By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
September 29,
more
here --
When Israeli
Prime Minister
Benjamin
Netanyahu
gave his
speech in the
UN General
Assembly on
September 29,
he said that
Israel bombing
Gaza to get
Hamas was the
same as the US
bombing Syria
and Iraq to
get ISIL.
Strike at
least two New
York City
notes,
Netanyahu said
that the
distance
between the
1967 lines and
Tel Aviv was
similar to
that between
the UN
building and
Times Square:
seven blocks.
He snarked
that saying
Iran doesn't
practice
terrorism is
like saying
Derek Jeter
doesn't play
shortstop. But
isn't Jeter
now retired?
Here
is the full
text of
Netanyahu's
speech, as
transcribed by
the Israeli
Mission to the
UN:
PRIME
MINISTER
BENJAMIN
NETANYAHU:
Thank you, Mr.
President.
Distinguished
delegates, I
come here from
Jerusalem to
speak on
behalf of my
people, the
people of
Israel. I’ve
come here to
speak about
the dangers we
face and about
the
opportunities
we seek. I’ve
come here to
expose the
brazen lies
spoken from
this very
podium against
my country and
against the
brave soldiers
who defend it.
Ladies and
gentlemen, the
people of
Israel pray
for peace, but
our hopes and
the world’s
hopes for
peace are in
danger because
everywhere we
look militant
Islam is on
the march.
It’s not
militants.
It’s not
Islam. It’s
militant
Islam. And
typically its
first victims
are other
Muslims, but
it spares no
one:
Christians,
Jews, Yazidis,
Kurds. No
creed, no
faith, no
ethnic group
is beyond its
sights. And
it’s rapidly
spreading in
every part of
the world.
You know the
famous
American
saying, all
politics is
local? For the
militant
Islamists, all
politics is
global,
because their
ultimate goal
is to dominate
the world.
Now, that
threat might
seem
exaggerated to
some since it
starts out
small, like a
cancer that
attacks a
particular
part of the
body. But left
unchecked, the
cancer grows,
metastasizing
over wider and
wider areas.
To protect the
peace and
security of
the world, we
must remove
this cancer
before it’s
too late.
Last week,
many of the
countries
represented
here rightly
applauded
President
Obama for
leading the
effort to
confront ISIS,
and yet weeks
before, some
of these same
countries, the
same countries
that now
support
confronting
ISIS, opposed
Israel for
confronting
Hamas. They
evidently
don’t
understand
that ISIS and
Hamas are
branches of
the same
poisonous
tree.
ISIS and Hamas
share a
fanatical
creed, which
they both seek
to impose well
beyond the
territory
under their
control.
Listen to
ISIS’
self-declared
caliph, Abu
Bakr
al-Baghdadi.
This is what
he said two
months ago: A
day will soon
come when the
Muslim will
walk
everywhere as
a master. The
Muslims will
cause the
world to hear
and understand
the meaning of
terrorism and
destroy the
idol of
democracy. Now
listen to
Khaled Mashal,
the leader of
Hamas. He
proclaims a
similar vision
of the future:
We say this to
the West -- by
Allah you will
be defeated.
Tomorrow our
nation will
sit on the
throne of the
world.
As Hamas’
charter makes
clear, Hamas’
immediate goal
is to destroy
Israel, but
Hamas has a
broader
objective.
They also want
a caliphate.
Hamas shares
the global
ambitions of
its fellow
militant
Islamists, and
that’s why its
supporters
wildly cheered
in the streets
of Gaza as
thousands of
Americans were
murdered in
9/11, and
that’s why its
leaders
condemn the
United States
for killing
Osama bin
Laden whom
they praised
as a holy
warrior.
So when it
comes to their
ultimate
goals, Hamas
is ISIS and
ISIS is Hamas.
And what they
share in
common all
militant
Islamists
share in
common. Boko
Haram in
Nigeria,
al-Shabab in
Somalia,
Hezbollah in
Lebanon,
al-Nusra in
Syria, the
Mahdi army in
Iraq, and the
al-Qaida
branches in
Yemen, Libya,
the
Philippines,
India and
elsewhere.
Some are
radical
Sunnis, some
are radical
Shiites, some
want to
restore a
pre-medieval
caliphate from
the seventh
century,
others want to
trigger the
apocalyptic
return of an
imam from the
ninth century.
They operate
in different
lands, they
target
different
victims and
they even kill
each other in
their battle
for supremacy.
But they all
share a
fanatic
ideology. They
all seek to
create
ever-expanding
enclaves of
militant Islam
where there is
no freedom and
no tolerance,
where women
are treated as
chattel,
Christians are
decimated and
minorities are
subjugated,
sometimes
given the
stark choice,
convert or
die. For them,
anyone can be
considered an
infidel,
including
fellow
Muslims.
Ladies and
gentlemen,
militant
Islam’s
ambition to
dominate the
world seems
mad, but so
too did the
global
ambitions of
another
fanatic
ideology that
swept into
power eight
decades ago.
The Nazis
believed in a
master race.
The militant
Islamists
believe in a
master faith.
They just
disagree who
among them
will be the
master of the
master faith.
That’s what
they truly
disagree
about. And
therefore, the
question
before us is
whether
militant Islam
will have the
power to
realize its
unbridled
ambitions.
There is one
place where
that could
soon happen --
the Islamic
State of Iran.
For 35 years,
Iran has
relentlessly
pursued the
global mission
which was set
forth by its
founding
ruler,
Ayatollah
Khomeini, in
these words.
“We will
export our
revolution to
the entire
world until
the cry ‘there
is no god but
Allah’ will
echo
throughout the
world over.”
And ever
since, the
regime’s
brutal
enforcers,
Iran’s
revolutionary
guards, have
done exactly
that.
Listen to its
current
commander,
General
Mohammad Ali
Jafari. And he
clearly stated
his goal. He
said “Our imam
did not limit
the Islamic
revolution to
this country,
our duty is to
prepare the
way for an
Islamic world
government.”
Iran’s
President
Rouhani stood
here last week
and shed
crocodile
tears over
what he called
the
globalization
of terrorism.
Maybe he
should spare
us those phony
tears and have
a word instead
with the
commanders of
Iran’s
revolutionary
guards. He
could ask them
to call off
Iran’s global
terror
campaign,
which has
included
attacks in two
dozen
countries on
five
continents
since 2011
alone.
You know, to
say that Iran
doesn’t
practice
terrorism is
like saying
Derek Jeter
never played
shortstop for
the New York
Yankees. This
is -- this
bemoaning by
the Iranian
president of
the spread of
terrorism has
got to be one
of history’s
greatest
displays of
doubletalk.
Now, some
argue that
Iran’s global
terror
campaign, its
subversion of
countries
throughout the
Middle East
and well
beyond the
Middle East,
some argue
that this is
the work of
the
extremists.
They say
things are
changing. They
point to last
year’s
election in
Iran. They
claim that
Iran’s
smooth-talking
president and
foreign
minister,
they’ve
changed not
only the tone
of Iran’s
foreign policy
but also its
substance.
They believe
that Rouhani
and Zarif
(generally/genuinely
?) want to
reconcile with
the West, that
they’ve
abandoned the
global mission
of the Islamic
Revolution.
Really?
So let’s look
at what
Foreign
Minister Zarif
wrote in his
book just a
few years ago:
We have a
fundamental
problem with
the West, and
especially
with America.
This is
because we are
heirs to a
global mission
which is tied
to our raison
d'être, a
global mission
which is tied
to our very
reason for
being.
And then Zarif
asks a
question -- I
think an
interesting
one. He says:
How come
Malaysia --
he’s referring
to an
overwhelmingly
Muslim country
-- how come
Malaysia
doesn’t have
similar
problems? And
he answers:
Because
Malaysia is
not trying to
change the
international
order.
That’s your
moderate. So
don’t be
fooled by
Iran’s
manipulative
charm
offensive.
It’s designed
for one
purpose and
for one
purpose only:
to lift the
sanctions and
remove the
obstacles to
Iran’s path to
the bomb. The
Islamic
Republic is
now trying to
bamboozle its
way to an
agreement that
will remove
the sanctions
it still faces
and leave it
with a
capacity of
thousands of
refugees -- of
centrifuges,
rather -- to
enrich
uranium. This
would
effectively
cement Iran’s
place as a
threshold
military
nuclear power.
And in the
future, at the
time of its
choosing,
Iran, the
world’s most
dangerous
regime, in the
world’s most
dangerous
region, would
obtain the
world’s most
dangerous
weapons.
Allowing that
to happen
would pose the
gravest threat
to us all.
It’s one thing
to confront
militant
Islamists on
pickup trucks
armed with
Kalashnikov
rifles. It’s
another thing
to confront
militant
Islamists
armed with
weapons of
mass
destruction.
I remember
that last
year, everyone
here was
rightly
concerned
about the
chemical
weapons in
Syria,
including the
possibility
that they
would fall
into the hands
of terrorists.
Well, that
didn’t happen,
and President
Obama deserves
great credit
for leading
the diplomatic
effort to
dismantle
virtually all
of Syria’s
chemical
weapons
capability.
Imagine how
much more
dangerous the
Islamic State,
ISIS, would be
if it
possessed
chemical
weapons. Now
imagine how
much more
dangerous the
Islamic state
of Iran would
be if it
possessed
nuclear
weapons.
Ladies and
gentlemen,
would you let
ISIS enrich
uranium? Would
you let ISIS
build a heavy
water reactor?
Would you let
ISIS develop
intercontinental
ballistic
missiles? Of
course you
wouldn’t. Then
you mustn’t
let the
Islamic state
of Iran do
those things
either,
because here’s
what will
happen. Once
Iran produces
atomic bombs,
all the charms
and all the
smiles will
suddenly
disappear.
They’ll just
vanish. And
it’s then that
the ayatollahs
will show
their true
face and
unleash their
aggressive
fanaticism on
the entire
world.
There’s only
one
responsible
course of
action to
address this
threat. Iran’s
nuclear
military
capabilities
must be fully
dismantled.
(Applause.)
Make no
mistake: ISIS
must be
defeated. But
to defeat ISIS
and leave Iran
as a threshold
nuclear power
is to win the
battle and
lose the war.
(Applause.) To
defeat ISIS
and leave Iran
as a threshold
nuclear power
is to win the
battle and
lose the war.
Ladies and
gentlemen, the
fight against
militant Islam
is
indivisible.
When militant
Islam succeeds
anywhere, it’s
emboldened
everywhere.
When it
suffers a blow
in one place,
it’s set back
in every
place. That’s
why Israel’s
fight against
Hamas is not
just our
fight, it’s
your fight.
Israel is
fighting a
fanaticism
today that
your countries
may be forced
to fight
tomorrow. For
50 days this
past summer
Hamas fired
thousands of
rockets at
Israel, many
of them
supplied by
Iran. I want
you to think
about what
your countries
would do if
thousands of
rockets were
fired at your
cities.
Imagine
millions of
your citizens
having seconds
at most to
scramble to
bomb shelters
day after day.
You wouldn’t
let terrorists
fire rockets
at your cities
with impunity,
nor would you
let terrorists
dig dozens of
terror tunnels
under your
borders to
infiltrate
your towns in
order to
murder and
kidnap your
citizens.
Israel justly
defended
itself against
both rocket
attacks and
terror
tunnels.
(Applause.)
Yet Israel
faced another
challenge. We
faced a
propaganda war
because in an
attempt to win
the world
sympathy,
Hamas
cynically used
Palestinian
civilians as
human shields.
It used
schools -- not
just schools;
U.N. schools
-- private
homes,
mosques, even
hospitals to
store and fire
rockets at
Israel. As
Israel
surgically
struck at the
rocket
launchers and
at the
tunnels,
Palestinian
civilians were
tragically but
unintentionally
killed. There
are
heartrending
images that
resulted, and
these fueled
libelous
charges that
Israel was
deliberately
targeting
civilians. We
were not. We
deeply regret
every single
civilian
casualties.
And the truth
is this:
Israel was
doing
everything to
minimize
Palestinian
civilian
casualties.
Hamas was
doing
everything to
maximize
Israeli
civilian
casualties and
Palestinian
civilian
casualties.
Israel dropped
flyers, made
phone calls,
sent text
messages,
broadcast
warnings in
Arabic on
Palestinian
television,
all this to
enable
Palestinian
civilians to
evaluate
targeted
areas. No
other country
and no other
army in
history have
gone to
greater
lengths to
avoid
casualties
among the
civilian
population of
their enemies.
(Applause.)
Now, this
concern for
Palestinian
life was all
the more
remarkable
given that
Israeli
civilians were
being
bombarded by
rockets day
after day,
night after
night. And as
their families
were being
rocketed by
Hamas,
Israel’s
citizen army,
the brave
soldiers of
the IDF, our
young boys and
girls, they
upheld the
highest moral
values of any
army in the
world.
(Applause.)
Israel’s
soldiers
deserve not
condemnation
but
admiration,
admiration
from decent
people
everywhere.
(Applause.)
Now, here is
what Hamas
did. Here is
what Hamas
did. Hamas
embedded its
missile
batteries in
residential
areas and told
Palestinians
to ignore
Israel’s
warnings to
leave. And
just in case
people didn’t
get the
message, they
executed
Palestinian
civilians in
Gaza who dared
to protest.
And no less
reprehensible,
Hamas
deliberately
placed its
rockets where
Palestinian
children live
and play. Let
me show you a
photograph. It
was taken by a
France 24 crew
during the
recent
conflict. It
shows two
Hamas rocket
launchers,
which were
used to attack
us. You see
three children
playing next
to them. Hamas
deliberately
put its
rockets in
hundreds of
residential
areas like
this --
hundreds of
them.
Ladies and
gentlemen,
this is a war
crime. And I
say to
President
Abbas, these
are the
crimes, the
war crimes,
committed by
your Hamas
partners in
the national
unity
government
which you head
and you are
responsible
for. And these
are the real
war crimes you
should have
investigated
or spoken out
against from
this podium
last week.
(Applause.)
Ladies and
gentlemen, as
Israel’s
children
huddle in bomb
shelters and
Israel’s Iron
Dome missile
defense
knocked Hamas
rockets out of
the sky, the
profound moral
difference
between Israel
and Hamas
couldn’t have
been clearer.
Israel was
using its
missiles to
protect its
children.
Hamas was
using its
children to
protect its
missiles.
(Applause.)
By
investigating
Israel rather
than Hamas for
war crimes,
the U.N. Human
Rights Council
has betrayed
its noble
mission to
protect the
innocent. In
fact, what
it’s doing is
to turn the
laws of war
upside down.
Israel, which
took
unprecedented
steps to
minimize
civilian
casualties --
Israel is
condemned.
Hamas, which
both targeted
and hid behind
civilians --
that’s a
double war
crime -- Hamas
is given a
pass.
The Human
Rights Council
is thus
sending a
clear message
to terrorists
everywhere:
Use civilians
as a human
shield. Use
them again and
again and
again. And you
know why?
Because,
sadly, it
works. By
granting
international
legitimacy to
the use of
human shields,
the U.N. Human
Rights Council
has thus
become a
terrorist
rights
council, and
it will have
repercussions
-- it probably
already has --
about the use
of civilians
as human
shields. It’s
not just our
interests.
It’s not just
our values
that are under
attack. It’s
your interests
and your
values.
Ladies and
gentlemen, we
live in a
world steeped
in tyranny and
terror where
gays are
hanged from
cranes in
Tehran,
political
prisoners are
executed in
Gaza, young
girls are
abducted en
masse in
Nigeria, and
hundreds of
thousands are
butchered in
Syria, Libya
and Iraq, yet
nearly half --
nearly half of
the U.N. Human
Rights
Council’s
resolutions
focusing on a
single country
have been
directed
against
Israel, the
one true
democracy in
the Middle
East; Israel,
where issues
are openly
debated in a
boisterous
parliament,
where human
rights are
protected by
the -- by
independent
courts, and
where women,
gays and
minorities
live in a
genuinely free
society.
The human
rights --
that’s an
oxymoron, the
human -- U.N.
Human Rights
Council, but
I’ll use it
just the same.
The council’s
biased
treatment of
Israel is only
one
manifestation
of the return
of one of the
world’s
largest
prejudices. We
hear mobs
today in
Europe call
for the
gassing of
Jews. We hear
some national
leaders
compare Israel
to the Nazis.
This is not a
function of
Israel’s
policies. It’s
a function of
diseased
minds. and
that disease
has a name.
It’s called
anti-Semitism.
It is now
spreading in
polite society
where it
masquerades as
legitimate
criticism of
Israel.
For centuries
the Jewish
people have
been demonized
with blood
libels and
charges of
deicide. Today
the Jewish
state is
demonized with
the apartheid
libel and
charges of
genocide --
genocide. In
what moral
universe does
genocide
include
warning the
enemy civilian
population to
get out of
harm's way, or
ensuring that
they receive
tons -- tons
of
humanitarian
aid each day
even as
thousands of
rockets are
being fired at
us, or setting
up a field
hospital to
aid their
wounded?
Well, I
suppose it's
the same moral
universe where
a man who
wrote a
dissertation
of lies about
the Holocaust
and who
insists on a
Palestine free
of Jews --
Judenrein --
can stand at
this podium
and
shamelessly
accuse Israel
of genocide
and ethnic
cleansing. In
the past,
outrageous
lies against
the Jews were
the precursors
to the
wholesale
slaughter of
our people,
but no more.
Today, we, the
Jewish people,
have the power
to defend
ourselves. We
will defend
ourselves
against our
enemies on the
battlefield --
(applause) --
we will expose
their lies
against us in
the court of
public
opinion.
Israel will
continue to
stand proud
and unbowed.
(Applause.)
Ladies and
gentlemen,
despite the
enormous
challenges
facing Israel,
I believe we
have a
historic
opportunity.
After decades
of seeing
Israel as
their enemy,
leading states
in the Arab
world
increasingly
recognize that
together, we
and they face
many of the
same dangers,
and
principally,
this means a
nuclear-armed
Iran and
militant
Islamist
movements
gaining ground
in the Sunni
world. Our
challenge is
to transform
these common
interests to
create a
productive
partnership,
one that would
build a more
secure,
peaceful and
prosperous
Middle East.
Together, we
can strengthen
regional
security, we
can advance
projects in
water and
agricultural,
in
transportation
and health and
energy in so
many fields.
I believe the
partnership
between us can
also help
facilitate
peace between
Israel and the
Palestinians.
Now, many have
long assumed
that an
Israeli-Palestinian
peace can help
facilitate a
broader
rapprochement
between Israel
and the Arab
world. But
these days, I
think it may
work the other
way around,
namely that a
broader
rapprochement
between Israel
and the Arab
world may help
facilitate an
Israeli-Palestinian
peace. And
therefore, to
achieve that
peace, we must
look not only
to Jerusalem
and Ramallah
but also to
Cairo, to
Amman, Abu
Dhabi, Riyadh
and elsewhere.
I believe
peace can be
realized with
the active
involvement of
Arab countries
-- those that
are willing to
provide
political,
material and
other
indispensable
support. I'm
ready to make
a historic
compromise,
not because
Israel
occupies a
foreign land.
The people of
Israel are not
occupiers in
the land of
Israel.
(Applause.)
History,
archaeology
and common
sense all make
clear that we
have had a
singular
attachment to
this land for
over 3,000
years.
I want peace
because I want
to create a
better future
for my people,
but it must be
a genuine
peace -- one
that is
anchored in
mutual
recognition
and enduring
security
arrangements
-- rock solid
security
arrangements
on the ground,
because you
see, Israeli
withdrawals
from Lebanon
and Gaza
created two
militant
Islamic
enclaves on
our borders
for which tens
of thousands
of rockets
have been
fired at
Israel, and
these sobering
experiences
heightens
Israel's
security
concerns
(regarding ?)
potential
territorial
concessions in
the future.
Now, those
security
concerns are
even greater
today. Just
look around
you. The
Middle East is
in chaos,
states are
disintegrating,
and militant
Islamists are
filling the
void. Israel
cannot have
territories
from which it
withdraws
taken over by
Islamic
militants yet
again, as
happened in
Gaza and
Lebanon. That
would place
the likes of
ISIS within
mortar range,
a few miles,
of 80 percent
of our
population.
Now think
about that.
The distance
between the
1967 lines and
the suburbs of
Tel Aviv is
like the
distance
between the
U.N. building
here and Times
Square. Israel
is a tiny
country.
That’s why in
any peace
agreement,
which will
obviously
necessitate a
territorial
compromise, I
will always
insist that
Israel be able
to defend
itself by
itself against
any threat.
(Applause.)
And yet
despite
everything
that has
happened, some
still don’t
take Israel’s
security
concerns
seriously. But
I do and I
always will --
(applause) --
because as
prime minister
of Israel, I’m
entrusted with
the awesome
responsibility
of ensuring
the future of
the Jewish
people and the
future of the
Jewish state.
And no matter
what pressure
is brought to
bear, I will
never waiver
in fulfilling
that
responsibility.
(Applause.)
I believe that
with a fresh
approach from
our neighbors,
we can advance
peace despite
the
difficulties
we face. See,
in Israel, we
have a record
of making the
impossible
possible.
We’ve made a
desolate land
flourish, and
with very few
natural
resources,
we’ve used the
fertile minds
of our people
to turn Israel
into a global
center of
technology and
innovation,
and peace, of
course, would
enable Israel
to realize its
full potential
and to bring a
promising
future not
only for our
people, not
only for the
Palestinian
people, but
for many, many
others in our
region.
But the old
template for
peace must be
updated. It
must take into
account new
realities and
new roles and
responsibilities
for our Arab
neighbors.
Ladies and
gentlemen,
there is a new
Middle East.
It presents
new dangers
but also new
opportunities.
Israel is
prepared to
work with Arab
partners and
the
international
community to
confront those
dangers and to
seize those
opportunities.
Together, we
must recognize
the global
threat of
militant
Islam, the
primacy of
dismantling
Iran’s nuclear
weapons
capability and
the
indispensable
role of Arab
states in
advancing
peace with the
Palestinians.
All this may
fly in the
face of
conventional
wisdom, but
it’s the
truth, and the
truth must
always be
spoken,
especially
here in the
United
Nations.
(Applause.)
Isaiah, our
great prophet
of peace,
taught us
nearly 3,000
years ago in
Jerusalem to
speak truth to
power. (Speaks
in Hebrew.)
For the sake
of Zion, I
will not be
silent, for
the sake of
Jerusalem, I
will not be
still until
her justice
shines bright
and her
salvation
glows like a
flaming torch.
Ladies and
gentlemen, let
us light a
torch of truth
and justice to
safeguard our
common future.
Thank you.
(Applause.)
(END)
Earlier
on September
29, Israel's
Foreign
Minister
Avigdor
Liberman took
three
questions at
the General
Assembly
stakeout.
Liberman had
previously
said that UN
envoy Robert
Serry would be
leaving his
position in
October, a
deadline Inner
City Press
then asked
Serry about.
(Serry said it
is up to Ban
Ki-moon, and
that Ban's
five year rule
is not a
rule.) But it
was not
possible to
ask Lieberman
about this on
September 29.
Back
on August 18,
Serry said,
"on three
occasions,
there was a
direct hit on
UNRWA
schools...A
total of 38
people were
killed in
those three
incidents, and
317 were
injured.
Eleven UNRWA
colleagues
were killed in
the line of
duty. The
Secretary
General has
called for a
thorough
investigation
into these
incidents to
assure full
accountability.”
So in the 12
days between
the two
statements,
has anything
been done? In
2009, Ban was
lobbied about
his
cover-letter
to the
previous board
of inquiry
report by Ian
Martin; now in
2014, as it
made up for
it, he
accepted free
private jet
travel from
Qatar, with
its stake and
position in
the conflict.
Neither is
acceptable.
On
the latter,
Israel's
Ambassador Ron
Prosor came
out of the
Council after
Serry's public
briefing and
said, among
other things,
that Qatar has
bought
campuses of
six
universities,
Harrod's and
the PSG
football club.
He cited the
2022 World
Cup, but did
not mention
Ban accepting
the
Qatar-funded
private jet.
He passed out
a flier,
"Captured
Hamas Combat
Manuel," which
Inner City
Press put
online here.