| HOME | Featured Stories | April 2008 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, April 30, 2008. |
|
Yehoshua HaLevi writes: "HOW I GOT THE SHOT: Light, form, color, texture, pattern: Take any one of these and you've got the foundation for a great photograph. In my classes, we learn to identify these design elements, single them out, and then advance to images built around two or more of these concepts. The wild irises of Mt. Gilboa are famous enough to merit a trail in their name in Beit Alpha National Park, located along the scenic route that winds from the Beka Valley up to Afula. I finally managed a visit there in the early spring of 2006. While there was plenty of seasonal color, to my dismay I only spotted this single iris which happened to be at the peak of its flowering. When I encounter a subject with potential, I'll often walk full circle around it to study the light, but here it was immediately obvious that a backlit angle would provide the greatest drama. I fiddled a bit more with my camera, mounted on a tripod with a macro lens, to create a background that would both complement the colors in the petals while isolating the flower from anything overly distracting to its form. Back in my digital darkroom, I applied a few quick finishing touches. I cropped the bottom so the stem would appear shooting upward from the lower right corner and I darkened the background just slightly to add emphasis to the backlit petals." Contact him at smile@goldenlightimages.com |
|
THE DIPLOMATIC DANCE WITH HAMAS
Posted by JCPA, April 30, 2008. |
|
This was written by Professor Efraim Karsh. |
No sooner had former U.S. President Jimmy Carter emerged from his Damascus meeting with Khaled Mashaal to declare Hamas' readiness to accept the Jewish state as a "neighbor next door" than the radical Islamist group demonstrated what its vision of peaceful coexistence meant by making the most ambitious attempt to kidnap Israeli soldiers and detonating two car bombs at a border crossing used for the introduction of vital foodstuffs and humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip. Meanwhile, Hamas' foreign minister, Mahmoud Zahar, reasserted the organization's commitment to Israel's destruction through demographic subversion (i.e., the "right of return") and vowed to continue the "armed struggle" against "the foundational crime at the core of the Jewish state." Attalah Abu Subh, Hamas' culture minister, amplified this assertion. "Everything we see in the Arab region and around the world –– the evil of the Jews, their deceit, their cunning, their warmongering, their control of the world, and their contempt and scorn for all the peoples of the world," he argued, "is based on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion –– the faith that every Jew harbors in his heart." The notion that Hamas' co-option into a political process aimed at stifling its overriding goal of destroying Israel will make it more hopeful and less despairing is a contradiction in terms. Yet the hope that Hamas could somehow be lured away from its genocidal agenda seems to be gaining wider currency. A bipartisan group of former U.S. officials, led by Zbigniew Brzezinski and Brent Scowcroft, have been calling for "a genuine dialogue" with Hamas.[1] Former Secretary of State Colin Powell told National Public Radio last year that some way must be found to talk to Hamas.[2] Some Israelis have also joined the chorus calling for talks with Hamas. "Before we are dragged into Gaza, we must exhaust the other possibility," wrote journalist Ari Shavit. "We should offer Hamas a deal: an Islamic republic in Gaza in exchange for full demilitarization. A full and fulfilling life for a Muslim community of brothers, in exchange for giving up violence and arms altogether." Shavit is aware that his proposal is likely to be rejected, as Hamas "tends to prefer the deaths of Israelis over the lives of Palestinians." Yet he believes that "if there is any chance of a frank negotiation with Hamas, this is the path the talks should take. Not a Carter-style illusion, not the temporary tactic of a passing tahdiye (truce), but a tough deal with tough terms. A street deal. A deal with thugs. A deal meant to give those who live on the other side of the fence a genuine opportunity to lay down the sword, pick up the Koran and become real neighbors." But why should Hamas pay a price, any price, for something it already has? It needs no Israeli consent to establish an "Islamic republic" in Gaza. It did precisely that in early 2006, to Israel's abhorrence, and is probably in a position to replicate this success in the West Bank, the only inhibiting factors being considerations of political expediency and Israel's effective counterinsurgency measures. It can likewise obtain peace and quiet for its Gaza subjects at any given moment if it stops the rocket attacks on Israeli towns and villages and sends no "holy warriors" to blow themselves up among Israeli civilians. Nor is Israel in a position to reach "a street deal," given the steady erosion of its deterrent prowess since the Oslo years, and especially after the hurried flight from south Lebanon on May 24, 2000, which was instrumental in triggering the so-called "al-Aqsa Intifada" and in inaugurating Hizbullah's military buildup, and numerous provocations, along Israel's northern border, that culminated in the 2006 Second Lebanon War. This war, and the thousands of rockets raining down on Israel's southern localities during the past eight years, despite countless Israeli threats of harsh retribution, afford a foretaste of Palestinian and Arab abidance by a "peace of the thugs." Above all, not only is the destruction of Israel not a bargaining chip, it is the heart of the matter. Hamas, which is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, sees the struggle for Palestine as neither an ordinary political dispute between two contending nations (Israelis and Palestinians), nor even as a struggle for national self-determination by an indigenous population against a foreign occupier. Rather, it sees Palestine as but one battle in a worldwide holy war to prevent the fall of a part of the House of Islam to infidels. In the words of Mahmoud Zahar: "Islamic and traditional views reject the notion of establishing an independent Palestinian state....In the past, there was no independent Palestinian state....[Hence], our main goal is to establish a great Islamic state, be it pan-Arabic or pan-Islamic." Hamas' charter not only promises that "Israel will exist until Islam will obliterate it," but presents the organization as the "spearhead and vanguard of the circle of struggle against World Zionism [and] the fight against the warmongering Jews." The document even incites anti-Semitic murder, arguing that "the Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.'" There's more. According to its charter, Hamas was established not merely to "liberate Palestine from Zionist occupation" or to wipe out Jews, but to pursue the far loftier goals of spreading Allah's holy message and defending the "oppressed" throughout the world: "The Islamic Resistance Movement will spare no effort to implement the truth and abolish evil, in speech and in fact, both here and in any other location where it can reach out and exert influence." Hamas' extreme belief that a perpetual state of war exists between it and anyone, either Muslim or non-Muslim, who refuses to follow in the path of Allah does not permit it to respect, or compromise with, cultural, religious, and political beliefs that differ from its own. Its commitment to the use of violence as a religious duty means that it will never accept a political arrangement that doesn't fully correspond to its radical precepts. As the movement's slogan puts it: "Allah is [Hamas'] goal, the Prophet its model, the Koran its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the cause of Allah its most sublime belief." Hamas certainly sees itself as part of the larger network of jihadi movements struggling with the West. Mahmoud Zahar has expressed the hope that Hamas' victories in Gaza will inspire the mujahideen in Iraq and Afghanistan. Moreover, Khaled Mashaal declared in a Damascus mosque in early 2006: "We say this to the West, which does not act reasonably, and does not learn its lessons: by Allah, you will be defeated." He added: "Tomorrow, our nation will sit on the throne of the world." He has lashed out at Western powers for helping the persecuted Christians of East Timor and for opposing Sudan's genocidal campaign in Darfur. Thus, Hamas identifies with global Islamist causes.[3] All this raises the question of how a Western diplomatic embrace of Hamas would impact on the larger war on terrorism. Legitimizing a jihadi group of this sort would undoubtedly undermine the broader struggle against Islamism, and deepen the doubts of many people in the Middle East and South Asia about the determination of the West to neutralize the current threat they all face at present. Hamas is plainly not an organization whose ideology can be integrated into any political process without undermining democracy and poisoning the norms of civil society. Hamas is not interested in peace with Israel; indeed, Mashaal has plainly stated that any tahdiye, or state of calm, is really "a tactic in conducting the struggle."[4] Unfortunately for Israelis and Palestinians alike, that is not something the wishful thinking of well-meaning pundits and even former U.S. presidents can change. Notes 1. Glenn Kessler, "Mideast Players Differ on Approach to Hamas,"
Washington Post, March 16, 2008,
2. Ibid. 3. Lt. Col. (res.) Jonathan D. Halevi, "Understanding the Direction
of the New Hamas Government: Between Tactical Pragmatism and Al-Qaeda
Jihadism," Jerusalem Issue Brief, Vol. 5, No. 22, April 6, 2006,
4. "Hamas Chief Sees Truce as a 'Tactic'," Associated Press, April 27, 2008. Professor Efraim Karsh is Head of Mediterranean and Middle Eastern Studies at King's College, University of London, and a member of the Board of International Experts of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. His most recent book is Islamic Imperialism: A History (Yale University Press, 2007).This article was published as a Jerusalem Issue Brief by Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (http://www.jcpa.org). |
|
THE MYTH OF PALESTINIAN MODERATION
Posted by Michael Freund, April 30, 2008. |
|
Even for a region awash in fable and legend, this one is a real whopper. It is the myth of Palestinian moderation, and US and Israeli leaders continue to buy into it. They embrace Mahmoud Abbas as a reasonable person, and base their policy on the belief that most Palestinians abhor violence and terror. But as I demonstrate in the column below from the Jerusalem Post, there is ample evidence indicating that neither of those assumptions is at all correct. This article appeared in the post and is archived at
Comments and feedback may be sent to: letters@jpost.com or to me directly. thanks,
|
|
Even for a president prone to misusing the English language, George W. Bush outdid himself last week. Sitting next to Mahmoud Abbas at the White House, Bush gushed and swooned over the visiting Palestinian leader, describing him in terms usually reserved for heroes and saints. "The president is a man of peace," Bush assured the gaggle of reporters who were present. "He's a man of vision. He rejects the idea of using violence to achieve objectives, which distinguishes him from other people in the region." While Bush's grammar may have been uncommonly accurate that day, his description of Abbas was anything but. For even a cursory glance at some of the Palestinian president's outbursts in recent months reveal a man wholly undeserving of such praise. On March 1, Abbas had the gall to insult the memory of the six million Jews murdered by the Nazis when he declared that Israel's counter-terror operations in Gaza were "worse than the Holocaust" (Jerusalem Post, March 2). And in an interview with the Jordanian newspaper Al-Dustur on February 28, Abbas boasted that he had been the first Palestinian to fire a bullet at Israel after the birth of the PLO in 1965. This ostensible "man of peace" then took pride in the fact that his Fatah movement had trained Hizbullah terrorists, and he did not rule out a return to the "armed struggle" against Israel in the future. And just two weeks ago, Abbas was planning to confer the Al-Quds Mark of Honor, the PLO's highest award, to two female Palestinian terrorists who took part in the killing of Israelis (Israel Radio, April 16). The event was cancelled only after it was publicized widely in the media. Need we also mention the Palestinian president's refusal late last year to recognize Israel as a "Jewish state"?
THIS OF course puts the lie to Bush's stubborn embrace of Abbas as a reasonable and judicious leader that can be counted on to forge a peace deal. If anything, the Palestinian president has repeatedly shown himself to be an intemperate hot-head. Nonetheless, that doesn't seem to stop Washington and much of the media from bestowing upon him the coveted title of a "moderate" leader that Israel can do business with. "Abbas's moderate and Western-backed government rules the West Bank," the Associated Press (April 25) helpfully explained in a recent report. According to Reuters (April 24), Abbas is "a pro-Western moderate," while Agence France-Presse referred to him on Monday as "moderate Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas," as though the appellation "moderate" was an integral part of his title. All of this shameful fawning on the Palestinian thug-in-chief raises a simple, yet rarely-asked, question: why is there such a widespread insistence on deluding the public into thinking that Abbas is a "moderate" leader who epitomizes the majority of Palestinians? The issue is more than academic. In fact, it goes directly to the core of current US and Israeli government policy. After all, the entire intellectual basis for the notion of granting the Palestinians a state rests on the dubious assumption that a majority of them are actually reasonable, peace-loving people. Too bad that all the available evidence appears to indicate otherwise. Last week, for example, the Palestinian-run Jerusalem Media and Communications Center published the results of a survey revealing that a majority of Palestinians (50.7%) support suicide-bombing attacks against Israeli civilians. This was in line with previous polls, which have consistently shown overwhelming Palestinian backing for anti-Israel terror. Indeed, just last month, the Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research found that an astonishing 84% of Palestinians supported the gruesome execution-style murder of 8 Israeli teens by a Palestinian terrorist at the Mercaz HaRav Yeshiva in Jerusalem. And by a margin of 64% to 33%, or nearly two to one, Palestinians were in favor of continued rocket attacks against Israeli towns and cities.
THESE COLD, hard facts present supporters of the peace process with a major problem, if only because they confirm that the very idea of Palestinian moderation is a myth. It is a figment of the imagination, a flight of fantasy that bears little resemblance to reality. After all, it is not as if a tiny minority of Palestinians support the murder of Jews. The bulk of them do. And wishing it were otherwise simply doesn't make it so. So let's stop fooling ourselves. Giving the Palestinians a state when a majority of them want us dead is both reckless and irresponsible. It is a recipe for disaster, and will only serve to create yet another radical, terror-sponsoring state in the region. And let's cease calling Mahmoud Abbas a "moderate." Anyone who refuses to recognize Israel as a "Jewish state," makes a mockery of the Holocaust, and threatens a return to violence, is certainly not deserving of such a characterization. Instead, let's call Abbas what he really is. For if he looks like an extremist, sounds like an extremist, and acts like an extremist, chances are that he is one. And more importantly, let's start treating him as such. Michael Freund served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. |
|
JEWS ARE UNDER SIEGE: A CALL FOR ACTION
Posted by Avodah, April 30, 2008. |
|
This was written by Charles Jacobs and Seth A. Klarman and it
appeared June 18, 2006 in
|
|
A rush of shocking events is creating a "tipping point" in Jewish consciousness. Increasingly, Jews feel our situation has substantially changed, and for the worse. The events include Iran's nuclear threats and Holocaust denial, Hamas' electoral victory, the torture and murder of Ilan Halimi in Paris by a Muslim gang, the "discovery" by a Harvard dean that Jews actually do conspire to control Congress and American foreign policy in the service of Israel and to the detriment of U.S. interests, and the British academic boycott. All of these demonstrate for many that there is a new assault on the world's Jews. The hostility is based on a unique and intense hatred of Israel and deep resentment of its supporters, accompanied by a growing willingness to use violence. As though in a "perfect storm," two global ideologies, rooted in different radical critiques of the West, have suddenly aligned against us: 1. Islamic anti-Semitism. Fueled by Saudi petro-dollars and Iranian revolutionary zeal, a global campaign in mosques and madrassas (Islamic schools) teaches hundreds of millions of Muslims that Jews are the sons of monkeys and pigs, and killing them is a holy deed. The internet and television embellish the message: docudramas in Iran, Egypt and Jordan depict Jews harvesting the organs of Muslim children, killing non-Jews to make matzo, and plotting to rule the world. This poison reaches Muslims in the West. Europe's Jews are besieged and violently assaulted –– on the streets and in the no-longer varnished rhetoric of polite society. In America, Freedom House told Congress it found Saudi-produced hate literature aimed at Americans, Christians –– but mostly Jews –– in mosques across the U.S. 2. In the West, "Palestinianism" –– the notion that an innocent, indigenous people suffers a senseless, cruel oppression by the Jews of Israel (who ought to know better) threatens to become the standard view. It is the basis for an attack by Western radicals on Zionism, Jewish national self-determination, and by extension on Jews everywhere. The "oppression" of an Arab people by Westerners is, for the far Left, morally and politically more consequential than the massacres, enslavements, beheadings, bombings, and ethnic cleansings committed by Arabs and Muslims from London to Sudan, from Spain to Indonesia. These are treated by radicals as distractions from (even caused by) the deeper Zionist evil. Rooted in separate critiques of the West, Islam and the radical left are now allied –– in Europe and increasingly in segments of America's professoriate, media, human rights community, and the leadership of certain Protestant churches. In America, Jews fret as a vicious anti-Israel movement has taken root on American campuses, and Jewish organizations reeled last summer when five mainline Protestant denominations passed anti-Israel resolutions. Most Jews don't yet know the extent to which public high school texts –– and teachers –– are delegitimizing Israel. Anti-Semitism is a virus that morphs. In the West now, hostility to Jews has little to do with the familiar hatreds –– of Judaism or the Jewish "race." Today's antipathy makes Israel "the Jew" and its "crimes" the old "Jewish crimes" –– killing of the innocent, theft (this time of land), arrogance, and the control of business, finance, government and the media by international cabals. As before, "Jewish crimes" stand out as uniquely, even cosmically evil. And as such, they call for correction. We were unprepared; we remain confused. Arab and Muslim Jew-hatred was misread as mere "street talk" that would dissipate when Oslo brought peace. Instead, Jew-hate is an engine of the global jihad. We are flummoxed by the new breed of Western adversaries. After centuries of attack by brutes, illiterates, right wing lunatics, and Christian anti-Semites, antagonism to the Jewish collective is now generated by soft-spoken moralists with high ideals, by "anti-racists" –– some of the most articulate of whom are Jews. Set to defend against thugs yelling "kike," we are attacked instead by college professors –– today a far more insidious enemy –– who berate us for supporting "immorality." No one wants to think that sixty years after the Holocaust, a new storm threatens Jews everywhere. But reality cannot be avoided or minimized. Confused, with our defenses down, Jews need to consider the profound impact of losing the ideological battle that can destroy the Jewish state. This new time requires courageous and talented leaders to grasp these new realities and create strategies to defeat the latest defamations, grounded in a libelous portrayal of the Arab-Israeli conflict. A leadership correctly prioritizing the threat would convince us to lay aside our furious left-right debates, and teach us instead to make Israel's basic case –– from the left as well as from the right. It would gather the support of non-Jews and distinguish clearly friends from enemies. Most important, a new leadership would bravely and tirelessly tell us the truth about our new situation and recruit our talent and resources to the task. If current Jewish leaders –– in this country which has been so good to the Jewish people –– can't or won't do these things, then this small but enormously talented people will have to get new leaders. For in this, the Jewish community cannot and must not fail. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
GOV'T DESTROYS SWIMMING POOL IN SMALL SAMARIAN TOWN
Posted by Hillel Fendel, April 30, 2008. |
|
Civil Administration and police officials swooped down on the small Jewish neighborhood of Havot Yair, located in Samaria 14 miles east of Herzliyah, and destroyed a small unauthorized swimming pool. The pool was about seven feet wide and 28 feet long. Though word of the impending law-enforcement operation was received early, dozens of youths who made their way to Havot Yair in order to stop the destruction were blocked by police vehicles, and the destruction was carried out without incident. A similar attempt was made to destroy the Hazon David synagogue in Kiryat Arba on Monday night, but was thwarted when hundreds of people arrived in the area. It is not clear why the police targeted only the swimming pool and not the other structures of Havot Yair, which is considered an "unauthorized illegal outpost." However, the pool's owner, Attorney Doron Nir-Tzvi, has an idea. "There are 22 families here," he told NRG-Maariv, "and the fact that they hit only the pool and not the other houses is because they are trying to terrorize a lawyer who has been representing [right-wing] anti-establishment causes for ten years." "An even worse reason for what they did today," Nir-Tzvi suggested, "is simple narrow-minded envy, according to which the settlers [Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria] are not allowed to live comfortably." "I am comforted by the fact that at this very hour, dozens of houses are being built in Jewish towns all over Judea and Samaria," he concluded, though he did not provide documentation for this statement. About Havot Yair Havot Yair [Yair's Farms, named for the story at the end of Numbers 32] is located between the city of Ariel and the community of Nofim. It was first established in 1999, was later destroyed by the government, was rebuilt in 2001, and now has 22 families and six permanent buildings. It is built on state-owned land. The community's website lists its hiking sites, as follows: –– The ancient winepress, near the synagogue Hillel Fendel, who is Senior New-Editor for Arutz Sheva
|
|
SUPPOSE OLMERT WERE LYING; WHO IS COMBATTING IRAN; HAMAS' MILITARY
GROWTH
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 30, 2008. |
|
BUSH SHUNS WESTERN WALL Pres. Bush wants to visit some symbolic part of Israel but rules out the Golan Heights and the Western Wall in favor of Masada. Masada is where the Jewish defenders committed suicide, not an uplifting symbol. At least Israeli paratroopers vow there “never again” to be conquered. The Western Wall is where Israel recovered its patrimony from centuries of Islamic and British oppression. It, like the Golan, legally was made part of Israel. What Israel may negotiate about it is one thing, but meanwhile, it is part of Israel. If the President of the US, whose Congress declared Jerusalem part of Israel, and whose law requires him to relocate the US Embassy to Jerusalem, boycotts the Western Wall as “controversial,” because the aggressor Arabs want it only now that they don't have it, let Israelis boycott Bush. He is no friend. He wants Israel to concede Jerusalem and whatever else it needs to survive. His ostensible closeness to Israel and to PM Olmert is phony. He is striving to leave office with another peace agreement. It would render Israel helpless. How does he think the agreement would be judged by historians? Would they be taken in by the hoopla of the agreement, followed by war and the destruction of Israel thanks to that agreement? Won't he be thought of like Neville Chamberlain, whose peace agreement led to war? SUPPOSE OLMERT WERE LYING ABOUT NEGOTIATIONS PM Olmert says he can reach an agreement with the P.A., but that agreement depends on the P.A. stopping terrorism, which he does not think it can do. Therefore, he says, he does not expect to implement the agreement. Suppose he is lying, the way his predecessor Sharon did about getting all the steps fulfilled except the last one, for which he would seek approval, and then disregarding disapproval of and taking the last step and expelling Jews. The US would say that this great agreement is being held up only because Israel is stubborn about it. It would suggest that Israel does what it always had done –– continue meeting its obligations under the agreement, and ask the Arabs to fulfill their part of the agreement, which they never do. Olmert would find an excuse. INCONSISTENT IN SUSPICION Democrats dismiss statements by Pres. Bush as those of a liar. Meanwhile, the Clintons and Obama lie continually about their past positions on the issues. Democrats take them seriously. However ridiculous the negative news about Israel, Internet antisemites take it seriously, even if from sources they otherwise don't believe. People are inconsistent in their suspicions but not in expediency. SUPPOSED CEASEFIRE Hamas is not firing rockets at Israel, at present, but its allies are. It launches other attacks. Israel does not deter Hamas. Hamas attacked a border crossing through which Israel lets in humanitarian supplies. Apparently Hamas wants Israel to shut the crossing so that a real humanitarian crisis will result, leading to condemnation of Israel and demands that Israel keep the crossing open to Hamas all the time (IMRA, 4/10). How callous Hamas is towards its own people and cynical about the world's response! It knows that the world is looking for an opportunity to condemn Israel. How can Israel deter Hamas? Israel won't bombard Gaza so as to force residents to rise up against Hamas, which they otherwise respect if not adore for making holy war. Israel won't wipe out Hamas and keep Gaza under control thereafter, largely because the Olmert regime is appeasement-minded, anti-Zionist, and cooperating with Bush in the hope of making a (farcical) peace agreement. How callous Olmert is towards his own people, whom he endangers by inaction! How cynical Bush is, in hoping to make an agreement in name only, though it obviously would lead to war and to Israel's destruction! How foolish are the Democrats, criticizing Bush for everything else but missing this victory he is handing jihad! Why are the Republicans silent about it? At least the pro-Israel Evangelicals object. WHO IS COMBATING IRAN? Iran's strategy is to destabilize and control via armed proxies, itself safe from retaliation. Sunni regimes threatened by Iran's looming shadow don't know how to counteract Iran. Having taught their people jihad, they can't oppose Iran's championship of it. They are as anti-Israel, anti-American, anti-Iraq as is Iran. The US hasn't figured out that Syria, Hamas, and Fatah now take orders from Iran. It thinks it can wean Syria from Iran. It gives money to Fatah, which shares it with Hamas. (It holds Israel back from dealing a fatal blow to Hamas and to Fatah, thinking it can arrange a peace between Fatah and Israel, instead.) The US has no comprehensive strategy. Iran does (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 4/11). HOW COLUMBIA U. OPERATES Arab professors were prominent in picking an anti-Zionist Jew to head the new Israel & Jewish studies. Prof. Yinon Cohen accepts the false story of the Palestinian Arabs about refugees, etc., and thinks that settlers should not be defended from attack (Prof. Steven Plaut, 4/11). SYRIAN SURPRISE Syria was investigating the assassination of a leading terrorist. Iran alleges that S. Arabia provided the car used by Israeli agents to perform the act (IMRA, 4/10). This pits Syria against S.Arabia. It's a standard tactic in the Middle East to blame Israel in every attack, including attacks one's own secret police instigate, and to accuse one's opponent of the day, in this case, S. Arabia, of helping Israel. S. Arabia rarely cooperates with Israel, against which it is in a state of war. HAMAS' MILITARY GROWTH We'd already heard that Hamas has formed large-scale military units, has improved their command structure, and gets them trained by Iran. Israel finds that they are importing heavier weaponry and have doubled their numbers to 20,000 in Gaza. They dug bunkers underground and planted bombs along the roads they expect the IDF to reach them on (IMRA, 4/10). Security officials and commentators warned that this would happen. Now it has, and Hamas would inflict much greater casualties on the troops and, by means of its accumulated rockets, on Israeli civilians. These high casualties are due to the Olmert regime's dithering or treason, not sure which. Israel can defeat Hamas, but it isn't clear that Israel can survive a full assault from Hamas, the P.A., Hizbullah, Syria, and Iran, likely to be joined by Egypt, S. Arabia and, if opportune, Jordan. Olmert is responsible for allowing the Hizbullah build-up and for failing to punish Syria so as to deter its intervention if not cause its overthrow. IN BAD TASTE Two men from Nablus, in Israel illegally, nevertheless worked in a restaurant in Ramat Gan. They were recruited into a terrorist plot to poison customers. They were foiled, but some members of the gang remain at large (IMRA, 4/10). In the Middle Ages, Jews were accused of poisoning the wells, when plague struck Christians but sanitary practices largely protected Jews. In our era, Palestinian Arabs accuse Israel of trying to poison them. No evidence adduced. The intercepted plot, however, is of an actual case, and it is of Islamic terrorism by poison. As I say, the Muslim Arabs usually do the terrible things they falsely accuse the Israelis of, because thinking up such charges is consistent with Arab culture and the charges are not consistent with Jewish culture. Israel doesn't poison Muslims. Witnesses against Peres, however, have died mysteriously. Thousands of Sephardic Israeli children died or suffered mysterious radiation poisoning when he was in charge of nuclear testing. OLMERT THREATENS UNFRIGHTENED HAMAS He is threatening to put Hamas out of business (Arutz-7, 4/11), How long have Israeli leaders threatened the terrorists, without acting? The threats have no effect upon the terrorists. Do the threats impress any Israelis? DISCRIMINATION Israel made two goodwill gestures, at the behest of the US. It prohibits much Jewish building in Judea-Samaria. It approved of houses for 30,000 Arabs in Judea-Samaria (Arutz-7, 4/13) in addition to the tens of thousands living there and in Israel illegally. The US did not press the P.A. to cede anything. The P.A. made no goodwill gestures to Israel. It praises terrorists and some of its men commit terrorism. ANOTHER DAMAGING “GESTURE” The US pressed Israel to let in 5,000 more P.A. laborers. Up to now, as the number of P.A. construction workers in Israel diminished, Israelis replaced them. 15,000 Jews did, last year. Industrial officials urged the government to reject the US request (IMRA, 4/11). Israel does not do what is in its own people's interest. Its interest is to employ its own people, impoverish P.A.. DON'T COUNT ON IT A week or two ago, the NY Sun laughed about how short-sighted experts were, decades ago, warning about food shortages. Now we have plenty, the Sun explained. This week, the news has been about shortages causing mass-starvation. Shortages do it directly and also by boosting prices beyond what poor people can afford. Conditions change. Don't take them for granted. The use of corn for car fuel gets the major blame for shortages. The falling dollar has inflated prices. They say that hedge funds have been buying crop futures, pulling food out of circulation. HOW UNIFIL CHECKS CARGO FOR ARMS
UNIFIL inspects the manifest, not the cargo (IMRA, 4/11). If the manifest is false? The Palestinian Arabs ship arms under false manifests. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
SYRIA, THE NPT, AND THE IAEA
Posted by Bryna Berch, April 30, 2008. |
|
This is INSS Insight No. 53, April 29, 2008. It was written by Ephraim Asculai. http://www.inss.org.il/research.php?cat=6&incat=&read=1778 |
|
Given the official US statements, backed by extraordinary visual evidence, there is little doubt that the Israeli Air Force raid on the night of September 6, 2007 destroyed a building housing a nuclear reactor. There are many political and military ramifications both of the facts themselves and the way they were brought to light. However, one of the longer term effects is the impact of the revelations on the nuclear non-proliferation regime in general and on the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in particular. What did the new information reveal? that the installation that was destroyed was a nuclear reactor, probably still under construction; that the reactor was similar to the North Korean reactor at Yongbyon that produced plutonium (subsequently used in an underground nuclear test explosion); and that Syria, despite its NPT obligations, concealed the very existence as well as the purpose of the installation and repeatedly denied the facts to the world and to the IAEA. Syria has been trying to buy a nuclear reactor from several sources for a long time. It had sought to buy a research reactor from Argentina in the mid-1990's, but this failed when Argentina's foreign minister told Syria that it would not sell it a reactor unless Syria signed a peace treaty with Israel. Syria then tried, unsuccessfully, to buy a reactor from Russia. Apparently, Syria then concluded a secret deal with North Korea for the construction of a Yongbyon-type reactor in Syria. The extent of the North Korean involvement is not yet publicly known and is not that relevant, except for the fact that North Korea acted in breach of its NPT obligations. There can be little doubt as to the purpose of the ill-fated reactor. Had it been intended for truly peaceful uses, it would have been declared to the IAEA. In addition, Syria's repeated denials give credence to the claims that the reactor was part of a clandestine weapons development program. Furthermore, Syria acted with astounding speed, razed the stricken installation, and is putting up a supposedly military installation on the old foundations, making it almost impossible for any investigators to reveal the original purpose of the site. There are five members of the NPT that have seriously reneged on their treaty obligations –– Iraq, North Korea, Iran, Syria, and Libya. Iraq's project came to an end as a result of the 1991 Gulf War. Libya agreed to a rollback, probably as a result of the American invasion and toppling of Saddam Hussein in 2003. The remaining three may still be conducting illegal activities aimed at producing nuclear weapons. North Korea has long been suspected of having a clandestine uranium enrichment project. Iran has an ongoing nuclear weapons development program. And there is no guarantee that Syria is not going the same route, given the rumors about the connection with the Pakistani scientist A. Q. Khan, the biggest proliferator of all. The nuclear non-proliferation regime suffered an additional blow with the uncovering of Syria's misdeeds. The extent of the damage will be only known over time, and the prospects for the future need a much more elaborate discussion. In any case, if there will be no substantive change in the manner of the oversight and the application of regime, and if the NPT PrepCom and review conferences continue to become bogged down in secondary issues, the situation can only deteriorate further. The reaction of the IAEA to the information that came out of the Congressional briefing was astounding. An Associated Press report quoted the IAEA: "The Director General [DG] views the unilateral use of force by Israel as undermining the due process of verification that is at the heart of the non-proliferation regime." In addition, "The Director General deplores the fact that this information was not provided to the Agency [by the U.S.] in a timely manner, in accordance with the Agency's responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), to enable it to verify its veracity and establish the facts." With regard to these statements, it should be noted first that verification is not a substitute for the demise of the reactor, which removed the potential for and the danger of plutonium production. Second, one should ask what would have actually happened had the facts been verified by safeguard inspections? Given the historical precedents, the IAEA DG would likely have deplored the fact that the reactor had not been declared in a timely manner, accepted Syrian assurances that hitherto the reactor would be safeguarded, and stated that Syria had the right to build and operate a nuclear reactor, as long as it was safeguarded. In any case, the IAEA could not have prevented the continuing construction and later operation of the reactor, which would have resulted in the potential for the production of plutonium, as was demonstrated by this reactor's sibling –– the Yongbyon reactor. It is easy to understand the DG's wrath –– he probably did not figure in any of the decision making process prior to the bombing. At present, Syria signaled that it would be willing to let the IAEA search for the truth. It is a "no win" situation for Syria if the inspectors uncover the remains of a nuclear reactor. It is a "lose" situation to the IAEA if it does not. One cannot escape the conclusion that the IAEA has continuously failed in its missions, notably in Iraq, Iran, and Syria. The IAEA has set up an extensive organization, including a Division of Information, which is really a Division of Intelligence, within its Department of Safeguards. The Syrian episode clearly demonstrates that the division has failed in its task. One does not need such a division if the DG states that he has to rely on external information and chastises the Member States for not providing the information in a timely manner. This may be an appropriate time for the Board of Governors (BOG) to contemplate a much more thorough oversight of the operation of this organization. Given the political realties, however, it is highly questionable whether the IAEA Board of Governors will indeed do so. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: YOM HASHOAH
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 30, 2008. |
|
Holocaust Day, or, as it is more properly known in Israel, Day of Remembrance of Martyrs and Heroes –– the feeling being that those who were brave and did fight back should not be forgotten. This is one of those times when I feel that my 'regular' posting material can be put aside. Observance began at sundown, and, as I do every year, I watched the televised ceremonies at the Holocaust Memorial, Yad Va'Shem. And, as I do every year, I wept. The core of the ceremony is the lighting of six flames, by six survivors, to represent the six million. Each of those who lights has been filmed telling his or her story, and that film runs before the flame is lit. One story is more painful than the next. ~~~~~~~~~~ But today was, somehow, different. For each of the magnificent people who told his/her story has made a significant contribution to the State. One, for example, was recruited by the Mosad, and sent into Germany, where he broke into an office and photographed the documents that convicted Eichmann. And one helped found a yishuv, a settlement, in the north in the early years of the State. His face lit with pride as he spoke of his contribution. And –– oh! –– the lessons to be learned from this. Lessons of bravery and hope and meaning in life. And, of course, I thought once again that this all hasn't happened to come to naught, and that whatever the horrors of what we are dealing with, we must come through at the end. There is an honor guard on the stage for the ceremonies, and I watched them with their military precision and prayed for all of our army to be strong, strong. ~~~~~~~~~~ Tomorrow at 10 AM a siren sounds and everyone stands still wherever he or she is in memory of the six million. People stop their cars and get out to stand. It's a moving and uniting experience. Except, of course, that Arabs don't stand still. And that's a story for another day. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
A NEW YAHOO GROUP INVITATION –– ATID YISRAEL
Posted by Sasha F., April 29, 2008. |
|
Dear Friends, please join a newly created online forum focusing on Atid Yisrael. Atid Yisrael translates as Future of Israel. This group is dedicated
to forming a new group of representative local governments for Yehuda
and Shomron communities.
Several months before the destruction of the Jews of Azza Prof., Dr. Shlomo Lev-Ami, a person now in his 90th yr. of his life called a meeting in Tel Aviv of all the "activist " right wing groups. Its purpose was to organize and unify these groups into a potent force to challenge the forces of suicide that rule the Jewish people. This meeting and several others over the next year attended by approx. 80 people, ultimately led to nothing and the effort was a total failure. When describing this failed attempt Prof. Lev-Ami explains "Initially when I began this attempt to unify I knew the fears and egos of the human psyche. That is why I presented myself as the figurehead, to allay all fears and concerns since I was above suspicion not asking anything for myself in the way of money or power. I was shocked to discover that although given the urgency of the hour no one was willing to cooperate on a unified level. They were only interested in promoting themselves and maintaining their individual businesses". Who is Shlomo Lev-Ami? Shlomo Lev-Ami is a fifth generation Jew in Israel who is 90 yrs. old. He was the commander of the Irgun and Lechi's operations during the days leading up to Israel's Independence. He now lectures at five universities weekly, traveling on his own using public transportation. His physical and mental condition is better than most 50 yr, olds and he devotes his time and energy, totally, to preventing the next Holocaust, which he believes is well on its way. He is not the sort of person to sit around, lecture, write and generally complain how terrible things are. He also is not one to endlessly proclaim if it was up to him or had he been in charge he would, could or should handle this or that problem the 'right' way. What he has set out to do with the last energies in him is the establishment of a movement "Atid Yisrael" (The Future of Israel) whose eventual goal is a complete change of the leadership of Israel. How? By influencing and proving to the public that there are individuals able and worthy of doing the job. Rather than attempting to make a futile mad dash for the prime ministers job the idea is to gain access to as many municipalities and communities by competing with our candidates for their top offices and the very least gain entry to the various town councils. The first such election is to take place this Nov., just imagine if we were able to replace the mayor of Sderot with a real leader, even in the opposition he could effect change. The second part of the plan involves the establishment of national committees covering every aspect of life (transportation, environment, defense. education, etc.) that would draft the most capable people in every field. While they would draft various papers and prepare realistic plans for each sector, most importantly, they would enact programs and projects in every realm that would begin a cycle of change and have a positive effect on bettering the quality of life. This double pronged plan of action would be accompanied by ongoing press coverage which would be manipulated to provide maximum coverage for the "Atid Yisrael" movement as they progress on both fronts –– representation (hopefully heads) of towns and cities throughout the country actively challenging and confronting the encroaching holocaust, activating the national commitees that will work intensely to implement change on the ground. This is believed to be the only real chance of involving and activating large sectors of the population by creating momentum, believing there is a chance for change and that there are serious people who are capable, willing and able to take the reins of leadership. A great deal of time of effort is going into this movement. Your comments would be appreciated. This will of course require a great deal of funding if it is going to be successful. Contact Sasha F. by email at alex@fliegler.net |
|
EGYPT: BETWEEN THE DEVIL AND THE DEEP BLUE SEA
Posted by Barry Rubin, April 29, 2008. |
|
Egyptian President Husni Mubarak is 80. After over a quarter-century in office he is ready for more. But how much longer will his rule--or regime--continue? And under him, Egypt has not done so badly, or has it? Well that depends. He has kept Egypt stable and out of war, no mean feat, and even delivered a bit of economic development, though recently there have been bread riots. But there has been no big improvement. One is reminded of the old Egyptian joke where the president's chauffer explains the difference among his last three bosses. Gamal Abdel Nasser (1952-1970) always turned left; Anwar al-Sadat (1970-1981) always turned right. Mubarak ordered: signal left, signal right, then park. Has Egypt been parked for the last 27 years? In some respects, yes. Being parked is better than getting run down by a speeding auto, though not better than making steady progress. Rights have been limited and suppression periodic. Yet this falls well short of the police states ruling in Syria and, formerly, Iraq. Corruption is astronomical. I can't talk about the ambiguity of Mubarak's regime without thinking of that great old Harold Arlen and Ted Koehler song, first recorded by Cab Calloway's orchestra in 1931. It begins: "I don't want you, But I hate to lose you, You've got me in between the devil and the deep blue sea." For his own people, Israel, and the United States (or the West in general), Mubarak's government is most unsatisfactory in very many ways. Egyptians face mismanagement and limits on freedom. Israel has a peace but a cold one. The United States and the West gets nominal cooperation from Cairo coupled with the government's lavish use of anti-Americanism, radical Arab nationalism, and even Islamist rhetoric to keep the masses mobilized on its side. Still, what's the alternative: violent instability or a radical Islamist revolution? Or is there a realistic hope of something better, of a moderate democratic state? Here, good intentions or wishful thinking should never be given precedent over realistic appraisal. In assessing a political situation, one should always remember politics is the art of the possible. Egypt is a country with "too many" people and not enough resources. There are no easy solutions. "I ought to cross you off my list, But when you come knocking at my door, Fate seems to give my heart a twist, And I come running back for more," sang Calloway. After all, that heart-twisting fate involves things like Hamas's takeover, Iraq's internal war, Hizballah's aggression, and Iran's expansionism plus nuclear weapons' drive. We are used to thinking of Egypt as the most important of all Arab countries, and that's still true relatively speaking though far less than a decade or two or three ago. By the force of realpolitik, the foreigners conclude about Mubarak's regime (Calloway again): "I should hate you, But I guess I love you, You've got me in between the devil and the deep blue sea." Thus, the West and Israel keep hoping. Maybe Egypt will restrain Hamas in the Gaza Strip and give vigorous backing to a serious peace process. Or possibly Cairo will lead a moderate Arab coalition against the forces of the Iran-Syria led HISH (Hamas-Iran-Syria-Hizballah alliance. A Muslim government official recently told me he calls them, the Addams family). After all, these actions are in Egypt's own interests, aren't they? Egypt's interests, though, are in playing both sides simultaneously to the greatest extent possible. An Egyptian diplomat actually told me not long ago that he had advised Israeli Arabs to pretend to be good citizens and demand to join the army so they could better subvert the country. State-owned Egyptian newspapers blame all the terrorism in Iraq on American conspiracies. Meanwhile, though, the Muslim Brotherhood is going to top-quality tailors to design its sheep's' clothing so that it can better wolf down Egypt. Credulous, or ill-intentioned, Westerners are all-too-willing to accept that the country's Islamist brothers are really moderates. It's easy to do that, just ignore their program and everything they say in Arabic. Just because they don't like the competition--al-Qaida or Iran--doesn't make them moderates. There is a decent, moderate, democratic-minded opposition. But it is far too weak and poorly organized. Even the main "reformist" group has now been taken over by the Brotherhood.Who would you bet on in a showdown? No contest. So what comes next? Gamal Mubarak, the president's 45-year-old son, who is deputy secretary-general of the ruling National Democratic Party? Perhaps some ex-general turned provincial governor or another official? In social terms, the country is becoming increasingly "Islamic" according to the more restrictive standards demanded by Islamists. Does that mean a political swing as well? Not necessarily but the danger bears close watching. Egypt is famous for muddling through. That's the most likely outcome but nobody should be too complacent in assuming that's the way things have to be. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloriacenter.org and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal http://meria.idc.ac.il. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
NY TIMES VS. ISRAEL, AGAIN; DON'T BASE POLICY ON "IF"; HOW TO ASSESS & DEAL WITH IRAN
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 29, 2008. |
|
“WQXR Radio, a New York City station owned by The New York Times, has refused to air a 15-second radio spot by the American Jewish Committee (AJC) because of descriptions "outside our bounds of acceptability." AJC Executive Director David Harris said the spot was aired on hundreds of stations in the United States, including CBS. The commercial stated, "Imagine you had fifteen seconds to find shelter from an incoming missile. Fifteen seconds to locate your children, help an elderly relative, assist a disabled person to find shelter. That's all the residents of Sderot and neighboring Israeli towns have. Day or night, the sirens go on. Fifteen seconds later, the missiles, fired from Hamas-controlled Gaza, hit. They could hit a home, a school, a hospital. Their aim is to kill and wound and demoralize. " New York Times Radio president Tom Batunek explained to AJC that the spot did not make it clear that the missile attacks were taking place outside of the New York City area. He added, "The description of the missiles as arriving 'day or night' and 'daily' is also subject to challenge as being misleading, at least to the degree that reasonable people might be troubled by the absence of any acknowledgement of reciprocal Israeli military actions." Harris commented, "In other words, according to Bartunek's logic, the only way to broadcast the plight of Sderot's residents over the airwaves is to equate Israel's right of self-defense with Hamas's and Islamic Jihad's right to strike Israel at will." The cancelled radio spot continued, "Imagine yourself in that situation. The sirens blast. 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The time to seek shelter has ended. The missiles hit. This is what Israelis experience daily. But, amazingly, they refuse to be cowed. Help us help those Israelis." Bartunek countered, "Finally, in my judgment the 'countdown' device and the general tone of the message do not meet our guidelines for decorum." The AJC executive director, also revealed that the same radio station, after the September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, refused another AJC commercial. The 2001 spot stated, "Recently, The New York Times reported that in Saudi Arabia, 10th graders are warned of 'the dangers of having Christian and Jewish friends,' and in Pakistan, a million children attending religious schools are taught to "distrust and even hate the United States." The radio station manger cited the paragraph, which was quoted from the parent company's newspaper, as not meeting the station's standards. Harris also said that last month, the Bloomberg radio news station rejected an AJC segment citing hate literature in children's textbooks in the Palestinian Authority (PA), Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran. "Everything written in this spot was verifiable," Harris said. "Yet, all this was not good enough for the station, which, without putting anything down on paper, asserted that there were some questions about what was being said." (Arutz-7, 4/7 verbatim.) Friends sometimes query me suspiciously about my sources. Their source is the NY Times, whose mendacity is obvious. The first ad clearly mentioned that the attacks are on Israel, but the WQXR, owned by the Times, whose reporting leaves much culpability unclear or falsely implied against Israel, claims the ad doesn't make it clear that the attacks are on Israel. False. The Times also objects to the ad's not mentioning Israeli retaliation. What has that got to do with it? Then there is the general ad about not meeting standards as of decorum. That sounds fishy. The real problem with the ad is that it doesn't meet the Times standard for anti-Zionism. The Times editorializes a lot about freedom of the press, but denies it to Jewish advertisers. JIMMIE CARTER EXPOSES HIMSELF Jimmie Carter presents himself as saintly but acts devilish. He praises many dictators and endorses their unfair elections. Now has exposed his evil core by a combination of vicious defamation of Israel for self-defense, studious obliviousness to Hamas terrorism against Israel, and his physical embrace of Hamas' leader. That embrace removed any doubt about Carter's moral bankruptcy. His was a repulsive performance. WHAT KIND OF PRESIDENT IS U.S. READY FOR? Some people tell me they would support high taxes if they got good services in return. “If?” But they don't and won't. One should not base policy on an “if,” the way the media and the US try to get Israel to. That is, polls ask Israelis whether they would sacrifice a lot of strategic territory for genuine peace, if the Arabs really were sincere. The Arabs are not sincere, and Israelis don't expect to have to seriously consider the sacrifices. Nevertheless, the media distorts the polls to indicate that Israelis are willing to sacrifice the land, without stating the “if.” Sec. of State Rice, for whom no Israeli sacrifice is too great and no Arab failure to meet agreement deserves rebuke, cites the misstated poll results. What she demands, Israel concedes, and Israeli policy is born. In the US, Social Security seemed to be an example of high taxes producing good service. The system was financially solvent, but the politicians looted it for various subsidies. Thus even a good service got undermined. Many other services or programs are not good. Welfare was well intended but created welfare dependency and had to be cut back. The misconceived subsidy of corn ethanol has helped raise food prices and a hundred million people abroad are starving, without the intended result of conserving much oil. Senators Obama and Clinton propose giant bureaucracies that would consume the economy and deprive people of choices. Is the US ready for an unscrupulous, big government, black radical President or an unscrupulous, big government, female radical President? ABBAS' SUCCESSOR In Israel again there is agitation to free the serial-terrorist leader Barghouti, sentenced to several life sentences for crimes committed after the peace agreements. I believe that he would be trotted out as the next great hope for peace after Abbas falls. He has made clear that he believes in jihad. Ah, they say, he is strong and can make an agreement that Abbas lacks strength for. Arafat already made an agreement. What good is a liar's agreement? “MISUSE OF WEAPONS?” The Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) complained about a mortar shell's killing an Arab boy in Gaza and wounding his brother. It condemned the “misuse of weapons.” (IMRA, 4/8.) The news brief didn't describe what really happened. Probably one of the many mortar shells now being fired at Israeli civilians fell short. What would stop the misuse of such a weapon, firing them more accurately and killing Israeli children? If the PCHR were decent, it could condemn the Islamic terrorism. LATEST FAILED GOODWILL EFFORT PM Olmert agreed to an amnesty for 10,000 of the estimated 50,000 illegal Arab residents of Judea-Samaria. This is in addition to about 12,000 it gave permanent residency to, before. This is supposed to be a goodwill effort, but the P.A. does not thank Israel for anything, just complains about other demands (Arutz-7, 4/8). Then Olmert pretends he has to give Judea-Samaria to the P.A. because there are too many Arabs in it. ISRAELI POLICY ON HEBRON TANTAMOUNT TO MURDER Israel is considering allowing P.A. police to patrol most of Hebron. The Jewish community there reminds us that the P.A. police force largely is composed of terrorists, its members commit terrorism, and it cooperates with terrorists. While preparing for an imminent war, the government should not be collecting guns from settlers and letting armed terrorists near them. Settlers will be dependent upon the government for protection (IMRA, 4/8) but the troops come late. Is the object to help the Arabs drive the Jews out, so that the government can more easily relinquish historical and sacred territory to the enemy? I think the government is disarming the settlers in order to sacrifice them. A decent and prudent government would let the P.A. prove it could successfully patrol the other cities, before extending patrols to Hebron. The government seems to be racing to make enough concessions to enable a desperate Pres. Bush's seem to have resolved the Arab-Israel conflict, in his remaining tenure. U.S. MISLEADS ABOUT WAR IN IRAQ The US has pretended that Syria and Iran share an interest in ending the war in Iraq. Actually, the US government knows that Syria and Iran are financing and helping to wage that war. If Syria and Iran ceased their wartime efforts, the US and Iraqi government soon would win (IMRA, 4/8). QUOTED FROM THE KORAN The Koran quotes Allah as urging followers to terrorize and torture non-believers, mentioning the Jews specifically and infidels generally. The Koran calls warfare against non-believers “Jihad.” (Steven Shamrak, 4/8.) OIL GETTING DIFFICULT TO EXTRACT IN MIDEAST The Gulf Cooperation Council states face a shortage of fuel. Big companies offer technology for injecting carbon dioxide into existing wells, in order to drive out more petroleum (IMRA, 4/9). That means that the cost of oil production is rising. Some oil fields are declining. HOW TO ASSESS & DEAL WITH IRAN David Wormser advises the US to weigh how its policies will be perceived by Iran, not just how we intend them. Otherwise, policies may backfire. When the US means to be reasonable, Iran perceives it as weak. Contrary to most reports, Mr. Wormser finds that the President of Iran is gaining politically, the way Hitler did after he bluffed his way through his crises. The leadership is aligned with the President, and the President replaces officials with hardliners. The line is “theofascist." Iran is taking over leadership of Islam. To do this, it needs Syria. To defeat Iran, defeat its proxies, such as Syria, Hizbullah, and Hamas (MEFNews, 4/9) and Fatah. WHO SOLD IRAN EQUIPMENT FOR MONITORING ISRAEL? The German company, Siemens sold Iran the capability of listening to Israeli phone calls (IMRA, 4/9). OLMERT FIGURES OUT HOW TO SHORTEN THE CONFLICT According to a newspaper report, he has agreed to cede to the P.A. Atarot airport just north of Jerusalem. This would strengthen the Abbas regime (IMRA, 4/10). It sure would –– the P.A. would fly in armaments and make war sooner, shortening the conflict. ISRAEL BUDGETING 5 YEARS TO GIVE OUT GAS MASKS Israel found the country's gas masks obsolete. It plans to take 5 years to distribute new ones to the whole country (IMRA, 4/10). War is coming sooner. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
SWITZERLAND SIDING WITH IRAN?
Posted by Olivier Guitta, April 29, 2008. |
|
This was published in Middle East Times
|
|
Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter went to Damascus last week to meet with Hamas' Khaled Meshaal, a man accused of terrorism by the United States, Israel and the European Union. Carter's initiative was criticized by the leadership in Washington and Jerusalem as appeasing terrorism. As damaging as some people, such as U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, say Carter's freelance diplomacy is to the United States, another visit by a Western dignitary to another Mideast leader, also accused of supporting terror, may have even greater repercussions. I am talking about last month's meeting between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Swiss Foreign Minister Micheline Calmy-Rey. In fact that meeting was a blessing in disguise for Tehran. Everything Calmy-Rey could do to please the mullah's regime was done. First, let's start with the symbolic; meeting with an individual bent on destroying another country, denying the Holocaust and lately also questioning the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks constitutes a major diplomatic faux-pas. Especially for a country which cherishes its legendary "neutrality." Indeed while the United Nations Security Council has passed three resolutions condemning and sanctioning Iran for its nuclear program, Swiss diplomacy seems totally unfazed by what the international community is trying to achieve. Switzerland has now publicly fissured the more or less united front against Iran and Tehran loves it. Ahmadinejad was beaming during his meeting and Calmy-Rey could not stop smiling, obviously charmed by the attention of the Iranian president. Realizing the diplomatic coup, the images of the meeting were broadcast on Iranian networks around the clock. Interestingly, the Swiss minister was wearing a white veil while nothing required her to do so. This symbolic attire is far from a detail and Iranian feminists were appalled that a Western woman would play so blatantly in the hands of the regime. Shirine, a student at the University of Tehran told the Swiss daily La Liberté: "By wearing the veil, Micheline Calmy-Rey did not help us, Iranian women are fighting everyday to free our heads from these symbols of domination." She ironically added: "[We] believed that women were free in Europe." Ismahane, a MD in Tehran, seconded this view, adding that she was ashamed that now "Western female officials are coming to play the pious in front of the 'devil of Tehran' as (Ahmadinejad) is referred to by Iranian feminists. But her behavior may be understandable. Calmy-Rey put water in her gas by showing a good face with her veil." To understand this last sentence it helps to know that the Swiss foreign minister traveled to Tehran to ink a gas contract. Indeed, a $20 billion gas deal was signed on March 17 between the Swiss EGL and the National Iranian Gas Export Company (Nigec). After the controversy regarding her visit grew louder, Calmy-Rey gave an interview on April 15 to the Swiss daily Le Temps where she tried to justify her trip by stating that the gas contract does not violate any of the U.N. sanctions against Iran (though it might violate the U.S. Iran Sanctions Act). Furthermore, the Swiss minister added that other European countries are doing business with Iran and don't get blamed for it. Unfortunately (for the Swiss), this explanation does not hold water: in fact, some major European countries have been recently curbing business with Iran (especially France and Germany) and advising executives of large companies of the risks associated with doing business with Tehran. Incidentally, the largest Swiss bank, UBS decided over two years ago to break all business ties to Iran. Calmy-Rey explained that she wanted to protect Switzerland's strategic interests by diversifying energy providers. She added that the goal of her ministry is to insure the security and the well-being of the Swiss population. Unfortunately, Calmy-Rey was caught lying when Le Temps revealed the next day that none of the gas from the Iranian contract would end up in Switzerland. This revelation sparked much controversy regarding Calmy-Rey's trip to Tehran. Interestingly, even within her own Socialist Party some people expressed concerns about her twisted explanation. Roger Nordmann, an energy expert with the Socialist Party said: "Mrs. Calmy-Rey's justification, that this agreement directly profits Switzerland, is not credible. On an energy level, it would be better to sign import contracts with Germany or France. But not to buy gas that won't reach Switzerland." Also tellingly, Swiss gas officials have joined the fray of Calmy-Rey critics. Eric Défago, the managing director of Gaznat and vice president of the Swiss Association of the Gas Industry, told Le Temps that "this contract is beyond understanding and totally contrary to usual practice." One interesting fact makes this Tehran's visit even more puzzling: for decades Switzerland has been importing oil and gas from Libya, but never ever has a Swiss official visited Libya. So why did Calmy-Rey really travel to Iran to meet with Ahmadinejad? Couldn't she meet with the energy minister or any other high-ranked officials other than Ahmadinejad? Christophe Darbellay, president of the Christian Democratic People's Party, thinks that Calmy-Rey had a hidden agenda. Interestingly, Calmy-Rey, who boasts about her high moral standards and her defense of human rights, said she also went to Tehran to address the human rights situation in Iran. This seems like a very long shot, especially in light of Calmy-Rey's pedigree. Indeed, the current Swiss foreign minister and fixture on the Swiss political scene has earned a reputation of blatant anti-Americanism and anti-Israel. She will rarely miss an opportunity to criticize Israel. This may explain why Switzerland was the only European country to recently vote for an anti-Israel resolution at the U.N. Human Rights Council, which incidentally is Geneva-based. There is more. Roger Koppel, the owner and chief editor of the Swiss weekly Die Weltwoche wrote in a recent Wall Street Journal Europe piece, entitled, "Somebody Stop Calmy-Rey": "It is a miracle that her most disastrous act so far went almost unnoticed. In December 2006, she received an Iranian delegation for talks on the nuclear program. To the horror of her closest colleagues, she came up with the idea of improving relations by holding a seminar on differing perceptions of the Holocaust. "One must understand the enormity of this: Ms. Calmy-Rey suggested a debate in Switzerland with Iranian Holocaust deniers on whether the murder of 6 million Jews actually happened. Fortunately, nothing came of this idea. It would not only have been outrageous, but also illegal, since genocide denial is a crime in Switzerland." So, maybe Calmy-Rey wanted to address the Holocaust issue with Holocaust denier Ahmadinejad. Nonetheless what seems the most likely reason of her Iranian trip and her lying about it could be the Iranian nuclear program. Indeed, one should not be surprised if Swiss diplomacy is trying to find a solution to help the Iranians one way or another. With such actions, it would appear that Switzerland has abandoned its long-cherished "neutral" label to the detriment of the West. One should not underestimate the potential nefarious effects of Switzerland's foreign policy, in particular when it comes to the Middle East. In light of this development Washington might want to reconsider having the Swiss represent U.S. interests in Iran. Now that relations with the French have improved, Washington should consider dropping Berne for Paris. Olivier Guitta, an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant is the founder of the newsletter The Croissant (www.thecroissant.com). |
|
WITH FRIENDS LIKE THESE
Posted by Isi Leibler, April 29, 2008. |
|
This article appeared in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
It's disconcerting and sad to see American Jewish "progressives" frenziedly lobbying the American administration to pressure Israel for further unilateral concessions to the Palestinians. To make matters worse, they understate –– even obfuscate –– their real game plan. They describe themselves as "pro-Israel," "Zionist" and "moderate." They lay claim to being the true custodians of peace, portraying other Jewish leaders and AIPAC as neoconservatives and extremists. While tempting to dismiss their behavior and Orwellian doublespeak as naïve and inconsequential, recall that the sham Soviet peace fronts succeeded in duping many gullible well-meaning liberals into endorsing campaigns promoting totalitarianism. It's all the more bizarre because no one would suggest that the current Israeli government is "hawkish." On the contrary, the Olmert government has lost the confidence of its people precisely because of unilateral concessions which undermine Israel's security and embolden terrorists. His government is an amen chorus which capitulates to every demand imposed on it by US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. It has provided weapons to the Palestinians which will almost certainly once again be redirected against Israel; it has released and granted amnesty to terrorists; and despite bitter opposition from the IDF, it has closed checkpoints and acceded to demands compromising security which have already resulted in Israeli casualties. Yet like a replay of the odious behavior of Haaretz editor David Landau, who told Rice that it would be his "wet dream" for the US "to rape Israel" for its own good, American "progressives" are urging their government to exert pressure on Israel for further unilateral concessions. This is not a new phenomenon. For years the Israel Policy Forum (IPF) has been lobbying the White House to get tougher with Israel. They claim that in 1993, prime minister Yitzhak Rabin appreciated their support for his efforts to reach a peace settlement with Arafat. They fail to mention that in contrast to Olmert, Rabin did stand up to US pressure. Rabin would have exploded had he encountered Jewish organizations exploiting his name as a means to justify lobbying the US administration to exert pressure on Israel. As far back as 2005, IPF president Seymour Reich boasted how his organization had successfully persuaded Rice to force Israel to make concessions on the Gaza border crossing –– concession that have since resulted in the loss of Israeli lives. More recently the IPF shamelessly lobbied the White House to press Israel to negotiate directly with Hamas. Reich wrote to Rice on March 21 that "no progress can be made if Hamas –– the governing body in Gaza –– is totally excluded from the process." M.J. Rosenberg, IPF's policy director, urged the U.S. to "be extending carrots and not just slapping them [Hamas] with sticks". The Progressive Jewish Alliance, another self-styled "pro-Israel" body, promotes exhibitions on US campuses of photo montages alleging the dehumanization of Palestinians by the Israeli army. They insist that their demonization of the IDF represent an expression of their love for Zion. Now with great fanfare and endorsement by much of the US liberal media, we have a new "progressive" initiative: an amalgam of various far-left organizations and individuals spearheaded by "Americans for Peace Now" and "Brit Tzedek V'Shalom" to establish "J.Street," a political action committee. Although proclaiming their intention to espouse "moderation" and bring "balance" into American Jewish leadership, their actual intent is to further US pressure on Israel and to undermine AIPAC, the highly effective pro-Israel lobby. Such behavior is especially unconscionable since –– aside from permits for extra housing to cope with natural growth in the densely Jewish populated settlement blocs implicitly endorsed by President Bush –– the Olmert government has conceded to all US government demands. It has even discouraged AIPAC and American Jewish leaders from trying to neutralize State Department pressures on itself for fear of antagonizing the administration. J Street also publicly opposes the use of force to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear capabilities, which undermines Israel's campaign to pressure Iran from going nuclear. In addition, J Street supports a swift withdrawal of US forces from Iraq, calls for direct dealings with Hamas and urges Jews to boycott Christian Zionists –– Israel's strongest allies. J Street intends to raise funds to provide $50,000 for selected Congressional candidates supporting these aims. Aside from a number of respectable personalities under the illusion that they have associated themselves with a "moderate" body seeking to promote peace between Israelis and Palestinians, J Street is mainly supported by prominent far-left Americans and Israelis like Ron Pundak, architect of the Oslo Accord. One of its principal theorists is Daniel Levy, a former adviser to Yossi Beilin who trivializes Palestinian incitement to murder Israelis. Former Jewish Agency chairman Avrum Burg, who has compared Israelis to Nazis and has urged the former to follow his lead and obtain European passports, is another notable J Street supporter. Burg's ranting against his country is so vile that even most of his Israeli associates distanced themselves from him. Writing this week in Haaretz, Burg pushed the envelope further and provided a gift to anti-Semites everywhere by accusing AIPAC of imposing "dual loyalties" on American Jews and of "institutionalizing near-treason and turning it into an enormous octopus of a political mechanism with enormous dimensions and numerous victims." Another key Israeli supporter is David Kimche, a leading figure in Israel Policy Forum. Kimche was director general of the Foreign Ministry under Yitzhak Shamir, where I had regular dealings with him. In those days, not only was he a hawk, but he even had the reputation of savagely roasting any Jewish leader who dared question Israeli government policies. "We live and die by our decisions, while you sit and pontificate from your armchair," he would say. Today he identifies with the extreme left. The Israel Council of Foreign Relations, which he heads, recently hosted a meeting in Jerusalem for ex-president Jimmy Carter, obliging the sponsor, the World Jewish Congress, to formally dissociate itself from the event. The "progressives" will also try to capitalize on the fact that the Barack Obama campaign has embraced former ambassador to Israel Daniel Kurtzer and appointed him Obama's adviser on Middle East affairs. Kurtzer, a Jewish dove, previously urged the Administration to take a tougher line with Israel. In his just-released book –– Negotiating Arab Israel Peace –– Kurtzer refers to the withholding of loan guarantees from the Shamir government by the first President Bush as an example of how an American government can effectively bring Israel into line. He accused Dennis Ross –– the Clinton-designated Middle East representative –– of having been biased in favor of Israel. He even castigates the Clinton and Bush Administrations for not employing sufficient Arabists in the State Department. The US is the only country capable of withstanding pressure from Arabs and their allies to isolate and delegitimize Israel. Thankfully, US public opinion and Congress has never been more favorably disposed towards Israel than today. Yet over the past year, the Bush Administration has tilted from its former policy. Nor can we exclude the possibility of a future US administration distancing itself further from Israel. It is therefore imperative that American Jewish leaders not underestimate the damage "progressive pro-Israel" groups can inflict, especially in light of the mainstream liberal media support J Street has enjoyed at its launch. In the face of existential threats, Israel needs the support of America Jewry more than ever. While all are free to express their opinions, "peaceniks" who have the gall to call on the US to put the heat on Israel to act as they believe best, rather than what the citizens of that democracy have decided is, must be exposed as fringe groups outside the Jewish mainstream. Contact Isi Leibler at his website http://www.leibler.com/article/328 or write him at ileibler@netvision.net.il |
|
FROM ISRAEL: "THAT HUDNA"
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 29, 2008. |
|
A correction: When I wrote about the US case against Kadish recently, I indicated that we had friends in Congress, the Pentagon and other places in the US, but that we also had enemies, in State, the Intelligence community, and the Justice department. I had secured my information from what I thought were reliable sources. Now I have heard from Sarah Stern, who heads the lobby group Emet, in Washington DC. She tells me that we have some very good friends in Justice, and that she has personally worked with some of them. I stand corrected and apologize. ~~~~~~~~~~ I wrote last about the proposed ceasefire (technically a hudna) for Gaza and indicated that since Hamas political head Mashaal had referred to it, with honesty, as a "tactic" this clearly wasn't going anywhere. A hudna buys them time to strengthen before they hit us again. Well...that was a foolish assumption on my part, altogether too rational. The news that broke yesterday was that Bush wanted to see us go for that hudna, with it in place before he arrived here in two weeks. There was some notion that this would help the "peace process." And, obviously, helping the peace process is all that really matters. Some of you already know how infuriated this made me –– this meddling by Bush into our security affairs. I still suspect that in the end this may go nowhere (and I'll explain a bit about why), but there are now several factors that it's worth examining. ~~~~~~~~~~ The "inspired" notion of Bush, or his advisors, is that Abbas feels constrained with regard to dealing with Israel when Israel is shooting at Palestinians in Gaza –– terrorist Palestinians, but for Abbas that is beside the point. It makes him look as if he's consorting with the enemy. And so stopping the shooting would presumably make it possible for Abbas to negotiate more freely. Abbas is giving good lip service to this idea of a truce. After meeting with Mubarak in Sharm el-Sheikh, he intoned, "The truce is a national interest of all Palestinians. A truce will alleviate the suffering of our people and pave the way for the reopening of the border crossings." However, reports Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post, the PA is actually quite anxious about this, because it would be a step towards legitimizing Hamas's takeover of Gaza, something Abbas is trying mightily to reverse. At a minimum, Abbas is insisting that the PA must be present at all opened border crossings, but if the crossings are opened in a deal between Israel and Hamas as part of a truce, exactly where does that leave the PA? An analysis in Haaretz carried this theme even further, saying that a truce that opened the crossings would render the PA almost irrelevant. According to this thinking, people would get the message that concessions are more likely to be drawn from Israel when there is shooting than when there are negotiations. ~~~~~~~~~~ It is truly ironic, and not at all surprising, that the US government, meddling in Middle Eastern affairs in an attempt to make things better, might, from their perspective, end up making them worse. Were they to push that truce down our throats, in an effort to strengthen Abbas, they might actually make him weaker. ~~~~~~~~~~ Egypt, still working towards that hudna, has invited four terrorist factions to Cairo for meetings in an attempt to convince them to cooperate: Islamic Jihad, the Popular Resistance Committees, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) and the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) . The serious question as to whether they will all be on board is a major factor getting in the way of what Egypt is attempting to accomplish. At a minimum, these groups are seeking commitments by Israel not to do any operations in Gaza, and to extend the truce to Judea and Samaria within six months. Problematic, to say the least. ~~~~~~~~~~ Then there is the issue of Egypt's commitment to blocking the smuggling of weapons into Gaza. Head of the IDF Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant is fiercely opposed to a ceasefire, in part because he's convinced smuggling would increase. He's also concerned about strengthening of the terrorist infrastructure inside of Gaza. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today 15 Kassams and 20 mortars were fired at Israel. A home and a clinic were hit, and five people in Sderot were lightly wounded. Said Defense Minister Ehud Barak: "This is not the right time for a ceasefire with Hamas." ~~~~~~~~~~ The comment of Hamas's Mahmoud Zahar, speaking today at Islamic University in Gaza, was that, "If Israel says no, it will pay a heavy price. We are a besieged people and we will have to use all our tools to defend ourselves against Israel...Hamas has 200,000 people who want to blow themselves up inside of Israel." ~~~~~~~~~~ And, indeed, we may be in for some tough times. Head of Military Intelligence Maj. Gen. Amos Yadlin told the Cabinet today that terror groups are planning a major attack for our 60th Independence Day, next week. While Hamas may be planning to breach the border between Gaza and Israel, as they did at Rafah not long ago. They would likely aim towards Israel this time because Egypt has gotten very serious about its response to a new attempt to break through at Rafah. And when the Egyptians get serious, they shoot to kill. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to a new report from YNet, a serious blowout has erupted between Israel's chief negotiator, Tzipi Livni, and the PA chief negotiator, Ahmed Qurei. Qurei reportedly exploded when Livni presented a map that showed Israel retaining Jerusalem, major settlement blocs in Judea and Samaria, and the Jordan Valley (essential from a security perspective). In addition, Qurei is said to be furious because Barak has indicated that there would have to be special security arrangements at a high point in Samaria that directly overlooks the airport. If this report is accurate, and if the quarrel is even half-way serious, then Bush can forget trying to push Israel into a truce in order to get the PA to negotiate faster. I'm waiting for confirmation. ~~~~~~~~~~ It's very good news being reported by the Post regarding sanctions with teeth against Iran. Apparently the EU is set to blacklist one of Iran's top banks –– a bank through which Iran conducts considerable business. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
GUSH KATIF REFUGEES ASK COURT TO ERASE DEBTS
Posted by Buddy Macy, April 29, 2008. |
|
This was written by Avi Tuchmayer and it appeared in
Arutz-Sheva
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) Refugees from destroyed communities in Gush Katif have appealed to the Supreme Court to force the government to enforce a pre-disengagement decision to erase refugees' debts to the World Zionist Organization. The decision to erase debts incurred by Gush Katif pioneers when they established their communities was made by the Knesset Finance Committee in 2004. As with other areas around the country, Gaza communities benefited from long-term loans from the Jewish Agency in order establish farming infrastructure, but when the Sharon Administration decided to pull out of Gaza, it became clear that local residents would be unable to repay the debts. Because the Finance Committee had supposedly "taken care" of canceling Gush Katif debts to the World Zionist Organization, the Knesset Laws Committee did not enshrine the debt erasure in the 2005 Evacuation –– Compensation Law. As a result, Gaza residents were left with little legal protection and saddled with debt for farming equipment and farm land they can no longer access. According to Anita Tucker, formerly of Netzer Hazani, the debt repayment is an especially sore point for pioneers who built up Jewish Gaza soon after the area was liberated from Egypt during the Six Day War. "When we came to Gush Katif over 30 years ago, the World Zionist Organization gave a package of benefits to encourage agriculture in development areas. We received various essentials to start a farm. I was a farmer in Gush Katif for 29 years. We were in the process of paying back those initial benefits, when the government threw us out of the land, that it had originally encouraged us to develop." Three years later, still refugees Three years after the government forcibly removed Gaza's Jewish residents from their homes, expellees continue to be scattered in a variety of temporary housing arrangements, and most remain without suitable employment options. Most refugees survive on compensation payouts they received at the time of the eviction. To raise funds to build a new dairy infrastructure in order to create a post-disengagement source of economic stability, some former Gush Katif communities sold shares in Tnuva, Israel's largest dairy product manufacturer. There is now a foreclosure order for approximately 3 million shekels on that money in order to cover the debts the refugees owe to the Zionist organization. The lawsuit names as defendants the government, World Zionist Organization, the Finance Ministry, the accountant general, the agriculture minister and the Sela Disengagement Authority, and asks the court to force the above-mentioned bodies to enforce the government's decision. They say the plaintiffs' real ability to restore and rebuild their lives has suffered, and due to the huge sums involved (which is more than the sum total of the payout they have received to date), it has impaired their abilities to repair their lives in the future. Contact Buddy Macy by email at vegibud@gmail.com. Or call him at 973-785-0057. |
|
PASSOVER AND POLLARD: AN OPEN LETTER TO BUSH, OLMERT
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, April 28, 2008. |
|
This was written by Kenneth Lasson and it appeared April 25, 2008 in The Baltimore Jewish Times. Kenneth Lasson is a law professor at the University of Baltimore specializing in civil liberties and international human rights. He is a frequent contributor to the Baltimore Jewish Times. |
|
Dear Mr. President and Mr. Prime Minister, I am very proud to be an American, to be Jewish, and to be a supporter of Israel. That pride is borne of the great national character reflected by both countries –– an ingrained commitment to freedom, democracy, and humanitarian values –– which in turn nourish our charitable impulses, our natural heritage, our melting-pot psyche. But it is also a requirement of good citizens everywhere to reflect upon their nations' failures, never to cease trying to correct them –– and always to understand the consequences of silence toward them. Thus must we acknowledge that the American system of justice, so genuinely principled in concept and gently noble in purpose and generally fair in practice, has failed badly in the case of Jonathan Pollard. While the former Navy intelligence officer acted wrongly in violating the law by passing classified information, the average punishment for that kind of activity is four years' imprisonment. Mr. Pollard's life sentence is so grossly disproportionate to the offense that it should shock the conscience of all fair-minded people. He is the only person in the history of the United States to receive an unlimited life sentence for passing classified information to an ally, a misdeed for which he has amply expressed remorse. He caused no actual harm to any individual or group. Were they asked their opinion, the majority of Americans would likely agree with the sentiments expressed by a federal judge in one of Mr. Pollard's appeals (all of which turned on technical procedural issues and not on substance), that the handling of his case was "a fundamental miscarriage of justice." And the government of Israel, which in the past has offered refuge to millions of people oppressed by genocidal regimes and rescued hundreds of thousands of children starved by Third World famine and sought to save other nations' victims of natural disasters, appears to have totally abandoned one of its acknowledged agents –– and not because it is unaware of his whereabouts. Pollard has been imprisoned for the past 23 years; he resides in a jail cell in North Carolina. Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Israeli citizens would strongly support an honest effort by their government to bring about his release, their leaders blindly ignore his plight. Even a virtually unanimous resolution by the Knesset to act on Mr. Pollard's behalf brings nothing but disingenuous platitudes. Israel has had many opportunities to press the issue with the United States –– to request, for example, that Mr. Pollard be returned to Israel in reciprocity for the many gestures made by the Jewish State at the behest of the U.S. in pursuit of its peace initiatives –– and by all accounts has failed genuinely to do so. While some might argue that for a simple citizen to tell his President or the Prime Minister of Israel the right thing to do is an act of chutzpah, those same governments have an obligation to respond to the voices of their people. Mr. Bush and Mr. Olmert, with all due respect, your silence has been deafening. In this season of redemption, it is wholly appropriate once again to make one simple entreaty: Let Jonathan Pollard go. At this, the time to celebrate freedom, the opportunity is upon you. On this Passover, do not pass over the chance to act. With this small gesture of leadership, please act now. Sincerely,
Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com |
|
US PRESSES ISRAEL TO ALLOW HAMAS TO PREPARE TO ATTACK ISRAEL UNDISTURBED
Posted by HaDar, April 28, 2008. |
|
This comes from Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA, who writes: "US presses Israel to allow Hamas to prepare to attack Israel undisturbed" is certainly a harsh description of the situation.This is called "US presses Israel on Gaza cease-fire." It was written by Yaakov Katz and Herb Keinon , and it appeared today in The Jerusalem Post www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208870506449&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull |
|
Pressure is picking up on Israel to reach a cease-fire deal with Hamas in the Gaza Strip ahead of US President George W. Bush's planned visit to Jerusalem in two weeks, defense officials told The Jerusalem Post on Sunday. Maj.-Gen. (res.) Amos Gilad, head of the Defense Ministry's Diplomatic-Security Bureau, has been holding intensive talks with Egypt on a proposed cease-fire in the Gaza Strip being brokered by Egyptian Intelligence Minister Omar Suleiman, according to the defense officials. There was increasing pressure from the US and Egypt to reach a deal before Bush's visit on May 14, the officials said, and Israel was making every effort to move forward with the deal, even though Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Defense Minister Ehud Barak had yet to formulate an official position on the matter. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is scheduled to visit Israel next week. "There is a push to wrap up the deal before Bush's visit," a top defense official told the Post Sunday. "The hope is that quiet in Gaza will enable Israel and the PA to focus on reaching a peace deal by the end of the year." Suleiman has in the meantime postponed a planned visit to Israel until the beginning of next week, after he receives a final answer from the various Palestinian factions on whether they accept the terms of the proposed cease-fire together with Hamas. Suleiman is scheduled to receive a final answer from the factions on Wednesday and will then update Israel. "Assuming the factions accept the terms, Suleiman will likely visit Israel in the beginning of next week to finalize Israel's position," the top defense official said, warning that if Israel rejected the deal it could damage relations with Egypt and be interpreted as a blow to Suleiman's prestige. While the Defense Ministry is pursuing the cease-fire talks, senior IDF officers have voiced opposition to halting military operations against Hamas in Gaza. On Sunday, two Kassam rockets struck Sderot. One scored a direct hit on a home, causing extensive damages but no injuries. One of the more dominant voices comes from OC Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant, who, the Post has learned, recently expressed fierce opposition to a cease-fire with Hamas, warning it would be used by the terrorist organization to rebuild its damaged infrastructure and to increase its arms smuggling under the Philadelphi Corridor from Sinai. Egyptian Foreign Ministry spokesman Hossam Zaki, who held talks in Jerusalem Sunday with Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and ministry director-general Aaron Abramovitch, said in Cairo a day earlier that Israel's "latest statements" on a cease-fire with Hamas should not be considered Israel's final word. In a statement, Zaki said that Israel "will make its position [on the proposed cease-fire with Hamas] clear following a series of closed-door meetings that will take place later." The government's position, repeated as a mantra by Olmert's spokesmen over the last week, is that Israel is not negotiating either directly or indirectly with Hamas, and that if Hamas wants a cease-fire it knows what it needs to do: stop all firing of Kassam rockets into Israel; stop terrorist attacks on Israelis anywhere; and stop the arms smuggling into the Gaza Strip. Zaki, according to the Egyptian statement, "played down Israel's initial rejection of the cease-fire as some sort of propaganda." Zaki, who is a close confidant of Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, said, "The cease-fire that Egypt has been seeking to achieve between the Palestinian and Israeli sides requires cooperation and real desire from the two sides." A senior official in the Foreign Ministry said Abramovitch told Zaki that it was essential to prevent Hamas's buildup in Gaza, and the terrorism emanating from the Strip. The official said that Zaki's visit was a reciprocal visit to one Abramovitch paid on him a few weeks ago. Transportation Minister Shaul Mofaz is expected to meet with Rice in Washington on Monday, a day before he takes part in the quarterly Israeli-American strategic dialogue. That daylong dialogue is once again expected to focus on the Iranian threat, and the ramifications of Teheran's nuclearization on the region. Mofaz will head the Israeli team, and his counterpart on the US side will be State Department Counselor Eliot Cohen, who has stepped in for Nicholas Burns, the recently retired under secretary for political affairs. Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net. |
|
DOES THE US SPY ON ISRAEL TOO?
Posted by Avodah, April 28, 2008. |
|
This is from the website of Carl of Jerusalem:
|
Shavua tov –– a good week to everyone. For those who are wondering how an Orthodox Jew can be on the computer on what is the eighth night of Pesach (Passover) in much of the world, please go here. Does the US spy on Israel too? And why does it seem that instances of people spying on behalf of the Jewish state are a much bigger deal in America than spying on behalf of Russia or China, for example? Two Jerusalem Post columnists devoted their weekend columns to this issue in the context of Ben Ami Kadish's arrest this past week. Both Herb Keinon and Caroline Glick take it for granted that the United States spies on Israel. But the Israeli reaction to the spying is very different from the American one. For the record, both Keinon and Glick were –– like me –– born in the United States. Here's Keinon: The surprise arrest in the US this week of 84-year-old Ben-Ami Kadish for allegedly spying for Israel a generation ago highlights a fascinating little point: One never hears about the US spying on Israel. Why not? Is Washington not interested in inside info on what Israel is up to? Is the CIA, with agents spanning the globe, not keen on securing pre-knowledge of Israel's technological advances in defense and security fields? Unlikely. Rather, the more probable reason is because when US spies are uncovered here, as they surely have been over the years, it never hits the news. Yossi Alpher, a former senior Mossad officer, cited former US officials as saying that the CIA spies on Israel, just as it spies everywhere else. "But when someone is caught here, he receives a wrap on the knuckles, and is declared persona non grata," Alpher said. "The fact that you never hear that someone was tried and put in jail for spying for the US reflects a different approach on Israel's part. It is not that we are not worried about sensitive information falling into other hands, it's just that when those hands happen to be friendly ones, we deal with it differently –– unlike the US Justice Department." And Glick: As for espionage, as the late Yitzhak Rabin once noted, every few years Israel discovers another US agent committing espionage against the state. Rather than make a big deal about it, and in spite of the fact that some of the information being stolen is deeply damaging to Israel's national security, out of a sense of comity with Washington, Israel keeps the scandals quiet and generally deports the spies. So why does it create such headlines in the US when someone is arrested for spying for Israel? Does the US target Israeli spies? Both Keinon and Glick argue that it does, although Keinon places the blame with the Justice Department and Glick places it mostly with the State Department and US intelligence agencies. Here's Keinon again: Alpher, who now co-edits the Israeli-Palestinian on-line dialogue magazine bitterlemons.org –– and is most definitely not a conspiracy theorist seeing an anti-Semite lurking under every US government desk [That's an understatement. I have a subscription to Bitterlemons.org. It's a newsletter that presents two Israeli views and two 'Palestinian' views on each issue. Most of the Israelis lean left. CiJ] –– said he can't escape the conclusion that the US Justice Department is looking for Israel. "When you take this case, together with the refusal to release [Jonathan] Pollard, even when spies working for the Soviet Union and China who caused death to other agents have been released, when you take into account the AIPAC case [the 2005 arrest of two senior AIPAC staffers on espionage charges], and attempts to recruit Israelis [to spy here for the US], it seems the Justice Department is targeting Israel. I don't know why, but we are being treated pretty roughly." Alpher said it is not unheard of in the annals of espionage, both here and abroad, that when someone old and frail is caught having spied may years ago, the charges are just dropped. But not this time. "The Justice Department is targeting Israel," he said. "They have been looking for additional Americans spying for Israel for a long, long time." Indeed, one senior government official said Kadish's arrest may finally shed some light on why the US has been so adamant for so long in holding Pollard, even though other spies who have spied for hostile countries –– not friendly ones –– have been treated more leniently. I doubt that we're going to learn why Pollard is being held. Many years ago, I had a meeting with someone who was in the intelligence unit in the IDF that was 'handling' Pollard. He claimed that the issue with Pollard is not what he did but what he knows. He claimed that the Americans will never let Pollard go free because what he knows remains explosive to this day. Obviously, he couldn't tell me anything about what Pollard knows. Glick places some of the blame at the Justice Department's doorstep too, but she places most of it with the Intelligence agencies and at the State Department: Tuesday was a banner day, a proud day for Jewish conspiracy theorists in America. People like Joseph E. diGenova smiled with glee as they watched 84-year-old Ben Kadish carted into the Manhattan Federal District courthouse on charges of transferring classified information to Israel 25 years ago. He's just like Jonathan Pollard, they whooped. Another Pollard! At last, we have proof that Israel operates spy rings and SLEEPER CELLS in America! They bragged and bragged and smiled and smiled as their terrorist metaphors got wilder and wilder. Sleeper cells? You mean agents sent to a country to lay in wait for the command to attack? Well, not exactly. DiGenova made his name as the federal prosecutor who railroaded Pollard into a life sentence for crimes that generally should have netted him no more than a few years in the slammer. Obviously he has a way with words. And when he told The New York Times "sleeper cells," apparently he was referring to the FBI agents who went to sleep for 23 years and then suddenly woke up and decided to cart an old man out of his nursing home and charge him with capital crimes. ... Most Israeli commentators and unnamed government officials angrily allege that the timing of Kadish's arrest was chosen to damage Israel's relations with the US at a key moment. In two weeks President George W. Bush is scheduled to visit Israel to participate in its 60th Independence Day celebrations. It has been widely presumed that during his visit, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government will seek to secure Bush's agreement to commute Pollard's sentence and release him from prison before Bush leaves office. Kadish, it is alleged, was arrested to block any possibility that Pollard will be released. Given the vindictiveness that has marked the US intelligence community's attitude toward Pollard since his arrest, it is possible that fear of a presidential pardon did inform the decision to arrest Kadish now. And yet, it is far from clear that an agreement on Pollard's release was ever in the cards. Bush has expressed no willingness to consider Israeli appeals for his release and neither the Sharon government nor the Olmert-Livni-Barak government has made any real efforts to secure Pollard's freedom. Indeed, in a sign of their contempt for Pollard, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government has Pollard's former handler, Pensioners Affairs Minister Rafi Eitan, sitting in the security cabinet. ... Kadish was arraigned the same day that the Los Angeles Times broke the story that CIA Director Michael Hayden would be briefing Congress on Thursday about Israel's September 6 air strike in Syria. For the past six months, the administration did everything it could to prevent any information on the Israeli air strike from getting out. In the end, Hayden was compelled to inform Congress about the details of the raid after the legislature conditioned its approval of the intelligence budget on receiving a full briefing on the air strike. According to the Los Angeles Times report and subsequent stories, Hayden's testimony would acknowledge that US intelligence agencies failed to recognize the dangers of the North Korean-built plutonium reactor that Syria had constructed not far from its border with Turkey. It was Israeli, rather than American intelligence agencies that penetrated the facility, brought back video and physical evidence of its character, and then effectively destroyed it in a complicated air strike and commando raid. So according to US media reports, Hayden's testimony would demonstrate two basic truths that the Jewish conspiracy theorists in the US intelligence community and the State Department are uninterested in having the public or Congress notice: Israeli intelligence is superior to US intelligence; and the US alliance with Israel is vital to US national security. Since Israel's independence 60 years ago and especially since US-Israel strategic ties blossomed after the Six Day War, Washington has been of two minds about the Jewish state. The first, public mind is that Israel is the US's strongest and most reliable ally in the Middle East, and that the US-Israel alliance is strong because it is based on shared values as well as shared interests. The second view is that Israel is a burden. As purveyors of this view see things, Israel is the national "Fagin." It is underhanded, pushy and untrustworthy. Indeed, as far as the anti-Semites in Washington are concerned, Israel is the source of all the US's difficulties in the Arab world and even in Europe. For years, the purveyors of the second view have carried out an independent foreign policy regarding Israel that is completely at odds with the official US policy of embracing Israel as an ally. Indeed, the State Department has undermined every presidential attempt to treat Israel well since 1948. As I argued last week, both Keinon and Glick see a connection between Kadish's arrest and President Bush's impending visit to Israel for the 60th Independence Day celebration. Here's Keinon again: However, the proximity of the arrest to US President George W. Bush's visit to celebrate Israel's 60th anniversary next month does have some Israeli officials wondering whether the two events might not, indeed, be connected. "They could have waited and done this after the Bush visit," the official posited. He speculated –– and at this point it is all speculation –– that there were some in the US intelligence community who wanted to keep Bush from coming here, and either announcing the release of Pollard, something that has been whispered about for the last few months, or giving Israel too many birthday presents before he leaves office, something that had been discussed more seriously. The official pointed out that it was the same intelligence community that last year produced the National Intelligence Estimate that said Iran had ditched its nuclear weapons program in 2003 –– conclusions which Jerusalem largely viewed as politically motivated to keep Bush from taking military action against Iran. Among the "gifts" reportedly on the table and being discussed as Bush's parting gift to Israel are linking Israel to the American worldwide radar system that provides early warnings of any ballistic missile fired anywhere in the world; advanced models of the Joint Direct Attack Munition smart bombs, or JDAMs; the possibility of selling Israel the F-22 Raptor, a stealth fighter; integrating Israeli defense industries into the production of the Joint Strike Fighter; and the possibility of upgrading the US-Israel strategic alliance to include some kind of defense pact. As a result of the Kadish case, there will now be those who will ask whether these types of "goodies" should be given to a country that spies on the US. Glick argues that Israel needs to be a lot more aggressive in its relations with the US, and notes with bitter irony that Nada Prouty, who penetrated both the FBI and the CIA on Hezbullah's behalf, is likely to get off with a six-month sentence. By arresting an 84-year-old World War II veteran in an effort to place Israel under a cloud of suspicion as its military triumph in Syria is exposed to the American people, the US is sadly showing Israel once again that nice guys finish last. If Israel wants to be treated with respect by the US, the lesson of the Kadish affair, of the Syrian raid and of the Pollard affair is that Israel had better start pushing back. The first thing it should do is arrest officials suspected of transferring classified materials to the US without authorization. It should then publish the names and details of US spies whom Israel previously caught and treated with kid gloves. Then it should publicly demand that Bush release Pollard from the prison where he rots, while the likes of Hizbullah agent Nada Prouty –– who penetrated both the FBI and the CIA –– is expected to receive a six-month prison sentence for her crimes. When Bush arrives to celebrate Israel's 60th birthday, Israel's leaders would do well to show him that at 60, Israel is a grownup country. And as such, it demands to be treated with the respect due to the US's most reliable ally in the Middle East. I agree with Keinon and Glick. There is no doubt that Israeli spies are treated differently by the US –– and with disproportionate harshness –– as compared with spies for anyone else. As Glick points out, the ridiculous arrest of two AIPAC lobbyists –– which has been hanging over our heads for four years now has been used by the US to avoid Israeli demands that it do anything concrete to stop Iran. I know that some Americans are going to react with hostility to this post –– I have seen enough of that on LGF this week. I'm not advocating that Israel spy on the US. I'm advocating a uniform standard of justice for those caught spying for Israel as compared with those caught spying for other countries and entities. It's clear to me that standard does not exist. Read the whole thing.
Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com
|
|
COMMANDER OF LEGENDARY SHIP EXODUS DIES AT 90
Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, April 28, 2008. |
|
This appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post
|
Yossi Harel, commander of the illegal Jewish immigrant ship Exodus, immortalized in the Leon Uris novel and Otto Preminger movie, died Saturday at the age of 90. His daughter Sharon said Harel suffered cardiac arrest at his Tel Aviv home. The ill-starred voyage of the Exodus, which sought to bring thousands of European refugees to Palestine after World War II, became a potent symbol of the Jewish struggle for statehood. More than 4,500 Holocaust survivors packed the ship in 1947 when it tried to run the British blockade of Palestine, meant to severely limit the immigration of Jews. The British Navy seized the vessel off Palestine's shores in July 1947, and after a battle on board that left three people dead, turned the ship and its passengers back to Europe. The Exodus' fate later inspired a fictionalized account by Uris and a movie directed by Preminger and starring Paul Newman. In all, Harel commanded four expeditions that brought thousands of refugees to the shores of Palestine, his daughter said. "He was an extraordinary, unusual man, very brave, very modest and very lucky because he was able to touch the lives of so many people," she said. The Jerusalem-born Harel is to be buried in Kibbutz Sdot Yam on Monday, she said. The communal farm was headquarters of the naval force of the Palmach, Israel's pre-state military. "History has proven that you cannot defeat refugees," Harel was quoted as saying two decades ago by the now-defunct Israeli newspaper, Hadashot. "It starts now with one boat. After that, dozens more will come," he said.
Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder by email at ceder@netvision.net.il
|
|
WHY POLLARD DID IT; ANIMALS, WATER, & PROPAGANDA; REFORM JUDAISM POLITICALIZED?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 28, 2008. |
|
JORDAN DEVELOPING Jordan is developing its armaments industry. It also is setting up a school against terrorism. It has offered to train people from other countries in the region at that school (IMRA, 4/5). How much anti-terrorist training should dictatorships have? The P.A. gets such training, but uses that training to thwart Israeli anti-terrorism. WHY POLLARD DID IT? Years ago, Jonathan Pollard explained to a rabbi why he revealed US intelligence about the Arabs to Israel. The major piece of intelligence was that the Arabs were planning to poison-gas Israelis. Contrary to agreement with Israel, the US withheld that intelligence from Israel. Pollard tried protesting through channels, but was rebuffed. If he had tried going through the media, Russia might have gotten valuable intelligence. Neither could he do nothing to save the hundreds of thousands of Jews who otherwise might get killed if he complied with US law and done nothing. He had to warn Israel, though it cost him much of his own life (IMRA, 4/5). Since the people had protection against the gas, Saddam withheld it. He did the ethical thing. It took great courage. Who of us has such courage? P.A. MEDICAL OFFICIALS VS. P.A. FARMERS A farmer was killed in Gaza near the border with Israel. P.A. medical officials said the death was from an Israeli tank shell. The victim's neighbors told Associated Press that the death was from a rocket that terrorists had fired at Israel, but which fell short (IMRA, 4/5). Jihadists reap propaganda by attributing more deaths to Israel. This would not be so if Westerners were more understanding about warfare and casualties. ROCKET WARFARE Hamas claims that it doesn't intend to kill women and children. This was contradicted by "...al-Qaida's second in command, Ayman al-Zawahiri, who said Hamas' random rockets kill women and children in violation of Islamic law (IMRA, 4/5). What do they expect, when they fire at civilian areas? This is like the Nazi blitz of London. Some call them cowardly, but I think that they just are bloodthirsty. ELITE IN IDF & ULTRA-ORTHODOX The IDF has formed a special commando battalion of 600 Ultra-Orthodox and Orthodox men to serve in the Jordan Valley. Pleased with them, the IDF would like to set up another such battalion. It is an experiment in integrating a religious life style within military life (IMRA, 4/6). ARE THEY REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT ANIMALS? An animal rights group in Israel lost a suit against the Jewish Temple movement's planned sacrifice of a sheep in anticipation of reconstructing the fallen Temple. The complaint likened the exercise to animal fighting. The judge disagreed, because there would be one sheep, slaughtered in the humane Jewish manner. The movement is exercising freedom of religion (Arutz-7, 4/6). I think that the stated concern for animals was a pretext for an action against Judaism. It is like the movements against Jewish slaughter and circumcision. Bigots usually find high-minded principles to cite in favor of repressing Jews. WATER & PROPAGANDA Foreign water experts accuse Israel of having started the 1967 war in order to gain water sources, and a German water consultant for the P.A. accuses Israel of barring Arabs from water in the Territories for selfish reasons. Israel has completed a study that shows that Israel is using less water from natural sources. How so? It desalinates and recycles much of its water, uses less, and there is a drought. Per capita consumption is just over a third of what it was in 1967. Israeli water authorities conclude that the results disprove the accusations (IMRA, 4/6). I don't see logic to claiming that Israel didn't want territory based on improvements in water processing that had not yet occurred. Proof is first of all in the fact that the Arabs started all of Israel's wars. Second, the Territories are part of the Land of Israel, to which Israel, as heir to the Mandate, and needing security from proven aggressors, is entitled. Third, Israel was ready from the start to relinquish conquered territory, if the Arabs would make peace. The Arabs weren't ready. Fourth, if Israel wanted more water, it would have seized part of Lebanon. Fifth, when the Palestinian Arabs get their hands on aquifers, they draw them down fast, as happened twice in Gaza and is happening in Judea-Samaria. HEBRON MASSACRE INVESTIGATION Barry Chamish further reviewed the investigation into the Hebron massacre, for which Dr. Goldstein was scapegoated. Most of the military and Arab testimony, which contradicted the official theory of the incident, was rejected by Judge Shamgar. Shamgar also made up timing for events to suit his theory. (He took the same non-judicial approach later with the Rabin investigation). Some Arab witnesses indicated they were eager to dispute the official theory, but then conformed to it. There were many loose ends and discrepancies. Witnesses obviously lied. Shamgar failed to check the loose ends, discrepancies, and lies. Soldiers whose testimony implied perjury were not, themselves, put on trial. Contradictions and anomalies surround the attack on the yeshiva in Jerusalem recently. Also unexplained is the failure of police to arrive for 30-40 minutes. Chamish concludes that these events, which demean the Right and religious Jews are perpetrated or planned by the Left. He calls this "peace by murder." (Chamish, 4/7.) HURVA SYNAGOGUE TO BE REBUILT The Jordanian conquerors of the Old City in the 1940s demolished all the synagogues there. The demolition was an example of Islamic intolerance. (That's Islamic, not just Islamist.) The Hurva synagogue's arch remained. It was just decided to rebuild that synagogue (Arutz-7, 4/7). I suppose the Arabs now will complain that the decision is an attempt to judaize the city. Probably the State Dept. will second the motion. REFORM JUDAISM POLITICALIZED? Rabbi Eric Yoffie, the head of Reform Judaism in the US, criticized prominent Christian Evangelist, Pastor John Hagee, who donated $6 million to Israel and declared that letting the P.A. take over parts of Jerusalem would be like turning it over to the Taliban. Hagee's organizations eschews efforts to convert Israelis. He urged Israel to reject Evangelist support, calling Hagee an "extremist" who opposes "territorial compromise" and who has made anti-Catholic statements. Hagee denies the alleged statements (IMRA, 4/7). I didn't hear statements on Catholicism, but read Yoffie name-calling over policy. He would deny Israel valuable support because of a difference over how to solve the Arab-Israel conflict. So far, Yoffie's solution has failed. Giving strategic land to fanatical enemies makes war likelier (and gets synagogues destroyed). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
ALL IN A DAY'S NEWS...
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, April 28, 2008. |
|
Along with other related articles, three covering the Middle East and North Africa caught my eye on April 26th. The first was written by a journalist whom I have long admired--and I don't admire many in the mainstream media. I met Tom Teepen, now a syndicated columnist for Cox News, some three decades ago. I was visiting Cincinnati for a few days out of my Columbus office and had assorted media, university, and other visits, lectures, and televised debates scheduled. We have, on occasion, briefly touched base afterwards over the years. Tom was editorial editor, I believe, for either the Cincinnati Post or Enquire. We spent a good deal of time reviewing the Middle East. Unlike too many others in the liberal camp, Tom still has maintained clear vision when it comes to Arab-Israeli politics. The real surprise was that my local newspaper published his op-ed. After many years of batting heads with the paper brass (first on my own, then with others), I'm finally noticing a bit more balance. So, Tom's Blaming Israel, Freelancing On Hamas –– What Is Jimmy Carter Thinking? made it into the Daytona Beach News-Journal. He recapped Mr. Peanut's recent hot date with Hamas in Syria, where Carter tried his best to make the deliberate disembowelers of Jewish babes and other innocents look good by getting it to provide him with some foggy cover for his non-stop assault on Israel, but Hamas--to its credit--wouldn't let him. Headlines soon claimed, anyway, that Mr. Peanut achieved a breakthrough, with Hamas offering to 'accept' Israel. When will they learn? Tom exposed Carter's nauseating comedy act. While an allegedly 'born again' Carter evidently doesn't put much value in honesty, Hamas does. It has no –– and will never have--any intention of granting Jews in one tiny state what Arabs demand for themselves in some two dozen others on over six million square miles of territory...including one already created from almost 80% of the original 1920 borders of Mandatory Palestine renamed 'Jordan.' The new state Arabs insist on creating on the ashes of Israel, not along side it, would be their second –– not first –– in 'Palestine,' the name the Roman Emperor Hadrian gave to Judaea after the Jews' second costly revolt for freedom in 133-135 C.E. He renamed the country after the Jews' historic enemies, the Philistines--a non-Semitic sea people from around Crete. Contemporary Roman historians such as Tacitus, Dio Cassius, and others wrote extensively about this themselves. To most Arabs, the whole region is simply purely Arab patrimony...in their own words. As for the scores of millions of non-Arabs who have been conquered, massacred, and suppressed, Egypt's past Uncle Tom Copt Foreign Minister, Dr. Boutros Boutros-Ghali, perhaps said it best...accept forced Arabization and /or dhimmi status (like he did) or else. Copts were the native Egyptians conquered by Arabs after the 7th century C.E. along with numerous others. As Mr. Peanut also knows, regarding the above, Hamas is no different than the alleged moderates of Abbas's latter day Fatah Arafatians –– regardless of how much whitewash he, Washington, and others throw upon them both. In order to force the Jews to play ball, a supposed Arab good cop had to be created to counter the State Department's Arab bad cop. Fatah (with as much, if not more, blood on its hands than Hamas) is simply more willing to play the Arabs' well-known destruction in phases 'diplomacy' game vis-à-vis Israel to use petrodollar greased-international pressure to force Israel back to its pre-'67, 9-mile wide, armistice line--not border--existence to set it up for a combined Arab/Iranian final blow...something that UNSC Resolution 242 expressly stated was not to happen in the aftermath of the 1967 War. But, Honigman, you say, you keep repeating these same points in many of your articles. Yes, I do. And as long as Arabs keep on repeating their lies and distortions, and morons or deliberate accomplices like Mr. Peanut do the same, those of us who care must repeatedly answer them. Their approach is if they repeat a lie often enough (and it goes unanswered), it will be accepted as truth. Teepen did a good job with his short op-ed, especially since he has been a fan of Carter in the past. But let me continue to pick up yet a bit more where he left off. With a new Presidential election approaching, I'll never forget the last televised Democratic National Convention featuring 'Apartheid Israel' Mr. Peanut chasing 'Israel is one of the top three evils in the world' Michael Moore all over the convention floor. Closer soul brothers do not exist--unless you want to throw in a more slick Obama and the company he keeps to make a trio. It was befitting that Carter visited Hamas in Syria, for Syria--not 'Palestine'--was indeed the birthplace of Hamas's patron saint, Sheikh Izzedin al-Qassam (for whom its 'militant' wing and rockets are named )...Latakia, to be exact. Of course, back then, many if not most Arabs in the area considered themselves to be southern Syrians, espousing one version or another of a Greater Syria plan. 'Palestinians' were the Jews. Along with scores (if not hundreds) of thousands of others who poured into the Palestine Mandate (after the break up of the over four century old Ottoman Turkish Empire) due to its economic development by Jews, the Sheikh joined numerous other 'native Palestinians' who entered relatively recently from the latter 19th century onwards from Syria, Egypt, and elsewhere in rejecting the rights of Jews to do the same thing in any part of the 'purely Arab patrimony,' the Dar ul-Islam. Recall that half of Israel's Jews were refugees from so-called 'Arab' and /or Muslim lands. Moving on. Article # 2, in the same paper, quoted Mahmoud Abbas complaining that, in his recent Washington visit, no one was talking about forcing Israel back to the ''67 borders.' I do admit, that was a pleasant surprise. While the State Department (and President Clinton and President Bush off and on) has tried its best to ignore 242's call for the establishment of secure and recognized borders to replace Israel's absurd 1949 armistice lines (which simply marked the point where Arab invading armies were halted upon Israel's rebirth in 1948), Israel, despite the weakness of Prime Minister Olmert and his crew, has evidently made it clear that it took President Reagan's words seriously when he stated on September 1, 1982: In the pre-1967 borders, Israel was barely 10-miles wide...the bulk of Israel's population within artillery range of hostile armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again. Not only were there mostly no Arab-Israeli 'borders' back then, but the Abbas/Arab claim that Israel is setting up settlements on Palestinian land has the same amount of truth in it as does the '67 border claim. When Transjordan (army led by British officers)--created from most of the Mandate of Palestine in 1922--attacked Israel along with a half dozen other Arab states loaded with arms left over by the Allies in World War II in 1948, it seized Judea and Samaria...British imperialism's west bank (of the Jordan River) as opposed to the Trans('across')jordanian east bank. Sir Alec Kirkbride, the Brits' East Bank rep, wrote extensively about this in his A Crackle Of Thorns: Experiences In The Middle East. The Arab land grab was illegal, only two nations recognized it. Still, Transjordan renamed itself Jordan, since it now held both banks, and saw to it that no Jews could reenter lands where their ancestors had lived and owned land for thousands of years until their massacres by Arabs in the 1920s and 1930s. At the same time, huge numbers of Arabs continued to pour in...more Arab settlers setting up Arab settlements. All together, so many Arabs were recent arrivals themselves into the Palestinian Mandate that the United Nations Relief Works Agency--UNRWA--had to adjust the very definition of the word 'refugee' from its prior meaning of persons normally and traditionally resident to those who lived in the Mandate for a minimum of only two years prior to 1948 when counting those who fled the fighting Arabs started upon Israel's rebirth. Contrary to the Arabs' claim that these were 'occupied Palestinian lands,' Judea and Samaria were non-apportioned parts of the Mandate, and leading international legal authorities such as Eugene Rostow, William O'Brien, and others have stressed that these areas were open to settlement by Jew, Arab, and other residents of the Mandate alike. How could you occupy lands taken from an illegal occupier? The territory in question is indeed disputed...not occupied Arab lands a la Abbas, Hamas, and Mr. Peanut. When Israel captured Judea and Samaria in the '67 War as a result of a bad decision by Jordan to join Egypt's Nasser, Syria, and others in the Arabs' latest attempt upon its life, it came to hold territory of the Mandate officially apportioned to no one...not 'Palestinian' land. The Arabs themselves rejected a proposed 1947 partition of the remaining 25% of the Mandate left over after the creation of Transjordan in 1922. While I do not advocate Israel holding on to the entire area, certainly a reasonable territorial compromise which corrects the travesty of the '49 armistice lines--a la 242--is a must. And Judea –– land of the Jews –– must never become Judenrein again...unless Arabs are prepared to see the one-fifth of Israel itself who are Arabs –– many hostile –– get the boot as well. Such population transfers have indeed already occurred elsewhere. Consider those involving Turks, Greeks, and Bulgars, Israel's Jewish refugees from 'Arab' lands, and India and Pakistan for starters. Now, about those Jewish settlements Abbas complains about in that second article. If Jews are to return to Judea and Samaria in the context of a 242-type territorial compromise, then how and where else will this come about if not by establishing/reestablishing Jewish towns and so forth--'settlements?' Without the latter, Israel doesn't get the former. Article # 3... The News-Journal finally gave the genocide in Darfur some of the attention it deserves...large front page article with maps and big pictures. Unlike the Arab-Israeli mess, however, the perpetrators might as well have come from Mars. No where was the word Arab mentioned. After the Arabs burst out of the Arabian Peninsula in the 7th century C.E. and forcibly Arabized millions of non-Arab peoples in the process, the Sudan (Nubia, etc.) held out for quite some time. In other parts of North Africa, native Jews aligned with Imazighen ('Berbers') to resist this conquest as well. We'll revisit this a bit later. Back in the '60s, the first modern civil war broke out between the non-Muslim black African south and the Arab and Arabized (remember Dr. Boutros-Ghali's comments above?) north in the Sudan. Sudanese President Nimeiry's stated during the slaughter of over a half million blacks at this time (and over a million more ever since) that... 'the Sudan is the basis of the Arab thrust into...black Africa, the Arab civilizing mission (Arabism and Pan-Arabism in Sudanese Politics, Journal of Modern African Studies, Vol. 11, #2, 1973, pp. 177-78).' Rudyard Kipling's late 19th century poem, 'The White Man's Burden,' supposedly typifies Western colonialist and imperialist attitudes towards the Third World. If that's the case, then what does Nimeiry and the other example below, expressed in the Syrian Arab Constitution of the Ba'th, typify? '...The Arab fatherland belongs to the Arabs. They alone have the right to direct its destinies...The Arab fatherland is that part of the globe inhabited by the Arab nation which stretches from the Taurus Mountains, the Pacht-i-Kouh Mountains, the Gulf of Basra, the Arab Ocean, the Ethiopian Mountains, the Sahara, the Atlantic Ocean, and the Mediterranean Sea.' Yet, the more recent full scale outbreak of violence in the Sudan in the 21st century has an even more revealing twist. While earlier bloodshed there and elsewhere could largely be seen as modern extensions of the fourteen century-old clash between the Dar ul-Islam and the Dar al-Harb, the one in the Sudan's Darfur (as those in Arab-occupied Kurdistan and much of the rest of North Africa) is mostly about Arab racism and chauvinism...pure and simple. You know, those folks who like to scream about 'racist Zionism.' Over a thousand years earlier, this led to the overthrow of the Syrian-based Arab imperialist Umayyad Caliphate. So, in Sudan's western region of Darfur, it's Arab and Arabized versus black Africans...regardless of religion. Ditto for Arab versus Kurd, Amazigh, and so forth. These victims are mostly Muslims. In Sudan's largely non-Muslim south, it's a combination of both Arab racism and the conquest of the Dar ul-Islam--as exemplified also in the expected subjugation and dhimmitude of Egyptian Copts, Lebanon's Christians, Near Eastern Assyrians, and Israel, Jew of the Nations, and home to whom Arabs call 'their' kilab yahud... Jew dogs. An Amazigh (Berber) publisher friend ( http://www.north-of-africa.com/ ) recently sent me a video produced by the highly respected Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). Its contents http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XROAu1cTcQ8 showed a debate on Al-Alam TV (Iran) on July 21, 2007over a new Berber-Jewish Friendship League set up in Morocco. Even more recently, Morocco has outlawed the creation of an Amazigh political party...especially since it espoused good relations with Israel. Keep in mind that Morocco has had, relatively speaking and as an 'Arab' country, reasonable relations with Israel itself. Hundreds of thousands of Israeli Jews had their roots there. But the prospect of former and current fellow victims of forced Arabization getting together has implications for Arabs that even the Moroccans can't allow. Much if not most of North Africa is of Amazigh--not Arab--descent. Among other comments in that debate, the Amazigh spokesman pointed out that both Jews and Berbers predated the Arab conquest by thousands of years, fought long and hard against that conquest, and want nothing to do with Arab identity and forced Arabization. Keeping in mind that in modern times many Berbers have already been killed by Arabs for less, very brave words indeed. To sum things up, those three news articles on April 26th were loaded with important material. The problem is that, without further extensive explanation such as what I've attempted here, the issues are too complex for many readers to grasp. Having said this, journalists and folks like ex-Presidents shoulder huge responsibilities and should therefore dig much deeper before commenting and pontificating a la Carter on such issues. By the way, when's the last time anyone heard Carter comment on any of the above non-Arab civil, political, and humanitarian issues? If they don't involve Arabs, he doesn't want to know. And a look at the contributors to his library and such may explain at least some of Mr. Peanut's Arab-colored vision. Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php |
|
IN MEMORY OF THE HERO; DELUSIONAL IN POWER ; JNF, WHOSE LAND IS IT?; DUPLICITY OF OCCUPIED LANDS
Posted by Steven Shamrak, April 28, 2008. |
|
Gloom of the Next War. 1. Iran has, openly and bluntly, threaten to destroy Israel and actively pursues development of nuclear weapon. In Memory of the Hero: Yossi Harel the ship commander, whose attempt to bring Holocaust survivors to Palestine aboard the "Exodus" 1947 built support for Israel's founding, died on Saturday. Olmert in Need of Intensive Psychiatric Care. At the same time when CIA officials tell US Congress that North Korea had been helping Syria build a plutonium-based nuclear reactor, which Israel destroyed last September, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert gave the 'life line' to Syria by his decision to put the Golan Heights, Jewish land, on the negotiating table in exchange for a 'promise' of peace with Syria. Even Kadima members in Knesset, rebelled against this stupidity and treachery. Only two years ago Olmert said: "As long as I serve as prime minister, the Golan Heights will remain in our hands because it is an integral part of the State of Israel." (It is time to resign and find a good psychiatrist!) Another Delusional in Power. American President George W. Bush welcomed PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas as "a man of peace." President Bush added: Abbas is "a man of vision," "He rejects the idea of using violence to achieve objectives." Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak Why must Israel provide health care to the enemy population, which supports bombing of Jews with rockets and destruction of Israel? Why must Israel open her borders and give them job? Most countries, even Muslim ones, don't! Leadership of so-called Palestinians has been using the international aid to buy rockets and bullets. So why Israel must care about terror-infested mob! JNF, Whose Land is it? The Jewish National Fund (JNF) owns 2,250 dunams of land in Gaza that is being illegally squatted upon by so-called Palestinians –– with Jews forbidden to live on it. The JNF purchased the land in the 1940s, with money donated by Jews worldwide seeking to redeem the Land of Israel for a Jewish national home. The JNF also has 53,000 dunams of land in Syria, which was purchased in the 30s. (Why is JNF silent about Jews land? The organization betrays the memory and trust of Jews who paid to secure future of Jewish people on Jewish ancestral land!) Quote of the Week: "America did not want Israel to go and fight the Six-Day War. America did not want Israel to go and bomb the nuclear reactor in Iraq... I respect the United States a lot, but I expect that kind of respect back... People who respect themselves, get the kind of respect they deserve from others." –– Moshe Feiglin, the head of the Jewish Leadership faction within the Likud party. Please, Call Exterminators. Over sixty-five percent of Arabs in Gaza support continued suicide bombings against Israeli civilians. Nearly 50 percent of Gaza's civilians feel that launching rockets at Israeli civilians is a "useful" means of terrorism. Meanwhile, Israel is allowing the transfer of hundreds of truckloads of food and supplies per week into Gaza. (When a house is infested with termites or rats, exterminators are called. The same approach must be applied to terror-infested population. Enemy must be resolutely removed from Jewish land!) Delusional and Jew-hating Bigots Who Rule the World. Former US President Jimmy Carter failed in his self-appointed mission to seek information about Ehud Goldwasser, Eldad Regev and Gilad Shalit. Carter claimed that Hamas is willing to be Israel's neighbour even after Hamas boss in Damascus, Khaled Mashaal, refused Carter's request to halt the rocket fire on Israel for a month, without preconditions, to gain some international goodwill. (Hamas has immediately issued denial of any intention to recognise Israel!) Duplicity of Occupied Lands. There are many lands around the world that have been occupied not so long ago by other countries. Many of them are still subjugated to the rule of an occupying power. They were conquered during offensive or defensive wars, throughout the process of establishment of statehood or as a part of colonial and imperial policy. The following is a far from complete list of the currently occupied lands: Great Britain still occupies 17 provinces of Ireland, Gibraltar and is holding on to the many residual symbols of her former colonial glory around the world. France is still holding on to many overseas territories like New Caledonia and French Guinea. France and Spain divided and have no intention to give independence to the Basque people, the oldest indigenous living group known in Europe. China –– The international community has done nothing to stop occupation of Tibet by China. Eastern, predominantly Muslim, provinces of China are still under 'imperial' communist rule. Chile –– From the 1840s, heavy Anglo-Chilean investments were made in nitrate mining on the Bolivian coast. Bolivia lost its coastal region after the war of 1879-1884. Since then, Bolivia has been economically stifled by Chile with limited access to the sea ports. Panama proclaimed its independence after the US expressed interest in obtaining the rights to the canal, which Colombia refused. US marines landed in Panama the same day when independence was declared. Russia has no plans to return the eastern part of Poland it has occupied since before WW2 and end occupation of eastern Prussia, the Kuril Islands and Southern Sakhalin. Russia still retains its status as an imperial power by holding on to Chechnya, Dagistan, North Ossetia, Tatarstan and many other national enclaves which were occupied by Tsar. USA –– The biggest and leading democracy of the world is one of the biggest occupiers as well. There is no intention of even talking about compensation for, never mind returning, the occupied land which used to be, not long ago, a part of Mexico. What about Puerto Rico, Hawaii and other 'strategic interests'? The United Nations maintains a list of territories that do not govern themselves. The list was initially prepared in 1946 and adopted in 1986. It has officially endorsed control of these lands by their former colonial powers! It should be remembered that most countries around the world (including USA, UK, France, Germany, China and Russia) were forged and established their current borders during the last 300 years. Their creation was accompanied by dramatic conquests and destruction of unique and independent cultures. In a Russian play one character asked the audience: "Look, who are the judges?" Yes, who are they to tell Jews what is their land and to force Israel to give away Jewish land to Arab scoundrels? Israel is the only country that can claim its statehood and ownership of the land. Jewish people have over 3,000 years of spiritual and historical connection with the land. Israel is the only state, which withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula after it was conquered during a defensive war. In exchange, Israel received the worthless piece of paper, which is called the Peace Agreement with Egypt. And yet, Israel is the only country under international pressure to surrender her own land to the enemy, a recently forged people –– called Palestinians, whose only goal, they are not even hiding it, is to destroy the Jewish state. There are three reasons why Israel is under such an international onslaught –– Traditional international anti-Semitism, a desire to sell out Israel in exchange for a steady supply of oil, and an appeasement of Islamic terrorists in order to defer attacks on the West! Does it make sense? What definitely takes place and make sense is that the world's economic and political powers ("Puppet Masters") apply pressure on Israel and use any means at their disposal, including manipulation of international law. An example of this is how it was done after Israel won the War of Independence. Immediately the Fourth Geneva convention ruled out population transfer as a legitimate way of resolving conflicts –– but only when it suits their economic and political interests, with complete disregard to historical, spiritual and even legal rights of any people, not just Jews (remember ongoing dismantling of Yugoslavia and non-existence of Kurdistan –– the homeland of 35 million Kurds, divided and occupied by five countries). The multitude of international organizations –– including the UN, IRC, Amnesty International etc –– are at full disposal of the international "Puppet Masters" and only too eager to assist by generating and manipulating public opinion –– creating the illusion of propriety. The bottom line: it is all about power, control and beyond doubt money! Contact Steven Shamrak at stevenshamrak@gmail.com and visit his website at www.shamrak.com. |
|
DAYENU
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, April 28, 2008. |
|
Shocking "Pesach Pogrom" by IDF against young Jewish family guided by rich liberal apartheid supporting jihadists, stifling the voices and votes of the democratic law abiding middle class. If they would have offered peace and pieces of the 22% left after the unilateral divide by the British Guardians of the Balfour Mandate for the Jews of Eretz Yisrael to terrorists it would have been too much. If they would have offered peace and pieces and suicide bombers replaced Intifada I with Suicide-fodder II it would have been too much. If they offered good will gestures of releasing Jihad murderers and they still do bad will and murder, it would have been too much. If they enlist terrorists into the PA Authority and they shoot and kill Jews, it would have been too much. If they arm the enemy, the suicide hate-mongers and Jew Killers and give them 2,000,000 bullets, military vehicles and night vision glasses it would have been too much. If almost 2,000 Jews are murdered by Oslo "dip-lunatics" who take the position of their enemies after "after is a deadly end", it would have been too much. If the Jews were evicted from Gush Katif and they burned the Magen David Synagogue and more imported terrorists occupy Gaza and shoot thousands of rockets at the Jews of Sderot , Yad Mordechai and Ashkelon, it would have been too much. If they shattered the dream of Jewish survival after the Holocaust, it is too much.
If they imprison security guards who save Jewish lives and take the guns away from trained IDF soldiers and pardon murderers, Jihadists with blood on their hands and in their minds and give weapons for mass murder of Jews to the Fatah and Hamas, Iranian supported genociders, it is much too much. If they destroy Jewish owned and occupied homes to please anti-Semites any day it is too much but Erev Pesach it is being the slave drivers and not the freed from Egypt slaves. The Jewish identity crisis is not just a lost identity, it is taking on the identity of the abusers and abusing our Jewish survivors.
Stop this "diplunacy" and save Israel. Release our patriots the Halamish brothers. Oslo has unleashed a plague of world "the rich liberal apartheid" stifling the voices of truth and opposition and anti-Semistism and it is getting worse because Israel abuses its protectors and patriots and gives license to unsettling hate, lawlessness, lies, stealing, murder, genocide. Release our patriots the Halamish brothers. It is much too much. Evelyn Hayes Pidion Shvuim Alert:
We are sorry to interrupt your Passover holiday but we turn to you with very disturbing news of how the Israeli army has been violating the religious and human rights of Jews in Judea and Samaria. On the eve of Passover, the army sent troops to throw out a Jewish family with five young children and a pregnant mother from their home in the community of Negohot in southern Judea. Imagine you and your family are preparing for the Passover Seder and the Sabbath as Israeli soldiers, equipped with American weapons, American vehicles and even American-made uniforms throw you out from your home, throw out all your prepared food and pots, turn off your gas and electricity and throw out your refrigerator, cooker and oven just hours before the festival. The crime of the family is not clear other than they entered into a new home built on their property in an established community approved and financed by the government. But these are difficult times when the government of Israel has to prove to the United States the commitment by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to destroy Jewish life through out Judea and Samaria and parts of Jerusalem. As those who serve and whose children serve in the army, we recognize the need for the defense of country and homeland but what is happening increasingly and the Israeli army is being used against Jews and to defend our enemies. We ask you to telephone your protest to the Israeli embassy in Washington and to raise this issue with your member of congress. Call the Israel embassy [telephone 202-364-5500] and ask to speak to the military attache. Stress that you are an American citizen whose support for the Israeli military is based on its protection of Jews. Say that you also plan to discuss this case with your member of Congress who decides on U.S. military aid to Israel. The Olmert government, with an approval rating of near zero, has refused any accountability to the Israeli people and fears only the Bush administration. Unless we act now, there will be many more young Jews in jail. The Jewish holiday of Passover is about redemption. Let's work to redeem our fellow Jews. With Love of Israel,
Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes." Contact her at haze@rcn.com. |
|
SELECTIVE OUTRAGE ON HUMAN RIGHTS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, April 27, 2008. |
|
Sh'lom Y'all, Joel Brinkley deserves Kudos and letters of thanks for getting it right about the UN and its hypocrisy regarding Israel. Mr. Brinkley does not delve in to the reason for the UN's perverse and irrational focus on Israel, and for its endless litany of lies and distortions and decontextualizations which underlie its endless anti-Israel resolutions, while it ignores bona fide violations of human rights in many Arab and Muslim countries, Sudan, Somalia, Cuba, Venezuela, North Korea, China (to name a few). Y'all may recall my essays of some years back, in which I demonstrate that the UN was hijacked by the Arab bloc in 1973. Between the Arab bloc, the USSR, the Asian Muslim nations bloc, and the Black African nations bloc, the Arab oil-mega-wealthy wheelers-and-dealers at the UN could muster enough support in the General Assembly to rubber stamp any and every anti-Israel resolution that the Arab propaganda-warriors could invent. The USA could veto Chapter VII resolutions in the Security Council, but Chapter VI resolutions could be easily moved through the General Assembly with unveto-able majorities. The first undeniable manifestation of the successful hijacking of the UN was Arafat's speech on Nov. 11, 1973. The UN willingly and enthusiastically violated the rules of its own charter by permitting him, a self-proclaimed terrorist and mass murderer with no legitimate status as representative of any sovereign state, to speak before the General Assembly in his military fatigues with what looked like a pistol in his holster (actually it was a pipe). Since then the Arab bloc has turned the UN General Assembly in to its own private sand box/play ground for anti-Israel and anti-American and anti-West resolutions and proclamations, and for pro-Palestinian and pro-Terrorist and pro-Muslim resolutions and proclamations. And that is what is happening now. The old Human Rights committee, co-chaired for years by Libya and Syria (remember my description of the "black slave" –– al-"abd al-'aswad? that's a Syrian invention –– we never hear about that, but we hear plenty of complaints about abu Ghuraib!) was so egregious in its hypocrisy that even supportive UN members had to agree to have it replaced by a new committee which would clean house, so to speak, and start focusing on real human riots violations (Sudan being the first and foremost and most urgent...where by now almost 3,000,000 black africans have been slaughtered by Arab sudanese –– now that's genocide!). But no...as Mr. Brinkley informs us...it is very much business as usual at the UN. So write him a note to congratulate him on his eye-opening and tragically very accurate article. Joel Brinkley is a professor of journalism at Stanford University and a
former New York Times foreign policy correspondent. E-mail him at
insight@sfchronicle.com.
His article
appeared today in San Francisco Chronicle
David Meir-Levi |
|
The world's foremost human rights organization has ordered its envoys to begin investigating people or groups around the world who abuse freedom of speech by violating certain "moral" standards. The envoys would rely on individual governments to define morality in their own states. Imagine what would happen if Washington, London, New Delhi –– even Moscow –– tried to pass laws forbidding public discussion of "moral" issues like religion, alcohol or sex. What organization is setting up this absurd investigation? The United Nations Several years ago, the United Nations found itself embarrassed by its Human Rights Commission because of its unremitting attacks on Israel and light regard for other human rights malefactors. It "cast a shadow on the United Nations system as a whole," then-Secretary-General Kofi Anan lamented at the time. In 2006, the United Nations abolished the commission and replaced it with the Human Rights Council, charging the new group with reform. During a quarterly meeting three weeks ago, this new "reform" council passed the resolution ordering its envoys, or "rapporteurs," to set off on the feckless investigation intended to repress freedom of expression. Not surprisingly, that prompted a torrent of complaint. As an example, the World Association of Newspapers called the council's action "intolerable" and "part of a dangerous, backward campaign." But a close look at the new Human Rights Council shows that its effort to suppress freedom of speech may be the least of its failings. The council works by sending envoys to world trouble spots. These people are supposed to bring back reports for council consideration. Its choice of nations for study offers a clear picture of its priorities. Last year, it decided that neither Cuba nor Belarus had human rights records worthy of interest. At the meeting just ended, the council ruled that the Congo deserved no further attention. An article in the current issue of Foreign Affairs magazine notes that "Congo is now the stage for the largest humanitarian disaster in the world –– far larger than in Sudan." Might that crisis engender a human rights concern or two? Speaking of Sudan, I would hope the council considers genocide a genuine human rights problem. It does have an envoy working there, Sima Samar. At the recent meeting, she told the council that "technical assistance by the international community is needed in Sudan." Good work! That set off an interesting discussion. The Malaysian representative said he "welcomed the progress achieved by the government of Sudan in improving legislation and the rule of law." Saudi Arabia praised Sudan "for the positive steps it has taken to improve the situation in the country." China's representative, too, heaped warm words on Sudan for recent "positive developments." We can hope he wasn't referring to the scorched-earth campaign under way in Darfur as he spoke. Sudanese military aircraft bombed clusters of villages and, in coordinated ground attacks, looted and burned homes. Hundreds of people were killed; tens of thousands fled to Chad. The United Arab Emirates representative congratulated Sudan for "making great efforts to resolve the Darfur conflict." If Sudan is not worthy of a serious human rights inquiry, then who is? Israel, of course. On its founding two years ago, the council declared that scrutiny of "human rights abuses by Israel" would be a "permanent feature" of every council session. But what of Palestinian rocket attacks and suicide bombings? Not interested. Since then, all but three of its 16 condemnations have been directed at Israel. The United States ceaselessly criticized the old Human Rights Commission for its "pathological obsession with Israel," as Alejandro Wolff, a U.S. representative to the United Nations, put it. Perhaps to assuage those concerns, the new council fired its permanent envoy for Israel, John Dugard. He had repeatedly compared Israel to South Africa's apartheid regime. In his place, at the meeting just ended, the council appointed Richard Falk, a retired professor of law at Princeton University. He is infamous for his penchant to equate Israel's treatment of Palestinians with Nazi Germany's treatment of Jews. Falk's views should play well in the council chambers. Discussion there seems to be dominated by Arab states and their sympathizers, including Cuba, Angola, Pakistan. The Arabs were the ones, after all, who persuaded the council to enact that detestable resolution to restrict freedom of speech. Arab states argued that the world too often disparages Islam –– equating the religion with terrorism. Rather than finding ways to discourage their citizens from strapping on suicide bombs, the Arab states want to prosecute people for talking about the problem. The United Nations wisely shut down the first Human Rights Commission. It's time to abolish this one, too. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: ISRAEL AND IRAN
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 28, 2008. |
|
This evening the Israel Law Center, Shurat HaDin, sponsored a talk by Brig. Gen. Yossi Kupervasser, former head of Military Intelligence, on the subject, "Does Israel have a Response to the Iranian Nuclear Threat?" The topic of his talk not withstanding, the General was quick to say that this should not be considered an Israeli problem, but rather a Western problem. Nor is the threat "simply" Iran, but rather the radical Islamic movement, with Iran at its fore, and its goal of changing the world order. The Iranian regime is confident that it will succeed in its goal of achieving nuclear weapons because the West's threats to date have been empty. One red line after another has been crossed by Iran over the last few years and there have been no repercussions. Pressure via the international community is not possible because Russia and China, on the Security Council, have not been cooperative. This is because they are not entirely unhappy with Iran's progress, as each has a desire to upset the current world order in its own way. ~~~~~~~~~~ What is frequently ignored is that Iran has been doing R&D on its nuclear weapons program for some 15 years. There is currently some disagreement as to precisely how far Iran has come to date, but what is clear is that the window of opportunity for responding is closing –– there is perhaps a year remaining before Iran has nuclear capability, perhaps two years. The Iranians are prepared to endure hardship for the sake of their long term goals. Deterrence will work with them only if they believe that continuing with their nuclear development will endanger the Islamic revolution. Any pressure placed on Iran must be backed up with a convincing threat of military action. As to that action, should it be necessary, far better that the US should take it. Should this not be the case, Israel is capable of military action that will set back Iran's nuclear program for perhaps five years. (General Kupervasser suggests that the memory of what Israel did might well remain for far longer than five years and act as a deterrence to rebuilding.) The military action would be difficult for Israel because multiple sites are involved, but it would be doable. The General, of course, was not at liberty to speak about how this would be done, nor would he address actions that might be taken by Israel should Iran go nuclear before that military operation was put into place. (He has genuine concern about delays that might end up bringing us to that point –– in essence action should have been taken yesterday.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Coincidentally, Haaretz reports just today on a statement by Commander of the Israel Air Force, Major General Eliezer Shkedi, who said in a television interview that "in Nazi Germany, people didn't believe that Hitler meant what he was saying. I suggest that we refrain from repeating that line of reasoning and prepare ourselves for anything." According to Haaretz, Shkedi, who is soon to retire from his position, spent much of his service "dedicated to the preparation for a possible mission that was never discussed in public: an Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities, should international economic sanctions prove to be fruitless." ~~~~~~~~~~ Looking back over the past week, we see the following, which merits at least passing mention: Talk of a "truce" (technically a hudna) in Gaza. First it came from Carter, when he met with Hamas officials, and then from the Egyptians, who were speaking about a six-month lull. The big breakthrough was ostensibly that Hamas was willing to have this hudna just in Gaza, with hopes that it would eventually extend to Judea and Samaria as well, but with no demand that it be inclusive from the start. No point in revisiting all of the details or statements, because in the end it is not sincere on the part of Hamas and (presumably) it is not going to happen. Yesterday Mashaal told al-Jazzeera that there might be a ceasefire but that: "It is a tactic in conducting the struggle. ... It is normal for any resistance that operates in its people's interest ... to sometimes escalate, other times retreat a bit...the battle is to be run this way and Hamas is known for that. In 2003, there was a cease-fire and then the operations were resumed." That, to a tee, is the description of a hudna –– an official lull that allows Arabs to regroup and strengthen towards the time of renewing "the struggle." We must hope that Israeli officials do understand this. Hamas, which is hurting, is seeking a lifting of the blockade of Gaza in exchange for the ceasefire, but at a minimum would have to get other groups such as Islamic Jihad on board. ~~~~~~~~~~ It made big news this past week when it was revealed that Olmert –– using the Turks as a go-between –– allegedly made an offer to Syria to return the Golan Heights in exchange for peace. That it came just when the details about Syria's nuclear reactor were being made public seemed to many as more than a little strange. There are claims that the connection in timing was not incidental –– that there was some intention on Olmert's part to allow Syria to salvage some dignity at a time of embarrassment, so that it would not overreact precipitously. (I am not sanctioning such an approach –– merely reporting on it.) At any rate, this will in the end also be talk that comes to nothing. For what was not emphasized in most media reports about Israel's willingness to give up the Golan was what was expected in return –– cessation of assistance to Hezbollah, a break with Iran, throwing Mashaal of Hamas out of the country, etc. This is simply not about to happen. In a statement to the Qatari paper Al Watan, today, Assad said that the time has not come for direct talks between Syria and Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Golan is not only a significant strategic asset to Israel because of its height, it is also a much loved and strikingly beautiful area where vineyards thrive and recreational facilities have been established. Not insignificantly, it is the watershed for a good deal of Israel's water. Considered by Israeli law to be fully a part of modern Israel (civic and not military law applies), it is a region that according to Jewish law was also part of the ancient land of Israel (religious laws of the land, such as shmitah, apply here). Most Israelis are much opposed to surrendering this area and a measure is being brought to the Knesset that would require approval within a national referendum before the Golan could be relinquished. ~~~~~~~~~~ At the beginning of Pesach, three disguised vehicles, carrying a considerable volume of explosives, was driven towards the Keren Shalom crossing between Israel and Gaza and detonated. Thirteen IDF troops were wounded. Keren Shalom is a crossing through which humanitarian supplies are driven. This is one of a series of events in which terrorists attempt to do damage to the very facilities that make life more bearable for the people of Gaza. To many this is simply incomprehensible, but that's because we're not thinking like terrorists. The guess in most quarters is that the terrorists believe it is better that the people suffer than that Israel look good for helping. In fact, suffering Gazans makes great PR. In the case of Keren Shalom, 200 trucks laden with humanitarian supplies are permitted by Israel to enter Gaza each week. According to Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant, head of the Southern Command, "Hamas is exploiting the compassion and generosity of the State of Israel by targeting humanitarian crossings. This is a deliberate attack against aiding the Palestinian population." There is a further speculation that humanitarian compassion demonstrated by Israel is perceived by the terrorists as a sign of our weakness. ~~~~~~~~~~ A similar action took place just today, when Hamas gunmen inside of Gaza attacked trucks on their way to Nahal Oz in Israel in order to receive fuel. The trucks, which had to turn back, were scheduled to bring fuel to UNRWA and to hospitals in Gaza. ~~~~~~~~~~ While on Friday, Shimon Mizrachi and Eli Wasserman, two Israeli security guards at the Nitzane Shalom Industrial Zone, were shot dead by a Palestinian terrorist coming out of nearby Tulkarm. The complex houses nine factories that provide jobs to Palestinians. Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Fatah's Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades all claimed responsibility. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
SAGAMORI ON "PALESTINIANS"
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, April 27, 2008. |
|
Dear friends, On too many occasions these days you hear the name "Palestine" as if such a country exists. Arabs in Judea Samaria and Gaza are called "Palestinians" as if such a nation has existed for centuries. All my efforts to find on the map a place called "Palestine" (except of course on Arab "Palestinian" maps) have failed. The mere fact that Arabs in Judea Samaria and Gaza decided in 1964 to call themselves "Palestinian," does not make them a nation. Ignorance, stupidity, chutzpa, or malice are the reasons behind those who dare distort history to such an egregious degree. Here is a reprint of a poignant article on the subject by the inimitable Yashiko Sagamori See what you think. |
|
"A View Of The Palestinians"
If you are so sure that "Palestine, the country, goes back through most of recorded history", I expect you to be able to answer a few basic questions about that country of Palestine: When was it founded and by whom? What were its borders? What was its capital? What were its major cities? What constituted the basis of its economy? What was its form of government? Can you name at least one Palestinian leader before Arafat? Was Palestine ever recognized by a country whose existence, at that time or now, leaves no room for interpretation? What was the language of the country of Palestine? What was the prevalent religion of the country of Palestine? What was the name of its currency? Choose any date in history and tell what was the approximate exchange rate of the Palestinian monetary unit against the US dollar, German mark, GB pound, Japanese yen, or Chinese Yuan on that date. And, finally, since there is no such country today, what caused its demise and when did it occur? You are lamenting the "low sinking" of a "once proud" nation. Please tell me, when exactly was that "nation" proud and what was it so proud of? And here is the least sarcastic question of all: If the people you mistakenly call "Palestinians" are anything but generic Arabs collected from all over –– or thrown out of –– the Arab world, if they really have a genuine ethnic identity that gives them right for self-determination, why did they never try to become independent until Arabs suffered their devastating defeat in the Six Day War? I hope you avoid the temptation to trace the modern day "Palestinians" to the Biblical Philistines: substituting etymology for history won't work here. The truth should be obvious to everyone who wants to know it. Arab countries have never abandoned the dream of destroying Israel; they still cherish it today. Having time and again failed to achieve their evil goal with military means, they decided to fight Israel by proxy. For that purpose, they created a terrorist organization, cynically called it "the Palestinian people" and installed it in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. How else can you explain the refusal by Jordan and Egypt to unconditionally accept back the "West Bank" and Gaza, respectively? The fact is, Arabs populating Gaza, Judea, and Samaria have much less claim to nationhood than that Indian tribe that successfully emerged in Connecticut with the purpose of starting a tax-exempt casino: at least that tribe had a constructive goal that motivated them. The so called "Palestinians" have only one motivation: the destruction of Israel, and in my book that is not sufficient to consider them a nation" –– or anything else except what they really are: a terrorist organization that will one day be dismantled. In fact, there is only one way to achieve peace in the Middle East. Arab countries must acknowledge and accept their defeat in their war against Israel and, as the losing side should, pay Israel reparations for the more than 50 years of devastation they have visited on it. The most appropriate form of such reparations would be the removal of their terrorist organization from the land of Israel and accepting Israel's ancient sovereignty over Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. That will mark the end of the Palestinian people. What are you saying again was its beginning? You are absolutely correct in your understanding of the "Palestinians" murderous motives. I am afraid however that you, along with 99% of the population of this planet have missed the beginning of WWIII (the enemy call it Jihad) quite a few years ago. The siege of the US embassy in Tehran in 1979, an event to which the latest Nobel Peace Prize winner had somiserably failed to respond, can be very well used as the day WWIII stepped out of the pages of the Koran and into the current events. I pray the United States and Israel lead the world to victory in this war. Come to think of it, there is no choice, be you a Christian, or even, believe it or not, a Muslim. Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
SHAKIRA POLITICKING UNDER THE GUISE OF SPOKESPERSON FOR YOUTH ADVOCACY GROUP
Posted by Carrie Devorah, April 27, 2008. | |
|
Media was called to cover a press conference on youth and education (as per Press Release.) Unexpected was how a global youth advocacy group could use congressional time and money to advocate for "palestine." Of immediate note upon entering the room was the young man pic left wearing the kafiyah, holding it on his shoulders, it being the accepted symbol for "palestine/supporters." Two youth were invited to speak –– the young woman and a young man. The young woman, in listing the countries represented listed few countries –– one of which was PALESTINE as she said and gestured when speaking. Much later I was told Shakira will not perform in Israel. Her father is or has family connections in Lebanon. Shakira was a guest of Nita Lowey D-NY and Gene Sperling, former Clinton staffer and currently serving on Council of Foreign Relations, also affiliated with Angelina Jolie, unabashed in her affiliations with similar groups. Of concern is the fact congressional reps are advocating global programs to benefit one side of a political divide. Should a congressional person or congressional real estate be used to advocate against Israel? My guess is C-span covered the whole of the event.
Carrie Devorah is a Washington DC-based photographer. Contact her at editor@carrieon.com |
|
166 EDUCATIONAL WEBSITES ABOUT THE HOLOCAUST
Posted by Jacob Richman, April 27, 2008. |
|
Shalom. Holocaust Remembrance Day is Thursday, May 1, 2008. I posted on my website 166 links to learn about the Holocaust. Site languages include English, Hebrew, French, German, Italian, Portuguese, Russian and Spanish. All 166 links have been reviewed / checked this week. The web address is: http://www.jr.co.il/hotsites/j-holoc.htm The top of the page should display the 2008 date. If the page has an older date, hold the control key and press the F5 key to refresh your browser with the updated page. Please forward this message to relatives and friends, so they can benefit from these educational resources. We must not forget. Contact Jacob Richam by email at jrichman@jr.co.il |
|
60 YEARS ON THE MAP
Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, April 26, 2008. |
|
This is due to be published in the next few days in the Jerusalem Post. |
|
Israel's major accomplishment in 60 years of independence is surviving –– staying on the map as a sovereign state, with equal status among the nations of the world. The many economic and cultural achievements have helped to contribute to this survival, and the desire for peace with our neighbors remains unfulfilled, but the triumph is that we are here. The primary goal of Zionism was and remains the re-establishment of sovereignty and self-determination for the Jewish people in our homeland. In addition to fulfilling the 2000 year old desire to return to Eretz Yisrael, the history of persecution (particularly in Christian Europe), expulsions, and pogroms culminating in the Holocaust demonstrated the dangers of dependence on others. In the modern world, the Jewish people could only survive, both physically and culturally, by regaining and maintaining national independence, equal to the Christian nations of Europe, the Moslem nations of the Middle East, and the others across the globe. The alternative was to disappear from the stage, along with the richness of the Hebrew language, and the heritage of 4000 years of Jewish history and tradition. 60 years ago, as the British prepared to leave and the Arab armies planned their invasion, most observers and policy makers predicted disaster for the nascent Jewish state. Arab leaders, such as Azzam Pasha, who was the Secretary-General of the Arab League, boasted: "This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades." American and European military officials and diplomats looked at the apparently overwhelming Arab advantages in weapons, population size and territory, and urged the Jews not to declare independence. Against these predictions, the tenacity and motivation of Israelis, aided by the intense identification and support from the Diaspora, have ensured the independence of the Jewish state. For the Arab and Moslem "rejectionists" (including the Iranians, who are claiming leadership of this group), the idea of Jewish sovereignty in the "Moslem Middle East" was and remains unacceptable. This fundamental conflict, and not differences over borders, post-1967 settlements and occupation, is the core of the conflict and has led to the wars of aggression and mass terror attacks against Israel. This rejectionism is often expressed through proposals for the "one state solution", the nullification of the Jewish symbols of the Israeli state (including the calendar and flag), and the demand that millions of Arabs who claim refugee status from 1948 have a "right of return", and thereby create an Arab majority. Similarly, the attempt to deny the 4000 year history of Jewish Jerusalem, as expressed in Palestinian textbooks, and by Yasir Arafat at the Camp David summit with President Clinton in 2000, also reflects this effort reverse Israel's status as an independent Jewish state. The campaigns in Western Europe and elsewhere that use labels such as "apartheid" and "racist" in reference to Israel and Zionism, and the strategy of boycotts, divestment and sanctions (BDS) are part of the efforts to deny the legitimacy of Jewish sovereignty. The same is true for the blanket condemnations of Israeli responses to terror attacks and the attempt to deny Israel the right to self-defense that is enjoyed by all other sovereign and independent nations. Similarly, the false claims of "war crimes" and "collective punishment" are used constantly to demonize Israel in the United Nations and by non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that exploit the rhetoric of morality to demonize Israel. This was also the main objective of the infamous 2001 Durban Conference, and the planned 2009 Review Conference, to be led by Iran, Libya and Cuba. The delegitimation and demonization of Zionism, and the singling out of Israel for special treatment, while erasing the context of Palestinian terrorism and other violent attacks, have become the modern form of antisemitism. In many examples, particularly among some of the leaders of the boycotts in British churches and universities, the themes of classical Christian anti-Semitism, including blood libels, have been revived as part of the intense anti-Israel propaganda. The few outspoken Jewish academics who confront this form of racism are themselves subject to antisemitic attacks. In the face of this intense and ongoing hostility, Israel's ability not only to survive, but to thrive, is the main story marking 60 years of independence. With 6 million Jewish citizens of Israel, ten times the population in 1948, the Hebrew language has been reinvigorated, and the Jewish culture has been preserved. At the same time, progress towards the acceptance of Jewish sovereignty equality among the nations of the world is painfully slow, and the struggle has been and will continue to be exhausting. But there are no better choices –– without the State of Israel, the remnants of the Jewish people, history, and culture will disappear. Gerald M. Steinberg is the Executive Director of NGO Monitor and chairman of the Political Studies Department of Bar Ilan University, Israel |
|
THE TELEGRAPH BUTCHERS THE TRUTH ABOUT GAZA
Posted by Dave Nathan, April 26, 2008. |
|
This is from Camera. |
|
An April 23 Telegraph (UK newspaper) article by Tim Butcher, "A portrait of life and death in Gaza," butchers the truth about Gaza with distortions, prejudicial language and one-sided reporting. According to Butcher, Gaza's economic woes are due to Israel's actions and it's only natural that Gazans would resent Israel. Nowhere does he mention the rampant anti-Israel incitement or any responsibility the Palestinians themselves might have for the lack of jobs and investment in Gaza. He fails to connect Gaza's poor economy with the Gazans' wanton destruction of the multi-million dollar greenhouse industry given to them after the Israeli withdrawal, the extremism and lack of the rule of law that make it unlikely that any large corporations would feel safe investing millions to turn Gaza's beautiful Mediterranean coastline into a tourist destination, or the relentless bombing of Israel from Gaza, which requires Israel to respond militarily and to close its borders to Gaza's workers and goods. While noting that Gazans are "without a meaningful economy," Mr. Butcher also never broaches the fact that enormous amounts of international aid have been squandered by the Palestinian leadership on weapons and terrorist training camps in Gaza. There is no focus on Hamas ignoring the basic needs of its electorate, in favor of unrelenting rocket attacks on Israeli civilians. Indicative of Butcher's partisan slant, he writes: "The Jewish state insists it fires only at confirmed military targets, but the death toll among Gazan civilians dwarfs the number of civilian Israelis killed." So, according to Butcher's odd logic, if the Palestinians were successful in murdering more Israeli civilians, and the numbers of civilians killed on both sides were more equal, somehow that would convince him that Israel really does aim at military targets? Does Butcher really see no difference between a Palestinian terrorist deliberately striving to bomb Israeli civilians versus an Israeli soldier deliberately striving to strike only terrorist targets, but inadvertently hitting civilians? Since Palestinians from Gaza launch rockets at Israeli civilians on a daily basis, it's certainly not for lack of trying that they haven't murdered scores of Israeli civilians. Butcher omits the fact that it is Palestinian war crimes that are responsible for the death of civilians on both sides. Palestinians launch rockets at Israeli civilians from within heavily populated Palestinian civilian areas, knowingly inviting Israeli fire at the launch sites, which will unfortunately sometimes result in death and injuries to innocent Palestinian bystanders. Contact Dave Nathan at DaveNathan@aol.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: PICKING UP AGAIN
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 26, 2008. |
|
After a Pesach recess it would be lovely to return to good news, but that is hardly to be expected. The most "optimistic" information I've encountered is the report, today, that Abbas, returning from a visit with Bush, is not upbeat about the chances for "peace" by the end of Bush's term. Seems the US won't pressure Israel enough for Abbas's satisfaction. Abbas –– upright fellow that he is –– says he's going to keep negotiating to the end; that happens to be the only way to keep getting all those international perks, it should be mentioned. Hamas officials are urging him to give it up and turn back towards mending fences with them. ~~~~~~~~~~ What I'd like to focus on here is the arrest this past week of US citizen Ben-Ami Kadish, for alleged espionage. Much ado is being made of this, but it is not quite what it appears. The charges involve transfer of classified information by Kadish, who was a US army mechanical engineer, to someone in the Israeli consulate, between the years 1979 and 1985. The level of information was not high, as Kadish did not have a high clearance, and the number of transfers of data was relatively small. Most significantly, it is my understanding that the US KNEW about Kadish's activities since 2004, at which time he was questioned by the FBI. So why arrest him now? The answer is political. Quite simply, while we find firm friends in the Congress and the Pentagon, there are also anti-Israel forces at work in the US –– in the State Department (which is self-evident) and in the Justice Department and within the Intelligence community. Seeing Israel as a burden that gets in the way of US relations with the Arabs, rather than a critical ally, they are seeking to undermine Israel's position at a critical juncture. There are various theories as to precisely what the goal of this arrest is, but the guessing is that this may involve either pressure on Israel for more concessions to the PA, or Bush's up-coming visit here for Israel's 60th Independence Day. Bush has tentatively planned a variety of "gifts" for Israel that involve military cooperation and sale of cutting edge military equipment. ~~~~~~~~~~ Caroline Glick has yet another theory about what may be going on. Kadish's arrest, she points out, happened on the same day that the news broke that Congress was going to be briefed about Israel's strike on the nuclear reactor in Syria last September. It seems that Israel's absolute silence on this matter was at US insistence. Stories regarding American concern that this news would cause unrest aside, Glick points out that there were other US motivations for keeping this quiet. Israeli intelligence acquired the information on the reactor while US intelligence had missed it –– thereby exposing the superiority of Israeli intelligence and Israel's value to the US as an ally. Then, too, there is the fact that the reactor was put together with N. Korean assistance, even as Rice continues to delude herself regarding her diplomatic success in getting N. Korea to abandon nuclear efforts. Embarrassing for the US. So, a good time to embarrass Israel.
~~~~~~~~~~ A regular pattern of attempts by the US Intelligence community to go after or embarrass Israel can be traced. Remember the AIPAC officials who were charged four years ago with passing information to Israel? The case, which has shown itself to be weak to the point of the ridiculous, has never come to court. And there are similar other instances of such actions. ~~~~~~~~~~ What is particularly galling is the fact that some spying is "routine" even between presumed allies, and most of the time not much is made of it. On several occasions, Israel has caught Americans spying here, but these spies receive no more than a slap on the list and banishment from the country. There are no arrests and no PR spectacles. Glick suggests that this should chance, and I very much concur. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
TERRITORIAL INTEGRITY: AMERICAN MIDDLE EAST POLICY AND WHAT IT MEANS FOR ISRAEL
Posted by Avodah, April 26, 2008. |
|
This is an article by Ami Isseroff and it appeared
on the Zionism and Israel Center website:
This article points out it has always been US policy to force Israel to trade land for peace. |
|
Sometimes we fail to notice the most important and obvious facts, precisely because they are right before our eyes, or because they are unpleasant to acknowledge. There is one overriding fact about American policy toward Israel that has been ignored in this way. In 1975, US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told the Iraqi foreign minister, in a secret meeting: We can't negotiate about the existence of Israel, but we can reduce its size to historical proportions. I don't agree that Israel is a permanent threat. How can a nation of three million be a permanent threat? They have a technical advantage now. But it is inconceivable that peoples with wealth and skill and the tradition of the Arabs won't develop the capacity that is needed. So I think in ten to fifteen years, Israel will be like Lebanon –– struggling for existence, with no influence in the Arab world. (see Kissinger tells Iraqis, "We Can Reduce Israel's Size") Revelation of this cynical conversation produced confusion among Zionists. Kenneth Stein was unable to say if this represented United States Policy or Kissinger's opinion or if Kissinger was simply trying to entice the Iraqis back into the US orbit. Stripped of some of the "icing," Kissinger was expressing what was no more and no less than US policy, and had been US policy since 1967 if not before and what remains US policy today. That is, to barter Israeli land for a peace deal, and to use US influence on Israel as a lever to gain influence in the Arab world. It was always the public policy of the United States, through administrations of both parties and under every presidency, and there was absolutely no reason to be surprised by Kissinger's promise to the Iraqis. Kenneth Stein agonized somewhat over whether or not Kissinger really meant what he had said: Kissinger's statement to Hammadi that the U.S. envisioned Israel as becoming small and non-threatening like Lebanon may have been U.S. foreign policy, or his personal view, or ingratiating diplomacy, or some combination of the three. Regardless, Kissinger's comments were what Hammadi wanted to hear. Stein also quoted a statement by Nixon to Syrian President Assad: President Richard Nixon told Syrian president Hafez al-Assad that Washington was committed to seeing an "Israeli withdrawal from all the occupied territories" (cited by Stein as taken from "Letter from President Ford to Prime Minister Rabin, September 1, 1975," reproduced in Michael Widlanski, Can Israel Survive A Palestinian State? (Jerusalem: Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, 1990). For some reason, Stein is doubtful if this was the policy of the United States. The reason for his doubt is hard to understand. Both secret and public documents have made it clear that United States policy regarding Israel since the Six Day War was centered around the idea that the United States must get Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories in order to satisfy the Arab states. U.S. diplomats and legislators, beginning in 1967, bemoaned the fact that Israel had achieved the Six Day War victory without U.S. aid, and therefore the United States had no way to force its withdrawal. This is revealed, for example, in Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee hearings held on June 9, 1967: It is a fact, is it not, that neither Soviet Russia nor the United States has given any material amounts of arms to Israel, and, if that is true, are they not relatively independent in their thinking at this point? It should be clear that "reducing the size of Israel" was always a goal of the United States since June 1967. On May 23, 1967, President Johnson had made a statement regarding US commitment to the territorial integrity of all nations, seemingly with the intention of reassuring Israel.. Following the June war, this statement was repeated, but now that Israel had conquered chunks of Jordanian, Egyptian and Syrian territory, it took on a new meaning: The US would pressure Israel to withdraw from the conquered territories in return for peace. In a State Department telegram sent on June 12 to the US Embassy in Israel, the following wording was included: As far as the attitude of the US is concerned, our principal points of departure are (a) President Johnson's reaffirmation on May 23 of long-standing American policy that "the United States is firmly committed to the support of the political independence and territorial integrity of all the nations of the area"; ...(c) the vital interest of the United States in its own relations with the Arab and Muslim world, a relationship in which Israel itself has an important stake... Ambassador Barbour replied on June 13 that he had in fact apprised Israeli Foreign Minister Abba Eban of these positions: As to United States points of departure I mentioned President's reaffirmation on May 23 of our commitment to support the political independence and territorial integrity of all nations in the area, the necessity to establish a regime of peace eliminating claims by either side of the right to infringe on the rights of others because of belligerency, U.S. vital interests in relation to the Arab world, and the overriding necessity that through magnanimous and imaginative policies, the foundations laid for a genuine reconciliation among peoples of the area. Yet again, from the same file, in response to Saudi and Aramco pressure on the U.S. regarding Israeli withdrawal, the following text was included in a telegram sent, also on June 13, from the U.S. State Department to the U.S. Embassy in Saudi Arabia: 3. In connection problems growing out of recent Arab-Israel hostilities, you may call attention addressee governments to long-standing USG support for territorial integrity and political independence of all states of the Near East. This position was re-stated by President Johnson today./3/ The USG desires the maintenance of friendly ties with all the countries of the region. In our view it is of the first importance for all to take steps now to assure that there is an end to the periodic hostilities and the state of belligerency which have marked Near Eastern history in the last two decades. The USG is fully prepared to join the other states to work for lasting arrangements which will serve permanently to reduce tensions in this region. And, from a later file of declassified documents, we have this statement: The tough question is whether we'd force Israel back to 4 June borders if the Arabs accepted terms that amounted to an honest peace settlement. Secretary Rusk told the Yugoslav Foreign Minister: "The US had no problem with frontiers as they existed before the outbreak of hostilities. If we are talking about national frontiers--in a state of peace--then we will work toward restoring them. But we all know that could lead to a tangle with the Israelis. There was, therefore, every reason for both President Nixon and Henry Kissinger to make the statements they had made about Israeli withdrawal, and they were by no means expressing their private opinions, but rather the stated policies of the United States government. The Johnson administration was unable to fulfill its ambition of forcing Israeli withdrawal. The Arab states under the leadership of Nasser were too intransigent to make even a show of peaceful intentions, and adopted the Khartoum resolutions. At the same time, the United States had no leverage whatever on Israel, since it had not supplied the arms with which the Six Day War was won, and had in fact, reneged on its promise to support Israel's navigation rights when it was put to the test. In order to force Israeli withdrawal, the United States would first need to gain some leverage on Israel. The US adopted a two fold approach to regaining its standing in the Middle East. The first part was to make Israel dependent upon it for arms and diplomatic backing, while at the same time working for a permanent peace settlement and Israeli withdrawal. The "peace settlement" part would be satisfactory to the pro-Israel faction that was generally in charge in the White House, while the Israeli withdrawal part would satisfy the rank and file career diplomats of the State Department, who never had excessive love for Israel or people of the Jewish persuasion. ... The US supports Israel in order to use return of the territories conquered in the Six Day War to gain leverage with Arab states. This policy worked admirably for many years. By 1975, the US had purchased the leverage on Israel by its role in the Yom Kippur War, in which it had agreed to resupply Israel through the air-lift. The Yom Kippur war made it clear to Israel that the scale of military engagements in the Middle East had changed radically since 1967, and that it could therefore no longer be militarily independent. The quantities of armaments and materiel consumed in a few short days of fighting necessitated a replacement capacity that could not be provided in a practical way by increasing the capacity of the Israeli military industries, and the technological innovations required were beyond the capabilities of Israel. Kissinger persuaded Nixon to resupply the Israelis in 1973, and Kissinger then used the leverage purchased by resupply to push for Israeli withdrawals in Sinai. The fruits of this policy for the US were the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty and US displacement of Russian influence in Egypt, and eventually, the Jordanian –– Israeli peace treaty and the Oslo process. In a masterly stroke, President Carter cemented both Israeli and Egyptian dependence on the US with large foreign aid deals. It has been very important for the United States to maintain this dependence. The torpedoing of the LAVIE interceptor project in the 80s was a great victory for US policy and another nail in the coffin of Israeli political independence. Thanks to that defeat, every time Israel attacks Palestinians or Hezbollah, it must use US aircraft, allowing anti-Zionists to point out that the "Zionist war criminals" are using US supplied weapons. In any case, what Kissinger told the Iraqis was apparently, a slightly "adapted" version of actual US policy. If it was shocking to some people, it is because they never understood and didn't want to understand what had been declared plainly many times. The same policy has been spelled out again quite recently by George Bush in his speech on the Middle East, and more recently by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in an interview with Sawa television. Israel will have to withdraw from the West Bank. ... Zionists in Israel and abroad who want Israel to keep the territories of the West Bank, and who sometimes label Israeli politicians as traitors because of concessions to Palestinians, need to understand that these concessions are concessions to the US government. In reality, the results and aftermath of the Six Day War are the full length novel version of the little episode of the 1956 Suez Campaign. After that campaign, President Eisenhower forced a precipitate Israeli withdrawal in return for "guarantees" that turned out to be worthless. Following the Six Day war, Israel has a better chance of getting guarantees that will not be worthless in return for withdrawal, but the withdrawal is evisaged by the US as equally inevitable.... Acute analysts will note that if Israel ever does return all of the conquered territories, then Israel would be of no further use in American attempts to ingratiate itself with the Arabs. At the same time, America would have very little leverage with the Arabs unless it pressed Israel for further concessions. Without doubt, there are those in the US diplomatic corps who would not be averse to exerting such pressure. Israeli politicians therefore have to think ahead to what American policy might be two days after the peace treaty is signed, when some Arab states, or Muslim groups, inevitably, nonetheless declare their objections to the presence of Israel in the Middle East. From the Israeli point, we will have no more territory to concede, but that may not necessarily be the American view. After all, in the early 50s, the US was behind a plan to get Israel to make concessions to Egypt in the Negev. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
"WE CEASE, THEY FIRE": ANATOMY OF LAST YEAR'S CEASEFIRE DISASTER THAT EVERYONE'S FORGOTTEN
Posted by Noam Bedein, April 26, 2008. |
|
"Hamas could learn both positive and negative lessons from the last round of escalation. On the positive side, it succeeded in consistently and systematically launching rockets at Israel, extending the rockets' range to Ashkelon, and it had victories in the battle for hearts and minds." –– from the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center's (ITIC) summary of the recent escalation of rocket terror There is talk circulating about the opportunity to communicate and reach an understanding with Hamas, to give Hamas a chance to foster a ceasefire with Israel. How many people remember that there was, in fact, such a 'ceasefire' with Hamas-controlled Gaza only one year ago? How many people remember what occurred during that 'ceasefire'? Well, the people in Sderot and the western Negev remember. Even if no one else does. Let us refresh out memories. >From November 26, 2006, until May 15, 2007, a ceasefire between Hamas and Israel went on for almost six months. One cannot ignore the statement made by Hamas five days before the ceasefire: "Hamas's military wing will stop the rocket fire when residents evacuate the city of Sderot." (from November 21, 2006) During that 'ceasefire', Gazans launched 315 missiles targeted at Sderot and the western Negev, according to an IDF spokesman. There was not one IDF response to the rocket fire during that ceasefire period. During a recent presentation at the IDC in Herzliya, to the cream of the crop of students of Israeli intelligence, the audience reacted with disbelief when they heard that there already was a 'ceasefire' last year, and that it wasn't kept in the slightest. Mecca Agreement During that 'ceasefire' period, on February 27, 2007, there was an agreement reached between the Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen). The agreement took place three months after the ceasefire went into effect; after 160 missiles had been fired at Israel since the day the 'ceasefire' commenced. Mashaal promised, in Moscow, to stop the Kassam rocket attacks. Two days later, seven missiles were launched from the Gaza Strip towards Israel. The question begs to be asked: What kind of Western democracy in the world would allow for a one-sided ceasefire? What other state would allow for a rocket to explode within its territory? Israel is going to celebrate 60 years of its independence in a few more weeks, as for the first time in 40 years a significant portion of its population are living under rocket threat. In the north, Hizbullah threatens with rocket fire from southern Lebanon. In the southern area of Israel, Hamas continues to fire from Gaza at Sderot, the western Negev and now Ashkelon. Hamas is also developing rockets that will reach Ashdod. At this point, up to half a million Israelis will be under rocket fire. No family in the state of Israel should have to live under rocket threat. At 60 years of independence, Israel's goal should be to end the rocket terror upon its citizens. It all starts with Sderot. Also, what most people forget is that Israel's adversaries are not advocating a 'ceasfire'; they promote a hudna. A hudna means no more than a temporary respite in the war between Islamic forces and non-Islamic forces. The authoritative Islamic Encyclopedia (London, 1922) defines hudna as a "temporary treaty" which can be approved or abrogated by Islamic religious leaders, depending on whether or not it serves the interests of Islam; and a hudna cannot last for more than 10 years. The Islamic Encyclopedia mentions the Hudaybia treaty as the ultimate hudna. Yasser Arafat also talked about a hudna in his speeches when he would refer to the Oslo Accords. In the words of the Islamic Encyclopedia, "The Hudaybia treaty, concluded by the Prophet Mohammad with the unbelievers of Mecca in 628, provided a precedent for subsequent treaties which the Prophet's successors made with non-Muslims. Mohammad made a hudna with a tribe of Jews back then to give him time to grow his forces, then broke the treaty and wiped them out. Although this treaty was violated within three years from the time that it was concluded, most jurists concur that the maximum period of peace with the enemy should not exceed ten years, since it was originally agreed that the Hudaybia treaty should last ten years." Noam Bedein is Director of the Regional News Service for Sderot & the Western Negev, a project of the Sderot Information Center for the Western Negev, Ltd, www.sderot-media.com |
|
WHAT HAS BECOME OF THE MYRICK PLAN?
Posted by David Meir-Levi, April 26, 2008. | |
|
The Myrick plan, enunciated in Congress by Rep. Sue Myrick (NC), is a powerful new approach, at the national Congressional level, to dealing effectively with the threat posed to our nation and to our civilization by islamo-fascist jihad terrorism, including both terror threats from abroad and the growing threat of jihadist terrorists already safely ensconced inside of our borders right now. Yet her work in the House of Representatives has merited almost no coverage in our press, and only some tepid responses from her colleagues. I urge y'all to write to your congress-persons and urge them to support Rep. Myrick in activating her plan (see summaries below). David Meir-Levi | |
|
From the Sue Myrick website:
Sue is also leading the charge nationally on issues related to terrorism. She is the founder of the Congressional Anti-Terrorism Caucus, which has more than 120 Members. This caucus meets with experts on terrorism and works to educate the public about the dangers we face from Islamofascism. "Myrick Aces, D.C. Flunks 'Jihadism 101'"
Reading U.S. Rep. Sue Myrick's "Wake Up America" agenda –– a 10-point plan targeting potential jihadist infiltration into this country's military, security, educational and financial institutions –– triggers mixed emotions. First, relief. Finally, there is an elected official who understands the urgency of these festering national security threats. Virtually every other elected U.S. official, up to and including the president (and presidential candidates) has shockingly ignored these same threats. Which leads to a flash of panic: How could our leaders have allowed so many years go by without taking action? Then comes, for me at least, a sense of resolve to help Myrick accomplish her goals by trying to boost a much-needed national conversation about the jihadist threat at home. The North Carolina Republican's plan warms up with two calls for investigations into those U.S. chaplains, in both the US military and the prison system, who were approved by Abdurahman Alamoudi, the convicted terrorist and Muslim Brotherhood (MB) member now serving 23 years in prison. In the early 1990s, back when he was something of a Washington power broker, Alamoudi helped set up the Pentagon's Muslim chaplain corps in conjunction with the Institute of Islamic and Arabic Sciences in America, a Saudi-funded operation that specializes in what you might call Jihadism 101. Alamoudi went to prison back in 2004, but no one since, in the military or the prisons, seems to have taken a second look at what his prodigies might be preaching (terrorism? treason? whatever?). Myrick plans to check into it herself. Next, she plans to ask the Government Accounting Office (GAO) to examine the process by which the FBI and Defense Department select Arabic translators. Of particular concern to Myrick –– but not, incredibly, to the FBI or the Defense Department –– is these two agencies' mind-boggling practice of advertising for recruits in what can only be described as pro-terrorism publications. Next on the congresswoman's to-do list is a call for an Internal Revenue Service investigation into the nonprofit status of the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Such status restricts "lobbying on behalf of a foreign government," but, as Myrick notes, plenty of foreign funds have found their way into CAIR's coffers to beg the question. Another Myrick plan is to introduce a bill to make preaching, publishing, distributing or financing calls for the death of Americans or American troops an act of sedition or solicitation of treason. She also wants to ask the GAO to assess total sovereign wealth fund investment in the United States. Such massive funds, owned and controlled by governments, first came to many Americans' attention with the recent purchase by the United Arab Emirates of a large stake in Citigroup; in recent years, however, there has been a spike in such foreign government investment in the United States. This raises concerns (that is, it should raise concerns) about the political goals of such funds –– for example, the spread of Islamic law through "Sharia-compliant banking." Thankfully, Myrick is concerned. The last few points on the Myrick agenda focus on the appalling lack of reciprocity and common sense in our nation's dealings with Saudi Arabia. Regarding the student visa program that is supposed to bring 21,000 Saudi students to this country, Myrick would attach the condition that the Saudis rewrite their textbooks to omit incitement against non-Muslims; regarding religious visas for imams, she would require of Islamic countries reciprocal visa arrangements for non-Muslim clergy; and regarding U.S. training of Saudi security forces, she would insist that the Saudis prosecute known Al Qaeda financiers and stop releasing repatriated Guantanamo Bay terrorists in exchange for their pledges not to attack ... Saudi Arabia. She will also be introducing a bill to block the sale of state-of-the-art offensive munitions to Saudi Arabia, especially Joint Direct Attack Munitions or JDAMs.
Contact information The Honorable Sue Myrick
The Honorable Sue Myrick
The Honorable Sue Myrick
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli,
currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern
studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director
of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org).
Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com
|
|
HIZBULLAH GAINING MILITARY STRENGTH; AGITATION SUBSIDIZED; UNO VS. FREEDOM OF SPEECH
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 25, 2008. |
|
CIVILIAN VS. MILITARY VIEWS PM Olmert now is considering letting the P.A. control the P.A. side of the border between Gaza and Israel. The IDF strongly opposes that. PM Olmert says he would take the step if violence subsided and if European monitors played a greater role than just observing (IMRA, 4/2). The usual course is that Israel's conditions either are not met but Israel gives in anyway, perhaps lying about whether they are met, or the Arabs change those conditions, as when they chased Europeans away, or continued negotiations and US pressure erodes the conditions. Some of the conditions announced in advance may sound prudent, but the final result is reckless. Violence may subside, but jihad does not end. Basing concessions on a temporary reduction in violence rather than on specific anti-terrorism steps is self-deceiving. HIZBULLAH GAINING MILITARY STRENGTH Hizbullah has been moving rockets into Lebanese villages south of the Litani River, contrary to the armistice agreement. UNIFIL can intercept Hizbullah installations only after coordination with the Lebanese Army. The news brief implies that the Lebanese Army does not authorize UNIFIL to intervene (IMRA, 4/2). The armistice agreement was much touted by PM Olmert and his Foreign Minister Livni, who arranged it. It has turned out, as predicted by their critics, to be a poor substitute for victory. The poor Israelis! Their government does not protect them from enemy rockets and does not keep the enemy from rebuilding military forces for further attacks. IMPLICATIONS OF REINFORCING ROOFTOPS IN ISRAEL One of Israel's defensive measures against rocket attacks is to reinforce roofs. That measure implies that Israel can tolerate the attacks. It emboldens the enemy to attack more (Uzi Landau in IMRA, 4/2). Imagine what it does to Israeli morale! The people want to replace the Olmert regime with one dedicated to defending them, but they can't. As the enemy widens the rockets' range, the cost of reinforcement becomes prohibitive. As the enemy makes missiles more lethal, reinforcement becomes useless. EU FUNDING ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT The EU has spent tens of millions of Euros from 2005 –– 2007 on NGOs in Israel and the Territories. Those NGOs have a political agenda on the Arab-Israel conflict. They ignore Arab terrorism and promote boycott, divestment, and sanctions against Israel and only Israel. They defame Israel in the most vicious manner and undermine human rights and Jewish identity, as most of them did at the Durban conference. The NGOs aggravate hostility and the problem. The EU subsidies are not transparent, have vague criteria, are subject to decision-makers' discretion, and there is little accounting for them (IMRA, 4/3). The donations are a source of foreign exchange Israel could do without. If it were a self-respecting country, it would ban subsidies for subversion. Well, if it were self-respecting, it would do a lot of things, such as not let Arabs steal public land or bombard Israeli cities or beat up Jews in mixed cities. HAARETZ' TWO VOICES Arab leaders describe their actual policies to their own people (actual, because they act on it), but describe fanciful policies to the West, in order to gain acceptance there as moderate. Also using two voices, the Israeli newspaper, Haaretz, is much more anti-Israel in its English-language translations than in its Hebrew editions, read by Israelis, who know the issues better. The English edition mis-described Pisgat Ze'ev, a Jewish neighborhood of northern Jerusalem as a "Jewish settlement surrounded by Arab towns in the W. Bank." Actually, it is not surrounded by Arab towns. Only the most extreme leftists describe Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem as settlements. The original, Hebrew version did not give those false impressions. The Far Left wants to give away that neighborhood, in which tens of thousands of Jews live. Haaretz subverts Israel's position, abroad. Editor David Landau was asked about his suggestion to Sec. Rice that the government of Israel wants to be "raped." He confirmed that he meant what he said and said he understands that Rice took his advice (Arutz-7, 4/3). LEFT'S UNDERHANDED WAY TO EXPEL SETTLERS The Left is said to have proposed compensation for any "settlers" who evacuate, to: (1) Shortcut a democratic decision on which areas to retain; (2) Get Israelis to resent being asked to defend those who don't accept the money; and (3) Make a pretext for reducing defense measures for those who are left. So far, the Jewish population of the Territories grows faster than in the State (IMRA, 4/3). WHAT RESPONSIBILITY HAVE ARABS FOR EACH OTHER? The higher fuel prices that are enriching oil exporting Arab states are helping to raise food prices beyond what many Arabs and foreign workers in other Arab states can afford. Some Arab governments subsidize food or offer other financial support to their people. Others don't. Riots occur. What responsibility have the enriched Arabs for the impoverished ones? (IMRA, 4/4.) Arab states use the Arab-Israel conflict to divert attention from real domestic problems, but they don't assist the impoverished Palestinian Arabs whom they claim to care about. They don't care about them. Most of them deny Arab refugees citizenship. The 140 million other refugees in modern times resettled, but the Arab world keeps its refugee problem seething. Then it looks for sympathy from foreign cultures. AGITATION SUBSIDIZED The Mukhtar of Silwan negotiated with Israeli authorities over archeological excavations. Nevertheless, Arabs there protested, some, violently. They were paid to by a German news agency looking for excitement and by S. Arabian and P.A. agents wanting strife. The Mukhtar said that Islamists threaten any Arab who works with the government of Israel at solving problems (Arutz-7, 4/4). UNO VS. FREEDOM OF SPEECH Muslim and other African members of the UNO Human Rights Commission passed a resolution against expression of opposition to Islam. They call such speech bigotry, but the member states are known for wanting to control speech. The US, which is not a member of the Commission, opposed the resolution. The European members abstained. They have been opposing freedom of expression against opposition to Islam. They censured and censored the Dutch film that expresses serious objections to the hatred espoused by Islam. Europe's opposition to freedom of speech undermines democracy (and defense against jihad). Some of the Europeans are afraid for their lives. The issues raised in the Dutch film are serious and proved. The leftist European officials won't discuss that. British politicians are trying to pass laws banning criticism of Islam (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 4/5) but not Islamic criticism of others. Again we find Bush's US a voice for decency and the European officials, whom Bush is urged to work with, a voice for surrender. The UNO remains evil. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
HARDBALL WITH WASHINGTON
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, April 25, 2008. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared yesterday
in Jerusalem Post
"The first thing [Israel] should do is arrest officials suspected of transferring classified materials to the US without authorization. It should then publish the names and details of US spies whom Israel previously caught and treated with kid gloves. Then it should publicly demand that Bush release Pollard from the prison where he rots, while the likes of Hizbullah agent Nada Prouty –– who penetrated both the FBI and the CIA –– is expected to receive a six-month prison sentence for her crimes." |
|
Tuesday was a banner day, a proud day for Jewish conspiracy theorists in America. People like Joseph E. diGenova smiled with glee as they watched 84-year-old Ben Kadish carted into the Manhattan Federal District courthouse on charges of transferring classified information to Israel 25 years ago. He's just like Jonathan Pollard, they whooped. Another Pollard! At last, we have proof that Israel operates spy rings and SLEEPER CELLS in America! They bragged and bragged and smiled and smiled as their terrorist metaphors got wilder and wilder. Sleeper cells? You mean agents sent to a country to lay in wait for the command to attack? Well, not exactly. DiGenova made his name as the federal prosecutor who railroaded Pollard into a life sentence for crimes that generally should have netted him no more than a few years in the slammer. Obviously he has a way with words. And when he told The New York Times "sleeper cells," apparently he was referring to the FBI agents who went to sleep for 23 years and then suddenly woke up and decided to cart an old man out of his nursing home and charge him with capital crimes. Both the fact that Kadish was released on a paltry $300,000 bail and the details that have been reported about his case make it pretty clear that Kadish was not a very serious spy. The sum total of his alleged actions, which occurred between 1979 and 1985, reportedly involved taking documents out of the library at the Picatinny Arsenal in northern New Jersey where he worked as a mechanical engineer and giving them to an Israeli consular official. The documents weren't highly classified because Kadish had a low security clearance. Out of the 50-100 documents he transferred over six years, three are mentioned in the indictment. He allegedly transferred a document relating to nuclear weapons –– weapons of which by the early 1980s Israel was widely believed to already have its own full arsenal. He allegedly transferred data relating to the F-15 fighter jet, which Israel already owned. And he allegedly transferred information about the Patriot missile defense system –– which the US gave Israel five years later. There is a reason that Israeli commentators are crying foul with the Kadish episode. According to the media reports, in 2004 –– a period in which US-Israeli strategic ties were in turmoil due to Israeli weapons sales to China, US weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, and US adoption of the anti-Israel road map –– the Bush administration pressed the Sharon government to acknowledge that 20 years earlier, when Pollard was transferring documents at a rate of hundreds per week to his Israeli handlers, Israel fielded another agent as well. Presumably, it was then that Israel was forced to divulge Kadish's identity to the Americans. According to the Israeli media, subsequent to Israel's confidential statements to US officials, Kadish was questioned by the FBI and admitted to having transferred documents to Israel. He then left the country, traveled to Israel –– where he could have stayed –– and came home to the US. Most Israeli commentators and unnamed government officials angrily allege that the timing of Kadish's arrest was chosen to damage Israel's relations with the US at a key moment. In two weeks President George W. Bush is scheduled to visit Israel to participate in its 60th Independence Day celebrations. It has been widely presumed that during his visit, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government will seek to secure Bush's agreement to commute Pollard's sentence and release him from prison before Bush leaves office. Kadish, it is alleged, was arrested to block any possibility that Pollard will be released. Given the vindictiveness that has marked the US intelligence community's attitude toward Pollard since his arrest, it is possible that fear of a presidential pardon did inform the decision to arrest Kadish now. And yet, it is far from clear that an agreement on Pollard's release was ever in the cards. Bush has expressed no willingness to consider Israeli appeals for his release and neither the Sharon government nor the Olmert-Livni-Barak government has made any real efforts to secure Pollard's freedom. Indeed, in a sign of their contempt for Pollard, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government has Pollard's former handler, Pensioners Affairs Minister Rafi Eitan, sitting in the security cabinet. It is also possible that Kadish was arrested to try to force Israel to make massive concessions to the Fatah terror group in order to secure a "peace agreement" between Israel and the PLO before Bush leaves office. In the past, the US has used allegations of Israeli espionage to cow Israel into toeing its line of appeasement towards the PLO. In 1997, the Clinton administration let loose hysterical headlines about a high-level Israel mole named "Mega" who had supposedly penetrated the highest levels of the US intelligence community. The story was a complete fabrication, but it came after a suicide bombing in Jerusalem had caused then-prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu to cut off contacts with Yassir Arafat. In 2004, the US indicted two senior AIPAC lobbyists in a transparently political move, claiming that they were trafficking in classified documents to try to force the Bush administration to do something to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The lobbyists are still awaiting their trial, which is looking more and more like a farce every day. But in the meantime, the US has been free from Israeli pressure to take the Iranian nuclear program seriously for four years. Kadish was arraigned the same day that the Los Angeles Times broke the story that CIA Director Michael Hayden would be briefing Congress on Thursday about Israel's September 6 air strike in Syria. For the past six months, the administration did everything it could to prevent any information on the Israeli air strike from getting out. In the end, Hayden was compelled to inform Congress about the details of the raid after the legislature conditioned its approval of the intelligence budget on receiving a full briefing on the air strike. According to the Los Angeles Times report and subsequent stories, Hayden's testimony would acknowledge that US intelligence agencies failed to recognize the dangers of the North Korean-built plutonium reactor that Syria had constructed not far from its border with Turkey. It was Israeli, rather than American intelligence agencies that penetrated the facility, brought back video and physical evidence of its character, and then effectively destroyed it in a complicated air strike and commando raid. So according to US media reports, Hayden's testimony would demonstrate two basic truths that the Jewish conspiracy theorists in the US intelligence community and the State Department are uninterested in having the public or Congress notice: Israeli intelligence is superior to US intelligence; and the US alliance with Israel is vital to US national security. Since Israel's independence 60 years ago and especially since US-Israel strategic ties blossomed after the Six Day War, Washington has been of two minds about the Jewish state. The first, public mind is that Israel is the US's strongest and most reliable ally in the Middle East, and that the US-Israel alliance is strong because it is based on shared values as well as shared interests. The second view is that Israel is a burden. As purveyors of this view see things, Israel is the national "Fagin." It is underhanded, pushy and untrustworthy. Indeed, as far as the anti-Semites in Washington are concerned, Israel is the source of all the US's difficulties in the Arab world and even in Europe. For years, the purveyors of the second view have carried out an independent foreign policy regarding Israel that is completely at odds with the official US policy of embracing Israel as an ally. Indeed, the State Department has undermined every presidential attempt to treat Israel well since 1948. Yet both the Israeli attack against the Syrian nuclear program and Israel's attitude toward espionage show how ridiculous and counterproductive that unofficial –– yet consistent –– US policy toward Israel actually is. In the case of the operation in Syria, protestations of the Israeli Left about not wanting to embarrass Syrian dictator Bashar Assad aside, Israel had a clear national interest in exposing the nature of the target as quickly as possible. Moreover, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert had a political interest in exposing the details of the raid to the Israeli public as quickly as possible. And yet, bowing to US demands, Israel placed draconian censorship regulations on media reports of the strike. To please the likes of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who still clings to the notion that her brilliant diplomatic skills will enable her to convince the North Koreans to give up their nuclear arsenal, Israel agreed to hide information of its vital mission and massive success from both its own people and from the global audience. As for espionage, as the late Yitzhak Rabin once noted, every few years Israel discovers another US agent committing espionage against the state. Rather than make a big deal about it, and in spite of the fact that some of the information being stolen is deeply damaging to Israel's national security, out of a sense of comity with Washington, Israel keeps the scandals quiet and generally deports the spies. By arresting an 84-year-old World War II veteran in an effort to place Israel under a cloud of suspicion as its military triumph in Syria is exposed to the American people, the US is sadly showing Israel once again that nice guys finish last. If Israel wants to be treated with respect by the US, the lesson of the Kadish affair, of the Syrian raid and of the Pollard affair is that Israel had better start pushing back. The first thing it should do is arrest officials suspected of transferring classified materials to the US without authorization. It should then publish the names and details of US spies whom Israel previously caught and treated with kid gloves. Then it should publicly demand that Bush release Pollard from the prison where he rots, while the likes of Hizbullah agent Nada Prouty –– who penetrated both the FBI and the CIA –– is expected to receive a six-month prison sentence for her crimes. When Bush arrives to celebrate Israel's 60th birthday, Israel's leaders would do well to show him that at 60, Israel is a grownup country. And as such, it demands to be treated with the respect due to the US's most reliable ally in the Middle East. Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com |
|
WE ALREADY HAVE PEACE WITH SYRIA
Posted by Guy Bechor, April 25, 2008. |
|
Quiet that has prevailed on Syria-Israel border for years may be better than peace There is not much difference between the peace we have with Syria today and the peace with have with Egypt, with the exception of the written agreement whose exact details nobody remembers. Bashar Assad has not traveled to Jerusalem, but when did Hosni Mubarak visit Israel? Only once, for the funeral of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, when the Americans forced the Egyptian president to do so. Moreover, our border with Syria is quiet and stable and no clash has taken place there for dozens of years, as opposed to the "border of peace" with Egypt, which is replete with criminal and terror infiltrations, as well as other troubles. Compared to Syria's border with Jordan and Iraq, its border with Israel is an asset: Damascus is enjoying the quiet and security too. Syria lost its hold on the Arab world, most of which boycotted her by not sending top leaders to the last summit meeting in Damascus. Today, Syria is isolated, lacks legitimacy, and a peace treaty with Israel would only serve to isolate it even more and further reinforce the Syrian leadership's illegitimacy among Arabs. A peace agreement with Israel will turn Iran into Syria's greatest enemy: A dangerous enemy that has a hold on Iraq and Lebanon, Syria's neighbors. Syria lost Lebanon, and therefore a peace treaty with Damascus does not mean a peace deal with Lebanon as well. On the contrary, there will be elements in Lebanon that would do everything to undermine an agreement between Syria and Israel. On the Golan Heights, IDF and Syrian forces are separated by a buffer in the form of UN forces. Each side knows its place, while an effective and powerful Israeli deterrence system exists. It must remain powerful in the future has well. Both our prime minister and the Syria president admitted that in recent months they created a system of signals, clarifications, and possibly even deterrence, for fear of misunderstandings. The Syria front is again stable, after a period of disquiet in the wake of the Lebanon War. What else can we ask for? Peace threatens Assad regime And no less important: As opposed to the old model of peace with Arab states, Israel continues to hold on to territory here, that is, the Golan Heights. This is the only case of "peace" between us and our neighbors where we hold on to both territory and stability. This is a much more advanced model for us than the Egyptian or Jordanian model. Paradoxically, at this time it appears that the only element the Syrian regime can rely on may be Israel. As opposed to the hatred it faces in Lebanon, Jordan, and Turkey, quiet with Israel is a supreme interest for Damascus. When will we realize that the peace we seek threatens the Syrian regime? Just like we frighten it with war, we do the same inadvertently with our desire for peace. This peace phantom threatens to sink Assad's regime. Yet our media outlets have continued to numb us with this conditioned peace reflex for dozens of years now, and the sense around here is that absolute happiness is right around the corner. If only we cede the Golan Heights, the Mideastern heaven will open its gates to us. Today, the Golan Heights stabilizes the Galilee and northern Israel in an existential manner. What will be our fate should we make the mistake and evacuate the Golan? The peace will end, the stability will end, and the quiet will end. Moreover, the Syrians will immediately dispatch a million Syrians to settle the area, just as they did in Lebanon, and with the option of a "resistance movement" just like in Lebanon. This was written for Ynet News
|
|
ISRAEL RELATIVELY SECURE ON SIXTIETH BIRTHDAY
Posted by Barry Rubin, April 25, 2008. |
|
Israel is Safe and Strong. Really. Let's face it, after almost 2000 years in exile and only 60 years of Israel as a sovereign nation, it still feels funny for Jews, especially those outside Israel, to have a state. That, along with other factors, makes it easy to underestimate Israel's success and security. However, though at first glance it might seem counter-intuitive to say so, Israel today is stronger, more secure and in a better strategic position than at just about any time in its history. Before dealing with this point directly –– by examining the very real threats the country continues to face –– let's talk about how these very real problems are magnified even further in the prism of Jewish thinking, especially outside Israel. There are a few factors to keep in mind when assessing Israel's situation and future. First, the long-term Jewish experience has been one of persecution, suffering, and often defeat. That is why a sense of pessimism linked with humor is so intertwined with Jewish culture. What does a Jewish telegram say? "Start worrying. Letter follows." What is the oldest Jewish joke in history? "The recently freed slaves in Sinai said to Moses: What, there weren't enough graves in Egypt that you have to bring us here?" Strength, victory, well-being and success; all are viewed (on a collective though not individual level) with suspicion. That Israel has provided such things is a major reason for its popularity with Diaspora Jews. But there is also a sense that things will not last. Second, no people are more obsessed with relentless self-criticism than are Jews. There are obvious biblical references here as well, in the prophetic tradition, and it has continued down to today. The great Israeli humorist Ephraim Kishon described his own arrival in the country shortly after independence in these terms: as the ship approached the coast it became very hot and we began criticizing the government over the weather. Every day in Israel, every conceivable failing (real or imagined) is relentlessly dissected. The negative is usually highlighted, though afterward people feel optimistic at having been able to vent their pessimism. The best example of this I ever experienced was walking down the street in Tel Aviv one day and running into a friend. "How's everything?" he asked. "Great," I answered. "How can you say that!" he exclaimed. "Don't you read the newspapers?" On the other hand, when annual quality of life polls are taken, the positive scores from Israelis are through the roof. In no small part, the culture of complaint and pessimism is a posture, an imposture that should never be mistaken for reality. Third, there is an obsession (this applies more outside Israel) with non-material factors. Because Diaspora Jews have often been powerless, and even when they have power it is indirect rather than institutionalized, they have always depended on the kindness of strangers. Hence, the obsession with what the media says about Israel, for example. However, Israel does not stand or fall on whether The New York Times likes it or whether former presidents write nasty books about it. Fourth, debates over political viewpoint and attitude toward Jewish identity play a role. Those who want to view Jewishness in the most narrowly traditional religious terms, who want to be totally assimilated, or who seek a leftist utopia have no place for Israel in the world they want. Wishing it would go away is an element of wishful thinking, an idea that it is unnatural influencing their perceptions of the actual situation. In circles friendlier to Israel's existence, those on the left may like to believe that Israel will collapse if it doesn't make peace with the Palestinians. Unfortunately, the Palestinians, and Arab states in general, are not so inclined and any way a bad deal is far more of a risk for Israeli security than no deal at all. Similarly, on the right, concessions over Jewish settlements or other matters are seen as bringing the sky down, though these have relatively little impact on Israel's interests and may have a positive effect regarding strategic needs. Finally, how do we define "security?" People in North America have a very exalted, even perfectionist, view of security being total. Still, I can only say that I will walk anywhere in Israel at any time of night without fear and let my children wander around to an extent unthinkable when on a visit to the United States. A very tough guy, my number-one choice as foxhole companion, was robbed on a Washington D.C street. Another Israeli friend walked three blocks in the wrong direction in that city and landed in the hospital after a brutal mugging. As for Europe, those societies face a more serious internal Islamist threat than does Israel, especially given their loss of purpose and self-confidence. Antisemitism is rising, both from new immigrants and in some case indigenous populations as well. In France, for example, Jewish life is becoming increasingly insecure. Finally there's the existential threat to security posed by assimilation, conversion, and intermarriage. And now to the aforementioned very real threats that the country does face, including terrorism. What has changed, though¾despite Iran¾is that the existential threat to Israel has declined sharply over the decades. From the 1950's through the 1980's, Israel could have faced an attack by the regular armies of all its neighbors on any given day. Egypt, Syria, and Iraq were fully backed by the Soviet Union, a superpower, capable of checking or matching any U.S. assistance. Those days are gone. There's no more U.S.S.R. The United States is, despite limitations, the world's only superpower. America's alliance with Israel and overwhelmingly pro-Israel public opinion remain strong, despite minor fluctuations. Arab regimes need U.S. help more than ever before and are less likely to cross Washington on substantial issues that go beyond rhetoric. Whatever bloodthirsty talk comes from various Arab regimes and media, they're not interested in direct conflict with Israel. For starters, because of Israel's military and technological superiority, they know they will lose. They also worry more about such immediate threats as radical Islamism, massive poverty, economic breakdown, Iran and Sunni-Shia conflicts. Egypt and Jordan have peace treaties with Israel that, though cool, inhibit confrontation. Most Lebanese see their main enemy as Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran. Syria's government, the only Arab regime bent on actively pursuing the conflict, is militarily weak and knows a full conflict with Israel would spell the end of its rule. The Saudis and smaller Gulf states are chasing after high living standards. Iraq is preoccupied with internal conflicts. Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia are trying to succeed at economic development and fending off Islamist oppositions. This isn't to minimize the rhetoric of hate that flows like a tidal wave every day across the Arabic-speaking world, nor is it to ignore the financial contributions to terrorist groups. But this is a far cry from the kind of total, high-priority opposition that Israel faced for so many decades, at times when it was far weaker than today. As for the Palestinians, in the best of all possible worlds, they would have a moderate leadership ready to make a compromise peace. The worst-case situation would be if they had a united leadership eager to make all-out war. The reality is somewhere in between. The Palestinians are badly divided, more so in fact than at any time in modern history. Gaza is ruled by Hamas; the West Bank by Fatah. And both of these groups, though especially Fatah, have serious internal splits. Peace is out of the question but so is an effective war effort backed by Arab regimes and a superpower. However many terrorist attacks are attempted, and sometimes succeed with dreadful result and however many rockets are fired at Israeli towns near the Gaza border, this does not pose an existential threat to Israel. And even if the world wants to prettify Fatah and make it seem more peace loving than it is, Hamas is going to remain outside the pale. Iran's nuclear threat is a very real one. But Tehran does not yet have these weapons and it still might be blocked from getting them. At any rate, Israel will have to decide on appropriate action if necessary to ensure this continues to be true. While this issue is being fought out in the present, the risk still lies in the future. Iran may never get a nuclear capability and even if it does so, it is unlikely to use such weapons on Israel. Of course, Israeli leaders must plan for the worst-case outcome but in terms of analysis Tehran has several major considerations to keep in mind, despite the inflammatory rhetoric of some of its rulers. Israel can defend itself and inflict huge damage on Iran, something which Iranian leaders are quite aware of despite their words. The regime, which has now been in power for 30 years, has been quite cautious about risking its own downfall. There are also many softer targets, including the entire Arab world, which have no nuclear defense of their own, and more anti-missile defenses, too, when that day comes. The greatest value of nuclear weapons for Iran is not their actual firing but their use as strategic leverage, to intimidate the West and its neighbors. Iran with nuclear weapons is a very big potential threat but the idea that Tehran will get the bomb and use it against Israel the next day is not the most realistic assessment. But I have left for last the factor that may be the most critical of all: Israel's strength as society and state. Israel has maintained its critical edge on the military side. Casualties from terrorism are down 90 percent from four years ago. In political terms, Israel is more united on the basics than it has been in many years. The economy is booming; immigrants in large part are being successfully absorbed. Despite short-term fits of pessimism and often-justifiable self-criticism, the people are confident. And that's part of the key to understanding what's going on here. In a conflict between a pragmatic, constructive, democratic society and ideologically fettered, violence-obsessed dictatorships, the former will ultimately win out. For one thing, the Israeli system permits progress, the correction of faults, and the far fuller use of human resources. For another, the country simultaneously defends itself and builds itself. What's most important, to paraphrase Israel's founding prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, is not what its enemies say and seek but what its people do. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloriacenter.org and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal http://meria.idc.ac.il. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com This article is from May 2008
World Jewish Digest,
|
|
STILL NO HOMES FOR GUSH KATIF JEWS
Posted by Buddy Macy, April 24, 2008. |
|
"Disengagement" from the Gaza Strip was completed on August 22, 2005 and from northern Samaria a day later. It is now 1,000 DAYS since our fellow Jews were expelled from their homes, yet inconceivably, and tragically so, building of permanent houses for most of the expellees HAS NOT EVEN BEGUN! Please write to Joseph Kanfer –– joseph.kanfer@ujc.org Malcolm Hoenlein –– malcolm@conferenceofpresidents.org June Walker –– jwalker@hadassah.org John Ruskay –– ruskayj@ujafedny.org Russell Robinson –– rrobinson@jnf.org Ronald Lauder –– rlauder@jnf.org (And send a copy to me: vegibud@gmail.com) Ask them what they have done LATELY to address the ongoing tragedy of the expellees from Gush Katif. Ask them what would happen to the up to 250,000 Jews who would be expelled from their homes should Olmert agree to "Palestinian" demands. Demand immediate, SIGNIFICANT ASSISTANCE TO THE EXPELLEES. Demand that they publicly say "NO" TO THE TWO-STATE "SOLUTION." Thank you so much. Buddy Macy
Contact Buddy Macy by email at vegibud@gmail.com. Or call him at 973-785-0057.
|
|
THE GREENHOUSE EFFECT REDEFINED
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, April 24, 2008. |
|
How ironic! Israel abandons state of the art greenhouses in Gaza, indeed research laboratories that someday, using Israeli brainpower, could have developed methods to counteract the ominous effects of climate change now battering food production worldwide, thoughtlessly allowing those laboratories to merge with the surrounding rubble and despair permeating a Hamas governed dysfunctional population of hand wringing Jew-despising Arabs, little able to fend for themselves let alone carry the baton of agricultural research bequeathed to them. Neighboring Egypt, another Jew-despising pro-Palestinian brainwashed Arab regime albeit tenuously obligated to remain civil by a once negotiated peace treaty with Israel, in better days the bread basket of the Roman empire, begins to burst at its ever widening fissures forming along the surface of a once tightly sealed pressure cooker, its desperate population fulminating while standing in endless lines to purchase lower priced government subsidized foodstuffs, seething at the autocratic regime that heretofore has held it in check. Might angst over a shortage of reasonably priced primary sustenance supersede tough guy President Hosni Mubarak's Machiavellian tendency to divert the frustration and anger of his exploited populace toward scapegoat Israel and Jews in general? After all, scientifically gifted Israeli Jews could very well be an asset to a third world little industrialized nation like Egypt, perhaps help him as well as other desperate despots find a way to grow crops efficiently. Might Israel serve the needs of regimes in the throes of potential starvation and consequential rebellion more as a research partner than a shlamazal scapegoat? World leaders, both Muslim and non-Muslim, must rid themselves of the bash Israel syndrome, stop skewing their rhetoric in favor of non-productive Arabs still psychologically poisoned by the 'Scarlet R', an inexcusable refugee status embraced for so many decades, still unwillingly to pick themselves up by their bootstraps albeit gifted a land of their own called Gaza. Enough! The very fact state of the art Israeli greenhouses now fester, perhaps serve as ammo repositories, while Gaza maniacs continue to fire deadly missiles into Sderot more than suggests it was a grave mistake for Israel to cede Gaza in the first place, a fact the world should loudly acknowledge forthwith! Might one (or more) of the candidates now vying for the U.S. presidency and presumed leadership of the free world loudly acknowledge what should be obvious, that a more propitious interpretation of the 'greenhouse effect' would indeed be an asset to the world. Alas, if Israeli citizens a/k/a scientists still retained greenhouses in Gaza, perhaps they would utilize them to discover a way to increase crop yields efficiently and cost effectively, combating the scourge of world hunger afflicting so many third world (and perhaps someday first world) Muslim and non-Muslim nations. Surely, Israeli greenhouses exist elsewhere within that cerebral nation, yet the ones morphed to a wistful memory, painfully wrecked within the dysfunctional enclave of Gaza, stripped of all vitality, symbolically represented a stark contrast between the self-defeating behavior of their surroundings and what human beings are capable of achieving when highly motivated to perform tasks that will advance their species. Imagine what Israelis could accomplish if they weren't forced to waste time as well as human and monetary treasure on defending their besieged state! Imagine those discoveries put on hold while Israeli brainpower must divert so much attention defending the Jewish homeland from Arabs besot with jihadist passions. So-called Palestinians, falsely cast as victims of Israeli aggression for so long by manipulative Arab leaders as well as a host of non-thinking Westernized anti-Israeli pundits and their minions, have no incentive to reexamine their unfulfilling non-productive lives. Indeed, this is a lose lose scenario for all involved parties as well as their future generations. Indulging those who refuse to recognize and improve their futile stagnant lives, born of a refugee psychology, while condemning those who cherish the notion of advancing mankind, makes no sense, thwarting the progress of our dysfunctional species heaped in ever greater challenges, faced with the very real possibility that billions of its members will ultimately directly die of starvation or diseases related to improper nutrition. Indeed, mankind seems to possess a masochistic tendency of not promoting a nation blessed with imaginative scientists who can truly lead the way in combating a crisis in progress. How can say former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, a well-educated and presumably brilliant soul, break bread with a terrorist Hamas organization yearning to destroy the Jewish homeland? Furthermore, while legitimizing the devil, how can he not insist that Hamas revise its despicable charter, i.e. its raison d'etre, in effect defined by the following statement? ...nevertheless, the Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah's promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree (cited by Bukhari and Muslim). The unintended consequence of Carter's pie-in-the-sky attempt to negotiate a truce between Hamas and Israel, however, was to demonstrate yet again the true colors of the Arab jihad junkies, still refusing to recognize the land of Israel as a sovereign Jewish nation. Might the former U.S. President now concede even he cannot craft a silk purse out of a sow's ear, or will he still ignore the obvious, sugar coat his failure, and continue bashing the 'apartheid nation' defined by his delusional Arab apologist mind-set? It boggles the mind that world movers and shakers still don't get it. It boggles the mind they refuse to heap praise upon the gifted nation of Israel, endowed with the intellectual potential ever so necessary to combat a planet threatening catastrophe in the making. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
HOW MUCH IS "ENOUGH"?; W.H.O. ACCUSES ISRAEL, IS REFUTED; ROADBLOCKS REMOVED, JEWS DIE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 24, 2008. |
|
FATAH LOSING POPULARITY IN JUDEA-SAMARIA Day after day, a major scandal about corruption by top P.A. officials emerges in Judea-Samaria. Much of the news is prompted by personal or factional rivalry. Fatah is losing credibility. It could not win an election there, now (IMRA, 3/31). The Sunday NY Times features a Hamas attack through the Gaza-Israel border, using armored vehicles it seized from the P.A.. Nevertheless, Israel just approved shipment of more armored vehicles for the P.A. in Judea-Samaria. Sec. Rice keeps demanding that Israel open up its border more. Seems to me it should seal it until the Arabs leave. HOW MUCH IS "ENOUGH?" Egypt occasionally blew up the entrances to a few of the 150 arms smuggling tunnels from Sinai to Gaza. The terrorists simply constructed a new tunnel. Israel said Egypt did not do enough. Now Egypt says it will blow up the whole tunnel. It has a special unit that will employ US tunnel-detecting equipment. Dr. Aaron Lerner asks the key question. How many of the 150 tunnels will Egypt seek out? Just enough to get favorable publicity, but not enough to curb arms smuggling? (IMRA, 3/31,) MOVE TO BLOCK CASE AGAINST MOUNT DESTRUCTION The Muslim Waqf has been illegally destroying ancient Jewish artifacts on the Temple Mount, for years. The government has not intervened. A private organization, Shurat Ha-Din brought suit against the Waqf. Under Israeli law, the Attorney-General has 15 days to adopt the prosecution, itself, or let the private parties proceed. Attorney-Gen. Mazuz instead has urged the court to squelch the case on the grounds that it is not in the "public interest." No details forthcoming (IMRA, 4/7). "Not in the public interest" is the government's standard excuse for not prosecuting Arabs and police who attack Jews in the Territories. It used to be said that the government let the Waqf operate illegally because it was afraid that otherwise masses of Arabs would riot. (Then squelch the lawbreakers!) Then, however, the government turned heavily to appeasement of the Arabs and to anti-Zionism. Another reason is that a trial would expose government incompetence, adding another black mark to PM Olmert's dark record. It is typical of Israel (and of Jewish organizations in the US) to try to repress opposition rather than to convince it. JEWISH-ARAB DEMOGRAPHICS Israeli demographers failed to foresee heavy Jewish immigration, the decline in Israeli Arab birth rates, and the incline in Israeli Jewish birth rates. Whereas PM Olmert says that he favors withdrawals because of an alleged increasing proportion of Arabs in the area, there is an increasing proportion of Jews in the area. The Jewish birth rate in Israel surpasses the Arab one, as the Arab population ages. Arabs are emigrating from Gaza (Arutz-7, 4/2). Now imagine if Israel further reformed its economy and stopped coddling the Arabs and mistreating patriotic Jews, how many Jews would return to Israel! CONGRESS RECOGNIZES JEWISH REFUGEES Congress asked the President to mention Jewish refugees from Arab states, in international forums mentioning Arab refugees from the Jewish state (Arutz-7, 4/2). HAMAS PLOT Hamas organized a supposedly peaceful demonstration near the Gaza-Israel fence. It planted among the demonstrators some terrorists using the protest as cover for attacking Israeli soldiers. Israeli security officials foiled the plot and arrested one of the terrorists (Arutz-7, 4/2). W.H.O. ACCUSES ISRAEL; REFUTED The World Health Organization accused Israel of letting P.A. Arabs die by denying them access to medical care or making them wait for it. W.H.O. cited specific cases. Israel checked those cases. It found that most of the patients were granted permission to enter Israel for medical treatment, but some did not act on it. Deaths were from the diseases. Nine-tenths of applicants are granted permission, and the rest may go to Egypt or Jordan for treatment, if they wish. Since a number of Arabs apply in order to commit terrorism in Israel, Israel must check the bona fides. Any delay is the jihadists' fault (Arutz-7, 4/2). This is an old canard, like the one accusing Jews of poisoning wells (which the Arabs do and Arafat once tried to do). W.H.O. forgets that Israel is not obliged to offer medical services to an enemy population. One wonders why Israel does. It is too humane for its own good. JOINT PATROLS & PRISONER RELEASES A P.A. policeman on joint patrol with Israelis murdered one and kept shooting at others. Although sentenced for life, he anticipates early release in some deal with Israel, after which, he said, he would resume killing Israelis (IMRA, 4/2). Joint patrols with one's unscrupulous enemies? Release prisoners dedicated to repeating their crimes of religion? The folly is all the worse by its repetition. OLMERT REGIME DID NOT LEARN FROM LEBANON WAR PM Olmert led the country into a war for which his country was not prepared. After the war, the country's anti-chemical warfare kits were deemed obsolete. The government is in process of gathering them up to be refurbished. Meanwhile, the country is unprepared for chemical attacks, which Syria is likely to be contemplating making. Since the Cabinet voted to have the kits refurbished without scheduling the work, extensive delay is possible (IMRA, 4/2). Refurbishing should have begun after a reasonable amount were collected. That way, an increasing number of people would have gained protection during the process. The way the government is doing it, nobody is protected during the collection process. ISRAEL'S PASSIVE DEFENSE AGAIN SHOWN UP Israel does not root out the terrorists who fire rockets at Israel. Instead, it has a warning system that gives people 15 seconds to race into bomb shelters, let the devil take the hindmost. The shelters do not prevent property damage. The jihadists have been extending the range and accuracy of their rockets. Now Iran has been shipping mortars to Gaza, thanks to Egyptian failure to block the smuggling. The mortars are faster, leaving insufficient time to hide. They also wreak more damage (IMRA, 4/2). ROADBLOCKS REMOVED AGAIN, MURDER THERE, AGAIN ""Each removal of any roadblock is tantamount to gambling with Israelis' lives," he said. "No roadblock was positioned where it was without a very cogent reason. No roadblock is without clear security value. Each roadblock is there only because it's necessitated by indisputable security contingencies." So PM Olmert, told the Knesset Defense Committee two weeks before removing dozens of them. Where one had been, an attempted murderer got through, as, when it had been removed before, a murderer got through (IMRA, 4/2). Israelis die because Olmert doesn't say no to Rice and he fears international condemnation. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
REASONS TO BRING OLMERT TO TRIAL FOR TREASON
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 24, 2008. |
|
Recently Israeli Intelligence discovered that Syria, with assistance from North Korea, was building a plutonium nuclear reactor. Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was confronted with the evidence but, delayed a response as long as possible. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the CIA were presented with irrefutable evidence but, she used her power of office to delay Israel from eliminating the Syrian/Korean reactor, lest it spoil her sophomoric plans for peace in a region that has never known peace. Despite the immediate danger to Israel and the region, Rice pressured a weak Olmert NOT to respond and to save an empty legacy for herself and President George W. Bush. Israel submitted evidence to the CIA, Bush and some Congressmen. The evidence was so overwhelming that Rice had to withdraw her childish plans for Israeli "restraint" even as she was protecting the Bush failed deal with North Korea –– in addition to the under-the-table talks with President Bashar Assad of Syria. Rice is an untrustworthy, dangerous liar through and through. But, there is a greater betrayal than merely a lying U.S. Secretary of State or a President hungry for recognition. It is the Prime Minister of the small State of Israel who has been thoroughly briefed on the hostile State of Syria building a plutonium-yielding nuclear reactor. Olmert's own generals had to force him to allow them to plan and carry out an attack to destroy the Syrian plant. After the Israeli Air Force completed its mission, Olmert and America dropped into total silence. The "secret" was miraculously NOT breached or breathed by any official or media source for the past 8 months. We now know that Olmert was in back-channel discussions to surrender to Syria the entire Golan Heights. These discussions continued by Olmert, Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Tzippi Livni in a greater frenzy, knowing that Syria was building a Plutonium Nuclear Reactor for no other reason than to destroy Israel. Olmert and his gang were hell-bent on assisting Syria recover the Golan, even at the almost certain risk of having Syria renege on any agreement reached. Olmert, Barak, Livni and the entire Kadima and Labor Parties have betrayed Israel's vital security to the greatest degree possible. At this very moment CIA Director Michael V. Hayden is briefing the American Congress on the perfidy of the North Koreans as Rice and Bush try to pretend that North Korea is living up to the terms of a badly flawed and failed agreement. While the U.S. can be harmed if such nuclear capability reaches Syria as well as other Muslim and Arab States who are rapidly becoming more Islamo-Fascist, the U.S. will not disappear in a radioactive cloud as could the minuscule Jewish State of Israel. Olmert, Barak, Livni and, no doubt, Shimon Peres seem to be prepared to sacrifice Israel for a mess of potage. If ever a Government should be tried for Treason, it is now. Knowing Syria's intent and then announcing that he (Olmert) was working to abandon the Golan Heights, Israel's largest water resource, Israel's security and sovereignty, is surely an act of betrayal and treason of the worst kind. This could be considered a "hanging offense" and such a trial should be implemented before any more damage can be done or any more Israeli blood spilled. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com |
|
ISLAMOFASCISTS, FASHIONISTAS AND EUROTRASH
Posted by Moshe Phillips, April 24, 2008. |
|
It is understandable if you have never heard of the Metro group of daily newspapers. What you do need to know is that there is yet another chain of newspapers whose biased coverage of news related to the Mideast conflict and the wider war on terror is just as disturbing as that of their well heeled cousins such as The New York Times, The Washington Post or The Philadelphia Inquirer. Additionally, you need to know that Metro papers reach more than 20 million daily readers worldwide and the number is growing rapidly. Metro is a 10 year old import from Sweden. Its U.S. editions are in Boston, New York and Philadelphia. Combined Metro's US Editions have a larger circulation than The Washington Post or the Chicago Tribune. Metro produces about 100 papers in 20 countries and has seven local editions in Canada. Metro's newspapers are free and aimed mainly at a commuter audience using mass transit. This is largely due in part to the questionable agreements between public mass transit agencies and Metro. It is not uncommon to see a large majority of readers on a bus or train in one of Metro's American cities reading the paper rather than a traditional paid daily. The Metro tabloid newspapers are reminiscent of the magazine-like format and content originated by USA Today. The March 25, 2008 U.S. Metro editions featured an article about the Arab headscarves widely known as keffiyehs. Harmless enough, right? In the hands of Metro the subject became a propaganda effort to romanticize Arab terrorists. The Philadelphia Metro used photos of Yasser Arafat and Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terrorist Leila Khaled wearing keffiyehs to accompany their story. As background, Khaled was a leader the PFLP terrorist unit that hijacked TWA Flight 840 on August 29, 1969 and later blew it up. The PFLP it must be noted introduced hijacking to the Mideast conflict in 1968 with the taking of El Al Flight 426. Khaled, the terrorist, is introduced to Metro readers as a "fighter" with the PFLP and the article states that the keffiyeh gave her a "girl gangsta edge" and that photos of her "with a rifle in hand" became "part of feminist iconography." Arafat's picture and write-up do not include any background information at all on the PLO terror chief. Perhaps we should be thankful that the Metro's editorial staff seems to consider Arafat enough of a celebrity that no explanation was needed. The March 25, 2008 article is a part of a strange pattern by Metro of publishing one sided human interest stories that ignore the Israeli victims of Arab terror. Here are some other examples culled from February editions of Metro Philadelphia: February 6, 2008 A one paragraph snippet on the opinion page ran with the headline "Gaza love that falafel." It was about Egyptians buying falafel in Gaza after Hamas terrorists destroyed the border fence. There was no mention of Hamas in the snippet and the violation of international law was described as "the fall of a border wall." February 14, 2008 A photo showing sheep eating carnations was given the title "Gaza Strip Eat your heart out." The explanation with the picture read in part "Palestinian farmers had to dispose of their flower crop due to the Israeli blockade of the Gaza Strip..." No explanation of why Israel has "blockaded" Gaza is given. There is no mention of the deadly Kassam missile attacks on Israeli towns. February 15, 2008 An article titled "Despite Muslim law, Valentine's still a go" told how Gazans celebrated Valentine's Day despite a closed border with Israel. Hamas was benignly described as simply "militant" and the reason the border is closed was left unsaid. Another headline on the same day and page read "Israel prepares for vengeful violence." The article was actually about an Israeli security alert following the killing of a Hezbollah leader. From the headline you would think Israel was going on the offensive. The article itself leads the reader to assume that Israel assassinated Imad Mughniyeh, the Hezbollah leader. Israel formally denied responsibility for the killing. As the above example shows even "hard news" in Metro is shockingly distorted. Another example is a ridiculous March 7, 2008 Metro headline that told readers "Seminary Shooting kills 8 in Jerusalem." A casual reader may have been led to believe that the attack was a "school shooting" and not a terrorist atrocity. In the article the terrorist was termed simply "an attacker" and a "gunman" His terrorist attack was labeled a "militant attack." And the Hamas terrorist organization was called "Hamas militants." Metro refused to call a terrorist a terrorist and define his murderous attack. The subtle agenda of the Metro is clear: The bashing of Israel and the dissemination of an Orwellian view of terrorists. Who owns America's newspapers? What agenda do these foreign owners have? What does it mean for Israel that 1.2 million people in the United States are reading a daily newspaper with a twisted view towards Israel and Islamic terrorists? These are just some of the questions raised by Metro's bias. Moshe Phillips is a member of the Executive Committee of the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For a Safe Israel –– AFSI. The chapter's new website is at: www.phillyafsi.com. |
|
THE GOLAN, HERE WE GO AGAIN
Posted by Batya Medad, April 24, 2008. |
|
It's hard to comprehend, but Olmert has joined Rabin, Barak and others of similar infamy in using the crucial Golan Heights as a "bargaining chip." Israel liberated the Golan Heights in the 1967 Six Days War. Until then, the Syrians used the Golan as their base of active terror operations against Israel's north. The victims of Syrian terror were the agricultural kibbutzim, the heartland of the Zionist Left. That's why immediately after the war, the Golan was rapidly settled with more agricultural communities. If I'm not mistaken, the Golan Heights and "eastern" Jerusalem were legally annexed to be considered sovereign Israel by the Knesset. That makes the use of them as "bargaining chips" illegal/seditious. Previous campaigns to cease Golan talks were successful, but the fact that Pandora's box was opened has left us in constant danger. Just because the previous anti-Golan Withdrawal campaigns were successful does not mean that we can relax, not at all. Each time it's brought up, it's more and more dangerous, like a cancer which returns, G-d forbid. The confidence of the gamblers grows with each attempt, and now they're hitting us on more than one front. The campaign against the division of Jerusalem has hit a stone wall, and nothing is done, besides powerless blogging like mine, stop the amputation of our Holy Biblical Land. So it's really no surprise that Olmert feels invincible. Don't give up. It's another test, and we have to pass. Remember: Issac wasn't sacrificed. He lived to marry and father children. We are descended from those children. Chag Kasher v'Sameach and Shabbat Shalom May You Have A Kosher and Joyful Holiday and A Sabbath Complete With All You Need Batya Medad lives in Shiloh.
She can be reached by email at
Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website
http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il
This article is archived at
|
|
WHITE HOUSE STATEMENT ABOUT SYRIAN NUCLEAR REACTOR BUILT WITH N. KOREA
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 24, 2008. |
|
"The Syrian regime supports terrorism, takes ac tion that destabilizes Lebanon, allows the transit of some foreign fighters into Iraq, and represses its own people. " (Dr. Aaron Lerner –– IMRA:) But there are all kinds of Israeli lefties with security backgrounds urging Israel to leave the Golan ASAP in return for a piece of paper. |
|
For Immediate Release
White House News
Today, administration officials have briefed select Congressional committees on an issue of great international concern. Until Sept. 6, 2007, the Syrian regime was building a covert nuclear reactor in its eastern desert capable of producing plutonium. We are convinced, based on a variety of information, that North Korea assisted Syria's covert nuclear activities. We have good reason to believe that reactor, which was damaged beyond repair on Sept. 6 of last year, was not intended for peaceful purposes. Carefully hidden from view, the reactor was not configured for such purposes. In defiance of its international obligations, Syria did not inform the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) of the construction of the reactor, and, after it was destroyed, the regime moved quickly to bury evidence of its existence. This cover-up only served to reinforce our confidence that this reactor was not intended for peaceful activities. We are briefing the IAEA on this intelligence. The Syrian regime must come clean before the world regarding its illicit nuclear activities. The Syrian regime supports terrorism, takes action that destabilizes Lebanon, allows the transit of some foreign fighters into Iraq, and represses its own people. If Syria wants better relations with the international community, it should put an end to these activities. We have long been seriously concerned about North Korea's nuclear weapons program and its proliferation activities. North Korea's clandestine nuclear cooperation with Syria is a dangerous manifestation of those activities. One way we have chosen to deal with this problem is through the Six Party Framework. Through this process we are working with our partners to achieve the verifiable denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula. The United States is also committed to ensuring that North Korea does not further engage in proliferation activities. We will work with our partners to establish in the Six Party Framework a rigorous verification mechanism to ensure that such conduct and other nuclear activities have ceased. The construction of this reactor was a dangerous and potentially destabilizing development for the region and the world. This is particularly true because it was done covertly and in violation of the very procedures designed to reassure the world of the peaceful intent of nuclear activities. This development also serves as a reminder that often the same regimes that sponsor proliferation also sponsor terrorism and foster instability, and cooperate with one another in doing so. This underscores that the international community is right to be very concerned about the nuclear activities of Iran and the risks those activities pose to the stability of the Middle East. To confront this challenge, the international community must take further steps, beginning with the full implementation of the United Nations Security Council resolutions dealing with Iranian nuclear activities. The United States calls upon the international community to redouble our common efforts to ending these activities and preventing the spread of weapons of mass destruction in this critical region. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
MAYORS ASK PERES TO PARDON JEWISH PRISONERS
Posted by Hillel Fendel, April 24, 2008. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) The campaign to free Jewish "nationalist" prisoners is heating up. The Honenu civil rights organization has organized 11 mayors –– so far –– to ask Pres. Peres to pardon them. Eleven mayors of towns and local councils in Judea and Samaria have signed a letter to President Shimon Peres asking him to pardon some 20 Jewish prisoners convicted of nationalist crimes. The letter states, "We are nearing the 60th anniversary of the founding of the State of Israel," the letter states. "These are days of unity and appeasement... We know that various requests have reached your table to pardon prisoners to mark the 60th anniversary milestone, and we assume that your honor is likely to respond positively to at least some of them." "It is no secret that for years, Jewish nationalist prisoners have been held in jail for various crimes they committed during periods of security crises, out of deep personal and communal distress. We are of the opinion that in the framework of the atmosphere of national reconciliation of this 60th year, and given that they have expressed regret for their actions, these prisoners should be pardoned, permitted to return to their homes, families, and small children, and to thus rehabilitate themselves." The letter has thus far been signed by: Dubi Tal, Jordan Valley Regional Council
The letter also alludes to the imbalance between Arab and Jewish prisoners, in that thousands of the former have been freed early over the years: "It is no secret that even in the past year, hundreds of terrorists have been freed. We oppose the release of terrorists from prison, but now that they have been freed, we ask that the Jewish prisoners be released as well, in order to correct the discriminatory policy against them." Last week, six of the prisoners submitted a request to be pardoned. One of them, Shlomi Dvir, Earlier this week, two women –– the wife of one of the prisoners (a mother of seven) and the fiancée of another –– met with Public Security Minister Avi Dichter and asked him to support their request for a pardon. They reported afterwards that Dichter told them straight out, "We have a political interest in releasing the Arabs, but we have no such interest in making similar gestures towards the Jewish prisoners." The women said they left the meeting feeling "humiliated."
Shmuel Medad, head of the Honenu was established several years ago to help citizens whose spontaneous acts of self-defense in life-threatening situations had embroiled them in legal trouble. In addition, Honenu hired lawyers, at group-discounted rates, to represent the hundreds of youths who were charged with crimes related to their protests of the Disengagement/expulsion.
Medad explained in a letter that this governmental attitude is much more harmful and corrupt than stealing money or the like: "It is an attitude of abandonment –– an attitude that produces the abandonment of Pollard, the release of terrorists, the removal of others from the list of wanted terrorists, the giving of weapons and uniforms to [Fatah], the abandonment of the MIA's Katz, Feldman and Baumol from the [1982] battle of Sultan Yaaqub, the forsaking of Ron Arad, Madhat Yusuf, Shalit, Goldwasser, and Regev, and many more in the past and –– if there is no change –– in the future as well. Not only that, but the government is now continuing this approach by negotiating the expulsion of Jews on a scale of 12 times larger than what happened in Gush Katif. And all because there is no 'interest...'"
Among the prisoners are two brothers who planned an
anti-Disengagement road blocking in 2005 using a burning car; three
who were convicted of conspiring to attack an Arab girls' school,
though the bomb never went off and they claimed that they had only
intended for it to be a scare; Haggai Amir, who had four years tacked
onto his Rabin-assassination related sentence for planning partisan
attacks against Arabs in defense of Yesha towns; David Emouyal of
Rishon LeTzion, who is serving an 18-year prison sentence for having
shot and wounded two Arabs in response to the murder of 8-month-old
Shalhevet Pass in Hevron; Ami Popper, who killed 7 Arab workers in
response to a series of Arab terrorist attacks (he was originally
sentenced to life, but the late President Ezer Weizman reduced this to
40 years; Popper's wife and son were recently killed in a car
accident, and his two remaining sons, with no parents to look after
them, have been given over to the foster care of a generous Jerusalem
family); and others.
Hillel Fendel, who is Senior New-Editor for Arutz Sheva
|
|
CHESED CHESED CHESED: MI KI'AMCHO YISROEL?
Posted by , April , 2008. |
|
This was written by the editor of Yeshiva World and it
appeared April 18, 2008 on
|
|
Mi Ki'amcho Yisroel! That's all the words I can find to describe my feelings about the amount of Chesed that is going on around the world right now. There are organizations delivering packages to the needy. These packages include: potatoes, eggs, apples, oranges, lemons, grapefruits, onions, matzoh, grape juice, wine, and anything else needed to make Pesach. Depending on the family size, they receive different amounts. No one is left hungry! Trucks are being driven, and boxes are being shlepped by hard working Yeshiva Bochurim (giving up time from their three week Bain Hazmanim). There are organizations who give out vouchers to the needy for suits, shaitels, shoes, shirts etc. There are organizations giving out huge amounts of money throughout the world. There are organizations who can send girls to your home to babysit your children, or to clean your home. There is a person in Eretz Yisroel who purchased a matzoh bakery to be able to supply families with matzoh for $8 dollars a kilo, as opposed to the regular $50 a kilo. The list is endless.... I am no Rov, Rabbi, Teacher, Preacher, Rosh Yeshiva, Rebbe. I am just the YWN Editor, and I'm not giving a Shabbos Hagadol Drasha. I just wanted to express my Hakoras Hatov to the thousands of Chesed organizations, Baalei Tzedakah, and ordinary Yidden throughout the world, who are helping make the Yom Tov of Pesach go a little easier for others. Instead of the negative, lets think of the positive. In this Zechus, let us hope that THIS year will in fact be the Z'man Cheiruseynu! YW Editor. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
JERUSALEM: FIRST, NOT THE LAST
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 23, 2008. |
|
Samson Blinded has posted a new item, 'Jerusalem: first, not the
last'. You can leave a comment at
|
|
Israeli conservatives act like ostriches: Olmert soothes their conscience by promising to relegate the Jerusalem issue to the last stage in peace talks with Palestinians. It's not even important that Olmert lies and, as Palestinians never fail to announce, negotiate Jerusalem now. Leaving the core issues for the last stage in negotiations is fundamentally wrong. Would you discuss a delivery time for the furniture set if you don't agree with the seller on price? In our situation, the seller doesn't even want to sell. Leaving the core issues for the later assures that Israel would give way on them, as the entire pressure now dispersed over several subjects will be concentrated on the issue of Jerusalem. The story would go thus: "Okay, we have agreed with Palestinians on just everything else, the peace is so close. Should we refuse peace because of the Arab-populated Jerusalem areas which we the Jews cannot live in, anyway?" Once all other issues are settling, partitioning of Jerusalem will be passed automatically. Neurotic Jews can rebel and refuse such peace, sublimating into the issue of Jerusalem all the distrust they feel to their government, but if counting on that, then what the peace process is for? Israeli policy of piecemeal concessions is devastating. Jews give away their bargaining chips one by one, lose bargaining power, and have the international pressure on the "leftover" issues increase. Back in 1972, Israel rebuffed Sadat's peace offer (whether realistic or not) of comprehensive peace with Arabs in return for Sinai; the Palestinians were ignored. Four decades later, Israel will find herself without the Sinai, the Golan Heights, and the West Bank –– but still not at peace with Arabs. Almost every Muslim leader have already declared that even ceding the West Bank and Jerusalem to Palestinians would not lead to immediate peace with Arab countries. And even where Israel has peace, there is no normalization: common Egyptians and Jordanians hate Israel now just as before we signed the peace treaties. Iraq and Kuwait, two countries under the US foot, flatly refused peace with Israel. Iran cannot be expected to sign peace with the Zionist entity even if Palestinians get a state. Saudi Arabia is the last country Israel wants to be at peace with, as the flow of Saudi oil money into Israel, already considerable, will skyrocket as Saudis buy out the Holy Land. Hezbollah-dominated Lebanon cares not a bit about the Palestinians and would not embrace Zionists even if Arafat is re-buried on the Temple Mount, as he might be if the Palestinians get Jerusalem. Peace with Syria would spell a military fiasco for Israel, as Syria will upgrade its arsenals under the protection of peace agreement like Egypt does –– to strike later with vengeance. Negotiations over Jerusalem with Fatah are puzzling. British hunted down Jewish terrorist groups Etzel and Lehi instead of negotiating with them. Fatah members continue attacking Jews, Fatah pays salaries to Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades with the money dutifully transferred by Israel, and in especially odd occurrence, a bodyguard of Ahmed Qurei, a top Palestinian negotiator, was killed in a firefight with IDF. The peace process is fraud. Israel is not at war with Palestinians –– or if we are, then bomb them out of existence rather than supplying them water and electricity. Palestinian threat to Israel is laughable: just ban the Arab migrant workers, and suicide terrorism, already happening just once a year, would almost cease. At any rate, Arab terrorism claimed many times less Jewish lives than ordinary car accidents. Ending Kassam and Katyusha rocket fire is also a no-brainer –– not with the absurdly expensive Iron Dome system, but with the common police measure of invading Gaza once a year or so, killing a couple of thousand Palestinian guerrillas, damaging their infrastructure to the Bronze Age level, and enjoying calm for another few months. Banning the UNRWA and other aid sources from Gaza and the West Bank would be a much greater service to peace than ceding the Arabs Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, and Haifa together: Palestinians should care about employment rather than live on foreign aid and use the ample idle time for radical activities. Paupers in search of food won't have time for terrorism. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
GOING NOWHERE FAST
Posted by Sergio Tessa (Hadar), April 23, 2008. |
|
This is by Rabbi David Bar-Hayim of the Machon Shilo organization –– Torah La'am VeLaaretz |
|
Clueless Leaders Israel is lost and directionless. Its political leaders lack vision and aspire to nothing. Judaism is lost and directionless. It rabbinical leaders lack vision and aspire to nothing. Revisionist leader Ze'ev Jabotinsky once illustrated his criticism of mainstream Zionism with the following analogy: "I see a man limping down the street, using only one leg, even though it is apparent that nothing is wrong with the other one. I turn to him and ask: 'Why don't you walk on both legs?' He replies: 'Is there something the matter with the one that I am using?'" Jabotinsky referred of course to the policy of "one more dunam, one more goat", whereby the Zionist Establishment focused on building up the land piecemeal, living from day to day, all the while refusing to enunciate its vision, the goal for which it was ostensibly striving: a sovereign state for the Jewish people in their historical homeland within clearly defined borders. Thus the most fundamental issues –– what kind of state were the Jewish people demanding, where would its borders be, and within what time frame? –– remained unaddressed. Jabotinsky's insight was that the leadership preferred it that way, like a man who opts to use only one of his legs. The result of this (lack of) policy was that the typical Zionist spoke fervently of the Jewish people's right to the Land of Israel but could not explain, even to himself, where the borders of his beloved homeland lay or on what basis he defined that territory. In the end, observed Shabtai Ben-Dov, it was the acceptance of the armistice lines of 1948 that "clarified" for most Zionists where the Land of Israel for which they had fought actually was. It was only "logical", therefore, for one time Education Minister Shulamit Aloni to refer to Hebron as "Hutz Laaretz" (overseas), and for the post-Six-Day-War Left to view a return to the very heart of our homeland as an "occupation". I once came face to face with the results of just such a Zionist education. The year was 1993 and I was doing reserve duty on the Jordanian border. Four of us were in a command car patrolling the border, and the discussion turned to then Prime Minister Rabin's stated willingness to negotiate with the Syrians about relinquishing the Golan Heights. The driver announced that he supported handing over the Golan for peace, at which point I asked him: "Tell me, all other considerations aside, to whom does the Golan belong, us or them?" He thought for a moment and replied truthfully "I have no idea." Why would he? Was he, a product of the State school system established by Ben-Gurion, ever taught what territory the Jewish people claimed and why? Israel's political leaders are just like that driver: they truly don't know where we belong or why, nor where we are supposed to be headed. Everything is negotiable, nothing is clear, the future is a black hole. Israel lost its way not in 1967 but in the 20's, 30's and 40's, before there was an Israel, by thinking small, by refusing to see the big picture, by denying the Jewish nation's destiny. By choosing mediocrity over greatness. Israel and Torah Judaism: Missing in Action The same can be said for Judaism. Have you ever noticed how some religious Jews refer to themselves as "Lithuanians"? Or that there is a Jerusalem suburb named "Poland Heights"? Treat the reality of over 5 million Jews living as a sovereign nation in their homeland for the first time in 2000 years as a continuation of Dvinsk, Minsk or Pinsk; insist that Jews in the Land of Israel must all behave, in terms of their customs and Halachic practice, as if they were still in Warsaw, Sanna or Marakesh; preach that the divisions of the Diaspora must be maintained today and for all time, thus perpetuating a seriously flawed Galuth mentality indefinitely; convince yourself that the Judaism of the Galuth is the real McCoy, that there is nowhere to go from here –– and that's precisely where you'll go. Nowhere. No greater purpose. Nothing. When the Beth HaWa'adh beth din (Jewish court) of Machon Shilo announced last year that all Jews in Israel may consume kitniyoth (rice, corn, legumes etc.) during Pesah, some thought that it was all about doing whatever is convenient. Not so. It's about getting Torah Judaism back on track. At the core of any authentic conception of Torah Judaism is its Halachic system. Halacha is the practical implementation and realization of those values and concepts that the Torah teaches and that the Jewish nation holds dear. An Halachic system always reflects the philosophy and vision that a particular ideology aspires to actualize in the real world. Halacha is never neutral; it is either a help or a hindrance. It either drives the Jewish people upwards and onwards, or it weighs it down and holds it back. One who refrains from eating rice, or soy beans, or corn starch on Pesah is not a better Jew than one who does. Halachically there is no question that it is permissible. On the other hand, one is not required to consume these items on Pesah, or at any time during the year. So what's the problem? It focuses the mind on a non-issue. And the more meaningless Pesah stringencies are promoted, the more meaningless Judaism becomes. Galuth Mode or Geulah Mode? Human beings are limited. We cannot be different people at one and the same time. A Jew can function in either Galuth mode or Geulah mode; you can't have both. If we concern ourselves with maintaining our Galuth-based identities, we have no time or inclination to wonder how it is that each Pesah we beseech Hashem that next year we might participate in the Pesah sacrifice and yet do nothing whatever to actualize this deep-seated aspiration in the real world. We have to make a choice: authentic, full-flavoured Torah, or a pale, watered-down substitute. Judaism's rabbinical leaders are just like that reserve duty driver: they truly do not know who and where we are or where we are supposed to be headed. They have no clue how to move on to the next stage. They are unsure of themselves, vague and uncertain about everything, preferring the familiar, downtrodden Galuth version of the Torah for the majestic, vibrant and uplifting Torah of the Land of Israel, the Judaism of Abraham, Moses, David and the Maccabees. Little wonder that when Jews once again controlled the Temple Mount in 1967, the rabbinical establishment had nothing to say other than to forbid all Jews from going there. If the truth be told, they breathed a sigh of relief when it was tossed back to the Moslems like an unwanted bone. Judaism lost its way not in 1967 but 2500 years ago when the Jewish nation declined to take up the offer of the Persian emperor Cyrus to return to its homeland. By thinking small, by refusing to see the big picture, by denying the Jewish nation's destiny. By choosing mediocrity over greatness, Galuth over Geulah. From that day to this, as R. Yehuda HaLevi wrote in his masterpiece The Kuzari (2:24), "our prayers for redemption are like the mindless cawings of rooks and ravens". If we think small, we shall indeed be so, particularly in the eyes of our enemies. If we think big, we shall indeed be great –– in the eyes of Hashem, in our own eyes, and in the eyes of the whole world. Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net. |
|
NEW SPY CASE SEEN AS ATTEMPT TO DELAY POLLARD RELEASE
Posted by Hillel Fendel, April 23, 2008. |
|
Following the news that an 83-year-old former US Army engineer, Ben-Ami Kadish of New Jersey, had been arrested on charges of spying for Israel 25 years ago, the Justice for Jonathan Pollard organization feels abandoned by the Israeli government once again. Speaking with Arutz-7's Yedidya HaCohen, Esther Pollard said, "I feel great disappointment at the Government of Israel. Everyone in the media comes to me and hears what they should be hearing from Ehud Olmert –– namely, that this entire [Kadish] case has nothing to do with Jonathan Pollard, that it does not cancel out the fact that Pollard deserves immediate release, and that the government of Israel is obligated to work for this goal." A statement released by the Justice for Jonathan Pollard organization states that the U.S. "has put Israel on the defensive once again, with breaking 'news' in the American media accusing Israel of running a spy in the US prior to the Pollard case... It is not clear for how many years the U.S. has been sitting on this 'breaking news' story waiting for the right moment to hurl new accusations against Israel, and thus falsely and unfairly target Jonathan Pollard by association." The statement notes that "unlike other espionage cases in the US, which are dealt with on a case-by-case basis, every accusation against Israel is yielded like a club against Jonathan Pollard –– as if the 23 years he has served is somehow not enough to make up for all of the sins of Israel." "It's Up to Olmert" When asked by Israel's Channel One TV News what impact this latest story will have on chances for her husband's release, Esther Pollard responded, "It will have whatever impact Prime Minister Olmert chooses for it to have. To date, Olmert has still not made an official request for Jonathan's release. It is time for the Prime Minister to discharge his legal and moral responsibility to save the life of an Israeli agent in peril, who has already served a grossly disproportionate sentence." She noted what she said was the "suspicious timing of the breaking 'news' story," just prior to President Bush's anticipated visit to the region for Israel's 60th anniversary. Several news analysts have made this connection as well, seeing the release of the story as an attempt to prevent Bush from possibly pardoning Pollard in time for the upcoming Presidential visit. "There is solid support for Jonathan's release," Mrs. Pollard said. "Every senior American official familiar with the case and the secret files –– people like James Woolsey, former head of the CIA, and Senator Dennis DeConcini, former head of the Senate Intelligence Committee at the time of Jonathan's arrest –– have been on record for years saying it is time to release Jonathan Pollard. There is no excuse that trumps the 23 years that Jonathan has already served in American prisons." "My husband should not have to pay the price for this latest case," Esther told HaCohen. "What, 23 years in prison are not enough? Olmert should say clearly that the cases are not connected. It is hard for me that after 23 years, we are once again abandoned, and that no one stands up for him." Mrs. Pollard urged the Prime Minister not to be deterred by this "blatant attempt to put Israel on the defensive, and to simply do the right thing: Bring Jonathan home now, alive, in time for Israel's 60th anniversary!" Hillel Fendel, who is Senior New-Editor for Arutz Sheva
|
|
FREE SPEECH UPHELD AGAINST JIHAD; MEDIA DISTORTION; ARABS WON'T STOP IRAN
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 23, 2008. |
|
P.A. CORRUPTION Different top P.A. leaders are accused of massive corruption. They stole public funds. (That was Arafat's #1 Or #2 goal for setting up the P.A.) One replaced medicine with placebos and sold the medicine at high prices (Arutz-7, 3/30). Where do they think they are, in China? Are these the people Rice and Olmert think will defeat Hamas? WHAT TACTIC IS LEGITIMATE? B'Tselem, a pro-Arab "civil rights" organization in Israel, has condemned terrorism. It did not condemn Arab attacks on Israeli soldiers (Arutz-7, 3/30). After all, the P.A. has signed peace agreements with Israel. The Arab could negotiate. Before the wars over it, the Land was set aside for Jewish development, but the Arabs committed aggression against it and attempted genocide. The Arabs have no right to fight. NEW YORK LEGISLATURE UPHOLDS FREE SPEECH Foreign Muslims in favorable jurisdictions, such as London, sue Americans for libel, to squelch their revelations about Muslim aggression. Many defendants cannot afford the legal costs, so they give in. The rules are stacked against defense, so although the sued authors and publishers are not libeling, they may lose anyway. Dr. Ehrenfeld is a New Yorker who did not seek the British market for her book, but when two copies showed up there, an Arab whose avocation is suing to repress criticism of Islam sued her. He won a sizeable judgment. She petitioned a US court. It found that current law does not protect American Constitutional rights from foreign jurisdictions. The court suggested she appeal to the State legislature. The Legislature unanimously passed a bill that finds foreign defamation judgments unenforceable here unless the foreign system allows the same rights of freedom of speech and press as America's. The bill allows the American defendant an appeal to court here. This protects Americans from false charges and unfair legal procedures abroad. It permits Americans to proclaim the truth, an important weapon in defense against Islam's drive to conquer. Will Gov. Paterson sign the bill? (Ehrenfeld, 3/31.) ISRAEL REVEALS MORE ABOUT RAID ON SYRIA PM Olmert revealed that Israel's raid on Syria destroyed a nuclear facility that N. Korea was developing. N. Korea had promised not to proliferate its nuclear technology. When asked, it lied about the facility (IMRA, 3/31). TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS Sec. Rice keeps demanding that Israel ease travel restrictions on P.A. Arabs. She knows that terrorists will take advantage of the changes to attack Israelis. One solution is to place travel restrictions on Rice. It would save innocent lives. MEDIA DISTORTION The NY Times seems to turn every national issue into an opportunity to condemn Pres. Bush, right or wrong. A recent editorial noted that he was dickering with N. Korea over how much of its nuclear activities it must disclose, in order to get subsidies in return for dismantling its nuclear weapons facilities. The editorial said he had wasted the prior six years by refusing to negotiate with N. Korea. What about that editorial is true? It is true that Bush once said it didn't pay to negotiate with N. Korea. Considering that it has a maniacal leader who breaks all his agreements and promises in order to pursue nuclear weaponry while his people starve, Bush is right. On the other hand, Bush did undertake negotiations with N. Korea. As with Iraq and Iran, N. Korea used the negotiations to gain time. It also used them to get subsidies while evading its own commitments. When the US wasn't itself negotiating, the US was prompting other countries, friendlier with N. Korea, to negotiate. Viz. the six-party talks in 2005. The editorial is misleading. The newspaper's political bias distorts the news. National security should be more important to it than dissembling in order to make political points. In my opinion, military strikes must be an option, or negotiation with fanatical regimes cannot succeed. We cannot persuade fanatics against their course of aggression. They have no scruples about agreements. We are fools to take their word for anything. Bush is aware of this in regard to Iraq, Iran, and N. Korea, though perhaps not in regard to the Palestinian Arabs. The Times appears to be naïve about them all. The Times has a record of being duped by dictators (Hitler, Stalin, Castro, Ortega, and Muslim ones). It sometimes sympathizes with them. Oddly, it thinks of itself as having principles. WESTERN MISUNDERSTANDING OF ISLAMISTS Western commentators often don't understand totalitarianism. When Iran and Hizbullah say they want to eliminate Israel, the commentators treat the statements as if mere propaganda. They don't understand that the Islamists are fanatical, take ideas to their ideologically extreme, and mean the worst of what they say. RICE WRESTS ANOTHER CONCESSION FROM ISRAEL She pressed Israel's Defense Minister to stop opposing P.A. control of the Gaza-Egypt border, if the P.A. officials are not associated with militias (IMRA, 3/31). Being not associated with militias is a fig leaf. The P.A. police and the leaders are as jihadist as Fatah and Hamas. When Abbas controlled the border, he let arms be smuggled in. Rice knows that. She doesn't care that her policy will bring more war. She relentlessly presses Israel for fatal concessions to the Arabs. She wants Israel shrunken and weaker. If Bolton were Sec. of State, it would be different. Liberals maligned him, leaving the anti-Zionists firmly entrenched in the State Dept.. CAN'T EXPECT ARABS TO STOP IRAN Egypt and S. Arabia oppose Iranian hegemony. They also oppose Israeli existence. Given a choice between the two, they support Iranian proxies against Israel. Hence they snub Syria at an Arab summit for its subservience to Iran, but let arms into Gaza and Iranian influence be exerted over Hamas. The US wants Arab help in checking Iran. It seeks their approval by getting Israeli concessions for the P.A., including Hamas, with which the US negotiates indirectly. Sen. Clinton concurs. She claims that the Clinton Administration's Oslo accords quieted the Arabs down. The facts prove otherwise. By empowering terrorists, Oslo revived terrorism and poverty, leading to the Oslo wars. Indeed, the Oslo and Annapolis processes made the Palestinian issue more prominent among the Arabs, and sentiment turned against the US. What should the US do? Stop helping Palestinian Arab terrorists. Stop relying upon Egypt and S. Arabia. Instead, the US should strengthen Lebanon and Iraq so they can oppose Iran and its proxies. It should make sure that Israel is prepared for its next war with those proxies (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 3/31). The problem with getting the US to stop helping terrorists against Israel is that, like Egypt, the State Dept. would rather weaken Israel than Iran. Sec. Rice devotes herself almost entirely to that. The world has other problems. WORLD ASSEMBLY OF MUSLIM YOUTH The Assembly demanded censorship of a Dutch film against the Koran for "insulting" their religion (IMRA, 3/31). Can't take it? Why don't they show any errors in the film? Why must be become censorious like them? Who will judge such films? ISRAELI ARABS PICK ON JAFFA JEWS Arabs in Jaffa have been bullying Jews there for years, without police intervention. An old woman said it got worse for her recently when an Arab first started spitting on her and then beat her up badly. The assailant comes from a criminal family that controls parts of the city and somehow gets police complaints removed without investigation. "The attack on Lilian Vaknin is just one story in a growing number of Arab attacks on Jews and Jewish property in recent years. The number of Arab Israelis involved in the attacks has grown exponentially. Throughout the Negev in the south and the Galilee in the north, and in mixed Arab-Jewish cities like Haifa, Lod and Yafo, Jewish cars are attacked with rocks, Jewish women are molested, Jewish farmers are terrorized, and police and firemen are attacked." A cattleman said, "While the IDF defends the country's borders from enemies, the country's land is being taken away from us –– and no one is doing anything about it, including the government..." (Arutz-7, 3/31.) There is no excuse for the government's failure to protect its Jewish citizens. MA'AN NEWS AGENCY BIASED The Ma'an news agency, run by Arabs, calls itself independent. However, it described the case of the Arab with two knives attacked Jews at a hitchhiking post in Judea-Samaria, without mentioning his knives or his attack. Ma'an gave as biased a report as the PLO news agency (IMRA, 4/1). OLMERT IGNORES CRITICISM "MK Netanyahu gave an excellent, detailed presentation citing both Olmert and Barak's disastrously wrong predictions regarding the consequences of policies they have advocated in the past while noting the warnings Netanyahu and others made that proved to be true. He explained how the very same mistakes in analysis of the past were being repeated at this time and outlined what actions he believes are needed in order to address Israel's challenges. Netanyahu also protested the absence of any serious substantive reply by the Olmert team to the arguments raised against their doomed and destructive policies." PM Olmert and his coalition did not reply. Olmert earlier had said discussion was pointless (IMRA, 4/2). ARABS WANT TO CLOSE SECURITY COUNCIL MEETINGS Council and Arab condemnation of extremists embarrasses Arabs (IMRA, 4/2). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
SUPPORT FOR A PALESTINIAN STATE IS SOFT AND RELUCTANT
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, April 23, 2008. |
|
1. Support –– among Israeli Jews –– for the proposed Palestinian state ("Two States Solution") is soft and reluctant, according to a March 31-April 1 poll conducted by the Tel Aviv University Center For Peace Research. 2. The establishment of the proposed Palestinian state is supported by 68%, many of whom –– other than the Israel's traditional Left –– subordinate their security and historical concerns to their demographic concern. However, the demographic scare has been debunked by the Bennett Zimmerman-led American-Israel Demographic Research Group (AIDRG), as summarized below. 3. 55% of Israeli Jews define Judea & Samaria as "Liberated Territory," compared with 32% who consider it "Occupied Territory," in defiance of a 15 year old Political-Correctness promoted by Israel's government, media, academic and k-12 education systems. 4. 57% of Israeli Jews do not accept the "Green Line" as Israel's border, compared with 23% who accept it. 5. 49%:43% oppose an agreement, which entails painful concessions –– a code name for substantial withdrawals. 6. 47%:40% of Israeli Jews consider the 1993 Oslo Accord a mistake. 7. 75% of Israeli Jews don't believe that negotiation would lead to an agreement with the Palestinians. 75% believe that even if an agreement would be concluded, the Palestinians would not consider it an end to their conflict with Israel. 8. Most Israeli Jews oppose the tangible –– potentially lethal –– consequences of the "Two State Solution." Their soft & reluctant support of the "Two State Solution" has been based on unfounded demographic fatalism. It has benefited from the absence of a systematic, full scale educational media campaign, highlighting historical, security and demographic aspects of Judea & Samaria mountain ridges (the "Golan Heights" of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and the 9-15 mile sliver along the Mediterranean, surrounded by the conflict-ridden, volatile, violent, non-compliant Arab Mideast, which is yet to experience inter-Arab peace). Happy Passover,
Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il |
|
FRENCH JEWS –– WHAT IS HAPPENING IN FRANCE
Posted by Avodah, April 23, 2008. |
|
This was written by Brenda H. Mitchell, Executive Assistant to the Rabbis, Temple Sinai, Atlanta, GA 30327. Contact her at bmitchell@templesinaiatlanta.org |
|
I received this post from a friend in NY. One of his friends is living in France and posted this to him with the request that he distribute it to his American friends. My friend prefaces with: "Once again, the real news in France is conveniently not being reported as it should. To give you an idea of what's going on in France where there are now between 5 and 6 million Muslims and about 600,000 Jews, here is an email that came fr om a Jew living in France. Please read!" "Will the world say nothing –– again –– as it did in Hitler's time?", he writes, "I AM A JEW –– therefore I am forwarding this to everyone on all my e-mail lists. I will not sit back and do nothing." Nowhere have the flames of anti-Semitism burned more furiously than in France: In Lyon, a car was rammed into a synagogue and set on fire. In Montpellier, the Jewish religious center was firebo mbed; so were synagogues in Strasbourg and Marseilles; so was a Jewish school in Creteil –– all recently. A Jewish sports club in Toulouse was attacked with Molotov cocktails, and on the statue of Alfred Dreyfus in Paris, the words "Dirty Jew" were painted. In Bondy, 15 men beat up members of a Jewish football team with sticks and metal bars. The bus that takes Jewish children to school in Aubervilliers has been attacked three times in the last 14 months. According to the Police, metropolitan Paris has seen 10 to 12 anti-Jewish incidents PER DAY in the past 30 days Walls in Jewish neighborh oods have been defaced with slogans proclaiming "Jews to the gas chambers" and "Death to the Jews." A gunman opened fire on a kosher butcher's shop (and, of course, the butcher) in Toulouse, France; a Jewish couple in their 20's were beaten up by five men in Villeurbanne, France The woman was pregnant; a Jewish school was broken into and vandalized in Sarcelles, France. This was just in the past week. So I call on you, whether you are a fellow Jew, a friend, or merely a person with the capacity and desire to distinguish decency from depravity, to do, at least, these three simple things: First, care enough to stay informed. Don't ever let yourself become deluded into thinking that this is not your fight. I remind you of what Pastor Neimoller said in World War II: "First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me. Second, boycott France and French products. Only the Arab countries are more toxically anti-Semitic and, unlike them, France exports more than just oil and hatred. So boycott their wines and their perfumes. Boycott their clothes and their foodstuff s. Boycott their movies. Definitely boycott their shores. If we are resolved we can exert amazing pressure and, whatever else we may know about the French, we most certainly know that they are like a cobweb in a hurricane in the face of we ll-directed pressure. Third, send this along to your family, your friends, and your co-workers. Think of all of the people of good conscience that you know and let them know that you and the people that you care about need their help. The number one bestselling book in France is...."September 11: The Frightening Fraud," which argues that no plane ever hit the Pentagon. Please Pass This On, Let's not let history repeat itself, thank you for your time and consideration. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
MUSLIM ANTI-SEMITISM 'STRATEGIC THREAT'
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 23, 2008. |
|
This was written by Haviv Rettig and it appeared yesterday in the
Jerusalem Post
|
|
Muslim anti-Semitism is growing in scope and extremism, to the point that it has become a credible strategic threat for Israel, according to a 180-page report produced for Israeli policymakers by the semi-official Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC) and obtained exclusively by The Jerusalem Post ahead of its Tuesday release. According to the report, by educating generations of Muslims with a deep animus toward Israel and Jews, this anti-Semitism, actively promulgated by many states in the region, holds back the peace process and normalization efforts between Israel and Muslim countries. It also forms the intellectual justification for an eliminationist political program. "This isn't ordinary prejudice," explained ITIC director Col. (res.) Dr. Reuven Erlich, formerly of the IDF's Intelligence Directorate, who heads the team of researchers that produced the report. "This prejudice is evil because it isn't theoretical. It is ideological incitement by states and organizations with the practical means of translating it into action." Following on a similar study produced in 2004, the report is a comprehensive examination of anti-Semitism in the Muslim world, with emphasis on Iran and Arab states. It is also an insight into the perception of the threat within the Israeli intelligence establishment. The ITIC operates under the aegis of the Israel Intelligence Heritage and Commemoration Center (IICC), the official commemoration agency for the fallen of Israel's intelligence services. The IICC is chaired by former Mossad head Efraim Halevy and maintains close contact with Israel's intelligence community. The ITIC's reports are widely read among Israeli policymakers. Among the report's most worrying findings is the growth over the past three decades of uniquely Muslim roots to older European versions of anti-Semitism. Without discounting classical Christian Europe's canards regarding secret Jewish conspiracies, the ritual slaughter of non-Jewish children and other allegations of Jewish evil, anti-Semitism in the Muslim world increasingly finds its own, Islamic reasons for anti-Jewish hatred through new interpretations of Islamic history and scripture. From the Koranic story of a Jewess who poisoned Muhammad, to the troubled relations between Muhammad and the Jewish tribes of Arabia, radical Islamist groups and thinkers have been using extreme anti-Semitic rhetoric that has grown increasingly popular with the Muslim public, particularly in Iran and the Arab states. Using well-known Koranic texts, these groups have been mapping out the Jews' "innate negative attributes" and teaching a paradigm of permanent struggle between Muslims and Jews. The goal of this "Islamified" anti-Semitism, according to the report, is to transform the Israeli-Palestinian conflict from a national territorial contest which could be resolved through compromise to a "historic, cultural and existential struggle for the supremacy of Islam." The study examined books, newspapers, television and radio broadcasts and Internet sites, along with studies of groups following anti-Jewish discourse in the Muslim world, such as MEMRI and the ADL. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, rising anti-Semitic sentiment in Europe was injected into Muslim lands through commercial and diplomatic ties. Spurred by opposition to Zionism and ideologically strengthened by Nazi rhetoric and support, Muslim anti-Semitism grew in the 20th century into a phenomenon so widespread that blatantly anti-Semitic texts can be purchased on street corners of Arab cities, even in countries where almost no Jews remain. The research team did not deal with "anti-Israel incitement," according to Erlich, "only with anti-Semitism. But when you read an article or listen to a speech, the terminology is confused and intertwined. You can't distinguish the anti-Zionism from the anti-Semitism." According to the report, the past decade has seen a veritable explosion of anti-Semitic literature in the Muslim world which intentionally confuses Israel and the Jewish people and is broadcast worldwide through books, radio, television, newspapers, caricatures and Internet forums. This discourse reaches outside Muslim lands to a large Muslim audience in the West. "Until about 10-15 years ago, anti-Semitism was imported into the Muslim Arab world from Europe," says Erlich. "They translated The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf into Arabic. Over the past 10-15 years, there's been a deep change. Today it isn't an import, but an export. This needs more research, since we don't have access to European mosques, but we're convinced that the export of anti-Semitic myths and politics to Europe is having an effect on European Muslim communities." The hundred-year-old Czarist forgery The Protocols, which accuses the Jews, among other "crimes," of fomenting liberalism by masterminding the American and French revolutions, is being published in new editions in Egypt, Syria, Iran and other countries. The report finds little government action either in the Muslim world or in the West to curb this phenomenon, citing restrictions on viewing Hizbullah's Al-Manar television station as an exception that proves the rule. At the heart of this surge in Muslim anti-Semitism lies Iran, with the regime's support for Holocaust denial and hosting of anti-Semites from around the world, along with formal calls for Israel's destruction by many of the country's leaders. "Iran is the first example of its kind since Nazi Germany in which a state officially adopts an active policy of anti-Semitism as a means to further its national interests," the report notes. It goes on to say that while Iran does not deny that Jews were massacred during WWII, the current regime seeks to minimize the scale of the Holocaust in order to reduce support for Israel's very existence in the West, which it believes comes from feelings of guilt over the world's inaction while Jews were murdered during WWII. On March 3, during fighting in Gaza, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad told his country's Channel 1 that "the real holocaust is happening in Palestine." Similarly, Palestinian groups, including the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, now regularly refer to Israeli-Hamas fighting in Gaza as a "holocaust." Anti-Semitism finds governmental sanction, and often support, in Islamic as well as secular states, among those who are at peace with Israel and those still in a state of war with Israel, the study finds. In countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, Egypt and Syria, daily promulgation of anti-Semitic messages are carried out through media that are under the supervision and censorship of the regimes. While the report's release is slated for Tuesday, Israel's cabinet minister in charge of anti-Semitism issues, Isaac Herzog, had already been briefed on its contents when he spoke to The Jerusalem Post on Monday. "There's a dissonance between the anti-Semitism that takes on the form of a religious clash and the regional coalition of moderate states, from Morocco to the [Persian] Gulf states and Turkey, that believes in peace and a two-state solution," according to Herzog, who belongs to the Labor Party. "Unimaginable and unacceptable expressions of anti-Semitism are somehow permitted among members of the coalition," he said. Part of the problem, he said, is that the rest of the world has simply grown used to Muslim anti-Semitism. "We respond to anti-Semitism only where large, vibrant Jewish communities exist. This is a mistake. It is incredibly dangerous that young Muslims are brainwashed with anti-Semitism. It starts with the Jews, but it won't end with the Jews." While the report notes that there are Muslim intellectuals who have rejected the growing anti-Semitism, they are in the extreme minority. They neither enjoy the support of the regimes nor possess enough influence or numbers to reverse the trend, says Erlich. Other Muslim intellectuals have explained the phenomenon as a side effect of justifiable anti-Israel sentiment. According to the report, however, while anti-Zionism feeds the growing anti-Semitism, specifically anti-Jewish sentiments are intentionally spread by religious and intellectual leaders in many Muslim societies, whose statements do not distinguish between Israelis and Jews. Finally, the report recommends the establishment of a well-funded international task force that will tackle the problem not only through diplomacy and information campaigns, but through legal measures. "We need a serious body of researchers and legalists, representatives of Israel, the Jewish communities and the nations of the world. Give it funds and send it to war on the diplomatic front, in the media, and with lawsuits," Erlich says, summarizing the recommendation. "Sue publishing houses that print The Protocols. It's a libel. The Syrian government still publishes [writings claiming] that Jews use Christian blood on Passover. You can't say this is anti-Israeli, or caused by the [Israeli-Palestinian] conflict." The report makes clear that the phenomenon of Muslim anti-Semitism is now widespread, popular and expanding. "The anti-Semitism that fed the Holocaust isn't dead," Erlich says. "It is prospering." Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
WHO KNOWS... WE DO
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 23, 2008. |
|
This is from Samson Blinded
|
|
Jews believe in the peace for various reasons. Some Jews are plainly self-hating, and just want a trouble for the Jewish state. Others are too tired of war, and just want to close their eyes to see the ivory tower of peace and happy relations between Jews, Egyptians, Iranians and whoever else. Some are primitive rationalists –– look at the numbers of Jews in the utopian movements such as the communist one –– and believe that every human problem, however immensely complex, can be reduced to a formula, discussed, and settled. Some politicians are crooks who use peace process to fool the masses into electing them. Some, notably the security establishment officials, see clearly that military methods fail to solve the problem, and opt for peace settlement. They just don't realize that even in mathematics, and surely in social relations, some problems are inherently unsolvable. Or it may be the other way around: the leftist Israeli establishment appoints the brainwashed ultra-leftists for security positions, and naturally they support the hollow peace. So instead of seeking an immediate solution, which ought to be wrong, Jews must accept the reality of intermittent low-level conflict which would drag on for the foreseeable future. We really don't know what would happen in a few decades. Improvements in nuclear power generation can devaluate oil, causing immense poverty and hunger in overpopulated Arab countries. Such a scenario would increase the number of desperate terrorists but diminish the threat by impoverished regular Arab armies. Arabs might get nuclear weapons, and surely leak them to terrorists who might or might not detonate them in Israel. That threat would only increase if peace agreements are signed, as Israel will find it diplomatically hard to preempt against friendly Arabs' nuclear facilities. Arabs might breed in Israel to the third of voters, join coalition with Jewish ultra-left and non-Jewish parties, and vote Jewish state out of existence, thus solving the problem of coexistence with Arabs. Or Jews might drive the hostile elements out of Israel. There are so many unknown variables in the peace process that trying to predict it amounts to nonsense. Some things, however, are easy to understand. The Arabs don't need peace with Israel: both peace and its absence are fine with them. They don't need Israel's assistance and don't fear her attacks. Peace treaty won't change the Arab behavior: they will continue supporting anti-Israeli terrorists if only to drain their countries of radicals and won't entrust Israel to be a vizier of Muslim funds (economic cooperation). The only substantial economic feature that would come out of Israeli-Arab peace is heavy investment by Muslims in the politically sensitive Israeli real estate, the process which is well underway now and only waiting to be legalized. Arabs, being completely indifferent to the peace process, offer Israel no concessions: Judea and Samaria must be abandoned, Jerusalem divided, and the refugees –– compensated, with some of them allowed returning to Israel. That's not really a peace plan, but an odd demand for capitulation of a victorious power to the defeated aggressors. Israel, on the contrary, gives way continuously and receives nothing in return. Arabs did not reciprocate the evacuation of Jewish settlements from Gaza, a major step which divided Jewish nation and left a scar for decades. Rather, Arabs intensified their attacks on Israel. Superficially, that applies to Palestinian militants only, but they enjoy support of every major Muslim state: Syria (weapons), Iran (money and training), Egypt (logistics), and Saudi Arabia (money and diplomatic support). Back in 1972, Sadat offered Israel peace with all Arabs in return for the Sinai and the Golan Heights, with no heed paid to the Palestinian state. Recently, Saudis offered Israel peace with all Arabs in return for Judea, Samaria, and Jerusalem. Now Israel negotiates with the Palestinians minute details of transferring them Judea, Samaria, and Jerusalem without expecting reciprocal peace with Arabs countries. The terms become progressively worse. But the real peace problem, it's not without, it's within Israel. Israeli Arabs form a third of Israel's young and absolute majority in several regions. The Jewish state now abandons religiously, historically, and strategically important lands to the Palestinian state so as not to be swarmed by two million Arabs living there. Reduced to the nine-mile-wide beachside state, Israel will be swarmed by her own Arabs –– who accept no peace process. It is an official policy of the PLO –– indeed, a democratic maxim –– that the Palestinians will breed to majority in Israel and then vote to unify it with the West Bank Palestine. Moderates among Palestinians proclaim they have no problem with Jews living in the resulting Arab state. Time solves the insolvable problems. Communism vanished from the book of time, leftist terrorism of 1970s ran to the end, and Islamic terrorism won't be eternal. Radical ideas do not last long as burning societies fall back into tranquility. The current levels of Palestinian terrorism are artificial, entirely propped by Beilin-Peres policies which brought the defeated PLO from Tunisia to the West Bank, enthroned it, subsidized heavily, and promoted internationally as a peace partner. So a shabby cat felt itself a lion. Palestinians support fighting Israel for two reasons: hope and hopelessness. A hope to prevail, and daily hopelessness of their lives. Both can be solved, by the overwhelming force and emigration, respectively. The Muslim Brotherhood, PLO, Hamas, in turn became political organizations; other guerrillas will follow the same road. Palestinians will always remain hostile to Israel, as Jews took over what the Palestinians think is their land. Such hostility would translate into low-level sabotage, but not a meaningful war. The peace process lacks a historical precedent. Never did hostile states negotiated peace for decades under fire. Peace never came through negotiations, but only through one side's defeat. America negotiated with Vietnam for decades, but Vietnam was not at war with America; North Vietnam was at war with the South –– and utterly defeated it. So the peace process failed in Vietnam, like elsewhere. Peace process is a leftist fallacy, a primitive rationalist approach to immensely complex problems which in fact can be exhausted, but never solved. Exhausting the Palestinian problem is easy, and Israel did it with success: behead the national organizations, expel their leaders, everyone of the slightest stance in Palestinian society. No great numbers are involved: ousting a few thousand top members of Fatah, Hamas, and other popular organizations would do. When Israel kept systematically expelling PLO associates in 1960-80s, everything was quiet on our Western Front. Even though the PLO tried ruling Palestine through its Department of Popular Organizations which oversaw everything down to students unions, it was nothing compared to the electrifying fact of Arafat's presence in the West Bank. Beilin-Peres clique brought Arafat from Tunisia to the West Bank, literally let the jinn of terrorism out of the bottle. They meant good, they meant Arafat to be their peace puppet. So they were wrong. As usual, societies pay in blood for leftists'crumbling projects. The majority of the Netherlands' population was good to Jews during Holocaust. But the problem is, the Dutch were also good toward their minority who collaborated with Germans. The minority hunted us, and so 75% of Jews were murdered. The majority of Israelis are decent Jews who wish their country well. But unless they stand up to the vicious leftist minority, too few Jews would survive in Israel. |
|
WHAT'S REALLY BEHIND THE SCREAMING HEADLINES ABOUT THE ARREST OF AN OCTOGENARIAN SPY FOR ISRAEL?
Posted by Avodah, April 23, 2008. |
|
This was written by Lenny Ben-David and comes from his
website: I*Consult
Ben-David is a former diplomat. Washington consultant to foreign embassies, lobbyist, writer and editor. |
|
American engineer Ben-Ami Kadish was arrested on Tuesday for allegedly providing to an Israeli "handler" classified data on nuclear weapons, F-15 fighter jets, and the Patriot missile air defense system. A few important points of perspective are vital: Kadish is 84 years old. The alleged crime took place some 25-30 years ago (!), between 1979 and 1985. Today Mr. Kadish lives an open, active life in a New Jersey retirement village where, according to a community newspaper, he and his wife open their sukka every year to raise money for local charities and for Magen David Adom. According to the New Jersey Jewish News, "Ben-Ami grew up in what was then Palestine and fought with the Hagana. He also served in both the British and American military during World War II and is an ex-commander of the Jewish War Veterans Post 609 in Monroe." News accounts suggest that Kadish's handler was the same man who directed Jonathan Pollard. Probably to avoid any issue of statute-of-limitations, the indictment alleges that this Zayde maintained ties to his handler until last month. Why now? Do federal prosecutors really see octogenarian Kadish as a major criminal? More likely, Kadish is being used by American officials as a means to loosen support for Israel as the two countries enter a tenacious period of negotiations. This is a pattern of American pressure that repeats itself. The tactic is geared to embarrass American supporters of Israel, particularly Members of Congress, who oppose weapons sales to Israel's foes, dangerous concessions to the Palestinians, or the abrogation of previous commitments to Israel. During the last 30 years, particularly, in times of tension, American officials claimed that Israel stole plans for the Sidewinder air-to-air missiles, diverted nuclear material from a U.S. plant in the 1960s, illegally obtained krytron triggers for nuclear weapons, pilfered computer components from Patriot missiles, and used American technology on the Lavie aircraft that was later transferred to China. The 2005 arrest of two AIPAC staffers is more of the same, and they were charged under the creaky 1917 Espionage Act statute older than Kadish. For years, unnamed American spy-hunters have been looking for an accomplice to Jonathan Pollard. Leaks on these stories almost always took place on the eve of some contretemps with the U.S. State Department. Today's case against 84-year-old Kadish reflects more the impatience of the U.S. Secretary of State with Israel's decision to continue building in Jerusalem and in settlement blocs and to retain security roadblocks. To push ahead in the illusionary Annapolis process at all costs, the State Department must de-emphasize President Bush's letter to Prime Minister Sharon stating that it is "unrealistic" to seek a "full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949." With President George Bush on his way to Israel to celebrate Israel's 60th anniversary, what better way to deflate the goodwill and cut-down the gifts the President is supposedly bringing? Lastly, in the twilight of George Bush's administration, a presidential pardon for Jonathan Pollard is again being discussed, at least by Jewish and Israeli sources. Disclosure of another Pollard-like spy would be an effective tool to keep Pollard locked up for good.
g
Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com
|
|
CAN ISRAEL REALLY STAND UP TO THE WORLD?
Posted by Michael Freund, April 23, 2008. |
|
With Israel coming under increasing pressure to make additional, far-reaching concessions to the Palestinians, the question has arisen once again of whether the Jewish state is capable of standing up for itself and its interests. Interestingly, there is another small Mediterranean state –– namely Greece –– that recently created a major diplomatic furor, all because of a question of semantics. And as I argue in the column below from the Jerusalem Post, Israel would do well to learn from their example. Comments and feedback may be sent to: letters@jpost.com or to me directly. thanks, and Happy Passover, Michael Freund |
|
Once upon a time, and it seems like it was truly a very long time ago, Israel knew how to stand on principle. Attacks on our citizens were met with swift and forceful retaliation. Talk of surrender alluded to our foes, rather than to official Israeli government policy, and we didn't hesitate to defy the world when necessary in order to defend ourselves. The spirit of Entebbe, Osirak and yes, the Six Day War, sparked our imagination, filling us with pride at the valor and heroism of the modern-day Jewish warrior. Our lives had meaning, our society had a purpose, and the nation's overriding goal was to build the land, rather than withdraw from it. But all that appears to have changed. Our leadership's infatuation with retreat has become an obsession. Yesterday's trial balloons have become today's diplomatic agenda, and what was once considered unthinkable, such as the division of Jerusalem, is now suddenly looming over the horizon. How did we reach this point? How could we sink so low so swiftly? Well, you might be saying to yourself, we don't have a choice. We're a small country, with limited resources. What else can we do? Do you really think we can stand up to the rest of the world? Heck yes. If you think this is naïve, just take a look at Greece, which recently stared down the entire Western alliance over an issue of semantics.
EARLIER THIS month, at a NATO summit in Bucharest, Greece singlehandedly caused a major diplomatic imbroglio, scuttling the expansion of NATO and defying the will of nearly all of its friends and allies, for the simple reason that it objected to the name of its neighbor, Macedonia. Macedonia, which used to be part of Yugoslavia, had been hoping to receive a formal invitation to join the trans-Atlantic coalition, as a means of further deepening its integration into the West. "But Athens blocked the invitation," the Associated Press reported on Monday, "to protest Macedonia's name, saying it implies a claim to a northern region of Greece also called Macedonia." As the Greek Foreign Ministry Web site explains, "The choice of the name Macedonia directly raises the issue of usurpation of the cultural heritage of a neighboring country. The name constitutes the basis for staking an exclusive rights claim over the entire geographical area of Macedonia." In other words, Greece is willing to risk the wrath of the United States, Britain and the rest of the NATO coalition, merely because they believe that Macedonia's choice of name masks expansionist ambitions that threaten to undermine their sovereignty and territorial integrity. The boldness of Athens's position becomes even more apparent when one considers that over 100 countries formally recognize Macedonia as Macedonia. Nonetheless, Greece stubbornly continues to insist that it be referred to as the "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia," or FYROM. There are those who will look at the Greek position with raised eyebrows, wondering what all the fuss is about. After all, who cares about names? But I applaud their resolute determination to stand firm and defend what they consider to be their national interests, even at the risk of international opprobrium. Indeed, Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakovannis didn't hesitate to announce publicly in March that "as regards the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia... the policy followed by our neighboring country in its relations with Greece, on the one side with intransigence and on the other with a logic of nationalist and irredentist actions tightly connected with the naming issue, does not allow us to maintain a positive stance." "As long as there is no such solution," she added, "Greece will remain an insuperable obstacle to the European and Euro-Atlantic ambition of FYROM." Imagine that. A country that is prepared to stand up for itself and proudly declare its willingness to be "an insuperable obstacle" over a matter of principle! If only Israel and its leadership would learn from Greece's example. Instead, we are being led by the nose inexorably towards catastrophe, unwilling to buck international pressure even when it threatens to undermine our very existence. There is, of course, an expression that something "looks like Greek to me" when we can not begin to fathom what it says. But this is one case where Israel would do well to start deciphering the words. And fast. Michael Freund served as an adviser to former Prime Minister Binyamin
Netanyahu.
This article is entitled "It's Greek to me" and it appeared today in The Jerusalem Post
|
|
IGNORANCE ISN'T BLISS
Posted by Naomi Ragen, April 22, 2008. |
|
Friends, The repeated claim that Shia Iran doesn't help Sunni terrorists is wrong. Dead wrong. When McCain stated this, he was called every name in the book: "Abysmally ignorant," said someone on the Atlantic.com website. Someone else accused him of brain failure. But the abysmally ignorant are those that can't figure out that terrorists all over the globe are helping each other. Irish terrorists, for example, are in love with PLO terrorists, with whom they share neither religion, nationality or culture. McCain got it right. The Obama cheerleaders might want to reconsider whom they are calling ignorant, and wise up. Tom Gross explains below in an article entitled "McCain was
right: Iran's help for Sunni terrorism" in National Review Online
Naomi |
|
The 4 million Democrats eligible to cast ballots today in the crucial, delegate-rich Pennsylvania primary might like to consider the following. The repeated claim by Barack Obama and his supporters in the media that Shia Iran doesn't help Sunni terror groups is wrong –– very wrong –– and yet again reveals their ignorance of foreign affairs, an ignorance that may prove extremely dangerous were he to become president. While Shia and Sunni extremists do of course have deep theological differences they cooperate in at least a dozen countries on a political and terroristic level to work against the interests of the United States. The following are a few examples of Shia Iran helping Sunni militants. Amir Taheri, who was formerly the executive editor of Kayhan, Iran's largest daily newspaper and remains one of the leading experts on Iran in the world, helped compile this information. * In AFGHANISTAN, Iran has financed and armed the Sunni Hizb Islami (Islamic Party) since the 1990s. *** If it was only one, or two, or even three, of Obama's close advisors who have adopted anti-American positions, one might possibly excuse Obama. But Obama has chosen to surround himself with many such persons. Again, if Obama had appointed even one reliable, experienced Democrat, such as Richard Holbrooke, to his foreign policy team, one might feel more comfortable that he won't make disastrous foreign policy mistakes if elected. But he hasn't. As an intelligent man, Obama is no doubt capable of mastering
foreign policy but it will take some time; and while he's doing
so, in an extremely dangerous world, it may well prove a very
costly education for the rest of us.
(For a longer version of this piece, goto
Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter. Or write nragen@netvision.net.il |
|
TERROR SURVIVOR, SHLOMI AZULAY, SPEAKS OUT
Posted by Fern Sidman, April 22, 2008. |
|
Can any of us ever imagine what our lives would be like had we personally survived a terrorist attack? In this age of ubiquitous terrorism, most of us only read about the horrific plight of victims of such attacks. We may certainly sympathize, yet we can never truly understand the emotional and physical trauma that envelopes the lives of those who are fortunate enough to survive. So is the case of a young Israeli man, whose miraculous story moved him to become a strident advocate for the rights of survivors of terrorism. Born in Jerusalem to Sephardic parents of Moroccon descent, Shlomi Azulay is a 34 year sabra, who is wise beyond his years. Says Shlomi, "I was born and raised in Jerusalem, and even though I grew up in a traditional home, I was very much a modern secular Israeli. I had very long hair, wore an earring and was totally immersed in the 'rebellious youth' mode. I served in the army and when I was 23 in the year 1997, I decided to come to the United States for a short visit, perhaps 2-3 weeks and I ended up staying for six years." While life in New York was exciting for Shlomi, he missed his family and friends in Israel and hadn't seen his mother for six years. For Shlomi the time had come to plan a trip back home and in the year 2002, Shlomi returned to Israel. While in Israel, a friend invited Shlomi to join him and others for an evening out at a new coffee shop in Jerusalem. It was a Motzei Shabbat, and even though Shlomi wasn't too thrilled about accepting the invitation, he nonetheless did so. "My friend was really excited about going to the Café Moment that happened to be located right across the street from then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's house. I accompanied him because I didn't want to disappoint him" says Shlomi. What occurred on that fateful night would change Shlomi's life forever. "When we arrived the club was jammed packed, literally wall to wall people, and the waitress told us that if we wished to be served we should try and come back later when perhaps the crowds would diminish. My friend knew several people at the club and stopped to talk with them. We were headed towards the exit when my friend spotted a young woman that he knew. He stopped to talk with her, however when I realized that this was not going to be a brief conversation, I excused myself and told my friend that I would meet him outside when he was finished talking." With pain etched on his face Shlomi continues, "I headed towards the exit and was standing at the threshold of the door when suddenly, out of nowhere, I heard a huge blast. My ears were ringing from the loudness of it. It was a bomb and it went off only three feet from where I was standing. I turned around and saw complete bedlam, total carnage, the likes of which no one could ever imagine. Body parts flying everywhere. I saw my friend's head blow right off his body. The young woman he was talking to also died. There was not even a scratch on her body. Her insides were blown up and it looked like she was sleeping. Had I stayed inside the club, I too, would have been killed." In the end, eleven people were killed and over 100 were seriously injured. Shlomi was treated for shrapnel wounds to his face, three broken joints in his lower back and an injured knee. "Even though I was never really religious, in the aftermath of the bombing, I was livid with G-d. I was angry that G-d could let this happen. I really did not turn to religion at all for solace or comfort" said Shlomi. "My life was a real mess. I couldn't function. I couldn't go to work. I couldn't deal with the nightmarish reality of what occurred. The government of Israel remained apathetic and totally indifferent to my plight and frankly, downright callous. They not only neglected to provide services to a survivor of terrorism, but they made me feel that I had to prove that I needed help. They made me feel as though somehow I was the criminal. I started to wonder to myself, who is our bigger enemy, the government of Israel or the Palestinian terrorists groups who engage in these suicide attacks", Shlomi recalls. "Here I was, mired in my anger, rage and resentment, when things began to change. I wasn't at all cognizant of it at the time, but the events that followed were orchestrated through the compassion and mercy of the One Above, by Hashem Yisborach" says Shlomi. Shlomi's mother felt her son's pain quite acutely, and one day through a chance meeting at her local JCC she met a representative from Hineni, the internationally renowned Torah outreach organization under the leadership of Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis. Shlomi's mother met Benjamin Phillips, the director of Hineni in Jerusalem who told her of Hineni's established programs for survivors of terrorist attacks, including the sponsorship of trips to Europe, the United States and elsewhere. She urged Shlomi to contact Hineni, to speak with them about participating in their programs. "Suffice it to say, I had absolutely no interest whatsoever in contacting Hineni or getting involved in such a program. Admittedly, I was quite cynical. After living in the United States for six years, I just couldn't believe that an organization would give away free trips to Europe or anywhere in the world. Soon after, Benjamin called me and asked me to join the Hineni group on their forthcoming trip to England. I told him in no uncertain terms that I was not interested and literally hung up on him. Thank G-d, Benjamin persisted. He called me again and again and again and finally I relented and I agreed to come down to Hineni for an interview. I just couldn't believe that I didn't have to pay for anything, that everything was absolutely free. He told me that I would meet many other survivors of terrorism and that we would just relax, have fun and enjoy ourselves for a week. I was still very skeptical and extremely hesitant about making any commitments and Benjamin told me that the group is leaving for England and he's not going without me. After endlessly tossing this around in my mind, I finally said, 'Why not? What do I have to lose?' So, off I was to England with Hineni", Shlomi recalls. According to Shlomi this was the best decision that he ever made. During his week in England he met many wonderful and kind people who understood and related to his plight. Shlomi and the other members of the Hineni group shared their experiences of surviving a terrorist attack, explored their emotions and graciously supported one another. Shlomi felt as though he made a new family with people who genuinely cared about him. He also says that he will never forget the abundant kindness that was shown to him by the people with whom he stayed. "We all stayed with different families, who had been told our personal histories before we arrived. They were so understanding and exceptionally generous in every way" says Shlomi. He adds, "What really touched me in such a special way was our first Shabbos in England. At that time, I didn't understand anything about Hineni or Rebbetzin Jungreis, yet the entire community came to see us on that Shabbos and talked with us and provided us with every accommodation imaginable. It was right then and there that my romance with Hineni began." After returning to Israel, Shlomi became totally immersed in Hineni activities. At the Hineni Center in Jerusalem, he began to give lectures about terrorism to audiences from virtually every country in the world. He even traveled to Holland where he addressed 1500 people; mostly members of a Christians for Israel organization. Shlomi became a media spokesman for Hineni in Israel and slowly but surely found himself as a chief advocate for Israeli survivors of Palestinian terrorism. "I had the opportunity to meet and talk with Rebbetzin Jungreis on one of her trips to Hineni in Israel. We had a chance to go to the Kotel together and we talked on a deeper, more meaningful level. She really displayed such genuine empathy and inspired me to do great things for the Jewish people," says Shlomi. About two years after joining Hineni, Shlomi began to learn Torah on a regular basis. "The person who served as my inspiration to learn Torah was my friend Amichai, a yeshiva bochur who I met at Hineni. He, too was also injured in a terrorist attack. He began to call me once a week. It was a long process until I decided to wear a yarmulke, to pray everyday at shul, to put on tzitzes, but eventually I did and I am indebted to Hashem for bringing Amichai and Hineni into my life, says Shlomi. Shlomi recounts his experiences at Hineni by saying that 99.9 percent of all the social services he received was through the efforts of Hineni. Everything from psychological counseling to complete medical care was provided free of charge to him and other survivors. "If I needed to see any doctors, any specialists, everything went through Hineni", says Shlomi. He says that the togetherness and love he felt at Hineni was beyond remarkable. "For us, the survivors of terrorism, the cohesive group atmosphere really aided us throughout our journey to healing and well being. We did everything as a group. We went out to a restaurant together, we went to a movie together, we learned Torah together." Shlomi says that Hineni does not receive any monetary assistance from the Israeli government and is privately funded. He has also publicly challenged the government of Israel regarding funds sent to Israel by the worldwide Jewish community to help terrorist survivors and victims of the 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah forces in Lebanon. As Shlomi has ruefully observed, "During the war, American Jews sent almost 40 million dollars to help Israelis directly effected by the war and other survivors. This money went through the UJA and Keren Hayesod and after engaging in extensive research, I found out that 39 million had vanished. The monies were never appropriated to Jews in Israel that are in such desperate need of services. As a matter of fact, I have proof that monies contributed not only did not end up assisting survivors of terrorism, but rather it was used to impede their progress. Soldiers were never given the bullet proof vests that were supposed to be provided. I have yet to receive an answer to my challenge from any government agency or representative and I think the American Jewish community must hold the government of Israel accountable", says Shlomi. Shlomi continues to forge ahead with his advocacy work on behalf of survivors of terrorism and is currently organizing a trip to the United States for Israeli survivors of terrorism and soldiers. Says Shlomi, "I am grateful to Hashem that I can participate in this great mitzvah and I hope that everyone reading this will want to participate as well. Anyone wishing to contact Shlomi Azulay to arrange for him to speak or to contribute funds for the upcoming trip for survivors of terrorism can reach him at: 646-220-0826 or by e-mail at hinenimiami@yahoo.com Contact Fern Sidman at ariellah@aol.com |
|
SHIN BET: GAZANS PAY DOCTORS TO DECLARE THEM ILL
Posted by Avodah, April 22, 2008. |
|
This was written by Dan Izenberg and it appeared yesterday
in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
Palestinians from Gaza bribed local doctors to declare that they were seriously ill and required treatment in Israel, the Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) charged on Monday.
"Recently there has been an increase in the exploitation of Israel's humanitarian policy by way of fraudulent medical permits in return for bribes to doctors in the Gaza Strip," a Shin Bet spokesman told The Jerusalem Post. "This, plus the requests of terrorist activists to enter Israel for medical treatment, increases the danger to state security." The statement came in response to the latest allegations by Physicians for Human Rights, which charged that since the beginning of April, the Shin Bet has been preventing 12 new cancer patients from receiving life-saving treatment in Israel. In addition to these 12, the Shin Bet had for several weeks been preventing dozens more, including cancer and heart patients, from passing through Israel on their way to treatment in Jordan and Egypt. PHR charged that the Shin Bet response to requests for entry permits to Israel is complicated and takes a long time, and thereby ignores the urgency of the situation. The slow processing by the Shin Bet follows an already protracted process in the Palestinian committee that approves the requests and in the IDF Liaison Office, before the matter comes to the Shin Bet. PHR also charged that the shuttling of patients who are barred from entering Israel directly to Egypt and Jordan did not work properly. They said the shuttle operated on an average of once every five weeks, that buses could not accommodate all the patients, so some were forced to wait, that many of the shuttles were canceled and that patients did not know when the next shuttle would be running. "The Shin Bet and the army portray the shuttle service as a genuine solution for the distress of many patients, including cancer patients, and as a worthy alternative to their demands to enter Israel for treatment," wrote PHR. "In this way, a flawed and unsuccessful procedure becomes a fig leaf for the continuation of the Shin Bet's harmful policy towards the sick population of Gaza and as a tool for the state to portray its alleged 'humanitarian' policy towards them." In its response to these charges, the Shin Bet added that the question of allowing sick Palestinians from the Gaza Strip into Israel cut across many authorities and was not the sole responsibility of the agency. The spokesman said that in all 12 cases, the agency had given its replies to the requests long ago, and therefore could not be held responsible for any delays that followed.
Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com
|
|
SUPPORT FOR TERRORISM AGAINST ISRAELIS RISES
Posted by David Meir-Levi, April 22, 2008. |
|
This was written by
Khaled Abu Toameh and it appeared yesterdat in The Jerusalem Post
Toaheh's article tells us why we should continue to petition Bush and Rice to stop their pointless and counter-productive pressure on Israel, and start supporting Israel in its need for a comprehensive military action against the Gaza Strip...an action which will render Hamas harmless and strongly deter Hezbollah for initiating any future military actions. |
|
The number of Palestinians who support attacks against Israelis continues to rise and more than half of them favor suicide bombings, according to a poll published this weekend. The survey also showed that Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh is still more popular than Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. The percentage of Palestinians who support "resistance operations" against Israeli targets rose from 43.1 percent in September 2006 to 49.5% at present. Support for this option was highest in the Gaza Strip, at 58.1%, with 24.5% in the West Bank agreeing. Palestinians who support bombing attacks against Israeli civilians rose from 44.8% in June 2006 to 48% in September 2006 and to 50.7% now. Again, more Gazans support these operations (65.1%), compared with 42.3% of Palestinians in the West Bank. The Palestinian public is divided on the rocket attacks on Israel: 39.3% said the firing of these rockets was "useful" to Palestinian national interests, while 35.7% said they were harmful. The poll results showed a general feeling of frustration with regards to the future of the Palestinian cause and the peace process in light of the ongoing Israeli military operations and the split between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Both Fatah and Hamas continue to lose support among the Palestinians, and the level of trust in political leaders also dropped. Support for Abbas fell from 18.3% in November to 11.7% this month. The poll also showed that fewer Palestinians are satisfied with Abbas's performance. Support for Haniyeh also went down, from 16.3% in November to 13.3% this month. The same applies to Fatah's imprisoned leader, Marwan Barghouti, whose popularity moved down from 14.3% to 12.8% during the same period. With regards to confidence in the political parties, support for Fatah decreased from 40% in November to 32.5% this month, while Hamas's popularity went down from 19.7% to 17.8%. The poll, conducted by the Jerusalem Media & Communications Center, covered 1,190 Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza Strip and has a margin of error of 3 percentage points. It was held from April 8-13. [Editor's Note: Results appear mixed –– both Fatah and Hamas have lost support but Palestinian Arabs support terrorism even more than before. Does this mean the "splinter" terrorist groups will gain more support from the Palestinian public?] David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
FORGET OIL, THE NEW GLOBAL CRISIS IS FOOD
Posted by Avodah, April 22, 2008. |
|
This was written by Alia McMullen, and it appeared January
7, 2008 in the Financial Post
|
|
BMO strategist Donald Coxe warns credit crunch and soaring oil prices will pale in comparison to looming catastrophe new crisis is emerging, a global food catastrophe that will reach further and be more crippling than anything the world has ever seen. The credit crunch and the reverberations of soaring oil prices around the world will pale in comparison to what is about to transpire, Donald Coxe, global portfolio strategist at BMO Financial Group said at the Empire Club's 14th annual investment outlook in Toronto on Thursday. "It's not a matter of if, but when," he warned investors. "It's going to hit this year hard." Mr. Coxe said the sharp rise in raw food prices in the past year will intensify in the next few years amid increased demand for meat and dairy products from the growing middle classes of countries such as China and India as well as heavy demand from the biofuels industry. "The greatest challenge to the world is not US$100 oil; it's getting enough food so that the new middle class can eat the way our middle class does, and that means we've got to expand food output dramatically," he said. The impact of tighter food supply is already evident in raw food prices, which have risen 22% in the past year. Mr. Coxe said in an interview that this surge would begin to show in the prices of consumer foods in the next six months. Consumers already paid 6.5% more for food in the past year. Wheat prices alone have risen 92% in the past year, and yesterday closed at US$9.45 a bushel on the Chicago Board of Trade. At the centre of the imminent food catastrophe is corn –– the main staple of the ethanol industry. The price of corn has risen about 44% over the past 15 months, closing at US$4.66 a bushel on the CBOT yesterday –– its best finish since June 1996. This not only impacts the price of food products made using grains, but also the price of meat, with feed prices for livestock also increasing. "You're going to have real problems in countries that are food short, because we're already getting embargoes on food exports from countries, who were trying desperately to sell their stuff before, but now they're embargoing exports," he said, citing Russia and India as examples. "Those who have food are going to have a big edge." With 54% of the world's corn supply grown in America's mid-west, the U.S. is one of those countries with an edge. But Mr. Coxe warned U.S. corn exports were in danger of seizing up in about three years if the country continues to subsidize ethanol production. Biofuels are expected to eat up about a third of America's grain harvest in 2007. The amount of U.S. grain currently stored for following seasons was the lowest on record, relative to consumption, he said. "You should be there for it fully-hedged by having access to those stocks that benefit from rising food prices." He said there are about two dozen stocks in the world that are going to redefine the world's food supplies, and "those stocks will have a precious value as we move forward." Mr. Coxe said crop yields around the world need to increase to something close to what is achieved in the state of Illinois, which produces over 200 corn bushes an acre compared with an average 30 bushes an acre in the rest of the world. "That will be done with more fertilizer, with genetically modified seeds, and with advanced machinery and technology," he said. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
QUEST OF CNN
Posted by Steven Plaut, April 22, 2008. |
|
One of the best reasons to switch to FOX News is CNN's Richard Quest. A know-it-all "business" journalist, who could not pass a pop quiz in any economics course I have ever taught. An unctuous mimic of Uriah Heep, an insult to the intelligence of CNN viewers, someone who reminds me of "Martin" in Bart Simpson's class. Now you will never know this from watching CNN or reading its web site, cause it ain't there, but Richard Quest was arrested Friday for running around Central Park very high on drugs, naked, and reportedly with a length of rope wrapped around his neck and also attached by the other end to that part of his anatomy that the Moyel would have attended to on the 8th day. See this: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080419/tv_nm/quest_dc_1 Let me say that I have been in Central Park many a time, including for 60s anti-Vietnam War protests back when I was a young whipper snapper, and never once was I naked, although I spent most of the antiwar protests hoping that some coeds near me would take off their tops. [I am too old now to remember exactly why.] No, that is not me in the movie singing the Aquarius song. Now I find this story quite inspiring. Not the part about the drugs, but the part about the rope. In fact, I think we could probably produce peace in the Middle East if we adopt the idea. See, just attack ropes with one end around the neck and the other end around the other end, to all Israeli politicians implicated in the "peace process," and set them loose to run around the Ramat Gan park at 3:00 in the AM, but making sure that THIS time CNN and not just Reuters is there to get the photo shoots. And everything else will follow! Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments –– both seriously and satirically –– on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
SEE UNIFIL RUN –– HIZBULLAH CHASES AWAY UNIFIL MONITORS
Posted by Bryna Berch, April 22, 2008. |
|
Another triumph for Condi comes unravelled! When General Olmert and
his cabinet of "generals" lost the Lebanese War in August 2006, Olmert
and the Bush administration reassured us that things were swell ––
UNIFIL was stepping in to fill the separation between Hezbollah and
the Israelis. So all would be calm. The realists knew better –– they
suspected that UNIFIL would be a pushover whenever Hezbollah wanted to
do something it had committed itself not to do. And so it is.
This is from yesterday's Jerusalem Post and written by the
Jerusalem Post Staff.
The original article ––
|
|
Hizbullah gunmen chased away UNIFIL inspectors in south Lebanon who identified a truck carrying arms belonging to the guerrilla group, a report published twice a year by UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon revealed Tuesday. The incident was the first time UNIFIL troops confirmed the presence of Hizbullah gunmen south of the Litani River, in violation of UN Security Council Resolution 1701, Channel 1 reported. The resolution, which enforced the ceasefire between Israel and Hizbullah after the Second Lebanon War, calls on the terror group to disarm and also forbids its members from operating south of the river in the southeastern part of Lebanon. Israel has claimed on more than one occasion that Hizbullah was not abiding by their end of the deal. The incident, on the night between March 30 and March 31, is cited in the report in reference to a different resolution –– UNSC Resolution 1559, which calls on all Lebanese militias to disarm. Sources in Jerusalem said the incident was a source of great embarrassment for UNIFIL. The troops trailed the truck and stopped it, but when the troops approached the truck, armed Hizbullah members jumped out and threatened to hurt them if they would not leave the area. The source said UNIFIL's men turned back and left the scene. This serious disregard of UN resolutions is reason for much disconcert, the report claimed. The incident was not previously published and similar incidents were not recorded. |
|
SILLY, SILLIER, & SILLIEST; EXTREMISTS EXPLOIT CONCESSIONS TO "MODERATES"
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 22, 2008. |
|
REFORM PROPOSED IN ISRAEL The Knesset is moving to eliminate debtors' prison (Arutz-7, 3/25). The US eliminated it before I was born. What took Israel so long? ANOTHER REFORM NEEDED Judicial custom in Israel is that if the police refuse (or fail) to undertake the appropriate forensic investigation, they may not prosecute. The two brothers who were convicted of firing guns at trespassing Arabs denied having fired. Police refused to test the guns. The Judge believed the Arab accusers, despite the absence of forensic evidence of a crime. The brothers are trying to get international pressure for their release (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 3/29). HERE'S WHAT'S SILLY Israel is attempting to negotiate a "two-state solution" with Abbas, who doesn't believe the Jewish people have a right to one of those states (Op. Cit.). AND SILLIER The US pressed Israel intos an informal ceasefire with Hamas, which then fired more than a hundred shells and fired bullets at Israeli farmers. That is in addition to Hamas arming and tightening its control over Gaza (Ibid.). The US claims it opposes Hamas. That's no way to do so. SILLIEST As Arabs stone more Israeli cars, and Arab criminals try to infiltrate Judea-Samaria more, Israel reduced settlement funds for counter-terrorism (IMRA,3/29). Is that stupidity, cheapness, or bigotry against settlers? LETTING ABBAS POLICE HIS CITIES Reluctantly, Defense Min. Barak bowed to US demands and let several hundred P.A. police into Nablus to patrol the city. The result is that the police coordinate with terrorists. So far, the police tolerate terrorists' placement of roadside bombs (IMRA, 3/29). What did he expect, real anti-terrorism? Hasn't happened in the other patrolled cities. Note the constant US pressure on Israel to let terrorists get through! Don't believe the rumor that Pres. Bush is favorable to Israel. REFORM PROPOSED IN ISRAEL The Knesset is moving to eliminate debtors' prison (Arutz-7, 3/25). The US eliminated it before I was born. What took Israel so long? ANOTHER REFORM NEEDED Judicial custom in Israel is that if the police refuse (or fail) to undertake the appropriate forensic investigation, they may not prosecute. The two brothers who were convicted of firing guns at trespassing Arabs denied having fired. Police refused to test the guns. The Judge believed the Arab accusers, despite the absence of forensic evidence of a crime. The brothers are trying to get international pressure for their release (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 3/29). BARUCH GOLDSTEIN FRAMED Barry Chamish and other readers of his have come up with such discrepancies in the official government version as to show that Dr. Goldstein was framed and trapped if not directly murdered by the government. The motive would have been to discredit prominent Kahanists such as Goldstein, nd to make it seem as if it would be better to oust the Jews from Hebron. One expects discrepancies in fast-moving, shocking events. The official story about Goldstein has too many discrepancies, some major. Witnesses saw a second shooter. Investigator Shamgar refused to listen to them nor to heed the finding of another, different type bullet from his. Too many people were shot for Goldstein to have done it all. How did the second shooter get away and why did he lock Goldstein in? Having fired only 105 rounds, how did Goldstein achieve 154 casualties, something even Green Berets couldn't do with a mob? In a mob, some people blocking access to others. Goldstein's intent was defense, not offense, since most of his shots were first at the ceiling as warnings, then at legs. (The government claims he became bitter against the Arabs and set out to massacre. Why does it make such a ridiculous claim?) Some older men were shot dead from his firing at the legs, because they didn't rise fast enough. Other older men were trampled by the crowd. Muslims murdered Goldstein, but those who boasted of having killed him were not prosecuted –– it would show Arab wrongdoing, dissipating some of the anger against Goldstein). There also are peculiar discrepancies in the story of the massacre of the 8 yeshiva students. Why no guard at the school and no official discussion about it? (Removal or change of guards is an old Mafia and Israeli secret service trick, applied to PM Rabin and the Israeli Ambassador to France.) How did the assailant get in unobserved, with 600 rounds of ammunition? Any help in carrying all that? Why did police who heard the shooting post a guard outside, instead of running inside to catch the assailant? (Chamish, 3/30.) Any cases alleged of Jews attacking Arabs and of Arab assassination of right-wing Jews should be scrutinized and audited by independent forensic experts. PUTTING TWO HEADLINES TOGETHER An IMRA headline of 4/17 is "Attempted Infiltration Through Kerem Shalom." Headline of 4/18 is "Easing of Restrictions Announced In Coordination." Three P.A. gunmen tried sneaking into Israel through that crossing used to supply humanitarian needs. The restrictions were on travel and on police stations. Terrorists keep trying to get at Israelis. Restrictions should be tightened until Israel gets at the terrorists. That would be prudent and logical, not easing. ISRAELI ARABS At this year's Land Day protests, Israeli Arabs chanted an appeal for terrorist attacks against Israel (IMRA, 3/30). When Israeli Jews suggest pro-active national defense, they are liable to arrest. Land Day commemorates the Arabs' loss of land in Israel. They abandoned property when they lost their civil war of aggression and genocide against the Jews. How they wax indignant over the consequences of their wrongdoing! "DISTINCTION BETWEEN EXTREMISTS & MODERATES?" Former PM Netanyahu criticized some governmental concessions to the P.A. in Judea-Samaria as rendering Israel less secure. A Cabinet Member faulted him for failing to distinguish between extremists and moderates (IMRA, 3/30). What distinction did the Cabinet Member make, aside from asserting that there is a difference? He didn't say what makes Abbas a moderate, though other people and I have pointed out many things that make him a terrorist. The Cabinet Member talks about distinctions, which really are false, but the point is not to whom Israel nominally makes concessions but that concessions, such as opening checkpoints, are taken advantage of by terrorists. I think that the West makes such distinctions in order to get Israel to make fatal concessions and because the West in incapable of seeing that all Arab factions are extremist. HAMAS USE OF LULL Hamas may be digging tunnels under the security fence. An Israeli official claims that Egypt finally is blocking the Sinai border to Gaza (IMRA, 3/30). BIG MEETING ON SECURITY CONCESSIONS The P.A. made many demands. Israel yielded. It did not demand anything concrete of the P.A., such as numbers of prisoners and destruction of weapons. If fact, some of the P.A. demands are for deployment of terrorists. The P.A. calls them police, but it recruits police from among terrorists (IMRA, 3/30). REPORTING OF ANTI-ISLAMIC MOVIE The Dutch film, "Fitna," is about Islam's bigotry and goal of world conquest. Many in the West have condemned it as inflammatory. Most US reporting includes far more of the condemnation than of the evidence and ignores the validity of the evidence (Arutz-7, 3/30). We are afraid of the truth. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
YOM HA'ATZMAUT –– CELEBRATION OF HOPE!
Posted by Steven Shamrak, April 21, 2008. |
|
Out of the ashes Eretz-Israel began emerging 60 years ago. Jews around the world saw new hope with the commencement of the realisation of a 2000 year-old dream. Since then Israel, a newly emerged agricultural country, has become one of the leading technological centres of the world. The country, which had no real military force at the time of its creation, is being defended by one of the world's most advanced army. Unfortunately, at the same time Jewish national spirit has being systematically squashed by inept political leaders who are selling out the Jewish national dream to the enemies. Fear, apathy and lack of self-respect have again replaced the boldness, enthusiasm and belief in the new bright future of the Jewish people. The spirit of the Zionist pioneers is being deliberately discredited and squashed by a corrupt bureaucracy run by a self-hating political elite both within Israel and in the Diaspora! Sixty years is a good occasion to celebrate the country's achievements. In accordance with the Gematria, Jewish numerology, number 60 symbolises the word "vessel" or unity. I only hope that this is a sign that from now on Jewish unity is going to emerge and the Jewish two-millennium dream will be achieved! Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak Zionism was always about re-creating a Jewish homeland in Palestine, not to be against anyone else. The systematic transfer of Muslim Sudanese, Algerians, Kurds, Circassians, Cherkesians, Turkmenians, Bosnians, Iranian, Egyptians and Arabs from Syria, the Arabian Peninsula and Iraq to Palestine by the Ottoman Empire and Great Britain since the creation of the modern Zionist movement in 1880s was a deliberate attempt of sabotage against the Jewish National aspiration. Just imagine if the Arabs had won the war in 1948, would any Jew live in Jerusalem, Haifa of Tel-Aviv by now? Those Jew-hating critics of Israel must take a close look in the mirror. Jews invented Humanism and, in spite of personal suffering, we live it! Traitors are Plotting Merger. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert has said that he does not rule out the possibility of a merger between his Kadima party and the Labor party. (A Kadima-Labor merger is considered in a desperate bid to stay in power!) Return Land to Jewish Owners. The Valero family is asking for the return of several dunams of land near the Damascus Gate (Shaar Shechem in Hebrew) of the wall around the Old City of Jerusalem as property of the inheritors of Aharon Valero. Valero purchased the property prior to the War of Independence, they say. The property was confiscated by the Jerusalem municipality decades ago and now includes a promenade, parking lots, and an Arab market. Quote of the Week: "It was not the decision by the United Nations that established the State of Israel; Israel arose in the merit of the Aliyah and the settlement enterprise, and in the merit of the struggle by the Lechi and Etzel, the Haganaha, and even HaShomer and Nili. But above all, the State of Israel was established in the merit of those who continued –– the warriors of the Israel Defense Forces, who repulsed the Arab attack after the declaration of the State." –– Binyamin Netanyahu, leader of Likud party. –– It is not an accident that he forgot to acknowledge the contribution of Irgun and the Stern fighters. Words are cheap! Has he learned his lesson of the Oslo war? Is he ready to repulse the Arab occupiers from the Jewish land after winning the next election? Enemy Create Artificial Fuel Crises. Terrorists in Gaza fired on Israeli trucks as they delivered fuel to Gaza last Thursday afternoon. The attack took place at the Nahal Oz fuel terminal, where terrorists murdered two civilian workers a week. Hypocrisy of the 'Loaded' Headlines: "The children of Gaza deserve a childhood..." –– Jewish children of Sderot, who are being shelled daily by rockets from Gaza, do not? Jews left Gaza, but the rocket attacks have intensified. Our enemies are using their own children as a human shield and consider their suffering as a part of Jihad and expected 'collateral damage'! Back into the Right State of Mind (Emergence of New Leadership) 60 years of independence of Israel and there is not much to celebrate. Yes Israel controls more land, but national morale and hopes Jews had attached to the creation of the Jewish state are being systematically squashed by an inept, corrupt, self-hating leadership in Israel and the Diaspora. The following is an extract of an interview Moshe Feiglin (the head of the Jewish Leadership faction within the Likud party) gave to Frontpage Magazine. It brought some glimmer of hope. We need to revisit the past inspiration of Zionism in order to achieve our goals in the future: Feiglin: ... the Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Olmert, came to a hospital in Ashkelon. He came to visit the Jews of Sderot and Ashkelon that had been wounded by the Qassam, Katyusha, and Grad rockets being fired from Gaza. Do you know what he told them? He said "get used to it"; just like that, "get used to it, I don't have a solution". Do you understand the meaning of that? Just 63 years after the gates of Auschwitz were opened, Jews are supposed to get used the fact that every once in a while we will get killed just because we are Jews. ... we don't have a solution. And this isn't about Olmert personally; the entire state of Israel doesn't have a solution. Our whole state of mind, our mentality, and our leadership are void of faith. That's why we have no solution. The problem is much more than Olmert not giving the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) an order. ...The problem is our mentality. Since Rabin's handshake, the entire state of Israel marched into a state of mind of pragmatism and non-spirituality. The only way we can solve this problem is not by getting more weapons from the United States. We don't need more F-15s and F-16s. That is not our problem. What we need is to march back into the right state of mind. And for that we need leadership. True, authentic leadership based on Jewish values. ...I say the entire Jewish Nation because whatever happens in Israel immediately reflects back on all Jews worldwide. When these Jews in Gush Katif were pulled from their homes, what happened to the level of anti-Semitism worldwide? It went up of course. Israel did what the world expected of us and anti-Semitism went up. When we defied the world and did what we had to do in 1967, the level of anti-Semitism dropped. Suddenly every Jew on the streets of Toronto and New York was proud to be a Jew. How did we achieve this true peace there? Rule number one: the Syrian Arabs that were there were evacuated. None stayed. So the first rule is, encourage the Arabs to leave. The second thing that was done was the land was taken over. After the war in 1967, we took the land over. The third rule is to annex the land. In the Golan Heights we annexed the land and put it under full Israeli sovereignty. The fourth rule is to flourish the land with as many Jewish villages as possible. And the fifth and most important rule is to never sign a peace treaty. We have not signed any peace deals with respect to the Golan Heights and look what we have –– true peace. A real, true peace exists there, something that doesn't exist anywhere else in the country. Our border with Egypt is very dangerous even though we have a peace deal signed with them. To this day, Egypt fights against us via that border. And we can't do anything because our hands are tied because of the peace deal we signed. Any solution that leaves the Arabs in their place will not work, period. Fortunately, one good thing did come out of Rabin's handshake –– 15 years under the PLO/Hamas regime have made the Arabs want to leave. Various polls have showed this, the majority wants to leave. ...every year Israel spends 10% of our entire national income on the concept of Oslo. That is $150 billion every decade spent building fences, destroying Jewish villages, and putting guards in front of every coffee shop and store. Before Oslo, Israel didn't need to have an armed guard in uniform in front of every store. That is 60,000 people on full payroll just guarding us from the effects of Oslo. That money is enough to give every Arab family in Yesha (the West Bank and Gaza) $250,000. America did not want Israel to go and fight the Six-Day War. America did not want Israel to go and bomb the nuclear reactor in Iraq. And there are many more examples like that. I respect the United States a lot, but I expect that kind of respect back and I believe I will get it. People who respect themselves, get the kind of respect they deserve from others. I will not let anyone tell me what is in my best interests. I am going to worry about Israel first, but I do believe that, at the end of the day, my policies are in the interests of the United States as well. First of all, we have to stop this game of being attacked by sub-contractors. Egypt is fighting us through Gaza. It attacks us daily. There is no doubt about it, there is a war going on between Egypt and Israel today. It is just being fought through a sub-contractor. Syria and Iran are fighting us through Hezbollah in Lebanon. And we are playing their game, instead of making them pay a price for what they are doing. We have to break this cycle and make them pay a serious price. We gave up the Sinai for peace and now they are using it against us. ...a strong Israel can achieve peaceful borders. Notice I didn't say "peace". "Peace" is something totally different. But we can achieve peaceful borders; a situation where people are not getting killed. A weak Israel can only achieve peace agreements. But those agreements come with a lot of bloodshed. Therefore, we should radiate strength. We have shown in the past that we can do that. Contact Steven Shamrak at stevenshamrak@gmail.com and visit his website at www.shamrak.com. |
|
THE ISRAELI 'SETTLER' SERVING IN ITALY'S PARLIAMENT
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 21, 2008. |
|
This was written by Meron Rapoport and is appeared April 18,
2008 in Ha'aretz
www.haaretz.com/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=976069 |
|
Almost 50,000 people live in Jerusalem's Gilo neighborhood, one of the largest in Israel. Up until now, it had no representative in parliament. As of this week, it does. Fiamma Nirenstein, a neighborhood resident for 10 years, was just elected to the Italian parliament. If we stick to the definitions of the UN, which views Gilo, on the capital's southern edge, as a settlement, one could say that Nirenstein is the first settler to be a member of a non-Israeli parliament. This week, in a series of phone calls to Rome, between the first reports of a close victory for the right-wing coalition, to which Nirenstein belongs, and the final reports of Silvio Berlusconi's sweeping victory, Nirenstein explained several times that she has not requested Israeli citizenship but that this bureaucratic fact does not affect her identity. "I feel as though I made aliyah," says Nirenstein in a conversation that fluctuates between Hebrew and Italian. In the elections, Nirenstein did not hide her Israeliness. Her campaign was centered on the view that Israel is Western democracy's vanguard in the struggle against world terror. "I ran for a place in parliament as a representative of the Liguria district. I held rallies in Genoa and other cities in the region," she recounts. "But I didn't talk with the people about local problems. I told them that the most important thing for their Italian identity is to stand by Israel's side." Nirenstein called her most recent book "Israele Siamo Noi" ("Israel Is Us"). By "us," she was referring, of course, to Italians. Even though Italy hasn't experienced much in the way of terror attacks and the number of Muslim immigrants there is small compared with other countries in Europe, the talk about the importance of the fight against Islamic terror, or simply of how to deal with Islam in general, is very much present in contemporary Italian discourse. Oriana Fallaci devoted the last years of her life to writing books in which she forthrightly pegged Islam as the source of all the world's evil. Berlusconi himself, the unquestioned leader of the Italian right for more than a decade, explained at one of his appearances a few days ago: "We must be conscious of the superiority of our culture, which gave prosperity to people in countries that adopted it and ensures respect for human rights and religion. This respect certainly does not exist in the Islamic countries." Perhaps this is the reason why Berlusconi and Gianfranco Fini, Berlusconi's partner and the former head of the neo-fascist party, proposed that Nirenstein join their joint list, Il Partito della Liberta ("The Party of Liberty"). Nirenstein's father arrived in Italy during World War II, as a soldier in the Jewish Brigade. In Florence, he met her mother, who fought as a partisan against the fascist government and later against the Nazi regime. "I was born as a communist," she says. In her youth she was part of the 1968 generation, founded the first feminist journal in Italy and worked at leftist newspapers. After the 1967 Six-Day War, a rift began to develop between her and her "communist comrades," who saw Israel as an occupying country. "I was confused for a long time," she says. "In 1982, I signed a petition against the First Lebanon War. Today I wouldn't sign it. What did Israel gain from the withdrawal from Lebanon?" To the right of Netanyahu Her first visit to Israel was as a reporter, and it was only after this initial visit that she returned in 1992 for the long term. For two years, she ran the Istituto Italiano di Cultura in Tel Aviv, and after the Rabin assassination, she decided she had to stay in Israel. "I had the feeling that this was the most interesting place in the world, and I also felt that the reporting on Israel was biased." She did not obtain Israeli citizenship because she thought an Israeli passport would hinder her in her work, but aside from that, she also thinks that "every Jew in the world is an Israeli even if he's not aware of it. Anyone who doesn't know it is making a big mistake." In terms of the reality of Israel's current political system, Nirenstein is located to the right of Kadima and Labor, and maybe even of Likud Chair Benjamin Netanyahu. She says she believes in the idea of two states for two peoples, but thinks the principle of "territories for peace" has been a failure. There's no point in discussing it, she explains, until the entire Arab world is capable of recognizing Israel. Negotiations with Hamas are absolutely out of the question. But there are polls which indicate that a majority of Israelis are prepared to negotiate with Hamas. Nirenstein: "The public supports a compromise with Hamas, so that it will stop firing on Sderot. But morally speaking, there mustn't be negotiations with Hamas, which thinks that Jews are the sons of monkeys and pigs. You can't negotiate with cannibals, who eat human beings." It's hard to argue with Nirenstein. Not just because of the poor quality of the phone connection to Rome, but also because she thinks that Israel is a beacon that should serve as inspiration for the entire West. "Israel is the vanguard of all the democracies in the world, and the time has come for Europe to recognize that," she says. But in the election campaign you met with Italians who barely know where Israel is. How did you persuade them that Israel is important to their lives? "I said that Italy can learn a lot from Israel. It can learn what a true democracy is, how a democracy can survive in conditions of conflict, without forsaking its fundamental principles. Israel is a culture of life, a culture of people who are always seeking peace. Our problem in Italy is that sometimes we don't know who we are. You can know who you are if you know your enemy and your friend. Israel is Italy's friend." In other words, Islam is the enemy? "I'm not saying that all Muslims are terrorists, or that all Muslims are criminals. But Hamas has announced that it wants to conquer Rome, to make it the outpost from which it will conquer all of Europe." And you think that Hamas really intends to conquer Rome? "Rome is a very symbolic place in the eyes of radical Islam. Italy, with its Catholic culture, is an enemy in the eyes of Islam." Obviously, this all touches on one of the central issues in Italy's recent election campaign: the immigrant issue. Fini, who is slated to be appointed parliament speaker in Berlusconi's new administration, frequently talks about the need to ban illegal immigration. Even the moderate Social-Democractic party, led by the former mayor of Rome, Walter Veltroni, devoted a good amount of attention to the subject. "People feel that immigration is threatening their cities, their culture," Nirenstein explains. "Maybe it's exaggerated, but the residents of Florence, for example, think of their city as a temple for the works of art that were created there. When they see the steps of the Duomo filled with immigrants, they're in shock." I lived in Florence. I remember Italy as a tolerant country. "It's changed a lot. There are entire quarters that you can't enter at night. There's rape, there are assaults, there's drug dealing. There are schools for immigrants where they don't hang the crucifix. The immigrants have contempt for our culture. We gave them work and they scorn our values. There's a deep contradiction between the more radical Islam and Italy's values. The straight-armed salute In Nirenstein's books, you don't find the aggressive anti-Muslim sentiment that screams from every page of Fallaci's books. But while she isn't part of the wave of opposition to immigrants and Muslims that is sweeping Italy, she does belong to the new right that scored an impressive election victory this week. It seems that there is no such thing as a right way to be "right" in all of Europe: Berlusconi, the avowed capitalist and most avid pro-American in Europe, on the one hand, the Lega Nord (Northern League) with its wild incitement on the other, and then Fini and his former neo-facist party. Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy almost seem like communists in comparison to this bunch. Nirenstein does not "completely" accept this definition. To her, Berlusconi is a centrist who also received votes from the left, because he's "for the downtrodden" and wants to lessen their tax burden. Nirenstein sees herself as "a friend of the Northern League," which just wants to turn Italy into a federal state. She feels this is a legitimate ambition, even if some of the League's pronouncements are "unpleasant." Her closeness to the former neo-fascist party caused Nirenstein some discomfort during the election campaign, particularly after one of Berlusconi's candidates for the Senate, Giuseppe Ciarrapico, proudly announced that he was and remains a fascist. According to Nirenstein, his candidacy "does not fit" with her candidacy as an avowed anti-fascist, a Jew and the daughter of a partisan, but she remained on the list nevertheless. "There's no such thing as a perfect list," she says. Did you encounter people like Ciarrapico during the election campaign? "At one of the election rallies I attended, in Genoa, someone gave the straight-armed salute. I went to the Allianza Nationale [the new name of the former neo-fascist party] people and asked who it was. I said that I protested, that I was stunned to see such a thing and that I did not want to see it again." But Fini himself used to do the straight-armed salute at rallies in the 1960s, when everyone knew where fascism had led to. "I don't know if Fini did that salute, maybe he did it in his youth. But I don't know what more he could have done than to kneel at Yad Vashem. Is he supposed to kill himself?" He may not have been able to do more. But how did you, as a Jew, the daughter of a partisan, feel alongside a man who supported fascism as an adult? "He was a fascist like I was a communist, when I was indifferent to what Pol Pot did, when I admired Che Guevara. I see him as someone who has since developed." Post-election Italy, says Nirenstein, is a better place, a more stable place, a place without a radical left and a radical right. She doesn't know yet what she'll do in the new parliament. Nirenstein would like to deal with foreign affairs, but she knows she'll have to pay a price: For now she'll remain in Rome and bid good-bye to her good friends in Israel. She's not giving up the house in Gilo, though. It will wait for the return of the parliament member from Rome. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
AFI BOOKLET FOR ISRAEL'S 60TH ANNIVERSARY
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, April 21, 2008. |
|
Dear Friends The AFI 60th anniversary booklet, written by our Membership Director, Fran Waddams, is attached. To download
I hope you will enjoy reading it. Please feel free to download it and share it with your friends, church or synagogue. Chag Pesach sameach! Simon and all at AFI For information on the Celebration in Central London and Manchester,
click here.
Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel
(www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com). Contact him at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk
|
|
HAMAS EXPLODES U.S. VEHICLES IN MASSIVE ATTACK
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, April 21, 2008. |
|
This is not the first time that American arms and equipment has been used by terrorist against us. When Begin invaded Lebanon, Sharon pulled out a few Billion Dollars worth of American guns, ammunition, electronics, vehicles and other sorts of equipment. A great deal of all this was officially listed as having been given to the Saudis and other "moderate" Arab regimes. I also remember reading at the time that the explosives used to murder the Marines in Beirut were American. Then there was an entire ship of mostly American arms intercepted a few years ago on its way to the PLO. I am so glad that the American Government is our dear friend. I can only dread to think what things would be like if they didn't really like us. This was written by Aaron Klein, WND's Jerusalem Bureau chief;
it is archived at
|
|
JAFFA, Israel –– Hamas used two seized U.S. military vehicles to carry out a large-scale attack this weekend against a major Israeli border crossing, Hamas leaders told WND. The vehicles were captured when Hamas last June took complete control of the Gaza Strip, overtaking all U.S.-backed security compounds in the territory associated with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party. The U.S. provided Fatah with weapons, vehicles and large sums of financial and military aid. Israeli defense officials called yesterday's border attack the largest, most sophisticated Hamas terrorist operation since Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005. "We utilized two American armored Jeep vehicles in the heroic operation at Kerem Shalom," said Abu Abdullah, who is considered one of the most important operational members of Hamas' so-called military wing. "We obtained the vehicles last June." Muhammad Abdel-Al, the spokesperson and a leader of the Hamas-allied Popular Resistance Committees terrorist organization which participated in this weekend's attack, confirmed two American vehicles were utilized. Abdel-Al added, "We warned you we would obtain all the weapons the Zionists and Americans gave to your puppets in Fatah. It is only a matter of time before we take over the West Bank and obtain the American weapons you are giving Fatah now." In the attack, which took place just hours after the Jewish state ushered in the Passover holiday, two explosive-laden vehicles disguised as Israeli military jeeps exploded at the Kerem Shalom crossing, the main Israeli transport area for goods and humanitarian aid into Gaza. Thirteen Israel Defense Forces soldiers were hurt in the attack, most wounded lightly to moderately. The two vehicles arrived at Kerem Shalom under the cover of dozens of mortar shells just after a third armored vehicle ripped a hole in the border fence. The two disguised vehicles exploded inside the crossing, one reportedly close to a group of soldiers. The drivers of all three vehicles were killed when their cars exploded. At roughly the same time as the Kerem Shalom attack, the Israel Defense Forces fired a missile at a truck approaching Kissufim, another border area previously used to cross into Gaza. The missile caused a massive explosion, indicating the truck was carrying a large amount of explosives defense sources believe was to be used in a second, simultaneous border attack at Kissufim. At nearly the same time along another area of the border, IDF soldiers spotted two Palestinians carrying explosives approaching the border fence just outside Kibbutz Be'eri, a Jewish town bordering Gaza. An IDF force of 11 soldiers entered Gaza in pursuit of the terrorists only to quickly realize they were being ambushed in an apparent Hamas trap. Four Hamas snipers fired at the unit, killing three IDF soldiers. Defense officials here believe Hamas attempted a major, coordinated attack at several points along Israel's Gaza border. Yoav Galant, IDF commander in the Gaza area, called the offensive Hamas' boldest operation since Israel's Gaza retreat. He said the attack, "the likes of which we have not seen since the disengagement," was an attempt "to execute mass-killings and abductions." Galant told reporters Hamas was "harming the interest of the Palestinians themselves, by attack crossings which are the humanitarian lifelines of Gaza." Former deputy defense minister Ephraim Sneh said the attack revealed "the true face of Hamas, which is [itself] creating the blockade on Gaza's people." But back in Gaza City, Sami Abu Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman, said his terror group would carry out more attacks on crossings to break what he claimed was an Israeli blockade of the territory. "These operations are the beginning of the explosions that Hamas has warned of," said Abu Zuhri. "If the parties don't intervene quickly to save Gaza and break the siege, what is coming will be greater." WND previously reported Hamas obtained armored U.S. military jeeps. Immediately after Hamas staged its coup and took over Gaza, WND quoted Hamas officials stating they seized "enormous" stockpiles of foreign weapons, including U.S. arms, that had been stored in Fatah security compounds. The U.S. in recent years reportedly transferred large quantities of weaponry to build up Fatah forces against rival Hamas. Hamas officials told WND in multiple interviews prior to last June they would seize the American weapons. Hamas last summer provided WND with a partial list of what the terror group said were seized weapons, The list included: * "Dozens" of mounted machine guns that can fire at Israeli helicopters Hamas' latest round of terrorist attacks comes as former president Jimmy Carter this weekend continued meeting Hamas leaders and reportedly discussed with them a cease fire to include the possibility of the Palestinians assuming some security control of the Gaza side of Israel's major border crossings. Carter met twice this weekend with Hamas chieftain Khaled Mashaal, and his deputy, Moussa Abu Marzouk, who both reside in Syria. The two men are accused of masterminding attacks that have killed hundreds of civilians. "Several subjects were discussed, including [Israeli-Palestinian] crossing points, [captured Israeli soldier Gilad] Schalit, the siege on the Palestinians and a cease-fire between Hamas and Israel," Abu Marzouk said. The AP quoted a senior Hamas official in Damascus, speaking on condition of anonymity, described the meetings between Carter and Hamas as "warm." Last week, Carter met in Egypt with senior Hamas leaders Mahmoud al-Zahar and Saeed Seyam. Israeli security officials stated it was "almost a one hundred percent certainty" both al-Zahar and Seyam were involved in planning this weekend's border attacks. Al-Zahar and Seyam are identified by both Israeli and Palestinian security officials as the two most senior leaders of Hamas' so-called military wing, which carries out terrorist activities from the Gaza Strip, including rocket strikes, suicide bombings, border raids, kidnappings and shooting attacks. In a WND exclusive interview earlier this week, Ahmed Yousuf, Hamas' top political adviser in the Gaza Strip, called Carter a "noble person" whose planned meeting with Hamas would help the terror organization "engage with the world community." Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. |
|
THE LIBELING OF A PEOPLE SURGES WITH A VENGEANCE
Posted by Marc Samberg, April 21, 2008. |
|
This was on my local PBS last night. Check PBS.ORG for your local
stations if in USA.
It was written by Alessandra Stanley and published January
8, 2007 in the New York Times.
|
|
Diatribes against the Jews are shockingly crude in Arab television programs and newspapers. They are also shockingly commonplace, "the elevator music for the Arab world," as David Ignatius, an international affairs columnist for The Washington Post, puts it in "Anti-Semitism in the 21st Century: The Resurgence," a PBS documentary that is broadcast tonight. And that background noise has become more strident and pervasive over the last few years, spread by satellite television and the Internet throughout the Middle East and North Africa, with echoes reverberating deep into immigrant groups in Europe. "Anti-Semitism in the 21st Century" tries to explain the origins of that hate as well as its surge. Whatever its roots, anti-Semitism in the Muslim world is linked inexorably to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and keeps getting worse. And no topic is more sensitive or incendiary. So not surprisingly, the script is cautious and elliptical, more comfortable exploring the past than the present. The film begins with a vitriol sampler, clips of various Islamic clerics culled by the Middle East Media Research Institute, a Washington monitoring group founded by Yigal Carmon, a former counterintelligence adviser to the Israeli government. In 2004 on Al-Manar TV in Lebanon, for example, Sheikh Taha al-Sabonji said, "Those responsible for all civil strife and other problems throughout history were the Jews." (Muslim extremists are not the only ones to express such sentiments, of course. Mel Gibson expressed a similar idea when he was arrested for drunk driving.) A history lesson follows. Various experts explain that Jews did not have equal rights in the Muslim-ruled world, but were relatively tolerated until the 19th century, when the crumbling of the Ottoman empire and the rise of the Zionist movement dramatically changed the landscape. Jewish refugees escaping persecution in Europe arrived in Palestine en masse. "The Arab reaction was a refusal of Jewish presence," says Zeev Sternhell, an Israeli historian. "It was not anti-Semitism." But European missionaries and colonists supplied those biases, bringing to the region a Christian rationale for anti-Semitism, steeped in images of Jews as devils and killers of Jesus. During World War II Arabs found common cause with European fascists. Hitler won the allegiance of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem by promising to remove the Jews from Palestine. Fabrications like the early-20th-century Protocols of the Elders of Zion and medieval blood libels, legends that Jews baked matzo with the blood of murdered Christian children, faded in Europe after World War II. They lingered on in the East, finding new traction when Arab armies were defeated in 1948 and Israel emerged as a state and Palestinians were displaced. Israeli's victory in the 1967 war left the Arab world humiliated and angry, so anti-Semitic theories of an all-powerful worldwide Jewish conspiracy were "soothing," says Bernard Lewis, professor emeritus of Near Eastern Studies at Princeton. The film does not mention that Mr. Lewis is one of the leading scholars that Vice President Dick Cheney consulted to formulate the administration's rationale for toppling Saddam Hussein. The documentary makes very little mention of the American occupation of Iraq — which is odd, given how often the Arab media paint the war as a sinister conspiracy cooked up by Israel and its supporters in Washington. The film reports that anti-Semitic acts of violence have almost doubled since the 1990s. But there are lots of other indicators besides violence. Lately lurid television dramas include cockeyed depictions of Jews and Jewish history. One notable example from 2003 is a lavish, Syrian-made series called "Al Shatat," a term for diaspora, which begins with Baron Edmond de Rothschild, an earlier financier of Jewish settlement in Palestine, on his deathbed, telling his family and friends that "God has given the Jews the mission of ruling the world." "Al-Shatat" also includes a modern-day blood libel: bearded Jews slitting the throat of a Christian child. Scholars say that Israel's enemies exploit anti-Semitism to rally support for their cause, but Rashid Khalidi, the Edward Said professor of Arab studies at Columbia University, argues that Israel also finds anti-Semitism useful. "I think that the brouhaha about it is a systematic attempt to draw attention away from the roots of the conflict," Mr. Khalidi argues. "There has been an oppressive occupation going on for 40 years, a people has been dispossessed." The narrator, Judy Woodruff, steps in as if to cool frayed tempers. "And while some say that hatred of Israel is caused by Israel's occupation of the Golan Heights and West Bank, and the conflict in Lebanon," she says, "others note that overt calls by Arab leaders for the destruction of the entire Jewish state were commonplace even before the occupation which began in 1967." "Anti-Semitism in the 21st Century" explores the ancient hatreds that have risen up in new forms. But the film's circumspection reveals just how complex the problem is to address, let alone redress. http://www.twocatstv.com/pressroom/press_antisem_starledg.htm
Our 2007 PBS film Anti-Semitism in the 21st Century: The
Resurgence,
has won the Cine Golden Eagle Award. For more info go to
Contact Marc Samberg at MarcSamberg@yahoo.com |
|
'PALESTINIANS' USED ISRAELI-SUPPLIED APC'S IN KEREM SHALOM ATTACK
Posted by Avodah, April 21, 2008. |
|
This comes from Carl in Jerusalem on his website:
|
|
As some of you may recall, just about a month ago, Prime Minister Ehud K. Olmert approved the delivery of twenty-five Russian armored personnel carriers ("APC's" in English or nagmashim in Hebrew) to the 'good terrorists' of 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen. The approval was contrary to the recommendations of both the IDF and the General Security Services. Some of you may have wondered at the time how something that is a 'personnel carrier' could be used directly for terrorism. Have a look at the picture at the top of this post –– it's an IDF issue APC. And if that's not enough for you to imagine how terrorists could use an APC, consider this account of Saturday's Hamas attack on the Kerem Shalom crossing and recall that Hamas got APC's and other pieces of military equipment when it overthrew Fatah in Gaza. Thirteen soldiers were wounded at 6 a.m. on Saturday when an armored personnel carrier –– supplied to the Palestinian Authority in the 1990s –– rammed through the fence between Israel and southern Gaza near the Kerem Shalom crossing, used to transfer humanitarian aid to the Strip. After the APC opened the gate, two vehicles –– disguised as IDF jeeps and packed with 300 kilograms of explosives each –– drove through. One blew up next to an IDF watchtower, causing extensive damage but no injuries to the soldiers inside. The second vehicle exploded next to a number of IDF jeeps belonging to the Southern Command's Beduin Desert Battalion. Despite the thick fog, the deputy battalion commander spotted the second jeep as it made its way into the crossing. Thinking at first that the jeep was Israeli, the officer tried to contact the driver on the standard military radio frequency. When he did not receive an answer, he understood that it was a car bomb. "The deputy battalion commander shouted, 'Car bomb, car bomb,' and all the soldiers ran into their armored jeeps," an officer who witnessed the infiltration said Sunday. Most of the soldiers made it into the vehicles. The 13 who didn't sustained light-to-moderate wounds. And that wasn't the only attempt to use an APC for a terror attack on Saturday: Moments later, another APC approached the Kissufim crossing, north of Kerem Shalom. A tank from Brigade 401 opened fire and destroyed the vehicle, which was believed to have been packed with explosives. But if any of you think that's enough to get Prime Minister Ehud K. Olmert to alter his plans to give the 'good terrorists' from Fatah more APC's, please think again. Also on Sunday, defense officials said Israel did not plan to alter an earlier decision to permit the PA in the West Bank to receive 25 APCs from Russia, despite the use of an armored vehicle in the Kerem Shalom attack. The decision to transfer the APCs was made by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert several months ago following a request by Russia to supply the vehicles to Fatah forces in the West Bank to bolster PA President Mahmoud Abbas. The more things change, the more they stay the same. This government is still 'led' by idiots. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
IRANIANS PROTEST DUTCH "ZIONISTS"
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, April 21, 2008. |
|
This comes from yesterday's Gateway Pundit website
|
 A large group of people congregated in front of the Dutch embassy in Tehran on Thursday to voice their strong protest against an anti-Islam documentary produced by the far-right Dutch politician, Greet Wilders.   Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
INDIVIDUAL ISRAELIS FIGHT ARAB POACHERS; WHAT GOVERNMENTS REALLY THINK ABOUT ISRAEL
Posted by Richard Shulman, April 21, 2008. |
|
ARAB CLAIMS & REALITY During this year's Israeli Arab protest against establishment of a Jewish state, an Arab claimed that Israel demolishes homes and ethnically cleanses cities of mixed populations on an unprecedented scale. Fact is, whole cities of Bedouin are illegal, but the government does not act against them (Arutz-7, 4/17). In Israel, an Arab clan illegally built a village of 20 houses that they call storage containers, on land owned by the Jewish National Fund. They cut a hole on the fence of the nearby kibbutz, and graze their horses on the Jews' crops. "Fearing Arab riots or political condemnation by the Israeli Left, Arab leaders, the Islamic Movement and their allies abroad, the police and the state prosecutors have simply stopped enforcing the laws against the Galilee and Negev Arabs. Surrounded by increasingly hostile and lawless Arab and Beduin villages, local Jews' livestock and crops are continuously plundered." Jews either abandon their fields or pay protection money to Arab gangs, because the police close thousands of complaints a year, alleging "lack of public interest." The Jewish state does not protect Jewish property. A farmer's son and combat veteran has organized a movement that guards the farms, fends off the Arabs, and teaches and inspires Israelis about their Zionist rights and purposes (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 3/24). The Arabs ethnically cleanse cities of mixed populations. In one town, Druse burnt down the Jews' houses. Muslim Arabs like to play the victim. Most people sympathize with the Palestinian Arabs, having no idea of the Arabs' extensive robbery of Jews in Israel and in the Territories. SEC. RICE'S LATEST CONCESSION FROM ISRAEL She got Israel's Defense Minister to approve a new P.A. town on the outskirts of Jerusalem, on the road connecting it to several Jewish towns in Judea-Samaria. The IDF foresees security problems (Arutz-7, 4/17). Arabs will attack Jews on that road, will try to cut off the Jewish towns, and will besiege Jerusalem. It's happened before. Rice interferes with Israeli security. She should be given a lifetime membership in the PLO terrorist organization. An Americans should stop asserting that Pres. Bush is pro-Israel. NEW ISRAELI ANTI-TERRORIST WEAPON Israel has developed a camera-guided machine gun that will enable Israeli troops indoors to fire at terrorists outdoors near the security fence (IMRA, 3/24). U.S. ARMS FOR ABBAS FAILS The US finds that Abbas does not undertake counter-terrorism with the arms and training the US gives him. He makes some arrests and has a few of the suspects tried, when pressed. Then he lets them go. His main use of power is to try to keep Hamas from wresting it away. Why keep giving Abbas arms? Obviously those arms either will be used by him against Israel or will be taken by Hamas and used against Israel (IMRA, 3/26). Could that be the purpose in arming him? Or does Sec. Rice still think, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that Abbas is anti-terrorist and a viable leader? SHOULD ISRAEL LET P.A. POLICE PATROL JENIN? Eventually, the P.A. must be responsible for maintaining order in its cities. Some Israelis, however, consider the P.A. police a threat to them. Having noted that terrorists exhibit military training, they are reluctant to let P.A. police assigned to Jenin receive such training in Jordan, under US auspices (Arutz-7, 3/26). The answers are not to recognize the P.A. and gradually to get the Arabs out and annex undeveloped areas of the Territories. Let the western Palestinian Arabs go to Arab states, including the Palestinian one, Jordan! Pity the countries that receive them! OBAMA'S ADVISOR Former US Air Force Chief of Staff Peek is a senior military advisor to Barak Obama. Gen. McPeek blames US Jews for the war in Iraq and for keeping the US from making peace between Israel and the Arabs. He accuses US Jews and Christian pro-Zionists of dual loyalty. If Obama wins, McPeek is likely to become Sec. of Defense (Arutz-7, 3/26). UNFREE SPEECH IN ISRAEL An Israeli was sentenced for "incitement to racism." When PM Sharon planned to expel thousands of Jews from Gaza and northern Samaria, Ben-Yaakov conducted an informal referendum asking which is preferable, that expulsion of Jews or the expulsion of hostile Jews from Israel. How democratic was the prosecution? (Arutz-7, 3/26). The government of Israel represses much dissent. Acting against Jewish interests, it is the government that is discriminatory. HOW ISRAEL TREATS DISSIDENTS Some teenaged girls protested the government's failure to demolish the house of the terrorist who had murdered eight yeshiva students. Arrested, they were placed in a prison with foul-smelling blankets and a chain-smoker but no ventilation. They were denied medical treatment, though one was injured, at at first, food and water. (Israeli police don't just arrest Jewish dissidents, they often beat them up.) This was verified by the Israeli Bar Association. Later, the police admitted they had had no reason for arresting the girls (IMRA, 3/25). In other words, the police were just repressing critics of the government. We keep hearing what a democracy Israel is, but it is a semi-police state. WHAT THE GOVERNMENTS SAY & WHAT THE MEDIA SAYS Foreign leaders tell former PM Netanyahu of their surprise that Israel does not use its overwhelming power vis-á-vis Hamas to bring it down and end its bombardment of Israel and its threats of greater damage in future (IMRA, 4/18). The media, however, asserts, and reports that the US government agrees with it, that Israel is too hard on Gaza. Those positions seem contradictory. I would explain them like this. The governments side with the Arabs, the US privately and some publicly, but think that Israel would be within its rights to use greater power against Hamas and are surprised that Israel listens to their demand that Israel refrain from doing so. UNO APPOINTMENT TO JUDGE ISRAEL ALREADY HAS The UNO has appointed an American Jewish (nominally?) law professor as special investigator of Israel's actions in the Territories. Prof. Falk has accused Israel of treating the Palestinian Arabs as the Nazis treated the Jews, of terrorism, and of having genocidal tendencies. He was part of a UNO mission which judged suicide bombing a valid method. His impartiality has come under question (IMRA, 3/27). The value of the UNO should come under question. After all, this outrageous appointment is routine for the UNO. So is stealing from the vast sums the UNO raises publicly and privately. Falk's demonstrated lack of solidarity with fellow Jews contradicts antisemitic conspiracy theories about the Jewish people conspiring in behalf of Israel. He is among the many Jews conspiring against Israel. How sad that such a sick mind comes from my Jewish people! Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
PLEASE HELP SAVE ISRAEL
Posted by Mark Tollman, April 21, 2008. |
|
Shalom and Howdy If the Jewish people don't retain all OUR biblical archeology and heritage and Bible-land, then ... we will become a vanquished people; dead physically and spiritually, severed from our Bible-soul. Let's save Israel. What to do? read www.middleeastsolutions.com and tell the world ASAP. ask the Knesset; to review the analysis of www.middleeastsolutions.com Please ask the bloggers to add this link, to their pro-Bible-Israel websites. Please write to the Israeli media, the Israeli newspapers,
organizations, groups, etc, talk about this on Israeli Radio.
Let's save Israel
www.middleeastsolutions.com seems to express a solution, very diplomatically. A population transfer, reminding Islam to kindly compute their square miles of these 52 Muslim countries –– Islam has 52 Muslim countries! The website does indeed provide the only true peace, that ensures a future for the Jewish people, connected to our Biblical Covenants and allows for our growth with safety. (otherwise we turn into a parking lot in a few decades) And gives Palestinians their county in Arabia. ( with wealthy Saudis to nurture them.) The British only gave us 20% of what was promised us. No one has suffered more that the Jewish People. Our connection to the land is biblical and ancient and 4000 years. The Romans, Christians and Muslims, have so brutally exterminated us. We are an endangered-species without our ancient-Homeland. ! ! !!!!!!! We are a special people; with a special situation. www.middleeastsolutions.com should be translated into Hebrew, so all Israel can read about the hopeful options of retaining our Bible-land www.pmw.org.il & www.prophetofdoom.net should also be translated into Hebrew; so we know what evil Islam is, and we must educate the naïve Knesset NOW. Perhaps a great website is simply needed; with these Koran quotes highlighted (www.prophetofdoom.net ) in multiple languages, telling what Islam is, in their own words. Listen to You Tube videos of Robert Spencer, Wafa Sultan, Nonie Darwish, Craig Winn, Ibn Warraq, Bridgette Gabriel, Bat Ye'Or (author of Eurabia), Walid Shoebat, Serge Trifkovic, Michelle Malkin, Melanie Phillips, Eurabia videos, Idiots Guide to Islam videos ___________________ HADITH Sahih Bukhari [4:52:176] Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Umar: Allah's Apostle said, "You (i.e. Muslims) will fight with the Jews till some of them will hide behind stones. The stones will (betray them) saying, 'O 'Abdullah (i.e. slave of Allah)! There is a Jew hiding behind me; so kill him.' " (www.prophetofdoom.net under the tab Islamic quotes ) Qur'an:8:12 "I shall terrorize the infidels. (non-Muslims) So wound their bodies and incapacitate them because they oppose Allah and His Apostle." Islam = terrorism The Jewish community of Hebron, is completely abandoned by the (dhimmi) Knesset. Can U please bring attention to their plight and help them {www.hebron.org.il } Lastly, i am always told that everyone knows about how the Koran turns Abraham & Jesus into Muslims, embellishing megalomania-Mohammed' s self-claimed Paraclete status. If everyone knows this, when will someone actually say it. Mohammed claims Abraham is a Muslim –– and Mohammed has no connection to Ishmael. (www.faithfreedom.org & www.answering-islam.org & www.memri.org & www.wikiislam.com) If Islam wants peace, then declare peace, but Israel keeps the Bible-land. If Islam wants peace, then Islam must apologize to Jews and Christians for morphing Jewish-Abraham and Rabbi Jesus into bogus Koran-Muslims. only this is peace. Also; Israel can't survive with the Muslim 5th Column. The Jews only have tiny Israel. Islam has 52 countries. The Israeli-Muslims, must leave. Only this is peace. It was always my assumption, if Christians were aware how the Koran morphs their Jesus into a bogus-Muslim, they would react with horror and revulsion, and in turn, would increase their support for Jewish-Israel. ( Koran 3.67 ) Perhaps the time has come to inform the Congress & EU, it seems that they don't know that Islam morphs their Gospel-Jews and our Bible-Jews into Koran-Muslims. So how do they get informed? perhaps this is something to explore for a website and information campaign. (www.pmw.org.il & www.prophetofdoom.net) And how does one change the paradigms of getting the population-transfer ideas of www.middleeastsolutions.com into the proposals and solutions, ASAP and NOW before its too late. Let's work on this NOW. PLEASE SAVE BELOVED-ISRAEL, OUR JEWISH BIBLE-NATION. This is our land, Promised to Isaac, Jacob, Moses and David When will we have our David Jerusalem temple, our Caves of the Dead Sea Scrolls, our Shiloh, our Shechem, ( where Joseph's tomb was destroyed), our Ariel near Joshua's Tomb, our Hebron, our Galilee Golan, our Bethlehem, of David's birthplace, our Bible-land of the 12 Tribes of Jacob, our Jerusalem of Mount Moriah. Tell the gentiles: if they want to celebrate Mohammed's Muslim-Jesus; then do that in their churches in Rome, but –– Save our little Jewish Bible-Nation ! ! !!!!!!!!!!! Tell the Knesset; if they don't want to ensure the Preservation of all our Bible-land of our Zion-David-hope, then tell them to Go live in Saudi Arabia NOW. What would David do? he would fight for Jewish Bible Israel of Zion. David would NEVER give away our Bible-land. NEVER. We need our land and more land for Growth & Development, water supply, farming, our Archeology, Bible-identity, security, sanity, Bible, tourism, David's kingdom, Preservation of the Jewish People, Aliyah. project what will happen to us, in a tiny country, 50 years from now –– we will be a crowded parking lot. {Islam has 52 Muslim countries} www.middleeastsolutions.com is the answer. Just do it. all of us. NOW. Contact Mark Tollman at marktollman@earthlink.net |
|
THE OSLO DAYENU
Posted by Steven Plaut, April 20, 2008. |
|
Oslo put the "die" back in "Dayenu!" When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Arafat would pursue peace.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Hamas would be more of a threat to the PLO than to Israel.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Arafat would fight the Hamas and Islamic Jihad "with no Supreme Court or 'Betselem'" (in Rabin's immortal words).
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that terrorism would decrease.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that hostility to Jews in the Arab and the Western media would decrease.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that trade between Israel and Arab countries would flourish.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Palestinian Authority would be disarmed.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the PLO would cooperate strategically with the Israel Defense Forces.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that there would be an economic peace dividend.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Israeli Arabs would demonstrate increasing moderation due to the "peace process".
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Hamas and Jihad would be persecuted and suppressed by the PLO.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that PLO arms would never again be used against Jews.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the PLO leadership would speak in terms of peace with the Jews.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the PLO would denounce and renounce anti-Semitism.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the PLO would encourage normalization and daily peaceful commerce between Arabs and Jews.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Palestinian Authority would be forced to spend all its energies on resolving domestic social and economic problems.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Palestinian Authority would have so many internal troubles that it would not have the time or ability to pursue confrontation with Israel.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the US would back Israel if the PLO reneged on its obligations or displayed duplicity.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the US would cease to pressure Israel to endanger its security and fundamental interests.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Europeans would rush forward to support Israel.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Japanese and Saudis would pour money into regional investments, including into Israel.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Egyptians would end all animosity towards Israel, Zionism and Jews.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the non-Arab Moslem countries would gush friendship for Israel.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Arab military expenditure would drop significantly.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Arab verbal threats against Israel would end.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Nazi-like propaganda in Arab countries would end.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Israeli Left would lead the retreat from the Oslo experiment it if proved to be not working.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the Palestinian Authority would never behave as a tin cup Third-World kleptocracy if granted power.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Jews remaining in Moslem countries would see their treatment dramatically improved.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that liberals and leftists around the world would congratulate Israel for taking risks for peace and rush forward with goodwill and support.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that the majority of Palestinians would denounce all violence and terror.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Israeli Arabs would exhibit moderation and increasing loyalty to the state of Israel.
When they forced Israel to commit Oslo, the Israeli politicians assured us that Palestinian chants of "Death to the Jews" and "Massacre the Jews" would end.
Dayenu. Oslo put the "die" back in "Dayenu!" Any one of these errors in judgment should have been enough to end the career of a politician in a normal country, possibly even enough to indict that politician and imprison him or her. But in Israel? The politicians prepare for negotiations on the Saudi Plan and prepare for new unilateral withdrawals from Judea and Samaria. Dayenu. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments –– both seriously and satirically –– on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
TERMINATION OF OUR SPECIAL STATUS AS THE CHOSEN PEOPLE
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, April 19, 2008. |
|
[Editor's Note: This has been moving around the internet with no author attribution. Mostly, it's signed "The Jews", as below. On the Freeman Organization website (www.freeman.org), it is signed: Respectfully, |
|
Subject: Official Letter
As you are aware, the contract made between you and Abraham is up for renewal, and this memorandum is to advise you that after, yea, those many millennia of consideration, we've decided not to renew. We should point out immediately that there is nothing in writing and, contrary to popular beliefs, we have not really benefited too much from this arrangement. If you go back to the early years of our arrangement, it definitely started off on the wrong footing. Not only were Israel and Judea invaded almost every year, but we went to enormous expense to erect, not one, but two Temples and they were both destroyed. All we have is a pile of old stones called the Western Wall. Of course, you know all this, but we feel it's a good thing to account for all the reasons we wish to terminate the contract. After the Hittites, Assyrians, etc., not only were we beaten up almost daily, but then we were sold off as slaves to Egypt (of all countries), and really lost a few hundred years of development. Now we realize that you went to a great deal of trouble to send Moses to lead us out of Egypt; and those poor Egyptian buggers were smitten with all those plagues. But, reflecting on those years, we are at a loss to understand why it took almost 40 years to make a trip that El Al now does in 45 minutes. Also, while not appearing to be ungrateful, Moses did lead us to the left instead of to the right at Sinai! To the only place in the middle east without any oil. And with water that is controlled by Jordan and Syria. Oy, if only he had stopped to ask directions. OK, so the mineral rights were not a part of the deal, but then the Romans came and we were really up to our necks in dreck. While it's true the Romans did give us water fit to drink, aqueducts, and baths, it was very disconcerting to walk down one of the vias, look up, and see one of your friends or family nailed to a three-by-four looking for all the world like a sign post. Even one of our princes, Judah ben Hur, got caught up with Roman stuff and drove like a crazy man around the Coliseum. It's a funny thing, but many people swore that Ben Hur had an uncanny resemblance to Moses –– go figure. Then, of all things, one of our most up-and-coming carpenters (he did great work, and cheap) declared himself your son (there was nothing said like this about Abe) and before we knew what was what, a whole new religion sprang up. To add insult to injury, we were dispersed all over the world two or three times while this new goy (oops, guy) really caught on. We were truly sorry to hear that the Romans executed him like so many others, but –– and this will make you laugh –– once again we were blamed. Couldn't someone else be chosen, maybe just once? Now here's something we really don't understand. That guy, Jesus Christ, really came into his own. Millions of people revered and worshipped his name and scriptures –– and still killed us by the millions. They claimed we drank the blood of newborn infants, controlled the world banks, operated the world's media, etc. Are we beginning to make our point here? So let's fast forward a few hundred years to the Crusades. Hoo Boy! Again, we were caught in the middle. They, the Lords and Knights, came from all over Europe to smack the Arabs and open up the holy places, but before we knew what hit us, they were killing us along with everyone else. Every time a King or a Pope was down in the opinion polls, they called for a Crusade or Holy War (today they're called a Jihad), and went on a killing rampage in our land. So, you tested us a little here and there, but some bright cleric in Spain came up with the Inquisition. We all thought it was a new game show, but once again we and quite a few others were used as firewood for a whole new street lighting arrangement in major Spanish cities. All right, that ended after about a hundred years or so –– in the great scheme of things not a long time. But every time we settled down in one country or another, they kicked us out. We wandered around a few hundred years or so, but it never changed. Finally we settled in a few countries, but they insisted we all live in ghettos, while the Russians came up with Pogroms. We all thought they made a spelling mistake and misspelled "programs," but we were dead wrong (very dead wrong). Apparently, when there was nothing else to occupy their time, killing Jews was the in thing to do. Now comes the really tough noogies. We were doing quite well, thank you, in a small European country called Germany, when some housepainter wrote a book, said a few things that caught on and became their leader. Oh boy! What a bad day that was for us –– your Chosen People (by now, you must be getting the drift of this e-mail?). We really didn't know where you were in the earth years 1933 to 1945. We know everyone needs a break now and then; even the Lord G-d Almighty needs some time off. But, when we needed you most, you were never around. You are probably aware of this, but if you have forgotten, over six million of your Chosen People, along with millions un-chosen others were murdered in cold blood. They even made lampshades out of our skins! Look, we don't want to dwell on the past, but it gets worse. Here we are, it's 1948, and millions of us are displaced again, when you really pull a fast one. We finally get our own land back! Yes, after all these years, you arrange for us to go back. Then all the Arab countries immediately declare war on us. We have to tell you that sometimes your sense of humour eludes us. So, we win all the wars, and we're now in a new century, but nothing's changed. We keep getting blown up, hijacked and kidnapped. We have no peace whatsoever. Enough is enough. We hope you understand that nothing's forever (except you, of course), and we respectfully would like to pull out of our verbal agreement vis a vis being your Chosen People. Listen, sometimes things work out, sometimes they don't. Let's be friends over the next few eons and see what happens. Meanwhile, how about this idea? We're sure you recall that Abraham had a whole other family from Ishmael (the ones who got the oil). How about making them your chosen people for a few thousand years? Respectfully yours, The Jews Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
PRIVATE ACCOMMODATIONS FOR ISLAM
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, April 19, 2008. |
|
This was written by R. John Matthies and it appeared yesterday in
Front Page Magazine. It is archived at
http://www.meforum.org/article/1885. The original article has live links to additional material. |
|
When is it appropriate to critique the policies of private enterprise? Private institutions are clearly permitted to carry out their business in a manner appropriate to their market, so long as they operate within the boundaries of the law. However, these institutions –– commercial, educational, or the media –– also play a major societal role, and hence carry great responsibility. For this reason, the practice of criticizing these institutions is an established tradition, as illustrated by book reviews, theater criticism, Hollywood gossip columns, sports talk, consumer reports, and others. Acknowledging that the critique of private institutions is different from the sort directed at government, we engage private sector entities in consideration of the influence they peddle and (indirect) power they wield. There are now many cases of Islamists in the West demanding accommodations –– and of these demands being met. These range from trivial cases of employee accommodation to cases of gender segregation. While state and local authorities have often bent to the designs of political Islam, it is to private institutions that one turns to examine the most egregious examples of accommodation. Still, it is more difficult to censure private institutions –– given their greater freedom of action –– than it is to censure lawmakers and public institutions, which are directly charged with serving the public good. Private entities have the right to run their own affairs, but the public cannot condone exceptions that result in exclusion or promote a regime of segregation. Merchants are free to choose the services or products they offer to target consumers and hence maximize profit. But to deny service to one group –– or create hardship for select employees –– to accommodate the wishes of another is unacceptable. Those policies that dismiss the rights of others –– whether in a place of work, study, or commerce –– must not be tolerated. For this reason, it is fitting to explore cases of accommodation with an eye both to the exceptional nature of the concession (in light of existing practice) and the degree to which group accommodation results in restricted movement, hampered speech, or great inconvenience to the majority. In the case of Britain's Sainsbury's convenience stores, for example, Muslim employees who prefer to avoid contact with alcoholic beverages for reason of religion are asked to raise their hands so a colleague can replace them at their post or scan the item for them. And those who object to stocking shelves with wine, beer, and spirits have found alternative positions within the company. A similar example is credited to Target, where Muslim employees at a Minneapolis store have been dispensed with handling pork products, for fear of contamination. Sainsbury's and Target have elected to satisfy employee wishes; the pertinent question is whether management has enacted these policies because it feels it's the right thing to do, or simply because no other options exist to fill the positions presently occupied by recalcitrant employees. (A spokeswoman for Sainsbury's admits as much, saying: "At the application stage we ask the relevant questions regarding any issues about handling different products and where we can we will try and accommodate any requirements people have.") If the latter is the case, it is difficult to imagine what these vendors can do or what suggestions we might offer. And so we tolerate exceptions of this kind –– with the caveat that one must guard against those accommodations that infringe upon the rights of others (and do not merely inconvenience). Both state and federal law are clear that employers are obliged to accommodate employees' religious beliefs where these are "reasonable" and do not detract from profitability. But this test fails to account for the inconvenience brought upon employees, which goes to the heart of the fairness issue. At the same time, it is clear that inconvenience extends to paying customers, who are forced to wait while another is found to handle the transaction –– to say nothing of the degrading sort of treatment to which the customer is subjected, who must appear to create a disturbance for wishing to purchase an "elicit" product. All told, these examples speak to the question of the degree to which Islam may be allowed to disengage from society. At the same time, it is also unacceptable for private concerns to enforce Islamic space of their own accord. Consider Harvard University's decision to institute women-only gym hours to accommodate the modesty requirements of campus Muslims, for example. Islamic Knowledge Committee officer Ola Aljawhary says: "These hours are necessary because there is a segment of the Harvard female population that is not found in gyms not because they don't want to work out, but because for them working out in a co-ed gym is uncomfortable, awkward or problematic in some way." But Harvard administrators explicitly noted that the new policy has less to do with gender than religion; and one reports that the Harvard Islamic Society itself was unaware of the change "until it was being formalized and in its final stages." It is one thing for young women to make their own private arrangements to accommodate a requirement for modesty, but it is quite another for a university to make these arrangements. Harvard must be asked to imagine where policies like these might lead (which others might be excluded), and to consider the motives of groups in support of such a program. As one explores cases of accommodation and abuse of influence across the private sphere, one must judge each according to a scale that accounts for both the exceptional nature of the concession and the degree to which the majority is inconvenienced, restricted as to movement, or hampered in expression. Private concerns may be compelled by situation and environment to alter established practice; but for these same concerns to impose a program of segregation or apply select "Islamic" standards constitutes a grave abuse of influence. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
REVEALED TRUTHS VS. REVEALED LIES
Posted by Dave Nathan, April 18, 2008. |
|
This was written by Caroline B. Glick for Jerusalem Post. |
 Jews believe in a G-d without form. The Jewish G-d is ineffable. To Abraham himself, G-d appeared only in visions, never in the "flesh." And yet, the story of G-d's deliverance of the Children of Israel from Egyptian bondage is packed with physical proofs of this consummately non-physical G-d. G-d exposes Himself to Moses in the burning bush. And then, from Moses' first appeal to Pharaoh through the parting of the Red Sea, G-d exposes Himself and His mastery of the universe and all that is in it again and again, in progressively powerful ways. At the Passover Seder, Jews recount these astounding manifestations of G-d's existence, presence and dominion. That is, at the Passover Seder, Jews celebrate the physical manifestations of the G-d we know to be formless and ubiquitous. Why would G-d feel the need to reveal Himself? And why do Jews, who accept an ineffable G-d place so much stress on His self-revelation? By our nature, human beings are skeptical. Before we believe something, we require proof. Whether that proof is collateral for a bank loan, burning a bush without harming it, laying waste to Pharaoh's Egypt or parting the Red Sea, the fact is that without proof, humans will not long believe. To convince the Children of Israel to accept Him and His laws throughout time, G-d showed us signs and wonders in Egypt that were powerful enough to keep us united as His people ever since. Contrast this natural human skepticism and the Jews' reasoned faith in G-d with the international and Israeli Left's engineered credulousness and blind faith in Peace. This week, former US president Jimmy Carter arrived in the Middle East on a "peace mission." Shunned by Israel's senior political leadership for his overtly hostile positions towards Israel and Jews, Carter had to suffice with a public dressing down for his incendiary anti-Israel rhetoric from otherwise friendly, and "pro-Peace" President Shimon Peres, and visits with Israeli doves affiliated with the non-Zionist Meretz party. From Israel, Carter continued to the Fatah-led, Israeli defended Palestinian Authority in Ramallah where he laid a wreath at the grave of arch-murderer and master terrorist Yassir Arafat, and hugged and kissed Arafat's Fatah and Hamas heirs. Both visits, of course were conducted against the backdrop of Carter's well-publicized plan to meet Hamas terror master and Iranian proxy Khaled Mashaal in Syria. By meeting with Mashaal, Carter is arguably breaching US law which prohibits American citizens from assisting terror groups. His planned meeting elicited criticism from the Bush Administration. His radicalism fomented Israel's informal, but fairly firm boycott of his visit. And yet, his faith in Peace being what it is, Carter brushed off his critics as men and women of little faith. For their part, Carter's Israeli allies, Yossi Beilin, David Kimche and their fellow believers in Peace embraced him. These Israelis, like Carter are not averse to meeting with Hamas. The fact is, while Carter may be the loudest proponent of negotiating with Hamas, he is far from alone. To advance this view in America, Carter's Jewish American and Israeli fellow believers just set up a new lobbying group in Washington. It is staffed by former Clinton administration, Peace Now, and Democratic Party officials. It is supported by the Israeli signatories to Yossi Beilin's European-financed 2003 Geneva "peace accord" with the Palestinian Authority's former propaganda minister Yassir Abd Rabo. The new lobby, "J Street," is tasked with financing the campaigns of American politicians who are willing to sacrifice the US alliance with Israel in the interest of Peace. Presumably, it is conversely tasked with scuttling the political fortunes of US politicians who refuse to do so. It is hard to know what to make of either the Bush administration's criticism of Carter, or for that matter the Olmert-Livni-Barak government's shunning of the former president. Legal restrictions on maintaining contacts with terror operatives aside, Carter's hostility to Israel and his enthusiastic embrace of Hamas are the logical outcome of their own policies. Indeed, several government ministers from Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni's Kadima party have expressed willingness to engage Hamas. And at present, through Egypt and Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government is negotiating with Hamas towards a temporary ceasefire which would leave the Hamas regime in Gaza intact and armed. The basic belief that informs both the Olmert-Livni-Barak government and the Bush administration is the same as Carter's. Namely, they believe that the Palestinian war against Israel is the consequence of Palestinian statelessness. Then too, both governments accept the Arab and European assertion that the lack of Palestinian statehood is the root cause of the Arab and Islamic world's rejection of Israel's right to exist and of the larger pathologies of the jihad supporting Arab and Islamic world. This basic ideological premise has been the core belief of the Israeli and American policymaking classes since the advent of the Israeli-PLO "peace process" in 1993. And in light of this premise it is hard to see how the official boycott of Hamas is sustainable or even logical. The belief that the root cause of all the Middle East's troubles is a lack of Palestinian sovereignty generally, and more specifically the view that Israel's continued control over areas it secured during the third Arab war against Israel is the root of the conflict, renders Israel solely responsible for resolving the conflict. It is Israel, after all that is blocking Palestinian control over Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem. It is Israel that is putting up obstacles to Palestinian sovereignty. This is the view that informed Israel's 1993 decision to embrace the mass-murdering father of modern terrorism Yassir Arafat and his PLO as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. It was this view that caused Israel to turn a blind eye to Arafat's transformation of Palestinian society into the most jihadist society in the Arab world through the constant indoctrination of his official Palestinian media organs, education systems and mosques. It is this view that still brings Israel's leaders to refer to Judea and Samaria as "occupied;" to negotiate the partition of Jerusalem; to illegalize Jewish building in Judea and Samaria and limit Jewish building in Jerusalem; to demonize Jewish opponents of their view as "extremists" and "enemies of peace;" and to ignore the need to defend the Western Negev from the Palestinian missile campaign in Gaza. It is this view that causes Israel's leaders to embrace Arafat's successor and deputy of forty years Mahmoud Abbas as a "peace partner" while turning a blind eye to his open support for terror and Israel's violent destruction; his Fatah party's deep involvement in terror attacks against Israel; his financial support for terrorists and families of jailed and dead terrorists; and his operational ties to Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Syria, and Iran. It is this view that has caused the US to treat Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria as moral equivalents of terrorism; to support the establishment of a Palestinian state that will be ethnically cleansed of all Jews; to pressure Israel to allow pro-terror Palestinian militias to deploy in Judea and Samaria and curtail its counter-terror operations; to provide financial, military and political support to pro-terror Palestinian militias; and to pressure Israel stop building homes for Jews in Jerusalem. And of course, it is this view that renders the US and Israel's current boycott of Hamas unsustainable and illogical. If Israel is to blame for the lack of Palestinian statehood, then nothing the Palestinians believe or do is relevant. The organizational separation of Hamas from Fatah is irrelevant. Hamas's subservience to Iran is irrelevant. Just as is the case with Fatah, so too, Hamas's embrace of terror as a means of advancing Israel's complete destruction is not a reason to boycott it. It is blameless. Carter is right. To maintain their belief in Peace through Israeli capitulation as a panacea for all the Middle East's deformities, Peace adherents have been forced to replace their natural skepticism with artificial credulity. For in contrast to the Children of Israel in Pharaoh's Egypt, not only have they received no evidence that their faith in Peace is reasonable, they have seen in the terrorist murder of more than 1,500 Israelis since 1993and in the daily incitement for Israel's destruction and massing of Palestinian terror armies of jihad overwhelming proof that their faith is unfounded. Indeed, just this week, Israel Radio reported that Abbas was planning to bestow the highest official PA honors on two female terrorist murderers jailed in Israeli prisons. Actually, the story about Abbas' plan to publicly embrace mass murderers is instructive of how the blind faith in Peace has been maintained now for 15 years. The Israel Radio broadcast forced the Olmert-Livni-Barak government for the first time to acknowledge Abbas' support for terrorists and so placed in question the rationality of their entire policy of capitulating for Peace. At their insistence Abbas announced he was canceling the awards. But as Prof. Mordechai Keidar from Bar Ilan University pointed out in a radio interview Wednesday, the only thing extraordinary about Abbas' planned ceremony was that it was reported by the Israeli media. The PA has been annually bestowing its highest honors on jailed mass murderers. It's just that the flock of Peace faithful who run Israel's media have never reported the story before. Yet, in spite of its leadership's and media's attempts to hide the truth from them, the Israel public has insisted on maintaining its natural skepticism and limiting its faith to its revealed G-d. Tel Aviv University's monthly Peace Index, which surveys the Israeli public's views on issues relating to the "peace process," showed that despite the government's and media's pro-Peace rhetoric and attempts to obfuscate reality, the majority of Israeli Jews have not accepted their views. The majority of Israeli Jews view Judea and Samaria as "liberated" rather than "occupied" territories. They do not believe that signing a peace treaty with the Palestinians will bring peace, and they oppose destroying the Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria. A poll of the public's views of the government's plans to negotiate the partition of Jerusalem taken this week by Bar Ilan's Begin-Sadat Center showed that 71 percent of Israelis oppose partitioning Jerusalem and ceding the Old City to the Palestinians. All told then, Passover's lesson of reasoned faith in the true revealed G-d over blind faith in a false G-d has not been lost on the Jews. And the celebration of faith and freedom that Passover embodies should instill us with certainty that one day soon, our leaders who uphold the irrational belief in fake Peace will be replaced by others who reject it.
Contact Dave Nathan at DaveNathan@aol.com
|
|
THANK YOU, AND A KOSHER AND HAPPY PASSOVER
Posted by Akiva, April 18, 2008. |
 Akiva's website is called Mystical Paths
|
|
HAVE FAITH IN BURNING BUSH, NOT GEORGE BUSH!
Posted by Gennadiy Faybyshenko, April 18, 2008. |
|
The title says it all. The two Bushes are completely opposite, one being holy and the other imperfect. This article will not address President Bush's stand on domestic issues, but rather his actions concerning Israel. As far as the war in Iraq, a sexual metaphor is particularly apropos: the Democrats say pull out and the Republicans say finish the job. Even though the Evangelical and Protestant Christian majority support Israel, the President of the United States does not. Indeed, President Bush constantly pushes to create a Palestinian terrorist state in the heartland of Biblical Israel. Everyone knows that a terrorist state would signal the beginning of the end of a Jewish state. President Bush asked (former Prime Minister of Israel Ariel) Sharon to uproot Jewish homes in Gaza for the sake of peace. And we see the results right now that those residing within the politically correct Israel boundaries suffer from the Kassam rockets constantly falling on a daily basis, inside Israel. Little by little, America becomes the enemy of Israel. I cannot count how many times that whore, Condoleezza Rice, journeyed to Israel to coerce her into making peace, as if it were Jewish-Israeli terrorists exploding themselves. There is no argument that Bush and his cabinet do not support the Jewish state. Bush does not even recognize Israel's capital, Jerusalem. He passed up numerous opportunities to sign the bill moving the embassy to Jerusalem, as a sign of recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital. By keeping his embassy in Tel-Aviv, Bush sets an example to the whole world that they should do the same. Bush seems to prefer that Jerusalem be the capital of a terrorist Arab state. Bush is not very smart, because the same Arab Muslim terrorists will take over Europe and America. It's just a matter of time, unless the civilized world realizes what is going on and take action. There is absolutely no doubt that President Bush expects the destruction of Israel and complete annihilation of the Jewish state. So as American Jews, let us not support that treacherous person. It's better to have an enemy who is open to public scrutiny than a slimy one who pretends to be a Jew-lover. I have a great deal of respect for the United States of America. It is the greatest country for a gentile that ever stood on this planet. My argument is with the current politicians, not with the country. So what can we do? We rally across the country –– there are so many people willing to help just for the asking. I know so many young Jews that have this passion in them, but we have to channel that passion in a smart and productive manner. A Jewish fist must be attached to a Jewish head. All those righteous gentiles who support Israel will be blessed by G-d. What a shanda it is for an Orthodox public who does practically nothing for the sake of Israel. "If I forget thee O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning. Let my tongue cleave to the roof to the mouth if I remember thee not; if I set not Jerusalem above my highest joy..." I wish that this phrase would come into realization for those clueless people. It is our commandment to do something and not just stand idly by. We should openly speak out against a Palestinian terrorist state; write more articles, utilize the media, and discuss with politicians. This is a big job and it depends on all of us. If the Arabs really want to have a state, they are welcome to do so in Jordan, which is itself a fictitious state cut illegally by British imperialism that was meant to be given to Jews. But since we live in modern times, we have to be flexible. But our flexibility stops there. I do not want to hear that the U.S. is helping Israel. No country does anything out of love for other countries. It is in its own best interests for the U.S. to help Israel, and for Israel to accept this economic aid hurts more than it helps. But America does give Israel three billion dollars in aid. Yes, but at what price? Israel never needed that money. If we remember the history, back in the seventies, Israelis found oil in the Sinai Peninsula. The budget from that source gave the country $2 billion annually. When Egypt saw that Israel was getting oil, they immediately recognized Israel and asked that the whole Sinai Peninsula to be given to them. Since when does a country that starts many wars, loses those wars, and then asks the winner to make compromises, ever happen? Well, in Israel! Then all of a sudden, a disgusting former U.S. president, Jimmy Carter, invites Anwar Saddat (then president of Egypt) and Menachem Begin (former prime minister of Israel) to engage in peace talks. Carter was such an anti-Semite that he first approaches Begin to make peace with Egypt, as if it were Begin's country who started the war with Egypt. Saddat was considered a moderate Arab. Moderate Arabs kill Jews moderately. So it's okay to make peace with moderate Arabs. It was the same Saddat, who in 1973 started the war on the Jews' holiest day, Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement) and proclaimed that Israel is a cancer that needs to be removed. But, then he became moderate and decided that instead of fighting (where his country lost battle after battle against the children of G-d), decided to use salami tactics and to quietly but efficiently slice Israel down. Unfortunately he did succeed, and as a result, Israel shrank four-fold. However, Carter promised to reimburse Israel for the loss of $2 billion oil dollars. So he started the program to give Israel $3 billion. The sad thing was, that Egypt also gets aid from the U.S. despite the oil in Sinai. In the alternative, there would be no U.S. aid and Israel would be standing on its own two feet. Everyone only dreams of Israel annihilation –– the European Union, the United Nations, the cursed Russia, and to that list, the United States of America. I know that there are good people who live here, but the flood from the third world countries brought a lot of anti-Semitism here and little by little started to desecrate this once great country. And we Americans stand idly and see this country go down. The presidential cabinet and unfortunately all the candidates for the presidency speak the same language. How would they like if Israel would be condemning the U.S. for "occupying" states such as Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, and California to Mexico, or better yet, for not returning the whole country to Native Americans! But Israel does not, because she has respect for America, and America should have the same for Israel. Gennadiy Faybyshenko is national director of Bnai Elim. Contact him at gennadiy1981@yahoo.com |
|
ABBAS A BIGOT; MCCAIN IGNORANT; ISRAELIS FAVOR TRANSFER OF ARABS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 18, 2008. |
|
WHAT FEMALE JUVENILE PROTESTORS FIND IN PRISON Some Jewish girls arrested for protests refused to identify themselves. For that, they were remanded to prison in Jerusalem. They were given dirty, stinking blankets and towels and refused food and water unless they identified themselves. Members of the Israeli bar association reported these inhumane conditions after visiting the girls (Arutz-7, 3/20). I remember a dissident Lieutenant Idri, whom the government tried but failed to frame, suffering rat bites in prison. ABBAS AGAINST ISRAEL IN VILEST WAYS The Arab population of Jerusalem has increased faster than the Jewish population. Nevertheless, Abbas told an Organization of Islamic Conference meeting that Israel ethnically cleanses Arabs there. Part of this cleansing, he explains, is due to the security fence. However, 30,000 Arabs from the P.A. moved into Jerusalem, in order to get onto the Israeli side of the fence. If Abbas doesn't know that, he isn't worthy of being negotiated with. If he does know it, then he is an enemy uninterested in making peace. The P.A. procedure is to teach children alleged (but non-existent crimes of Israel against their people. France proposed a curriculum to support peace-making. Abbas turned down the idea. He prefers to indoctrinate in bigotry. Remember his recent statement that if he doesn't get what he wants from negotiations, he would return to the armed struggle (IMRA, 3/22). Actually, his organization still engages in it. MCCAIN IGNORANT Sen. McCain told Israelis that Abbas wants peace (Arutz-7, 3/20). He has been on the Senate Armed Services Committee for many years, but still doesn't understand the Islamic enemy. He may not be as appeasement-minded as his rivals, but gets taken in by some of the popular (un)wisdom of the day. V.P. CHENEY'S VOW "The US will never pressure Israel to take steps that threaten its security." Dr. Aaron Lerner suspects that the US often pressures Israel to take steps that threaten its security, but denies that Abbas threatens Israeli security (IMRA, 3/22). LOST BETS ON ABBAS US and Israeli policy suppose that Abbas is reasonable compared with Hamas, would replace Hamas, and would make peace. Both have been transferring hundreds of millions of dollars and thousands of weapons to Abbas. They keep releasing Arab prisoners to boost his popularity. Nevertheless, he steadily loses popularity. He also is trying to make a coalition government with Hamas. That means he doesn't oppose Hamas' program (IMRA, 3/22). He has not reformed his anti-Israel program nor ended his regime's corruption. How long will the US and Israel bet on that losing horse? Until Hamas takes over his regime and acquires his weaponry in Judea-Samaria, as it did in Gaza? DON'T CEDE PART OF JERUSALEM: More MK Netanyahu warned that if Israel ceded part of Jerusalem to the P.A., then Iran, working through its proxies (perhaps including Fatah), certainly would attack Israel from there and likely would restrict access by pilgrims (Arutz-7, 3/23). Isn't that obvious? It isn't to the government of Israel. That government does not know how to look out for its people and doesn't care to. INFORMAL CEASEFIRE WITH HAMAS Israel has stopped raiding Hamas, and Hamas has stopped firing at Israel. Hamas members are producing explosives, sometimes blowing themselves up by mistake. Hamas also is using the opportunity to exert totalitarian control over hospitals and mosques in Gaza (IMRA, 3/23). As Hamas intensifies its control, it intensifies its indoctrination of the people. How would such people ever make peace? The West does not consider that. Problem is, Westerners can't imagine how fanatical those Muslims are. STRINGS ON SAUDI AID S. Arabia economic aid requires imposition of Islamic law (Pipes #845, 3/22). ISRAEL DOESN'T OBJECT TO EGYPTIAN NUCLEAR PROGRAM Egypt will get expertise and materials from Russia. Israel said it doesn't mind, so long as there are safeguards (IMRA, 3/24). Safeguards are promised but are winked at or aggressively violated. How can Israel trust Russia? If Egypt doesn't mind Egypt getting nuclear knowhow, how can it object to Iran doing so? From civilian programs come military ones. PALESTINIAN ARAB FISHERMEN Iran has been dropping floatable tubes of weapons into the Mediterranean Sea. Currents bring the tubes off the coast of Gaza. There, fishermen bring them to shore, unless the IDF succeeds in detecting and destroying them (IMRA, 4/17). The media and the UNO treat the Palestinian Arabs as simple, deserving, civilians. Thus Israel was denounced for restricting P.A. fishing boats. Current headlines in the NY Times refer to civilians killed in Gaza by Israel. They rarely refer to civilians killed in Gaza by fellow Muslims. Neither do they remark much about the constant Muslim efforts to kill Israelis, from Judea-Samaria as well as from Gaza. Nor do they suggest feasible means for Israel to protect itself. Warped morality! HAMAS CHILD TV On TV in Gaza, a boy breaks into the White House, says that it has been turned into a mosque, and repeated stabs Pres. Bush to death, and expresses satisfaction over it, claiming that the US and Israel murdered Muslim children's parents. The program quotes the Koran in approving the slaying of infidels. The whole program shows an lslamic desire to take over the world (Arutz-7, 4/17). AFTERMATH OF REDUCED CHECKPOINTS An Arab man approached two Jews standing at a bus stop in Judea-Samaria. Becoming suspicious, one moved behind a concrete barrier. The other brought his hand near his concealed pistol. The Arab drew a knife. The intended victim was afraid to fire immediately, because the government prosecutes Jews who defend themselves aggressively. Instead he waited until the last second. Then he drew and shot the assailant. The assailant reached into his jacket for another knife. The victim shot the assailant again, killing him. The Army praised the victim for acting "proportionately." The P.A. reported that the Arab was murdered merely for passing by (Arutz-7, 4/17.) Israelis rarely initiate attacks on Arabs. How perverse of the government, intimidating its people to risk death by slow response to terrorist attacks! ISRAELIS FAVOR TRANSFERRING ARABS OUT If the P.A. were to become a state, then 3/4 of Israelis would favor transferring Israeli Arabs to it. 30% would transfer all Arabs unconditionally. 28% more would transfer Arabs who did not express loyalty. 19% more would transfer those who live in areas bordering the P.A. (Arutz-7, 4/17). Catching on! Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
JISTTTIFMAG AND THE MEANING OF JIHAD IDEOLOGY –– THERE IS A DEEP AND DANGEROUS EVIL IN THE MUSLIM WORLD
Posted by David Meir-Levi, April 18, 2008. |
|
A few weeks ago, in a talk I gave in Burlingame, I discussed the types of leverage that the Saudis and other mega-wealthy oil-sheikhdoms have over the west, and especially over the USA (which explains why the White House should really be called "The White Tent"). One of those types of leverage is the Saudi (and other Arab oil-mega-wealthy) ownership of a very significant percentage of US government bonds. The threat that these oil-wealthy mega-rich Arab bond-owners could dump their bonds, thus bringing the American bond market to its knees, and by extension sending western stock markets into a tailspin, and devaluing the USA dollar even further, is awesomely compelling to any American leader (president, congress, Federal Reserve, etc.). One of the participants asked the rational question: well, wouldn't doing so hurt the Saudis financially too? And, if so, would not that financial loss be a deterrent to such action by the Saudis? I explained that there are cases where: ideology trumps reality (as for example in the Afro-centrism of American historians and related academics in the 1980s-90s), ideology trumps morality (as for example in Stalin's Russia of post WW-2 where the starvation deaths of millions of civilians was cheerfully accommodated by the Communist party as part of the cost of bringing the blessings of communism to the world), ideology trumps rational thought (as for example in my oft-quoted comment by Ilan Pappe: "I care less about veracity, I have an agenda to advance"), and ideology even trumps personal well-being ... From Nuri Sa'id's famous quip to Ben-Gurion (in the late 1930's): "We (Arabs) would rather do it ourselves, even if it meant we had to wait a hundred years for these improvements (that Zionism brought to then-so-called Palestine), rather than learn it from you Jews"... to the vociferously and enthusiastically restated support by Arabs in the West Bank and Gaza Strip for the victory of Hamas, even though that victory harbingers a return to a 7th century economy... to the growing support for the Taliban in Afghanistan even though the re-instatement of a Taliban government would most likely recreate the suffering and privation endured by the Afghanis under former Taliban rule... to the growing support among Israeli Arabs for Hamas and Hezbollah even though the civilians under these terror-government's rule live in depressed economies and are deprived of the most basic human rights... .....we see that people possessed of an adequately compelling ideology are willing to sacrifice personal well being, and their lives and the lives of others, in order to advance that ideology. "Jihad in the cause of Allah until Islam dominates the entire world" is just such an adequately compelling ideology...for some. And that "some" most assuredly includes the Arab oil-mega-wealthy who would scoff at the inconvenience of losing billions of dollars in bond values in order to bring down the USA. Note below the candor with which the Muslim academician (article #1) explains the true ultimate goal of Jihad: "Islam uber Alles". This ideology is, by its own practitioners' and promoters' definition: Jihadist (J = advanced by means of Jihad) Islamic (I = based upon the most central tenets of Islam, originating from the Qur'an and the Sunna) Supremacist (S = Islam will reign supreme in the entire world once Jihad has achieved victory) Totalitarian (T = democracy is heresy per many Islamic leaders) Triumphalist (T = Islam will triumph over the entire world eventually...and the sooner the better) Tyrannical (T = the needs and rights of the individual must be suppressed as the Umma makes all sacrifices necessary for the victory of Islam via Jihad) Theological (T = the core ideas emerge exclusively from the theology [the religious ideology] of islam dating back to Mohammed) Imperialist (I = the spread of Islam via warfare includes the inalienability of conquered lands...once a land comes under Muslim rule, it remains under Muslim rule in perpetuity no matter what and can never revert back to non-Muslim sovereignty) Fascist (F = Islamic totalitarian ideology seeks the same tyrannical control over society that fascism demands) Misogynist (M = the position of women in Muslim society is well known, the Qur'an states that a woman is worth half of a man and must be subordinated to her male warden: usually father, husband, brother, or oldest male child) Apartheid (A = all non-Muslims are inferior to Muslims per numerous quotes in the Qur'an). Genocidal (G = those who refuse to convert and are not "people of the book" must die, no matter how many millions may thus be doomed to death by the Jihadists). As best as I understand western morality, such an ideology is just plain evil (*). Supremacist, Tyrannical, Totalitarian, Triumphalist, Imperialist, Fascist, Misogynist, Apartheid, and Genocidal are all adjectives for concepts that our culture deems evil. They were evil when advanced by the NAZIs, and evil when advanced by the Soviets. And they are evil now, as they are advanced by some ideologically driven Jihadist Islamic theologians, and their followers. Yet, this is the ideology that runs some significant part of the Arab (and a probably smaller but still significant part of the non-Arab Muslim) world. This is the ideology which runs as well the Arab side of the Arab-Israel conflict and runs Hamas (article #2) and the PLO (article #3). When our leaders ignore (or remain ignorant of) this ideology (per Glick in article #3), they render themselves incapable of making the kinds of decisions, based upon an accurate assessment of the dynamics of the conflict as this ideology drives and affects it, which are needed in order to resolve the conflict with defeat for evil. Such leaders betray the trust of their electorates, compromise their own integrity, and place all of western civilization at risk of defeat at the hands of the highly motivated JISTTTIFMAG who will sacrifice all in order to achieve victory. David ML (*) This does not mean that Islam per se is evil, or that all Muslims are evil. Rather it means that the JISTTTIFMAG interpretation of Islam is evil. And those Muslims who implement that ideology are evil, as are those who are complicit in active or passive ways with the advancement of that ideology, as are those (Muslim or otherwise) who stand idly by in silence or who offer the services of cheerleader or obfuscator (Jimmy Carter as an example of the latter). Just as not all Muslims are terrorists but almost all terrorists are Muslim, so too not all Muslims are evil, but those who perpetrate and/or accommodate and/or support and/or facilitate the implementation of this evil ideology are indeed evil people. |
|
1.) the core Muslim ideology of Jihad, from a Muslim preacher on a Muslim website frequented by Muslims who have questions about Islam;
If we were to make a list of all the Islamic terms and concepts that have been inadvertently misconstrued or deliberately distorted, by the apologetic Muslims or Western orientalists, then Jihad can easily be placed at the top of that list. Although the significance of Jihad in the Qur'an and Sunnah cannot be overstated, its exact place in the overall framework of Islamic values and imperatives has been a matter of some debate. Some writers have described Jihad as the fifth pillar of Islam, while others have relegated it to a mere Fard Kafayah (a collective, rather than personal, duty). A highly misleading but popular idea in this respect is that any war in which the Muslims are engaged, even if the motives are other than purely Islamic, is Jihad fi Sabeel lillah. In view of the confusions and misunderstandings that surround this most fundamental of Islamic concepts, we are going to discuss here, very briefly, the meaning and import of Jihad vis-á-vis the other duties and obligations of a Muslim. The word Jihad is not synonymous with "Holy War" which is what the Western media wants everyone to believe. After four decades of Cold War, the Western powers suddenly found themselves without a legitimate enemy, and, consequently, they have designated Islam and the Muslims as the most deadly threat to world peace. The image of all Muslims as terrorists was inculcated by numerous so-called documentaries, like the infamous Jihad in America (PBS). In the face of such widespread media stereotypes, it is indeed an uphill task to educate the non-Muslims regarding the true meaning of Jihad. Much more important, however, is the task of removing the misconception which are prevalent among the Muslims themselves. The foundation of the edifice of Islam consists in the verbal testimony of God's unity and Muhammad's (SAW) prophethood. Built upon this foundation are the four pillars of Islam with which all of us are familiar, i.e., Salat, Zakat, Saum, and Hajj. Please note, however, that Iman (or faith) also has two pillars: an unshakable inner conviction in the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and the struggle in the path of Almighty Allah (SWT). This has been described in the Qur'an thus: They alone are the mo'min who come to believe in Allah and His messenger and afterwards never doubted, and who strive in the way of Allah with their wealth and their lives. Only they are truthful and sincere. (Al-Hujurat 49:15) What does this ayah really mean? It means that there is absolutely no way, for a person who claims to be a believer, to avoid Jihad fi Sabeel lillah and still remain a believer in the sight of Almighty Allah (SWT). Indeed, the very definition of a mo'min, as given in Surah Al-Hujurat, necessitates that a strong faith and state of inner certitude be coupled with an active struggle in the path of Allah (SWT). The word Jihad and the verb that goes with it mean to struggle against some opposition. Thus, each and every human being is engaged in Jihad, in the sense that everyone has to struggle for his existence. However, the kind of Jihad we are talking about should be qualified as fi Sabeel lillah, that is to say, trying and exerting one's utmost in the path of Almighty Allah. It is an earnest and ceaseless activity involving the sacrifice of physical and mental resources, wealth, property, and even life, only for the sake of attaining the pleasure Almighty Allah (SWT). In order to understand the meaning of striving in the path of Allah, we should first have a clear concept of the responsibilities of a Muslim. According to the Qur'an and the Sunnah, the obligations of a Muslim are three-fold: A Muslim is required to become an obedient slave of Almighty Allah (SWT), he is required to mold his life, his values, his priorities, and his ambitions according to the commands of his Lord. Secondly, he must preach and disseminate the ideational and practical guidance of Islam to his fellow human beings, to enjoin all that is good and prohibit all that is evil. Thirdly, he must try his utmost to establish the domination of Islam over all other systems of life, all over the world. Even a superficial analysis of these three obligations is enough to establish the fact that none of them is easy to fulfill. There are immence difficulties to overcome, all sorts of oppositions to put up with, and countless problems to solve at each of the three levels. A Muslim must put in a great deal of hard labor in fulfilling these obligations, he must exercise all his abilities and all his resources if he is to fulfill his duties. In other words, he is required to engage in a constant Jihad. This struggle or Jihad covers a wide spectrum of religious obligations, and its inherent activism can be understood as having nine different stages or aspects, as explained below: In trying to live a life of total obedience to Almighty Allah (SWT) and to follow the example of Prophet Muhammad (SAW), a Muslim must resist the following: * the sinful impulses and evil inclinations of his own nafs; In trying to spread the teachings of the Holy Qur'an and those of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) to every nook and corner of the world, a Muslim will encounter three types of people, and therefore he must develop different approaches and levels of scholarship to cater for each of these groups: * the educated and intelligent classes; In endeavoring for the establishment of the ascendancy of Islam over all other systems of life, members of the Islamic movement will have to go through the following stages: * Passive Resistance, enduring all verbal and physical persecution without retaliation; It should be obvious from the above discussion that armed conflict or Qitaal constitutes only the last of the nine stages or aspects of Jihad, and that these two are not synonymous terms. Thus, we see that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) spent the entire twelve years of the Meccan period in calling people towards Islam, in organizing and training those who responded, and, during all that time, both he and his Companions endured all verbal and physical harassment with a non-violent attitude. It was only after Hijrah, when a strong center of the Islamic Movement was established in Medina, that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) decided that now there was enough strength at his disposal to challenge the Quraysh, and only then the Islamic movement entered the phases of Active Resistance and Armed Conflict. In view of this, all the revivalist and revolutionary Islamic groups throughout the Muslim world must keep the following fact in mind: While an armed struggle against an un-Islamic political system is permissible under certain conditions (whether or not it is feasible in today's world is another issue), such a struggle cannot be launched without first going through the initial eight stages of Jihad. It is vitally important that those who are trying to change the world in accordance with the will of Allah (SWT) must first change their own lives. It is indeed ironical that the life-style of many of the Muslims who are engaged in Islamic activism cannot be described as ideal or exemplary. We must keep in mind that Prophet Muhammad (SAW) has described the struggle to make one's own self obedient to Almighty Allah (SWT) as the "Greater Jihad." We cannot expect to eradicate the evils in our society unless we first subjugate our own sinful impulses. Similarly, it is also essential that all the available means and resources be utilized in calling people towards the light of Islam, in removing their false beliefs, and in helping them realize the truth of Prophet Muhammad's (SAW) teachings, before initiating the final phases of Jihad. What, exactly, is the nature of the relationship between Iman and Jihad, or faith and struggle? During the days of early, pristine Islam, we find that the two major realities –– which formed the focus of attention for the Muslims –– were Qur'an and Jihad. Qur'an was the source of Iman, and Iman manifested itself in Jihad. Primarily, it was the force and appeal of the Qur'anic verses that conquered the hearts and souls of the Companions (RAA), leading to a profound change in their values, priorities, ambitions, and thinking pattern. This inner transformation quite naturally led to a sense of dissatisfaction and discontent with what was happening in their environment, resulting in the development of friction and a lack of harmony between the Muslims and their un-Islamic milieu. A genuine inner change necessarily leads to a conflict with the status quo. In the case of the Companions (RAA), the inner transformation was characterized by Iman, and the resulting conflict took the form of Jihad. Things began to change, however, when Islam entered the era of "statehood" and ceased to be a "movement." As a result, the attention of the Muslim community gradually started to shift from the moving and inspiring verses of the Qur'an to legal and judicial matters, from the inner dynamics of Iman to the external manifestation of Islam, and from Jihad in the path of Allah (SWT) to warfare for the defense –– or expansion –– of the Muslim territories. The idea that Jihad is a Fard Kafayah was made popular by the legalistic mind which equated it with the responsixbilities of the armed forces. How can we bring about an Islamic Renaissance in our own times? It will be possible only by following the methodology of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). The only surefire and unfailing strategy for Islamic Renaissance, therefore, must involve the revitalization of Iman through the Qur'an, and the launching of an Islamic movement on the basis of the dynamism thus unleashed. We need to establish a strong nucleus of true conviction and faith among the educated and rational elements of the Muslim society –– the brain-trust of the Muslim Ummah –– by means of the propagation of the Qur'anic wisdom at the highest intellectual level. The light of Iman will then illuminate all other segments of the society. This is the essential prerequisite for Islamic Renaissance, as it constitutes the only methodology to generate the dedicated and committed man-power to undertake the Jihad for the establishment of the domination of Islam over all other systems of life, all over the world. 2.) the propensity of western leaders to ignore, or be ignorant of, the role that Jihad ideology plays in the context of Middle Eastern conflicts. Carter's Confusion
Let's be fair to Jimmy Carter. Let's suppose he isn't indulging in egotistical grandstanding, that he doesn't harbor a deep-seated bias against Israel, and that he's not been influenced by the millions of dollars Islamists have provided to his Carter Center. Let's suppose his freelance diplomacy is sincerely in pursuit of the elusive path to peace in the Middle East. Even so, why in the world would he pay a courtesy call on Khaled Mashaal, an admitted terrorist master? Meshaal has claimed responsibility for organizing numerous suicide bombings, slaughtering mostly Israeli civilians but Americans too. The head of Hamas' politburo, Mashaal lives not in Hamas-ruled Gaza, from which missiles rain down on Israeli villages daily. Nor does he live in the West Bank, which is controlled, more or less, by Fatah, Hamas' rival. He resides instead in Syria, a guest of dictator Bashar al-Assad, Iran's client, who for the past five years has facilitated the flow of al-Qaeda combatants into Iraq. Those who attempt to appease tyrants are generally suspected of cowardice. More often, I suspect, lack of imagination is the cause. When Neville Chamberlain met with Hitler in Munich, he no doubt believed he could reason with him because he also no doubt believed that the Führer –– whatever his grievances or ambitions –– was a reasonable man like himself. Offer Hitler a good deal –– land, power, prestige –– and surely he'd take it rather than plunge his nation into a terrible war. What this leaves out is ideology. Hitler's ideas –– odious as they may now seem to you, me, and Carter (though certainly not to Meshaal) –– inspired millions to fight and die for the glory of the Third Reich. And Marxist/Leninist/Stalinist/Maoist ideology inspired millions to fight and die for the illusion of a Communist utopia. The ideology of Hamas derives from something more enduring than Mein Kampf, Das Kapital or Mao's Little Red Book. It is rooted in a 1,400-year-old religion. Hamas proudly proclaims that "the Koran is our constitution, Jihad is our way, and death for the sake of God is our highest aspiration." Hamas leaders promise their followers not just rewards here on Earth but in the next world as well –– a selling point neither Nazism nor Communism could offer. Hamas' Charter asserts that it is "one of the wings of the Moslem Brotherhood," a transnational organization "characterized by its deep understanding, accurate comprehension and its complete embrace of all Islamic concepts of all aspects of life, culture, creed, politics, economics, education, society, justice and judgment, the spreading of Islam, education, art, information, science of the occult and conversion to Islam." Surely, Carter is aware that, as a matter of religious conviction, Meshaal can not accept Israel's existence. Hamas believes every inch of Israel and, indeed, of any land ever ruled by Muslims is "an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgment Day." A Muslim can fight to reclaim this endowment or he can fail to fulfill the obligations his faith imposes. To Hamas, there is no Third Way. The Hamas Charter asserts that "initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to [Hamas'] principles. ... There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad." And by Jihad, Hamas does not mean an internal struggle for personal improvement. Not only do Hamas members oppose a "two-state solution," they believe that nation-states are un-Islamic. Instead, an Islamic caliphate is to be re-established, an empire that is to expand until the Dar al-Islam, the world ruled by righteous Muslims, consumes the Dar al-Harb, the world in which infidels and apostates currently hold sway. "Rome will be conquered, just like Constantinople was, as was prophesized by our prophet Muhammad," Hamas member and Palestinian parliamentarian Yunis al-Asal pledged this month on a Hamas television program. Does Carter sincerely think he can convince Meshaal to reject such ideas and embrace the Carter Center's kumbaya mission of "waging peace and building hope"? Does he really believe he can change Mashaal's mind, much less open his heart? If so, Carter is as clueless now as he was almost 30 years ago when, on his watch as president, the Ayatollah Khomeini took power in Iran, seized America's embassy, held our diplomats hostage and sat back to watch Carter do nothing effective in response. But let's be fair to Carter. He alone is not responsible for the rise of Islamism in all its malevolent variations. He is responsible, however, for so profoundly misunderstanding what is happening in the world over so many years. –– Clifford D. May, a former New York Times foreign correspondent, is president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism. by Caroline Glick The Jerusalem Post Apr. 14, 2008 Speaking to IDF commanders in Judea and Samaria last week, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert exhorted the officers tasked with preventing Palestinians from attacking Israel while operating under civilian cover to have sympathy for them. Olmert said "Take all the Palestinians who have been stripped at the roadblocks just because of fear that there may be terrorists and terror operatives among them. Take all those who wait at roadblocks because of fear that a car bomb may drive through the same roadblock. This could be a boiling cauldron, liable to explode and cause horrible burns, and it could be something else, dependent only on your ability to act wisely and forcefully." Since Olmert knows that IDF soldiers are as courteous as possible to Palestinians at roadblocks, his statement will have two major consequences. First it will cause a loosening of regulations at roadblocks and so impair IDF counterterror capabilities. Second, by insultingly insinuating that IDF forces are cruel, Olmert demoralized his own soldiers and reduced their willingness to accomplish their mission by hinting that they cannot expect the government to back them. Olmert's message is just the latest action his government has taken in recent weeks that undermine the IDF's ability to maintain its military success since 2002 in defeating Palestinian terrorists in Judea and Samaria and preventing them from reorganizing. The Olmert-Livni-Barak government's decision to take down roadblocks throughout Judea and Samaria; provide immunity from arrest to wanted terror fugitives; and permit the deployment of US-backed Fatah militias in Jenin all serve to directly undermine the IDF's remarkable achievements in defeating and preventing the reconstitution of the Palestinian terror war machine in Judea and Samaria since Operation Defensive Shield was carried out in 2002. Even more disturbingly, its reported willingness to cede the Jordan Valley to Fatah in the negotiations it is now conducting with Fatah leaders Mahmoud Abbas and Ahmed Qurei indicate that the Olmert-Livni-Barak government is ready to transform Judea and Samaria into a base for global jihadist forces just as occurred when Israel surrendered Gaza's border with Egypt in 2005. That the government is squandering the IDF's hard-won achievements in Judea and Samaria is made clear in a paper on counterinsurgency warfare authored by Major General (res.) Yaakov Amidror released this week by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Amidror's paper, "Winning Counterinsurgency War: The Israeli Experience," focuses on Israel's military defeat of Palestinian terror forces in Judea and Samaria during and subsequent to Operation Defensive Shield. AMIDROR IDENTIFIES six components of counterinsurgency warfare which he deems essential for effecting military victory over irregular forces. These components are: a political decision by the government to defeat terrorism; Through its actions, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government it is undermining four of these components. After identifying what he views as the essential components of successful counterinsurgency campaigns, Amidror identifies and defines three forms of military victory. First, there is "total victory" which involves both a military defeat of insurgent or terror forces and the political reorganization of their societies from terror-supporting societies into terror-combating societies. Second, there is "temporary victory" which involves a one-off military defeat of enemy forces which is not combined with any political transformation of their societies. Finally, Amidror considers what he refers to as "sufficient victory." As he defines it, a sufficient victory involves defeating an irreconcilable foe and then preventing him from rebuilding his capacity to wage war. Like a temporary victory, a sufficient victory doesn't entail any political transformation of enemy society, and indeed it takes for granted that such a transformation is impossible to enact. But as opposed to a temporary victory, Amidror argues that the effect of a sufficient victory can be longstanding if the victorious side is willing and able to consistently prevent enemy forces from reconstituting themselves. That is, a sufficient victory requires a continuous rather than one-off campaign. Amidror's definition of sufficient victory leads him to conclude that contrary to the approach of the Israeli and Western Left, there is a military option for victory in counterinsurgency wars devoid of political transformation. From an Israeli perspective, Amidror's vision of counterinsurgency warfare view is reasonable and understandable. Israel's options for transforming Palestinian society from a terror-supporting society to a terror-combating society are limited. Influenced by domestic, pan-Arab and pan-Islamic jihadist indoctrination; supported militarily, financially and politically by Arab states, Iran, terror groups and the West, the Palestinians have little reason to transform. MOREOVER, ISRAEL's strategic and national interests in maintaining control over Judea and Samaria could render sustainable a military strategy with no withdrawal element. This is not the case in other battlefields such as the US counterinsurgency in Iraq. To a degree, Amidror's view that sufficient victory is possible is echoed in recent statements by US military commanders in Iraq. In a dispatch from Iraq published last month in National Review, Richard Lowry reported, "For all the security gains over the last year, American commanders believe they have hit a plateau." Absent coherent, competent action by the Iraqi government to secure and maintain the loyalty of Iraqis to the Iraqi state, like the IDF in Judea and Samaria, all US forces in Iraq can do is keep violence down to sufferable levels. Yet in contrast to Israel's success in Judea and Samaria, the success of US counterinsurgency efforts in Iraq is the consequence first and foremost of their politically-transformative guiding principles. As Lowry noted, the 80,000 Iraqi security volunteers who now openly collaborate with US forces in counter-terror operations, "represent more or less a direct transfer of forces from the enemy's side to ours." In Israel, the basic assumption that guided both the decision by the Rabin-Peres government to embrace the PLO and form the Palestinian Authority in 1993 and the decisions by subsequent governments to leave the PA in place and maintain allegiance to the PLO as a negotiating partner was that like the Iraqi security volunteers, and like the South Lebanese Army which supported IDF operations in South Lebanon from 1985 through 2000, PLO and Fatah forces would act as transformative agents in Palestinian society moving it from a terror-supporting society to a terror-combating society. This view, always controversial, has been proven wrong again and again. Just last week, the PLO ambassador to Lebanon Abbas Zaki restated the PLO's aim of destroying Israel in an interview with Lebanese television. In Zaki's words, "The PLO... has not changed its platform even one iota." That platform, to destroy Israel in stages, remains the objective of the PLO." He continued, "In light of the weakness of the Arab nation and the lack of values, and in light of the American control over the world, the PLO proceeds through phases, without changing its strategy. Let me tell you, when the ideology of Israel collapses, and we take, at least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety, and we will begin to progress with our own ideology, Allah willing, and drive them out of all of Palestine." Israel's willingness to maintain its support for the PLO in spite of the PLO and Fatah's obvious rejection of Israel's right to exist and their continuous support and involvement in terror attacks against Israel exposes two flaws inherent in Amidror's view that it is possible to maintain a sufficient victory in counterinsurgency wars over the long term without inducing political transformation of enemy societies. The first flaw is that it takes as a given that the will of the victorious army's government to maintain counterinsurgency operations will remain constant. The Olmert-Livni-Barak government's maintenance of the inherently adversarial Fatah terror group as a legitimate negotiating partner shows that this is not the case. The government's commitment to Fatah necessarily induces it to undermine IDF achievements in Judea and Samaria. Those achievements are inimical to the interests of Fatah and so, from the government's current perspective, they must be cancelled to please Fatah. Since 2002, the IDF's military control over Judea and Samaria has not involved any serious efforts to transform Palestinian society on the grassroots level. It has not enhanced security for Palestinian civilians who are terrorized by terror operatives operating in their villages and towns. As Amidror notes, Israel's actions to separate civilians from terrorists in Judea and Samaria are limited to crafting operations that minimize collateral damage. But while Israel does not target Palestinian civilians, it has done nothing to prevent them from being targeted by Palestinian terrorists. And so, it has given them no option to fight those terrorists. As a consequence although militarily the situation in Judea and Samaria has been transformed over the past six years, politically, the only change among Palestinians is that they have become more radicalized. And here lies the second flaw in his analysis. To be successful, a counterinsurgency war must have a political component that reaches out to enemy populations. While it is true that Israel has limited capacity to change the way that Palestinians think about Israel and the form their society ought to take, Israel does have some capacity. For instance, Israel could launch a hearts and minds campaign among Israeli Arabs who are both politically and demographically linked to the Palestinians. Such a campaign would be two-pronged. First it would involve a concentrated law and order campaign whose aim would be to reassert Israel's sovereign authority in Israeli Arab areas. Second, it would secure law-abiding Israeli Arabs while delegitimizing the current anti-Israel, pro-terror leadership now in charge of Israeli Arab society and so cultivate the conditions necessary to replace that leadership with Israeli Arabs who embrace their identity as Israelis and oppose terrorism. The impact of such a campaign on the Palestinians in both Judea and Samaria would no doubt be dramatic. Amidror makes the important point that there is no empirical data that proves the oft-repeated contention that terror-supporting societies are more willing to sacrifice for victory than terror-combating societies. As the Israeli public has shown since the Palestinians began their terror war in 2000, Israelis are just as willing, if not more willing, to make sacrifices for victory as the Palestinians. But for victory to be accomplished and secured, a military campaign needs to be complimented by a political campaign led by a political leadership that explains reality to its own public and is able to give terror-supporting societies another option.
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli,
currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern
studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director
of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org).
Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com
|
|
UK FATHER AND SON BANNED FROM PUBLIC SWIMMING POOL FOR NOT BEING MUSLIMS
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, April 18, 2008. |
|
This comes from Jihad Watch
|
|
Refused entry: David Toube and his 10-year-old son were turned away from a 'Muslim-only' swimming session A father and his five-year-old son were turned away from their local swimming pool because they were the wrong religion. David Toube, 39, and his son Harry were told that the Sunday morning session was reserved for Muslim men only. Hackney Council, which runs the Clissold Leisure Centre in Stoke Newington, north London, claimed staff there had made a mistake. However, the Muslim-only session was advertised on its website. Mr Toube, a corporate lawyer, described his experiences on a blog. "I arrived at the pool to discover that they were holding what staff described to me as "Muslim men only swimming," he wrote. "I asked whether my son and I could go as we were both male. I was told that the session was for Muslims only and that we could not be admitted. I asked what would happen if I turned up and insisted I was Muslim. "The manager suggested that they might ask the Muslims swimming if they minded my son and I swimming with them. If they didn't object, we might be allowed in." A few days later, Mr Toube, who lives with his wife, 38-year-old barrister Samantha, and their two sons in Stoke Newington, North London, spoke to another leisure centre employee. "He gave me an identical story. His explanation was that it was a requirement of the Muslim religion that Muslims could not swim with non-Muslims." Mr Toube joked: "I asked him whether Clissold Leisure Centre would institute Whites Only swimming for racists. His answer was that they would if there was sufficient demand." He added: "I spoke to a number of Muslim friends, and none of them had heard of a religious prohibition on swimming with non-Muslims. "One friend was so disgusted with Hackney for trying to segregate Muslims and non Muslims that he suggested that he take his little daughter swimming with us, just to prove the point." However, Dr Taj Hargey, chair of the Muslim Education Centre of Oxford, said it was not true that Muslims could not swim with non-Muslims. "There is no Koranic verse or any statement from the sources of Islam that says different religions should be segregated," he said. "The only requirement is that when women swim they should be modestly clad." The Prophet Mohammed is recorded as saying that it is a Muslim's duty to learn to swim as it could save his or her life. The swimming sessions for male Muslims were advertised as taking place every Sunday from 8am to 9.30am. Leaflets stipulated: "It is compulsory for the body to be covered between the navel and the knees. "Anyone not adhering to the dress code or rules within the pool will not be allowed to swim. All brothers welcome.' A leisure centre spokesman said staff were wrong to refuse entry to Mr Toube. He added: "The member of staff the user spoke with at the time was mistaken when referring to the session as Muslim-only. "The men's modesty session is not a private hire and is, therefore, open to the public. "Staff cannot ask your religion on entrance and you won't be refused entry if you don't appear to be Muslim." A spokesman for the Equality and Human Rights Commission said: "Segregating services may amount to unlawful discrimination and could create a sense of unfairness, inadvertently increasing community tension." Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
PRAYER FOR ISRAEL'S CAPTIVES AND MFAS
Posted by Avodah, April 17, 2008. |
|
|
|
THE PC MAKE-OVER OF PASSOVER
Posted by Steven Plaut, April 17, 2008. |
|
In recent years, Passover has undergone a make-over in the American Jewish non-Orthodox community, one that has converted it largely into a holiday devoted to celebrating human rights, protesting a long list of human rights abuses and promoting fashionable causes. The remake seems designed to make Passover a cosmopolitan holiday, one with a universal message in which all can join, in essence the Jewish answer to the Declaration of the Rights of Man of the French Revolution. Back in the 1960s, a series of Political Correctness Haggadot (plural of Haggada) were written, in which the message of Passover was turned into a celebration of the civil rights movement in the United States. Arthur Waskow, the guru of the Tikkun-"Renewal" crowd, wrote at the time a Black Liberation Passover Haggadah, celebrating black militants like the Black Panthers, who were themselves coincidentally calling at the same time for the annihilation of Jews. Later Political Correctness Haggadot were devoted to homosexual rights, women's liberation, and assorted other faddish causes, not least of which was Palestinian "liberation". No doubt, this year will see Defend Iran and Help Obama Haggadot or No War for Oil ones. "Multicultural" Passover seders became fashionable in some circles, in which the seder became a mixture of acclamations for human rights and freedom, taken from a wide variety of non-Jewish sources. As yet another illustration, a few years back the Passover cause celebre of American Jewish liberals was Tibet (my guess is it will be this year again), with Tibetan officials invited to Passover seders, and where the leftist Religious Action Center (RAC) of the Reform synagogue movement called on Jews to hold Tibetan-freedom Passover seders in solidarity with Tibet. The RAC is devoted to the proposition that Jewish values are nothing more and nothing less than this year's leftist political fads, including gay "marriage", supporting affirmative action apartheid programs, and opposing all welfare reform. Its head, Rabbi David Saperstein was quoted with approval a few years back by the American Communist Party's weekly newspaper. In all of these attempts to recast Passover as the celebration of human rights, the Professional Liberals of the American Jewish Establishment (or PLAJEs, for short) seem to be overlooking one little point. And that is that Passover has absolutely nothing to do with human rights and is not at all a celebration of human freedom. Not that there is anything wrong with celebrating human rights, mind you. I would certainly not object to creating such a holiday, and my personal preference would be to hold it on Hiroshima Day, the day in which the A-bomb saved countless human lives and created the conditions under which freedoms could be extended to many millions of oppressed Asians. For the record, Passover is the celebration of Jewish national liberation. It is one of three such Jewish holidays devoted entirely to celebrating Jewish national liberation, the other two being Hannuka and Purim, and Passover is the only one with Torah foundations. It is not the celebration of generic civil rights, nor even the celebration of freedom and dignity for oppressed peoples around the globe. It is the celebration of Jews achieving national self-determination and taking their homeland back by force of arms. The only role that human rights play in the story of Passover is in showing that, under certain circumstances, human rights may be trampled upon for the greater good –– namely, for Jewish national liberation. In order to achieve Jewish national liberation, God ran roughshod over the human rights of the Egyptians. He afflicted them with a series of plagues. He then killed all Egyptian first-born. While Pharaoh no doubt deserved everything he got, most of the rest of the Egyptian people were completely innocent, hardly responsible for Pharaoh's human rights abuses, themselves oppressed by Pharaoh yet still subjects of collateral damage. They paid the price for Pharaoh's crimes and God saw this as necessary and just. The innocent first-born of all those innocent Egyptian parents were killed. And while it is not clear, apparently the first-born of the non-Jewish slaves were also innocent victims of the Tenth Plague. And then, even the first-born of the animals in Egypt were killed, a development that would no doubt have driven the animal rights movement to hysterical outrage. What on earth did those poor animals do to deserve such a punishment? While all of the above involve the Almighty's decision to violate the legitimate human rights of the Egyptian people, human rights abuses in the Passover story are not restricted to those inflicted by the Divine. The Jewish slaves, before taking to the road, also take away the wealth and savings of the Egyptian people, albeit at Divine command to do so. While Pharaoh no doubt owed them some back wages, this wealth was in essence being stolen from the innocent Ordinary Egyptians, and not necessarily only from the yuppie upper classes. Incidentally, the poor sons of Haman, the 75 thousand or so Persians who get killed and the others who have their property confiscated by the Jews according to the Scroll of Esther, and all those innocent Greek Seleucid Republican Guards getting whacked by the Maccabee Green Berets are other examples of human rights going out the window when Jewish national liberation and independence are pursued. Passover is, of course, hardly a glorification of these human rights abuses. It is simply a celebration of Jewish national liberation even when it is pre-conditioned upon a certain necessary amount of moral tradeoffs and realpolitik. The lesson is clear. When there is no choice, squeamishness over the "human rights" of innocent people is out of place. The human rights of the Egyptians in the story of Exodus count for no more than the human rights of innocent Germans and Japanese getting the hell bombed out of them in World War II, or innocent residents of Baghdad and the Sunni Triangle getting bombed by the Coalition forces. Such things are necessary in the real world. Human rights sometimes need to be compromised to protect Jews and achieve Jewish self-determination and other goals. All of which is of course lost upon all those self-righteous PLAJEs whining about Israel shooting rubber bullets and tear gas at Arab rioters and retaliating for th eQassam rockets fired by the fascist Palestinian hordes. And the lesson that innocent humans sometimes must be abused and have their rights compromised will no doubt serve as a refreshing reminder for all those urchins marching in the current "peace marches" in solidarity with Islamofascism. The real lesson of Passover is that Jewish national liberation and freedom does not come cheaply. The real world involves difficult choices, moral compromises and tradeoffs. Achieving a higher moral end often involves taking steps that would themselves be considered abusive or immoral on their own grounds, but are required in order to achieve the greater good. Such tradeoffs are the stuff with which moral posturers and self-righteous practitioners of recreational compassion cannot deal. It does not fit into their simplistic world view and lazy armchair moralizing. It is the great tragedy of the American Jewish community, or at least the non-Orthodox majority therein, that it is so overwhelmingly dominated by assimilated Professional Liberals and self-righteous practitioners of recreational liberal compassion, people whose understanding of political tradeoffs and public policy analysis never go any deeper than a good bumper sticker. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments –– both seriously and satirically –– on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
EHUD OLMERT GOES AGAINST THE ISRAELI ZEITGEIST
Posted by BESA Center, April 17, 2008. |
|
This was written by Efraim Inbar, who is professor of political
studies at Bar-Ilan University and the director of its Begin-Sadat
(BESA) Center for Strategic Studies. This article appeared yesterday
in the Jerusalem Post www.jpost.com /servlet/Satellite?cid=1208356966724&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull |
|
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert is negotiating the future of Jerusalem with his Palestinian interlocutors. Tzipi Livni, his minister for foreign affairs, admitted that all core issues "are on the table." Few know that before the July 2000 Camp David summit, the then Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, consulted with the mayor of Jerusalem, Olmert, on how to divide the city. Barak violated the taboo on Jerusalem by offering the Palestinians sovereignty on the Temple Mount. This elicited the largest rally ever held in Israel –– over 250,000 people demonstrated against it. Barak's coalition disintegrated (for other reasons as well), leading to his political fall. Today, Olmert is similarly desperate for reaching an agreement with the Palestinians before elections. Yet, no Israeli government is likely to survive concessions in Jerusalem under the current political constellation. The Israel Beiteinu party has already left the coalition in opposition to talks over permanent status issues, while the Shas party threatens to do likewise if the government discusses Jerusalem with the Palestinians. Even elements within the ruling Kadima party will likely desert the coalition if the Jerusalem issue is touched. At least one Laborite (Yoram Martziano) shares a similar position. If elections will be held in the near future, the strength of the opposition to concessions on Jerusalem will only grow. Nevertheless, Olmert's arrogance leads him to believe that he knows better than his people what is good for the Jews. He ignores the will of the Knesset and is in the process of making concessions on Jerusalem without having the political mandate to do so. Olmert is out of sync with the Israeli public. His popularity is very low and few trust him. For example, 60 percent of the electorate does not believe his disclaimer that he is not negotiating over Jerusalem. Moreover, his nonchalant attitude is not shared by his fellow countrymen. They look with trepidation at Olmert's intrigues to survive politically even if the price might be the division of Jerusalem.
THE POLLS on the issue of Jerusalem, including a recent survey conducted by the BESA Center for Strategic Studies, clearly indicate that over 70 percent of the Jews in Israel oppose relinquishing Israel's sovereignty over the Temple Mount, even if this will be necessary to lead to a peace treaty with the Palestinians. A similar amount of Israelis think it is unacceptable to have a Palestinian capital in the eternal city. In other words, an overwhelming proportion of Israelis are ready to forgo a peace treaty and continue the armed struggle against the Palestinians in order to assure Israel's sovereignty over the holiest place to the Jews. Their views show that they are not tired by the protracted conflict as Olmert, a hedonist, wrongly presumes. Indeed, Olmert is not listening to the fears of his people. A large majority of the Israeli public believes that concessions in Jerusalem are dangerous to Israel's security. Significantly, 61 percent of the Jews in Israel do not believe that the division of the city within the context of an agreement with the Palestinians will end the conflict and put to rest Palestinian additional claims. Moreover, 69 percent believe that Palestinian terrorism will continue unabated even after concessions on the Temple Mount. A majority also believes that areas ceded in Jerusalem to the Palestinians will serve as terrorist bases and if holy places are transferred to Palestinian control, they will not be safeguarded. Olmert arrogantly dismisses the national security concerns of Israel's citizenry. This is not only usurping Israeli democracy, but also prolonging the conflict by providing false hope to the Palestinians that they may gain a foothold in Jerusalem. Olmert's behavior whets the Palestinian appetite for concessions. Finally, the partition of Jerusalem is simply a bad idea when the zeitgeist dictates uniting cities such as Berlin, Belfast or Nicosia. Why should Jerusalem be different?! Jews have held a majority in the city for the past 150 years. The Palestinian demand to apply the principle of self-determination to Ramallah is valid for Jerusalem as well. Even the Arab minority in the city has shown its preference for living under Israeli rule, as many have moved to the Israeli side of the security barrier being built around Jerusalem. Their choice is reasonable, as Jerusalem offers the quality of life of a modern Western city, while only a few kilometers away, a Third World standard of living, chaos and religious intolerance are the norm. An undivided Jerusalem is the best guarantee for a better life for all Jerusalemites. Olmert's irresponsible encouragement for the unreasonable Palestinian demand for dividing Jerusalem is dangerous. Days before Passover, when we join past generations of Jews in declaring "Next Year in Jerusalem," Olmert's insistence on dividing the city looks more lunatic than ever. The Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies is at Bar-Ilan University. |
|
AN ARAB VIEW OF CARTER'S VISIT TO HAMAS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, April 17, 2008. |
|
Thanks to Ami Isseroff for passing on this editorial by Michael Young in the Beirut Daily Star. Michael Young is opinion editor of The Daily Star. Young's insight is helpful, as is Isseroff's comment about the "lull" (tahdiyeh: a temporary hiatus in fighting so that one can regroup and re-arm and re-deploy in order to be better prepared for the next round). Recall that while critique of Carter gains credibility when it comes from an Arab, a large part of the Lebanese Arab community bitterly hates and fears Hezbollah and Hamas and Syria and Iran –– so Young's commentary may in part be a function of that anti-Hamas sentiment. That having been said, I find myself in complete agreement with Young and Isseroff, and would add only that Carter, like Pelossi and others before him, is in violation of American law and is displaying a vigilante behavior vis-a-viz American foreign policy –– behavior which is quite unbecoming a former president and incongruent with what has been hitherto the norm for former presidents. Moreover, such behavior, in as much as it lends succor and support to an avowed enemy in war time, undermines our ability to wage that war and as such borders on treason. Readers may recall Alan Dershowitz' conclusion about Carter, based on Carter's most recent book. Dershowitz concludes that Carter has literally sold out to the Saudis. If Dershowitz is right, then Carter's visit may be motivated by the wishes of his Saudi funders to undermine our ability to wage that war. The article below is called "Jimmy Carter : a fool on a fool's
errand." It was written by Michael Young, of the Daily Star
staff. It appeared today and is archived at
Ami Isseroff writes about it: This article could have been written for Jerusalem Post. It should have been written for Ha'aretz, but Ha'aretz editors chose to praise Carter instead. It was written by a clear sighted Arab friend who understands the Middle East much better than the editors of Ha'aretz or Meretz Youth, and it was published in the Beirut Daily Star. |
|
Say what you will about Jimmy Carter, he has a way of transforming moments of plodding gravitas into uproarious comedy. Remember that moment during the 1980 Democratic convention when Carter stood up, and in a phrase paying tribute to Hubert Humphrey, instead praised "Hubert Horatio Hornblower," confusing the late vice president with the character from the C.S. Forester novels? As Carter prepares to meet with a senior Hamas leader, Khaled Meshaal, in Damascus, the former American president again risks attempting to say one thing, only to blunder into another. Carter's declared goal is to affirm that no one can avoid talking to Hamas. As he put it last week, "I'm not a negotiator. I'm someone who might provide some communication. I'm going to try to make [Meshaal] agree to a peaceful resolution, both with Israel and with Hamas' Palestinian rivals." The debate over whether the United States, Israel and others should talk to Hamas has become tiresome, largely because those supporting dialogue invariably limit their reasoning to a narrow syllogism: Hamas is a central actor in the Palestinian conflict; to resolve the conflict you need to talk to central actors; therefore talk to Hamas. To many engagers the problem is mainly one of communication. If only everyone could just sit around a table and talk, things would work out. Khaled Meshaal hasn't yet been shown the prospective gains from a peaceful resolution of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict; he hasn't been talked to. But because he's a pragmatic man, a sincere dialogue would allow him to deploy some of that pragmatism to the benefit of reaching a peaceful regional equilibrium. You can almost hear Khaled Meshaal gasping at the naivete of such sweeping positivism, as he prepares to score points off his solemn American visitor. Meshaal knows what talks with Hamas would really imply, and he knows the snag is hardly one of miscommunication. For one thing, negotiating with Hamas would effectively undermine the authority and credibility of Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestine Liberation Organization –– together, the paramount representatives of the Palestinian people. If the engagers' riposte is that Abbas is already discredited, that only confirms their intention to replace Abbas with Hamas as Israel's chief interlocutor. Still, senior members of the Fatah movement would disagree with the grim assessment of Abbas. They believe Hamas is increasingly squeezed in Gaza, its credibility on the wane as it has brought only hardship to the strip's inhabitants. That is why, they point out, the movement is so desperate to break out of the Israeli blockade. As for the West Bank, Hamas has lost ground there as well, they insist, despite claims that the movement could seize control of the area were it not for the presence of the Israeli Army. Regardless of whether this is true, it makes no sense today to damage Abbas by opening a channel to Hamas, which has never endorsed the agreements reached with Israel during the Oslo years. In fact, to bring Hamas into negotiations would only grant legitimacy to the movement's rejection of those agreements, and of the entire Oslo process. This, in turn, would only further constrict Abbas' slim margin of maneuver. A second consequence of talking to Hamas, Meshaal knows, is that it would insert Iran and Syria squarely into the Palestinian track. There are differences between Meshaal in Damascus and Mahmoud Zahhar and the Hamas leadership in Gaza, but it's hard to imagine that an open channel to the movement would not enhance Meshaal's standing, and that of his backers. Meshaal is more accessible and can call on substantial Iranian funding, even if the Muslim Brotherhood's financial networks benefit all factions. Whoever ends up speaking on Hamas' behalf, Tehran and Damascus could only gain from a dialogue with the movement. Yasser Arafat's singular achievement for three decades was to safeguard the "independence of the Palestinian decision," particularly from Syria. Talking to Meshaal could well mean reversing that accomplishment. There is also a valid case to be made that Hamas is not interested in a peace treaty with Israel, because its ultimate ambition is to liberate the whole of Palestine. Certainly, that's what the movement demonstrates day in and day out. Meshaal has declared that Hamas would accept a deal on the basis of a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, but has added a key caveat that this must also include a right of return for the Palestinian refugees of 1948 to their places of origin. For Israel this is a non-starter on demographic grounds, and Meshaal knows it. However, it does allow supporters of dialogue with Hamas to conveniently slot the movement into the Oslo consensus, even if the reality is different. Whatever Hamas' true intentions, the contention that states should not talk to the movement on principle is difficult to sustain, if only because politics abhors a vacuum and the impulse to do something different can become overwhelming. That's why the onus should be placed on defenders of engagement to substantiate their proposals. Talking should not be an end in itself. First the engagers should clarify what Hamas will agree to talk about. The movement says it is willing to negotiate a long-term truce with Israel, a notion once championed by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon as well. If both parties agree, fine. But the outcome won't be peace. Israel will use the interregnum to consolidate its hold on strategic parts of the West Bank, while Hamas will use it to marginalize its Palestinians foes, rearm, and prepare for a showdown with Israel. On the other hand, if Hamas is willing to discuss peace, then the movement has to first demonstrate this before anyone seriously considers overhauling the Palestinian-Israeli track. That shouldn't be difficult, even if nothing shows that Hamas is contemplating peace with Israel, while everything about the movement's behavior and rhetoric says the contrary. That's why Jimmy Carter is on a fool's errand, complicating an already complicated situation. It's often said that Carter has been a better ex-president than president. That's no compliment, so ghastly was his tenancy of the White House –– the Camp David accords notwithstanding. Peace may be a long way away between Palestinians and Israelis, but Carter won't speed things up any by turning into Meshaal's patsy. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
PASSOVER GREETING FROM MANHIGUT YEHUDIT
Posted by Manhigut Yehudit, April 17, 2008. |
 Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org. Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922 (cell) |
|
ANOTHER SYRIAN ARMORED DIVISION MASSES ON ISRAELI-LEBANESE BORDERS
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 17, 2008. |
|
April 16th I posted an article entitled: "PLANNING TO LOSE THE NEXT WAR?". The question mark was "just" a courtesy. As you read the following DEBKAfile piece, it seems clear that Israel's PM Ehud Olmert and DM Ehud Barak are formulating a plan to "throw the fight". All of their actions demonstrate that they seem to want Syria to attack and over-run the 20,000 Jewish men, women and children plus the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) on the Golan Heights. Such an pre-meditated attack would show that Olmert and Barak do not need to face their electorate and the Knesset so they can "cleverly" by-pass any Peoples' Referendum. I recall a similar situation when General Israel Tal called up a full-armored exercise on the Golan at a time when Syria was similarly acting aggressively. The moment Israel initiated her maneuvers, then President of Syria, Hafez al Assad, withdrew his troops. His son Bashar would do the same. Since 1967 when Israel liberated the Golan from the Syrians who had been mercilessly shelling the civilians in the Israeli valleys below the Heights, Syria has been "peaceful". Why? Because as long as Israel sits on top of the Golan, she can look down into Damascus and note the moment Assad turns on his tanks. Ehud and Ehud, acting like Siamese twins joined at the hip, are behaving like the perennial cowards they are. They have not called up additional Israeli forces on the Golan to a full alert. Clearly, this is a deliberate death sentence for Israeli communities and soldiers standing up there protecting the rest of Israel. There are options: One: Bring Olmert to immediate trial for treason. The Jewish nation does NOT have to, MUST NOT COMMIT NATIONAL SUICIDE. That is the message to our people Erev Pesach 5768. It comes from the DEBKAfile. |
|
DEBKAfile –– We start where the media stop
DEBKAfile's military sources report that Damascus has deployed the 10th armored corps at the Massaneh crossing of Mount Hermon. It links up with the northwestern positions the 14th division took up last month on the Syrian-Israeli border which cuts through the Hermon range. Syrian troops are now strung along a continuous crescent-shaped line from the central Lebanese mountains through Mt Dov on the western slopes of Mt. Hermon and up to southeastern Lebanon. This deployment, commanding Syria's Israeli and Lebanese borders, is under the command of the president's brother, Maher Assad. The 10th armored corps was moved forward straight after Syria's snap civil defense exercise which crashed after three hours last Thursday, April 10. The exercise was ordered without notice by president Bashar Assad on the last day of Israel's five-day homeland defense drill. DEBKAfile's military sources are criticizing Israel officials for attributing Syria's latest military movements to domestic troubles inside the Syrian leadership. They say this is throwing sand in the public's eyes and at one with the government's practice of playing down all the heightened military threats to Israel –– whether from Syria, the Lebanese Hizballah or the Palestinian Hamas in Gaza. The IDF's Northern Command officers report that the Syrian army's buildup opposite Israel has accelerated in April and warn that its units are arrayed for a quick transition to attack mode. The link-up between Syria's 10th and 14th divisions on the border running through Mt Hermon should have been a wake-up call for the government in Jerusalem, they say, and elicited counter-moves to show Damascus that Israel is ready to meet every contingency. Sunday, April 13, prime minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas met briefly to rough out the position Abbas will put before President George W. Bush whom he meets at the White House in ten days. Olmert made the gesture of licensing the entry to Israel of 5,000 Palestinian construction workers. This gesture was challenged by security services as a carrying the risk of terrorist infiltration and by economic leaders who say the Palestinians will take Israeli jobs. Foreign minister Tzipi Livni is in Qatar, where she is to address the 8th annual Doha Forum on Democracy, Development and Free Trade. Qatari rulers plan to persuade her that Israel should back their initiatives to patch up quarrels in the Arab world between Egypt and Syria and the Palestinian Fatah and Hamas. Neither is in Israel's interest, because conciliation would confer legitimacy on Arab and Islamist radicalism and spur its expansion. Livni, who knew she would come under pressure during her Doha visit, insisted on going through with it and treating it as a breakthrough in Israeli relations with the Gulf emirates. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: CARTER'S DESTRUCTION
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 17, 2008. |
|
Today is the day that Jimmy Carter –– in defiance of requests from several quarters that he not do so –– is going to be meeting with officials from Hamas. To achieve peace, he maintains, it is necessary to speak with all sides. The response to this from the Daily Star of Lebanon (of all places) is on the mark: "To many engagers the problem is mainly one of communication. If only everyone could just sit around a table and talk, things would work out. You can almost hear Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal gasping at the naiveté of such sweeping positivism, as he prepares to score points off his solemn American visitor." Indeed. Carter is conferring legitimacy on a terrorist organization. And while he deludes himself that he can talk them into doing this or that, he serves, wittingly or unwittingly, as their "patsy." There is a signal lesson here, for certain. For many on the left believe that by and large matters can be worked out if only everyone talks. But this is simply not the case. Carter has set back the already very tenuous efforts for peace in the Middle East. Evil is evil, and sometimes this must be recognized. ~~~~~~~~~~ Matters with Gaza are heating up again. What commentators are observing is that there is a new Hamas tactic, with squirmishes at the border rather than depending exclusively on the launching of rockets (although they are still launched as well). Hamas finds there is a better opportunity to kill Israelis this way: two were killed at Nahal Oz last week and three in the battle this week. Today the IDF foiled attempts by Hamas terrorists at Keren Shalom to enter Israel. Certain aspects of this change in behavior are particularly notable. One, that Hamas is taking its cue more and more from Hezbollah and acting like an organized military rather than a ragtag group of guerillas. Second is the opportunity for changing tactics and reorganizing which they availed themselves of. After the major operation about a month ago, there was a lull which was thought to be indicative of Israeli deterrence generated by the operation. If you remember, there was talk at that time about a ceasefire of sorts being arranged off the record. Well, it was during that lull that they regrouped –– and this fact is of signal importance. Any "ceasefire" or "hudna" will give them a chance to strengthen themselves and ultimately only serve to our detriment. And whatever deterrence power we had seems to be lost with their new tactics. ~~~~~~~~~~ This is being to dawn on more of our decision makers, who realize that the current situation cannot continue. And so, there is talk again about a major operation –– similar to Operation Defensive Shield in Judea and Samaria in 2002. This would take place only after Bush visits in May. The goal would be to clean out Gaza and take down Hamas. However... there is still concern about an "exit strategy," which means there is not yet the recognition that we may have to maintain a presence for some time to come (indefinitely as far as I'm concerned). The reason Defensive Shield has had long term positive effects for us is because once we went back into areas that had been turned over to the PA, we retained the right to continue to run operations there to control the terrorist infrastructure. What is being discussed is turning over Gaza to a third party. Bringing in the UN or the EU would be a disaster in a host of ways, but is not likely to happen, as none of these parties is exactly eager to be involved. The alternative is allowing Egypt to come in. Egypt, which is threatened by the radical Hamas at its border, has a vested interest. The problem is one of Egyptian long-term stability and intentions towards Israel. What happens if there's a change of regime and the Egyptians then seek to move from Gaza east into Israel within the Green Line? Many may have forgotten, but Gush Katif was established in southern Gaza as a way to block movement of troops from Egypt up into Gaza, as this is the traditional way that enemy troops have entered the area. ~~~~~~~~~~ Yesterday I wrote about awards that Abbas was going to defer on two terrorists in our prisons. He has cancelled the plans to do this. And no other conclusion is possible other than that his growing awareness that this caused a furor and was not going to play well made him think twice. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to a survey just done by the University of Maryland and Zogby International, Nasrallah is the best loved leader in the Arab world, followed by Assad of Syrian. Says it all, I think. ~~~~~~~~~~ In another survey, done by the Gaza-based Institute of Development Studies, 44% of the residents of Gaza definitely want to leave, and 80% are thinking about it. Who can blame them? A smart policy would be to help them immigrate elsewhere. ~~~~~~~~~~ In a televised speech today to mark "Prisoners' Day," Abbas said there can be no peace deal with Israel unless all 8,500 prisoners are released. This is one of those things I hope he really means, because even Olmert cannot/would not do this. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is talk, still in its very early stages and facing several hurdles, of a merger between Kadima and Labor. The rationale for this is simple: neither party by itself, according to the polls, would top Likud. Merged into one new super-party, they very well might. And so, there is also talk, also in very early stages, of a merger of Yisrael Beitenu with Likud, which would counter that. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
WHERE THE BRAINS ARE
Posted by Avodah, April 16, 2008. |
|
This was written by Rachel Raskin-Zrihen and it appeared in Arutz-Sheva (www.irsaelnationalnews.com) |
|
You can thank Israel later. I always thought if anyone was going to figure out how to foil terrorist attempts of various types, it would be the Israelis. And it looks like I may have been right. It seems the Israelis have developed one technology to alert authorities of a possible hijacking and another that Pity the poor terrorist stupid enough to enter Israeli air space. diverts airline-destroying missiles. Both technologies –– Code Positive and Flight Guard –– were, as might be expected, the result of experience. According to an Associated Press story, as of 2008, all airlines flying into Israel are required to equip their pilots with the system that lets ground controllers know if a plane has been commandeered by terrorists. Code Positive, which Israel will distribute free, consists of a personalized card with which pilots relay a predetermined code upon approaching Tel Aviv. If hijackers kill or remove the cockpit crew, as was done in the September 11 attacks, their failure to send the code will alert Israel that something's wrong. If a pilot is forced to activate Code Positive, then he or she can enter false data, which will serve as a discreet mayday message. The system is said to be bluff-proof. And pity the poor terrorist stupid enough to enter Israeli air space. The Jewish state improved its aviation counter-measures following a 1973 tragedy in which warplanes shot down a Libyan airliner that strayed into the Israeli-controlled Sinai, suspecting it planned to ram a ground target. Scores of crew and passengers were killed. Now, Israel relies on advance notice of potential hijackings from its intelligence services and its foreign allies. But should the worst happen, fighter jets can be scrambled within minutes to implement a series of tactical counter-measures. The strategy is reportedly to divert planes to uninhabited areas by unnerving the hijackers by first buzzing the plane. If that doesn't work, cannons are fired near its cockpit. And as a last resort, there are shoot-down orders. Now that we've addressed the threat from terrorists inside a plane, let's turn to the protection of planes from attack from outside. To handle that, Israel developed Flight Guard, also as a result of a frightening incident. One might recall the 2003 near-miss of a Soviet-era shoulder-fired, heat-seeking missile, fired at an Israeli passenger jet taking off from Kenya. The incident alarmed the international aviation industry; and sent Israeli brains into action. The result was a device that's fitted to a plane's fuselage. When its sensors detect an incoming missile, Flight The incident alarmed the international aviation industry; and sent Israeli brains into action. Guard fires a flare to divert it. Fabulous. I hope they develop a way to return the missile to sender. Imagine the wild-eyed lunatic's surprise when he sees his murderous missile do a cartoon-like U-turn. I can almost see the frantic running around in circles with the missile in hot pursuit. The device, which costs about $1 million per unit, is already on several El Al planes. Evidently, though, some nations object, suggesting the flares pose an unacceptable fire risk. So, as an alternative, a system known as the Multi-Spectral Counter MANPADS System, was approved, which uses non-pyrotechnic lasers to sear the heat-seekers on incoming missiles, throwing them off course. You can thank Israel later. Can you imagine what diseases could be cured and what discoveries could be made if Israel didn't have to spend so much of its intellectual and financial capital on defense? Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
THE PRAYER FOR EATING BREAD ON PESACH
Posted by Daisy Stern, April 16, 2008. | |
|
This was filed by Shira Schmidt and it appeared yesterday in
Cross Currents | |
|
I have been searching the internet for the prayer to say upon eating bread on Pessah, and I found it by Googling "zachor Michlalah movies." There you can see/hear the late Reb Yonah Emanuel who was a teenage inmate in Bergen-Belsen during the Passover of 1944 when the prayer over bread was recited. He reads the entire prayer (it is not a bracha) over bread and describes Pessah in that death camp in this 3 minute segment of a longer DVD. The reason for my search: The recent controversy over selling hametz in the public square during Passover in Israel. I translated the prayer for bread during Passover into English at the end of this posting. The controversy and court decision (by a national religious judge!) that permits selling bread in Israel during Passover reminded me of two Seder meals sixty-something years ago. Passover 1943, Konin Concentration Camp Before describing Pessah of 1943 in the Konin concentration camp in Poland, Rabbi Yehoshua Aronson gives us, in his memoirs, this startling description of a new arrival, one Dr. Hans Knopf. "In the summer of 1942 a limousine came into camp. Several SS officers stepped out, followed by a serious and grandly dressed old Jewish man. The chauffeur unloaded six leather suitcases, each bearing a label with its owner's name. As we observed this impeccably dressed Jewish gentleman with his six expensive leather suitcases in a Jewish slave-labor camp, we went into a fever of curiosity. We strained to observe this heartening phenomenon that burst into our benighted camp." This description of Dr. Knopf, along with large portions of Rabbi Aronson's memoir, are now available in English in Esther Farbstein's Hidden in Thunder: Perspectives on Faith, Halachah, and Leadership during the Holocaust. She points out that the memoir describes the special status of this Jewish doctor from Germany with telling details such as his having his own room-cum-clinic, and his owning fine silk pajamas. "He was given a room that, as a German patriot, he decorated with photographs of himself on horseback and medals from his glittering military past as an officer in World War I. Sometimes he would dandify himself by putting on his officer's uniform. Knopf treated the Jews with condescension and estrangement, ashamed to come into contact with fellow Jews." Slowly, however, he began to realize the connection between the Jews' fate and his own. The memoir describes the transformation wrought in this assimilated Jew, for by the time Passover rolled around in the spring of 1943, Dr. Knopf was deeply involved in seder preparations. "The German-Jewish doctor of all people insisted we hold the seder despite our fatigue and the late hour." Perhaps it was contact with deeply rooted scholars such as Rabbi Aronson, that triggered this metamorphosis. "When he discovered that I was a rabbi, Knopf never stopped pestering me; he would often pour out his heart to me. He told me how devoted he had been, how he had served and fought for the German homeland. As I observed this disillusioned Jew, I became heartsick." Rabbi Aronson survived to write his memoirs and to become the beloved chief rabbi of Petah Tikva, Many inmates came to Rabbi Aronson with the dilemma: to eat hametz or not? Realizing that most were too weak to last a week without bread, Rabbi Aronson responded with guidelines. Hametz was to be eaten on Pessah, but in order to minimize the transgression involved he ruled that each bite should be less than kzayis, "the volume of an olive" and the bites should be spaced at long intervals. Esther Farbstein points out that the desire to ask halachic questions was a form of spiritual resistance and heroism for two reasons. It reflected a cherishing of mitzvot as a raison d'etre which kept many Jews going and it was a form of defiance, their way to assert freedom in a slave-labor camp. Back to our dandified Dr. Knopf who when he had arrived kept the other Jews at arms' length. Here he was, ten months later deeply involved in preparations for the seder. His turnabout is poignantly expressed in one of the most moving descriptions in the Aronson memoir. Where would they find the means to bake the matza? Knopf had a stove in his clinic/room. He risked his life and insisted they bake the little bit of dough that they sequestered in his very room. They were not found out, and held a seder that year, although the doctor did not survive in the long run. However Rabbi Aronson did survive. He went on to become the beloved chief rabbi of Petah Tikva, and to write his memoir immortalizing Dr. Hans Knopf who risked all to bake matza. Passover Bergen-Belsen, 1944 By 1944 there was no question that Jews must eat hametz to stay alive. Rabbi Avraham Levisson from Holland dealt with this issue in Bergen-Belsen. Esther Farbstein points out that he had been active from the start of the war in finding solutions to tragic dilemmas as the Dutch Jews were concentrated in Westerbork, Holland from 1939 onwards ( he encouraged inmates to give their wives a conditional get, lest they become agunas). Beginning in 1942 each Tuesday a selection was made of Jews who were transported by train to death camps such as Auschwitz and elsewhere. "Rabbi Levisson was known to the inmates as 'Rabbi Simcha' ('Rabbi Happiness') because of his warm, positive attitude toward them. He organized extensive religious activity. In 1943 he was deported via Westerbork to Bergen-Belsen." In 1944 Rabbi Levisson and his father, along with the Chief Rabbi of Rotterdam Rav A.B. Davids and a number of Jews surreptitiously gathered in one barrack to quietly hold a seder. Man cannot live on potatoes alone. The Dutch rabbis, seeing the Jews could not survive without eating bread on Pessah, composed a prayer to recite upon eating hametz during Passover. You can see/hear Yonah Emanuel, one of those present in the camp, read this prayer and explain the circumstances in a segment from the DVD "V'Hi She-Amda" about Pesach during the Holocaust, produced by Zachor After the prayer was composed, other inmates wanted copies. Since there were no Xerox machines, typewriters, or carbon paper in the camp, Yonah's older brother Elhanan Emanuel, hy"d, copied it again and again by hand in the concentration camp after his twelve-hour shifts of slave labor. Rabbi Levisson himself gave the few potatoes he saved for Passover to his own father, who was even weaker than he was. This week I spoke with Rabbi Levisson's daughter, who now lives in a religious neighborhood of Ashdod, to get the background details behind the prayer. She had been hidden as a baby with a Christian family in Holland. She explains that her father died of exhaustion on April 25,1945, on a train shortly before the train was liberated by the Soviets. Her family and many others recite the prayer over hametz on Passover at the seder each year, immortalizing the spiritual heroism that it represents. For the Hebrew version see the aron-hasfarim.co.il website.
This week every radio talk show in Israel and every newpaper discussed the "hametz" law. I was surprised no one made a point that I often make when there is a charge of religious coercion: In Switzerland it is against the law to wash your car or hang laundry on Sunday. You get fined! But how come no one calls that 'religious coercion"? FOR those who read Hebrew, you can read the entire trial decision permitting the sale of hametz on the internet. Judge Bar-Asher Zaban pinned her decision on the interpretation of the word pumbe –– what is public versus private space. For those in Israel –– Hidden in Thunder, from which these two examples were adapted, will be sold at half price and is among the hundreds of books on sale at significant discounts in the annual book sale at the Merkaz Harav Kook Yeshiva Jerusalem, from the Sunday after Pesah until the following Sunday (22bNisan to 29bNisan, 10am-9pm, Fri. Til 1pm) in person or by phone. People outside Jerusalem can phone in credit-card orders that will be delivered, tel.02-651-5592.
Contact Daisy Stern at daisystern1@gmail.com
|
|
CHRONICLES OF MUFFY
Posted by Moshe Saperstein, April 15, 2008. |
|
Several of you sent in your own suggestions for Jewish-themed horror films. Two of the best, from the same source, were THE AMITYVILLE SHNORRER and NIGHT OF THE LIVING CHOLENT. I had promised myself that one letter, just one letter, could be written without an appearance by the cats. I was determined this would be that letter. Alas... my favorite kitten, my Muffy, who received special care as she is so slow and dreamy and delicate, has betrayed me. Muffy eats as deliberately as Rachel, examining her food absent-mindedly, taking small bites separated by long, thoughtful pauses. The male creatures, like me, swallow everything in nanoseconds, food disappearing down their throats like light disappearing into a black hole in space. They then circle Muffy to snatch the barely nibbled sustenance she continues to contemplate. And I stand above her, annoyed but determined, wielding a broomstick to ward off those daring to threaten my Muffy's gastronomic ruminations. And how am I rewarded? The carefree teen, apple of my eye, is with child. If that is too elliptical for you, I'll make it easy. The slut is pregnant. The lazy lope has become a waddle. Her width is starting to rival her length. First I argued that she was just gaining weight. Then I could ignore the bitter truth no longer. My baby Muffy, carefree kitten, had betrayed me. |
|
On Thursday, the 10th of April, I stepped outside carrying a bushel of wet laundry. It was mid-morning and I noticed Muffy was lying in her favorite spot among some bushes on our lawn. She appeared to have caught a mouse, and was holding it between her front paws. The mouse was dark grey and, to my amazement, Muffy was licking it. I've seen cats toy with captive mice, frogs, birds, creepy crawlies. But I had never seen a cat licking a captive. A moment later I went from amazed to flabbergasted, to the point of dropping the laundry basket, as a second mouse emerged from between her back legs. This, too, was dark grey and Muffy turned her attention to it and began licking. Even your dimwitted correspondent realized she was giving birth. [Please don't tell me about some article you've seen in the Bulgarian Journal of Pseudo-Science about a cat birthing a rat.] Rachel was having a music lesson but came running at my call. We stood there, spellbound, as two more Muffets emerged, these blond as their mother. Each was licked in turn, then all four were out of sight, covered by Muffy's stomach. Rachel's only comment, between oooh's and aaah's, was "How does she know what to do? She didn't even take a Lamaze course". My own thoughts were completely scrambled. Should I make a Kiddush in shul in honor of the newcomers? Would Muffy be able to say the Prayer of Thanksgiving for a safe delivery? Could I arrange for both fathers to be called up to the Torah during the reading of the weekly portion? If any of the four were male, could I find someone to circumcise them? Should they be named? [This last is not as mundane/inane as you imagine. Does it benefit a kitten's development to be called Simba? Simbata? Does it retard his/her development to be called Yankel? Yentl?]
THURSDAY THRU SUNDAY ARE INCREASINGLY BLURRED. Muffy, though expressionless, was clearly exhausted. When the wee ones nursed her body trembled. It was scary to see. Rachel, though never as worshipful of Muffy as I was, became her main protector. Whether it was maternal instinct, or feminist identification, Rachel began feeding her constantly though this meant literally putting the food in her mouth as Muffy wouldn't move away from the furry four. It also meant literally pulling the food out of my mouth, but I had enough instinct for self-preservation not to complain. And the food! No cat food for Muffy. Chicken it was, and Philadelphia Cream Cheese [30% fat!], and slices of salmon. Rachel also realized that mother and offspring were directly in line of the sprinklers that go off at 5am every morning, and built a barrier of plastic lawn chairs to protect them.
AMONG THOSE WHO CAME TO STARE were neighbors and their children. Strangest of all were those visitors who were having their cars repaired. One of our neighbors, the boom-box rap music aficionado, has opened a business building and repairing automobile sound systems. Every afternoon between five and a dozen vehicles appear and he works on them til almost midnight. They fill our parking lot, and as Muffy's Sanctuary abuts this area those with time to kill stared at Muffy and kitties from a respectful distance. Though most of these guys –– they were all guys –– looked like they had just stepped off a Wanted poster, their behavior was exemplary. The babies doubled in size between Thursday and Friday, and continued to grow though not at that rate. By Sunday they no longer looked like mice, but not yet like cats. By definition they should be considered adorable, or at the very least, cute. I thought them repulsive, slugs with hair. By Sunday Rachel's Catering Service was working smoothly. And I was still putting out cat food for the other felines. Their behavior was fascinating. One by one –– Muffy's siblings and elders acted the same way –– they would cautiously approach her, stare, then back away. And they never touched the food strewn around her. Yet I still had to spend much time, broomstick in hand, on guard. This was because of the dogs, outsized and vicious, who roam our landscape. I still weep at the memory of Cat, my first feline love, dead in the jaws of a savage hound back in Gush Katif. And of how we struggled to keep her kittens alive. And I was determined not to see those scenes repeated. Complicating our efforts to run the Succor The Stupid Savages Animal Shelter, Pessach Cleaning Madness Syndrome is in full flower. Most chametz items are put away, Pessach utensils and the rest are out but not yet in use, and everything that is in use –– including the food –– is throwaway plastic. The Wondrous La P, far from collapsing under the strain, or even
being stressed out, seems to grow stronger and more competent each
day. Just watching her exhausts me. She does have me doing Pessach
shopping, a genuine nightmare. The Kosher for Passover stickers mean
little. I've seen stickers with the imprimatur of the Vatican, the
Wakf, Atheists-r-Us. And I can't forget an incident –– it
must be thirty years or more –– when I saw an employee of
the Beit Hakerem supermarket putting Kosher for Passover stickers on
bottles of beer. I complained to the manager who 'thanked' me while
giving me the look of death. He assured me the bottles would be
removed, but I have always wondered how many people relied on the
sticker and unwittingly washed down their Seder matzoh with a brew.
A FURTHER COMPLICATION TO OUR RUNNING the Feed the Fatuous Felines Animal Shelter is that I have a severe case of conjunctivitis, which I have already passed along to Rachel. One of my eyes is swollen shut, kept that way by glue-like goop. No big deal as that's the bad eye. The good eye is a slit, so the left side of my face is Frankenstein, the right side is Fu Manchu's fat cousin. As conjunctivitis is highly contagious we had to cancel plans to attend a wedding last night and another wedding tonight, as well as to meet some dear relatives at the airport Thursday morning. Our hope is that we are well by Friday as we are supposed to go to Ari and Efrat for the Seder. [Rachel has a cream for the conjunctivitis. I started with the cream but had a severe allergic reaction, so have been switched to drops. The drops contain steroids so I can use them five days only. I guess the doctor is afraid of the drops leaving me with a Schwartzeneger physique. Though with my luck instead of being like Roger Clemens I'll end up like Samuel Clemens. While I'm venting, let me complain about the Sick Fund practice of constantly looking for bargains on the medications they dispense each month. Every month the medicines change size, shape, color; chaos for the multiple pill-poppers like myself who are both digitally and mentally challenged.]
Before dawn yesterday morning [15.4] I thought I heard barking on the front lawn. But as we always hear barking from someplace or other, and I was too exhausted to drag my carcass out of bed, I did nothing. An hour later, stepping onto the lawn in the early light, I was horrified to see that Muffy and the two dark Muffets were gone. Only the golden ones, shivering in the dawn chill, remained. Those damned dogs, again! And the scenes of a lifeless Cat carried off filled my head, and the tears flowed. Rachel seemed much less emotional about Muffy's disappearance. "Let's just wait and see what happens" she said. Not only had Muffy disappeared but none of her siblings or elders appeared. The cat food I spread remained untouched. The next hours were hellish. I visualized the golden Muffets starving to death, or being eaten alive. Every passing moment ratcheted up my grief, and though a small voice said 'Keep things in perspective', my tendency to hysteria kept reinforcing itself. At which point, when I thought my heart would burst, Muffy reappeared. And my heart almost did burst, with joy. But even that joy was mixed with worry as she picked up one of the muffets and walked off out of sight. Not long after she returned for the last one. A neighbor knowledgeable about cat behavior assures me that Muffy has simply reestablished herself in a less public place, less accessible to prying humans, to raise her offspring. I was whining about Muffy's lack of gratitude to her devoted servants. "Why don't you track down her new lair and bring food to her there?" Rachel suggested. "I don't do deliveries" said I in my most petulant voice.
At 3am this morning I took a break from typing and stepped outside for a smoke. The sky was overcast. Not a star in sight. Earlier in the evening there had been a pre-Pessach program for local children and the streets were littered with debris including candy wrappers of all sizes and plastic cups. Our parking lot was also blessed with the cigarette butts left behind by our auto repairman's customers. Suddenly there was a gust of wind, then another, then a whirlwind that lifted all the debris and spun it around. And there I was in the middle of it. For a moment I was frightened, then unexpectedly exhilarated. It was like being in the midst of a ticker tape parade, and I pretended to lift my arms in acknowledgment of the cheering throng as the ticker tape fell about me. That I have no arms to lift didn't bother me. That the cheering throng existed only in my imagination didn't bother me. That trash instead of ticker tape swirled around me didn't bother me. What was real was the sense of exhilaration that lasted the duration of my cigar and sent me to bed happy. Later in the morning I noted how empty the lawn seems. Only Chaleria, the leprous brown and black cat who I believe is the father of two of the Muffets, made an appearance. The others have dispersed to new hangouts. What I felt yesterday as resentment is now resignation. And no small sense of relief that our obsessive involvement with them has ended, at least for now. In the words of Mister Spock, 'may they live long and prosper'. Now I'll have more time to molest the plants.
I REALLY SHOULD APOLOGIZE FOR MY OBSESSION with the plants. During my freshman year at Rabbi Jacob Joseph High School on the Lower East Side we were required to take a test that would indicate what we wanted to do later in life. There were thirty-eight kids in my class. Twelve wanted to be lawyers, fifteen wanted to be accountants. Five wanted to go into business, four hoped to be scientists. One –– need I identify the weirdo? –– wanted to be a farmer. The test was called the Kuder Preference Test and it was filled with questions like "Would you rather a) sell shoes, b) fight fires, c) be a forest ranger, d) prepare a budget?" The same question was asked some sixty times in various guises. When I was called in to meet with the Guidance Counselor to discuss the results, he hemmed and hawed and seemed very uncomfortable. "It seems you want to be a forest ranger or a farmer" said Mr. Brown, clearly dismayed that a good religious Jewish boy from a working class family in New York aspired to such un-Jewish professions. So he put me into the Beginner's Bookkeeping class. Alas, I was as decimally challenged then as I am digitally challenged today. But my desire to be a farmer was legitimate, however ill-considered. I had little idea of the hard work entailed, the loneliness, the frustration over bad weather or crop failure due to infestation or poor financial return. What I had was a yearning to work the land, my land. Though at that point I had no clear conception of what 'my land' was. Seward Park, near both the yeshiva and our apartment, had a section roped off that was divided into tiny plots –– each the length and width of a grave –– that were set aside "so city children can learn the pleasures of country life". I put my name down for a plot and was told there was a two year wait. I waited, and two years later was informed my plot was available. When I went to claim it I was told by a Jewish Parks Department employee that there had been a mistake. The plots, it was explained, were reserved for 'disadvantaged minorities' and as a white Jew I didn't qualify. It was then I noticed that only blacks and Puerto Ricans were working the plots. And this was the early 1950's. It was only when we settled into our home in Gush Katif that I was able to indulge my fantasies of working the land, my land in Eretz Yisrael. Surrounded by real farmers I could not delude myself that I was really farming. But my red and white grapes, my few fruit trees and bushes, all prospered under my loving care. This is one of the reasons I felt Gush Katif was Paradise, and why I remain bereft at its loss.
A MIDDLE-AGED NEIGHBOR OF OURS, father of four, recently received a call-up notice for reserve duty in the army. "I sent it back," he told me, "with a note that they should send it to my Neve Dekalim address. When I can pick it up there I'll be happy to serve. But not before." I was about to congratulate him when he continued: "What a shame the army is being controlled by such a corrupt and incompetent government." I groaned inwardly. Having recently written that "Leftists don't get it until they 'get it'" it is hard for me to face the fact that our side doesn't get it either. The army is as corrupt and politically tainted as the government and the politicians. Career officers long ago learned that career advancement, plus post-career employment, was dependent on their following the left wing line. I know that anecdotal evidence is suspect, but I want to remind you of what a barber once told me. It was during the election campaign between Peres and Netanyahu. The barber received a call from a pollster asking him for whom he was voting. Peres, he replied. When I pointed out he was a lifelong Likud supporter and would be voting for Netanyahu, he said "My boy wants to make the army his career. If I tell them I'm voting for Netanyahu, my boy's chances for promotion will disappear. No matter how good he is." And during the expulsion I repeatedly heard stories about officers who apologized for throwing us out, saying that if they refused to take part their military careers were over.
What is true of the army is equally true of the police. The ongoing saga of the Halamish brothers is a case in point. The brothers, part of a First Response team on their settlement, were accused of firing at Arab intruders. They claimed that they had not fired their weapons. The police took the weapons for examination, but instead of checking to see if they had been fired, first fired them "to see if they were in working order." Thereby ruining their defense. Police incompetence is not unusual. But this was pure politically motivated malevolence. Need I remind you that during the Barak-Netanyahu election gangs of thugs regularly beat up those holding Netanyahu signs. The police would always arrive after the thugs had gone, often arresting the bloodied Netanyahu workers for 'disturbing public order' or 'filing a false report'. I am also reminded of the famous line in the POGO newspaper cartoon strip: "We have met the enemy, and he is us." When informed that I have conjunctivitis, and have passed it to Rachel, our daughter Dafna cheerfully informed me that I must have caught it from her and the children, whom I visited last week. She suggested that I forget the drops and put warm, wet Camomile tea bags on my eyes. It is disgusting, but I am doing so just to please Rachel who finds the sight of me tea-bagged highly amusing. At least if it were Earl Grey... This clearly isn't the letter I set out to write. So let me slink off with a simple chag sameach. Moshe Saperstein and his wife, Rachel, were among the thousands of Jews kicked out of their homes in Gush Katif, in the Gaza strip, and forced into temporary quarters so dismal, their still-temporary paper-based trailers in Nitzan, seemed a step up. Read more of their essays/diaries by googling saperstein on Think-Israel google box on the home page, Think-Israel.org. Contact them at ruchimo@.netvision.net.il |
|
SELLING TERROR: MADISON AVENUE MEETS THE BEKAA VALLEY
Posted by Jonathan Schanzer, April 16, 2008. |
|
Hezbollah, the radical Shiite terrorist organization in Lebanon, is best known for attacking Israelis. But the organization also attempts to gain the support of Lebanese citizens with a sophisticated network of social services, political outreach, and financial aid. And recently, the militia has turned to advertising campaigns to bolster its image. Hezbollah owns or controls at least two known advertising companies: Ressalat and Media-Publi Management. The U.S. Department of the Treasury should designate both as Specially Designated Global Terrorist entities (SDGTs) immediately as part of its ongoing campaign to cut off Hezbollah from the global financial system. According to a recent article in the Lebanese al-Nahar, Ressalat is a "Hizbullah-funded organization that handles advertising and cultural events for the group." The company does not appear to have a web presence, but al-Nahar identified Mohamed Noureddine as Ressalat's creative director. One French report also identified Noureddine as the director of a think tank tied to Hezbollah's secretary general Hassan Nasrallah. His name can also be found alongside pro-Hezbollah videos on YouTube. After the car bombing that killed Hezbollah commander Imad Mughniyeh on February 13, Noureddine and his team launched a sophisticated advertising campaign to lionize the slain terrorist leader. Within hours of the bombing, colorful stencil drawings of Mughniyeh's bearded and bespectacled face appeared on huge billboards throughout Lebanon. The stenciled portrait was similar to the iconic drawing of Latin American revolutionary Che Guevara. These Mughniyeh billboards –– some of which read: "Prophecy of the Final Victory" –– now line the road from the Beirut airport to the city's downtown district. According to Mohammed al-Amin, managing director of a billboard company that rented space to Ressalat, the entire network of billboards along the airport road and within the group's stronghold in the southern suburbs of Beirut cost at least $100,000. In 2006, following Hezbollah's war against Israel, the group reportedly paid an unnamed public relations firm some $140,000 to design an ad campaign called "Divine Victory," glorifying the 34-day war that ended with a U.N.-brokered cease-fire on August 14, 2006. Last year, Hezbollah posted a huge billboard in southern Lebanon, facing northern Israel, with the faces of two kidnapped Israeli soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. Additionally, near the coastal town of Naqura (where the U.N. peacekeeping force maintains its headquarters), Hezbollah posted a large mural portraying an Israeli warship that had been hit by the terrorist group during the 2006 war. Was Ressalat behind all of these billboards? The answer is still unknown. There may be other unidentified Hezbollah advertising companies lurking in Lebanon. However, Hezbollah's advertising operation is not limited to billboards. As first revealed by analyst Avi Jorisch, a Lebanon-based company called Media-Publi Management handles ads and promotions for al-Manar, Hezbollah's television station. Media-Publi is now listed (complete with address and phone number) with the Lebanese Advertising Agencies Association. The company also openly operates a website (www.mpmlb.com), which actually lists al-Manar's scheduled programming and boasts of serving as "the exclusive media representative of al-Manar T.V. station...We are responsible of reservation and monitoring of the ads on al-Manar [sic]." Media-Publi reportedly worked with numerous advertising agencies, including the world-renowned Saatchi and Saatchi, selling ad space to numerous multinational corporations. After the SDGT designation of al-Manar in March 2006, however, many advertisers pulled their products from al-Manar's airwaves. Media-Publi has four known employees: Saeed T. Fadel (Marketing Coordinator), Hussein Nassour (Account Handler), Ahmad Haidar (Account Handler), and Ibrahim Farhat (General Manager). Farhat identifies himself as the public relations manager for al-Manar. It is unclear whether the others are Hezbollah members. It is equally unclear whether either of these two advertising companies belong to the Lebanese Media Group, the parent company of al-Manar, which was also designated by the U.S. Treasury as an SDGT in March 2006. If these companies are part of this broader network, Treasury's designation already applies to them. The designation must simply be enforced. If these companies are not subsidiaries of the Lebanese Media Group, the U.S. Treasury Department should consider a new round of designations to include Media-Publi, Ressalat, as well as the four Media-Publi employees listed on the site. Similarly, other banking systems and companies around the world should be encouraged to cease doing business with them. Hezbollah's Lebanese advertising operations must not be allowed to continue. Jonathan Schanzer, a former terrorism analyst for the U.S. Treasury Department, is director of policy for the Jewish Policy Center and author of the forthcoming book, Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine (Palgrave, November 2008). This article appeared yesterday in Weekly Standard (Online)
|
|
IS THE OLMERT GANG PLANNING TO LOSE THE NEXT WAR?
Posted by Gail Winston, April 16, 2008. |
|
I am deeply disturbed by reports of greater and greater build-ups of Syrian troops and armor into what can become a major thrust to over-run the Israeli Golan Heights. I feel certain that Israeli forces can defeat any Syrian attack –– unless they have been ordered by Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to retreat –– thus allowing the Syrians to take over Israel's vital defensive area that overlooks Israel's Northern communities. Some have forgotten that, at several different times, the Labor Party's Leftist doctrine was to abandon the Golan Heights to Syria. Then PM Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres and Ehud Barak each engaged in back-channel negotiations with first Hafez al Assad and now with his son, Bashar Assad to gift the Golan to Syria all the way down to the shores of the Kinneret Sea. That was within the Left's failed doctrine of "Land for Peace". Many players tried to inaugurate this transfer. Israeli Leftists, the U.S. State Department, with an illustrious cast, including former Secretaries of State such as James Baker, III, Madeleine Albright, and now Condoleezza Rice –– among others. Offers were made for Israel to abandon their sophisticated electronic listening post on Mt. Hermon and Mt. Dov. The Americans offered to occupy those early warning stations and alert Israel if Syria was moving troops and armor into aggressive positions –– as Syria is doing now. At one point, the idea was floated that the U.S. would establish a large Air Base on the Heights, once the Jews had been forced to abandon the Golan. So far, this hasn't come to fruition. When Barak was Prime Minister/Defense Minister, he tried to stampede the Israeli citizenry and the Knesset to run from the Golan, proclaiming that "the Syrians could over-run the Jewish settlements, massacring the Israeli civilians and IDF soldiers –– so we better leave." Which brings me back to the point of my suspicions. Have Barak, Peres, Olmert and Livni, together with the connivance of Bush, Rice and Baker been in back-channel negotiations to allow Syrian troops (now massing) to over-run the Golan? This would require some or a lot of civilian casualties. Naturally, the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) would engage and take inevitable losses, at which time Olmert and Barak would order a military retreat –– along with the evacuation of civilians and a complete surrender of all their personal and communal real estate. This would fit Leftist doctrine of abandoning territory without have to face Israeli opposition in the Knesset or general public. Olmert and Barak could then throw up their hands and say: "We have no choice" and besides "We saved the Golan settlers and soldiers from Syria." It disturbs me greatly to be so distrusting of Israeli leadership to think that they would betray their own nation and commit high treason in negotiating so perfidious a deal. Perhaps I am unduly suspicious but, I saw Israel's greatest hero, Ariel Sharon, betray the nation as he abandoned 10,000 Jewish men, women and children when he ordered the evacuation of Gush Katif/Gaza, the destruction of all their homes, farms, factories, businesses, schools, yeshivas, synagogues and even their cemetery to blood-thirsty Arab Muslim Terrorists. Sharon and Olmert destroyed 21 thriving, innovative Jewish communities in Gush Katif and 4 more in Northern Samaria. As predicted Gaza has become a Terror base and Northern Samaria is open to entry by any Muslim Arab Terrorists. I am also mindful of Olmert and Livni's "secret" negotiations to divide Jerusalem, denials notwithstanding. I vividly recall the Oslo betrayal as seven cities were bartered away to Yassir Arafat by Rabin, Peres and Yossi Beilin for "Peace In Our Time". They all became centers of Islamo-fascist Terrorism. Presently, I observe Ehud Barak invited 600 Palestinian Police, trained in Jordan by U.S. personnel to "occupy" Jenin as "peace-keepers". The same is planned for Hevron. It has also been reported that Foreign Minister Tzippi Livni has been negotiating, at the behest of Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to turn over the Atarot Airport at the North East corner of Jerusalem to the President of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen). Abbas also heads Fatah, the Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigade and many other tentacles of the PLO Terror organization he "inherited" from his former 40 year partner, companion, Godfather of today's modern Terrorism –– Yassir Arafat. Surrendering this Airport will jeopardize all of Israel's airspace, especially over the greater Jerusalem area. I am mindful of Olmert, Livni and Barak offering to break the Camp David Accords and allow 1000 or more Egyptian troops to man Gaza's border to "stop" Arab Muslim Palestinians from smuggling in arms and Terrorists –– for which Egypt has been actually acting as the enabler. There are more dire events being planned under the table but, these are sufficient to warrant suspicion of what Olmert, Barak, Peres and Livni have planned for the Golan Heights, central Israel, Hevron, Jerusalem as a whole and Jerusalem's airspace. I wonder if Lt. General Gabi Ashkenazi, current Israeli Chief-of-Staff, has been brought into such plans? Would he cooperate in such a pre-planned retreat of Israeli forces? I wonder too if the GSS (General Secret Service) Shabak, Shin Bet and the Mossad have also agreed to betray their nation –– with the idea that all of the above politicians "know what's best for the country without telling them" –– as was done with the Oslo and Gaza surrenders? I would suggest that these matters be broadly discussed, including within the Security Committees of the Knesset. They should question Olmert and Barak –– who would be expected to deny such plans –– much as they still deny their discussions with Israel's adversaries to re-partition Jerusalem as well as Judea and Samaria. If they are even beginning to plan on losing the next war facing Israel, their actions spell treason and that is usually a hanging offense in most democratic countries. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com |
|
FORGET ABOUT PEACE
Posted by Steve Kramer, April 16, 2008. |
|
As we celebrate the Passover holiday, we remember that our escape from Egyptian servitude was the defining moment for the Jewish people. We had entered Egypt centuries before as a small but free clan; we left Egypt as a great multitude which had regained its freedom. This memory is reaffirmed by Jews in their daily prayers and is a pillar of our faith. The receiving of the 10 Commandments at Mt. Sinai and our delayed entry into the Promised Land forged the new generation of Hebrews into a nation. Our sovereignty over Israel has been discontinuous. Our land was overrun by Egyptians, Assyrians, Babylonians, Persians, Syrio-Greeks, Romans, and Muslims. But for 2,000 years we maintained a presence in Israel (even when it was renamed Palestine by the Romans after the sack of Jerusalem in 70 CE). Religious Jews' prayers turn towards Zion on a daily basis and our Bible mentions Jerusalem or Zion more than 150 times. Even nominally religious Jews are reminded of the Exodus at the yearly Seder, an audio-visual program when wine is drunk, matzo is eaten along with other traditional foods, and the story of our escape from slavery is read and sung to emphasize the uniqueness of the Passover holiday. The emergence of Zionism in the mid-19th century was an outgrowth of a surge in nationalism that affected diverse peoples. Religious Jews who had always lived in Israel/Palestine were joined by religious and secular Zionists who saw the opportunity to revive our national aspirations in the Promised Land. Very gradually, the slow stream of immigrants to Palestine accelerated while Jewish philanthropists funded numerous settlement projects. During WWI the Balfour Declaration legitimized the Zionist enterprise for the gentiles and in the post-WWI period the League of Nations gave Britain the Palestine Mandate to establish a national home for the Jews in Palestine. But what was the Arab reaction to the metamorphosis of a tiny Jewish remnant in Palestine into a vibrant economic enterprise? From the first, with the exception of Emir Abdullah of Transjordan, the Jews were seen by Arab leaders as a threat and an insult to Muslims, who only tolerated Jews on "Arab Land" when they were limited in number and without any power –– in other words, dhimmis. Of course, the Arab masses followed the lead of their rulers, helped along by vile propaganda against the Jews. The case for the Arabs was stated eloquently by Amin al Husseini (1895-1974), the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem from British Mandate times. While still a young man, he told a native-born Jewish co-worker: "Remember, Abbady, this was and will remain an Arab land. We do not mind you natives of the country, but those alien invaders, the Zionists, will be massacred to the last man. We want no progress, no prosperity. Nothing but the sword will decide the fate of this country." [www.Zionism-Israel.com] Husseini later became infamous for his close connections to top Nazis when he fled to Germany during WWII. Nothing has changed today concerning the Arab attitude towards Israel. For example, PLO Ambassador Abbas Zaki recently said, "Let me tell you, when the ideology of Israel collapses, and we take, at least, Jerusalem ... we will begin to progress with our own ideology, Allah willing, and drive them [the Jews] out of all of Palestine [from the River Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea]." April 9, 2008; NBN TV (Lebanon) [translated by memri.org] Israelis, with the coming of the Oslo Accord in 1993, dropped their defensive posture with which they had withstood both Arab armies and terrorists and swallowed the proposition that Yasser Arafat, an avowed enemy of Israel for three decades, had been transformed into a peace partner. The ensuing "peace negotiations" resulted in many more casualties among both Israelis and Palestinians than had occurred in previous periods of outright belligerence. A new mindset had seduced Israelis into thinking that the standoff between Arabs and Jews was really a matter that could be solved by appeasing Palestinians with land –– a bit here, a bit there. But I, and many others, contend that nothing has fundamentally changed since Grand Mufti Husseini's time. Misled by (Israeli) Peace Now and other international NGOs (non-governmental organizations), many Israelis and friends have failed to connect the dots, which plainly show that Muslim antipathy to Israel isn't something that can be bought off, piece by piece. But let's give credit for frankness to President Ahmadinejad and other Iranian leaders for plainly stating in English their beliefs that Jews are interlopers on Muslim land and that the State of Israel is a European invention inflicted on the Palestinians to assuage European guilt over the Holocaust –– which must be "wiped off the map". By listening to the Iranians' frank statements, those who are willing to hear get the unvarnished Muslim view on Israel and the Jews. What are Israel's prospects as it enters its 61st year, given the acquiescence to the Iranian diatribes by Arab regimes and the world in general, and with damning evidence that the Iranian leaders intend to develop nuclear weapons and to use them against Israelis? Frankly, they are dismal, if we continue to suffer leaders who believe that peace talks can be carried on with Palestinian leaders who have no power to enforce a treaty, even if they wanted to –– which they don't. Israel must find leadership which will instruct us and our allies that nothing has changed in regard to the opinion Muslims have had towards the Jewish State of Israel all along. Eleven years after signing the Oslo Accords, Yasser Arafat, speaking live on Palestinian television, called on Palestinians to "terrorize your enemy." As reported by Ha'aretz newspaper (May 14, 2004), "Our nation is patient and determined," he said, "... which sacrificed its body to defend itself, which was laid bare by the Nakba [catastrophic creation of State of Israel] carried out by the international, Zionist and imperialist powers, which didn't have the right to allow [the creation of Israel], for those who didn't have the right [to live there]." Mahmoud Abbas, the current Palestinian president, prefers to bask in the glory of the fallen martyr (Arafat) rather than risk his own neck by sincere efforts to accept the existence of the Jewish state. In the meantime, if not for Israel propping him up, the Iranian proxy Hamas would take over the West Bank just like they did in Gaza. When Israel finally elects a prime minister who doesn't mince words about our prospects for peace and who is willing to utilize the big stick that the Israel Defense Forces can wield, Israel will be in a position to deter its enemies. A bold leader of the stature of Winston Churchill or David Ben Gurion would engender respect not only from our adversaries but also from our friends. Presently, Israel's friends hesitate to be "more Israeli than the Israelis", but when we project and utilize our power to frighten and deter our enemies, those ambivalent allies will avidly support us. The Europeans, who are next in line after this country for Muslim domination, might wake up and realize that Muslim domination is not ordained. Even if a united West, following Israel's example, shuts down the Muslim jihad only for several decades instead of several centuries, which they accomplished by the Treaty of Carlowitz in 1699 in Serbia, the West will be better prepared for the next Muslim jihadist initiative and the Muslim moderates (yes, there are some) may have a chance to grow in influence. Forget about peace ... for now. It's not something that Israel can negotiate on its own and it won't happen under the existing circumstances. Read what Professor Moshe Sharon, retired professor of history at Hebrew University, has written on negotiations with the Arabs in his brilliant article, "No peace, no peace plans, no price for peace –– a short guide to those obsessed with peace". Sharon wrote: "In the present situation in the Middle East and in the foreseeable future 'peace' is nothing more than an empty word. Israel should stop speaking about 'peace' and delete the word 'peace' from its vocabulary together with such phrases as 'the price of peace' or 'territory for peace'. For a hundred years the Jews have been begging the Arabs to sell them peace, ready to pay any price. They have received nothing, because the Arabs have no peace to sell, but they [Israelis] have still paid dearly. It must be said in all fairness that the Arabs have not made a secret of the fact that what they meant by the word 'peace' was nothing more than a limited ceasefire for a limited period." "Since this is the situation, Israel should openly declare that peace does not exist as an option in the Arab-Israeli conflict, and that it has decided to create a new state of affairs in the Middle East, compelling the Arab side to ask for peace; and pay for it. Unlike the Arabs, Israel has this merchandise for sale." [emphasis added] "From now on Israel should be the side demanding payment for peace. If the Arabs want peace, Israel should fix its price in real terms. The Arabs will pay if they reach the conclusion that Israel is so strong that they cannot destroy it. Because of this, Israel's deterrent power is essential." I say that while the way ahead for Israel is dire, it is far from hopeless. If Israelis and Westerners face facts and give up daydreams about a "new Middle East", then we can utilize a practical and effective strategy to maintain Israel's security and to continue to surge ahead on many fronts, including economics and science, and especially social well-being. If Israeli leaders are up to it, the nation's future will be praiseworthy and Israel will truly be "a light unto the nations". In the meantime, the yearly refrain at the Seder table –– "Next year in Jerusalem!" –– is still relevant. Israelis welcome friends, family, and tourists to come and visit, while we enjoy life and wait for the leadership we require. Contact Steve Kramer at sjk1@jhu.edu This essay was published today in Jewish Times |
|
FROM ISRAEL: WITHOUT END
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 16, 2008. |
|
This may be the last message I send before Pesach begins Saturday night. During the week of Pesach my postings will be sent infrequently, if at all. To all on this list who will be celebrating, I extend my wishes for a joyous and meaningful Pesach. ~~~~~~~~~~ Just when we think Abbas's terrorist predilections could not be more obvious, another incident comes to our attention. According to Israel Radio, the Al Kuds Mark of Honor, the PLO's highest medal, will be given to two women terrorists who were complicit in killing Israelis: Ahlam Tamimi, involved in planning the suicide bombing of the Sbarro restaurant in Jerusalem, and Amra Muna, who seduced a young Israeli man over the Internet and then lured him to Ramallah where he was murdered. Palestinian Minister for Prisoner Affairs Ashraf el Ajami said that his ministry gave PA President Mahmoud Abbas a comprehensive list of prisoners who were potential nominees, and Abbas's office made the choices from this list. The decision rests with the PA president. ~~~~~~~~~~ There have been at least 19 Kassams launched into Israel today. There has been, as well, considerable activity between the IDF and Palestinians in Gaza, starting late last night and continuing into today. In what was called a routine operation, troops had entered Gaza to target terrorists launching rockets. When a Givati Brigade near the border with Gaza identified several armed Palestinians approaching the fence at the border –– and suspected that they either intended to infiltrate into Israel (as had happened only days ago) or to plant an explosive device at the border –– they, too, moved into Gaza. Heavy exchange of gunfire ensued, as it became apparent that there was a Palestinian cover force that had not been identified. Ultimately, three of our soldiers from this Brigade were killed. IDF officers are saying that it was a tactical error to not have identified the terrorist covering force before moving into the area, but that the impulse to engage with the terrorists who had been spotted was correct. Meanwhile, the Palestinians are saying that these operations, which included two air strikes, have killed some 12 people, which includes five children. This claim should surprise no one: the IDF says the targets of the strikes were armed fighters. ~~~~~~~~~~ The convoluted fuel story: After the attack that killed two Israelis who worked at the fuel terminal at Nahal Oz last week, Israel stopped shipments of fuel into Gaza. The IDF rapidly identified a situation in which Hamas was deliberately stockpiling what fuel was had, in order to generate an artificial crisis. (Sound familiar?) The claim was that the electric generator in Gaza would have to be shut down for lack of fuel. (Note: This generator only supplies some 20% of the electricity of Gaza, with 70% coming from Israel.) But the manufactured crisis seems to have worked, as Barak then made the decision to resume shipments –– only diesel for the power plant. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Asharq Al-Awsat in London today, Olmert has offered the Palestinian 64% of Judea and Samaria, with a variety of shared options for Jerusalem. This, of course, would have to be confirmed. But my cynical take is that this is actually good news if true. Because the PA will never ever accept only 64% of Judea and Samaria and the sharing of Jerusalem. Sad, indeed, that there is the hope that, once again, we will be saved by our enemies. ~~~~~~~~~~ The US has agreed to allow Israel to hook into its world wide radar system that would supply early warning of any ballistic missile launched at us from anywhere in the world. This is good news. Israel, meanwhile, has just tested the Green Pine Radar system that showed itself capable of identifying and tracking a missile that mimics an advanced Iranian Shihab 3 ballistic missile carrying a split warhead and with advanced radar evading capabilities. The radar system ties into the Arrow missile defense system: Had a real threat been identified, the Arrow –– which has been shown effective in previous tests –– would have been activated. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
FINALLY GOOD NEWS FROM GAZA: 80% OF GAZA RESIDENTS CONSIDERING EMIGRATION
Posted by Carl in Jerusalem, April 16, 2008. |
|
There's finally some good news from Gaza this evening: A survey by the Gaza-based Institute of Development Studies has found that 80% of Gaza's residents find it 'difficult to cope' with their situation and are considering emigration. Better yet, 44% percent said explicitly that they want to leave Gaza. The institute presented the survey as part of a request to the international community to protect Gazans from Israel's wrath and to pressure Israel to enable economic development in Gaza. The research also shows that since Hamas took over Gaza in June 2007, economic conditions in Gaza have worsened considerably. According to the report this is primarily due to the closure of border crossings into and out of Gaza, including the crossing into Egypt at Rafiah. ... Saudi newspaper Ukaz, meanwhile, interviewed Dr. Mahmoud al-Hebash, a "minister" in Salam Fayyad's rival Fatah government in Judea and Samaria, who said the Hamas government was responsible for the Gaza crisis. Hamas is making efforts to grab control of the aid sent to Gaza from "the legitimate government" in Ramallah, al-Hebash explained. He claimed Hamas is giving Israel excuses to continue "the policy of blockade," as he termed it. Al-Hebash called upon the Hamas government to recognize its responsibility for the crisis in Gaza following its military takeover. He accused it of trying to export the crisis to neighboring countries, meaning mostly Egypt. That fits right in with Hamas taking half of the fuel supplied to Gaza for weapons manufacturing. But this isn't just a question of a 'government' making the wrong choice in allocating guns v. butter. The findings of a Near East Consulting poll released Tuesday showed that some 94 percent of Gaza residents believe their economic situation under Hamas rule is significantly worse than it was before the terrorist organization took over the region. [That's an overwhelming percentage for a fair survey. CiJ] ... The survey, which polled 900 Gaza residents, found that 64 percents of respondents live under the poverty line. More than two out of every five, (41 percent) said they would leave Gaza immediately if they could. Half of those polled feel less security since Hamas took over the region in June 2007 and 18 percent feel no change in the level of security. Some 32 percent said they feel more security since Hamas took control of Gaza. More security? Must be the remaining Hamas supporters. If Israel had a decent government in place, it would encourage the denizens of Hamastan to emigrate to any country willing to take them. Sadly, Olmert, Livni & Co. are more likely to cooperate with the fatwas that prohibit the 'Palestinians' from leaving the 'blessed lands' and with the Mufti who issued them. This comes from Carl's website
|
|
THE HOLOCAUST DECLARATION
Posted by Dave Alpern, April 16, 2008. |
|
Except for perfunctory and mealy-mouthed "denouncements," we see no concrete action against Iran for its open and repeated calls for annihilation of Israel, a full-fledged member of the United Nations. These calls are a clear, blatant and shameless violation of the UN Charter. This was written by Charles Krauthammer and published April 11, 2008 in the Washington Post. Contact him at letters@charleskrauthammer.com |
|
On Tuesday Iran announced it was installing 6,000 more centrifuges –– they produce enriched uranium, the key ingredient of a nuclear weapon –– in addition to the 3,000 already operating. The world yawned. It is time to admit the truth: The Bush administration's attempt to halt Iran's nuclear program has failed. Utterly. The latest round of U.N. Security Council sanctions, which took a year to achieve, is comically weak. It represents the end of the sanctions road. At home, the president's efforts to stop Iran's nuclear program were irreparably undermined by November's National Intelligence Estimate, whose "moderate confidence" that Iran has not restarted nuclear weaponization –– the least important of three elements of any nuclear program –– has promoted the illusion that Iran has given up the pursuit of nuclear weapons. Yet uranium enrichment, the most difficult step, proceeds apace, as does the development of nuclear-capable ballistic missiles. The president is out of options. He is going to hand over to his successor an Iran on the verge of going nuclear. This will deeply destabilize the Middle East, threaten the moderate Arabs with Iranian hegemony and leave Israel on hair-trigger alert. This failure can, however, be mitigated. As there will apparently be no disarming of Iran by preemption or by sanctions, we shall have to rely on deterrence to prevent the mullahs, some of whom are apocalyptic and messianic, from using nuclear weapons. This will be even more difficult than during the Cold War, when we were dealing with rational actors. We will, nonetheless, have to use the Cold War model in which deterrence prevented the Soviets from engaging in nuclear aggression for half a century –– long enough for regime change to make deterrence superfluous. (No one lies awake today worrying about post-Soviet Russia launching a nuclear attack on the United States.) We don't know how long the mullahs will be in power, but until they are replaced, deterrence will be an absolute necessity. During the Cold War, we were successful in preventing an attack not only on the United States but also on America's allies. We did it by extending the American nuclear umbrella –– i.e., declaring that any attack on our allies would be considered an attack on the United States. Such a threat is never 100 percent credible. But it was credible enough. It made the Soviets think twice about attacking our European allies. It kept the peace. We should do the same to keep nuclear peace in the Middle East. It would be infinitely less dangerous (and therefore more credible) than the Cold War deterrence because there will be no threat from Iran of the annihilation of the United States. Iran, unlike the Soviet Union, would have a relatively tiny arsenal incapable of reaching the United States. How to create deterrence? The way John Kennedy did during the Cuban missile crisis. President Bush's greatest contribution to nuclear peace would be to issue the following declaration, adopting Kennedy's language while changing the names of the miscreants: "It shall be the policy of this nation to regard any nuclear attack upon Israel by Iran, or originating in Iran, as an attack by Iran on the United States, requiring a full retaliatory response upon Iran." This should be followed with a simple explanation: "As a beacon of tolerance and as leader of the free world, the United States will not permit a second Holocaust to be perpetrated upon the Jewish people." This policy –– the Holocaust Declaration –– would not be tested during the current administration, because Iran is not going to go nuclear before January 2009. But it would establish a firm benchmark that would outlive this administration. Every future president –– and every serious presidential candidate –– would have to publicly state whether or not the Holocaust Declaration remains the policy of the United States. It would be an important question to ask because it would not be uncontroversial. It would be argued that the Holocaust Declaration is either redundant or, at the other extreme, provocative. Redundant, it would be said, because Israel could retaliate on its own. The problem is that Israel is a very small country with a small nuclear arsenal that is largely land-based. Land-based retaliatory forces can be destroyed in a first strike, which is precisely why, during the Cold War, both the United States and the Soviet Union created vast submarine fleets –– undetectable and thus invulnerable to first strikes –– that ensured a retaliatory strike and, thus, deterrence. The invulnerability and unimaginably massive size of this American nuclear arsenal would make an American deterrent far more potent and reliable than any Israeli facsimile –– and thus far more likely to keep the peace. Would such a declaration be provocative? On the contrary. Deterrence is the least provocative of all policies. That is why it is the favored alternative of those who oppose a preemptive attack on Iran to disarm it before it can acquire nuclear weapons. What the Holocaust declaration would do is turn deterrence from a slogan into a policy. It is, of course, hardly certain that deterrence would work on the likes of Ahmadinejad and other jihadists. But deterrence would concentrate the minds of rational Iranian actors, of whom there are many, to restrain or even depose leaders such as Ahmadinejad who might sacrifice Iran's existence as a nation to vindicate their divine obligation to exterminate the "filthy bacteria" of the Jewish state, a "disgraceful stain [on] the Islamic world." For the first time since the time of Jesus, Israel (known as Judea at the time) is the home of the world's largest Jewish community. An implacable neighboring power has openly declared genocidal intentions against it –– in clear violation of the U.N. Charter –– and is defying the international community by pursuing the means to carry out that intent. The world does nothing. Some, such as the Russians, are literally providing fuel for the fire. For those who see no moral principle underlying American foreign policy, the Holocaust Declaration is no business of ours. But for those who believe that America stands for something in the world –– that the nation that has liberated more peoples than any other has even the most minimal moral vocation –– there can be no more pressing cause than preventing the nuclear annihilation of an allied democracy, the last refuge and hope of an ancient people openly threatened with the final Final Solution. |
|
JEWS WHO SHOOT ARABS IN SELF-DEFENSE GO TO JAIL; ARAB TERRORISTS WHO SHOOT
JEWS GO FREE
Posted by Lee Caplan, April 15, 2008. |
|
This is called "Jewish Security Prisoners Request Pardon" and was written by Hillel Fendel for Arutz-Sheva. It appeared today. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) "If drug and sex-crime convicts can request pardons, and with hundreds of terrorists having been freed, it would seem to be right to provide some balance and pardon some Jews as well." So says Shlomi Dvir, a Jewish father from Gush Etzion who has completed six years of his 15-year prison sentence. Dvir was convicted of having conspired to bomb an Arab school in eastern Jerusalem in response to the wave of Palestinian terrorist attacks in 2001 and 2002 in which hundreds of Jews were murdered. Dvir was convicted together with two other co-conspirators; they never denied involvement in the case, but rather said that the bomb was never meant to go off. Atty. Naftali Wurtzberger said at the time that it was clear that the bomb could not have gone off, "but the question is whether the defendants did this purposely or accidentally. The court entered the realm of 'intentions' by saying that this was done only accidentally." Speaking with Arutz-7's Yigal Shok and Uzi Baruch by phone from Ayalon Prison, Dvir said he and the five other "Jewish security prisoners" in the religious wing of the prison have submitted a request for a pardon in honor of Israel's upcoming 60th anniversary. The other five include Ofer Gamliel –– father of seven who has been allowed out of prison exactly five times during his six years –– as well as the two Harel brothers, who were sentenced to 30 and 40 months in prison, respectively, for planning an anti-Disengagement road blocking in 2005. Yarden Morag, who was convicted together with Gamliel and Dvir, is in Maasiyahu Prison in Ramle, because he is treated like other prisoners and is allowed vacations. "The Shabak (General Security Service) refuses to allow us to leave the prison," Dvir said, "even for the most humanitarian of reasons. I recently asked to be able to visit my grandfather, whose health has gravely deteriorated. The judge couldn't understand why they were giving me such a hard time, and was about to grant my request, when all of a sudden a Shabak guy made a special trip to court to present some supposedly secret evidence, and the judge suddenly refused my request." Dvir was also not allowed to attend his brother's wedding last year, though he was allowed out –– for three hours at a time –– when each of his last two children were born. The Jewish legal rights organization Honenu has been in the forefront of fighting for the legal rights of Jewish security prisoners, Jews arrested for having shot at Arabs in self-defense, and Jews facing legal problems for having protested on behalf of the Land of Israel. In response to a question, Dvir said he regrets his actions: "My mistake was in not realizing that acts of nationalist nature should not be done by individuals, but rather by the government." To sign a petition (in Hebrew) asking President Peres to pardon the Jewish security prisoners, click here Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com |
|
DON'T SACRIFICE ISRAELI LIVES
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 15, 2008. |
|
This was written by Josh Hasten and it appeared yesterday in
the Jerusalem Post
The writer is the former spokesman for the Yesha Council and is currently the president of a Jerusalem-based PR firm. |
|
Moving to Israel at the height of the intifada in the winter of 2002, my wife and I soon became fatalists. With Arab terrorists daily carrying out suicide bombings and shooting attacks, we decided that the only way we were going to live a somewhat normal existence –– go out to eat, travelling on roads throughout the country –– was by rationalizing that "when it's your time it's your time." Based on that philosophy, we've traveled freely by private car all over Israel over the past six years –– including Judea and Samaria, and more recently Sderot, where the threat of coming under enemy fire is actually greater. But last week, as a result of recent government gestures towards
our "peace partners," we were a little nervous traveling to my
in-laws, who live in Kedumim in the Shechem bloc, east of Kfar
Saba. The reason for our concern was that in one of the most
recent signs of good will, Defense Minister Barak ordered the
IDF to dismantle 50 unmanned barricades throughout Samaria, even
though barricades and roadblocks are proven terror deterrents.
Luckily, we arrived at our destination unscathed. But recent
history has shown that it's only a matter of time before our
enemies take advantage of the eased restrictions to mount
attacks.
IN ADDITION to the reduction in barricades, it has been reported that the government has taken further steps in recent weeks that potentially put the lives of residents of Judea and Samaria at greater risk. These include:
ALONG WITH these security-related risks, the Olmert government continues to implement a building freeze throughout Judea and Samaria, even inside consensus communities. Ariel Mayor Ron Nachman recently told The Jerusalem Post that no building projects have been authorized "for the last four years." Based on the above evidence, it seems that by hook or by crook our government is doing everything in its power to destroy the "settlement movement" as we know it. The rationale seems to be that if Israelis can no longer build homes in Judea and Samaria and our enemies have more opportunities to attack them, eventually despair will set in and the Israelis there will "come home" to pre-1967 Israel. Perhaps the government is trying to make its own life easier should another Gush Katif-style withdrawal arise, so that there would be fewer residents around to resist evacuation. Yet no matter what type of shenanigans the government pulls, and no matter how great the will of our enemy to shed Jewish blood, the residents of Judea Samaria will not abandon their communities or their way of life. As was the case in Gush Katif, the vast majority of residents will not seek compensation to relocate and will remain in their homes till the very end. The most disheartening aspect of the current situation is that more Jewish lives may be lost senselessly in the communities and on the roads of Judea and Samaria as a result of these government decrees curtailing means of defense. The government of Israel is sending the unsettling message that
the blood of those living on the wrong side of an imaginary line
on a map is not as red as their fellow countrymen.
Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net
|
|
PASSOVER 2008 REFLECTIONS
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, April 15, 2008. |
|
The legacy of Passover has inspired the cause of Liberty –– as a natural right –– in the US in particular and throughout the globe in general. For example: *Presidents George Washington and John Adams were compared to Moses and Joshua. The following reflections on Passover are based on writings by Jewish sages, recently enhanced by Rabbi Moshe Grylak's "Hagadah uPishra." For more of my newsletters and OpEds, please visit http://yoramettinger.newsnet.co.il. Happy Passover,
|
|
1. Date. The Exodus took place around 1,300BC, 600-700 years before Greek philosophers promoted democracy, establishing the Jewish People in the forefront in the battle against rogue ideologies. Passover is celebrated on the 15th day of the Jewish month of Nissan –– the first month of the Jewish year and the introduction of natural and national spring (Nitzan is the Babylonian word for spring and the Hebrew word for bud). Nissan ("Ness" –– miracle in Hebrew –– is the root) is the month of miracles, such as the Exodus, Parting of the Sea, Jacob wrestling the Angel, Deborah's victory over Sisera, Daniel in the Lion's Den, etc. The 15th day of any Jewish month is endowed with full moon, which stands for optimism in defiance of darkness and the most difficult odds. It is consistent with 15 parts of the Hagadah (the chronicles of Passover), 15 generations between Abraham's message of monotheism and Solomon's construction of the first Temple and the 15th day of the Jewish month of Shvat –– the "Exodus" of vegetation (Arbor Day). 2. The first Jewish holiday. Passover has four names: Holiday of Pesach (the sacrifice), Holiday of Liberty, Holiday of Matza and Holiday of Spring. It is the first Jewish holiday, according to the Jewish calendar, which starts in the spring (Aviv in Hebrew, which consists of two words: Father of 12 months), the bud of nature. The word spring is mentioned 3 times in the Torah, all in reference to Exodus. Passover –– which commemorates the creation of the Jewish nation lasts for 7 days, just like the creation of the universe. Passover is the first Jewish pilgrimage and the basis for the other two annual pilgrimages. Thus, the first stop of the Exodus was at Soukkota (Soukkot/Tabernacles is the 3rd pilgrimage), and Passover is the prelude to the receipt of the Torah/Ten Commandments (Shavou'ot/Pentecost the 2nd pilgrimage). 3. David Ben Gurion, Israel's Founding Father highlighted Passover's focus on the Land of Israel and memory (UN Commission, 1947): "300 years ago, the Mayflower launched its historical voyage. How many remember the data of the voyage, how many passengers were on the Mayflower and what kind of bread did they consume? However, 3,300 years earlier, the Exodus from Egypt took place. Every Jew knows the date of the Exodus –– 15th of the month of Nissan –– and the kind of bread –– Matza, leaven bread –– consumed. Until today, Jews all over the world, tell the story of the Exodus and eat Matza on the 15th of Nissan. They conclude the story of the Exodus [Hagadah] with the statement: This year we're slaves, but next year we shall be liberated; this year we're here, but next year in Jerusalem." Consistent with Ben Gurion's comments, Jacob and Joseph demanded to be buried in Hebron and in Shchem (Nablus) and not in Egypt, since burial sites perpetuate presence and deed. The Exodus set the Jewish People on the Road Map to the Land of Israel, not just –– and not primarily –– to the sliver along the coastal plane and not just to liberation. 4. Role model of Liberty. Passover –– just like monotheism, the Sabbath, Ten Commandments, repentance/Yom Kippur –– constitutes a Jewish gift to humanity. It has been a global inspiration to liberty and to national liberation (Let My People Go). Jews have been targeted by enemies of personal and national liberties (from Pharaoh, Nazism, Communism to Palestinian/Arab/Islamic terrorism and Ahmadinejad), because Jews have been rightly perceived as the messengers of liberty as a God-given natural right and equality before the law. 5. Inspiration for Puritans, Pilgrims and Founding Fathers: *George Washington and John Adams were compared to Moses and Joshua. The Exodus inspired the Puritans, the Pilgrims and the Founding Fathers, who considered themselves "the modern day People of the Covenant ", King George III "the modern day Pharaoh", the Atlantic "the modern day Red Sea" and America "the modern day Promised Land". The term Federalism is based on "Foedus", the Latin word for "The Covenant." The Founding Fathers considered the political structure of the 12 Tribes, sustaining semi-independence, governed by Moses, Aharon, Joshua and the 70 person Legislature, a model for the 13 colonies and the US political system. The legacy of the Exodus has nurtured optimism, principle-driven defiance of odds, long-term tenacity and the centrality of tradition, education and national memory. 6. veHigadetah (thou shall assert to your children) is a central theme in Exodus. Its root is "Gid" –– the Hebrew word for ligament. Just like the ligament, which connects the bones of the body, the commandment of "veHigadetah" constitutes the prerequisite for generational-educational connectivity-continuity. veHigadetah is the living, educational, moral Jewish substitute (Torch) for stone and metal historical monuments. veHigadetah nurtures memory, education, faith, defiance of odds and liberty, key themes of Passover. The Hebrew word for "memory" is Zikaron, which is composed of two Hebrew words: Zakh (pure) and Ron (hymn). The Hebrew word for "education" is Khinoukh, whose root is "to inaugurate." The Hebrew word for "faith" is Emunah, whose root is Amen. The Hebrew word for "liberty" is Kherut, spelled identically to the word Kharut, "carved." In other words, liberty is carved in stone, independent of human rulers, nurtured by –– and bolstering –– education, determination and faith, never to be taken for granted. A nation which commemorates enslavement and deliverance of 3,300 years ago is destined for a glorious future, while a nation which turns its back on its cradle of history dooms its future. 7. Moses, the hero of Passover, has become a role model of leadership. The Mosaic legacy has greatly impacted US democracy, hence Moses' marble replica at the House Chamber on Capitol Hill, at the Rayburn House Office Building's subway station and at the Supreme Court (holding the Ten Commandments). Moses' name is mentioned only once in the Passover Hagadah, as a servant of G-d, a testimony to Moses' humility, in order to humanize –– rather than deify –– Moses and to highlight the role of God in the Exodus. Similarly, Moses' grave site is purposely unknown, and the only compliment accorded by the Torah to Moses –– a prime leader in human history –– is "the humblest of all human beings". 8. The Exodus is mentioned 50 times in the Torah, equal to the 50 years of Jubilee, another historical pivot of liberty ("Proclaim liberty throughout the land to all the inhabitants thereof", Leviticus, 25, 10, inscribed on the Liberty Bell). 50 days following the Exodus, Moses received the Torah, which includes –– according to Jewish tradition –– 50 Gates of Wisdom. The commemoration of the Exodus is one of the 613 Jewish/Mosaic laws. Passover is highlighted in most Jewish prayers and rituals, such as the daily prayers, the welcoming of the Sabbath, the blessing over wine, each holiday, upon circumcision, at the door step (Mezuzah) of Jewish homes, etc. 9. Passover commemorates an early War of Civilizations. Moses' victory over Pharaoh (the pioneer of "The Final Solution") reflected the victory of humility over hubris, truth over lies, conviction/morality over convenience/immorality, solidarity/compassion over selfishness/cynicism, sharing/contribution over abuse, realism over wishful-thinking, constituent over ruler and personal and national liberty over tyranny. Passover demonstrates that dramatic crises could be transformed into dramatic deliverance –– from slavery to role-model moral system. The term Passover (Pesach in Hebrew) referred to the sacrificial lamb, which spared the Jews the 10th plague (death of the elder son) –– it Passed-Over their homes. Judaism introduced the immorality of human sacrifices. The Hebrew words for sacrifice are Korban (to get closer), Ola (to elevate), Mincha (to be guided, to relax) Khatat (to cleanse) and Shlamim (wholesomeness). 10. Passover commemorates the victory of Jewish demography. Jacob arrived to Egypt with 70 members of his family, but Moses launched the Exodus with 600,000 adult males and a total of some 3 million people –– quite a demographic momentum. The Exodus was the first case of a massive Jewish immigration (Aliya) to Israel, in defiance of odds and projections –– as have been all major Aliya waves since 1948 –– but in touch with Jewish history and destiny. A Jewish Demographic Momentum has currently been in motion between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. While Herzl launched the Zionist voyage –– in 1897 –– with an 8% Jewish minority west of the Jordan River in 1900, and Ben-Gurion celebrated the 1947 UN vote with a 33% minority, today's Jewish State is endowed with a 67% majority over 98.7% of the land west of the River (without Gaza) and a 60% majority with Gaza. Arab fertility rate has declined substantially –– as has the fertility rates throughout the Moslem world –– in addition to a significant increase in annual net Arab emigration, while Jewish fertility rate creeps upward (the highest in the industrialized world), bolstered by annual immigration (Aliya) since 1882 (for additional demographic data, please visit http://yoramettinger.newsnet.co.il). Ambassador Yoram Ettinger is a consultant on US-Israel relations as well as the Chairman of Special Projects at the Ariel Center for Policy Research. Formerly the Minister for Congressional Affairs to Israel's Embassy in Washington, DC, Ettinger also served as Consul General of Israel to the Southwestern US. He is a former editor of Contemporary Mideast Backgrounder, and is the author of the Jerusalem Cloakroom series of reports. Contact him at yoramtex@netvision.net.il |
|
LENNONISM IMAGINES THE MIDDLE EAST
Posted by Barry Rubin, April 15, 2008. |
|
The Middle East today is driven by five big conflicts: Among states for power; the Iran-Syria alliance's war on everyone else; the struggle between Arab nationalists and Islamists to control each country, and the Sunni-Shia and Arab-Israeli conflicts. No wonder there's so much turmoil. To many in the West, this seems a time-wasting matter of "false consciousness." One need merely explain their true interests to the Iranian and Syrian governments, to Hamas or Hizballah, to Arabs and Muslims, so they can rise to moderation. Western sins will be atoned by throwing out Israelis, Lebanese, and Iraqis with the bath water. How can the doctrine now dominating Western discourse possibly understand these issues, especially when the song of the siren is heard in the land? Call it Lennonism, not the Leninism of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov, known as Lenin, but of former Beatles' member, John Lennon. His blueprint for utopia would be a better theme song for the European Union than its current anthem: "Imagine there's no countries/It isn't hard to do/Nothing to kill or die for/And no religion too/Imagine all the people/Living life in peace...." One can only refer here to George Gershwin's earlier lyrics: "It ain't necessarily so." There are several problems with Lennonism. First, contrary to current wisdom, love of country and belief in religion can be a very productive thing, although of course that depends on specifics. Second, despite the misdeeds committed in the name of deity and country, those doing them today are rarely from Western democracies. Ironically, those most likely to use them to good purpose are also those most eager to abandon them. After centuries, the West developed a tolerant form of patriotism and religion. Why abandon what you've already tuned properly? Having transcended the problems associated with religion and nationalism, the democratic world doesn't need to discard them. Third, it's quite true that some use God to justify their own will and terrible deeds but, as Fyodor Dostoevsky reminded us in 1880, if God doesn't exist morality is on a weak basis. Consider the case of Phil Spector, who produced the record of "Imagine." While he beat the charge of first-degree murder of a woman who resisted his advances, the trial brought out his likely guilt, madness, violent propensity, and massive drug and alcohol abuse. What Lennon glorified as "Living for today," usually means mindless consumerism. For Karl Marx, religion was merely the masses' "opiate," a drug keeping them from realizing they should instead be overthrowing the ruling class and installing a socialist utopia. Marx was disagreeing with the proto-Zionist Moses Hess who called religion an opiate in the sense that it was a healing balm that reduced life's pain. Finally, patriotism might be the scoundrels' last refuge, as Samuel Johnson said in 1775, but hating one's country and religion is the first. At any rate, the Middle East is not ready for this Lennonist vision. For those confronting the real threat of radical Arab nationalism and Islamism, Lennonism is unilateral disarmament. The more Lennonist the West, the more contemptuous and certain of victory are its enemies. To make matters worse, Lennonists give the Middle East a free pass, arguing that Arabs and Muslims have such compelling grievances that they cannot be expected to indulge in this elevated philosophy. In effect, the Lennonists accept the notion that Western civilization is an empty cart which must give way at the bridge to the full cart of those who really believe in nationalism and religion. According to this view, those who want to kill you are reacting to past oppression and so that makes it okay. The West must destroy its own patriotism and religion while appeasing that of those who "really mean it." And let's not forget that if you ridicule Christianity and Judaism or slander America or other democratic states no one will cut off your head. Instead, you will become a hero to the intellectual and cultural elite. Thus, those who worship diversity define it at home as a situation in which no one dares disagree with them, and define it abroad as supporting quaint customs like dictatorship, lies, and oppression. In Barrack Obama, America now has its first Lennonist presidential candidate. He recently accused average small-town Americans of being bitter over economic problems so that "they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them or anti-immigrant sentiment or anti-trade sentiment as a way to explain their frustrations." This is a version of the Marxist concept that anything other than determination to pursue economic well-being through a leftist utopian solution is "false consciousness." Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini explained thirty years ago that anyone thinking Islamist revolution's purpose was "to lower the price of housing or watermelons" was a fool. Of course, Obama didn't mind listening for 20 years to anti-American, anti-Semitic, anti-middle class, and anti-white rants from his minister-mentor, who played on his congregation's bitterness quite effectively to explain their frustrations in other terms. Poor Lennon himself was murdered by a deranged fan who listened to all the talk of peace and love, then responded in his own way. The real world is tough. Conflict is real, hate effective, and there are people out there trying to kill you. Better hope there are some on your own side motivated enough by patriotism, religion, and love of liberty that they'll put their bodies between you and the bullets because they think there is something worth killing and dying for. Lennonism is intoxicating: believe in change; all can be okay if we just keep apologizing and don't offend anyone. Unfortunately, though, nowadays there are many who, to quote Lennon, "dream the world will be one." And the world they envision as one would be living under a caliphate. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloriacenter.org and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal http://meria.idc.ac.il. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
YESHA COUNCIL EVACUATES OUTPOST NEAR MODI'IN AS PART OF DEAL
Posted by Bryna Berch, April 15, 2008. |
|
The two essays below talk about the Yesha Jews giving up an outpost they've established. Problem is that the Olmert Gov't has adopted some of the tactics of their friends, the Palestinian Arabs. Promise. You don't have to keep your word. All they are doing is coaxing the Jews of Yesha into a bargaining psychology, not a defend-your-homes state of mind. Ted Belman put it this way: I believe this creeping disengagement even without a declaration of principles being agreed to, will continue. The GoI will not put all this to the electorate until it is sure of winning. The more Israelis get used to it the less resistance there will be to the deal being worked out."To read his article below, click here. |
|
1. Jerusalem Post staff
April 15, 2008
The Council of Jewish Communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha) quietly evacuated the illegal outpost of Mevo Horon North on Monday, as part of a deal with the Defense Ministry, Ma'ariv reported Tuesday. According to the report, the settlers left the outpost willingly in exchange for new building permits in nearby Mevo Horon. Twenty families were living in the outpost, which is located near Modi'in. "We are ashamed of the evacuation, but we did it only because it will save other places," one of the residents told the paper. 2. SMALL NEIGHBORHOOD DESTROYED IN EXCHANGE FOR LARGER ONE
A new Jewish neighborhood in Yesha was nipped in the bud last night (Monday), with the consent of residents who hope to thus save other Jewish towns. The outpost in question, known as Merom Ayalon, is located just to the northeast of Mevo Horon and just to the east of the Jerusalem-Tel Aviv highway. It is located just over the Green Line; in the Six Day War, when it was liberated from Jordanian control, Jordanian military plans were found to capture and destroy nearby Kibbutz Shaalvim. Twenty people were living in 6-8 structures in the seven-year-old neighborhood left the site voluntarily late Monday night. They explained that they were ashamed of having taken this action, "but we did it in order to save other sites for Jewish settlement." The evacuation was carried out following an agreement with the Defense Ministry, in exchange for permission to build new housing in the neighborhood's well-established mother town of Mevo Horon, and more. Over 1,000 people live in Mevo Horon, which was founded in 1970. The Mevo Horon secretariat announced that it was not proud of the deal, but agreed to it "in order to help save several outposts deep in Jewish territory in the Shomron." The agreement includes permission to expand Mevo Horon by another 100 housing units. MK Ariel: Nothing Gained MK Uri Ariel (National Union) was not happy with the voluntary evacuation. "It will not bring about any positive results," he said. "Any agreement in which the 'reward' is that the government agrees to un-freeze [some] construction in Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem is not worthy of trust." Ariel took the opportunity to once again call on Shas to quit the coalition "even before Pesach, and topple this government." Baruch Marzel of Hevron, head of the Jewish National Front organization, says that the Yesha Council has "not learned anything from previous agreements. The last agreement they made regarding outposts brought about the Disengagement from northern Shomron and Gaza, and this one is likely to bring about an even large withdrawal from Judea and Samaria." Two cranes arrived in Merom Ayalon on Monday night, and removed six caravans. No Land of Israel supporters were on hand to protest, as the agreement had been kept secret since it was formulated two weeks ago. "This was a desecration of G-d's Name," one resident told NRG-Maariv, "but it is important to emphasize that it is being done with great pain and sorrow, and only to save other settlement spots." |
|
FORTY YEARS IN THE DESERT
Posted by David Wilder, April 15, 2008. |
 In a few nights we will participate in one of Judaism's most ancient ceremonies, and certainly one of the year's most treasured events. We sit around a table and conduct a Seder –– the annual recitation of the story of Israel's redemption from Egypt. Rabbi Avraham Yitzhak HaKohen Kook, Israel's first Chief Rabbi, writes that that exodus had a two-fold purpose. On the one hand, it was a goal in and of itself, that being liberation from Egyptian bondage. However, he teaches that the exodus was also a means to an end, that end being the reception of the Torah at Mount Sinai, and eventually, observance of that Torah in Eretz Yisrael. The exodus as a stand-alone event was momentous, but its real significance came to pass only years and decades later. We are currently marking the sixtieth anniversary of Israeli independence. The Jewish people have made tremendous leaps and bounds over the past six decades. Who could have expected, in May of 1948, the power and prestige a Jewish state would command at the beginning of the twenty-first century. This is especially notable considering the fact that the Jewish people, coming out of a 2,000 year old exile, had to virtually recreate its national being from scratch, having been totally removed from exercises in sovereignty for two millennium. On top of this we can never forget that Israel was reborn from within the ashes of Auschwitz. Jews have prayed, day in and day out for thousands of years for not only a return to Zion, but also for Techiat HaMetim, the revival of the dead. Israeli independence is no less than revival of the dead. For this, we rejoice and give thanks to the L-rd for have granted us this most magnanimous gift of national life. That's the up side. The down side is all too well known. From the very beginning there was a concerted effort made to oppress the foundations of Jewish being. The founding fathers, or most of them, were not great fans of observant Judaism. The kidnapping and forced resettling of over 1,000 Yemenite children is perhaps the quintessential example of attempts to eradicate Judaism from the Jews. Yet Ben Gurion was known to have answered, in reply to a question about Jewish legitimacy to settle in Eretz Yisrael, that the source of Jewish rights to the Land is the Bible. The relationship between Israel's leadership and our Land has been overtly problematic. Eretz Yisrael was almost viewed as a 'card' to be dealt at the proper time. This was explicitly felt both prior to and following the 1967 Six Day war, when Israeli leaders attempted to refrain from liberating Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria, and following their liberation, expressed a desire to abandon them at the first possible opportunity. So it was that Israeli paratroopers, having captured the Old City of Jerusalem and Judaism's most sacred site, Temple Mount and the Kotel (The Western Wall) were told to prepare to leave only a short time after the victory. Yamit, Oslo, Hebron, Gush Katif and the northern Shomron all speak for themselves. Other words are superfluous. Where does this leave us, after sixty years? In my humble opinion, the state of Israel isn't really sixty years old. Yes, if we count from 1948, to 2008, the result is sixty. But in reality, we couldn't really call ourselves a full-fledged sovereign entity while our heart was still in captivity. That heart being Jerusalem and Hebron. They go hand-in-hand, together. David began in Hebron for seven and a half years before moving up to Jerusalem. Hebron was lost in 1929; Jerusalem in 1948. Jerusalem was liberated on the 28th of Iyar and Hebron the following day. Hebron was chopped into two parts in January, 1997. Ehud Barak offered Arafat 90% of Jerusalem only a few years ago. The fates of these two eternal, holy cities are inextricably combined and cannot be separated. Following the Six Day war former Jerusalem residents, expelled during the 1948 War of Independence were repatriated. Moshe Dayan, then Minister of Defense, refused to speak to former Hebron Jewish homeowners who had lost their property to Arab marauders following the 1929 riots and massacre, and subsequent final expulsion in the spring of 1936. Only in 1968, exactly forty years ago this Friday, did Jews return to the first Jewish city in Israel. As with many such stories, from close-up they seem almost ordinary. In reality, not only a physical reality, but also a metaphysical truth, such events are earthshaking, or perhaps better put, 'heaven-shaking.' The return of a small group of Jews, that 1968 Passover in Hebron, with the guidance of Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda HaKohen Kook, with the participation of Rabbis Waldman, Druckman and Levinger, was the forerunner of a massive awakening, a returning to the heart of our land throughout Judea and Samaria. But this awakening too was not only a corporeal return to the land; rather, it was, primarily, a spiritual arousing, the voice of the Jewish people bursting through the ages, an almost primal expression of the faith buried so deep inside the souls of the Jewish people, who for centuries had cried out 'next year in Jerusalem,' whereby 'Jerusalem' was the keyword representing all our land, Eretz Yisrael. Without Jerusalem, without Shechem, without Hebron, we were as a body without a soul, a golem, whose bodily movements were predefined, perhaps classified as 'natural.' But the spirit, the inner essence, the heart, the soul, was missing. Only with the liberation of Jerusalem and Hebron and with them the rest of Judea and Samaria could we really and truly say, 'we are back home –– we have returned.' That Passover, forty years ago, was the breaking of the ice –– the trailblazer, the results of which are the authentic rebirth, physically and spiritually, of the Jewish people. As Jews began returning to their physical roots, so too did they commence the return to their spiritual roots; the numbers of Jews who have 'returned,' who have come back to observant Judaism in the past 40 years is beyond numbers. And that homecoming, as such, began with, and was initiated by our return to our land, our return to our heart –– to Jerusalem and Hebron. The group of Jews who initiated and participated in that 'Seder' in Hebron in 1968 might not have known it then, and maybe some of them are still unaware of it today, but they were the sparks that set the fire of the return of the Jewish people to themselves after two thousand years. Just as the exodus from Egypt had a double goal; one immediate and the other long-term, so too did our statehood in 1948 have a double agenda; one immediate –– announcing before all the world, we, the Jewish people have not died out, we have escaped the bondage of galut, of exile, you have not been able to extinguish us; and also long-term –– to bring the people back to all their land, to all their land and to all their heart and soul, physically and spiritually. So as we celebrate sixty years and forty years, we can conclude that really, only now, are we beginning. The Jewish people spent forty years in the desert before entering the Land, forty years fraught with problem and crises. Now, we too have finished forty years, also filled with unimaginable predicaments. And just as then, when we came into the land the problems didn't come to a swift end, we too, today, may still face unbearable situations. But those aren't the key. The key is, we are home, we are in Israel, we have returned to Hebron and to Jerusalem, we have rediscovered ourselves, we have been granted the Divine gift of life, we are here to stay. Happy Passover, Happy 60, Happy 40!
David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You
can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10,
Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write
to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230,
hebronfund@aol.com
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: WHAT DOES IT TAKE?
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 15, 2008. |
|
Abbas Zaki is no upstart within Palestinian politics. Long an influential member of Fatah, he sits on its powerful Central Committee. Additionally, he is the PLO's representative to Lebanon. This, according to MEMRI is what Zaki said recently in the course of an interview on Lebanese TV: "We believe wholeheartedly that the Right of Return is guaranteed by our will, by our weapons, and by our faith. "The use of weapons alone will not bring results, and the use of politics without weapons will not bring results. We act on the basis of our extensive experience. We analyze our situation carefully. We know what climate leads to victory and what climate leads to suicide. We talk politics, but our principles are clear...We harvest U.N. resolutions, and we shame the world so that it doesn't gang up on us, because the world is led by people who have given their brains a vacation –– the American administration and the neocons. "The P.L.O. is the sole legitimate representative [of the
Palestinian people], and it has not changed its platform even one
iota. In light of the weakness of the Arab nation and the lack of
values, and in light of the American control over the world, the
P.L.O. proceeds through phases, without changing its strategy. Let me
tell you, when the ideology of Israel collapses, and we take, at
least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety,
and we will begin to progress with our own ideology, Allah willing,
and drive them out of all of Palestine."
~~~~~~~~~~ We who are vehemently opposed to current Israeli and American policy with regard to our negotiating a "two state solution" –– which would require us to surrender part of Jerusalem and all or most of Judea and Samaria –– feel, more often than not, that our words of warning fall on deaf ears. It makes little or no impact on those who persist in conceptualizing the PA as "moderate" when we speak of Jerusalem as the heart of our existence and our very raison d'être, which we are at risk of surrendering. But now, here it is from the enemy. And I wonder if anyone will even bother to sit up and pay attention. "When...we take, at least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety, and we will begin to progress with our own ideology...and drive them out of all of Palestine." It's time, way past time, for us to sit up and say, "Look you bums, this is ours and you are entitled to none of it. It's time for us to remember that we HAVE an ideology and to adhere to it instead of the Palestinian narrative. ~~~~~~~~~~ Allow me, please, to clarify what I see as the major, and very significant, implications of the Zaki interview: [] For us to surrender any part of Jerusalem, which is historically ours and which is, according to our own basic law, the undivided capital of Israel, would be to surrender the sense of who we are and what our entitlement is. It would be to cut out our own heart. [] The Palestinians fully intend to continue to push for the (non-existent) "right of return," which would undermine us from within. [] The Palestinians have never abandoned their "Phased Program," which was formulated after they realized the Arabs couldn't destroy Israel in a war. What it does is set out a policy of achieving a Palestinian state in all the land by stages instead, and using politics as a method of reaching the final goal. This means there is no reason whatsoever to trust that an agreement struck with the PA would represent a final cessation of hostilities rather than a way station towards further hostilities. And yet...and yet...there are those who insist on trusting it. "We must take chances for peace" is their watchword. And it is unbearable. ~~~~~~~~~~ More of what we're dealing with from inside: Israeli MK Ahmed Tibi, Chair of the United Arab List, in attendance at the Doha Forum on Democracy in Qatar, registered as "Palestinian." The response within the Knesset, both to the left and the right, has been outrage, with the suggestion made that he might consider moving to Ramallah –– that his choice of identity was his to make, but that he could not have it both ways. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is so much to address that I've been mum on the subject of Obama, even as I shudder at the prospect of his becoming president. It would be an understatement to say that his support for Israel is shaky, no matter the superficial impression he lends and those whom he is able to fool. (There are always those who, for whatever reasons, are ready to be fooled.) The latest "name" advisor to join his camp is Daniel Indyk, former US ambassador to Israel. I recommend an article by Ed Lasky in The American Thinker, on the
positions of Indyk vis-a-vis Israel, which are enough to make your
hair stand on end if you love Israel. Just as the acorn falls close to
the tree, so is the candidate likely of similar mind. Read it and be
forewarned. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
.
WHAT IS A SUFFICIENT VICTORY?
Posted by Bryna Berch, April 14, 2008. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared today in the
Jerusalem Post
|
|
Speaking to IDF commanders in Judea and Samaria last week, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert exhorted the officers tasked with preventing Palestinians from attacking Israel while operating under civilian cover to have sympathy for them. Olmert said "Take all the Palestinians who have been stripped at the roadblocks just because of fear that there may be terrorists and terror operatives among them. Take all those who wait at roadblocks because of fear that a car bomb may drive through the same roadblock. This could be a boiling cauldron, liable to explode and cause horrible burns, and it could be something else, dependent only on your ability to act wisely and forcefully." Since Olmert knows that IDF soldiers are as courteous as possible to Palestinians at roadblocks, his statement will have two major consequences. First it will cause a loosening of regulations at roadblocks and so impair IDF counterterror capabilities. Second, by insultingly insinuating that IDF forces are cruel, Olmert demoralized his own soldiers and reduced their willingness to accomplish their mission by hinting that they cannot expect the government to back them. Olmert's message is just the latest action his government has taken in recent weeks that undermine the IDF's ability to maintain its military success since 2002 in defeating Palestinian terrorists in Judea and Samaria and preventing them from reorganizing. The Olmert-Livni-Barak government's decision to take down roadblocks throughout Judea and Samaria; provide immunity from arrest to wanted terror fugitives; and permit the deployment of US-backed Fatah militias in Jenin all serve to directly undermine the IDF's remarkable achievements in defeating and preventing the reconstitution of the Palestinian terror war machine in Judea and Samaria since Operation Defensive Shield was carried out in 2002. Even more disturbingly, its reported willingness to cede the Jordan Valley to Fatah in the negotiations it is now conducting with Fatah leaders Mahmoud Abbas and Ahmed Qurei indicate that the Olmert-Livni-Barak government is ready to transform Judea and Samaria into a base for global jihadist forces just as occurred when Israel surrendered Gaza's border with Egypt in 2005. That the government is squandering the IDF's hard-won achievements in Judea and Samaria is made clear in a paper on counterinsurgency warfare authored by Major General (res.) Yaakov Amidror released this week by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Amidror's paper, "Winning Counterinsurgency War: The Israeli Experience," focuses on Israel's military defeat of Palestinian terror forces in Judea and Samaria during and subsequent to Operation Defensive Shield.
AMIDROR IDENTIFIES six components of counterinsurgency warfare which he deems essential for effecting military victory over irregular forces. These components are: a political decision by the government to defeat terrorism; winning and maintaining control of the territory from which terrorists operate; acquiring relevant intelligence; isolating the terror enclaves from outside supporters; multidimensional cooperation between intelligence gatherers and fightxing forces; and separating civilians from terrorists. Through its actions, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government it is undermining four of these components. After identifying what he views as the essential components of successful counterinsurgency campaigns, Amidror identifies and defines three forms of military victory. First, there is "total victory" which involves both a military defeat of insurgent or terror forces and the political reorganization of their societies from terror-supporting societies into terror-combating societies. Second, there is "temporary victory" which involves a one-off military defeat of enemy forces which is not combined with any political transformation of their societies. Finally, Amidror considers what he refers to as "sufficient victory." As he defines it, a sufficient victory involves defeating an irreconcilable foe and then preventing him from rebuilding his capacity to wage war. Like a temporary victory, a sufficient victory doesn't entail any political transformation of enemy society, and indeed it takes for granted that such a transformation is impossible to enact. But as opposed to a temporary victory, Amidror argues that the effect of a sufficient victory can be longstanding if the victorious side is willing and able to consistently prevent enemy forces from reconstituting themselves. That is, a sufficient victory requires a continuous rather than one-off campaign. Amidror's definition of sufficient victory leads him to conclude that contrary to the approach of the Israeli and Western Left, there is a military option for victory in counterinsurgency wars devoid of political transformation. From an Israeli perspective, Amidror's vision of counterinsurgency warfare view is reasonable and understandable. Israel's options for transforming Palestinian society from a terror-supporting society to a terror-combating society are limited. Influenced by domestic, pan-Arab and pan-Islamic jihadist indoctrination; supported militarily, financially and politically by Arab states, Iran, terror groups and the West, the Palestinians have little reason to transform.
.
MOREOVER, ISRAEL's strategic and national interests in maintaining control over Judea and Samaria could render sustainable a military strategy with no withdrawal element. This is not the case in other battlefields such as the US counterinsurgency in Iraq. To a degree, Amidror's view that sufficient victory is possible is echoed in recent statements by US military commanders in Iraq. In a dispatch from Iraq published last month in National Review, Richard Lowry reported, "For all the security gains over the last year, American commanders believe they have hit a plateau." Absent coherent, competent action by the Iraqi government to secure and maintain the loyalty of Iraqis to the Iraqi state, like the IDF in Judea and Samaria, all US forces in Iraq can do is keep violence down to sufferable levels. |
|
THE EXPULSION LIBEL: 1948 ARAB "EXODUS" RECONSIDERED
Posted by Rachel Neuwirth, April 14, 2008. |
|
I often receive letters from readers that raise relevant and important questions. One such letter, from Mr. David Gesundheit, gently reproves me for he describes as "one inaccuracy ... that I would like to point out. It is stated [by R.N.] that the Israelis did not expel Palestinian Arabs from what is now Israel. The truth is that there were some Palestinian Arabs that were evacuated from their towns. Albeit it was a minority, but there were some. Israel was at war and you can justify this action because of it, but nevertheless it did occur." What follows is my response to Mr. Gesundheit's legitimate concerns. When I wrote that "[Israel] did not expel the Palestinian Arabs," I did not mean that no Israelis have forced any Arab residents of Palestine to evacuate their homes at any place or at any time during the past sixty years. Rather I meant that there was never any mass expulsion of the Arab population as a whole from Palestine/Israel, or from any region or part of Palestine/Israel, either during the Israeli War of Independence in 1947-49(the usual time-frame given by the anti-Israel "revisionist" or "new" historians for the alleged expulsion) or at any other time, and that it was never the policy or objective of Israel's government to make Israel or Palestine "Arab-free," or of "ethnically cleansing" the country of Arabs. If there ever was such a policy, then it would be impossible to explain how 1.4 million Arabs live in what is now sovereign Israeli territory today –– many more than lived in the same territory before the state of Israel was founded. Just before the outbreak of first major Arab-Israeli war on November 30, 1947, a few months before Israelis declared their independence, there were at most 900,000 Arabs living in this same area. Today there are large Arab populations in every region of modern-day Israel –– the Galilee region in the north, the central coastal plain, the Judean hills, the "Shefela" or foothills region, and the Negev desert in the south. Arabs are at least 20 per cent of Israel's present-day population. Arabs are half the population of two Israeli cities, Ramla and Lod, from which the Arab residents were, according to many historical accounts, expelled by Israeli soldiers during the War of Independence. Naturally, I am skeptical of these accounts, since they don't explain why there are more Arabs residing in these two cities (which were only small towns in 1948) than there were before the Arabs were allegedly expelled from them. Akko, another Israeli city, still has an Arab majority, just as it did in 1948, before Israeli soldiers gained control of it. There are large Arab communities in Israel's three largest cities, Tel Aviv-Jaffa, Jerusalem, and Haifa, as well as in the city of Beersheva, which was a tiny village in 1948, but now has a combined Jewish and Arab population of over 100,000 people. Over 100 of the Arab villages that were in what is now Israel before the nation was reestablished in 1948 are still in Israel today; some of them, such as Umm-el-Fahm, Nazareth, and Sakhnin, have grown into all-Arab cities over the past sixty years. The Israeli government has also built new towns for its Arab citizens at locations that were previously uninhabited, and provided new homes and land to the Arab "settlers" in these communities at little or no cost to them. And all of this Arab population is additional to the Arab inhabitants of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza region, who now number (depending on which population estimate you choose to believe) somewhere between 2.4 and 3.6 million people. This makes for a total present-day Arab population of what had been the territory of western Palestine under the British mandate of somewhere between 3.6 and 5 million people –– about three times the total Arab population of this territory right before the War of Independence, and seven to ten times the Arab population in 1891. And if we include what is now the Kingdom of Jordan in "Palestine," which we should, since it was the eastern section of the original British Palestine Mandate territory, then the total Arab population of Palestine has risen for about 1.7 million immediately before Israel became independent to perhaps eight million today. Some expulsion! As for the more specific and limited question of whether the Israel Defense Forces expelled some Palestinian Arabs from their homes in some villages, and possibly one town (Lydda or Lod, then with a population of 15-30 thousand people) during the Israel War of Independence sixty years ago, the answer is, "yes, but only because the Israelis were compelled to carry out these measures in self-defense." The Israeli soldiers, in some places and at certain times in the course of the war, had no other way to repel a massive armed offensive by a coalition of thousands, if not tens of thousands, of Palestinian Arab guerilla-terrorist "civilians," acting in concert with tens of thousands of guerilla "volunteers" and regular army soldiers who poured into Palestine from six Arab states, but to remove the Arab inhabitants, or some of them, from certain villages that served as bases of operation and sources of recruits for the Palestinian and other Arab guerilla-terrorists. The Israeli forces were extremely reluctant to take any measures against their Palestinian Arab neighbors, whom most of the Israeli or Palestinian Jews regarded with respect and even affection. But the Israeli soldiers were sometimes forced to take such measures because many of these same Arab neighbors, acting on instructions or orders from their political leadership, had launched a violent, sustained attack on the Jewish population of Israel-Palestine. If the Israel-Jewish defense forces had not undertaken some harsh counter-guerilla measures in some localities, the Palestinian-Israeli Jewish community, which then numbered only 650,000-750,000 people, and which was interspersed among nearly twice that many Arabs, might easily have suffered complete annihilation. The overwhelming preponderance of the evidence strongly indicates that it was Arab, not Israeli, actions that were the primary cause of the displacement of Palestinian Arabs during the war. The war was begun not by Israel, but by the Palestinian Arab leaders and by the governments of the Arab states, in an effort not only to strangle the infant Jewish state in its crib, but also to exterminate its Jewish inhabitants. The Palestinian and other Arab leaders were quite frank about having begun the war. Jamal Husseini, the Acting Chairman of the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine, told the United Nations Security Council on April 16, 1948: The representative of the Jewish Agency told us yesterday that they were not the attackers, that the Arabs had begun the fighting. We did not deny this. We told the whole world that we were going to fight. Ismayil Safwat, one of the commanders of the Palestinian Arab guerilla-terrorists, admitted in March, 1948 that: "The Jews haven't attacked any Arab village, unless attacked first." Nor did the Palestinian and other Arab leaders make any attempt to conceal their genocidal objectives. The supreme Palestinian Arab leader, Hajj Amin el-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, exhorted his followers over Radio Cairo, "I declare a holy war, my Moslem brothers! Murder the Jews! Murder them all!" Other Palestinian leaders made similar pronouncements. As for the objectives of the Arab states' invasion of Palestine-Israel, they were expressed clearly enough by the Secretary General of the League of Arab States. According to a report in The New York Times on May 16, 1948, "On the day that Israel declared its independence, Azzam Pasha, Secretary General of the Arab League, at Cairo press conference declared "jihad", a holy war. He said that the Arab states rejected partition and would set up a "United State of Palestine." Pasha added: 'This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades.'" The Palestinian Arab guerilla/terrorists began the war with a massacre of Jewish civilian passengers in a bus passing through the Arab town of Lydda (now Lod), on November 30, 1947. They subsequently attacked nearly every Jewish village and urban neighborhood in Palestine, and closed all of the major roads in Palestine to Jews through a regular system of ambushes and sniper attacks. They also killed upwards of two thousand Jews, at least half of them civilians, and wounded thousands of others in the course of the war. In addition to attacking their Jewish neighbors on their own, the Palestinian Arab guerilla/terrorists cooperated closely with the invading armies of the six intervening Arab states, who attacked the Jews with artillery, tanks, aircraft and British-trained, and sometimes British-commanded, soldiers. The Palestinian Arab guerilla-terrorists' siege of the roads created severe shortages of food and fuel in some Jewish communities, most notably in the Jerusalem area, where the Jewish inhabitants had to be put on starvation rations by their own government and came close to starving to death. The Arab guerilla-terrorists even blew up the water aqueduct to the Jewish sections of Jerusalem, forcing the inhabitants to drink only carefully rationed rain water. For defending themselves against both the armed Palestinian Arab "civilians" and the invasion forces of the Arab states, the Israelis had only a hastily organized army that was really an ad hoc civilian militia, poorly armed, and consisting mainly of men and women who had no previous military training or experience, and who were drafted from their normal civilian occupations only after the Arab attacks had already begun. Only a small core of men and women, less than 10,000, were fully trained and more or less professional soldiers. The Israeli soldiers were not trained or experienced in occupying Arab communities and separating out armed guerillas from peaceful civilians. In any case, the Israelis had no manpower to spare for such delicate and sophisticated counterinsurgency operations, since they had to repel the armies of the invading Arab states even as they were forced to deal with the "local" guerilla-terrorists as well. These unfortunate military realities occasionally made expulsion of the inhabitants from "hostile" villages that served as bases of operation for guerilla attacks on Israeli soldiers and civilians the only practical means of halting these attacks. On the other hand, Arab villages from which guerilla-terrorist attacks did not originate, and that did not offer armed resistance to the Israeli forces, were left alone by the Israeli soldiers; or if they were occupied by the Israelis, the inhabitants were well treated, and were not asked to leave Israeli-held territory. In a few cases, Arabs from villages in which only a few families remained were asked to resettle elsewhere in Israel, in more populous Arab villages a few miles away. Where most of the inhabitants of a village had chosen to remain, the village was left in place and undisturbed. That is why over a hundred of the Arab communities dating to before Israel's independence still exist in Israel, and have in fact expanded their populations by as much as sevenfold in sixty years –– one of the most rapid population growth rates in the world. But Israeli counterinsurgency operations and security measures accounted for only a small minority of the Palestinian Arabs who became refugees during the War of Independence, or who claimed refugee status after the war. A much larger number of Arabs fled their homes in response to the urging, or even the orders and threats, of Arab politicians and/or military commanders. Substantial contemporary documentary evidence, much of it published at the time, clearly indicates that both the Palestinian Arab leadership and the governments of the Arab states that attacked Israel called on their own people to evacuate large areas of the country. For example, Kenneth O.Bilby, the correspondent in Palestine for the New York Herald Tribune during the War of Independence wrote in a book published shortly afterwards that said: The Arab exodus, initially at least, was encouraged by many Arab leaders, such as Haj Amin el Husseini, the exiled pro-Nazi Mufti of Jerusalem, and by the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine. They viewed the first wave of Arab setbacks as merely transitory. Let the Palestine Arabs flee into neighboring countries. It would serve to arouse the other Arab peoples to greater effort, and when the Arab invasion struck, the Palestinians could return to their homes and be compensated with the property of Jews driven into the sea. After the war, the Palestine Arab leaders did try to help people –– including their own –– to forget that it was they who had called for the exodus in the early spring of 1948. They now blamed the leaders of the invading Arab states themselves. These had added their voices to the exodus call, though not until some weeks after the Palestine Arab Higher Committee had taken a stand. –– Kenneth O. Bilby, New Star in the Middle East, (Doubleday, 1950). And the British news magazine The Economist, no friend of Israel or the Zionist movement, reported on October 2, 1948, while the war was still in progress, that Of the 62,000 Arabs who formerly lived in [the Palestinian, now Israeli, city of] Haifa not more than 5,000 or 6,000 remained. Various factors influenced their decision to seek safety in flight. There is but little doubt that the most potent of the factors were the announcements made over the air by the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit... It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades.On May 3, 1948, the American news magazine Time reported that The mass evacuation, prompted partly by fear, partly by order of Arab leaders, left the Arab quarter of Haifa a ghost city.... By withdrawing Arab workers their leaders hoped to paralyze Haifa. Sir Alan Cunningham, the last high commissioner for the British administration of Palestine, which was in the process of withdrawing from the country while the fighting raged, wrote to the Colonial Office in London on February 22, 1948, and again on April 28, 1948, that British authorities in Haifa have formed the impression that total evacuation is being urged on the Haifa Arabs from higher Arab quarters and that the townsfolk themselves are against it. The American consulate in Haifa had telegraphed Washington on April 25 that "local Mufti-dominated Arab leaders urge all Arabs (to) leave (the) city [Haifa] and large numbers are going." Three days later the consulate followed up this communication with another that said, "reportedly Arab Higher Committee ordering all Arabs (to) leave." On April 23, Jamal Husseini, the Acting Chairman for the Arab Higher Committee for Palestine, admitted as much in a speech to the United Nations Security Council: The Arabs did not want to submit to a truce. They rather preferred to abandon their homes, their belongings and everything they possessed in the world and leave the town. This is in fact what they did. And on April 27, 1950, only two years after the Arab evacuation of Haifa, the Arab National Committee of Haifa asserted in a memorandum submitted to the governments of the Arab states that The removal of the Arab inhabitants... was voluntary and was carried out at our request... The Arab delegation proudly asked for the evacuation of the Arabs and their removal to the neighboring Arab countries.... We are very glad to state that the Arabs guarded their honour and traditions with pride and greatness.... When the [Arab]delegation entered the conference room [for negotiations with the Jewish authorities in Haifa] it proudly refused to sign the truce and asked that the evacuation of the Arab population and their transfer to neighboring Arab countries be facilitated. In June 1949, only six months after the conclusion of hostilities, Sir John Troutbeck, the head of the British Middle East office in Cairo and, according to historian Efraim Karsh, "no friend to Israel or the Jews," made a fact-finding visit to Gaza and interviewed some of the Arab refugees there. Troutbeck reported that he had learned from these interviews that the refugees ...express no bitterness against the Jews (or for that matter against the Americans or ourselves) [but] they speak with the utmost bitterness of the Egyptians and other Arab states. "We know who our enemies are," they will say, and they are referring to their Arab brothers who, they declare, persuaded them unnecessarily to leave their home... I even heard it said that many of the refugees would give a welcome to the Israelis if they were to come in and take the district over. And the Palestinian Arab newspaper Falastin, only a month after the war ended (Feb. 19, 1949), reported that The Arab states which had encouraged the Palestinian Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies, have failed to keep their promise to help these refugees. Whatever their motives for giving such reckless, irresponsible instructions to the Palestinian Arabs, the leaders of the jihad against Israel, including both the chiefs of the Arab States and the Palestinian Arab leaders, bear a heavy load of guilt for inflicting suffering on their own people, and then dishonestly blaming Israel for the consequences of their own actions. The time is long overdue for the Arab League governments to accept responsibility for the people whom they have displaced and in many cases left stateless by their attempt, in cooperation with the Palestinian Arab leadership, to strangle Israel and exterminate her people in the year of her birth. And it is high time that today's Arab leaders, and the Palestinian Arab terrorist organizations whom they finance and sponsor, cease to exploit, as a propaganda weapon in their ongoing war against Israel, the suffering that an earlier generation of Arab leaders inflicted on their own people.
Documentation and Further Reading: The quotations from Arab and British sources in this article may be found on the world wide web at Israel Defender here, and: http://www.aijac.org.au/review/2000/258/essay258.html
Two articles by Efraim Karsh,"Were the Palestinians expelled? The story of Haifa,", and "Rights and Wrongs: History and the Palestinian "Right of Return," form the best general introductions to the origins of the Palestinian Arab refugee community, and the causes of the Palestinian "exodus" of 1948. Eli E.Hertz, Arab and Jewish Refugees –– The Contrast, and David Meir-Levi, Big Lies: Demolishing The Myths of the Propaganda War Against Israel, also provide useful summaries of these historical events. In addition, all of the web pages linked above provide important and useful information on this subject. Seth Franzman's article in the August 16, 2007 issue of the Jerusalem Post, provides a good summary of the "military" background of terrorism and aggression against the Israeli Jewish community. Those wishing to study the military background of the Palestinian Arab refugee exodus in greater depth should consult Netenel Lorch, The Edge of the Sword: Israel's War of Independence 1947-1949, and One Long War, both available from amazon.com; as well as John and David Kimche, A Clash of Destinies: The Arab-Jewish War and the Founding of the State of Israel, also published under the alternative title Both Sides of the Hill: Britain and the Palestine War, which is available under both titles from Amazon.com. Demographic information about Israel's Jewish and Arab population is available from Israel 's Central Bureau of Statistics. Rachel Neuwirth is a Los Angeles-based analyst on the board of directors of the West Coast Region of the American Jewish Congress and the chairperson of the organization's Middle East committee. Contact her by email at rachterry@sbcglobal.net This article was first published at www.AmericanThinker.com John Landau contributed to this article. |
|
THE GRAND AND ONGOING DECEPTION
Posted by Ted Belman, April 14, 2008. |
|
It is standard practice for athletes and magicians to fake us out. They distract our attention to mislead us as to their intentions. Politicians do too. It used to be Israel's policy to put facts on the ground to strengthen Israel's hold on Judea and Samaria and to make time work against Palestinians. That was when we considered such lands "disputed territories", when we sought to get agreement on "defensible borders" and believed that Jerusalem would be Israel's undivided capital forever. No longer. As a result of this activity, the US declared war on the settlements. The Mitchell Report in May '01, recommending a "settlement freeze", was the first salvo. The Roadmap was the second. While Israel agonized over its acceptance it finally did so subject to fourteen reservations. These reservations served no purpose other than to put Israelis at ease about its acceptance. They were never heard from again. You might say the Israelis were faked out. Even so it is interesting to note that the reservations did not take issue with the settlement freeze or the requirement that Palestine be "viable" or that it be "contiguous. This was covered in my article Making a Silk Purse out of a Sow's Ear. Thus Israel was committed to same for the first time. Thereafter Israel began demonizing settlers and restricting building in the settlements subject to some posturing about infill. Israel also began turning a blind eye to illegal building by the Arabs. In effect it was now allowing Arabs to put facts on the ground even though no one was to take any steps that would prejudice the negotiations. Sharon, who accepted the Roadmap and talked of painful concessions, bulldozed the Gaza Disengagement. Shortly thereafter his new party in coalition with Labour announce their Convergence Plan to much opposition so they backed off publicly. But remained committed to ending the occupation. One of the big complaints of the Disengagement was that it was unilateral. I took issue with such criticism because no commitment he would have gotten would have been enforceable. Regardless the Kadima/Labour Coalition was determined to negotiate a withdrawal from the Westbank. This is what it wants to do. This governs all. So while we are focussed on the negotiations of core issues, wondering if Israel will avoid the Saudi Plan, Israel is using negotiations as a cover for disengagement sometimes known as "goodwill gestures". Once again Israelis are faked out. I wrote about this in "Annapolis" is a separation process, not a peace process and in Why must Israel create a "horizon of hope"? My central point was that the Declaration of Principles in essence is an agreement for withdrawal and disengagement. It allows Israel to remain in the West bank for security reasons until the US-trained Palestinian Army can do the job. In the meantime Israel will not be sitting idle. It will begin to encourage settlers to leave, will stop financing anything on the east side of the new border, will give greater license to the Arabs including in Jerusalem. With each passing month Israel will be disengaging or ending the occupation. It doesn't matter when an agreement on Jerusalem will be negotiated. It doesn't matter if terror stops. The more Israel withdraws, the more certain there will be a Palestinian state. Israel's primary concern is to have borders agreed upon. If borders are agreed upon, Israel can end the occupation by returning to them. It won't matter whether Jerusalem has been solved. But the more Israel disengages, the more tenuous its hold on Jerusalem will become. But what about Hamas? While everyone is "outraged" that Brzezinski visited Syria and that Carter is visiting Hamas, I am sure they are a back channel and will be reporting back to Bush and Rice. America plans to wean Syria away from Iran. This will undermine Hezbollah and Hamas. So I expect that starting next year we will hear more and more about the Syrian tract. Israel is quite prepared to vacate the Golan in exchange for peace with Syria and Lebanon. Can America do it? Yes, ultimately. Especially when Israel wants the same thing. If you don't believe me watch this State Department Video on The US-Palestinian Partnership I believe this creeping disengagement even without a declaration of principles being agreed to, will continue. The GoI will not put all this to the electorate until it is sure of winning. The more Israelis get used to it the less resistance there will be to the deal being worked out. But just to be sure, Kadima and Labour are in serious negotiations for a power sharing agreement between them so they can run on one ticket in the next election. While it is appropriate for athletes and magicians to deceive, it certainly is not okay for the Government of Israel to deceive its own citizens. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
WHAT'S GOING ON IN SYRIA?
Posted by Olivier Guitta, April 14, 2008. |
|
Syria has been regularly popping up in the news. In fact, recent events point to the importance of that country for the future of the Middle East. Syria's political situation may indeed have an important impact on a few countries: first of course Lebanon, second Iraq, third Israel, and finally Iran. First, one should not underestimate Syria's potential for creating havoc on a whim by using some of the militant groups it actively supports: such as Hezbollah and Fatah al-Islam in Lebanon, or Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the Palestinian territories. But also one should not forget Syria's active role in facilitating the transit of foreign fighters joining insurgent groups in Iraq to attack coalition troops or the Iraqi army. Interestingly back in October 2007, the U.S. command in Iraq announced having seized important documents that included a list of around 500 fighters that entered Iraq through Syria. Last week, the usually well-informed Saudi daily Al-Watan revealed that those documents showed the undeniable role of Syria in terrorism in Iraq. They also allegedly proved how the terror group Fatah al-Islam –– that became notorious when it attacked the Lebanese army and fought from the Nahr al-Bared camp in May-June 2007 –– is strictly a product of Syrian services and not an al-Qaida affiliate, as Damascus pretended. In fact, Syrian authorities were seizing the passports of al-Qaida fighters (coming mostly from Saudi Arabia) who were traveling to Iraq to join the insurgency. They gave these passports to Palestinian and Syrian combatants who were going to Lebanon to fight the Lebanese army. The goal behind this tactic was to be able to blame the Saudi services and in particular Saudi Prince Bandar Bin Sultan (the ex-Saudi ambassador in Washington and the current national security director) of helping foster Sunni terrorism inside Lebanon. DNA tests, performed on some Fatah al-Islam combatants killed in Nahr al-Bared and holders of Saudi passports, proved that they were not actually Saudis. Interestingly, last week, the Iranian Fars news agency reported that the results of the investigation on Imad Mugnieh's killing in Damascus led to both Riyadh and Jerusalem. This seems clearly like an attempt to blame two of Tehran's enemies, Saudi Arabia and Israel. Indeed, in light of available information, Syrian security services were possibly one way or another involved in Mugnieh's death. And here is where the situation becomes even more complicated and could lead to a shakeup at the top of the regime. Last week, media reports abounded about the demise of Syria's strongman, the powerful head of the security services and Bashar Assad's brother-in-law, Assef Shawkat. For instance, the Algerian daily Ech Chorouk reported that Assad had his brother-in-law arrested for allegedly planning a coup against him. Still, according to Ech Chorouk, Shawkat allegedly contacted the CIA for help and was then denounced by none other than Mugnieh. If this theory holds any water then it could possibly explain the potential role of Shawkat in Mugnieh's murder. Obviously in a country controlled by such a secretive regime, reliable information is tough to obtain. But the Lebanese weekly Al-Shiraa confirms that Shawkat is under house arrest and that two military intelligence officers were allegedly executed last week for their role in Mugnieh's assassination. Also Al-Shiraa affirms that apartments of several high-ranked officers close to Shawkat were searched and that the car of a lieutenant colonel was shot at. Also, Shawkat's wife, Bushra Assad, is reportedly in Paris with her children. But French authorities have denied that she asked for political asylum in France. These revelations point out the shakiness of Assad's regime and the maneuvers behind the scenes. It seems important to note that Israel and the United States have diverging views when it comes to Assad. In fact, the numerous public reports of "secret" and not so secret negotiations between Jerusalem and Damascus over peace prove that Israel is at the moment satisfied with dealing with Assad. Indeed, Assad is viewed as a weak leader who, for example, did not retaliate after Israel bombed Syria's nuclear facility back in September 2007. At the same time, Israelis have privately complained that the United States is not "allowing" them to go through with the negotiations with Assad. If the rumors of possible CIA involvement in the Shawkat coup turn out to be true, then this seems like an ill-advised strategy to say the least. Indeed, replacing Bashar Assad with Shawkat or Rifaat Assad (Bashar's uncle) or Abdel Halim Khaddam (the ex-vice president who was kicked out of power and Syria in 2005) –– basically three individuals belonging to the old guard –– is not going to be beneficial for the region. What remains sure is that Syria is the key to a lot of thorny issues in the Middle East and therefore should be handled the right way. In light of the complexity of the situation, this is not a cakewalk, but neither the Israeli nor the U.S. approaches seem like good ones at the moment. Olivier Guitta, an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant, is the founder of the newsletter The Croissant (www.thecroissant.com). This appeared today in Middle East Times. |
|
PLO OFFICIAL: WE'LL DRIVE ISRAEL OUT OF PALESTINE
Posted by Daily Alert, April 14, 2008. |
|
"The PLO is the sole legitimate representative [of the Palestinian people], and it has not changed its platform even one iota."  That's what the PLO's ambassador to Lebanon, Abbas Zaki, told Lebanon's NBN TV in an interview that aired last Wednesday and was translated by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). "In light of the weakness of the Arab nation and the lack of values, and in light of the American control over the world, the PLO proceeds through phases, without changing its strategy. Let me tell you, when the ideology of Israel collapses, and we take, at least, Jerusalem, the Israeli ideology will collapse in its entirety, and we will begin to progress with our own ideology, Allah willing, and drive them out of all of Palestine," added Zaki. The clip can be viewed at http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1738.htm. And in a sermon televised on Friday, Yunis al-Astal, a Hamas MP and cleric, told worshipers that Islam would soon conquer Rome, "the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital, which has declared its hostility to Islam, and which has planted the brothers of apes and pigs in Palestine in order to prevent the reawakening of Islam," just as Constantinople was. Rome, he said, would become "an advanced post for the Islamic conquests which will spread through Europe in its entirety, and then will turn to the two Americas, and even Eastern Europe." In his address aired on Hamas's Al-Aksa TV and also translated by MEMRI, Astal told his audience: "Allah has chosen you for himself and for his religion, so that you will serve as the engine pulling this nation to the phase of succession, security, and consolidation of power, and even to conquests through da'wa [preaching] and military conquests of the capitals of the entire world." "I believe that our children or our grandchildren will inherit our jihad and our sacrifices, and Allah willing, the commanders of the conquest will come from among them. Today, we instill these good tidings in their souls, and by means of the mosques and the Koran books, and the history of our prophet, his companions, and the great leaders, we prepare them for the mission of saving humanity from the hellfire on the brink of which they stand." The clip can be viewed at http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/1739.htm
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com
|
|
POLLING OF UNQUALIFIED POPULATION IS DANGEROUS
Posted by Steven Shamrak, April 14, 2008. |
|
Americans likely to vote in November strongly believe the United States should take Israel's side in its conflict with the Palestinians, according to a poll conducted by Public Opinion Strategies and Greenberg Quinlan Rosner Research. Sixty percent of those who say they will cast their ballots in the presidential election support Israel, according to a poll. Some 85 percent of respondents supporting Republican candidate Sen. John McCain, 62 percent backing Sen. Barack Hussein Obama and 58 percent of those for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton say America should stand with Israel during the current Israel-Palestinian conflict. At the same time, 84 percent of respondents support a two-state solution and ceding Jewish land in order to create another terror infested Arab state. Of course the question about a two-state solution was not presented to the participants in the poll this way, otherwise most of them would have said "No" and it would contradict US foreign policy and the intentions of the 'politicly correct', if not self-hating, Jewish organisation which commissioned the poll! It is easy to manipulate public opinion by asking loaded or vague questions, or after exposing the population to a cleverly designed propaganda campaign. It is dangerous to base any policy on unqualified public opinion! Public support of the war in Iraq five years ago is a good example. No one has asked the opinion of lay people about "Cold Fusion". Most people don't even know what it is. But, everyone has an opinion about Israel, the future of Jewish land, and is willing to express it. It is even unethical to poll a population which has no knowledge about a subject. Dictators, unscrupulous politicians and their masters have been manipulating public opinion to provide backing for their shady intentions. Most Americans support Israel, but have not thought what the land of Israel, Eretz-Israel, means for Jews. They have not even questioned the legitimacy and intentions behind the Arab claim for Jewish land or the viability of a two-state solution. Interestingly, the poll has shown that more than 50 percent supporters of anti-Israel candidates, Clinton and Obama, care about Israel. But, have those supporters bother to read what Clinton or Obama have said about the Arab-Israel conflict in the past or study their candidates' foreign policy platform toward Israel? Do they really know the candidates they intend to vote for? Democracy must not be blind! Ethnic Cleansing of Palestinians by UN. Cheering Chileans welcome 39 'Palestinian' refugees who will make this South American country their home after fleeing violence in Iraq. The refugees were the first of 117 Arab Palestinians whom the Chilean government has agreed to receive under a plan coordinated with the Catholic Church and the office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. (The United Nation is facilitating the Ethnic Cleansing and made "Population Transfer" as a successful resolution of a conflict, legal again. It can thus also be applied by Israel to fake Palestinian people!) Livni Gives Away Northern Jerusalem. Negotiations for Jerusalem continue apace. It is reported that Foreign Min. Livni has agreed to give away Atarot Airport. Useless Agreements of the Sick Leadership! Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said last Thursday that he is certain Israel and the Palestinian Authority can reach an agreement by the end of this year. He just doesn't see any chance of it being implemented anytime soon. Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak Quite often I am asked: "Is questioning Israel anti-Semitism?" –– Definitely "Yes", if the same people do not use the same vigour, scrutiny and are not applying the same moral, historical and legal standards to Muslim, Christian or other countries and organizations! Hamas Falsifies 'Humanitarian Crisis'. Hamas has set up a bureaucratic structure to systematically falsify claims that Israel is causing a humanitarian crisis in Gaza and is backed by representatives of the United Nations. Study of one claim that Israel did not allow 60 Gaza Arabs to receive treatment in Israel reviled that. Israeli hospitals treated one-third of those listed and that the remainder never asked to enter Israel. More than 7,000 Arabs from Gaza were treated in Israeli hospitals in 2007. Strange Statistics. 64% of Israeli Jews won't enter Arab towns in fear for their lives and 62% of the Jewish public expressed concerns that the local Arab population would eventually engage in civil disobedience and terror. At the same time 58% of the Arab public believes that Israel is democratic enough for them and 75% of the Arabs said they believe Israel is a good place to live. (Arabs hate Jews and the existence of Israel, but love benefiting from living in the Jewish state.) Policy of Self Destruction. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert tentatively agreed to grant 10,000 Arab illegal aliens in Judea and Samaria permanent resident status. (The Israeli government does not protect the demographic future of the country. National betrayal is the official policy of the Kadima and Labor parties.) Tortured by PA and Egypt. Four PA parliamentarians who investigated the death of a member of Hamas, Sheikh Majid Barghouti, said that he died as a result of torture in prison by the PA security forces. Several Arabs from Gaza say that they were brutally tortured while in prison in the Sinai Peninsula by Egyptian forces. Sensory deprivation, electric shocks, whippings and beatings were used. (No international outcry! Why are those anti-Semitic Human right defenders silent?) Quote of the Week:
Hezbollah Readying for War. With Iranian backing, Hezbollah has dramatically increased their rocket range and can now threaten most of Israel. The Lebanese based group has acquired new Iranian rockets with a range of about 185 miles. In 2006 Hezbollah fired nearly 4,000 rockets into Israel. (As the Lebanese government has done nothing to stop the second Hezbollah military build up, it must be held accountable!) Questionable Loyalty. An IDF Second Lieutenant serving in a trackers unit, most likely non-Jewish, was sentenced to six years in prison on Sunday for selling stolen weapons, 21 stun grenades for NIS 5,800 and a Negev machine gun, to an undercover policeman. Revolving Doors of Terror. Two Arab terrorists who murdered two young Jewish men at Nahal Telem in the Hevron area in January escaped a PA prison. One of the terrorists was employed by Mahmoud Abbas' American-trained PA security forces; the other was a Fatah employee at the Sharia Court in Hevron. (By paying the salaries of killers of the Jews, the US and UN are sustaining and fostering anti-Israel terrorism!) Hypocrisy of the 'Loaded' Headlines: "Gaza: No Checkpoints in Heaven" –– Because there are no PA Islamic terrorists in Heaven! Invasion is not Enough. President Shimon Peres told Army Radio last Tuesday that the only way to stop all rocket attacks against Israel from Gaza is to invade and take over the area, a move he opposes. (He admitted that he is wrong, but is still unable and unwilling to look for alternatives. Invasion of Gaza must be followed by removal of all enemy population and re-unification with Israel. Otherwise, it is just an endless 'cat and mouse' game!)
"Fake Assumptions Behind Bogus Peace Process."
Throughout the on-again, mostly off-again peace process between Israel and the Palestinians for the last decade, Jerusalem has operated under certain basic assumptions. Chief among them were: * the primary goal of the Palestinian national movement was to establish an independent state, and to do so, it was willing to allow that state to be demilitarized; (Destruction of Israel was and still is their primary goal) (Four million Muslims were forced to leave their homes after the US lead coalition invaded Iraq. Four million are forced from their homes by Sudan in Darfur. To resolve the Arab-Israel conflict, instead of wasting international aid and enriching corrupt PA officials, Israel and the international community must agree on an orderly transfer, with financial and logistic support, of four million people who call themself Palestinians from Israel, Judea, Samaria and Gaza to Sinai, the population of which at the moment is 250,000. Sinai has vast contiguous land. This is the only viable solution to the conflict. No signature under any agreement will stop Islamic terror in Israel!) Contact Steven Shamrak at stevenshamrak@gmail.com and visit his website at www.shamrak.com. |
|
U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT UNDERMINES JEWISH RIGHTS AND DEFIES INTERNATIONAL LAW
Posted by Eli E Hertz, April 14, 2008. |
|
The Tale of a "U.S.-Palestinian Partnership" The U.S. State Department has recently released a video on its website displaying remarks on the current activities of the new "U.S.-Palestinian Partnership" headed by Mr. Walter Isaacson, President of the Aspen Institute, and one of the C0-Chairs and the Coordinator of this initiative who stated at that press conference: "The Partnership will be "trying to get a [Arab] call center developed ... in East Jerusalem ..." Mr. Walter continues: "I certainly think that Minister [Ehud] Barak is very much in favor of this call center" [Is Barak giving-up on 'East Jerusalem'? Is Shass listening?]Ziad Asali, President of the American Task Force on Palestine stated in the same press conference: "And what is available to us [Arab Palestinians] at this point in time is what we can do in the West Bank and East Jerusalem ... The first call center that's being considered actually is [from all places] in East Jerusalem." In the name of "business development and economic opportunities [For Palestinian Arabs]" the State Department is systematically ignoring and undermining Jewish rights to Judea and Samaria and the sovereignty over Israel's Capitol –– Jerusalem. Palestinian Arabs are encouraged by their success' at historical revisionism and global brainwashing (including the U.S. State Department), with the "Big Lie" of a 'Palestinian people.' Historically, before the Arabs fabricated the concept of Palestinian peoplehood as an exclusively Arab phenomenon, no such group existed. This is substantiated in countless official British Mandate-vintage documents that speak of the Jews and the Arabs of Palestine-not Jews and Palestinians. The State Department's use of fabricated and loaded terms such as 'Palestinian People' and 'East Jerusalem' is a perilous threat that will only continue to incite Palestinian Arabs –– leading to war, not peace. To Condoleezza Rice: You maintained that you are "a student of international history" and the Jewish people's history is well documented. Palestinian Arabs have nurtured a myth that historically there were two Jerusalems –– an Arab 'East Jerusalem' and a Jewish 'West Jerusalem.' Jerusalem was never an Arab city; Jews have held a majority in Jerusalem since 1870, and 'east-west' is a geographical, not political designation. It is no different than claiming Annapolis, the capital of Maryland should be a separate political entity from the rest of that state. Jerusalem has served, and still serves, as the political capital of only one nation –– the one belonging to the Jews. To view the press conference or read the entire text please go to
Eli E. Hertz is president of Myths and Facts, Inc. The organization's objective is to provide policymakers, national leadership, the media and the public-at-large with information and viewpoints that are founded on factual and reliable content. Contact him at eli@hergo.com |
|
U.S.A. AND ISRAEL HAVE NO MORAL AUTHORITY TO OPPOSE CARTER
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, April 14, 2008. |
|
Aaron Klein calls out 'hypocrites' who bolster, arm, train, fund terrorists. This article appeared in World Net Daily (WND). |
|
JERUSALEM –– Israeli officials here are giving former president Jimmy Carter the cold sbhoulder for his plans to meet the chief of the Hamas terrorist group, which the U.S. and Israel have been attempting to isolate. The State Department and its director, Condoleezza Rice, even criticized Carter for his reported plans to meet Hamas. But the Israeli government and Rice have no moral authority whatsoever to judge Carter while they are enabling terrorists far more active than Hamas. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzippy Livni, and Defense Minister Ehud Barak all reportedly turned down requests to see Carter, who arrived in Israel today and is due in Syria later this week, where he is likely to meet Hamas chieftain Khaled Meshaal, who resides under protection in Damascus. The State Department says it twice advised Carter against meeting any Hamas representative. Rice told reporters this weekend she finds it "hard to understand what is going to be gained by having discussions with Hamas about peace when Hamas is, in fact, the impediment to peace." Hamas is listed by the State Department as a terrorist organization. The group is responsible for scores of deadly suicide bombings, and thousands of shooting attacks and rocket firings against civilian population centers. Meanwhile, in a furious drive to reach an Israeli-Palestinian agreement, the U.S. and the Israeli government are arming, training, financing and even pardoning the most active Palestinian terrorist group. U.S. policy considers Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah organization to be moderate, even though Fatah's military wing, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, is listed by the State Department as a terror group, just like Hamas. Fatah's Brigades is statistically responsible for more anti-Israel terrorism the past eight years than Hamas. The group took responsibility, along with the Islamic Jihad terror organization, for every suicide bombing in Israel since 2005 and for thousands of shootings and rocket attacks, including recent high-profile terrorist operations. Still, U.S.-backed negotiations started at last November's Annapolis conference seeks to give Abbas' Fatah a Palestinian state, likely in the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem, before the end of the year. For almost 10 years now the U.S. has been operating training bases for Fatah's security forces, including its police, intelligence, Force 17 and Preventative Security services units. Many members of those units carried out scores of terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians and soldiers. Hundreds of members of Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades serve openly in Fatah's security forces; many previously attended U.S.-run courses as members of Fatah's security forces. For example, the chief of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in the West Bank city of Ramallah was trained by the U.S. and currently also serves as a Fatah security officer. Ditto for the chief of the Brigades in Nablus. Another example, Abbas previously appointed Al Aska Martyrs Brigades commander Mahmoud Damra as head the U.S.-backed Force 17 force, with which American coordinates security. Damra, who was on Israel's most wanted list of terrorists, was later arrested by the IDF for planning terror attacks. The very people who are condemning Carter for planning to meet Hamas are negotiating in person on a regular basis with terrorist-saturated Fatah. Livni and chief Palestinian negotiator Ahmed Qureia have been meeting weekly while Olmert and Abbas have been meeting biweekly to hammer out an agreement. Abbas is due in Washington this month for talks with Rice and President Bush. You'd think since Israel is heavily negotiating with Fatah, the Palestinian organization's gunmen would refrain from attacks for just a few months until an agreement is signed. But since the November conference, Fatah has perpetuated or attempted scores of terror attacks. Here are just a few out of nearly 50 attacks since November: * Last week, Fatah Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades members infiltrated the Gaza-Israel border in an attempt to kidnap Israeli troops. The terrorists shot dead two Israeli civilians. The Brigades, Islamic Jihad and the Popular Resistance Committees claimed responsibility. After all this, logic would dictate someone at the State Department or in Olmert's office would call off negotiations with Abbas until attacks are halted or at least ask for a commitment to end the Fatah terrorism. Instead, as has been widely reported, the U.S. last month commenced elite training courses in Jordan and the West Bank city of Jericho to help establish a stronger Palestinian police force run by Fatah. Also, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak, another critic of Carter's slated Hamas meet, agreed this month to supply the PA police with ammunition, rubber bullets and night-vision equipment and to allow the transfer of 50 armed jeeps to the force. So now, after Barak's gesture, Fatah terrorists can scout Jewish targets in the dark with Israeli-provided night-vision goggles, shoot at Jews with Israeli-transferred bullets and retreat into their Israeli-transferred armored vehicles to fend of any IDF fire. The U.S. and Israel continue to play a deadly game where Hamas are the "bad" terrorists while the more active Fatah are the "good" terrorists. There is no question Carter, whose views on Israel are well known, is up to no good in meeting with Hamas. He would become the most high-profile American figure to sit down with the terrorist group. His visit could be the break in the dam Hamas has been looking for to end the terror group's international isolation, leading the way to contacts between Hamas and European leaders and eventually even with American diplomats. Carter should rightly be condemned. But Rice and the Israeli government have lost the high ground at opposing anyone who bolsters terrorists. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. Zelasko writes,
|
|
IS THIS STILL AMERICA?
Posted by Rock Peters, April 13, 2008. |
|
Today there is no more talk of Jesus or Moses
Jesus said, "Love your enemies"
In NYC Muslims attack Jews
A federal reserve bank refuses me services
Liberals attack Judeo-Christian values
In San Francisco
Muslim organizations like CAIR
And as we watch
We see Mexican students in California
Muslim women dressed in black burkas
"We must be tolerant!"
Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad comes to Columbia University
Baraq Obama runs for President
A Jewish college student flushes a Koran
When I see Muslim youths beating Jews on the street
But I will not sit
For I would rather die on my feet
Never again! Not while I live!
Live free or die! United We Stand! Rock Peters is the Communications Director for ACT for America's (NY chapter.) ACT for America! is a citizens' action group committed to preserving American liberty and freedom and defeating Muslim terrorism. We are currently having a membership drive by sponsoring the viewing of the movie "Obsession." We appreciate ALL help in raising the level of public awareness to our patriotic cause. Rock Peters' multimedia website –– www.godsaveusa.com –– is dedicated to fighting Muslim terrorism. It is both factual and attractive. Contact him at rockpeters@aol.com |
|
IT ALWAYS WAS JIHAD
Posted by Asher Eder, April 13, 2008. |
|
To: David Horovitz, Editor, Jerusalem Post Subject: "It always was Jihad", by David Horovitz, Jerusalem Post. |
|
Dear Sir, I hadn't yet the chance to read Benny Morris' new book on the 1948 war, so I refer only to your interview with him (in JPost of April 11, page 24): The following historic facts should have been mentioned, too –– and perhaps it could be done in a special interview; or in form of a "Readers' Letter": 1) Chaim Weitzman and King Feisal of Iraq signed in 1919 an "Agreement" in which the King welcomes the Jews back in their ancient home country, and thus help also re-build the Arab society. However, he made his commitment depending on getting all the lands South of Turkey (liberated in WWI). Yet, the British and the French "created" Syria, Iraq, Jordan, and the "Mandate of Palestine", and thus de-validated that "Agreement". 2) At the very same year, Mufti Amin el-Husseini came forth with his instigations against any Jewish immigration (mentioned in your article) –– but the British made him the "Mufti of Jerusalem", and did not object his styling himself "Grand-Mufti of Palestine", even did not really interfere in his instigation of the riots of 1920/21; 1929; 1936-38. It needs to be stressed that in the latter, his gangs killed 3-4 times as much local Arabs ("Palestinians", mainly of the Nashashibi Tribe whom he accused of "collaboration" with the Jews), than they killed over 700 Jews. 3) The Arab League adopted his stance, and in the "Round Table Conference" convened 1938 in London by the British to find a solution, the Arab delegates refused plainly to sit with Jews on one table –– and the British, caving in, arranged two adjacent rooms, one for the Jewish delegates, one for the Arabs, with a British mediator standing in a connecting door... Also, the "Arab Boycott" needs to be mentioned. 4) Amin el-Husseini managed to escape to nazi-Germany where he raised for its "Waffen-SS" two Moslem Divisions; and called in 1943 from Radio Berlin for a Jihad against the Jews [[there was no State of Israel then]], charging: "Kill the Jews wherever you find them –– this is pleasing to Allah". Caught by the French toward the end of the war, but soon released, he went to Cairo to organize armed resistance against any immigration of Jewish survivors. 5) In Cairo, Amin el-Husseini became the mentor of Rauf el-Chodbi, later better known by his adopted "nome de guerre" Arafat. While that name sounds to (ignorant) Westerners like Smith or Miller, it signals to the Arabs/Muslims the goal: Each Moslem has to make at least once in his life the "Hadj" to Mecca which gets completed and crowned by ascending Mount Arafat (mentioned in Sura "The Cow", 194) –– –– and now that pilgrimage has to be crowned by the "Jihad" against Israel, lead by the PLO-Leader Arafat... Accordingly, his "Fedayeen"-group was re-named El-Fatah, this name being taken from the Opening Sura = El-Fatah of the Koran. That is, they are to open the way to all of "Palestine" 6) Right after the Six-Days-War, when Israel's government suggested negotiations with the Arabs to finally settle the whole dispute, the ill-famous Khartoum-Conference retorted with its three-fold "NO": no negotiations with Israel; no recognition of the State of Israel; and no solution of the refugee problem. That is, the latter became a tool and war instrument in the hands of the hostile Arab nations. 7) Hence, the war, in fact an Arab/Israel war, got described by Arab propaganda as "Israel-Palestine War" –– and our media and government adopted that propaganda ruse, along with the rest of the world. Much to our detriment; and self-delusion. –– At least, now Benny Morris got that right.. 8) The above should make it clear that Israel-Palestine peace negotiations are rather futile. Whatever we concede to the "Palestinians" –– territories; or even East-Jerusalem –– is in fact a concession to the Jihad-minded Arab world, for getting nothing substantial in return (at best, we'll get a "Hutnah", a kind of armistice to be done away with as soon as it seems opportune). One cannot achieve true peace by making concessions to that spearhead called "Palestine": either there will be peace with the Arab/Muslim world; and consequently also with the locals –– or else we will only delude ourselves. 9) We do not need to share Benny Morris' lack of an answer, even pessimism, in regard of the situation: the Arabs' Jihad against Israel is in plain contradiction to the teaching of the Koran, even of the attitude of the early Caliphs (especially of Omar). There are many means to bring that home to the Muslim people. Of course, I don't have any illusion that we could convince hard core Jihadists, but quite a number of Moslem people might be open, and thus will not support directly or indirectly that crazy, even criminal, Jihad idea. Moreover, it will show also to our people that there is light at the end of the tunnel: it will give hope, instead of despair. However, whether that could be done by a socialist/liberalist "government", is another question... 10) Attached herewith the "Summary" of an essay on "Peace is possible between Ishmael and Israel..." 11) Please, forward this letter also to Caroline Glick; and to Sarah Honig. Thanks. Sincerely,
|
|
AN ABBAS OF FAILURE
Posted by Barry Rubin, April 12, 2008. |
|
'Rice Wins Concessions from Israel," read the Washington Post headline after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's recent visit. Rice herself told reporters her goal was to further Israel-Palestinian Authority talks by getting Israeli concessions to "improve the quality of life" for Palestinians. She listed 10 different Israeli concessions, which included removing 50 roadblocks, easing checkpoint procedures, giving PA security forces more leeway in Jenin, increasing travel and work permits, backing economic projects, letting 700 US-trained PA security men deploy, and giving the PA armored vehicles and night-vision goggles. Rice claimed success, saying talks are now "moving in the right direction." Are they? Will these concessions make the PA more stable or moderate? No. One wonders if we'll ever see the headline: "Rice Wins Concessions from Palestinians." I doubt it. How should one score this outcome: Israel 10, PA 0, because Israel might get international credit for taking risks for peace? Or the opposite –– PA 10, Israel 0 –– since the former got all the material gains? Certainly, the PA isn't bragging. On the contrary, it denies Israel gives anything. Neither does the PA take advantage of either these measures or of the huge aid it receives to improve its people's quality of life. That's something only Westerners care about.
TO COMPREHEND its world view and strategy, consider PA leader Mahmoud Abbas's March 29 speech to the Arab summit in Damascus. That presentation, along with the summit itself, shows the trap in which Arab politics is stuck. Even Abbas's opening Koran quote presents a paradox: "If you will aid the cause of Allah, He will aid you and plant your feet firmly." Abbas's rivals, both in Hamas and among his own Fatah radicals, say that's what they do: follow divine will and feet-planting by rejecting concessions and continuing war to total victory. His second point is a professed confidence "that we all do agree that... a joint Arab stand and action suffices" to bring success. This line, used for 50 years, is wrong on both counts: there's no Arab unity and even if there were it wouldn't suffice. Indeed, this was a most divisive Arab summit, with the Saudis and Jordanians leading opposition to Syria's attempt to seize control of Lebanon. His third theme was that while Palestinians "remain committed to the option of a just peace, the two-state solution... Israel pursues its aggression and occupation, the construction of settlements, and the Judaization of Jerusalem." Rather than portraying Israel's current government as wanting a deal, he says it aims to seize all but "a few isolated areas." This is the government that withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip and is willing to pull out of most of the rest of the territories. Yet according to Abbas, it "seeks to undermine the possible establishment of an independent state on the land of the Palestinian people." But if so, how can the Palestinians make peace with Israel? Why is Hamas wrong in saying that only victory through violence can work?
IN ABBAS's telling, Israel's aggression is unprovoked. He speaks of "barbaric attacks, causing hundreds of defenseless victims," and its evil intent to "undermine the possibility of reaching a peace agreement...." He ignores constant attacks on Israel from Gaza and offers no credible way to deal with them. He merely asks Hamas to give him Gaza and return to being one party in a PA-dominated system. This won't happen. Hamas will keep attacking Israel and trying to take over the West Bank. For all this, he blames not Hamas –– with whom he desperately tries to conciliate –– but only Israel. Here's the trap: Hamas (and elements in Fatah) attack Israel, Israel responds, Abbas cites this as proof Israel doesn't want peace and that negotiations cannot succeed. His bottom line: "The Israeli government seeks by the power of its occupation to impose a political solution on the ground according to its own wishes." Meanwhile, instead of competing with Hamas, the PA uses Western aid to subsidize Hamas, spending, according to Abbas, 58 percent of its budget on Gaza and paying salaries for 77,000 employees there, more than it has itself! In theory, this projects PA influence; in practice it ensures Hamas holds power. He gives Hamas money unconditionally while begging it for Gaza. While Abbas has no strategy for regaining Gaza or making peace with Israel, his rivals have a clear, simple program appealing to reigning passions and world view. As Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah puts it: "The Zionist entity can be wiped out of existence. Our nation is stronger now than ever before." Only "Zionist-American propaganda" –– in which he includes Abbas –– wants to fool Arabs and Muslims into thinking they "don't have any hopes of winning.
THE U.S. State Department excused Abbas's speech as just rhetoric. But that's untrue. Abbas feeds the Hamas-Iran line by demonizing Israel and implying negotiations are useless. He's not even trying to win his own people's support by improving their lives. We've become so used to this behavior that we forget there's an alternative. Abbas could say: "Israel is ready to make peace with us if we prove we'll keep our pledges. Let's defeat the radical Islamists, stop the attacks on Israel that breed conflict, end incitement to violence, reform our own regimes, align with the West and get an independent state." Israel needs to work with Abbas and keep him afloat as the lesser of two evils. But Abbas is incapable of making peace or regaining Gaza. His PA regime might fall to Hamas or be taken over, on his not-distant retirement, by still-dominant Fatah radicals even more eager to ally with Hamas and return to armed struggle. Here's where Rice and much Western policy is wrong. By not demanding and getting PA concessions and by giving money unconditionally, they ensure not only that peace will fail but that there will be decades of conflict ahead. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloriacenter.org and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal http://meria.idc.ac.il. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). This article appeared in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
TIME IS RUNNING OUT
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 12, 2008. |
|
This was written by Leo Bretholz and it appeared April 7, 2008
in the Washington Times
|
|
As a survivor of the Holocaust, I am writing to speak out for those who were silenced by the Nazis and their French collaborators. On Nov. 6, 1942, I was on a train traveling from the holding camp of Drancy, located near Paris, to Auschwitz. That train was composed of 20 cattle cars, each holding 50 doomed people for a total of 1,000. More than 70 of such convoys left Drancy for Auschwitz from March 1942 to September 1944. Pregnant women, mothers nursing their babies, whimpering children, the elderly –– men and women alike, were shoved into these cattle cars with little room to breathe. Each of us was given a slab of stale bread, a small portion of cheese and a can of sardines, though no means to open it. Our "bathroom" was one bucket for the entire car. In no time, it overflowed, leaving all of us standing, squatting, and sitting in human waste. Dehumanization had begun in earnest. Residents of the town of Drancy looked the other way as the train, filled with misery and despair, started its journey to Auschwitz. We were a part of the war they wanted to ignore. Some on board understood our fate, while others clung to optimistic hope. As I considered escaping, an elderly woman emboldened me not to give up. She said "If you jump and succeed, you'll be able to tell the story. Who else will do it?" She added: "Que Dieu vous garde!" (May God watch over you!) Fortunately, I managed to leap from that train before it reached the German border, and spent the next four years running for my life, always one step ahead of those who wanted me dead. Of the 1,000 Jews that left Drancy that morning, many died en route and 773 were gassed on arrival at Auschwitz. Those who remained were forced into labor, and only five of them survived. In May 1945 the war ended. I had slipped through the Nazis' fingers several times, both before and after my escape from the train. Most of my family was not so fortunate. In 1947, I arrived in America to start a new life. Today, I am a United States citizen. I live according to American laws and honor our ideals. A fundamental American principal is that every person has the right to access the legal system, to have their day in court. But for every rule, unfortunately, there is an exception. I am one of more than 600 individuals suing the French national railroad –– Societe Nationale des Chemins de Fer francais (SNCF) –– for its World War II role in deporting Jews and other "undesirables" from our homes and delivering us to Auschwitz and other Nazi death camps. SNCF deported more than 75,000 people to concentration camps aboard trains marked with a "Da" for "Trains of David." SNCF took its job seriously and did it well. The company ensured that it had capacity to meet demand, and it maintained its rail stock in the hope of preventing escapes like mine. It supported the Nazis willingly and profited from this. In the years since, unlike so many other Holocaust-era companies, SNCF has not taken any steps to make financial reparations to its victims. I jumped from convoy No. 42 with a purpose. I must tell the story of those who perished, and seek justice on their behalf. I turned to the American courts, hoping to hold SNCF responsible for its illegal actions, only to find my path blocked. The Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act (FSIA) of 1976 was enacted to limit immunity to a government's public acts, not its private, commercial ones. However, the law also grants immunity to corporations whose shares are owned by a government. The French government owns shares of SNCF. Therefore, SNCF, one of the 500 largest companies in the world, selling more than $100 million worth of Eur-rail passes and other travel services each year in the United States, has immunity from our litigation. Fortunately, members of Congress are seeking to close this unintended loophole. H.R. 3713, legislation to hold Holocaust accomplices accountable, would permit us to have our day in court. I hope more Members of Congress will support this important bill. On behalf of others forced aboard SNCF trains, we are simply asking for the opportunity to hold the company legally accountable for the crimes it committed and the profit it made from those crimes. In this country, is it too much to ask for our day in court? It has been more than 60 years since I jumped from that train, the start of a journey that would forever change my life. Time is running out. Hopefully Congress will act before it is too late. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
WHAT'S LEFT OF BUSH'S DEMOCRACY AGENDA?
Posted by Daniel Mandel, April 12, 2008. |
|
The other month in Cairo, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice confirmed at a press conference that the Bush Administration had quietly waived a congressional hold on $100 million in military aid to Egypt. The Washington Post observed that Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit, standing next to her, "couldn't conceal his smug satisfaction." As well he might. Congress had halted funds in the interests of protecting the independence of the Egyptian judiciary and stopping police abuses by the regime of Hosni Mubarak –– precisely the sort of exercise in promoting democracy, not merely in Iraq, but across the Middle East, that President George W. Bush declared in November 2003 to be "a focus of American policy for decades to come." Previous administrations had preferred stable autocracies that in time incubated Islamist absolutism. Yet, in the event, and putting the special and mixed case of Iraq to one side, Bush's new democratic commitment has not even outlived his own presidency. At first, Bush's commitment looked like it was being upheld. In 2003, he called on Mubarak to release leading human rights activist Saad Eddin Ibrahim and withheld $130 million in supplemental aid to Cairo until he did so. In 2005, Rice cancelled a visit to Cairo to protest the arrest of another such activist, Ayman Nour, leading to his release. Egypt, being after Israel the second highest recipient of U.S. foreign aid, is susceptible of pressure, adroitly applied and sustained, and now was surely the time for more. Yet already in February 2005, the Bush Administration, which had called for elections in Egypt, allowed itself to be fobbed off in with what was described by the New York Times as Mubarak's "unexpected announcement" of direct, multiparty presidential elections for the first time since the 1952 military coup. In fact, proclamations of impending democratic reform have a long pedigree in Egypt and Mubarak, who once stated that no president should serve more than two terms, is now into his fifth, having spent the last two years harassing opposition figures into impotence. In 2006, hundreds of Egyptians were arrested for demonstrating in favor of judges who denounced the rigging of recent parliamentary elections. Apparently, Mubarak was still unimpressed with the tenor of election results, so he obviated the risk of a repeat performance in local elections by simply canceling them. Meanwhile, his presidential challenger, Nour, again rots in jail for allegedly falsifying petitions to run in the presidential elections that were actually approved by the government at the time. Yet these regressive developments no longer move the Bush Administration to protest or to consider withholding its enormous annual subvention to Cairo. American failure to promote democracy appears to be a pattern. Libya is another example. Fearing Washington's wrath before during and after the removal of Saddam Hussein, Libya's perennial maximum leader Muammar Ghaddafi dismantled his non-conventional weapons programs and suspended the use of terrorism. The U.S. was in a strong position to pressure Ghaddafi to liberalize his country and in Fathi El Jahmi, Libya's leading human rights activist, it had a natural ally. Indeed, U.S. pressure led in 2004 to Jahmi's release from prison. But Jahmi's new-found freedom last only two weeks. His re-incarceration and the absence of any Libyan move towards democracy did not prevent the Bush Administration in 2006 from resuming full diplomatic ties with Libya. Today, Gaddafi still exercises sole, despotic dominion in Libya and Jahmi rots in prison. In the Palestinian Authority, Bush dramatically broke with past orthodoxy in June 2002 by calling upon Palestinians to elect "leaders not compromised by terror" and to "build a practicing democracy, based on tolerance and liberty." Since then, however his administration has been frantically working to subvert the attainment of these very goals. In 2003, Bush adopted the Roadmap peace plan, designed to lead to Palestinian statehood irrespective of Palestinian conduct, and claimed it to be an elaboration, rather than the undoing, of his own goals. In 2006, his Administration plunged forward with urging elections on a population radicalized by hate propaganda and resentful of corrupt elites. The result was delivering power to Hamas, the Palestinian offshoot of the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, which calls in its Charter for the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews –– a monumental failure of democracy promotion which Rice denies to this day. Having wrongly second guessed this outcome, the Bush Administration now backs an increasingly Islamist Fatah that has taken no steps in the direction of Bush's June 2002 benchmarks and works to create a Palestinian state governed by it. The Bush Administration seems to have hit upon a maladroit mixture –– a preoccupation with democratic processes at the expense of democratic purposes, a fixation with means rather than ends, and a partiality for détente with dictators. The result has been the emboldening of radical and authoritarian regimes alike, the empowering of terrorists and their sponsors and the demoralization of reformers. This is the legacy that Bush bequeaths his successor in just over nine months. Daniel Mandel (PhD Melbourne, 1999) is a Research Fellow in the
Department of History at Melbourne University and author of H.V. Evatt
and the Establishment of Israel: The Undercover Zionist (Routledge,
London, 2004). This article is archived at
|
|
LIVNI GIVES AWAY WHAT DOESN'T BELONG TO HER –– NORTHERN JERUSALEM
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 11, 2008. |
|
This is by Hillel Fendel and it appeared today in
Arutz-Sheva
|
|
Negotiations for Jerusalem continue apace, with a local Jerusalem paper reporting that Foreign Minister Livni has agreed to give away Atarot Airport. Shas says it's still not leaving the government. The Kol HaZman (All the Time) paper reports that in ongoing secret talks with top Palestinian Authority negotiator Abu Ala, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni has agreed, in the name of Israel, to transfer the Atarot airfield in northern Jerusalem to PA control. The paper states it source as "senior Foreign Ministry elements." The Goal: Strengthen Fatah Israel apparently recognizes Hamas control in Gaza as permanent, and therefore wishes to strengthen Fatah –– perceived as more moderate –– in Judea and Samaria. Fatah terrorists, members of the organization's Al Aqsa Brigades, have carried out many murderous attacks against Israeli civilians in recent weeks, months and years. One of the most active terrorist forces in the area, it has been designated terrorist organization by the U.S., the European Union, Canada, and Japan. Alternatively, it is not clear that the Hamas-takeover scenario will not repeat itself in Judea and Samaria, thus leaving the Atarot Airport in Hamas hands –– if Israel in fact relinquishes it. Mayor is Against Jerusalem Mayor Uri Lupolianski is strongly against the loss of Atarot to the terrorists. His aides said he was "astonished" to hear of the secret agreement, and feels it will be a grave security failure and a significant concession on Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem. "It is inconceivable," the mayor reportedly said, "that while Israeli flights from Atarot have been stopped because of security fears, the threat will now become even more severe, with control of the entire area being given over to the PA." He warned of the dangers of "hostile airplanes" in the skies of Jerusalem. Lupoliansky promises he will work even harder to advance his plan to build 10,000 housing units for Jews in Atarot, hoping to thus thwart the plan to give it to the PA. Jerusalem Municipality officials said the agreement to give away Atarot represents a de-facto recognition of the division of Jerusalem. Olmert Takes no Responsibility Staffers in Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's office said, "These are talks being handled by the Foreign Minister, and therefore answers must be received from her." Livni's press secretary said that the contents of the talks are not meant to be publicized. Shas Doesn't Budge Meanwhile, the Shas Party –– whose departure from the government coalition would likely lead to the toppling of the government and new elections –– continues to stay put. Relating to a new American initiative to give the PA partial control of Jerusalem for five years, Shas spokesman Ro'i Lachmanovitch told Arutz-7's Hebrew newsmagazine on Thursday that Shas was going nowhere: "We continue to stand behind the stance set by [the party's spiritual leader] Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef, which is that the moment Jerusalem is placed on the agenda of the diplomatic talks, Shas will quit the coalition." A late-breaking development in another sphere may move Shas, however: The sudden decision by the Cabinet secretariat not to discuss the non-enforced chametz law in this Sunday's agenda. Shas had hoped for quick government action to legislate a change in the law that would enable its enforcement, in light of a recent court ruling allowing chametz to be sold in stores. Shas MKs are reportedly angered by the decision, and political analysts estimate that Shas may threaten to quit the coalition over it –– though this has not yet happened. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
THE SHELF AGREEMENT. WHY MUST ISRAEL CREATE A "HORIZON OF HOPE"?
Posted by Ted Belman, April 11, 2008. |
|
PM Olmert announced that he expects to reach an agreement with the PA (whatever and whoever that is) by the end of the year and went on to say it won't be implemented for many years. "We will insist on all the terms of the Road Map, first and foremost among them a cessation of terrorism, as a precondition for implementation of any understanding. But the first step creating a horizon of hope for us and for the Palestinians can be taken, it must be taken, and we will make every effort in order to successfully do so this year." The obvious question is why must we create a "horizon of hope"? The argument goes, if the Palestinians have hope, they will abandon terror. Where is the evidence of this? Evidently we are offering them a carrot as an inducement to forgo terror. The Oslo accords also offered them a carrot of autonomy and they accepted it on this basis only to get their many feet in the door and then immediately resorted to terror and never honoured their obligations. So Bush offered them another carrot, the prospect of a Palestinian state subject to cleaning house. The Roadmap followed shortly thereafter. It set out the steps to be taken to get the carrot. More terror was the result. Even that carrot, wasn't enough to change anything. I should point out there was a hidden carrot included in the Roadmap namely, the Saudi Peace Plan was mentioned for the first time as a principle in reaching an agreement. Rest assured that when the Abdullah first mentioned the Plan it had been agreed by the US that the plan would be incorporated in the Roadmap after Bush announced his vision of a Palestinian state. This Plan thereby undermined the principles of Res 242 requiring defensible borders, which were the guiding principles until then. Sharon objected to its inclusion and Powell got brusk with him and basically said take it or leave it. You cannot have the Roadmap without the Saudi Plan as part of it. As you know, nothing changed. Palestinian terror continued. Sharon sought to break the impasse and take the future into Israel's own hands and disengaged from Gaza unilaterally. This also offered hope to the Palestinians as they had every opportunity to build on what Israel left behind. They decided to destroy it instead. Around this time, Condi started saying that the Palestinians must be offered "hope". As if Israel hadn't been offering them hope from the git go. Nevertheless she would build on this idea with diplomats all over the word picking up on it as if on cue, which they probably were. This new initiative culminated in the Annapolis conference and the inversion of the steps. First the core issues were to be decided upon in a Declaration of Principles. But we were told not to worry because such agreement would be a "shelf agreement" only to wait upon the requirements of the first phase to be satisfied. To call it a "shelf agreement" is to suggest that it will lie fallow like a government report, with no immediate consequences. Nonsense. Even now before the agreement is finalized, it is being implemented on the ground. Arabs are being allowed to build anywhere on what will be their land without the necessity of a building permit. Jews on the other hand are severely restricted from building on their land or land they own. Palestinians are being tasked with the job of policing certain Arab towns and we just heard about how their political rights in Jerusalem are being expanded. To call this a "shelf agreement" is a bald-faced lie. But beyond the question of its implementation, the most important consequence of it is the fact that the lands accorded to the Palestinians would in effect be held on trust for them. I have no doubt that after the "shelf agreement" is signed, Israel will pass the bill offering compensation to settlers to move out, more roadblocks would be lifted etc. Israel will gradually withdraw over the next five years while the US increasingly works with Fatah to increase their strength to govern and reduce terror. The Americans are training Fatah in the same way and for the same purpose as they are training the Iraq army. The only difference is that in the case of the territories, Israel is the occupier but in both cases, the US is in charge. In effect this shelf agreement is the blueprint for all interim steps to be taken toward its implementation. Once there is better separation, Palestine will be declared with or without a cessation in terror and incitement. Keep in mind the object of the peace process is to end the occupation, not end the terror. For this reason Israel is investigating ways to protect themselves from missiles and rockets. The way I see it is that if you are in favour of ending the occupation along the lines suggested, this is a good plan and it is irreversible. If on the other hand you hate the deal that is being cut, too bad. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
CHILDREN'S DVD PRAISES MUSLIM SUICIDE BOMBERS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, April 11, 2008. |
|
Some may recall the horrific case of al-Qaeda operatives in Baghdad last year who parked a car next to a shopping center in Baghdad, left a sleeping infant inside (to make the car look innocent and unthreatening, and thus deflect suspicion), and then distanced themselves from the car before they blew it up, killing the infant and numerous bystanders and shoppers. I commented at the time that this inhuman barbarism was not freedom fighting or revolution or resistance, it was psychotic murder....the work of homicidal maniacs, insane people. I've written on the brutality and barbarism of the Palestinian Authority's and Hamas' education of children from the age of 4 or 5 in to suicide bombing as an ideal, martyrdom (shahada) as a way of life-and-death with honor....a clear indication of the PA leadership's intentions to maintain a terror war for decades. I've also commented occasionally on the issue of human shields...the Palestinian and other Arab/Muslim terrorist penchant for placing women and children in harm's way knowing that Israeli forces will be deterred: a practice which, despite its deterrence, does end up often with dead innocents. I've pointed out that the culpability for those dead innocents rests solely upon those who put them in harm's way...and not upon the IDF (per international law). Despite my familiarity with all of the above, I was shocked to read the article below (children's dvd praises muslim suicide bombers), which came to my attention only now. So we learn that El-qaeda operatives in the UK are teaching British Muslim children to blow themselves up and take with them as many infidels as possible....using cartoons and videos and songs and sing-along tunes and images of maternal love and the loving child's natural desire to emulate the beloved parent....just what children love. They use the innocent child's natural propensity for love as the springboard for the inculcation of a deeply psychotic hatred which they intend will lead the child to suicide and homicide. And they give the video, sound track in Arabic, English subtitles so even the UK Muslim children who speak English can imbibe of the wisdom of the terrorists who assert that killing infidels in this world buys you reward in the next which is far greater than anything that you can achieve in your lifetime in this world. This is evil beyond comprehension. And British Muslim adults distribute these videos to British Muslim children. There is a truly deep and indescribable evil in the Muslim world. It can be no accident that while not all Muslims are terrorists, almost all terrorists are Muslims. I assume that, similarly, not all Muslims are proponents of such evil inherent in teaching children to hate and kill and blow themselves up, but it is clear that all proponents of this evil are Muslims. I have no doubt that this too is not an accident, not a statistical aberation. Moreover, and perhaps even more dangerous, those Muslims who are not proponents of such evil simply remain silent in the face of that evil...with the exception of a very few, described briefly in the 2nd article. Silence in the face of evil is complicity. Complicity with evil is evil. And as witness and validation to my assertion about this evil, read the second article below (Meir Abelson). I've highlighted and put in to italics some segments that seem particularly important. |
|
1.Daily Express
London suicide bomber Mohammed Sidique Kahn making a video before the 7/7 bombings A SINGALONG film glorifying suicide bombers is being handed out to British children. In one scene on the DVD an orphan girl rejoices at the chance to emulate her terrorist mother as she discovers a stick of dynamite in a wardrobe. The propaganda discs have been given to youngsters celebrating Eid, the biggest Muslim festival of the year.Now police in Bradford are in possession of one and are investigating whether Al Qaeda fanatics are distributing them across Britain. Mosque leaders in the Yorkshire city –– home to one of Britain's largest Asian communities –– claim to have no knowledge of the DVD.The Egyptian-made disc shows self-proclaimed orphans ranting against the West in a cartoon-style song complaining about the plight of the Palestinian people.The terrorist-recruiting DVD, which contains tracks sung by children in Arabic but with English subtitles, has details of a Leeds distribution company on the back cover. Now the West Yorkshire counter terrorism unit is trying to discover how many have been distributed.One song is about two children who lose their mother when she becomes a suicide bomber. It is believed to be a reference to Reem al-Reyashi, a 22-year-old Palestinian woman who blew herself up in 2004 at a crossing in the Gaza Strip, killing four Israelis. The film begins with an Arab woman playing with her two children, then leaving home with dynamite tucked in her dress.She blows herself up after being challenged by soldiers. Her children and husband are then seen finding out about her death on TV.One daughter, rummaging around her mother's wardrobe, finds a stick of dynamite hidden in a drawer and, turning to the camera, says: "My love will not be by words. I will follow my mother's steps."One of the DVDs was handed to Shipley MP Philip Davies by a constituent whose grandson brought it home from a mosque in Bradford, which has a Muslim population of more than 50,000. After viewing the disc Mr Davies contacted the police. He said: "It's outrageous that this material is readily available in West Yorkshire."It beggars belief that somebody is prepared to proudly proclaim that they distribute this material."My worry is about how many children have been influenced by it." Mr Davies will ask the Home Secretary what support the Government is giving to police to locate and eliminate this kind of material.Last year an Al Qaeda propaganda DVD was discovered being handed out at a mosque in Dewsbury, yards from the home of 7/7 ringleader Mohammad Siddique Khan. Last night the head of West Yorkshire counter terrorism, Det Chief Supt John Parkinson, said his officers were investigating whether any offences were committed involving the new disc.Yorkshire Muslim peer and Shadow Communities Secretary Baroness Warsi said it was "deeply disturbing if this kind of material is being aimed at young children". At Leeds Crown Court this week a former English language tutor was jailed for four years after he was found with material showing how to make a suicide vest with explosives and shrapnel. Rizwan Mahmood Ditta, 29, described as a devout Muslim from a respected family, also possessed films urging holy war against non-Muslims and supporting Osama Bin Laden. 2. These Critics Are Accessories To Murder!
Israel is in the dock. The basis of the conflict is –– we are told –– "Israel's occupation of Palestinian land." Her attempts to defend herself are "disproportionate and excessive." Her response to the rain of missiles and suicide bombers is branded "a heavy-handed campaign of violence destroying all hopes of peace." Putting up checkpoints and building an "apartheid wall" has made Gaza "the biggest open prison in the world." She has created a `humanitarian crisis in Gaza.' She ignores obligations she has undertaken, and acts contrary to "international law." Hardly a week passes without someone proposing a boycott. And –– the most preposterous accusation of all –– that she is a "racist" state. This is a small sample of daily bludgeoning that Israel –– the only democracy in the Middle East –– endures. However, they all have one thing in common –– they are all irrelevant, [DML: I would say that they are antithetical] not only to peace in the Middle East, but to the peace of the whole world. I (Meir Abelson) open my case with the words of two Muslims: the first is Walid Shoebat, a reformed terrorist, who wrote in his book "Why I Left Jihad:" "I choose to speak out because I know what is wrong. And what is wrong has nothing to do with Israel's `occupation of the land;' it is Islam's occupation of the mind. There are other victims, just like me, millions of them, and like Hitler's Jugend –– they are all kids. They are taught the same songs about killing Jews as I was. When will we get rid of the education propaganda promoting both destruction and self-destruction? Will it take a generation? Ten? Until then there will be no peace, no matter what kind of land settlement the world tries to enforce. Not when Muslim children undergo this occupation of the mind. There is no solution unless we liberate the children from an evil and growing menace and stop the cycle." My next witness is Ibn Warraq, author of several books, including "Why I am not a Muslim" and "What the Koran Really Says." In the former work, he asks: "Is the Sharia (Islamic law) still valid? We may ask how a law whose elements were first laid down over a thousand years ago, and whose substance has not evolved with the times can possibly be relevant in the twentieth century. The sharia only reflects the social and economic conditions of the time of the early Abbasids and has simply grown out of touch with all the later developments –– social, economic and moral. It seems improbable but we have progressed morally: we no longer regard women as chattels that we can dispose of as we will: we no longer believe that those who do not share our religious beliefs are not worthy of equal respect; we even accord animals and children rights, But as long as we regard the Koran as eternally true, with an answer to all the problems of the modern world, we will have no progress. The principles enshrined in the Koran are inimical to moral progress." Ibn Warraq expands on the character of Mohammed, and quotes from Dr. Margoliouth's summary of the picture that emerges in the prophet's biography by Ibn Ishaq: "The character attributed to Mohammed in the biography of Ibn Ishaq is exceedingly unfavorable. In order to gain his ends he recoils to no expedient, and he approves of similar unscrupulousness on the part of his adherents, when exercised in his interests. He profits to the utmost from the chivalry of the Meccans, but rarely requites it with the like. He organizes assassinations and wholesale massacres. His career as a tyrant in Medina is that of a robber chief, whose political economy consists of securing and dividing plunder, the distribution of the latter being at times carried out on principles which fail to satisfy his followers' ideas of justice. He is himself an unbridled libertine and encourages the same passion in his followers. For whatever he does he is prepared to plead the express authorization of the deity. It is, however, impossible to find any doctrine which he is not prepared to abandon in order to secure a political end. At different points in his career he abandons the unity of God and his claim to the title of Prophet. This is a disagreeable picture for the founder of a religion, and it cannot be pleaded that it is a picture drawn by an enemy, and even though Ibn Ishaq's name was for some reason held in low esteem by the traditionalists of the third Islamic century, they make no attempt to discredit those portions of the biography which bear hardest on the character of their Prophet." There are resonances of Mohammed's character in the assessment of Arab society today, in the book "Temperament and Character of the Arabs," (1960) by the Arab psychologist Dr. Sania Hamady, Professor of Social Relations at Miami University: "The Arab has no scruples about lying if by it he achieves his objective. His conscience has an interesting elasticity....To be clever, one has to see through all the admirable manners, engaging words, and the feigned humility of the Arab....Arab society is ruthless, stern and pitiless. It worships strength and has no compassion for weakness." Prof. Hamady points to the "vindictive race-feeling of the Arabs aided, in some degree, by the glory accruing to them from having given the world its last and greatest prophet." Her conclusion is that they need liberation from the self [that] necessitates a cleansing from within, giving up stale ideals, obsolete ideas, illusions about reality (themselves, their milieu and the universe), certain disagreeable patterns of behavior, and some unjust modes of social relations." My third witness is Irshad Manji, who describes herself as a `Muslim refusenik.' Like Walid Shoebat, she declares: "...I'm asking questions from which we can no longer hide. Why are we all being held hostage by what's been happening between the Palestinians and the Israelis? What's with the stubborn streak of anti-Semitism in Islam? Who is the real coloniser of Muslims –– America or Arabia? Why are we squandering the talents of women, fully half of God's creation? How can we be so sure that homosexuals deserve ostracism –– or death –– when the Koran states that everything God made is `excellent'? ...if we don't speak out against the imperialists within Islam, these guys will walk away with the show. And their path leads to a dead end of more vitriol, more violence, more poverty, more exclusion. Is this the justice we seek for the world that God has leased to us? If it's not, then why don't more of us say so?" And as a final thrust, she asks: "Why [do] I bother associating with a faith that beats at the centre of so much international turmoil and individual torment?" My fourth witness is not a Muslim; she is Brigitte Gabriel, a Lebanese Christian, who from the age of ten, lived in an underground bomb shelter for seven years while Muslims throughout the Middle East poured into her country and declared jihad against the Lebanese Christians. One horrific extract from her book "Because They Hate" is enough: "They started massacring the Christians in city after city... The Western media seldom reported these horrific events. Most of the Press was located in West Beirut, controlled by the PLO and the Muslims. One of the most ghastly acts was the massacre in the Christian city of Damour, where thousands of Christians were slaughtered like sheep. The combined forces of the PLO and the Muslims would enter a bomb shelter and see a mother and a father hiding with a little baby. They would tie one leg of the baby to the mother and one leg to the father and pull the parents apart, splitting the child in half. A close friend of mine became mentally disturbed after they made her slaughter her own son in a chair. They tied her to a chair, tied a knife to her hand, and holding her hand, forced her to cut her own sixteen-year-old son's throat. After killing him they raped her two daughters in front of her....People have been so sheltered in this country that they have not paid attention to what has been going on for the last twenty-some years. And today, even after the attack on September 11, people still cannot fathom that this type of barbarity can happen here." [DML: the barbarity and inhuman brutality of the Muslim attackers described above has many antecedents in Muslim attacks on Christians and Jews throughout 1,380 years of Muslim history, and is of a piece with the use of children as human shields, and with the teaching of psychotic homicidal hatred to innocent children]. Well, I (Meir Abelson) live in Israel; and it has happened here –– even before Israel became a state, and even before there was any so-called "occupation." It happened in 1929 in Hebron, Motza, Jerusalem, Safed, and Jaffa. One British eye-witness exclaimed: "They did not mutilate their victims –– they merely hacked them to pieces." In Safed, they hung the Chief Rabbi upside-town by his legs and put a Primus stove under his head. I have an album of photographs from the Hebron massacre, showing hacked arms and fingers laid out on the hospital table, and some of the victims in bed with hands and arms lopped off. We are constantly urged to make
concessions to the "moderates." Who and where are they? They are
certainly not the PLO under Mohammed Abbas, whose covenant still
calls for the elimination of Israel. The answer is given in the
research carried out recently by Hillel Cohen of the Harry S. Truman
Institute for the Advancement of Peace under the title "Army of
Shadows." The author documents what happened to the moderates ––
they are all dead; hacked up with axes, riddled with bullets,
slaughtered with knives and exploded by bombs –– from the start of
the British Mandate until 1948. As Cohen reports, there were two
factions in Palestinian Arab society; the fanatics led by Haj Amin
al-Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, and the moderates, who included
such notable families as the Nashashibis. The latter believed that
the Zionists had come to stay and that the common good of
Palestinian Arabs demanded coexistence with the Jews. There was wide
and friendly cooperation between Jews and Arabs, until the
rejectionists spearheaded a continuum of murderous riots. In the
period covered by the book, hundreds of Palestinian Arab moderates ––
maybe 1,000 –– were murdered. Countless others got the message:
moderation is treason punishable by death.
Now let us examine the major accusations made against Israel.
1.Her "occupation of Palestinian land." First –– there is not and never was a nation called Palestine. Two thousand ago The Romans, in order to wipe out any memory of the countries known as Judea and Samaria, changed the name to Palestine, after the Philistines, who occupied a small strip of land along the cost. In 1937 the distinguished Arab historian Professor Philip Hitti, testifying before the Anglo-American Committee in 1946, declared: "There is no such thing as Palestine in history; absolutely not." The Palestinian Arabs always regarded themselves as southern Syrians, or alternatively as "part of the great Arab nation;" except during the years 1948-1967, when King Hussein illegally occupied Judea and Samaria, and renamed them his "West Bank." Then the Arabs were Jordanians and lived under Jordanian rule, acknowledging Kind Abdullah, and then King Hussein, as their country's leader. Until 1967, when –– as Walid Shoebat testified, "We were suddenly Palestinians! The Arab leaders removed the star from the Jordanian flag, and instantly, we had a Palestinian flag!" The correct legal description of Judea, Samaria, the Golan and Gaza today is "undistributed parts of the British Mandate." The Arabs, however, regard the entire area as "holy Arab land," and for Israel to exist therein is sacrilege. Why, then, should Israel have any "good faith" –– to quote the "Road Map" –– when the Palestine Liberation Organization still adheres to its Charter calling for her destruction, publishes maps that omit showing Israel, and continues incitement and hatred unabated? By all canons of logic and decency, there is no reason why Israel should be barred from building in Judea and Samaria, which are included in the area that is designated in the legal document known as the "League of Nations' Mandate for Palestine" for "close settlement by Jews." 2. Israel ignores her obligations and acts contrary to international law. I doubt whether most of those who bleat about international law know anything about it. One thing is clear: resolutions of the United Nations are NOT international law. These are more often than not politically motivated and redolent with double standards; the use of resolutions to champion positions in political quarrels are liable to undermine the credibility of the organization, even in areas of relative agreement. The General Assembly's moral authority is suspect in that the coercive powers wielded by a few states that may be diminutive in population but formidable in importance because of the resources they control. This frequently inhibits members who might wish to vote no, or even to abstain, on a range of matters, notably, but not exclusively affecting the Middle East; witness the most outrageous manipulations of voting such as the equivalence of Zionism with racism, or categorizing the United States or Britain as "racist states." However, the Charter of the United Nations IS international law. Article 51 states that "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations....." This is in fact precisely what Israel has been doing ever since the State was founded; yet I cannot recall any Resolution being passed condemning the various attacks by Syria, Egypt, Iraq or Jordan. And what about "armed bands?" There is a long series of proposals and international instruments, including the Draft Declaration on Right and Duties of States (Article 4), and the Draft Code of Offences against the Peace and Security of Mankind (Article 2(4), (5), and 6. Article 2(4), as revised in 1954, stigmatized as such an offence: "The organization, or the encouragement of the organization, by the authorities of a State, of armed bands within its territories or any other territory for incursions into the territory of another State, or the toleration of the use by such armed bands of its territory as a base of operations or as a point of departure of incursions into the territory of another State, as well as direct participation in or in support of such excursions." There is hardly an Arab state that has not committed such an offence against Israel over the past 60 years; is this "international justice?" 3. Israel is belaboured for putting up "checkpoints," an "apartheid wall," creating a "humanitarian crisis" and an "open prison." Let's get a few things straight. Where did these unfortunates come from? They are refugees; and there are nearly seventy Arab, refugee officials and other reliable eye-witnesses who have testified that in 1948 the Arab leaders, and the Palestinian Arabs themselves, were responsible for their own flight. The Palestinian Arabs are neither the first nor the last population to become refugees. This condition is the inevitable outcome of tragic conflict –– and the 20th century saw approximately 135,000,000 refugees due to numerous conflicts. However, the Palestinian Arabs are the only refugees who have not been resettled within a generation, and for whom a special organization –– UNRWA –– was set up. Furthermore, a Palestinian refugee is someone who lived in Palestine for only two years preceding the conflict in 1948, and who, as a result of this conflict, lost both his home and his means of livelihood and took refuge in one of the countries where UNRWA provides relief. No other refugees have been granted such a wide definition. In the 1951-1967 Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, nothing is said about their descendants; yet the tally of Palestinian refugees has always been multiplied many times by the addition of their descendants. And who created this "open prison," with the attendant restrictions on movement? One of the many witnesses is Richard Galloway, former director of UNWRA, declared angrily in 1958: "The Arab states do not want to solve the refugee problem. They want to keep it as an open sore, as an affront to the United Nations, and as a weapon against Israel. Arab leaders do not give a damn whether Arab refugees live or die." At a refugee conference in Homs, Syria, the Arabs declared that "...any discussion aimed at a solution of the Palestine problem which will not be based on ensuring the refugees' right to annihilate Israel will be regarded as a desecration of the Arab people and as an act of treason." It is clear that the finger of blame for the refugee problem should be pointed at the Arabs themselves. Those who live in Gaza today are no less extreme. They voted into power the Hamas organization, an Islamic terrorist group, which continues to receive overwhelming support. In fact, as I write these lines, these "pitiful" refugees on whose behalf the world pours out untold wealth and sheds so many tears, are taking to the streets in thousands, distributing sweets, shooting in the air, and cheering the successful terrorist attack on the Mercaz Harav Yeshiva in Jerusalem. 4. "Israel is an apartheid state." This falsehood is clear to anyone who simply visits our hospitals and universities. The fact is that in Israel, Arabs are freer than in any Arab state. They have full civil rights; they have Arab-Israeli political parties and their representatives sit in the Knesset. Arabic is an officially recognized language in Israel. Altogether, Israel has 15 officially recognized religions. As is known, Israel was the first to take in the Vietnamese boat people in 1970 when the world ignored them; and today, we have hundreds of Darfur Muslims rebuilding their lives in Israel. Israel has been under more or less constant attack for sixty years. She has been attacked by Arab States, armed bands, terrorist attacks on her civilian population characterized by the most bestial and inhuman atrocities. Her defensive actions are in accordance with international law; yet they are automatically condemned as "disproportionate and excessive," without anyone defining what these terms mean –– or even suggesting alternative methods of coping with the situation. The record of lies that are spread –– and believed –– about Israel without proof is inexhaustible. Yet the same tactic has been adopted by the Arabs since Haj el Husseini, the convicted criminal who Sir Herbert Samuel appointed to be Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, learned during his stay in Berlin as Hitler's guest. His first essay in the art of propaganda was to circulate photographs of the Jews slaughtered at Hebron in 1929, and describe them as Arabs killed by Jews. The same technique has been used ever since, but with far greater sophistication; and the world accepts all the lies as truth. It is no wonder that the distinguished French philosopher Jacques Ellul warned that "propaganda is today a greater danger to mankind than any other of the more grandly advertised threats hanging over the human race." Consider this: If a private individual were known to be a serial killer: if he were known to have never honoured a single commitment he had undertaken; if he were known to be an inveterate liar –– would anyone trust him as a serious negotiating partner? I believe there will never be peace in the world until we treat groups as we would treat individuals. And I believe there will never be peace in the Middle East until the Arabs cease (1) their indoctrination of Jihad; (2) their constant calls for Israel's destruction; (3) their attacks on Israel with missiles, bombs and suicide mayhem: and (4) their abominable and outrageous propaganda, of which the latest is that Israel burns Palestinian children in ovens. Those who blame Israel are not only rewarding and encouraging the real culprits and their terrorist minions; they are acting as accomplices to murder, as surely as if they fired the weapons. [DML: those who blame Israel are complicit with, and accomplices in, the genocidal goals of hamas and fatah and hezbollah and islamic jihad and the el-aqsa martyrs' brigade and the dozen or so other Arab/Muslim terror organizations. Genocide is against international law. Incitement to genocide is against international law. Planning and promotion of genocide is against international law. In a rational world, Akhmedinejad and the leaders of Hamas and Fatah and Islamic Jihad etc would all be on trial in the Hague today. Genocide is evil. Complicity with evil is evil.] David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
ISRAEL LACKS SUFFICIENT DETERRENCE AGAINST TERRORISTS
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 11, 2008. |
|
This is by Amos Harel and Avi Issacharoff and it appeared yesterday in Haaretz www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/973458.html |
|
The murder at the fuel depot at Nahal Oz yesterday shows that Israel is having a hard time establishing a sufficiently effective deterrent against the terror organizations operating from the Gaza Strip. Even if Hamas is not currently firing rockets at the Negev itself, it is continuing to clash with the Israel Defense Forces along the Gaza border and is not lifting a finger to rein in the smaller Palestinian factions firing Qassams and sending operatives into Israel. In contrast with the situation on the Lebanese border since the war, there has barely been a single day of quiet on the southern border in the last two years. Without sufficient deterrence, the IDF is unable to completely prevent Palestinians from infiltrating into Israel or sending snipers to shoot at Israelis or place explosives near the border fence. Of dozens of attempted attacks, one must assume that every once in a while the terrorists will achieve a victory, especially when the attack is as well-planned as yesterday's. In the past, there was an attempt to maintain a kind of buffer zone of about a kilometer west of the fence, where Palestinians were not allowed to enter. In effect, though, this does not happen today. In the past week alone, shots were fired at Public Security Minister Avi Dichter's entourage in Givat Nizmit and at farmers in the fields of Kibbutz Ein Hashlosha. A tunnel was found near the fence in northern Gaza, and yesterday's shooting attack took place. This is partly because the IDF has reduced its offensive operations in the security zone west of the fence. When its activities were more intensive, the number of incidents along the fence decreased. In the last month, in light of the indirect understanding reached through Egypt, the IDF reduced its activities in this area. (The operation in which an IDF soldier was killed yesterday, east of Khan Yunis, was part of a renewed effort in the security zone, due to sniper fire on farmers). Without creating depth on the Palestinian side of the border, it is hard to thwart terror attacks. In addition, there was a specific failure related to yesterday's attack: Despite the observation posts along the border, especially near the crossings, the infiltration by terrorists was noticed too late. The four Palestinians managed to cross the fence unhindered and kill the two truck drivers at short range. The IDF did at least respond quickly, sending a tank and infantry after the terror cell and killing two of its members inside the Strip. Later, acting on intelligence from the Shin Bet security service, the Israel Air Force attacked vehicles holding operatives involved in the operation. The Israelis were surprised yesterday that the Palestinians were attacking a border terminal that is still operating, even if on a reduced scale. The Palestinians' logic is that if Israel reacts by cutting off what is left of the fuel supply, that will illustrate the suffering of the Gaza residents. On the Palestinian domestic front, the residents' anger will once again be directed toward Israel, and on the international front, the press and United Nations will condemn Israel while the murder of the two drivers will be rapidly forgotten. That is one of the reasons Israel was in no rush last night to declare an extended closure of the border crossing, making do with an announcement that the terminal would be closed to investigate the attack. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
TERRORIZING PUBLISHING
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, April 10, 2008. |
|
This first article below was written by Roger Kimball and it appeared in the NY Sun
Mr Kimball, co-editor of the New Criterion, is publisher of Encounter
Books. The second, from the Star Gazette, is called "One signature away from protecting freedom."
|
|
1. This spring, Encounter Books is publishing "Willful Blindness: a Memoir of the Jihad," by Andrew McCarthy, who helped prosecute the "blind sheik" Omar Abdel-Rahman and other jihadists. I recently received a message from someone who helps distribute our books in Britain: "Can you please let us know if there are any references to Saudis and terrorist[s] in the book. We are just concerned that this book could potentially create libel lawsuits as it could offend Saudis living in England ... " So books offensive to Saudis are verboten? Not if I have anything to say about it. But note the preemptive cringe: the very threat of legal action has made the publishing world skittish, not to say craven. Welcome to the world of libel tourism. When the American researcher Rachel Ehrenfeld published "Funding Evil: How Terrorism Is Financed –– and How to Stop It," she suddenly found herself slapped with a libel suit –– but not in America. A Saudi banker, Khalid bin Mahfouz, brought the suit in England. Even though the book was not distributed in Great Britain, a British judge ruled that Ms. Ehrenfeld must apologize and pay Mr. Mahfouz £110,000. Not only did Ms. Ehrenfeld refuse, she promptly countersued in New York, asking the federal courts to rule that the British judgment contravened the First Amendment. Though the Second Circuit seemed sympathetic to her plight, Ms. Ehrenfeld's claim depended upon whether, as a matter of New York State law, the court had jurisdiction over Mr. Mahfouz. Just before Christmas, New York's highest state court ruled that jurisdiction was lacking. That decision leaves Ms. Ehrenfeld in legal and professional limbo: discouraged from writing about Mr. Mahfouz or traveling to countries where he might seek to collect on the British judgment, and damaged in her ability to find publishers who will have to weigh the risks of being dragged into foreign courts. Mr. Mahfouz is an energetic libel tourist. His Web site lists successful actions against three other books: "Reaping the Whirlwind: The Taliban Movement in Afghanistan," "Forbidden Truth: U.S.-Taliban Secret Oil Diplomacy and The Failed Hunt for Bin Laden," and "Alms for Jihad: Charity and Terrorism in the Islamic World." The case against "Alms for Jihad" by Robert O. Collins, a professor emeritus of history at the University of California, and J. Millard Burr, a retired employee of the State Department, was especially egregious. The publisher, Cambridge University Press, instantly capitulated to Mr. Mahfouz's demands. Not only did it pulp all unsold copies of the 2006 book, but it paid "substantial damages" to Mr. Mahfouz and even went so far as to contact libraries worldwide to ask them to remove the book from their shelves. Enter the copycats. Several weeks ago, a former Crown Attorney named Faisal Joseph filed a human rights complaint for the Canadian Islamic Congress against Maclean's, the distinguished Canadian magazine. Why? Because Maclean's had published "The Future Belongs to Islam," an excerpt from Mark Steyn's best-selling book "America Alone: The End of the World as We Know It." The article, according to the complaint, was "flagrantly Islamophobic" and exposed Muslim Canadians to "contempt and hatred." The editor of Maclean's, Kenneth Whyte, published 27 responses to Mr. Steyn's article, but rejected a demand that he publish, unedited, a five-page article by Muslim students. "I told them I would rather go bankrupt than let somebody from outside our operations dictate the content of the magazine," he said in a statement published in Maclean's on December 5, 2007. It may come to that. Canada's "human rights commission," like the despotic tribunals of yesteryear, is endowed with the power to fine and imprison those who trespass against their dictates. Responding to the complaint, Mr. Steyn cautioned against the commission's effort "to criminalize debate. That's the way they do things in Sudan and Saudi Arabia, not Canada." Let's hope so. But I recommend we remember those little warnings that accompany financial prospectuses: "Past results are no guarantee of future performance." As of this writing, the commission's prosecutors have won 100% of the cases they've brought. The observation that the triumph of evil will happen when good men stand by and do nothing has special relevance at a time, like now, that is inflected by terrorism. Our new enemies are not political enemies in any traditional sense, belligerent in the service of their own certain interests. Their violence is focused on the very existence of an alternative to their vision of beatitude, namely on Western democracy and its commitment to free speech and economic prosperity. What can we do about it? On January 14, Assemblyman Rory Lancman of Queens and Senate Deputy Majority Leader Dean Skelos of Long Island introduced the "Libel Terrorism Protection Act" in New York. The legislation, which was recently passed and now awaits the governor's signature, would overrule New York's highest court and, as Mr. Lancman put it, would give journalists "the tools they need to continue to fearlessly expose the truth about terrorism and its enablers." That is a good start. Let's hope that Congress follows suit by making libel tourism a federal cause of action. Among other advantages, this would permit generous civil discovery against those attempting to stifle criticism of Islamofascism –– precisely the sort of chilling effect anyone interested in freedom would want to get behind. ------------------ 2. Paterson should sign law to prevent foreign libel laws from applying to New Yorkers. In societies in which people govern themselves and hold public officials accountable, the ability to freely gather and share information is critical. But government officials on the receiving end of public scrutiny do not always agree that robust discussion is a good thing. Therefore, two pieces of legislation, one national the other state, bear watching. On the national scene, the Bush administration is invoking national security concerns to urge Congress to narrow provisions of the "Free Flow of Information Act." The act would be a national shield law, permitting journalists to safeguard the identities of people who provide them confidential, sensitive and yes, sometimes embarrassing, information held by governments. Reminding the Senate, where the act is pending, of its fear of all things remotely suggestive of terrorism, four members of the president's Cabinet wrote separate letters to senators last week. In their letters, they argued that the bill's definition of "journalist" is too broad and, that its protections will encourage more leaks of classified information to the media and that its existence will strengthen the counterintelligence efforts of our adversaries. Fighting terrorism should not mean suspension of the rights that make our nation strong and need not require that our government function in secret. If we are to hold public officials accountable, more information on their activities, not less, is needed. As the world becomes a smaller place, and boundaries to the sharing of information all but disappear among free nations, Americans can find freedoms we take for granted attacked by courts abroad. To provide some protection, we urge Gov. David Paterson to sign into law an amendment to New York's Civil Practice Law and Rules. The change, unanimously passed by the state Legislature on March 31, makes civil judgments in libel and defamation cases levied against Americans in foreign courts unenforceable unless the foreign nation provides the same free speech protections as those guaranteed under American law. The measure was made necessary because of a judgment last year against a New York author who was sued for libel by a Saudi businessman in a British court. The author, Rachel Ehrenfeld, named the businessman as a supporter of terrorism in her book "Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Funded –– and How to Stop It." She sold 20 copies of her book in England, where libel laws favor the plaintiff. New York law did not allow this state's courts to shield Ehrenfeld from the $225,000 judgment. Upon Paterson's signature, New Yorkers will not have to bite their tongues for fear of being harassed in court for offending a reader or listener in a country that lacks free speech protection. The professional media benefit, but so do authors, playwrights, broadcasters and bloggers. If we are to live in a global village, the laws of selected nations cannot be used as weapons to stifle discussion. This nation is built on a foundation of robust discussion and free exchange of information. Measures that work against those basic premises, whether imposed by a foreign court or an administration with a penchant for secrecy, are fundamentally un-American. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
US CHRISTIANS 'MORALLY' SUPPORT ISRAEL
Posted by Avodah, April 10, 2008. |
|
This was written by Etgar Lefkovits and it appeared
yesterday in The Jerusalem Post
|
|
More than 80 percent of American Christians say they have a "moral and biblical obligation" to support the State of Israel, and half say Jerusalem should remain its undivided capital, according to a survey released on Thursday. While evangelical Christians are the strongest supporters of the Jewish state, strong pro-Israel convictions cut across all key Christian denominations in the US, according to the poll carried out on behalf of the Washington-based Joshua Fund, an evangelical organization. Eight-two percent of respondents said they had a "moral and biblical obligation" to love and support Israel and pray for the peace of Jerusalem," 10% disagreed and 8% did not know. Eighty-four percent of Protestants agreed with the statement (including 89% of Evangelicals), compared to 76% of Catholics. Half of the American Christians surveyed opposed Israel dividing Jerusalem with the Palestinians in a peace agreement, 33% were unsure and 17% thought it should be divided. Fifty-three percent of Protestants supported a united Jerusalem, as did 44% of Catholics. Evangelical Christians were most supportive of a united Jerusalem, with 62% in favor and 11% against. A plurality of the US Christians (44%) surveyed said they did not know whether a future Palestinian state in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip would be a peaceful moderate democracy or a terrorist state, 32% said that it would be a terrorist state and 24% said that it would be a peaceful democracy. The survey found clear differences between Protestants and Catholics on the issue. Protestants were more likely to say a Palestinian state would be a terror state by a 10-point margin; Catholics were evenly split. Evangelical Protestants said a such entity would be a terrorist state by a 20-point margin,but non-evangelical Protestants said it would be a peaceful and moderate democracy by six percentage points. The belief that a Palestinian state would be a terrorist state was strongest among Republican and conservative Evangelicals. Nearly half (49%) of American Christians surveyed were interested in visiting Israel, including about quarter of both Catholics and Protestants who were "strongly" interested. Forty-seven percent of those polled were not interested in visiting. There are 50 million-60 million evangelicals Christians in the US. Two-thirds of respondents said that if Iran developed nuclear weapons, it would eventually try to use them to attack Israel, 23% were unsure and 13% said Iran would not attack. Finally, 45% said they would be more likely to support a US presidential candidate who would protect America from Islamic terrorism, protect Israel from a nuclear attack from Iran, oppose the division of Jerusalem and refuse to pressure Israel to make concessions on issues of national security, compared to 29% who said such positions had no effect on their vote and 9% who would be less likely to support such a candidate. The survey will be officially released on Thursday at a conference at the Jerusalem International Convention Center (Binyenei Ha'uma) organized by The Joshua Fund that is expected to be attended by 2,000 evangelical Christians fromaround the world. The non-profit organization aims to raise more than $100 million over the next three years to help Israeli victims of terrorism, and to fund humanitarian projects in Israel in education, health, welfare and immigrant absorption,and $20m. for Christians in the West Bank, Gaza, Iraq and Sudan, said Joel C. Rosenberg, the group's founder and president. "Our support for Israel is unwavering and unconditional," he said. The survey, which was conducted by McLaughlin and Associates by a telephone sampling of 1,000 American Christians last month, had a margin of error of plus or minus three percentage points. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
MOST JEWS REGARD JUDEA AND SAMARIA AS LIBERATED –– NOT 'OCCUPIED' –– AND OSLO AS A MISTAKE
Posted by Avodah, April 10, 2008. |
|
The Peace Index Project is conducted at the Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research and the Evens Program in Mediation and Conflict Resolution of Tel Aviv University, headed by Prof. Ephraim Yaar and Prof. Tamar Herman. It has been issued monthly since the heyday of Oslo 'peacemaking' efforts. This month, they surveyed Jews separately and those those who run the 'peace index' had a bit of a shock. The telephone interviews were conducted by the B. I. Cohen Institute of Tel Aviv University on March 31 and April 1, 2008, and included 588 interviewees who represent the adult Jewish and Arab population of Israel (including the territories and the kibbutzim). The sampling error for a sample of this size is 4.5%. For the survey data see: http://www.tau.ac.il/peace |
|
Most Jews regard Judea and Samaria as liberated –– not 'occupied' –– and Oslo as a mistake While most of the Jews (68%) still support what's called the 'two-state solution,' when you get beyond that basic question, it becomes clear that Israeli Jews have a very different idea than the 'Palestinians' of what a 'two-state solution' means: About three-quarters do not believe the negotiations will lead to an Israeli-Palestinian peace agreement, and an identical proportion says that even if an agreement is signed it will not, from the Palestinians' standpoint, end the historic conflict with Israel. This pessimism is apparently what fosters the hard-line positions that most of the Jewish public now takes on central aspects of the conflict and the chances of resolving it. It turns out, for instance, that in retrospect only among Meretz, Labor, and Kadima does a majority say the decision to launch the peace process at the beginning of the 1990s was correct. In the public overall, the number of those who think so (40%) is lower than the percentage of those who believe it was a mistake to enter the peace process that enabled the Oslo accords (47%). We found a similar mindset among those who say that if a peace treaty entails difficult concessions, it's preferable to remain in the existing situation (49%, with 43% preferring an agreement even if its price is difficult concessions). We were surprised to discover that even though, over the years, the concept of "occupation" has become more common both in the political discourse and the media, [Translation: Even though the leftist media has done its best to brainwash the Israeli public. CiJ] today a majority of the Jewish public defines the West Bank as "liberated territory" (55%) and not as "occupied territory" (32%). This may explain the new popularity of the position (57%) that the Green Line should not be considered the future border between Israel and the Palestinians, and that a new borderline should be established so that most of the settlements will be on the Israeli side and large Israeli Arab communities would move to the Palestinian side (only 23% of the Jewish public currently favors the Green Line as the future border; only among Meretz voters does a majority take the opposite view). Interestingly, even among those who see the West Bank as "liberated territory" there is a clear majority –– albeit small compared to the majority among those who see it as "occupied territory" –– of supporters of a two-state solution. Here too the pessimism about the chances of ending the historic conflict with the Palestinians is widespread among both groups, though, as expected, more so among those who view the West Bank as liberated. Moreover, if a peace agreement is signed on the basis of the two-states-for-two-peoples formula, the majority (65%) would want the border between the two states to be a closed one, without free passage from state to state. [Under current circumstances, that would leave the 'Palestinians' without an economy and –– depending on arrangements between Judea and Samaria on the one hand and Gaza on the other –– without a port. CiJ] The desire for segregation of the two peoples also emerges in the broad opposition (75.5%) to the idea of a binational state as an alternative solution to the two-state formula. Finally, a considerable majority (61%) does not believe in Prime Minister Olmert's sincerity when he says he intends to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinian Authority by the end of this year. Indeed, only among Labor voters (not even among Kadima voters) does a majority credit the sincerity of his intentions. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
WHY CAN'T JEWS BUY HOMES IN HEBRON?
Posted by David Wilder, April 10, 2008. |
|
Many events, despite their joy and festivity, may also have bittersweet shadows lurking behind them. It is customary at every Jewish wedding, that under the huppa, or wedding canopy, the groom recites the words from Psalms 137:5-6: "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its cunning. Let my tongue cleave to the roof of my mouth, if I remember thee not; if I set not Jerusalem above my chiefest joy." In some traditions the groom also places ashes on his forehead, recalling the destruction of the second Temple, and breaks a glass as an expression of loss. Even on the happiest of occasions, we recall the depths of sorrow at the loss of our most significant national enterprises, Jerusalem and the Temple.
ON THURSDAY night I attended a wedding. The daughter of one of Hebron's leaders was married in Jerusalem. As is wont at such weddings, the groom rubbed two sets of ashes on his forehead: ashes discovered in the Old City of Jerusalem, from the fire 2,000 years ago which destroyed the city, and also dust from Gush Katif, razed and obliterated almost three years ago, this summer. However, this past Thursday night had a particularly poignant significance. The groom was a graduate of Mercaz HaRav High School. He knew many of the young men killed there by an Arab terrorist just a few weeks ago. The night of his marriage was also the "shloshim" –– the 30th day following the murders. That night there was also a large memorial service at the yeshiva in memory of the young victims. So, when the groom recited the words, "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem," all the people in attendance were remembering not only the Temple from two millennium ago, but the deaths of those eight students, only a short time ago. This is, perhaps, the story of Judaism: a combination of sadness and happiness, mixed together, making for the Jewish people.
SOME EVENTS can be understood; others are difficult to fathom. We are currently celebrating the first anniversary of the conclusion of the purchase of Beit HaShalom in Hebron. Exactly a year ago attorneys gave us the green light, and in we went. This huge, 3,500 square meter structure, strategically located on the road between Hebron and Kiryat Arba, was the first property purchased outside of the borders of the original Jewish neighborhoods. The roof of the building serves as a lookout, with a view of Kiryat Arba to the east and the Hebron Hills to the south. It is an amazing sight; on the one hand, exceedingly beautiful, and on the other hand, a bona fide security asset. Israel is on the verge of a 60th birthday. Since the birth of the state in 1948, despite all the problems encountered, Israel has made tremendous achievements. Who could have expected that a people being shoveled into ovens only a few years before, with over six million of their brethren exterminated, could overcome all odds and bring an ancient nation back to life, a feat unequaled by any other culture or nationality in the history of the world. It certainly does deserve to be celebrated. However I cannot but sense that this celebration is somewhat bittersweet with the case in point an excellent example, a microcosm of issues continually encountered. The Jews came back home to Israel; but to what kind of an Israel? Of course growth and development are measures of success. But do we remember where we've come from? Do we take into account the triumphs upon which modern Israel was born? Do we recall the bedrock which serves as the justification for the rebirth of our people in our homeland?
HEBRON WAS the first Jewish city in the land of Israel, home to our patriarchs and matriarchs. The Cave of Machpela is our people's second holiest site, after the Temple Mount in Jerusalem. It was off-limits to Jews for 700 years, until Hebron came under Israeli control in the 1967 Six-Day War. As we celebrate 60 years of independence, so too we observe 40 years since the return of Jewish residency in Hebron during Passover of 1968. Yet when Jews legally purchase a building in Hebron, 60 years after the rebirth of our statehood, such a transaction is automatically shrouded in controversy. So much so that the families in the building were prevented from installing glass windows throughout a snowy and rainy winter. At present they still may not install plastic shades on the windows, nor may they hook up the building to the city's central electric services. This is not due to any question of the legality of the purchase, but rather to a fundamental question: Can Jews continue to live, grow and develop freely in Hebron? How can we, as a people, justify our existence in Tel Aviv or Haifa, if we do not recognize the validity of our presence in Hebron? If we cannot accept and respect the very pillars upon which our statehood lies, a peek into a crystal ball of the days and years to come looks dismal and bleak. A people with no past, or a people that refuses to recognize its past, has no future. A Jewish purchase of a building such as Beit HaShalom in Hebron should not be viewed as "problematic." Instead it should be cheered on as a positive step in the renewal of Israel's oldest city. The time has come for Jews throughout Israel and around the world to declare their allegiance to Hebron. David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com This article appeared April 8, 2008 in the Jerusalem Post |
|
SHIN BET THWARTS MASS RESTAURANT POISONING
Posted by Daisy Stern, April 10, 2008. | |
|
This was written by Efrat Weiss and it appeared in
| |
|
Two Palestinian employees detained mere days before they planned to lace food at Ramat Gan grill bar with tasteless, odorless toxin The thwarting of an alarming terror plot was cleared for publication on Thursday, almost three weeks after a joint Shin Bet and police operation led to the arrest of two Palestinian employees of the 'Grill Express' restaurant in Ramat Gan. The men, Eihab Abu Rial and Anas Salum, both 21-year-old residents of the West Bank city of Nablus, had planned to lace dishes served at the establishment with a powerful toxin without odor or taste, in the hopes of killing as many patrons as possible.
The two did not have working permits and were residing in Israel illegally. While in Nablus, they had been recruited to the al-Aqsa Martyr's Bridges, the military wing of Fatah, under the guidance and funding of Hizbullah. The men were arrested by police investigators following information obtained by the Shin Bet, several short days before they planned to carry out the attack. Toxin was to come from West Bank In their questioning the men told interrogators they were to receive the poison from two operatives in the Balata refugee camp in Nablus –– Husseini Salag and Hani Quabi –– who are still wanted by security forces. The white substance is virtually undetectable and affects its victims approximately four hours after being ingested. Salag, they said, also sought to use them to bring a suicide bomber across the border. Defense officials say they are concerned Quabi continues to seek the means to carry out an attack in Israel using illegal Palestinian residents. A similar incident occurred five and a half years ago in Jerusalem. At the time, three Arab residents of east Jerusalem were arrested before their plan to poison Israeli patrons at the Rimon Café in central Jerusalem could be realized. The three had also planned to carry out a suicide bombing during a right-wing demonstration. The cell had been found to operating under Hamas. Some four years ago a Fatah cell was arrested in Qalqiliya, the group
had been planning to detonate an explosive device encased in
HIV-infected blood in a crowded Tel Aviv area.
Contact Daisy Stern at daisystern1@gmail.com
|
|
ISAIAH 43:7
Posted by Avodah, April 10, 2008. |
|
Commit with all your heart and with all your soul to know My ways, and to guard the gates of My holy shrine and to observe My laws and commandments. Hold My Torah in your heart and may the awe of Me be before your eyes. Guard your mouth and your tongue from all transgression and guilt, and I shall be with you wherever you go, and I shall teach you wisdom and knowledge from everything. Know full well that everything The Holy One Blessed Be He created was created for His own glory, as it is said (Isaiah 43:7), 'Anything that carries My name was created in My honor –– I created it, I produced it, I made it!' Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
DEFEND YOURSELVES!
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 10, 2008. |
|
It's long past time for the Israeli army and all the Israeli people to get back to the business of defending themselves. Delete the scum called "the Olmert Government" that floated to the surface. Because they are not part of the people and they have proven many times that they will not protect you. Those (except for some) came to the Government –– not as patriots but –– because they were greedy for power, privilege and money....always the money. The enemy has grown in strength and their people are entirely behind them. If ever they were only civilians, that has long since passed. Unlike the Israeli Leftists, the Muslim Arab Palestinian people are fully behind their Muslim Arab Terrorists who bomb, shoot Rockets, Missiles and kill Jews. To this they are fully pledged –– whether as a people or as a Muslim "Jihadist". They have further pledged to train their very youngest children to hate and kill Jews, with many so trained have now reached maturity and taken their place alongside their trainers. The Israeli government is not only useless in these perilous times, they cravenly become an ally and enablers to our most fearsome enemies. As I said before, they are useless to the point of being traitors. But, there is no time to effectively dump Olmert out of office where he has total control. The fight is (or should be) with Arab and/or Muslims, be they Palestinians, Syrians, Iranians, Egyptians, Lebanese, Libyans, or even Saudis (like the 15 suicide bombers who killed 3000 from many countries in America on 9/11). We observe, with consternation, Olmert issuing orders to attack Jews who wish to defend their own G-d given Land, their homes and their lives. There is little or no doubt that there will be a saturation missile attack coming from Hamas, Hezb'Allah, Syria and Iran. The so-called Israeli Arab Muslims inside of Israel will do as much inner damage as they can long known by Israeli Intelligence. This is a war that Israel did NOT start nor will it end –– until a great number of Muslim Arabs are defeated and dead. The Arab Muslims in a full scale war with Israel will offer no quarter, no pity and will kill any soldier or civilian in the most gruesome way possible. When the Americans fire-bombed Dresden, they viewed all the people in the Axis as the enemy. When Hiroshima and Nagasaki were bombed, killing all under the world's first nuclear bombs, it was because everyone in Japan was a pledged enemy who would kill Americans when they could –– even if they had to commit suicide ("Hari Kari") to do so. Millions more would have died if the A bombs had not been used –– both American soldiers and Japanese. Attackers chose the rules of life or death, forcing their victims to fight for their lives. Israel faces implacable, irredentist enemies who delight in killing Jews, be they infants, women, children, husbands or brothers. The slaughter of innocents was and is still their favorite rule of war. Therefore, it is time the Jews fight back –– without those so-called civilized rules of warfare. The E.U., the U.N., the Bush-Rice Administration requires only Jews to follow "rules". Islamists have made civilian collateral damage the rule when they fight –– not the exception. The rule for the Jews must be to win at any cost to the enemy. The Israeli Government of failure should be put under house arrest –– lest they interfere with the defense of the nation –– as they have for their entire term of office. We are told that Mahmoud Abbas, head of the Palestinian Authority, Fatah and Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade plus other Terror organizations are all in lock-step with Hamas, will call upon all Palestinians to march 'en masse' to Israel's borders and cross over unless stopped and they should be stopped with necessary force –– even if it "seems" excessive. These are the militia of the Terrorists. They should not be called "militants" because they are Terrorists. If they are called Terrorists, maybe they can be eliminated for the benefit of all. They are the enemy and should be treated as the enemy. Whether it's rifle fire, air fuel bombs, artillery –– all methods should be used to rout the enemy. Give them the same pity they would give you and your family. If you think fighting the enemies of the Jewish people should be "restrained" as demanded by the nations, some will recall the past, unrestrained savagery of the marauding Muslim Arabs. Some will recall how in 1948, hordes of Arab Muslims who overran communities and slaughtered everyone they could catch. They tortured and, to complete their rage, they mutilated the dead Jews. It's not only retribution for the past but, it's what they still do and what they plan to do in the future. War is not civilized. It is brutal. It is pitiless. It is cruel. Winners survive. Losers die or become slaves. The leaders of Israel are losers because they wish to be losers. What do you want for your people in Israel? What do you want for the Jews of the world? Who are to be the "winners" and who will be the "losers" in this merciless war between two religions, two civilizations? Some will recall how the nations were positively impressed when Israel fought and won the 1967 Six Day War. Then the Jewish leadership started its downward spiral as they apologized for winning. The nations soon turned back to their age-old attitudes of despising Jews for their weakness. The Leftist leadership thought that by debasing themselves and the Jewishness of themselves, by abandoning the Land, they would bring honor and cheers from the world. Instead, the crawling and sniveling encouraged the enemy to greater demands and acts of Terror. As for the nations of the world –– and especially the Arab Muslim world, they merely asked for more. The more Israeli leaders cringed and begged, the more assured the Muslim Arabs were in their belief that Israel was soon to collapse. These Jewish leaders of the Left thought that de-Judaizing the nation would bring friendship from the Muslim and European countries. Instead, this appeasement attitude brought more war and Terror. But, that did not stop the Leftist Jewish leadership from giving up more and more often in obedience to American State Department demands that the Arab and Muslim countries were to be appeased. Israel has now sunk to her lowest level –– as both civilians and soldiers alike have nothing but contempt for the whining Olmert and his despised followers. When Jews once again exhibit pride in themselves, their Jewishness and the Jewishness of their nation, only then will the Muslims and the Europeans back off. As for the anti-Semitic cabal, presently led by Bush, Rice, Baker, Scowcroft, Carter, Brzezinski –– the Arabist State Department, they are merely an embarrassment to all Americans. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com |
|
ISLAMIC ATTITUDES TOWARDS JERUSALEM
Posted by Steve Kramer, April 10, 2008. |
|
We recently had the opportunity to hear Moshe Sharon speak at the Bible Lands Museum in Jerusalem. Moshe Sharon received his Doctorate in Medieval Islamic History from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. He has served as an Advisor on Arab Affairs to former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin as well as to the Ministry of Defense. Prof. Sharon is a former director of the World Zionist Organization branch in Johannesburg, South Africa and is a retired professor of Islamic History at the Hebrew University. What made this lecture doubly interesting is that we recently heard Professor Dan Bahat lecture on a similar topic. [for a fascinating summary of Sharon's thoughts on Islam past and present, see http://www.ropma.net/agenda_of_islam.htm ] |
|
Professor Sharon, though not as world renowned as Islamic historian Bernard Lewis, is equally erudite and very stimulating. He began his lecture on how Jerusalem became Al Quds (the Arabic name of Jerusalem) by quoting from Sura 17:1 of the Koran about Muhammad's night journey to the "furthest mosque". The entire Koran, including this sura, doesn't mention Jerusalem once and certainly doesn't specify it as the site of the "furthest mosque". But since 750 CE, 120 years after Muhammad's death, Muslims have believed that Jerusalem is the place referred to in the sura. In short, Jerusalem is holy to Muslims because Muhammad visited it. Sharon told us that according to legend, Muhammad visited the Foundation Stone (the summit of Mt. Moriah) and climbed a ladder to heaven where the angel Gabriel introduced him to all of the luminaries of Judaism and Christianity, and finally to God. There God told Muhammad that his followers must pray to Allah (God) 50 times a day. Afterwards, Muhammad again saw Moses and told him what he'd been instructed. Moses said it was impossible to expect his followers to pray 50 times a day and Muhammad should ask God to reduce the number. Muhammad did so and God reduced the number to 40. When Moses heard this, he said it still wasn't possible and Muhammad should return to God. The number was reduced to 30. Moses persisted in telling Muhammad to request the number to be reduced. When the number reached five, Moses told Muhammad to again ask for a reduction, but Muhammad said that since the Jews prayed three times a day to God, Muslims could pray five times, and it remained that way. Sharon explained that this belief is from the oral traditions surrounding Muhammad, which were formulated in the 120 years between Muhammad's death and the first written history of his life. During Muhammad's lifetime, nomadic Jewish tribes were numerous in Arabia and they were the sole monotheists, setting them apart from the other, pagan, tribes. Muhammad, who believed in monotheism, naturally tried to convince the Jews to follow his teachings. To curry their favor, he had all his followers pray towards Jerusalem, where the Holy Temple had been built atop the Foundation Stone. However, the Jews weren't overly impressed. When the great majority failed to follow him, Muhammad turned against the Jews, defeated them in battle, and had his followers turn their backs on Jerusalem and pray towards Mecca, which has its own foundation stone, the Kabba. Jerusalem was relegated to third place among Muslim holy sites, after Mecca and Medina (the burial place of Muhammad and home to two Jewish tribes). We were surprised to learn that Abraham, who came to Mt. Moriah when God ordered him to sacrifice his son Isaac, was a Muslim! Sharon explained that according to Islam, Adam was the first Muslim. How could this be, if every Muslim has to believe that Muhammad is the final messenger of Allah (God), but Muhammad wasn't born until 570 CE? The answer is that God first created Muhammad from dust and then returned him to dust. Since Adam was created from dust which contained Muhammad's essence, Adam and all the other important Jewish religious figures, including Jesus, are Muslim. This tradition also explains how the First Temple was never Jewish –– according to Muslims –– but was always a mosque, since it was built by King Solomon, a Muslim. Within a hundred years of Muhammad's death in 632 CE, his followers had created the world's greatest empire. During the period 633-640 the core of the Muslim Empire was carved out in the Middle East. The Arab conquest of Jerusalem occurred after a short siege in 638 when the Christian patriarch Sephronius surrendered the city to a lowly second lieutenant. This fact was glossed over and the Caliph Omar Ben Al Khattab recreated the conquest by approaching the walled city via the Lion's Gate, atop a donkey. Considering himself a savior, Omar alighted from the donkey and entered through the gate wearing tattered clothes, as the messiah's entrance had been prophesied in the Jewish Bible. He asked Sephronius to show him the Foundation Stone (Temple Mount), but since the Christians had no use for the site and showed their disrespect for it by using it as a garbage dump, Omar was taken to the Holy Sepulcher church instead. Omar turned to a former rabbi and Muslim convert Kha ab al-Akhbar to show him the true location of the Foundation Stone. After uncovering the sacred place, Omar decided to build a mosque just south of it, facing Mecca, thereby insuring that the worshippers' backs would be to Jerusalem. He ignored the advice of al-Akhbar, who suggested building the mosque in a location north of the Foundation Stone, which would have included Jerusalem in the worshippers' view while praying towards Mecca. Since houses of worship were most often built in places that were venerated by previous inhabitants, the Al-Aqsa mosque built by Omar included within it remnants of both a Second Temple warehouse and a later Roman temple. In 685, Abd al Maliq began construction of the Dome of the Rock to protect pilgrims when they came to venerate the Foundation Stone. Al Maliq intended to overshadow the nearby Church of the Holy Sepulcher, Christianity's most holy site in Jerusalem. In building the structure, he used the same octagonal shape favored by the Christians, with a dome atop it nearly identical to the one at the Holy Sepulcher. Sharon noted the extremely significant inscription of Koranic verses running nearly 800 feet around the interior of the dome. Surprisingly, Sura 17:1 (the night journey) doesn't appear. Instead, all of the verses attack Christianity, proving al Maliq's enmity against the Christians, to which the building is dedicated. The structure was converted into a mosque in 1187, after the defeat of the Crusaders, who had made the site into a church. Sharon described three stages in the Muslim sanctification of Jerusalem. First was the important position accorded to Jerusalem by both Muhammad and Caliph Omar, although it was minor compared to Mecca's centrality. Second was the impact of conquering Christian Jerusalem and building the Dome of the Rock to overshadow the Holy Sepulcher. Thirdly, there was the significance of the Foundation Stone in Jerusalem, where the (Muslim) prophet Abraham went to sacrifice Isaac. Of least importance, according to Sharon, was Sura 17:1, depicting Muhammad's night journey. Sharon contends that though the Jewish prophets made Jerusalem holy for Muslims, it was only a backwater for them, unimportant and too full of Christians and Jews. Muslim demands for Jerusalem only became prominent when Christians and Jews fought for it. Jerusalem, or Al Quds as the Muslims renamed it in the 9th century, was never a capital for Muslims. Even when the Ottoman Empire ruled the area for four hundred years, it was the little town of Ramle that was their administrative capital, not Jerusalem. In fact, only the Jews made Jerusalem the capital of their nation. Even for Christians, the sanctity of Jerusalem was based on the Jewish Bible. During the time that Jordan annexed the West Bank and the Old City of Jerusalem, from 1948 to 1967,no Muslim monarch came to the Dome of the Rock or Al-Aqsa mosque, with the exception of the Jordanian monarch Abdullah I, who was assassinated there by a Palestinian Arab. As for Abdullah's own capital, Sharon wryly noted that it remained the city of Amman. On a contemporary note, the fact that the Muslim Waqf, which controls the upper plateau of the Temple Mount with Israel's permission, is paradoxical. On one hand, the Muslims proclaim that the Jews never had a Temple there; on the other hand, they persistently vandalize the site and attempt to destroy artifacts which relate to the ancient Jewish presence in Jerusalem. Contact Steve Kramer at sjk1@jhu.edu |
|
FROM ONE THING TO THE NEXT
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 10, 2008. |
|
The very reputable Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, which has close ties with the Shin Bet, has released a report, "Hamas's Military Buildup in the Gaza Strip." It says that Hamas has an army of 20,000 armed men, many of whom were trained in trained in Iran and Lebanon. They have modeled themselves after Hezbollah, drawing lessons from the last war. The report details the brigades and the types of weapons they have. The buildup is not expected to reach completion for some years yet. You can read the report here:
My question, then, is whether we're going to sit here and wait for that completion. There's no one awake at the helm at the moment, unfortunately. ~~~~~~~~~~ It has now been released that the Israeli police arrested two young Palestinians in March who were in the country illegally and were planning to perpetrate a terrorist attack by putting poison in the food at the Ramat Gan restaurant where they worked. They had been recruited by a cell of Al Aksa Brigades –– which you will please note, is part of the "moderate" Fatah. This particular cell is directed and financed by Hezbollah. So, note this as well: Fatah receives Hezbollah (which means Iranian) financial support. Two men, one of them named Hani Ka'abi, were going to supply the slow acting, tasteless, colorless poison powder. Warned the announcement from the prime minister's office with regard to this: "It should be emphasized that the terrorist infrastructure headed by Hani Ka'abi is currently active in attempting to perpetrate other terrorist attacks, possibly with the assistance of other Palestinians illegally present in Israel." This means that hiring or in any way assisting illegal Palestinian workers is NOT a good idea. To my way of thinking, to increase the number of workers permitted into the country is all together not a good idea either. But it's clear that Defense Minister Barak doesn't agree with me, as he is going to request of the Cabinet that the quota for Palestinian construction workers be increased by 5,000 (subject to security restrictions). ~~~~~~~~~~~ As Olmert and Barak proceed with various concessions to the Palestinians, there is frequently discussion here about whether this is Olmert's initiative and Rice and Bush are coming along for the ride, or whether Bush and Rice, in particular, are pushing Israel into actions we'd rather not take. Often, the consensus is that the initiative comes from Olmert, and often that assessment is not wrong. But here's a case where it isn't so: The US (and I believe this winner came from the White House) has a new proposal: By the end of this year, Israel and the Palestinians should sign a general agreement on principles good for five years, that doesn't touch the issue of Jerusalem or the refugees. In the course of those five years, the Palestinians would have some "municipal sovereignty" in Jerusalem. You know what this really is, don't you? It's the "George Bush wants a legacy in his term, so he doesn't give a damn what happens later as long as a piece of paper is signed" proposal. It is outrageous. And outrageously stupid. So full of holes it could be used as a sieve. ~~~~~~~~~~ Allow me to point out just a few of the more egregious weaknesses in this plan: What happens if there is no agreement at the end of five years and time has run out? Are the Palestinians going to be willing to go backwards? Why should they have any "municipal sovereignty" if this was supposed to be shelf agreement that wouldn't activate until the PA had eradicated terror infrastructure? How can there be a "part-way" agreement? Either there is a meeting of the minds for a Palestinian state, on all core issues, or there is not. Actually, going part way raises hopes that might later be dashed, fomenting violence. ~~~~~~~~~~ Ahmed Qurei has said "nothing doing." There has been no official word from Israel yet, but reports are that there is great reluctance to accept this plan. However, it is being said that the US might pressure both sides into taking it. Pressure both sides? My thought: This is one point on which both sides can agree. They don't like what Washington is proposing and don't wish to sign on to it. They should convey a joint message that there will be no cooperation on this. ~~~~~~~~~~ The single positive note here is that this proposal indicates that negotiations are indeed not moving smoothly. ~~~~~~~~~~ In case you haven't had enough of George Bush for one day, let me add this: Reports are that as Bush plans his itinerary for his visit in May to celebrate our 60th Independence Day, he will be scrupulously avoiding the Kotel (Western Wall) because this would imply that it's part of Israel and that might infuriate the Palestinians. Well, his decision infuriates me. How about you? Maybe he needs to hear what you think about this: Fax: 202-456-2461 Comment Line: 202-456-1111 comments@whitehouse.gov ~~~~~~~~~~ Latest on that Sharm el-Sheikh conference that Bush (sorry, that name again) wants when he's here in May: Israel will not be invited. It is to be a US-Arab meeting only, with Abbas, Mubarak and Abdullah. ~~~~~~~~~~ In case you haven't heard: Israel's enemy, Jimmy Carter, apparently has plans to meet Mashaal in Damascus next week. The State Department is trying to discourage him. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
BUSH TO DIVIDE JERUSALEM?
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, April 10, 2008. |
|
Two news stories on Jerusalem.The first
was written by Aaron Klein, Jerusalem Bureau of
WorldNetDaily and it appeared in WND yesterday.
It is called "O Jerusalem! America drafts plan to cut in 2"
The second comes from Arutz Sheva and is called "PA: No Decision on Jerusalem for 5 Years." That's like saying: "Due to the infection in your right hand, we will have to temporarily amputate it. No need to worry, we can glue it back on some time in the future." If you can believe that, then you can believe this: |
|
1. Aaron Klein, Jerusalem Bureau of
WorldNetDaily
Allows Palestinian security control, asks Israel to forfeit Temple Mount JERUSALEM –– The United States, which has been mediating negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority here, has proposed a plan to divide Jerusalem, WND has learned. The plan, divided into separate phases, among other things calls for Israel eventually to forfeit parts of the Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest site. According to the first stage of the U.S. plan, which was obtained by WND, Israel would give the PA some municipal and security sovereignty over key Arab neighborhoods in eastern Jerusalem. The PA would be allowed to open some official institutions in Jerusalem, could elect a mayor for the Palestinian side of the city and would deploy police forces to maintain law and order. The initial stage also calls for the PA to operate Jerusalem municipal institutions, such as offices to oversee trash collection and maintenance of roads. After five years, if both sides keep their certain commitments called for in a larger principal agreement, according to the U.S. plan the PA would be given full sovereignty over the eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods and also over sections of the Temple Mount. The plan doesn't specify which parts of the Temple Mount would be forfeited to the Palestinians. After the five year period, the PA could deploy official security forces in Jerusalem separate from a police force and could also open major governmental institutions, such as a president's office, and offices for the finance and foreign ministries. The U.S. plan leaves Israel and the PA to negotiate which Jerusalem neighborhoods would become Palestinian. According to diplomatic sources familiar with the plan, while specific neighborhoods were not officially listed, American officials recommended sections of Jerusalem's Old City as well as certain largely Arab Jerusalem neighborhoods such as Jabal mukabar, Beit Hanina, Shoafat, Abu Dis and Abu Tur become part of the Palestinian side. As WND reported previously, many of the Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem, including all of Shoafat, a large Arab section, were constructed illegally on property owned by the Jewish National Fund, a Jewish nonprofit that purchases property using Jewish donors funds for the stated purpose of Jewish settlement. According to diplomatic sources, the plan is being discussed by Israel and the PA but has not yet been accepted. The sources said the plan was delivered earlier this month by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during her trip to the region to push Israeli-Palestinian negotiations started at last November's U.S.-backed Annapolis summit, which aimed to create a Palestinian state before the end of the year. Since Annapolis, negotiating teams including Israeli Foreign Minister Tzippy Livni and chief Palestinian negotiator Ahmed Qureia have been meeting weekly while Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA President Mahmoud Abbas have been meeting biweekly. The U.S. is "very deeply involved" in all aspects of the negotiations, according to a top diplomatic source. To demonstrate the level of U.S. involvement, the source pointed to recent U.S. supervision of Israeli commitments to dismantle about 50 West Bank anti-terror roadblocks and to bulldoze what are called illegal outposts, or West Bank Jewish communities constructed without government permits. "The U.S. oversaw the removal of each and every roadblock, making sure the roadblocks were actually removed," said the source. "Also, even though Israel prepared a report of all illegal outposts and handed it to the Americans, U.S. officials have been doing their own very specific independent investigating to find each and every illegal outpost and then oversee their dismantlement," the source said. Olmert's government has hinted a number of times it will divide Jerusalem. In December, Israeli Vice Premier Haim Ramon said the country "must" give up sections of Jerusalem for a future Palestinian state, even conceding the Palestinians can rename Jerusalem "to whatever they want." "We must come today and say, friends, the Jewish neighborhoods, including Har Homa, will remain under Israeli sovereignty, and the Arab neighborhoods will be the Palestinian capital, which they will call Jerusalem or whatever they want," said Ramon during an interview. Positions held by Ramon, a ranking member of Olmert's Kadima party, are largely considered to be reflective of Israeli government policy. Olmert himself recently questioned whether it was "really necessary" to retain Arab-majority eastern sections of Jerusalem. Israel recaptured eastern Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount –– Judaism's holiest site –– during the 1967 Six Day War. The Palestinians have claimed eastern Jerusalem as a future capital; the area has large Arab neighborhoods, a significant Jewish population and sites holy to Judaism, Christianity and Islam. About 231,000 Arabs live in Jerusalem, mostly in eastern neighborhoods, and many reside in illegally constructed complexes. The city has an estimated total population of 724,000. 2. PA: No Decision on Jerusalem for 5 Years
(IsraelNN.com) Palestinian Authority sources quoted in Yediot Acharonot said Thursday that negotiators had agreed to push off a final decision on the status of Jerusalem for five years. In the meantime, they said, Israel and the PA will reach a temporary agreement allowing the PA to take municipal control of certain Arab neighborhoods in the capital city. The decision to postpone a final decision was reportedly made recently in negotiations between Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and senior PA negotiator Ahmed Qurei (Abu Ala). Israel has not confirmed the report. The PA insists that it be given all areas of Jerusalem that were under Jordanian control between 1948 and 1967, including the Old City and the Temple Mount, as the capital of a new PA state. The issue has caused tension within the coalition, and the Shas party has threatened to leave the government if Israeli negotiators agree to split the city. |
|
FROG BITES SCORPION*
Posted by Barry Rubin, April 9, 2008. |
|
[Editor's Note:
"Palestinian Terrorists Murder Two Israeli Truck Drivers at Gaza Fuel Depot" by Yuval Azoulay, Avi Issacharoff and Amos Harel "Two Israeli truck drivers were shot dead and two other Israelis were wounded Wednesday when four Palestinian terrorists from Gaza infiltrated the fuel depot near Nahal Oz. The victims were Oleg Lipson, 37, and Lev Cherniak, 53. IDF soldiers killed two of the terrorists. Later in the day, a Palestinian sniper wounded an IDF soldier in the area. An IDF spokesman said the Palestinians fired mortar shells before the attack as a diversion. The infiltration occurred after the latest delivery of fuel to Gaza, funded by the EU." (Ha'aretz)] |
|
On April 9, Palestinian terrorists from the Gaza Strip attacked the Nahal Oz fuel terminal in Israel near the border. Two Israeli workers were killed. Shortly before, a shipment of diesel fuel for the Gaza power plant, paid for by the European Union, had left there. What makes this attack especially significant –– and horrible –– is that the only reason the terminal was open and the workers were present was to supply the needs of the Gaza Strip's population. In previous months, the international media and many governments criticized Israel for not doing enough to help Gaza, despite the fact that the area is ruled by an openly anti-Semitic regime which makes clear its goal of destroying Israel, and also daily fires mortars and rockets into Israel. Indeed, as part of this attack, several mortar shells were fired at the terminal. Hamas, and the world, cannot have it both ways. Either Hamas is the aggressor while Israel is the victim, in which case there should be full international support and favorable media coverage for Israel. Or if unwilling to take such an appropriate stance, the world cannot expect Israel to risk its people's lives to fuel Gaza machine shops that make rockets to assault it and should stop complaining about Israeli actions in self-defense. In either case, the latest attacks make even clear what should already be obvious: Hamas is responsible for any suffering in the Gaza Strip. And if Israel should cut off all fuel deliveries to the Gaza power plant, which would only affect about one-quarter of the area's supplies, it is fully justified in doing so. The situation, however, goes even beyond this: Hamas is deliberately intensifying the suffering in order to use it as a pretext for its own failure as government, its attacks on Israel, and its ability to beg for international support for victim. Could the situation possibly be any more obvious? Apparently it is still not obvious enough for too much of the media and too much of the Western political establishments. Of course, there are many exceptions and more so as time goes on. One of the classic Middle East stories is the tale of the frog and the scorpion. The scorpion demands that the frog provide a ride across the river on his back. "But you will sting me and I will die," protests the frog. The scorpion points out, in response, that since he cannot swim he would not do such a rash thing since he, too, would drown. The frog agrees. The scorpion climbs onto the frog and they set off. But in the middle of the river the scorpion stings the frog, and as they sink beneath the water the frog complains, "Why did you do that? Now we'll both die!" And the scorpion complains: "Well, what do you expect, this is the Middle East." So goes the story in its traditional form. But now we can add some additional modern touches. First, in the new version the scorpion declares that he will sting the frog without any doubt. But the frog agrees to take the scorpion because he is encouraged or intimidated by onlookers' remarks on onlookers –– "What! You won't take that poor scorpion on a ride? What kind of imperialist, racist aggressor are you?" Second, after the duo drowns, the next day newspapers run the following headlines:
* Based on the classic journalistic saying, "Man Bites Dog, news; Dog Bites Man, no news. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloriacenter.org and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal http://meria.idc.ac.il. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). |
|
WHAT'S AT STAKE FOR THE WEST IN LEBANON?
Posted by Dave Nathan, April 9, 2008. |
|
This is a summary of a briefing March 6, 2008 by David
Wurmser. David Wurmser is a specialist on the Middle East and served as an advisor to Vice President Dick Cheney until recently. His prior positions included special assistant to John R. Bolton at the Department of State and a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. Wurmser is the author of numerous influential papers and three books, including Tyranny's Ally: America's Failure to Defeat Saddam Hussein (AEI Press, 1999). In 2000, he contributed to the Middle East Forum's Lebanon Study Group report, "Ending Syria's Occupation of Lebanon: The U.S. Role," which condemned Syria's occupation of Lebanon. He received a Ph.D. in international relations from Johns Hopkins University. Mr. Wurmser addressed the Middle East Forum on March 6, 2008 in New York City. The speech was entitled "Iran's Stake in the Levant." |
|
Mr. Wurmser calls Lebanon a "key battleground between the West as a whole and the forces that seek to drag the Middle East down." The situation in Lebanon must be viewed in the context of the larger conflict in the region, which is becoming far more dangerous. Two years after the Cedar Revolution in March 2005, which was brought on by the assassination of Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri, the Lebanese are still living through a tragedy. The inability to install a new president today is indicative of the situation. It is because of the size and success of the popular demonstrations by the Lebanese, however, that Lebanon has become the focal point of the enemies of the West, namely Iran, Syria, and Hezbollah. Mr. Wurmser focused on the Iranian strategy toward Lebanon, arguing that Iran is undergoing a transformation, not in the direction of reform as the West hopes, but from a pure theocracy toward a "theofascist state on the edge of an even more aggressive foreign policy." This transformation in Iranian politics, according to Mr. Wurmser, is being played out in Lebanon and in Gaza. Top American officials have made statements to the effect that U.S. and U.N. sanctions have hurt the Iranian regime, and that the support for former president Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani and other figures deemed "moderate" in the December 2006 elections indicated the weakening of the Iranian regime. Mr. Wurmser asserts that this perception is false because it ignores the real indicators. Rather, a new power structure is emerging in Iran that is closely aligned with President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. For example, Ahmadinejad fired many government officials and replaced them with a group of hard-core members of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). Mr. Wurmser singled out Gholam Hossein Mohseni-Ejehei, whom Ahmadinejad placed in control of Intelligence, who espouses an aggressive anti-Western foreign policy and supports terrorism; and Saeed Jalili, whom Ahmadinejad appointed as head nuclear negotiator for Iran, is a veteran of the IRGC who was mutilated in the Iran-Iraq war. Mr. Wurmser traced several of Ahmadinejad's actions to Jalili's 1990 book, Foreign Policy of the Prophet, arguing that Jalili's writings, though they describe the time of Muhammad, are a blueprint for Iran today. Jalili cites an episode in which Muhammad told his followers to proselytize, not negotiate. In this spirit, Ahmedinejad has fired ambassadors and replaced them with more proselytizing ones. Jalili wrote about how Muhammad and his successors sent letters out to other tribes telling them to "convert or you will face the sword," as well as to major powers in Byzantium and Persia. Mr. Wurmser linked this to Ahmedinejad's sending similar letters to President Bush. He pointed out how the "language is lifted straight out of Jalili's book, and that, in fact, "Jalili is the mind behind Ahmedinejad." Mr. Wurmser analyzed tensions between IRGC officers and the ayatollahs whom the officers believe "betrayed the will of Allah" when they signed the treaty ending the Iran-Iraq war. A separate group of ayatollahs, based in Mashhad in northeastern Iran, sees itself as true believers. This group considers the current state of Islam to be weak, and it seeks to expose the West as "a collapsing, hollow tree." It expects the imminent return of the Twelfth Imam, the hidden Imam at the center of the Twelver Sh'ia movement of Islam. Its version of Islam is messianic and apocalyptic, and according to Mr. Wurmser, it provides the ideological basis for Iran's shift to a more aggressive and risk-seeking stance against the West. He also identified a radical change in Iranian's notion of Islam. While the Iranian revolution defended Shi'ite interests and opposed Arab nationalism, over the past four years, "Iran has made a bold move to co-opt Arab nationalism." The Arab-Israeli conflict has become a key issue on which Iran can attempt to seize leadership of the Islamic world from the Sunnis and Arabs. A central part of Iran's national policy, Mr. Wurmser asserted, is to have an active war with Israel, be victorious, and seize leadership of the Muslim world. Iran's success at assuming the mantle of Islam is evident in that in the past two or three years, Muslim Brotherhood leaders have recognized that Shi'ites are true Muslims, a concept that they had vehemently opposed previously. Mr. Wurmser argued that Iran needs Syria in order to co-opt Sunni politics and Arab nationalism. He called Syria a "geographic gateway for Iran to be a player in the Arab-Israeli conflict," and through this, to maintain the appearance of a successful Iranian revolution. Ahmedinejad came to power because it was thought that the Iranian revolution was weak. If Syria collapses, Mr. Wurmser thinks Iran will implode and that Syria is the avenue through which to attack Iran. Gaza is also a battleground for Iran, said Wurmser, citing that 80% of terrorist activity in Gaza is committed by a force trained in Iran that answers directly to Damascus and Tehran. Mr. Wurmser considers things to have gone well for Ahmadinejad in the last few months. He compared Ahmadinejad's bold opposition to the West and accusations of cowardliness on the part of followers who urge a more cautious policy to the way Hitler galvanized his generals in the 1930s by accusing them of lack of will. Disturbingly, each crisis increases Ahmadinejad's reputation as his supporters rally round him. In his recommendation for American foreign policy, Mr. Wurmser stressed that the United States must take into account how its policies are perceived in the Middle East. In 2003, when the United States acquiesced to the European acceptance of the Iranian regime as a legitimate interlocutor on nuclear issues, the Iranians read this as tacit acceptance and, therefore, weakness. During the same year, when the U.N. sanctioned the American presence in Iraq, Iran saw this as weakness on the American part because the superpower asked for permission to strike. Mr. Wurmser described the summer of 2003 as a "key moment, because the momentum the Iranian people were building against the regime was punctured by perceived American weakness." On the question of what concrete things the United States can do to support democracy in Lebanon, Mr. Wurmser emphasized the need for swift response to the assassinations of Lebanese leaders. At least six government officials have been killed since Hariri, but the U.S. response has been slow and ineffective. Meanwhile, Hezbollah and Syria are "killing the Lebanese government out of existence." Mr. Wurmser concluded that "the United States can have an effect if we show we are committed to acting to preserve what happened in March 2005" when the Lebanese staged the Cedar Revolution. Contact Dave Nathan at DaveNathan@aol.com |
|
I HOPE THAT ISRAEL STILL HAS A CHANCE
Posted by Steven Shamrak, April 9, 2008. |
|
Dear friend, Please, read this interview. I hope that Israel still have a chance with emerging new leadership! Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) is a group of people inside the Likud party who want to see Israel adopt a more Jewish character. Moshe Feiglin, its cofounder, has emphatically said he does not want a theocracy, but he does want a State based on Jewish values. The Manhigut Yehudit website address is http://www.manhigut.org. To learn more about Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) and to read their plan for Israel's future, visit www.jewishisrael.org. Or contact Shmuel Sackett, International Director (516) 330-4922 (cell) |
|
Rabkin: Moshe Feiglin, thank you for joining me for this interview for Frontpage Magazine. Feiglin: The pleasure is mine, Dan. Rabkin: Let's discuss your views on some of Israel's most pressing issues. To start off, can you tell us a little bit about yourself and your rise through the ranks of the Likud? Feiglin: I first got involved in politics in 1993 when I co-founded the Zo Artzeinu (This Is Our Land) movement to protest the Oslo Accords. In 1998, I went on to co-find the Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) movement to lead the State of Israel with authentic Jewish values. We are now part of the Likud and are growing stronger with every day. In 2003, I participated in the Likud primaries for the first time. I ran against two former Israeli Prime Ministers, Netanyahu and (Ariel) Sharon, and got 3%. In the 2006 primaries I got 13% of the votes. In the most recent primaries, held last August, I finished second to Bibi (Netanyahu) with one-fourth of the votes cast. Rabkin: If the polls are to be believed and the Likud win the next general election, what role do you see yourself playing in that government? Feiglin: In a nutshell, in Israeli elections you don't vote for a person, you vote for a party. Based on what share of the vote your party gets, you get a certain number of people from your party's list in the Knesset (Israeli Parliament). I plan on getting a high enough spot on the Likud's list to get a seat in the Knesset. After you are in the Knesset your spot on the list doesn't matter. I am not sure though that I would want to be a Member of Cabinet. I am talking about a revolution in Israel, but if I accept a cabinet position under a leadership that will continue in the same direction, I will end up being a part of the problem instead of part of the solution. So I am not sure at all that I want to be just a Minister, I want to be Prime Minister. You see Dan, the Likud has the power in Israel –– the Likud represents the people. The Likud had a slogan before, "Only the Likud Can!", and it is true. Only the Likud can build and only the Likud can destroy. Unfortunately, when it is run by the wrong people it destroys. The leaders were good people, don't get me wrong. Ariel Sharon was a hero and Netanyahu is a talented man. Yet, when you don't have that Jewish point in your leadership, you are doomed to fail. This has been proven time and time again. Therefore, Israel needs real Jewish leadership and I am ready to provide it. Rabkin: Are you satisfied with the current leadership in Israel? Feiglin: Two weeks ago the Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Olmert, came to a hospital in Ashkelon. He came to visit the Jews of Sderot and Ashkelon that had been wounded by the Qassam, Katyusha, and Grad rockets being fired from Gaza. Do you know what he told them? He said "get used to it"; just like that, "get used to it, I don't have a solution". Do you understand the meaning of that? Just 63 years after the gates of Auschwitz were opened, Jews are supposed to get used the fact that every once in a while we will get killed just because we are Jews. Now we have a flag, a parliament, the strongest military in the Middle East and we're supposed to get used to it? Why did we even start all of this? What was the reason that we even established the State of Israel to begin with? We did that because we are not going to "get used to it". And here comes the Israeli Prime Minister telling his people to "get used to it". But you know, he is right, we don't have a solution. And this isn't about Olmert personally; the entire state of Israel doesn't have a solution. Our whole state of mind, our mentality, and our leadership are void of faith. That's why we have no solution. During the 2006 war with Lebanon, we had a member of the Knesset, Azmi Bishara, an Israeli Arab, standing on top of Carmel Mountain in Haifa. He had his cell-phone open talking directly with Hezbollah, maybe even (Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan) Nasrallah himself, telling them they missed with their rockets and in what direction to aim the next one to be on target. A Knesset member doing this! He was caught by the Israeli security organizations and what happened? Did we hang him or put him in jail? No. We just opened the gate and let him go to Jordan and we even kept on paying his Knesset salary. How can anyone be satisfied with this? Rabkin: Absolutely incredible. You rose to prominence in Israel protesting the Oslo Accords. You were also one of the loudest voices against the Gaza Disengagement a few years ago. Can you tell us why? Feiglin: What happened when (the late Israeli PM Yitzhak) Rabin shook the hand of the leader of the Palestinian Liberation Organization, the leader of an organization that exists to liberate every piece of land that the Jews have and give it to the Arabs? Let's assume somebody comes into your house and tells you that your house is actually his. You are just sitting in your living room and he tells you the whole house is his. By shaking his hand, what signal are you sending? The natural human reaction would be to scream, yell, kick him out, call the police –– anything you need to do to get him out of there. You do that so everyone understands this claim is false and you are not accepting it. The minute you shake his hand you lost your house. You have conceded to his claims. Maybe you will come to some sort of compromise on the house itself, but that will only happen if this good guy agrees to it. But you see what has happened? All of a sudden, you became the bad guy and he is now the good guy. And this is exactly the type of situation we got ourselves into in 1993 when Yitzhak Rabkin shook Yasser Arafat's hand. But something much worse happened in Gush Katif (Gaza). The Israeli military actually went into Jewish villages in Gush Katif and kicked Jews out. Israel went into the homes of people, who actually believe that this land belongs to the Jews, and kicked them out of their homes and abandoned their synagogues to the Arab mobs and their torches. And this was broadcast to the entire world. Every country had their media present as this was happening. I was there; I saw all the microphones and cameras. There is not anyone in the world that did not see what the Jews were doing to themselves. With these actions, the Jews showed the world that the entire land of Israel did not belong to the Jews, but to the Arabs. And now we are the bad guys and the Arabs are the good guys. And this applies to every single Jew in the world, whether we like it or not, because Israel is the land of the Jewish nation and we are all represented by the state of Israel. The history of the Jewish people, all of us, is being written today in Jerusalem, not in New York or Toronto, but in Israel. And to everyone watching we have become the bad guys. Everyone agrees that it is not nice that the Palestinians –– I mean the Arabs of Gaza, since there is no such thing as "Palestinians" –– shoot rockets and missiles at civilians. The world knows it is not nice, but they accept it anyway. You know why Dan? Why does the world stand by and accept that they are killing civilians? They accept it because, after all, it is their land and we took it away from them. Many nations have had to fight for their rights and killed civilians. The Americans killed thousands of civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The British did the same in Dresden. But everybody understood then and still understands today, who the good guy was and who the bad guy was in those conflicts. For Israel, we can only respond to these attacks under the very narrow frame of self-defense. If someone is shooting at us, we can shoot him down, exactly at that moment. But not the guy to his left, the guy to his right, or the women whose skirt he is hiding behind when he shoots at us. Heaven forefend that we should try to limit the amount of fuel or water or electricity with which we supply them. Of course, under such circumstances, there is no way that we can win this war or stop these attacks. Rabkin: The way you spell it out, Israel is in serious trouble today. What needs to be done to turn things around? Feiglin: The problem is much more than Olmert not giving the IDF (Israeli Defense Forces) an order. Not that I like Ehud Olmert, believe me, I am not one of his fans. But the problem is much bigger. The problem is our mentality. Since Rabin's handshake, the entire state of Israel marched into a state of mind of pragmatism and non-spirituality. The only way we can solve this problem is not by getting more weapons from the United States. We don't need more F-15s and F-16s. That is not our problem. What we need is to march back into the right state of mind. And for that we need leadership. True, authentic leadership based on Jewish values. A leadership for Israel that believes in the God of Israel. Look at Olmert and many of the other leaders of Israel today. They can't even explain to their own kids why we established the State of Israel to begin with. Olmert's kids are not in Israel (Olmert's son Shaul lives in New York and has been associated with anti-militaristic left-wing groups. His other son, Ariel, studies French Literature at the Sorbonne in Paris). The same thing is true about many of our other current leaders. What we need is a Jewish Revolution to take back the leadership and it has already begun. We are growing stronger every day. Last August the Likud held primaries, a race that was not only going to define the leader of the Likud party, but also the next Prime Minister of Israel. Every fourth Likudnik, your regular blue-collar guy who represents the average Israeli, put my name down. And you know what my slogan was in that race? "Feiglin –– Because He Has a God". A couple of years ago, even one year before, it would have been impossible for me to finish second to Netanyahu for the leadership of the Likud and the entire State of Israel. And let me tell you something else –– in the next primaries I will win. I say this because this concept of Jewish Leadership, leadership that will lead the State of Israel in the name of God, leadership that will lead the State of Israel with Jewish values, leadership that knows where it comes from and where it is going, real Jewish leadership, is picking up steam and cannot be stopped. This totally new concept, which is being attacked from all sides, is gaining more and more popularity. And believe me Dan, this will continue. We cannot lose, we cannot stop going in this direction, because without this there is no hope. No hope for Israel and no hope for the entire Jewish Nation. I say the entire Jewish Nation because whatever happens in Israel immediately reflects back on all Jews worldwide. When these Jews in Gush Katif were pulled from their homes, what happened to the level of anti-Semitism worldwide? It went up of course. Israel did what the world expected of us and anti-Semitism went up. When we defied the world and did what we had to do in 1967, the level of anti-Semitism dropped. Suddenly every Jew on the streets of Toronto and New York was proud to be a Jew. So you see, what happens in Israel immediately affects all Jews worldwide. A proud Israel with real Jewish faith, that knows what it stands for, impacts Jews tremendously. So you see Dan, the problem isn't with the Arabs; the problem is with the Jews themselves. Rabkin: OK, but you must have some ideas on how Israel should deal with its enemies. Feiglin: The answer is very simple. There is only one place in Israel where Jews are safe. Only one area where Jews can live in peace, safe from rockets and bombings. That place is the Golan Heights. Inside the Golan Heights you won't even get stones thrown at you. The border between Israel and Syria is the quietest, most peaceful border we have. The place is beautiful and safe, like heaven. How did we achieve this true peace there? Five steps were taken. Rule number one, the Syrian Arabs that were there were evacuated. None stayed. So the first rule is, encourage the Arabs to leave. The second thing that was done was the land was taken over. After the war in 1967, we took the land over. The third rule is to annex the land. In the Golan Heights we annexed the land and put it under full Israeli sovereignty. The fourth rule is to flourish the land with as many Jewish villages as possible. And the fifth and most important rule is to never sign a peace treaty. We have not signed any peace deals with respect to the Golan Heights and look what we have –– true peace. A real, true peace exists there, something that doesn't exist anywhere else in the country. Our border with Egypt is very dangerous even though we have a peace deal signed with them. To this day, Egypt fights against us via that border. And we can't do anything because our hands are tied because of the peace deal we signed. So these five steps must be taken in Gaza and everywhere else that we have problems with Arabs. Of course today there is no official war going on, so we can't just throw the Arabs out. However, like I said before, the Arabs are not the problem. The problem is the Jews. We must understand that we established the State of Israel for a reason, not just to create one more democratic state. For that we could have stayed in Toronto or Australia. We came to Israel to establish a real Jewish state. And when we have real Jewish leadership in Israel, then we will deal with all of the rest of our problems in the same way as we dealt with the Golan Heights. Rabkin: With no official war going on, like you said, you cannot just "throw the Arabs out". So how would you go about implementing your five steps? Feiglin: Any solution that leaves the Arabs in their place will not work, period. Fortunately, one good thing did come out of Rabin's handshake –– 15 years under the PLO/Hamas regime have made the Arabs want to leave. Various polls have showed this, the majority wants to leave. Where do they want to go? Rabkin: By your smile, I would have to guess Canada. Feiglin: Yes, Canada. With some of them preferring to go to Saudi Arabia and Kuwait to work in the oil fields. But the first important fact is that they want to leave. The second fact is that every year Israel spends 10% of our entire national income on the concept of Oslo. That is $150 billion every decade spent building fences, destroying Jewish villages, and putting guards in front of every coffee shop and store. Before Oslo, Israel didn't need to have an armed guard in uniform in front of every store. That is 60,000 people on full payroll just guarding us from the effects of Oslo. That money is enough to give every Arab family in Yesha (the West Bank and Gaza) $250,000. Look what we have here: they want to leave and we have the money. We are spending the money anyhow and we will just spend more and more. We built fences, so they started shooting rockets above it. So what will we do now? We will have to make the fences higher to stop the rockets. Or we will invent a high-tech system that costs millions to shoot down every $100 rocket they shoot. It is crazy; we will just end up spending more and more. Basically, the Arabs want to leave and we have the money and ability to encourage and help them find a future somewhere else in the world where they won't be used as ticking bombs against us. With the money we give them, there are many countries who wish to get this kind of immigration. So we have the ability in 10 to 15 years solve the problem, at least most of it. So this is what Israel should do with the Arabs. But, even though this is logical, it will not work. I am telling you right now Dan, this will not happen. More and more blood will be spilled because of this Oslo mentality when the solution is simple and right in front of our eyes. The right steps will not be taken until Israel has real Jewish leadership. Rabkin: Some of your policies are at odds with the policies of the United States. Seeing as they are such an important ally, are you concerned about that at all? Feiglin: America did not want Israel to go and fight the Six-Day War. America did not want Israel to go and bomb the nuclear reactor in Iraq. And there are many more examples like that. I respect the United States a lot, but I expect that kind of respect back and I believe I will get it. People who respect themselves, get the kind of respect they deserve from others. I will not let anyone tell me what is in my best interests. I am going to worry about Israel first, but I do believe that, at the end of the day, my policies are in the interests of the United States as well. Rabkin: Today, Israel is facing numerous very serious security threats. Hezbollah is furiously rearming in the north. The rockets are raining down from Gaza. How do you view the situation and what must be done about it? Feiglin: Israel has a problem today. America has the same problem. We simply don't understand who the enemy is. How could we win the war in Lebanon in 2006 if we didn't know who the enemy was? Same thing today in Gaza. In Iraq, the US is also fighting the wrong enemy. That is why they are going to lose there. We lost the war in Lebanon. No doubt about it, we lost. It was not because we weren't strong enough and not because America didn't support us. We got the full support of America. It was because we didn't understand who the enemy was, who was hitting us, and because we did not have the right set of values to fight with. To answer your question about what I would do about Lebanon, we must go into Lebanon like we did a few times before and conquer the territory from which attacks against Israel are being launched. This will send a message to the entire Arabic world: every territory that is being used to attack Israel will be taken away forever. If we don't do that then we will get attacked again and again because they have nothing to lose. They learn that they can only gain by attacking us so they continue. Losing lives every once in a while doesn't mean anything to them. They believe in death anyhow. So if we don't put this kind of a price-tag –– a price-tag of lost land, the only language they understand –– we will keep defending ourselves to death. Rabkin: Tell me if I am wrong, but the "enemy" behind everything you are referring to is Iran. The "loss of land price-tag" policy that you just outlined is aimed more at Tehran's terrorist proxies in the region like Hezbollah and Hamas and the land bordering Israel. What policy would you use to confront Tehran directly? Feiglin: First of all, we have to stop this game of being attacked by sub-contractors. Egypt is fighting us through Gaza. It attacks us daily. There is no doubt about it, there is a war going on between Egypt and Israel today. It is just being fought through a sub-contractor. Syria and Iran are fighting us through Hezbollah in Lebanon. And we are playing their game, instead of making them pay a price for what they are doing. We have to break this cycle and make them pay a serious price. Rabkin: How exactly would you do that? Feiglin: First of all, we have to understand and make sure the whole world understands exactly who is fighting who over here. Until you do that you cannot fight back. What gives you the right to bomb Damascus or Tehran otherwise? Or Egypt for that matter? I don't know what we should do about their actions against us, but maybe that should be done against Egypt as well. We gave up the Sinai for peace and now they are using it against us. Maybe it should be taken back. The point is this Dan: a strong Israel can achieve peaceful borders. Notice I didn't say "peace". "Peace" is something totally different. But we can achieve peaceful borders; a situation where people are not getting killed. A weak Israel can only achieve peace agreements. But those agreements come with a lot of bloodshed. Therefore, we should radiate strength. We have showed in the past that we can do that. Rabkin: Let's talk a bit about Tehran's nuclear weapons program. With the publication of the November 2007 National Intelligence Estimate in the US, the prospect of American military action to stop Iran from developing a nuclear weapon has decreased significantly. If Israel is forced to go it alone vis-à-vis Tehran, what would Moshe Feiglin do? Feiglin: We should take a page out of (former Israeli PM) Menachem Begin's book (referring to the bombing of the Iraqi Osirak nuclear reactor in 1981). Rabkin: What about the consequences? Iran has missiles that can hit every city in Israel. They have established biological and chemical weapons programs. They have terrorist proxies all over the world. Feiglin: Should we wait until those same missiles have nuclear warheads? With a nuclear bomb the consequences will be much worse. Rabkin: Moving away from the Middle East, I understand that on your way here today you had some difficulties with Canadian Customs and Border Services and were held up for several hours. Could you comment on what exactly happened? Feiglin: If you don't mind Dan, I don't want to get into details. The bottom line is that I am happy that the Canadian government made this visit possible. Rabkin: Fair enough. Going back a bit, recently you received a letter from British Home Secretary Jacqui Smith barring you from the United Kingdom. Feiglin: This topic, Dan, I will be more than happy to talk to you about. Rabkin: I discussed the contents of that letter in my Londonistan Rising article, today I'd just like to get your feelings on the whole ordeal. Feiglin: I should frame the letter and hang it on my living room wall. All kidding aside, I am really proud of it. Britain has officially decided to be the doormat of the extreme Islamic world. London looks like the neighborhoods I have around my house (in the West Bank), so why would I even want to go there? I had not asked permission to go there and had no plans of any kind to go in the future. The letter was totally initiated from their side. Rabkin: Why do you think they specifically targeted you? Feiglin: As you correctly noted in your article, they have a long history of targeting Israelis. But with this letter I think they correctly defined the one leader in Israel that understands our enemies well. And because of that I am able to deal with the problem. So they targeted me for going in the right direction. Rabkin: Have you had any problems with any other countries? Feiglin: No, none. Rabkin: Moshe Feiglin, thank you for joining me today. Feiglin: Thank you, Dan. Contact Steven Shamrak at stevenshamrak@gmail.com and visit his website at www.shamrak.com. |
|
CENSORING SDEROT
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 9, 2008. |
|
This is a
New York Sun Staff Editorial; it appeared yesterday. It is
archived at
|
|
The mayor of the Israeli town of Sderot, Eli Moyal, stopped by the editorial rooms of the Sun yesterday to bring us up to date on the travail of his town of 23,000 that, in the past few years, has been hit by what is now 7,000 Qassam rockets fired from neighboring Gaza. The mayor walked in to the Sun's office just as we were sitting down to write an editorial on the refusal of the New York Times company to air on its radio station, WQXR, an advertisement that is part of the series that the American Jewish Committee has been airing on hundreds of stations around the country. The ad the Times turned down was about precisely the rain of rockets that has been directed at the civilian population of Sderot. It turned out that the mayor hadn't heard about the contretemps over the advertisement –– or about the rationale the Times gave for turning it down. According to the American Jewish Committee's president, David Harris, the Times's radio station manager, Tom Bartunek, wrote to the American Jewish Committee that the ad might be "misleading, at least to the degree that reasonable people might be troubled by the absence of any acknowledgement of reciprocal Israeli military actions." Mr. Harris called that explanation "stunning." Wrote Mr. Harris: "In other words, according to Bartunek's logic, the only way to broadcast the plight of Sderot's residents over the airwaves is to equate Israel's right of self-defense with Hamas's and Islamic Jihad's right to strike Israel at will." So we found ourselves trying to explain to the mayor of Sderot that this is the Kafkaesque situation faced by the Jewish defense agencies in today's politics. When Poland, on whose soil so many millions of Jews perished in the Holocaust, canceled a talk that was to be held at its consulate in New York by a professor named Anthony Judt, who feels the creation of the Jewish state was a mistake, the politically correct intelligentsia voiced angry protests. We'll see whether Stephen Walt, John Mearsheimer, and Mr. Judt and their ilk protest the refusal of the New York Times to air the ad on Sderot. It's not, incidentally, that the New York Times is unaware of the situation in Sderot. It issued over the weekend a front page story on how the city was emerging as a new symbol of the war. The people of Sderot are nothing, however, if not hard-headed about their situation. The message from their mayor is that New Yorkers should understand that the people of Sderot are not being attacked by the Palestinians. They are being attacked by international terrorist organizations. "People still believe that we're fighting Palestinians, but we're not," he said. They are being attacked by Iran and Syria and their proxies. Why any radio station or newspaper in New York would not want to stand proudly with Israel and the people of Sderot is just beyond us –– and, we've no doubt, most New Yorkers. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
EXCERPTS FROM "THE KUZARI" BY RABBI YEHUDA HALEVI
Posted by Avodah, April 9, 2008. |
|
This is from Arutz-Sheva
|
|
The book was written by Rabbi Yehuda HaLevi in the form of a conversation between a Rabbi and the non-Jewish king of Kuzar, a seeker of the true path to G-d. In a long and detailed discourse, the Rabbi explains that the true service of G-d is only in the Land of Israel. Among the very long list of its praises he says: "The Patriarchs yearned for it and endeavored to live in the country even though it was in the hands of pagans." The "Kuzari" continues, citing the halachic law: "Concerning a woman who refuses to move there with her husband, our Sages decreed that she is divorced and that she forfeits her marriage settlement. On the other hand, if the husband refuses to accompany his wife to Israel, he is bound to divorce her and pay her Ketubah. They further say that it is better to dwell in the Holy Land, even in a town mostly inhabited by idol worshippers than in the Diaspora, even in a town mostly inhabited by Jews; for he who dwells in the Holy Land is compared to him who has a G-d, whilst he who dwells outside the Land is compared to him who has no G-d. Thus said David, 'For they have driven me out this day from living in the place that is the inheritance of the L-rd, saying go and serve other gods,' which means that he who dwells in the Diaspora is as if he served strange gods." When the Rabbi finishes praising the transcendental value of living in the Land of Israel, the king of Kuzar chastises him, saying: "If this be so, thou fallest short of the duty laid down in thy law, by not endeavoring to reach that place, and making it thy abode in life and death. Is it not the gate of Heaven? All peoples agree on this point. Christians believe that the souls are gathered there and then lifted up to heaven. Islam teaches that it is the place of the ascent. All the Jews turn to it in prayer. Thus thy bowing down and kneeling in its direction is either mere appearance or thoughtless worship. Yet your first Forefathers chose it as their abode, and lived there as strangers, rather than as citizens in their own country. This they did even in a time when the Shechinah was not yet visible, and the country was full of unchastity, impurity, and idolatry. Your Forefathers, however, had no other desire than to remain in it. Neither did they leave it in times of dearth and famine except by G-d's permission. Finally, they directed their bones to be buried there. The Rabbi answers in shame and disgrace: "This is a severe reproach, O king of the Kuzars. It is the sin which kept the Divine promise with regard to the Second Temple from being fulfilled. Divine Providence was ready to restore everything as it had been at first, if they all had willingly consented to return. But only a part was ready to do so, whilst the majority and the aristocracy amongst them remained in Babylon, preferring dependence and slavery, unwilling to leave their mansions and their affairs. Had we been prepared to meet the G-d of our Forefathers with an honest mind, we would have found the same salvation as our fathers did in Egypt. If we say in our prayers, 'Worship at His holy hill; worship at His footstool; He who restoreth His glory to Zion,' and other words of this nature, this is but as the chattering of the starling and the nightingale. We do not realize what we say by this sentence, nor others, as thou rightly observes, O king of the Kuzars" (Kuzari, 2:22-25). The story concludes as follows, and I quote at length for readers who have not yet studied this monumental treatise of the fundamentals of Jewish faith: "The Rabbi was then concerned to leave the land of the Kuzars and to betake himself to Jerusalem. The king was loth to let him go, and spoke to him in this sense as follows: 'What can be sought in the Land of Israel nowadays, since the Shechinah is absent from it, whilst with a pure mind and desire, one can approach G-d in any place. Why wilt thou run into danger on land and on sea, and among the various peoples living there?'" The Rabbi answers: "The Land of Israel is especially distinguished by the L-rd of Israel, and no religious function can be perfect except there. Many of the Jewish laws do not concern those who do not live there; and heart and soul are only perfectly pure and immaculate in the place which is specially selected by G-d. The danger one runs on land and sea does not come under the category of, 'You shall not tempt the L-rd,' which refers to risks which one takes when traveling with merchandise in hope of gain. However, he who incurs even greater danger on account of his ardent desire to reach a state of cleanliness in his service of G-d is free from reproach. He braves danger, and if he escapes, he praises G-d gratefully. But should he perish through he sins, he obtains the Divine favor, and he may be confident that he has atoned for most of his sins by his death." The king tries to dissuade him with the following argument: "I thought thou didst love freedom, but I now see thee finding new religious duties which thou will be obliged to fulfill in the Land of Israel, even though they are in abeyance here." The Rabbi answers: "I only seek freedom from the service of those numerous people whose favor I do not care for, and shall never obtain, though I work for it all my life. Even if I could obtain it, it would not profit me –– I am speaking of the service of men and courting their favor. I would rather seek the service of the One whose favor is obtained with the smallest effort, yet it profits in this world and the next. This is the favor of G-d. His service spells freedom, and humility before Him is true honor." The Rabbi concludes: "This means that Jerusalem can only be rebuilt when the Jewish People yearn for it to such an extent that they embrace her stones and dust." Embracing Her Stones and Her Dust Finally, the king of the Kuzars concedes: "If this is the case, it would be a sin to hinder thee. It is on the contrary a merit to assist thee. May G-d grant thee His help, and be thy protector and friend. Amen."
|
|
PALESTINIAN 'MODERATES' ENSURE EXTREMISM
Posted by Barry Rubin, April 9, 2008. |
|
"Rice Wins Concessions from Israel," read the Washington Post headline after Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's recent visit. Rice herself told reporters her goal was to further Israel-Palestinian Authority (PA) talks by getting Israeli concessions to "improve the quality of life" for Palestinians. She listed ten different Israeli concessions including: removing 50 roadblocks, easing checkpoint procedures, increasing travel and work permits, backing economic projects, letting 700 U.S.-trained PA security men deploy, and giving the PA armored vehicles and night-vision goggles. Rice claimed success, saying talks are now "moving in the right direction." Are they? Will these concessions make the PA more stable or moderate? No. One wonders if we'll ever see the headline: "Rice Wins Concessions from Palestinians." I doubt it. How should one score this outcome: Israel 10, PA 0, because Israel might get international credit for taking risks for peace? Or the opposite, PA 10, Israel 0, since the former side got all the material gains? Certainly, the PA isn't bragging. On the contrary, it denies Israel gives anything and doesn't take advantage of such measures –– or the huge aid it receives –– to improve its' people's quality of life. That's something only Westerners care about. To comprehend its worldview and strategy, consider PA leader Mahmoud Abbas's March 29 speech to the Arab summit in Damascus. That presentation, along with the summit itself, shows the trap in which Arab politics is stuck. Even Abbas's opening Koran quote presents a paradox: "If you will aid the cause of Allah, He will aid you, and plant your feet firmly." Abbas's rivals, both in Hamas and among his own Fatah radicals, say that's what they do: follow divine will and feet-planting by rejecting concessions and continuing war to total victory. His second point is a professed confidence "that we all do agree that...a joint Arab stand and action suffices" to bring success. This line, used for 50 years, is wrong on both counts: there's no Arab unity and even if there were it wouldn't suffice. Indeed, this was a most divisive Arab summit, with the Saudis and Jordanians leading opposition to Syria's attempt to seize control of Lebanon. His third theme was that while Palestinians "remain committed to the option of a just peace, the two-state solution...Israel pursues its aggression and occupation, the construction of settlements, and the Judaization of Jerusalem." Rather than portraying Israel's current government as wanting a deal he says it aims to seize all but "a few isolated areas." This is the government that withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip and is willing to pull out of most of the rest. Yet according to him, it "seeks to undermine the possible establishment of an independent state on the land of the Palestinian people." But if so, how can the Palestinians make peace with Israel? Why is Hamas wrong in saying that only victory through violence can work? In his telling, Israel's aggression is unprovoked. He speaks of "barbaric attacks, causing hundreds of defenseless victims," and its evil intent to "undermine the possibility of reaching a peace agreement...." He basically ignores constant attacks on Israel from Gaza and offers no credible way to deal with them. He merely asks Hamas to give him Gaza and return to being one party in a PA-dominated system. This won't happen. Hamas will keep attacking Israel and trying to take over the West Bank. For all this, he blames not Hamas –– with whom he desperately tries to conciliate –– but only Israel. Here's the trap: Hamas (and elements in Fatah) attack Israel, Israel responds, Abbas cites this as proof Israel doesn't want peace, and thus negotiations cannot succeed. His bottom line: "The Israeli government seeks by the power of its occupation to impose a political solution on the ground according to its own wishes." Meanwhile, instead of competing with Hamas, the PA uses Western aid to subsidize Hamas, spending, according to Abbas, 58 percent of its budget on Gaza and paying salaries for 77,000 employees there, more than it has itself! In theory, this projects PA influence; in practice it ensures Hamas holds power. He gives Hamas money unconditionally while begging it to hand Gaza back to him. While Abbas has no strategy for regaining Gaza or making peace with Israel, his rivals have a clear, simple program appealing to reigning passions and worldview. As Hizballah leader Hasan Nasrallah puts it: "The Zionist entity can be wiped out of existence. Our nation is stronger now than ever before." Only "Zionist-American propaganda" –– in which he includes Abbas –– wants to fool Arabs and Muslims into thinking they "don't have any hopes of winning." The U.S. State Department excused Abbas's speech as just rhetoric. But that's untrue. Abbas feeds the Hamas-Iran line by demonizing Israel and implying negotiations are useless. He's not even trying to win his own people's support by improving their lives. We've become so used to this behavior that we forget there's an alternative. Abbas could say: "Israel is ready to make peace with us if we prove we'll keep our pledges. Let's defeat the radical Islamists, stop the attacks on Israel that breed conflict, end incitement to violence, reform our own regimes, align with the West, and get an independent state." Israel needs to work with Abbas and keep him afloat as the lesser of two evils to Hamas. But Abbas is incapable of making peace or regaining Gaza. His PA regime might fall to Hamas or be taken over, on his not-distant retirement, by still-dominant Fatah radicals even more eager to ally with Hamas and return to armed struggle. Here's where Rice, and much Western policy, is wrong. By not demanding and getting PA concessions and by giving money unconditionally they ensure not only that peace will fail but that there will be decades of conflict ahead. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center http://www.gloriacenter.org and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal http://meria.idc.ac.il. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). |
|
ISRAEL AND THE UNITED STATES –– WHO BENEFITS?
Posted by Gerardo Joffe, April 9, 2008. |
|
The United States is without question Israel's most important ally. Also, without question, Israel is the staunchest and most reliable friend of the United States. But there are some who believe and vigorously advocate that Israel is a burden to the United States and that, were it not for Israel, peace would prevail in the Middle East. What are the facts? The "Israel lobby." A patriotic-named foundation urges, in full-page ads in national newspapers (very expensive –– who pays for it?), to influence Congress to withhold support for Israel. Professors from prestigious universities write essays in which they aver that the United States is in thrall to the "Israel lobby." This lobby is said to pull the strings of American policy. Its supposed main promoters are AIPAC (American Israel Public Affairs Committee) and the so-called "neo-cons," some of whom are indeed Jewish. They are said to exert an almost magical spell over policy makers, including the leaders of Congress and the President. Some even say that the Iraq war was promoted by this omnipotent "Israel lobby," that the President was flummoxed into declaring war on Saddam Hussein, not in order to defend the United States or to promote its interests, but in order to further the interests of Israel. Israel is indeed a major recipient of U.S. aid. Israel receives yearly $1.8 billion in military aid and $1.2 billion in economic aid, a substantial portion of our yearly aid budget. Almost all of the military aid is spent in the United States, making Israel one of the major customers of the U.S. defense industry. Virtually all of the economic assistance goes for repayment of debt to the United States, incurred from military purchases dating back many years. America's staunchest ally. A good case can be made that aid to Israel, certainly the military portion, should be part of the United States defense budget, rather than of the aid budget because Israel is, next only perhaps to Britain, by far the most important ally of the United States. Virtually without exception, Israel's government and its people agree with and support the foreign policy objectives of the United States. In the United Nations, Israel's votes coincide with those of the United States over 90% of the time. The Arabs and other Moslem countries, virtually all of them recipients of American largess, almost reflexively vote against the United States in most instances. Israel is the major strategic asset of the United States in an area of the world that is the cradle of Islamo-fascism, which is dominated by tyrants and permeated by religious obscurantism and shows almost total disregard for human rights. During the decades-long Cold War, Israel was America's indispensable rampart against the inroads of the Soviet Union. It is now the bulwark against the aggressive intentions of Iran. During Desert Storm, Israel provided invaluable intelligence, an umbrella of air cover for military cargo, and had personnel planted in the Iraqi deserts to pick up downed American pilots. Gen. George Keagan, former head of U.S. Air Force Intelligence, stated publicly that "Israel is worth five CIAs," with regard to intelligence passed to our country. He also stated that the yearly $1.8 billion that Israel received in military assistance was worth $50 to $60 billion in intelligence, R&D savings, and Soviet weapons systems captured and transferred to the Pentagon. In contrast to our commitments in Korea, Japan, Germany, and other parts, not a single American serviceperson needs to be stationed in Israel. Considering that the cost of one serviceperson per year –– including backup and infrastructure –– is estimated to be about $200,000, and assuming a minimum contingent of 25,000 troops, the cost savings to the United States on that score alone is on the order of $5 billion a year. Israel effectively secures NATO's southeastern flank. Its superb harbor, its outstanding military installations, the air and sea lift capabilities, and the trained manpower to maintain sophisticated equipment are readily at hand in Israel. It is the only country that makes itself available to the United States in any contingency. Yes, Israel is not a burden, but a tremendous asset to the United States. Israel is indeed America's unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Middle East and the indispensable defender of America's interests in that area of the world. The people of the United States, individually and through their Congressional representatives, overwhelmingly support Israel in its seemingly unending fight against Arab aggression and Moslem terror. But that support is not based on the great strategic value that Israel represents to the United States. It is and always has been based on shared values of liberty, democracy, and human rights. America and Israel are aligned by their shared love of peace and democracy. Israel and the United States stand together in their fight against Islamo-fascist terrorism. These shared values, these common ideals, will bind Israel and the United States forever. Gerardo Joffe, is President of FLAME. |
|
BETTER TO HAVE MURDERED JEWS, CHAS VESHALOM?
Posted by Lee Caplan, April 9, 2008. |
|
About two weeks ago, Defense Minister Ehud Barak, in trying to defend his decision to allow 600 armed Palestinian Authority policemen into Jenin despite knowing it did not jibe with the requirements of Israeli security, said, "We have overriding responsibility for the security of Israeli citizens, but in order to improve the chances in our talks with the Palestinians, we must try to make things easier for them, even at the price of a calculated risk." Now, in trying to defend his decision to remove checkpoints, he says: "We must not help them claim that the negotiations will fail because we have not made enough gestures." It would be infinitely better and infinitely more appropriate if the security of Israeli citizens would be the determining factor, not whether the Palestinians can blame Israel for the failed negotiations. Protecting Jews should be his ONLY concern, period! Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: ATTACK
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 9, 2008. |
|
Somewhere between four and seven terrorists –– breaking through a fence –– entered Israel from the center of Gaza today and made their way to the Nahal Oz fuel terminal, where they killed two civilians who worked at the terminal: Oleg Lipson, 37,and Lev Charniak, 53; both from Beersheba. It is speculated that this was intended to be a kidnapping and that only a swift response by the IDF on the scene prevented this. Responsibility has been claimed by Islamic Jihad, the Popular Resistance Committees and splinter group of Fatah –– Mujahideen Brigades. Israel says, however, that, as Hamas rules the area, Hamas is to be held responsible. The irony is that Gaza receives much of its fuel via this terminal, and that the two men killed were involved in that process. Four million liters of gasoline and diesel oil, and an unlimited supply of cooking fuel, enter Gaza via the Nahal Oz crossing every week. Investigation is now on-going. ~~~~~~~~~~ Egypt, for its part, is vastly uneasy because of renewed threats by Hamas to breach the border and enter the Sinai again as happened in January. Said an unidentified Egyptian official: "[Egypt] will not take lightly the protection of its frontiers against any attempt to violate them, no matter who they are. Egypt's borders are a red line you cannot cross. Egypt is capable of responding to any attempt to violate its frontiers." Egypt, I will say, can be –– and if pushed, will be –– tough on those entering Egyptian territory. The Egyptian Foreign Ministry expressed "profound amazement" at the Hamas threats in light of efforts Egypt has made "to lift the blockade on the Gaza Strip and reach a truce allowing Palestinians from Gaza to live a normal life." It warned that inappropriate actions would "damage the Palestinian cause." ~~~~~~~~~~ What was actually said yesterday, by Khahil al-Hayya, described as a senior member of Hamas, was "all options are open to break the siege. I expect that what will happen next will be greater than what happened before, not only against the Egyptian border, but against all the crossings." This constitutes a threat against Israel, as well. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to an unsettling report by Mate Binyamin regional council deputy head Moti Yogev, the IDF has begun collecting weapons from the armories of communities in Judea and Samaria –– even personal weapons the army provided to settlers for self-defense. "These steps are being carried out, surprisingly, at the same time that unprecedented steps are being taken to ease the security restrictions on Palestinians, including lifting roadblocks and other impediments that undermine the security of the residents of Judea and Samaria," Yesha Council of settlements head Dani Daya wrote to Maj.-General Gadi Shamni of the Central Command. An IDF source said the decision to collect the arms was made because several break-ins that occurred at armories over the past few years. Aaron Lerner of IMRA has it right: "So if you think that the IDF suddenly strips the armories today simply because of something that has been going on for years please contact IMRA at once for our special early bird special sale of the Brooklyn Bridge." I will remind everyone that very recently an attempted terrorist attack near Shilo was stopped because one of the intended victims was carrying a personal weapon, which he used. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert and Abbas met in Jerusalem on Monday in an attempt to further negotiations. Reports indicate that it ended in "mutual recriminations." Yesterday chief negotiators Tzipi Livni and Ahmed Qurie met and discussed "core issues." ~~~~~~~~~~ Yesterday, as well, Yossi Beilin announced that when Bush comes here in May he also would like to do a summit meeting at Sharm el-Sheihk that would be a follow-up to Annapolis. Beilin expressed the opinion that, unless something concrete had been accomplished, such a meeting would be foolish. "It's an idiotic idea to hold another hollow summit." I would say that's about right. Today Jerusalem officials, who say planning is in the early stages and that no date has been set and no invitations extended, confirm Bush's intentions in the matter. Bush will be here May 14-16 in honor of Israel's 60th. (Those of us who live in Jerusalem shudder at the anticipation of another visit from the US president, which totally freezes the city.) According to Beilin, Bush and Egyptian President Mubarak would host the summit, with Olmert, Abbas and Jordan's King Abdullah invited. Oh joy. ~~~~~~~~~~ I am reluctant to return to this subject, because I feel there is much of greater significance to discuss. But briefly here I believe it's appropriate: Former president Moshe Katzav had entered into a plea bargain with the attorney general nine months ago, with regard to the charges against him of sexual impropriety; the charge of rape was dropped and lesser charges were put in place. At that point the women who had made the original accusations were outraged. Now, as Katzav was scheduled to come before the court, he decided to renounce the plea bargain and go to trial in order to prove his innocence. Attorney General Mazuz called this "shocking," and indicated that the prosecution would likely to return to an indictment that included the more severe charges. ~~~~~~~~~~ Returning to the unsubstantiated report I referred to on Monday, with regard to Fatah and Hamas having secretly reached an agreement for a unity government: We would have to "wait and see," I had concluded. That remains my conclusion after checking with two Arabic-speaking Israelis "in the know." One, a journalist, said the report wasn't true. But the second, an academic, said something different: Fatah and Hamas are always talking, he said. But he remains doubtful that they will achieve a final and stable agreement. Could they reach an agreement, even temporarily, that might upset the negotiations? I asked. That was possible he conceded. We spoke a bit about Abbas's vulnerability and weakness, which he termed as being between the "rock of Israel and the hard place of Hamas." That is, Abbas's autonomous options are minimal to non-existent and there is possibility that he might attempt to go with Hamas as a way of resolving his difficulties. Wait and see... Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
U.S. HOUSE YET AGAIN SUPPORTS ISRAEL!
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, April 9, 2008. |
|
Kudos to the U. S. House of Representatives, introducing and recently approving H. R. 185, informing a mostly uninformed nation and world that Jews, Christians, and other ethnic groups were booted out of Arab regimes over the years, forced to become refugees, thus implicitly deserve as much (if not more) recognition than so-called Palestinians, manipulating the 'R word' as if it belongs to them exclusively. Indeed, per this honorable piece of legislation, yet to be approved perhaps modified by the U.S. Senate and signed into law by the U.S. President, "approximately 850,000 Jews have been displaced from Arab countries since the declaration of the State of Israel in 1948." Egad! That's 100,000 more 'refugees' than claimed by so-called Palestinians, yet somehow, someway, all of those Jewish folks shed the self-defeating stigma of refugee status, migrated to other nations including Israel, mostly picked themselves up by their own bootstraps, worked hard, beget generations of productive children, some even becoming Nobel laureates, while those 'poor humiliated' Arab waifs, claiming to be tossed out of Israel albeit if truth be told mostly persuaded to leave by Arab invaders intent on annihilating the Jewish State at her inception, beget generations of so many self-defeated Jew-despising lost souls, a consequence of bizarrely retaining their humiliating badge of dishonor, emblazoned with the 'Scarlet R', affixed to their deflated chests, dwelling unproductively in wretched camps, pathetically groveling for sympathy from a propagandized world, despicably yet deftly manipulated by Machiavellian Arab autocrats, using the shlamazel Jewish homeland as a diversionary scapegoat to absorb the frustration and anger of their own exploited populations. The following quotes should enlighten those who suggest Israeli Jews were responsible for displacing Arabs in 1948. –– "The refugees were confident that their absence would not last long, and that they would return within a week or two. Their leaders had promised them that the Arab armies would crush the 'Zionist gangs' very quickly and that there was no need for panic or fear of a long exile." –– Monsignor George Hakim, Greek Catholic Bishop of Galilee, in the Beirut newspaper Sada al Janub, August 16, 1948. This legislation, countering Arab propaganda, begins to level the playing field if and when serious Middle East peace negotiations yet again commence. Indeed, how can a 'right of return' be claimed for so-called Palestinians when no compensation is offered to the descendents of Jewish folks, in fact way more severely abused by leaders of Arab regimes? The House Resolution concludes:
How curious is it that heretofore Middle East peace negotiation efforts between Israelis and so-called Palestinians have avoided the 'no brainer' observations delineated within H.R. 185? Is it assumed that Israeli negotiators must be constrained to focus narrowly on security and tranquility issues, while Arab negotiators could demand anything they want, indeed not only land but a 'right of return' for descendants of families that used to live in sovereign Israel? Obviously, broaching any compensation issue for descendants of displaced Jews would totally disrupt the tenor of peace negotiations, surely reversing the momentum in favor of Israel, posing an obvious resolution that all issues of compensation, including the ersatz Palestinian 'right of return', would have to be withdrawn. Now we couldn't have that could we? What would the Holocaust revisionist Mahmoud Abbas, fair-haired anointed Arab peace partner of the Bush Administration, say to his minions? Might they consider tarring and feathering any spokesperson that would dare be persuaded to concede that issue to the Jews? Realistically, we know Arab negotiators never meant for peace negotiations to be successful, allowing Jews and Arabs to finally live in peace, allowing Arabs living in squalor the opportunity to make a productive go of it. 'Allah forbid' such a thing! Then Israel would no longer be the perennial punching bag of throngs of indoctrinated Arabs and their supporters. Then corrupt leaders such as erstwhile billionaire Arafat and perhaps his understudy Abbas would no longer be able to skim off their cut of Euros meant for penniless Palestinian refugees. Surely, no self-respecting Holocaust revisionist such as Abbas would ever want to rock the boat that much. Indeed, the very fact that a 'right of return' leading to a loss of Israel's Jewish heritage is even tossed on the table, a non-starter for all Israeli negotiators, gives Arab negotiators a default reason to reject any and all attempts to successfully accomplish anything at the peace table. So, at this point in time, why bother? Again, kudos to the U.S. House of Representatives! Let us hope its ever necessary resolution becomes the law of the land of Israel's most formidable ally. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
UNNAMED "HUGE ADVANTAGE" FOR ISRAEL; FATAH TURNED ISLAMIST
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 8, 2008. |
|
WHAT THE NY TIMES IGNORES Jews have been demonstrating against the murder of eight yeshiva students. Police charged a peaceful demonstration (another one, elsewhere was not peaceful), and arrested 22 demonstrators. They pulled girls by the hair, bouncing them roughly along the pavement. They kicked and hit people. In court, the judge asked the chief officer why his staff had arrested the 22. He said he did not know. The judge released the detainees. The P.A. daily newspaper celebrated the murders (IMRA, 3/17). The arrests were undemocratic and the police brutal. This has happened many times. But the US media pretends that Israel is democratic, rather than a police state. Leftists assert that Israel is not democratic, but they mean in regard to the Arabs, who are not falsely arrested and who are not treated brutally. Israel is not anti-Arab, but it sure seems antisemitic. IDF CHANGES The IDF is reacting to the increase in enemy stockpiles and accuracy and range of missiles. It has been hardening airports and fortifying weapons depots. It also is seeking airplanes that can take off vertically or on short runways, because longer runways can be damaged by rockets (IMRA, 3/17). PROF. ALAN DERSHOWITZ EXPLAINS PROPORTIONALITY It means that if the P.A. fires a rocket, one doesn't retaliate with a nuclear weapon, all out of proportion. Neither does it mean that retaliation may not take more lives than the instigating attack. A rocket might kill a hundred people. If it misses, that does not prohibit Israel from firing a rocket that kills a hundred people. Governments that condemn Israel for fighting disproportionately are misconstruing international law (Sorry, lost source). Do the governments not know international law or are they just seeking excuses to condemn Israel unfairly? I think both –– given any excuse to condemn Israel, they don't check its validity. UNNAMED "HUGE ADVANTAGE" FOR ISRAEL Egypt is to set up a power line that would supply Gaza's needs. This would replace Israel's line. Israeli officials acknowledged that this would reduce Israeli power over Gaza, but called the prospect a "huge advantage for Israel." They did not define that advantage. Dr. Aaron Lerner asks what it is (IMRA, 3/19).U NEW CONTROVERSY OVER BOOK ON ISLAM The Truth About Muhammad: Founder of the World's Most Intolerant Religion, was written two years ago, but Hamas just heard of it. Muslims became outraged over its treatment of what is sacred to them. One of their sympathizers, Karen Armstrong, accused author Robert Spencer of libel. However, Mr. Spencer cites sacred Islamic texts: "'I have been made victorious with terror' –– so says Muhammad not according to me, but according to Bukhari (Vol. 4, Book 52, Number 220). Sahih Bukhari is the hadith collection, that is, the collection of traditions of Muhammad, that Muslims consider most reliable." "Spencer quotes another hadith to back up his claim about Muhammad tempting would-be martyrs with paradise: 'On the day of the battle of Uhud, a man came to the Prophet and said, 'Can you tell me where I will be if I should get martyred?' The Prophet replied, 'In Paradise.' The man threw away some dates he was carrying in his hand, and fought till he was martyred' (Bukhari Volume 5, Book 59, Number 377)." "Spencer also documents in detail how Muhammad breached the Treaty of Hudaybiya with the Meccan tribe of Quraish. Regarding the Moslem leader's order to kill Jews, Spencer writes, 'both of the earliest biographers of Muhammad, Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Sa'd, both zealous Muslims, record his telling his followers at a certain point: 'Kill any Jew that falls into your power.'" (Arutz-7, 3/19.) Since Spencer relates Islamic principles according to Islamic texts, why does Hamas call him lying and insulting? He is descriptive. In many mosques, the imams preach the principles Spencer relates. I think Hamas fears that if the West knew what Islam believes in, it would not call Islam a religion of peace and would resist Islamic propaganda. FATAH TURNED ISLAMIST Arafat turned increasingly to Islam as a unifying element, as a counter-balance to some modern middle class opposition, and to appear less corrupt. His organization, Fatah, has taken on Islamic symbols and ideology. It is not much different from Hamas. Nevertheless, the West still thinks of Fatah as a nationalist organization (MEFNews, 3/21). It is an illusion convenient for suggesting that Israel can deal with Fatah. TELL THE POLLS TO THE POLS 84% of P.A. Arabs approve of the massacre of the yeshiva students. 64% approve of rocket attacks on Israeli cities. Many of those who disapprove do so for strategic reasons, not ethical ones. Almost 65% of Israelis oppose further withdrawals, and only 24% favor them (Arutz-7, 3/21). But Olmert and Rice keep describing the Palestinian Arabs as moderate and Israelis as favoring withdrawals. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
PM SHARON TRIED TO RELEASE BARGHOUTI, NOT POLLARD
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 8, 2008. |
|
This comes from Justice for Jonathan Pollard. |
|
Why did former Israeli Ambassador Danny Ayalon wait years to come forward with the claim that he personally participated in an initiative by then-Prime Minister Ariel Sharon allegedly intended to free Jonathan Pollard? In a compelling and well-researched expose¥ in the Hebrew media, "Who's afraid of Pollard?" [Makor Rishon 4/4/08 –– soon to be released in English by J4JP] investigative journalist Pazeet Ravina recalls Danny Ayalon coming forward last year [June 2007] to tell of a private conversation with American Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice which took place years ago, in which he presented a proposal by then-PM Ariel Sharon to release Marwan Barghouti in return for Pollard. Subtitled "Sharon Also Tried", Ravina reports that according to Ayalon, Rice
rejected the deal out of hand, at the meeting which occurred prior to Israel's
withdrawal from Gush Katif and the Northern Shomron in 2005. [See related
INN article.
The trouble with the release of Danny Ayalon's story is its timing. In fact, the timing was no coincidence. The story hit the Israeli media last year at precisely the time that Ehud Olmert needed the credibility of the comatose former prime minister to act as political insulation when his cabinet ministers began issuing calls for the release of Marwan Barghouti. Barghouti, as should be recalled, is serving 5 life sentences plus 40 years for the murder of Israeli citizens. Ayalon was enlisted to tell his story so that the great General Arik Sharon –– not Olmert –– would be perceived as the originator of the plan to free the Palestinian mass murderer. Ayalon's timely revelation thus provided Olmert with the cover he needs to release Barghouti with political impunity, when the time comes. So why did Sharon send Ayalon to propose the deal to Rice years ago, instead of doing the job himself with Bush? Sources in Washington report that Sharon sent Ayalon to speak with Rice about a possible swap, only to "feel out" the Americans to see if they were willing to assist in a deal to free Barghouti –– something which Israel clearly wanted. However, there was no American interest in Barghouti at that time, which is why the deal was rejected. Instead, at that time, just prior to the Palestinian elections, the Americans were placing their money on Abu Mazen as their proxy "to lead the Palestinian people." In the ensuing years, the Americans have come to realize that Abu Mazen looks good in a suit and speaks English well enough, but either can't or won't deliver the goods. He is not the "strong leader" that they hoped he would be. Consequently, years later, the Americans are finally amenable and even eager to see Barghouti released to take over where Abu Mazen has failed. Nevetheless, to protect Barghouti's image with the Palestinian street, all parties are aware that it must appear as if a high price is to be paid for releasing Barghouti, lest he be perceived as a collaborator. If that is the case, why is it that the request for a Pollard –– Barghouti swap has never again been raised by Israel? Simply put: Olmert found another card to "trade" for Barghouti, a young soldier named Gilad Shalit, so the Pollard card has been completely shelved. To conclude: in the interests of keeping the record straight, Ariel Sharon did indeed try to release a prisoner, but it was not Pollard. It was the mass murderer, Marwan Barghouti. Pollard was just a means to an end. After all, if Sharon had really wanted to free Pollard (as opposed to freeing Barghouti) he knew that this was a deal that could only be negotiated at the highest level, directly between the Prime Minister and the President. It should be noted that Esther and Jonathan Pollard have always been and continue to be opposed to the release of terrorists and murderers for any reason. [See Jonathan Pollard's speech: "Don't Trade Me for Barghouti" http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2004/112104.htm ] SEE ALSO: "Exposé: Who's Afraid of Pollard?" –– by Pazeet Ravina –– Makor Rishon Feature English Translation by J4JP at www.jonathanpollard.org (Coming soon! Watch for it!) WND Exclusive [2004]: "Pollard: Israel Groomed Jailed Terrorist to Head PA" by Aaron Klein http://www.jonathanpollard.org/2004/112004.htm Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
JUDENREIN PALESTINE
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 8, 2008. |
|
This was written by Moshe
Arens and it appeared today in Haaretz
|
|
What makes the removal of the outposts in Judea and Samaria seem like a mission impossible for Israel's defense minister? Most will agree that they were put up illegally, and like all illegal structures in a country in which the rule of law is supposed to prevail, they should never have been put up in the first place, and they should be removed. But behind the government's intention to remove them lurks a ghost. It is the ghost of the uprooting of the settlers in Gush Katif. The Gush Katif settlers were there for many years and their settlements were perfectly legal –– no one will contest that. And yet they were forcibly removed from their homes by orders of the Israeli government. The removal of the settlers from their homes in Gaza was part of a policy, or if you like an ideology, that cannot be called by any other name but Judenrein Palestine. In other words, certain parts of western Palestine, or using the generally accepted terminology in Israel, certain parts of the Land of Israel, need to be cleared of all Jews. This is the declared policy of the Olmert government, and it presumably is part of Tzipi Livni's negotiating position in her talks with her Palestinian counterparts. Can you blame many Israelis, including many who do not countenance the erection of illegal outposts, for feeling less than enthusiastic about the removal of the outposts, when their removal is seen as no more than a prelude to the forcible removal of the settlements in Judea and Samaria that were established legally, just as were the settlements in Gush Katif? The concept of removing all Jews from a certain region is surely repugnant to any person not prepared to deny somebody's rights on the grounds of his ethnic or religious origin. It brings back the worst memories of the tragedy that befell the Jewish people in World War II. When it is applied to a part of the Land of Israel [by Jews] it is also contrary to the very foundations of Zionism, a movement based on the right of Jews to settle and live in their land, a right that has received international recognition. And yet, not only the Olmert government's ministers, but many Israeli citizens who insist they are confirmed Zionists, and of course those who claim no such affiliation, all of liberal views, subscribe to this concept. Presumably this is because they consider this view to be part and parcel of making peace with the Palestinians. What kind of a peace can this be when nobody Jewish will be allowed to live within the borders of Israel's neighboring state? The settlement policy condoned by successive Israeli governments and promoted by the settlers' movement over the years created a patchwork of Jewish settlements dispersed throughout Judea and Samaria, and not concentrated in settlement blocs. As a matter of fact, Gush Katif and Gush Etzion were the only large settlement blocs beyond the Green Line, and the former exists no more. The architect of this settlement strategy was none other than Ariel Sharon, who for years urged the settlers to occupy each "hilltop." And it was he who, as prime minister, so graciously received Talia Sasson in his office when she presented him her report proving that many of the outposts he had encouraged and authorized were illegal, something he must have been well aware of. Both of them must have been smiling to themselves at this meeting. It is generally agreed that Israel should not incorporate all of Judea and Samaria, with its large Arab population, within its borders. But does it necessarily follow that all areas not incorporated within Israel's borders need to be cleared of all Jews? The Palestinian negotiators currently engaged in the phantom negotiations with Israel's foreign minister are in any case not capable of making and carrying out any commitments. But when and if serious Palestinian negotiators appear, it will have to be made clear to them that the continued presence of Jews on territory over which they will have sovereignty in the future, and the assurance of their safety, must be part of a durable peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. An agreement that does not include such a provision will not be an agreement worthy of being called a peace agreement. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
EREKAT: OLMERT TO GRANT AMNESTY TO 10,000 ARAB ILLEGAL ALIENS
Posted by Avodah, April 8, 2008. |
|
This was written by Nissan
Ratzlav-Katz and it appeared in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) Prime Minister Ehud Olmert agreed Monday to grant amnesty to 10,000 Arab illegal aliens residing in Judea and Samaria, according to Palestinian Authority (PA) negotiator Saeb Erekat. The move would grant the illegals permanent resident status. Approximately 54,000 Arabs in Judea and Samaria fall into this category. The amnesty, if enacted, would apply to those Arabs who entered the country legally, on foreign passports, and then remained in Judea or Samaria beyond the terms of their visas. According to various estimates, approximately 54,000 Arabs in PA-controlled areas of Judea and Samaria fall into this category. 12,000 have already received residency rights through conventional requests submitted to Israeli authorities. Israel has been more restrictive on Arab immigration since the beginning of the Oslo War in 2000. Erekat revealed the tentative approval for amnesty shortly after Prime Minister Olmert and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas met for talks on Monday. The meeting was the first between the two men in over a month. In a three-hour meeting, they discussed the discreet ongoing negotiations between Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and PA negotiator Ahmed Qurei (Abu Ala). Olmert and Abbas reportedly agreed to speed the pace of negotiations in order to reach an agreement before the end of the year. In his other comments, Erekat dismissed recent Israeli goodwill gestures, such as the removal of dozens of checkpoints in Judea and Samaria, as "a PR stunt." "The siege and closure continue to be hermetic," Erekat claimed. "There is no change on the ground.... The West Bank is becoming a prison." Erekat said that "settlement activities occupied a large part of the negotiations" between Abbas and Olmert. According to Erekat, Abbas told Olmert that "settlement expansion" needs to stop. Israeli spokesman Mark Regev said that "both sides raised concerns." Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
REVOLUTION IN EGYPT
Posted by Michael Travis, April 8, 2008. |
|
Just about everyone enjoys watching Arab despots on the receiving end of a good, violent demonstration! However,................ as we have seen in Iran, Iraq, and Turkey....."regime change" in the Moslem world can have very serious and unexpected consequences. Mubarak rules over Egypt with an iron fist, imprisoning his enemies and routinely visiting terrible violence upon the Moslem Brotherhood. This is a good thing. As you read reports of the food riots in Egypt, keep this in mind; Mubarak has kept the Suez Canal open and maintained a "State of [Cold] Peace" with Israel. If the Mubarak government were to collapse we should expect a massive Egyptian military to fall into the hands of a new regime aligned with, if not controlled by, the Egyptian Moslem Brotherhood. A Brotherhood Government can be expected to make attempts to regain Egyptian hegemony over the region by re-establishing a new, improved and expanded version of the "United Arab Republic", restrict passage through the Suez Canal, and use it's American trained military to spearhead an attack on Israeli targets. A horrific regional war will surely follow. In the Islamic world, "Democracy" is a temporary strategy meant to camouflage institutionalised tyranny. "Islamic Democracy" is a jackbooted thug, whose mission is genocide against Jews and Christians, and the enslavement African, European, and North American peoples. As harsh and brutal as Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak may seem, the alternative promises to be hell on earth. This article below comes from the Atlas Shrugs website (www.atlasshrugs.com).
See the original article for the full complement of pictures
|
|
REVOLUTION IN EGYPT! My dear sweet courageous friend in Egypt, Sandmonkey, wrote me this earth shattering missive. "Never thought I would see the day, where over 50,000 people revolt again the autocratic regime in Egypt, but it's happening in the Nile Delta City of Mahalla. Thepictures are exhilarating, people are stepping with their feet on pictures of Mubarak. Yet Nobody is reporting this. Not in the international media in the US or europe, which means that it's up to the blogsphere to get the word out. Those people need all the international media, focus and support they can get. So please help spread the news. Let's shame the MSM. Let's get the revolution televised!" The leftarded media is really getting on my freakin nerves. EYGPT_REVOLUTION  The following happened after I stopped blogging yesterday: Malek was released, we found out where Sharqawy was detained, there was a tiny protest at the Lawyer's syndicate in Cairo, and the city of Mahalla went on fire. Clashes erupted between the people and the police, shots were fired, over 100 detained and at least 2 are dead. Here is the story: Egyptians angry with the government about high prices set fire to shops and two schools in a Nile Delta textile town on Sunday after police thwarted plans for a general strike and countrywide protests. Hossam has more Sometime after 3pm, demonstrations broke out in El-Shoun Sq, chanting against price increases.. Mubarak's police fired on the demonstrators.. A man and a child were killed.. Police trucks attacked.. Buses caught on fire... Mass round ups of activists and citizens... Ghazl el-Mahalla labor organizers Kamal el-Fayoumi and Tarek Amin el-Senoussi are in police custody... Police gunshots heard throughout the town according to witness... |
|
LOOK WHAT THEY ARE DOING. PREPARING A WHOLESALE MASSACRE OF THE JEWS?
Posted by Daisy Stern, April 8, 2008. |
|
I have a feeling they are planning to start with the Binyamin region of the Shomron. Think about it; where did they remove the checkpoints this time? Only in that part of Yesha. Now they are taking their weapons away. There was an article this week-end in the JP about settlers training, and I am sure the beasts don't like that. TAKE NO SURVIVORS!. So between removing checkpoints and Jewish weapons, it looks like a perfect set-up IN THAT REGION. I guess they are going region by region, leaving Hevron for last. They know that they'll get quite a bit of resistance here. They go where it looks weak and easy. Those people should be warned. Jack said: Remember Peres said, "A few good messacres and they will leave." Rabin said, Spring of 1995: "I promise we will do our best to take care of the wounded." And Chaim Ramon said in Haaretz in 2001, "I advised Barak at Camp David not to raise the issue of Jerusalem now but to wait 5 or 10 years, until Jerusalem is like Gaza today and then israel will be ready for concessions on Jerusalem." Is that why the police did not respond effectively to the Merkaz HaRav massacre, even after 20 minutes? They know they are not making peace or there is no reason for Jerusalem to ever be like Gaza. What are they doing? |
|
(IsraelNN.com) The IDF has taken away hundreds of rifles from communities in the Binyamin region in Samaria, Voice of Israel government radio reported. Members of emergency teams were allowed to retain their weapons, but one Yesha security officer said that the military establishment has refused to authorize weapons for new team members, even though several of them are experienced combat officers. The Defense Ministry has been planning the removal of the weapons for two years but previously backed down in the face of continuing Arab terrorism. Security officials of the communities expressed concern that they will be left with little defense at the same time that the government has ordered the removal of dozens of roadblocks and blockades designed to restrict travel by Arab terrorists. Contact Daisy Stern at daisystern1@gmail.com |
|
MFA: GAZA –– ISRAELI AIDS AND HAMAS ATTACKS
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 8, 2008. |
|
Communicated by the Foreign Ministry Spokesman. |
|
Today, Tuesday, 8.4.08 (as of 16:30 Israel time), terrorists in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip fired 32 mortar bombs and three Kassam rockets at Israeli territory. So far, there have been no reported injuries or damage. In addition, during an IDF operation against terrorists operating near the border fence between Israel and the northern Gaza Strip, terrorists opened fire on the IDF force. The IDF soldiers returned fire, hitting two gunmen. Rocket-propelled grenades and Kalashnikov rifles were found on the two terrorists. At the same time, 127 humanitarian aid trucks, carrying medical equipment, diapers and basic food products were transferred today from Israel to the Palestinian population in Gaza, via the Sufa and Kerem Shalom crossings. Israel is facilitating the entry of humanitarian aid into the Gaza Strip while at the same time it is being attacked from that territory. Israel holds Hamas fully responsible for these attacks and their consequences. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
MY RESPONSE TO RABBI ERIC YOFFIE
Posted by Saul Goldman, April 8, 2008. |
|
This below was written by Jan Willem van der Hoeven, Director International Christian Zionist Center. Contact them at iczc@iczc.org.il and visit their website: www.israelmybeloved.com My hearfelt apologies to Jan Willem who happens to be a dear friend and a true Zionist whose life and the lives of his children are pledged to our historic vision of homecoming. Sadly, men like Eric Yoffie are the ones whose voice is heard; not because he speaks with integrity but because people want to be reassured that their apathy is good. |
|
It is truly amazing how self-destructive some of the Jewish leaders are in their relationship to those who, as never before, want to stand at Israel's side at a time when its precious people are again threatened with genocide, as they were by the Nazis. The recent remarks of Dr. Eric Yoffie –– head of the Union for Reform Judaism in the United States –– are only one example of this self-destructiveness which repeatedly reveals itself, especially in relation to what even Israel's top politicians have described as the best friends Israel has among the Gentiles today. It is sad and appalling that, whereas Christians have been rightfully upbraided for not having done what they could to assist the Jewish people before and during the days of the Holocaust, and whereas many Christians have now learned at least this lesson of history and wish to fight for Israel's survival in the face of the new and ever-growing danger of elimination, these tender-hearted Christians are now rebuked by the very people who once justifiably criticized them before concerning the Holocaust. What, then, is Dr. Yoffie's narrow-minded reasoning for rejecting this worldwide Christian support as shown today in many forms, organizations, and actions? Well, he does not agree with the political agenda of these Christian friends of Israel. A majority of them are against homosexuality. And they are for a one state solution: Israel should be allowed to live in its God-given land, with Arabs choosing either to live as loyal Israeli citizens in that land or to live in one of the 21 already-sovereign Arab states. And this, Dr. Yoffie, is your set of reasons for denying these Christians as much as a warm –– well meant –– thank you or encouragement? It reminds me of the amazing outburst of the very-leftist Israeli politician Avraham Burg, a guest with me on the popular Popolitika TV talk show here in Israel, who jabbed his finger at me said: "And you –– you are one of the most dangerous men in Israel." This in spite of the fact that both my children served their full time in the Israel Defense Forces. What did he mean? That when fellow Jews or Israelis belong to the right politically, this is already bad enough; but when non-Jews are saying the same things, basing their positions on the teachings of the Tanach, they have to be silenced or ostracized because they are dangerous to the ideology of the left? So there are, unfortunately, many Jews and Israelis who hold exactly the same views as Dr. Yoffie. Should we Christians say that we reject the sacrifices and activities these right-leaning Jews and Israelis are involved in: the settlers, those fighting in elite units of the Israel Defense Forces, those on the barricades for a purer Jewish and Israeli lifestyle, shocked or adverse to the increasingly gentilized –– or should we say paganised –– character and lifestyles of new Tel Aviv? Is this a reason to upbraid, criticize and reject as unacceptable those Jews and their Gentile friends who want to stand for a strong and Jewish Israel on all their God-given land; writing them off as unacceptable because their mainly Tanach-inspired love and dedication does not square with the often more liberal and Gentile-oriented lifestyle of some? Contact Saul Goldman at gold7910@bellsouth.net |
|
DO YOU KNOW WHO IS DRIVING TRUCKS ACROSS AMERICA?
Posted by Ruth S. King, April 8, 2008. |
|
This is called "Religion of Phony CDL Holders: More Muslim Trucking School Fraud" and it was written by Debbie Schlussel and it appeared yesterday on her website. Please begin the process of getting Debbie's investigative reporting on illegal alien-Muslim truck drivers out to as many people as possible. Thanks! |
|
Remember the Missouri and Kansas trucking schools I told you about a couple of years ago? The majority of their students were Muslim illegal aliens, and school owners conspired with Muslim trucking company owners to helped these students cheat on and pass the Commercial Driver's License (CDL) tests. Well, as I wrote then, this phenomenon has been happening all over the country, with Muslim illegal aliens going to trucking schools in droves, where they almost unanimously pass the CDL tests. When 9/11 happened we asked why this country allowed so many Muslim aliens to take suspicious flying lessons. This is the pre-9/11 of the road because CDLs lead to Hazardous Materials hauling certificates, and who knows what kind of deliberate disaster. It only takes one. The Detroit Al-Qaeda terror cell –– whose convictions the government
absurdly overturned –– was caught with the answers to the CDL test in
the house in which its members were living. Wonder what they were
going to do with a truck and the HazMat hauling certificates they were
seeking? We'll never know. But we have a pretty good idea.
THE LATEST NEWS is the conviction of Mustafa Redzic in Cape Girardeau, Missouri, and the question is whether or not the feds will track down his "students" and cancel their CDLs: Mustafa Redzic, owner of Bonsa Truck Driving School in St. Louis, was convicted late Wednesday of multiple charges involving a bribery/fraud scheme to provide easy tests to hundreds of students applying for commercial drivers licenses, United States Attorney Catherine L. Hanaway announced today. "Testimony at trial described a troubling pattern of corruption and deception that allowed hundreds of unqualified drivers to obtain commercial drivers licenses in use across the country," said Hanaway, who along with Assistant United States Attorney Tom Albus, prosecuted the case. Co-defendant Troy Parr is a driver's license examiner employed at a testing facility at 315 Lynual, Sikeston, Missouri, which conducted examinations for people seeking Commercial Drivers' Licenses ("CDLs") required for driving large trucks. Redzic runs Bonsa Truck Driving School, a driver education business which, until recently, operated at 7719 Hall Street in north St. Louis. Parr and Redzic formed a plan for Redzic to send his customers to Parr's testing facility in Sikeston to receive "short tests" for their commercial drivers licenses. Redzic wanted his customers to receive a much less rigorous test than is proper under Missouri standards. For example, Parr's test of Redzic's customers would take approximately one half hour when a proper examination should take approximately two hours. Also, multiple students often took the same "short test" at once. In exchange, Redzic agreed to pay Parr's facility the maximum fee authorized. Redzic was also willing to send his students on a two-hour one-way trip, past numerous other accredited testers, to receive these short tests. Parr benefited by the steady stream of business and Redzic benefited from the nearly 100% success rate his students enjoyed testing at Parr's facility. After they had passed their examinations at Parr's facility, Redzic's clients could obtain more lucrative employment open to commercial drivers. Additionally, Redzic also invited Parr to St. Louis on numerous occasions where Parr would "consult" with Redzic on his drivers' education operation in St. Louis. Redzic would cover Parr's expenses on these trips, as well as provide Parr with a cash payment. These cash payments ranged from a few hundred dollars to several hundred dollars, and on one occasion Redzic paid Parr $2,500. In addition to cash payments, Redzic promised to eventually hire Parr as the director of his drivers' education facility in St. Louis and promised Parr he would share in its considerable profits. Between January 2004 and April 2005, Redzic obtained approximately six hundred licenses for his clients through Parr. Redzic earned approximately $1,800,000 in tuition from those six hundred clients. What are we doing to stop this from happening? Why aren't we limiting who takes trucking lessons and who qualifies to take the CDL test? Why are illegal aliens continuing to be licensed to drive trucks in America? Contact Ruth King at RuthSKing@aol.com |
|
THE JEWISH STATE AT 60
Posted by Rachel Kapen, April 8, 2008. |
|
In Pirkay Avot –– Ethics of the Fathers –– a repository of Jewish wisdom, it is written that the age of 60 symbolizes old age. Well, perhaps it is or it was true as far as a human being is concerned but it is hardly true for a country. A country observing its' 60th Birthday is considered young and at its prime. However, in the case of the State of Israel, it is indeed celebrating only a 60th Birthday but this is in its modern manifestation as an independent Jewish entity in the Land of Israel or Palestine. It existed in biblical times until the destruction by the Romans of 70 C.E. I will never forget the afternoon of Friday the 14th of May, 1948 when we were all huddled around the radio to listen to the charismatic and extremely courageous leader of the Jewish 'Yishuv" (the name of the Jewish Community of Eretz Israel) proclaim the establishment of a Jewish state in Eretz Israel to be called: Medinat Israel –– The State of Israel. The joy of the Yishuv was indescribable and my family and myself joined the throngs of people who went to the street to dance and sing. But actually it really started already on the night of November the 29th when the U.N. General Assembly voted on the partition of the land into a Jewish state and Arab state, a vote the Jews accepted happily yet the Arabs rejected out of hand and declared war on the not yet born Jewish State with the help of their Arab brethren in 7 Arab states. The day following the historic U.N. Partition Resolution, against my mother's pleadings, my father went to his factory in Arab Jaffa, The small factory was torched by an Arab mob for being owned by a Jew and he was rescued by a good-heart and loyal Arab employee who managed take him to his own home in Jaffa, tend to his wounds as best as he could, and then under the cover of darkness to smuggle him back to our home in Jewish Tel Aviv to the relief of his family who didn't know whether he were alive or dead. Both my parents Sarah and Yosef Garber left their little towns in Eastern Europe in early 1920s, my father left his little town in Lithuania after serving in the Lithuanian army and my mother left her little town named Sapotkin in Belorussia, the first one to do so, because they both believed that there is no future for Jews in the country of their birth and were instilled with the desire to go Eretz Israel, their ancestral Homeland and help rebuild it so other Jews can join them as well. It is worth noting that both as an older sister who immigrated to the United States of America years earlier and both sisters sent their younger sibling tickets so they could join them and both rejected the idea by thank you but no thank you. My mother who came in 1921 –– after being stranded for many months in Vienna because of Arab riots which caused the British Government to close the gates to the land under Arab pressure –– was sent to a women workers farm where the young pioneers learned how to tend the land. After that she worked in orange groves in Rishon Lezion before coming to what was then called Little Tel Aviv. My father, after receiving the special permit from the British Government, came straight to Tel Aviv which had many unpaved streets, and he worked at paving the roads and building houses of the First Hebrew City as it was called, adjacent to Arab Jaffa. After a few years of saving grush to grush (it contained ten mills, the smallest coin) he together with his former army buddy Meir who came together with him, they established an ice-boxes factory in Little Tel Aviv. Both my parents were the greatest patriots one can imagine. I'll never forget the night of November 29, 1947, when my father woke me up to tell me with a choked voice that we have a state as tears rolled his cheeks. And although he lost everything when an Arab mob torched his small factory in Jaffa, he never said one derogatory word against Arabs and neither did my saintly mother Sarah. All they wished for was to see the day when peace will prevail in the land they so loved. My mother passed away one day following Yom HaShoah-Holocaust Memorial Day 40 years ago and my father preceded her by several years. Would they be happy to celebrate Israel's 60th Birthday were they still alive? Needless to say that they would be sad to see that peace between Jews and Arab is as elusive as ever and there is still bloodshed on a daily basis. Yet, there is a strong Jewish State which they help establish and Jews are no longer at the mercies of others. Both my parents lost their entire families in the Shoah. Imagine how many innocent Jews could have been saved if there were an independent Jewish state then? And this is reason enough to rejoice and say the Jewish traditional blessing of sheheheyanu, the blessing of thanksgiving, and still continue to wish for peace to prevail in the land. Contact Rachel Kapen at skapen285466MI@comcast.net |
|
LISTENING TO THE HOLOCAUST TRIVIALIZER, AVRUM BURG
Posted by Marion D.S.Dreyfus, April 8, 2008. |
|
Provocateur, infant-terrible, Holocaust-iconoclast Avrum Burg –– now visiting the US on a book tour disguised as a discomfort-the-comfortable roust –– is not that extraordinary. From attending last night, we saw the ex-Member of Knesset is provocative, "humanistically" inclined, but really a 'me-too.' Not unlike attention-seeking authors with books to sell. In trying to strip the Holocaust of its intrinsically genocidal nature –– primarily of course leveled at Jews, though of course at others, too, he tries to sweep the enormity of the event to Jews under the rug, the way a director did some decade and some ago on Broadway, with Anne Frank's story. But it did not and does not work, as this is ineradicably a Jewish tragedy. He tries to erect, instead of the genuflection to the dead six million-plus (I include all those babies in the bellies of the women who miscarried, or who were slain before being born, which I believe few people had bothered to include in the huge numbers of murdered) the image of the Righteous Gentiles, which his father before him roved the world to locate and honor. No doubt these persons are towering heroes, But as epic as their sacrifice and effort was, it was a fractional number of people, not unlike the handful of those who protest radical Islamism by converting out or protesting in speeches and websites the appalling excesses of their brethren. They do not eclipse the narrative of sorrow and monumental evil of the nazis against the Jews, in consummate effort to destroy us utterly. He de-contextualizes the efforts of his countrymen to withstand the unceasing onslaughts of the enemy all around. He castigates the "occupation" much as anti-Semites do, but he has less excuse. Burg accuses Israel –– unfairly and bizarrely –– of solipsism in regard to world suffering. This charge is frankly ludicrous; he is either delusional or ignorant. Israel is concerned with her welfare –– it is a time of uncommon peril, with life and death in the balance on a daily basis, and anti-Israel, anti-Jewish fervor at a fever pitch. But that does not mean that Israel and Jews are inwardly obsessed; quite the contrary, he is but one manifestation of how Israelis are flitting about the globe helping causes from Darfur to tsunamis to Katrina to Rwanda and everywhere in between. He cannot really know the reality of what Jews are doing, and where. He is a man with a mission: Epattez le bourgeois! Big deal. He is not the first to slap his own people in the face. His ideas are obvious and boring. Under their annoying elite presumption that we ought to exempt ourselves from our tiny concern with existence and fund-raising (how dare he? It is not as if there are millions of dollars flowing in to help the needy non-terrorists in Israel the way there are billions flooding the do-nothings in Gaza and elsewhere under the noxious idleness of Abu Abbas) he asks that Jews abandon their 'narrow' focus and expand their horizons to the 'way we used to be'...before the birth of the State? When we were a fledgling nation? When Jews were not so focused on our curiously selfish, perhaps lackadaisical efforts to stay alive in a world seeking our extinction? When did Jews focus narrowly? When did Jews not have to watch their backs? He ignores the conundrum. He basically wipes the slate of Damocletian sword looming over the Israeli head, assuming we are a normal state like Uruguay or Belize. He ignores what is inconvenient, such as Israel's outsize generosity and kindness to all inclement disasters and exigencies. He forgets how much the Jews give to all causes, not just Israel. But forgetting our premier position in the globe in terms of giving for charity, bar none, he fails to remember that every nation in the world defends itself, and keeps itself alive, and there is nothing wrong with that. He claims not to be an Israeli, but to 'love all mankind.' any time anyone claims to love all mankind, grab your wallet, first, and watch your backside, next. Loving everyone is just another way of saying I can't be bothered liking my personal family or you or you, because I'm "bigger than that." Burg is a fraud, in my view. As Gertrude Stein said, "There's no there there." He's a lot like Obama. Smoke, mirrors, fog, with nothing under the one-molecule-thick layer of naive nothingness of theory unsupported by reality, experience, fact .. and decency. Contact Marion Dreyfus at dreyfusmarion@hotmail.com |
|
RECONSIDERING THE AUDACIOUS REVEREND
Posted by A Recovering Presbyterian, April 8, 2008. |
|
It has been a while since I have posted. Amid a host of distractions, I had time to rethink my last post. It was tangentially political –– in that people have associated Rev. Wright with Sen. Obama's political campaign; but I am utterly unconcerned with that campaign. The three issues I had about Rev. Wright's comments still remain: the theology that birthed them strikes me as problematic; I wonder to what degree these represent opinions in the African American community; and I wonder to what degree these reflect the views of some progressives –– particularly religious and Christian progressives. Criticisms of criticisms of Rev. Wright's comments tend to fall into two categories. It is asserted that these comments were taken out of context; and it is asserted that the reverend was 'speaking prophetically'. I don't find either of these arguments persuasive or even tenable. When a person says a thing has been taken out of context, he or she is attempting to indicate that the 'contextual' meaning of the phrases was not the same as the literal meaning of the words. An example of this would be if a speaker were quoting someone else –– and then that quote (the speaker's actual words, but not from him or her) were attributed directly to the speaker. Another example might be if a person made an allusion or reference to something else. Or perhaps the intent was ironic. In any case –– this 'taken out of context' argument hinges on the speaker not actually meaning what his or her words literally mean. That is clearly not the case with Rev. Wright's comments. People who level this charge are apparently indicating something very different when they use the word context. These seem to indicate the whole life experience of Rev. Wright and their perceptions of the experiences of the African American community as 'context'. That may well be a legitimate use of the word –– but it is NOT a legitimate use of the criticism. The criticism implies that the speaker did not actually say and intend the statements in question. This is clearly an untrue implication. A more valid charge might be that critics have 'cherry picked' from among Rev. Wright's statements to find those most prone to generate negative reactions. But THAT charge wouldn't change the nature of the statements themselves. I also reject the notion that Rev. Wright was speaking prophetically in these statements. In common parlance, speaking prophetically indicates either telling the future, or conveying a direct message from God. It is true that a certain faction of self-identified Christians use the term 'prophetic' in a different manner –– but this is a dishonest usage. These employ the term 'prophetic' to describe their preferred political agendas that they view as 'social justice' issues, and the prophets of the Hebrew Bible emphasized justice, therefore, emphasizing social justice is 'speaking prophetically'. I called this dishonest –– what I mean is this: it is designed to align the political preference of the individual with prophecy, and it of necessity has the character, "Thus sayeth the Lord." Some of those who choose this usage may not be conscious of the fact that the overwhelming majority of their hearers will hear, "Thus sayeth the Lord," or "God is on the side of my political cohort," or, "If you disagree with me, you are stupid AND evil –– because you are against God." In this climate, the ONLY honest application of the word prophetic to one's speaking is if God literally, personally communicated with the speaker. This is a vastly different usage than appeal to the Bible –– because that can be externally verified by the hearer and makes no claim about the status of the speaker. So ... was Rev. Wright speaking prophetically? Two elements in his comments exclude the possibility. First he proffered factual errors. Were God giving him the word to speak, he would not say wrong things. I do not mean to suggest that Rev. Wright was being dishonest –– just mistaken on a couple of points. Second, God actively corrected His prophets who sought the damnation of their audience. It is a very different thing to confront about misdeeds, to threaten judgment from God, to call evil "evil" –– than to wish the damnation of hundreds of millions of people. That does not minimize the fact that Rev. Wright made some true statements, nor does it address how many people share his views. So here's where the route to hypocrisy lies. I find it necessary to evaluate the statements Rev. Wright made –– some I find true, others I find wanting. But there is a great difference between evaluating and interpreting statements and evaluating people, their ministries, and their careers. I find the possibility rather high that, were I in Rev. Wright's situation, I would be tempted to hold some similar opinions and say similar things. Not being in that position, I cannot evaluate –– but it would the height of foolishness to say, "I would never do X or say Y". Often, I expect our reactions really do "depend on whose ox is being gored." As Christians, we are called ambassadors of Christ; as representatives of Jesus Christ, we ought to speak the truth in love. I would hope I would not wish damnation on anyone; I would hope I would not see the sudden murder of thousands as 'getting what they deserved'. But I know very well that I have often departed from 'speaking the truth in love', substituting either false diplomacy or 'speaking the truth in vitriol'. If the choice were between these two –– speaking falsely or truthfully with vitriol –– I'd prefer the truth; but that is little better than falsehood. Contact the writer at wspotts@zoominternet.net |
|
WHAT ENCOURAGES ISRAEL'S ENEMIES?; WHAT IS A CALCULATED RISK?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 8, 2008. |
|
HOW TO BEHAVE AT PUBLIC MEETINGS Israeli Pres. Peres was introduced to a French Jewish community as the man who armed Israel, decades ago. He launched his speech with mention of a visit to a Jerusalem yeshiva in memorial to the youths killed there recently. People heckled him by introducing him as the "traitor} who armed P.A. terrorists with thousands of rifles. They accused him of responsibility for the yeshiva massacre. Peres replied by calling the hecklers a fringe. French Jewish community leaders denounced the youths as louts to be disregarded (Arutz-7, 3/16). In modern society, the means of information and publicity are controlled by those in power. A fringe may very well be right. That is the case in Israel and at that meeting. Peres is a traitor. He did arm the enemy. He strives to give the enemy large parts of Jewish territory. He is part of the regime of dirty political tricks for which fascism is noted. The Israeli media should have been alarming the country over plans to give thousands of rifles and military training to the P.A. police, responsible for much of the terrorism. Those arms and training have not been used against Hamas, the ostensible purpose for it. Nobody is held to account for that dishonorable blunder. The "louts" tried to set the record straight, not to honor someone largely responsible for thousands of Israeli casualties. Ordinarily, I think that polite heckling is permissible but not attempts to drown out a speaker. This is a case of desperate need to save a country whose leaders work for the enemy against its people. WHAT ENCOURAGES ISRAEL'S ENEMIES Israel's current Prime Minister is its weakest and most unpopular one. His regime worries more about foreign public opinion that is hostile no matter what Israel does, than about military necessity. The enemy continually bombards Israel almost with impunity, because the government of Israel is afraid to counter-attack strongly enough to end the bombardment, lest it inflict casualties upon civilians. (The few it does inflict get condemned as if many.) Israeli apologies for the few casualties do not impress the enemy or the rest of the world. The government claims it is afraid to launch a major attack on Gaza also because its troops would suffer casualties. Meanwhile, its civilians suffer casualties from bombardment. The longer it puts off the major attack, the greater would be the military casualties during such an attack, because the enemy is preparing. Not that Israel has a strong defense, but wars are not won by defense (Prof. Steven Plaut, 3/16 from Edward Bernard Glick). Israel's sense of military ethics is confused and suicidal, or is it directed by treason? WHAT IS A CALCULATED RISK? Sec. Rice was at it again. She came out with an Israeli reduction in security and another of the recurring P.A. promises finally to act against terrorism. The reduction in security –– remove 50 roadblocks in Judea-Samaria. A spokesman for PM Olmert said that taking down checkpoints is a risk, but this is a "a calculated risk," balancing the need to protect the Israeli public and to provide freer movement for P.A. Arabs (Helene Cooper, 3/31m A9). "Calculated risk." How clever that sounds. Clever it isn't. It lets terrorists pass those points unchecked. Balance? How can one balance survival for the Israelis against convenience for the Arabs? And what Arabs! Those Arabs' whole society is organized, by Abbas as well as Hamas, to hate Jews and to destroy their state. But Rice is worried about Arabs' freer movement. A sensible and freer Israeli regime would refuse to risk security until the P.A. stops supporting terrorism. What would show an end to that support? Abbas would stop praising "martyrs," who simply murdered Jews, and start condemning them. His media would stop promoting jihad. His textbooks would stop libeling the Jewishpeople and pretend there is no Israel. He would stop threatening to resume terrorism if bargaining doesn't get him his jihadist demands. He would stop demanding Israel's release of terrorists and would stop releasing them, himself. He would arrest P.A. police who commit terrorism instead of recruiting terrorists into his police forces. Neither he nor Arafat did those things since Oslo, 1993. They didn't because they don't believe in those proposals and they fear assassination if they proposed them. Their people don't believe in those proposals, either. If their people don't believe in the Jewish people's right to sovereignty there, then why should Israel make their lives more convenient at risk to its own people's lives? Since Abbas won't make those proposals, the faith that Rice and Olmert place in Abbas is unfounded. Either they are stupid about it or have sordid motives. EU CLAIMS JEWISH BUILDING PREJUDGES NEGOTIATIONS The EU claims that settlement building contravenes International Law (which law and how?) and prejudges negotiations. The EU also recognizes Israel's right to self-defense but calls for an end to all violence. Then how would Israel defend itself from terrorists who don't end violence? (IMRA, 3/16.) Implication: Arab settlement building does not prejudge negotiations? Why not? Actually, building does not change land's legal status. The EU talks nonsense. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
IDF COLLECTING MILITARY-ISSUED WEAPONS FROM SETTLERS
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, April 8, 2008. |
|
I, among others, have written frequently about the Leftists' plans to strip Israeli citizens of their defensive weapons, leaving the citizenry open to assault by Muslim Palestinian Terrorists. This was done repeatedly under Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres, to settlers, individually and their communities (settlements, kibbutzim, towns, etc.) where the Government ordered the Army to use the "excuse" of "inspecting the weapons" and then never returning them. In 2000 we wrote "PRE-POSITIONING OF WEAPONS IN YESHA" documenting in full the situation in Israel at that time. It is somewhat worse now. But, one point should be made again today: " ... should the Arabs attack, the Israeli military will have a difficult time reaching many of the embattled communities. Rabin, Peres and now Barak, having turned over control of many of the access roads to Palestinian Police 'cum' terrorists (now numbering at least a 41,000 man Para-Military force) who can and will block IDF relief columns. So, it would be far better if some of the equipment were already there, i.e., "Pre-Positioned." There is also a high probability that Israeli troops may be called up to Israel's borders should Egypt and Syria move troops to a high alert, possibly coordinating their moves with Arafat. This would leave the 200 large and small communities in YESHA entirely unprotected from a concentrated attack by Arafat's Para-Military now armed with automatic weapons, anti-tank, anti-aircraft missiles, bombs, explosives and armored vehicles. Israeli Arabs have smuggled in arms which, in combination with Arafat's Para-Military could delay Israeli troops in a rescue attempt." Clearly, this self-destructive tactic of removing defensive weapons from civilians is currently being implemented by the Olmert, Barak, Livni Government. Civilians (including Army officers on reserve) are being stripped of their protection at a time of increasing risk due to Olmert Government egregious efforts to undermine the safety, security and sovereignty of the State and her loyal citizens. Removing roadblocks, checkpoints, citizens' licensed weapons, negotiating surrender of Israeli homes, farms, Land –– all create a "perception of military and national weakness" in the minds eye of the watching Muslim Arab countries and Terrorist organizations. These suicidal actions are inviting attack by Terrorists and massive Arab Muslim armies, well-armed with Billions of American tax-payers' dollars in high tech weapons' systems. Also, this collection of citizens' arms is in effect at the same time as the Olmert Government orders the collections of citizens' gas-masks while there are increasing threats of Chemical and Biological missiles being launched from Syria or, by proxy, by Hezb'Allah who is supplied by Iran through Syria. Stripping Israeli citizens and IDF officers of their only methods of defense proves that the Olmert Government is actually working with Israel's self-proclaimed enemies to insure their success in taking over Israeli territory and weakening the peoples' ability to defend themselves and their families. Treason is a crime against humanity that brings the penalty of death by hanging or firing squad. Remember how the Nazis tried to keep defensive weapons out of the hands of the Jews in the Warsaw Ghetto (and elsewhere during the Nazi German occupation of many countries in Europe) prior to emptying the Warsaw Ghetto and shipping the stalwart Jews to the death camps? This time Olmert, Bush and Rice are conspiring secretly with Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen), President of the "Palestinian" Authority (and purportedly with Bashar Assad, President of Syria) to drive the Jews out of Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and all those areas of Jerusalem (East, North and South) that were occupied by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967. King David would have ordered summary executions for traitors who tried to do this. But, Israel is supposed to be a democracy. By secretly negotiating abandonment of 500,000+ Jewish men, women and children from the Land of Israel, after brave soldiers and civilians died to liberate them and then build their lives by building their communities, a Peoples' Court might rule that the current Olmert, Barak, Livni, Peres government is ordering the Staticide, self-destructive national suicide of the Jewish State of Israel. Is this how to celebrate our 60th anniversary? Or is this the day Rice, Bush and Olmert complete their betrayal of the Jewish nation by insuring her citizens can NOT defend themselves? The authors of the American Constitution anticipated the potential for the betrayal of the people and so inserted the Second Amendment to the Constitution's Bill of Rights the right of the people to keep and bear arms which was ratified in 1791. That Right was pre-existing in both common law and in the early American state constitutions. ### 1 "PRE-POSITIONING OF WEAPONS IN YESHA" by Emanuel A. Winston August 8, 2000 IDF Collecting Settlers' Weapons"
In recent weeks the IDF has been collecting hundreds of military-issued weapons in the Binyamin region in the West Bank, including weapons that were in the possession of IDF officers. According to reports Tuesday, the only people who were given leave to keep their weapons were rapid response teams and those charged with maintaining security in the settlements. "This is a severe blow to the security of those driving on roads in the territories, especially following the removal of roadblocks and the delivery of weapons to the Palestinian Authority," a reserve officer who lives in the West Bank told Israel Radio. In a recent meeting with Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salaam Fayad, Defense Minister Ehud Barak discussed a list of goodwill gestures he planned to approve for the Palestinians, including the deployment of 600 PA security personnel currently being trained in Jordan to Jenin. Members of the Palestinian police have been implicated in recent shooting attacks in the West Bank which killed Ido Zoldan, Ahikam Amihai and David Rubin. "The weapons were collected for maintenance reasons and are intended to stay in the IDF's hands except for in emergency cases," the army said in response. "There are still weapons in the hands of rapid response teams and those who are licensed to carry arms." "If need be, weapons will be distributed to graduates of combat units," the army added. [WHEN? IN TIME?? AFTER ANOTHER CIVILIAN MASSACRE –– or ANOTHER WAR?] by Winston
Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His
articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the
Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For
Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).
Contact him at gwinston@gwinston.interaccess.com
|
|
INSIDER LEAKS PLANS FOR PALESTINIAN STATE
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, April 8, 2008. |
|
This was written by Aaron Klein for World Net Daily
|
|
JERUSALEM –– U.S.-backed negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians are expected to generate an agreement by the end of the year that would set up a Palestinian state in the West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem, according to a source who has participated in the talks. In one of the first media glimpses into the current negotiations, a source who takes part in the regular meetings outlined for WND the main objectives of the secretive negotiations. Since last November's Israeli-Palestinian Annapolis summit, which set as a goal the creation of a Palestinian state before 2009, negotiating teams including Israeli Foreign Minister Tzippy Livni and chief Palestinian negotiator Ahmed Qureia have been meeting weekly while Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas have been meeting biweekly. Unlike previous Israeli-Palestinian negotiations in which both sides attended with about a dozen advisers each, the teams working with Livni and Qureia are small, usually consisting at most of five people each. Also unlike previous talks, in which the contents of many meetings were leaked quickly to the media, the current negotiations have resulted in few press leaks. According to the source who has been playing a role in the meetings, the two sides are drafting an agreement, to be signed by the end of the year, requiring Israel to evacuate most of the West Bank and certain eastern sections of Jerusalem. The source said Israeli community blocks in the zones of Gush Etzion, Maale Adumin and Ariel would remain Israeli while most of the West Bank and parts of Jerusalem will be slated for a Palestinian state. In contradiction to statements by Olmert, the status of sections of Jerusalem is being negotiated but the specifics of any agreed-upon Israeli withdrawal is as yet unclear, said the source. "It is understood [Jerusalem] Arab neighborhoods would become part of a Palestinian state," the source said. The source told WND both sides agreed Israel would retain Jerusalem's Pisgat Zeev neighborhood, which is located near large Arab communities. Many of those Arab towns were constructed illegally on property owned by the Jewish National Fund, a Jewish nonprofit that purchases property using Jewish donors funds for the stated purpose of Jewish settlement. The source said the U.S. pledged advanced training for thousands of PA security officers who would take over security in the West Bank and eastern sections of Jerusalem and operate in those territories instead of the Israel Defense Forces and Israeli police. The U.S. previously has trained thousands of Palestinian security officers, including units in which known members of Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terrorist group serve. Scores of those security forces have carried out terrorist attacks against Israeli soldiers and civilians, including recent deadly shootings in the West Bank. But the source claimed the planned U.S. training is different: "This training is unlike anything before. The PA, Israel and the U.S. are working very closely to vet the forces. All sides are approving the training candidates. The training is more advanced than ever. It will create a very serious Palestinian army," said the source. The source said as part of the negotiations, Abbas has agreed to hold early PA elections in the West Bank by 2009, including presidential elections that could replace the Palestinian leader. PA elections previously have been held simultaneously in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip. The source's description of planned new elections only in the West Bank implied the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip would be treated as a separate entity Leaders from the Hamas terrorist organization, which swept the last municipal elections, stated the past few days Hamas would agree to early elections. The Hamas leaders also said for the first time ever, their organization would propose a candidate to compete with Abbas' Fatah group in PA presidential elections. The source speaking to WND about the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations said while a signed agreement and PA security force training can be expected before the end of the year, it has not yet been determined when any Israeli withdrawals would be implemented. He said Olmert would be headed to new Israeli elections with an Israeli-PA agreement in tow. The source said the U.S. is "very deeply involved" in all aspects of the negotiations. To demonstrate the level of U.S. involvement, the source pointed to recent U.S. supervision of Israeli commitments to dismantle about 50 West Bank anti-terror roadblocks and to bulldoze what are called illegal outposts, or West Bank Jewish communities constructed without government permits. "The U.S. oversaw the removal of each and every roadblock, making sure the roadblocks were actually removed," said the source. "Also, even though Israel prepared a report of all illegal outposts and handed it to the Americans, U.S. officials have been doing their own very specific independent investigating to find each and every illegal outpost and then oversee their dismantlement," the source said. U.S. training of the PA security forces already started last month at U.S.-controlled bases in the Jordanian village of Giftlik, according to Israeli security officials. Over 600 elite PA soldiers are enrolled in the current course, which includes training in the use of weapons, conducting ambushes, fighting street crime, fighting terrorism, and dealing with hostage situations, among other things. After the unit is finished training in Jordan, they will continue with more advanced training courses at a U.S.-run base in the West Bank city of Jericho. All training is being directly overseen by Gen. Keith Dayton, the U.S. security coordinator to the Palestinian territories. As a test of the PA's abilities, a battalion of about 600 PA officers recently trained by the U.S. is set to deploy in the West Bank city of Jenin, which is considered a sanctuary for Palestinian terrorist organizations. The U.S. and Israel will monitor closely the officers' activities but it wasn't immediately clear how the success or failure of the Jenin force would impact the deployment of other such forces since the Jenin force was deployed despite recent negative U.S. reports of PA security forces. A U.S. security report last month concluded the PA is failing to fight terrorism. The report was compiled by Gen. William Fraser, who was deployed to the region to monitor implementation of agreements pledged by Israel and the PA at Annapolis. Fraser's report slammed the PA for failing to arrest, interrogate and place terrorist suspects on trial. The report said the PA occasionally carries out arrests of suspected terrorists, but usually only following pressure from Israel or the U.S. The arrested terrorists, the report said, are rarely interrogated or tried but instead are briefly detained. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. |
|
ISRAELI JEWS FEAR THAT ARAB ISRAELIS ARE RADICALIZED
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 7, 2008. |
| This is a Press Release from Amir Gilat, Ph.D., Communication and Media Relations, University of Haifa. Contact him at agilat@univ.haifa.ac.il |
|
Arab-Jewish relations index for 2007, which will be presented tomorrow at the Haifa Conference for Social Responsibility at the University of Haifa: 62% of the Jewish public is wary of civil disobedience among the Arab public; 64.6% avoid entering Arab towns in Israel *A slight rise compared to last year in the majority of indices that measure relations between Jews and Arabs* 62% of Jews suspect that Arab Israelis will begin a popular uprising and 64% refrain from entering Arab towns in Israel –– reports the Arab-Jewish relations index for 2007, which will be presented tomorrow at the Haifa Conference for Social Responsibility held at the University of Haifa. The index also reveals that the Arab public has some suspicions of their own: 62% are suspicious of a transfer and 76% are suspicious of State-sponsored violence. From the index, complied by Prof. Sami Smooha –– Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences at the University of Haifa and a 2008 Israel Prize Laureate in Sociology, it was revealed that more than half of the Jewish public and the Arab public think that relations between Jews and Arabs are not good and they become even worse in the future. In the study, presented for the second year at the Haifa Conference for Social Responsibility, 699 Jewish civilians and 719 Arab citizens representative of the country were asked their stance on a range of issues relating to the Jewish-Arab rift. Notwithstanding the suspicions of both sides; 86% of the Jewish population and 75% of the Arab population believe that Israel is a good place to live; 85% amongst the Jewish public and 71% amongst the Arab public prefer Israel over any other nation in the world. 58% amongst the Arab public believe that Israel democratic for them too. Also; 62% of the Jewish public believe that Arab citizens risk national security by their high birth rate (compared to 64.4% last year); 80% are suspicious of Arab Israeli support for the Palestinian national struggle (compared to 83.1% last year). 80% of Arabs fear that their civil rights may be harmed (compared to 77.4% last year) and 83% are worried about major land expropriation (compared to 80% last year). Furthermore, the percentage of Arabs who deny Israel's right to exist as a Jewish-Zionist state rose slightly from 62.6% last year to 64% this year. The percentage of Arab civilians who deny Israel's right to exist rose from 15% last year to 20% this year. Support for the use of violence to advance the interests of the Arab minority rose from 9.5% to 10.8% this year. 18% of the Jewish public denies the right of existence to the Arabs as a minority in Israel compared to 16% last year. Altogether, 48.3% of the Jewish public believe that they can't trust Arab citizens; however, 60.2% of the Arab public believe that they can't trust Jewish citizens; while 37% of the Jewish public supports encouraging Arabs to leave Israel, one third support stripping the Arabs of their voting rights. The indices that measure the possibility of co-existence between the two groups showed declines. Only 54% of the Jewish public feels that both sides have historic rights to the Land compared to 68.5% last year. Also, support for the two-state solution was down from 74% the previous year to 70% this year. Last year, 67.5% of the Arab public polled believed that Israel within the borders of the Green Line has a right to exist as a Jewish and democratic nation where Jews and Arabs can live side by side –– compared to 49% this year. "The index exposes the dimensions of the deep rift between Arabs and Jews; in order to narrow this divide, there is a need to settle the Palestinian question and to find a balance between the Jewish and democratic characters of the State. Nevertheless, looking at it in perspective and in comparison to surveys conducted over the years, it is important to note that there isn't a trend towards extremism in the attitudes of the Arab population or entrenchment among the Jewish public," Prof. Smooha said. The full results from the index will be presented at the Haifa Conference for Social Responsibility held on April 8-9 at the University of Haifa on the topic of "Whose responsibility is it?". The conference will discuss a range of topics related to the links between the State, civilian society and the private sector on all things related to social responsibility in Israel. Participants in the conference include; the State Comptroller, Justice Michah Lindenstrauss; High Court Judge, Justice Dalia Dorner (ret.); Interior Minister, Meir Shetreet; MK, Amir Peretz; former General Manager of the Finance Ministry and Chair of Governing Council, University of Haifa, Dr. Yossi Bachar; Israel Prize Laureate, Dov Lautman; Minister for Welfare and Social Services, Yitzhak Herzog; Menashe Samira, Director-General, Second Television and Radio Broadcasting Authority; and more. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
TOO MUCH DEFERENCE
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 7, 2008. |
|
This was written by Jonathan Rosenblum and it appeared April 4, 2008 in the Jerusalem Post. Contact him at http://www.jewishmediaresources.org |
|
Whenever I speak abroad about Israel's security situation, I'm invariably asked: Why doesn't the Israeli government ignore world opinion and do what it must to stop the terrorism? I always answer by pointing out that Israel does not manufacture F-16s or most of her other major weapons systems. Second, Israel's economy is dependent on trade with other countries, chief among them the European Union. Yet deference to world opinion has been taken way too far by our current government to the point that Israel is unwittingly helping to fuel the international campaign of delegitimization against it. That campaign led by the unholy of trinity of NGOs, the United Nations, and major Western media outlets, the BBC chief among them, was the subject of a day-long symposium, featuring an impressive array of experts, sponsored by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs last week. Not discussed, however, was the impact of Israeli government policy on the delegitimization of Israel. Since the first Oslo Accords, successive Israeli governments have adopted the position that Israel's security is better served through diplomacy than by ensuring that Israel maintains defensible borders. Yet those diplomatic efforts and the various attempts to subcontract our defense to outside parties –– to Yasir Arafat under Oslo, to the U.N. in Lebanon, and to Egypt in the Philadephi Corridor –– have only harmed our international standing, which is demonstrably lower today than at the start of the Oslo process. Any fleeting good will generated by such actions as the Gaza withdrawal is soon lost –– and then some –– when Israel is forced to respond to the consequences of its concessions. Whenever Israel acts out fear of becoming a pariah state by exercising greater restraint or making further concessions, it only convinces its critics that even Israelis know that they are the villains in this piece. For example, this week's decision to remove 45 West Bank roadblocks and checkpoints, in response to pressure from Secretary of State Rice, gave credence to Palestinian claims that the purpose of those roadblocks was to imprison Palestinians, not protect Israeli civilians. (It was only 15 minutes before the first Israeli civilian was attacked by a knife-wielding Palestinian just beyond a recently dismantled roadblock.) For knowingly endangering its own citizens, all Israel received from Secretary of State Rice was the frosty message, "We'll be watching you." Israelis tend to observe Prime Minister Olmert's antic efforts to remain in power with a certain bemused fascination, and to view as a harmless fantasy his negotiations with the Palestinians over a "shelf agreement," which will not be implemented until such time as the Palestinians actually do something to stop terrorism and incitement against Jews. That, however, is a mistake. Leaks from the negotiations suggest that the declaration of priniciples will include a provision that the 1949 Armistice Lines constitute the starting point of negotiations over borders. That represents a retreat both from U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which recognized Israel's right to "secure" borders, and from President Bush's much touted promise to Prime Minister Sharon that Israel would hold on to security blocs in any final agreement. Israel is being forced to enunciate its final positions with regard to unknown future circumstances, without the Palestinians having yet made a single concession. One does not conduct negotiations with one's cards face up on the table. Entering into negotiations at the present time with the PA only reinforces the perception of Israel as the guilty party in its own eyes, and further convinces the Palestinians that past breeches of agreements carry no penalty. Why should we be talking with Abbas at all after he declared a 3-day mourning period for arch-terrrorist George Habash and the Fatah newspaper splashed a front-page picture of the "martyred" murderer of 8 yeshiva students? One good indication of the success of the PA anti-incitement "efforts" is the recent New York Times poll that 84% of Palestinians supported the murders at Mercaz Harav. Yet the PA's manifest failures receive no criticism from the U.S. State Department –– only Jewish building –– because we have adopted the posture of obsequious supplicants. There is no assurance that the "shelf agreement" will remain on the shelf forever. It will be the Americans, as much as Israel, who will determine when it is time to dust it off. And if Israel disagrees that the circumstances are propitious for granting the Palestinians the power to paralyze the coastal region with missiles aimed at Israel's center –– home to 80% of its population –– from the high ground of the West Bank, it may find itself on a collision course with the Americans. Every Israeli offer –– even those that are rejected –– eventually wends its way back into future negotiations. The rejected Israeli proposals at Taba continuously resurface, despite President Clinton's assurances that they were off the table. The past is never past in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations. Our obsession with "peace" treaties with our neighbors –– treaties for which the purchase price is always further territorial concessions –– has blinded us to the larger strategic threat facing us –– i.e., Iran's emergence as the leading regional power and the noose of Iranian proxies closing around our necks. Consider the absurdity of Israel sending Syria twenty peace feelers, at the very time that half the members of the Arab League were boycotting a Damascus summit Syria because of Syria's continued obstructionism in Lebanon and close ties with Iran. Finally, Olmert is undermining Israel's still strong support in the United States. One cannot expect Americans to be more supportive of Israel than the Israeli government. President Bush has repeatedly said that he is only pushing for the "final" agreement Israel says it wants. When he talks to Bush, Olmert is like a little kid afraid to rat on a bullying older sister (Condoleeza Rice) for fear of being pounded later if he does.
A SELF-RESPECTING ISRAELI STANCE would begin by pointing out that twice in the past century the world community affirmed the right of the Jewish people to reconstitute its ancient homeland in Eretz Yisrael. It would counter every discussion of Palestinian refugees with a discussion of the equal number of Jewish refugees from 1948. It would seek the right for Jews to live in security in a future Palestinian state just as Arabs live as citizens with full rights in Israel. It would scoff at the concept of international law that applies to only one country in the world. And it would never tire of pointing out the double standard inherent in the world's lack of concern with the execution of 100 Buddhist monks in Chinese-occupied Tibet, or the deliberate extermination of hundreds of thousands of black Muslims in Darfur. But our leaders are incapable of making this case, for they are not truly convinced that we Jews have any real claims in Eretz Yisrael or that we should not be happy with whatever the Arabs grant us. They are products of an educational system that Nobel Laureate Aaron Ciechanover described recently as failing to provide its products with any reason to live here: "We have ... attempted to copy, unsuccessfully, the developed countries of the West, in an effort to be like every other nation." When David Ben-Gurion was asked from where the Jews derived the right to live in Eretz Yisrael, he would hold up Bible. He conducted a Bible study group in his home. How absurd to imagine today, observes Ciechanover, "that one of this country's leaders would study and teach the Bible in his home. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
WQXR, OWNED BY NY TIMES, BANS AJC AD EXPLAINING SDEROT'S DANGERS
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 7, 2008. |
|
This is by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu and it was published today in
Arutz-Sheva
|
|
WQXR Radio, a New York City station owned by The New York Times, has refused to air a 15-second radio spot by the American Jewish Committee (AJC) because of descriptions "outside our bounds of acceptability." AJC Executive Director David Harris said the spot was aired on hundreds of stations in the United States, including CBS. The commercial stated, "Imagine you had fifteen seconds to find shelter from an incoming missile. Fifteen seconds to locate your children, help an elderly relative, assist a disabled person to find shelter. That's all the residents of Sderot and neighboring Israeli towns have. Day or night, the sirens go on. Fifteen seconds later, the missiles, fired from Hamas-controlled Gaza, hit. They could hit a home, a school, a hospital. Their aim is to kill and wound and demoralize. " New York Times Radio president Tom Batunek explained to AJC that the spot did not make it clear that the missile attacks were taking place outside of the New York City area. He added, "The description of the missiles as arriving 'day or night' and 'daily' is also subject to challenge as being misleading, at least to the degree that reasonable people might be troubled by the absence of any acknowledgement of reciprocal Israeli military actions." Harris commented, "In other words, according to Bartunek's logic, the only way to broadcast the plight of Sderot's residents over the airwaves is to equate Israel's right of self-defense with Hamas's and Islamic Jihad's right to strike Israel at will." The cancelled radio spot continued, "Imagine yourself in that situation. The sirens blast. 15, 14, 13, 12, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1. The time to seek shelter has ended. The missiles hit. This is what Israelis experience daily. But, amazingly, they refuse to be cowed. Help us help those Israelis." Bartunek countered, "Finally, in my judgment the 'countdown' device and the general tone of the message do not meet our guidelines for decorum." The AJC executive director, also revealed that the same radio station, after the September 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States, refused another AJC commercial. The 2001 spot stated, "Recently, The New York Times reported that in Saudi Arabia, 10th graders are warned of 'the dangers of having Christian and Jewish friends,' and in Pakistan, a million children attending religious schools are taught to "distrust and even hate the United States." The radio station manger cited the paragraph, which was quoted from the parent company's newspaper, as not meeting the station's standards. Harris also said that last month, the Bloomberg radio news station rejected an AJC segment citing hate literature in children's textbooks in the Palestinian Authority (PA), Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Iran. "Everything written in this spot was verifiable," Harris said. "Yet, all this was not good enough for the station, which, without putting anything down on paper, asserted that there were some questions about what was being said." Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
FROM ISRAEL: HINTS OF WAR
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 7, 2008. |
|
We are now in the midst of the largest National Home Front Training Exercise ever undertaken in Israel. Beginning yesterday, and extending until tomorrow, it was designed to allow various agencies to practice coordination and appropriate response in case of a war emergency that reaches the home front (which undoubtedly the next war will). A variety of scenarios are being rehearsed: conventional and non-conventional rockets hitting Israel, chemical-biological incidents, etc. There will be field drills and a nationwide siren sounded as a test tomorrow (except in the area of Sderot, where sirens are not tests). The sense that our nation is prepared is enormously important. It was stated up front that this was not planned in relation to any particular current event, i.e., the tension in the north. But this is how our enemies are reading it –– as a muscle flexing meant to be a threat. ~~~~~~~~~~ And, predictably, an Iranian official stated that "The states of the region must closely watch the Israeli drill. These provocative actions should be brought to the attention of the relevant officials in the international community." In response, National Infrastructure Minister Binyamin Ben Eliezer, not known for cautious and judicious speech, commented that "an Iranian strike on Israel will lead to an Israeli response that will devastate the Iranian nation." ~~~~~~~~~~ On Friday, Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter was accompanying a group from the Canada Israel Committee to the area adjacent to Gaza. When they climbed to Givat Nazmit, a popular observation point, in order to survey the area, a sniper shot at the group, wounding Dichter's personal assistant, Mati Gil. The IDF responded immediately, shooting at the source of the fire until it stopped. A statement quickly came from Hamas saying they were responsible and had been aiming at Dichter himself. Later there were claims that an al-Qaida group was responsible. There were also various opinions voiced as to whether the sniper would have known Dichter was there, or whether he was simply aiming at a large group. ~~~~~~~~~~ By late last week the IDF reported removal of 10 roadblocks –– near Tulkarm, Nablus (Shechem) and Kalkilya. An obviously distressed Israeli security official commented that, "There is no doubt that the removal of the roadblocks will make it easier on terrorists to carry out attacks and then escape back to the territories, but the decision was made at government level." While a PA security official claimed, "not one roadblock has been removed. Maybe the IDF removed roadblocks in its own bases, but not in the Palestinian Authority and certainly not in the West Bank." If we can't win anyway, why even bother? ~~~~~~~~~~ Allow me, please, to share here some of the most recent happenings in the PA: PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad was cited in the journal al-Rai, in Kuwait, on Saturday as saying: "There is no solution for the troubles in Gaza, or for the rockets being fired from it. All we can do is transfer funds to the Gaza Strip." Transfer funds? The PA pays certain salaries to people in Gaza. But of course none of it gets into Hamas hands, right? ~~~~~~~~~~ A dozen Al Aksa gunmen who had agreed to go to a PA prison in exchange for being taken off the Israeli wanted list have escaped from the prison (actually, for the second time). They ran because they were being beaten by a guard. The PA put out a call asking them to return voluntarily. Nothing doing, was their answer. We returned voluntarily the first time we ran, but not now. Said an Israeli spokesperson: "It's clear that dealing effectively with terrorism by the PA government is an integral element in the peace process. These people escaping from jail is a matter of concern to Israel." I would think so. ~~~~~~~~~~ Fatah old-timers (Arafat cronies who have been in charge through to the present) are expressing new concerns about the threat of a coup by the "young guard, "reports Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post. This is hardly a new scenario, but has been growing more intense in recent weeks, as Fatah is preparing for its first General Conference since 1989, at which time new leaders are supposed to be elected. The recent scandals that have emerged within Fatah –– which involve the old guard and documents suggesting the embezzlement of millions –– have exacerbated the tensions. But the younger people challenging the old timers are afraid that Abbas will not permit them to assume new positions. In fact, it has been suggested that the tensions will prevent the conference from taking place at all. From his prison cell, Marwan Barghouti is believed to have a good deal to do with the movement to oust the old timers. (Which makes it clear why Abbas is in no rush to see him released in the course of a prisoner exchange.) All of this internal unrest impinges upon the ability of the Fatah-dominated PA to conduct negotiations with Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ From one source I have picked up this information, which still requires confirmation: Reportedly, Hamas and Fatah have been negotiating for the last few weeks and are on the verge of reaching the framework for an accord that would lead to a unity government. This would require Olmert to break off all talks, even if Abbas at this point did not. (And it is likely that Abbas would, because Hamas, which would have the upper hand, would not be a party to negotiations.) While, as I said, this requires further confirmation, it strikes me as likely because Abbas knows how weak he is (how close to being toppled by Hamas in Judea and Samaria) and because he doesn't really want a two-state solution anyway. It cannot be emphasized enough how much the political discourse in the Palestinian areas has radicalized, and how little support Abbas has for striking a deal, even within his own Fatah party, which remains committed to Israel's destruction. The young guard may be anti-corruption, but that doesn't mean they want to deal with us. What is more, I noted not long ago that after the signing of the accord in Yemen, which committed the two sides to talk further, it suddenly became strangely quiet, with no further news reports on what was happening. (Right after the signing, Abbas hedged, and I saw that as potentially a way for him to play both ends against the middle.) So, when I now read that Abbas has chosen to do this in secret, it does not strike me as surprising in the least. Presumably, Abbas, who had promised Bush he wouldn't deal with Hamas, hopes to extract maximum benefits from the US before tipping his hand. It may be (it seems to be) that the pressure from Rice to give the maximum to Abbas was a last, desperate attempt to show him that he's better off negotiating with Israel. But what would be most disturbing, should it be true, is the suggestion that Rice knew, as she made those concessions, that Abbas was already in the process of talking with Hamas but chose not to deal with it as it would have resulted in considerable embarrassment to her. If this turns out to be so, it means she was making concessions hoping to still lure Abbas away, but mindful of the fact that what was offered might in the end come into Hamas hands. This would have the makings of her undoing, I would say. It would probably be too much to hope, that this might teach the US invaluable lessons: That the promises of the Palestinians cannot be trusted. And that ideology trumps economy (that is, that the Arabs cannot be bribed into making peace). I will refrain from further speculation here and go into "wait and see" mode. ~~~~~~~~~~ That splendid Israeli-Arab (Muslim) journalist Khaled Abu Toameh, who reports so accurately and incisively for the Post, recently gave a talk at the University of Oregon in which he said that two, if not three, generations of Palestinians would have to be educated for peace before the situation would change. I had recently said I thought it would take at least a generation. Now I see I was being optimistic. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
HISTORIAN: UK IS NOW EUROPEAN CENTER OF ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 6, 2008. |
|
This was written by Etgar Lefkovits and it appeared today in the
Jerusalem Post
|
|
Britain has become the epicenter for anti-Semitic trends in Europe as traditional, age-old anti-Semitism in a country whose literature and cultural tradition were "drenched" in anti-Semitism has developed into a contemporary mix of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, an Israeli historian said Monday. The problem of anti-Semitism in Britain is exacerbated by a growing and increasingly radical Muslim population, the weak approach taken by a timid British Jewish leadership, and the detachment of the British from their Christian roots, said Hebrew University historian Prof. Robert S. Wistrich in a lecture on British anti-Semitism at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. "Britain has become the center point for the meeting of anti-Semitic trends in Europe," Wistrich said. In a wide-ranging two-hour address, the Cambridge University-educated historian, who has just completed a book on global anti-Semitism, traced the roots of British anti-Semitism to its history, culture and literature going back to medieval times. "Anti-Semitism in Great Britain is at least a millennial phenomenon and has been around for 1000 years of recorded history," Wistrich said. He noted that the expulsion of all Jews from Britain in 1290 by King Edward I following years of anti-Semitic violence was the first major expulsion of any Jewish community in Europe. Jews were banned from Britain until 1656, when Oliver Cromwell, who had overthrown the monarchy, authorized their return. Wistrich noted that a Jewish presence was not required in Britain to produce potent and resonating anti-Semitic stereotypes in classic English literature, including in works by Chaucer, Marlowe, Shakespeare, Dickens, Trollope, T. S. Elliot, and D. H. Lawrence, which he said continues to impact British society hundreds of years later today. "The authors are conveying and transmitting to a future generation an embedded anti-Semitism whose influence is impossible to underestimate," Wistrich said. "English literature and culture is in fact drenched in anti-Semitism," he said, adding that British intellectuals fail to understand the long-term impact of this phenomenon. During World War II, the British refusal to rescue the Jews of Europe and their decision to close the gates of Palestine stemmed not only from a policy of realpolitik but by anti-Semitic sentiments, he said. "Nothing was to be construed as fighting a Jewish war," he said. He noted that the famed British wartime leader, Winston Churchill's, record on Zionism was "far from brilliant, rhetoric aside" noting that he promoted the infamous White Paper, which severely limited Jews from immigrating to Palestine during World War II. The recent controversial contemporary theory of a Jewish lobby controlling American government policies in the wake of the 2003 Iraq War actually had its antecedents a century earlier, and dated back to the infamous anti-Semitic forgery The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, while anti-Israel activities on British campuses was going "strong blast" in the 1970s, he said. In his address, Wistrich said that today's British media had taken an almost universally anti-Israel bias, especially but not exclusively on the BBC, with context removed from description of Israeli military actions, and Islamic jihadist activity such as suicide bombing never connected to ideology. "Under no circumstance will a Palestinian act of terrorism be referred to as terrorist, They are militants similar to the floor-shop dispute in Liverpool whose workers have decided to go on strike," he said. "Palestinian terrorism is portrayed as a minor pin-prick compared to 'massive' retaliation of this 'rogue' state [Israel]," he said. "You cannot read a British newspaper without encountering a variant of the libel that Zionism is racism or Zionism is Nazism," he said, describing a culture of "barely disguised hatred" when the subject of Zionism of British Jewry or Anglo-Israel relations is broached, unless they are "the good anti-Zionists." With the media and the elites skewed against Israel –– aided by former Israeli academics who routinely condemn the Jewish state and who have attained "historic dissident status and are listened to as the authentic voice of Israel" –– the whole discussion of anti-Semitism had become distorted in Britain, with the accuser becoming the accused, he said. "The self-proclaimed anti-racists of the [London Mayor Ken] Livingstone brand lead the pack when it comes to the prevailing discourse about Israel and by implication Jews." "If you bring up the subject of anti-Semitism you are playing the anti-Semitism card and you are [seen as] a dishonest deceitful manipulative Jew or lover of Jews who is using the language of anti-Semitism to disguise hide or silence criticism of Israel," he said. The tenure of former prime minister Tony Blair –– considered to be the most favorable British premier to the State of Israel –– was a paradox of the British situation today, Wistrich said. He said that Blair's support for Israel during the Second Lebanon War was "the straw that broke the camel's back" for a British premier who had already supported the Iraq War and was closely allied with US President George W. Bush, and helped bring about his downfall. Today, the rapidly growing Muslim community in Britain numbers at least 1.6 million, compared to about 350,000 Jews. Wistrich faulted British-Jewish leadership for taking a "softly softly approach," which he said was "very strange" and did not bear fruit in contemporary times. "There is a long tradition of doing things behind closed doors and it is different to break with tradition but it should be broken," he said. The historian noted that the straying of the British from their Christian roots has also created a changed reality in the Anglo-Israeli relationship with no Bible-based reasons or raison d'etre for a Jewish presence in the Holy Land. He cited the recent support of the archbishop of Canterbury for the adoption of parts of Sharia, or Islamic law, in Britain –– the same country, which, he noted, was once the birthplace of the US evangelical movement. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
FATAH LOSES ITS GRIP IN LEBANON AS WELL AS GAZA
Posted by Jonathan Schanzer, April 6, 2008. |
|
Palestinian Islamist groups attacked members of the Fatah faction in Lebanon's densely populated Ain al-Hilweh refugee camp in late March, the Lebanon Daily Star reports. The al-Qaeda-linked Jund al-Sham organization fired rockets on Fatah positions, resulting in four wounded Fatah fighters. Lebanon, home to as many as 400,000 Palestinians, is a longstanding base of support for Fatah. Lebanon's twelve Palestinian refugee camps have long been crucial to Fatah's traditional status as the "sole representative of the Palestinian people." Many Palestinians in Lebanon, since the 1970s, have turned to Fatah for jobs, social services, and protection. Increasingly, however, the Fatah movement has been reduced to one faction among many in these teeming camps. The challenge to Fatah in Lebanon is not a new phenomenon. In 2002, Arabic newspaper ash-Sharq al-Awsat reported "intense armed presence and reciprocal military alerts between [the] Fatah movement and the Islamic Asbat al-Ansar," also in the Ain al-Hilweh refugee camp. Asbat al-Ansar was designated as a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department for its ties to al-Qaeda. Between September and November 2002, the Ain al-Hilweh camp was the scene of no fewer than 19 bombings. Fatah loyalists were subsequently targeted with shootings, grenade attacks, and even car bombs. In one 2003 communiqué to Fatah, Asbat threatened to "turn Ain al-Hilweh and the rest of Lebanon into a pool of blood to wash away your treason and corruption and send you to hell." Tensions stemmed from the fact that Asbat al-Ansar sought to wrest control of Ain al-Hilweh from Fatah, which had long been the traditional ruling faction of the camp. The fighting continued into 2004 and 2005. Last year, after the June coup that toppled Fatah and brought Hamas to power in Gaza, Lebanese Palestinians began to show outward signs of losing faith in Fatah. According to news reports, they had already grown restless with Fatah in the spring of 2007, when it was commonly believed that Fatah failed to protect the Palestinians of the Nahr al-Bared refugee camp during a raid by the Lebanese Army to oust the al-Qaeda affiliate group Fatah al-Islam. Fatah failed to exert political influence to restrain the invasion, and then failed to provide funds for reconstruction of destroyed property in the camp that it had promised to camp residents. Hamas capitalized on Fatah's failures to expand its leadership role in the Lebanese refugee camps. Observers now believe that Hamas is slowly eclipsing Fatah's long-established infrastructure in the camps. Amidst the Israeli incursions into Gaza in early March 2008, hundreds of Palestinian students attended Hamas-sponsored rallies in the Rashidiyeh, Bourj al-Shemali, and al-Bass refugee camps. In place of Fatah placards and flags, increasing numbers of green Hamas banners are flying. While it is well known that Hamas and Fatah engaged in bitter battles on the streets of Gaza and the West Bank in the last year, the mainstream media has largely overlooked the fact that the Hamas-Fatah conflict has widened to include some pockets of Lebanon. News services have reported tit-for-tat violence in Ain al-Hilweh. Indeed, Fatah has publicly warned Hamas that it would not tolerate an armed Hamas presence in the camps. The challenge to Fatah by the Palestinian Islamists of Lebanon raises two important points: First, the January 2006 Hamas electoral victory in the West Bank and Gaza, along with the June 2007 Hamas coup that ousted the Fatah party from the seat of power in the Gaza Strip, were only the most observable indications of Fatah's waning power. The challenges Fatah faces in Lebanon are further indications that Fatah is no longer the "sole representative" of the Palestinians, neither in the Palestinian territories nor the Diaspora. More broadly, the challenge to Fatah in Lebanon raises questions about Fatah's rightful place as arbiter of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. If Fatah is literally under fire from the Palestinian people who appear to no longer appreciate its leadership, how effective can Fatah be in negotiating with the U.S. and Israel for peace? Jonathan Schanzer is director of policy for the Jewish Policy Center and editor of inFOCUS Quarterly. He is author of the forthcoming book, Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine (Palgrave, November 2008). This article appeared today in Pajama Media
|
|
NEW YORK TIMES HATCHET JOB AGAINST ISRAEL; U.S. FLAWED
APPROACHES TOWARDS ISRAEL AND IRAQ
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 6, 2008. |
|
NEW YORK TIMES HATCHET JOB AGAINST ISRAEL Under the headline, "Barred From Main Road, Palestinians Fear Two-Tiered System," Ethan Bronner misleads readers in support of the canard of Israel imposing apartheid upon the Arabs (NY Times, 3/28, A1). For 13 paragraphs, the journalist builds allegations of Arabs, excluded from a major road, being a case of apartheid, without giving a credible Israeli motive. Nor is it a racial exclusion, like "apartheid," since Israeli and Jerusalem Arabs may use the road. The Israeli government and Supreme Court, after all, bend over backwards to uphold Arab complaints against Israel. Not until the 14th paragraph is there much of an Israeli explanation –– security against the dozens of attacks on Jews along the road. The Times rarely reports these attacks. The Times omits Islamic crimes, then acts as if Israeli defense is overly-aggressive. The Israeli explanation is much briefer than the repeated Arab ones. It lacks their emotional boost. It is scoffed at by opponents of the policy, without rebuttal. Giving the Arab side several times as much coverage, and letting it answer Israel but not letting Israel answer it, is a NY Times propaganda technique. A related technique, in which the Times usually indulges, is to present human interest stories and personal claims of hardships for Arabs, without presenting human interest stories and personal claims of hardships for Jews. The article omits mention of the victims of Arab attacks, the significance to peace prospects of those vicious attacks, and the lengthy detours that many Israeli drivers must make if they want to be surer of getting home or to work, alive. The situation is so egregious, that if Israel weren't so politically correct and therefore impractical, it would move all the Arabs out if not wipe them out. Isn't it ridiculous to allow an enemy population, constantly agitating to kill the Jews and to take over, to live amongst them in Israel and in the Territories? That's the real, unstated story. When one is aware of the terrorism the Times doesn't report, of Israel's having built up the Arab standard of living when it fully ran Yesha, and of Israel allowing Arabs into its colleges, hospitals, and stadiums, the notion that Israel separates some of the traffic simply for Israeli convenience obviously is propaganda. Still another technique is to quote only leftist sources, keeping the discussion one-sided. The Times specializes in quoting from Haaretz, which is so far Left that it often damns Israel and sides with the terrorists against its own people. TIMES ON THE DUTCH FILM AGAINST ISLAM The filmmaker states that Islam endangers Dutch freedom. The Dutch government denies that and claims the film is intended only to offend, but Holland allows freedom of speech (3/28, A8). How are readers to judge without examples of Islamic activity in the Netherlands? The newspaper does not inform. FLAWED U.S. APPROACH TOWARDS ISRAEL Yesha Arabs commit terrorism and Israel expands (or doesn't expand) settlements. To appear even-handed, the US criticizes both. This makes it the two types of action seem on the same moral plane. They are not. US unfair. The US usually mutes its criticism of Arab terrorism. It does not hold Abbas responsible for any of it (just is asked to "try harder"). (Some is from his area.) While the US pretends that Abbas accepts Israel's right to exist, he insists upon an Arab "right of return," knowing it would destroy Israel. Although the Olmert regime would allow the Arabs to set up a state there, perhaps if they end terrorism, the Arabs do not recognize Jewish religious and historical rights to any part of the area. That is the reason for the lack of peace. In pretending that both sides impede peace, the US lets the Arabs get away with obstruction. Some of the Jewish settlements are adjacent to Jerusalem and within the security fence. They would not interfere with a two-state plan. Others are amidst an Arab population, and would interfere with that plan. The US opposes all settlements alike. (I oppose that plan, which would give the Palestinian Arabs a second state at the expense of the Jewish people.) The obstacles to peace are the Palestinian Arab rejection of it and the Arab states failure to take a moderate position (IMRA, 3/14 from Jerusalem Post editorial). The Post assumes that the US is undiscerning and unfair on a series of individual matters. That assumption misses the big picture about the US. The truth is, the US doesn't make distinctions among settlements for the same reason that it does not object to any Arab building, however illegal. The reason is that it wants Israel out of all those areas. The State Dept. traditionally is anti-Zionist. The Council on Foreign Relations, to which the Secretaries of State belong, wants Israel out of many Israeli areas, too. Israel could not survive. FLAWED U.S. APPROACH IN IRAQ The US assumes responsibility for many aspects of Iraqi government. One of them is helping to supply electricity. The flow shuts down for hours. The US paid but gets blamed. Shouldn't this be Iraq's responsibility? (Daniel Pipes #843, 3/15.) Good question, but what is the answer? Can the US let Iraq assume responsibility and pay for service, stopping the jihadists from stealing the oil? A learned discussion about the prospects for this would help. The US can afford to save Iraq but it can't afford to waste its resources on Iraq.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several
web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on
Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target
overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him
at richardshulman5@aol.com
|
|
U.S. SUPERVISING TRAINING OF ELITE PA UNIT IN JORDAN
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 6, 2008. |
|
This was written by
Avi Issacharoff for Haaretz
|
|
About three weeks ago, the Palestinian interior minister, General Abdel Razak al-Yahya, arrived in the Jordanian village of Giftlik to visit the training camp of the "special second battalion" of the Palestinian National Security force. Yahya gathered all 620 soldiers and officers belonging to the first PNS battalion to undergo training under an American program and Jordanian guidance –– the first supposedly elite unit of what used to be viewed as the Palestinian Authority's army. "Your duty is not to any organization or party, but only to the Palestinian Authority," Yahya told them. The old general, a veteran of numerous battles and wars with Israel as a member of the Palestinian Liberation Organization's military wing, the Palestinian Liberation Army, and even the Syrian army, did not hide his opinion about clashing with Israel. "You are not here to confront the Israeli side, and the conflict with it has led until now only to suffering and not to positive results. You must prove to the Israelis that you are capable of performing and succeeding." He told the young officers, most of them in their 20s, that their objective, first and foremost, is to aid their people to contend with the threats of crime, terror and other problems. Yahya, like others present on the occasion, could not help but feel that the new force currently taking shape in Jordan is different from everything they have seen before. Even the Israeli defense establishment is not treating this battatlion with the customary disdain it reserves for the PA's security forces. It is not just a matter of the American training program, but also and mainly the motivation and "fighting spirit" of those soldiers, "the cream of Palestinian youth." They were sent to Jordan only in late January, for a four-month course, as part of the plan drawn up by the U.S. Security Coordinator for the Israel-Palestinian Authority, Lieutenant General Keith Dayton, to rebuild the PA security services and particularly the PNS. Potential recruits were subjected to quadruple vetting. First the PA rejected candidates who were unsuitable because of past involvement in crime or terror organizations. Then the Israeli Shin Bet, the Americans and Jordanians considered each candidate separately. Only 20 names were struck off the list by the Israelis. The training the Palestinian troops are receiving at the camp in Giftlik is very diverse: using guns and rifles, taking control of houses and clearing them out, conducting arrests, crowd control, using force and even lessons about human rights and military ethics. They are being trained to deal also with hostage situations. They will move at the beginning of June to a camp in Jericho, where they will undergo an array of other training: driving, first aid and logistics. During July they are slated to get equipment and arms, and will be ready for action as of August 1. "Dayton's baby," as some senior PA officials have dubbed the battalion, made the news recently after Israel agreed to have the soldiers deploy to Jenin on completing their training, but there is still no certainty regarding their first assignment. This is the first battalion to undergo American training, but Dayton's plan calls for training another four battalions of similar size. Palestinian Interior Ministry officials say a second group will be able to leave for training in Jordan in early August. Dayton and his team have accompanied the battalion since its inception. It was also they who presented the Defense Ministry this past February with the lists of equipment transfers that Israel will have to approve for the new PNS forces: cars (just recently, Israel okayed equipping PA security services with 148 pickup trucks for moving troops), uniforms, shoes, first-aid equipment and more). Contrary to media reports until now, the Palestinians were pleasantly surprised by the Israeli defense establishment's willingness to help make the new forces' training and equipment a success, perhaps out of a desire to avoid friction with the U.S. administration. Nevertheless, Israel has yet to approve transfer of basic equipment such as bulletproof vests and helmets. The PA initially thought of asking for night-vision equipment as well, but was persuaded by the Americans to drop it. Dayton's team is also involved in setting up a strategic planning group at Yahya's Interior Ministry, which is responsible for all security services. The group is meant to draw up a budget and strategic guidelines for PA forces. In addition, the American team is planning infrastructure projects such as rebuilding bases and training facilities for PA troops. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
THE IDF'S FIRST 'GLATT KOSHER' COMMANDOS
Posted by Avodah, April 5, 2008. |
| This is by Yaakov Katz and it appeared today in the Jerusalem Post |
|
They are trained by the IDF's best instructors and are expert marksmen, scouts and urban warfare fighters. In contrast to their counterparts in the elite units belonging to the Golani or Paratrooper Brigades, these soldiers sport large black velvet yarmulkes and sidelocks, making up the first glatt kosher Sayeret –– elite reconnaissance squad –– in IDF history.  Members of the Nahal Haredi elite reconnaissance unit participate in maneuvers in the West Bank. The squad is part of Nahal Haredi, which was established nine years ago as a single company. Today it is a full battalion –– called Netzah Yehuda –– with three companies and the newly-established elite counter-terror squad which is under the direct command of Battalion Commander Lt.-Col. Itzik Gai. The battalion belongs to the Kfir Brigade and is based in the Jordan Valley. Most of its 700 soldiers are recruited in Israel and come from a haredi or national religious background. After they complete two years of service, Nahal Haredi offers the soldiers help in completing matriculation and pre-college studies. Sources in the battalion said that the new elite squad was made up of 20 soldiers who were chosen after completing their basic and advanced training. "The soldiers who are chosen undergo advanced training with an emphasis on urban warfare techniques and reconnaissance," a source in the battalion said. "The squad has bomb sappers, snipers and medics –– basically everything a unit going into combat would need." The unit, which operates in the Jordan Valley, Jericho, sometimes deploys by helicopter or in military vehicles. They are trained by IDF reservists who have served in elite units. "The counter-terror squad is used to lay ambushes and for operations that need to be launched within a matter of minutes," the source said. "The soldiers in the unit are always on standby." The IDF is pleased with the performance of Netzah Yehuda and recently announced plans to try and enlist enough haredi soldiers to be able to establish a second battalion in a similar framework –– two years of military service as a combat soldiers and one year completing matriculation exams and preparing for university. Rabbi Zvi Klebanow, director of the Nahal Haredi Organization, said
that the elite fighters "are a pride for Israel by demonstrating their
ability to maintain a haredi lifestyle while at the same time serving
their country."
Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com
|
|
EXCERPT FROM THE EPIC "WERB LETTER" BY JONATHAN POLLARD
Posted by Justicd For Jonathan Pollard, April 5, 2008. |
|
No one can fully appreciate the Pollard case who has not first read the epic " Werb Letter," as it has come to be known. The letter was written circa 1989 by Jonathan Pollard, in solitary confinement, in a dungeon cell 3 stories underground at USP Marion, in response to an American rabbi who asked him why he had done what he did for Israel. More than 80 pages long, the letter includes an overview of the historical and political background of the era. The following excerpt occurs towards the end of the letter: |
|
"In retrospect, Rabbi, I know that there may have been other ways in which I could have exposed Weinberger's treachery. At the time, though, I was so scared of what might happen if the embargoed intelligence did not reach Israel that I threw caution to the wind. But tell me, Rabbi Werb, what would you have done in my situation? Go to the press and run the risk of having sensitive information inadvertently leaked to the Russians? Turn your eyes away from what was going on and try to live with the potential consequences? Convince yourself that the security of 4 million hard-pressed Jews was worth less than your loyalty to a man who was pledged to destroy them? The decision I made, Rabbi, may very well have been illegal, but I honestly thought that I was doing something morally right. Should I have just sat there and done nothing while Israel was being stabbed in the back? What kind of self-respecting Jew could do that? Oh, I know, Rabbi, that there are many within the American Jewish community who are absolutely furious over what I did. No matter what, they wail, I should never have endangered our position here by exhibiting such loyalty to Israel. So what was I supposed to do? Let Israel fend for herself? If you think that this is what I should have done, then how can we condemn all those smug, self-righteous "American" Jews during the Second World War, who consciously participated in the abandonment of European Jewry? Seriously, Rabbi, what would be the difference between what they did and a decision on my part to have kept silent about the Iraqi poison gas threat to Israel? After all, the same gas which the Nazis used 40 odd years ago to murder our European brethren could just as easily be used today by the Arabs to exterminate the Jewish population of Israel. Was I really expected to just let history repeat itself without doing anything to protect our people from such a calamity? Could you have stood by silently and let this happen? Granted, I broke the law. But, to tell you the truth, Rabbi. I'd rather be rotting in prison than sitting Shiva for the hundreds of thousands of Israelis who could have died because of my cowardice. I ask you, Rabbi, have the fires of the concentration camps grown so cold that people have forgotten that 6 million Jews were butchered while the whole world looked on in silence? Have the screams of Neve Shalom grown so faint that people have forgotten that we are still considered fair game for slaughter? Have the burial ceremonies on Mount Herzl grown so commonplace that people have forgotten the grim price of independence? Well, I don't forget these gruesome images, Rabbi. I kept them in the forefront of my mind to serve as a constant reminder of just how precarious our existence really is. So you see, Rabbi, I just couldn't walk away from the problem of the intelligence embargo and pretend it didn't exist. I had to act."
Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com
|
|
FEAR OF DEMOCRACY
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, April 5, 2008. |
|
By squelching debate –– out of loathing for its non-leftist political opponents and out of fear of jihadists and the regimes that promote them –– the West as a whole undermines not only its own values and foundational creeds. It also undermines the non-jihadists of the Islamic world, who, if ever empowered, would work to promote a form of Islam that does not respond to challenge with violence but rather with the discourse of reason and mutual respect for differences of opinion. This below was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared April 3,
2008 in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
The West stands by idly as its foundations are rent asunder. Last Friday the UN's Human Rights Council took a direct swipe at freedom of expression. In a 32-0 vote, the council instructed its "expert on freedom of expression" to report to the council on all instances in which individuals "abuse" their freedom of speech by giving expression to racial or religious bias. The measure was proposed by paragons of freedom Egypt and Pakistan. It was supported by all Arab, Muslim and African countries –– founts of liberty one and all. European states abstained. The US, which is not a member of the Human Rights Council, tried to oppose the measure. In a speech before the council, US Ambassador to the UN in Geneva Warren Tichenor warned that the resolution's purpose is to undermine freedom of expression because it imposes "restrictions on individuals rather than emphasiz[ing] the duty and responsibility of governments to guarantee, uphold, promote and protect human rights." By seeking to criminalize free speech, the resolution stands in breach of the UN's Declaration of Human Rights. Article 19 of that document states explicitly: "Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers." The Europeans' decision to abstain rather than oppose the measure seems, at first glance, rather surprising. Given that the EU member states are among the UN's most emphatic champions, it would have seemed normal for them to have opposed a resolution that undermines one of the UN's foundational documents, and indeed, one of the most basic tenets of Western civilization. But then again, given the EU's stands in recent years against freedom of expression, there really is nothing to be surprised about. The EU's current bow to intellectual thuggery is of course found in its response to the Internet release of Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders' film Fitna. The EU has gone out of its way to attack Wilders for daring to exercise his freedom of expression. The EU's presidency released a statement condemning the film for "inflaming hatred." Dutch Prime Minister Jan Peter Balkenende issued statements claiming that the film "serves no other purpose than to cause offense." Then, too, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon blasted the film as "offensively anti-Islamic." These statements follow the EU's quest to restrict freedom of speech following the 2005 publication of cartoons of Muhammed in Denmark's Jyllands Posten newspaper. They also come against the backdrop of the systematic silencing of anti-jihadist intellectuals throughout the continent. These intellectuals, such as Peter Redeker in France and Paul Cliteur in the Netherlands, are threatened into silence by European jihadists. And the governments of Europe either do nothing to defend the threatened thinkers or justify the intellectual blackmailers by sympathizing with their anger. IT IS axiomatic that freedom of expression is the foundation of human freedom and progress. When people are not allowed to express themselves freely, there can be no debate or inquiry. It is only due to free debate and inquiry that humanity has progressed from the Dark Age to the Digital Age. This is why the first act of every would-be tyrant is to take control of the marketplace of ideas. Yet today, the nations of Europe and indeed much of the Western world, either sit idly by and do nothing to defend that freedom or collaborate with unfree and often tyrannical Islamic states and terrorists in silencing debate and stifling dissent. There are two reasons why this is the case. First, the political Left, which rules supreme in the EU's bureaucracy as well as in most of the intellectual centers of the free world, has shown through its actions that it has no real commitment to democratic values. Rather than embrace democratic values, the Left increasingly adopts the parlance of democracy cynically, with the aim of undermining free discourse in the public sphere in the name of "democracy." Writing of the leftist uproar against Wilders' film in Europe in Der Speigel, Henryk Broder noted that almost across the board, the European media has castigated Wilders as "a right-wing populist." As Broder notes, on its face this assertion is absurd, for Wilders is a radical liberal. In Fitna, the outspoken legislator shows how verses of the Koran are used by jihadists to justify the most heinous acts of mass murder and hatred. His film superimposes verses from the Koran calling for the murder of non-Muslims with actual scenes of jihadist carnage. It also superimposes verses from the Koran vilifying Jews with footage of Islamic clerics repeating the verses and with a three-year-old girl saying that she learned that Jews are monkeys and pigs from her Koran classes. Fitna concludes with a challenge to Muslims to expunge these hateful, murderous religious tenets from their belief system. While arguably, but not necessarily, inflammatory, Wilders' film serves as an invitation to Europe and to the Islamic world to hold an open debate. His film challenges viewers –– both Muslim and non-Muslim –– to think and to discuss whether Islam accords with the notions of human freedom and what can be done to stop jihadists from exploiting the Koran to justify their acts of murder, tyranny and hate. As Broder notes, by calling Wilders a "right-wing populist," the Left seeks to silence both him and his call for an open discourse. The underlying message of such labeling is that Wilders is somehow beyond the pale of polite company and therefore his message should be ignored by all right thinking people. If you don't want to be intellectually isolated and socially ostracized like Wilders, then you mustn't watch his film or take it seriously. Doing so would be an act of "right-wing populism" –– and everyone knows what that means. Like all anti-democratic movements, today's political Left seeks to silence debate and so undermine democracy, first, by demonizing anyone who doesn't agree with it and then by passing laws that criminalize speech or override the people's right to decide how they wish to live. In the EU, the Lisbon Treaty effectively regurgitated by bureaucratic fiat
the constitution that was rejected by voters in France and the Netherlands
and was set to be defeated by the British. In Britain, Parliament has
labored for years to pass a law that would criminalize insulting Islam.
Then, too, one of the first actions the Brown government took after entering
office last summer was to prohibit its members from talking about "Islamic
terrorism."
AS IN Europe, so too in Israel, the Left goes to extraordinary lengths to undermine democracy in the name of democracy. In just one recent example, this week leftist law professor Mordechai Kremnitzer warned the Knesset not to pass a law enabling a referendum on any future partition of Jerusalem or surrender of the Golan Heights. As Kremnitzer sees it, "If the verdict of a referendum is determined by a small majority that includes Arab voters, then a certain sector whose view was not accepted is liable to attempt to reject the legitimacy of the referendum and may fight against it violently." That "certain sector" Kremnitzer was referring to, of course, are the Jews who oppose the partition of Jerusalem and the surrender of the Golan Heights, by a large majority. Kremnitzer's argument is both ridiculous and self-serving. It is ridiculous because he knows that in 2004, Likud members held a referendum on the government's planned withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria. Then-prime minister Ariel Sharon pledged to abide by the results of his party's vote. But when 65 percent of Likud members rejected his plan, he ignored them. And the public's reaction, while strong, was completely nonviolent. The only "sector" that used sustained force and intimidation in the run-up to the withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria was the government. It deployed tens of thousands of policemen to break up protests and bar protesters from travelling to lawful demonstrations, and jailed protesters without trial for months. In its overtly anti-democratic and legally dubious actions, the government was ably defended by Kremnitzer and his colleagues, who either stood by as the civil liberties of the protesters were trampled or enthusiastically defended the government's abandonment of democratic values by calling the protesters "anti-democratic." Indeed, in his testimony Wednesday, Kremnitzer parroted that argument by claiming that referendums "are a recipe for harming democracy." Aside from being factually and theoretically wrong, Kremnitzer's argument ––
like the arguments of the EU bureaucracy that sidelined Europe's citizenry
by passing the Lisbon Treaty –– is transparently self-serving. Like his EU
counterparts, he knows full well that his support for an Israeli surrender
of Jerusalem and the Golan Heights is a minority view. So his actual concern
is not the health of Israeli democracy, but the power of the political Left
to determine policy against the interests and wishes of the public.
THE SECOND reason that the Left acquiesces to the silencing of speech is because its members are just as concerned about the threat of Islamic supremacy as their political opponents. But unlike their opponents, they are too cowardly to do anything about it. This point was made clear, too, in the wake of the release of Wilders' film. This week a delegation of Dutch Christian and Muslim religious leaders travelled to Cairo to speak to religious Islamic leaders. Speaking to Radio Netherlands, Bas Plaisier, who heads the Dutch Protestant Church, said the delegation's mission was to "limit the possible consequences" of Wilders' film. The consequences he was referring to, of course, are the prospects of violent Muslim rioting and attacks against the Dutch and against Christians worldwide. Radio Netherlands reported that Plaisier "has been receiving disturbing reports from Dutch nationals all over the world, including ones about fear of repercussions among Christians in Sudan, the Middle East and Indonesia." So the real reason the Dutch Protestant Church decries the film is not because it thinks Wilders is wrong, but because its leaders believe that Wilders is absolutely right. It's just that unlike Wilders, who has placed his life in danger to express his views, they are too cowardly to defend themselves, and so, they travel to Cairo to genuflect to religious leaders who daily oversee the preaching of hate and Islamic supremacy in Egyptian mosques. They go on bended knee to coo before those who coerced the institutionalization of Egypt's religious persecution of its Christian Coptic minority and its silencing of liberal critics of the Mubarak regime and the Muslim Brotherhood. And that is the rub. By squelching debate –– –– out of loathing for its non-leftist political opponents and out of fear of jihadists and the regimes that promote them –– the West as a whole undermines not only its own values and foundational creeds. It also undermines the non-jihadists of the Islamic world, who, if ever empowered, would work to promote a form of Islam that does not respond to challenge with violence but rather with the discourse of reason and mutual respect for differences of opinion. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
PALESTINIANS CONTINUE TO THINK IT'S 1948
Posted by Eleazar Ben-Yair, April 5, 2008. |
|
This article was written by Asaf Romirowsky and it appeared April
3, 2008 in the Jewish Exponent
|
|
The Palestinian narrative sees Israel's 1948 War of Independence as the al Naqba –– "the catastrophe." The birth of a sovereign Jewish state is perceived to be the root of all evil because this supposedly solidified how the small Jewish community robbed the Palestinians of their land. That is the recurring mantra found in Arab historiography –– a hypersensitive focus on discrimination and inequality. In general, Arab scholars tend to ignore the huge corpus of materials found in the archives on the war and zoom in on what are legitimate or illegitimate claims, using U.N. resolutions as the be all and end all. Here we are, on the eve of Israel's 60th anniversary, and the Palestinians are still the only nationality that identifies and defines itself by its refugee status. Since the end of World War II, there have been approximately 140 million refugees worldwide. All have been assimilated with the exception of one –– the Palestinians. Ergo, as long the Palestinian refugee problem exists, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will continue. And now, in order to illustrate how long the Palestinians have suffered, the Palestinian Authority has embarked on a new initiative to commemorate Israel's 60th anniversary by calling on all Palestinians living in the Diaspora to converge on Israel by land, sea and air to forcefully implement the Palestinian "right of return." The design –– drawn by Ziad Abu Ein, a senior Fatah operative and deputy minister for prisoners' affairs in the P.A. –– states that the Palestinians have decided to implement U.N. Resolution 194, calling for a right of return for all Palestinian refugees. The proposal of this plan now –– notwithstanding if this ever came to fruition –– is clearly geared toward embarrassing and hurting Israel during the anniversary celebrations by highlighting the right of return and, in essence, motivating Palestinians to act out against Israel by any means possible. Article 11 of the resolution, passed in December 1948, states that "refugees wishing to return to their homes and live at peace with their neighbors should be permitted to do so at the earliest practicable date, and that compensation should be paid for the property of those choosing not to return and for loss of or damage to property which, under principles of international law or in equity, should be made good by the governments or authorities responsible." Path to Destruction In reality, what is, of course, ignored is the desire to live in peace; moreover, what's not mentioned is the fact that the right of return calls for 4.25 million Palestinian Arabs –– refugees of the 1948-9 war and their descendants –– to immigrate to Israel, turning the Jewish majority in that country into a minority and ending Jewish self-determination in a sovereign state. In other words, its exercise can have only one result: the end of the Jewish state. (Talking about issues of "rights" enables academics and certain policymakers to avoid saying this in too blunt a fashion.) Overall, this discussion on the right of return is based on a highly specific reading of history –– one that assumes an Israeli responsibility for creating the refugee problem via what they're calling "ethnic cleansing." Restitution from the allegedly guilty party involves the return of the refugees and their descendants. Finally, the Palestinians –– 60 years after the modern State of Israel was established –– instead of searching for paths for peace, are searching for paths of destruction. Distorting empirical history to discover alleged rights manages to create an ongoing, unjustified animosity toward Israel, and continues to lead even well-meaning Palestinians down a path of false hopes built on false foundations. Asaf Romirowsky is the manager of Israel & Middle East Affairs for the Jewish Federation of Greater Philadelphia and an associate fellow at the Middle East Forum |
|
WALID SHOEBAT DENIED ENTRY TO ISRAEL. THEY DON'T LET HIM IN: HE DOESN'T TELL COMFORTABLE LIES ...
Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), April 5, 2008. |
|
Walid Shoebat has been denied entry into Israel. Walid Shoebat, former member of PLO's military wing who attempted to lynch Israeli soldier in 1970s, is today one of Jewish state's best PR people in war against Palestinian terror. In exclusive interview, he tells Ynet he was educated to hate Jews from his infancy, became an Israel supporter after reading Bible This was written by Yitzhak Benhorin and it appeared in
Ynet News |
|
WASHINGTON –– "As a child I was a brainwash victim. I was taught songs about killing Jews. Now I see millions of other children who are also the victims of a fascist ideology," Walid Shoebat tells Ynet. Shoebat, a former Palestinian terrorist from the town of Beit Sahour, who almost lynched an Israeli soldier and planted explosive devices, is now one of the State of Israel's best PR people in the United States. Shoebat is a one-man PR machine. He gives interviews to TV channels and radio stations, delivers speeches across the US, and has even written four books in which he recounted his past as a terrorist in the mid 1970s, and the personal change he went through when he converted to Christianity and became one of the most enthusiastic preachers against radical Islam and in favor of the State of Israel. His claim that there is no different between the Hamas and the al-Qaeda organizations has enraged Muslims and Arabs, both in the US and in the West Bank. When a BBC interviewer attempted to distinguish between Hamas, "which fights for legitimate rights," and al-Qaeda, "which simply likes to kill people," Shoebat gives him a live history lesson, mentioning the name of Mustafa Azzam, a Palestinian from Jenin, who was Osama bin Laden's spiritual father and a source of inspiration for radical Islamists in the West Bank. Shoebat views Hamas and al-Qaeda as different expressions of the radical Islam which murders Christian and Jewish atheists. Offspring of Palestinian struggle leaders Shoebat speaks from personal knowledge. As a youth in Bethlehem in the 1970s, young Walid was active in the PLO's military wing. After leaving for studies in the US in the 1980s, he served as chairman of the Palestinian students in a Chicago college, raised funds to finance Palestinian terror in Israel and Lebanon, and was even joined the Muslim Brotherhood. "My recruiter in Chicago was preacher Jamal Said, who is still roaming freely in Illinois. This is what is happening in mosques across America," he said in a TV interview. Walid's grandfather, Abdullah Ali Awad –– who was the Beit Sahour mukhtar (village head) and the colleague of Haj al-Amin Husseini and Abed al-Kader, the leaders of the Palestinian struggle before the establishment of the State of Israel –– would probably turn in his grave could he hear his grandson's remarks. Shoebat's family raised a number of terrorists, some of whom were involved in terror attacks in Israel in recent years, including at attack in central Jerusalem. His relatives cannot understand how such a traitor could have emerged from their family. Shoebat was born in Bethlehem in September 1960, but could actually have been born in the US. His mother Marilyn is a Christian American, who visited the Holy Land with her Muslim husband and two brothers who were two and five years old at the time. She couldn't imagine that her husband and his family members would not let the children return to the US and that she was about to be stranded in the Middle East for 35 years. She finally returned to the US in 1994. 'Rachel was a Jewish whore' He grew up in Beit Sahour, where he was brought up on the notion that "Jesus was a Palestinian revolutionist." Shoebat recounts that "the learning material was brought from Jordan and the education was anti-Semitic. My teachers were al-Azhar graduates and Muslim Brotherhood members. The school was located nearby Rachel's Tomb, but no one taught me who Rachel was. Years later I asked my uncle, who served as an educational supervisor in Bethlehem, how it was possible that I wasn't taught who Rachel was, and he replied: 'Rachel was a Jewish whore'." In an interview to CNN, Shoebat said that he had been brought up to hate Jews from an early age. "Since you are five you learn to hate the Jews. Over the years you also learn to deny the Holocaust and adopt a racist ideology. Nasrallah apologizes for firing rockets that hurt Arabs, but doesn't apologize for hurting Jewish children. "It's like becoming addicted to a drug. Lynching two Israeli soldiers in Ramallah and proudly presenting the Jewish blood on your hands." Naturally, Shoebat, who grew up in an atmosphere of resistance to the occupation, took part in distributing Palestinian flags, spraying graffiti against Israel, and throwing rocks at Israeli soldiers. In May 1977, he was held for three weeks in detention in Jerusalem on suspicion of inciting to violence. According to Shoebat, unlike his friends who remained in detention for a prolonged period, he was released following the intervention of the US consul general in Jerusalem. Nevertheless, the time he spent in jail served as a life-changing experience for him that provided him with a chance to meet other terror operatives. After his release, an explosives expert named Mahmoud al-Mugrabi recruited him to the ranks of the resistance groups. Shoebat, who was then only 16, was sent by al-Mugrabi to blow up a Bank Leumi branch in Bethlehem. He took a bus to the bank, but when he arrived there he noticed several Palestinian children passing by, and instead of placing the explosive device inside the branch he panicked, threw the bomb on the roof and fled. The device eventually exploded without causing real damage. I was depressed and scared about what I had done, Shoebat said, but added that he acted in accordance with what his father and his Muslim environment expected of him: To kill Jews and become a shahid. He continued his involvement in other activities, and on one occasion beat up and stabbed an Israeli soldier with his friends. The soldier eventually managed to call for help and was rescued by other troops. Bible led to a transformation Shoebat's mother, who was concerned his acts would lead to his death, decided to send her son to the United States to study in 1978. This might have been the decision that saved his life. The move to the US did not bring about an immediate transformation though. He continued to act for the Palestinian cause and later raise money to fund the first intifada. The change came about in 1993, after he started reading the Bible, in an attempt to persuade his Christian wife to convert to Islam. For six months he read and studied the Bible, and this led him to the conclusion that everything he had been taught to believe about Judaism was a lie. He converted to Christianity and turned from an enemy of Jews to an ardent supporter of Judaism and Israel. Shoebat began giving lectures in synagogues and churches across the US and the world, appeared on TV shows and held lectures in universities. Palestinian organizations in the US have been constantly trying to discredit him, and his own family members claim that his stories are false and that he is an Israeli agent. However, none of them can explain why Shoebat is considered persona non-grata in Israel. "They won't let me into Israel, because as far as the state is concerned I'm a terrorist," he explained to Ynet. Over the past year, Shoebat has been trying to obtain an entry permit to Israel, which he wishes to visit with his family, but has been denied repeatedly. In the US, on the contrary, he is a very popular lecturer, who has already been asked to speak before Congress, the FBI and the Department of Homeland Security. Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net. |
|
ISRAEL'S SETTLEMENTS CONFORM TO ALL RULES AND NORMS OF INTERNATIONAL LAW
Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, April 5, 2008. |
| This is from the Israeli Foreign Ministry. |
|
Israeli settlements in the West Bank are legal both under international law and the agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. Claims to the contrary are mere attempts to distort the law for political purposes. Yet whatever the status of the settlements, their existence should never be used to justify terrorism. The Palestinians often claim that settlement activity is illegal and call on Israel to dismantle every settlement. In effect, they are demanding that every Jew leave the West Bank, a form of ethnic cleansing. By contrast, within Israel, Arabs and Jews live side-by-side; indeed, Israeli Arabs, who account for approximately 20% of Israel's population, are citizens of Israel with equal rights. The Palestinian call to remove all Jewish presence from the disputed territories is not only discriminatory and morally reprehensible; it has no basis either in law or in the agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. The various agreements reached between Israel and the Palestinians since 1993 contain no prohibitions on the building or expansion of settlements. On the contrary, they specifically provide that the issue of settlements is reserved for permanent status negotiations, which are to take place in the concluding stage of the peace talks. The parties expressly agreed that the Palestinian Authority has no jurisdiction or control over settlements or Israelis, pending the conclusion of a permanent status agreement. Furthermore, Israel had established its settlements in the West Bank in accordance with international law. Attempts have been made to claim that the settlements violate Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949, which forbids a state from deporting or transferring "parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." However, this allegation has no validity in law as Israeli citizens were neither deported nor transferred to the territories. Even if the Fourth Geneva Convention were to apply to the territories, Article 49 would not be relevant to the issue of Jewish settlements. The Convention was drafted immediately following the Second World War, against the background of the massive forced population transfers that occurred during that period. As the International Red Cross' authoritative commentary to the Convention confirms, Article 49 (entitled "Deportations, Transfers, Evacuations") was intended to prevent the forcible transfer of civilians, thereby protecting the local population from displacement. Israel has not forcibly transferred its citizens to the territory and the Convention does not place any prohibition on individuals voluntarily choosing their place of residence. Moreover, the settlements are not intended to displace Arab inhabitants, nor do they do so in practice. According to independent surveys, the built-up areas of the settlements (not including roads or unpopulated adjacent tracts) take up about 3% of the total territory of the West Bank. The Fourth Geneva Convention was certainly not intended to prevent individuals from living on their ancestral lands or on property that had been illegally taken from them. Many present-day Israeli settlements have been established on sites that were home to Jewish communities in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) in previous generations, in an expression of the Jewish people's deep historic and religious connection with the land. Many of the most ancient and holy Jewish sites, including the Cave of the Patriarchs (the burial site of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and Rachel's Tomb, are located in these areas. Jewish communities, such as in Hebron (where Jews lived until they were massacred in 1929), existed throughout the centuries. Other communities, such as the Gush Etzion bloc in Judea, were founded before 1948 under the internationally endorsed British Mandate. For more than a thousand years, the only time that Jewish settlement was prohibited in the West Bank was under the Jordanian occupation (1948-1967) that resulted from an armed invasion. During this period of Jordanian rule, which was not internationally recognized, Jordan eliminated the Jewish presence in the West Bank (as Egypt did in the Gaza Strip) and declared that the sale of land to Jews was a capital offense. It is untenable that this outrage could invalidate the right of Jews to establish homes in these areas, and accordingly, the legal titles to land that had already been acquired remain valid to this day. Jerome S. Kaufman is National Secretary of the Zionist Organization of America and hosts the Israel Commentary website (http://www.israel-commentary.org). |
|
SHE REALLY WANTS TO KILL US DEPARTMENT: 10 CHECKPOINTS REMOVED AS GOOD WILL, RICE NOT SATISFIED!
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 4, 2008. |
|
This was written by Ezra HaLevi, a writer for Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). It is called "Ten Checkpoints Removed As Goodwill, Pa And Rice Not Satisfied." |
|
The IDF, on orders from the Olmert government, removed 10 manned checkpoints in the Binyamin region and Samaria Thursday evening. The roadblocks were taken down near Ramallah, Shechem, Tal Karem and Kalkilya. Officials explained that the roadblocks were removed as part of a series of "goodwill gestures" to the Palestinian Authority. Ostensibly under US pressure, Israel recently agreed to remove dozens of checkpoints and roadblocks in Judea and Samaria in order to make travel easier for local Arabs. In return, the PA said it would try to stop terrorism. Daily attacks continue on roads in Judea and Samaria –– Jewish resident say as a result of previous decision to remove roadblocks and open up bypass roads to PA Arabs. The IDF reports daily findings of weapons and explosives at security checkpoints across Judea and Samaria as well. Goodwill Not Accepted A Palestinian Authority official quoted in Yediot Acharonot Friday accused IDF officials of fabricating reports regarding the removal of the checkpoints. "The number of checkpoints the IDF removed is zero," the man claimed. "The Israelis are raising the bar of lies and fraud." In the eyes of the Fatah-run PA, Israel has made no significant changes in the past several months, he added. Other PA sources confirmed that two major checkpoints around Jericho were removed and that several dirt roadblocks were flattened and abandoned as well. The manned dirt roadblocks generally are located between particularly hostile villages and major roads used by Jewish motorists. Residents of the villages use alternate routes, such as driving to the nearest major PA city and getting on a highway from there. The dirt mounds were conceived as a way of preventing attackers in Israeli-controlled Area B from fleeing after an attack to PA-controlled Area A territory –– as defined in the Oslo Accords. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice did not praise the move. She instead called for the removal of 50 such roadblocks and said General William Fraser, whose job is to monitor the implementation of the Road Map plan, would "follow up on the specifics and will make certain that in fact there are 50 and that they are going to be removed." During the press conference in Jerusalem, Rice said that "General William Fraser will be following up on the specifics and will be making certain that in fact that are 50 [roadblocks] and that they are being removed, that in fact they have some impact on the access and movement." More Goodwill Gestures Other unilateral Israeli moves to assist the constituency-lacking Fatah include the authorization of up to 8,000 new homes for a new PA Arab settlement in the Binyamin region; providing Fatah with armored vehicles from Russia; the deployment of PA police despite their involvement in recent fatal attacks; the removal of the Rimonim security checkpoint and the upgrading of facilities at other checkpoints, such as Hawara, south of Shechem. Terrorist attacks have continued unabated. RICE HAS AN ATTITUDE. PROTEST. TELL HER BOSS. President George W. Bush
Condoleezza Rice
Jewish Liaison at WhiteHouse:
Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
WHAT'S MORE IMPORTANT: BLUE JEANS OR BEING BLOWN UP?
Posted by Barry Rubin, April 4, 2008. |
|
It's hard to satirize a lot of media coverage about Israel and the Arab-Israeli or Israeli-Palestinian conflicts. The truly dreadful stuff is in the details, the small stories and big assumptions on which they are based, rather than in any "scoops" or blockbuster articles. There are basically two types of such articles. In one, the author's basic and extreme political bias comes out clearly. The writer is consciously determined to slam Israel. This happens more often in large elements of the European press and in Reuters. A Reuters reporter called me and told me that they were writing a story on how Israel destroyed the Palestinian economy. I suggested that perhaps they should do an article about the problems of the Palestinian economy rather than assume the answer. When the story came out, my short quote was represented fairly, but the rest of the article was totally biased, trying to prove a thesis, and even misquoted a World Bank report. In the article, the report blamed Israel for the problems but the actual text –– available online –– said the opposite. Another personal experience. Australian Broadcasting Company, that country's main and official television network interviewed me on the main events of the Middle East in 2007. I said that the most important single thing was Hamas's takeover of the Gaza Strip, an action which set back the chances for peace by many years, even decades. When the story was broadcast it had been edited so that I appeared to be saying that Israel policy had set back the chances for peace by many years, even decades. I filed an official complaint and in the end they came down on my side, sort of. The decision was that the piece had been carelessly edited or something like that. In the online correction, however, they didn't even say that but merely that I had asked that an explanation be added to make clear my point was not about Israeli policy. Of course, the reporter had done it on purpose. But most silliness, especially in the U.S. media, is based on the blindness of assumption: of course Hamas could become moderate, of course the Palestinians want peace, of course Fatah is moderate, of course Israel treats them unfairly. So we get AP items like Laurie Copans, "Israeli-Palestinian Trade Suffers," March 28. Oh dear, suffering trade. That's bad. Wouldn't more trade be good for everyone? The article is very long for AP, 22 paragraphs. It tells us a touching story about how –– due to the fact that "the Palestinian driver did not have a permit through an Israeli military checkpoint and the X-ray machine at a crossing was broken," a shipment of blue jeans for the Israeli market "arrived 8 1/2 hours later." Silly me. I expected the reporter would then compare a delayed shipment of blue jeans with the danger of dozens of Israeli civilians being murdered. Nope. Let me explain: this is wartime, safeguarding lives is more important than expediting clothing. If the Palestinians are not happy with the delays let them crack down on terrorism so that roadblocks aren't needed. Does the article make this point? Hardly, and even then only in a derisive way. Here is paragraph four. Note how it tells you about the real story in a way that says it is totally unimportant: "Israel agreed this week to issue more permits for Palestinian laborers and merchants, but has yet to take down any of the hundreds of West Bank checkpoints it says are necessary to stop suicide bombers. With little real progress on the peace front and violence persisting, Israeli-Palestinian business ties are discouraged." Now is it so unproved, a mere Israeli assertion, that checkpoints are necessary to stop suicide bombers, not to mention other forms of terrorism? It is well established that past terrorists have come through checkpoints yet this is treated as some possibly wild or at least unproven Israeli allegation. Are Israelis quoted for balance after all the quotes from Palestinians toeing the party line? Sure, but only if the Israelis say what the author wants: "`Israel has an interest in not having hungry neighbors,' [economist Ephraim] Kleiman said. `Israel has a vested interest in the economic well-being of the Palestinians. It's much more important than any moral obligation.'" Not Kleiman's fault. What he said is right in context. But the reporter didn't put it into context. Instead the message is: Trade is vital for peace and human needs. The Palestinians are hungry, if the Israelis hold up the jean deliveries it verges on being a crime against humanity, and security is either an illusory factor or an outright excuse. Oh, and there is also the big ending. Here it is: "A harrowing incident made [Israeli designer Irit] Levzohar ... thankful for the Israeli security. "Once, when she made the trip to the West Bank herself, she discovered a stack of guns after she pulled her bags of clothing out of a Palestinian driver's truck. "'I began to shake all over and I dropped the bags,'" Levzohar said. "'All I could think about was my children.'" "She confronted her Palestinian supplier, who promised never to work with that driver again, and reported the incident to the Israeli military. Now Levzohar says she only picks up clothes at authorized crossings. "`You can't gamble for business,'" Levzohar said." Yeah, that seems a relevant consideration, doesn't it? Perhaps it isn't just an Israeli claim about the need for roadblocks to stop terrorists and weapons from getting into Israel. But that's stuck in at the end (the part most likely, as AP editors know, to be cut by newspapers to make a piece fit) rather than made part of the lead. And probably it got in only because it was a colorful anecdote that spiced up the article. In many cases, pieces like this don't even have that ending but stick to the usual framework. Trade is good; Palestinians are hungry; Israel is bad. The key elements involved here –– terrorism is central, extremism among Palestinian leaders incites and organizes it, Israel wants piece while Palestinian groups don't –– is absent from most of the articles written on these issues. No wonder so many in the West find the Middle East incomprehensible. A lot of the coverage makes it seem that way precisely because the reporting ensures that viewers don't understand what is going on or how things work. Reminds me of what a very cynical Washington Post reporter once told me: "That's why they're called stories" Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press, August 2007). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: MUSLIMS CONSIDERED
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 4, 2008. |
|
I would like to focus on a two-part lecture I attended yesterday at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. It sheds further light on an issue I've raised a couple of times recently. The first speaker was Dr. Rafael Yisraeli, Professor of Islamic and Middle East history at Hebrew University. His subject was Sheikh Ra'id Salah from Umm el Fahm, which is an Israeli Arab village near Haifa that is the center of radical Islamic sentiment in Israel. The Sheikh heads the Islamic Movement of Israel (which has ideological ties to the Muslim Brotherhood). From the time of its founding decades ago, the Islamic Movement was violent and promoted acts of sabotage (in one instance planning something against the national water carrier). In 1995, when Israeli elections were upcoming, the Movement split. The relatively more moderate Sheikh Abdallah Darwish wanted the Movement to participate in the political process. Sheikh Salah was adamantly opposed because he refused to give legitimacy to the Zionist government. His plan was to be involved only in local elections in Israeli Arab towns in order to organize Islamic life in Israel separate from Israeli national life. Sheikh Salah is today the dominant figure of the Movement, and considered something of a hero because of his imprisonment for collaboration with Hamas. ~~~~~~~~~~ Sheikh Salah has founded the Aksa Foundation which garners large sums from Islamic nations. He has founded an Islamic college and promoted social activities –– all of which promote anti-Israel Islamic values. It is Sheikh Salah who incites via false charges that the Israeli government is digging under the Temple Mount. ~~~~~~~~~~ Says Prof. Yisraeli, the worst danger to our country is not from outside, but this movement from within. The nation is asleep. Devoid of a true sense of democracy and the rule of law, they demand the right to do whatever they wish and they call it democracy. ~~~~~~~~~~ The second speaker was Dr. Manfred Gerstenfeld, Chairman of the Board of Fellows of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. Dr. Gerstenfeld, who grew up in Holland, studies issues of anti-Semitism in Europe today. Yesterday his subject was the video "Fitna." Many of you will already be aware of this video, produced by Dutch parliamentarian Geert Wilders, which has just been released to much controversy. Dr. Gerstenfeld traced for us the history of this video: His focus was on the fact that, late last year, after Wilders announced his intention to make a video on radical Islam there was an enormous reaction before anyone had seen it. Had the reaction been less, says Gerstenfeld, the video would have been released quietly: Those opposed to it actually generated the publicity that made it known internationally. The video was released on March 27 on LiveLeak. Within 24 hours, millions had seen it, including 3 million Dutch. Amidst international condemnation and threats –– from Indonesia, Afghanistan, Iran, etc. etc. –– LiveLeak took it down, but it can now be seen on other sites. Many in the Dutch government and commercial world were afraid that this would impinge negatively on relations with Arab and Muslim nations. ~~~~~~~~~~ Gerstenfeld addressed only the first half of the video, which shows a selection of the major radical Muslim crimes and anti-Semitic attacks, and ties them to the Koran. He regrets, he says, that the video does not clarify the fact that what is being referred to is only a minority (10-15%) of the Muslim world, and that not every Muslim is radical and draws upon these Koran verses to justify violence and terrorism. Doing this, he says, would have made the video stronger. Gerstenfeld pointed out that this 10-15% of the Muslim world constitutes more people than all of Hitler's troops. In no way does he mean to imply that the fact that not all Muslims are involved means there is no danger. In fact, what he said was that 'the largest criminal body in the world is moving ahead." ~~~~~~~~~~ At this point in the discussion, Prof. Yisraeli interjected something that I would like to share: How do you define "radical"? he asked. Yes, 10-15% may go out and commit terror acts, but when they do, the majority of the remaining 85-90% go into the streets and dance, and pass out candies. What Prof. Yisraeli was raising is the much debated issue of whether there are two Islams today –– radical and non-radical –– or whether it is of one piece. A discussion for another day. ~~~~~~~~~~ The second half of the video, which Dr. Gerstenfeld did not discuss in any detail, addresses the Muslim situation in Holland. My own critique of it is that unless there is background understanding (awareness, for example, of the fact that many Muslims refuse to assimilate into the culture of their adopted country and push for Sharia law), it is difficult to understand what is being discussed. But this part of the film raises the enormously significant issue of what is happening in Europe today and whether European culture is being overwhelmed. Dr. Gerstenfeld suggests that it is not necessarily possible to extrapolate from the situation in Holland to that in other European countries. But it is worth noting that, while the Dutch government was in an uproar about the film out of fear of criticism and attack, the Dutch people applauded it. A poll taken showed that Wilders's party would garner more seats in an election now. More than half the Dutch think that Islam is a threat, and 57% think that permitting Muslim immigration into the country was the greatest of mistakes. (It should be noted that many European countries are now starting to clamp down, and undo what has been done to date with regard to the Muslim immigration.) ~~~~~~~~~~ See it for yourself, I urge you:
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
AL-QAIDA NO. 2: WE'LL TARGET WORLD JEWS
Posted by Marc Samberg, April 4, 2008. |
|
Apologists, explain this one too. Please read the language here. The word "Jews", not either "Zionists" nor "Israelis" is used. The leadership of the Moslems have stopped trying to hide their hatred of Jews and their thirst for Jewish blood as the Western apologists do by claiming they are anti-Zionist, not anti-Jewish. If anyone believes that, then let me sell you a bridge overlooking Manhattan Island and Brooklyn. This was written by Jerusalem Post staff and it appeared yesterday
|
Al-Qaida No. 2 Ayman al-Zawahri pledged Wednesday night that the group would attack Jews in Israel and throughout the world. In an hour-and-a-half-long audio response to questions submitted to the movement on extremist Web sites, Zawahri said: "We promise our Muslim brothers that we will do the best we can to harm Jews in Israel and the world over, with Allah's help and according to his command." Zawahri reassured many of the questioners, who seemed worried about the direction of the organization, that the global jihad was on track and would soon expand elsewhere. "I expect the Jihadi influence to spread after the Americans' exit from Iraq, and to move towards Jerusalem," he said to those asking when attacks on Israel would take place. Zawahri also slammed the UN for "assisting the establishment of Israel," calling the organization an "enemy of Islam." The audio message, which was accompanied by a 46-page English transcript, was the first installment of answers to a raft of online questions and focused mainly on future al-Qaida efforts elsewhere in the region, particularly Egypt. Zawahri responded to criticism about Al-Qaida's notoriously brutal tactics, maintaining that it does not kill innocents. "We haven't killed the innocents, not in Baghdad nor in Morocco, nor in Algeria, nor anywhere else," he said according to the English transcript which, like the audio message, appeared on Web sites linked to the group. The answer was in response to the question "excuse me, Mr. Zawahri, but who is it who is killing with Your Excellency's blessing the innocents in Baghdad, Morocco and Algeria?" Al-Qaida has taken credit for the destruction of the World Trade Center which killed nearly 3,000 people in New York City in 2001, while its affiliates in Iraq, Afghanistan and Algeria regularly set off explosives in crowded urban areas that have taken thousands of lives. "If there is any innocent who was killed in the Mujahideen's operations, then it was either an unintentional error or out of necessity," Zawahri added. He went on to say that it was their opponents who killed innocents and also noted that "the enemy intentionally takes up positions in the midst of the Muslims for them to be human shields for him." He also predicted the end of the Saudi state, which is "swimming against the tide of history" and the government of his native Egypt, which he called a "corrupt, rotten regime (that) cannot possibly continue." Many of the questions he chose to answer focused on restarting the jihad in Egypt, which Zawahri himself helped begin and was crushed by the government in the 1990s. "The days will reveal to you what you didn't know, and news will come to you from those who didn't have it," he said quoting an old Arabic proverb, about when the jihad would begin again in Egypt, and counseled patience. Egypt's plainclothes State Security officers and uniformed police were declared "permissible to kill" in the struggle for Egypt and he hinted that he had supporters in the Egyptian army, like the man who assassinated former Egyptian President Anwar Sadat in 1981. "The Egyptian army which produced Khalid al-Islambouli ... continues to be full of those whose hearts boil with jealousy for Islam and Muslims and who long for the opportunity to remove the corrupt gang which rules Egypt," he said. Though the tape could not be independently verified, the message bore the logo of the Al-Qaida's media arm, al-Sahab, and appeared on Web sites linked to the organization. Al-Zawahri said he chose around 100 questions to answer. Al-Sahab, announced in December that al-Zawahri would take questions from the public posted on Islamic militant Web sites and would respond "as soon as possible." Zawahri also addressed the issue of al-Qaida's founder, Osama bin Laden, assuring supporters that the reclusive leader was in good health. "Sheik Osama bin Laden is healthy and well, by the grace of Allah," he said, while noting he would not be there forever. "He must die one day, whereas Allah's religion will remain."
Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com
|
|
THE DEVIL'S PASSOVER LAW
Posted by Avodah, April 4, 2008. |
|
This comes from the Dreaming of Moshiach website
http://dreamingofmoshiach.blogspot.com/2007/04/ its-time-bh-preparing-for-moshiachs.html |
|
The story of Salach Taomri is related to Passover and can illustrate the background of the unfortunate situation in Israel. It is one of the reasons why we are still attacked by the Palestinians. Who is Salach Taomri and why is his story so important? Salach Taomri was a heroic figure for the Palestinian world. He received his recognition before the Lebanon War –– 1982 when he managed several big terrorist attacks against the Israeli army. He is tall and physically strong and he looks more like a stiff Englishman than a Palestinian or Arab. He is very proficient in English and his French, Hebrew and Arabic are excellent. Salach Taomri is one of the top scholars in the Palestinian world. He is bright, smart and charismatic. There isn't one single Palestinian child that hasn't heard about Salach Taomri. Every child knows what he looks like. By the time he turned twenty-four, his picture was hanging on the wall in almost every Palestinian household. If you stop a Palestinian child on the street and ask what he would like to be when he grows up, he will answer you that he would like to be Salach Taomri. At the time that this story takes place Salach had already given up hope. He thinks, despairingly, that the Palestinians will never rule over the Israelis, never get even and never get their own Palestine. The only hope that he had left was that, if he fights, the Palestinians might get a tiny portion of land of Israel. These anxieties were always on his mind. He had spent all his life wondering what will happen to the Palestinians. He was convicted for his terrorist attacks and became a prisoner in an Israeli jail where he stayed for many years. The jail in Nasser holds more than a thousand terrorist and suspects. In the jail, he became the leader of all the prisoners. The top Israeli prison officers, weren't able to get anywhere with any of the prisoners without speaking to Salach in advance.
HERE IN THE WORDS OF TAOMRI, he explains the reason for the big change that occurred to him that would make a difference to every single person living in Israel. Salach Taomri says, " I was in solitary confinement, absolutely closed off and disconnected from the rest of the world. Only through the bars that divided me from the long hallway was I able to look out. In this hallway, for twenty-four hours a day walked an Israeli guard with his arms full of guns and ammunition. I called him to me, because I had noticed that he was eating a pita sandwich, with great gusto and relish." "Are you Jewish?" I asked him. He shook his head yes, his mouth full with the pita. " If so, why are you eating Chametz on Pesach? Don't you know that Jews are forbidden to eat Chametz on this holiday?" The guard was astonished and shocked to hear these words coming from a top terrorist. There was a moment of silence and then he replied." I am not obligated to the wonders that happened to my people more than two thousand years ago. I am secular, I have nothing to do with that." Salach Taomri continued "... I sat on my dirty mattress, absolutely in shock. I said to myself, " A nation that has no connection to their history and past, and is capable of publicly desecrating its own credibility and beliefs, is a nation that has cut their roots from the land. Therefore, we, the Palestinians can achieve our goals." That night, my attitude underwent an about face. I wasn't able to fall asleep. In those dark hours of the night, I tried to figure out what happened in that short confrontation with the officer. As I sat thinking of everything, his words came back to me, " I am not obligated to the wonders that happened to my people more than two thousand years ago. I am secular, I have nothing to do with that." Then I said to myself, " If these Jews have no respect for their religion, why should we respect them?" I could not accept the idea that this Jew was willing to eat Chametz on Pesach with no concern in front of all the Arab prisoners. The next day, the guards allowed me to go to the regular prison room. I gathered together all the leaders of the Palestinian prisoners that were there. I told the story of what had happened to all those who knew my opinion that we had no chance to win the war against the Israeli's. I told them about the shocking event that I went through and my conclusions. "We are changing our approach," I told everybody. "From this very day on, we are going down a new path, a new war. We want everything. We shall demand everything. Not just a little percentage of Israel, not just the little bones that they throw down to us when they feel like it. We are going to battle for the whole ball of wax. We want all of the Holy Land, because standing against us is a nation that is not connected to its past. We will fight against the Jews in Israel for amongst them there is no concern for their history. We are fighting against the Jews in Israel, because they don't care about their roots anymore. Since the Jewish people don't care about their religious laws and traditions, they will have no strong motivation to fight and to go to battle. Therefore, we are going to win." Salach Taomri went on talking, " Since that event, I have told this story to more than a hundred thousand of my people. I convinced them that we had to change our tactics. We must fight without compromise!!" Taomri was later selected as a member of the Palestinian Parliament. He was later offered a position as minister in Yasser Arafat's cabinet, but he refused. The Palestinian world still keeps a very special and unique dignity for Salach Taomri. He continues to be a top instigator and preacher for the new war against the Jewish state. Salach Taomri adopted a new attitude and a new battle since that meeting on the night of Pesach with the Israeli officer in 1987 in prison.
THE DAMAGE WAS DONE, THE FIRST INTIFADA BEGAN ... We cannot even come close to assessing the great damage that this officer caused to the Jewish people. There is no way that we can appraise the great harm that the Israeli guard at the prison put every single person into with his words and his actions. Can anyone estimate how much Jewish blood was spilt and is in danger's path because of that?? Thousands and thousands of our people cannot fix the damage that has been done. Salach saw the pita on Pesach, and understood that it is possible to make the Arab revolution, because some of our people decided to disconnect from our path and roots. Those who want to cut the relationship and threaten our right to exist on our land should look at what one single pita on Pesach can do. If we don't have a past we don't have a future. This principle, the Arabs understood, and therefore they come to their terrorist attacks with the power of their faith and are willing to sacrifice their lives to become martyrs. They call those who fight against the Jews, Jihad and holy. The sheik sends men, boys, girls and kids out to fight, and they meet with great success against the mighty Israeli army. Why? Perhaps it is because we have a lack of faith. If we have a fear of G-d, they will not be able to defeat us. Unfortunately the situation has gotten even worse ... Jerusalem Municipal Court Justice Tamar Bar Asher-Tzaban has issued a ruling allowing the sale of bread and other leavened products in groceries, restaurants and pizzerias during Pesach. The court's decision purposely comes on the eve of Rosh Chodesh Nissan in order to avoid an appeal against the apikoret's ruling prior to Pesach. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
WHY ABBAS DOESN'T FIGHT TERRORISM; ETHICS OF AGENTS PROVOCATEURS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 4, 2008. |
|
WHY ABBAS DOESN'T FIGHT TERRORISM "The American officers responsible for monitoring Israeli and Palestinian (P.A. Arab) compliance with the road map peace plan recently criticized the P.A.'s counterterrorism efforts. Specifically, the Americans are concerned that the PA does not engage in the full spectrum of counterterrorism activities, including arrests, interrogation and trial. Trials generally take place only if the PA is under external pressure ... when they do take place, they are generally hasty affairs." (Quotes from Haaretz journalists.) "It isn't because of a lack of resources that the P.A. declines to implement serious and consistent measures against the terrorists. Nor ... a lack of will ... " "The stark truth is that notwithstanding all the verbiage about Palestinian 'moderates' and 'friends of peace', the PA –– from Mahmoud Abbas down –– doesn't consider terror activity against Israelis to be fundamentally unacceptable. At most they may quibble over the efficacy of a given attack and criticize it for being counter productive." "'Moderate' Abbas' attitude about terror is brutally illustrated by his demand that each and every terrorist now being held by Israel be set free –– regardless of what crime he committed or when he committed it. This makes the "peace process" a farce that Israel's leadership had better recognize (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 3/28). MORE JEWS FRAMED IN YESHA? About 20 Arabs broke into a field near Gush Etzion, where Jewish children play. The community security officer called two civil guards for help. The three told the Arabs to leave. The Arabs advanced on them, with clubs. The officer fired a warning shot. The Arabs advanced. The three Jews retreated, rather than shoot down the Arabs. The Arabs filed a complaint of assault and battery. Police arrested the Jews, claiming they all had fired at the Arabs. Claiming to test whether the civil guards' guns worked, the police fired them. Now the guards could not prove they had not fired their guns. The three were convicted by the judges (no jury trial in Israel), without evidence. The judges said (as usual) that they believe the Arabs and want to set an example. The defendants' appeals were denied on the peculiar grounds that they had not filed a complaint first. The justice system there is rigged in favor of the Arabs against settlers (Arutz-7, 3/28). The example is let Arabs kill you. Why didn't the court find it strange that the Arabs invaded the Jews' land, but complain about being victims? The Arabs trespassed, but the judges believe the Arabs? If three armed Jews had fired at the Arabs, why no Arab casualties? ETHICS OF AGENTS PROVOCATEURS The ruling Israeli Labor Party and allied media played dirty tricks, and denouncrf the whole opposition for what government agents did in the name of the opposition. The evidence indicates that Rabin planned a fake assassination attempt on himself which Peres exploited to make real. Most of the dirty tricks were covered up, but although several were exposed, the perpetrators got off. No reform. Same people in place. Doing what? Spying against terrorism is necessary. Spying on dissidents to repress their objection to illegal governmental acts is wrong. Particularly unethical is directing Israeli provocateurs to incite dissidents to violence, so as to bring their movement into disrepute. Settlers have identified many secret service agents in their midst. What is more criminal than when government induces crime? I'll tell you what is worse. The main provocateur committed violence in order to get opponents maligned for it. Regime allies distort Talmudists' general statements into a call for general violence against Arabs, to make the rabbis detested. Israelis, who have only a semblance of democracy, have little understanding of it and don't know the extent of the controls over them. I've met some who don't think governmental use of force against their peaceful protests is fascistic. The American media remains unaware of the problem or, as I suspect of the NY Times, which champions phony Arab "rights," ignores leftist oppression because it wants the Right repressed. The Times' selective defense of democracy is not democratic. US Jewish organizations should be defending Israeli Jewry against leftist oppression, but tends to ignore governmental wrongdoing and express solidarity with the government there, as if that is being pro-Israel. US prosecutors employ certain techniques of dubious ethics. One is offering defendants lighter sentences if they testify against their co-conspirators. Their testimony may be perjury in their self-interest. Another technique is a sting operation. Offering to cash stolen property probably does not induce much additional theft. Sometimes sting operations offer a temptation that leads to a crime that without the offer would not be committed. The crime is engendered by the government. That is improper. The most grievous Israeli technique is provoking people into committing violence. Extensive use of this technique against settlers and others makes the government of Israel a criminal conspiracy. It purports to represent leftist ideals and democracy, but its cynical and brutal criminality is Czarist if not Stalinist. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
ARAB TERRORIST SHOT DEAD BY QUICK THINKING WOULD-BE VICTIM
Posted by Bryna Berch April 4, 2008. |
|
There's the joke about the Brit, the Frenchman and the Israeli who were captured by cannibals and were granted one last wish before they became dinner. The Brit wanted to sing a last "God Save the Queen" and the Frenchman asked for a plate of snails. It was the Israeli's turn. He asked to have his hands untied so he could pray for the last time. As soon as his hands were free, he pulled out a gun and shot all the cannibals. "Why did you wait so long?" his companions asked. "I didn't want anyone to say I was hasty or unprovoked." You may think it's life imitating art –– or sick humor –– when you read the story below.
It was written by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz, who writes for Arutz-Sheva.
|
|
A Palestinian Authority terrorist was shot dead late Monday afternoon as he attempted to stab two people at a bus stop near Shiloh, 20 miles north of Jerusalem. The armed civilian who put an end to the attack is a school principal from the town of Itamar. After 5:30 p.m. on Monday afternoon, an Arab man approached the Shiloh Junction bus stop and began talking to two people, an adult and a teenager, who were waiting there. In an interview with Arutz Sheva, the teenager, Hillel Maeir, described the events which followed: After a short conversation in broken English and Hebrew, which aroused the suspicion of the two, the 16-year-old young man decided to move away, behind a concrete barrier at the bus stop while the older man placed his hand on his personal weapon. At that point, the attacker suddenly pulled out a six-inch knife and tried to stab the adult Israeli. Because of his fear of getting entangled with the law for using his weapon, the would-be victim waited until the last second to draw his personal weapon. Hillel Maeir described that as the terrorist's knife was coming down toward the Jewish man, he managed to cock his pistol and shoot the terrorist all in the same motion of drawing his weapon. The bullet knocked the Arab off his feet and wounded him. When the terrorist then reached into his shirt, the civilian interpreted the motion as a possible attempt to detonate an explosive vest, and he shot again, this time killing his attacker. It later turned out that the PA resident was reaching for a second, concealed knife. Military and police forces alerted to the attack arrived at the junction and radioed for an emergency medical response unit. The responding Magen David Adom (MDA) team pronounced the terrorist dead at the scene. The quick-thinking civilian who killed the attacker was identified as Rabbi Erez Bar-On, the principal of the Hitzim High School in Itamar, near Shechem. Rabbi Bar-On is a graduate of the Hesder yeshiva in the town of Har Bracha, on Mt. Gerizim in Samaria. IDF officials had nothing but praise for Rabbi Bar-On in the wake of the attempted stabbing. "The citizen acted properly, in a decisive and fitting manner," army officials said in a statement to the press, "and his actions showed preparedness and proportionality." As is its practice in most cases of such foiled "lone wolf" terror attacks, the Palestinian Authority presented the would-be attacker as an innocent victim, murdered by the Zionists. A PA news outlet controlled by Hamas referred to the dead man as a shahid ("martyr") in a story under the heading "Zionist Settlers Kill Palestinian in Cold Blood". The Fatah-controlled PA news agency WAFA identified the terrorist as 22-year-old Abed al-Latif Kharoub and, like Hamas, claimed he was "shot dead in a cold blood by a group of colonizers as he was walking near Tarmas'aya town, north Ramallah." MK Ariel: DM Barak's 'Gestures' Led to the Attack Knesset Member Uri Ariel (National Union-National Religious Party) attributed the attempted terrorist attack near Shiloh on Monday afternoon to the removal of IDF roadblocks in Judea and Samaria earlier in the day. The attack took place just hours after the IDF began easing security checks for PA Arabs, and just a few kilometers west of a checkpoint that was removed, he said. MK Ariel blamed Defense Minister Ehud Barak for approving the loosening of security measures as a "gesture" to the PA. Ariel sees Barak as responsible for any attacks resulting from the reduced number of checkpoints. Barak recently both approved the removal of checkpoints and froze government funding aimed at providing extra protection for Israeli vehicles in Judea and Samaria, Ariel noted. [Editor's Note: UPDATE April 9, 2008: This is "Police Still Haven't Returned Gun to Man Who Thwarted Attack" by Ezra HaLevi and Maayana Miskin, Arutz-Sheva: (IsraelNN.com) Rabbi Erez Bar-On, who thwarted a terrorist attack at a Samaria bus stop last week, said Tuesday that police have not yet returned his gun. |
|
TROUBLE BREWING IN THE GULF
Posted by Olivier Guitta, April 4, 2008. |
|
Hezbollah chief terror master Imad Mugnieh created havoc, terror and a trail of blood during his life. His death is likely to bring more of the same. And this might not be "limited" to potential retaliation terror attacks. Indeed, Kuwait is already paying the nefarious consequences of Mugnieh's death. Mugnieh was not well liked in Kuwait, to say the least: at one point, he was considered public enemy number one. He was allegedly behind a 1988 airliner hijacking that resulted in the death of two Kuwaitis. The latest crisis in Kuwait started on Feb. 16 when a demonstration in homage to Mugnieh, organized by Shiites, took place. Following this, authorities arrested eight Shiite personalities, including two ex-MPs and a cleric. They were accused of belonging to an organization called Hezbollah-Kuwait, of wanting to overthrow the regime and propagating false news on the country abroad to tarnish Kuwait's image. They were all later freed on bail. But that is not all: the attorney general has asked parliament to remove the immunity of two current Shiite MPs. And Kuwaiti minister of the interior, Sheikh Jaber Khaled al-Sabbah, announced that the state would "deport any expatriate who took part" in the rally. Overall tension is increasing in the tiny Gulf emirate. Multiple bomb threats have been made in the past weeks. On March 8 an anonymous caller warned authorities that two bombs were going to explode aboard two incoming planes. The arrests of the Shiites personalities caused the ire of the Shiite community that followed up with two more important demonstrations. Shiites represent about one-third of Kuwait's 1 million population. They feel that they are being unfairly treated by the Sunni regime. A young Shiite, Abbas, told the Lebanese daily L'Orient-Le Jour: "I love Kuwait. It is my country, but such actions tell me that I am not welcome." This situation has much broader implications and might involve the major player in the region: Iran. In fact, rumors of Iran's involvement in stirring chaos in the Gulf, by using the local Shiite population, have been abound in recent years. For analyst Nabil al-Fadhi, Iran is behind this crisis because it is looking to deter Kuwait from allowing the United States to launch attacks against the Islamic republic from its territory. But the trouble is far from limited just to Kuwait. In fact, Bahrain has witnessed numerous incidents, including riots by members of its Shiite community. And in Manama, just over the March 8 weekend, the ranch belonging to the prime minister's adviser was torched along with several cars. Finally, Saudi Arabia is not immune to tensions with its Shiite community, who mostly live in the oil-rich Eastern provinces. In light of Iran's expansion ambitions and its will and ability to stir chaos in the region (look at Lebanon, for example), the fears of the Gulf countries are clearly justified. If one thought that the situation was not explosive and complicated enough between the West and Iran, now one must take into account the potential domestic turmoil that may be brewing in some countries in the region. Olivier Guitta, an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant, is the founder of the newsletter The Croissant (www.thecroissant.com). This appeared March 17, 2008 in Middle East Times
|
|
INTERNATIONAL IRAN-CONFERENCE IN BERLIN
Posted by Robin Stoller, April 4, 2008. |
|
Dear colleagues and friends, I want to invite you to our Iran-conference "Business as usual? The Iranian regime, the holy war against Israel and the West and the German reaction". The conference will take place in Berlin, May 2nd and May 3rd 2008 and is organized by the Mideast Freedom Forum Berlin (MFF-Berlin). MFF is a forum consisting of academics, scholars, journalists, members of Jewish Organizations and Iranians in exile. Please find below the conference program in English and German. Translation to English and German will be available at the conference. If you can support the conference with a donation, please contact me. Please distribute this mail. It would be a pleasure to welcome you at our conference. Best regards
|
|
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen and dear Friends, we would like to inform you about an international conference on Iran that will take place in Berlin on May 2nd and 3rd. A diverse group of renowned speakers from different countries, including exile-Iranian opposition members, academics, politicians, journalists and NGO representatives, will be speaking. Below you can find the program schedule, which will be updated with a number of additional speakers. Please see: www.mideastfreedomforum.org. To receive our newsletter please send an empty email to join@mideastfreedomforum.org. Registration to the conference will be possible on our website: www.mideastfreedomforum.org We urgently need donations –– you can find our bank account below or on our website. Your sincerely,
Please support the conference and our further work with a donation! Reason for payment: "Freedom Forum"
BUSINESS AS USUAL? THE IRANIAN REGIME, THE HOLY WAR AGAINST ISRAEL AND THE WEST AND THE GERMAN REACTION Friday, May 2nd 2008 11 a.m. Press conference 7 p.m.
7.30 p.m.
Religious and ideological motivation in Iranian domestic and international policies
A second Holocaust? The threat to Israel
"Strategic partner"? The special German-Iranian relationship
Capitulate to the Iranian Regime?
Chair: Alan Posener
Saturday, May 3rd 2008 10.15 a.m. –– 12.00 p.m. Theocracy and Human Rights.
Anatomy of Terror in the Iranian theocracy
Women under theocracy
The situation of the Kurds in Iran
Chair: Caroline Fetscher
12.45 p.m. –– 14.30 p.m.
The roadmap to the bomb
Terror and ideology-export: The Islamic Republic's war against the West
Iran and the Islamist network in Germany
Chair: Dr. Sylke Tempel
16.00 p.m. –– 17.45 p.m. Iran and Europe: Dialogue or confrontation? The EU, Iran and the effectiveness of sanctions
Business as usual? German-Iranian trade relations
Know nothing, hear nothing, see nothing –– Germanys policy towards Islamism: Calculation or anticipatory obedience?
18.15 p.m. –– 20.15 p.m. Final panel:
International cooperation against the Mullah-Regime
Where are the anti-fascists? Iran and the meaning of "Coming to terms with the Nazi past" in 2008
Freedom, secularization, democracy –– for a new Middle East
Chair: Doris Akrap
Contact Robin Stoller at robin.stoller@ak-x.net |
|
YOUR MONEY KILLS ISRAELI AND PALESTINIAN CHILDREN
Posted by David Frankfurter, April 4, 2008. |
|
I have previously written about the Funding for Peace Coalition website (http://eufunding.org.uk/). Their latest submission to a UK parliamentary inquiry once again documents the way international funding of the Palestinians lacks transparency or adequate controls –– resulting in its diversion to corruption and violence. At the end of the day, it is used to support war crimes, including the murder of Israeli civilians and the use of Palestinian civilians as human shields. And your money is used to promote "terrorist insurance" social welfare schemes. Everyone is guilty –– Europe, the US and even Japan give huge sums –– both directly and indirectly. NGO Monitor has just published a highly detailed examination of European Union (EU) funding of political NGOs in the Arab-Israeli conflict. The fifty-page report, 'Europe's Hidden Hand', shows that the EU provides tens of millions of Euros from public money to NGOs whose activities directly contradict EU policy. That is –– simply another avenue where international funds promote a never ending war against Israel. I recommend that everyone read at least the Executive Summary, if not the full report of this latest publication. And in all of this, no-one asks UNRWA to settle even a single Palestinian refugee as a citizen of anywhere. Can you imagine what it would be if the Jewish refugees of WWII or the millions of descendants Jews thrown out of Arab countries were still stateless? Put all of this together and work out what you are going to do to put pressure on your political representatives to stop pouring money into exacerbating the Middle East conflict. David David Frankfurter is a business consultant, corporate executive
and writer who frequently comments on the Middle East.
To subscribe to his 'Letter from Israel', email him at
david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to
|
|
MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES & HAMAS-FATAH CIVIL STRIFE; MORE JEWS FRAMED IN YESHA?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 4, 2008. |
|
MIDDLE EASTERN STUDIES & HAMAS-FATAH CIVIL STRIFE Hundreds of subsidized US professors of Middle Eastern studies visited the P.A., where rivalry between Hamas and Fatah has been building up for a dozen years. Very few wrote about it. They were too busy bashing Israel for counter-terrorism and lavishing praise on the P.A. as a healthy society turning democratic. Even when regional media took up the issue, the professors mostly ignored it. Two notorious ones, Rashid Khalidi and Joseph Massad, of Columbia U., failed to warn the US about the coming strife. The professors of Middle Eastern studies failed to grasp that the two factions would conflict, although both were more interested in destroying Israel than in setting up a viable state of their own. They have failed to explain why they missed this major development, one that may break out into a wider war. Why should our governmental policy makers pay them any heed? (MEFNews, 3/12.) Let the government stop subsidizing those university centers for jihad, until they become of use to our country. ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE: STRATEGIC ASSESSMENT Israel's annual intelligence report anticipates renewed warfare with Hizbullah this year or next. Apparently: "1) Lebanon is crumbling and falling into the hands of Hizbullah, 2) Syria remains a threat, and 3) Israeli-Arabs are joining the fray. The report also notes Gaza and the world-wide Jihad movement as threats to Israel, but the most significant danger of all lies in Iran's nuclear program." A retired general thinks such reports unduly negative, because they focus on what the enemy strives to do, not on what Israel might do. Israel has a better economy and it can deter its enemies, he said (Arutz-7, 3/12). Since Israel constantly makes empty threats, its enemies aren't deterred. Israel is forfeiting all its strategic positions and initiatives. Therefore, I think the report is not unduly negative. Israel's enemies have proved they mean business. They are not arming and training for nothing. Their economies may not be good, but they have plenty of money for war and don't mind stinting on domestic needs. Israel does the opposite, wasting money on domestic lobbies and stinting on military needs. FREE PRESS VS. PROPAGANDA WAR Israel is embargoing al-Jazeera, because it is the enemy's propaganda arm for warfare against Israel (Op. Cit.). It's time to distinguish between legitimate media and propaganda arms of war. WHY ABBAS DOESN'T FIGHT TERRORISM "The American officers responsible for monitoring Israeli and Palestinian (P.A. Arab) compliance with the road map peace plan recently criticized the P.A.'s counterterrorism efforts. Specifically, the Americans are concerned that the PA does not engage in the full spectrum of counterterrorism activities, including arrests, interrogation and trial. Trials generally take place only if the PA is under external pressure –– when they do take place, they are generally hasty affairs." (Quotes from Haaretz journalists.) "It isn't because of a lack of resources that the P.A. declines to implement serious and consistent measures against the terrorists. Nor ... a lack of will ... " "The stark truth is that notwithstanding all the verbiage about Palestinian 'moderates' and 'friends of peace', the PA –– from Mahmoud Abbas down –– doesn't consider terror activity against Israelis to be fundamentally unacceptable. At most they may quibble over the efficacy of a given attack and criticize it for being counter productive." "'Moderate' Abbas' attitude about terror is brutally illustrated by his demand that each and every terrorist now being held by Israel be set free –– regardless of what crime he committed or when he committed it. This makes the "peace process" a farce that Israel's leadership had better recognize (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 3/28). MORE JEWS FRAMED IN YESHA? About 20 Arabs broke into a field near Gush Etzion, where Jewish children play. The community security officer called two civil guards for help. The three told the Arabs to leave. The Arabs advanced on them, with clubs. The officer fired a warning shot. The Arabs advanced. The three Jews retreated, rather than shoot down the Arabs. The Arabs filed a complaint of assault and battery. Police arrested the Jews, claiming they all had fired at the Arabs. Claiming to test whether the civil guards' guns worked, the police fired them. Now the guards could not prove they had not fired their guns. The three were convicted by the judges (no jury trial in Israel), without evidence. The judges said (as usual) that they believe the Arabs and want to set an example. The defendants' appeals were denied on the peculiar grounds that they had not filed a complaint first. The justice system there is rigged in favor of the Arabs against settlers (Arutz-7, 3/28). The example is let Arabs kill you. Why didn't the court find it strange that the Arabs invaded the Jews' land, but complain about being victims? The Arabs trespassed, but the judges believe the Arabs? If three armed Jews had fired at the Arabs, why no Arab casualties? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
US JEWS: ARE WE OK WITH RICE DEMANDING MORE & MORE FROM ISRAEL?
Posted by Lee Caplan, April 3, 2008. |
|
"Rice demands more concessions,", Israel's second largest daily newspaper, Maariv, warned Israelis this week. Maariv reported that the United States's Condoleezza Rice is "pressuring Israel" despite "the Israeli message that it would be impossible to reach a signed final accord by the end of 2008". In response, even Israel's opposition leader, Former Premier Netanyahu, rushed to the Israel Government's aid, saying pointedly that "there are already Iranian bases in Gaza that are threatening the Negev (i.e. Southern Israel), and there are already Iranian bases in the North, in Lebanon, which are threatening us. We cannot allow ourselves Iranian terror bases in Judea and Samaria –– which will threaten Tel-Aviv and Gush Dan (i.e. Israel's most heavily populated area)". ACTION ITEM: You can contact the Jewish Liaison at the White House to question Dr. Rice's pressuring Israel to endanger itself. Judea and Samaria are a bikeride away from all of Israel's heavily populated areas, and also from Israel's sole international airport. Dr. Rice's pressure to set up a new Palestinian state in those crucial areas, Judea and Samaria, clearly can have only one result: yet another Iranian terror state –– thrust like a dagger into Israel's heart. Jewish Liaison, WhiteHouse: Jewish.Public.Liaison@WhiteHouse.Gov.
Please also call the White House comment line at 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111. Thanks for helping Israel.
Write us at us4israel@gmail.com about any aspect of supporting Israel's rights and overcoming anti-Semitism toward Israel and Israelis. |
|
RICE AS THE DIPLOMAT FAIRY GRANTS THE TERRORIST WISHLIST
Posted by Sultan Knish, April 3, 2008. |
|
|
The number one item on any terrorist's Wishlist is weapons. And Rice insured that 700 heavily armed terrorists are to be deployed in Jenin, already the site of one of Israel's bloodiest battles with Fatah Terrorists. And just to insure that the heavy armor will be on their side, the terrorists will also be receiving Russian armored vehicles. It'll be a tossup whether Fatah's terrorists will be able to use them against Israel, before Hamas seizes them and uses them against Israel. The second item is course of mobility and penetration. So Rice has had Israel dismantle roadblocks between Jenin, Tulkarem, Kalkiyah and Ramallah. This will allow terrorists to move more easily through the West Bank and coordinate their operations. This will allow more rockets to be fired from the West Bank and allow terrorist groups from Hamas to Islamic Jihad to the various Fatah groups to rebuild their infrastructure, distribute smuggled weapons, move new recruits into training and carry out new terrorist attacks. Then Rice had Israel increase the number of travel permits into Israel, so once the the terrorist groups are ready, they can carry out suicide bombing attacks inside Israel itself. No similar concessions on the ground have of course been required by Rice from Fatah. Contrary to Rice's claims, boosting travel permits and removing roadblocks will not improve anything. Because the reason those roadblocks and travel restrictions were in place to begin with, was because of Arab terrorist attacks. The blood of anyone who dies in a terrorist attack because of this will be on Rice's hands. Every time Israel loosens restrictions, terrorist attacks inevitably follow. Israel responds and restores restrictions, which bring the condemnation of the world. This puts us right back in the "Just Let Him Stab You a Little Bit" politics of Henry Kissinger that brought Israel to the brink of destruction in the Yom Kippur War and that is doing the same thing today. Because the dirty secret of the Cycle of Violence is that it only ends when Israel or its enemies are destroyed. The diplomats have already decided which side they want to see destroyed. Their wishlists are an attempt to see it through to the end. When speaking of this, one is reminded of the words of Psalm 125. They that trust in the LORD are as Mount Zion, which cannot be moved, but abides forever. As the mountains surround Jerusalem, so the LORD surrounds His people, from this time and forever. For the rod of wickedness shall not rest upon the lot of the righteous; that the righteous put not forth their hands unto iniquity. Do good, O LORD, unto the good, and to them that are upright in their hearts. But as for such as turn aside unto their crooked ways, the LORD will lead them away with the workers of iniquity.Peace be upon Israel.
This comes from the April 2, 2008 issue of the Sultan Knish website
|
|
IDF REMOVE 10 WEST BANK ROADBLOCKS –– UNTIL ISRAELIS GET MURDERED?
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 3, 2008. |
|
This was written by Efrat Weiss for YNET and AP
Israel Radio reports this evening that security officials say the roadblocks will be returned if and when the Palestinians manage to murder some Israelis thanks to the removed roadblocks. |
|
The IDF said in a statement Thursday that it took down 10 manned roadblocks near the West Bank towns of Nablus, Tulkarem and Qalqiliya to ease restrictions on the movement of Palestinians, in keeping with the commitments Israel made to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice during her visit to the region earlier this week. However, none of the points are major crossings. Israel promised Rice it would remove 50 roadblocks to ease restrictions on Palestinians. Israel says the obstacles are needed to keep Palestinian assailants out, but the Jewish state also wants to boost moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas by easing restrictions on his people, as peace negotiations proceed. "There is no doubt that the removal of the roadblocks will make it easier on terrorists to carry out attacks and then escape back to the territories, but the decision was made at government level," an Israeli security official told Ynet. Jericho checkpoints also removed A Palestinian security official refuted the report, saying "not one roadblock has been removed. Maybe the IDF removed roadblocks in its own bases, but not in the Palestinian Authority and certainly not in the West Bank." On Monday, Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki said Israel removed two checkpoints in Jericho in addition to evacuating the Rimonim checkpoint near Ramallah. Yesha leaders claimed that the IDF's plan to remove the Modiin roadblock in the Binyamin area, which is in the vicinity of Jerusalem, was canceled after settlers said they would man the roadblock themselves if needed. The settlers said the Modiin roadblock was crucial, adding that in the past an Israeli woman was killed because it had been removed. Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad said recently that Israel was not living up to its commitment to freeze settlement construction and ease Palestinian movement in the West Bank. A report published last year by Peace Now stated that there are 93 manned checkpoints throughout the West Bank, in addition to 467 roadblocks, such as gates, ditches and sand mounds. Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
AD TARGETING JEWS FOR CONVERSION 'OFFENSIVE AND INSULTING'
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, April 3, 2008. |
|
New York, NY, March 28, 2008 –– A statement by an Evangelical Christian group which defends targeting Jews for conversion by Christians who grew up as Jews, was labeled "offensive and insulting," by the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). Sponsored by the World Evangelical Alliance, "The Gospel and the Jewish People: An Evangelical Statement," appeared as a full-page advertisement in the March 28 edition of The New York Times. ADL said the statement validates and defends those who converted from Judaism to Christianity for using their religious and cultural Jewish experience as tools to proselytize Jews, such as Jews for Jesus and so-called "Messianic Jews." Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director, said in a statement: The World Evangelical Alliance Statement defending the targeting of Jews for conversion is offensive and insulting to the Jewish people and brazenly dismisses Jewish self-definition. Instead of validating God's irrevocable covenant with the Jewish people, and ongoing Jewish covenantal life, themes also found in their Scripture, this group of religious leaders does the opposite. ADL said the statement also stands in contradiction to Rev. Billy Graham who said: "I believe God has always had a special relationship with the Jewish people, as St. Paul suggests in the book of Romans. In my evangelistic efforts I have never felt called to single out the Jews as Jews ... " In 2000, Graham defended Jews during the Southern Baptist Convention's major effort to proselytize Jews, saying, "I normally defend my denomination. I'm loyal to it. But I have never targeted Muslims. I have never targeted Jews." The statement, signed by 44 Christian academics, clergy and journalists, states that "we recognize that it is good and right for those [Jews who converted to Christianity] with specialized knowledge, history and skills to use these gifts to introduce individuals to the Messiah, and that includes those ministries specifically directed to the Jewish people." Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
IN THE SPIRIT OF CHANA
Posted by Batya Medad, April 3, 2008. |
|
A few minutes ago, I had a phone call asking me to participate in a poll. I agreed and began listening to the questions and choosing answers from those offered. With each question, I became more and more concerned. It seemed like one of those polls for the Left, for those fronts for groups which want to prove that we're a bunch of prostitutes –– for money we'd leave our homes. Well, I told the girl on the phone, that I've probably been living in Shiloh since long before she was born, and I find her questions offensive. Yes, I told her that I know that she's just doing her job, what she gets paid to do. I know that she didn't write the questions and the choice of answers. But I could hear the direction the questions were going. They started out rather innocuously. "How would you describe your life in your community?"
"Why did you move to there?"
"How do you see your community five years from now?"
The questions began getting even worse, and I told her: "I refuse to continue. I know exactly what this survey is for and where it's leading. I find it highly offensive. If I was living in Shiloh, Ohio or Shiloh, Tennessee, nobody would dare ask me such questions or ask me to leave my home." I told her that I've lived here a long time, and this is the original Shiloh, and I have no plans nor desire to leave. Yes, this is the Shiloh of the Bible. This is the Shiloh where Joshua established the capital of the Hebrew tribes after the Exodus from Egypt and the 40 Years of Wandering. This is the Shiloh where the Tabernacle stood for 369 years. This is the Shiloh where Chana prayed for a son who would dedicate his life to the Jewish People. And this is the Shiloh where Chana stood up to Eli who accused her of drunkenness, when she prayed silently and sincerely to G-d. We have returned to pray to G-d at Shiloh. Each of us mouths our words to G-d, like Chana did thousands of years ago. G-d is waiting to hear our prayers. Chazal, our sages, say that Chana was originally infertile, because G-d wanted her prayers to be exceptionally strong. Today our People and and Land are suffering greatly. We need a true leader with strength of character and a goal and vision of a strong Jewish Nation in our Holy Land. Please join us in Shiloh on Sunday, Rosh Chodesh Nissan, the Month of Miracles, at 10am. Batya Medad lives in Shiloh.
She can be reached by email at
Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website
http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/ or go to http://www.shilo.org.il
This article is archived at
|
|
PA POLICE WHO MURDERED ISRAELI OFFICER ON JOINT PATROL SENTENCED
Posted by Bryna Berch, April 3, 2008. |
|
Both the items below are from Arutz-Sheva; the second was written by Hillel Fendel, who is Senior New-Editor for www.IsraelNationalNews.com. |
|
As the Olmert government prepares to further arm the Palestinian Authority, a PA policeman who intentionally murdered an Israeli Border Police officer on a joint patrol was sentenced Wednesday. PA police officer Na'al Yassin was sentenced to life in prison plus 30 years at the IDF's Salem Military Court in Samaria Wednesday for murdering Border Police Officer Yossi Tabijah in September, 2000. The murder took place on September 29, during a joint PA and Israeli patrol mandated by the Oslo Accords outside the PA-controlled city of Kalkilya. An Israeli and PA jeep were parked next to each other when Yassin came out of the jeep, yelled Allahu Akbar and began firing inside the Israeli vehicle at the two Border Police inside. Tabijah was killed and his fellow officer was badly wounded in the attack. The IDF prosecutor called Yassin an "animal that hates life" and described how he emptied several clips into the jeep, even reloading several times. At his trial, Yassin expressed confidence that he would be released from prison as part of a future deal and assured those present that he would kill Israelis again. He also said: "If you want peace, go back to Europe." BUT Gov't Refuses to Link Merkaz HaRav Murder and Guns Given to PA (IsraelNN.com) Likud Knesset faction chairman MK Gideon Saar submitted an "urgent query" to the Knesset regarding last month's terrorist slaughter in which eight Yeshivat Merkaz HaRav students were gunned down. He wanted to know if Israel supplied the murder weapon to the PA –– and did not receive an answer. Saar asked where the terrorist, a resident of eastern Jerusalem who did not have a license to carry a weapon, received the Kalachnikov that he used for the murders. "Does the security establishment know from where the terrorist received his weapon?" Saar asked. "Was this a weapon that was given to the Palestinian Authority by the Government of Israel?" In accordance with accepted Knesset procedure, the Minister Responsible for Liaison with the Knesset, Ruchama Avraham-Belila, took the forum to respond, and said as follows: "This was a murderous and lowly attack by an evil degenerate who came in to murder students while they were studying Torah. This was a shocking and appalling incident. After checking your question with the relevant bodies, I can answer you the following at this point, though it might not be enough for you: The General Security Service is currently in the middle of investigating the attack, and now, at this stage, all the details are under the veil of the censor. As soon as the investigation concludes, MK Saar, I will be happy to transmit to you all the details of what I know." In response, Saar said, "I will suffice at this stage by expressing my hope that the Government of Israel will not carry out its intention of submitting thousands more Kalachnikov rifles to the Palestinian Authority, until the answer to my question as to how the terrorist obtained his weapon is answered." Hero Blames Peres It will be recalled that just minutes after the murderous attack, Yitzchak Dadon –– one of the two heroes who killed the terrorist –– was interviewed on several TV and radio stations, and each time he blamed President Shimon Peres and the Israeli government for having given to the PA the rifle that was used to murder the students. Ever since the Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, Israel has given thousands of weapons such as Kalachnikov rifles to the PA. The Rabin-Peres government of those days felt that the Palestinian Authority needed to instill law and order, especially with the influx of tens of thousands of PLO terrorists into Judea, Samaria and Gaza. Justifying Israel's giving them thousands of guns, Rabin said at the time, "Fatah will fight Hamas without [the restrictions of] the Supreme Court and B'Tzelem." Despite the many deaths of Israelis at the hands of Kalachnikov-toting terrorists since then, and despite several "Don't give them guns!" campaigns by the nationalist camp, the government continues even now to either provide guns or to allow Egypt to send guns to the Palestinian Authority. |
|
"THE HEAVENS REJOICE AND THE EARTH IS GLAD" (Psalms 96:11)
Posted by Eleazar Ben-Yair, April 3, 2008. |
|
This is from Yitzchak Reuven of The Temple Institute. |
This coming Saturday evening marks Rosh Chodesh Nisan, the first day of the month of Nisan, and it is certainly a time for rejoicing. What distinguishes Nisan from the other months of the Hebrew year, and in particular, what is so special about the first of Nisan? As opposed to the previous month of Adar, which is characterized by the attribute of hidden miracles, which reaches its most articulated expression within the Purim message, (in which the scroll of Esther, read on Purim, does not contain within its text a single mention of G-d's name), Nisan is described as the month of revealed miracles. Again, this is most clearly articulated by the miracles which bring about the climax of the Exodus from Egypt, the plague of the first born and the splitting of the Sea of Reeds. This latter miracle was performed expressly for all the world to see. There is a blessing that we are instructed to say only once a year, and only during the month of Nisan: "Blessed are you, G-d, King of the universe, in whose world nothing is lacking, and has created beautiful things, and goodly trees for man to take pleasure in." This blessing is to be recited only when viewing two blossoming fruit trees. Why? We know that Nisan, the month referred to in Exodus 12:2, "'This month shall be unto you the beginning of months,'" is the first month of the Hebrew calendar, and is considered the new year for marking the Temple pilgrimages, and the reigns of the kings of Israel. And we know that the commandment to mark the month of Nisan was the first commandment given to the nation of Israel as they prepared to leave Egypt. We also learn that the first of Nisan which began the second year of the Israelite sojourn through the desert, was the day that the tabernacle was inaugurated, and G-d's shechinah –– presence –– was made palpably manifest to the children of Israel for the first time: "And Moses and Aaron went into the tent of meeting, and came out, and blessed the people; and the glory of HaShem appeared unto all the people." (Leviticus 9:23) The answer to our questions is beginning to emerge. Two history making events took place on the first day of Nisan, within the space of one year. The first was when G-d, for the very first time directly engaged the entire nation of Israel and commanded them to begin marking time from the new moon of Nisan. Though still in Egypt, this marked the beginning of the end of Israel's exile as G-d has re-engaged the people. He takes them out from exile and places them in His world, as it were, the desert. But man is meant for this world and to exist indefinitely on the rarefied level that the Israelites now found themselves in was simply not viable. In order to make permanent and eternal their convenant with G-d, He had to be brought into man's world. And this is the intention of the tabernacle: to make a place, around which the entire nation is arrayed, in which G-d's very presence can dwell and be made manifest to the people. This is what took place on the first of Nisan, in the second year in the desert. And this is what G-d desires most of His children: to be welcome in this world. And now we know why spring occurs each year during the month of Nisan: "The heavens rejoice and the earth is glad." (Psalms 96:11) The heavens and earth are rejoicing because G-d is "happy." His "dream" his been fulfilled. His children have returned to Him, and He to His children. Therefore we make the blessing in the month of Nisan: "Blessed are you, G-d, King of the universe, in whose world nothing is lacking, and has created beautiful things, and goodly trees for man to take pleasure in." What could possibly be lacking in a world in which G-d is present and His presence is manifest? Even the flowering trees, like the two witnesses who testify to the appearance of the new moon, these two trees that we bless, like all of nature, are witnessing G-d's nearness. Witnessing and rejoicing. Tune into this week's Temple Talk –– http://www.templeinstitute.org/main.htm –– as Rabbi Chaim Richman and Yitzchak Reuven explore the sublime beauty of Rosh Chodesh Nisan, and have a look at the Torah reading of Tazria, which takes us from the birthing of babies to the affliction of tzarat. This week's Light to the Nations: is
entitled: "The Month of Nisan: The first day of Nisan is the day of
the declaration of independence from Egypt, and also, one year later,
the day that G-d's presence in the tabernacle became manifest to the
Israelites. No wonder 'the heavens rejoice and the earth is glad' as
Nisan rolls around." View at
This week also features the latest Bat Melech video teaching by
Rabanit Rena Richman, entitled, "Sara Imenu: The Matriarch Sara:
nsights into the spiritual essence of the matriarch Sara, as revealed
through a close reading of the Scriptural text." View at
Also available is Rabbi Richman's short parashat hashavua
teaching of Tazria, (Leviticus 12:1-13:59): "Purity and impurity:
being in spiritual harmony with the Creator and His world. Recognizing
that the physical world is imbued with the spiritual, and that even
the words that pass through our lips can alter our own existence."
View at
The Temple Institute along with Temple Movements and the Sanhedrin will all be participating in a day long symposium this coming Sunday, in Jerusalem, the topic: "The Holy Temple and the approach of Passover" in which contemporary issues impacting on the Passover offering will be discussed. Also planned is the slaughter of a lamb, (for instructional purposes only, and not a Passover offering), which has already drawn the fire and raised the ire of a local animal rights group. To learn more about the upcoming symposium, please click here. To read about the planned protest of the event by the animal rights activists, please click here. To read the Temple Institute's response to the activists, please click here. Blessings from Jerusalem,
Contact Eleazar Ben-Yair at eleazar_benyair@yahoo.com
|
|
ERIC YOFFIE, JUST SHUT UP
Posted by Steven Plaut, April 3, 2008. |
|
"Rabbi" Yoffie is a leading theological practitioner of Political Liberalism as Judaism, a form of pseudo-Judaism and "liberation theology." Yoffie has a long track record of issuing anti-Israel and pro-Palestinian pronouncements. This past week he is calling for a Jewish jihad against Christian evangelists, because the latter are guilty of supporting Israel. Who does not need to be criticized, according to Yoffie? Islamofascists, of course. Last year, "Rabbi" Yoffie sucked up to them at the Islamic Society of North America's 44th annual convention in Chicago, IL. While still president, Moshe Katsav made a point out of refusing to call Yoffie a Rabbi. So imaginative suggestions for ways to shut Yoffie up are being solicited. So far we have: 1. Stick the stockings from a Reconstructionist Christmas tree into his mouth. 2. Borrow a giant reefer for him from Arthur Waskow. 3. How many Kafiyas can he swallow in an hour? 4. Get him the seafood platter from a progressive egalitarian California Reform "temple" we know about. 5. Two words: fur balls. 6. Get him to recite fatwas from the Religious Action Center of David Saperstein at the speed of an old 45 record being played at 78. 7. Make him give all his liberal speeches in Hebrew. (Or Aramaic) 8. Make him give a class on the Daf Yomi before any political speech he plans to give. 9. Get him to a dentist who was admitted to dental school via affirmative action. 10. Let him drink every day as if it were Purim. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments –– both seriously and satirically –– on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. Or write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il |
|
HAR HAZEISIM VANDALS IN CUSTODY
Posted by Shoshanna Walker, April 3, 2008. |
|
This is a news item from The Yeshiva World
|
|
Police arrested four Arabs, residents of Ras el-Amud, alleged to have damaged and desecrated graves on Har HaZeisim (Mount of Olives) during recent months. Police report three of the four admitted to their actions, stating they set out to deface Jewish graves. The cemetery, despite its holiness, has been for the most part ignored by Israeli authorities over recent years, with daily vandalism attacks being commonplace. Many gravestones are desecrated and destroyed, and area Arabs frequently and intentionally conduct themselves inappropriately in the cemetery, well-aware of their lack of respect for the religious site. In addition, permitting the situation to deteriorate over the years, security traveling to and from the cemetery is precarious at times, and there are reports of visitors being targeted in rock-throwing and harassment attacks, with little or no police response. (Yechiel Spira –– YWN Israel) Contact Shoshanna Walker by email at rosewalk@concentric.net |
|
NEW YORK STATE PASSES LAW AGAINST LIBEL TERRORISM
Posted by Bryna Berch, April 3, 2008. | |
|
One of the Jihadist terror techniques is to frighten authors, publishers, media people and corporations into self-censorship and compliance under threat of being sued. In Britain, libel laws are such that almost anything can be construed as libel and "truth" is no defense. Hence, anyone who writes a book against Jihad and Islamism is liable to be sued for libel. New York State has just passed an important bill that should help stamp out libel terrorism and protect free speech. These articles below deal with the new legislation. Let's work to ensure it is more widely enacted. | |
|
"Libel protection law –– NY shouldn't enforce dubious judgments"
New York gladly welcomes foreign tourists and their money, but now the state is ready to turn away those who come shopping for a place to enforce dubious libel judgments won abroad against journalists and publishers. Under the guidance of Sen. Dean Skelos (R-Rockville Centre) and Assemb. Rory Lancman (D-Fresh Meadows) the "Libel Terrorism Protection Act" was unanimously passed by the State Legislature last month. Gov. David Paterson should waste no time signing it. The law's title stems from a case involving Rachel Ehrenfeld, a Manhattan author who investigates terrorist networks. Her book, Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It, named Khalid bin Mahfouz, former banker to the Saudi royal family, as a financier to Osama bin Laden and al-Qaida. Mahfouz, who vehemently denies funding terrorists, sued Ehrenfeld in London, winning a $225,000 judgment against her. International plaintiffs choose British courts because it's easy to win a libel judgment there. Ehrenfeld's book wasn't even published in England, but Mahfouz won because 23 copies purchased over the Internet were shipped there. The Skelos-Lancman bill would prohibit New York courts from enforcing any defamation judgment obtained in a foreign jurisdiction that did not provide the considerable free speech and free press protections provided in the United States by the federal and state constitutions. Now that's having a day in court. Joel Stashenko (jstashenko@alm.com)
ALBANY –– State legislators voted unanimously this week for legislation that would protect authors and publishers in New York from libel judgments won by plaintiffs in foreign countries with standards that are less stringent than in the United States. In approving A9652/S6687 (See Bill Summary and Memo), the Senate and Assembly reacted to a Court of Appeals ruling that declined to change the state's long-arm statute for cases of so-called "libel tourism," which critics say is the use of outstanding foreign libel judgments to discourage New York-based authors from writing controversial works and publishers from printing them. In Ehrenfeld v. Mahfouz, 9 NY3d 501 (2007), Judge Carmen Beauchamp Ciparick wrote of the growing concern that foreign libel judgments are being used to "chill free speech" in the United States. But she said that a call for extending the reach of the long-arm statute "must be directed to the Legislature," not the courts (NYLJ, Dec. 21, 2007). Assemblyman Rory I. Lancman, D-Queens, said the bill he and Senator Dean G. Skelos, R-Rockville Centre, are sponsoring does what the Court of Appeals refused to do judicially. Both the Senate and Assembly approved the bill Monday. The measure would allow defendants to seek to have foreign libel judgments declared unenforceable in New York courts if judges find the countries where those judgments were won have weaker libel laws than in the United States. Mr. Lancman said he knows of no other country with stronger libel laws for defendants than the United States, effectively making all foreign libel judgments void in New York. "To my knowledge, the free-speech protections that are afforded American citizens are unique in the world," Mr. Lancman said in an interview. "The world may be flat, but I don't think we should bend or accommodate on that core value one iota." The bill also gives New York courts personal jurisdiction over plaintiffs in foreign defamation proceedings in which New York residents or people amenable to jurisdiction here are defendants. Mr. Lancman said the plaintiff in last year's Court of Appeals' case would be free to avail herself of the legislation if it is signed into law by Governor David A. Paterson. New York author Rachel Ehrenfeld faces a defamation judgment and a damage award of $225,000 against her that was won in a British court by Saudi businessman Khalid Bin Mahfouz. In Ms. Ehrenfeld's book, Funding Evil –– How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It, she identified Mr. Bin Mahfouz as a financier of Al Qaeda leading up to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Mr. Bin Mahfouz has denied bankrolling terrorism. Mr. Bin Mahfouz has not sought to enforce the judgment against Ms. Ehrenfeld. Her attempt in federal court to have the judgment ruled unenforceable was rejected last month by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. The federal panel based its ruling on the answer to a certified question about the reach of New York's long-arm statute that the state Court of Appeals provided in Judge Ciparick's unanimous ruling in December. Mr. Lancman said the measure was amended in one significant way from earlier versions to allow non-New York residents to avail themselves of New York courts to seek a declaratory judgment on a foreign libel judgment. Earlier versions had required that defendants live in New York or have substantial financial ties to the state to have standing (NYLJ, Feb. 28). "It is no longer limited to just New York residents," Mr. Lancman said. "That would solve any privileges' and immunities' clause objections to the bill." Despite amendments, the chief administrative judge's Advisory Committee on Civil Practice remains opposed to the bill, two members of the group said yesterday. In March, the committee voted 20-2 to oppose the bill and urge the Legislature to reject it (NYLJ, March 4). Mark C. Zauderer of Flemming Zulack Williamson Zauderer, a civil practice committee member, questioned whether a defendant can constitutionally bring a declaratory judgment action against a foreign libel plaintiff who has no contacts with New York or the United States. The legislation also puts New York "out of line" with other states on how its courts regard foreign judgments and would craft an exception to the enforcement of foreign libel judgments that other states do not recognize, Mr. Zauderer said in an interview. "The attempt to extend jurisdiction in the way this bill does creates the impression that New York is inconsistently applying its long-arm jurisdiction, making different rules for a particular kind of action," Mr. Zauderer said. He suggested that the legislation would become the subject of a court challenge if it becomes law. "Courts will have to determine whether somebody seeking to take advantage of this procedure can do so constitutionally in a situation in which the foreign libel plaintiff has absolutely no ties in New York," he said. George F. Carpinello of Boies, Schiller & Flexner in Albany, said the bill "would not accomplish what it purports to do and raises serious constitutional questions." Mr. Carpinello is chairman of the chief administrative judge's civil practice committee. Mr. Carpinello said the committee does not plan further criticism of the bill beyond a letter it sent to legislators in March urging them not to pass it. Aides to Mr. Paterson are also "looking at our letter," Mr. Carpinello said. A spokeswoman for the governor declined yesterday to say if Mr. Paterson has a position on the bill. The governor does not comment on legislation before it reaches his desk, she said. Messrs. Zauderer and Carpinello have both argued that New York courts already have the leeway to enforce or not enforce foreign judgments on a case-by-case basis under Article 54 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. Michael Peel and Megan Murphy
Rinat Akhmetov, a Ukrainian energy tycoon ranked by Forbes magazine as the world's 214th richest billionaire, is no stranger to England' s libel courts. He has launched successful actions in London over the past year against Kyiv Post and Obozrevatel, two Ukrainian internet journals. Laura Tyler, his lawyer, says Mr Akhmetov went to England because he has a reputation and business links there, and because its court rulings are internationally acknowledged as "just and fair". "He doesn't want to have a judgment that people will wave around and say, 'You paid for that,'" she says. It is the kind of argument derided by growing numbers of international critics of England's strict defamation laws. Whatever the merits of Mr Akhmetov's actions, critics say, they provide a quintessential example of "libel tourism" by rich public figures who use courts in London to pursue cases that have their roots elsewhere. Hugh Tomlinson, QC, a London-based libel barrister, says of Mr Akhmetov's case against Obozrevatel: "This is a Ukrainian attacked in a Ukrainian newspaper in Ukrainian in Ukraine." US critics argue that libel tourism is a spreading disease that harms free speech around the world, preventing legitimate reporting on public figures ranging from powerful tycoons to alleged financiers of terrorism. Rory Lancman, one of the law's sponsors, says England should "really take a look at how its courts are being misused by foreigners, and the impact that's having on citizens of other countries". The criticism stems mainly from a series of English lawsuits targeting Americans investigating alleged terrorist financing. Sweet & Maxwell, the British legal publisher, says the number of English libel cases involving allegations relating to terrorism rose from three in 2005-6 to eight in 2006-7, even though the total number of defamation actions fell from 74 to 64. In perhaps the most high-profile case of the past few years, the author Rachel Ehrenfeld lost a 2005 action brought by Khalid bin Mahfouz, a Saudi Arabian businessman whose family she accused in a book of sponsoring al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups. The High Court in London found for Mr bin Mahfouz in part because 23 copies of Ms Ehrenfeld's book had been bought in England and because the first chapter of it was available online. Critics of the English system say libel tourists exploit rules heavily weighted towards claimants, allowing them to win cases in London they would lose in the US. Unlike in America, the burden in an English libel case is on the defendant to prove their allegations are true. A second criticism is that London courts are too ready to take jurisdiction both over plaintiffs who have few links to England, and over publications that barely register in the country. In February Iceland's Kaupthing Bank won an apology and damages from Ekstra Bladet, a Danish newspaper. Kaupthing had argued that a number of the paper's articles in both Danish and English were downloaded and read in England and Wales. But libel tourism is not merely an English phenomenon. Other jurisdictions are accused of providing even readier forums for roving defamation claimants. Both Ireland and Northern Ireland have become hotbeds of libel litigation, due in part to the high payouts available Paul Tweed, an Irish libel lawyer who has acted for singers Britney Spears and Jennifer Lopez, says he has US celebrity clients who "just want an apology" they cannot secure at home. This raises the question of whether libel tourism is partly sustained by the US stance of making it almost impossible for public figures to sue successfully –– even when they have legitimate grievances. So, despite the new act in New York, libel judgments in countries with tight rules are likely to continue echoing around the world. They are a chastening reminder to writers that the ease of electronic publication and retailing has made defamation a global business. As Ms Tyler, Mr Akhmetov's lawyer, puts it: "It's no longer your news stand that contains the libel. It's accessible everywhere internationally." |
|
DAYENU –– IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ENOUGH
Posted by Bernard J. Shapiro, April 2, 2008. |
|
Dear Friends of Israel: Like most of you, I am frustrated, angry and depressed over the actions of the Israeli government. We must, however, get over the depression and then use our anger to spur ourselves to greater action on behalf of Israel. EIN BREIRA. In that spirit I offer the following chant or song to sing at demonstrations (slightly abridged from the popular song sung at Passover). Sing the traditional Dayanu, and then the new resistence against the deportation of Jews from Eretz Yisrael Dayanu. Please distribute to your friends for their family Seder this year as widely as possible. With Love of Israel |
|
TO THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT OF OLMERT, BARAK, LIVNI AND PERES
If you had collaborated with enemy to get elected to office,
If you had collaborated with the enemy and not given away our Sacred Land and Holy Places,
If you had collaborated with the enemy, given away our Sacred Land and Holy Places; and not divided the People of Israel setting brother against brother,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and Holy Places; divided the People of Israel; and not beaten and abused women and children,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and Holy Places, divided the People of Israel; beaten and abused women and children; and not suppressed our freedom of speech,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and Holy Places; divided the People of Israel beaten women and children; suppressed our freedom of speech and not endangered our water supply,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and
Holy Places; divided the People of Israel; beaten women and children;
suppressed our freedom of speech; endangered our water supply and not
released terrorist murderers into our midst,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and
Holy Places; divided the People of Israel; beaten women and children;
suppressed our freedom of speech; endangered our water supply,
released terrorist murderers into our midst and not surrendered our
strategic mountains that protect us from attack,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land
and Holy Places; divided the People of Israel; beaten women and
children; suppressed our freedom of speech; endangered our water
supply; released terrorist murderers into our midst; surrendered our
strategic mountains; and not created a Palestinian State dedicated to
the destruction of Israel,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and Holy Places; divided the People of Israel; beaten women and children; suppressed our freedom of speech; endangered our water supply; released terrorist murderers into our midst; surrendered our strategic mountains; created a Palestinian State and not broken G-d's Covenant with Abraham,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and
Holy Places; divided the People of Israel; beaten women and children;
suppressed our freedom of speech; endangered our water supply;
released terrorist murderers into our midst; surrendered our strategic
mountains; created a Palestinian State, broken G-d's Covenant with
Abraham and not defamed religious Jews and their TORAH,
If you had collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and
Holy Places; divided the People of Israel; beaten women and children;
suppressed our freedom of speech; endangered our water supply;
released terrorist murderers into our midst; surrendered our strategic
mountains; created a Palestinian State, broken G-d's Covenant with
Abraham, defamed religious Jews and their TORAH and not jeopardized
Jewish rule in Jerusalem,
TO THE ISRAELI GOVERNMENT OF OLMERT, BARAK, LIVNI AND PERES: You have done all of these things. You have collaborated with the enemy; given away our Sacred Land and Holy Places; divided the People of Israel; beaten women and children; suppressed our freedom of speech; endangered our water supply; released terrorist murders into our midst; surrendered our strategic mountains; created a Palestinian State; broken G-D's Covenant with Abraham; defamed religious Jews and their TORAH and even jeopardized Jewish rule in Jerusalem. DAYENU! WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH OF YOUR RULE! BY YOUR ACTIONS YOU HAVE FORFEITED ANY CLAIM TO LEGITIMACY. DAYENU! "FOR ZION'S SAKE I WILL NOT HOLD MY PEACE, AND FOR JERUSALEM'S SAKE I WILL NOT REST" Bernard J. Shapiro is in the Freeman Center for Strategic Studies
|
|
AMERICA'S COALITION CONFUSION SUPPORTS THOSE WHO ATTACKED TWIN TOWERS AND NOT THOSE IRAN /SYRIA OCCUPIED
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, April 2, 2008. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared March 31, 2008 in the Jerusalem
Post
|
|
A core question arises from last weekend's Arab League summit in Damascus. Boycotted by half the league's members, the conference demonstrated the depth of Egyptian and Saudi opposition to Iran's rise to prominence in the Arab world. So too, Iranian Foreign Minister Manouchehr Mottaki's ostentatious participation at the summit showed the strength of Iran's strategic ties with Syria. The question that arises from the summit is if Egypt and Saudi Arabia are willing to discard even the semblance of Arab unity in order to make clear their opposition to Iran, why do they support Hamas? Hamas is an Iranian proxy. It receives its arms, training and orders from Teheran. Its leaders reside in Syria. Given their open opposition to Iran, and their increasingly open opposition to Syria as Iran's client, wouldn't it make more sense –– from their perspective –– to boycott Hamas? The reason that Egypt and Saudi Arabia support Hamas in spite of its client relationship with Teheran is that for Egypt and Saudi Arabia, support for Palestinian terrorists trumps opposition to Iran. If they are forced to choose between fighting Iran and collaborating with Iran in support of Palestinian terrorists, they will always choose the latter. This is why they are spearheading negotiations between Fatah and Hamas towards the reestablishment of a Fatah-Hamas unity government. This is why Egypt enables Hamas and Iran to use its territory as their weapons supply route. Egypt and Saudi Arabia think supporting the Palestinians is more important than fighting Iran because the Palestinians fight Israel. As the heads of the so-called "moderate Arab" camp, Egypt and Saudi Arabia hate the Jews more than they fear the Iranians. The central question then for policymakers in Washington who are
trying to deploy a successful strategy for preventing Iran from
acquiring nuclear weaponsand asserting regional predominance is how
can the Palestinian war with Israel be defused so that the "moderate"
Arab states will be forced to join them in confronting Iran?
THE CONSENSUS answer that the US has come up with is to pressure Israel to make massive concessions to the Palestinians. It is argued that such concessions will appease not just the Palestinians, but more importantly, they will appease the US's "moderate" Arab supporters in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. As this thinking goes, if Israel can be forced to cough up big enough concessions quickly enough, then the Palestinians will quiet down and the Egyptians and Saudis will be sufficiently satisfied with the "progress" being made to direct their attentions to confronting Iran. This argument was elucidated this week by Democratic Senator and presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton in an interview with the Jewish Exponent. Clinton claimed that the Oslo negotiating process between the PLO and Israel which her husband embraced as his central Middle East policy from 1993 through 2000 brought levels of violence down between Israel and the Palestinians and so engendered regional stability. In her words, "I think what we did in the '90s was beneficial in a strategic way and led to a period where, at times, there were no attacks being made, nosuicide bombings and no deaths." She then went on to criticize the Bush administration which during its first term in office did not pressure Israel to restart negotiations towards Palestinian statehood with the PLO. Clinton added that she would consider opening negotiations with Hamas if she is elected president. Clinton's argument is notable for two reasons. First, it accurately reflects not only her view, but the view now being pushed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice in her bimonthly visits to Israel. As she made apparent in
her visit to Israel this week, Rice believes that the only way to reach an agreement is for Israel to empower Fatah and give Hamas a pass. So too, in her clear support for Egypt's negotiations with Hamas, Rice shows that the Bush administration is already holding indirect negotiations with Hamas.
THE SECOND reason that Clinton's argument is notable is because it has been so obviously disproven by reality. During the years that her husband was applying massive pressure on Israel to appease the Palestinians, terror levels against Israel eclipsed anything Israel had seen since the 1950s. In the 15 years which preceded the 1993 Oslo accord, 216 Israelis were murdered in terrorist attacks. In the seven years of the Oslo peace process, 286 Israelis were killed. Indeed, it was only in 1994, when Israel was first transferring territory to PLO control and the Palestinian Authority was building its armies that Israel suffered its first suicide bombing. During the six years of the Palestinian uprising from 1987-1993, 172 Israelis were killed. During the first six years of the Palestinian terror war against Israel which Oslo produced, more than 1,100 Israelis were killed. Violence levels dropped not because of peace talks, but because of Israeli offensive operations against the Palestinians. As Yasser Arafat told Palestinian audiences throughout the 1990s,
his goal in the Oslo process was to gain the military and political
means to continue his war against Israel. Arafat's confidante Faisal
Husseini made this Palestinian perspective explicit with the outbreak
of the Palestinian terror war in September 2000. Speaking to the Arab
media, Husseini said that for the Palestinians, the Oslo process was
a "Trojan horse" against Israel. They came to Israel bearing the
promise of peace with the premeditated aim of using Israel's
willingness to make peace as a means of launching a new round of war
whose aim was the political and military destruction of the Jewish
state.
THE OSLO process which Clinton praises and Rice apes with her Annapolis process brought the Palestinian issue, which had been buried throughout much of the 1980s to the forefront of the pan-Arab social consciousness and political agenda. This it did to the detriment of other salient issues like Iran's steps towards regional hegemony, Egyptian and Saudi repression of liberal forces in their countries, and, during the 1990s, Saddam Hussein's systematic breach of UN Security Council sanctions. Here it is worth noting that the pinnacle of US success in building an Arab coalition against a rogue state came in 1990. The Gulf War against Saddam Hussein, which saw the entire Arab world united with the US against a
fellow-Arab regime, came not in the midst of a Palestinian-Israeli peace process. Itcame when there were no diplomatic negotiations whatsoever between Israel and the Palestinians or between Israel and any state.
THERE ARE two principal reasons that the advent of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations weakened pan-Arab interest in working with the US against common threats. First, because the Oslo process empowered terrorists, terror attacks increased. Each terror attack received massive, supportive coverage in the Arab media. Second, since the Oslo process placed terrorists in charge of Gaza, Judea and Samaria, the Palestinians found themselves ruled by murderers who had no interest in economic development and opposed liberalization and democracy. As a consequence, the Palestinian economic situation went from one of sustained growth to one of massive depredation. The footage of Palestinian terror attacks and Palestinian economic privation shown daily in the pan-Arab media eclipsed coverage of every other issue. And since the US is viewed as Israel's ally, it engendered unprecedented levels of anti-Americanism in the Arab world. So if the Palestinian-centric model embraced by the US to build an Arab coalition against Iran works precisely to undermine such a coalition by bringing to the forefront the one issue that the Arabs and the Iranians agree on, what would an alternative model of policymaking look like? The Achilles heel of the US's current strategy is its reliance on Egyptian and Saudi support. Since Egypt and Saudi Arabia prefer fighting Israel to confronting Iran, a better policy for confronting Iran would be to base a US coalition on states that prefer fighting Iran to fighting Israel. Regionally, Israel, Lebanon and Iraq fit this model.
IF THE US were to shore up these allies and stiffen their resolve to confront Iran rather than divert its attention to a policy which simply serves to galvanize Arab attention and energies against Israel and away from Iran, the US would pose a more imposing threat to Iran. It would also push the Iranian threat to the forefront of political discourse in Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Such a revised policy would involve not only shoring up Israeli, Iraqi and Lebanese willingness to confront Iran and Syria. It would also involve scaling back US involvement in the Palestinian conflict with Israel. Such a scaling back could only be successful if at the same time as it disengaged from the negotiations process between Israel and Fatah, Washington also gave Israel a green light to defeat Hamas in Gaza. Such an Israeli operation would both end the specter of an Iranian takeover of Judea and Samaria and remove Iran's ability to reignite the Palestinian conflict at will. Obviously, to advance such a policy option, the US would have to confront an Israeli government that has embraced the incorrect logic of the current failed strategy of winning Arab support for confronting Iran by forcing Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians. So too, it would have to confront an Iraqi government that is afraid to confront Iran, and a UN that seems to have abandoned its previous willingness to acknowledge Syria's culpability for the 2005 assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. It would also have to ensure that Israel's military defeat at the hands of Iran and Hizbullah in 2006 will not repeat itself. That defeat enabled Hizbullah to reassert its control over south Lebanon and acquire an even more sophisticated arsenal than it had two years ago. Replacing the current failed strategy of squeezing Israel in the hopes of winning the support of unreliable Arab allies for confronting Iran will no doubt be a controversial move. It will win the Bush administration no fast friends in Europe or on American university campuses. It will even anger the Israeli Left which now sues for peace with Syria. The only advantage to be had from basing America's strategy towards Iran on building a US-led anti-Iranian coalition comprised of states that prefer to fight Iran than to fight Israel is that such a policy has the potential of actually ending Iran's increased domination of the Middle East and of preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes." Contact her at haze@rcn.com. |
|
TIMES PRETENDS ABBAS NOT LIKE HAMAS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 2, 2008. |
|
HIZBULLAH READY FOR RENEWED WAR Hizbullah has completely recovered. It is ready to resume war. The IDF may be waiting for that, rather than fully engaging Hamas, now (IMRA, 3/11). If Hizbullah attacks, Hamas probably would, too. Then what will Israel have gained by sparing Hamas now? How will this work out? Will Hizbullah expect UNIFIL to let it by and not let the IDF by? Or will it drive UNIFIL out, first? BARRY CHAMISH LOSES LIBEL SUIT BY ITAMAR BEN-GVIR Mr. Chamish demonstrated in court that the many actions taken by Mr. Ben-Gvir, supposedly in the name of the Right, never worked. They made the Right appear extreme and gave the government an excuse for appeasing the Arabs. Chamish listed Ben-Gvir's offensive acts, so readers could judge for themselves that they more likely were part of the government's dirty tricks against the Right. Indeed, the secret police lent an apartment to Ben-Gvir, who rarely was arrested and never convicted for crimes that usually get right-wingers convicted. Although he was a student, Ben-Gvir always had funds for suing critics. Chamish concluded from that evidence that Ben-Gvir was a secret service agent. (Wouldn't you have? Perhaps Chamish should have been more cautious and said just that Ben-Gvir acts like a secret service agent. Then it would not be libel.) The court convicted Chamish for having made the accusation without proof. It fined Chamish, although Ben-Gvir suffered no damages. It refused to hear Chamish's appeal, which, Chamish advises, included Ben-Gvir's admission that the secret service had hired him at some time (Chamish, 3/10). Prof. Steven Plaut was convicted of libel against a Holocaust-denying professor, but won on appeal. Nevertheless, a fine was levied on him, too. Plaut's original conviction was by an Arab judge who made her prejudice against patriotic Jews explicit. Plaut explains that the justice system is run by far leftists who indulge in their bias, rather than rule on the law and precedent. He does not allow for Chamish having been subjected to the same type of injustice. TIMES PRETENDS ABBAS NOT LIKE HAMAS Many examples show Hamas indoctrinating Gazans with Jew-hate and for war to the finish. Abbas is making efforts to reduce bigotry and is restrained. No examples cited (NY Times, 4/1, A1). The sources could cite many examples. The Times deceives readers, in order to make Abbas seem like a peace partner. That gives the anti-Zionist paper an opportunity to demand that Israel make concessions to the Arabs. THE UNO AS A PLACE WHERE AT LEAST THEY TALK Israel finds the monthly Security Council monthly briefings on the Mideast, are just a "roasting" of Israel. The Israeli Ambassador expressed Israel's "gratitude to the assassins of Damascus and the butchers of Sudan, both beacons of human rights, for the expert presentations on terror and genocide." The Palestinian Arab UNO observer said that although the Security Council does not take action, at least people can air their views. Meanwhile, a Holocaust-surviving Member of Congress asked Switzerland to rescind its nomination of an "antisemitic apologist for dictators," Jean Ziegler, as adviser to the UN Human Rights Council. UN Watch called Ziegler a supporter of Robert Mugabe and Fidel Castro and a 'co-founder of the Gadhafi Prize for Human Rights." (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 3/26, p.7.) The UNO used to be thought of as a place where opposing sides would talk rather than fight. They do talk. But they also fight. The purpose of the UNO speeches mostly is for indecent countries to bash decent countries. There is no shortage of airing PLO propaganda, in or out of the UNO, but a shortage of facts. Did you think Switzerland was one of the decent countries? Not if it nominates Ziegler. Ziegler's reports to the UNO constantly defamed Israel. DEALING WITH HAMAS An Op-Ed in the NY Sun alleged "two sensible alternatives" to dealing with Hamas: "bludgeon the Hamas into submission ... or sit down and talk with it." A letter protested that terrorist organizations never honor their negotiated commitments, so why negotiate? A negotiated ceasefire would allow it to re-arm and then break the ceasefire, prepared to fight harder. Anyway, Hamas takes its orders from Iran, which does not negotiate sincerely, either (3/26). Negotiations with Iran over nuclear development, about which Iran had secret programs that broke its commitments, vindicate the letter writer. ISRAELI LEFTIST TALI FAHIMA Fahima paid a condolence call on the family of the slain terrorist who murdered eight yeshiva students. Fahima expressed willingness to do the same for the victims' families, but feared being attacked by them. Fahima condemned Israel and has been convicted of aiding terrorists (IMRA, 3/11). Condolence over a mass-murderer? What kind of ethics or lack of sanity grips Fahima? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
ISRAEL CALCULATED HOW MANY ISRAELIS MAY DIE BECAUSE CHECKPOINTS DROPPED TO PLEASE RICE
Posted by Sergio Tessa (HaDaR), April 2, 2008. |
|
"Calculated risks" says Ehud Barak. Did he calculate how many Jewish children it is worth to sacrifice to please whomever? ... This article is called "Analysis: Taking calculated risks for Abbas"
and it was written by Yaakov Katz and it appeared
in The Jerusalem Post
This comes from Dr. Aaron Lerner from IMRA, who commented on this article: The term "calculated risk" has been featured in reports of the Oslo experiment from the very first day, but it should hardly provide comfort. |
|
At noon on Monday, IDF troops arrived at the Rimonim checkpoint near the settlement of Kochav Hashahar and began taking it apart, piece by piece. Less than five hours later, and a mere 15 kilometers away, a Palestinian was shot dead after he tried to stab a group of hitchhikers outside the settlement of Shilo. Beyond serving as ammunition for the settlement movement in its campaign against the goodwill gestures Defense Minister Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians on Sunday, the sequence of events demonstrates the risks involved in altering the tight security envelope the IDF has succeeded in creating in the West Bank in recent years. The removal of the Rimonim checkpoint –– which connects Ramallah with Jericho –– on Monday has created a number of headaches for the IDF's Central Command and its commander, Maj.-Gen. Gadi Shamni. From a military perspective, the checkpoints are a crucial tool in the war against terror, with troops catching Palestinians on a daily basis trying to cross them carrying weapons or explosives. Officials close to Barak admitted on Monday that the lifting of the roadblock was accompanied by a number of security risks. But, they said, the risks were "calculated." As demonstrated by the 35-page report that Barak presented US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice with on Sunday, Israel's primary objective with the gestures is to bolster PA President Mahmoud Abbas and his government in Ramallah. This is being done in face of the growing Hamas threat in the West Bank and the terror group's takeover of the Gaza Strip in June. Bolstering Abbas comes with a degree of danger. The lifting of 50 dirt roadblocks, as well as the Rimonim Checkpoint, will allow Palestinians to travel on roads they did not have access to in the past. Weapons smuggling will most likely increase, and there is a fear in the IDF that drive-by-shootings will as well. "The Palestinian people in the West Bank only care about one thing, and that is having a better quality of life," a top IDF general explained on Sunday regarding the need for the gestures. "The hope is that once their lives improve they will begin to appreciate Abbas more and Hamas less." While this tactic has a chance at working, Israel's recent decision to impose sanctions on the Gaza Strip has so far failed. According to the general, the cuts to electricity, fuel and raw material supplies to Gaza have not only failed to turn the people there against Hamas, but have instead had the opposite effect, bringing about an increase in the people's hatred for Israel. This is where the gestures come into play. Israel does not require intelligence briefings to take note of Hamas's growing presence in the West Bank, not just militarily but mostly through the social services it provides the people. So the IDF is bringing government ministers to meet with their Palestinian counterparts –– to get them to create new joint initiatives, like the establishment of a Palestinian National Insurance Institute, which will be able to provide social services in the West Bank instead of Hamas's Dawa institutions. Fatah, a top Israeli defense official said Monday, is still perceived as being corrupt in the eyes of the Palestinian public, and it is likely that in the next elections Hamas would win again. For this reason, the chairman of the Palestinian elections committee recently said during a meeting with Israeli officials that his recommendation to Abbas was to stave off elections for as long as possible. Sergio Tessa can be reached at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: TENSION IN THE NORTH
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 2, 2008. |
|
A report by a 'top military intelligence officer" to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee yesterday included a warning that Hezbollah is getting ready for new violence along the border with Israel. A "change in preparedness" south of the Litani River has been detected, which UNIFIL is unable to prevent. While UNIFIL monitors open areas, it is prohibited from entering southern Lebanese villages and towns without coordination with the Lebanese army, and it is precisely in these areas that Hezbollah is increasing operations, with operatives dressed as civilians. (The ultimate outcome of this situation is painfully easy to predict, as we take on Hezbollah operatives and are condemned for hitting "civilians.") This report clarifies Defense Minister Barak's motives in touring the northern border yesterday and making a statement that "Israel is the strongest country in the region, and I wouldn't recommend that anyone provoke us. Hezbollah is becoming stronger, but so are we. The IDF is prepared for all eventualities. We watch the pastoral calm, and we know that other things are seething beneath the surface." ~~~~~~~~~~ While, today, al-Quds al-Arabi, in London, has reported that Damascus is summoning its reserves and concentrating its forces along the Lebanese border in anticipation of an Israeli attack on Hezbollah and Syria. This has been denied by a member of Syrian's National Security Committee, which says Hezbollah is quite capable of taking care of itself. None the less, Barak is taking it all seriously enough so that he has cancelled a trip out of the country. And Deputy Chief of Staff Maj. Dan Harel said today that "anyone who attempts to attack Israel should bear in mind that the response will be harsh and painful." Both, however, at one and the same time, have indicated that nothing is imminent. The paper additionally said that Hezbollah is currently refraining from exacting revenge for the murder of Mughniyeh at this time, so as to not give Israel an "excuse" to attack. If this is true, it would be a significant indicator of Israeli deterrence. ~~~~~~~~~~ I offer here two cautionary notes regarding not believing everything you hear (or read): In an interview published yesterday in Al Aayam, a Palestinian paper, Khaled Mashaal, political head of Hamas in Damascus says that Hamas accepts a state defined by '67 lines. Not spoken, but implied here is that Hamas accepts Israel within the Green Line. His source for this is the Prisoners Document, which was drafted in Israeli prison by Hamas and Fatah prisoners, calling for a Palestinian state on all the territories occupied in 1967, with Jerusalem as its capital. However (and this is a huge 'however'), the document says nothing about accepting the right of Israel to exist within those '67 lines. ~~~~~~~~~~ The second incident involves WHO (the World Health Organization) of the UN. At a press conference yesterday in Jerusalem, Ambrogio Manenti, the head of WHO in Gaza and the West Bank, said that Israeli policy with regard to bringing Gazans who require medical treatment into Israel was "inhumane." Manenti's charge is that sick Gazans have to wait so long for security clearance that they die before they can be brought in. Col. Nir Press, commander of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration, responded to these charges, saying that they were "one-sided, inaccurate and misleading." He pointed out that while stringent security checks were necessary because on occasion there are attempts to smuggle suicide bombers into Israel using the ruse of illness, over 90% of those requesting treatment in Israeli hospitals receive clearance. And the other 10% is provided with an opportunity to utilize a shuttle across Israel to go into Jordan for treatment. To illustrate the problem, Manenti had highlighted five cases of Gazans who had allegedly died waiting for clearance. Press said, however, that all five had clearance to come into Israel and two in fact had received treatment in Israel; the others had been held up by internal factors inside of Gaza and not by lack of clearance. In 2007, 7,226 permits were granted to sick Palestinians to travel to Israel, an increase of over 50% from 2006 when 4,754 were allowed in. in the first quarter of 2008, 2,000 ill persons from Gaza have already been brought to Israeli hospitals. I recently wrote the story of premature twins of a Palestinian mother from Gaza, in Barzelai hospital in Ashkelon, who were brought into the bomb shelter when a Katyusha was shot near the hospital from Gaza. ~~~~~~~~~~ accreditatio Yet one other concession that Barak has indicated willingness to consider, at the prodding of Rice, is the granting of permission for the PA to monitor the Gaza side of the Erez and Karni crossings into Israel, if the violence stops. In this, he is would be on a collision course with the IDF, which is adamantly opposed. Two officers have spoken out: OC Southern Command Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant and Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories Maj.-Gen. Yussef Mishlev. As one defense official rightly explained it, "How can we let Abbas deploy forces there while Hamas is in control of Gaza?" Indeed, how can we? There is the suggestion that even Barak, who said it would be "considered," knows we cannot. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
WHERE IS AMERICAN JEWRY
Posted by Elyakim HaEtzni, April 1, 2008 |
|
Complaints we have in Israel against American Jews are not directed at the various George Soroses or Noam Chomskys, or at those Jews uninterested in the fate of the Jews in the Jewish state. We address our cries to those for whom Eretz Yisrael still holds a place in their hearts –– and to their organizations and institutions. We ask them the following: Where are you in our hour of need? Don't you know that if we sink, the ground beneath your own feet will quake? Have you not yet learned that the very fact that the Jews have their own country has buttressed your status in the Diaspora? Until this very day you regret your silence during the Holocaust, which derived from your great admiration for President Franklin D. Roosevelt and from the fear of being accused of dual loyalties. Today when you weigh those fears against the annihilation of the millions, you see matters in their proper proportions. Yet today your conscience is called upon once more to make a similar decision –– albeit one much simpler, for today's America is not like the anti-Semitic America of that time. Don't you understand the danger looming over Israel? The entire world, led by the United States, is hunting Israel down to wrest from it Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria, the Land of the Bible –– its entire raison d'etre as a Jewish state. Don't you see how the entire Negev and the country's south are being shelled or are under threat of shelling from rockets and missiles as a result of the Gaza withdrawal, the destruction of dozens of settlements and the transformation of 10,000 Jews to refugee status? Did their outcry touch your heart? Do you hear today's cries coming from Sderot and Ashkelon? Don't you know that while the rockets are falling in the south, Syria and Hizbullah in Lebanon are preparing an attack from the north, and that at this moment tens of thousands of their missiles are aimed at the heart of our country? Take note that only the center of the country still enjoys calm. The only reason for that is that the army controls Judea and Samaria, and that is because there are hundreds of Jewish towns there ("the settlements," in the language of our enemies). And now, the United States is pressuring your Jewish brethren in Israel to dispense with even that defense. President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have sworn to establish a Palestinian terror state right next to Tel Aviv, Netanya, Hadera and Haifa before year's end –– and toward that end, expel 300,000 of our Jewish brothers and sisters. And faced with all this, you remain silent? Worse, most of your organizations support this anti-Jewish, pro-Arab policy! Today, missiles are flying from the ruins of Gush Katif and landing in the Negev. On the day that missiles are being launched from the ruins of the Jewish towns in Samaria, please don't say, "We didn't see. We didn't hear. We didn't know." You knew very well! The Annapolis Conference, in which a blind, stumbling, defeatist Israeli government open to American pressure knowingly consented to commit national suicide, occurred in your country. Rice, whose total identification with Palestinian interests is patently obvious, is applauded by your audiences. And you call President Bush, the man with the "vision" of a Palestinian state that will endanger every city and village in Israel, "the greatest friend Israel ever had in the White House." You say this when in reality (and history will be the judge) he is the first president openly and explicitly raising the demand and exerting heavy pressure to establish in our midst a devil, a dragon, a dybbuk –– in the form of an Islamic, Arabic, radical terrorist state called by the false name of "Palestine." That state would transform every day in the life of the Jewish state to Hell. And all this for the sake of a fictitious people and a fictitious land that never existed throughout history. Other voices in the Republican camp, namely Vice President Dick Cheney, senators and congressmen, have not enjoyed support from most of American Jewry, and have subsequently become silent. Quite the opposite, countless Jewish organizations have been supporting the Palestinian agenda. Many Jews in America have good reason to be embarrassed that the only organized American community supporting the rights of the Jewish people to its historic homeland in Judea and Samaria and its eternal capital, Jerusalem, consists of non-Jews. They are the Evangelical Christians. For Jews faithful to their patrimony, some Christian churches are more open today than many Jewish temples. Their organizations and media are more open to nationalistic Jews than are the mainstream Jewish establishment. They visit Hebron, Shiloh and Beit El –– places that many Jewish leaders stay away from. Everyone talks about the political power of American Jewry, but from here we see only the weakness and lockstep obedience to every presiding administration. We ask ourselves, "Why do Christian pastors have no inhibitions about criticizing their president regarding his policy toward Israel, while Jewish rabbis wouldn't dare?" Today, money is not the critical factor. It is political pressure capable of meeting the enormous Arab pressure. Regarding your historic omission during the Holocaust, when you failed to exercise your power as Queen Esther did in her time (ignoring the risk to her own life), you have tried to atone with money. Yet all the money in the world cannot bring back to life a single Jewish child. Even today, it is not money that can save us, but rather the political power that you are afraid to exercise. It looks like today, when the American Jewish community is flourishing as never before and enjoying the height of acceptance by the public at large, you do not feel secure enough; hence you are doing the only safe thing –– swimming with the flow and cheering on the regime, even at the expense of your besieged brethren in the Holy Land. I conclude with two requests: First, that those Jews who support the Palestinian line should at least not emphasize their Jewishness, and add the weight of their "Jewish witnessing" to the brunt of pressure being applied on us. Second, that the not insignificant number of Jews who, like Mordechai in the Scroll of Esther, do not bow down before the president of the United States when he sets out to replace the vision of the prophets with the "vision" of Palestine, should organize themselves and establish an organization paralleling the Jewish protest organizations that in Israel face off with the government and block with their bodies the slippery slide down the Palestinian slope. Today, like the air we breathe, we need an organized Jewish political force in the United States that, together with our non-Jewish friends in America and the Jewish nationalist camp in Israel, can breach the siege that is closing us off. Attorney Elyakim Haetzni, among Hebron's original settlers, is a prominent publicist for Eretz Yisrael causes. Contact him at ehaetzni@netvision.net.il This article appeared in The Jewish Press Send comments to Zvi Katzover, mayor of Kiryat Arba, at Rivka@kiryat4.org.il. |
|
PALESTINIAN POLITICS: ONWARD AND DOWNWARD
Posted by Barry Rubin, April 1, 2008. |
|
A recent Washington Post column, entitled, "Let's Help the Good Guys in the West Bank," provided what it thought of as good news: "Fortunately, there is a smart and honest leader of these forces: Salam Fayyad, an apolitical economist (with a doctorate from the University of Texas) who is prime minister of the Palestinian Authority." The tip-off is the word apolitical which, in this case, means: completely lacking any political base or armed support and thus totally ineffectual. Unfortunately, Fayyad is not Palestinian politics' future. Those who really control Fatah, shape Palestinian public opinion, and carry guns aren't impressed by Fayyad's diploma. For many in the West, moderation is like gravity: it's impossible to reject. Yet that's precisely what Palestinian politics do. Three factors fuel this trend. First, Fatah and the PA continue to be corrupt, incompetent, and incapable of self-reform. Second, given the cult of violence and total victory dominating Palestinian political culture Hamas is inevitably seen as heroic because it fights and rejects compromise. Based on underestimating Israel (always seen on the verge of collapse) and overestimating their own forces (heroic martyrs aided by history and deity), they expect to win. Compromise is treason; moderation is cowardice. This is the daily fare of Palestinian ideology and politics, purveyed by leaders, clerics, media, and schools. Abbas tells his people and others that, as he said recently to an Islamic summit, Palestinians "are facing a campaign of annihilation" by Israel. The U.S. State Department merely calls this "overheated political rhetoric," not comprehending that such talk by Abbas incites terrorism and forecloses his own options. It's easy to justify violence but hard to rationalize making peace with those you say are committing genocide against you. That's why the PA does things like letting "imprisoned" terrorists who murdered two Israeli hikers to "escape." Every such terrorist is seen by both the PA and public opinion as a hero. Third, due to its own weakness and the strong political culture it never challenges, the current leadership cannot make peace. They know, contrary to Western claims, that negotiating a political solution would destroy them, and act accordingly. For all these reasons, Fatah has been working harder to negotiate a deal with Hamas than it has to fight it in Gaza. In addition, Fatah is undergoing a radicalization process which may not displace Abbas but will install his successor. Public opinion is also more extreme, with support for terrorism zooming upward. Fatah both heeds and feeds the trend. Ahmad Dahbour, former high-ranking PA Culture Ministry official, now top writer for the official PA newspaper, explains: "The treacherous Zionist enemy will never permit us to lessen our revenge towards him, or to stray from our confrontation against him, until he is wiped off this land, which is saturated with the blood of the martyrs." What is significant is not the language's bloodthirstiness but its open use from someone at the heart of "moderate" institutions. Both Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and the PA newspaper defined the killer of eight Jewish students in Jerusalem as one of those heroic martyrs. We're now seeing the birth of a new Fatah all right but not the one heralded by such people as former British prime minister Tony Blair or Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice but rather an even more extremist version. It's coming from those who wield guns not pens, namely the Al-Aqsa Brigades. Contrary to much reportage, it is not an "offshoot" but essential part of Fatah. Its leader, Marwan Barghuti, would be Fatah and PA head within two years if not in an Israeli prison for past terrorist activities. The brigades demand Fayyad's firing and replacement by, "A new government that would not abandon the armed struggle." Like others in the Fatah leadership their strategy is not to fight but to ally with Hamas. Despite Hamas's bloody expulsion of Fatah from Gaza, killing Israelis wipes out all sins in Palestinian politics. That's the kind of thinking that makes the movement so impossible to change or to move toward peace. Both Barghuti and Hamas's political front-man, Ismail Haniyya, run ahead of Abbas in the polls. The main thing keeping Fayyad in office is not honesty or moderation but because removing him would kiss good-bye to almost $7 billion in Western aid, which will no doubt be squandered or worse. Worse means that much money, like the U.S. arms abandoned by Fatah in fleeing Gaza, could end up in Hamas's hands. Or it will pass to Abbas's successor. One reason why many Westerners misunderstand the conflict and countries adopt ridiculously irrelevant policies is ignorance of how extremism is attractive in its own right. After all, if people are all alike and universally pragmatic, Palestinians must want to end the conflict and get an independent state through negotiation and compromise. Why go on suffering? No "rational" person would act that way. Therefore, many in the West reach one of two conclusions:
These are articles of unshakeable faith, impermeable to evidence or experience. Whenever Palestinian leaders reject peace it must be because they weren't offered enough. Westerners think Fatah and the PA merely need raise Palestinian living standards and get a state to show their people Hamas is a failure, the PA is a success. Naturally, everyone prefers success. Well, it depends on how you measure success. As horrible as it sounds, in Palestinian politics success is still measured by the number of Israelis killed and by the ability to assert that one has never given up the chance for total victory and Israel's disappearance some day. Sad, regrettable, but also true. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told Abbas, "We must keep our eye on what we're trying to achieve." In U.S. diplomatic circles this passes for tough talk. But what Abbas is trying to achieve is quite different from what Rice wants. Given the strategic realities, Israel must deal with the PA and try to keep Fatah in power on the West Bank. But there should be no illusions. Solving the conflict won't happen. Putting it atop of Western governments' agenda, blaming Israel for Palestinian intransigence, or romanticizing Fatah and PA is a big mistake. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press, August 2007). His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof. Rubin's columns can be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com |
|
WAFA SULTAN IN HIDING
Posted by Avodah, April 1, 2008. |
|
Wafa Sultan has been forced into hiding, after her appearance on Al
Jazeera prompted a death fatwa from a scholar of the "Religion of
Peace."
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) Dr. Wafa Sultan has been forced to go into hiding with her family following a fatwa (religious edict) from an Islamic scholar, according to Omedia. Sultan faces the fatwa following a recent debate on Al-Jazeera in which she challenged Egyptian Islamist Talat Rheim over Dutch cartoons of Mohammed, who Muslims revere as a prophet. Sultan argued that Denmark had the right to print the cartoons. Sultan joins a growing list of public critics of radical Islam facing death threats. Her supporters have asked the American public to join them in writing to the embassy of Qatar, the country which sponsors Al-Jazeera, as well as to United States President George Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, asking them to defend Sultan's right to free speech and personal safety. Listen to her on Muslims on video.
Click here.
Contact Avodah by email at avodah15@aol.com
|
|
TO MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS IN ISRAEL –– WHY AREN'T YOU OUT THERE PROTESTING?
Posted by Doris Wise Montrose, April 1, 2008. |
Dear Ones, Where were you when Condi's motorcade drove from the airport to Olmert's house? Why didn't you line the streets and throw rotten eggs at her limo? Why don't you have spray-painted sheets hanging from your balconies, telling her to go home, telling Olmert to step down? Don't email me that you're so upset, so shocked, so outraged that your country is giving up the checkpoints that protect you, when all you do is sit at your keyboard. That's what I do because I can't do anything else from the other side of the world. Granted, I'm not there and maybe I shouldn't be saying all this because I'm not there, BUT HELP ME OUT HERE. I have nothing to support, nothing to point to. How can I convince anyone that Jews will never give up "east" Jerusalem when you appear so complacent? How can I convince anyone that you are outraged at the constant attacks on Sderot, at the murders of our yeshiva boys, at anything at all –– when you don't get off your duffs and go outside to at least thumb your noses at Condi? I don't need to tell you, this is her 14th trip to your country to demand more and more concessions from you and to receive more and more false promises from Abu Mazen. Please, I beg you, stand in front of Olmert's house with a homemade sign that says the peace they're processing is the peace of the grave, that you WANT checkpoints to protect you, that you don't want to live next door to a Palestinian terror state. Make a sign that says America is
betraying Israel –– (See Caroline Glick's "Rice's Betrayal
Of Israel" in the March 26th Jewish Press) –– and
flaunt it in front of the American cameras there for the "grips and
grins."
IF YOU WOULD JUST DO SOMETHING, THEN I would have something to point to. THEN Olmert and Livni would have something to point to. They could tell Condoleezza Rice, "Geez, we'd like to help, but as you can see, the people are outraged; there is no popular support for these concessions you want from us." What is wrong with you people? You grieve and you go on. What's the world to think? They don't get your emails, they don't read your blog posts, they don't know that any of this bothers you at all. You are silent, you are invisible. If you're going to go down, must you go this quietly? Please don't sit in your apartment and wait for the Iranian nukes. Get rid of Olmert, get in front of the cameras. Do Something. Give me something to point to, something to support. (They can't arrest everybody, can they?) And of course –– {sigh} –– tell me if I'm out of line. With love for you and for Israel from the other side of the world, I remain, at your service,
Contact Doris Wise Montrose by email at doris@cjhsla.org
|
|
SHOULD NEWSPAPERS HIRE MORE MUSLIMS?; MAJOR POLITICAL TECHNIQUE OF THE U.S. 2007 ELECTION
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, April 1, 2008. |
|
FREE COUNTRIES STIFLE PROTEST? Dictatorships that sponsor Olympics exploit them to make foreigners' presence lend the regimes legitimacy. Tibetans and others have used the Olympics to be held in China as an opportunity to protest Chinese oppression. In Athens, where the Olympic torch starts forth, Tibetans have been arrested along the route. Some committed civil disobedience, by lying in the path of the torch relay. Others were arrested for displaying a banner calling for freeing Tibet, displaying it from a balcony (Paul Anst & Richard Spencer, NY Sun, 3/25, p.6). Does Greece bar the right to petition for grievances even when it does not interfere with other people's free exercise, just with their consciences? Sounds like Israel. ISRAEL GETS ITS MAN Israel just arrested near Tulkarm the terrorist it was sought for preparing the suicide attacker of a hotel in Israel. Israel had been seeking him or investigating since 2002. It may take years, but Israeli raids in the Judea-Samaria area supposedly controlled by Abbas yield perpetrators of past crimes (IMRA, 3/26). Abbas wants the raids to cease. He wants existing prisoners released and no punishment for criminals not yet arrested. And they think he opposes terrorism! POLLARD SHOWS OLMERT'S BAD FAITH The government of Israel has been claiming to support Pollard in every way and to be striving for his release, even before the present regime. By law, it is obliged to support his wife and himself financially and in other ways. Pollard says that nothing has been done. His wife is ill and impoverished. He wrote asking the government to indicate what sums it advanced to him, since he didn't receive any. The Prime Minister's office replied with a three-sentence note referring to the very generalized claims that Mr. Pollard was inquiring about. It was an insulting, indirect admission that the government has no evidence for its claims. Pollard now wonders whether money was appropriated but misallocated, in view of the government's known corruption (IMRA, 3/26). Some government actions, such as refusing to tell Pres. Bush, as getting Pollard clemency would require, that it wants Pollard out, and not sending the ambassador to visit the prisoner, indicate it fears his release. Prominent Israeli officials fumbled and betrayed his case from the start, letting him be the scapegoat for irritating the US. They would be embarrassed if he got out. SHOULD NEWSPAPERS HIRE MORE MUSLIMS? Yes, recommends Phillip Bennett, managing editor of the Washington Post. His reason is that most US readers don't know the basics of Islam. They get poor translations of key Arabic words, such as "jihad," as holy war, when it also means inner struggle. He assumes that Muslim reporters would be more accurate (rather than biased) and that non-Muslims reporters don't or can't report accurately. Both assumptions are naïve if not false. He got his supposedly corrected definition of jihad from an affiliate of C.A.I.R., an organization that defends Islamist groups. When Islamists talk about jihad, they almost always mean holy war and seldom mean inner struggle. Mr. Bennett was misled. He also has at his newspaper a poor definition of "Islamist" as just a political movement governed by Islamic law. The American people seem to have caught on to the basic meanings of these terms better than has Bennett and his newspaper (Daniel Pipes #842, 3/9). Wouldn't want Bennett doing the hiring of Muslim reporters. It would be like the US government rejecting Israeli translators of Arabic in favor of Muslims who deliberately mistranslate in order to favor jihad and who tip off Islamists. U.S. CRITICIZES ISRAELI COUNTER-TERRORISM US envoy Dayton expressed frustration over Israeli raids into the P.A. parts of Judea-Samaria. He complained that it impedes P.A. efforts against terrorism (IMR0A, 3/11). He means Israel should suffer attacks while the P.A. "tries?" He, like his predecessors, did not list those alleged efforts. I never heard of any efforts against terrorism. I have reported the extensive P.A. diplomacy and propaganda in favor of terrorism and the extensive US effort in support of the jihadists against Israel and its effort against Israeli self-defense and counter-terrorism. In that way, the US is part of the evil axis. THE MEANING OF ISRAEL'S CEASEFIRE Israel's Foreign Minister said Israel would not allow Hamas to choose when to attack and when to cease and regroup. Meanwhile, her government was arranging an informal ceasefire for Hamas. That would give Hamas the opportunity to cease and regroup, and then renew the attack at a time of its choice (IMRA, 3/11). So it happened. Hamas held back for a time, Israel held back, and then Hamas fired another 30 rockets. CEASEFIRE MYSTERIES On 3/11, a senior Israeli security officials confirmed that Israel and Hamas have agreed to a ceasefire arranged through Egypt. PM Olmert said it means that Israel is showing "restraint and strength." (IMRA, 3/11.) In another report from IMRA, Hamas denied any agreedment. Time after time, the Arab Muslims make unclear agreements that, when criticized, they claim don't exist or that the person making them is not authorized to do so. How do negotiators check those representatives' authority to make agreements? So long as one follows the rules of war, restraint is no virtue. It indicates weakness rather than strength. Is it a sign of "strength" that Israel now allows Hamas free reign to accumulate more rockets, so that when it resumes firing them, it can fire 50 a day instead of 30? Is it a sign of strength that Israel fails to eradicate Hamas? Hamas calls it a victory for "resistance." For example, Hamas claimed a military victory when Israeli forces withdrew from a recent incursion into Gaza, after killing more than a hundred of the enemy with almost no losses of its own. Israel withdrew because its leaders are not determined to win, and acquiesce to US demands to withdraw. MAJOR POLITICAL TECHNIQUE OF THE U.S. 2007 ELECTION Sen. McCain opposes his rivals' proposal to withdraw from the war. "How can they argue at the same time for the morally reprehensible abandonment of our responsibilities in Iraq?" (He was referring to the prospect of the jihadists taking over the country and purging millions who risked their lives to cooperate with us.) The Democratic National Committee (D.N.C.) replied, "John McCain's empty rhetoric today can't change the fact that he has steadfastly stood with Pres. Bush from day one and is now talking about keeping our troops in Iraq for 100 years." The jist of his full remarks is to cast some blame on McCain for favoring our entry into the war." (NY Sun, 3/27, p.4.) Whether it was a mistake to enter the war is a separate question from whether it would be a mistake to abandon it. The D.N.C. political technique here is to ignore the opponent's challenge by flinging irrelevant criticism at him, and never admit mistakes. It makes one wonder whether the replier, D.N.C. Chair Howard Dean, in this case, has a relevant answer and not just an over-simplified sound byte, and can refrain from nastiness (which is what an irrelevant implication of an opponent's bad faith is). Can Dean grasp the moral problem McCain raised? Unfortunately, Dean's tactic is common. Clinton and Obama do it to each other constantly. This makes their campaigns demeaning and disappointing. Will Clinton solve major problems when she is so petty? Can nasty Obama unite us? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
U.S. GOVERNMENT RECOGNIZES PALESTINIANS NOT THE ONLY MIDDLE EAST REFUGEES
Posted by Stanley A. Urman (JJAC), April 1, 2008. |
|
The text is from
|
Congress Passes First Ever Resolution on Jewish Refugees from Arab Countries
WASHINGTON, DC (April 1, 2008) –– In what may be the beginning of a dramatic shift in United States policy, the U.S. Congress passed House Resolution 185, which grants first-time-ever recognition to Jewish refugees from Arab countries. Prior to the adoption of H.Res.185, all Resolutions on Middle East refugees referred only to Palestinians. This Resolution affirms that the U.S. government will now recognize that all victims of the Arab-Israeli conflict must be treated equally. It further urges that the President and U.S. officials participating in Middle East discussions to ensure that any reference to Palestinian refugees must: "also include a similarly explicit reference to the resolution of the issue of Jewish refugees from Arab countries." The Resolution was introduced by Reps. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL), Joseph Crowley (D-NY) and Mike Ferguson (R-NJ). With the passing of this Resolution, Rep. Nadler stated, "We believe that as a member of the Quartet, and in light of the U.S. central and indispensable role in promoting Middle East 'just peace', the U.S. must reaffirm that it embraces a just and comprehensive approach to the issue of Middle East refugees." Rep. Joseph Crowley said, "The world needs to understand that it is not just the Arabs and it's not just the Palestinians in the Middle East, but also Jewish people who themselves were dispossessed of their possessions and their homes, and were victims of terrorist acts. These are people who lived in Middle Eastern communities not for decades, but for thousands of years." Rep. Crowley added that the Resolution will, "bring light upon an issue that has been swept under the carpet." "Discussions of Middle Eastern refugees invariably focus exclusively-and shortsightedly-on the plight of those of Palestinian descent," said Rep. Ros-Lehtinen. "Far fewer people are aware of the injustice faced by Jewish refugees from Arab lands and Iran. Many Jews saw their communities, which had existed vibrantly for centuries systematically dismantled. They lost their resources, their homes, and their heritage sites, fleeing in the face of persecution, pogroms, revolutions and brutal dictatorships." Rep. Mike Ferguson said that there was very strong bi-partisan support for this issue which recognizes, "the plight of hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees who were displaced from countries in the Middle East, Northern Africa and all around the Persian Gulf." Congressmen Ferguson acknowledged that the U.N. has never recognized Jewish refugees, and that this,"is completely unacceptable and long over due, and this is one of the things this Resolution seeks to address." Malcolm Hoenlein, Executive Vice-President of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations commented, "the failure during all these years to recognize other refugees, compounded the indignation and the suffering and the deprivation of Jews in Arab countries. There was a systematic process of expulsion which the Arab governments engaged in." He added that the Resolution is not an obstacle to peace. "It is a distortion to talk only of one refugee population, as that would undermine the ultimate outcome of any negotiations. The Congressional action will educate a generation that know too little about the other refugees." The passing of this Resolution is the strongest U.S. declaration on the rights of Jewish refugees that were displaced from Arab countries. H.Res.185 underscores the fact that Jews living in Arab countries suffered human rights violations, were uprooted from their homes, and were made refugees. Stanley Urman, Executive Director of Justice for Jews from Arab Countries stated that, "Congress has restored truth to the Middle East narrative, by recommending equitable treatment of all Middle East refugees. Only in this fashion can there be movement from truth to justice, from justice to reconciliation, and from reconciliation to peace –– between and among all peoples and states in the region." Underscoring the importance of the Resolution, Rep. Nadler added, "When the Middle East peace process is discussed, Palestinian refugees are often addressed. However, Jewish refugees outnumbered Palestinian refugees, and their forced exile from Arab lands must not be omitted from public discussion on the peace process. It is simply not right to recognize the rights of Palestinian refugees without recognizing the rights of Jewish refugees." Media Kit is available at www.justiceforjews.com/mediakit2.html. Justice for Jews from Arab Countries
To see "The Forgotten Refugees," a documentary on the Jewish
refugees from Arab countries,
click here.
Stanley Urman is Executive Director of Justice for Jews from Arab
Countries. Contact by email at info@justiceforjews.com
|
|
MUSLIM HYSTERIA OVER FITNA AROUND THE WORLD
Posted by Avodah, April 1, 2008. | |
|
This is from yesterday's Sultan website | |
Damascus –– Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir called on Muslims at an Arab summit in Damascus to "challenge those who insult" the prophet and proposed "a binding international charter" calling for the respect of religious beliefs. (a binding charter, I believe they call that Sharia) "The offenses against our Arab and Islamic nations under the banner of freedom of expression are derogatory and defamatory and go against all human values," al-Bashir said. (as opposed to raping and murdering hundreds of thousands of people as al-Bashir's government has done) Amman –– Following the release of Geert Wilders' film Fitna, a group of 53 Jordanian MPs have delivered a petition to their government in Amman, demanding that it break all diplomatic ties with the Netherlands. They also want the Dutch ambassador expelled from the country. The Jordanian parliament consists of 110 members, 60 of whom were present when the petition was delivered. Java –– On the Indonesian island of Java hundreds of Islamic students took to the streets of the city of Magelang to protest against the film. Indonesia's Minister for Social Affairs Bachtiar Chamsyah had previously called for demonstrations. Malaysia –– Former Malaysian leader Mahathir Mohamad urged the world's 1.3 billion Muslims to boycott Dutch products. Foreign Minister Rais Yatim said in a statement late Saturday that Wilders "must bear full responsibility over the release of the movie and the consequences of his action." (a none too subtly veiled threat) Cairo –– Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit called Wilders' film "a humiliation" to Islam. Egypt's Grand Imam Mohammed Sayyed Tantawi asked the Dutch government to do everything in its power to prevent Wilders from releasing his movie. "or the consequences will be severe." Karachi –– Police are tightening security around a Dutch consulate in Pakistan after Muslims angrily protested a Dutch lawmaker's anti-Quran film. About two dozen students burned an effigy of lawmaker Geert Wilders in front of the Karachi press club Saturday, a day after hundreds protested across Pakistan. Bangladesh –– "This totally unwarranted and mindless action can have grave consequences ... because it will offend millions of Muslims around the world," a foreign ministry statement said on Friday. "Islam is a faith of peace which preaches patience and understanding," it said. (If Islam is so peaceful, patient and understanding, why worry about offending Muslims?)
Contact Avodah by email at avodah15@aol.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: SURREAL
Posted by Arlene Kushner, April 1, 2008. |
|
Even in the irrational environment with which we are coping, this gets a "most surreal" award: Khaled Mashaal, political head of Hamas in Damascus, has given an interview. He explained that Israel has turned down an offer to restrict the attacks on both sides –– that is, by Israel and by Hamas in Gaza –– to only military targets, leaving civilians out of it. This is a blatant set up, of course. For we here in Israel truly have military bases that might be targets and areas that are exclusively civilian. We are careful not to merge the two. But Hamas puts its terrorist activities and weapons inside civilian areas on purpose. Thus, if Israel were to commit to never attacking where there are civilians, there would be no opportunity to attack terrorists for fear of accidental injury to civilians. Hamas would have perfect cover and a free ride to do as it wished. But read further for the surreal part of Mashaal's statement. Implying that with their current weapons Hamas would find it difficult to accurately target just military bases, even if that were its intention, he then said: "We have primitive weapons. I ask the international community and the Americans to give us more advanced weapons so we can shoot more accurately." I am not making this up. Several things need to be clarified with regard to this: Yes, Kassams are relatively simple home-made rockets. But they are also now in possession of Grad Katyushas and other more sophisticated weapons, and working every day to improve the accuracy even of the Kassam. When they hit places like Sderot, it is not because they aimed for a military base and accidentally hit civilians –– they are aiming directly for that civilian population; the inaccuracy means they can't be sure if they will hit a school, or a house three blocks away. Mashaal maintains that Hamas has the right and the obligation to keep shooting to combat the "occupation." "This is ordinary behavior" –– as the Americans fought the British during the revolution, and the French fought the Nazis. ~~~~~~~~~~ Mashaal also alluded to the third party negotiations with Israel on the release of Shalit, claiming that Hamas was ready to strike a deal but that Israel is the stumbling block. We refuse, you see, to OK everyone on Hamas's list of 1,000 prisoners it demands be released. It should be noted that Marwan Barghouti, a Fatah terrorist leader, was on the list. ~~~~~~~~~~ Lastly, Mashaal had words for Abbas: "We invite Mr. Abbas to come for unconditional talks in Gaza. Talks on how to address the reasons for the split, to return Gaza and the West Bank to unity and solve the security problem." I believe it is only a matter of time until there are overt, public dealings (negotiations and cooperation at least if not a full unity gov't) between Fatah and Hamas. Abbas is currently playing both ends against the middle, avoiding that overt contact so that American largesse continues. But the fact that there is no overt contact doesn't mean that there is nothing going on in back rooms between the two groups. What I noticed is that the agreement signed in Yemen has totally disappeared from the radar screen. Fatah backed off, saying there were "errors" in the signing, but to the best of my knowledge didn't totally disavow the understanding. And then, nothing further reported. ~~~~~~~~~~ We must return to Rice and Barak and Olmert, for the scenario in which they are actors has not yet played itself out. After finishing meetings here in Israel, and amidst a flurry of very "optimistic" statements about how well things were going and the possibility that there might be an agreement before Bush comes in May, Rice went off to meet with Abbas. Even on the plane, as I understand it, she began to question our sincerity in enacting all of the concessions that Barak presented her with. She indicated that the US would be watching us very closely to make sure we did what we have said we would, and quickly. In fact, she has charged General Fraser with monitoring this. "General Fraser will be following up on the specifics and will be also ... making certain that in fact there are 50 [roadblocks] and they are being removed." A nasty tone, after her expression of being "amazed" at what we offered. But will the US also be closely monitoring PA progress in stopping terrorism? She didn't say so. ~~~~~~~~~~ To provide further evidence of our sincerity, Barak then made another announcement: He is considering allowing PA forces into Hevron and Tulkarm after the 700 already announced are deployed in Jenin. Hevron is the worst of options, as there is a Jewish community there, which is not the case in Jenin or Tulkarm. And that Jewish community recognizes this as a direct threat to their security. "It would be extremely dangerous," said community spokesperson David Wilder. "The community is already under constant attack." He revealed that shots were recently fired at his apartment, leaving a hole in his son's closet. "Today a rock was thrown into the home of a family that lives next to me ... The violence is continuing." ~~~~~~~~~~ Additionally, the announcement was made that we have already removed two roadblocks in the Jericho area and are also removing the Rimonim roadblock near Ramallah. The Yesha council expressed anger at this. The change in the situation, allowing Palestinians more "freedom of movement," means they will be free to come into areas where presently they do not have access, and there is likely to be an increase in weapon smuggling. There is concern, as well, about drive-by shootings. Yesterday, there was an attempted terrorist attack at a hitchhikers station near the community of Shilo. A Palestinian –– not immediately recognizable as such –– approached two Israelis at the junction. When he suddenly shouted "Alah Akbar" ("God is great" –– the standard cry of terrorists attempting to kill Jews) and pulled out a knife in an attempt to stab them, one of the Israelis –– Erez Bar-On of Ofra –– stepped back, took out his personal gun and shot him. Police later discovered a second knife on the terrorist, a student from Birzeit University, who died. Bar-On, in interview, expressed great disapproval of the government decision, saying that providing Palestinians with more freedom of movement increases the likelihood of such incidents. ~~~~~~~~~~ You may remember the story of David Landau, who was then, but no longer is, editor of Haaretz: At a dinner with Condoleezza Rice some months ago, he advised Rice to "rape" Israel, meaning forcing us into things we would not want to do. Yisrael Medad, on his blog site today recounts this: "I ran into David Landau yesterday at a funeral. I told him that he should watch the way he talks, referring to 'raping Israel' and all that. "He smiled and retorted: 'I meant what I said and I understand Condi Rice has taken my advice.'" No comment is necessary. ~~~~~~~~~~ When Rice met here with Olmert, he told her (and I'll get to this below) that Israel would continue to build in major existing communities in Judea and Samaria as well as in neighborhoods of Jerusalem beyond the Green Line. In the subsequent press conference with Abbas, Rice lambasted us for this, saying that it was counter productive to "peace." (Note that she didn't lambaste the PA, when making her statement to the press here, for failure to clamp down on terrorism.) What is happening –– which I've described before –– is that Olmert is caught between demands of Rice and demands of Shas. The only time he really says no to Rice (and it shows he can do so if he wishes to!) is when his coalition is threatened. Shas threatens to leave if building isn't done. And so there has now been an announcement that 600 units will go up in Pisgat Ze'ev, a northern Jerusalem neighborhood. (I confess that this confuses me a bit, as I am sure I read about this some weeks ago; perhaps it was not finalized until now.) And there is word that Olmert has assured Shas that the freeze on building in the major community of Betar Illit, which is beyond Jerusalem, will be lifted as well, and that 800 units will go up there. Shas members are patting themselves on the back for these accomplishments, and pointing to them, once again, as a reason to stay in the coalition. In point of fact, more would be accomplished if they left the coalition. ~~~~~~~~~~ It is always to the good when Olmert is put in the position of resisting Rice's demands, and shows willingness to protect our right to build in Jewish areas. Israel's stance is that we have a right to build within eastern Jerusalem and Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria that we are likely to keep in a settlement, and that this is consistent with international understandings. "It is not true that we are building in violation of our obligations," Olmert said to his Kadima faction at a meeting in the Knesset. "We are not building new settlements, everyone must understand this ... " "We don't hide our views on Jerusalem and major settlement blocs, we are being honest about everything throughout the negotiations," he said. I would truly like to think this is so. The PA is demanding our return to the '67 lines, and word has come out that our negotiators are getting ready to accede to this –– which would be a horror. If we are truly holding out for Jerusalem and major settlement blocs, there will be no deal, because the PA simply does NOT compromise. All of this said, and with acknowledgement to Shas for putting Olmert in this position, it must be noted that Shas is taking heat from its haredi (ultra-Orthodox) constituency, which is looking for more housing. The neighborhoods in which Olmert has approved building are thus haredi, and will serve Shas's constituency. ~~~~~~~~~~ As to Rice's enthusiastic prediction that there might be an agreement by May, she has since backed off on this, and Olmert, as well, has made statements discouraging expectations of a quick agreement. What is being sought is a general outline of what a Palestinian state would be like in terms of borders, control of Jerusalem and dispension of the refugee issue. This is to be called a Declaration of Principles, and it is supposed to be shelved until all pertinent road map commitments are met. As this requires the PA to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure and cease incitement, it means, in theoretical terms, no enactment of the principles, as least for a generation or more, as I said the other day. But in reality this is an extremely dangerous process –– I believe so and every serious analyst I have read also says so. Once we've established the "principle" of a Palestinian state, the international community (and this very much includes the US), will cut the PA slack –– as the PA is ALWAYS cut slack –– and we will be pressured to give them that state before they've met their obligations. Thus it is fervently to be hoped that no agreement is reached in principle. It is being said that "real progress" is being made in the negotiations, but no one outside the immediate process really knows what this means. The expectation is that because the PA cannot and will not compromise, that issues of control of eastern Jerusalem (including the Jewish quarter and the Temple mount) and "return" of refugees will present insurmountable obstacles to finalizing an agreement. Yoel Marcus, writing in Haaretz, suggests that the clearest indication that the negotiations are mostly hot air is the silence from Shas. ~~~~~~~~~~ Yesterday, to the surprise of many, Barak made a comment about leaving the coalition after all. He is, however, definitely full of hot air with regard to the reason he is giving: that Olmert is accountable for failures during the Lebanon war and that this remains unfinished business because the PM hasn't resigned. This is true enough, but if this were Barak's true concern, he would have pulled out right after Winograd was released. Never-the-less, Barak, in a meeting with bereaved parents of soldiers, declared, "Elections in two or three years are not a possibility." I would say he's moving according to his own timetable for maneuvering himself into position to be the next prime minister. One might even speculate as to how his dealings with Rice might have been structured to meet his own agenda. Amir Peretz who is former chair of Labor and former Defense Minister, attacked Barak at a Labor faction meeting, saying he was out of touch with reality: "You have an obsession with being prime minister, but you have no agenda. What is your economic agenda? What is your social agenda? What is your political agenda?" Polls, it must be noted, have Netanyahu and Likud well ahead of Barak and Labor. ~~~~~~~~~~ It has been revealed by a Japanese newspaper, Asahi Shimbun, that when Olmert was in Japan in February, he told officials that last September the IDF operation into Syria targeted a nuclear facility built with North Korea's help. ~~~~~~~~~~ I do not report on a daily basis regarding the attacks on Israel from Gaza, but please don't imagine that it is quiet. On some days 15 or 20 rockets may be launched. Today two mortars hit in the Ashkelon region, causing light injuries. ~~~~~~~~~~ In a talk at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs yesterday, Professor Robert Wishtrich of Hebrew University stated that the UK is the center of European anti-Semitism. There is historical precedent for this, it didn't evolve in modern times: Since medieval times, Britain has been rife with anti-Semitism. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
| Home | Featured Stories | Background Information | News On The Web |