Larry Lowenthal, head of the American Jewish Committee in Boston, misses the point:
At the December 10th lunch in Boston, Sari Nusseibeh was not asked the key question:
Since Nusseibeh holds a key position in the Palestinian Authority, why does Nusseibeh refuse to convey his “moderate” message on the official PBC TV or radio of the Palestinian Authority?
Since Nusseibeh reported to the group in Boston that he did not approve of the sermon given by the Imam in a mosque run by the Palestinian Authority, why did Nusseibeh not make his dissent known on the PBC?
The American Jewish Committee should have asked these questions, because the AJC is an agency which specializes in ethnicity and conflict management.
One of AJC’s cardinal principles in ethnic struggles is that leaders must convey the same message to each other that they convey to the other side.
In other words, it does not matter one iota what Sari Nusseibeh says to Jews in Boston or to Jews in Tel Aviv.
What matters would be if he demanded an interview on the PBC, the Palestine Broadcasting Corporation.
Did the Israeli government, the AJC and other Jewish organizations not make the same mistake with Arafat ten years ago, when they did not insist that Arafat convey a message of peace and reconciliation to his own people on the PBC, preferring instead to ignore that message?
Did the AJC not take out full page ads in the New York Times to show the maps of Palestine which obliterate Israel that the Palestinian Authority has issued in their new PA school books?
Has it not occurred to the AJC that Nusseibeh has adapted the “modus operandi” of Arafat, to convey one message to Israeli and western audiences and yet another message to his own people?
Is it not a tragic moment that an AJC official will swallow Nusseibeh’s explanation that he was entrapped into praising a mother who dispatched her son to commit an act of premeditated murder… and that he did not know that he was to appear on the panel with a Hamas leader?
Could that AJC official defend Nusseibeh’s statement in front of the parents and families of the five boys whose murder he praised?
Would that AJC official have reacted that way if Nusseibeh had praised the cold-blooded murder of five students in HIS community?
This is reminiscent of what occurred last February in Jerusalem, when the AJC invited an official of the PLO to address its delegation. That official endorsed the murder of every man, woman and child who lives and breathes beyond the “green line”, from the Jerusalem Tel Aviv road to the Old City of Jerusalem.
Yet the AJC would issue no public condemnation of such a clear endorsement of premeditated murder which was stated so clearly to a delegation of the AJC.
Yes, as my colleague Miri Eisen wrote in the Jewish Advocate of December 10th, “you make peace with enemies”, yet only after you defeat them or after they annul their declaration of war.
And the PLO remains at war with the state and people of Israel. Miri should know that. As an officer in the IDF, she was the first Israeli official to review the documents seized from the PLO headquarters in Ramallah.
In only two weeks, the PLO will celebrate its fortieth anniversary, founded by the Arab League with a mandate to continue the 1948 war to destroy Israel.
The clever 1974 a.m.endment to the PLO covenant enabled the PLO to do so in stages
The PBC will once again run festive programs to proclaim that the PLO has not abandoned its war to destroy Israel and those festivities will likely be downplayed in the western and the Israeli media, in the world of wishful thinking and political correctness.
And the PBC will remind their people that the PLO Covenant remains etched in stone.
The time has come to salute the late Prime Minister Rabin, who had the courage to obligate the PLO to change the PLO Covenant before Israel would sign any agreement with the PLO.
On April 24th, 1996, our news agency dispatched the only TV crew to covered the session of the PNC where the PLO Covenant was supposed to be changed and never was changed, despite the false report issued by US Ambassador Indyk and then-prime minister Peres.
It was those false reports which allowed Arafat into the USA on his first official visit one week later, because the US Congress enacted a law which forbid the US to deal with the PLO unless it changed its covenant.
Yes, Abu Mazen and Sari Nusseibeh are more soft-spoken and look better than Arafat, yet their PLO ideology is no different, and their ability to manipulate Jews is not different.
The likes of Abu Mazen and Sari Nusseibeh will now oversee a new wave of murder, while offering sound bytes of “moderation” for the consumption of the western media, the Israeli press, the Jewish organizations and the Israeli government.
Yet there are times when media bytes of moderation belie the truth of a policy.
The question remains: How many Jews have to be murdered by the PLO until those who head the institutions of the Jewish people in the diaspora and Israel will wake up to the reality of PLO policy.