06-24-2018 07:05:35 PM -0700
06-24-2018 01:33:26 PM -0700
06-23-2018 11:28:09 AM -0700
06-22-2018 05:46:20 PM -0700
06-22-2018 09:10:32 AM -0700
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

Supporting the 'Peace Process' and the Muslim Brotherhood: MSM Misinformation

There's an Arab proverb that goes like this: When an enemy extends his hand to you, cut it off. If you can't, kiss it. Whom do you think is being classified for receiving either the cutting or the kissing treatment today?

In contrast to the "empower-our-enemies" approach, two of the best Middle East journalists have just written from different perspectives on the real Middle East. The results are refreshing, as elsewhere throughout the media the odds are fixed at about four to one against sanity.

At one think-tank, Khaled Abu Toameh has published “Ramallah vs. the `Peace Process.’” He puts "peace process" in quotes to show his sarcasm, of course. He tells the story of two Israeli Arab businessmen who wanted to open a Fox clothing store in the West Bank, like the one I like to shop at in Tel Aviv's Dizengoff Center.

Although given Palestinian Authority permission and having already made a big investment, they found themselves the target of attacks -- and calls for fire bombing the store. The assaults were even organized by PA journalists. So they gave up -- costing West Bank Palestinians 150 jobs.

I could easily tell the same story a half-dozen times. As Abu Toameh concludes:

This incident is an indication of the same "anti-normalization" movement which [PA leader] Abbas supports will be the first to turn against him if he strikes a deal with Israel.

But, of course, for both the reason that this is a powerful radical movement and the fact that he is one of the leaders of the anti-peace camp, Abbas ultimately won’t make a deal.

Journalist Aaron David Miller asks: “Does John Kerry's Peace Process Have a Chance?” In subtle terms, he answers "No":

Neither Abbas nor Netanyahu wants to say no to America's top diplomat and take the blame for the collapse of negotiations. This proved sufficient to get them back to negotiations, but more will be required to keep them there, let alone to reach an accord. Right now, neither has enough incentives, disincentives, and an urgent desire or need to move forward boldly.

Unfortunately, right now, the U.S. owns this one more than the parties do. This is not an ideal situation. It would have been better had real urgency brought Abbas and Netanyahu together rather than John Kerry.

In other words, Kerry wants and needs these talks; Netanyahu and Abbas don’t.

I mean it literally when I say that there are only three sensible people given regular access to the mass media on the Middle East. One is Miller; the other two are Jeffrey Goldberg of the Atlantic and Jackson Diehl of the Washington Post. (If I have left someone out, please remind me. But remember I said "regularly.") If you want to know the real attitude in the Middle East, consider this recent  exchange in Israel’s Knesset:

Jamal Zahalka of the Arab nationalist party, Balad: "We, the Arabs, were here before you (the Jews) and we will be here after you!"

The prime minister asked permission to approach the podium and said in answer, "The first part isn't true, and the second part won't be!"

Remember that the Communist Party is the most moderate of the Arab parties.