YouSaid · the spoken record

Gillerman

lines on the record: 555
first: 2003-02-20
most recent: 2008-07-22
sittings or episodes: 44
sources: un-security-council

Every line below is reproduced as it was said and linked to the record it came from. Nothing here is summarised or generated. Directory · Search · Corrections

“In fact, not only has Israel repeatedly asserted that there is no political significance to this fence; we have demonstrated in practice and articulated in negotiations that Israel is ready and able, at tremendous cost, to adjust or dismantle a fence if so required as part of a political settlement. In the context of its withdrawal from Southern Lebanon in May 2000, Israel moved a similar structure in order to comply with Security Council resolution 425 (1978). After having adjusted the fence, Israel moved portions of it a further 95 centimetres, at a cost of millions of dollars, to respond to requests by the Secretary-General. Similarly, in the context of permanent-status negotiations, Israel expressed a willingness to adjust the fence established in Gaza as part of the permanent territorial settlement.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Israel remains committed to resolving all aspects of the conflict, including the final status of the West Bank and Gaza, through political negotiations. The sole purpose of the fence is to protect the vital security of Israeli citizens targeted by Palestinian terrorism. It does not annex territories to the State of Israel nor does it change the status of the land, its ownership or the legal status of the residents of these areas. The Palestinian observer's accusations in this regard are belied by the fact that certain sections of the fence, for example near Modiin and Kibbutz Maale Hachamisha, are actually being built within sovereign Israeli territory.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“What is really racism is the mistreatment and persecution of Jews in Arab lands, the prohibition of entry imposed upon Jews in certain Arab countries, and the prohibition of the sale of property to Jews on punishment of death. To build a fence in order to provide security for the Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel and ultimately to advance the vision of peace between two peoples, Israeli and Palestinian, is anything but racism. Thirdly and above all, they have charged that the fence is an act of de facto annexation and an attempt to prejudice final-status negotiations, as though it were Israel and not the Palestinian leadership that walked out of those negotiations and adopted the path of violence. The Israeli Government has repeatedly made clear, and I reiterate again today, that the fence has no political significance.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“The use of the term "wall" is a transparent attempt by some to evoke memories of darker days, when solid walls were used by certain States to divide one people and prevent the flight to freedom. The comparison is both false and offensive. This fence seeks to separate two peoples who are in conflict, to prevent suicide bombers from targeting innocent civilians and thus to create a terror-free environment in which finally we can move towards a peaceful settlement, which is itself founded on the concept of separation between the Israeli and Palestinian peoples. Secondly, they have charged that the construction of the fence is racist, though what is really racism is their suggestion that one people does not have the right to protection from murderers.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Those short sections that are actually a solid structure are only in areas where Palestinian terrorists can and have shot at Israeli civilians on roads or in nearby towns. Despite blatant misrepresentations to the contrary, there is no enclosure of the West Bank and no Palestinian town or village is closed off. Passage and movement are guaranteed between Palestinian areas throughout the West Bank and into Israel. And, as I have stated, the fence will enable a reduction of Israeli forces in Palestinian areas, thereby facilitating greater freedom of movement within the West Bank and an overall improvement in the humanitarian situation for the vast majority of Palestinian residents, without enhancing the risks of terrorism.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“In numerous cases, the authorities and the complainants have reached mutual agreement regarding alterations of the path. Complainants whose concerns are not resolved also have the unprecedented opportunity to file a petition directly with the Israeli Supreme Court. In seeking to divert attention from the fact that the true architects of this fence are the Palestinian leaders who have failed to take any measures against terrorism, Palestinian representatives have used a number of emotive and pejorative terms, which are without foundation. First, they have termed the fence a "wall", even though they are fully aware that for well over 90 per cent of its length it is a chain-link fence.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Indeed, there are a number of precedents in which other States have made this kind of requisition for security purposes, pursuant to the applicable provisions of international humanitarian law. There is no change whatsoever in the legal status of this territory and it remains the property of the owner. Compensation matching the properties' value is provided for the use of the land and any damage to trees and crops. In addition, owners of agricultural land are also provided with compensation for the full value of their crop yield for as long as the property will need to be used. Farmers who cultivate olive and fruit trees growing within the security fence area can designate a new site to which the trees will be replanted. All residents have the opportunity to submit objections.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Local Palestinian residents have been engaged and consulted throughout that process, with a View to providing individual solutions and ensuring access to schools, health resources and so on. The use of public and unused lands has been of the highest priority. In the circumstances Where that has been impossible, dozens of agricultural gates have been established along the route of the fence to enable farmers to continue cultivating their lands. In addition, new crossing points have been added for Israeli and Palestinian pedestrians and vehicles, as well as for the transfer of goods. Any private land used in building the fence is requisitioned for military purposes, in full conformity with the relevant provisions of international humanitarian law and local law that specifically provide for that purpose.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Could it be that those on the Palestinian side opposing the fence wish to ensure that the terrorist weapon remains a decisive factor in their arsenal? Could it be that the fence is particularly objectionable to extremists in Palestinian society because they see it as thwarting their long-term agenda of seeking Israel's destruction? In determining the route of the fence, Israel has sought to create a barrier between those areas from which the terrorists originate and those that they seek to target. But along with those security concerns, Israel has taken into consideration other humanitarian and environmental concerns, even at the cost of increasing the risks to its civilians. The rights and interests of local populations must be weighed against the rights of civilians to protection from terrorism.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“By building the fence, Israel will be able to significantly reduce the presence of its forces in Palestinian areas and further diminish the necessity for defensive action within Palestinian cities. Importantly, the fence will also enable the removal of roadblocks and checkpoints. The result will be greater freedom of movement within the West Bank without increasing vulnerability to terrorism. Moreover, it is hoped that the protection and security that the fence provides will help create an atmosphere conducive to peaceful and fruitful negotiations. The security fence is a crucial measure in taking terrorism out of the equation. When a Palestinian leadership emerges that is ready to negotiate a political solution, the terror weapon will be less available to scuttle the efforts for peace.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Between Israel and Palestinian Authority areas there is no border or natural obstacle, and the distance dividing terrorists emanating from Palestinian cities and targeted Israeli population centres has sometimes been less than a ten- minute walk. But in those areas of the West Bank where a fence has been constructed, a reduction in terrorist attacks is already evident. The third factor supporting the construction of the fence has been the knowledge that it will enable Israel to markedly reduce its involvement in the daily lives of Palestinians. The net effect of the construction of the security fence will be a reduction in terrorism and an overall improvement in the quality of life for both the Israeli and the Palestinian peoples.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“We have seen this in the Gaza Strip, where since the construction of a similar fence, under an Israeli-Palestinian agreement of 1994, not a single terrorist has succeeded in penetrating into Israel from Gaza through the fence in order to execute an attack. That fence garnered no dissent from the Security Council or from the Palestinian side, and has in fact contributed to enhancing the personal security and welfare of Israeli and Palestinian communities on both sides of the fence. Until now there has been a stretch of some 300 kilometres across which Palestinian terrorists have been able to infiltrate Israeli population centres to murder civilians.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“There is no democracy that has found a perfect solution to the problem of terrorism - especially suicide terrorism, which was invented and perfected by the Palestinians - and most especially when it operates from within a society whose leadership is passively and actively supportive of its goals. Among States facing such a threat, Israel has been among the most successful, preventing over 80 per cent of attempted terrorist attacks. But as the terrorists develop new and even more heinous means of murder, so must we devise better methods of prevention. The construction of a security fence is one of the most effective non-violent methods of preventing the passage of terrorists and their armaments from the terrorist factories in the heart of Palestinian cities to the heart of civilian areas in Israel.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“But by deciding to remain passive, and even to support terrorism, the current leadership has built that fence with their own hands. The second factor that has convinced Israelis of the need to construct the fence has been the scarcity of other options. There are no easy choices. In the horrendous situation that we are faced with, in which terrorists are operating with impunity in the heart of civilian centres, there is no perfect way by which we can obstruct the terrorists without having some impact on the lives of the Palestinians they are hiding among. Trying to find the appropriate balance between the right of Israelis to live without being blown up on buses and in restaurants and the right of Palestinians to live and move freely is a dilemma that Israel, its courts and its citizens anguish over daily.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“We have yet to hear from any Palestinian leader the simple moral truth that deliberately killing the innocent is wrong. For evidence of that duplicity, one need look no further than the fact that the Palestinian Observer at the United Nations occasionally offers muted criticism of terrorism but, at the same time, considers it unacceptable for a Council resolution to expressly condemn the actions of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade and to call for their dismantlement, as required by the road map. In short, had there been any concerted action by the Palestinian side to confront and prevent the terrorists - as they have repeatedly undertaken to do - the security fence might not have been necessary.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“As we can see almost daily from the headlines, Yasser Arafat continues to prevent the emergence of a Palestinian leadership that will do something other than foment hatred, sponsor terrorism or encourage and tolerate the smuggling of sophisticated weapons into the hands of murderers while using civilians as human shields. To be sure, along with the continued incitement and the glorification of murder as martyrdom, there are occasional half-hearted condemnations of terrorist atrocities offered by the Palestinian leadership to placate the international community. But those merely condemn terrorism as a tactic, saying that it is against the interests of the Palestinian people. Were terrorism to be an effective tool, those statements imply, it would presumably be acceptable.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“In choosing terrorists over Israel, and jihad over salam, Arafat and the Palestinian Authority have flouted numerous Security Council resolutions - including resolutions 1373 (2001) and 1435 (2002) - the provisions of the road map and repeated Palestinian undertakings in our peace agreements. Those documents clearly require that the Palestinian Authority dismantle the terrorist infrastructure, prevent terrorism and incitement, and bring those responsible to justice. Yet, to this day the Palestinian leadership continues to declare, brazenly and publicly, that it has no intention of fulfilling the very first clauses of the road map, which call, inter alia, for the dismantlement of terrorist capabilities and infrastructure.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“The single most important factor has been Yassar Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. Israel's policymaking over the past 10 years has been guided by the belief that measures agreed bilaterally by the two sides are preferable to unilateral measures. Indeed, we still believe that today. But 10 years and thousands of victims later, we have painfully come to the realization that wanting someone to be a partner does not make him one. Yasser Arafat has proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is incapable, unwilling and uninterested in making peace with Israel. In the choice faced by the Palestinian leadership - namely, between building a partnership with Israel or with Palestinian terrorist groups - the terrorists have won every time.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“It is a message that the victims of terrorism, at least if they are Israeli, cannot seek or find protection in this Council from the rogue regimes that continue to sponsor the deliberate murder of innocent civilians, in violation of international law and the Council's own resolutions. This is the true double standard at the United Nations, and sooner or later it must be addressed. Many lies and misrepresentations have been made about Israel's security measures, but no lie is so bold and audacious as the one which pretends that Israel's actions occur in a vacuum and are not in response to years and years of terrorism of the most vicious and brutal kind. The decision to construct a security fence is one which Israel has arrived at with great reluctance. Three main factors have brought us to this conclusion.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“What message is sent by the Council when it convenes to address Israel's measured defensive response against a terrorist training facility, a response in which there were no casualties, but does not convene immediately to address the deliberate murder of 20 innocent civilians at a beachfront restaurant in Haifa on the eve of the holiest day in the Jewish calendar? What message is sent when the focus of a debate is the building of a security fence by Israel to protect against terrorism, rather than the murder of hundreds of innocent civilians that made its construction inevitable?”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Here we go again. In a pattern that is as familiar as it is distasteful, we have gathered for yet another meeting of the Council called to censure Israel for its measures to prevent terrorism, rather than to address the terrorism itself. Members might pause to consider what message is sent to the citizens of the world by this kind of Council activity, especially after hearing from the Palestinian Observer that the biggest war crime carried out in contemporary history is not the murder of innocents, but the defensive measures taken to protect them.”
2003-10-14 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4841 (2003) · source
“Today, on the very eve of the Day of Atonement and the thirtieth anniversary of the Egyptian-Syrian aggression that initiated the Yom Kippur War, we call on members of the Council to come to the aid of the victims of terrorism, not of its sponsors. Syria deserves no support for its complicity in murder, and the Council would commit an unforgivable act of moral blindness were it to act otherwise. The time has come for the Council, which adopted resolution 1373 (2002), and which has been at the forefront of the global counter-terrorism campaign, to hold to account a brutal dictatorship that is world-renowned for adopting terrorism as its primary tool. The world is watching. And today, more than on any other day, God is watching too.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Like any State faced with such a critical and prolonged threat, Israel must exercise its inherent right and obligation to defend its citizens. What can we tell the Arab and Israeli mothers of children murdered in this weekend's attack in Haifa? Should we say, "We could have prevented the death of your son or daughter. We could have stopped a terrorist from walking into your town, your school, your home, your bedroom - but our hands were tied"? Israel remains committed to a peaceful solution to the Middle East conflict and is ready to make painful compromises to that end. But no peace can come while terrorism prospers. No negotiations can bring progress, while our citizens die on the streets.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“If there is a double standard in this Organization, it is that while some States are afforded the right to protect their citizens, Israel too often is sent the message that its citizens are not worthy of protection. If there is a double standard, it is that some States are able to support terrorism with impunity, while those defending against it are called to account. If there is a double standard, it is Syria sitting at the Council table and raising one hand to vote against terror and the other to perpetrate and initiate terror around the world. For the sake of peace and the reputation of the Council, let there be no such double standard today. In the face of the rejectionism, aggression and terrorist sponsorship of the Syrian regime, together with Iran and the Palestinian Authority, what would the international community have us do?”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“And it is designed to prevent further armed attacks against Israeli civilians in which Syria is complicit, with a View to encouraging Syria to resolve its dispute through bilateral negotiations in accordance with Security Council resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973), as it is legally required to do. This is not a hypothetical question. Many States members of the Organization and of the Council have been faced with terrorism of far less intensity and have responded with far less restraint and far less concern for human life. And yet the Security Council has not seen fit to scrutinize their conduct. Indeed, on certain occasions the Council has specifically endorsed such defensive measures.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Israel's measured defensive response to the horrific suicide bombings against a terrorist training facility in Syria is a clear act of self-defence in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter. Those actions come after Israel has exercised tremendous restraint despite countless acts of terrorism that have claimed hundreds of innocent lives, for which Syria bears direct and criminal responsibility. It comes after Israel and the international community as a whole have repeatedly called on Syria to end its support of terrorism and finally comply with international law.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Syria would do well to take a hard look at the mirror and count itself fortunate that it has not yet, for unfortunate reasons, been the subject of concerted international action as part of the global campaign against terrorism - not yet. The Syrian delegate speaks a great deal about so- called resistance. Perhaps he can tell us precisely, without his familiar diplomatic word games and misrepresentations, how exactly the murder of children and babies in a restaurant is an act of legitimate resistance. Or perhaps he could tell us how the Syrians themselves have dealt with resistance, such as in the case of Hama, in which some 10,000 Syrian civilians were murdered by the Syrian armed forces.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“This is the same regime that speaks so often of occupation while it brutally occupies the neighbouring territory of Lebanon. It is the same regime that speaks of international law and human rights while it subjugates its people under a repressive and primitive dictatorship, violating countless international obligations. It is the same regime that supported the Saddam Hussain regime in Iraq in violation of Security Council resolutions and that to this day facilitates the infiltration of terrorists to attack civilian and military targets in Iraqi territory. And it is this same despotic regime that speaks so freely of double standards at the United Nations.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Security Council resolution 1373 (2001), adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter - which in act of the highest hypocrisy Syria itself voted for - makes absolutely clear that States must prevent acts of terrorism and refrain from any form of financing, support, safe harbour for or toleration of terrorist groups. Syrian complicity in and responsibility for suicide bombings are as blatant as they are repugnant. The membership of this arch-sponsor of terrorism in the Council is an unbearable contradiction and an embarrassment to the United Nations. For Syria to ask for a Council debate is comparable only to the Taliban calling for such a debate. It would be laughable, if it was not so sad. And yet, members of the Council and the United Nations can hardly be surprised at this shameless act of hypocrisy by the Syrian regime.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Syria has facilitated the transfer of arms to Palestinian terrorist organizations such as Islamic Jihad by allowing the transfer of sophisticated weapons from Iran to Hizbollah through Syrian territory. Hizbollah, itself a vicious terrorist organization, has then sought to smuggle those arms to Palestinian terrorist groups, as was evidenced in the Karine A arms shipment and similar incidents. These are just a few examples of the extent and nature of the involvement of the Syrian regime in the deliberate murder of innocent civilians. Each and every one of these acts constitutes a grave violation of international law and Security Council resolutions, as well as a threat to international peace and security. There are few better exhibits of State sponsorship of terrorism than the one provided by the Syrian regime.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“In another State-run announcement on 1 January 2002, Damascus Radio declared "The entire world knows that Syria, its political leadership and its Arab people...have turned Syrian Arab soil into a training camp, a safe haven and an arms depot for the Palestinian revolutionaries." And on 13 May 2002, President Bashar Assad himself announced in reference to so-called acts of resistance "IfI was not President of Syria I wouldn't hesitate to participate in them." This was not said by Osama bin Laden or by Saddam Hussain, but by a President of a State that is a member of this Council. Syria has also played host to a number of conferences in which senior terrorist operatives from Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other organizations meet.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Shallah himself, the Secretary-General of Islamic Jihad, is known to have transferred funds in the hundreds of thousands of dollars from Damascus to the individual accounts of Islamic Jihad operatives such as Bassani ak-Saadi, who is responsible for Islamic Jihad financing in Jenin. Syria uses its State-run media and official institutions to glorify and encourage suicide bombings against civilians in restaurants, schools, commuter buses and shopping malls. To mention but a few examples, Radio Damascus - far from being a free radio - in a broadcast on 9 May 2002 lauded "the wonderful and special suicide attacks which were executed by some of the sons of the Palestinian nation".”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Instructions are also given to halt terrorist activity when it suits Syrian or Iranian interests to avoid the spotlight, such as following the terrorist attacks of 11 September in the United States. It is very strange that Syria decided to be in the spotlight today and actually put itself in the dock on this very day, after these actions. Iran, through the use of the Syrian and Palestinian banking systems, sustains a systematic money transfer system, and large sums of money have been transferred to Islamic Jihad as well as other terrorists organizations through Damascus for the planning and perpetration of attacks. Mr.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Three such operatives - Tarek Az Aldin, Ali Saffuri and Taabat Mardawi - have been identified under investigation as specifically designated liaisons for relaying instructions between officials in Damascus and terrorist cells in the West Bank and Gaza. Mr. Mardawi himself has admitted involvement in many attacks, including a bus bombing in Haifa in May 2001, a suicide attack at a restaurant in Kiryat Motzkin in August of that year and an attack on a bus near Nazareth in March 2002. Another example comes from an intelligence report provided by the Head of the Palestinian Preventative Security Apparatus on 31 October 2001, which asserts that Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizbollah were meeting in Damascus "in order to increase their joint acitivity with the aid of Iranian money".”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“The Ein Saheb base, which was targeted in Israel's measured defensive operation today, is just one of those facilities sponsored by Syria and Iran. Recruits at camps such as Ein Saheb come from Islamic Jihad, Hamas and other terrorist groups. They are taught how to assemble bombs, conduct kidnapping, prepare suicide belts, gather intelligence and establish terrorist cells. Some have also received aviation instruction. Recruits training at those camps are slated to return to Palestinian Authority territory and other areas to set up cells and conduct terrorist operations. Syria has itself facilitated and directed acts of terrorism by coordination and briefings via phone and Internet and by calling activists to Damascus for consultations and briefings.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Among the many terrorists group that operate and benefit from the auspices of the Syrian dictatorship are Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Hizbollah, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. It is well known that the Secretary General of Islamic Jihad, Ramadan Abdallah Shallah, is one of several terrorist leaders who operate freely in Damascus and receive immunity and support from the Assad regime. Allow me to briefly detail, for the benefit of Council, the extent of support that Syria, as well as the regime in Iran, afford to terrorist organizations such as Islamic Jihad, which are engaged in the deliberate massacre of innocent civilians. Safe harbour and training facilities are provided throughout Syria for terrorist organizations such as Islamic Jihad, Hamas and Hizbollah, both in separate facilities and in Syrian army bases.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Among the attacks perpetrated by that organization were the massacre of 21 teenagers at a discotheque in Tel Aviv on 2 June 2001; the bombing of 5 June 2002 at the Meggido Junction, which killed 18 Israelis; the bombing of a commuter bus on 21 October 2002, which killed 14 Israelis; the attack on a shopping mall in the Israeli town of Afula on 19 May 2003, in which three civilians were killed and over 70 wounded; and the attack on 30 March 2003, in which a suicide bomber detonated his explosives at a cafe in Netanya, wounding 58 civilians. The encouragement, safe harbour, training facilities, funding and logistical support offered by Syria to a variety of notorious terrorist organizations is a matter of public knowledge.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Islamic Jihad is an organization committed to the destruction of Israel through holy war and which engages in the deliberate and widespread murder of innocents to that end. It opposes moderate Arab Governments and actively supports terrorist attacks against Western targets. There could not be a more obvious example of a terrorist organization. The massacre in Haifa is the latest of over 40 terrorist atrocities committed by Islamic Jihad in the past few years.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“Yesterday, a Palestinian suicide bomber entered a crowded beachfront restaurant in the port city of Haifa, murdering 19 innocent civilians and wounding at least 60 others. The restaurant - a symbol of Arab-Israeli coexistence, as is the city of Haifa - was frequented by Jewish and Arab citizens of Israel alike, and among the victims were four Israeli Arabs, three children and a little baby girl. Five victims were members of the same family and three were members of another family. Whole families were wiped out by that horrendous act, taking place on the Jewish sabbath on a quiet, peaceful beachfront in the city of Haifa. Islamic Jihad, a terrorist organization that operates freely from Palestinian Authority territory and has headquarters in Damascus, Syria, proudly claimed responsibility for this massacre.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“First, let me congratulate you, Sir, on your assumption of the presidency of the Security Council. Let me also express to you my regret that your first meeting should be of this nature and take place on this day. I wish also to express to Sir Emyr Jones Parry my great appreciation for his able and fair stewardship of the Security Council last month. This meeting of the Security Council is being convened within hours of Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, which is the holiest day of the Jewish calendar. I deeply regret that the Council could not meet after this most important religious day so as to allow Israel to participate fully in the debate. I will, unfortunately, have to leave this meeting after I make my statement in order to observe this holy day.”
2003-10-05 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4836 (2003) · source
“The draft resolution would have come to the defence of a man who has devoted all his energies to scuttling the road map and who continues to cause untold suffering to both Israelis and Palestinians through his support and toleration of terrorism. To advance the cause of peace, we do not need more one-sided United Nations resolutions. Lord knows we do not need to increase the already unprecedented burden on United Nations time and resources that is expended every single year by pandering to the Palestinian representative's endless partisan initiatives. What we need is for both sides to commit themselves to the cause of peace and to resolving this dispute through dialogue in an atmosphere free from terrorism, Violence and incitement, which, unfortunately and tragically, have been the tool of Mr.”
2003-09-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4828 (2003) · source
“It did not focus on the clear legal responsibility of the Palestinian leadership to dismantle the terrorist infrastructure including confronting groups such as Hamas, the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, the Fatah, Tanzim and others, whose acts of murder lie at the very heart of the problem. Instead, it focused its criticism on the victims of terrorism and on the response to terrorists rather than on terrorism itself. In a perverse manner, the draft resolution sought to equate the deliberate murder of innocent civilians with targeted counter-terrorism operations directed against those illegal combatants responsible for murder and for continuing to plan further acts of terror. The adoption of the draft resolution would have harmed efforts to bolster the peace process.”
2003-09-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4828 (2003) · source
“I would first like to congratulate you, Sir, on the able, efficient and considerate manner in which you handled yesterday's debate and its continuation today. The draft resolution presented before the Council today for voting was, in our View, tragically lopsided. I would therefore like to commend those countries that did not support it. I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate a number of points from Israel's perspective. The draft resolution did not focus on terrorism killing innocent men, women and children, killing in the process the hopes for peace.”
2003-09-16 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4828 (2003) · source
“I must say that I am very saddened - and I say that even with a tinge of pity - at the pathetic remarks of the Palestinian representative. Unfortunately, I will be unable to meet him at his level, because the descent would be too abrupt. He has proved once again that he represents the dark past of the Palestinians rather than the bright future they truly deserve. As to the claim that Yasser Arafat is a legitimate leader, let me remind the Council that the Palestinians thought that Saddam Hussain was a legitimate leader, along with many other people whom history has chosen to remove from the stage. The mere fact that the Palestinian representative has felt the need to refer to very dubious events and inventions that happened 50, 60 or 70 years ago proves the very poor case and the very blatant demagoguery that I prefer not to answer.”
2003-09-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4824Resumption1 (2003) · source
“Arafat has continued to demonstrate that he is on the wrong side of history and that he refuses to learn any lessons about the effects of terrorism for both Israelis and Palestinians. Rather than taking responsibility to build a genuine, democratic Palestinian society that can live in peace with its neighbours, he has turned Palestinian victimhood into a professional enterprise and Palestinian suffering into a source of power and personal prosperity. We will bring no benefit today to the cause of peace, or to the legitimate rights of Palestinians and Israelis, if we come to the defence of someone who has brought only suffering and the promise of further bloodshed.”
2003-09-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4824 (2003) · source
“Our discussions today take place on the tails of 11 September, the anniversary of the worst terrorist attack in history, and the signing of the Declaration of Principles in Washington on 13 September 1993. These two events are a haunting and vivid illustration of the devastating effects of terrorism and of the promise and possibility of peace if terrorism is abandoned and the vision of peace between Israelis and Palestinians is vigorously pursued. Time and again, the world has held out hope that Mr. Arafat has rejected the path of terrorism for the path of peace; the hope that he has become a responsible statesman and not remained a professional terrorist. In the two years following 11 September, Mr.”
2003-09-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4824 (2003) · source
“Arafat, we fundamentally undermine our efforts to allow an empowered Palestinian Prime Minister to work to implement the road map and reach a peaceful solution. Such a policy serves the interests of no one other than the terrorists whom Mr. Arafat continues to support. It is time we expressly admitted that he is part of the problem and not part of the solution. Israel holds out hope that a new and different Palestinian leadership that categorically abandons the ways of Mr. Arafat will be ready to fully and responsibly implement its obligations to fight terrorism and incitement. If it does so, it will find in Israel a willing partner ready to make painful compromises, as it has proven before, to realize President Bush's vision.”
2003-09-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4824 (2003) · source
“The efforts of the Palestinian representative in this Chamber advance not the interests of the Palestinian people, but the personal interest and corrupt rule of Mr. Arafat himself. High-minded rhetoric about the so-called legitimacy of Mr. Arafat's leadership and the illegitimacy of Israel's interference are meaningless and hypocritical in the face of the hundreds of dead and injured innocent civilians killed with the direct approval or acquiescence of Mr. Arafat himself. What country, faced with terrorism of this unprecedented magnitude and duration, would not hold directly and criminally responsible the person who has both orchestrated the terror and refused to suppress it? In perpetuating this game of legitimizing Mr.”
2003-09-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4824 (2003) · source
“It is the price paid in lives because ambulances carrying the injured from a terrorist attack must slow down so that they can be checked as a result of intelligence reports indicating that terrorists are attempting to booby-trap ambulances to explode upon arrival at hospitals. It is the price paid in fear by courageous Israeli civilians who do not know when or where the next attack, resulting from Mr. Arafat's encouragement or acquiescence, will come. It would be a grave error if the Council were to come to the aid not of the victims of terrorism, but of their sponsor and perpetrator. The Council's focus should be directed first and foremost at terrorism and at its facilitators, and not at the response to terrorism. Pressure should be directed against the problem and not against those who are its victims.”
2003-09-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4824 (2003) · source
“Let us take a moment to consider the price of Israel's goodwill gestures made at the behest of the international community in the hope that Mr. Arafat's leadership would respond in kind. It is the price paid by Dr. David Applebaum and his daughter Nava, who were among those murdered in the terrorist attack in Jerusalem this past Tuesday. Dr. Applebaum, a renowned specialist in emergency medicine and the head of the emergency room at Shaare Zedek Hospital, who himself had treated countless terror victims, had brought his daughter to the Jerusalem cafe for a heart- to-heart talk on the very eve of her wedding.”
2003-09-15 · UN Security Council · Security Council, S/PV.4824 (2003) · source