Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Truth behind Camp David?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    The Truth behind Camp David?

    A look back at Camp David..


    the scam of camp david

    Reviewed by Muhammad Ali Siddiqi

    One of the many baseless charges levelled against Yasser Arafat was that he was afraid of peace, that his sole aim was the destruction of Israel, and that was why he failed to clinch the deal which Ehud Barak, then Israel’s prime minister, offered him at Camp David in July 2000.

    After the summit was over, Israeli and American media blitz made the world believe that Barak had made many “concessions”, that he had gone out of his way to achieve peace, but that it was Arafat who scuttled the summit. President Clinton personally led this campaign and went to the extent of appearing on Israeli TV to tell the Israeli public what pious intentions Barak had and how “Arafat’s intransigence” doomed Camp David II.

    This myth lasted for quite some time, until the truth became known, and the truth was that Barak merely wanted to return home as peacemaker and win a second term provided the peace was in the form of a diktat to Arafat.

    From the very beginning, the talks appeared a complete fraud to the Palestinians because Clinton acted not as a mediator but as an Israeli agent. The Americans had done no serious homework, and it appeared to the Palestinian delegation as if the Israelis and Americans constituted one delegation. The US side also did not stick to the terms of reference used in previous negotiations, namely UN (‘land for peace’) Resolution 242.

    On two key questions — Palestinian sovereignty over Jerusalem and the right of the Palestinian refugees to return home — the American-Israeli side came up with no meaningful offers.

    As for the “concessions” Barak offered to Arafat, it is pertinent to examine the Israeli concept of this word. Israel proper today consists of 78 per cent of Palestine; the rest of it, i.e. 22 per cent, has been under its occupation since June 1967. It has established Jewish settlements there with a view to holding on to the land forever, because its ultimate aim is a Greater Israel. However, when Israeli leaders speak of “concessions” they mean something over and above the 78 per cent of Palestine they have already stolen from the sons of the soil.

    The book under review is the result of research by the author, who quotes Israeli and American officials to point out that Barak’s concessions were a fraud, and that the Americans had all their proposals and plans vetted by the Israelis before they were presented to Arafat. Two-thirds of the American delegation consisted of Jews, and they included such ardent Zionists as Dennis Ross, Martin Indyk and Madeleine Albright.

    Basically, Clinton had only two aims: one, he wanted to go down in history as someone who finally ended the Arab-Israeli conflict; two, he should do nothing that would compromise Hillary’s chances in her bid for a Senate seat. Apparently, he found the two aims incompatible, for he could accomplish only the latter. In fact, the second factor was so important that, in the midst of the summit talks, Clinton had to intervene with the press to clarify Hillary’s use of profanities against a certain campaign manager who was Jewish.

    The author’s findings are based on extensive interviews he did of American, Israeli and Palestinian delegates involved in the marathon discussions, the records of personal conversations available to him, and the truth he was able to establish because of the obvious contradictions that any intelligent observer can detect in a web of lies.

    According to the author, Clinton made “a conscious decision” to break his pledge to the Palestinians and blame Arafat for the summit’s failure (p 335).

    The most unfortunate aspect of the Camp David talks was the insulting way in which they treated Arafat. When they first met at Camp David, Barak did not even look at Arafat, much less exchange pleasantries. Clinton once shouted at Arafat and said, “It is impossible ... to ignore ... the rights of Jews on the Temple Mount.” At one stage, Clinton grasped Arafat’s forearms, brought his forehead close to his’ and looked like assuming the role of an interrogator — tactics which, according to the author, Barak “precisely” wanted (p 299).

    Clinton also shouted at Ahmad Korei, now the Palestinian prime minister, and said, “This isn’t the Security Council here. This isn’t the UN General Assembly. If you want to give a lecture, go over there and don’t make me waste my time. I am the president of the United States...” His shouts could be heard far away.

    There was also what the author called “an absurd debate” between Clinton and Arafat, with the former giving Judeo-Christian perspective to Jerusalem against the latter’s Islamic dimensions.

    According to the author Barak and Clinton adopted a “colonial approach to diplomacy: bring in the natives, use ... psychological pressure, and hope they succumb.” The man of steel that Arafat was, he refused. He was categorical, “The Palestinian who will give up Jerusalem has not yet been born. I will not betray my people... Don’t look to me to legitimize the occupation!”

    Author Swisher’s painstaking research gives us an insight into the scam that Camp David turned out to be. Reading the book makes one feel as if one is watching a drama whose drop scene the world awaited in suspense.

    The summit ended in failure because Clinton did not have Carter’s statesmanship or integrity to act as an honest broker.
    How can a man die better than facing fearful odds for the ashes of his fathers and the Temple of his Gods?

    #2
    Re: The Truth behind Camp David?

    Note to self: Never sponsor peace talks. The warring parties will make you the scapegoat and assume no responsibility themselves.
    Boycott Venezuelas State owned Citgo.

    Buy Royal Dutch Shell gasoline!

    Comment


      #3
      Re: The Truth behind Camp David?

      I have a question: How much Different was the Camp-David Agreement from UN Peace resolution #242?
      Can you Hear me Now!! Good

      Comment


        #4
        Re: The Truth behind Camp David?

        Originally posted by Ohioguy
        Note to self: Never sponsor peace talks. The warring parties will make you the scapegoat and assume no responsibility themselves.

        note to yourself: Sponsor peace talks only when you are neutral..Haven't seen anyone blame the US for the Egypt-Israel peace agreement?
        How can a man die better than facing fearful odds for the ashes of his fathers and the Temple of his Gods?

        Comment


          #5
          Re: The Truth behind Camp David?

          Camp david is a jewish scam.

          Its the same kind of scam whites in america did to Native american, and the Native americans got indian reservations in south dakota in return.
          The Sindhis, Punjabis, Pathans, Balochs, Mahajirs are all my brothers !!! All pakistanis are my brothers !!! Lets work to bring democracy to our land so we can have long term stability and equal rights for all !!! MQM and other racist separatists Murdabad !!!

          Comment

          Working...
          X