Good news has come to us from Ramallah: the Palestinian Authority is pregnant; rather, the un-elected and American-imposed Palestinian Prime Minister Salaam Fayyad is the one awaiting child. In an recently published interview, he has announced to Israeli paper Haaretz: “The time for this baby to be born will come, and we estimate it will come around 2011.”
Unlike female humans, and similar to female whales, the gestation period of Palestinian men allied with the Israeli occupation extends two years at the least, as far as Fayyad (the one that Shimon Peres has nicknamed “the Palestinian Ben Gurion”) declared in a document he published on August 25, 2009, under the title, “Palestine: Ending the Occupation and Establishing a State.”
He repeated his declaration in Haaretz: “The birth of a Palestinian state will be celebrated as a day of joy by the entire community of nations.”
But given the long-term relations that tie Mr. Fayyad to the Americans since his work at the International Monetary Fund from 1995-2002, some heretics reject the theory of Immaculate Conception. They call for knowledge of the father’s identity, relying on Fayyad’s own words as evidence.
According to Haaretz, Fayyad plans to induce labor in August 2011, so that “the state is born during Obama’s first term,” which the heretics insist means that he is likely the father of Fayyad’s child.
According to Western custom, “non-Cuban” cigars will be passed around to friends and relatives of the happy parents. We cannot fail to recall here that, despite Fayyad’s announcement of his pregnancy in August 2009, congratulations did not reach him from the European Union and the Quartet until December 2009. Since many prior pregnancies of other Palestinians allied with the Israeli occupation were of the hysterical sort, and in rare cases where the pregnancy was real it was aborted before its time, in order to ensure the continuation of this “real” pregnancy to the end, there are many steps that must be taken before the birth of Fayyad’s child. The most important are:
That is what Fayyad immediately agreed, declaring: “Related to the Zionist ethos, fine, Israel is a biblical country, there are lots of hilltops, lots of vacant space, why don’t they [the settlers] use that, and let us get on with it?”
Secondly, a commitment to repress all forms of resistance against Israel, called “incitement,” such as freedom of expression and freedom of political action. “Incitement can take the form of many things – things said, things done, provocations – but there are ways for dealing with this. We are dealing with this.”
Thirdly, waiving the Palestinian people’s right of return to the homes and lands from which they were displaced at the hands of the Jewish European colonizers: “Of course, Palestinians would have the right to reside within the State of Palestine.”In an interview in the latest issue of the Journal of Palestine Studies, Fayyad insists on presenting himself as a man who does not oblige when he deals with the United States.
Hugo Chavez must stop and learn a lesson in independence and non-alignment from Fayyad, “The Third Way.” That is the name of the slate under the umbrella of which Fayyad ran in the 2006 elections. Fatah accused it of being funded by the Central Intelligence Agency. ”
The Third Way” earned 2.41% of the vote.
It must not escape the reader that Fayyad is the only witness to his heroic positions against the Americans, and for that reason he is excited to narrate them to those who interviewed him. Fayyad informs us that he stood in the face of the Americans when he resigned from the post of Minister of Finance in 2002. He was asked to visit the United States, when he refused and informed the Americans that he was busy with the tasks of his new post. He would visit them when his schedule allowed. That’s not all, though, for after that (and this no one knew until now) he stood in the face of General Keith Dayton, the American trainer and leader of the mafia gangs of Palestinian Security. Fayyad ordered him not to speak with journalists, telling him that he was nothing but a trainer to the Palestinian Security Forces, not an adviser.
Fayyad did not mention (and whoever conducted the interview did not remind him) that the Americans had appointed him to be the Prime Minister of the Palestinian Authority coup government in June 2007, after the PA (and Keith Dayton with it) failed in their coup against democratically-elected Hamas in Gaza. In any case, had Fayyad not uncovered these facts, his positions against imperialism would have remained unknown and unappreciated by the masses.
In an interview with the Journal of Palestine Studies, Fayyad shows his concern regarding the continuation of the Israeli colonial theft of Jerusalem, to such a degree that he, in all his strength, recommends full Arab normalization with Israel in order to stop this robbery:
“The Arab identity of the place is strengthened when the Arabs come to it. It is not strengthened by boycott, because boycott in a way normalizes the occupier. I believe that Arab visits to Jerusalem are an important duty. I strongly encourage that. In doing so, there is support for and strengthening of the Arab dimension of Jerusalem’s identity.”
It is curious that this paragraph disappeared from the English version translated from the Arabic article that appeared in the most recent issue of the Journal of Palestine Studies!
During the conference, Martin Kramer (an extremist in the American context, but a centrist in the Israeli context) presented his famous, bad proposal that calls for limiting Palestinian offspring and disposing of “young [Palestinian] men that we do not benefit from.” Perhaps Fayyad’s recognition of Israel’s “Biblical” claims to acquiring Palestine was revealed to him there during his presence in Herzliya.
The record is replete with violations of all these rights by Dayton’s gangs, who target whoever belongs to Hamas in particular.
The student elections that took place last week in Bir Zeit University are a sufficient and illustrative example. As Dr. Islah Jadd indicated in an article she published about Bir Zeit University’s elections, the essence of democracy is what was exposed to danger, in a university that has always been a beacon of these freedoms.
Since the Palestinian Authority came to power, especially after Hamas’ victory in 2006, every single person that the Islamists put up as a candidate in the student elections has become a target of arrest by Dayton’s gangs, as soon as his name appears on the list of candidates or upon victory in the elections.
As a result of this terrorizing climate, the Islamist parties decided not to nominate any candidates in the most recent elections, in order to avoid their arrest. Thus, even though the elections themselves were free, the terrorizing of candidates and their arrest guaranteed the results in advance. However these elections are called “democratic.” As for the fact that the percentage of student participation in the last Bir Zeit University elections was less than 50%, that is a practical proof of the kind of American democracy that Fayyad and Dayton’s gangsters want to establish in the state that he will give birth to next year.
Fayyad’s plan to establish a Palestinian state in August 2011 is tantamount to accepting the Camp David proposal that was presented to and rejected by Arafat in 2000. And the Americans believe that as long as Palestinians — or at least America’s collaborators amongst them — present these proposals, with the appearance that they are a challenge to Israel or even to America’s will, that the proposals will then become more acceptable to the naive Palestinians than if Israel or the Americans imposed the proposals on them directly.
In 1999, the Clinton administration and its allies in the region, including the Jordanian government, undertook to do whatever possible to guarantee Netanyahu’s defeat in the Israeli elections. They succeeded in supporting Ehud Barak winning the elections, so that the latter could conduct the Camp David negotiations under Clinton’s patronage. However, whereas Arafat had no choice but to reject what was proposed to him, had he accepted them, he would have lost all the legitimacy he had enjoyed with the Palestinian people.
Today, Barack Obama has a new partner who does not care about or pay attention to things like popular legitimacy, inasmuch as, in any case, he doesn’t possess an atom’s weight of it. While Arafat, the historical leader of the Palestinians since the 60s, had been elected with a majority of votes in 1996 in unfair elections, the unknown Fayyad did not play for a day any role in the Palestinian national movement, in the same way that he does not enjoy any bit of electoral legitimacy. Despite this, he was imposed as a higher leader of the Palestinian Authority.
And look, there he is, the King of Jordan joining once again the choir of those criticizing Netanyahu in a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal. Obama is coordinating his present efforts with the Israeli Labor Party, which currently forms part of Netanyahu’s present governing coalition. The goal is the latter’s collapse through Labor’s withdrawal from it, as punishment for Netanyahu disobeying Obama’s orders. To realize this desired goal, prominent members of the Labor Party are partaking in meetings with Palestinian officials and non-officials in the United States and the West Bank, to coordinate efforts and accession to Obama’s plan towards a new Camp David.
However, Obama’s child will not be born without the availability of a Palestinian leader who will accept the Camp David conditions that, today, are even worse than they were when Ehud Barak presented them to Arafat in 2000.
With the rise of the number of Jewish settlers by the tens of thousands, with the apartheid separation wall swallowing Palestinian lands, with the confiscation of more lands in the West Bank and Jerusalem; 65% of the West Bank that Arafat rejected (and which was marketed by the Americans and Israelis as 95% of the West Bank) will be even further reduced before Fayyad proposes it himself to the Palestinian people.
In this context, according to rumors coming out of Washington, or at the very least, in the Washington Post, the peace plan that Obama is studying these days is built entirely on Camp David’s foundation, except that “90% of the map would look the same” as the plan that Ehud Barak presented to Arafat in 2000, which means that what will be presented to the Palestinians will be about 58% of the West Bank. It seems this will be the size of Fayyad’s awaited newborn.
After completing these preparations, Fayyad will give birth to his illegitimate American child, who will be baptized with the name “Palestine.”
Unlike the child of Nazareth, Fayyad’s child will not bring salvation to the Palestinian people, rather, it will be a ruinous, outrageous disaster upon them.
Please send gifts to the mother and child to the address of Mr. Salaam Fayyad’s office in Ramallah.
River to Sea
Uprooted Palestinian
Uprooted Palestinian
I am sorry, that I interrupt you, would like to offer other decision.
ReplyDelete