ALWAYS HOPE FOR A BETTER FUTURE!
Follow the News with an open mind.
Never stop asking to find out the truth!
Criticisms / Disagreements lead to a better future.
Participation of all is the key.
This page is also a way to improve your English.
Be critical of the current president
Earlier this year a Buddhist woman was raped and murdered in western Myanmar. The authorities charged three Muslim men.
A week later, 10 Muslims were murdered in a revenge attack. What happened next was hidden from the outside world.
Bloodshed
pitted Buddhists against minority Rohingya Muslims. Many Rohingya fled
their homes, which were burned down in what they said was a deliberate
attempt by the predominantly Buddhist government to drive them out of
the country.
"They were shooting and we were also fighting. The fields were filled
with bodies and soaked with blood," says Mohammed Islam, who fled with
his family to Bangladesh.
There are 400,000 Rohingya languishing in Bangladesh. For more than
three decades, waves of refugees have fled Myanmar. But the government
of Bangladesh considers the Rohingya to be illegal immigrants, as does
the government of Myanmar. They have no legal rights and nowhere to go.
This
is a story of a people fleeing the land where they were born, of a
people deprived of citizenship in their homeland. It is the story of the
Rohingya of western Myanmar, whose very existence as a people is
denied.
Professor William Schabas, the former president of the International
Association of Genocide Scholars, says: "When you see measures
preventing births, trying to deny the identity of the people, hoping to
see that they really are eventually, that they no longer exist; denying
their history, denying the legitimacy of their right to live where they
live, these are all warning signs that mean it's not frivolous to
envisage the use of the term genocide."
THE PRESIDENT: Good evening, everybody, and let’s give it up for our
host –- the tallest elf I’ve ever seen –- Conan O’Brien. (Laughter and
applause.) We’re also grateful to all the outstanding performers, the
choirs, the glee clubs who are sharing their tremendous talents with
us.
Tonight is a chance to get in the Christmas spirit; to spread some
joy and sing along with artists who have much better voices than we do.
(Laughter.) But it’s also a chance to make a real difference in the
lives of some very brave young people being treated at Children’s
National Medical Center. Many of these kids and their parents are going
through tough times right now, and your support helps give them a
reason to hope –- not just during the holidays, but all year round.
And that’s really what Christmas is all about. Each of us is
incredibly blessed in so many ways. But those blessings aren’t just
meant to be enjoyed -- they’re meant to be used and shared with those
who have less. The Christian faith teaches us that on this day a child
was born so that we might have eternal life. And at the heart of many
of the world’s great religions is the idea that we’re all better off
when we treat our brothers and sisters with the same love and compassion
that we want for ourselves.
So yes, tonight is about Conan and Diana Ross and Santa and all the
other talented folks on this stage. But it’s also about the Americans
who are spending this holiday in a hospital bed, or a shelter, or
protecting our freedom on a battlefield far from home. Let’s keep them
in our prayers, and follow Christ’s calling to love one another as He
has loved all of us.
Merry Christmas, everybody. God bless you, and God bless these United States of America.
Remarks of President Barack ObamaWeekly AddressThe White HouseDecember 8, 2012
Hello, everybody. Over the last few weeks, there’s been a lot of
talk about deadlines we’re facing on jobs and taxes and investments.
But with so much noise and so many opinions flying around, it can be
easy to lose sight of what this debate is really about. It’s not about
which political party comes out on top, or who wins or loses in
Washington. It’s about making smart decisions that will have a real
impact on your lives and the lives of Americans all across the country.
Right now, middle-class tax cuts are set to expire at the
end of the year. Time is running out. And there are two things that
can happen.
First, if Congress does nothing, every family in America will see their income taxes automatically go up on January 1st.
A typical middle-class family of four would get a $2,200 tax hike.
That would be bad for families, it would be bad for businesses, and it
would drag down our entire economy.
Now, Congress can avoid all this by passing a law that
prevents a tax hike on the first $250,000 of everybody’s income. That
means 98 percent of Americans and 97 percent of small businesses
wouldn’t see their income taxes go up by a single dime. Even the
wealthiest Americans would get a tax cut on the first $250,000 of their
income. And families everywhere would enjoy some peace of mind.
The Senate has already done their part. Now we’re just
waiting for Republicans in the House to do the same thing. But so far,
they’ve put forward an unbalanced plan that actually lowers rates for
the wealthiest Americans. If we want to protect the middle class, then
the math just doesn’t work.
We can and should do more than just extend middle class
tax cuts. I stand ready to work with Republicans on a plan that spurs
economic growth, creates jobs and reduces our deficit – a plan that
gives both sides some of what they want. I’m willing to find ways to
bring down the cost of health care without hurting seniors and other
Americans who depend on it. And I’m willing to make more entitlement
spending cuts on top of the $1 trillion dollars in cuts I signed into
law last year.
But if we’re serious about reducing our deficit while
still investing in things like education and research that are important
to growing our economy – and if we’re serious about protecting
middle-class families – then we’re also going to have to ask the
wealthiest Americans to pay higher tax rates. That’s one principle I
won’t compromise on
After all, this was a central question in the election. A
clear majority of Americans – Democrats, Republicans and Independents –
agreed with a balanced approach that asks something from everyone, but a
little more from those who can most afford it. It’s the only way to
put our economy on a sustainable path without asking even more from the
middle class. And it’s the only kind of plan I’m willing to sign.
Everyone agrees we need to bring down our deficit and
strengthen our economy for the long-term. The question is whether we
can do it in a responsible way that allows us to keep investing in the
things that have always made America strong. I’m convinced we can. And
if both sides are willing to compromise, I believe we can give
businesses and families a sense of security going into the New Year.
Original published in theNewsweek December 10, 2012 edition.
Sayed Hashua on sadness and sin in the Holy Land.
“How can you live in that city?”my friends, both Jews and
Arabs ask me, They’re right.Jerusalem
has always been tough, and it’s been getting more and more religious,
extremist, and racist over the years.
As I wrote these words in May, I asked myself the same
question. It was the morning of Jerusalem Day, when Israel celebrates its
completion of the city’s occupation: the annexing of the Old City and East
Jerusalem. The radio newscaster talks of large scale police deployment
throughout the city and right wing Knesset members planning to visit the Temple
Mount. Soon the main roads will be blocked and the parades will start. People
will give speeches about unified Jerusalem, the Jewish people’s eternal
capital. The Jews will have their “flag dance” and enter the Old City, where
they’ll celebrate victory by singing and dancing , and the Temple Mount
Loyalists will try, as they do every year, to ascend the mount with a model of
the Third Temple. The Arabs will watch the goings-on from their windows, biting
their tongues in profound sorrow. They can do nothing in face of the
right-wingers’ defiance.They lost the
war, and they are still losing. Today they will shut themselves behind heavy
wooden doors, concealing a life of suffering that does not interest the flag
dancers. The revelers don’t want to read the study stating that 84 percent of
Arabs children in Jerusalem live beneath the poverty line.
I’ve never told my friends the real reason why I stay here.
They wouldn’t understand. Who would believe me if I said I live here because
the holy city has always been, for me, the city of sin? Who would believe me if
I swore I can’t even have a drink anywhere else?
I arrived in Jerusalem 20 years ago, as a 115-year-old boy,
when my parents sent me to s Jewish boarding school in West Jerusalem. I hated
the city as soon as I entered it. On my first bus ride, a soldier got on and
immediately pegged me as Arab: a boy leaving his village for the first time,
with Arab’s clothes, an Arab’s thin moustache, and most tellingly frightened
look of an Arab. That was the first time I was taken off the bus and searched.
It took me a while to blur my external identity. I gradually gained command of
Hebrew. I learned from my classmates what to wear so as not seem suspicious,
and I shaved off my mustache and grew my hair long. When I felt ready, I
started to leave the boarding school and go out around town. In Jerusalem I
discovered cafés, record shops, bookstores, none of which could be found – and
still can’t – where I was born in Kfar Tira. I was a young boy, and I started
doing the things I’d always been warned against. I found the backstreet pubs
and started drinking.
It’s been two decades since then, and I still roam the city.
I’ve learned to recognize not only the mosques and churches, but also people’s
looks. I can tell by the way someone looks at me if they are Arabs or Jewish. I
can tell who has lost hope and who still believes. Arabs my age are no longer
capable of even dreaming of a better future for this city. They cannot imagine
a liberated Jerusalem, a Jerusalem of peace, a Jerusalem that would make then
independent. Entire generations in East Jerusalem merely pray for things not to
get worse. But they get worse, with every government decision to build another
Jewish enclave in East Jerusalem, and every group of settlers planning the next
“City of David” in another Arab neighborhood.
Sometimes it seems as if East
Jerusalemites need the occupation – they cannot imagine their lives without it,
they’re addicted to it, resigned to the oppression and afraid of becoming purposeless
if it suddenly disappears. Sometimes it seems that a whole generation wants to
be controlled by their master more than the master needs his slaves. Israel has
taught East Jerusalem residents to dream only of their National Insurance
stipend, captives of their state allowances. It has taught them to be thankful
for being allowed to sweep the street and wash dishes in the restaurants. It
has taught them to be grateful for still being allowed to work inside Israel, unlike
their brothers on the West Bank.
East Jerusalem is growing weak and isolated. The only glimmer
of hope can be seen, occasionally, in the eyes of small children. Because of
all this, I have little choice but to get drunk. And as I’ve mentioned, I can’t get drunk
anywhere other than Jerusalem. Because if you’re going to sin, you might as
well do it as close as possible to where God resides.
Sayed Kashua writes a column for Haaretz and is author of
three novels. This article was translated from Hebrew by Jessica Cohon. Editor’s
note: This essay is the first in two-part series on Jerusalem, featuring one
article by an Arab citizen of Israel followed next week with an assay be a
Jewish citizen of Israel.
THE PRESIDENT: Merry Christmas, everybody! (Applause.) Michelle
told me to be brief because she wants to hear music. (Laughter.)
Thank you, Secretary Salazar, for that generous introduction and for
your dedication to protecting our natural resources. I want to thank
Neil Mulholland and the whole National Park Foundation and the National
Park Service team for helping to put on this beautiful production.
Let’s give a big hand to Neil Patrick Harris -- (applause) -- and
this evening’s performers for putting on a fantastic show. And I want
to also thank all of you for joining us to celebrate this great American
tradition.
As has been mentioned, we’ve been lighting the National Christmas
Tree for 90 years now. In times of war and peace, triumph and tragedy,
we’ve always come together to rejoice in the Christmas miracle. But our
tree has been having a hard time recently -- this is our third one in
as many years. Our longstanding tree was lost in a storm, and then its
replacement didn’t take hold. It just goes to show, nobody’s job is
safe here in Washington. (Laughter.) But I feel good about this one.
It was planted just days before Hurricane Sandy, and it made it through
the storm in one piece.
Now, we know that some of our neighbors to the north saw a more
ruthless and destructive Sandy. And this holiday season is especially
difficult for families who lost everything in the storm. But it’s also a
time for us to be grateful for the heroism and perseverance of ordinary
men and women in the storm’s path who’ve showed us that Americans will
always be stronger than the challenges that we face. And as I did
before Thanksgiving, I can’t help but tell a story of their enduring
holiday spirit.
This evening, in Midland Beach, New York, on a street lined with
houses and businesses devastated by the storm, a great big Christmas
tree shines out of the darkness. Just a couple of weeks ago, as
impacted families were still seeking some sense of getting back to
normal, one local nursery donated the tree, another chipped in for the
lights and a star, and 70-year-old Tom Killeen and his longtime buddies
from the area planted it at the end of the street, overlooking the town
beach. As Tom says, the tree has one message: “It’s Christmas time, not
disaster time.”
And Tom is right. For centuries, the message of Christmas -- of
peace and goodwill to all -- has guided millions of people around the
world through good times but also through bad times. This year is no
different. It’s a chance for all of us to open our hearts to the least
fortunate among us. It’s a chance to remember what Christ taught us --
that it is truly more blessed to give than to receive, and that the
simplest gifts bring the greatest joy. And it’s a chance to count our
blessings and give thanks to those outstanding service members who
bravely defend them.
For Americans of all backgrounds and beliefs, may this holiday season
remind us of the spirit of brotherhood and generosity that unites us as
citizens. And may every tree from Midland Beach to this Ellipse and
all across the country shine as a beacon of hope for all Americans.
So on behalf of Michelle, Malia, Sasha, Grandma and Bo, I’d like to
wish each and every one of you a very Merry Christmas and a peaceful and
joyful holiday season.
God bless you, and God bless America. (Applause.)
(Christmas carols are sung.)
THE PRESIDENT: Well, everybody, I just want to say, can we give a
huge round of applause to these outstanding performers? (Applause.) To
our outstanding choir. (Applause.)
Neil, are we going out with a song?
MR. HARRIS: Sure, let’s sing one. You start it.
THE PRESIDENT: No, no, no -- (laughter) -- I just wasn’t sure. I
know this program is taped so we can always edit this out. (Laughter.)
Was there something else that we were supposed to be singing? Santa
Clause Is Coming To Town -- that's what I thought. Let’s hit it!
President Obama on Tuesday dismissed the latest deficit-cutting
proposal from Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) as "still out of balance."
"I
think that we have the potential of getting a deal done, but it's going
to require ... a balanced, responsible approach to deficit reduction
that can help give businesses certainty and make sure the country
grows," Obama told Bloomberg TV. "Unfortunately, the Speaker’s proposal
is still out of balance."
Republicans on Monday countered the
president's call for $1.6 trillion in tax increases with an offer to cut
$2.2 trillion from the deficit with a combination of spending cuts,
entitlement reforms and $800 billion in new tax revenue.
Obama said the latest Republican plan, which would raise $800 billion in
revenues without increasing the tax rates on the wealthiest Americans,
"didn't add up."
"There's been a lot of talk that we can raise
$800 billion or $1 trillion in revenues just by cutting loopholes,"
Obama said. "But a lot of your viewers understand that the only way to
do that would be if you completely eliminated, for example, charitable
deductions."
The president said "every hospital, university, and
non-profit agency across the country would find themselves on the verge
of collapse" under such a plan, and that realistically, only between
$300 billion to $400 billion could be raised by eliminating deductions.
"If
we're going to be serious about reducing our deficit while still being
able to invest in things like education ... and if we're going to
protect middle class, then we're going to have to have higher rates on
the wealthiest Americans," Obama said.
Boehner shot back that
Republicans are "willing to make concessions" in the talks, but need
Obama to put forward a credible proposal.
"If the President
really wants to avoid sending the economy over the fiscal cliff, he has
done nothing to demonstrate it. Instead, he has offered a plan that
could not pass either house of Congress," Boehner said in a statement.
"With
our latest offer we have demonstrated there is a middle ground solution
that can cut spending and bring in revenue without hurting American
small businesses. The President now has an obligation to respond with a
proposal that does the same.”
The fate of the Bush-era tax rates
for the wealthy remains the central disagreement between the president
and congressional Republicans in negotiations to avoid the "fiscal
cliff." Obama has made tax hikes on the wealthy a precondition for any
agreement, but Republican leaders have ruled out increasing the rates.
The
White House on Tuesday threw another demand into the mix, saying an
increase in the federal debt ceiling must be part of a final agreement.
"We're
not going to negotiate on what is a fundamental responsibility of
Congress," White House press secretary Jay Carney said, referring to the
debt ceiling.
The Obama spokesman said the biggest obstacle in
the fiscal talks is the refusal on the part of Republicans to
acknowledge that tax rates for the wealthy need to go up.
"We need
Congress to be serious about what the parameters of a deal look like,"
Carney said. "It's not good government for one party in Congress to
refuse to acknowledge what a compromise must include."
But Carney
refused to say whether Obama would accept a top tax rate of less than
39.6 percent — the level scheduled to take effect in January when the
Bush tax rates expire.
Republican leaders have pressed Obama to
"get serious" in their negotiations by putting entitlement reforms on
the table. The president on Tuesday said he was "prepared to make some
tough decisions" about entitlements, but balked when asked directly if
that would include cuts to Social Security or Medicare benefits.
"I
can't ask folks who are middle class, seniors who are on Medicare,
young people who are trying to get student loans to go to college to
sacrifice by not get anything from higher-income folks," Obama said.
Pressed
on the issue, Obama said he was "happy to look at how we can actually
make those entitlement programs stronger" but avoided taking a
definitive stance on whether benefits could change.
The president
said he did not believe that negotiators were going to be able to come
up with comprehensive entitlement or tax reform packages in the next two
weeks, urging instead a "down payment" that would avert the fiscal
cliff but allow more time to craft the eventual program.
"What
I've suggested is, let's essentially put a down payment," Obama said.
"On taxes, let's let tax rates on the wealthiest go up ... and then
let's set up a process with a time certain at the end of 2013 or the
fall of 2013 where we work on tax reform, we look at what tax loopholes
and deductions both Republicans and Democrats agree we can close, and
it's possible we can lower rates by broadening the base at that point."
Moves by UK, France, Spain, Denmark and Sweden are in protest to Israel's plan to build 3,000 homes on Palestinian land.
A defiant Israel has rejected a wave of American and
European condemnations over plans to build thousands of new homes in
West Bank settlements, vowing to press forward with the construction in
the face of widespread international opposition.
The UK, France, Spain, Denmark and Sweden on Monday summoned Israeli
ambassadors in their respective countries to protest Israel's plans to
build more settler homes in east Jerusalem and the West Bank.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's office said Israel would continue
to stand up for its interests "even in the face of international
pressure, and there will be no change in the decision taken".
The announcement from Netanyahu's office was likely to deepen a rift
that has emerged between Israel and some of its closest allies following
the UN's recognition of a Palestinian state last week.
Russia and Germany have also expressed opposition to the building of
additional settlements, and the White House issued a statement urging
the "Israeli leader to reconsider their unilateral decisions".
The official twitter-account of Russia's ministry of foreign affairs
said that, "Israeli construction on Palestinian territories occupied in
1967 is illegal, unrecognised and condemned by Russia and
internationally."
Media reports on Monday also said France and Britain were considering recalling their ambassadors to Israel over the plans.
Al Jazeera's Charlie Angela, reporting from London, said that the
British government was "frustrated not only by the scale of this
expansion...but also by the timing of the announcement."
French President Francois Hollande said he was deeply concerned about the effect it could have on the peace process.
"I said, as the French foreign minister did, that we are highly
pre-occupied by what was announced by the Israeli government - the
installation of new colonies composed of 3000 settlements with all the
consequences it could have on the peace process," said Hollande on
Monday.
'Fatal blow'
The decision to build in a key area east of Jerusalem, called E1,
sparked a storm of diplomatic protest from Washington and Brussels as
well as from UN chief Ban Ki-moon, who on Sunday warned it would deal an
"almost fatal blow" to the prospects of resolving the conflict.
E1 is a highly contentious area of the West Bank that runs between
the easternmost edge of annexed east Jerusalem and the Maaleh Adumim
settlement.
Palestinians bitterly oppose the project, as it would effectively cut
the occupied West Bank in two, north to south, and sever it from
Jerusalem, and make the creation of a viable Palestinian state even more
problematic.
Carl Bildt, Sweden's foreign minister, told Al Jazeera that Sweden wants to "urge the Israeli government to take a step back".
"We had anticipated that they would be ready now to enter into direct
peace negotiations with the Palestinians after the vote in the UN, and
instead, we are extremely concerned over the announcement that we've
heard from the Israeli government," said Bildt.
Josh Lockman, a professor of international law at the University of
Southern California, said Israel's reaction to Palestine's new UN status
brings into doubt its "genuine commitment to a two-state solution".
"[Israel's announcement] will draw a lot of condemnation, not just in
the region from key actors such as Egypt, Turkey and Qatar, which are
already trying to broker this undoubtedly tenuous ceasefire between
Hamas and Israel, but also the European Union and the United States," he
told Al Jazeera on Monday.
Unless you’re actually driving around the West Bank – sailing down the freeways Israel
has built atop Palestinian land, or steering down the two-lane roads
etched into the hillsides topped with more than 200 subdivisions,
little bits of California
atop stone hills straight from Bible story books – it’s difficult to
appreciate the reality of what Israel calls its “settlement project.”
But a geography specialist named Danny Seidemann found a vivid point of
reference for the new part of it Israel announced over the weekend:
“The doomsday settlement.”
If the U.N. has moved to declare Palestine is a state,
then Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu has a few things to
say–and do–about that. The 1.6 million Palestinians living on the Gaza
Strip are already separated by 25 miles from the 2.4 million on the West
Bank. The project Netanyahu’s government began moving forward on
Friday would cut the West Bank itself in half, dividing its north from
its south while barricading off a bit of Jerusalem in the bargain, and
with it, in all likelihood, the plans to name the Arab sections of the
city as Palestine’s capital. “The impact,” says Seiedmann, whom foreign embassies routinely consult as an expert on settlements and the boundaries of the contentious city,
“is basically the creation of facts on the ground that would make the
two-state solution dead. It’s not only a game-changer, it’s a
game-ender.”
The reaction to Netanyahu’s bold move, both in Israel and abroad, was
swift and negative. Britain and France summoned Israel’s ambassadors to
hear protests, and reportedly were considering ordering their own envoys home, a move without precedent. Washington condemned the move, which came just hours after UN ambassador Susan Rice forcefully delivered a speech of solidarity with the Jewish State on the floor of the General Assembly.
In Israel, both the right and left wing of the Hebrew press asked
why, after losing the U.N. vote 138 to 9, an Israeli government would
announce a move sure to further its international isolation.
(Technically, the way Palestine is run hasn’t changed because of the
vote; the Palestinian Authority simply has a different status–which
happens to have the word “state” in it–within the international
organization, with a few new legal prerogatives.) In Ma’ariv the
conservative columnist Ben-Dror Yemeni called Netanyahu’s move
“Pavlovian,” writing, “Rather than thank the American administration
for its amazing support on Thursday at the UN vote, the slap in the face
came on Friday with the announcement of the construction of thousands
of additional housing units.” In Yedioth Ahronoth, Nahum Barnea
reported from the Saban Forum, a Washington gathering of prominent
Israeli and Americans where the rules constrain attendees from saying
who said what. The gist of a speech by a prominent American politician
(identified in the same paper the next day as former Obama chief of
staff Rahm Emmanuel) was: “You Israelis are ingrates. You’ve screwed
yourselves.” Barnea’s conclusion: “Something bad has happened over the
years to the production line in Israeli politics.”
The “doomsday settlement” would be built on a section of land labeled
“E1” on planning maps of Jerusalem and its surroundings. The land is
currently a park – the visually striking western slope of a hillside
leading toward the Jordan Valley and a massive Jewish settlement already
in place, Maale Adumim. All the land is Palestinian, but Israel has
occupied it since 1967, and by filling it with Jewish housing would make
it impossible to travel from, say, Ramallah, to Hebron. On maps, what
looks like open space to the east is in fact the depths of the Jordan Valley, hundreds of meters below sea level where the Dead Sea lay.
“The administration warned Netanyahu publicly last Friday, ‘Please
don’t do it,’’’ Seidemann says, who goes on to describe the Israeli
Prime Minister’s decision to ignore the advice as consciously flagrant.
Meanwhile, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas returned
from New York to cheers. “We are now a state,” he told a throng of 3,000
loyalists in the West Bank city of Ramallah. “The world is with us,
and history is with us, God is with us and the future is ours.” The new
paradigm was displayed down the length of a nearby building, where a
banner unfurled in hazard yellow read, in English, Arabic and Hebrew:
“Warning! This is illegally occupied land. State of Palestine,
29/11/2012”
“Let me just say that we are standing at a very big Palestinian
wedding,” said a delighted Talal J’bara, 65. “It is the first time the
world recognizes who we are and that we even exist.”
“The most important thing now is that our leaders do whatever it
takes to stop the expansion of the settlements and all of Israel’s
wrongdoing,” said Khateem Khatab, a retiree who had traveled from
Jerusalem to Ramallah for the celebratory rally. “Negotiations will
only prevail once the Israelis stop all their provocations against the
Palestinian people and their land.” (Netanyahu also announced Israel
would hold back more than $100 million in tax revenues owed to the
Palestinian Authority, a punishment that Washington also had urged
Israel to forgo. )
Abbas framed the bid for statehood as a last-ditch effort to revive
negotiations begun almost 20 years ago aimed at creating a Palestinian
state beside Israel, roughly on the border that separated the two
populations until 1967, when Israeli forces defeated Arab armies and
began occupying the West Bank and Gaza. But as the negotiations dragged
on, Israel continued settling its people on the land – they now number
500,000, including neighborhoods built in East Jerusalem.
Having foresworn violent resistance, Abbas argued that diplomatic
leverage was the only kind available to check Israel’s military and
other advantages. The UN vote naming Palestine a “non-member state”
opens the door to the International Criminal Court, where individual
Israelis could be charged for violations of war crimes, a threat Abbas
says he will hold in abeyance for now. A period of sorting and settling
is likely underway. Though both sides say they are wiling to return to
negotiations, each are likely to be addressing mostly their own
constituencies for the next few months. Netanyahu is facing an election
set for Jan. 22, a prospect that Seidemann and others say may help
account for his decision to brandish E1 — it plays to the rightist and
settler constituencies that have recently all but overwhelmed his Likud party.
Abbas, meanwhile, is under new pressure to find a way to reconcile
with Hamas, the militant Islamist group that governs Gaza, and bring the
two Palestinian territories under a unified administration, especially
now that they’re nominally a state.
But in a conflict that’s finally, ultimately, about land, the lessons of November were not lost on Palestinians:
Hamas launched 1,300 missiles into Israel during the military
offensive aimed at stopping the launches, and in return won territorial
concessions. Under the terms of the cease-fire brokered by Egypt, Gaza’s
fishermen doubled the distance they can travel from shore before
encountering Israeli gunboats, and Palestinian farmers won access to the
one-third of the enclave’s arable land that abuts the border fence with
Israel proper. A week later, Abbas, who heads the secular Fatah party,
won the lopsided vote at the United Nations, and Israel’s response was
to appropriate another chunk of the West Bank for its own use. “We
have one goal and to be honest it doesn’t matter whether it is Fatah or
Hamas, the most important thing is that we achieve our freedom,” says
Manar Fathi, 40, at the Ramallah rally. “As long as the world is with
us, I don’t think we even care about what Israel is and what they can do
to us.”
JERUSALEM ― Israel has suddenly found itself thrust into a diplomatic crisis.
International
outcry is mounting in reaction to Israel’s announcement that it would
permit the building of 3,000 housing units in an area called E1. If
completed, the development would divide the West Bank in half.
“We
deplore the recent Israeli government decision to build 3,000 new
housing units and unfreeze development in the E1 block. This threatens
the viability of the two state solution,” The British Foreign Office
said in a statement. “Any decision about any other measures the UK might
take will depend on the outcome of our discussions with the Israeli
government and with international partners including the US and European
Union.”
In almost every European capital, from Stockholm to Paris and extending even to Moscow, Israeli ambassadors were called to hear angrily-worded rebukes by foreign ministries.
For
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, this latest crisis comes at a
critical moment. He faces elections on Jan. 22, and is trying to
consolidate his personal power base in the face of an extreme right-wing
list of candidates from his own party, the Likud. In addition, he has
joined forces with his hard-line foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman,
who represents an even more extremist party.
The announcement that
planning for the controversial housing development would be given an OK
may have been a nod in the direction of these political menaces.
But,
coming Friday, one day after the UN General Assembly voted to grant
Palestine an enhanced status, non-voting observer member state, which
Israel had decried as a unilateral move and a blatant violation of the
Oslo Accords, it is widely seen as retribution against the Palestinian
government.
There is “a feeling of crisis,” a source in Israel’s foreign ministry told GlobalPost.
Only
two weeks ago, Netanyahu portrayed the international support granted to
Israel during the Gaza incursion as a personal achievement,
underscoring his close coordination with the administration of US
President Barack Obama. Netanyahu had been widely criticized for all but
openly supporting the candidacy of Mitt Romney during the US election,
and presented the US-negotiated cease-fire agreement as evidence of the
close working ties between Israel and the United States.
“I told
quite a few people we were treading on thin ice,” a diplomatic source
distressed by the current development said. “I kept telling everyone who
was so pleased about the diplomatic support we got during operation
Pillar of Defense that this was very thin ice, and you know you’ve gone
too far only when you find yourself in icy water.”
Netanyahu, who
has a brusque personal style more appealing in Israel’s rough-and-tumble
political fray than in the diplomatic corridors of Europe, is not
popular in international diplomatic circles.
For many Israeli
right-wingers, convinced that the world opposes Israel without
criterion, that reputation serves Netanyahu as a credential of his tough
stance. On the other hand, having spent much of his youth and early
adult years in the United States, he is also known in Israel for his
polished English and American airs.
Only one European nation supported Israel’s position at the United Nations ― the Czech Republic.
This has lead a growing number of Israelis to ask, as did the
diplomatic correspondent on Channel 10 news, about “Netanyahu’s message
failure and his policy failure” in ratcheting up the Palestinian
resolution to such importance, while apparently making no plan to move
forward in the aftermath.
There are growing concerns in Jerusalem
that the prime minister’s office may be confusing success in some of its
messaging with support for its policies
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, I want to welcome Prime Minister Borisov to
the White House, and his delegation from Bulgaria. I have to say at the
outset that Bulgaria has proven to be one of our most outstanding NATO
allies.
Obviously, there are very strong bonds between our two countries,
including many Bulgarian Americans in my hometown of Chicago. It
reminds us of the strong people-to-people relationship between the
United States and Bulgaria.
I've had an opportunity to work and discuss issues with the Prime
Minister in the past, and he has always been a very effective leader on
the world stage. And I think it's important for everybody to know that
he's also a black belt in karate, so you should be very careful crossing
him. (Laughter.)
We're going to have a lot to discuss during this meeting. But first
and foremost, I want to thank the Prime Minister for the strong
partnership in NATO. Bulgaria has been a strong supporter of the
efforts in Afghanistan, and we'll have the opportunity to touch briefly
on the transition that needs to take place there. But I want to thank
him and his fellow countrymen for their service and sacrifice.
We've also had excellent cooperation on criminal investigations, law
enforcement, counterterrorism -- and most recently, I want to thank the
Prime Minister for his very diligent investigation of the tragic
terrorist attack that killed Israeli civilians in Bulgaria. The
security teams in Bulgaria have worked very hard and cooperatively in
bringing the perpetrators to justice.
But of course, the relationship is not just based on security
issues. Bulgaria is a modernizing country, and I know that the Prime
Minister is interested in a range of reforms to create an open and
transparent government, to improve trade and commerce between our two
countries, as a leader in the Balkans in moving towards further
integration with Europe and the rest of the world economy. We've been
very impressed with the progress that's been made in Bulgaria, and I'm
looking forward to hearing from the Prime Minister how the United States
can further assist in those efforts.
So, Mr. Prime Minister, welcome to you. And we look forward to this
conversation. The American people send their regards to the people of
Bulgaria. And the other thing I have to say is the weather is not
always this good, so you should enjoy some of the sights while you're
here as well.
PRIME MINISTER BORISOV: (As interpreted.) Mr. President, it is an honor that you invited us all here to the White House.
First of all, I would like to extend my congratulations on your winning the trust again of the American people.
Of course, the fact that you pointed out you are from Chicago, I
would like to point out that this is one of the biggest Bulgarian cities
-- over 150,000 Bulgarians make Chicago their home. And everybody in
Bulgaria was deeply moved at your telephone call to express your
condolences for the Bulgarian citizen as well as the Israeli nationals
who perished in the terrorist act.
I'm very glad that you pointed out that in countries such as Iraq and
Afghanistan, places where our soldiers, U.S. and Bulgaria, fight for
democracy shoulder to shoulder, that we do have additional topics of
mutual interest. And I thank you for the opportunity to lay a wreath
today at Arlington National Cemetery at the Tomb of the Unknown
Soldier. As you know, a lot of Bulgarian soldiers perished and were
seriously, grievously wounded in our missions in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And the way that the U.S. people -- and you, personally -- protect the
memory of the perished soldiers is unparalleled throughout the world.
It is true that Bulgaria is an island of stability in the Eastern
Balkans. Our budget deficit is very low, our foreign debt is very low,
and our financial stability is great. Thank you for the opportunity in
the energy sphere for Bulgaria to work towards diversification of energy
sources. We do have deep reserves in this area for the future.
Especially, I also would like to thank you for the excellent
cooperation with the United States in such areas as social security,
national security, counterterrorism, combating organized crime. Our law
enforcement services work together very effectively.
Of course, the Bulgarian citizens are expecting your decision on
Bulgaria's joining the Visa Waiver Program. We do have visa-free travel
regime with the entire European Union. And thank you once again for
the opportunity to discuss these topics.
Hi, everybody. I’m here on the factory floor of a business in
Hatfield, Pennsylvania, where folks are working around the clock making
toys to keep up with the Christmas rush.
And I came here because, back in Washington, the clock is
ticking on some important decisions that will have a real impact on our
businesses – and on families like yours.
The most pressing decision has to do with your taxes. See,
at the end of the year, middle-class tax cuts are set to expire. And
there are two things that can happen.
First, if Congress does nothing, every family will see
their income taxes automatically go up at the beginning of next year. A
typical middle class family of four will see their income taxes rise by
$2,200. We can’t let that happen. Our families can’t afford it, and
neither can our economy.
The second option is better. Right now, Congress can pass a
law that would prevent a tax hike on the first $250,000 of everybody’s
income. Everybody. That means that 98 percent of Americans and 97
percent of small businesses wouldn’t see their income taxes go up at
all. And even the wealthiest Americans would get a tax cut on the first
$250,000 of their incomes.
Congress can do that right now. They can give families
like yours a sense of security going into the New Year. They can give
companies like this one some certainty about what to expect down the
road. And with the issue behind us, we’ll have more time to work out a
plan to bring down our deficits in a balanced way – including by asking
the wealthiest Americans to pay a little more, so we can still invest in
the things that make our nation strong, like education and research.
So let’s begin by doing what we all agree on. Both parties
say we should keep middle-class taxes low. The Senate has already
passed a bill to keep income taxes from going up on middle-class
families. Democrats in the House are ready to do the same thing. And if
we can just get a few House Republicans on board, I’ll sign this bill
as soon as Congress sends it my way.
But it’s unacceptable for some Republicans in Congress to
hold middle class tax cuts hostage simply because they refuse to let tax
rates go up on the wealthiest Americans. And if you agree with me, then
I could use your help. Let your congressman know what $2,000 means to
you. Give them a call. Write them an email. Or tweet them using the
hashtag “My2K.” That’s My2K.
You and your family have a lot riding on the outcome of
this debate. We all do. And as citizens, we all have a say in the
country we want to build – not just on election day, but every day. So
make your voice heard. I promise, it makes a difference. Thanks, and
have a great weekend.
To recognize World AIDS Days, the White House installed a commemorative Red Ribbon on the north portico of the house. Go to http://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/eop/onap to learn more on how the administration is working towards an AIDS-free generation.
Away from its busy capital city and famous canal, Panama is one of the world's most ecologically diverse nations.
Yet huge new hydroelectric dam projects now underway are seeing pristine rivers damned and virgin rainforest flooded.
The
government says it is vital for economic growth, big business is
cashing in and even the UN has awarded carbon credits on the basis that
the resultant energy will be 'sustainably' produced.
But for the indigenous Ngabe people - whose homes are vanishing
under water - it is a catastrophe. So they have been fighting back.
Filmmaker Glenn Elis went to Panama for People & Power to find out
more.
ast February, the most famous Panamanian in the world went for a
routine medical check-up. The authorities used a decoy, and General
Noriega, the country's former military governor, was spirited back to
his luxury detention centre, safe from prying eyes and a hungry press.
Nonetheless, acres of news print around the world were lavished on the
event, while a far more urgent unravelling Panamanian story dropped
under the radar.
Filmmaker's view: Glenn Elis
Panama's largest indigenous group, the Ngabe, had decided to take a
stand against the unlawful encroachment of their homeland. Since the
time of the conquistadors, the Ngabe have been pushed to the margins of
the country - forced to live on the land that no one else wanted. Twenty
years ago the Panamanian government finally ceded what was considered a
useless tract of land to them. The Ngabe had in fact lived there for
centuries, so by rights it has always been theirs.
But now this land, rich in mineral deposits and rivers, is considered
priceless. And Ricardo Martinelli, Panama's authoritarian president who
is a close friend of former Italian premier Silvio Berlusconi, wants it
back.
His plan is to open the Ngabe heartland to foreign mining companies
and push hydroelectric power projects onto an unwilling population. The
problem is that the Ngabe have nowhere else to go. So the scene was set
for a dramatic showdown, which started when the Ngabe closed the
Pan-American Highway in Chiriquí province in the west of the country -
bringing Panama to a standstill.
Their demand: an audience with the president. Martinelli's response
was extraordinary for this relatively peaceful country with a
constitution that forbids the formation of an army. The police, who
human rights observers say have become increasingly militarised since
Martinelli became president three years ago, launched a vicious
crackdown, cutting communications with the outside world, and allegedly
shooting innocent bystanders as well as peaceful protesters.
Harrowing reports surfaced of rapes and the mistreatment of
detainees, as scores of Ngabe men, women and children were arrested. At
least two people were killed and many more were injured. The crackdown
lasted for three days and proved so unpopular with Panamanians, that
Martinelli was forced into negotiations with the Ngabe.
Opening fire
The talks were taking place at the National Assembly building in the
centre of Panama City and dozens of Ngabe families had set up camp
nearby to show support for Silvia Carerra, their elected leader who is
known as the Casica.
It was here that my crew and I set up our camera on my first day in
Panama to interview some of the people who had travelled hundreds of
miles to make their point. We had just started to interview a young
woman and child when gun shots rang through the air. The police had
opened fire at the demonstrators. There were several shotgun injuries,
none serious, but nasty all the same. It seemed inexplicable. Why fire
into a crowd filled with women and children, particularly at a time
when their leader was negotiating with the government?
It is possible that the government was never that keen to talk to the
Ngabe in the first place and that this was an attempt to provoke a
reaction which would force the cancellation of the talks. If that was
the plan, it did not work. The Casica had no intention of letting the
government set the agenda and the talks continued.
But as I flicked through the channels in my hotel room later that
night I was given an insight into the less than perfect relationship
between the government and the media here. Panamanian TV media carried
the police's version of events - that drunken Ngabe youths had gone on
the rampage. It was a story that I knew for a fact was far from the
truth.
A piece of paradise
The next day one of the so-called 'drunkards', a teetotaller by the
name of Ricardo, invited us to his village. It was a six-hour drive from
Panama City followed by a gruelling trek through mountain jungle. But
nothing could have prepared me for the beauty of Kia - a settlement
nestling on the banks of the Tabasara River.
Here the Ngabe have carved out a little piece of paradise for
themselves, and I saw at once why they are fighting so hard to protect
it. There is an open air school where children are taught in the Ngabe
language, which is vital if their unique culture is to survive. And I
enjoyed a continuous stream of hospitality as we talked into the early
hours under a night sky unblemished by light pollution.
The following morning Ricardo gave us a guided tour of the village,
explaining the close bond between his people and nature. I was taken a
short distance to the riverbank where a little girl showed us a colony
of Tabasara Rain Frogs, one of the rarest species in the world, which
are found nowhere else on the planet. If the government has its way, all
this will be flooded and the frogs will disappear.
Yet a few miles downstream from Kia, the massive construction site of
Barro Blanco is an ugly blot on the landscape. As the enormous dam
takes shapes, armed guards patrol the perimeter to keep the villagers
away. When the dam is complete the village of Kia will be lost.
From Kia I travelled northwest to visit Ngabe villagers who had
already lost their community. They had been made homeless by another
hydroelectric project last year, when the mighty Changuinola River was
dammed. Here I met Carolina. Her house had been built on higher ground
than those of her neighbours in the village of Guiyaboa, but it was
still not high enough. The village now lies deep underwater and all that
can be seen is the roof of Carolina's house, jutting out of the water
like some incongruous monument. She told me that she and countless
others had received no compensation for loss of their land, crops or
housing.
I travelled on through Chiriqui province, the scene of the crackdown,
and met and interviewed survivors and the relatives of those who had
been killed by the police. I found it hard to understand why they had
died. All the Ngabe had been asking for was an opportunity to talk to
the government - a concession that the authorities had to make in the
end anyway. It is not surprising that, away from the glitzy skyscrapers
of the capital, a terrible sense of injustice and resentment is
simmering below the surface.
A roll call of Panama's wealthy
Back in Panama City, Jorge Ricardo Fabrega, the country's powerful
minister of government, agreed to meet me and explain the government's
side. He admitted that things could have been handled better at
Changuinola, but insisted that during the recent crackdowns the police
had behaved very professionally. He was keen to underline the importance
of hydroelectric energy for Panama's booming economy and then stated
categorically that nothing would be allowed to stop the Barro Blanco
project going ahead.
"There's one thing that I have to make clear," he said. "We're not
going to cancel Barro Blanco. The Barro Blanco project is under
construction and it will continue." As I listened I thought of Ricardo
and the other villagers whose future was being decided by the minister
and his friends.
By now news had got around that a filmmaker from Al Jazeera was in
the country and someone discreetly passed me a lengthy document
detailing the government's future hydroelectric plans. It was an
eye-opener. The sheer number of the projects is startling; if they all
go ahead they will surely produce far more electricity than Panama will
ever need, no matter how dynamic or fast growing its economy. Which begs
the obvious question: What will they do with all this power?
Alongside each project listed were the names of the company directors
involved - a roll call of Panama's wealthiest families. It was not
difficult to put two and two together. Electricity is a commodity like
anything else and if there is spare capacity it can be sold to
energy-hungry consumers in neighbouring countries. Someone, it seemed,
was going to get very rich. Unsurprisingly, that document has never been
made public.
It was then I realised what Silvia Carerra, the Casica, was up
against in her negotiations with the government. And on my last evening
in Panama, I was lucky enough to meet her. Despite having been up since
sunrise debating with other Ngabe leaders, she found time for an
interview.
A charismatic 41-year-old, with little in the way of a formal
education, she has found herself locked in negotiations with the
minister I had just met. This remarkable woman is all that stands
between her 100,000 kinsmen and development projects they neither want
nor need. It must be a terrible responsibility. I found her candour and
determination refreshing. She told me that even after all the government
had done the Ngabe would never give in.
But in the meantime, of course, work at Barro Blanco and elsewhere goes on.
The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect Al Jazeera's editorial policy.
JERUSALEM — Israel is moving forward with development of Jewish
settlements in a contentious area east of Jerusalem, defying the United
States by advancing a project that has long been condemned by Washington
as effectively dooming any prospect of a two-state solution to the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
A day after the United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly to upgrade the status of the Palestinians,
a senior Israeli official said the government would pursue “preliminary
zoning and planning preparations” for a development that would separate
the West Bank
cities of Ramallah and Bethlehem from Jerusalem. If such a project were
to go beyond blueprints, it could prevent the creation of a viable,
contiguous Palestinian state.
The development, in an open, mostly empty area known as E1, would
connect the large settlement town of Maale Adumim to Jerusalem. Israeli
officials also authorized the construction of 3,000 new housing units in
parts of East Jerusalem and the West Bank.
The timing of the twin actions seemed aimed at punishing the
Palestinians for their United Nations bid, and appeared to show that
hard-liners in the government had prevailed after days of debate over
how to respond. That represented a surprising turnaround, after a
growing sense that Israeli leaders had acceded to pressure from
Washington not to react quickly or harshly.
The Obama administration swiftly condemned the move as unhelpful. Senior
officials expressed frustration that it came after Israeli officials
had played down the importance of the Palestinian bid and suggested that
they would only employ harsh retaliatory measures if the Palestinians
used their new status to go after Israel in the International Criminal
Court.
“We reiterate our longstanding opposition to settlements and East
Jerusalem construction and announcements,” a spokesman for the National
Security Council, Tommy Vietor, said. “We believe these actions are
counterproductive and make it harder to resume direct negotiations or
achieve a two-state solution.”
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a speech on Friday night
in Washington, criticized Israel’s decision to proceed with plans for
construction without referring to any settlements directly by name.
“These activities set back the cause of a negotiated peace,” she said at
the Saban Forum at the Brookings Institution.
Israel gave the United States only a few hours’ notice of the plan, a
senior official said. President Obama did not call Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu, the official said.
For Mr. Obama, whose most bitter clashes with Mr. Netanyahu have come
over settlements, the Israeli move could undermine a series of
developments in recent weeks — from the violence in Gaza to the
Palestinian vote — in which the two leaders appeared to draw closer
together.
For years, American and European officials have told the Israelis that
E1 is a red line. The leaked, somewhat vague, announcement of plans to
proceed with building is the diplomatic equivalent of what the Israeli
military did last month when it massed tens of thousands of ground
troops at the Gaza border. It is a potent threat that may well, in the
end, not be carried out because the Israeli government worries about its
consequences.
The Palestinian Authority described the plan as “a new act of defiance
from the Israeli government.” Saeb Erekat, the chief negotiator, said in
a statement, “At a moment where the Palestinian leadership is doing
every single effort to save the two-state solution, the Israeli
government does everything possible to destroy it.”
Mr. Netanyahu’s office declined to comment on the zoning and
construction decisions, which were made Thursday night around the time
of the General Assembly vote.
But Israel has long maintained its right to develop neighborhoods
throughout East Jerusalem and the West Bank — more than 500,000 Jews
already live there — and Mr. Netanyahu, responding to the United Nations
speech by President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, said,
“Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.”
While Israel has frequently announced settlement expansions at delicate
political moments, often to its detriment, the E1 move came as a shock
to many after a week in which both Israelis and Palestinians toned down
their talk about day-after responses to the United Nations bid.
Avigdor Lieberman, the ultranationalist foreign minister who for months
denounced the Palestinian initiative as “diplomatic terrorism” and said
Israel should consider severe sanctions against the Palestinian
Authority, had told reporters in recent days that there would be “no
automatic response.”
Mr. Lieberman, who spoke before Mrs. Clinton at the Saban Forum,
castigated Mr. Abbas as a failed politician who had sought to upgrade
the Palestinians’ status to divert attention from an ailing economy at
home.
Mr. Erekat’s spokesman declined to discuss whether the Palestinians
would use their upgraded status, as a nonmember observer state with
access to United Nations institutions, to pursue a case in the
International Criminal Court, regarding E1 or the other settlement
expansion.
Less contentious moves were already in progress: the Palestinian
Authority has begun changing its name to “Palestine” on official
documents, contracts and Web sites, and several nations are considering
raising the level of diplomatic relations, giving Palestinian envoys the
title of ambassador.
All but one European country, the Czech Republic, voted with the
Palestinians or abstained in Thursday’s United Nations vote, many of
them citing concerns about settlements in West Bank and East Jerusalem
territories that Israel captured in the 1967 war. The settlement of E1, a
4.6-square-mile expanse of hilly parkland where some Bedouins have
camps and a police station was opened in 2008, could further increase
Israel’s international isolation.
“This is not just another few houses in Jerusalem or another hilltop in
the West Bank,” said Daniel C. Kurtzer, a former American ambassador to
Israel and Egypt. “This is one of the most sensitive areas of territory,
and I would hope the United States will lay down the law.”
After a day in which Israeli government officials insisted that the
United Nations vote was a purely symbolic one that had not changed
anything on the ground, the revelation of the development moves late
Friday stunned and outraged even some of Mr. Netanyahu’s supporters.
“A number of important countries are telling us that they think it’s
wrong to do settlements, and these are our best friends,” noted one
senior Israeli government official, speaking on the condition of
anonymity for fear of being fired. “After they say this directly or
indirectly, the immediate response is to build more settlements, even in
one of the most controversial areas, E1? How does that make sense? What
is the message the government is sending its best friends?”
Dani Dayan, the leader of Israel’s settler movement, said the
development of E1 was an “important Israeli strategic interest,” but he,
too, was somewhat dismayed by the timing. “We don’t like the idea of
developing our communities as a sort of retaliatory or punitive step,”
he said.
Shelly Yacimovich, head of the left-wing Labor Party, also questioned
the strategy. “Construction in the Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem is
not controversial,” she said Friday night in a television interview.
“But to do this now? That’s sticking a finger in the eye.”
It is hardly the first time Israel has been criticized for bad timing on
settlement expansion. In August 2011, a month before a previous bid by
Mr. Abbas for upgraded status at the United Nations Security Council,
Israel’s Interior Ministry gave final approval for the construction of a
1,600-unit apartment complex in the East Jerusalem neighborhood of
Ramat Shlomo.
On the eve of an April 2011 meeting between Mr. Obama and Israel’s
president, Shimon Peres, a Jerusalem planning committee gave its
go-ahead for 1,000 units. And in 2010, Mr. Netanyahu was embarrassed by
an early approval of the Ramat Shlomo development hours after a
Jerusalem visit by Vice President Joseph R. Biden Jr.
But E1 — where a plan approved years ago calls for 3,910 housing units,
2,192 hotel rooms and an industrial park, in addition to the police
station — is more contentious than all those projects combined.
Presidents Obama, George W. Bush and Bill Clinton have all strenuously
objected to any settlement there.
Dani Seidemann, a Jerusalem lawyer and peace activist, described E1 as
“the fatal heart attack of the two-state solution” and said Mr.
Netanyahu was wielding “the doomsday weapon.”
Still, he and others noted that the approval was only for zoning and
planning, early steps in a long development process before bulldozers
begin work, and could be just what he called “the dramatic flourish.”
That may be why the announcement is so vague. Turning the plans into
reality is likely to take years. On the other hand, just asserting that
such steps are being considered is a way of signaling Israel’s
readiness, after having lost a key battle at the United Nations, to
engage fully in the diplomatic war over the future of the West Bank and
East Jerusalem.
Jodi Rudoren reported from Jerusalem, and Mark Landler from Washington.
Michael R. Gordon contributed reporting from Washington, Peter Baker
from Hatfield, Pa., and Ethan Bronner from New York.
THE PRESIDENT: Hello, everybody! Thank you. Thank you. (Applause.) Well, good morning, everybody.
AUDIENCE: Good morning!
THE PRESIDENT: Everybody, please, please have a seat. Have a seat. Relax for a second. (Laughter.)
It is good to see all of you. Hello, Hatfield! (Applause.) It is good
to be back in Pennsylvania. And it is good to be right here at K’NEX.
(Applause.) I want to thank Michael Araten, Robert Glickman, and the
inventor of K’NEX, Joel Glickman, for hosting me today and giving me a
great tour. (Applause.) Where did they go? Where did they go? I want
to -- (applause) -- stand up. Stand up so everybody can see you guys.
There they are. (Applause.) There you go.
And I just noticed, we’ve got a couple of outstanding members of Congress here. We’ve got Chaka Fattah -- (applause)
-- and Allyson Schwartz. (Applause.)
Now, I just finished getting a tour of the K’NEX workshop. I have to
say, it makes me wish that Joel had invented this stuff a little sooner,
when I was a kid. (Laughter.) Back then, you couldn’t really build a
rollercoaster out of your Erector Set. (Laughter.)
And I also got a chance to meet some of the folks who have been working
around the clock to keep up with the Christmas rush, and that’s a good
thing. These guys are Santa’s extra elves here. They manufacture
almost 3,000 K’NEX pieces every minute. And every box that ends up on
store shelves in 30 countries is stamped “Made in America.” And that’s
something to be proud of. That’s something to be proud of. (Applause.)
By the way, I hope the camera folks had a chance to take a look at some
of the K’NEX, including that flag made out of K’NEX. And Joe Biden was
in Costco; he wanted to buy some of this stuff. (Laughter.) But I told
him he had too much work to do. I wasn’t going to have him building
rollercoasters all day long. (Laughter.)
Now, of course, Santa delivers everywhere. I’ve been keeping my own
naughty-and-nice list for Washington. So you should keep your eye on
who gets some K’NEX this year. (Laughter.) There are going to be some
members of Congress who get them, and some who don't. (Laughter and
applause.)
So, look, this is a wonderful time of year. It’s been a few weeks
since a long election finally came to an end. And obviously, I couldn’t
be more honored to be back in the White House. But I’m already missing
the time that I spent on the campaign visiting towns like this and
talking to folks like you.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: We love you!
THE PRESIDENT: I love you back. That's why I miss you. (Applause.)
And one of the benefits of traveling and getting out of the White House
is it gives you a chance to have a conversation with the American
people about what kind of country do we want to be
–- and what kind of country do we want to leave to our kids.
I believe America only thrives when we have a strong and growing middle
class. And I believe we’re at our best when everybody who works hard
has a chance to get ahead. That's what I believe. And I know that's
what the founders of this company believe as well. We were talking
about these guys' dad, who I understand just passed away at the age of
101. So these guys have good genes in addition to inventive minds. And
the story of generations starting businesses, hiring folks, making sure
that if you work hard, you can get ahead, that's what America is all
about. And that’s at the heart of the plan that I’ve been talking about
all year.
I want to reward manufacturers like this one and small businesses that
create jobs here in the United States, not overseas. (Applause.) And
by the way this is a company -- one of the few companies in the toy
industry that have aggressively moved jobs back here. (Applause.)
That's a great story to tell because we’ve got the best workers in the
world and the most productive workers in the world, and so we need
champions for American industry creating jobs here in the United
States.
I want to give more Americans the chance to earn the skills that
businesses are looking for right now, and I want to give our children
the kind of education they’ll need in the 21st century. I want America
to lead the world in research and technology and clean energy. I want
to put people back to work rebuilding our roads and our bridges and our
schools. And I want to do all this while bringing down our deficits in a
balanced and responsible way. (Applause.)
Now, on this last point, you’ve probably heard a lot of talk in
Washington and in the media about the deadlines that we’re facing on
jobs and taxes and investments. This is not some run-of-the-mill
debate. This isn’t about which political party can come out on top in
negotiations. We’ve got important decisions to make that are going to
have a real impact on businesses and families all across the country.
Our ultimate goal, our long-term goal is to get our long-term deficit
under control in a way that is balanced and is fair. That would be good
for businesses, for our economy, for future generations. And I believe
both parties can -- and will -- work together in the coming weeks to get
that done. We know how that gets done. We’re going to have to raise a
little more revenue. We’ve got to cut out spending we don’t need,
building on the trillion dollars of spending cuts we’ve already made.
And if we combine those two things, we can create a path where America
is paying its bills while still being able to make investments in the
things we need to grow like education and infrastructure. So we know
how to do that.
But in Washington, nothing is easy, so there is going to be some
prolonged negotiations. And all of us are going to have to get out of
our comfort zones to make that happen. I’m willing to do that, and I’m
hopeful that enough members of Congress in both parties are willing to
do that as well. We can solve these problems. But where the clock is
really ticking right now is on middle-class taxes. At the end of the
year, middle-class taxes that are currently in place are set to expire
-- middle-class tax cuts that are currently in place are set to expire.
There are two things that can happen. If Congress does nothing, every
family in America will see their income taxes automatically go up on
January 1st. Every family, everybody here, you’ll see your taxes go up
on January 1st. I mean, I’m assuming that doesn’t sound too good to
you.
AUDIENCE: No!
THE PRESIDENT: That’s sort of like the lump of coal you get for
Christmas. That’s a Scrooge Christmas. A typical middle-class family
of four would see their income taxes go up by about $2,200. That’s for a
typical family -- it would be more for some folks. That’s money a lot
of families just can’t afford to lose. That’s less money to buy gas,
less money to buy groceries. In some cases, it means tougher choices
between paying the rent and saving for college. It means less money to
buy more K’NEX.
AUDIENCE: Booo -- (laughter.)
THE PRESIDENT: Just the other day, economists said that if income
taxes go up on the middle class, people will spend nearly $200 billion
less in stores and online. And when folks are buying fewer clothes, or
cars, or toys, that’s not good for our businesses; it’s not good for our
economy; it’s not good for employment.
So that’s one path: Congress does nothing, we don’t deal with this
looming tax hike on middle-class families, and starting in January,
everybody gets hit with this big tax hike and businesses suddenly see
fewer customers, less demand. The economy, which we’ve been fighting
for four years to get out of this incredible economic crisis that we
have, it starts stalling again. So that’s one path.
The good news is there’s a second option. Right now, Congress can pass
a law that would prevent a tax hike on the first $250,000 of
everybody’s income -- everybody. So that means 98 percent of Americans,
97 percent of small businesses wouldn’t see their income taxes go up by
a single dime -- because 98 percent of Americans make $250,000 a year
or less; 97 percent of small businesses make $250,000 a year or less.
So if you say income taxes don’t go up for any income above $250,000,
the vast majority of Americans, they don’t see a tax hike.
But here’s the thing. Even the top 2 percent, even folks who make more
than $250,000, they’d still keep their tax cut on the first $250,000 of
income. So it would still be better off for them, too, for us to go
ahead and get that done. Families would have a sense of security going
into the new year. Companies like this one would know what to expect in
terms of planning for next year and the year after. That means
people's jobs would be secure.
The sooner Congress gets this done, the sooner our economy will get a
boost. And it would then give us in Washington more time to work
together on that long-range plan to bring down deficits in a balanced
way: Tax reform, working on entitlements, and asking the wealthiest
Americans to pay a little bit more so we can keep investing in things
like education and research that make us strong.
So those are the choices that we have. And understand this was a
central question in the election -- maybe the central question in the
election. You remember. We talked about this a lot. (Laughter.) It
wasn't like this should come as a surprise to anybody. We had debates
about it. There were a lot of TV commercials about it. And at the end
of the day, a clear majority of Americans -- Democrats, Republicans,
independents -- they agreed with a balanced approach to deficit
reduction and making sure that middle-class taxes don’t go up. Folks
agreed to that.
Now, the good news is we're starting to see a few Republicans coming
around to it, too -- I'm talking about Republicans in Congress. So the
reason I'm here is because I want the American people to urge Congress
soon, in the next week, the next two weeks, to begin the work we have by
doing what we all agree on. Both parties agree that we should extend
the middle-class tax cuts. We've got some disagreements about the
high-end tax cuts, right? Republicans don’t want to raise taxes on
folks like me; I think I can pay a little bit more to make sure that
kids can go to college and we can build roads and invest in NIH so that
we're finding cures for Alzheimer's. And that’s a disagreement that
we're going to have and we've got to sort out.
But we already all agree, we say, on making sure middle-class taxes
don’t go up, so let's get that done. Let's go ahead and take the fear
out for the vast majority of American families so they don’t have to
worry about $2,000 coming out of their pockets starting next year.
The Senate has already passed a bill to keep income taxes from going up
on middle-class families. That’s already passed the Senate. Your
member of Congress like Allyson and Chaka, other Democrats in the House,
they're ready to go. They're ready to vote on that same thing. And if
we can just get a few House Republicans on board, we can pass the bill
in the House. It will land on my desk, and I am ready -- I've got a
bunch of pens ready to sign this bill. (Laughter.) I’m ready to sign
it. (Applause.) There are no shortage of pens in the White House.
(Laughter.) And I carry one around for an emergency just in case, just
waiting for the chance to use it to sign this bill to make sure
people's taxes don’t go up.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: Thank you!
THE PRESIDENT: Well, don’t thank me yet, because I haven't signed it. (Laughter.) I need some help from Congress.
So the key is, though, that the American people have to be involved.
It's not going to be enough for me to just do this on my own. So I'm
hopeful that both sides are going to come together and do the right
thing, but we all know you can't take anything for granted when it comes
to Washington. Let's face it. And that’s why I'm going to be asking
for all of you to make your voices heard over the next few days and the
next couple of weeks.
I need you to remind members of Congress -- Democrats and Republicans
-- to not get bogged down in a bunch of partisan bickering, but let's go
ahead and focus on the people who sent us to Washington and make sure
that we're doing the right thing by them.
So I want you to call, I want you to send an email, post on their
Facebook wall. If you tweet, then use a hashtag we're calling "My2K."
Not Y2K, “My2K,” all right? Because it’s about your “2K” in your
pocket. (Laughter.) We’re trying to burn that into people’s minds
here. (Applause.)
So in the meantime I’m doing my part. I’m meeting with every
constituency group out there. We’re talking to CEOs. We’re talking to
labor groups. We’re talking to civic groups. I’m talking to media
outlets, just explaining to the American people this is not that
complicated. Let’s make sure that middle-class taxes don’t go up.
Let’s get that done in the next couple of weeks.
Let’s also work together on a fair and balanced, responsible plan so
that we are paying our bills -- we’re not spending on things we don’t
need, but we are still spending on the things that make us grow. That’s
the kind of fair, balanced, responsible plan that I talked about during
the campaign, and that’s what the majority of Americans believe in.
So I’m hopeful, but I’m going to need folks like you, the people here
in Hatfield and here in Pennsylvania and all across the country, to get
this done. And a lot is riding on this debate. This is too important
to our economy, it’s too important for our families to not get it done.
And it’s not acceptable to me, and I don’t think it’s acceptable to
you, for just a handful of Republicans in Congress to hold middle-class
tax cuts hostage simply because they don’t want tax rates on
upper-income folks to go up. All right? That doesn’t make sense.
(Applause.)
If your voices are heard, then we can help businesses like this one.
We’re going to sell a whole bunch of K’NEX. (Laughter and applause.)
Let’s give families all across America the kind of security and
certainty that they deserve during the holiday season. Let’s keep our
economy on the right track. Let’s stand up for the American belief that
each of us have our own dreams and aspirations, but we’re also in this
together, and we can work together in a responsible way; that we’re one
people, and we’re one nation.
That’s what this country is about. That’s what all of you deserve.
That’s what I’m fighting for every single day, and I will keep fighting
for as long as I have the privilege of being your President.
