This is why Dan Gillerman is the man I’m going to marry (once I steal him from his wife of umpteen years):
“The 29th of November is a reason for celebration,” said Gillerman, who spent the last few days at the conference in Annapolis. “On this date, the world got a gift: a state which contributes to humanity more than all the countries in the UN that mourn on this day.”
The date in question is the anniversary of UN Resolution 181, which partitioned the British Mandate of Palestine into two countries, one for Jews, and one for Arabs.
For Palestinians, November 29 is a day of regret. Since 1977, this day is earmarked at the UN as an annual day of “Solidarity with the Palestinian People,” and is typically commemorated as a day of mourning. Part of the discussion in Thursday’s General Assembly meeting was reserved for the “Question of Palestine,” an annual ushering-in of several anti-Israel resolutions.
“Israel recognized two states for two peoples already 60 years ago,” Gillerman said. “If the Arabs would have agreed to the historic partition plan, the Palestinians would have had a state for 60 years. What would a 60-year-old Palestinian state look like? Look at what Israel has accomplished in 60 years, where we are and where those who tried to destroy us and who continue to try to destroy us are today.”
Of course, they never wanted a state. And they don’t today. There are some Palestinians who pretend otherwise (more on that tomorrow), but there’s a reason the UN refuses to stop holding commemorations on November 29th. They don’t really want the Jewish state, either.
“a state which contributes to humanity more than all the countries in the UN that mourn on this day.â€
Just beautiful. Not anything I can add to this, really.
Of course, the actual mourning is that the UN attempted to create a set of unviable areas with the Jews forbidden Jerusalem (though it would have been called international). Given the areas alloted to the Jews, and the fact that they were not fully contiguos, it would have been extremely difficult (to say the least for the Jews to have survived. Since Jerusalem would have been surrounded by Arab territory, I doubt that the Jews could have maintained access to it at all. Remember West Berlin and the Berlin blockade during the partition of Germany. Jerusalem would have been lost to the Arabs within the first year.
I recommend you read and see the whole speech. There are other jewels such as this:
“The penchant for blaming Israel for the repeated Palestinian failures is so widespread and contagious that the absurdity of it goes completely unnoticed. And today reminds us why: the Palestinian addiction to the culture of victimhood is fed by this world body and specifically many of its Member States – as we just witnessed – who day after day, week after week, month after month, and year after year, use this international forum for their rhetorical theatrics. Broadway might have been on strike, but the theater on the East River is always open for business.”
I posted the entire speech and a link to the video here.
Yes, Gillerman is one hell of an advocate.
Reminds me of Abba Eben and his eloquent words.
I just do not understand how Olmert can stay in office this long, when so many others are better suited to lead Israel during this difficult period.
Israel unfortunately suffers from the vices of party government, rather than the problems of representative government.
A starlet and her husband, who was also her manager, had their final quarrel, and when she screamed “I want a divorce!” he agreed, but reminded her “I’m still your manager, baby — remember, we got a contract!”
Olmert has a coalition.