islam wasn't created until about the 3rd century AD. On consideration, it seems many Zionists may naively equate "Jew" with "descendant of ancient Israel", when it could be that the Palestinians may have more blood birthright to the land of "Israel" than the relatively new European Jew arrivals. Granted the present day Palestinians are about 0% practicing Jews. But that doesn't mean they are not descended from Ancient Israel. Some DNA research is in order.
As opposed to Israel ceding THEIR fertile land and established infrastructure to Muzzie thugs and psychopaths?? Not only Jordan, but the REST of Arab-Muzzie nations were morally obligated to share Arab-Muzzie land with their "bothers". Yet you don't see the rationale here?? Even at the outset of UN 181 there was NO mention of "What about the Palestinians?" by ANY one. No Muzzie nation complained. CAN YOU EXPLAIN WHY THAT WAS?? Did you know Jordan expelled and MURDERED Palis by the bushelful as they tried to emmgrate to Jordan? That's right -- they locked them OUT. But you are looking for Israel to surrender their God-given, UN-mandated land to a hostile people swearing "DEATH!" to Israel -- "Palestinians" who simply have NEVER exited as a nation, a culture, a history??
I did. The Israelis didn't fire into the territory occupied by the 'Palestinians' after the phony accord was reached!
Liberals are like Slinkys. They're good for nothing, but somehow they bring a smile to your face as you shove them down the stairs.
No one is asking Israel to cede their land, fertile or not. Israel transferred civilians to land that was not theirs. They were warned not to do this by the UN and the United States. Israel told everyone to go fuck themselves. NOW they're whining about giving it up? Then I say Israel can go fuck themselves.
Nope. Not necessary. The Palestinians were given their own land by UN 181.
Yes. Was there a place called "Palestine"? YES. By whom was "Palestine" coined? The Romans. Would it be that they are not human? That they have no ancestry? Perhaps they have no souls, allowing them to be treated as something other than human and not bothering to evangelize into Christians? Well THAT was some unexpected over-the-top drama. Come on, man. "Palestine" is no different than the moniker "Cajun country", or any other loosely bases area with local or provincial culture. Yet..."Palestinian" culture is unofficial culture at that. Can you point out any "history" of "Palestinian" government? Nation? Leaders? Artists? ANY ID that supports a past "Pali" culture? Even American Indian "nations" have 1000% more of a claim to their respective identity and history as "nations". My impression is that most modern day Israeli Jews are actually of European or central Asian origin. Afterall, after WW2, Jews fled there from Europe and elsewhere to form their own state. And what I find ironic is the distinct possibility --given ancient Israelites inhabited the region as long as they did -- that between the 2 groups, it's the Palestinians who might carry more blood of ancient Israelis in them than the present day Israeli Jews. You may indeed be right on much of the original Israelites; Many have blended western Euro traits and DNA. Your theory with respect to Pali blood is also valid; It IS Semitic after all. As to Jewish Identity, the direct lineage is Semitic, and as you note far closer to "Palestinian" DNA. After all, is it really reasonable to believe that an indigenous culture would not intermarry with neighboring cultures? Or that any expulsion of a people from an area would be a 100% clean sweep, or anything close to that, especially after 1000 years or so of association with other peoples? One might think that Jews would about never intermarry with Muslims. However, Islam wasn't created until about the 3rd century AD. Yep. As noted, intermarriage between ALL peoples was rife, especially in the Mediterranean region. From there it obviously branched out in all directions. On consideration, it seems many Zionists may naively equate "Jew" with "descendant of ancient Israel", when it could be that the Palestinians may have more blood birthright to the land of "Israel" than the relatively new European Jew arrivals. Granted the present day Palestinians are about 0% practicing Jews. But that doesn't mean they are not descended from Ancient Israel. Some DNA research is in order. Interesting thesis. Be that as it may that "Palestinians" carry "Jewish" DNA, we are still discussing a Nation. A nation shares similar/common culture, language, and precepts of "liberty" and ethics. AND "history". THIS is exactly where the entire mythical nation of "Palestine" falls apart. Let me pose this: IF we consider the current geographical area BOTH "Palestine" AND "Israel", who should have dibs? And why? Other than bloodlines and DNA, the two are diametrical OPPOSITES.
What "phony accord" are you talking about?
It's ok for good guys to go after the bad guys. It's not ok for the bad guys to go after the good guys. Black and white. The Palestinians would be better off just leaving peacefully. That would be a great solution.
Wait a minute; You are actually citing the UN one again as some kind of impartial, fair body concerned over the welfare of...Israelis?? Where were they when Israel was invaded in '48, '56, '67. and '73 wen the ARabs invaded WITHOUT provocation?? Oh that's right -- the UN and Arabs told Israel to Eff THEMSELVES. Every single time. Israel beat back every one o those illegal those advances...and ONLY then did the reptilian liars from the UN stop the wars...because Israel was kickin' azz, Frankly they had NO compulsion to give back an INCH of land they won fair and square. NOW they're whining about giving it up? Then I say Israel can go fuck themselves. Well, of course that's your position. Because you are a UN-Muzzie Symp. Israel to you and your UN-Muzzie pals: GET BENT.
Really? Can you point that out....like...ON A MAP??
You can't reason with these people. Facts don't matter. Blind as bats. They sport the same delusional lens the Left-Dems wear in the US.
I'm citing the same UN and the same UN resolution that gave land to Israel which they gladly accepted. That resolution also gave land to the Palestinians. "Where were they when Israel was invaded in '48, '56, '67. and '73 wen the ARabs invaded WITHOUT provocation??" The ARabs, not the Palestinians, invaded Israel. In 1948, 700,000 Palestinians were forced from their homes and lands because of that war, yet you want to blame and punish them?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Partition_Plan_for_Palestine
The UN didn't have anything to give. So tell us how they gave something they didn't have. What other countries did the UN own or was it only Israel that the UN owned? I'm well aware of their self serving resolutions but those are only words of wannabes world rulers.
You're a hypocrite unless you get the f*** out of American Indian Land piece of s***
Yeah, they did. Great Britain turned over disposition of their Mandate for Palestine to the UN for them to divide between the Palestinian Arabs and the Palestinian Jews.
Because nobody wants the Palestinian's around, they're hoping they all catch a slow boat to South America that sinks on the way there.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
The Indians weren't protected by the 4th Geneva Convention.
The one Jimmy Carter and the two factions agreed to and called 'The Camp David Accord.'. Of course it wasn't worth the paper it was written on and Carter crowed about HIS accomplishments even before the ink dried. Also before the ink dried the 'Palestinians' were lobbing missiles into Israel as per usual.
Liberals are like Slinkys. They're good for nothing, but somehow they bring a smile to your face as you shove them down the stairs.
But for some reason that information isn't widely disseminated in our MSM. By Thomas Erdbrink, Aug. 4, 2018 TEHRAN — Across Iran’s heartland, from the sweltering heat of its southern cities to the bustling capital, protesters have taken to the streets with increasing intensity in recent months, much to the satisfaction of the Trump administration, which is hoping the civil unrest will put pressure on Iranian leaders. Some demonstrations — about the weak economy, strict Islamic rules, water shortages, religious disputes, local grievances — have turned deadly. The protesters have shouted harsh slogans against clerical leaders and their policies. The events are broadly shared on social media and on the dozens of Persian language satellite channels beaming into the Islamic republic. On Thursday, protests were held in the cities of Arak, Isfahan, Karaj and Shiraz, as people — in numbers ranging in the hundreds, perhaps more — took to the streets, chanting slogans like “death to high prices,” but also criticizing top officials. A smaller protest was held in Tehran, where some people were arrested, according to videos taken at the scene. In the city of Eshtehard, west of the capital, protesters attacked a religious school on Thursday, forcing 500 clerics in training to flee, the semiofficial Tasnim news agency reported. Truck drivers who went on strike in May for higher wages restarted their strike last week. The strike has affected fuel deliveries, leaving some gasoline stations empty in parts of the country, including Caspian Sea areas north of Tehran. Iran’s currency, the rial, has lost nearly 80 percent of its value compared with a year ago, weakened at least in part because the Trump administration withdrew the United States from the nuclear agreement in May and restored American economic sanctions. The first batch of those restored sanctions is set to take effect on Monday. President Hassan Rouhani of Iran, who supported the nuclear agreement, is under fire not only from hard-liners but also from the Iranians who voted for him — the vast middle class. Both groups say his economic policies have failed. President Hassan Rouhani of Iran is under fire not only from hard-liners but also from the middle-class Iranians who voted for him. The demonstrations began after a week of unprecedented nationwide protests in January. In more than 80 cities, including Tehran, people took to the streets with economic demands and calls for more freedoms. In total, 25 people were killed and more than 4,000 were arrested. The protests over the past six months have been relatively isolated, sporadic, scattered and much smaller than the antigovernment demonstrations in 2009, when millions took to the streets. But they reflect a common theme of rising dissatisfaction, many say. Activists critical of the government concede the demonstrations do not threaten Iran’s leadership. Security forces, mindful of the 2009 upheavals, are now much better equipped to crush any organized antigovernment demonstrations. The protesters share neither unifying leadership nor clear agenda. While many members of the large middle class are unhappy, they mostly watch from the sidelines, adverse to uncertainty. “There is no vision, no leadership, and the protests will not lead to any chain reaction across the country, at this point,” said Bahman Amoei, a well-known political activist who has spent several stints in jail for his activities. “I have to admit that the state, its security and propaganda machine, is capable of engineering public opinion very successfully and persuade the wider populace that the status quo is in their favor and change will be too costly,” he said. However, for the country of 80 million, long one of the calmest in the Middle East, the growing list of demonstrations and strikes is remarkable. In July, brokers of Tehran’s vast bazaar marched across the city protesting high prices and clashing with security forces near the Parliament building. Protesters in the southern border city of Khorramshahr clashed with security forces for days over water shortages. Defying risk of arrest, women have protested the compulsory Islamic head scarf. In February, deadly clashes erupted between members of a religious minority and security forces. In March, protests over water shortages spread to Isfahan, Iran’s third largest city. Students clashed with police officers in riot gear near Tehran University during antigovernment demonstrations in December.CreditEuropean Pressphoto Agency There also have been strikes, most notably in the Kurdish regions, where bazaars closed in April to protest restrictions on border trade. Truckers went on strike the following month. In the city of Kazeroun, two people were killed in clashes over plans to redraw its borders. Videos show that some protesters have gone well beyond strictly economic grievances to challenge Iran’s foreign policy and religious rules. Secular protest slogans aimed at Iran’s leadership also criticize its support for Syria and groups in the Palestinian territories and in Lebanon. Often protesters evoke the name of Reza Shah, an authoritarian who industrialized Iran at the beginning of the century, with a very firm hand. In Khorramshahr, videos showed protesters shouting: “You have plundered us in the name of religion.” Because of travel restrictions placed on foreign reporters, it is hard to determine the scope of demonstrations and clashes around the country. Interviews with protesters in Tehran suggest they are exasperated with what many view as the government’s economic incompetence and corruption. One said that he felt as if his life were shrinking by the day and simply could not take it anymore. “We had been given bad news for days, our hearts were full of anger,” said the protester, Hassan Seyedi, a broker at the Alaedine electronics bazaar in Tehran. In recent months, he and his colleagues spontaneously closed their shops and took to the streets, shouting slogans and clashing with the police. Other merchants closed their shops in solidarity. In front of the Parliament building, a crowd of hundreds shouted: “Death to freeloading bigwigs!” “We filmed and took selfies; the second day we went out again,” Mr. Seyedi said. But now his was back in his small shop, where he pays a monthly rent of more than $3,100. “I can’t afford to protest too long,” he said. “I need to make any money I can.” The protests have compounded the increasingly dire predicament that Iran’s leaders face as they prepare to deal with the restored American sanctions. Foreign investors are leaving the country, and the Iranian government, anticipating less oil income, has tightened the use of foreign currency. That move has accelerated the decline in the rial, driving anger that seems more aimed at Iran’s leaders than the United States. For a country of 80 million, long one of the calmest in the Middle East, the growing list of demonstrations and strikes is remarkable.CreditArash Khamooshi for The New York Times Hard-liners have consistently played down the protests. “Around a hundred people take to the streets in cities populated by five million people,” said Hamidreza Taraghi, a political analyst. He accused Iran’s enemies, most notably the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel, of helping foreign based opposition groups. “Foreign powers are seeking to seize upon our economical problems and create unrest.” Iran’s leaders are struggling to come up with new solutions to keep their country running. Instead, factional feuds are leading to daily accusations of corruption and decadence. Last month a website linked to a former presidential candidate, Mehdi Karroubi, who has been under house arrest since 2011, alleged that Gen. Qassem Soleimani, a hero of the hard-liners, was part of a mafia importing cars. Hard-line news outlets criticized photographs of Mr. Rouhani wearing foreign brands. Beyond the accusations, no one seems to have a solution. “There is incompetence on all levels,” said Hojjat Kalashi, a sociologist who has been banned from leaving the country because of his writings. “Our officials keep on hoping for some form of an international breakthrough, a deal that will solve everything, but in reality they have no strategy.” At Tehran’s Grand Bazaar, things were back to normal after the protests and strike last month. In the gold trading area, one merchant, Mostafa Arabzadeh, admitted that he had also closed his shop. “To protect my valuables,” he said. Mr. Arabzadeh said he disliked the protesters and felt they were playing into the hands of Iran’s enemies. “People that are angry forget we have one thing the rest of the region doesn’t have: peace and stability,” he said, adding, “We should cherish that.” But many agreed that the protests and the strikes would continue in one form or another. “People are no longer afraid to show their dissatisfaction,” said Abolghasem Golbaf, a publisher. When schools reopen after the summer break, Mr. Golbaf said, students and professors would very likely join the demonstrations, possibly presenting a new challenge to security forces. “People want their voices heard,” he said.
Vegetarians eat vegetables. Beware of humanitarians!
The Camp David Accord was an agreement between Israel and Egypt and had nothing to do with the Palestinians. That agreement has been honored to this day by Egypt, demonstrating that you CAN negotiate with the AY-rabs and they WILL stick to their promises. But that agreement cost the U.S. billions. As part of the deal, Egypt was guaranteed military aid equal to 50% of whatever we gave Israel. "In the case of Egypt, US aid granted since the signing of the 1978 Camp David Accords was "untouchable compensation" for maintaining peace with Israel. This deal is considered a cornerstone of US-Egyptian relations."
They're welcome to my land if I get to build a casino on it.
Push the Moos (pigpiss be upon them) into the sea. Rinse and repeat until the deathcult is dead.
If we obeyed the UN like misterwhite dreams about...
#17. To: Liberator (#15)
Now THAT represents a stunning degree of ignorance.
#18. To: misterwhite (#2)
I agree. So Trump should have cut off aid to both countries until they reached a deal. What's Israel's incentive to sit down and negotiate?
#19. To: A K A Stone (#4)
Israel has no incentive to negotiate with terrorists who seek to destroy it.
Israel should bulldoze all the palis out of Israel.
#20. To: misterwhite (#17)
What part did I get wrong?
#21. To: Liberator (#12)
Kinda hard to live peacefully with these people. Wait...it's IMPOSSIBLE.
#22. To: misterwhite (#21)
Which is why they wish to have their own state.
#23. To: Liberator (#20)
Does that stipulation still apply...even though Israel has been invaded in '48, '56, '67, and '73??
#24. To: misterwhite (#21)
I agree. Which is why they wish to have their own state.
#25. To: Liberator (#22)
You DO understand that Trans-Jordan was a YUGE land mass allocation for Muzzies,
#26. To: Pinguinite, misterwhite (#24)
If they were permitted their own state, there would exist an central authority to which Palestinians would need to answer, and an entity that would have an incentive to maintain agreements with Israel and punish rogue Palestinians that undermine that interest.
#27. To: Liberator (#22)
Then why haven't the Muzzie bros and sistah give the Palis THAT land??
#28. To: Liberator (#22)
Moreover...the land sliver Israeli was given was mostly barren...UNTIL they made it green.
#29. To: Pinguinite (#24)
(Edited)
#30. To: misterwhite, pinguinite (#25)
Trans-Jordan (later Jordan) was payback by the British to the Sharif of Mecca (Hussein ibn Ali al-Hashimi) who, along with "Lawrence of Arabia", defeated the Ottomans in WWI. It had nothing to do with the Palestinians west of the Jordan river.
#31. To: Liberator (#30)
WHERE did I assert that the Trans-Jordan land allocation included land for/as "Palestinian" interests?
#32. To: All (#30)
In 1948, as the British withdrew from Palestine, and five Arab nations prepared to invade Israel, a ragtag group of young men from around the globe volunteered to defend the new country. Called Machal, or volunteers from abroad, many were World War II veterans from the US.
#33. To: Liberator (#26)
Maybe THIS link will help address the notion of a historical "Palestine"
#34. To: misterwhite (#31)
(Edited)
Then why are you saying the Jordanians have some obligation to give land to the Palestinians?
#35. To: misterwhite (#5)
Read some history.
#36. To: Liberator (#34)
As opposed to Israel ceding THEIR fertile land and established infrastructure to Muzzie thugs and psychopaths??
#37. To: Liberator (#34)
Not only Jordan, but the REST of Arab-Muzzie nations were morally obligated to share Arab-Muzzie land with their "bothers".
#38. To: Pinguinite (#33)
(Edited)
Would the conclusion be that the Palestinians simply materialized out of thin air?
#39. To: IbJensen (#35)
The Israelis didn't fire into the territory occupied by the 'Palestinians' after the phony accord was reached!
#40. To: Pinguinite (#19)
#41. To: misterwhite (#36)
No one is asking Israel to cede their land, fertile or not. Israel transferred civilians to land that was not theirs. They were warned not to do this by the UN and the United States. Israel told everyone to go fuck themselves.
#42. To: misterwhite (#37)
The Palestinians were given their own land by UN 181.
#43. To: IbJensen (#35)
(Edited)
The Israelis didn't fire into the territory occupied by the 'Palestinians' after the phony accord was reached!
#44. To: Liberator (#41)
You are actually citing the UN one again as some kind of impartial, fair body concerned over the welfare of...Israelis??
#45. To: Liberator (#42)
Really? Can you point that out....like...ON A MAP??
#46. To: misterwhite (#44)
#47. To: misterwhite (#44)
#48. To: A K A Stone (#46)
The UN didn't have anything to give.
#49. To: Liberator (#22)
Then why haven't the Muzzie bros and sistah give the Palis THAT land??
#50. To: A K A Stone (#47)
You're a hypocrite unless you get the f*** out of American Indian Land piece of s***
#51. To: misterwhite (#39)
What "phony accord" are you talking about?
#52. To: IbJensen (#0)
“Iran is fighting for their own survival,” he went on. “They’ve got demonstrations in every city. This is far worse than it was years ago when President Obama could’ve maybe crushed Iran if all they needed was a positive statement — the people that were demonstrating. Well, these demonstrations are larger, but they’re more widespread. They’re all over the country.
#53. To: IbJensen (#51)
The one Jimmy Carter and the two factions agreed to and called 'The Camp David Accord.'.
#54. To: A K A Stone (#47)
You're a hypocrite unless you get the f*** out of American Indian Land piece of s***
#55. To: IbJensen (#0)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]