| HOME | Featured Stories | February 2010 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
NOTE: Links to Videos are at the bottom
of this page.
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: A STREAM IN THE GALILEE
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, February 28, 2010. |
|
This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. HOW I GOT THE SHOT: Before I moved to Israel, I don't believe I once imagined taking a hike on a trail made of water. In our desert climate, where it is hot and dry most of the year, water walks are very popular and a refreshing way to get close to places we don't frequently experience. I admit that toting $5,000 worth of equipment over slippery rocks while taking uncertain steps to unknown depths sets my heart racing, but I've done stupider things in pursuit of my art. This shot was taken in the Snir Stream, a tributary of the Jordan River flowing through the Galilee near Kiryat Shemona. I cannot think of another photograph I've taken of moving water in which the water flows away from the camera. Waterfalls, rivers, rushing tides and gushing rain: the water always moves down and towards the camera. So I like this shot just because it's different and because the colors, especially anything in the sage family, are among my favorites. I stopped down to f22 and exposed for 1/2 second to capture both the movement of the water and turn it white, which creates a nice contrast to the surrounding brown and black rocks and tree stumps. Because many people are afraid or unable to hike through the stream, there are ample opportunities for quiet contemplation. You just may have to get your feet wet first. Technical Data: Nikon D-300, 28-105 zoom @ 28mm, ISO 100, 1/2 second at f22.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at
smile@goldenlightimages.com and visit his website: Newly available: The Koren Birchon: Praise for the Land of
Israel, featuring 75 full color photographs of Israel.
|
|
LATMA SATIRE IN H
Posted by Bernice Lipkin, February 28, 2010. |
|
Latma Satire in H is brilliant satire. You will understand all about the ersatz status of that newly-hatched people, the Palestinians, from watching the bit on the Youths in the History Section. See it here. It's in Hebrew with English subtitles. We have clustered reader-suggested videos at the bottom of this page. |
|
|
|
DON'T ATTACK JEWS
Posted by Moshe Dann, February 23, 2010. |
|
Moshe Dann urges Netanyahu to refrain from mistakes made by anti-settler predecessors |
|
On December 18, 2009, Aluf Benn and Amos Harel, writing in Haaretz, offered one of the most important insights into Israeli policy regarding the Iranian nuclear threat. "When Netanyahu was finance minister in Ariel Sharon's cabinet, he urged Sharon to focus on the struggle against Iran. When Netanyahu resigned over the disengagement plan, and Sharon left Likud and established Kadima, Netanyahu told Sharon that if he acted against Iran before the election, Netanyahu would support him. Sharon did not act. "It is possible that years ago, the problem of Iran's nuclear project could have been solved by one tough blow and with relatively minimal risk... If it had been bombed, Iran would have lost large quantities of raw material for uranium enrichment, and its nuclear program would have been set back years. But nothing happened." Why not? Benn and Harel do not answer this crucial question, nor did the media pick up their observation. Was the Air Force incapable? Did Israel lack essential information? Was America, bogged down in Iraq, reluctant to agree? In hindsight, the decision not to bomb the Iranian facility was a gigantic mistake that changed the course of history. There may have been, however, another reason for Sharon's inattention: his preoccupation with unilateral withdrawal from Gaza and northern Samaria. The Gaza disengagement, which took place in August, 2005, took a year to prepare, mobilized massive resources and cost billions of shekels. Focused on expelling Jews from their homes and destroying 25 communities, did Sharon ignore existential threats to Israel's existence? Similarly, in 2006, PM Ehud Olmert, in the midst of the war in Lebanon, announced his intention to evacuate more settlements. What would have happened had the IDF been prepared for war with Hezbollah instead of attacking the tiny hilltop community of Amona earlier that year, to destroy a few Jewish homes? Another catastrophic failure of leadership is upon us again. Midnight attacks on innocent Jews by the IDF and police in order to destroy a few Jewish homes might seem justified in order to fulfill obligations PM Netanyahu undertook to "freeze settlement building." But is this necessary? Are these homes more important than hundreds of thousands of illegal Arab buildings? What purpose does it serve? Distraction from the real issues? Inspiring agenda needed PM Netanyahu speaks eloquently about Zionist heritage, but are not the Jews whom his government attacks part of that heritage? Does his definition of Zionist heritage depend on what the UN allows, President Obama dictates, or Peace Now's hysterics? Sharon's failure to bomb Iran when it was possible is now re-enacted on the backs of Jews who live in Judea and Samaria. Netanyahu's silence about Iran in 2004 — which led to Hamas' catastrophic takeover of Gaza — echoes in 2010 as he and his "inner cabinet" created an intolerable situation, not only to please Obama, but to satisfy the rabidly anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist policies of his Defense Minister, Ehud Barak. Netanyahu's efforts to appeal to Zionist heritage, improve transportation and laud Israeli technical achievements are safe positions; but that is hardly an agenda that will inspire a nation under attack, or offer a way out of Israel's growing demonization and threats to its legitimacy and very existence. PM Netanyahu was not elected in order to appeal to American or European policies, or to destroy Jewish homes. Been there; done that. He was elected to strengthen Israel's security, to stamp out corruption, to insure an impartial and fair judicial system, and to enhance our educational system so that it includes basic elements of Jewish and Zionist values and heritage. As a national leader, Netanyahu failed in 2004; he could have opposed Sharon and exposed Sharon's obsessions. He could have made Iran the issue. He didn't, and now we all must pay for that. But what has he learned from 2004? I would offer a simple principle: When you attack Jews, you will lose — always. And one more: Zionist heritage did not begin or end with Tel Hai and the site where the State of Israel was proclaimed. Zionism is an ongoing, evolving process that includes every Jew and those who support the right of the Jewish people to statehood in the Land of Israel. Heritage programs must not only be historical, but guides to the future. They can also provide parameters for meaningful leadership. Netanyahu's primary obligation is to protect Israel, spiritually and physically — by any means necessary. He fumbled in 2004; let's hope that he won't repeat that mistake. The author is a writer and journalist living in Jerusalem. This
|
|
PRESIDENT OBAMA'S FIRST YEAR: THE WRITING WAS ON THE WALL
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, February 28, 2010. |
|
I am not surprised by President Obama's performance – since January 2009 — in face of unprecedented and simultaneous economic, social, national security challenges, domestically and internationally. I am not surprised by President Obama, who was elected to the most difficult and complicated post — during a most unstable period internally and externally — in spite of his obvious lack of experience and superficial world view. I am not surprised by President Obama's policy toward the Jewish State and toward the Arab-Israeli conflict, which is a derivative of his world view that was fully displayed during the 2008 campaign. I am not surprised by President Obama's performance — the writing was on the wall for those who were ready to read it! Obama was elected at the peak of an economic meltdown, the extent of which has not been determined. Millions of Americans have lost their homes, unemployment is around a 26 year record 10%, under-employment is 17%, the budget deficit is the worst since the end of WW2, hundreds of banks have collapsed, the real estate bubble burst, private consumption and investment have dipped beyond expectation, the social security and the medical insurance systems are severely threatened, taxes are rising and government's involvement in the economy is expanding. Obama is increasingly identified and burdened with the economic crisis – which was not caused by him — and the steps taken to solve the crisis. Obama prefers to be preoccupied with domestic challenges, which will determine the future of the USA and of his presidency. However, as expected, he is sucked into the lava of Islamic terrorism and religious, territorial, tribal, ideological and power struggles throughout the globe. While Obama extends his hand to rogue regimes, Islamic terrorism stretches its hand into the US mainland, exacerbating a sense of insecurity and reawakening the question: "When – and not if – will the second shoe fall?!" Islamic terrorism has intensified its operational, political, financial, ideological and logistical involvement in Asia, Africa, the Middle East, Europe, the USA, Latin America and Australia. Pakistan persists in its double-role of the most critical base of Islamic terrorism on one hand and counter-terrorism on the other hand. In fact, Islamabad could be taken over by terrorists along with its nuclear arsenal. India's restraint in the face of Islamic terrorism may be suspended, reigniting the endemic conflict with Pakistan. The US war in Afghanistan could be Vietnamized and the war in Iraq is far from a conclusion. The possible evacuation of US troops from these two arenas could add fuel, not water, to the fire, further destabilizing the region and the globe. Syria has provided safe haven for anti-US Iraqi terrorists. Iran supports and incites Persian Gulf and global terrorism, while upgrading its ballistic and nuclear capabilities, which would agitate the Gulf, the Middle East, the US, Europe and the entire world. Nuclear North Korea has been a source of unexpected threats. Russia and China have never hidden their imperial aspirations, which have gravely concerned their neighbors in East Europe and Asia. Mexico is facing a lethal challenge from drug cartels, which have expanded their internal wars into Texas, Arizona and California. Venezuela and Cuba collaborate with enemies and rivals of the USA, who may thus gain access to Washington's backyard. And, that's an incomplete list of external challenges preoccupying Obama. President Obama is facing these challenges with a world view, which was enunciated during the 2008 campaign and in three major speeches at Cairo University (June 4, 2009), the UN General Assembly (September 23, 2009) and West Point Military Academy (December 1, 2009). In contrast with the US ethos, Obama does not believe in the moral, economic and military exceptionalism of the US or in the destiny of the US to lead the battle of Western democracies against rogue regimes. He views the US as a power-in-retreat, which abused its dominance. Therefore, he systematically apologizes to Muslims, in particular, and Third World societies in general, investigates the conduct of CIA agents in their war against terrorists and is closing down the Gitmo detention camp. He does not define the world as an arena of confrontation between free societies and terror organizations and states, but as a platform of engagement between rivals who must comprehend that covenants and accords are preferable to wars and that their common ground exceeds that which separates them. Obama is convinced that military force does not solve conflicts and that the era of military balance is over. Therefore, he cuts the budget of military R&D and missile defense, does not replenish military inventories consumed in Iraq and Afghanistan, does not expand US armed forces despite expanding threats and initiates agreements to reduce the arms race, even when this advances Russian interests. Obama's Administration refrains from using the terms "international terrorism," "Islamic terrorism," (because "Islam is part of America...") or "Jihadist terrorism" (because "Jihad means to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal..."). According to Obama, there are no terrorists, only "extremists," "man-made disasters" and "isolated cases" such as Al-Qaeda and Taliban. Terrorism is considered a challenge for law-enforcement officials rather than for military personnel. Moreover, terrorism constitutes, to an extent, a Third World reaction to abuse and lack of respect by the Western World. Therefore, terrorists benefit from the rights of civil law offenders. And, when there is no moral clarity, there is hardly battle field clarity. Obama considers the UN as the quarterback of international relations and the bureaucracy of Foggy Bottom as the luminaries of foreign policy. He aspires to move closer to the European state of mind and world view, while the world is in a dire need of a US Marshall and not for a European cop. Hence, Obama aims at minimizing unilateral initiatives and maximizing military, legal, political and environmental multilateralism. He has joined the vehemently anti-US and anti-Israel UN Council on Human Rights, which was boycotted by Bush. Furthermore, he awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom to Mary Robinson, who headed the Council on Human Rights and led the racist anti-US and anti-Israel UN "Durban Conference." Obama's attitude toward the Jewish State has been a by-product of his aforementioned world view, of his non Judeo-Christian background and of his inner circle associates and friends at Harvard University and in Chicago, who have been critical and hostile toward Israel. The principles of "moral equivalence" and "evenhandedness" have underlined his policy toward the Arab-Israeli conflict. He does not regard Israel as a strategic, let alone unique, ally and is hardly a supporter of US joint defense and commercial projects with Israel. He does not rush to defend Israel at the UN and views the Jewish State as part of the exploiting Western World and the Arabs as part of the exploited Third World. Obama has adopted the sophisticated line of Arab propaganda, claiming that the moral foundation of Israel is the Holocaust, which resulted in ushering Jews to a newly acquired home, while uprooting Palestinians from their own home. He perceives the Palestinian issue as the crux of the Arab-Israeli conflict, the root cause of anti-US Islamic terrorism and the chief trigger of Middle East turbulence. His prescription for the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict is an Israeli withdrawal to the 1949/67 Lines, the uprooting of Jewish communities in the Golan Heights, Judea and Samaria, the repartitioning of Jerusalem, the negotiation of the return of the 1948 Arab refugees to the pre-1967 Israel and the exchange of land. President Obama is intent on clipping the wings of the Jewish State morally, strategically and territorially. However, that is not a top priority for him. He would not confront Israel's friends on Capitol Hill and in the public if they are mobilized against his prescription. Does Obama have the power to overcome such a pro-Israel alliance and impose a solution on Israel? Voters in the US elected Obama to office, in spite of his lack of experience domestically and globally. Instead of reading the writing on the wall, US voters entertained the delusion that an "attractive cover" meant an "instructive book." However, Obama's conduct since January 2009 has led to the collapse of his attractive image. For example, a majority of Americans oppose higher taxes, an expanded budget deficit and bigger government, which have become Obama's trade mark. 60% of the US public believes that the US is moving in the wrong direction. Support for Obama has declined from 65% in January 2009, to less than 50% in January 2010 — the steepest presidential decline since 1975. From a consensus-builder candidate in 2008 he has emerged as a controversy-promoting president in 2009. >From a moderate candidate he has transformed into a liberal president, while only 20% of the American public consider themselves to be Liberals. From a coattail candidate, who received the Independent vote and swept Democrats to a major victory in both congressional chambers, he has become an anchor-chained president, who has distanced Independents from the Democratic Party, has energized the Angry White Vote and could drag Democrats to defeat in November 2010. The Democratic failure in November 2009 and public opinion polls for the spring primaries and for the November 2010 election, suggest a major Republican tailwind. As a result, a number of prominent Democratic legislators have announced retirement. Therefore, as we approach the November 2010 election, and as legislators are growing more attentive to their constituents, moderate and conservative Democratic legislators are distancing themselves from President Obama. While Obama is perceived as a President who strays away from the American consensus, Israel benefits from a consensus support. "Joe Six Pack" and "Lunch Pail Mabel," conservative and liberal America, Jews and Christians, Republicans and Democrats do not view Israel as a classic foreign policy issue, but as an internal Judeo-Christian American issue, which is bonded with the USA through shared values, mutual threats and joint interests. Israel is largely regarded as a peace-seeking democratic militarily-able ally, surrounded by enemies who reject American values. US public opinion polls position Israel as the fourth or fifth most favorite ally with 66%-70% support, compared with the Palestinian Authority, which is at the bottom of the list along with Iran and North Korea. The key factor of support for the idea of a Jewish State — since the 17th century — has been the US public and its representatives on Capitol Hill. Most initiatives enhancing the US-Israel relationship originated in Congress, many times following a struggle against an opposing Administration. President Obama's world view suggests that such struggles could be intensified during the next few years. The writing is on the wall! 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 This article appeared first in Makor Rishon weekly, January 15, 2010. |
|
ISLAMIC INTOLERANCE
Posted by CPocerl, February 28, 2010. |
|
This comes from Strategy Page
|
|
In the last few months, Moslems have attacked Buddhists in Thailand, Jews everywhere, Baha'is in Iran and Christians in Egypt, Iraq, the Philippines, Pakistan, Malaysia and elsewhere. This is not a sudden and unexpected outburst of Moslem violence against non-Moslems. It is normal, and at the root of Islamic terrorism. While this violent behavior represents only a small number of Moslems, it is a large minority (from a few percent of a population, to over half, according to opinion polls). Moreover, the majority of Moslems has not been willing, or able, to confront and suppress the Islamic radicals that not only spread death and destruction, but also besmirch all Moslems. This reveals a fundamental problem in the Islamic world, the belief that combining righteousness with murderous tactics, is often the road to power and spiritual salvation. Throughout history, when these tactics were applied to non-Moslems, they often failed. The non-Moslems were unfazed by the religious angle, and, especially in the last five hundred years, were better able to defeat Islamic violence with even greater violence. Thus, until quite recently, the Moslems fought among themselves, and left the infidels (non-Moslems) out. But after World War II, that began to change. During the Lebanese civil war of 1975-1990, Christian and Moslem Arabs fought bitterly over political, cultural and, ultimately, religious differences. The capital, Beirut, was divided into Christian and Moslem sections by the Green Line. The name came from the fact that in this rubble filled no man's land, only grass and weeds survived. And that the line on a ceasefire map was drawn in green. There have been a lot more Green Lines since then. Few realized it at the time, but this war was but the first of many between Christians and Moslems in the 20th and 21st centuries. Many of the earliest Moslem converts were Christians. And many of the peoples Moslem armies unsuccessfully sought to conquer were Christian. The original Crusades, which modern Moslems portray as Western aggression, were actually a Western attempt to rescue Middle Eastern Christians from increasing Islamic terrorism and violence. But Islam as a political force was in decline for several centuries until the 1970s. Then things changed, and they continue to change. Fueled by oil wealth and access to Western weapons and technology, Islamic radicals saw new opportunities. Islam was again on the march, and few have noticed the many places it was turning into religious war with Christians and other non-Moslems. In Asia, we have a Green Line between India and Pakistan. Inside India, many Moslem communities remain, and feelings aren't always neighborly. Indonesia and the Philippines suffer growing strife between Moslems and non-Moslems. Malaysia has fanatical Moslems persecuting more laid-back ones, and non-Moslems in general. China has a large Moslem community that generates an increasing amount of violence. Russia and America have formed a curious partnership to deal with Islamic-based terrorism coming out of Afghanistan and Pakistan. And in Chechnya, Russia faced Islamic-inspired violence all alone in the 1990s. Africa has a rather dusty Green Line south of the semi-arid Sahel region. Many African nations are split by increasingly sensitive religious differences. The Moslems are in the north, Christians and animists in the south. Nigeria, Chad and Sudan are among the more violent hot spots at the moment. When the Moslem Somalis stop fighting each other they will return to raiding their Christian and animist neighbors to the south. The Middle East still contains many non-Moslems. None have their own country, except for Israel. But Egypt contains five million Copts, native Christians who did not convert to Islam. Similar small Christian communities exist throughout the Middle East, and growing hostility from Moslem neighbors causes many to migrate, or get killed. Moslems also have turned their righteous wrath on dissident Moslem sects. The Druze and Alawites are considered by many Moslems as pagans pretending to be Moslems. Similarly, the Shias of Iran and neighboring areas are considered less orthodox, not just for their admitted differences, but because many adherents openly practice customs of the pre-Islamic Zoroastrian religion. These differences are less frequently overlooked today. To survive, the many Druze have allied themselves with Israel, and most of the current Syrian leadership are Alawites who pretend to be more Shia than they really are. Even Europe has a Green Line. The Moslems in the Balkans (Albanians and Bosnians) have been a constant source of strife for the last decade. Moslem migrants in Europe face even more persecution because of all those Green Lines, and this makes it easier for radical groups to recruit and carry out their crusade against Christians. In many European cities with Moslem minorities, there are neighborhoods where non-Moslems are advised to stay out of. But the Green Lines are about more than religion. A lot of it is politics. One of the reasons Islam ran out of steam centuries ago was that the Moslem areas never embraced democracy, and intellectual progress. Until the 20th century, most Moslems lived as part of some foreign empire, under local totalitarian monarchs. The foreign empires are gone, but democracy has had a hard time taking hold. The dictatorships are still there. And the people are restless. Radical Islam arose as an alternative to all the other forms of government that never seemed to work. In theory, establishing "Islamic Republics" would solve all problems. People could vote, but only Moslems in good standing could be candidates for office. A committee of Moslem holy men would have veto power over political decisions. Islamic law would be used. It was simple, and it makes sense to a lot of Moslems in nations ruled by thugs and thieves. Especially if the people are largely uneducated and illiterate. Islamic Republics don't work. The only one that has been established (not counting others that say they are but aren't) is in Iran. The major problems were twofold. First, the radicals had too much power. Radical religious types are no fun, and you can't argue with them because they are on a mission from God. Most people tire of this in short order. To speed this disillusionment, many of the once-poor and now-powerful religious leaders became corrupt. This eventually sends your popularity ratings straight to hell. It will take a generation or so for everyone in the Moslem world to figure out where all this is going. This is already happening in Iran, where moderates are getting stronger every day, but everyone is trying to avoid a civil war. While the radicals are a minority, they are a determined bunch. The constant flow of Islamic radical propaganda does more than generate recruits and contributions in Moslem countries, it also energizes Moslem minorities (both migrants and converts) in Western countries to acts of terrorism. In the United States, you find such Moslems getting arrested several times a year for attempting to carry out religious violence. Radicals throughout the Moslem world continue to take advantage of dissatisfaction among the people and recruit terrorists and supporters. To help this process along they invoke the ancient grudges popular among many Moslems. Most of these legends involve Christians beating on Moslems. To most radicals it makes sense to get people agitated over faraway foreigners rather than some strongman nearby. Most radicals lack the skills, money or ability to carry their struggle to far-off places. So most of the agitation takes place among Moslem populations. Any violent attitudes generated are easily directed at available non-Moslems. Thus we have all those Green Lines. But the more violence you have along those Green Lines, the more really fanatical fighters are developed. These are the people who are willing to travel to foreign lands and deal with non-believers, and kill them for the cause. We call it terrorism; the fanatics call it doing what has to be done. Defending Islam with jihad. Not surprisingly, Moslems get motivated to do something about Islamic radicalism when the violence comes to their neighborhoods. That's why terror attacks in the West are so popular. The infidels are being attacked, without any risk to those living in Moslem countries. Iraq changed all that, and during the course of that war (2004-7) the popularity of Islamic terrorism, in Moslem countries, declined sharply because the terrorists were killing so many Moslems. That, in the end, is what has killed, for a while, most Islamic terrorism in Iraq. But this time around, it would be nice if the Moslem world got their act together and expunged this malevolent tendency once and for all. Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
EXPERIENCING ROCKET BOMBARDMENT; ARAB KIDS TAUGHT HATRED AND MARTYRDOM;
EU POLICY AND DUBAI ASSASSINATION
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 28, 2010. |
|
HOW ISRAELIS EXPERIENCE ROCKET BOMBARDMENT: PART 1: ATTACKS 
I interviewed a recently emigrated American whom I knew and who now arranges for local residents to show visitors launching sites on the grounds of former Jewish communities in Gaza, more or less adjacent to Israel. That is how close the danger is! He provided first-hand reports in more depth than the New York newspapers had, for what is a continuing situation. A couple of farmers were killed by snipers in Gaza, alongside their farms. [That is what happens with side-by-side living. I never heard of Israelis firing rifles into Gaza at non-terrorists just going about their business. Anti-Zionists who constantly condemn Israel as picking on the Arabs miss Arab aggression.] All the rocket news focused on Sderot, near Gaza, until Ashkelon, a bigger city, came within range of the technically improved rockets. [I was on my way to visit people in Ashkelon when the rockets first began striking there.] Actually, thousands of rockets also struck other towns and kibbutzim. Kibbutz Near'am received 750 mortars and Kassam rockets, not gift-wrapped. When the IDF does report bombardment, it often states that they fell on an "open field." That may be a military deception. The IDF won't serve as an enemy artillery spotter who informs the gun crews where the shells land so they can adjust their aim. The "open field" may be between a house and a kindergarten, where a rocket struck without injuring anyone. But there were people in the house and kindergarten. They were shaken psychologically by the blasts. Many Israeli children are taking tranquilizers. So are some pets. People worry that they will not hear the alarm. Some are afraid to take a shower, lest that be when the attack comes. People in the more dangerous zone drive with seat belts unbuckled and car windows open, so they will be surer to hear the alarm. Parents have to strategize which child to take out of the car, first. When the rocket alarm sounds, Israelis have only 15 seconds to find shelter. Hurry or die! Mothers grab their young children. Usually, they make sure to know where they are. However, one time, a mother couldn't find hers! Her 15 seconds were up. Frantic, she ran into the center of the house, and there was her child! In the shelter, children count off the seconds. More cautious mothers do not let them out immediately after the first explosion, lest there be a second one A mother in Kibbutz Nir Am, which lies between Gaza and Sderot, could not locate her young child when the alert went off, signaling the launching of a Kassam rocket by Palestinian Arab terrorists. A few seconds later she heard a thump, and when she raced to her backyard she found her son there, mere meters from an unexploded Kassam. The Kassam had failed to detonate, because it had landed where earlier downpours turned the ground into mud that absorbed the landing. Since this near-tragedy occurred on the second day of Chanukah, the boy's mother called it her family's personal miracle of Chanukah.
HOW ISRAELIS EXPERIENCE ROCKET BOMBARDMENT: PART 2: WHAT TO MAKE OF IT. A leftist kibbutz had favored the expulsion of all the Jews from Gaza. The leftists did not realize that they would be attacked, once the IDF was no longer patrolling Gaza. They had thought that the IDF was just guarding Jewish communities in Gaza. They did not understand that the Jewish communities in the Territories served as a breakwater absorbing the storm from jihad. It is a human tendency to rely upon one's present safety, and to close one's eyes to the approaching menace. [Same thing happened throughout history. In ancient Greece, a few people tried to warn of the approaching danger from Phillip of Macedon and his son, Alexander the Great. People paid no attention. The Macedonians picked off city after city, until Athens was alone.] Under bombardment, many leftists finally are realizing that their policies of appeasement failed [as is usual with determined or fanatical enemies.] Most rocket and mortar firing is ignored by the major media, but an Israeli incursion undergoes intense journalistic scrutiny. Hence, most foreigners get no sense of the constant attacks Israelis experience and of the justification for their attempts to silence the attackers. Under both military assault and assault by foreign diplomatic, media, and academia, Israelis feel isolated. They welcome expression of concern for them. My source finds that Israelis there do not feel like victims. They endure. But the bombardment does take a toll. This explains the Gaza war, which anti-Zionists profess not to understand. Members of Knesset, some of whom live in bombarded towns, often do not respond to local issues such as the rocket rain. Americans assume that Israelis in targeted towns simply need approach their Members of Knesset. But they do not have Members of Knesset. Israel is not divided into constituencies, as is the U.S.. Israelis elect parties, which pick the Members of Knesset. Parties may have other interests. It therefore is difficult to hold Israeli politicians accountable. Parties there, at least since the time of PM Rabin, do not keep campaign promises to an extent that would surprise Americans. Lacking representative government, Israelis find it difficult to marshal legislative support and its public relations strength. The Palestinian Arabs are far more talented than Israelis on public relations. They pose old people in front of rubble, to elicit sympathy (Jeff Daube, representative of Zionist Organization of America in Israel, 12/10). To see a 6-minute video of the rocket situation, enter WWW.UTube.com and search on "Sderot ordeal." The major media are more likely to pick up stories about that, than about Israelis. Israelis' houses get blown up, but usually the residents were not in the way at the time. I recall the complaint by one old Arab woman of being tired of her job, which was to sit in front of a destroyed house as if it were hers, but which had not been occupied; it was photogenic. The camera may not lie, but the Palestinian Arab photographer often makes false propaganda for jihad. I have reported that they often stage phony Israeli attacks, including the one on the Al-Dura boy, which attack was widely publicized by credulous media, gravely impaired Israel's reputation, and eventually was proved a fraud.
PALESTINIAN ARAB KIDS TAUGHT HATRED AND MARTYRDOM Today, Al-Quds TV station in Lebanon broadcast the message that Zionist gangs raided Palestinian Arab villages, to shoot children and the elderly. Based on that, all Palestinian Arabs are gun-wise and war-ready. The greatest joy for a child is to die a martyr, killing Jews. The narrative specifies "Jew" (www.imra.org.il, 2/27 from www.memri.org). By self-description, practically the whole Palestinian Arab population wants war. Contrast that with U.S. efforts to call the non-Hamas Palestinian Authority leaders moderate and the people as a whole wanting peace. When whole generations are brought up on a series of such war propaganda programs, how can peace be possible until generations have passed? Arab rulers, who disseminate such propaganda, should be suspected of aggression, not Israeli rulers, whose curriculum stresses peace. One hears the claim that anti-Zionism is not anti-Jewish. That broadcast and religious quotations from the Palestinian Authority disprove the claim. The propaganda does not differentiate Israeli Zionists from other Zionists and from other Jews, nor soldiers from civilians. Hence the Arab-Israel conflict is a religious jihad, and not a mere territorial conflict. Armed Israelis do not single out children and the elderly to shoot but to spare. Thus the P.A. case is based on blood libel. P.A. children are being raised on false grounds of hatred. And, hypocritically, they are taught to kill all Jews regardless of age, the very same condition they complain about when they pretend it happened to them. Another false contention is that Zionism intended to dispossess Arabs. It asked them to stay in independent Israel, but the Arabs made war and then fled. Now the Arabs blame Israel for loss of their villages that Israel urged them to stay in. Since they started the war, their loss is their own fault. A Muslim writer recently commented about my piece on Libya that Ghadafi is crazy and misrepresents Islam with his call for jihad on Switzerland. Does the same misrepresentation of Islam apply to Palestinian Arab leaders who urge children to kill all Jews? If so, let moderate Muslims correct the extremism in people who mistakenly claim to speak for their faith. That is the eventual path to peace.
EU POLICY AND DUBAI ASSASSINATION European foreign policy does not reflect the national interests of the EU. "Take the EU's initial response to the killing of Hamas terror-master Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai on January 19. A senior terrorist engaging in the illegal purchase of illicit arms from Iran for Hamas-controlled Gaza is killed in his hotel room. The same Dubai authorities who had no problem with hosting a wanted international terrorist worked themselves into a frenzy condemning his killing. And of course, despite the fact that any number of governments, (Egypt and Jordan come to mind), and rival terrorist organizations, (Fatah, anyone?) had ample reason to wish to see Mabhouh dead, Dubai's police chief Lt.-Gen. Dahi Khalfan Tamim blamed Israel. "Not only did he blame Israel, to substantiate his claims, Tamim released what he said was video footage of alleged Mossad operatives who entered Dubai with European and Australian passports." "Relying only on Tamim's allegations, EU leaders went into high dudgeon. Ignoring the nature of the operation, the basic lack of credibility of the source of information, and the interests of Europe in defeating jihadist terrorism in the Middle East and worldwide, the chanceries of Europe squawked indignantly..." British Foreign Office sources told the Daily Telegraph, "If the Israelis were responsible for the assassination in Dubai, they are seriously jeopardizing the important intelligence-sharing arrangement that currently exists between Britain and Israel." "It reportedly took the intervention of the highest echelons of Europe's intelligence agencies to get their hysterical politicians and diplomats to stop blaming and threatening Israel. After being dressed down, on Monday, the chastened EU foreign ministers abstained from mentioning Israel by name in their joint condemnation of the alleged use of European passports by the alleged operatives who allegedly killed the terrorist Mabhouh." "And lucky they held their tongues. Because on Tuesday, Tamim claimed that after the hit, at least two of the alleged members of the alleged assassination team departed Dubai for Iran. It's hard to imagine Mossad officers feeling safer in Iran than in Dubai at any time and certainly it is hard to see why they would flee to Iran after killing an Iranian-sponsored terrorist." "What the initial European reaction to Tamim's allegations shows is that blaming Israel has become Europe's default foreign policy. It apparently never occurred to the Europeans that Israel might not be responsible for the hit. And it certainly never occurred to them that cutting off intelligence ties with Israel will harm them more than Israel." "They didn't think of the latter, of course, because Europe has no idea of what its interests are. All it knows is how to sound off authoritatively." Even if individual countries wanted to act in their own interests, the new EU treaty subordinates national foreign policy "to the whims of bureaucrats in Brussels. "As for its rhetoric, as the EU's rush to threaten Israel for allegedly killing a terrorist shows, it is cowardly, ineffectual and self-defeating." "Obviously Europe should favor Israel over a Hamas terrorist. But in its current state of strategic imbecility, no European leader can acknowledge this basic fact. Consequently, Europe may well be doomed." (Caroline Glick in www.imra.org.il, 2/27). MY COMMENT: When an ideology is blind everything else, those who hold that ideology blind themselves. They lack introspection. No longer think for themselves. Ruin the lives of millions and perhaps billions. In this and the next article on what Dubai illustrates, Caroline Glick demonstrates that governments often do not act in self-interest, but in their enemies' interest. The shibboleth that governments always act in their own interest misleads people to suppose that the governments of the U.S. deals with Israel out of self-interest when it makes demands of Israel. The same myth leads Members of Congress who sympathize with Israel not to oppose Israeli policies that they think harmful to Israel and therefore to international defense against jihad; they cannot imagine that Israel regimes pursue anti-Zionist policies.
ISRAELI POLICY AND DUBAI ASSASSINATION "If the Mossad did in fact kill Mabhouh, then the operation was an instance in which Israel distinguished itself from its European detractors by acting, rather than preening." Unfortunately, such instances are increasingly the exception rather than the rule. Over the past 16 years or so, Israel largely descended into the European statecraft abyss. Rather than use rhetoric to explain policies adopted to advance its national interests, successive Israeli governments have adopted policies geared toward strengthening their rhetoric that itself stands in opposition to Israel's national interests." For example, "Israel's national interest is to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Today, the only way to secure this interest is to use force to destroy Iran's nuclear installations." "Given Iran's leaders' absolute commitment to developing nuclear weapons, no sanctions — regardless of how "crippling" they are supposed to be — will convince them to curtail their efforts to build and deploy their nuclear arsenal." "Beyond that, and far less important, the Russians and the Chinese will refuse to implement 'crippling sanctions,' against Iran." "IN LIGHT of these facts, it is distressing that Israel's leaders have made building an international coalition in support of 'crippling' sanctions against Iran their chief aim. And this is not merely a rhetorical flourish. Over the past several weeks and months, Israel's top leaders have devoted themselves to lobbying foreign governments to support sanctions against Iran." "Last week PM Binyamin Netanyahu went to Moscow to gin up support for sanctions from the Russian government. This week, Defense Minister Ehud Barak traveled to the UN and the State Department and Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon flew off to Beijing just to lobby senior officials to support sanctions." "It isn't simply that this behavior doesn't contribute anything to Israel's ability to destroy Iran's nuclear installations. It harms Israel's ability to do so, if only by diverting our leaders' focus from where it should be: preparing the IDF to strike and preparing the country to withstand whatever the aftereffects of such a strike would be. Moreover, by calling for sanctions, Israel contributes to the delusion that sanctions are sufficient to block Iran's race to the nuclear finish line." "As for the Palestinian issue, it is fairly clear that at a minimum, Israel's interest is to secure its control over the areas of Judea and Samaria that it requires to protect its Jewish heritage and its national security. But it is hard to think of anything the government has done in its year in office to advance that basic interest." "It is argued that Israel's interest in maintaining good relations with the US administration trumps its interest in strengthening its control over areas in Judea and Samaria that it deems vital. The problem with this argument is that it takes for granted that Israel can determine the status of its relations with the US administration. In the case of the Obama administration, it is abundantly clear that this is not the case." "President Barack Obama and his senior advisers have demonstrated repeatedly that they are interested in weakening — not strengthening — the US alliance with Israel. This week the administration condemned Israel for defining the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem as national heritage sites. The fact that they are national heritage sites is so obvious that even President Shimon Peres defended the move." [Peres was one of the first Israeli leaders to act contrary to Israel's interest.] "Moreover, Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, reiterated for the millionth time this week that he opposes military strikes against Iran's nuclear installations. That is, for the millionth time, the top US military officer effectively said that he prefers a nuclear armed Iran to an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear installations." "In the interest of strengthening Israel's ties with a hostile administration, the Netanyahu government has adopted rhetoric on the Palestinian issue that is harmful to Israel's national interests. It declared its support for a Palestinian state, despite the fact that such a state will define itself through its devotion to Israel's destruction." "It has outlawed Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria, despite the fact that the move simply legitimizes the Palestinians' bigoted demand that Jews be barred from living in Judea and Samaria." "And it has advocated on behalf of Palestinian leaders like Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad who refuse to accept Israel's right to exist." "Indeed, if Israel were to reject the current European model and craft a foreign policy that advanced its national interests, one of its first acts would be to point out that the unelected Palestinian Prime Minister Fayyad is not a man of peace." "Just this week, Fayyad threatened to respond with a religious war to Israel's classification of the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel's Tomb as national heritage sites. Last Friday he joined rioters at Bil'in to attack Israel's security fence. Fayyad has taken a lead role in the campaign to implement an international boycott of Israeli products. Over the past couple of years he has sought to take control over the PA's security forces not to fight terror, but to prevent Israel from fighting terror. Finally, since the Hamas victory in the PA legislative elections in 2006, he has overseen the transfer of hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas." "In short, Fayyad, a former World Bank employee, is not a 'moderate,' as his supporters in the US and Europe claim. He is a fiscally sound terror financier and sponsor, actively waging war against Israel." [That makes him all the more dangerous to the free world.] "As for the Palestinians, the situation will not be remedied simply by firing a few incompetent office holders. For 16 years, in the interest of enhancing the country's ties with Europe, and to a lesser degree with the US, successive Israeli governments have ignored Israel's vital national interest in maintaining its control over Judea and Samaria. Indeed, they have preferred Euro-friendly, and Israel-unfriendly rhetoric to the sober-minded pursuit of Israel's national interest." "To avoid Europe's encroaching fate [at the hands of Radical Islam], Israel must abandon its current course. The purpose of rhetoric is to support policies adopted in the pursuit of a nation's interests. And Israel has interests in need of urgent advancement MY COMMENT: If Israel did assassinate the Hamas terrorist leader, it should get a medal. The question should not be why Israel did it, but why didn't others try to do it? Continued devotion to the failed sanctions campaign against Iran may be a way of pretending to do something rather than having to do something with unforeseen and unpleasant consequences. In a world of difficult choices, many politicians do not choose. But not choosing alternatives is choosing the present, disastrous course. U.S. foreign policy makers blundered in not attempting Iran regime change, when there still was time to work on it. They thought that was bad. Now what do they think? In the case of President Obama, who pulls his punches even with sanctions, the sanctions campaign was a way of diverting attention from military action. That inexperienced radical's deceptive ways and his conceit about his own knowledge and capabilities, narrow our choices on critical issues. What that president and his predecessor did to us was dither away alternatives until we are left with military attack by us, which Obama rejects, and nuclear attack by Iran, against an anti-missile defense that Obama rejects. Compounding our quandary is the lack of scrutiny by media and academia. They are too poor, dependent upon government, or ideologically rigid, themselves. They do not explore the issues sufficiently. They do not enlighten the public. The same dissenters who correctly warned of one disaster after another, such as the disasters of Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and Lebanon and reliance upon the UN, are ignored when they warn again. Our policy makers haven't the character or intelligence to realize that people who foresaw outcomes before might have insight again.
ISRAEL'S HAMAS AGENT Mosab Hassan Yousef, son of a Hamas leader, has just come out with an autobiography of his many escapades as an agent for Israel's secret service. It must be an exciting and revealing book. Mr. Yousef says he was mistreated when the Israelis captured him. After a while, he realized that the captors respected his religious rights, did not again mistreat him, and the Hamas representatives tortured their own people in prison. He began to see who and what really was evil. He decided he must do what he can to stop terrorism, but spared a number of terrorists by arranging for their capture rather than their assassination. Some of them do not realize they owe their lives to him. But he advises Israel not to release terrorists still in captivity, in exchange for one Israeli. Too many innocent lives would perish. Yousef became Israel's most valuable agent in Hamas, not just by having inside information, but by ingenuity and instinct. It was he who discovered a secret echelon really running Hamas. He also turned Christian. When the risk of being discovered by Hamas became too great, he was pulled out and went to the U.S. and a new life (Haaretz in www.imra.org.il, 2/27). There is a greatness to that person. All the more regretful that Israelis started by mistreating him.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
DUBAI, IRAN AND THE ASSASSINATION; TIME FOR A JEWISH TEA PARTY?
Posted by Susana K-M, February 28, 2010. |
|
This was written by Daniel Greenfield and is from his website:
|
|
Over in Dubai, the assassination has now become a fullblown circus, with the Emirati police acting with the expected professionalism and attention to detail so typical of police forces in the region. That is to say they're basically unrolling the largest conspiracy of all time, which long ago stopped making sense, but is likely to involve every nation in the world and about a thousand Mossad agents before it's done. Dubai police on Wednesday afternoon revealed that fifteen more suspects have been connected to the mysterious assassination of Hamas terror chief Mahmoud al-Mabhouh at a hotel in the emirate last month, and that three of the suspects later fled Dubai through Iran. According to new intelligence cited by the Al Jazeera and Al Arabiya news networks, the suspects — among them five women — came to Dubai from six European countries and from Hong Kong. Three of them were found to possess Australian passports, while the remaining twelve possessed passports from the UK, Ireland and France. "The extensive investigation has led to a total of 26 suspects so far involved in the crime," read a Dubai government statement quoted by Al Arabiya It's safe to say that this is A. Sheer lunacy While the idea of Israeli agents fleeing to Iran rings as senseless to most people, Arab countries have a way of trying to blame each other for conspiring with Israel. Even when those claims make no sense at all. Especially when they make no sense at all. The Dubai police authorities are demanding an international investigation, though it's doubtful that there's much international interest in investigating the whole mess. They're also shrieking that they have DNA and fingerprints, which is impressive only when you consider that for them to be any use they have to be matched against existing suspects. Of course this is a helpful distraction from Dubai's own collapsing economy, its ballyhooed tallest building in in the world that had to be shut down and its mall shark tank that sprang a leak. But someone might want to have a word with the developers of the mall, Emaar Properties. That's the same company that constructed the record-shattering Burj Khalifa skyscraper, which was shut down earlier this month after an elevator malfunctioned, trapping 15 passengers for nearly an hour before help came. Emaar, with strong ties to the Dubai's ruling family, was struck hard by the global financial meltdown. And it's also rather clear, that Dubai's ruling family did a lot of their construction on the cheap. They didn't spare the slave labor, but clearly they didn't spare the quality either. Islam researcher Matthias Küntzel meanwhile has a fascinating Journal article on Dubai, which again reinforces the fact that much of Dubai's wealth is attributable to companies using it to do business with Iran. Dubai is in fact already the "gateway to the Iranian market" — and not only for German companies. The tiny emirate is considered to be the hub for much of the world's illegal trade with Iran. Virtually nothing is produced in Dubai and yet, its activities have somehow catapulted the UAE to the top of the list of countries exporting to Iran in 2009. An astounding 80% of all Emirati imports are re-exported, one-quarter of which goes to Iran via Dubai. Some 8,000 Iranian firms and 1,200 Iranian trading companies are registered in the emirate. Every week, about 300 flights shuttle between Dubai and Iran. Dubai has one of the world's largest artificial harbors, Jebel Ali, a mere 100 miles away from the Iranian container port of Bandar Abbas. Between 2005 and 2009, the value of goods exported from Dubai to Iran tripled, reaching $12 billion. In 2008, total German exports to the UAE reached $11 billion, an increase of 40% over the previous year. In the vehicle construction and mechanical engineering sectors, exports rose by more than 60%. The desire of the German-Emirati Joint Council to open the "gateway to Iran" even wider is therefore rather worrisome. That's just part of the picture behind the fraud that is Dubai. At the Jerusalem Post meanwhile, Caroline Glick has a compelling piece that argues that Europe and America have forgotten what it means to defend their own interests. They didn't think of the latter, of course, because Europe has no idea of what its interests are. All it knows is how to sound off authoritatively. THIS HAS not always been the case. It was after all Europe that brought the world the art of rational statecraft. Once upon a time, Europe's leaders understood that a nation's foreign policy was supposed to be based on its national interests. To advance their nation's interests, governments would adopt certain policies. And to facilitate the success of those policies they developed rhetorical arguments to explain and defend them. Contemporary European statecraft stands this traditional foreign policy model on its head. Today, rhetoric rules the roost. If actions are taken at all, they are adopted in the service of rhetoric. As for national interests, well, the Lisbon Treaty that effectively bars EU member states from adopting independent foreign policies took care of those. With national interests subordinated to the whims of bureaucrats in Brussels, Europe does little of value in the international arena. As for its rhetoric, as the EU's rush to threaten Israel for allegedly killing a terrorist shows, it is cowardly, ineffectual and self-defeating. If the Mossad did in fact kill Mabhouh, then the operation was an instance in which Israel distinguished itself from its European detractors by acting, rather than preening. Unfortunately, such instances are increasingly the exception rather than the rule. Over the past 16 years or so, Israel largely descended into the European statecraft abyss. Rather than use rhetoric to explain policies adopted to advance its national interests, successive Israeli governments have adopted policies geared toward strengthening their rhetoric that itself stands in opposition to Israel's national interests. Take Israel's positions on Iran and the Palestinians, for instance. Regarding the Iranians, Israel's national interest is to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Today, the only way to secure this interest is to use force to destroy Iran's nuclear installations. Given Iran's leaders' absolute commitment to developing nuclear weapons, no sanctions — regardless of how "crippling" they are supposed to be — will convince them to curtail their efforts to build and deploy their nuclear arsenal. Beyond that, and far less important, the Russians and the Chinese will refuse to implement "crippling sanctions," against Iran.
IN LIGHT of these facts, it is distressing that Israel's leaders have made building an international coalition in support of "crippling" sanctions against Iran their chief aim. And this is not merely a rhetorical flourish. Over the past several weeks and months, Israel's top leaders have devoted themselves to lobbying foreign governments to support sanctions against Iran. Last week Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu went to Moscow to gin up support for sanctions from the Russian government. This week, Defense Minister Ehud Barak traveled to the UN and the State Department and Strategic Affairs Minister Moshe Ya'alon flew off to Beijing just to lobby senior officials to support sanctions. It isn't simply that this behavior doesn't contribute anything to Israel's ability to destroy Iran's nuclear installations. It harms Israel's ability to do so, if only by diverting our leaders' focus from where it should be: preparing the IDF to strike and preparing the country to withstand whatever the aftereffects of such a strike would be. Moreover, by calling for sanctions, Israel contributes to the delusion that sanctions are sufficient to block Iran's race to the nuclear finish line. As for the Palestinian issue, it is fairly clear that at a minimum, Israel's interest is to secure its control over the areas of Judea and Samaria that it requires to protect its Jewish heritage and its national security. But it is hard to think of anything the government has done in its year in office to advance that basic interest. It is argued that Israel's interest in maintaining good relations with the US administration trumps its interest in strengthening its control over areas in Judea and Samaria that it deems vital. The problem with this argument is that it takes for granted that Israel can determine the status of its relations with the US administration. In the case of the Obama administration, it is abundantly clear that this is not the case. President Barack Obama and his senior advisers have demonstrated repeatedly that they are interested in weakening — not strengthening — the US alliance with Israel. This week the administration condemned Israel for defining the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem as national heritage sites. The fact that they are national heritage sites is so obvious that even President Shimon Peres defended the move. Moreover, Adm. Michael Mullen, chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, reiterated for the millionth time this week that he opposes military strikes against Iran's nuclear installations. That is, for the millionth time, the top US military officer effectively said that he prefers a nuclear armed Iran to an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear installations. In the interest of strengthening Israel's ties with a hostile administration, the Netanyahu government has adopted rhetoric on the Palestinian issue that is harmful to Israel's national interests. It declared its support for a Palestinian state, despite the fact that such a state will define itself through its devotion to Israel's destruction. There's much more here, but it's an essentially compelling summation of the disease that has taken hold of the policies of the First World. In the blog roundup, while the left was busy being outraged over the assassination of a Hamas terrorist, The New Centrist has the story of a Cuban dissident who died in prison of a hunger strike. Doubtlessly Cuba's "excellent health care system" did all it could. Zapata's case sparked several street protests by government critics earlier this month, including one during which police in Camagüey detained some 35 people for several hours. The detainees later complained that some of them were beaten during the roundups. But of course the media isn't particularly interested in reporting on this. However every gang of terrorist supporters who throws rocks at Israeli soldiers protesting the fact that Israel still exists... now that gets unlimited media coverage. Elder of Ziyon tackles the "Israel has the right to defend itself but..." argument. The Onward James blog questions just how formidable a foe, the Taliban, really are. United States Central Command General David H. Petraeus said on Meet The Press that the Taliban is a formidable force. I am a bit non-plussed. Nonetheless, I suppose it depends on whose rules they fight. NATO allies fight under the Geneva Convention rules; they do not. No question it's difficult to fight a nation, a culture, an ideology, when the declaration of war is ambiguous such as — War on Terrorism — or that NATO is there only to protect, and should be policemen hunting for criminals. I understand that collateral damage is, sadly, also the price of war. Innocent citizens, or those who are not fighting, are killed. Of course the less the better. But the jihadists do not think that at all. The mujahideen defeated the Russians, because the Russians forgot why they were there and gave up. AT ISRAPUNDIT, CHARLES JACOBS ASKS WHETHER IT ISN'T TIME FOR A JEWISH TEA PARTY This campus phenomenon — the growth of the Muslim factor, the Jewish establishment's reluctance to respond forcefully to threats and the failure of public officials to protect Jews against Muslim threats — now mirrors the situation developing for Jews off campus: As mosques, funded by Saudi Arabia, and controlled by radical Muslim organizations, expand across America — unopposed — Jewish leaders fail to respond. Here too, "making nice" — through "dialogues" and outreach programs such as "twinning" synagogues and Islamic centers — is the Jewish establishment's primary response. And even when, as in Boston and Buffalo, such naïveté backfires, and Jews find instead of sincere and peaceful partners to shake hands with that they have been hoodwinked by Islamist anti-Semites, Jewish leaders remain silent. Meanwhile, in contrast to the Jewish community, a significant portion of America is in rebellion against — and is in the process of challenging — its political establishment. Grass-roots frustration expressed first in raucous "town hall" meetings and now in the Tea Party movement defeated incumbent Democrats and influenced elected officials not to run for re-election. Americans are angry with both parties. Why? Former CIA official Herbert Meyer notes that Americans were shocked by "two catastrophes we hadn't imagined our political establishment would allow to happen." First there was 9-11, "when we discovered that for years, Al Qaeda and its allies had been waging holy war against us," and our leaders — who knew — did not tell us. The second was "the 2008 financial crash, which revealed that our economy is a house of cards built on a pile of debt so high we cannot possibly repay it." Changing America's Jewish leadership is more difficult: Jewish political leaders are not democratically elected — or replaced. As with royalty, we may get lucky from time to time with an outstanding leader. But our "leaders" are mostly selected and controlled by well-intentioned philanthropists. Many of these donors are politically liberal, and even those who are not are inherently conflict-averse and comfortable with the status quo. Meanwhile, as we wait and pray for more effective leadership, we need to introduce the concept of "accountability" for our sclerotic Jewish leaders — perhaps by lighting grass-roots fires under them. What about a town hall meeting? The problem with that though can be summed up by pointing out how many of these groups are basically undemocratic, and are funded by grants from Democratic politicians. This is part of a typical pattern in liberal politics, in which liberal activists run organization that claim to represent a demographic, get grants to dole out to that demographic, and encourage that demographic to support those same politicians. This is machine politics at its ugliest and there's no way to really change that culture.
OTHER MATTERS Lemon Lime Moon has the equation for ending conflict Noah David Simon takes on the Obama Administration over Rachel's Tomb. The Obama administration criticized Israel Wednesday for designating two Jewish holy sites supposedly on Palestinian territory as Israel national heritage sites but the dumb bastards in the Obama administration seem to forget that Rachel's Tomb and the Tomb of the Patriarchs are indigenous to the Jewish people and were there thousands of years before the fabricated "Palestinians" fraudulently claimed the territory to be theirs. For Spanish speaking readers, the REFLEXIONES SOBRE MEDIO ORIENTE Y EL MUNDO blog continues to translate some of my articles into Spanish, including my recent piece on Dubai, MAHMOUD AL-MABHOUH: MATAR A UN TERRORISTA — ANAÁLISIS EXCLUSIVO and ISRAEL, EL HOLOCAUSTO Y LA LECCIÓN DE SUPERVIVENCIA Via Religion of Peace, England's legacy comes down to this. NO suprise that we have another sickening blatant example of the British judiciary system going soft on muslim thugs. Iraqi, Serwan Abdullah, 23, another muslim-sorry-excuse-for-a-man spat on a World War II hero's medals, worn by his proud grandson, on Remembrance Day. After committing the abhorrent and unprovoked act — the cowardly Abdullah quickly ran away. The smirking Serwan Abdullah consistently voiced no remorse or sorrow for his despicable act: "Abdullah showed no remorse and told officers he had done 'nothing wrong' adding: 'I am proud of what I have done. I have no respect for him. F*** him and f*** his medals.'" One is reminded of Philip Larkin's Homage to a Government Next year we are to bring the soldiers home
...and not even the money anymore Dear readers, enjoy the weekend. To those who celebrate Purim this sunday, Happy Purim. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
THE NORTHERN TINDER BOX
Posted by Jonathan Spyer, February 28, 2010. |
|
The war of words is continuing. The latest salvoes were fired last week by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, and his Lebanese ally and client Hassan Nasrallah. Ahmedinejad reportedly told Nasrallah that if Israel attacks Hizballah, the response should be sufficient to lead to the closure, once and for all, of the Israeli 'case.' In the same week, Nasrallah promised attendees at a 'Resistance Martyrs Day' celebration that his movement would target Israel's infrastructure in the event of further hostilities. The Hizballah leader mentioned airports, factories and refineries as possible targets. Hizballah second in command Naim Qassem joined in this week, describing Israel as 'worse than Nazism,' and the 'leader of international crime under the sponsorship of the U.S. and major world powers.' Qassem reiterated his movement's rejection of any diplomatic option vis a vis Israel, saying that "What was taken by the force of occupation can only be regained by the force of the resistance." The self-confident, warlike tones of these leaders are by now familiar. But what, if anything, is revealed by these most recent statements? Some analysis has suggested that the heightened rhetoric may presage an attempt by Iran to heat up the northern front in response to the hardening international stance to Iran's nuclear program. While nothing should be ruled out, a number of factors should be borne in mind in this regard. Hizballah and its backers are well aware of the broad contours of Israel's likely response in the event of further aggression by the movement on the northern border. The message has been adequately transferred that a future conflict would not remain within the parameters of a localized Israel-Hizballah clash in southern Lebanon. Rather, with Hizballah present in the Lebanese government, and its decisions regarding war not subject to supervision or appeal by any other element in Lebanon, a future war is likely to take on the characteristics of a state to state conflict. The results of such a conflict would be damaging to northern Israel, without a doubt. But to Lebanon and to Hizballah, they are likely to be devastating. This means that from the Iranian point of view, the Hizballah card is one of the most valuable that Teheran holds — but it can probably be played only once. So there is reason to suppose that the Iranians have good reason to hold back on committing their Hizballah clients until a possible later stage — most likely, in response to a future western or Israeli strike on Iranian nuclear facilities. Of course, past wars in the region have often erupted not from a decision by one or other of the sides, but rather from a situation of ongoing, rising tensions, which was then ignited by a single, ill-judged action — such as the attempted murder of Ambassador Shlomo Argov, which led to Operation Peace for Galilee in 1982, or the Hizballah kidnapping attempt which precipitated the war of 2006. Hizballah's failure to avenge the death of senior movement official Imad Mughniyeh remains a major issue for the movement. In his speech to the rally last week, Nasrallah referred to this issue, saying "What we want is a retaliation that is up to the level of Imad Mugniyeh." But here the movement faces a dilemma. Any major strike on an Israeli target is likely to provoke precisely the conflagration that Hizballah and its supporters fear. Hizballah, in addition to being a client and proxy of Iran, is also a Lebanese Shia movement, requiring the support of the Shia of southern Lebanon for its longer term goal of dominating the country. And for all their pride in the 'divine victory' of 2006, the stream of residents of south Lebanon seeking to flee the area whenever security tensions have risen over the last three years has surely not escaped the Hizballah leadership's attention. So can we conclude that deterrence has been achieved, and the situation of latent tension in the north is likely to remain at its current level for the foreseeable future, short of an Israeli strike on Iran's nuclear facilities? To do so would be to assume that the thinking of the Hizballah leadership and its allies in Iran is ultimately pragmatic, rational, and non-ideological. This would be a mistaken assumption. The writings of Hizballah's leaders, and its actions — particularly since 2000 — offer clear evidence that its commitment to jihad against Israel is a genuine one. Recent visitors to Beirut speak of an atmosphere of high, even delusional morale, among Hizballah's cadres. It is sincerely believed that the next war will initiate Israel's demise. And there is in the public domain clear evidence of at least one abortive operation which could have sparked renewed conflict — namely, the foiled IRGC/Hizballah plan to kidnap the Israeli ambassador to Azerbaijan, for which two movement members are on trial. Ultimately, there are ample pragmatic reasons as to why the Iran/Hizballah side might want to avoid escalation at the present time. But there are also irrational elements within the thinking of these forces — which incline them toward underestimation of their enemy. There is also a clear motivation for actions intended to reap a cost to Israel, but one not sufficiently high that Jerusalem will launch a full scale response. The possibility here for error and mis-calculation is obviously immense. The recent deployment by Hizballah of sophisticated M-600 surface to surface missiles adds further fuel to the mix. The situation in the north is complex, multi-faceted, and requiring of only a single wrong move to end the fragile quiet of the last three and a half years.
Dr. Jonathan Spyer is a senior research fellow at the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, Herzliya, Israel
This article is archived at
|
|
"SHALOM INTERNATIONAL'S LAST 25 MONTHS AND WHERE WE NEED TO GO WITH THIS MOVEMENT!"
Posted by Bob Kunst, February 28, 2010. |
|
Dear "Chosen" Activists: Our impressive activism, needs to be reviewed, as we are now putting 'structure' to what has already been accomplished,with our agenda and what makes us unique and how we can do so much more with this 'structure' that will put us on a major new and positive level, across the nation and across the planet. There is no question that we are a missing link in resistance, while a role-model of the alternatives to those who should be doing what we are doing and aren't and why we do what we do and are not competing with anyone on these successes. Imagine if this impact were duplicated in every community? Imagine how much more could be accomplished, since there is strength in numbers. Imagine if those loaded with excuses instead focused on making it all happen? G-d's hand is on all of these efforts, and we are blessed with the many thousands who have participated with us in the last 25 months. It's one thing to complain about the horrors out there and then actually doing something about it, which is our highly visible and constant expertise we urge everyone to be a part of and embrace as part of your own activism. The attacks upon Israel and Jews is escalating. Iran and its nukes and Obama with EU and UN pressures for Israel to commit suicide and with the anti-semites in the Jewish organizations also participating in this tragedy, we have a great deal at stake at this critical moment in history. "Never Again is happening again". We are back in the 1930s by our 'so-called leaders', who haven't learned a thing from the past,but are repeating the same dangerous mistakes, showing 'weakness' our enemies are taking advantage of and leaving us all more vulnerable as a result. So while our history for the last 25 months may be long, please read and understand how much we've been able to accomplish, with G-d's help and all of you who did get it. We have legs. We have terrific ideas. We know how much more can happen if you also do your part. Shabbat Shalom,
|
|
A BRIEF HISTORY OF SHALOM INTERNATIONAL/ WWW.DEFENDJERUSALEM.NET FROM OCT. 2007 TO FEB. 24, 2010. We've now done 215 rallies/events and 1,128 news interviews that has reached very many millions across this planet. We 'broke' the silence within the global Jewish community to stop the Olmert government in Israel, when it said it would divide Jerusalem and Israel. This goes for any Israeli government or those pushing Israel to do this suicide that would finish off the Jewish state and give the Nazi their final victory. We established that the best defense is a good offense and have been pro-active and manipulating the situation, not just reacting to the Muslims menace and threats, locally and globally, which they love to manipulate. We have been mobilizing people of conscience within the Jewish, Christian, Hindu, Bhuddist, 'infidel' communities, all threatened by the Muslim Nazis. We have been functioning not on Israel being 62-63 yrs. old, but being 5000 yrs. old and our need to defend the faith and all historical places in the Holyland establishing our roots and rights to be there. We have been the most visible of all Jewish organizations, though most groups have sided with Obama to divide Jerusalem and Israel which would finish off the Jewish state and further endanger world Jewry. Obama met with 14 of these Jewish groups to divide Jerusalem and Israel from "AIPAC" to "J St." and sell this to the Jewish grassroots. We have opposed Obama and Hillary and anyone who would divide Israel, Jerusalem and America, while our whole effort has been to support, protect and defend Israel, Jerusalem and America. We have taken on the Jewish and Israeli establishments,CAIR and the Muslim Jihadists, the UN, EU, The Vatican, Obama/Hillary, Gov. Crist of Fla., Target Stores, Jimmy Carter and politicians in both political parties, 'G-20' and other Summits of world leaders among so many of our efforts. We have developed and are furthering developing a global effort with all of these successes. We have shown that we aren't afraid, aren't going to be misrepresented or intimidated, are going to tell the truth and alter this stupid direction of 'land for peace' and '2 states for 2 peoples' as phony, dangerous and a pereceived weakness that is only leading to more war. We are the real 'peace' movement. We have been doing right vs wrong, not left vs. right. Our Covenant with G-d is our foundation. Our faith, identity, history, all of it must be stated to the world, which tragically Israel hasn't a clue on public relations and the propaganda war that is critical and necessary and we have been filling that gap on a major level. Our 1128 news interviews have reached millions nationally and internationally. We have proven that every time we show up and state our case, the grassroots is always with us, everywhere we have been. WHERE WE HAVE BEEN; WHAT WE HAVE DONE 1. We took this campaign to the White House and led the movement on these issues, starting on Nov. 25, 2007 with 80 people and 15 key media. We have rallied at the White House on 14 occassions, the last time on July 5, 2009, when Obama was Pres. We have also rallied there when Olmert was there, as well as Fatah's Abbas as no different than Hamas. People from all over the world joined with us each and every time we rallied and only a few negative comments from people. 2. We rallied then to the Holocaust Museum in Wash., D.C. after marching from the White House. 3. We led the efforts against this "Annapolis Summit" in Annapolis, Md., where we spent two days and did 150 news interviews. We have exposed both Olmert and Livni, urged by Pres. Bush and Condoleeza Rice, to come in through a side door at this Summit, as the cowards they all are in rewarding the very enemies of Israel and America. Olmert/Livni having no self-respect or respect for Israeli sovereignty are the very forces we exposed as the frauds and embarassments they were/are. There is no one to negotiate peace with. You can't make peace with someone who wants to kill you. Fatah, Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. are an extension of the Mufti of Jerusalem, alligned with Hitler to exterminate all Jews. This insane 'peace' effort only brings those committed to Israel's and America's destruction closer to the major Israeli cities and Ben Gurion airport, while inviting more terror attacks upon the U.S. and the West. Propping up Abbas in West Bank, who barely has any support amongst his own people let alone can't stop Hamas, is plain stupidity and dangerous. While the Arabs cowardly deny the Holocaust, they want to finish the job Hitler started, want to grab everything Jewish in G-d's 'holy' land and everything else, with the grand theft in the Holocaust and also the throwing out of 900,000 Jews from Muslim lands in 1948. We are the only Jewish organizaion using these issues as part of our 'truth' campaign. The Israelis completely ignore the Mufti of Jerusalem and Hitler. Another major mistake. At the same time we rallied in Annapolis, we were with Knesset Israel Synogague, where Rabbi Weisblum fed us for 2 days. We also rallied at the Israeli Consulate in NYC with Assemblyman Dov Hindkind and at the Holocaust Memorial in Philly on the same day. We also rallied at the U.S. State Department in Wash., D.C. 4. We stated during the Presidential election: "Obama is Bad For Israel and America". We took this campaign to The Boca Raton Synogague; a fundraiser for Obama at the Diplomat Hotel in Hollywood, Fla., a national mayors conference in Miami, where Obama was at. We also took this to the Democratic National Convention in Denver, Colorado for 4 days and another 250 media interviews (Aug., 2008). We also took this to the Republic National Convention in St. Paul, Minn. (Sept. 2008) and another 250 media interviews. We also took this to the first Presidential debate in Oxford, Miss. and much more media. We also took this to the national AIPAC Convention in Wash.,D.C. in 2007,plus will be protesting at AIPAC in D.C. from March 21-23, 2010. We also took this to a McCain rally in Orlando and also at an Obama/Hillary Rally in Orlando in 2008. Also at a debate at Bet Breira Shul in S. Dade and at a table we had shared with S. Fla. Friends of Israel at Federation event. We also rallied against Obama at a rally for him in Tampa. 5. We took our "Keep Jerusalem and Israel United " campaigns to the "General Assembly" of 3000 Jewish leaders in Nashville, Tenn. in Nov. 2007 and Nov. 2009 in Wash., D.C.; the National Religious Broadcasters Convention, Proclaiming Justice to All Nations Dinner, in Nashville, Tenn., Feb. 2008; the National Jewish Democratic Coalition, Wash., D.C. in Nov. 2009, and opposed "J St." at their national convention in D.C., Nov. 2009. 6. We opposed Muslims wanting Sharia law, in Tall. in March of 2009 and also this March 11, 2010 in Tall. for Round II on this level. We opposed CAIR twice at the Ft. Laud. Convention Center, 2008,2009 with Americans Against Hate and once we opposed CAIR with Jesse Jackson in Arlington, Va. in Nov. 2009. We led opposition with 75 people and help from Joyce Kaufman Radio Show and Tom Trento of Fla. Security Council, when 300 Muslims screamed: "Jews Into The Ovens", when Israel finally attacked Hamas in Gaza on Dec. 30, 2008. At our one-yr. anniversary,12/30/09, our 300+ were there with lots of media and the Muslim cowards did a no-show. We rallied with Americans Against Hate in Ft. Laud. against CAIR's getting a street sign by Nova Univ.in Broward County, with CAIR supporting Hamas in 2010. We also rallied against a mosque in Pompano Beach,Fla. with Rev. Dozier in 2010. Since Dec. 30, 2008, the Muslims at the Ft. Laud. Fed. Bldg. would come back the next week but this time with 250 and we having 250. The following week they had 150 and we had 300. Our rally for Israel at the Holocaust Memorial on Miami Beach on 1/4/09, had 2000 and then we had 300 at the Israeli Consulate in Miami facing the 300 Muslims and 12 of them got arrested. Shalom International has done weekly rallies at the Ft. Laud. Fed. Bldg. every Tuesday since 12/30/09 through to 2/23/10. We have also begun rallying at FAU, Boca Raton, (3-5P.M.) every Monday, with 3 major rallies during the war and weekly for the last two months, to great reaction from those at FAU, with a large Muslim population, and only a few blocks from both a Mosque and Muslim Center. We have rallied for 6 times in Boynton Beach, at Jog Rd. and Gateway at Noon every Monday in Boynton Beach. For the last 6 weeks we also rally every Wed., at Pines Blvd. and entry to Century Village, 5-6P.M in Pembroke Pines. We are the ONLY Jewish group in the world with Christian friends who help us to rally 4 times weekly (weather permitting) on behalf of Israel and America. The results of our activism and opposition to the pro-Hamas gang was that this effort caught on globally with many rallying for Israel against Hamas from S. America to the Ukraine and across America. Tom Trento's You Tube on those Muslims screaming "Jews Into the Ovens" got over 500,000 hits and helped push this entire scenario of counter-protest in support of Israel going after Hamas. We also rallied with 50 against 1500 pro-Hamas in Orlando in 2009. We also rallied twice in Melbourne, Fla. with 300 and again with 75, both in 2009. 7. We rallied against Jimmy Carter at Carter Center in Atlanta, May 7, 2008 with local and national media attention, for his support for Hamas, his collaboration with the Arabs for his Carter Center and his anti-semitism. When Jimmy Carter recently offered his apology to the Jews, we rejected it as a 'political stunt' and 'sorry, doesn't cut it', and with two Associated Press stories got over 300 media worldwide, plus opened the door to many attacks upon Carter from everywhere. We aren't finished with him yet and plan more events in Atlanta, plus one meeting we already had there. 8. We were part of the Jewish Heritage Festival in Daytona Beach in 2008 and will again on March 14, 2010 have a table at this event for 5000+. 9. We rallied against Obama and Rahm Emanuel in Chicago, Ill., Aug. 9, 2009, with Caroline Glick of Jerusalem Post, our feature speaker and we had 9 media nd 300 attend in the first rally in Obama's back yard, also with much support from the Russian Jewish community in Chicago. On this same day, Abbas and Fatah were demanding in Bethlehem, not just East Jerusalem but all of Jerusalem. This effort to rally in Chicago began with a meeting in Philly, that came from a couple who rallied with us in Boca Raton. 10. We rallied to "Keep Jerusalem United" in NYC again at the Israeli Consulate; at a rally for thousands at an Armory rally in 2008; at Central Park on "Israel Day" in 2008; 3 times at the UN against Iran's Little Hitler-2008,2009; Against the Left/Pro-Hamas march of 5000 and us with 50. In Times Square in 2008. We were also part of a coalition rally at the UN with other anti-Muslim Jihadists. Also, we rallied in front of the State Capital in Albany, NY. 11. We had 3 more rallies at the Torch of Friendship in Miami in 2008, including with the Hispanic Coalition and also against the Muslims Jihadists. Our first rally in this effort took place at the Torch of Friedship Oct. 2007 and our first media was the Jewish Journal, that's given us 8 stories since. 12. We addressed Hadassah in Coral Springs,Fla. plus did one rally there. We addressed an Israeli-American Club in Kings Point Condo in 2009, plus also rallied against Obama at Kings Point in 2008. 13. We were the principle speakers at a rally for Israel at Century Village in Feb. of 2009 (6 rallies outside there since). 14. We've had 2 meetings and 3 rallies at Chabad in Boca Raton, one rally at a park in downtown Boca Raton with 150 and meetings in Chabad in N. Miami Beach, while attending a large gathering for the Rebbe's anniversay since his passing, in Philly where Sen. Lieberman was the feature speaker. 15. We rallied for Israel at a presidential candidate debate at FAU in 2008, met at Rabbi Goldman's shul in Pompano Beach,(also there when Laurie Cardoza Moore of Proclaiming Justice to All Nations spoke there) and rallied with Rudy Guiliani campaign in Ormand Beach, with our efforts and spoke to him to address these issues of our campaign. We also spoke at an event for Christians and Jews United for Israel in Boca Raton in 2009. 16. We rallied outside the Shul of Bal Harbour when Sen. Lieberman came to speak in 2008. We rallied when Liberman was speaking in Ft. Laud. and also at a Stadium Rally for Sen. McCain in Bwd. County. 17. We've had organizational meetings in Detroit, Philly, Atlanta, Ft. Laud., Silver Springs, Md., Sunny Isles, Fla., North Miami Beach, Boca Raton. 18. We rallied at a McCain rally at F.I.U. in 2008, with 5000 there to see him. 19. We also rallied at the Super Bowl on 2/7/10 in Miami and Art Deco visibility on Miami Beach a week earlier with our tee-shirts, with many thousands giving us support. 20. We also addressed Rotary Club in Palm Beach in 2008; rallied against Chavez of Venezuela and his anti-semitic politics in Shul in North Miami Beach and Consulate in Miami in 2009. We participated in church luncheon in Palm Beach. 21. We participated in "Tea Party" rallies in Ft. Laud. (5); Weston, Fla. and also in Wash., D.C. and will be part of one this April 15 in Ft. Laud.. Have collected over 1000 names from these events. A rally for Israel in Orlando Shul on 2/14/10, was leafleted by a couple who join with us every Tues. at Fed. Bldg. in Ft. Laud. We support Israel and America and have been well received at these events. We do not get involved with 'tea party' inside politics or who they are endorsing. 22. We protested Jewish sell-out members of Congress in S. Fla. in 2009 in going after Rep. Wexler in Delray Beach and Rep. Klein in S. Palm Beach and Rep. Wasserman-Schultz(Schmutz) in Weston. We also rallied for U.S. military in Iraq and Afghanistan in Ft. Laud. in 2009. 23. We rallied in the rain against Rev. Wright — Obama attended this racist's Church — at the National Press Bldg. in Wash., D.C. in 2008 and got lots of media there as well. 24. We rallied with JDLCanada in Toronto in Aug. of 2009 at the U.S. Consulate against Obama's sellout politics against Israel. We also addressed this organization a few days earlier and we also got local media as a result of this effort. 25. We were part of a meeting at Beth Israel Synogague on Miami Beach about building in East Jerusalem and met with Nof Zion. com folks who then agreed to help us to go to Jerusalem, to organize our rally: "Hands Off of Jerusalem", when the Pope was there in May of 2009. We would do 60 media interviews with 200 at our rally. This was preceded by our efforts in Geneva, Switzerland as part of this effort. Nof Zion has a project with the most spectacular view of Jerusalem and is building 400+ units. Please check them out as one of the key investments and preservation efforts for a United Jerusalem. 26. We also stood in front of the Vatican in Rome with our sign, 4/25/09,: "Keep Jerusalem United" and this photo made world news including the Orthodox Union publication in the U.S.. 26. We rallied in Geneva, Switzerland against the anti-semitic and anti-Israel "Durbin II" UNazis conference that also gave Iran's Little Hitler a forum to again blast Israel with. We participated and had a table at a major conference on these issues, a Remember the Holocaust event with 3000, a rally against Darfur genocide with 100, and another pro-Israel rally and got a dozen media interviews for these efforts as well as a mailing list from many of the dozen Jewish groups and many Jews attending these events from 4-20-24/09. We also had a rally at the UN in NYC at the same time as we were in Geneva. 27. We had two ads in the Jerusalem Post in Oct. 2009, that one key local rabbi helped us to get. The focus was on all the bad things that happened to Israeli leaders who sold out to the enemies of Israel and the Jewish nation. 28. We met with some Jewish leaders,but Christian Zionist leaders in Portland, Oregon, put 200 of our stickers there in circulation with their support. 29. We confronted 60 anti-Israel political groups such as "J St." at a conference at the Wilson Center, in Wash., D.C. in Nov. of 2009. Only two of us were for Israel, but we made international news at this event as well. We confronted one Jew and one Arab, both sides of the same coin, in their give up everything politics, at a forum at the U. of Miami in 2009. 30. We were interviewed on WIOD Radio several times including to comment on officer murdered by Nazi at Holocaust Museum in 2009. We were also interviewed by Jewish radio shows in Philly, Phoenix, AZ., and Jewish Activist Radio out of NYC and Joe Orlow. We've also been interviewed by Jewish papers in Atlanta, NYC, Wash., D.C., S. Fla. and the JTA. Also, Ch. 2 and 10 from Israel and Haaretz and JPost several times. We were also interviewed on "Wiley Drake" Christian Radio 6 times. 31. We opposed Rev. Phelps Nazis, from Topeka, Kansas, both at the General Assembly in Wash., D.C., Nov., 2009 and again when they came down to Boca Raton Federation, when we organized 100 against them and much media attention as well for our efforts in 2010. 32. We were the only Jewish group visible at the "G-20" World leader Summit in Pittsburgh,Aug., 2009 and got 20 media interviews there as well. 33. We got over 300 media worldwide in demanding that Fla. Gov. Crist change a special election date that would fall on the last day of Passover to another date, and that this insensitivity was an act of 'anti-semitism'. Gov. Crist changed the date and we then called him a 'mensch' and got media on that one as well. This was in Dec. 2009, for an election now taking place on April 13, 2010. Another victory for our side. 34. We initiated a national exposure upon Target Stores selling a "Palestine" Globe that eliminated "Israel". This product from China, was exposed via media on Joyce Kaufman's Radio Show in S.Fla. and by letter, we wrote to the CEO on 1/24/10. On 1/25/10, we got a call from Target customer relations that they would remove the globes, but we could buy them continually for another week. On 1/28/10, at a rally we did in NYC at "Ground Zero", 9 media were there for us as well to focus on our opposition to '9/11' trial in NYC, our opposition to Muslim Jihadists responsible for '9/11' and the Globe from Target. The NYTimes Blog, and subsuquent major story from the NYPost, plus Fox and NBC tvs in NYC and over 100 media worldwide picked up on this story, which is still on-going with Target refusing to explain itself on how this happened in the first place or what they did with the globes themselves, we don't know were destroyed or given away which only adds to the same problem. We expect to confront Target at it stockholders meeting in May. With a global campaign against Israel claiming Israel doesn't exist, or the Holocaust didn't happen or that '9/11' was an inside job, and those who say Israel shouldn't exist, or those who say Israel should not be able to defend itself (Goldstone Report) by UN, EU, etc. or are boycotting Israel, this 'globe' is the key example and model of what their goals are in marginalizing Israel on every level and delegitimizing Israel and therefore an additional attack upon the Jewish people worldwide as part of this assault. These dangers we face with synogagues and churches under attack and the need to defend ourselves everywhere is part of a meeting with Rabbi Moskowitz we attended in Chabad Shul in Kew Gardens, Queens,NY, on all of these issues, on 1/31/10. We are working on a National Jewish Security Council, relationship with Rabbi Moskowitz. 35. When the tragedy of the Haitian Earthquake took place, we participated with a group at the City of Miami Beach to help organize relief. We also took the tremendous Israeli success of being first and foremost in saving Haitian lives with their medical team and took this info to a S. Fla. Radio station, that previously had ignored Israel while promoting Saudi Arabia as being involved when it wasn't. We reversed this for the Caribbean community with the DJ reversing himself from a week earlier and promoting Israel and stating how the Muslims and Arabs were AWOL. This is also an on-going campaign for us to reach out to the radio community media to change this anti-Israel image and to correct what really happened is going on there. 36. As you can see we have been the most successful grassroots effort in the nation and planet and also the most underfunded and still $15,000 in debt. We take no salary as yet for our successes. We have also gotten a headquarters at 2040 N.E. 163rd St., in North Miami Beach, near Aventura since April 2009. 37. We put out 10,000 bumper stickers that say with both the U.S. and Israeli flags on them: "Keep Jerusalem United" and "Protect and Defend" and they are all over the world as one of our visible fundraisers. We have also produced thousands of "Keep Jerusalem United" buttons; 5000 posters donated to us as well as 19 large banners; and hundreds of pins also donated to us for fundraising. We also have paintings from Holocaust survivor, Eva Costabel of NYC on magnificent scenes from Jerusalem that are for sale on our web site,www.defendjerusalem.net which is managed by Barnett.Your donations are vital either through paypal on the web or by check to: "Defend Jerusalem", P.O.Box 402263, Miami Beach, Fla. 33140. 38. We've also had donated art work from Carole Flato, Marlene Arribas and Jeannene Ross, and Beena, to advertise our rallies with. 39. From Israelpundit to Voices of Unity Coalition, and very many blogs and emails putting out our messages and efforts to mobilize resistance to the madness out there so that we have had access to very many thousands of people all over the world besides our own 5000 e-mail list. We have put out 300+ e-mails and announcements, and hundreds of tee-shirts and many thousands of flyers. With all of our visible attempts to tell our side of the story, we are sort of a mini Al Jazeera, taking advantage of being at the right place at the right moment and stating our case for the world to understand another point of view they aren't getting otherwise.We've actually been interviewed by Al Jazeera on 3 occassions too. When we were in Israel we pleaded with the locals to take advantage of 1000 media covering the Pope they could take advantage of to tell their story to the world eager to hear from them and most, tragically didn't get it. But we did, with the help of NofZion.com and got coverage all over Europe and the world that Jerusalem belongs to every Jew and every Jew murdered for being a Jew and that Israel is strictly caretaker for what belongs to G-d and his gifts to us, his 'chosen' people who are the world's scapegoats and also the world's conscience and why we are the missing link in telling the truth and moving beyond those foolish politics that are allowing the next Holocaust, G-d forbid. We stood firm that the Pope shouldn't give sainthood to Hitler's Pope Pius XII, and to open papal documents on WWII and to return $millions in Jewish holy items and articfacts stolen in the Holocaust and in the Vatican needing to be returned to the Jewish people. We have also advocated that the death camps be taken over by Israel and these holy sights and the world's largest Jewish cemeteries, need to have the truth told about all victims and also to prevent commercialism, trivialization and Vaticanization of those camps. 40. We are the biggest bang for the buck and the most successful and underfunded Jewish group with Christian supporters as well, helping us to make this difference in the last 25 months. Imagine if every Jew understood both the threats and the opportunities and also experienced the support we are getting, that one has to experience, beyond the biased anti-Israel media and the politics supporting the terrorists from the EU, UN, Obama, and the Jew-haters around the world, including in our own community doing so much harm to us all. We will rally opposite the Looney-Left and Pro-Hamas gang in Wash., D.C. when they march on March 20, 2010, and we are peacefully resisting at the corner of Conn. Ave., M St. and 18th St., starting at 9 AM.. On June 6, 2010, our "Gathering of Mensches" at the Holocaust Museum in Wash. D.C. at 8 AM to Remember "D-Day" anniversary and the Holocaust and this anniversary of the "Sixth Day War" when Israel and Jerusalem were reunited...and then our march to the WWII Memorial for wreath laying and taps, and then march past the White House (Muslim House) on our way to the U.S. Capitol for a 2 P.M. Rally on protecting and defending America and Israel and to finally make a huge statement of thanks for everyone confronting the Muslim extremists in Iraq and Afghanistan, and Israel on the forefront in the Middle East and everyone standing tall against these threats across the planet. Shalom International/www.defendjerusalem.net is a constant reminder of defending our Covenant with G-d, our religion, our 5000 yr. history, our identity as Jews and with help from our Christian supporters and others who believe as we do that time is running out and the dangers are great and our collective need to respond to this danger and emergency with another war on the horizon, let alone terrorist attacks in the U.S. from domestic Muslim Jihadists. ACT NOW, BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE. PUT YOUR FINANCES, RESOURCES, TIME AND EFFORTS BEHIND WHAT IS WORKING AND WOULD WORK EVEN BETTER WITH YOUR HELP AND SUPPORT. Bob Kunst is President, Shalom International. Contact the group by email at shalominternational@mindspring.com. Visit the website at www.defendjerusalem.net |
|
FATAH LEADERS PRAISE MASS MURDERER
Posted by Maayana Miskin, February 28, 2010. |
|
A Fatah conference held this week in Ramallah included a speech in praise of terrorists. A member of Fatah's central committee, Mahmoud el-Aloul, said Fatah would continue to honor Arabs who died fighting Israel and commemorate their attacks. El-Aloul, formerly the governor of Shechem, said Fatah would endeavor to pass the "tradition of struggle" to the next generation of PA Arabs. Among his listeners were representatives from various PA institutions. The PA is currently run by Fatah, and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is a long-time member of the group. Aloul gave particular honor to female terrorist Dalal Mughrabi. Mughrabi led a squad of eleven terrorists who infiltrated Israel by boat from Lebanon in 1978 and murdered dozens of civilians, including 13 children and American photographer Gail Rubin, in what became known as the Coastal Road Massacre. A spokesman for MK Michael Ben-Ari of the National Union slammed the government for failing to act in the face of Fatah's praise for terrorism. "The government needs to figure out why it insists on conducting negotiations with a gang of terrorists. In any normal country, the government would declare war on Fatah over statements like these. "Only Israel allows itself to capitulate to its enemies." Maayana Miskin writes for Arutz-7, where these articles were published today. |
|
DR. ANAT MATAR: "BOYCOTT ISRAEL BUT PLEASE DON'T BOYCOTT ME."
Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, February 28, 2010. |
|
I went to a recent talk given by Dr. Anat Matar on her recent visit to London. Dr Matar is a senior lecturer in the Department of Philosophy at Tel Aviv University. She is also an Israeli citizen who wants the world to boycott Israel. She is a member of Who Profits? Exposing the Israeli Occupation Industry. Dr. Matar feels that the only way to end Israel's occupation of the West Bank is for there to be an economic, cultural and academic boycott of her own country. Imagine boycotting yourself! Would any Brit or American call for a boycott of their respective countries over Afghanistan or Iraq? Only a courageous, caring and unselfish person would even contemplate this, surely? Her son, Hagai, spent two years in an Israeli prison for refusing to enlist. At her talk at SOAS Dr. Matar outlined the three main objections that her friends on the radical anti-Zionist left have to a boycott:
Poor Anat. Her own supporters attacking their boycott heroine. She tried to put across her ethical argument and explained how hard it is to be an artist in Israel: "You can't make a film or be a dancer without taking money from the Israeli government. If you are rich you are alright but if you are poor and an artist and support the occupation what do you do? They can't give up their lives. If they support the boycott it will finish their careers". I then realised how wrong I was. I had honestly respected Dr Matar. However misguided, she actually seemed to be willing to sacrifice herself for what she perceived to be the greater good of Israel and the Palestinian people; an academic boycott in which even she would suffer. But in effect she was calling for an academic and cultural boycott just so long as those who are against the occupation are not affected which, conveniently, includes herself. So in a nutshell her message to the world is: "Boycott Israel, boycott all Israeli academics but please don't boycott me." Dr. Matar isn't as courageous as she would like people to think she is. Meanwhile, you can make your way down to the Tate Modern this weekend and see what Israeli artists have to say about Israel through their art.
Contact Israel Academia Monitor. by email at
e-mail@israel-academia-monitor.com. Visit the website at
|
|
MUSLIM BEAUTY CONTEST
Posted by CPocerl, February 27, 2010. |
|
This was written by Richard Moriarty and is from The Sun
|
|
NICE humps, full lips and a shiny body — these are just some of the qualities required for females entering a bizarre camel pageant being held in the United Arab Emirates. The hard-working animals have been groomed and beautified for days to ensure that all contestants look their best. And with millions of pounds in prize money at stake, competition at the third annual Al Dhafra Festival in the remote desert of Western United Arab Emirates is fierce. Gulf Arabs from across the region gather in a large sandy plot in Ajman to sit in for a four-hour competition, which will see the selection of the best out of 150 camels every day. The three-day spectacle ends with the top two finalists bagging luxury cars, while eight others win cash. The body is divided into five sections, with 20 points each, to mark beauty and elegance. After the prettiest camels are selected, their owners must then vouch for purity of lineage. Following the pageant some camels are auctioned off, with the best going for as much as 16million dirhams (&lb;2.85m). The festival is a celebration of not only all-things-camel, but also serves to remind participants of the country's traditional way of life. Saeed al-Aameri, who owns a large camel farm and is a participant in the pageant, said: "The UAE's heritage is linked to camels and this festival emphasises this. Traditions and customs lie in maintaining our history."
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
MUSLIM SEX SLAVES: BACHA BAZI
Posted by CPocerl, February 27, 2010. |
|
This is from the Bare Naked Islam website
MUSLIM SEX SLAVES: 'BACHA BAZI' aka Boy Play where very young boys are the 'entertainment' for grown men |
|
Popular in Afghanistan, these "dancing boys" are actually sex slaves, lured off the streets by pimps, taught to dance and sing, to wear make-up and to dress like girls. Then they are made to perform before large groups of men. ALL of them are sexually abused. So let me get this straight. We know paedophilia is condoned in Islam but I thought homosexuality was against the law? 
"Dancing boys" are a lucrative business. Powerful former warlords and businessmen love to watch them and will pay a lot of money to have their own boy for Bacha Bazi. Some of the boys are traded like swap cards amongst the rich and powerful and if they disobey their "owners" they are killed or brutalised. The trade in boys is well known to the United Nations. According to Nazir Alimy, who compiled a report on the issue for the UN, there is no doubt who is funding this practice and why the police refuse to stop it. "According to our research these dancing boys are used by powerful men for sex," Mr Alimy said. Paedophiles and pimps search for young boys so they can sell them or groom them to be trained as "dancing boys". In one case a journalist goes in the car with a paedophile named Dastager. As they drive, Dastager explains the type of boy he is looking for. Then in broad daylight the "dancing boy master" stops the car, goes to a shopfront and brings a boy back to his the waiting car According to a report prepared for the United Nations there is evidence that the practice of bacha bazi and the sexual abuse of boys is common throughout the north of the country. It confirms that young boys, some of them only 10 years old, are lured into life as a sex slave. There is also evidence that this type of abuse is spreading throughout Afghanistan."It's true they make the boys wear girls' clothes and make them dance in front of many men," he said. The powerful customers are often former warlords who helped drive the Taliban out of the north. Others who involve themselves in the trade of boys are wealthy businessmen. Under the Taliban, Bacha Bazi was outlawed. Today it is still a crime but clearly there is no concerted effort being made to stop the practice and the criminal activity that surrounds it. See an excellent 6-part documentary about BACHA BAZI here: bacha-bazi-documentary
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
ARAB BID FOR DISCRIMINATION IN JAFFA; AMNESTY INT'L AND TALIBAN; GADHAFI URGES ARMED JIHAD AGAINST SWITZERLAND
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 27, 2010. |
|
ONTARIO CONDEMNS ISRAEL APARTHEID WEEK The legislature of Ontario passed a resolution condemning Israel Apartheid Week and its false terminology. B'nai B'rith Canada described the Week as an outpouring of hatred that defames Israel on campus and leads to antisemitic violence (www.imra.org.il, 2/25). It seems to be organized Israel-bashing that does run over into
antisemitism, rather than teaching anything.
ISRAELI COURT THWARTS ARAB BID FOR DISCRIMINATION IN JAFFA 
The Israel Land Authority auctioned some land in Jaffa, a part of Tel Aviv. Jews had lived in Jaffa for thousands of years. [Persecuted by Arabs before statehood, Jaffa Jews founded Tel Aviv.] The high bidder was a group of Jews who wanted to build an apartment house for themselves there. The losing bid was by Arabs. Some Israeli Arabs and politically motivated NGOs sued over it. They contended that the Arabs are losing a majority in Jaffa [which no longer is a separate city], that Arabs have a housing shortage in Jaffa, and that the purchase somehow discriminates against Arabs and therefore Jews should not be allowed to buy more land there unless they allot apartments to Arabs. The judge rejected the petition as in bad faith, merely being self-serving in the name of equality. Counsel for defense said that the Arab premise is that all of Israel belongs to the Arabs and that Jewish building anywhere is a settlement to be barred. The defense had argued that the Jews won the bid fairly, that they have human rights to buy public land offer and to enjoy land they own [i.e., not have to turn around and offer it to someone else], and the right to live wherever they want to in their own country. Having lost in court, Arab activists turned to mass protest and threats of violence. Indeed, the construction site was vandalized. "In recent weeks the world Jewish community has been told that Jews are forbidden to live in parts of Jerusalem and the territories. Now Jews are being informed by Arab-Israelis and so called human rights groups that they are also prohibited from live in Jaffa, a suburb of Tel-Aviv that has had a Jewish presence for thousands of years, as well. The battle over Jewish rights inside the State of Israel is truly heating up." (www.imra.org.il, 2/25.) As I have put it, the Arabs are trying to turn the clock back and renew their fight to take over the country. Their loyalty is questionable. Their immediate goal is ethnic separation or apartheid, with special privileges for themselves. I sense that the courts no longer are ruling almost automatically in behalf of the Arabs, because the Arabs are going too far. When I visited Jaffa on a couple of early trips to Israel, the majority was Jewish. Following the principle of the Arabs' case, should Israel have barred further Arab property acquisition in Jaffa, lest it change the demographic balance? What about Holon and other cities whose balance changed in favor of the Arabs? Should there be neighborhood-by-neighborhood ethnic restrictions, a la apartheid?
WHAT DO IRAN'S THREATS AGAINST ISRAEL MEAN? 
In the past two weeks, Iran's President Ahmadinejad repeatedly has threatened to destroy Israel. What does he mean? On February 25, he said that the eradication of Israel is a "divine promise." He said that Iran would stand with Syria, Lebanon, and the Palestinian Arab organizations if they were attacked by Israel. He accused Israel of wanting war. Together they would end the Zionist state. Ahmadinejad asserted that Israel makes its moves from a position of weakness (www.imra.org.il, 2/25). Referring to "divine promise," Ahmadinejad is confirming that to Muslims, this is holy war, not a territorial dispute. The West does not pay heed. It prefers to perceive the conflict as a territorial dispute, rather than as part of a global effort to conquer the world. By perceiving the conflict as territorial, the West, which is more or less hostile to Israel based on obsolete conflicts, can chip away at the territorial integrity of Israel as if solving a problem and appeasing the Muslims. This policy weakens the Israeli bastion of Western civilization. No matter what threats emanate from the Mideast, and no matter how much those threats are acted upon, Westerners do not take them seriously, especially when directed against Israel. What Ahmadinejad intends is to destroy Jewish sovereignty and the Jewish people. The UN Charter prohibits one member from trying to destroy another. But who pays attention to the UN when doing so might benefit Israel? All is posturing, all is pretense of ethics. Ahmadinejad covers himself technically by conditioning his threat upon Israel attacking Iran or an ally of it. Self-defense is the false cry of aggressive dictators. Dictators commit aggression in the name of self-defense. But the Muslim notion of self-defense is offense against Israel on the grounds that Israel's very existence as a non-Muslim state on land Islam once had conquered is an act of aggression. Ahmadinejad can manufacture incidents by his proxies and then declare the war he, not Israel, obviously wants. In effect, Iran has declared war on Israel. In actuality, Iran has been making war on Israel by proxy and on Iraq by proxy and by some of its own troops. Having threatened to destroy Israel, Israel may not let Iran proceed to develop nuclear weapons with which to do so. Ahmadinejad would call that the aggression that releases any restraint upon Syrian and Hizbullah missiles. Israel does not start wars. It either defends itself from aggression or pursues terrorism. It sometimes suffers terrorist abuse for years before reacting. Its whole outlook is for peace whereas the Muslim outlook there is for conquest and domination, actually relishing violence. Arafat was offered a lot, by Israeli negotiators, but preferred Intifada. Arafat's and Abbas' schools teach bigotry and violence, whereas Israeli schools teach tolerance and peace. Having spared Hizbullah, Hamas, and Fatah, and having tried to be nice to the Arabs only gets Israel a reputation for weakness among Mideastern aggressors. It is the wrong way to deal with them. It also is the wrong way to appear to the West, which also loses respect for Israel and gives Israel no credit for decency. This is the way of the world.
ARE ANTI-ZIONISTS ANTISEMITIC? Here is a long, satirical essay by Prof. Steven Plaut (2/26, verbatim) on anti-Zionists who deny they are antisemitic. I have a few qualifications to offer. When I was a boy, some fellow Jews were not Zionists or were anti-Zionists. (1) Still existing are ultra-Orthodox Jews who believe that the secular Zionism of the State of Israel is not adequate. I think they have a good point. (2) Some Socialists believed that Jews should help bring about socialism and integrate into their non-Israeli societies. They were unaware of the depth of antisemitism. Their dream failed both as to socialism and to integration. They did not deny the Jewish people's right to re-constitute their state, but thought it unnecessary. Therefore, most of them were not antisemitic about it, but Karl Marx was, the Communists were, and the Far Left still is. Once Israel formed, the bulk of the Socialists upheld its rights. (3) Reform Jews opposed a Jewish state out of fear that their loyalty to their Diaspora countries would be questioned. By distancing themselves from their Jewish heritage, which they toned down, they demonstrated a form of antisemitism. Most of them now accept Israel, but the lingering Reform anti-Zionism that pervaded the New York Times has solidified in it even under its present ownership by converted descendants of Jews. Say What? Anti-Semites? Who, us anti-Zionists? US? We have nothing against Jews as such. We just hate Zionism and Zionists. We think Israel does not have a right to exist. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. Heavens to Mergatroyd. Marx Forbid. We are humanists. Progressives. Peace lovers. Anti-Semitism is the hatred of Jews. Anti-Zionism is opposition to Zionism and Israeli policies. The two have nothing to do with one another. Venus and Mars. Night and Day. Trust us. Sure, we think the only country on the earth that must be annihilated is Israel. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. Sure, we think that the only children on earth whose being blown up is ok if it serves a good cause are Jewish children. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. Sure we think that if Palestinians have legitimate grievances this entitles them to mass murder Jews. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. Naturally, we think that the only people on earth who should never be allowed to exercise the right of self-defense are the Jews. Jews should only resolve the aggression against them through capitulation, never through self-defense. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We only denounce racist apartheid in the one country in the Middle East that is NOT a racist apartheid country. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We refuse to acknowledge the Jews as a people, and think they are only a religion. We do not have an answer to how people who do NOT practice the Jewish religion can still be regarded as Jews. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We think that all peoples have the right to self-determination, except Jews, and including even the make-pretend Palestinian "people". But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We hate it when people blame the victims, except of course when people blame the Jews for the jihads and terrorist campaigns against them. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We think the only country in the Middle East that is a fascist anti-democratic one is the one that has free elections. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We demand that the only country in the Middle East with free speech, free press, or free courts be destroyed. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We oppose military aggression, except when it is directed at Israel. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We really understand suicide bombers who murder bus loads of Jewish children and we insist that their demands be met in full. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We think the only conflict on earth that must be solved through dismembering one of the parties to that conflict is the one involving Israel. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We do not think that Jews have any human rights that need to be respected and especially not the right to ride a bus without being murdered. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. There are Jewish leftist anti-Zionists and we consider this proof that anti-Zionists could not possibly be anti-Semitic. Not even the ones who cheer when Jews are mass murdered. These are the only Jews we think need be acknowledged or respected. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We do not think murder proves how righteous and just the cause of the murderer is, except when it comes to murderers of Jews. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We do not think the Jews are entitled to their own state and must submit to being a minority in a Rwanda-style "bi-national state", although no other state on earth, including the 22 Arab countries, should be similarly expected to be deprived of its sovereignty. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We think that Israel's having a Jewish majority and a star on its flag makes it a racist apartheid state. We do not think any other country having an ethnic-religious majority or having crosses or crescents or "Allah Akbar" on its flag is racist or needs dismemberment. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We condemn the "mistreatment" of women in the only country of the Middle East in which they are not mistreated. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We condemn the "mistreatment" of minorities in the only country in the Middle East in which minorities are NOT brutally suppressed and mass murdered. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We demand equal citizen rights, which is why the only country in the Middle East in need of extermination is the only one in which they exist. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We have no trouble with the fact that there is no freedom of religion in any Arab countries. But we are mad at hell at Israel for violating religious freedom, and never mind that we are never quite sure where or when it does so. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. So how can you possibly say we are anti-Semites? We are simply anti-Zionists. We seek peace and justice, that's all. And surely that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.
ANOTHER ARAB-JEWISH HOUSING TUSSLE IN JERUSALEM 
The Mayor of Jerusalem plans to turn part of the Silwan neighborhood, near the Old City, into a showcase of shops, restaurants, day care center, boutique hotels, and a large park, attracting tourists. He has offered 120 Arab families a switch to the new apartments. They prefer to keep their houses. They call the sub-neighborhood al-Bustan; he calls it Gan HaMelech or Kings Garden, because it looks out upon the place where King David was thought to have been. Mayor Birkat thinks his plan would benefit the Arabs. They call him a liar. They say they lived there for decades, and own the land. A Palestinian Authority (P.A.) official accuses him of ethnic cleansing. He calls them liars. He said that all their houses were built within the past 20 years, and without permits. (About 20,000 illegally built houses are in Jerusalem.) Those houses' illegality and location is why he chose this area for urban renewal. The Arab residents "and the rest of the world — do not recognize Israel's sovereignty over East Jerusalem." They say, "For us, the occupiers cannot tell us what is legal and illegal." As background, the New York Times explains that the area historically was a greenbelt. In the 1990s, people started erecting those houses, without the municipality paying heed. In mentioning other parts of Silwan, the newspaper refers to Jewish residents as "settlers." The world professes concern about expelling Arabs and replacing them with Jews. Barkat says that Jews are leaving Jerusalem for areas of higher income opportunities and Arabs are leaving the Palestinian Authority and entering Jerusalem for higher income. [Jerusalem pays welfare benefits.] Taking a business-like approach to solving municipal problems, Barkat denies any hidden political agenda. The Arabs say they fear being squeezed from both directions. One resident accuses the Mayor of wanting to isolate the al-Aksa Mosque to build a Jewish temple (Ethan Bronner, 2/26, A1). The New York Times reports people's arguments and sometimes counter-arguments, but rarely identifies facts. It also uses slanted terminology. Let's make some sense of this article. Having studied city planning, I can see the sincerity of the Mayor's attempt at municipal beautification and upgrading. Can that approach win Arab approval? No. The Arabs have gotten away with lawlessness by threatening violence too long to be reined in easily now. What may appear a matter of law enforcement and city planning is a religiously motivated struggle to wrest Israel from the Jewish people, aided by foreign countries that don't realize that the same jihadists hate them, too. The reporter did not judge whether residents have legal title to the houses and land, but one can figure out who is telling the truth by the background of the area having been a greenbelt until about 20 years ago and the widespread illegality of Arab housing. Did the reporters check aerial photos of 20 years ago? NY Times articles are replete with Arab assertions that sound impressive but are specious. For example, the statement that occupiers cannot judge what is legal. First, the Arab who said it implies a right (only by Arabs) to steal and build upon public land. Do foreign anti-Zionists favor that land theft? They accuse "settlers" of land theft, but what about the 20,000 houses in Jerusalem, alone? Second, even if Israel were an occupier, it took control over the area in self-defense, and therefore administers it legally. Should Israel allow chaos? Third, there was no sovereign owner of the area, there was just the Mandate when Jordan invaded, seized it, then attacked Israel again and lost it in the process. Israel is chief heir to the Mandate. It had a right to annex it. Fourth, the wartime separation of the Old City from the New City had no legal status, so reuniting the two parts of Jerusalem was natural. Fifth, so it does not matter what a hostile, unfair world wants and rationalizes, Israel has legal sovereignty there. Sixth, why don't people ask what is the basis for Palestinian Arab claims to the Old City, since they never had sovereignty over it, they never had a government there, they did not conquer it last, and only recently did they even claim to be a separate nationality, though the PLO Covenant admitted they are not but just Arabs? Do they refer to the UN General Assembly recommendation that Jerusalem not belong to an independent state? By its logic, the Palestinian Authority cannot claim it, if it is supposed to be independent. In any case, that recommendation by the General Assembly, impractical because it makes new states not viable, has no legal force. Incidentally, first the Arabs rejected the recommendation, preferring double or nothing. They got nothing. Now they want to recognize the recommendation, as a first step in conquering Israel. Hypocritical. Do not be deceived by legalistic arguments for what is motivated religiously. Ethan Bronner should not have given unchallenged credence to an Arab's claim that the Mayor wants to replace al-Aksa Mosque by a renewed Jewish temple. There is no evidence for that. It is absurd, because only a powerless religious minority favors that, the government does not. Arabs who talk like that either are venting paranoia or propaganda in behalf of jihad. They who rouse people to riot over such spurious accusations are the fanatical ones, not this hardly religious Mayor. What about ethnic cleansing? I have consulted with the Jerusalem Buildings Dept. on their statistics and with others. The Arab population of Jerusalem has doubled. Arabs and their supporters fabricate hysterical claims of ethnic cleansing there, as they do of genocide in Gaza, where casualties were just a few hundreds out of a million and-a-half. They made similar claims about a battle in Jenin, where their figures were found to have been exaggerated many-fold. They are at war. They make false propaganda. The West should not be deceived. Ethnic cleansing? I recently reported that the Mayor offered to retain many Arabs' illegal houses and one Jews' illegal house in another neighborhood. That is not the act of someone who wishes to oust Arabs. How is it that thousands of Arabs are moving from the P.A. into Jerusalem? The Temple Mount was built by Hebrews, as was much of the Old City. They absorbed the Canaanites, and are the aborigines. Jews built the New City, too. To suggest that Jews who move into a different neighborhood of their city are "settlers" is to use hostile terminology. The same newspapers keep making the same errors of presentation leaving readers with the same misunderstandings. No wonder little progress is made!
AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL AND THE TALIBAN Moazzam Begg of Britain, a leading supporter there of the Taliban, was captured in 2001 as an enemy combatant. In 2005, he was released from Guantanamo without indictment. He formed an organization, Cageprisoners, ostensibly a human rights organization. However, he and another senior member speak in behalf of Radical Islamic rule. So what interest has he really in human rights? Nevertheless, Amnesty International (A.I.) has taken him on tours of Europe, where they urge Europe to demand that more prisoners be released and that Europe give them haven. A.I. hired Gita Sahgal to head its gender affairs unit on her condition that she clean up A.I.s sordid alliance with that terrorist in the name of human rights. As soon as she addressed the matter, they suspended her. She thinks A.I. is too ideological, to the point of not understanding what really is going on. Salmon Rushdie put it, "It looks very much as if Amnesty's leadership is suffering from a kind of moral bankruptcy and has lost the ability to distinguish right from wrong." (Michael Weiss, Wall St. Journal, 2/26, A13.) The same thing was said about Human Rights Watch. I think the problem is that these organizations absorb a philosophy of indiscriminate Third World advocacy. They fail to realize that they are fostering the most oppressive, reactionary movements. In this case, a Radical Muslim is exploiting A.I. to appear moderate while promoting his agenda, which is far from moderate. I believe that people arrested by mistake should get an early hearing to correct the error, and terrorists should not be released. Why should Europe, beset by Radical Islam, should welcome more such people?
LIBYA'S GADHAFI URGES ARMED JIHAD AGAISNT SWITZERLAND 
Libyan dictator Gadhafi urges armed jihad against Switzerland. He called Switzerland an infidel state that destroys mosques. He asks Muslims to block the entry of Swiss people and goods. He declared any Muslim who works with Switzerland an apostate. So far, few have accommodated him. The latest contretemps may have begun in 2008, when Geneva police arrested his son on the charge of beating two servants. Libya then detained two Swiss businessmen. Libya convicted the pair of violating residency laws. In November 2009, Switzerland passed by a large margin a referendum to ban the construction of minarets on mosques. Gadhafi may have been reacting to that vote, when Libya refused to release the two men. This week, A Libyan court voided one man's conviction, and the other started serving a four-month sentence. Switzerland now restricts visas to Libyan citizens. Libya reacted by barring some European citizens from entering, and stopped issuing visas to much of Europe, not just to Switzerland. Italy thinks that Libya will renege on a deal to prevent illegal immigrants from departing from Libya for the EU (Wall St. Journal, 2/26, A9). Tit-for-tat diplomatic retaliation seems childish to me. Innocent people get punished that way. Switzerland neither destroys mosques nor bans their construction. Its referendum, to which I see little sense, refers only to new minarets. Gadhafi, like many Arab Muslim radicals, has a mixed-up idea of what happened, but readily calls for violence.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
SOMETHING'S SERIOUSLY WRONG AT YORK UNIVERSITY
Posted by Boris Celser, February 27, 2010. |
|
This article was written by David Frum (dfrum@aei.org.) of the National Post.
This is archived at
|
|
Next week, York University will once again open its halls and classrooms to "Israel Apartheid Week," so-called. This year as every year, militants and activists will use the taxpayer-funded facilities of York to vilify the Jewish state. Well, that's free speech, isn't? Everybody gets to express his or her point of view, no matter how obnoxious, right? No, not right. Not at York. At York, speech is free — better than free, subsidized — for anti-Israel haters. But for those who would defend Israel, York sets very different rules. In advance of York's annual hate-Israel week, the campus group Christians United for Israel applied to use university space to host a program of pro-Israel speakers. The university replied that this program could only proceed on certain conditions. It insisted on heavy security, including both campus and Toronto police — all of those costs to be paid by the program organizers. The organizers would also have to provide an advance list of all program attendees and advance summaries of all the speeches. No advertising for the program would be permitted — not on the York campus, not on any of the other campuses participating by remote video. These are radically different and much harsher terms than anything required from the hate-Israel program. The hate-Israel program is not required to pay for its own security. It is free to advertise. Its speakers are not pre-screened by the university. The pro-Israel event, scheduled for this past Monday, Feb. 22, was cancelled when the organizers declined to comply with the terms. A university spokesman told the Jewish Tribune that it insisted on the more stringent requirements on pro-Israel groups "due to the participation of individuals who they claim invite the animus of anti-Israel campus agitators." The logic is impressively brazen: Since the anti-Israel people might use violence, the speech of the pro-Israel people must be limited. On the other hand, since the pro-Israel people do not use violence, the speech of the anti-Israel people can proceed without restraint. Over the past days, however, the university appears to have realized that this "We brake for bullies" policy on speech might present some PR problems. So now it seems they have reverted to a bolder policy: flat-out denial. I called York on Thursday for comment on the incident. York's smooth chief communications officer was out for the day. So apparently was his deputy. I got instead an audibly nervous substitute. I asked: Is it York's policy to allow thugs to decide what may be said on campus, and what can't? He insisted that, no York had the same rules for all. "Are you telling me," I asked, "that York imposes precisely the same requirements on all student groups?" "All student groups that request university space, yes." I said: "I'm going to print that answer in the newspaper. It's going to be kind of embarrassing if you are quoted as saying something blatantly untrue. Do you want to modify your statement in any way?" The spokesman said he would stick with his "precisely same requirements" quote. I offered one more chance to amend the answer. Pause. And then burst forth a flood of amazing flack-speech reprising Chevy Chase's legendarily incoherent performance in Spies Like Us. What he meant, he said, was that it was the "process" and the "protocols" that were the same, leading to a "needs-based assessment" of each particular case. Hemina, hemina, hemina. The truth is this: York students are treated "the same" only in the sense that every student is equally exposed to the utterly arbitrary ad hoc decision-making of a fathomlessly cowardly university administration. It was not always this way. One of the speakers invited to the pro-Israel event, Daniel Pipes, spoke at York in 2003. Violence was threatened then too. Local militants distributed leaflets urging the disruption of Pipes' talk. But York's then-president Lorna Marsden refused to allow thugs to veto academic speech. She provided the police presence to ensure that Pipes' talk could proceed unmolested, although admittedly in a tense atmosphere that might have daunted someone less personally courageous than Pipes. But the current York administration lacks Marsden's commitment to freedom. Even when public speech is not an issue, Jewish students at York experience ethnically and religiously based intimidation and even violence. On the rare occasions when the university disciplines anyone for such incidents, it takes care always to penalize both the Jewish targets of harassment and the anti-Jewish culprits. The motive again is not fairness, but fear. Something has gone seriously wrong at Canada's third-largest university. You can find a list of York's board of governors at yorku.ca/univsec/board/members.htm.If so minded, maybe you should contact them and ask them what they will do to correct York's betrayal of the values of a free society.
Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
MARCH IS BUYCOTT ISRAEL MONTH
Posted by Midenise, February 27, 2010. |
|
This comes from Dusty. It is archived at
|
|
From our Friends at Buycott Israel! There seems to be no stopping the momentum BUYcott is gaining around the world. In addition to the new BuyIsraeliProductsNow campaign we told you about last week, a new project is starting this week: BUYcott Month (www.buycottmonth.com), a month-long campaign for buying from, investing in and celebrating the state of Israel. Going Downhill 
I managed to buy the only bottle of Israeli wine within 500 miles while ski vacationing in Big Sky Montana!
BUYcott Month is a little offbeat, but promises to be a lot of fun. Supporters of Israel from around the world are being asked to send in photos of themselves or friends buying and enjoying Israeli products, taking part in Israel-related cultural events, "breaking" a boycott, or doing anything that celebrates Israel or fights anti-Israel activity during the month of March. Never too young to buycott halva 
I am doing a display about Israel for my homeschool group's
International Dinner. Here I am buying Israeli halva for dessert.
Are you buying Israeli products during Buycott Month? Having a couscous party? An Israeli wine tasting? An Ahava mud-wrestling match? We want your photos and your story. We're ready to share pictures of you:
Or how about a dose of "Extreme Boycott" like sharing Israeli chocolates at the top of a mountain or at the bottom of the sea? Don't be frightened
It's just me in my Dead Sea Premier Mask Miracle Noir!
Don't forget — its your support that led to a 33% increase in Israeli exports in the last quarter of 2009. Lets kept the monentum going. Support democracy and buycott Israel!
Contact Milton Franks-Lhermann at midenise@zahav. net.il
|
|
PALESTINIANS THREATEN UPRISING OVER ISRAEL'S INCLUSION OF 2 WEST BANK HOLY SITES IN PRESERVATION PLAN
Posted by Paul Lademain, February 26, 2010. |
|
On Feb 25, 2010, at 3:04 AM, Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi (The Israel Project) wrote in reply to our expression of concern over the feeble tactics used to put down arab aggression in the Jewish Homeland. Ms. Mizrahi shucked us off, again with this reply: "Interesting thoughts but Israel respects very much the 20 percent of their country that is not Jewish. They also have rights as citizens." The SC4Z responded as follows and we think you should know about our support for Israel: |
|
Dear Ms. Mizrahi: We value your reply to our thoughts about putting down Arab riots but we have to ask whether you are arguing that the rights of the non-Jews — e.g. stone-hurling arabs whose citizenship might in fact be Sudanese or Yemeni (and why do you assume every Arab present in Jewish Palestine is a "palestinian"?) — are paramount to the rights of Jewish Israelis? The fact that non-Jews have rights as "Israeli citizens" does not legitimize the Arabs unlawful claims to lands recognized in 1920 as an integral part of the Jewish Homeland pursuant to established international law. We must also and again ask why Jews seemingly tremble at the prospect of having to defy the US State Department, and the relics of the Carter Administration embedded therein, who ignore or violate international law? Why does Israel itself ignore the body of international law which recognizes that the regions called Judea and Samaria are an unseverable part of Israel? Why do American Jews and particularly their many skilled and highly-paid lawyers fall silent before the sham and meaningless Oslo Accords? Is their silence due to language barriers? Or are they merely turning a determinedly deaf ear to the insults and disrespect the Arab World really shows them behind their backs? And what about all the Jewish Palestinians whose ancestors civilized the very same region some Jews are so eager to trade away for naught more than mere promises of "peace". Why do Jews ignore their rights to their land? Why, for instance, aren't Jews demanding a land-for-land exchange? Why not demand a portion of the Arabian Peninsula? What kind of peace are American Jews really advocating for Jewish Israelis? One turning solely about the demands of the Arabs whose rights and demands strategically change at the whim of external powers? By the same principle seemingly advanced by some prominent American Jews for application only to Jewish Israelis, ought we not therefore demand on behalf of the Arabs that American Baptists chase after bin Laden and offer to trade away Texas in exchange for "peace" with al Qaida? What about us? We are the secular Christians. What about OUR rights? What about our demands? We are the majority. We see Israel as the boulder on the path of Islamic imperialism. We say that the Free World needs a larger boulder. Our pockets have been picked for the past three decades to fund the accounts of all the corrupt leaders of every warring state throughout the middle east to the disadvantage of our ally, Israel. Apparently American Jews don't think about our needs and demands. We hope American Jews will awake to the fact that if they continue to accede to insults and the violence directed against Jewish citizens of Israel, and worse still in lands that have long been recognized and respected as the Jewish Homeland (most of which was wrongly handed away by the Britz for the sake of gaining an advantage with the relatively new state of Saudi Arabia) that they themselves, as American Jews, will be ridiculed, singled out for insults, diminished, and ultimately and again ordered to paste on their symbols of inferiority. Again, we thank you for your reply. But we continue to hope that you will invest in Prof. Howard Grief's seminal analysis of international law. On Feb 25, 2010, at 3:04 AM, Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi wrote: Interesting thoughts but Israel respects very much the 20 percent of their country that is not Jewish. They also have rights as citizens ____________________________________________ From: lademain@verizon.net [mailto:lademain@verizon.net]
Subject: Re: Palestinians Threaten Uprising over Israel's Inclusion of 2 West Bank Holy Sites in Preservation Plan On Feb 24, 2010, at 1:08 PM, The Israel Project wrote: Palestinians Threaten Uprising over Israel's Inclusion of 2 West Bank Holy Sites in Preservation Plan Our comment to Ms. Mizrahi: "We are the Secular Christians for Zion (SC4Z) and we implore you to purchase, study, ingest, incorporate in your thinking all the facts laid out by Prof. Howard Grief in his seminal analysis of international law which delineated the boundaries of the Jewish Homeland. (Citation, below) We hope it will adjust your thinking and your attitude toward the Jewish Homeland. Inasmuch as the boundaries recognized (and irrevocably reaffirmed by the Treaty of Ghent ca. 1920) encapsulate most of the Golan Heights, almost all of the lands that later became the new state of Jordan (to become the homeland for the arabs who later sought to be known as "palestinians") and the region now known as Gaza and all of the lands between the ocean and the sea including the West Bank ... etc. etc. etc." The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law (Hardcover) Howard Grief. www.amazon.com
Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net. He describes himself as a Secular Christian for Zionism (SC4Z). |
|
SECRET ADAR GATHERING IN SA-NUR; GRAVES VANDALIZED ON MOUNT OF OLIVES
Posted by Maayana Miskin, February 26, 2010. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) Dozens of people traveled to northern Samaria this week, avoiding police along the way, in order to attend a festive gathering with Rabbi Yitzchak Ginsberg. The gathering was held in Sa-Nur, one of the cities demolished in the 2005 Disengagement. 
Those who reached Sa-Nur were not only veteran Land of Israel activists, but also citizens from across the country. The group met with Rabbi Ginsberg in an ancient structure that, prior to the destruction of Sa-Nur, served as an artisans' gallery. 
The meeting was originally scheduled to take place in Homesh, another community that was torn down in 2005. However, as would-be celebrants approached Homesh, they saw that Border Police had gathered there in hopes of preventing Israelis from congregating at the site. Instead of clashing with the police officers, the group simply changed its destination and continued to Sa-Nur. Participants reported that the gathering was emotionally charged, with feelings of joy mingling with sadness over the destruction of the once thriving community and hope that it would soon be rebuilt. 2. GRAVES VANDALIZED ON MOUNT OF OLIVES
Lalov chassidim were dismayed Thursday to discover that the tomb of the Rebbe of Lalov had been desecrated. The grave site on Jerusalem's Mount of Olives (Har Hazeitim) was vandalized, and the vandals even set fire to a space inside the tomb. The incident was not the first of its kind. Approximately three months earlier, Lalov chassidim who came to visit the rebbe's grave found that the tombstone had been smashed with sledgehammers. Other graves in the ancient cemetery have been vandalized as well. In November, relatives of the deceased were horrified to find that dozens of graves were methodically broken and stray dogs had taken up residence in the ruins. At a November Knesset meeting, representatives of various government offices agreed to work together to restore security to the site. Chaim Miller of the Movement for the Citizens of Jerusalem informed Jerusalem police chief Ilan Franko of the incident and asked him to take immediate action. "The Jerusalem Police must find the criminals who did this and ensure that Jews can visit the Mount of Olives safely," they said. The working assumption is that Arabs from the neighborhood were
responsible for the vandalism, Miller said. The Lalov Rebbe's tomb has
apparently been targeted due to the large number of visitors, he said.
Arab attackers see that the tomb belongs to that of a great Jewish
leader and choose it as their target in order to demoralize as many
people as possible, he said.
Maayana Miskin writes for Arutz-7, where these articles were published today.
|
|
PAKISTAN, TALIBAN, ISI, US ACCESS SITPREP
Posted by CPocerl, February 26, 2010. |
|
The Winter Of Our Discontent February 26, 2010: In the last few weeks, Pakistani and American intelligence forces have arrested at least fourteen Taliban leaders in Pakistan. These arrests were carried out with some reluctance by Pakistani intelligence personnel, but were apparently ordered by the commander of the army, who was backed by the civilian government, which had recently purged the intelligence agencies of many Islamic radicals. Pakistan has turned away from its' creation. Pakistan has destroyed much of the Pakistani Taliban in the last six months, and is now arresting the leadership of the Afghan Taliban. Pakistani intelligence officials have good reason to be unhappy with this roundup. Even though Pakistan won't allow the Taliban leaders to be interrogated alone by the Americans, much less taken out of the country, U.S. officials have been able to sit in. That quickly revealed that the Taliban leadership had long been in touch with Pakistani intelligence, and some of the captives were quite indignant at how this long (nearly two decades) relationship had been so unceremoniously ended. The ISI (Inter Service Intelligence agency, sort of a Pakistani CIA, run by the military) has long insisted that staying in touch with the Taliban, and other Islamic radical outfits, helped protect Pakistan, and contribute to Pakistani foreign policy efforts. It hasn't worked out that way, especially after September 11, 2001. Back then, Pakistan was forced to make a choice; either join the United States in a war against Islamic terrorism, or go to war with the United States. That was a no brainer, but ISI tried to maintain its relationships with Islamic radical groups. That didn't work out too well. This was all part of a trend. For several years now, the United States, Afghanistan, India and many Pakistanis, have been pressuring the Pakistani government to reform the ISI. This organization has long been a power unto itself, with its own agenda and many members who support Islamic radicalism. Two years ago, the government sought to disband the political wing of the ISI. This section was believed be largely responsible for Pakistani support of Islamic, or simply Pakistani, terrorist operations in Afghanistan and India, as well as support for Taliban and al Qaeda in Pakistan itself. The political wing has also served as a domestic spying operation whenever the military was running the country (which is more than half the time.) Pakistan is currently run by a civilian government that came to power in the Summer of 2008. ISI has long supported Islamic terrorists, but now Pakistan is determined to root out "Taliban spies" in the ISI. The problem is that these Islamic radicals have been operating openly in the ISI for three decades, and were put there by the government in the late 1970s, when it was decided that Islamic conservatism was the solution for Pakistan's problems (corruption and religious/ethnic conflicts.) These guys are not just "Taliban spies," but Pakistani intelligence professionals that believed, and encouraged (they invented the Taliban) Islamic radicalism. The ISI itself was created in 1948 as a reaction to the inability of the IB (Intelligence Bureau, which collected intelligence on foreign countries in general) and MI (Military Intelligence, which collected intel on military matters) to work together and provide useful information for the government. The ISI was supposed to take intel from IB and MI, analyze it and present it to senior government officials. But in the 1950s, the government began to use the ISI to collect intel on Pakistanis, especially those suspected of opposing whatever government was in power. This backfired eventually, and in the 1970s, the ISI was much reduced by a civilian government. But when another coup took place in 1977, and the new military government decided that religion was the cure for what ailed the country. Typically, the Pakistani generals seized control of the government every decade or so, when the corruption and incompetence of elected officials became too much for the military men to tolerate. The generals never did much better, and eventually there were elections, and the cycle continued. The latest iteration began in 1999, when the army took over, and was only forced, by public pressure, to relinquish power two years ago. Civilian governments tend to be hostile to the ISI, and apparently this produced a serious effort to clear out many of the Islamic radicals. The ISI grew particularly strong during the 1980s, when billions of dollars, most of it in the form of military and economic aid, arrived from the oil-rich Arab governments of the Persian Gulf. All this was to support the Afghans, who were resisting a Russian invasion (in support of Afghan communists who had taken control of the government, and triggered a revolt of the tribes). The Afghan communists were atheists, and this greatly offended Saudi Arabia, and other Arab countries, who feared that Russia would encourage Arab communists to rebel elsewhere. So the resistance to the Russians in Afghanistan was declared a holy war which, after a fashion, it was. After about nine years of fighting the tribes, the Russians got tired of their slow progress (and had more pressing problems back home, like the collapse of their economy from decades of communist mismanagement), and left. The Russians were gone by 1989 (and the Soviet Union collapsed two years later), but the Afghans promptly fell upon each other and the civil war seemed never-ending. This upset Pakistan, which wanted to send millions of Afghan refugees back home. Few of the refugees were interested as long as Afghans were still fighting each other. So the ISI created its own faction, the Taliban, by recruiting teachers and students from a network of religious schools that had been established (with the help of Saudi Arabian religious charities) in the 1980s. The most eager recruits were young Afghans from the refugee camps. The Taliban were fanatical, and most Afghans were willing to support them because they brought peace and justice. But the Taliban never conquered all of Afghanistan, especially in the north, where there were few Pushtun tribes (most Taliban were Pushtuns, from tribes in southern Afghanistan). The Pushtuns were about 40 percent of the population, and had always been the most prominent faction in Afghanistan (the king of Afghanistan was traditionally a Pushtun.) Although a military junta was again running Pakistan when September 11, 2001 came along, the president of the country, an army general (Pervez Musharraf), sided with the United States, and turned against the Taliban. But many in the ISI continued to support the Taliban, and the army was too dependent on the ISI (for domestic intelligence, and to control Islamic militants that were attacking India, especially in Kashmir) to crack down on this ISI treachery. Al Qaeda took this betrayal badly, and declared war on the Pakistani government. The ISI was used to seek out and kill or capture most of the hostile al Qaeda operatives in Pakistan. But the ISI told Islamic terrorists who remained neutral that they would be left alone. The ISI thwarted government efforts to have the army clear al Qaeda out of the border areas (populated largely by Pushtun tribes, there being more Pushtuns in Pakistan than in Afghanistan). But now, in one sense, it's September 11, 2001 all over again. The U.S. has told Pakistan that it is fed up with getting screwed around by the ISI, and if Pakistan doesn't clean out the ISI, and shut down Islamic terrorists along the Afghan border, NATO, U.S. and Afghan troops will cross the border and do it. Pakistan wants continued U.S. military aid to bolster its defenses against India. But if it suddenly has a hostile U.S. in Afghanistan, and less (or no) military aid, its general military situation will be, well, not good. While Afghanistan, and the foreign troops there, are dependent on Pakistani ports and trucking companies for supplies, Pakistan is also dependent on the U.S. Navy for access to the sea. Pakistan does not want to go to war with the United States in order to defend Islamic terrorists it openly says it is at war with. Pakistan is being forced to destroy the Islamic radical movement it has nurtured over the last three decades, although it's still questionable if there's enough political will in Pakistan to actually do the deed. ISI critics also call for more police, and more professional and better equipped ones at that. The U.S. is threatening to restrict aid if the Pakistanis do not reform the police and ISI. This is from Strategy Page
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
MUSLIMS WORKING AT CAVE OF THE PATRIARCHS; ISRAEL APARTHEID WEEK; REPORTING OF EVICTION OF ARABS FROM JERUSALEM HOUSES
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 26, 2010. |
|
ISRAEL CITES WORK FOR MUSLIMS AT CAVE OF THE PATRIARCHS 
PM Netanyahu declared that Israel stands for freedom of worship, explaining that the State's refurbishing of designated national sites facilitates rather than hampers their use. He cited the reconstruction being finished at the entrance plaza and path leading to the Muslim prayer room at the Cave of the Patriarchs. Netanyahu said that claims to the contrary are fabricated to arouse antagonism (www.imra.org.il, 2/25). By contrast to Israeli rule, when the IDF liberated the Old City of Jerusalem, they found the entrance plaza to the Temple Mount a trash heap. Holy to the Muslim Arabs? Arousing antagonism there, both by general indoctrination and by false accusation is common Arab practice. Many times Arab leaders incited and attempted to incite their people to riot and violence at the Temple Mount and throughout the Mandate on the basis of false rumor. Some such rumors were deliberately spread by those same leaders who feigned indignation against non-existent Jewish plots to harm a mosque, etc. Abbas, like Arafat, tried to get foreign Arab states to attack Israel to "defend" that mosque. The mosque still stands in that country whose air force knocked out nuclear factories in Iraq and Syria, but can't seem to destroy the mosque it is accused of trying to destroy. How absurd the accusation! Sometimes Arab riots and agitation to riot require security measures such as barring younger Muslim Arabs from entering Jerusalem and the mosque area. That security situation becomes a pretext for claiming Israeli oppression and hindrance of Arab freedom of religion. Incidentally, the Muslim Arabs do not extend freedom of religion to others. Indeed, some of the riots are to keep Jews from worshiping on the Temple Mount. Israeli police tend to bar civilly behaving Jews rather than have to face rampaging Muslim Arabs. In that case, who is oppressing whom? Ask yourselves how often does one hear U.S. officials lament that those Arab acts of aggression do not help a peace process, and compare that with the many times U.S. officials lament that any Israeli self-defense does not help a peace process. Then ask yourselves how valid is the anti-Zionist complaint that the U.S. neglects deserving Arabs in order to give "unstinting support" to Israel? One question leads to another, the next one being to question the inconsistency of those who suggest ending U.S. aid to Israel as an economy measure, but who do not suggest as an economy measure ending the equal amount of U.S. aid to the Arabs, mostly for their military. From basic facts, one can tease out many conclusions at odds with publicized concepts.
IDF ON ISRAELI ARMY ETHICS AND UN GOLDSTONE REPORT At Israel's armored corps training graduation, corps commander Agai Yehezkel said he and his colleagues are not embarrassed by the UN Goldstone report, which questions IDF ethics. The Report does not confuse them. He said that the graduates and their families can "testify more than anything to the education on ethics, the sense of volunteering and morality." The Chief-of-Staff stated that Israel strives for normality while still, after more than 60 years of sovereignty, has to struggle for existence against enemies still striving to end its existence (www.imra.org.il, 2/25). The IDF strives more than any other army to restrict warfare to the rules of war. It comes up against enemies who strive more than many other armies to expand warfare well beyond the rules of war. Aside from wanting to be ethical, the IDF behaves beyond reproach in order to gain foreign public approval. Such approval eludes it. Worse than not having their decency recognized is the distortions of their behavior. The Goldstone report, for example, is a hodgepodge of selected incidents, disproved accusations, lack of objective investigation, and a biased mission and procedure. Popular bias, whether religious or commercial, and based on biased reporting in Europe, has its psychological defense mechanisms that refuse to recognize reality. Israel has its own defense mechanism in refusing to recognize the futility of those public relations efforts. I usually emphasize the hypocrisy of Israel's critics. They usually accuse Israel of crimes it does not commit, and they usually do not accuse the Arabs of the crimes the Arabs do commit. Thus Israel's critics said little during and after Hamas bombardment of Israeli cities, and little about Hamas fighting from among civilians, thereby criminally risking their lives. This leads me to question the sincerity of their indignation against Israel for defending itself from gunmen firing upon it near civilians. What kind of critics expect Israel to act suicidal-pure against such villainy, and ignore the villainy? Unethical behavior towards adversaries is not a problem with the IDF but with the UN.
ANTICIPATING ISRAEL APARTHEID WEEK 
For four years, anti-Zionists held an "Israel Apartheid Week" early in March, in dozes of cities throughout the world, including on U.S. campuses, virtually unchallenged. Appalled by the ensuing Israel-bashing, people are organizing an opposition this year that at a minimum would debunk the notion that Israel is apartheid (A new booklet, "Apartheid: Fact Vs. Fiction" has recently been published on line and in print and covers the key issues.) Thousands of Jews and non-Jews are signing up for training in activist roles. They will act as truth squads, dogging the speakers with questions that bring out a factual contrast to their "bias and hypocrisy." One of the organizations involved in the training is The David Project, which has an office in Manhattan. Its "Israel Peace Week" project, alone, has enrolled thousands of participants in a program tailored to each of 30 campuses. The challengers intend to disable the anti-Zionists' "smug righteousness" and show that "Israel is a force for peace in the Middle East." This approach does not just react to opponents' agenda, but takes a positive initiative. For example, at the University of Cincinnati, David Project is co-hosting a day-long program on U.S.-Israel relations with UCDemocrats and UCRepublicans. Another spreading initiative related to Apartheid Week is the BUYcott movement, which sets up chapters to buy Israeli products (www.buyIsraeliProductsNOW.org)
The pro-Zionists plan to debate issues, as contrasted with the anti-Zionists at University of California Irvine, who shouted down and who call names. Another contrast it seems to me is that the leftist and Muslim students who denounce Israel do so from negative motives and with malice, whereas the pro-Israel students has a positive motivation. Democracies are slow to react, but there seems to be a reaction setting in to the common enemies of Israel, the U.S., and of democracy in general. The intellectual ferment involved is good for the students' characters, minds, and civic responsibility.
TERRORIST FINANCING: CORRECTION A misunderstanding led to the erroneous conclusion that the U.S. dropped its boycott of the Hamas leadership except for the head of that terrorist organization. The misunderstanding was in comprehending the U.S. notification, reproduced here to show you the U.S. government in action: "Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) list — (This list is NOT part of the Specially Designated Nationals [SDN] List) Section (b) of General License 4 issued pursuant to the Global Terrorism Sanctions Regulations (31 C.F.R. Part 594), the Terrorism Sanctions Regulations (31 C.F.R. Part 595), and the Foreign Terrorist Organizations Sanctions Regulations (31 C.F.R. Part 597) authorizes U.S. financial institutions to reject transactions with members of the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) who were elected to the PLC on the party slate of Hamas, or any other Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO), Specially Designated Terrorist (SDT), or Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT), provided that any such individuals are not named on OFAC's list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons (SDN List). The individuals in the following list are PLC members who were elected on the party slate of an FTO, SDT, or SDGT. They do not, however, appear on the SDN List. As indicated above, transactions involving these individuals must be rejected. In order to uniquely identify these names, OFAC has created the program code [NS-PLC]. The prefix "NS" stands for "non-SDN"." Get it? It is difficult to boycott well-connected individuals. They can find proxies to do their banking. The government's boycott list is huge, unwieldy, and lumps together all sort of causes, some not so dangerous. "There is even some logic in lumping together drug-smuggling barons, terror groups, dangerous states such as Iran, and the political leaders of odious regimes (whether or not they have also carried out war crimes), because to a considerable extent, they all cooperate, through finance, intelligence, weapons and operational support, in trying to subvert or conquer the free world." Banks will waste time complying, and, in turn, will waste government investigators' time on mistaken identification reports by banks. The EU has been doing some excellent work against terrorism. Problem is, the EU is so bureaucratic, that it has various divisions working at cross-purposes (http://www.terrorfinance.org/). The U.S. trains some terrorists. Let it teach them how to be equally bureaucratic! Let them teach us how to be more flexible!
UNRWA DENIES SPONSORING EVENT P.A. NAMED AFTER TERRORIST 
The Palestinian Authority (P.A.) named a tournament after a terrorist, and claimed the event was sponsored by UNRWA. UNRWA protested. The P.A. retracted its claim (http://www.palwatch.org/, the new website of Palestinian Media Watch).
REPORTING OF EVICTION OF ARABS FROM JERUSALEM HOUSES
For the Boston Globe, James Carroll wrote about the eviction of some Arabs from housing in the Shimon HaTzadik part of the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of eastern Jerusalem. Mr. Carroll is the author of "Constantine's Sword: The Church and the Jews, a history of Christian hostility toward Jews. The book displays awareness of the baleful effect of European indoctrination in hatred of Jews, but Carroll's columns on Jerusalem ignores the Muslim Arab indoctrination in hatred of Jews as stimulant for Arab attacks on Jews in Israel. His columns have as their theme that Israel has been squeezing the Arabs out of Jerusalem and increasing the predominance of its Jewish population. Actually, since Israel took control of city, the Arab population increased sharply, along with it its percentage of the city's population. How mistaken can a reporter be? His article relies primarily upon the word of Arab property claimants. He also quoted an Israeli medical student's assertion that those Arabs were being expelled for the second time. He does not know whether they had been expelled before or had fled. Such assertions require verification. The Arabs involved had houses built in the 1950s on land that Carroll misleadingly called "vacant." Actually, Jewish organizations had bought the land toward the end of the 1800s. Jews still lived there when Jordan seized their land in the 1948 war. Jordan brought those Arab families onto that land. The Arabs did not have title to the land, but Carroll misleadingly puts it that they failed to get title only because of the intervention of the 1967 war that put the Jordanian invaders out. If Jordan had given the families title, it would have been as beneficiaries of stolen property. When the Arab invaders had been expelled, the Jewish families initiated legal proceedings to restore their property. The process took about 40 years! The courts ruled early on that the Arab residents were "protected tenants." This means they could keep using those houses so long as they paid rent. But they stopped paying rent. It was only because they stopped paying rent that the courts found that the owners may have the tenants evicted. Carroll does not mention that legitimate reason, instead denigrating the Jews' property rights and Israel's legal process as unfair to the Arabs and irrelevant to the issue. His bias is obvious from his wording. "He refers to the barrier Israel erected to stop terrorists from infiltrating and murdering Israelis as the 'so-called security barrier.'" This implies that there was no need for some security measure. He called Israel's Foreign Minister "far-right," but did not call the protesters against Jewish recovery of their property, "far-left." Jews who moved in he called "extremists," and not protesters handing out Communist leaflets and epithets such as "apartheid." To get an idea who is extremist, look at accompanying photograph. Apparently to leftists, Jews who move in near Arabs want apartheid. That contrasts with former S. African whites, who wanted blacks to move away from them. Validity is not the Left's strong point in its name-calling.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
DESPITE THE VIOLENCE, HEBRON'S CHILDREN BEGIN PURIM
Posted by Hebron Jewish Community, February 26, 2010. |
|
To see the video click here. To obtain this set of photos, write to David Wilder at hebron@hebron.com |
|
You can contribute directly in Israel to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, email: hebron@hebron.org.il or phone: 972-52-431-7055. In USA, write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, email: hebronfund@aol.com or phone: 718 677 6886. |
|
ISRAEL RAIDED 'ARAB ROCKET FACTORY' IN OWN CAPITAL
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, February 25, 2010. |
|
This was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared in today's World Net Daily. Move indicates dangerous escalation of Palestinian terrorism |
|
JERUSALEM — Israeli border police earlier this month secretly raided an Arab neighborhood in Jerusalem to search for a suspected Qassam rocket factory, according to a senior Palestinian security official with knowledge of the incident. Officially, Israel told media the raid, which took place in the Shoafat neighborhood on Feb. 8, was to arrest tax evaders and enforce municipal laws. But the security official told WND that border police also searched Shoafat's metal and steel workshops and factories for a suspected Qassam manufacturing site. Upon further questioning today, Moshe Finsi, spokesman for the border police here, told WND part of the Shoafat raid indeed focused on anti-terror activities and not just municipal matters. "Yes, part focused on anti-terror action to prevent organized terror, search for bombs, drugs, weapons," he said. Finsi denied the raid searched for any Qassam factory. Shoafat is located in the northeast section of Jerusalem. The village is entirely inhabited by Arabs and Palestinians, although many of the Arab homes there are built illegally on Jewish-owned property. Although Shoafat is technically in Jerusalem, Arab roads there lead directly into the West Bank. On Wednesday, Israel announced to the public that the Palestinian Authority two weeks ago — just before Israel's raid on Shoafat — arrested five members of Hamas and discovered a Qassam rocket in Beit Likya, a village about four miles from Israel's Ben Gurion International Airport. If a rocket factory production site was found inside a Jerusalem neighborhood, it would be a major escalation of the Palestinian terrorist infrastructure. PA security sources speaking to WND did not rule out the possibility Hamas was intending to fire the rocket as part of its revenge for the assassination in Dubai last month of Hamas member Mahmud al-Mabhouh. The Israel Defense Forces released an official statement saying the Qassam rocket was ready to be launched toward the center of the country. "Information about the existence of the rocket was received from the Palestinian security apparatus," stated the IDF. PA sources, meanwhile, said there is larger evidence Hamas is attempting to set up a military infrastructure in the West Bank, which borders Jerusalem and is within rocket range of Tel Aviv and the airport. The PA sources said Hamas is trying to compensate for major pressure against its militant efforts in the Gaza Strip by boosting its armed presence in the West Bank. The sources said that in the last few weeks alone nearly $2 million in cash was confiscated from Hamas members. They said interrogations of recently arrested Hamas leaders revealed the Islamist group was using the money to help establish a West Bank military wing. Israeli media reports today quoted Palestinian sources saying the PA smashed the Hamas cell in Beit Likya. But sources inside the PA told WND that at least three senior Hamas militants escaped a raid and are still seeking to establish a military wing in the city, which is about one mile from the major Israeli town of Modiin. The Obama administration has backed a PA-led state in the West Bank. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in November announced a 10-month freeze on Jewish construction in the territory in an attempt to jumpstart talks aimed at creating a West Bank PA state, a move that would first see an Israeli retreat from the area. Following Israel's evacuation of the Gaza Strip in 2005, Hamas seized the coastal territory, forcibly expelling the U.S.-trained security forces of PA President Mahmoud Abbas. Now, Jordanian intelligence officials say, Hamas is attempting to set the stage for an eventual West Bank takeover. PA security officials previously told WND that a recent Fatah investigation discovered Hamas had attempted with some success to establish a military wing in the northern West Bank city of Jenin, a longtime Fatah stronghold although the Iranian-backed Islamic Jihad terror group also has a presence there. Hamas gunmen in Jenin were thought to be numbered in the dozens, but the PA found out Hamas purchased more than 600 high-powered assault rifles and distributed them to fighters in the city, the security officials said. The officials said Fatah raids confiscated about 100 rifles, but they believe 500 more were handed out by Hamas in Jenin. Fatah's investigation also found that some members of its declared military wing, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group, were recruited by Hamas in Jenin with higher paychecks, security officials said. Earlier this month, the PA arrested one of its own top police chiefs, accusing him of working for Hamas. The arrest highlighted the issue of Hamas infiltration of Fatah forces. That issue is significant since Hamas' infiltration of Fatah forces in the Gaza Strip was thought to have been the Achilles heel that led to the terror group's takeover in 2007 of the entire Gaza Strip. Since the late 1990s, the U.S. has run training bases for PA militias. The U.S. also has provided hundreds of millions of dollars in financial aid and weapons to build up the PA militias. The past two years, the U.S. stepped up its efforts at training the PA, running more advanced courses guided by Keith Dayton, the U.S. security coordinator to the Palestinian territories, who in 2007 initiated an advanced program for Palestinian police that trains 500 to 600 cadets at a time at the American bases. The U.S. currently operates training bases for the PA police and other militias, such as Force 17 and the Preventative Security Services, in the West Bank city of Jericho and also at U.S.-operated bases in the Jordanian village of Giftlik. Still, Israeli security officials here say they are concerned Abbas' Fatah organization in the West Bank is infiltrated by Hamas just as it was in Gaza in 2007. Hamas' infiltration of Fatah in Gaza was so extensive, according to top Palestinian intelligence sources, it included the chiefs of several prominent Fatah security forces, including Yussef Issa, director of the Preventative Security Services, the main Fatah police force. Issa regularly coordinated security with the U.S. and Israel. Israeli security officials said despite recent U.S. training they were also concerned Abbas is not strong enough in the West Bank to impose law and order without the help of the Israeli army. According to the officials, Fatah's intelligence apparatus routinely hands the Israel Defense Forces lists of Hamas militants that threaten Fatah rule, requesting that Israel make arrests. Hamas leaders previously warned they would take over the West Bank if Israel pulls out of that territory. At a Gaza rally in 2007, Hamas' leader in Gaza, Mahmoud al-Zahar, said, "Israel thinks Fatah in the West Bank is there to serve it, but we will take over the West Bank the way we took over Gaza." Nizar Rayyan, a senior Hamas leader in Gaza, stated Hamas will soon control Abbas' office in the West Bank. "In the autumn, Hamas supporters will be praying in the Muqata compound in Ramallah (the site of Abbas' presidential office)," he said. "We are now praying at the presidential compound in Gaza, just as we said we would. Abbas' regime will fall like a leaf come autumn." Military strategists long have estimated Israel must maintain the West Bank to defend itself from any ground invasion. Terrorist groups have warned if Israel withdraws, they will launch rockets from the West Bank into Israeli cities. Many villages in the West Bank, which Israelis commonly refer to as the "biblical heartland," are mentioned throughout the Torah: The book of Genesis says Abraham entered Israel at Shechem (Nablus) and received God's promise of land for his offspring. He later was buried in Hebron. The nearby town of Beit El, anciently called Bethel, meaning "house of God," is where Scripture says the patriarch Jacob slept on a stone pillow and dreamed of angels ascending and descending a stairway to heaven. In the dream, God spoke directly to Jacob and reaffirmed the promise of territory. And in Exodus, the tabernacle rested in Shiloh, believed to be the first area the ancient Israelites settled after fleeing Egypt. 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. |
|
ISLAMIC APARTHEID MONTH
Posted by Phyllis Chesler, February 26, 2010. | |
|
Guess who's coming to California State University at Sacramento? None other than CAIR — only this time they're pairing Japanese American students with Muslim American students for a three hour workshop: "Voices Unite in Solidarity; Japanese American Students and Muslim American Experiences Post-9/11." Makes sense, given all the recent and multiple Japanese-American underwear, shoe, and body-cavity bombers. Gotta stop those Japanese jihadists. On March 2, 2010 (smack-dab in the middle of the by-now infamous Israeli Apartheid week), California students will be helped to understand that the racist views that led to the 20th century internment of Japanese American citizens during Word War II is, come to think of it, happening all over again — but this time it's happening to Muslim American students who are being persecuted; treated as badly as Israel allegedly mistreats the Palestinians; as badly as America once treated the native Indians, the African slaves, immigrants, the impoverished, the way Americans and Israelis have always treated all the innocent, noble underdogs. God bless the internet, God bless Pajamas Media. Why? Because of our most excellent readers. A reader, one Ibn Rawandi, wrote to me about this very workshop in Sacramento. With his permission, allow me to share his letter with you.
Dr. Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's
Studies at City University of New York. She is an author and lecturer
and co-founder of the still ongoing Association for Women in
Psychology (1969).
|
|
PURIM COMPENDIUM
Posted by Steven Plaut, February 26, 2010. |
|
1. Memo: To the Mossad
You guys can use my passport any time you want. Just let me know when you want to come by and pick it up.
2. The Purim Clown
Shani Rosen-Winter is a baby girl, six months old. For Purim she was dressed as a clown by her mother, Anat Rosen-Winter, an attorney. For Purim Mrs. Rosen-Winter took her baby daughter to the Apropos cafe in the fashionable cafe district of Tel Aviv a block away from Dizengoff Street. The Palestinians engaged in terror, suicide bombings and violence. Rabin pursued Oslo anyway. Baby Shani then became the living epitome of the Oslo peace process and the new Middle East. When the bomb went off, her mother was mortally wounded and died in the ambulance on the way to the hospital. Anat Rosen-Winter, together with two other women, Dr. Michal Meidan Avrahami, a medical doctor, and Yael Gilad, a social worker, were killed. Dr. Michal Meidan Avrahami was 16 weeks pregnant. They will be added to Beilingrad, that cemetery of victims of peace named after Yossi Beilin, godfather of Oslo. For you see, once upon a time there was a foolish idea. Yossi Beilin, head of the far-left fringe of the Labor Party advocated it secretly. But he assured the Party and everyone else that if the Palestinians engaged in terror, launched suicide bombings and violence, then the idea would be abandoned and discarded. The Palestinians engaged in terror, launched suicide bombings, and violence. Beilin promoted his idea and opened secret negotiations in Oslo anyway. When the late Prime Minister Rabin was brought aboard the Oslo bandwagon, he reassured Israel. He was a hawk and general, after all. If the Palestinians engage in terror and suicide bombings and violence, they will lose the great historical opportunity presented by Oslo, he will call off the negotiations at once and take back everything offered by Israel. The Palestinians engaged in terror, suicide bombings and violence. Rabin pursued Oslo anyway. After Rabin was killed, Prime Minister Shimon Peres accelerated the Oslo process. As he considered turning over the cities in Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians, he assured everyone that if the Palestinian terror, suicide bombings and violence did not stop at once, Oslo would be halted and the Palestinians would lose their great historic opportunity forever. The terror, bombings and violence continued. Peres continued to make concessions and pulled Israel out of the West Bank cities. Peres got trounced in the elections for his hypocrisy. Netanyahu got elected. He promised to continue Oslo, but only if the Palestinians behave themselves with a complete absence of terror, bombings and violence. He threatened ominously, any resumption of terror and bombings would end Oslo forever, the PLO would be stripped of everything it had received. Israel would return to its pre-Oslo policies. On March 21, 1997, the same day the press carried reports that Netanyahu would agree to accept a Palestinian state as long as the PLO agreed to allow Israel to keep Jerusalem, the day after Arafat urged Palestinians to renew the violence and intifada and warfare until Israel had fully relinquished Jerusalem, the Palestinian campaign of suicide bombings was renewed. As a result in one moment, Baby Shani became the epitome of the Oslo peace process. She was seriously, though not mortally, wounded in the bomb blast. She was grabbed by 18-year old Shabtai Labanda, who handed her off to a police woman, while he rushed to apply a tourniquet to another bomb victim whose arm had been blown off. The TV image that will be most remembered, not only of the bombing on March 21st, but of Oslo in general, will be that of this police woman running back and forth frantically with Baby Shani in her arms trying in desperation to find the baby's mother. The mother was dead. Israel cemented up the house of the suicide bomber, who will NOT be buried in a pigskin, in contrast with the technique used by Britain to suppress Islamic terror in Malaysia and the Philippines after World War II. Israel used to blow up houses of terrorists, but the Israeli Left complained this was cruel and unusual, so now the doors of their homes just get cemented up. Then three hours after the cameras are gone, the family of the dead terrorist can move back in. The suicide bomber who murdered Baby Shani's mother, Yael Gilad, Dr. Michal Meidan Avrahami and her unborn child had been arrested three weeks earlier for illegal sojourn within Israel. Before that he had got himself fired from his job at a cafe in a suburb of Tel Aviv for sexually harassing a Jewish waitress. But in post-Oslo Israel, the government has a policy of seeking to release as many Palestinian criminals as possible to keep the PLO happy. So the terrorist in question was released. Why seek to put terrorists on the street? For the same reason the Israeli government has a policy of sanctioning the theft by Palestinians and the PLO of 34,000 cars a year from Israel, a third of the number purchased each year by Israelis, as "reparations" to the Palestinians, while Israeli police have been ordered not to stop the theft. Since the victims of the bombing are three women, with most of the wounded also women,one might expect the far-Left Israel Women's Network, the main feminist militant group led by Prof. Alice Shalvi, to speak up. The only thing they have to say about all this is that Israel must not build any housing in Jerusalem and must return to its 1949 borders. You know, those borders once described by Labor Lemming Abba Eban as "Auschwitz Borders." Members of the PLO leadership praised the bombing as a great act for peace. The PLO says the Jews are to blame for building housing in Jerusalem. The Foreign Minister of Egypt says that Baby Shani is motherless because "Israeli policies necessitate responses that are dangerous to the peace process." (Ha'aretz March 23, 1997) The Israeli Labor Party continues its role as chief apologist and PR agent for Palestinian terror. When Arafat ordered a pogrom last fall in which 15 Israelis were murdered, the Labor Party said it was all the Likud's fault, because the Likud had agreed to allow Jews to walk through a 2200-year old Hasomonean water tunnel blocks away from the Al-Aqsa Mosque. Now the Labor Party is again saying that the Likud is to blame for Shani's Mom getting murdered, since the government has decided to let Jews build houses in Jerusalem on land they purchased and own. U.S. President Bill Clinton is continuing his election campaign on behalf of Shimon Peres even though Peres lost the election. Before the election, Clinton flew all the way to Sharm Al-Sheikh to help Peres get elected. Now he is pressuring the Israeli government (Ha'aretz March 23, 1997) to bring Peres and the Labor Party in to a national unity government, presumably to make it more likely that Israel redeploy out of Jerusalem and back to its Auschwitz Borders. Israeli response to Clinton's naked meddling in internal Israeli affairs? Well, it was not — as I suggested — to cable, "Sure as soon as you confess and compensate Gennifer Flowers." Ha'aretz also reports that the US State Department flippantly dismissed Israeli reports to it that Arafat had given a "green light" to renewed terror and bombings. It does not fit in with Madge Albrights all-bright view of the peace process. And what of Baby Shani? Who will grow up without a mother? Fear not, she will be growing up into a Brave New Middle East, a post — Oslo post-Zionist world of "peace" and Beilingrad.
3. The Unworldly Neturei Karta
In one of the most remarkable scientific discoveries of all time, a CD-Rom containing the protocols of a high-level secret meeting of NASA, the American space agency, has just been leaked to the media. The content of that meeting is so dramatic that it is likely to change the entire course of human history. We bring you the highlights of that meeting as a special service to our readers: Commander Nishtikeit, chief of NASA control: I would like to thank all of you senior military officers and scientists for attending this meeting today on such short notice. NASA control center has decided to release to the nation and world information on what may be the most astounding discovery in all of human history. It seems that ironclad evidence has now been uncovered of the presence on earth of humanoid cyborgs, that is, cybernetic robots that look vaguely human but were constructed in a different galaxy and transported here. Dr. Trombenick, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: But there have been urban legends about such things for years. There were numerous internet reports that the Governor of California and Reverend Al Sharpton are really cyborgs, but these proved baseless. Commander Nishtikeit: Yes, we know all about that. But this time we have absolute proof. It seems a bizarre looking space travel vehicle has carried cyborgs into our galaxy and has deposited two or three hundred of them right here on earth. General Lemeshkeh, US Air Force: What form do these alien contraptions take? Commander Nishtikeit: That is the most bizarre part of the story. It seems the space ship, which looks amazingly like a large flying bagel, had earlier been beaming up earth images in order to design its cyborgs to look like earthlings. Its tele-imaging processor was focused on several neighborhoods on earth, just east of the East River. Yes, all those people looking for signs of aliens in Roswell, New Mexico, had things wrong. The aliens just wanted their cyborgs to look just like earthlings and to be able to pass as humans, so they designed them to look exactly like ultra-Orthodox Jews from Brooklyn. Colonel Muttelmessig, US Navy: Are you serious? This is not something out of an old Woody Allen movie? Commander Nishtikeit: Absolutely serious! The aliens planted these cyborgs on earth dressed like Chareidi ultra-Orthodox Jews, in black coats, with beards and side curls and hats, and called them the Neturei Karta. It seems they picked that name up from listening to broadcast of an earthling in Brooklyn referring to someone as a Notorious Karger, but they botched up the words. Professor Shikker, Caltech: You mean those Neturei Karta people who have been protesting in favor of destroying Israel and who even attended the Holocaust Denial conference in Iran are in reality humanoid cyborgs placed on earth as part of a devious plan of planetary infiltration? Commander Nishtikeit: You have put your finger right on it! In a sense, we all should have realized this much sooner. After all, only a group of space aliens could have thought that Nazis with Payot, dressed outwardly as religious Jews, could pull the wool over the eyes of actual humans. Virtually no Jews on earth even recognize the Neturei Karta as Jews, and until our discovery the Jews regarded them as some sort of pagan cult in religious garb. The Neturei Karta members seem to know virtually nothing about Judaism, other than two or three sentences from the Gemara, which they cite obsessively out of context to prove that Israel must be destroyed. A number of terrestrial Rabbis, including Israel's Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger, have initiated efforts to excommunicate members of this pro-terror anti-Semitic Neturei Karta sect. Israeli Rabbis of the "Save the Nation and Land" group have made a similar call. Former Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau, a child Holocaust survivor who is currently the Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv declared, "It is something completely insane. Is it conceivable that any Jew, for whatever reason, would support a Holocaust denier in a generation when people with numbers tattooed on their arms are still among us? It is an insanity that has no justification and no explanation." Even the Eida Hareidit, an anti-Zionist Jerusalem-based council of Hassidic courts and other religious groups which includes the Neturei Karta, was dramatically harsh in its condemnation of the cyborgs who went to Iran to sit beneath the swastikas. Dr. Trombenick: Is that how you caught on to the alien scheme in the first place? Commander Nishtikeit: Well, that was part of it. Now that we know the truth, we are kicking ourselves for not seeing all the indicators earlier, showing that the Neturei Karta are really cyborgs from another galaxy. The Jews on earth quickly realized these were not real Jews, but very few figured out that they are not even mammals. Captain Shvindeldik: But something here is puzzling. If these space aliens are so technically advanced, how could they have made such a foolish error as constructing robots for placement on earth that look outwardly like religious Jews yet behave like Nazis? Professor Shtiklech, Princeton University: Maybe, in spite of their ability to undertake inter-galactic travel, they are really not that bright after all? After all, why would creatures having an electronic GPS or Galactic Positioning System need to construct all those crop circles in order to navigate around the Midwest? Commander Nishtikeit: Well, that is one possibility. Another may be that their instruments were damaged when the Flying Bagel entered earth's atmosphere. We have some evidence that the original design for the cyborgs was for creatures with 6 arms, but their spaceship commander realized that these would be quickly recognized as frauds because they would not know on which arms to put tefillin. Major Shlumperdik, his deputy: They seem to have made other strategic errors as well. They placed these cyborgs on earth with no visible means of support. So once earthbound, the cyborgs ran to terrorist organizations, neo-nazi groups, and Holocaust Denial conferences in order to raise money to support themselves. One would think that beings from a superior civilization would have figured out a better cover for their robots. Dr. Trombenick: But if they look so much like actual Orthodox Jews, how can they be distinguished from the real thing? Commander Nishtikeit: Well, there are several ways. First, when struck upon the head with a large rolling pin, nothing seems to happen to them. The pin just bounces off. Their heads seem to be constructed from some special space alloy into which nothing can permeate. Second, when looking closely at their scalps, one can see that they used to have three antennae there, which were somehow surgically removed before the machines were deposited on earth. In addition, their mid-sections seem to be built with another special alien alloy. That is why they seem to be the only ones on earth whose digestive systems are unaffected by eating large portions of chulent. General Lemeshkeh: So how should we earthlings communicate or interact with them and try to make friends? Major Shlumperdik: Well, there is always that rolling pin idea I mentioned earlier. But other than that, the best strategy seems to be to make little tinfoil antennae and glue them on to one's head or hat when approaching these aliens. You know, to show them that we have no hostile intentions and want to welcome them on our planet. But then we need to make clicking space static sounds, demand to be taken to their leader, and ask them to take us for a tour of their spaceship. Commander Nishtikeit: I wonder if I can get one of them to teach me how to program my DVD machine. (assembly dismissed) Happy Purim, everyone!
4. SAY WHAT? ANTI-SEMITES? WHO, US ANTI-ZIONISTS?
Say What? Anti-Semites? Who, us anti-Zionists? US? We have nothing against Jews as such. We just hate Zionism and Zionists. We think Israel does not have a right to exist. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. Heavens to Mergatroyd. Marx Forbid. We are humanists. Progressives. Peace lovers. Anti-Semitism is the hatred of Jews. Anti-Zionism is opposition to Zionism and Israeli policies. The two have nothing to do with one another. Venus and Mars. Night and Day. Trust us. Sure, we think the only country on the earth that must be annihilated is Israel. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. Sure, we think that the only children on earth whose being blown up is ok if it serves a good cause are Jewish children. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. Sure we think that if Palestinians have legitimate grievances this entitles them to mass murder Jews. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. Naturally, we think that the only people on earth who should never be allowed to exercise the right of self-defense are the Jews. Jews should only resolve the aggression against them through capitulation, never through self-defense. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We only denounce racist apartheid in the one country in the Middle East that is NOT a racist apartheid country. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We refuse to acknowledge the Jews as a people, and think they are only a religion. We do not have an answer to how people who do NOT practice the Jewish religion can still be regarded as Jews. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We think that all peoples have the right to self-determination, except Jews, and including even the make-pretend Palestinian "people". But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We hate it when people blame the victims, except of course when people blame the Jews for the jihads and terrorist campaigns against them. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We think the only country in the Middle East that is a fascist anti-democratic one is the one that has free elections. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We demand that the only country in the Middle East with free speech, free press, or free courts be destroyed. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We oppose military aggression, except when it is directed at Israel. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We really understand suicide bombers who murder bus loads of Jewish children and we insist that their demands be met in full. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We think the only conflict on earth that must be solved through dismembering one of the parties to that conflict is the one involving Israel. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We do not think that Jews have any human rights that need to be respected and especially not the right to ride a bus without being murdered. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. There are Jewish leftist anti-Zionists and we consider this proof that anti-Zionists could not possibly be anti-Semitic. Not even the ones who cheer when Jews are mass murdered. These are the only Jews we think need be acknowledged or respected. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We do not think murder proves how righteous and just the cause of the murderer is, except when it comes to murderers of Jews. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We do not think the Jews are entitled to their own state and must submit to being a minority in a Rwanda-style "bi-national state", although no other state on earth, including the 22 Arab countries, should be similarly expected to be deprived of its sovereignty. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We think that Israel's having a Jewish majority and a star on its flag makes it a racist apartheid state. We do not think any other country having an ethnic-religious majority or having crosses or crescents or "Allah Akbar" on its flag is racist or needs dismemberment. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We condemn the "mistreatment" of women in the only country of the Middle East in which they are not mistreated. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We condemn the "mistreatment" of minorities in the only country in the Middle East in which minorities are NOT brutally suppressed and mass murdered. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We demand equal citizen rights, which is why the only country in the Middle East in need of extermination is the only one in which they exist. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. We have no trouble with the fact that there is no freedom of religion in any Arab countries. But we are mad at hell at Israel for violating religious freedom, and never mind that we are never quite sure where or when it does so. But that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such. So how can you possibly say we are anti-Semites? We are simply anti-Zionists. We seek peace and justice, that's all. And surely that does not mean we have anything against Jews as such.
5. The Boojoos-Political Satire
It has been quite a while since we devoted an incitement to the subject of the Boojoos. Boojoo is shorthand for Buddhist Jew. The BOOJOOS are people who take vedic forms of paganism and dress them up as an "alternative" form of Judaism. The Reconstructionist Deconstructionists are among the better-known examples of the movement. But of course the most important Boojoos are the Woodstockischer Hassidim, a small cult group that reads Tikkun Magazine and follows the teachings of people like Michael Lerner and Arthur Waskow, the Rabbi Cheech and Rabbi Chong of this great movement. I assume you are all familiar with that towering achievement of the intellect, Tikkun Magazine. Tikkun is the magazine for Jewish fossilized 60's radicals and new-wave pseudo-religious mystics, the main vehicle of expression for "PC Judaism", that is, the school of thought that holds that Judaism is nothing more and nothing less than the PC Leftist political agenda. It is edited by 60's Radical Michael Lerner, and hosts Israeli far-Left journalists (mostly from Haaretz), Hippy-Rabbis ("Mitzvahs for McGovern"), people like Arthur Waskow (who is founder of the tree-hugging branch of Judaism), etc. Its logo should probably read, "Like heavy, Dude, this Judaism is really great dope!" Anyway, Tikkun editor Michael Lerner was in the news back in 1992 after Clinton won that Presidential election. The reason is that Lerner was apparently Hillary Clinton's favorite Jew. After the election, Hillary made Lerner her official guru, and together they rambled about the nation promoting Lerner's religion of "The Politics of Meaning". This, you will recall, is basically the promoting of PC politics clothed in pseudo-religious symbols and imagery. Lately Hillary distanced herself from Michael of Meaning, apparently because even the hillbillies in Arkansas were starting to make fun of him around their stills. So what became of Lerner? Well, a team of analysts has just completed an exhaustive study and has reached the incredible and serendipitous conclusion that Michael Lerner has been the person inside the children's TV character Barney the Dinosaur. The first clues were that Barney and Lerner seem to have somewhat similar bodily dimensions and both have that big overbite. But what gave it away was the fact that Barney has been preaching the Politics of Meaning from PBS television stations to masses of unsuspecting children. Indeed, the entire essence of the Politics of Meaning is expressed in the theme song: "I wuv you, You wuv me, We're a Happy Famil-wee." When confronted with this and asked whether that song was the elaboration of the Politics of Meaning for Children, Lerner hesitated and said, "Yes, well, er, no. Actually it is the full elaboration of Politics of Meaning for adults as well." Meanwhile, as your faithful correspondent on the spot, we have gotten hold of advance galleys for the forthcoming issue of the Hippy-Jewish far-Left Tikkun magazine and it promises to be a lollapalooza. I thought you might enjoy hearing about what our Boojoo brethren have in mind for their next work of progressive loving-and-caring politics of meaning. The cover article will be entitled, "Shatnez for the 21st Century", written by Rabbi Michael Moonbeam. In it, he argues that just like vegetarianism is the ultimate form of kashrut and the truly highest spiritual fulfillment of Biblical kashrut laws, so nudist davening is the ultimate and highest fulfillment of Biblical laws against shatnez, the mixing of fibers in garments from certain sources. He argues that progressive Jews should adopt the habit of congregating in minyans in the nude, other than wearing the requisite tallis and yarmulka. In the second article, Rabbi Arthur Woodstock devotes a full 16-page article to the question of Cannabis Smoking on the Sabbath. He points out that while in the past it was believed that Torah rules prohibit all lighting of fire, including for smoking, on the Sabbath, Rav Woodstock has concluded that smoking of marijuana is not only permitted for the Sabbath, but downright mandated. Oh, I have discovered a song that is the Tikkun official ballad, taken from the important textbook, "Customs and Ceremonies of the Woodstockischer Hassidim", authored by the famous Woodstockischer Admor Shlita of Philadelphia. It goes to the same melody as Puff the Magic Dragon.
And now from Sioux City, Iowa, Pants Productions brings you live from the Ed Sullivan Theater: The Late Show, with Dave Letterman. Tonight's Top Ten List. Tonight, Dave brings you the ten recent feature articles appearing in Tikkun magazine: 10. Why the Yom Kippur services should be conducted only in Black English.
Finally, It has occurred to me that many of the members of the editorial board of Tikkun magazine, not to mention most of their readership, must be pushing 65 years old. Think about that. Well I have, and I think that there are a number of fine business opportunities, selling products to the geriatric hippies and menopausal Marxists of this fine magazine. I am now looking for some partners to go in with me in these ventures, developing products to sell to the Tikkun readership, advertising in the magazine. Anyone with some idle capital, give me a buzz. Here are the projects I have thought of so far: 1. A book of recipes for preparing hashish brownies laced with Metamucil, just the thing to keep you a regular revolutionary. They will also be sold at the new progressive bistro we will open, to be called Chez Che.
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. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
PURIM GUIDE FOR THE PERPLEXED
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, February 25, 2010. |
|
Assembled from various Jewish Sages |
|
1. Purim is the holiday of contradictions and tenacity-driven-optimism: Grief replaced by joy, Esther's concealment replaced by the disclosure of her national/religious identity, Haman's intended genocide of Jews replaced by redemption, Haman replaced by Mordechai, national and personal pessimism replaced by optimism. One of Purim's lessons: Life is complex, full of contradictions, ups & downs and difficult dilemmas and worthy of principled-determination. 2. The timing — The Jewish month of Adar. Adar is the root of the Hebrew adjective "Adir" (glorious, awesome, exalted, magnificent). It is, also, a derivative of the Akkadian word Adura (heroism). Jewish tradition (Babylonian Talmud) highlights Adar as a month of happiness, singing and dancing, prohibiting eulogies and fast on Purim. The zodiac of Adar is Pisces (fish), which is a symbol of demographic multiplication. Hence, Adar is the only Jewish month, which doubles itself during the 7 leap years during each 19 years cycle. Purim is celebrated on the 14th (in non-walled towns) and (in Jerusalem) on the 15th day of Adar (February 28 and March 1, 2010), commemorating the national liberation of the Jewish People in Persia and the (161 BCE) victory of Judah the Maccabee over Nikanor, the Assyrian commander. Moses — whose burial site is unknown — was born, and died (1273 BCE), on the 7th day of Adar, which is Israel's Memorial Day for soldiers, whose burial site is unknown. The events of Purim occurred following the destruction of the 1st Temple by Nebuchadnezzar (586 BCE) and the exile from Zion, during the leadership of Ezra who returned to Jerusalem, and the inauguration of the Second Temple (3rd of Adar, 515 BCE) by Ezra and Nehemiah. Nebuchadnezzar died in Adar 561 BCE (Jeremiah 52:31). Einstein published the theory of General Relativity in Adar 1916. 3. Purim's Hebrew root is fate/destiny ("Pur"), as well as lottery (to commemorate Haman's lottery which determined the designated day for the planned Jewish genocide) "to frustrate", "to annul" ("Le'Ha'fer), "to crumble" and "to shutter" (Le'Phorer), reflecting the demise of Haman. 4. Purim — A (522 BCE) War of Civilizations between Mordechai the Jew and Haman the Iranian-Amalekite — constitutes an early edition of the war between Right VS Wrong, Liberty VS Tyranny, Just VS Evil, Truth VS Lies, as were/are the precedents of Adam/Eve VS Snake, Abel VS Cain, Abraham VS Sodom & Gomorrah, Jacob VS Esau (grandparent of Amalek), Maccabees VS Assyrians, Allies VS Nazis, Western democracies VS Communist Bloc and Western democracies VS Islamic terrorism. 5. Mordechai, the hero of Purim and one of Ezra's deputies, was a role model of principle-driven optimism in defiance of colossal odds, in face of a global power and in spite of Jewish establishment. According to Judaism, deliverance is ushered by the bravery of faith-driven individuals, such as Nachshon — who was the first to walk into the Red Sea before it was parted — and Mordechai. He was a politically-INcorrect statesman and a retired military leader, who practiced "disproportionate pre-emption" instead of defense, deterrence or retaliation. The first three Hebrew letters of "Mordechai" spell the Hebrew word "Rebellion" ("Mered"), which is consistent with the motto/legacy of the American Founding Fathers: "Rebellion against Tyrants is Obedience to G-D"). Mordechai did not bow to Haman, the second most powerful person in the Persian Empire. Mordechai was a member of the tribe of Benjamin, the only son of Jacob who did not bow to Esau. The name Mordechai is also a derivative of Mordouch — the chief Babylonian god. Mordechai was a descendant of King Saul, who defied a clear commandment (to eradicate the Amalekites) and spared the life of Agag, the Amalekite king, thus causing further calamities upon the Jewish People. Consequently, Saul lost his royal position and life. Mordechai learnt from Saul's error. He destroyed Haman, a descendant of Agag the Amalekite, and Haman's entire power base, thus sparing the Jewish People a major disaster. In Gimatriya, "Cursed Haman" equals "Blessed Mordechai" — 502. 6. Queen Esther, the heroine of Purim's Esther Scroll (the 24th and concluding book in the Old Testament) was Mordechai's cousin. One cannot comprehend Purim without studying the Esther Scroll. Esther demonstrates the centrality of women in Judaism, shaping the future of the Jewish People, as did Sarah, Rebecca, Miriam, Batyah, Deborah, Hannah, etc. Sarah was the first Jewish woman, and Esther was the last Jewish woman, mentioned in the Bible. Sarah lived 127 years and Esther ruled over 127 countries. The name Esther is a derivative of the Hebrew word "Hester" — "clandestine", "hidden", "subtle", which was reflective of her (initially) unknown Jewish identity and subtle-style at the royal court. The name Esther is also a derivative of Ishtar — a Mesopotamian goddess, Astarte — a Phoenician goddess. In fact, the one day pre-Purim Fast of Esther (commemorating the three day fast declared by Esther in order to expedite deliverance), was cherished by the Marano in Spain, who performed Judaism in a clandestine manner. The Scroll of Esther is the only book in the Old Testament, where the name of G-D is hidden/absent. It has been suggested that the explicit name of G-D is absent because the Scroll of Esther is the only Old Testament book, which deals exclusively with the Diaspora and not with the Land of Israel. According to Michael Bernstein, the noun "King" appears 182 times in Esther Scroll, which is the total sum of 26 (numerical value of G-D) times 7 (days of creation). Esther's second name was Hadassah, whose root is Hadass — myrtle tree in Hebrew — which constitutes a metaphor for eyesight 20:20. The name Esther is identified with the planet Venus (hence, Esther's other Hebrew name — Noga — a glaring divine light, which is Venus in Hebrew). In Gimatriya, Esther and Noga equal 661 and 58 respectively, and the sum of 6+6+1 and 5+8 is 13 (the number of G-D's virtues). In "small Gimatriya" both Esther (1+6+4+2) and Noga (5+3+5) equal 13, which is also the total sum of one in Hebrew — which represents monotheism, as well as the total sum of love in Hebrew. 7. The Persian King appointed Mordechai to be his top advisor, overruling Haman's intent to prevent the resettling of Jews in Zion, the reconstruction of the Temple and the restoration of the wall around Jerusalem. He foiled Haman's plan to exterminate the Jews. The king prospered as a result of his change of heart and escaped assassination. That was the case with Pharaoh, who escaped national collapse and starvation and rose in global prominence, once he appointed Joseph to be his deputy. 8. Purim's four commandments: *Reading/studying the "Esther Scroll" within the family, highlighting the centrality of family, education, memory and youth as the foundation for a solid future. *Gifts to relatives and friends emphasize the importance of family and community. *Charity (at least the value of a meal) indicates the value of compassion and responsibility. *Celebration and Happiness sustains the element of optimism and faith as the backbone of an individual and a nation. 9. Lethal enemy destroyed and commemorated. The pre-Purim Sabbath is called "Memorial Sabbath" ("Shabbat Zakhor"), commemorating the war of extermination launched by the Amalekites against the Jewish Nation, since the Exodus from Egypt. One of Purim's lessons: Be wary of enemies, employing false-tenuous accommodation, in order to conceal a strategic goal of extermination. 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 |
|
FROM ISRAEL: BEFORE PURIM
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 25, 2010. |
|
Only a brief posting before Purim — there will not be another until after, on Monday. I begin by sending wishes for a Hag Sameach. A joyous Purim. Let us be mindful of G-d's hand in our lives, even when it is hidden, and of our responsibility to act along with the Almighty to secure our redemption. The lessons of this holiday. Haman did not get us, and we will not be defeated now, either. ~~~~~~~~~~ The US State Department has chastised us for having the audacity to recognize sites that are part of our ancient heritage because they happen to be in areas that the Palestinian Arabs seek. We've been told that the administration views it as "provocative" — that we've included in our list of Heritage sites the Machpelah, the burial cave of our Patriarchs and Matriarchs, purchased by Avraham, as documented in the Torah, and the burial site of our Matriarch Rachel, also documented in the Torah. My friends in the US, let the Secretary of State and the President know what you think of this, please. Remind them that these sites — some 3,500 years old — were part of the Jewish heritage long before Islam even existed and that it is not within the jurisdiction of the US to ask Jews to relinquish them. Remind them that there is free access to holy sites here only when Israel is in control, that when the Arabs are in control they ban Jews — this is solidly documented by precedent. President Barack Obama
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
~~~~~~~~~~ I end with additional, and fascinating, commentary with regard to the Dubai assassination of al-Mabhouh. Claudia Rosett, in her piece, "Video Killer Thriller in Dubai," informs us that Dubai is Iran's top trading partner and plays "a critical role as Iran's offshore banker and exporter." In 2001, "more than half the September 11 hijackers passed through Dubai en route to attack the U.S...and the 9/11 Commission reported that roughly half the $250,000 the hijackers spent preparing for the attacks was wired to them via Dubai banks. " A nice place, Dubai. Rosett points out that "Dubai's security apparatus has just given an impressive display of its surveillance abilities. Closed circuit cameras followed members of the alleged hit team arriving and departing the airport, and tracked them at a shopping mall and at various hotels, including that of top Hamas terrorist Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. All of which points toward a big question. If Dubai surveillance is this adept, where's the rest of the Dubai video collection? "Dubai's authorities are putting on a curious display of priorities, appearing far more incensed over the murder of one Hamas terrorist than over the use of their turf for terrorists such as al-Mabhouh to plot and facilitate the murders — albeit elsewhere — of many others. If this is all about enforcing civilized norms, Dubai's authorities are clearly in a position to help, if they so choose. May we see the rest of the video collection?"
~~~~~~~~~~ Tom Gross, writing in the National Post of Canada, points out that Mabhouh had five different passports with him in Dubai. He finds it strange, and indeed it is, that the media is not covering this aspect of what occurred, and that there seems no interest in which countries these passports came from. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ABBAS THREATENS HOLY WAR OVER HISTORICAL SITE DESIGNATIONS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 25, 2010. |
|
ABBAS THREATENS HOLY WAR OVER HISTORICAL SITE DESIGNATIONS Palestinian Authority (P.A.) head Abbas warns of holy war over Israel's designation of Rachel's Tomb as an Israeli national site. It is not an idle threat, considering that the P.A. (said to be planning an uprising anyway) launched an intifada, which sputtered, so the P.A. fanned the flames by pretending that Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount was some kind of affront to Islam. [For the record, he showed Islam no disrespect in that visit. He did come to affirm Israeli sovereignty on the Mount. The Arabs oppose all Israeli sovereignty. They exploited his presence as a pretext.] PM Netanyahu had added Rachel's Tomb, just outside the southern part of Jerusalem, and the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, to a previously published list of sites to be refurbished. Muslims now claim that Rachel's Tomb is a 1,000 year old mosque, but referred to it as such only 44 years ago. (A prior news brief put it as 14 years.) The Muslim world protests the designation and some called the designation a "provocation." Hamas called the designation "arrogance" and "aggression against Muslim holy sites, and demand a violent response. Arabs have been rioting in Hebron for a couple of days. Iran claimed that Israel "annexed" the two sites and said Israel is engaging in ethnic "cleansing" of all religious sites. [Israel allows Muslim worship at the Cave of the Patriarchs and Christian worship at Christian sites. There has been no annexation of those sites.] Egypt claimed that Israel is acting against international law in seeking to "alter" religious features. [Refurbishing is not altering religious features but preserving them.] The UN expressed "concern." 
Prime Minister Netanyahu's office accused Abbas of a "'deceitful campaign of lies and hypocrisy' by referring to Jewish sites as Moslem mosques. The Arab world's claims follow a campaign the past several years to deny the existence of any Jewish history at the Temple Mount site, including the Western Wall (Kotel) in the Old City of Jerusalem." "'The State of Israel is committed to freedom of religion for worshipers of all faiths at the holy places and thus it acts in practice,' said the office of the Prime Minister. 'Rachel's Tomb and the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the over 3,500-year old resting places of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs of the Jewish People — Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca, Leah and Rachel — certainly deserve preservation and rehabilitation.'" Genesis 23 describes Abraham's purchase of the plot in Hebron for the burial of his wife, Sarah. Genesis 35.19 describes the burial of Rachel, near Bethlehem. "Jews had free access to Rachel's Tomb under the rule of the Ottoman Empire since the 19th century, and Muslim references to a mosque at the site began to appear publicly only in 1966. Muslim history refers to Rachel's Tomb as far back as the Quran, which recounts Rachel's death and burial, as stated in the Bible." The Oslo Accords interim agreement in 1995 states that security arrangements must "ensure free, unimpeded and secure access to the relevant Jewish holy sites." The agreement also defined Joseph's Tomb in Shechem and the Shalom Al Israel synagogue in Jericho as "Jewish holy sites (in addition to the recently designated two sites). "The Oslo Agreement also states, "The Palestinian side shall respect academic freedom and rights... [and] shall ensure free access to archaeological sites, open to the public without discrimination." "The Sharon government surrendered daily access to Joseph's Tomb (pictured) following Arab terrorist attacks, and Jews have been barred from the Jericho synagogue since the PA took over full control of Jericho. Knesset Member Dr. Michael Ben-Ari (National Union) this week led a group of Jews past blockades and visited the synagogue, until the IDF removed them." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/24). Although the Muslim Arabs complain that Israel mistreats Muslim religious places, the record shows that they break their agreements to allot Jews access to their religious sites, while Israel keeps its agreements to give Muslims access to their religious sites. That is what Netanyahu must mean in calling Abbas hypocritical. Even worse, P.A. police let their people destroy Joseph's Tomb and attack Rachel's Tomb. If the Palestinian Arabs really thought that Rachel's Tomb were a mosque, would they have thrown firebombs and rocks at it and vandalized it? (Weapons used are cited in 2/24 press release by ZOA.) If Abbas starts a holy war over this non-issue, will he use the troops trained by the U.S.? What does his threat show us about his alleged moderation and U.S. betting on him? We need to turn Gaza into a litigious society like the U.S., as a way of conflict resolution. Lawyers can paralyze industries and impoverish companies but do not kill a lot of people.
NEW YORKERS' OPINIONS ON DUBAI ASSASSINATION 
Most reports are of officials' and experts' views of the Dubai assassination. What do individuals think of it? Here is some of their analysis. I do not claim they are a cross-section — they come from letters to the Editor of the Wall St. Journal. The slain man was a veteran terrorist "dedicated to killing us and destroying Western civilization using methods that flagrantly violated all the laws of war." Eliminating him should be treated as a victory for us, not as a "diplomatic nightmare" [because forged passports were used] nor as a murder mystery. Treating it that way is part of the Administration's denial "that radical Islamists are waging a terrorist, unconventional war against the West." How perverted to transform his slaying into a crime and a setback to the West! The Dubai police do not know who killed him. It could have been done by rival groups assisted by rival governments. Naturally, Dubai blames Mossad, "Who else do they ever blame?" The abuse of passports was called a global threat. Doesn't Dubai's having allowed such a terrorist to enter pose more of a global threat? What did Dubai want of Israel? If Israel asked its government to extradite him would it have cooperated? No. That is another global threat. Sanctions should be considered against the United Arab Emirates. Remember when the Mossad captured the notorious mass-murderer, Adolf Eichmann in Argentina? Should Mossad first have gotten Argentina's approval? Some people oppose assassination, likening it more to capital punishment, even though it is war. But opposing capital punishment is more appropriate for criminals already imprisoned where they cannot do further harm. Al-Mabhouh was free and activist. There is no ethical issue in liquidating al-Mabhouh. The U.S. uses drones to assassinate terrorists in Afghanistan and Pakistan. That is accepted [so long as it does not strike civilians]. Why a double standard against Israel? (2/24.) International law requires all governments to neutralize common enemies of mankind, a classification that includes terrorists. Of course, they don't relish foreign agents shooting people in their countries. But why are they harboring them, contrary to international law and common decency?
AL-QAEDA ESCORTS ALGERIAN SMUGGLERS Algeria reports that Al-Qaeda men provide security for drug smugglers in the Sahara desert in Algeria. Al-Qaeda earns money it can use for recruiting. Al-Qaeda also may get to use the smugglers' air strips for getting into other countries (www.imra.org.il, 2/23). Will Islamic authorities condemn al-Qaeda assistance to drug smugglers as un-Islamic?
ISRAEL CLEARED A FEW BEDOUIN SQUATTERS 
The Israel Land Authority rents to Bedouin for seasonal planting about 25,000 acres of land in the Negev desert for about $2 per acre. Bedouin have claimed that some of the land belonged to them, but could not prove it in any court. This winter, they illegally squatted and planted crops on some land. They also uprooted hundreds of saplings planted during the Jewish holiday devoted to that. One was caught in the act. "Last week, a Be'er Sheva court accepted a petition by the Regavim land association and ordered the demolition of 30 illegally-built luxurious Bedouin houses in the Negev — within a year." This year, Israel cleared Bedouin squatters from about 1,850 acres. On Tuesday, Israel cleared 350 acres east of Be'er Sheva, near Nevatim, and near Dimona (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/24). The cleared land is just a fraction of Bedouin squatting — theft of land and illegal building — in Israel. They prevent lawful use of the land, as for Army maneuvers. Cumulatively, this is a threat to taking over the country, the way the growing Arab population in the Galilee shouts slogans to that effect. By not cracking down earlier and harder, and indeed by feeling pressured to retroactively legalize much Bedouin land usurpation, Israel encouraged more lawlessness. Some of the Bedouin make the finest Israeli soldiers, but others throw stones at passing Israeli vehicles. These pages contain a torrent of facts, but some people ignore them entirely, and instead assert endlessly, without substantiation and against the historical record, that Zionists squatted extensively on land owned by Arabs and vandalize Arabs' crops. There is a complication here in a clash of eras. Bedouin, like the Mongols, the ancient Hebrew before Moses, like cattlemen on the open U.S. range, and other nomads, did not have permanent land and modern concepts of land title. They or their cattle wandered. That brings them into conflict with people who set up fixed positions of farms and urban centers, and who do divide up land by title.
LONDON IS HAMAS HUB A private Israeli organization, Intelligence Information Center, reports that London is the hub of global Hamas activity. Exploiting certain decency and weaknesses in British democracy, Hamas works behind the scenes to direct anti-Zionist discussion and control public opinion about Israeli treatment of Arabs. Here are how Britain facilitates Hamas activity: A. Britain's excessive freedom of politics and speech lets Hamas, a declared terrorist organization, operate there. "The report says Hamas works hard to conceal their activities and avoid prosecution, rarely attributing to themselves the disinformation and advocacy of violence they publish and distribute. Because they consider children to be a primary target for their messaging, they spend a lot of effort writing anti-Israel and pro-war propaganda for minors." "Hamas also uses British organizations, politicians, and other channels to garner money and supplies for use in Gaza, according to the Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/24.) If the Arabs in general were as moderate as reputed, they would reject Hamas propaganda as false and from terrorists. As for Britain, whose forces are embattled abroad as gatekeepers against Radical Islam, at home it acts as the gateway for Radical Islam What good is democracy if it does not defend its own people?
ISRAEL'S PRES. PERES ON DESIGNATED SITES Israeli President Peres told a visiting UN official that Hamas and other extremists were trying to incite an artificial conflict over the naming of Israeli national sites. Peres said that "Israel plans to invest significant amounts in infrastructure that will increase the accessibility of holy sites to all worshipers. By doing so it aims to honor and allow freedom of worship to all, irrespective of their faith, and protect the holy sites. There is no violation of Muslim or Christian religious rights in any holy place." (www.imra.org.il, 2/24.) The two questions one often hears is whether Israel is fair to Muslims and whether Muslims are fair to Jews. I have reported many instances whereby Israel bars Jewish access to holy places or does not protect that access from Arab attack. This is a third outlook, that both sides are unfair to Jews. There often are more than two sides to the story: the conventional side, the radical side, and the accurate side.
U.S. ANTI-TERRORIST LAWS AND THEIR CHALLENGES 
U.S. anti-terrorist law prohibits "material support" of foreign terrorist organizations. What is "material support?" Does it interfere with personal freedom? The clause covers collecting funds, carrying weapons, and training terrorist personnel. What if the training is for disaster relief? U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy pointed out that giving tsunami money to the Tamil Tigers, terrorists of Sri Lanka, might spare them funds they then would spend on terrorism. Solicitor General Elena Kagan backed up that example with another, the Hamas builds both houses and bombs. Justice Sonia Sotomayor stated that such an interpretation would forbid teaching terrorists to play the harmonic (Jess Bravin, Wall St. Journal, 2/24, A3). Terrorist organizations such as Hamas do charitable work to make people beholden or sympathetic to their recruiters. Most help to such organizations or to totalitarian governments that sponsor terrorism facilitates their over-all goals. The notion of separating their political and military wings is specious.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
THEY GO AGAIN
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, February 25, 2010. |
|
...those racist Zionists...always stirring up trouble. This time, they dared to name Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs as National Heritage Sites. Just Like they dare claim about Jerusalem and such. Ugh! Imagine the gall... Two sites that the world would know absolutely nothing about were it not for their Jewish connections — both over three thousand years old. Certainly not enough time for Jews to proclaim any rights to. I mean, think of the Alamo and America...And yet, look what they just went ahead and did... After all, we all know that those sites are really on "Palestinian" land on the "West Bank," right? Certainly the Obama Administration does...It just took Israel to task over such audacity. Like it also demands that no Jew live in Judea or Samaria (but it's ok for 1/5 of Israel to be made of the freest Arabs anywhere in the world outside of the West) and stop building in parts of Jerusalem as well. But — reply those Jew fascists — the land was not known as the "west bank" (as opposed to the "east bank" of the Jordan River, that part of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine — about 80% of the total area — that British imperialism formed today's Arab Jordan from) until the very last century and was known as Judea (as in land of the Jews) and Samaria for thousands of years before then. (Quick quiz:...Was Jesus born in Bethlehem of Judea or Bethlehem of the West Bank or Bethlehem of Palestine in the New Testament?) Look, the time for politically correct should have been over long ago. Bluntly, no Arab (with the exception of a few Christians, whose Lord was also Jewish carpenter) would have ever known of the Tomb of the Patriarchs, the Temple Mount (or, as Arabs call it, Buraq's Mount — named after Muhammad's winged horse, with the head of a woman, who supposedly just happened to fly him up to Heaven from the Jews' historic Temple of Solomon), the significance of Jerusalem, Abraham, the Akedah, etc. and so forth if their "Seal of the Prophets," Muhammad, did not flee his enemies in Mecca in the 7th century C.E. and take refuge in the date palm oasis town of Medina — established by Jews fleeing the Roman wars centuries earlier. Indeed, Jewish influence was so important in that region that Yemen, just to the south, had a series of Jewish kings practically right up to the rise of the Prophet of Islam. After the hijrah — Muhammad's flight to Medina — he soon found himself in the midst of a mixed Jewish and pagan Arab population (itself now influenced by the Jews). Before long, he himself was speaking about one G_d, supposedly has an encounter with the Angel Gabriel, speaks of Abraham, Moses, and so forth — all from the Holy Book of his Jewish hosts...and then orders his followers to face towards Jerusalem in prayer...as Jews do. Wow...what a coincidence! I mean, I'll give that Hebrew Angel of G_d, Gabriel, credit, but perhaps — just maybe — Muhammad's long sojourn and study with Jews, at the very least, also had something to do with his, and therefore also the Arabs' who accepted his religio-political leadership — new beliefs? A major Arab commentator, Jalaluddin, came right out about a thousand years ago and said Muhammad's change of the qibla — direction of prayer — away from the Kaaba in Mecca towards Jerusalem was done only to win the support of the important Jewish tribes. While Jerusalem is never mentioned even once in the Qur'an, it is mentioned many hundreds of times in the Hebrew Bible (aka, "Old Testament"). To say that such things as Jerusalem, Abraham, the Tomb of the Patriarchs, and so forth are as important to Arabs and other Muslims as they are to Jews is to simply tell a lie. Or, perhaps, Jews should restake a claim to their holdings in Medina? As soon as the Jews refused to accept Muhammad's demand that they accept him as the ultimate human chief honcho, he massacred all the Jewish males and enslaved the women and children...and changed the qibla back towards Mecca again. Jews don't need President Obama or anyone else's approval to declare the truth. Israel is entitled to that territorial compromise promised by the final draft of UNSC Resolution 242 in the wake of the June 1967 War — whether in Judea and Samaria, the Golan Heights, or wherever. And unlike places like American Samoa or President George Bush's Texas ranch, Jews have thousands of years of history linking them to those lands — territory where Arabs continuously launched death and destruction from. That President Obama and the State Department (which rejected Israel's right to exist in the first place) expect Israel to simply cave in to all that the Arabs demand should be no shock to anyone with functioning neurons. If Arabs can stake a claim to Jerusalem based upon the belief of a night journey by Muhammad from the Arabian Peninsula, on a winged horse, to the Temple of Solomon in the land of the Jews, then objections to Jews officially claiming the Tombs of the Matriarchs and Patriarchs as National Heritage Sites in Judea are utterly absurd and laughable. No Arab (with good intentions) will be kept out of those site... But, neither will any Jews. 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. His recently published book is called "The Quest for Justice in the Middle East: The Arab-Israeli Conflict in Greater Perspective." Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php |
|
THE FACTS OF WHAT WE KNOW!
Posted by Patrick Dempsey, February 25, 2010. |
| I used to have a card index, to keep all the pertinent facts relating to The Holocaust. Of course, technology took control, and I lost all that information, diligently placed on my old PC. The crash lost me all those facts, snippets of information that I had learned, and apart from what the mind retained, a lot of the information has been lost. I know it is out there and while I was forced to acknowledge what little I retained ,by giving out parts of what was asked of me, there is a gulf between the two poles. For instance, I stated that when Gerstein was at Belzec, 6,000 Jews of Lvov were disposed of, treated, resettled. This was taken that only 6,000 Jews of Lvov were murdered, not the 50,000 murdered during August 1942, and not the total of 123,000 Jews of Lvov murdered that I had clearly assessed for my book on 'der Einsatzgruppe'. But all of this has become a worrying trend for me as I am constantly asked to review my position, by Students, Academics and other interested parties. Luckily, I can look back to some of the research for my work and state the example that was presented at the time. This, however, does not square it with some people. For example, after Tregenza, there was a gradual reassessment of Belzec's place in the murder apparatus? Did we have the right figures, did we actually have the geographical position of this Death Camp? That sin of the 'Wolzec paradox' was still haunting me. So I chose to stick with what I knew, and what was generally accepted as known. The facts, as they are, are stated here, and unless any of you knowing differently, this is what I will state to all those who seek my advice in the future! We have largely accepted that 6 million Jews died in the Holocaust, even when German records do not exist to fully endorse or even record this. From the Camps, the 'Aktion Reinhard' Camps included, most personnel managed to destroy whatever documentation that might have existed. Hitler, knowing the ramifications of discovery, ordered the obliteration of the physical evidence and Himmler promptly ordered Blobel and his SK1005 into the field to remove all traces of the evidence that had been buried. Exhumation was the order of the day, and death and killing sites were disgorged of their evidence. Then as each and every Death Camp was being dismantled, the gas chambers and their crematoria were destroyed along with any physical evidence that had been buried prior to the enlargement of any destructive capacity. What then now exists of the evidence? Apart from the physical evidence that has been nearly obliterated completely, a few scientific examinations have proved the remnants of huge burial and cremation pits. I cite the Tregenza work at Belzec to revise our impression of what actually took place within this particular compound. My own assessment of 1,250,000 possible Jewish murders here, while it does appear extravagant, how can we historically know, let alone revise our position? Alongside this assessment we have the deportation train details that systematically record the 'Resettlemnt East', and those timetables which converge here at Belzec, Sobibor, Treblinka and particularly Auschwitz. Of the killings themselves, one moving film of actual murder footage survives, barely 4 minutes in which to comprehend this huge undertaking. Then there are just over 190 actual photographs of the killings themselves, taken across the breadth of the 'aktionen', to fully compliment this limited appreciation of the awful detail which catapulted the Jews toward oblivion. That said, we are no nearer the proof of the victims now than we were 65 years ago when say the murders at Liepaja were being photographed? What we have above all else though is the evidence provided by Survivor's, independent Witness's and some Perpetrators, to add to the overall incomprehensibility that has gripped us for so many years. For the legion of Survivor's, there is little evidence of what was dealt out to some of their Families, Friends, Neighbours or their fellow Jewish brethren. Added to this wealth of testimonial we have the various War Crimes Trials; Nuremberg as the Major indictment against the perpetrator's, while Doctor, Einsatzgruppen and Camp Trials are all supplementing the knowledge of that period of history. It is a tragic period we have each sought out to add our own portion of testimony toward. Of course, not all of Hitler's atrocity has been so religiously destroyed, and there is an emergence of evidence from within Germany itself and now, more latterly, from an immense archive retained in Russia that needs to be looked at, assessed and added to our understanding, comprehension and appreciation of what only the victims can know. While elaborate detail does exist, from the Oneg Shabbat, from those like Reder, Wiernik, Vrba, Kaplan, Levi, Wiesel and Korczak, we have a detail that restores only a forgotten page in that history. The details themselves are worked into a fabric of that past which must convince us of what should never be accomplished again, in spite of the failure to fully acknowledge the wrong's done, and the crimes committed against these Jews of The Holocaust. Millions of pages, billions of words have been used to record the passing of an entire Jewish People, a community of Europe destroyed in the midst of a knowing and indifferent European society. We have the embryo of a disaster put together to become what was a very Final Solution, a near total resolve that was so complete and which acknowledges that while not all victims were Jews, all Jews were victims in accordance with how Elie Wiesel articulates this. Patrick Dempsey writes on the Holocaust. Contact him at pd1010@hotmail.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: LET THEM YELL
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 25, 2010. |
|
There was a huge reaction on the part of the Palestinian Arabs to the announcement by our prime minister that the Machpelah in Hevron and Kever Rachel outside of Bethlehem would be included in our Heritage sites. What? Jews claiming sites in areas that they are telling the world belong exclusively to them? In Hevron there was rioting both Monday and yesterday, with rioters burning tires and throwing rocks at members of the IDF. Riot control techniques were employed by the IDF. ~~~~~~~~~~ Fayyad relied upon one of the PA default positions: He called on the international community to pressure Israel to change its decision. PA leaders have been led to believe that they are so much the darlings of the Western world, that their every request will be heard. They don't have to act on their own behalf, others will do it for them. Fayyad pointed out that Israel has also named the walls of the Old City as a Heritage site. But these walls, he says, "are inside eastern and occupied Jerusalem, which will be Palestine's eternal capital." ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, Abbas fell back on the other PA default position: threat of violence. He said that this decision constituted a "severe provocation" that could ignite a "war of religions" and lead to a new intifada. ~~~~~~~~~~ My favorite (so to speak) is this: The Palestinian Center for Human Rights claims that our government's decision "constitutes a violation of Article 1 of the Hague Convention for the Protection of Cultural Property in the Event of Armed Conflict of 1954, which calls upon an occupying power to 'safeguard and respect' property that is 'of great importance to the cultural heritage of every people.'"... PCHR called for the international community "to provide protection for Palestinian civilians, their property and their religious sites." THEIR religious sites. This is their modus operand, is it not? We can laugh. We can scoff. But we must make sure that the world doesn't believe them. That is why telling our narrative, speaking clearly about our heritage, is so important. It's impossible to over-emphasize this. To relinquish our claim to our holy sites would ultimately be to relinquish our claim — our right — to this land. ~~~~~~~~~~ And there is something else that has to be emphasized constantly: We share. We are in control at the Machpelah. But the Arabs also are given access to it, and place for their prayers and celebrations within. There are particular holy days when only Jews may enter, and others when only Muslims may enter. President Shimon Peres, in a meeting with Special UN Envoy of the Middle East Process, Robert Serry (about whom more below), made this very point: "[Israel] aims to honor and allow freedom of worship to all, irrespective of their faith, and protect the holy sites. There is no violation of Muslim or Christian religious rights in any holy place." ~~~~~~~~~~ From several quarters there has been an appropriate response from our government. Vice Premier Silvan Shalom called the PA reaction "insolent and outrageous and another attempt to rewrite history." "We are talking about a campaign of lies and hypocrisy," said a statement from the prime minister's office. It was further pointed out that right now renovations are being done by Israel in the hall where Muslim prayers are held. If we lived to be 1,000, we would not see renovation of a Jewish prayer hall done by the Arabs if they were in control. ~~~~~~~~~~ In fact, based on past history and various statements made, we have serious reason to doubt we'd be permitted access to the Machpelah at all if it were (G-d forbid) in Muslim hands. There is the precedent of the Seventh Step: In 1267, the Muslim Mameluks forbade Jews to enter the Machpelah. They were not permitted to climb beyond the seventh step of the stairway leading to the edifice on the eastern side. But pious Jews, although humiliated, stood on that seventh step and prayed there. This prohibition actually was in effect for 700 years, until 1967, when Israel liberated Hevron. It is devotion to the Machpelah that keeps the Jewish residents of Hevron so determined: they are convinced, with solid reason, that Jewish access would be lost if they left. ~~~~~~~~~~ We have, as well, the evidence of how the Arabs have destroyed Kever Yosef (Joseph's Tomb at Shechem) since it was turned over to the PA, in open defiance of their Oslo obligations — they attempted to turn it into a mosque. And see below for a story of how the Muslims have attempted to co-opt Kever Rachel:
~~~~~~~~~~ Returning to UN Envoy Serry: He told Peres that UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon would be visiting the region to discuss ways to facilitate movement of goods into Gaza. While there was a need for certain goods such as building materials to go in for the rehabilitation of several buildings, Sperry said that there is no humanitarian problem in Gaza. Allow me to repeat this: A UN envoy says there is no humanitarian problem in Gaza. (Thanks to Yisrael M. on this.) You can see this in a release from the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
Please, take every opportunity to share this information. This is one more way in which we can reinforce truth in the face of pervasive lies directed at Israel. These lies come from a variety of sources, from UNRWA to Congressman Brian Baird of Washington State, who has been pushing for the US to do a "Berlin airlift" style operation to bring supplies into Gaza. ~~~~~~~~~~ France is flip-flopping with regard to early recognition of a Palestinian state. First, Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner came out squarely in favor of such early recognition. But then President Nicolas Sarkozy, in a press conference with Abbas, spoke about a "viable" Palestinian state, but shied away from promoting recognition of one now or soon. Sarkozy said that Kouchner was looking for ways to bring momentum to the peace process but that France's goal remained "a functioning Palestinian state in clearly set borders." From my perspective this dichotomy of thinking reflects something else, as well: If Sarkozy were reasonably certain that "a functioning state in clearly set borders" would evolve after France lent support, I suspect he'd go along. The unease results from (very rational) doubts about the Palestinian Arabs ever getting their act together. To support a state that doesn't happen is to be left looking very foolish indeed. Frankly, that anyone in Europe would entertain the notion of lending early support for a Palestinian state, after what has been revealed regarding the incredible corruption of the PA, is a clear indication of diplomatic dysfunction, in my opinion. We might call it Kouchner chasing fairy tales. ~~~~~~~~~~ There has been backtracking by Europeans on another issue, as well: that of alleged use by the Mossad of forged European passports in the assassination of al-Mabhouh. The simple truth is that there is no direct evidence linking the Mossad to what happened in Dubai, no matter the suspicions. The fact that some of the forged European passports carried the names of people who also have Israeli citizenship proves nothing. And so, the EU issued a statement about the passports that did not mention Israel. Nonetheless, the statement by the EU troubled me: "The killing of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai on 20 January raises issues which are profoundly disturbing to the European Union. This was an action which cannot be conducive to peace and stability in the Middle East..." Hold it for a second! Killing a man whose job it was to import accurate missiles from Iran to Gaza so they could be used against the civilian population of Israel is not conducive to peace and stability? Some very distorted thinking is at work here. The statement then went on to vigorously protest the use of forged European passports, and so on and so forth. ~~~~~~~~~~ See Michael Totten, writing on this subject in Commentary: "Al-Mabhouh was a terrorist commander...He was a combatant. Unlike his victims, he was fair game. He would have been fair game for even an air strike if he were in Gaza. As he was, instead, in Dubai, he was taken out quietly without even alerting, let alone harming, any of the civilians around him. "If only Israel could fight all its battles this way. It would be the cleanest and least-deadly war in the history of warfare. Even some of Israel's harshest critics should understand that... "It's unlikely that Israel can avert the next war by assassinating its enemy's leadership, but it's always better to take out a high-level target in person whenever possible than with a blockbuster bomb from a distance. I can't help but wonder if those griping about the recent hit in Dubai — assuming the Mossad actually did it — care less about the lives of real human beings than the latest excuse to bash Israel." (emphasis added)
~~~~~~~~~~ "The Good News Corner" Purim approaches. In most of Israel, it comes after Shabbat, in Jerusalem (and Sfat, walled cities), it comes on Shushan Purim, which is Monday. But we are into the month of Adar, which is a month for being joyous. Today I had occasion to be at the offices of NDS Technologies, a major international hi-tech corporation with offices in Jerusalem. The receptionist was wearing bunny ears, and in the lobby were make-up people doing "faces" on NDS employees. Only in Israel! I thought. And I was joyous for it. ~~~~~~~~~~ Archeologist Dr. Eilat Mazar has announced the discovery, outside the walls of the Old City in an area referred to as Ophel, of stone fortifications that are believed to date back 3,000 years to the time of King Solomon and the First Temple. The city wall that has been exposed is 70 meters long and six meters high. According to Dr. Mazar, it "testifies to a ruling presence. Its strength and form of construction indicate a high level of engineering." A comparison with other findings and the nature of the pottery uncovered at the site "enable us to postulate with a great degree of assurance that the wall that has been revealed is that which was built by King Solomon in Jerusalem in the latter part of the tenth century BCE." Perhaps most exciting: "This is the first time that a structure from that time has been found that may correspond with written descriptions of Solomon's building in Jerusalem. "The Bible tells us that Solomon built — with the assistance of the Phoenicians, who were outstanding builders — the Temple and his new palace and surrounded them with a city..." Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
AHASHVEROSH, ISRAEL AND THE "RULE OF LAW"; THE MOSSAD'S MISTAKE; HOW
SHOULD THE JEWISH STATE DEAL WITH THE IRANIAN THREAT?
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, February 25, 2010. |
|
These below are three essays dealing with perception, the Jewish state and when should the rule of law rule. |
|
AHASHVEROSH, ISRAEL AND THE "RULE OF LAW" 
When Sharon introduced his "Disengagement" idea, it seemed like nothing more than a preposterous dream. Nobody understood what the State of Israel would gain from perpetrating this horrible crime against thousands of Israeli citizens. Nobody deceived themselves into thinking that this folly would bring peace; the Arabs of Gaza left no room for doubt. So how did Sharon manage to get his immoral and illogical decision into Israel's mainstream? On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he commanded Mehuman, Bizzetha, Harbona, Bigtha, and Abagtha, Zethar, and Carcas, the seven chamberlains that ministered in the presence of Ahashverosh the king to bring Vashti the queen before the king with the crown royal, to show the peoples and the princes her beauty; for she was fair to look on. (The Scroll of Esther 1:10-11) After six straight months of drunken feasts, the foolish king had nothing to boast about — except for his wife's beauty. He commands to bring her before all the merrymakers to show the entire nation her beauty, attired in her crown — and nothing else. Is there a royal decree more foolish than this? True, nobody will be expelled from his home, nobody's life will be shattered and barring Vashti's pride, nothing will be destroyed. Nevertheless, this was a classic case of a patently illegal order, complete with a black flag flying overhead. But the queen Vashti refused to come at the king's commandment by the chamberlains; therefore was the king very wroth, and his anger burned in him. (The Scroll of Esther 1:12) Vashti refuses to obey the immoral order. We would expect that with no further ado, the king would command to behead her. That is how he handled the murder conspiracy of Bigtan and Teresh and that is what Queen Esther feared would happen to her when she dared come before the king without being summoned. But Ahashverosh understood that he had painted himself into an immoral corner. He realized that his decree would not stand the test of reason and that he was essentially endangering the legitimacy of his leadership and reign on power. What is the last resort of a criminal and foolish tyrant? How does he restore his legitimacy? Then the king said to the wise men, who knew the times — for so was the king's manner toward all that knew law and judgment; 'What shall we do unto the queen Vashti according to law, for she has not done the bidding of the king Ahashverosh by the chamberlains?' (Esther 1:13,15) Suddenly, Ahashverosh remembers the "rule of law." He consults with his legal advisors and defers to the Supreme Court. The Midrash relates that at first, Ahashverosh turned to the Jewish wise men. But they quickly understood that he was not looking for justice, but rather for legitimacy for his immoral decree and for his very leadership. The Jewish wise men evaded his overtures. The Persian Supreme Court, though, was happy to take on the case and found the penultimate creative legal solution to the royal predicament. It did not deal with the question of who was right. It dealt with only one issue — the perpetuation of the existing establishment. And so they wrote in their legal decision: 'Vashti the queen has not done wrong to the king only, but also to all the princes, and to all the peoples, who are in all the provinces of the king Ahashverosh. For this deed of the queen will come abroad unto all women, to make their husbands contemptible in their eyes, when it will be said: The king Ahashverosh commanded Vashti the queen to be brought in before him, but she came not. (Esther 1:16-17) In other words, it makes no difference at all if the directive was logical, moral or even legal. Vashti, or Gush Katif, are not part of the equation. All that matters is the perpetuation of Ahashverosh's power. If the queen will not appear before the nation attired in nothing more than her royal crown, the subservience of all the women in the entire kingdom will vanish and the empire will crumble. That makes sense, doesn't it? It is not the dubious honor of the king that is in question here. It is not even the need to be the darling of the media that lies behind the irrational decree to destroy Gush Katif. It is simply a matter of responsibility toward the perpetuation of the leadership. For if we do not carry out our orders and drive women and children from their homes today, tomorrow nobody will carry out their orders and the state will be destroyed. In fact, Ahashverosh's kingdom was indeed destroyed in a relatively short amount of time. But it wasn't because of Vashti's refusal to obey orders. On the contrary, it was because the state had lined up with the immoral conduct of its leader. And Israel? Where are we today after we have collectively hidden our heads in the sand and obeyed the criminal orders of our leaders? In a symposium on insubordination that was held last week in Efrat, Rabbi Yuval Cherlow surprised the audience when he said that if he had known that the residents of Gush Katif would be treated so poorly after the expulsion, he would have instructed his students to refuse to obey their expulsion orders. When I asked him why, Rabbi Cherlow explained that the outrageous treatment suffered by the residents of Gush Katif was a "crime against humanity." Until now, we had been told that it was wrong to disobey orders to drive the Jews from Gush Katif so as not to destroy the state and the army. Today, we are told that it is permissible to destroy the state and the army if the victims of the expulsion are not properly recompensed. The moral acrobatics inherent in this type of rhetoric open the eyes of the public to understand that not everyone who holds the title of Rabbi is necessarily the standard bearer of justice or truth. The moral foundation of a rabbi who will instruct his students to obey orders and destroy, G-d forbid, the home of the widow of Second Lebanon war hero Ro'i Klein, HY"D, is no less rotten than the moral foundation of a rabbi whose personal conduct is perverted. A footnote: I stood with a few friends on the ruins of the home of Livnat Ozeri. Her husband Nati had been murdered by terrorists just a month before. Now, soldiers and policemen had snuck up on her home on a hilltop outside Kiryat Arba in the middle of the freezing Hebron night. They dragged her five sleeping orphans — in their pajamas and with no coats or shoes — from their beds, and destroyed their home and everything in it. They dumped the widow and orphans onto a Jerusalem street — in the middle of the night. There was no great public outcry. Not even from Yesha. Nati Ozeri was a Kachnik — not "one of ours." Not long after that, we got Gush Katif. Shabbat Shalom THE MOSSAD'S MISTAKE Everyone is telling us there is nothing to worry about. The international Mabhouh assassination scandal will eventually evaporate, explain Israel's Intelligence veterans. After all, this is not the first time that undercover security agencies used foreign passports. The main thing is that Mabhouh has been eliminated and that all of our forces — according to foreign reports, of course — are safely back at home. What, then, is the problem?
So why the international brouhaha? Once again we see that the most advanced intelligence organization equipped with the most sophisticated UAVs, state of the art technologies and the most expensive intelligence devices are no match for the preconceptions of the person making the decisions. Intelligence excellence does not help the organization that is fighting yesterday's war. Stalin knew about the imminent German invasion but his preconceptions did not allow him to use the information that streamed to him on the eve of the attack. Golda knew — from Jordan's King Hussein and other sources — about the impending Egyptian/Syrian attack on Israel, but was surprised for the same reason. After 9/11, I wrote an article explaining that America was going to lose the war against Iraq. How did I guess? I wasn't privy to a fraction of the information that the decision makers in Washington had. The answer is simple. If a person is entrenched in a preconception, all the information in the world will not help him. I understood that the Americans are incapable of understanding an enemy that is not a state. When the US was attacked on 9/11, President Bush looked for a guilty state. With remarkable stupidity, Saddam Hussein provided him with the return address he was looking for. The Americans certainly did conquer Iraq for a few days. But they lost the war because their preconceptions do not fit reality. For the very same reason, Israel lost the last two wars that it fought. It looks like the same thing also happened to the Mossad in its Dubai mission. I assume that the people at the Mossad don't understand what we want from them. For decades, they have been using foreign passports and no problems arose. The enlightened Western world is actually pleased that someone did the dirty work for it and rid it of a menacing terrorist. So why the international uproar? All the intelligence agencies in the world use foreign passports. The pundits explain that the Arabs are pressuring the British, so they must let off some steam. Soon, they reassure us, all will return to normal. But it won't. Somebody in the Mossad and the echelon that authorized the Mabhouh mission is still living in the eighties. They didn't notice that the Western world, and particularly the British, no longer sees Israel as the good guy in the story. For them, Mabhouh is a freedom fighter. If you didn't notice, Israel's most senior ministers are wanted in Europe's capitals for war crimes. No need for sophisticated electronics. All that you have to do is open your eyes to reality. If Israel's leaders are wanted for crimes against humanity, what does that say about our country? In the eyes of much of the world, Israel is no more than a pirate ship sailing on borrowed time. The world has changed, ladies and gentlemen. Israel can no longer expect the international community to wink its eye and look the other way. To the esteemed Meir Dagan. Please turn off your computer and your telephones — and think for a moment about Israel's place in the world today. HOW SHOULD THE JEWISH STATE DEAL WITH THE IRANIAN THREAT? 
Just like Mordechai. There is no reason to fight the Iranian nation. All that we need to do is to eliminate its leadership. Modern Western culture allows for the killing of millions of soldiers, but does not abide by the assassination of political leaders. This is a patently immoral approach. The Iranian leader deserves to die. Israel has the technology to carry out his assassination. It should make use of it as soon as possible.
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)
|
|
AN OVER-DUE SLAP-BACK TO THE ISLAMIC INVADERS ...
Posted by Paul Lademain, February 24, 2010. |
|
Sarah Honig provided an operational definition of 'Dam butlab dam' — to us, the SC4Z, this was an unfamiliar phrase.
We suggest a few words for these put-upon Jews — but first, before they can say them, they must screw up their courage, straighten their backs, and YELL: We are MAD as hell and we won't take this anymore! (dialogue cribbed from the movie "Network".) Now that Sarah has described how Jews have been made to suffer, it's up to Jews to put a stop to 'Dam butlab dam' ... If they don't, they will continue to be hounded, despised, disrespected, and abused like doormats. So, practice saying this with us: "We are MAD as hell and we won't take this anymore!" If the arabs riot, put them down, down, down. Rock throwing? Shoot them! Smear them with pig turds. March in the streets with placards demeaning the dhimmi-French who abandoned their nation to fire-bombing Muzzies. Insult Greta Duisenberg. Slam Xavier Solana. Ridicule Jimmy Carter — the first US dhimmi. Remember how American blacks gained power? They rioted ... they burned, they put fear in the hearts of the Ku Klux Klan! Now it's time for Jews to put down their pastries, set aside their comfy habits, get some dirt under their fingernails, and give the rioting arabs a taste of their own medicine. You might as well inflict pain, because your concessions and myriad embarrassing appeasements have brought you nothing but disrespect and bullying. If you don't fight back; if you refuse to cease appeasing and apologizing, your children will inherit a very short, cloudy, anxiety-riddled future ... in your own land, no less! We are the politically incorrect Secular Christians for Zion. We urge your best minds to set aside their mournful threnodies and serve the arab invaders a taste of their own sauce. If you find Jews like Dorit Beinish contaminating the sovereign rights of Israeli Jews, then she must be tossed out. No self-respecting Jew should allow anyone to steal their lands. No Jew should invite the nose of the camel into your tent. The Jew who did so and brought this terror into your land is a vain, arrogant, unrepentant fool. You know who we mean. Moreover, Jews who insist on coddling the anti-Israel vipers amongst them should be reminded that these are the very Jews whom the venomous snakes will devour last. The invading arab occupiers have chosen a purpose which for them cannot be altered, and that purpose is your death. There is nothing left to analyze once you fully understand that the choice is between you or them. Are you willing to throw your lives away for the sake of Islamic fascism? For the sake of posturing for peace? Did the Jews who obediently pasted on their gold stars earn the love of the nazis? OK, there's your answer. Now fight, for goodness sakes, and get rid of the very idea of 'dam butlab dam'! Viva to the Patriots of Israel from the Secular Christians for Zion. Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net. He describes himself as a Secular Christian for Zionism (SC4Z). |
|
PALESTINIANS HAVE FAILED TO PROTECT JEWISH SACRED PLACES
Posted by Susana K-M, February 24, 2010. |
|
This comes from The Israel Project.. |
|
Palestinians Threaten Uprising over Israel's Inclusion of 2 West Bank Holy Sites in Preservation Plan Fact Sheet: Palestinians Fail to Protect Jewish Sacred Places Examples of Palestinian and Jordanian failures to protect holy sites and freedom of worship Experts available for comment on archaeological and holy sites Resources on Temple Mount destruction (courtesy Biblical Archaeology Review) Palestinian leaders reacted this week with promises of violence to the Israeli cabinet's decision to include two holy sites in the West Bank as part of a comprehensive plan to preserve Israel's national heritage and religious sites.[1] Ismail Haniyeh, the leader of Iran-backed Hamas in Gaza, urged Palestinians to unleash a new intifada (uprising) in response to the decision.[2] "Jerusalem is ours, the land is ours, and God is with us," Haniyeh said. "We will not accept these decisions and they will have no ramifications."[3] Meanwhile, Palestinian rioters threw stones at Israeli soldiers and burned tires in Hebron, the location of one of the controversial sites.[4] The Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, Judaism's second-holiest site after the Temple Mount and its Western Wall,[5] is also venerated by Muslims and Christians.[6] Likewise, Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem, another of Judaism's holiest sites,[7] is also sacred to Muslims and Christians.[8] The $107 million (NIS 400 million) Israeli plan approved Sunday (Feb. 21) would restore about 150 heritage and holy sites.[9] Netanyahu's spokesman, Nir Hefetz, said on Tuesday that just as maintenance work on the entrance and road to the Muslim prayer room of the Cave of the Patriarchs is underway, its Jewish sections — and Rachel's Tomb — also have a right to be refurbished.[10] In a meeting with UN Special Coordinator for the Peace Process Robert H. Serry on Wednesday (Feb. 24), Israeli President Shimon Peres said, "Israel plans to invest significant amounts in infrastructure that will increase the accessibility of holy sites to all worshipers. By doing so it aims to honor and allow freedom of worship to all, irrespective of their faith, and protect the holy sites. There is no violation of Muslim or Christian religious rights in any holy place."[11] Palestinian and Jordanian Failure to Protect Holy Sites Israel, the West Bank and Gaza contain hundreds of religious monuments and places of worship holy to Jews, Muslims and Christians. Israel long ago put into place comprehensive laws protecting all such sites and ensuring access to people of all religions.[12] The same protections have not been extended by the Palestinian Authority or under Jordanian rule. As a result, since Israel's establishment in 1948, a significant number of Jewish holy sites has been damaged or vandalized. Desecration of holy sites occurred when Jordan controlled East Jerusalem and the West Bank before 1967. That has continued until today in areas under Palestinian control, despite formal agreements: Both Israel and the Palestinians promised to protect all religious sites under their control as part of the framework of the Oslo peace process. The failure to adequately uphold these provisions is seen by Israel as a serious impediment to Israeli-Palestinian relations.[13] In recent years, Palestinian terrorists and rioters also have destroyed and abused Christian holy places.[14] Although neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis have a constitution, the Knesset (Israeli parliament) enacted the Protection of Holy Places Law of 1967 to ensure that anyone who vandalizes a holy site could suffer legal consequences. The law states: "Whoever does anything that is likely to violate the freedom of access of the members of the various religions to the places sacred to them is liable to imprisonment for a term of five years."[15] Additionally, the Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip (also known as Oslo II), signed in September 1995, explicitly states that "each side undertakes upon itself to respect sites in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip which are regarded as holy, or which hold archaeological value."[16] Instances of Palestinian terrorists exploiting holy sites are violations of the First Additional Protocol (1977) to the Geneva Conventions and may constitute war crimes.[17] Following are examples of Palestinian and Jordanian failures to protect holy sites and freedom of worship:
Experts available for comment on archaeological and holy sites United States: Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, Founder and President, The Israel Project
Dr. Mitchell Bard, Executive Director, American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise
Hershel Shanks, Editor, Biblical Archaeology Review
Israel: Prof. Yedidia Stern, Bar-Ilan University, Faculty of Law
Footnotes: [1] "PM Netanyahu's Remarks at Today's Cabinet Meeting at Tel Hai,"
Israel Prime Minister's Office, Feb. 21, 2010,
[2] "Hamas calls for uprising over West Bank sites," Alalam,
Feb. 24, 2010,
[3] Waked, Ali, "Abbas, Haniyeh: Heritage sites will ignite a war,"
YnetNews, Feb. 23, 2010,
[4] Waked, Ali, "Abbas, Haniyeh: Heritage sites will ignite a war,"
YnetNews, Feb. 23, 2010,
[5] Lazaroff, Tovah; Freund, Michael, "Coming of age at Rachel's
Tomb," JWeekly.com, Nov. 2, 2007,
[6] Prusher, Ilene R., "Does Hebron clash signal new round of settler
revolts?" Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 9, 2008,
[7] Lazaroff, Tovah; Freund, Michael, "Coming of age at Rachel's
Tomb," JWeekly.com, Nov. 2, 2007,
[8] "Bethlehem University research project explores importance of
Rachel's tomb," Bethlehem University, May 4, 2009,
[9] "Israel to include West Bank shrines in heritage plan," Reuters,
Feb. 21, 2010,
[10] Keinon, Herb; Lazaroff, Tovah, "'Abbas campaign is
hypocritical,'" The Jerusalem Post, Feb. 24, 2010,
[11] "President Peres meets with UN Special Coordinator Serry," Israel
Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Feb. 24, 2010,
[12] "Protection of Holy Places Law," Israel Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, June 30, 1998,
[13] Shragai, Nadav, "The Palestinian Authority and the Jewish Holy
Sites in the West Bank: Rachel's Tomb as a Test Case," Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs, Dec. 2, 2007,
[14] Kershner, Isabel, "Palestinian Christians Look Back on a Year of
Troubles," The New York Times, March 11, 2007,
[15] "Protection of Holy Places Law," Israel Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, June 30, 1998,
[16] "Israeli-Palestinian Interim Agreement on the West Bank and the
Gaza Strip," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Sept. 28, 1995,
[17] Foreign Ministry Legal Advisor, "Terrorist Penetration and Armed
Combat in Holy Places — Legal Perspectives," Israel Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, April 11, 2002,
[18] Ami-El, Mark, "The Destruction of the Temple Mount
Antiquities," JCPA, Aug. 1, 2002; Lefkovits, Etgar, "Temple Mount
relics saved from garbage," The Jerusalem Post, April 15, 2005,
[19] Ami-El, Mark, "The Destruction of the Temple Mount Antiquities,"
JCPA, Aug. 1, 2002; Lefkovits, Etgar, "Temple Mount relics saved from
garbage," The Jerusalem Post, April 15, 2005,
[20] Ami-El, Mark, "The Destruction of the Temple Mount Antiquities,"
JCPA, Aug. 1, 2002; Lefkovits, Etgar, "Temple Mount relics saved from
garbage," The Jerusalem Post, April 15, 2005,
[21] Ami-El, Mark, "The Destruction of the Temple Mount Antiquities,"
JCPA, Aug. 1, 2002; Lefkovits, Etgar, "Temple Mount relics saved from
garbage," The Jerusalem Post, April 15, 2005,
[22] Ami-El, Mark, "The Destruction of the Temple Mount Antiquities,"
JCPA, Aug. 1, 2002; Lefkovits, Etgar, "Temple Mount relics saved from
garbage," The Jerusalem Post, April 15, 2005,
[23] Ami-El, Mark, "The Destruction of the Temple Mount Antiquities,"
JCPA, Aug. 1, 2002; Lefkovits, Etgar, "Temple Mount relics saved from
garbage," The Jerusalem Post, April 15, 2005,
[24] Shragai, Nadav"The Mount of Olives in Jerusalem," Jerusalem
Viewpoints (JCPA), July-August 2009,
[25] Gilbert, Martin "Jerusalem: A Tale of One City," The New Republic, Nov. 14, 1994, accessed via Nexis.com [26] Shragai, Nadav, "The Palestinian Authority and the Jewish Holy
Sites in the West Bank: Rachel's Tomb as a Test Case," Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs, Dec. 2, 2007,
[27] Shragai, Nadav, "The Palestinian Authority and the Jewish Holy
Sites in the West Bank: Rachel's Tomb as a Test Case," Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs, Dec. 2, 2007,
[28] Shragai, Nadav, "The Palestinian Authority and the Jewish Holy
Sites in the West Bank: Rachel's Tomb as a Test Case," Jerusalem
Center for Public Affairs, Dec. 2, 2007,
[29] Waked, Ali, "Shalom slams 'barbaric act'," YnetNews, Sept.
15, 2005,
[30] "YMCA library building in Gaza City blown up," Intelligence and
Terrorism Information Center," Feb. 21, 2008,
[31] Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, "International
Religious Freedom Report 2007: Israel and the Occupied Territories,"
U.S. Department of State, 2007,
[32] Kurshner, Isabel, "Palestinian Christians Look Back on a Year of
Troubles," The New York Times, March 11, 2007,
[33] "Chronology of the Siege," PBS, April 1, 2002,
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/siege/etc/cron.html;
Myre, Greg, "Militants Briefly Take Over Bethlehem Building," The
New York Times, Dec. 20, 2005,
Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
KNESSET PROPOSAL: ANNEX ALL JEWISH TOWNS IN LAND OF ISRAEL
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, February 24, 2010. |
|
This is worth pushing. All of those of you that have the organizations skills or an organization should pull out all the stops to press this into law. Be it letters, petitions, editorials or whatever, start screaming that this law be passed. There is definitely a chance to pass this but the pressure must be enormous and unending until it is law. I hope I do not have to explain to any of you why this is so important. But in short, once there is such a law, the idea of a PLO Terror State will be dead. Furthermore it will knock the fence sitters onto our side and bring an end to the Oslo treason. This was written by Hillel Fendel, Senior News Editor of Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
(Israelnationalnews.com) The Ministerial Committee for Legislation will consider a bill proposed by MK Yaakov Katz (Ketzaleh) on the annexation of Jewish towns in Judea and Samaria (Yesha). The bill was supported last year by Prime Minister Netanyahu himself. The legislation committee is charged with deciding whether or not the government will back proposed legislation — often the critical factor in whether a given bill will be passed or defeated. It will vote on Katz's new bill at its next weekly meeting, this coming Tuesday (after the Purim holiday). The bill proposes that the Jewish towns of Judea and Samaria be annexed to Israel, just as eastern Jerusalem and the Golan Heights have been annexed in the past. The bill was proposed in the previous Knesset by former MK Benny Elon, whom Katz succeeded, in many respects, in the Knesset. The bill was co-signed at the time by many MKs, among them Binyamin Netanyahu and other current Likud party Cabinet ministers such as Limor Livnat, Silvan Shalom, Yisrael Katz, Gideon Saar, Michael Eitan, Gilad Erdan, Yuval Steinitz, and more. MKs from other parties also signed at the time. Explaining the proposed law, Katz said, "Following the liberation of parts of our national homeland in the 1967 Six Day War, Israeli law was applied to the areas in which 300,000 Jews live in the liberated neighborhoods of Jerusalem, and to those in which reside 20,000 Jews in the Golan. The time has now come to create a similar situation to the 350,000 Jews of Judea and Samaria. I am sure that the ministers, who co-signed the law last year, will now reaffirm their support and their signatures." Only Jewish towns annexed Some 26 MKs are currently co-signed on the bill. No ministers or deputy ministers are among them, in keeping with the requirement that legislation sponsors not serve in those positions. Among the co-signers are MKs Levine, Hotovely, Elkin, Danon and Shama of the Likud; Rotem, Michaeli and Miller of Israel Our Home; Orbach of the Jewish Home; Ariel, Eldad, and Ben-Ari of the National Union; Moses and Maklev of United Torah Judaism, and Ze'ev, Vaknin, and Amsalem of Shas. The legislation states: "The law, jurisdiction and administration of the State shall apply in the following cities, regional councils, and local councils, and the communities therein," followed by a list of the Jewish cities and councils in Judea and Samaria: "Oranit, Alfei Menashe, Elkanah, Efrat, Ariel, Beit El, Beit Aryeh-Ofarim, Beitar Illit, Mateh Binyamin, Jordan Valley, Givat Ze'ev, Gush Etzion, Har Adar, Mt. Hevron, Dead Sea Scrolls, Modiin Illit, Maaleh Adumim, Maaleh Ephraim, Emanuel, Kedumim, Kiryat Arba, Karnei Shomron, and Shomron." The proposal emphasizes that it does not call for the annexation of all of Judea and Samaria to the State of Israel, but only of the Jewish towns there and their residents. Acknowledging that most or all of the Arabs in Judea and Samaria are now subject to Palestinian Authority law, it states, "The current situation creates an absurdity, in that the only citizens who are discriminated against are the Israelis — who must pay income tax and various fees, but do not receive all the rights of citizens; they are tried [in certain cases] in military courts, not civilian ones." "The Knesset has already passed several measures applying parts of Israeli law to the Jewish towns in Yesha [Judea and Samaria]," the proposal continues, "but not in a uniform, systematic manner. As [former Meretz party MK] Prof. Amnon Rubenstein has written in his book entitled Constitutional Law: 'From a logical standpoint, it would be simpler if the Army administration [that officially governs Judea and Samaria] would apply Israel law in totality on all the Jewish local councils, instead of this patch-up job the government currently utilizes.'" "This legislation is hereby proposed in order to stop the discrimination against the Israeli citizens and in order to create uniformity in the law." 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. |
|
JORDAN TO PROTECT JERUSALEM CHRISTIANS!; ISRAELI REACTION TO DUBAI
ASSASSINATION ACCUSATIONS; J STREET FABRICATED ANTI-ISRAEL SCANDAL?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 24, 2010. |
|
A FEW AMERICAN JEWS OPPOSE ISRAEL'S LAW OF RETURN Perhaps a thousand American Jews object to Israel's law of return. The law grants immediate citizenship to would-be immigrants whom it defines as "Jewish." Gentiles may and do apply for citizenship, but for them it is not granted automatically. Some left wing, Jewish protesters call the law racist. Dr. Amy Kaplan, an English professor at the University of Pennsylvania and a co-founder of the 'Breaking the Law of Return' campaign, calls Arabs who had lived in Israel as discriminated against, because the law of return does not apply to them. Bar Ilan University political scientist Dr. Gerald Steinberg and Hebrew University political scientist Dr. Moshe Maor reject the protest as just another angle in a campaign to overthrow Israel, rather than a legitimate subject. Some of the protesters admit they are gunning for Israel for other reasons. Dr. Maor reminds us that it was the United Nations that recommended a separate state for the Jewish people. Dr. Steinberg added, "If there was a French group that denied the right of the French to live in France and demanded that the French language be replaced by a kind of international culture it would get absolutely no publicity," he added. "But because it's Israel it gets attention." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/23). There is a international movement for denigration, defamation, and disintegration of Israel as a scapegoat on whose innocent back the world loads its self-indulged sins and blames the tarnished goat. (Tarnished with gornisht.) That movement constantly come up with another slander, falsification of history, or peculiar legal slant in order to attack Israel. This is a piling on by bullies that incorporates misguided idealists, people who hate their civilization, Jews who appease the Left in order to be accepted by it, Arabs seeking genocide, and other antisemites. In this movement, the self-declared idealists work with totalitarians who commit real and serious crimes against humanity and with real bigots, but fail to repudiate them. What could be more evil? The movement is phony. Now let's discuss the law of return, so as leave no doubt about its decency. It is one of the most decent endeavors in history. An indicator of ethical belief is consistency in applying it. The anti-Zionist movement lacks such consistency. Consider its human rights and legal concept that the Law of Return is racist. Many countries have a similar law. Do the protesters object to those countries' policies? No. Only to the Jewish state's policy. Then their objection is not on principle about racism, but to what Jews do. Judeophobia! Some European countries have laws of return (and crosses in their flags). Many Arab states bar Jews from becoming citizens (and Muslim symbols in their flags). Some bar most Jews from visiting. Millions of their people hate foreigners. Some Arab regimes won't admit foreign Arab immigrants as citizens, even their children and for generations. They make Islam the official religion and may bar public display of other religions, just as they did in the middle ages. They may oppress other nationalities and religions, such as the Kurds, Berbers, Copts, Assyrians, to the point of genocide. Come to think of it, equal citizenship in such countries is not that great. Nationalism is natural, though under Islam, less so. Muslim regimes worry about rebellion, so they may repress groups less likely to be loyal to them. Leftists try to apply the principle of national self-determination to western Palestinian Arabs, who are not a nationality, but deny self-determination to the Jews. Inconsistent. The re-establishment of the State of Israel was prepared for by the Palestine Mandate, which recognized the Jewish people's historic connection with the Land of Israel (of which it had been deprived by imperialism, not the least of which was Muslim Arab imperialism). The Mandate, endorsed by the UN, encouraged their return. Israel became a place of refuge for millions of persecuted Jews, including from Arab states. It still is needed for that. The law of return merely implements the promise of Zionism, whose purpose of reunification in the holy land and homeland as well as a safe harbor for a world that still persecutes Jews. What could be more humane? Is the prospect of genocide by Palestinian Arabs far-fetched? No, there is precedent for it. They tried before. Although the UN also recommended a separate Arab state, the Zionists did not ask Arabs to leave for it, they said the Arabs may stay. Instead, the Arabs demanded everything and attempted to murder and expel the Jews, lost, and fled. Have the Palestinian Arabs reformed? No. They hate the Jews more. They now claim that their own, voluntary flight after their attempt at genocide was instead a Zionist attempt to dispossess them. Remember the strong hold that vengeance has upon the Arabs! What is the claim of the Palestinian Arabs to the area? Is it that ancient Arabs conquered the area? The Hebrews conquered it both before and after them. The Arabs lost control more than a thousand years ago. Nor was it ever an important center to them, including when Jordan re-conquered old Jerusalem in 1948. When World War I ended the Turkish Empire, which had ruled most of the Arabs, the victors let the Arabs have most of the Mideast and the Jews their corner of it. Fair enough, except to the Kurds and Berbers. Now suppose the law of return were overturned. Millions of Arabs would flood in. They would end Jewish self-determination. Taking their cue from Saddam vis-à-vis the Kurds or Sudan vis-à-vis the black Muslim Sudanese, the new Arab majority probably would expel and murder the millions of Jews there. Jihad would attain a big victory. What could be more inhumane? Is mass-murder what these anti-Zionists want or cannot foresee? Some principles, they have!
JORDAN TO PROTECT JERUSALEM CHRISTIANS? 
King Abdullah Of Jordan (AP/Michel Euler) "Jordan's King Abdullah warned the Archbishop of Canterbury on Sunday that Israel threatens to evict Muslims and Christians from eastern Jerusalem. The king also said Jordan will act to protect non-Jewish holy sites in the Palestinian Authority area," Jordan had signed an armistice agreement in 1949 that pledged to keep religious sites accessible, including the Jewish cemetery on the Mount of Olives. How well did the King's dynasty protect Christians in Jerusalem when it seized the Old City in 1948? Jordan banned Christian purchases of property in Jerusalem, and required Christian schools to teach the Koran and to close on Fridays instead of on Sundays. Jordan restricted Christian access to Christian holy sites in the Old City and Bethlehem to the Easter and Christmas holy days and only to visiting dignitaries. By 1967, the 25,000 Christians in Jerusalem in 1948 had dwindled to 13,000. The Jordanian Army also denied Jews access to their religious holy sites (and expelled all Jews from the Old City). Jordan desecrated the Mount of Olives cemetery. In 1967, Israel liberated the Old City and re-opened holy sites to Christians (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/23). What does the King mean, Israel intends to evict Muslims and Christians from Jerusalem? It implies a program of religious apartheid that Israel does not have but that the Palestinian Authority has for Jews and applies gradually to Christians. What is the situation? Some Arabs fleeing the Palestinian Authority sneak into Jerusalem. There would be nothing wrong with deporting them, and much risk with retaining them. Many Arabs build illegally in Jerusalem as well as in Judea-Samaria and Israel, often on land they do not own. Some Arabs sell land to Jews, at risk of the apartheid Palestinian Authority executing them for it. If word gets out, those Arabs deny the sale. the leftist Israeli prosecutors and judges tend to oust the Jewish purchasers until years of litigation and agitation have passed. Some Jews built on purchased or state land they were allotted, went through most of the stages of permits, but when the Defense Minister arbitrarily and for politics does not not issue the final permit, the Left complains mightily that the illegal houses of Jews should be demolished. The local and municipal governments of Israel issue demolition orders for some of those buildings. If the houses are inhabited by Arabs, the inside Left and the outside world call Israel discriminatory. Actually, it is those critics who are discriminatory, wanting Israel to over-enforce laws against Jews and under-enforce laws against Arabs. Now think of King Abdullah interfering by falsely claiming the building scofflaws need protection and issuing a veiled threat. Isn't that irresponsibly demagogic? Well, that is jihad. Incidentally, much of his armament is purchased by U.S. grants.
ISRAELI ARMY SAVES MONEY, RISKS LIVES Smugglers and terrorists tend to traverse deserts and other areas where security is scant. Near the Judean Desert and outside the security barrier, two Jewish communities, Beit Yatir and Shani-Livnah, have been guarded by the IDF for a quarter-century. This week the Army informed the communities that it would stop guarding them by day's end. This was an economy measure. The reduction in security there may attract terrorists (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/23). Why no notice?
ISRAELI REACTION TO DUBAI ASSASSINATION ACCUSATIONS 
European countries have been questioning Israeli ambassadors about forged European passports used by the Dubai hit squad. Much of the media has condemned Israel. Israel's Foreign Minister Lieberman notes that the media reports cite no evidence. Although, as per usual Israeli policy, he neither confirms nor denies the accusations, he asks why they accuse Israel and whether the accusation isn't part of Mideastern hostility to Israel http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/23). There is sufficient evidence for suspicion but not for condemnation. At least some of the passports were in the name of Israelis from Europe, and Israel once before had used forged British passports, though it later pledged not to. On the other hand, the slain Hamas leader had other enemies, they probably would like to implicate Israel. We'll have to wait and see.
J STREET FABRICATED ANTI-ISRAEL SCANDAL? Israel's Foreign Ministry has called the anti-Israel scandal, that a returning J Street tour for Members of Congress laid at Israel's feet, a fabrication. J Street claimed that the Deputy Foreign Minister boycotted the delegation and blacklisted it with the government. Then, said J Street, Deputy Min. Ayalon hastily apologized to the group. Barukh Binah, Foreign Ministry deputy director-general and head of its North America Division, denied there was any apology, because there was nothing to apologize for. Ayalon had not objected to meeting with the group; neither was he on their schedule; nor had he obstructed their meeting with other officials. A Foreign Ministry officials thinks that J Street exploited the Members of Congress to generate headlines that it could use in fund raising (www.imra.org.il, 2/22). There are plots, but just as often there are misunderstandings. Unfortunately, people tend to see deliberate affront in them, when predisposed to dislike the other party. Too soon for a conclusion about this story.
ISRAEL ARRESTS BEST P.A. REFORMER JUST BEFORE P.A. WOULD Here is a long, verbatim story of what the Palestinian Authority really is like, how the U.S. and Israeli politics operate. It is not a pretty picture that Israel's great journalist, Caroline Glick, paints. It demonstrates that the Palestinian Authority is not worth supporting, that it engages in extra-judicial killing for sordid reasons, that the government of Israel and its politics harms the Jewish cause, and that U.S. foreign aid is another instance of government profligacy. Israel's is the only government that can force the rest of the world to recognize that Abbas is not an ally. Fahmi Shabaneh is an odd candidate for dissident status. Shabaneh is a Jerusalemite who joined the Palestinian Authority's General Intelligence Service in 1994. Working for PA head Mahmoud Abbas and GIS commander Tawfik Tirawi, Shabaneh was tasked with investigating Arab Jerusalemites suspected of selling land to Jews. Such sales are a capital offense in the PA. Since 1994 scores of Arabs have been the victims of extra-judicial executions after having been fingered by the likes of Shabaneh. A few years ago, Abbas and Tirawi gave Shabaneh a new assignment. They put him in charge of a unit responsible for investigating corrupt activities carried out by PA officials. They probably assumed a team player like Shabaneh understood what he was supposed to do. Just as Abbas's predecessor, Yasser Arafat, reportedly had full dossiers on all of his underlings and used damning information to keep them loyal to him, so Abbas probably believed that Shabaneh's information was his to use or ignore as he saw fit. For a while, Abbas's faith was well-placed. Shabaneh collected massive amounts of information on senior PA officials detailing their illegal activities. These activities included the theft of hundreds of millions of dollars in international aid; illegal seizure of land and homes; and monetary and sexual extortion of their fellow Palestinians. Over time, Shabaneh became disillusioned with his boss. Abbas appointed him to his job around the time he was elected PA head in 2005. Abbas ran on an anti-corruption platform. Shabaneh's information demonstrated that Abbas presided over a criminal syndicate posing as a government. And yet rather than arrest his corrupt, criminal associates Abbas promoted them. Abbas continued promoting his corrupt colleagues even after Hamas's 2006 electoral victory. That win owed to a significant degree to the widespread public revulsion with Fatah's rampant corruption. With Israel and the US lining up to support him after the Hamas victory, Abbas continued to turn a blind eye to his colleagues' criminality. [With] his new status as the irreplaceable "moderate," he allowed his advisers and colleagues to continue enriching themselves with the international donor funds that skyrocketed after Hamas's victory. Since 2006, despite the billions of dollars in international aid showered on Fatah, Hamas has consistently led Fatah in opinion polls. Rather than clean up their act, Abbas and his Fatah colleagues have sought to ingratiate themselves with their public by ratcheting up their incitement against Israel. And since Abbas has been deemed irreplaceable, the same West that turns a blind eye to his corruption, refuses to criticize his encouragement of terrorism. And this makes sense. How can the West question the only thing standing in the way of a Hamas takeover of Judea and Samaria? Recently, Shabaneh decided he had had enough. The time had come to expose what he knows. But he ran into an unanticipated difficulty. No one wanted to know. As he put it, Arab and Western journalists wouldn't touch his story for fear of being "punished" by the PA. In his words, Western journalists "don't want to hear negative things about Fatah and Abbas." Lacking other options, Shabaneh brought his information to The Jerusalem Post's Khaled Abu Toameh. On January 29, the Post published Abu Toameh's interview with Shabaneh on our front page. Among other impressive scoops, Shabaneh related that Abbas's associates purloined $3.2 million in cash that the US gave Abbas ahead of the 2006 elections. He told Abu Toameh how PA officials who were almost penniless in 1994 now have tens and even hundreds of millions of dollars in their private accounts. He related how he watched in horror as Abbas promoted the very officials he reported on. And he showed Abu Toameh a video of Abbas's chief of staff Rafik Husseini naked in the bedroom of a Christian woman who sought employment with the PA. If Shabaneh's stories were about Israeli or Western officials, there is no doubt that they would have been picked up by every self-respecting news organization in the world. If he had been talking about Israelis, officials from Washington to Brussels to the UN would be loudly calling for official investigations. But since he was talking about the Palestinians, no one cared. The State Department had nothing to say. The EU had nothing to say. The New York Times acted as if his revelations were about nothing more than a sex scandal. As for Abbas and his cronies, they were quick to blame the Jews. They accused Shabaneh — their trusted henchman when it came to land sales to Jews — of being an Israeli agent. And when Channel 10 announced it was broadcasting Husseini's romp in the sack, Abbas demanded that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu bar the broadcast, (apparently forgetting that unlike his PA-controlled media, Israel's media organs are free). SHABANEH'S ODYSSEY from PA regime loyalist to dissident is an interesting tale. But what is more noteworthy than his personal journey is the world's indifference to his revelations. Just as the mountains of evidence that Fatah officials — including Shabaneh's boss Tirawi — have been actively involved in terrorist attacks against Israel have been systematically ignored by successive US administrations, Israeli governments and EU foreign policy chiefs, so no one wants to think about the fact that Fatah is a criminal syndicate. The implications are too devastating. Since at least 1994, successive US administrations goaded by the EU have made supporting Fatah and the PA the centerpiece of their Middle East policy. They want to receive proof that Fatah is a terrorist organization that operates like a criminal organization like they want — in the immortal words of former EU Middle East envoy Christopher Patten — "a hole in [their] head." As for the Western media, their lack of interest in Shabaneh's revelation serves as a reminder of just how mendacious much of the reportage about the Palestinians and Israel is. For 16 years, the American and European media have turned blind eyes to Palestinian misbehavior while expansively reporting every allegation against Israel — no matter how flimsy or obviously false. When the history of the media's coverage of the Middle East is written it will constitute one of the darkest chapters in Western media history. But while the American and European allegiance to the fable of Fatah as the anchor of the two-state solution accounts for the indifference of both to Shabaneh's disclosures, what accounts for the Netanyahu government's behavior in this matter? Shortly after the Post first published Shabaneh's story, the PA issued an arrest warrant against him. He was charged among other things with "harming the national interests" of the Palestinians. But Abbas's henchmen couldn't put their hands on him. Israel had already arrested him. Shabaneh was booked for among other things, illegally working for the PA. It is indeed illegal for Israeli residents to work for the PA. But oddly, although Israeli authorities have known whom Shabaneh worked for since 1994, until his disclosures were made public, they never saw any pressing need to arrest or prosecute him. Official Israel has nothing to say about Shabaneh's information. Rather, in the wake of his disclosures, everyone from Netanyahu to Defense Minister Ehud Barak has continued to proclaim daily their dedication to reaching a peace accord with Abbas. This even as Abbas and his cronies accuse Israel of using the "traitorous" Shabaneh to pressure Abbas into negotiating with Israel. There are two explanations for Israel's behavior. First, there is the fact that the presence of Barak and his Labor Party in the government makes it impossible for Netanyahu and his Likud Party to abandon the failed two-state paradigm of dealing the PA. If Netanyahu and his colleagues were to point out that the PA is a kleptocracy and its senior officials enable terror and escalate incitement to deflect their public's attention away from their criminality, (as well as because they want to destroy Israel), then Labor may bolt the coalition. Beyond that, there is no doubt that an Israeli denunciation of Abbas and his mafia would enrage the US and EU. Apparently, Netanyahu — who to please President Barack Obama accepted the two-state paradigm in spite of the fact that he opposes it, and suspended Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria despite the fact that he knows doing this is wrong — is loathe to pick a fight by pointing out the obvious fact that the PA is a corrupt band of oppressive thieves. Shabaneh argues that due to PA corruption, Hamas remains the preferred alternative for Palestinians in Judea and Samaria. In his view, the only reason Hamas has yet to take over Judea and Samaria is the IDF presence in the areas. The strategic implications of his statement are clear. Far from being a bulwark against Hamas, Abbas empowers the Iranian-backed jihadist force. The only bulwark against Hamas is Israel. WHAT THIS means is that Israel must end its support for Abbas. Every day he remains in power, Abbas perpetuates a myth of Palestinian moderation. As a supposed moderate, he claims that Israel should curtail its counter terror operations and let his own "moderate" forces take over. To strengthen Abbas, the US pressures Israel to curtail its counter terror operations in Judea and Samaria. To please the US, Israel in turn cuts back its operations. Abbas's men fight Hamas, but they also terrorize journalists, merchants and plain civilians who fall in their path, and so strengthen Hamas. To ratchet up public support for Fatah, Abbas escalates PA incitement against Israel. This then encourages his own forces to attack Israelis — as happened last week when one of his security officers murdered IDF St.-Sgt. Maj. Ihab Khatib. And so it goes. It is clear that Barak will threaten to bolt the coalition if Netanyahu decides to cut off Abbas. But if he left, where would he go? Barak has nowhere to go. He will not be reelected to lead his party. And if Labor leaves the coalition, Netanyahu would still be far from losing his majority in Knesset. As for angering the White House, the fact of the matter is that by pointing out that Abbas is not a credible leader, Israel will make it more difficult for Obama and his advisers to coerce Israel into making further concessions that will only further empower Hamas. Shabaneh told the Post that he fully expects the PA to try to kill him. But in a way, the yawns that greeted his story are his best life insurance policy. Until the world stops believing that Fatah is indispensable, no one will listen to the Shabanehs of the world and so the PA has no reason to kill him. Just as the Post was the only media organ that would publish his story, so
the Israeli government is the only government that can force the rest of the
world to recognize that Abbas is not an ally. But to do that, the government
itself must finally break with the fairy tale of Fatah moderation (via www.imra.org.il, 2/22).
Iran's President Ahmadinejad said, today, that capitalism is on the verge of collapse (www.imra.org.il, 2/22) Meanwhile, American analysts report that Iran's economy is failing badly. More companies and countries are disinvesting from it since the last time I reported that. I think that it is not so much that capitalism is collapsing, as that Europe and the U.S. over-restrict it, over-tax it, and over-spend. If they reform, the system would revive.
SYRIA CONDEMNS ISRAELI DESIGNATION OF NATIONAL SITES Syria condemns Israel's inclusion in its list of national sites to preserve the Cave of the Patriarchs and Rachel's Tomb. Syria called the designation "aggression" and a violation of international law (www.imra.org.il, 2/23). An over-reaction. "Aggression" to renovate and preserve the Hebron site that Israel shares with Muslims? "Violation of international law," although the Oslo Accords name Rachel's Tomb as a Jewish site and recognize the status quo of the Hebron site? (IMRA displayed the relevant portions of the Oslo Accords, 2/23.) IMRA also provided evidence that the Palestinian Arabs concocted the story of Rachel's Tomb being a mosque. "The 'Beit-ul-Moqaddas' designation of Rachel's Tomb was first invented in 1996 — that's14 years ago." The Bible, written a millennium before Islam was declared, describes the burial of the Hebrew patriarchs and matriarchs in Hebron. That Muslims want to consider such sites also holy to them should not mean that they then may bar them to the original people who commemorate them. But the Arabs are exclusivist about it. Hence, the hasty designation of other religions' holy sites as mosques. Incidentally, IMRA points out that whatever care Israel takes of the sites does not preclude Israel's ceding them as part of a final status agreement. Therefore, the Arab objection to their listing is propaganda and rabble-rousing, unjustified. If Israel did cede them, the Muslim Arabs undoubtedly would deprive Jews of their rights, as threatened by Muslim religious leaders and as practiced by centuries of Islamic rule and by violations of agreements by Jordan and the PLO.
KING SOLOMON'S WALL FOUND IN JERUSALEM 
Hebrew University archaeologists found an 18-foot high, 210-foot long section of a wall built in the time of King Solomon and probably at his direction. It is in the Ophel area between the City of David and the Temple Mount's southern wall. "Uncovered in the city wall complex are: an inner gatehouse for access into the royal quarter of the city, a royal structure adjacent to the gatehouse, and a corner tower that overlooks a substantial section of the adjacent Kidron valley." Although Palestinian Arabs deny there is evidence for an ancient Hebrew presence there, in order to insinuate their own claims for the area, more and more evidence keeps getting uncovered. I have seen much of it. You will note that, as usual, the writing found is Hebrew and not Arabic. This site's consistency with the Bible is telling.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
THE EUROPEAN LOBBY IN ISRAEL
Posted by Seth J. Frantzman, February 24, 2010. |
|
The EU, realizing it cannot get Israel to change its laws through diplomatic means, has resorted to creating an internal lobby — through lavish funding of NGOs — to get Israel to bend.
Ever since the publication of John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt's
The Israel Lobby there has been much talk of the "lobby." In England
mainstream and respectable Channel 4 aired an entire program entitled
Inside Britain's Israel Lobby which claimed the "lobby" "owns" the
Conservative Party. Amidst all the talk of an Israel lobby in the
West, people have ignored the growth of a lobby located in the Holy
Land itself, the European lobby in Israel.
The European Parliament adopted the European Initiative for Democracy and Human Rights (EIDHR) in 1994. This was part of the European Union's broader belief that "democracy and human rights are universal values that should be vigorously promoted around the world." The initiative was supposed to promote democratization through the promotion of "fair and free" elections and mainstreaming "democratic values" through "accountability, transparency and equality."
In 2007, a subtle change in the name of the EIDHR was made. The word "initiative" was changed to "instrument." This seemingly banal change may be a result of semantic arguments among EU staffers but it puts in words the increasingly meddlesome way the EU has chosen to work within Israel.
The EU may have realized during the second intifada that its concerns were not being listened to. Perhaps they heeded the increasingly alarmist statements of Israelis themselves, such as former Haaretz editor David Landau who in 2007 told US secretary of state Condoleezza Rice that the US needed to "rape" Israel into a settlement with the Palestinians. Regardless of the exact cause, in 2002 the European Union began lavishly funding non-governmental organizations in Israel. It claimed that it was doing this because of "the vital contribution made by NGOs to the promotion and protection of the principles of liberty, democracy, respect for human rights and the rule of law."
Between 2002 and 2008, a total of $14 million was granted to various Israeli NGOs through the EIDHR. My investigation of the NGOs that received funding revealed that the lion's share of the money benefited two groups: Palestinians and Israeli Arabs. $5.5 million was directed specifically to causes for Palestinians such as the Association for Civil Rights in Israel's project "Building a Better Future: Empowering the Palestinian Residents of East Jerusalem to access their planning and house [sic] rights" which received $135,000. A further $7m. went specifically to programs that benefit only Israeli Arabs such as the al-Awna fund's "Master Plan for the Unrecognized Beduin Villages: Securing minority rights for housing and social services" which received $263,000. Even when the EIDHR funded programs for women it did so only for programs for Beduin or Israeli Arab women, except for a token $100,000 it gave to an organization called Isha le Isha (Woman to Woman) which helps fight women trafficking.
There was not one cent directed specifically towards any of the numerous and diverse Jewish communities in Israel: Ethiopians, Russians, Yemenites, Persians or Jews from the Caucasus. The only mention of Jewish citizens as potential recipients was in a grant to the Mossawa Center, the advocacy center for Arab citizens in Israel. It received $402,000 for a project that "aims to combat racism and transform inter-communal relations between target groups who include the Jewish majority, Arab minority and ethnic groups including the Russian, Ethiopian, Mizrahi and Reform Jewish communities."
Around $73,000 was directed towards former IDF soldiers. It wasn't to help them with trauma or reward them for a "shared citizenship." It was to get them to "break the silence" about what they witnessed while in the army, to provide testimony that might lead to a process whereby European courts might put the soldiers or their officers on trial for war crimes. Of course that is not what Breaking the Silence stated for the public. They described their project as "personal encounters with former Israeli combat soldiers."
THE EIDHR's "instrument" to affect Israeli policy is merely the tip of the iceberg. In its November 2009 report "Trojan Horse: The impact of European government funding for Israeli NGOs" NGO Monitor illustrated that individual European embassies in Israel and other EU projects give lavishly to Israeli NGOs, sometimes even making up the majority of their budgets. In fact "foreign-funded local NGOs are responsible for a significant portion of the petitions brought before the Israeli High Court of Justice," says the report.
The EU, realizing it could not get Israel to change its laws through diplomatic means, has resorted to creating an internal lobby within Israel to get Israel to bend to the will of Europe.
Israel's human rights organizations would counter that it is not important where their money comes from, their cause is just. It is also true that some Israeli human rights organizations view everything through the lens of the conflict, meaning they apply only for projects involving Palestinians or "Palestinian citizens of Israel" and don't have an interest in the rights of the Jewish population of the country.
Shatil, which claims to help Ethiopian Jews, applied for $1m. for Beduin and $1m. "to educate and raise awareness among the Arab residents of Israel's five Jewish/Arab mixed cities" and nothing for the Ethiopians.
The question is whether the EU funding of these organizations constitutes the creation of a shadow lobby. The EIDHR doesn't directly sue Israel on behalf of the freedom of movement of Palestinians. Instead it funds local NGOs that do. Furthermore the EIDHR sends $8.4m. in funding directly to NGOs in the Palestinian territories on top of the money it gives to Israeli NGOs whose projects only benefit Palestinians.
In every other country in the world, the EIDHR directs its funding towards large-scale projects supporting "democracy" and "civil society." In Egypt it gave $10m. (2003-2008), none of which went specifically towards projects for the minority Coptic Christians.
It is time for those, especially in Europe, who speak about a "Jewish/Israel" lobby to recognize that for eight years Europe has directed a concerted effort towards establishing a European lobby in Israel that discriminates against its Jewish population and supports some radical NGOs.
Seth Frantzman is a PhD researcher at the Hebrew University.
This appeared in the Jerusalem Postt
|
|
AJAMI IS GOOD FOR THE JEWS
Posted by Ari Bussel, February 24, 2010. |
|
Ask an Israeli Arab, considered a minority with equal rights in the Jewish State, if she or he would prefer to live in Israel or in any Arab state, and the overwhelming answer be a resounding YES. Any non-Israeli Arab would always prefer to be treated IN ISRAEL if ill or injured. Occupation or not, propaganda aside, the truth is quite telling. As bad or as challenging as life may be in Israel, Arabs still prefer to live there. Christians come to escape persecution under Muslim rule and Muslims because they know what is good for them, not what the Arab American "anti-defamation league" or the "Council on American-Islamic Relations" decides from afar. Life in the Middle East is challenging. The area, mostly a desert, still resembles a nomadic society of the seventh century dressed up with multi-billion dollar Dubai-like construction projects. Outwardly modern, yet rotten and medieval inside. Honor killings, murder of those with whom one disagrees, subjugation of women, depravation of liberty and freedom, torture, beheadings, and the list goes on and on. Most of us realize we live in the 21st Century AD and would not want to move backwards to a primitive, nomadic society. We prefer life as it is, with all the faults and ills of modern-day society. A new movie depicts Arab (Muslim) society in Israel. As we review the movie in the context of today's Middle East, let us keep in mind the Israeli Police Commissioner's statement today: "The increasing involvement of Israeli Arabs in violent crimes in proportions and scope which are beyond their representation in society is becoming increasingly more alarming. ... The criminals have no localities or boundaries, little concern to human life, they take over legal markets and national infrastructure, they join forces with and infiltrate into government systems, threaten judges, police officers, lawyers, municipal workers and heads of municipalities ...." Let us visit the system of Israeli Arabs expansion into the criminal world from the viewpoint of Arab society itself. Laemmle, a theater chain in Los Angeles that brings foreign films to a wide, eclectic audience, cosponsored the screening. The invitation was innocent enough. It read in part: Lost in the international debate on the Israeli-Palestinian question is the fact that Israel has become a complex multicultural society. No film makes that more evident than the gritty crime drama Ajami — Israel's strong entry into this season's Oscar race. Shot with mostly non-professional actors by [a Christian] Arab and Jewish co-directors Scandar Copti and Yaron Shani, the film is almost entirely in Arabic and is a harsh reality-check on the country's healthcare system, relations between police and the citizenry, inter-Arab gang rivalries, and the rift that separates Jews, Christians and Muslims. Ajami is Israel's entry for Best Foreign Language Film Oscar in the upcoming Academy Awards in Los Angeles. While Israel is yet to win an Oscar in this category, she was previously nominated, including last year for the animated film Waltz with Bashir and a year earlier for Beaufort. Ajami is an eye-opener. It exposes us to the New Israeli Arab and to Arab society where there is little, if any, meaning for human life. A young man enters a café and starts shooting in the air, a normal manner of expression among Palestinians, sometimes used to vent anger, sadness or a cause for celebration. We are told the reason for this particular shooting was to extract protection money from the owner. The owner of the café takes out a gun and shoots the shooter. It was done in self-defense, but ignited a "cycle of violence," a favorite term by terrorists and their cohorts. Apparently it was the perpetrator's "RIGHT" to do as he pleases, to threaten and endanger other people's lives, and now it is his and his family's "RIGHT" to demand justice, the Arab way. The café and adjoining home are set afire and the owner is shot. A 15-year-old boy is shot to death in broad day light, mistaken for the brother of the Café owner. He was just an innocent neighbor, his life wasted in a short moment. The family itself lives in fear for there are still other members that can be executed until the primal urge of revenge is satisfied. Life has no meaning; the animalistic urge to kill rules. We are exposed to a "Sulcha," a gathering in front of an elder (in this instance a clergy person) during which negotiations take place. The loss of ability to bear children, paralysis, loss of future income etc. are taken into account, and when the final tally is taken, a certain discount is extended "in honor of god." I did not quite understand if this is the take of the clergyperson or if indeed it is for Allah. Either way, an utterly and completely convoluted world is depicted. In the movie, multiple interlinked stories are told in chapters. They are intertwined, disjoint parts are repeated from different angles and yet move us forward. There is actual friendship (in which the hatred of the Jews is the greatest uniting factor), constant references to a god (devoid, apparently, from any connection to good and benevolent behavior of the "believers") and a human touch — a son who will do anything to save his dying mother and a family which takes (physical) care of a paralyzed grandfather. But most importantly, we are exposed to a culture we do not know, a culture that exists within Israeli society (Israeli Arabs and Bedouin) and throughout the Muslim countries. There is a Christian minority among them, but recent history has shown that Christianity is not tolerated under Muslim rule, and most Christians fled from Lebanon — where once they constituted a majority — and even from their holiest city — Bethlehem, birthplace of Christ. In the movie, a young Christian Arab woman can never marry the Muslim youth she loves, because her father will beat her to death. The movie itself is powerful, raw and bloody. It depicts segments of Israeli society living in a modern, law-abiding country, yet completely detached. Hebrew words intermingled in their spoken Arabic, yet the predominant culture is that of the slums. It shows elements of terror, criminals and those who have no concern or regard for law and order. A judge unto their own, as the Hebrew saying goes: "every violent person, a man." To an Israeli, the movie was a surprise. It portrays life as it is, highlighting the police struggle against a community that prefers to protect itself rather than vomit from within its midst narcotic dealers; terrorism and its aftermath; kidnapping an Israeli soldier and the devastation to his family; the craving for separation from Israel by creating a Palestinian state on its ruins yet the ongoing, imperative need to be in Israel, to work and earn a living there and to utilize the medical and other services she has to offer. Since the parts are seemingly disjointed, at moments we are left with our imagination running wild, high on adrenaline. In one scene, we are led to believe a brutal police officer shoots an Arab youth at close range, and we are ready to blame police brutality, the Israeli atrocities, the Zionist Occupation and on. In the next chapter, as we look at the scene from a different camera and a wider angle the identity of the true shooter is revealed: an Arab boy, emotionally unstable or easily influenced and frightened. The viewer who build up anger is thus disillusioned, left without Israel to blame. Without an outlet, the active participant's anger is reignited and Israel is once again to blame. Nothing in this movie is anti Israel. On the contrary, she is forced to deal with Arab culture from the Arabs' own perspective, portrayed as the worse of American gangs where drugs are a means of income, violence begets violence, one's honor is paramount and there is a total disrespect of that we call "normal." Modern Western culture clashes with a pseudo barbaric lifestyle brought to a screen near you compliments of an Israeli Oscar contender. It is for this reason the movie will not be shown or have wide release or distribution in Arab states. First, it does not attack Israel (although this can be easily fixed by twisting facts and transposing reality, blaming Israel for all of society's ills). Second, it shows things as they truly are, and the Muslims will do everything possible to prevent the truth from being shown. They live in their make-believe world and speak differently in English and in Arabic. For Western ears they deplore murder, yet clergymen readily justify it in sermons in Arabic, particularly murder against Pigs and Apes (a.k.a. Jews and other non-believers). Ajami will expose viewers to a facet of life we normally try to avoid. Egregious realities like a neighbor that asks you repeatedly to keep quiet. Eventually he warns he will call the authorities. How do you respond? Take a knife and stab him once, twice, three times in the chest and abdomen until he falls dead? His daughter is about your age. You have lived together for years. It is a pity that a film that goes beyond the so-called "Conflict" (existence of the Jewish State) is degraded by many to a propaganda piece it was never meant to be. If the movie were not eye-opener enough, then its usage against Israel reinforces that we live in dangerous times. Times when people skew and manipulate, portray facts to fit their agenda, lie and deceive or do anything necessary to destroy a way of life, the Western way of life, our way of life. In the series "Postcards from Israel," Ari Bussel and Norma Zager invite readers throughout the world to join them as they present reports from Israel as seen by two sets of eyes: Bussel's on the ground, Zager's counter-point from home. Israel and the United States are inter-related — the two countries we hold dearest to our hearts — and so is this "point — counter-point" presentation that has, since 2008, become part of our lives. Contact them by mail at aribussel@gmail.com |
|
THE THREE DS OF ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by Truth Provider, February 23, 2010. |
|
Demonizing Israel is no longer a Palestinian/Muslim and their followers blood sport in universities and town squares across America, it is moving into main street, poisoning even such organizations as the US Presbyterian Church. First, watch the following video which defines the new kind of anti-Semitism. Then heed the call to action about the US Presbyterian Church renewed intention to do just that, demonize Israel. REMEMBER:
WHEN NATO FORCES KILL CIVILIANS IN AFGHANISTAN IT IS
CALLED A MISTAKE.
THE DIFFERENCE: FOR TINY ISRAEL IT IS ALWAYS A WAR FOR SURVIVAL. Israel is being
Educate yourself and stand up for Israel!
To see: Crossing the Line: The Intifada comes to campus,
click here.
Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send
an email to ynz@netvision.net.il
|
|
CHRISTIAN SITES VULNERABLE IN ISRAEL'S DISPUTED TERRITORIES
Posted by Susana K-M, February 23, 2010. |
|
List of religious sites holy to Christians already or potentially under Palestinian control Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu announced Sunday (Feb. 21) that he would include two holy sites in the West Bank as part of a comprehensive plan to preserve Israel's national heritage and religious sites.[1] Shortly before the $5.3 million (NIS 20 million) plan was approved, Netanyahu said, "Today, we are due to approve a comprehensive plan, the largest ever, to strengthen the national heritage infrastructures of the State of Israel..."[2] The two sites are the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem. The Cave of the Patriarchs, Judaism's second-holiest site after the Temple Mount and its Western Wall,[3] is also venerated by Muslims and Christians.[4] Rachel's Tomb, the third-holiest site in Judaism,[5] is also sacred to Muslims and Christians.[6] Many other sites that are religiously significant to Christians because of their association with the life of Jesus as recorded in the New Testament are located in modern-day Israel and the West Bank. Israeli law mandates that all people, regardless of religious affiliation, have the right to visit all holy places within Israel.[7] In 2008, about three million people visited Israel; of those, two million were Christians.[8] However, the future of Christian holy sites located in the disputed territories — currently controlled by Israel — is uncertain. A final-status peace deal likely would involve Israel relinquishing portions of those areas to the Palestinian Authority (PA).[9] Under Palestinian control, the sanctity of Christian religious sites has not always been respected. In 2002 during an Israel Defense Forces (IDF) counterterrorism operation in Bethlehem, dozens of armed Palestinian militants took over the Church of the Nativity, trapping about 60 clergy.[10] Meanwhile, other holy sites already under Palestinian control are increasingly vulnerable as Christian Palestinians continue to emigrate from the area.[11] Israel is one of the only places in the Middle East where the Christian population is growing.[12] Following is a list of religious sites holy to Christians that are either currently under Palestinian control or may be placed under Palestinian control as part of a peace agreement: Bethlehem (PA control) The Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem is a major Christian holy site marking the traditional site of Jesus' birth. According to the New Testament (Luke 2:1-20; Matthew 2:1-9), Jesus was born in a manger on the site while Mary and Joseph were there to register for the Roman census. The church, commissioned by Roman Emperor Constantine, is one of the oldest Christian churches in existence.[13] St. Catherine's is a Roman Catholic church next to the Church of the Nativity and has several chapels of historic and religious significance. The Chapel of St. Jerome is traditionally thought to be where the Bishop of Bethlehem translated the Bible from Hebrew and Greek into Latin, and the Chapel of the Innocents commemorates King Herod's slaughter of the babies of Judea. The Chapel of St. Joseph is said to be where an angel appeared to Joseph and commanded him to flee to Egypt.[14] Shepherds' Fields, another Christian pilgrimage site in Bethlehem, is where the New Testament (Luke 2:8-20) says an angel descended to announce the birth of Jesus to the shepherds.[15] Monastery of the Temptation (PA control) The Greek Orthodox Monastery of the Temptation is on Mount Quarantal, just north of Jericho. It is the traditional desert site where Jesus went after his baptism to fast and pray for 40 days.[16] Bethany (PA control) The Tomb of Lazarus is in Bethany, a village on the east slope of the Mount of Olives. The New Testament (John 11:1-44) recounts that Bethany was the home of Lazarus, Mary and Martha, and Jesus frequently visited the village. Christians believe Jesus raised a man named Lazarus from the dead there after he had been in the tomb four days. There is also a Franciscan Church of St. Lazarus that stands on the site of earlier churches. Jerusalem (Israeli control, located in disputed territory) Garden of Gethsemane The Garden of Gethsemane is where the New Testament (Matthew 26:36-56; Mark 14:32-5) says Jesus led his disciples after the Last Supper and asked them to keep watch while he prayed. There they fell asleep and then fled when Judas identified him. The Basilica of the Agony, or the Church of All Nations, marks the place where Jesus prayed alone, and a chapel is built around a piece of exposed bedrock at the place of Jesus' prayer.[18] The Cave of Gethsemane marks the site of where Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss.[19] The Tomb of the Virgin Mary is also located in the Grotto of Gethsemane.[20] Ecce Homo Arch Part of a gate dating from the time of Hadrian, the arch was named in the 16th century. It is part of the Via Dolorosa but is not one of the stations of the cross. Ecce Homo Arch is where many believe Pontius Pilate said, "Behold the man!"[21] Via Dolorosa The Via Dolorosa is believed to be the path Jesus took to Calvary, where he was crucified. Stations of the Cross mark various events along the way, some of which are not recorded in the New Testament. The New Testament (John 19:17) says Jesus was made to carry his own cross from the place of his condemnation to Calvary.[22] The Chapel of the Condemnation, built over the site traditionally identified with the trial of Jesus (John 17:19), is on the Via Dolorosa. The Franciscan Monastery of the Flagellation is also on the Via Dolorosa, next to the Chapel of the Condemnation.[23] Church of St. Anne This church was built over the traditional site of the birthplace of Anne (Hannah), the mother of Mary.[24] Church of the Holy Sepulcher One of the holiest sites in all of Christianity is the tomb of Jesus, located within the Church of the Holy Sepulcher. The church was built around the tomb by Roman Emperor Constantine.[25] The site of Jesus' crucifixion is believed to be the area identified as Calvary within the Church of the Holy Sepulcher.[26] According to the New Testament (Matthew 27:32-55), Jesus was crucified at "a place called Golgotha (which means The Place of the Skull)" between two thieves. After about three hours of suffering and mocking, Jesus "gave up his spirit." Garden Tomb The Garden Tomb is believed by many to be the garden and sepulcher of Joseph of Arimathea and therefore a possible site of the resurrection of Jesus.[27] Chapel of the Ascension The Chapel of the Ascension on the Mount of Olives is the traditional site of Jesus' ascension into heaven after his resurrection (Luke 24:50-51; Acts 1:9-11). The Chapel was built over the site traditionally considered to be where Jesus prayed on the night of his betrayal.[28] Church of the Pater Noster This church is built on the traditional site in Jerusalem where Jesus taught his disciples the Lord's Prayer (Luke 11:1-4) or the "Our Father" (Pater Noster in Latin). The original church, built by Emperor Constantine over a cave in fourth century CE, has been partially reconstructed. The third-century Acts of John also references the cave on the Mount of Olives and Jesus' teaching.[29] City of David Excavations in the City of David as recent as 2005 reveal what is believed to be the Pool of Siloam. The original Pool of Siloam was built by Hezekiah around the year 701 BCE. This is the place referred to in the New Testament in the story of a blind man who was given sight by Jesus. According to the story (John 9), Jesus put mud on the man's eyes, told him to wash in the Pool of Siloam and then the man could see.[30] Dominus Flevit Church This small Franciscan church is on the upper western slope of the Mount of Olives. Dominus Flevit, which means "the Lord cried," is believed to mark the place where the New Testament (Luke 19:41) says Jesus mourned over Jerusalem. Before the construction of the modern church, the foundations of a fifth-century monastery were discovered beneath.[31] Tel a-Shakef (Hamas control) A sixth-century Byzantine church dedicated to John the Baptist was discovered in 1999 at a dig at the northwest edge of the Gaza Strip at an Israel military installation, before Israel's 2005 withdrawal from all of Gaza. An earlier excavation at the site revealed a magnificent bathhouse and fish pond in almost perfect condition next to the church.[32] Footnotes: [1] "PM Netanyahu's Remarks at Today's Cabinet Meeting at Tel Hai,"
Israel Prime Minister's Office, Feb. 21, 2010,
[2] "PM Netanyahu's Remarks at Today's Cabinet Meeting at Tel Hai,"
Israel Prime Minister's Office, Feb. 21, 2010,
[3] Lazaroff, Tovah; Freund, Michael, "Coming of age at Rachel's
Tomb," JWeekly.com, Nov. 2, 2007,
[4] Prusher, Ilene R., "Does Hebron clash signal new round of
settler revolts?" Christian Science Monitor, Dec. 9, 2008, [5] Lazaroff, Tovah; Freund, Michael, "Coming of age at Rachel's
Tomb," JWeekly.com, Nov. 2, 2007,
[6] "Bethlehem University research project explores importance of
Rachel's tomb," Bethlehem University, May 4, 2009,
[7] "General Assembly, Forty-Third Session, Item 77: Report of the
Special Committee to Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human
Rights of the Population of the Occupied Territories," United Nations
— General Assembly Security Council, April 19, 1988,
[8] Israel Ministry of Tourism communiqué, Jan. 21, 2009;
Rosenblum, Irit, "New Israeli tourism initiative calls on Christian
pilgrims to pedal the Nazareth — Jerusalem route," Haaretz,
Jan. 22, 2009
[9] "226 The Clinton Peace Plan — 23 December 2000," Israel Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, Dec. 23, 2000, [10] "Chronology of the Siege," PBS, April 1, 2002, [11] Bronner, Ethan, "Mideast's Christians Losing Numbers and
Sway," The New York Times, May 12, 2009,
[12] "Christians are Leaving the Middle East," Voice of America
News, Jan. 17, 2006,
[13] "Israel-s Archaeological Treasures — The Judean Foothills,"
Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Nov. 29, 1999,
[14] "Bethlehem: The Church of St Catherine of Alexandria at the
Basilica of the Nativity," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, March
15, 2000,
[15] "Bethlehem," Jewish Virtual Library Virtual Israel Experience,
[16] "Jericho," Jewish Virtual Library Virtual Israel Experience,
[17] Gonen, Rivka (2000), Biblical Holy Places: An Illustrated
Guide, Jerusalem: Paulist Press, pp. 51-52; Kedmi, Dr. Roni, "In the
footsteps of Jesus," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
[18] "Jerusalem: The Basilica of the Agony (Church of All
Nations)," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, March 15, 2000,
[19] Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome (1998), The Holy Land: An Oxford Archaeological Guide, New York: Oxford University Press, p. 131. [20] Eldar, Yishai, "Focus on Israel: Jerusalem — Christian
Architecture through the Ages," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Jan. 1, 2000,
[21] "Archaeological Sites in Israel — Jerusalem — The Northern Gate
of Aelia Capitolina," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, July 29, 1998,
[22] Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome (1998), The Holy Land: An Oxford Archaeological Guide, New York: Oxford University Press, p. 34-36. [23] "Jerusalem within the Walls," Israel Ministry of Foreign
Affairs, [24] Eldar, Yishai, "Focus on Israel: Jerusalem — Christian
Architecture through the Ages," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Jan. 1, 2000,
[25] "Archaeological Sites in Israel — The Church of the Holy
Sepulcher," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, July 29, 1998,
[26] "Archaeological Sites in Israel — The Church of the Holy
Sepulcher," Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, July 29, 1998, [27] "The Garden Tomb," Garden Tomb (Jerusalem) Association,
[28] "Jerusalem — Beyond the Old City Walls," Jewish Virtual
Library Virtual Israel Experience,
[29] Murphy-O'Connor, Jerome (1998), The Holy Land: An Oxford Archaeological Guide, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 125-126. [30] Shanks, Hershel (2005), "The Siloam Pool Where Jesus Cured the Blind Man," Biblical Archaeology Review 31(5), pp. 16-23. [31] "Jerusalem: The Chapel of Dominus Flevit," Israel Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, March 7, 2000,
[32] "Church of John the Baptist Discovered," Israel Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, March 7, 1999,
Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
THE FIRST EVER ZOHAR CONVENTION IS AIRING LIVE ON KABBALAH TV RIGHT NOW
Posted by Kabbalah Information, February 23, 2010. |
|
Today is the 2nd day of the 1st ever Zohar Convention in history. The Zohar Convention is very unique because it is the first time that so many people are meeting in order to study The Zohar together, for the sake of attracting the influence of the Correcting Light. "Nothing like this has ever occurred in history. The Zohar was only studied by small groups of people, in secret, hiding from everyone so no one would find out, not even their closest relatives. We have to understand what an exceptional gift we have merited to receive. Every person who has a chance to participate in this event is extremely lucky because it holds a tremendous reward." — Dr. Michael Laitman. You are welcome to view the live broadcast of the remaining 2 days of the Zohar Convention on Kabbalah TV. Here are all the resources you need to connect: View the Live Broadcast Schedule of the Zohar Convention on Kabbalah TV. Visit the Zohar Convention 2010 Information Page |
|
NEVER SURRENDER JEWISH LAND; ADMISSION OF THE TRAITOR; SAUDI CONTROL MEDIA AND EDUCATION
Posted by Steven Shamrak, February 23, 2010. |
|
Never Surrender Jewish Land. In recent weeks, the United Nations has expressed its interest in "redoubl" attempts to provoke Israel to withdraw from the northern part of Ghajar, which Israel annexed in 1967. In 2000, the IDF pulled out of northern Ghajar, but re-entered in 2006 as part of the Second Lebanon War. The United Nations aims to place northern Ghajar in the hands of Syria. (Britain and France, in violation of the rules of the Mandate system, illegally ceded 5% of Jewish land to Syria, as well 77% to trans-Jordan, in 1922. No other country in the world gave up a land it had concurred during a defensive war from an enemy. Specially its own land!) Ghajar is inhabited by Alawite Muslims, a minority sect of Shi'ite Muslims who hold an eclectic array of beliefs largely drawing from Islam, but also including some Christian and some secret beliefs. Israel must not create a precedent of surrendering Jewish land to the enemies. At the same time, Villagers, fearing a humanitarian and security disaster if the pullout takes place, have said they want to remain residents of Israel and recently held marathon meetings with the President, Prime Minister, Defense Minister, and various ministers and Knesset members in an effort to garner support and prevent the withdrawal. Hypocrisy of the Headlines. Hamas says killed Israeli civilians by mistake — Systematic bombardment of civilian areas in Israel for many years is just a 'little' mistake! 'The War on Terror' — The Bigots' Style. The international police cooperation organization Interpol added the passport names and pictures of the 11 suspects in the killing of senior Hamas terrorist Mahmud Mabhouh to its wanted list. Admission of the Traitor. Speaking at a conference at Tel Aviv University, former Prime Minster Ehud Olmert said that he was willing to surrender Jerusalem's Holy Places, including the Temple Mount, to international control in order to reach an agreement with the PA. (Thank G-d that the PA is not willing to accept peace with Israel in any way, otherwise the self-hating traitors would give up all Jewish land for the illusion of peace!) When Archaeology becomes Threat to Fake Policy. The United States-based Time Magazine complained last week that the archaeological activities of the "City of David Foundation" are hijacking Israel 's political agenda, implying the organization is forcing Muslims to accept the Jewish truth of Biblical historical statements through archaeological discoveries in the Ir David neighbourhood, south of Jerusalem's Old City. (One can't change archaeological artefacts for political reasons but can hide them or forbid even talk about them. Saudi Arabia and Jordan, to prevent Jewish discoveries, are very restrictive of any archaeological diggings. Egypt disallows scientific debate on the origin of the Pyramids and the Sphinx.) Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak All spy agencies use fake or stolen identities, as well as foreign passports, in order to protect their agents during covert operations. Only Israeli Mossad, consistently the most successful security organization in the war against Islamic terror, is chastised by the media and some countries for doing its job well using common practice. This is another example of the anti-Semitic double standards of international bigots! Israel Funds Anti-Israel Rhetoric via PA. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman told the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that much of the international delegitimization against Israel is carried out by the Palestinian Authority (PA), adding that some of it is paid for by cash that Israel supplies to the PA. Most of the legal motions filed against IDF officers are financed and initiated by the PA. Lieberman said: " We must examine, as a society, whether we consent to accept these rules of the game — that allow them to negotiate with us while turning many of their resources against us." (Appeasement of international bigots and idiotic policies must end!) Political Campaigning in Israel is Empty Rhetoric. An Iranian attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada, according to Peter Kent, Canada's Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the Americas and a legislator from an Ontario community with a large Jewish population. (Politicians such as this, like Barack Obama before him, are campaigning in Israel only to win Jewish votes. Talk is cheap!) Israeli Labor Party Fears Democracy. Labor party Chairman Ehud Barak again expressed his strong opposition to a proposal to give Israeli citizens living abroad the right to vote in Israeli elections. Another Anti-Israel Bigot Angered by Snub. Speaking to reporters in Tel Aviv a visiting U.S. congressman William Delahunt, a Democrat from Massachusetts, lashed out at Israel 's number two diplomat, saying he was snubbed by the Foreign Ministry and demanding an official clarification. The trip is hosted by J Street, a liberal, anti-Zionist Jewish lobbying group. (Not every anti-Israel bigot must be welcomed in Jerusalem. It would be even better not to let them in at all. Anti-Jewish political bigots must not be allowed to use trips to Israel for self-promotion!) UNRWA Promoting Terrorism. An UNRWA (the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees) educational program has honored the terrorist Abu Jihad with a football tournament in his name. The tournament was organized by the Fatah Students' Youth Movement at UNRWA's Women's Training Center in Ramallah. (This is not the first time UNRWA has helped the PA to promote terrorism among so-called Palestinians.) Quote of the Week: "Stabbing proves that there is no strategic difference between Hamas and Fatah, both of which share the goal of the elimination of Israel. Both organizations are wolves but one of them is disguised as a lamb and we must fight them harshly." — Deputy Minister of the Development of the Negev and Galilee. It Pays to be a Terrorist. The Palestinian Authority (PA) Prime Minister has enhanced regular monthly stipends for the families of slain terrorists. Funds are deposited into the bank accounts of the "shahids" (martyrs) families at the same time that salaries are transferred to the accounts of PA government workers. It is believed that at least part of payout is derived from the internationally-donated funds that are transferred to the PA via the Bank of Israel for humanitarian purposes only. No Concessions before Negotiations. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said at the weekly Cabinet meeting on Sunday that Israel will not make major concessions before negotiations. "First, we will conduct negotiations without preconditions. We do not accept the idea that Israel must always make extraordinary concessions..." (He should say: "Israel will not make any concessions"! The enemies of Israel have offered only rocket fire and random terror attacks as concessions.) US is Subsidising Terror. The United States announced on Thursday that it will donate $40 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, for Arabs in the Palestinian Authority-assigned areas, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. (The American funding comes despite a report that Hamas terrorists are employed by the agency. That is why Canada decided last month to stop its UNRWA funding. The US 's huge international debt has also not stopped this stupidity!) What Diplomatic Relation? The Egyptian Journalists' Union has sanctioned two journalists who interviewed Israel's ambassador to Egypt, Shalom Cohen. Hussein Sarang, a veteran reporter, was suspended from his job for three months. Israeli officials said that the sanctions were evidence that Egypt was "trying to erase the presence of Israel from the Egyptian consciousness." (The presence Egypt has never really allowed!) Saudi Control Media and Education. Ever wonder why CNN and Time are so blatantly pro-Islamic? Ever wonder why they are so eager to transmit Islamic propaganda? Rupert Murdoch's efforts to retain control over his News Corp media empire were boosted today when a billionaire Saudi prince Talal, friend of Rupert, upped his stake in the company. Such a role would appear to give the Prince some say over the way the business is run& The Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, a nephew of the Saudi king — son of the founding King of Saudi Arabia Abdul Aziz Al Saud, is already the second largest stakeholder in the News Corp., with 5.7 percent of the shares of the media company. The stake is held through Kingdom Holding. With surprisingly little media attention, Saudi Arabia has bought a stake in the company that owns what has been, until now, arguably its most visible and influential critic: the Fox News Network... In December 2005 Prince boasted about his ability to change what viewers see: "I picked up the phone and called Murdoch... (and told him) these are not Muslim riots, these are riots out of poverty. Within 30 minutes, the title was changed from Muslim riots to civil riots." ...Bin Talal is a big backer of Islamist organizations in the US, including the Islamic Society of North America, an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial, the largest terrorism financing trial in US history. It should also be noted that ISNA has been revealed to be a front for the Muslim Brotherhood, the original Jihadist organization Harvard University and Georgetown University have received $20 million donations from Prince bin Talal to finance Islamic studies. Yale University selected Muna Abu Sulayman, general secretary of the charitable foundation of Prince Alwaleed Bin Talal, as a world fellow for 2009. The Yale World Fellow Program seeks to build a network of global decision makers who have a fundamental, mutual understanding born of common experience and information. Ms. Muna Abu Sulayman is the daughter of Dr. AbdulHamid Abu Sulayman, one of the most important figures in the history of the global Muslim Brotherhood. Prince has also raised his stake in Citigroup to 5 percent in late 2008 from less than 4 percent in a move that came as the company was facing a possible collapse. His Kingdom Holding is the single largest shareholder in Citigroup. PS: 1987 Bill Ayers solicited Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour (a.k.a. Donald Warden — an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an outspoken enemy of Israel) to raise money for Obama's Harvard Law School education. At the time al-Mansour associate Percy Sutton was raising money for Obama's education, al-Mansour was the top financial advisor to mega-billionaire Prince Alwaleed (Alwalid) bin Talal of the Saudi royal family. 1988-1991 Obama attended Harvard Law School. http://www.campus-watch.org/article/id/8144
Steven Shamrak was involved in the Moscow Zionist movement. He worked as a construction engineer at the Moscow Olympic Games project and as a computer consultant in Australia. He has been publishing an Internet editorial letter about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001 and has a website www.shamrak.com. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com |
|
THE PALESTINIAN ARABS INVENT A RELIGIOUS CLAIM
Posted by Paul Rotenberg, February 23, 2010. |
|
Excerpted from: The Palestinian Authority and the Jewish Holy Sites in the West Bank: Rachel's Tomb as a Test Case by Nadav Shragai, No. 559, 22Kislev 5768/2December 2007 Nadav Shragai is the author of At the Crossroads, the Story of the Tomb of Rachel (Jerusalem Studies, 2005); The Mount of Contention, the Struggle for the Temple Mount, Jews and Muslims, Religion and Politics since 1967 (Keter, 1995); and "Jerusalem is Not the Problem, It is the Solution," in Mister Prime Minister: Jerusalem, ed. Moshe Amirav (Carmel and the Florsheimer Institute, 2005). He has been writing for the Israeli daily newspaper Ha'aretz since 1983. The Jerusalem Viewpoints series is published by the Institute for Contemporary Affairs, founded jointly with the Wechsler Family Foundation. See here. |
|
In 2000, after hundreds of years of recognizing the site as Rachel's Tomb, Muslims began calling it the "Bilal ibn Rabah mosque."[20] Members of the Wakf used the name first in 1996, but it has since entered the national Palestinian discourse. Bilal ibn Rabah was an Ethiopian known in Islamic history as a slave who served in the house of the prophet Muhammad as the first muezzin (the individual who calls the faithful to prayer five times a day).[21] When Muhammad died, ibn Rabah went to fight the Muslim wars in Syria, was killed in 642 CE, and buried in either Aleppo or Damascus.[22] The Palestinian Authority claimed that according to Islamic tradition, it was Muslim conquerors who named the mosque erected at Rachel's Tomb after Bilal ibn Rabah. The Palestinian claim ignored the fact that Ottoman firmans (mandates or decrees) gave Jews in the Land of Israel the right of access to the site at the beginning of the nineteenth century.[23] The Palestinian claim even ignored accepted Muslim tradition, which admires Rachel and recognizes the site as her burial place. According to tradition, the name "Rachel" comes from the word "wander," because she died during one of her wanderings and was buried on the Bethlehem road.[24] Her name is referred to in the Koran,[25] and in other Muslim sources, Joseph is said to fall upon his mother Rachel's grave and cry bitterly as the caravan of his captors passes by.[26] For hundreds of years, Muslim holy men (walis) were buried in tombs whose form was the same as Rachel's. Then, out of the blue, the connection between Rachel, admired even by the Muslims, and her tomb is erased and the place becomes "the Bilal ibn Rabah mosque." Well-known Orientalist Professor Yehoshua Porat has called the "tradition" the Muslims referred to as "false." He said the Arabic name of the site was "the Dome of Rachel, a place where the Jews prayed."[27] Only a few years ago, official Palestinian publications contained not a single reference to such a mosque. The same was true for the Palestinian Lexicon issued by the Arab League and the PLO in 1984, and for Al-mawsu'ah al-filastiniyah, the Palestinian encyclopedia published in Italy after 1996. Palestine, the Holy Land, published by the Palestinian Council for Development and Rehabilitation, with an introduction written by Yasser Arafat, simply says that "at the northwest entrance to the city [Bethlehem] lies the tomb of the matriarch Rachel, who died while giving life to Benjamin." The West Bank and Gaza — Palestine also mentions the site as the Tomb of Rachel and not as the Mosque of Bilal ibn Rabah.28 However, the Palestinian deputy minister for endowments and religious affairs has now defined Rachel's Tomb as a Muslim site.[29] On Yom Kippur in 2000, six days after the IDF withdrew from Joseph's Tomb, the Palestinian daily newspaper Al-Hayat al-Jadida published an article marking the next target as Rachel's Tomb. It read in part, "Bethlehem — 'the Tomb of Rachel,' or the Bilal ibn Rabah mosque, is one of the nails the occupation government and the Zionist movement hammered into many Palestinian cities....The tomb is false and was originally a Muslim mosque."[30] * * * Notes 20. Nadav Shragai, At the Crossroads, the Story of the Tomb of Rachel, Jerusalem Studies, 2005,(Al em ha-derekh, sipuro shel kever rachel, shaarim le-heker yerushalaim, 2005 pp. 230-1. 21. Danny Rubinstein, "The Slave and the Mother," Ha'aretz, October 9, 1996, and a private conversation with Orientalist Yoni Dehoah-Halevi. 22. Ibid. 23. Shragai, At the Crossroads, pp. 48-52; Miginzei Kedem, Documents and Sources from the Writings of Pinhas Name, ed. Yitzhak Beck (Yad Yitzhak Ben-Tzvi, 1977), pp. 30-32 (Teudot u-mekorot tokh kitvei Pinhas, Miginzei Kedem, Yad Yitzkah Ben-Tzvi, 1977, pp. 30-32). 24. Eli Schiller, The Tomb of Rachel (Ariel, 1977) (Kever Rachel, 1977), p. 18. 25. Ibid. 26. Ibid. 27. Yehoshua Porat, "Two Graves, Two Worlds," Ma'ariv, around the same time. 28. Islam adopted the same tactic regarding the Western Wall. Further information can be found in Dr. Berkowitz' book. He found that until the eleventh century Muslim scholars disagreed as to where the prophet Muhammad had tied al-Buraq, his winged horse, after his night ride. Some identified the place as the southern wall of the Temple Mount, others as the eastern wall, but none of them suggested any connection to the western wall, sacred to Judaism, called the Wailing Wall in the diaspora and the Western Wall in Hebrew. The claim was only made after the "Wall conflict" broke out between Jews and Muslims before the 1929 riots. During the riots of 1929, violence broke out in Jerusalem and on the Temple Mount. From there it spread to neighboring areas and hampered regular visits to Rachel's Tomb. In 1929 the Wakf demanded control over the tomb, claiming it was part of the neighboring Muslim cemetery. It also demanded to renew the old Muslim custom of purifying corpses in the tomb's antechamber (the structure added by Montefiori in 1841). 29. Shragai, At the Crossroads, p. 233. 30. Al-Hayat al-Jadida, October 8, 2000. 31. Christian sources identified the site as such almost two thousand years ago. For example, see the New Testament, Matthew 2:18. Paul Rotenberg lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact him at pdr@rogers.com |
|
PA DEMANDS CONTROL OVER HIGHWAY; ARABS/LEFTISTS FUMING AT
ISRAELI HERITAGE SITES; STEWARD PUNISHED — HE CALLED THE GULF "ARAB GULF"
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 23, 2010. |
|
P.A. DEMANDS JURISDICTION OVER HIGHWAY The Palestinian Authority (P.A.) plans to build a city of 200,000 and a highway in southern Samaria that would cross a highway used by residents of Jewish towns to get to the State of Israel. The highway mostly is in Area A, full P.A. control. The P.A. has asked Israel to give Area A status to the portion of its highway that presently is in Area B, P.A. administrative control and Israeli security control. Jewish residents of that Benjamin area worry that the new highway would become a source of terrorism, that along with the legal building would come, as usual, illegal building, that the new highway could be used to separate eastern Benjamin from western Benjamin, and that the Arabs have contiguity from Ramallah to Birzeit (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/22). The P.A. is waging jihad against Israel and is reviving the old civil war in Israel. In that civil war, the Arabs used to attack Israeli traffic and cut off entry to Israeli cities. They almost starved out the population of the New City of Jerusalem. Arab construction aims at baring the growth of Jewish areas and cutting them off, while complaining that Jewish construction would prevent Arab municipal expansion. Don't expect consistency. These strategic considerations by the Jewish residents of Benjamin are not idle ones.
ISRAEL ADDS TWO MAJOR SITES TO LIST OF ISRAELI NATIONAL HERITAGE SITES "PM gives in to pressure from Shas ministers, right-wing groups, lobbyists. The Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem will be included on the list of heritage sites marked for state renovation and preservation, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu declared at Sunday's cabinet meeting." Arabs rioted in Hebron, on hearing the news. They called it illegal under the Oslo accords. They rioted elsewhere, in addition. They commemorated the violent protests going on weekly at Bilin' Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA remarks that one should allow for a head of government not knowing of the original, mistaken decision, and should not assume it is permanent. PM Netanyahu did the right think in heading off the mistake (www.imra.org.il, 2/21.) The New York Timess describes the Cave of the Patriarchs as the burial site of Abraham, sacred to the three Abrahamic faiths (2/22). "Patriarchs" is plural. It is the traditional burial site of several other patriarchs and matriarchs of the Jewish people. As usual, the Arabs accuse Israel of violating agreements that the Arabs never honored in any significant way. They did not cite any clause banning the list and renovation. I find that they call something illegal simply as a way of condemning it. Illegality is what the Arabs practice constantly, as by rioting. PM Netanyahu should not have needed pressure to include two of the most important Jewish sites in his list. Interesting that there are few or no Arab historical sites there, just
Jewish and Christian, and the Christian ones refer to when the
majority were Jewish, Christianity originating out of Judaism.
ARAB AND LEFTIST REACTION TO ADDITIONS TO LIST OF ISRAELI HERITAGE SITES 
Here is how Maan News reported Palestinian Arab and leftist Israeli reaction to PM Netanyahu including the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron and Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem in Israeli national sites to be renovated. My reaction to the Arab reaction is in ellipses. 1, Their inclusion is described as unusual, Maan suggests, because neither is within the State of Israel. "'This is another attempt to blur the borders between the State of Israel and the occupied territories,' Meretz party chairman Chaim Oron told the Hebrew-language daily Yedioth Ahronoth." [There is no official border there, just an armistice line where the State of Israel ends and Judea-Samaria, a part of the Mandate never allocated to any state, begins. Never allocated, cannot be considered occupied.] [The distinction is blurred by some Israelis, whose road maps therefore were misleading and could get motorists lynched if they enter Arab-controlled areas unwittingly. The distinction is blurred by the Palestinian Authority (P.A.), which treats the whole area, the State of Israel as well as the territories, which are in the traditional Land of Israel, as "Palestine" and belonging to the Arabs.] [To interpret the inclusion of these two of the most important sites in Jewish history as an attempt to blur borders is paranoid. It reflects Meretz' desire to cede the sites, which is a political matter, whereas historical sites are a cultural one.] 2. "This announcement is an act of aggression against the cultural and religious rights of the Palestinian people," said Dr Hamdan Taha, director of the PA Tourism Ministry's antiquities department, in a telephone interview." [Having the same long-term history and culture as the other Arabs in the region, Palestinian Arabs are not a nationality with national rights. As for their religious traditions, Israel respects them and grants equal access to joint sites. When in power, the Muslims did not respect Jews' religious rights to sites, and out of power, they vow to bar Jews from the Cave of the Patriarchs. The Muslim inconsistency in this puts the sincerity of their objections into doubt. They would rather let the sites decay, as they had let the area around Temple Mount become a trash heap, when they controlled it.] [I think the term "national" confuses people. Westerners think "country" and "nation" are interchangeable, but "country" is a politically defined area whereas "nation" or "nationality" are ethnic. A nationality may be in part of a country and may be in or all of several countries. The Jewish nation has back part of its original country, but the rest of its national homeland is in the disputed Territories and in Jordan. Most Palestinian Arabs are of relatively recent immigrant stock and had little or no concept of nationality until even more recently, when they advanced it for purposes of jihad. They made up a history by denying Jewish history there. At the time of the Mandate, they identified themselves primarily as villagers and Muslims. (Radical Muslims do not believe in nationality). Some began to consider themselves Syrian. When the UN suggested a country be set up for them, they expressed little interest in it and great interest in smothering the Jewish country that the UN also suggested.] 3. "'Instead of making use of heritage to promote peace, it is being used as a means to promote war," Taha said, maintaining that the proposal's timing could not be discounted: 'This is clearly intended to obstruct the peace process.'" [Renovating religious and cultural sites does not obstruct a peace process, if any. Claiming that it does, and riling up the people, as by the Fatah strike mentioned below, does.] 4. "Also noting that the shrines in question are holy to many faiths, Taha insisted that Netanyahu's plan to designate them as Israeli heritage sites 'reflects an artificial history that solely serves Israel's settlement policy.'" [The Muslim Arabs used to recognize the predominant Jewish heritage in Israel and claim to the Temple Mount. Now they deny such history. They make up an artificial history, as by claiming that Jesus was a Palestinian. According to the Christian Testament, the Last Supper he attended was a Jewish seder. The Jewish Testament, which referred to those holy sites, was written more than a millennium before Islam arose. It is absurd to deny the Jewish connection to the whole country, affirmed by the League of Nations. I would not put it past the United Nations to dis-affirm the connection, but the difference is that the League was sincere and the UN largely is run by demagogues.] 5. Fatah declared a general strike for Monday, while Hebron's mayor, Kahled Al-Eseili, called on UNESCO to move quickly "to protect the Ibrahimi Mosque, prevent its desecration, and act against alterations to its features." [Renovation is not desecration. The Muslim Arabs are exclusivist about this. Israel is integrationist.]
STEWARD PUNISHED FOR CALLING THE GULF "ARABIAN GULF" Ancient Greek cartographers used the name, "Persian Gulf." Maps have followed suit, ever since. About half a century ago, Arabs demanded that it be called "Arab Gulf." A Greek steward on an Iranian airline did. Iran expelled him. It explained that the name, "Persian Gulf" is very important to it. The news brief states that such a controversy could inflame national pride to the point of war (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/21).
"TERRORISTS FROM BOTH THE FATAH AND HAMAS FACTIONS CONTINUE TO ATTACK ISRAELIS 
"Terrorists from both the Fatah and Hamas factions continue to attack Israelis despite a PA (Palestinian Authority)campaign to prove that its troops can successfully fight terrorism in Judea and Samaria." The P.A. informed the IDF of the location of a rocket launcher near Ben-Gurion Airport, before it could be fired. The P.A. claimed that the launcher belonged to Hamas. In the past two days, Arabs twice tried to run over Israeli soldiers. Near Bethlehem, Arabs were rioting, Israeli troops were called, Arabs opened fire on the troops, an Arab tried to run over the troops. The other incident occurred near Hebron. No injuries. Also near Hebron, Arab and leftist demonstrators attacked two Jewish youths at the Maon farm, on Monday. They required first aid (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/21).
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 and visit his website:
|
|
PARALLELS: KAHNAWAKE MOHAWKS AND JEWISH SETTLERS
Posted by Michael Devolin, February 23, 2010. |
|
Chief Dan George said, "When the white man came, we had the land and they had the bibles. Now they have the land and we have the bibles." One may read this statement and easily miss the sad truth found in the second sentence, which is the fact that we have continually imposed upon the Native peoples of Canada our non-Native culture and Christianity to the extent that they are left with not much more than the white man's culture and Christianity, or to borrow Chief Dan George's symbolism, our bibles. In a recent article in the Globe and Mail, Lysiane Gagnon excoriates the band council of Kahnawake Mohawks for their decree that all non-natives must leave the reserve south of Montreal. Obviously, Lysiane Gagnon is the typical opportunistic, Western journalist: not so concerned with the truth and the sensitivities of others as much as with having her slanderous drivel published in a national newspaper. She joins the usual throng of disconsolate do-gooders who have wilfully cast off the initiative required for preserving their own Canadian identity, and so now, as a cheap counterpoise to their lethargic existence, chooses instead to calumniate the Mohawk nation for protecting theirs. I see many parallels between the Mohawks' self-defence and preservation of their culture and their lands with that of the Jewish "settlers" of Israel and their self-defence and preservation of a culture and land-the habitation of which is a Torah-prescribed segment of their Torah observance. Just as the Mohawk tradition and culture pre-dates the religion of the Christian armies who invaded and wrested ownership of their land from them, so too Jewish culture and tradition pre-dates the religion of those Muslims who invaded Israel during the Islamic Arab invasion in the 7th century. Just as the Muslims of the present day are demanding that Jews faithful to the laws and traditions of their ancestors repudiate those same laws and traditions, so too Canadian non-natives, primarily media types, have recently demanded that Mohawks repudiate the laws and traditions of their ancestors and acquiesce to the dictates of these effete journalists by allowing non-natives to intermarry with Mohawks and thereafter live within the bounds of Mohawk territorial dominion. Mohawks have been forced to relinquish land, as when the Canadian government chose to build the St. Lawrence Seaway canal on Mohawk territory, a major construction project that consequently separated the residents of Kahnawake from the natural river shore. Likewise the Jews of Gaza have been forced from their homes and off their land by the Israeli government (at the behest of foreign governments half a world away) in order to allow Muslim fundamentalists to assume possession of those Jewish homes and Jewish land. Just as Mohawks are presently being told they cannot exist exclusively as Mohawks on Native land, so too Jewish settlers of the West Bank are being denied the right to exist exclusively as Jews on Jewish land. There is no law written (at least not outside those written to accommodate Islam's conquest of Jewish land or the white man's imposition of his culture upon native populations) that prohibits Mohawk or Jew from living on their ancestral lands respectively; nor is there any law written that prohibits Mohawk or Jew from bringing up their children according to their ancient traditions and laws respectively. Of course, the recent Canadian media frenzy about Kahnawake Mohawks commanding a defence of their ancient identity has been propagated by certain journalists, primarily Lysiane Gagnon of the Globe and Mail, as a protest against Mohawk "racism," as though Mohawks endeavouring to enhance a Mohawk consciousness is somehow prejudice. Natan Sharansky writes, "Identity can involve a person's connection with history. It can mean the desire to have children be part of this history, to educate them about a valued past so that it becomes part of their future." Another parallel shared by both Mohawk and Jew is the fact that their respective antagonists, whether Islamist or non-native, effete journalists like Lysiane Gagnon, refuse to publicly acknowledge the deeper history of both Mohawk and Jew. Perhaps these antagonists are avoiding these particular histories and the fact that their remembrance can prove beyond a doubt that neither Christianity nor Islam is in possession of laws and ethics that can equal or surpass those already taught to Mohawk and Jewish children. Michael Devolin is a Noachide; he is Director, Bnai Elim Canada.
Contact him at devolin@reach.net.
Read his columns on
|
|
NAPOLITANO SECRETLY HOSTS TERRORIST GROUPS IN D.C.
Posted by Midenise, February 23, 2010. |
|
This comes from Corruption Chronicles, a Judicial Watch Blog
(http://www.judicialwatch.org). |
|
In the Obama Administration's latest effort to befriend radical Muslims, the cabinet official in charge of protecting the country's safety covertly met with a group of extremist Arab, Muslim and Sikh organizations to discuss national security matters. Briefing radical Islamists who want to murder Americans about homeland security measures may seem like a bizarre tactic to counter terrorism, but it's the center of Obama's famous change rhetoric. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano, most concerned about a wave of anti-Muslim backlash after the Ft. Hood massacre, and her senior staff privately met in Washington D.C. with the groups. Among them was the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood, which is a sort of parent organization of Hamas and Al Qaeda. Not surprisingly, the mainstream media ignored the two-day event which was exclusively reported this week by an alternative internet news company that regularly breaks big stories. Napolitano actually spent and hour and a half briefing the Middle Easterners about the U.S. government's new "counter-radicalization" and "anti-terrorist" programs largely aimed at their followers. The top-secret event was part of President Obama's innovative program aimed at creating an information-sharing framework with Muslim organizations, even those with known extremist ties and terrorist connections. The idea, laughable as it may seem, is to win over Muslims and get them to collaborate with the U.S. government. Officially, the Department of Homeland Security billed the event as a low-key meeting with faith and community-based groups to brainstorm about ways to increase engagement, dialogue and information sharing. After all, the groups are key homeland security partners that contribute to American life and exemplify the diversity that is a hallmark of our country, the agency claimed in a press release. Strengthening partnerships with these groups will help the U.S. better prepare, assess and respond to threats, Napolitano assures. This is the same official whose biggest concern was preventing a wave of anti-Muslim sentiment in the United States after an Al Qaeda wannabe Army major went on a murderous rampage at the nation's largest military base. These are just some examples of the administration's push to befriend the enemy. Last month Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signed a special order — intended as a sign of respect to Muslims around the world — to allow the reentry of two radical Islamic academics whose terrorist ties have for years banned them from the U.S. Just this week Obama ordered the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) to focus on Muslim outreach and diplomacy, a rather unusual mission for the space agency. Contact Milton Franks-Lhermann at midenise@zahav. net.il |
|
THE ISRAELI HIGH COURT SHOWS ITS TRUE COLORS — AND THEY ARE NOT PRETTY
Posted by Manhigut Yehudit, February 23, 2010. |
|
It was reported yesterday that Israeli High Court Justice Yoram Danzinger was a Peace Now activist and yet did not recuse himself from participating in the High Court's recent deliberations on whether or not to support a Peace Now petition which would lead to the Israeli government destroying the home of fallen war hero Major Roi Klein among 16 other homes in Judea and Samaria. Justice Danzinger, who was called a "minor Peace Now activist" in a statement released by the High Court, voted last week in favor of Peace Now's petition to order the destruction of the homes. Major Klein, a "religious Zionist", was killed when he jumped on a grenade during the 2nd Lebanon War in 2006 in order to save the lives of the men under his command. He posthumously received Israel's second highest medal, the Medal of Valor. Major Klein's widow and young children live in Samaria in a home targeted by Peace Now's campaign to destroy the Jewish connection to the Land of Israel by destroying Jewish homes in our biblical heartland and handing over the land that these homes sit on to the Arab enemy. Manhigut Yehudit officials declare that not a single Jewish home in Judea and Samaria should be destroyed whether it is of a war hero or not. The leftist, anti-Jewish Israeli High Court choosing to destroy the home of Major Klein shows that it is fighting head-on against who it sees as Israel's main enemy — namely Jews who are attached to the Land of Israel and to G-d, and who participate in the political system of the country. The fact that the ideologically homogeneous leftist High Court, whose members are virtually elected by the sitting justices themselves, allowed a jurist with a clear history of prejudice to participate in deciding a case shows the tremendous bias of this court, and the need for it to be reformed immediately to reflect the will of the "traditional Jewish-leaning" Israeli public. Manhigut Yehudit calls for said immediate reform, focusing on transparency and adherence to the rule of law in Israel where Jewish principles are supposed to take precedence over secular principles in case of a conflict between the two. The selection process must be changed so that the court will be filled with justices who will adhere to this concept. 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) |
|
A DAY DREAM AT THE SEA
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, February 23, 2010. |
|
|
|
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il. Go
to |
|
GUARDIAN'S FLAGSHIP BLOG REEKS OF ANTISEMITISM
Posted by Susana K-M, February 22, 2010. |
| This was written by Jonathan Hoffman and was published in JC.com yesterday. Monitoring and exposing antisemitism on the Guardian newspaper's 'Comment is Free' blog. |
|
Exactly why is this website different from all other websites? That was the question posed by a commenter on the Guardian's flagship blog "Comment is Free" (CiF) last week in response to the suggstion by a number of commenters on the thread that the call by Jenny Tonge for the IDF to investigate organ harvesting in Haiti was manufactured by the Jewish media cabal to smear Tonge. That whiff, or perhaps more accurately, stench, of antisemitism is something which is ever present in "Comment is Free" threads that deal with Israel and Jewish-related subjects. In a typical comment thread on the Israel/Palestinian conflict, you'll encounter analogies to Nazi Germany and apartheid South Africa, claims that Zionism is a racist ideology, accusations that Israel ethnically cleanses the indigenous inhabitants of Palestine and that the nefarious Israel lobby wields untold control over US and UK foreign policy. Any pro-Israel commenter will tell you that the minute that they espouse a position in support of Israel, they are cyber-mobbed by a group of virulently anti-Israel commenters parroting the familiar tropes of the anti-Israel narrative. And if you decide to stick around long enough you'll discover that comments which don't quite fit what we at CiF Watch call the "Guardian World View", such as those comments that cite excerpts from the Hamas Charter, are summarily deleted. CiFWatch is replete with examples. It is against this backdrop that Professor Geoffrey Alderman has joined a long list of pro-Israel commenters who have been banned from posting. But to really understand what goes on "below the line" in the comment threads, you have to understand what diet of hate commenters are being fed by the "above the line" Guardian-commissioned articles. "Comment is Free" regularly features articles that portray Israel as the equivalent of apartheid South Africa. For example, Ben White, author of "Israeli Apartheid: A Beginners' Guide" and an apologia for Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial, is a regular columnist. Other regulars include Seth Freedman and Antony Lerman, both part of a vocal minority of anti-Zionist Jews that find a welcome home in the Guardian. The former recently wrote a despicable article using Israel's heroic efforts in Haiti as a stick with which to beat Israel for the travails of Gaza, the latter an article denying that a Pat Oliphant cartoon making analogies between Israel and Nazi Germany was antisemitic. The Guardian has even commissioned articles on more than one occasion from Hamas members including Khalid Mish'al and supporters of the one-state solution, such as Ali Abunimah of the virulently anti-Israel Electronic Intifada, are given a platform. Dig a little deeper and you'll learn that "Comment is Free" allowed Peter Oborne to publicise his infamous documentary prior to its airing on Channel 4 — followed by a ringing endorsement from Antony Lerman — and Victoria Brittain was given a platform to spread unsubstantiated claims that Israel was causing blue baby syndrome among Gazans through poisoning of the water — a modern day blood libel if there was ever one. Sure "Comment is Free" may occasionally publish the odd token pro-Israel article — so that it can trumpet the claim of "balance" — and may even ratchet up the frequency of these articles when there is increased scrutiny — as happened two weeks ago. However one cannot ignore the fact that the overwhelming number of articles are, in varying degrees, anti-Israel in their bias. And what are we to make of the case of Isabella Mackie (aka BellaM) who is a CiF moderator and daughter of none other than Guardian chief editor, Alan Rusbridger, engaging in an ad hominem attack on Melanie Phillips, in contravention of the Guardian's talk policy? Even worse, what about the more recent case of a commenter going by the moniker of "William Bapthorpe" who advocated the slaughter of West Bank Jews down to "every last man, woman and child"? Though this comment was deleted, Matt Seaton, editor of "Comment is Free", brazenly refused to ban "Bapthorpe". It was only after wider publicity of the affair through CiF Watch and a police complaint that some two weeks later Seaton bowed to pressure and banned "Bapthorpe". So when Matt Seaton says "[w]e take all forms of hate speech extremely seriously, especially antisemitism, and we work hard to delete offensive postings rapidly" how can we take what he says seriously? K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
UN AFGHANISTAN REPORT: UN BLAMES TERRORISTS FOR CIVILIAN CASUALTIES —
UNLIKE STANDARDS USED FOR ISRAEL
Posted by David Bedein, February 22, 2010. |
|
Why are Afghan civilian casualties considered "accidents" while Palestinian civilian casualties are "war crimes"? |
|
A little-noticed "United Nations' Annual Report on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict", issued in January, which absolved allied coalition forces of culpability for civilian casualties in the almost decade long war against Taliban terror groups in Afghanistan. According to the report issued by the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan, at least "5,978 civilians were killed and injured in 2009, the highest number of civilian casualties recorded since the fall of the Taliban regime in 2001." The United Nations report asserted that the rising death toll there was due to the Taliban terror group's suicide attacks and explosive roadside devices placed by the Taliban. The UN report explained that the Taliban frequently attacked coalition forces in densely populated areas and did not blame the United States army or its allies for deaths of civilians who were non combatants who live near the areas from where Taliban launched its attacks, using the civilian areas as a collective human shield. The UN Afghanistan report stands in stark contrast to a recent report issued by a United Nations' Human Rights Council's investigative team, headed by Judge Richard Goldstone, a South African judge, which conducted an inquiry into Israel's January 2009 three week military incursion into the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. The Goldstone Report discussed "eleven incidents in which Israeli forces launched direct attacks against civilians with lethal outcome... in which the facts indicate no justifiable military objective pursued by the attack." These UN allegations of war crimes by the Israeli Defense Forces have been vociferously protested by Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has gone so far as to call the Goldstone report a "strategic threat," saying that it hampers the ability of democracies to fight terrorism and to engage in asymmetrical warfare. A senior Israeli government official said that Israel is held to a different standard than other countries in international forums. In direct contrast to the Goldstone Report from the same United Nations, the UN holds the Taliban terrorists directly responsible for collateral deaths in Afghanistan, at the same time that the UN alleges that Israel engages in "intentional attacks against the civilian population and civilian objects," even though Hamas terrorists openly use homes, schools, hospitals and mosques as their protective place of operation. Unlike Afghanistan, the UN blames Israel — not Hamas — for collateral deaths, injuries and damage to non combatants. The United Nations even suggests that Israel must award reparations to the population of the Gaza Strip, a territory ruled by an internationally recognized terrorist organization. The United Nations Afghanistan report, on the other hand, noted that coalition forces have been attempting to minimize civilian casualties in Afghanistan, saying that "International military forces did take strategic and specific steps to minimize civilian casualties in 2009," In summarizing its findings, the Afghanistan Annual Report on Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict found the "declared strategy of prioritizing the safety and security of civilians is a welcome development." By the same token, the report laid the blame on the Taliban for causing Afghan civilian deaths, drawing the conclusion that "the inability or unwillingness of the armed opposition to take measures that pre-empt and reduce the harm that their tactics entail for civilians translates into a growing death toll and an ever larger proportion of the total number of civilian dead." Significantly, more non-combatants have been injured or killed in Afghanistan by allied troops than by IDF forces in Gaza. A former British commander in Afghanistan, Col. Richard Kemp, told the BBC that he did "not think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more effort to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the [Israel Defense Forces] is doing... in Gaza." However, a career diplomat with years of experience at the United Nations, noted that it is no surprise that the United Nations uses a different standard to judge Israel. The diplomat mentioned that the UN defined the Sri Lankan-Tamil conflict as an "internal matter", and that the UN turned a blind eye to the brutal tactics used by the Sri Lankan army, when it finally crushed the 25 year Tamil terrorist rebellion only last year, causing the deaths of thousands of terrorists and non combatants who were slaughtered by Sri Lankan Government forces in the final stages of the conflict. David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency. (http://Israelbehindthenews.com). He is president of Center for Near East Policy Research. Contact him by email at media@actcom.co.il |
|
WHO IS RASHAD HUSSAIN?
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, February 22, 2010. |
|
When Cal Thomas makes the following observation through the eyes of an old pro in the fashion of honest journalism, you can make book on it. Cal Thomas comes from the era when accurate journalism was the goal and the norm. Regrettably, many of today's journalists are politically Left Liberal leaning journalists, acting just like a political party to protect President Barack Hussein Obama from his own policies. Clearly, Obama has an agenda which is demonstrably Left Leaning and pro-Islam, no matter how great the threat that radical Islam poses for America, the countries of the Free West and America's allies. The Rashad Hussain matter is only a small peek hole into Obama's, under-the-radar practice, and Obama's plans to assist and stimulate Islamic expansion into America and globally as the radical "Jihadists" aim to create a Global Caliphate for Islam. This was written by Cal Thomas and it appeared in the Jerusalem Connection
|
|
President Obama's appointment of Rashad Hussain, his deputy associate counsel, as special envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the second largest inter-governmental organization after the United Nations, charged with safeguarding and protecting "the interests of the Muslim world," should be of serious concern to Congress and the American public. Especially since Hussain, a devout Muslim, has a history of participating in events connected with the Muslim Brotherhood, according to the Chicago Tribune, "the world's most influential Islamic fundamentalist group" whose goal is to create Muslim states throughout the world. In 1991, a memo written by Mohamed Akram for the Shura Council of the Muslim Brotherhood spelled out the objective of the organization. Akram said the Muslim Brotherhood "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." I am unable to find any "revelation" that has repealed that objective. Quite the contrary. Terrorists seem on track for implementing it. The president proudly announced that Hussain is a Hafiz, someone who has completely memorized the Qur'an, but he did not spell out what qualifies Hussain to meet with foreign leaders at a diplomatic level in a role that approximates that of an ambassador. According to Jihad Watch, a blog directed by American author Robert Spencer, which "aims to bring to public attention the role of jihad theology and ideology in the modern world," Hussain's ties to the Muslim Brotherhood date back to his days at Yale Law School. Ask yourself: If you or your group were interested in damaging or destroying the United States, wouldn't infiltration at every possible level of government and culture be an effective strategy? You would build your schools and mosques, some of which teach and preach Jihad; you would penetrate the government; you would demand special rights because of your religion — such as no body scanners for Muslim travelers at airports and prayer rooms and foot washing facilities at shopping malls; you would seek to change the foreign policy of the United States because you hate Israel and all Jews (and those "cross-worshiping" Christians) and you would dare the U.S. government to monitor your speeches and associations because you want to keep America's guard lower than it would be for, say, a spy from communist China. This was roughly the plot of the creepy movie, "The Manchurian Candidate" in which a crazed woman uses her brainwashed son to help her overthrow the U.S. government so that she might impose her ideology on the country. Unlike the film, this plot is real. As expected, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, described as America's largest Muslim civil liberties organization, is thrilled with Hussain's appointment. In a statement, CAIR said Hussain "will be in a position to strengthen positive outreach to the Islamic world and will be able to provide the president with direct access to the views and concerns of Muslims worldwide." Is there anyone in the dark about those "views and concerns"? Haven't they been pretty obvious for the last, oh, 40 years? Don't they regularly tell us in their newspaper editorials, TV commentaries, sermons and actions? In an age of terrorism when the president's own chief counterterrorism adviser, John Brennan, compares released terrorists who return to Jihad with released American criminals who return to crime, it is unsettling to see someone with Hussain's background representing the United States to nations that may harbor or fund terrorists and want to destroy Israel and America. Franklin Roosevelt would not have named Charles Lindbergh, a suspected Nazi sympathizer, personal envoy to Berlin. It is unfortunate that the U.S. Senate is not required to confirm special envoys. Hussain should be asked about his ideology and associations. If he is to represent America, he should represent what America stands for and not a personal ideological or religious agenda that is not just un-American, but anti-American. 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@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH USA READY TO DECLARE WAR AGAINST ISRAEL
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, February 22, 2010. |
|
This is from the Simon Wiesenthal Center, 2009 Simon Wiesenthal Center 1399 South Roxbury, Los Angeles, CA 90035. (310) 553-9036 |
|
A group of activists hostile to Israel, including theologians and others in some prominent Protestant churches have launched a dangerous campaign to use theology to delegitimize the Jewish State and her supporters. They may be only days away from putting the policy of a large Protestant denomination on a collision course with Israel's survival — unless we raise our voices in protest. This comes just as Israel's right to defend her citizens is denounced as 'war crimes and crimes against humanity' by the UN's Goldstone Report; when Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon was verbally attacked at Oxford University with chants of "Slaughter the Jews"; and when screaming Muslim "activists" tried to silence or censor the speech by Israel's Ambassador to the United States, Michael Oren, at the University of California, Irvine. In 2004, The Presbyterian Church in the US (PCUSA) became the first mainline Protestant denomination to approve a policy of divestment from Israel. Unpopular with church members, it was later rescinded. But in 2008, church leaders supposedly seeking to balance PCUSA'a Middle East policies, instead, created a committee dominated by seven activists holding strong anti-Israel beliefs. The lone member sympathetic to Israel, quit in protest when he saw their radical agenda. Here's what we know about their report from a press release leaked by the committee last month:
Adoption of this poisonous document by the Presbyterian Church will be nothing short of a declaration of war on Israel and her supporters. It will be negatively impact interfaith relations, and could have significant repercussions in the political domain, with 46 Members of the US Congress and Senate who are Presbyterians. And these initiatives, encouraged by the Geneva-based World Council of Churches, will cause a ripple effect on other denominations. Which is why we urgently ask you to do two things:
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
REPORTING FICTION AS FACT
Posted by Naomi Ragen, February 22, 2010. | |
|
Friends, It's disgusting that the BBC and other British news outlets are making up stories about the participation of Israelis and Jews in the assassination of al- Mabhouh in Dubai. If they were involved, they should get a Nobel Prize for Peace. But no one has proved that. The fact that this venal terrorist had five foreign passports doesn't seem to interest anyone, as Tom Gross points out. My thanks to Tom Gross for this information and for everything he does to make sure the truth has a fighting chance in the quagmire that is British "journalism." This below was written by Tom Gross. Naomi | |
|
We all know that journalists (including some at highly-regarded newspapers) often makes things up, but rarely have we witnessed such a mix of misinformation, disinformation and innuendo passed off as fact, as we have in recent days in the reports dealing with the death of Hamas terrorist Mahmoud Mabhouh. (Some of this admittedly can be attributed to the complete failure of the Israeli government — whether or not Israel had anything to do with the matter — to provide an effective response to the media.) For example, the story in yesterday's (London) Sunday Telegraph that British immigrants to Israel had their passports removed and copied at passport control at Tel Aviv airport, is highly implausible. Passports are not taken from immigrants at Tel Aviv airport. This has never been the practice. I have checked with several recent immigrants and they have confirmed that this is not so. The Telegraph story, written by a London-based correspondent, has all the signs of being planted by anti-Israel elements at the British Foreign Office (of which there are many — witness, for example, the reinstatement last year of Rowan Laxton, a high-ranking diplomat and "Middle East expert" at the British Foreign Office, even after a London court had found him guilty of racially aggravated harassment for saying "F**king Israelis, F**king Jews... they should be wiped off the face of the earth" in a crowded London gym). But other media lapped up the Telegraph story. For example, Sky News ran it all day yesterday on its ticker tape at the foot of the screen, probably doing great damage to future British tourism to Israel by falsely reporting that British passports would be removed and copied at Ben Gurion airport. (Among other nonsense published in The Sunday Telegraph yesterday was the
claim that "Tzipi Livni, the head of the opposition Kadima Party in Israel,
was another Mossad high-flier. She was posted to Paris as a kidon, carrying
out ruthless operations against Arab terrorists." See the second note here:
MAKING THINGS UP? Even worse was the story in yesterday's London Sunday Times by its notoriously unreliable reporter Uzi Mahnaimi, claiming that the paper had evidence that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had personally ordered the hit on Mabhouh, and even providing quotes attributed to Netanyahu when he supposedly gave such orders. The Sunday Times story was then splashed all day as the lead story on the websites of papers like Ha'aretz, which is so full of contempt for the elected government of Israel that it will publish almost anything to paint Netanyahu in a bad light. A comparable motive is true in Britain in the case of The Daily Mail, who were determined to attack Gordon Brown's government and thus on Friday published an anonymous story (without any author's byline, or quoted persons in it) claiming that the British government "knew in advance that Israel was going to use British passports". The Daily Mail claimed in its story that they had been told this by a serving member of the Mossad. Again, this is virtually inconceivable since serving members of the Mossad do not speak to journalists but The Daily Mail's report was treated seriously and rebroadcast around the world as lead item by major TV stations. Even The New York Times and International Herald Tribune got in on the act on Friday, telling readers that Israel has engaged in 40 Dubai-type assassinations in recent years — again claims made without a shred of evidence, and highly unlikely to be true. The French media have also regurgitated the stories of the British media, leading to French Prime Minister François Fillon, who was in Syria this weekend, to declare — in front of President Assad of all people! — "we are against this form of assassination; whoever orders them should be punished. Like the British and the Germans we have asked Israeli authorities to explain themselves." IGNORING THEIR OWN COUNTRIES' "MURDERS" At the same time that they blamed Israel, these very same British and American media made very little of the fact that every day last week their own governments killed terrorists in Afghanistan (and elsewhere). Given the level of censorship they are imposing on their Afghan coverage (censorship that news broadcasters like the BBC fail to tell viewers about), they almost never mention the civilians their armies are killing. (The almost three dozen civilians — mainly women and children — killed by a NATO strike yesterday are being reported in some media, but similar strikes last week were largely ignored by the same media so eager to paint the death of a leading Hamas terrorist as some kind of "master crime". Preliminary reports indicate that Dutch forces were in charge of the area where the civilians died yesterday, but instead EU foreign ministers are preparing today to condemn Israel, not Holland.) (Having milked all it could out of its reports in recent days that British citizens' passports were used, The Times of London's main online world news headline today reads "Dubai hit squad 'used diplomatic passports'" — which is the opposite of what The Times was claiming last week.) Mabhouh had five different passports with him in Dubai: there seems to be no media coverage or interest in which countries' passports he was using. NOTHING KNOWN FOR CERTAIN ABOUT MABHOUH'S DEATH The governments of Jordan and Egypt (where Mabhouh previously spent a year in prison in 2003) had sought Mabhouh for some time. Some Arab media have reported that the operation against Mabhouh may have been carried out by a rival Palestinian group and the photographed individuals have nothing to do with it. Indeed it is not even clear that the nine photographs that the Dubai authorities have released to the media actually portray real people. (Have they been heavily retouched, for example? Is each one a composite of several faces?) The photos have been shown repeatedly in news broadcasts and plastered on the front page of newspapers around the world in the last 48 hours [it is now almost a week], but not a single person has come forward to say they recognize any of them, even from high school days, despite front page headlines such as Israel's Ma'ariv newspaper saying "If you recognize any of these people, call us". (Even if Israel was responsible for Mabhouh's death, it doesn't mean the photos produced by Dubai had anything to do with it. Almost no one is questioning whether this evidence is really evidence at all.) Unlike the anti-Israeli elements of the Western media that have rushed to blame Israel (creating a public furor and thereby forcing the hands of the British, Irish and French governments to summon their respective Israeli ambassadors), the Arab media are suggesting that the truth is far more complicated. For example, the Arab world's leading and arguably its most reliable newspaper, Al Sharq Alawsat, ran these stories:
WAS THIS DOUBLE-BLUFF, TRIPLE-BLUFF, BLIND MAN'S-BLUFF? Nice job, shame about the syrups
When it was reported that Mossad had stolen the identities of British passport holders to carry out a covert operation in Dubai, it didn't add up. Why would Israeli intelligence implicate British Jews living in Israel? And given that Mossad has access to the most sophisticated assassination techniques in the world, why were the alleged assassins wearing the kind of ill-fitting nylon wigs and comedy moustaches last seen being sported by bank robbers in The Sweeney, circa 1975? None of it makes sense outside of the kaleidoscope universe of Middle East espionage. Was this double-bluff, triple-bluff, blind man's-bluff? Even one of the men who had his identity stolen doesn't believe it was Mossad. I shouldn't think we'll ever know, which suits everyone involved. The diplomatic 'row' between Britain and Israel is a dog-and pony show, which will soon blow over. Ultimately, whoever killed him, a notorious terrorist is dead. Works for me. --------------------------------------------------------------- THE BBC "SHOULD EXAMINE THIS DISGRACEFUL TRANSMISSION, APOLOGIZE TO JEWS AND REMOVE FROM ITS ARCHIVE THE SLANDEROUS WORDS" BBC blasted for 'bigoted fear-mongering'
The New York-based American Jewish Committee blasted the BBC on Sunday for airing an accusation that Jews around the world assist in supposed Mossad assassinations. The AJC said in a statement that it was "dismayed that a guest on BBC Radio 4 was allowed to state unchallenged" that the Mossad relies on Jews for assassination plots. "This baseless accusation crosses every red line between legitimate public discussion and bigoted fear-mongering," said AJC executive director David Harris. "In less than a minute, the BBC has cast a shadow on the lives of Jews worldwide." BBC Radio 4's PM program interviewed Gordon Thomas, author of Gideon's Spies, a book about the Mossad, about the January 20 assassination of Hamas military commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai. Local authorities and many international media outlets believe that the killing of Mabhouh, who bought rockets for Hamas forces in the Gaza Strip, was carried out by the Mossad. In explaining the Mossad's operating methods outside Israel, Thomas told PM host Eddie Mair, "They have a whole backup system called 'asylum.' These are people, local residents, Jewish people, who help the Mossad. It is estimated to be in the world about half a million; some people say a million; I tend to say it's about half a million, all of them Mossad people." "Of course, Mr. Thomas is irresponsible in making such unfounded assertions on a radio program heard around the world," said Harris, "but even more shocking is BBC, a premier public broadcaster with a far-reaching global network. How can the interviewer allow such aspersions to be cast on a community without the reporter calling the so-called expert to order?" The comments also drew condemnation from observers of the BBC. "Unfortunately, such ugly and nonsensical statements on the BBC come as no surprise. The BBC often handpicks interviewees who are likely to say such things as part of a wider pattern to demonize the State of Israel," said Tom Gross, a former Middle East correspondent for The Sunday Telegraph and a Middle East analyst who has long been critical of BBC coverage of the region. The AJC called on the BBC "to examine this disgraceful transmission, apologize to Jews around the world and remove from its archive the slanderous words." Reached for comment, the BBC press office in London said, "This interview was part of a wider piece about the assassination of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh which involved contributions from a number of people including Gordon Thomas, an author of a book about [the] Mossad. "The sentiments expressed by Gordon Thomas were clearly his own opinions. They came at the end of the interview when it was being wrapped up and there was no time to come back on them." --------------------------------------------------------------- [Tom Gross adds: Last night, in a speech in London, former senior British army officer Col Richard Kemp, who was a commander in Afghanistan, said international media including the BBC are being exploited by "dark forces" who want to harm Israel and were "motivated by anti-Semitism".] --------------------------------------------------------------- "AMID ALL THE EXCITABLE NONSENSE BEING TALKED ABOUT DEAD HAMAS COMMANDER MAHMOUD AL-MABHOUH I THINK THE BBC HAS TOPPED THE LOT" BBC broadcast: 'One million Jews help Mossad'
Amid all the excitable nonsense being talked about dead Hamas commander Mahmoud al-Mabhouh I think the BBC has topped the lot. In an interview broadcast on Radio 4's PM programme last night broadcast (at 17:35 mins) one interviewee explained that up to one million Jews worldwide might be on hand to assist Mossad in executions. That would mean about one in every dozen Jewish people worldwide is a secret assistant to assassins. Now I must have more than a dozen or so Jewish friends. So which is it? Maybe I know two? It makes you think doesn't it? The next time I am at a friend's child's bar mitzvah the likelihood is that on at least 10 separate occasions during the day I'll be helping myself at the buffet beside, or dancing opposite, someone who secretly helps in assassinations. Which will certainly make me more circumspect about my dance moves, not to mention barging in at the buffet queue. Most people are terrible at keeping secrets, and Jews are no different from anyone else in this regard. So the idea that up to a million of them keep this secret knowledge strikes me as not just one of the most ridiculous, but in the present climate one of the most dangerous, ideas for the BBC to pump into circulation. Yet it typical of the lather nearly all the press have got into with this Dubai business. If anyone is interested in a more balanced and factual view of things, can I
heartily recommend the indispensable Tom Gross here
*** Thank you too to all the other journalist subscribers to this list who also
linked to my previous Dubai dispatch, such as Stephanie Gutmann on The Daily
Telegraph website
--------------------------------------------------------------- "OBVIOUSLY IT WOULD HAVE BEEN BETTER TO CAPTURE HIM AND SUBJECT HIM TO JUDICIAL JUSTICE. BUT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO DO SO, ESPECIALLY IN DUBAI." If Israel killed Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, did it have the right to?
If Israel killed Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, Did It Have the Right To? I don't know whether Israel did or did not assassinate the leader of the Hamas military wing, Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. But assuming for argument's sake that the Mossad made the hit, did it have the right to engage in this "extrajudicial assassination?" Not all extrajudicial killings are unlawful. Every soldier who kills an enemy combatant engages in an extrajudicial killing, as does every policeman who shoots a fleeing felon. There are several complex legal questions involved in assessing these situations. First, was the person who was killed a combatant, in relation to those killed him? If Israel killed Mabhouh, there can be absolutely no doubt that he was a combatant. He was actively participating in an ongoing war by Hamas against Israeli civilians. Indeed, it is likely that he was killed while on a military mission to Iran in order to secure unlawful, anti-personnel rockets that target Israeli civilians. Both the United States and Great Britain routinely killed such combatants during the Second World War, whether they were in uniform or not. Moreover, Hamas combatants deliberately remove their uniforms while engaged in combat. So if the Israeli Air Force had killed Mabhouh while he was in Gaza, there would be absolutely no doubt that their action would be lawful. It does not violate international law to kill a combatant, regardless of where the combatant is found, whether he is awake or asleep and whether or not he is engaged in active combat at the moment of his demise. But Mabhouh was not killed in Gaza. He was killed in Dubai. It is against the law of Dubai for an Israeli agent to kill a combatant against Israel while he is in Dubai. So the people who engaged in the killing presumptively violated the domestic law of Dubai, unless there is a defense to such a killing based on international principles regarding enemy combatants. It is unlikely that any defense would be available to an Israeli or someone working on behalf of Israel, since Dubai does not recognize Israel's right to kill enemy combatants on its territory. If it could be proved that Israel was responsible for the hit — an extremely unlikely situation — then only Dubai could lawfully bring Israelis to trial. They would not be properly subjected to prosecution before an international tribunal. But what if a suspect was arrested in England, the United States or some other western country and Dubai sought his extradition? That would pose an interesting legal, diplomatic, political and moral dilemma. Traditional extradition treaties do not explicitly cover situations of this kind. This was not an ordinary murder. It was carried out as a matter of state policy as part of an ongoing war. A western democracy would certainly have the right and the power to refuse to extradite. But they might decide, for political or diplomatic reasons, to turn the person over to Dubai. Turning now to the moral considerations, which might influence a decision whether to extradite, the situation is even murkier. The Goldstone report suggests that Israel cannot lawfully fight Hamas rockets by wholesale air attacks. Richard Goldstone, in his interviews, has suggested that Israel should protect itself from these unlawful attacks by more proportionate retail measures, such as commando raids and targeted killing of terrorists engaged in the firing of rockets. Well, there could be no better example of a proportionate, retail and focused attack on a combatant who was deeply involved in the rocket attacks on Israel, than the killing of Mahmoud al-Mabhouh. Not only was Mabhouh the commander in charge of Hamas' unlawful military actions at the time of his death, he was also personally responsible for the kidnapping and coldblooded murder of two Israeli soldiers several years earlier. Obviously it would have been better if he could have been captured and subjected to judicial justice. But it was impossible to capture him, especially when he was in Dubai. If Israel was responsible for the killing, it had only two options: to let him go on his way and continue to endanger Israeli civilian lives by transferring unlawful anti-personnel weapons from Iran to Gaza, or to kill him. There was no third alternative. Given those two options, killing seems like the least tragic choice available. I leave to others, more expert in these matters, whether if Israel ordered the killing, it was strategically the right thing, or whether they carried it off in an intelligent manner. But as to the legal and moral right to end the threat posed by this mass murderer, the least bad alternative would seem to be his extrajudicial killing. --------------------------------------------------------------- "IT'S FASCINATING TO WATCH THE WORLD TRY TO TURN THE DUBAI ASSASSINATION INTO A DEBACLE FOR ISRAEL" A Dubai Victory
It's fascinating to watch the world try to turn the Dubai assassination into a debacle for Israel — all because the team members were captured on CCTV and the British and Irish authorities are making a momentary stink about the use of forged British and Irish passports. You, the reader of this post, will be captured on CCTV a dozen times today simply going about your business. The people calling the operation "sloppy" and a "debacle" seem to actually believe that the Mossad is unaware that there are video cameras in airports and hotels today, or that the passport photos of the agents would not be revealed to the public. Really. More important, the fact of the matter is that the team got into Dubai, rubbed out a bad guy, and got out. No drama, nobody was captured, and nobody knows the real identities of the team or where they are now. Given the extraordinary risk and complexity of the operation, that's a win in my book. And now the Iranians, Syrians, and their terrorist clients have been given another reminder that their people aren't safe anywhere — even in the heart of the Arab world. And as for the people who are whining about "passport fraud" misdemeanors while ignoring the felony staring them in the face: what do you say about the fact that the terrorist in charge of illegally smuggling missiles from Iran to Hamas apparently had an open invite to hang out in Dubai? This isn't a problem? The Israelis either deal with high-level terrorists discreetly, or they
leave them alone to go about their work, which means more and better arms in
Gaza and Lebanon, which means a more destructive war down the road for the
Arabs who live in these combat zones. Those who are pretending to be
scandalized by the Dubai assassination tend to be the same people who
pretend to care deeply about Palestinian civilians. I wonder if they're
aware of their own hypocrisy.
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.
|
|
PA DEMANDS: GIVE US LAND FOR HIGHWAY
Posted by Hillel Fendel, February 22, 2010. |
|
"We're building a highway, so give us some Israeli-controlled land." This is the latest demand made by the PA of Israel, following the start of construction on a new PA city in the heart of southern Shomron (Samaria). The new city — the first planned city in PA-controlled areas — is to be located between the Jewish communities of Shilo and Ateret, just west of the major Highway 60 leading from Nazareth to Be'er Sheva. The name of the new town is Rawabi, meaning Hills, and is designed to house between 25,000 and 40,000 Arab residents in its first stage — and 200,000 when it is completed. It is a private enterprise, with funding from Qater and businessman Bashar Massar of Shechem (Nablus). The new city is to be located some nine kilometers north of Ramallah, between the Arab villages of Atara and Jiljilya. The closest Jewish community is Ateret, and residents there are duly concerned. "As of now, there is Arab contiguity from Ramallah to Birzeit," a leading resident of Ateret told Israel National News, "and this essentially breaks up the Binyamin Regional Council into eastern and western halves. Building an Arab city, of course, deepens this split." "The four-lane highway that the PA wishes to build in the direction of Ramallah will have to cross our main artery, Road 465, which is the main highway used by residents of Beit El, Ofrah, and other parts of eastern Binyamin to reach central Israel." Ateret is a growing Jewish town, despite the difficulties. It has grown in the past six years from 55 families to 100, and more are scheduled to be moving in this coming summer. The "construction freeze" caught the town as it was about to build a new neighborhood. One of its main attractions is the musical yeshiva high school Kinor David. Israel Had No Say In effect, Israel had no say in the construction of the city, as it is being built in what the Olso Accords denote as Areas A (full PA control) and B (PA administrative control, Israeli security control). The planned highway between Rawabi and Ramallah, too, passes almost exclusively in these areas — except for a short stretch around Highway 465. Israel Not Agreeing to Give Land for Highway — So Far The PA has asked Israel to grant Area A status to that stretch, but Israel's defense establishment is not in favor, in order not to detach western Binyamin from eastern Binyamin. However, the paving of the road will apparently receive Israeli permission — though as of now the PA is refusing to pave the highway, or even to request permission to do so, until Israel agrees to place the planned route in Area A. Whose Land? Another issue is that of land ownership and use. With the permission of the Civil Administration, and the active cooperation of the Jewish National Fund, forestland has been planted practically up to the borders of Ateret. "And we know that where there is legal building, there is also illegal building," an Ateret source said, "and we see that this is beginning already. In addition to taking land that could be used for Jewish growth, this is a security danger as well." A highly-placed source in Ateret said he has heard that the PA highway will pass under Road 465, and not over, "but this is not official... What is needed, though, is at least that our important highway be improved; it needs better lighting, a new paving, and proper signs. We know that the Road Works Department has put us on its schedule, but work has not yet started." "It's important to know that there are some who view our highway as dangerous, and that was true before Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. But since then, there has been only one shooting incident throughout this time. If people are hesitant to drive on this highway, it's only a psychological bloc." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
SWEDEN — MALMOSTAN — JEWS ARE LEAVING
Posted by K_Hallal, February 22, 2010. | ||||||
|
A FACT too often overlooked by media: everywhere, it is actually Muslim immigrants (and neo-Nazis, sure) who are responsible for the anti-Semitic attacks, as Robert Spencer duly points out! When media report growing anti-Semitism, they ought to stress this simple truth: millions of Muslims have been invading Europe, and having the socialists turned supporters of Muslims -I see no better reason than their basically sharing a monolitic fundamentalism (read their unfailing, unshakable submission to the Party) together with the electorate gains the Left badly needs — we couldn't expect a different outcome. This below is by Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch
| ||||||
|
Jews leaving Swedish city because of attacks by Muslims The lead paragraph in this Telegraph article says that Sweden's reputation as a tolerant, liberal nation is suffering — as if Swedes have suddenly become anti-Semitic. But when you read down into the article a bit, you see that it is actually Muslim immigrants who are responsible for the anti-Semitic attacks. So the problem is that Swedes have been too tolerant and liberal, in tolerating the planting and proliferation of a hateful, supremacist, and anti-Semitic ideology on Swedish soil. "Jews leave Swedish city after sharp rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes," by Nick Meo in the Telegraph, February 21 (thanks to all who sent this in): Sweden's reputation as a tolerant, liberal nation is being threatened by a steep rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes in the city of Malmo. This article matter-of-factly notes that real neo-Nazis are allied with jihadis, contrary to the Leftist/Charles Johnson myth that neo-Nazis are anti-jihad: Malmo's Jews, however, do not just point the finger at bigoted Muslims and their fellow racists in the country's Neo-Nazi fringe. They also accuse Ilmar Reepalu, the Left-wing mayor who has been in power for 15 years, of failing to protect them. Of course. Why should he protect them from a threat he refuses to acknowledge exists? Mr Reepalu, who is blamed for lax policing, is at the centre of a growing controversy for saying that what the Jews perceive as naked anti-Semitism is in fact just a sad, but understandable consequence of Israeli policy in the Middle East. Cue the obligatory mainstream media moral equivalence — but as you read this, remember that Muslims are not leaving Sweden because of hate crimes, Jews are: Malmo's Jews are not the only ones to suffer hate crimes. If Swedish elites had allowed for realistic education about Islam instead of spreading soothing Religion of Peace lies while Muslim immigrants poured into Sweden, no one would be surprised. Some of the Readers' Comments
Here's the full article in the British Telegraph: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ sweden/7278532/Jews-leave-Swedish-city-after-sharp- rise-in-anti-Semitic-hate-crimes.html "Jews leave Swedish city after sharp rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes" Sweden's reputation as a tolerant, liberal nation is being threatened by a steep rise in anti-Semitic hate crimes in the city of Malmo.
When she first arrived in Sweden after her rescue from a Nazi concentration camp, Judith Popinski was treated with great kindness. She raised a family in the city of Malmo, and for the next six decades lived happily in her adopted homeland — until last year. In 2009, a chapel serving the city's 700-strong Jewish community was set ablaze. Jewish cemeteries were repeatedly desecrated, worshippers were abused on their way home from prayer, and "Hitler" was mockingly chanted in the streets by masked men. "I never thought I would see this hatred again in my lifetime, not in Sweden anyway," Mrs Popinski told The Sunday Telegraph. "This new hatred comes from Muslim immigrants. The Jewish people are afraid now." Malmo's Jews, however, do not just point the finger at bigoted Muslims and their fellow racists in the country's Neo-Nazi fringe. They also accuse Ilmar Reepalu, the Left-wing mayor who has been in power for 15 years, of failing to protect them. Mr Reepalu, who is blamed for lax policing, is at the centre of a growing controversy for saying that what the Jews perceive as naked anti-Semitism is in fact just a sad, but understandable consequence of Israeli policy in the Middle East. While his views are far from unusual on the European liberal-left, which is often accused of a pro-Palestinian bias, his Jewish critics say they encourage young Muslim hotheads to abuse and harass them. The future looks so bleak that by one estimate, around 30 Jewish families have already left for Stockholm, England or Israel, and more are preparing to go. With its young people planning new lives elsewhere, the remaining Jewish households, many of whom are made up of Holocaust survivors and their descendants, fear they will soon be gone altogether. Mrs Popinski, an 86-year-old widow, said she has even encountered hostility when invited to talk about the Holocaust in schools. "Muslim schoolchildren often ignore me now when I talk about my experiences in the camps," she said. "It is because of what their parents tell them about Jews. The hatreds of the Middle East have come to Malmo. Schools in Muslim areas of the city simply won't invite Holocaust survivors to speak any more." Hate crimes, mainly directed against Jews, doubled last year with Malmo's police recording 79 incidents and admitting that far more probably went unreported. As of yet, no direct attacks on people have been recorded but many Jews believe it is only a matter of time in the current climate. The city's synagogue has guards and rocket-proof glass in the windows, while the Jewish kindergarten can only be reached through thick steel security doors. It is a far cry from the city Mrs Popinski arrived in 65 years ago, half-dead from starvation and typhus. At Auschwitz she had been separated from her Polish family, all of whom were murdered. She escaped the gas chambers after being sent as a slave labourer. Then she was moved to a womens' concentration camp, Ravensbrück, from where she was then evacuated in a release deal negotiated between the Swedish Red Cross and senior Nazis, who were by then trying to save their own lives. After the war, just as liberal Sweden took in Jews who survived the Holocaust as a humanitarian act, it also took in new waves of refugees from tyranny and conflicts in the Middle East. Muslims are now estimated to make up about a fifth of Malmo's population of nearly 300,000. "This new hatred from a group 40,000-strong is focused on a small group of Jews," Mrs Popinski said, speaking in a sitting room filled with paintings and Persian carpets. "Some Swedish politicians are letting them do it, including the mayor. Of course the Muslims have more votes than the Jews." The worst incident was last year during Israel's brief war in Gaza, when a small demonstration in favour of Israel was attacked by a screaming mob of Arabs and Swedish leftists, who threw bottles and firecrackers as the police looked on. "I haven't seen hatred like that for decades," Mrs Popinski said. "It reminded me of what I saw in my youth. Jews feel vulnerable here now." The problem is becoming an embarrassment for the Social Democrats, the mayor's party. Their national leader Mona Sahlin — the woman who is likely to become the next prime minister after an election later this year — last week travelled to Malmo to meet Jewish leaders, which they took to be a sign that at last politicians are waking to their plight. After the meeting, the mayor, Mr Reepalu, also promised to meet them. A former architect, he has been credited with revitalising Malmo from a half-derelict shipbuilding centre into a vibrant, prosperous city with successful IT and biotech sectors. His city was — until recently at least — a shining multicultural success story, and has taken in proportionally more refugees than anywhere else in Sweden, a record of which it is proud. Sweden has had a long record of offering a safe haven to Jews, the first of whom arrived from the east in the mid-nineteenth century. Today the Jewish population is about 18,000 nationally, with around 3000 in southern Sweden. The mayor insisted to The Sunday Telegraph that he was opposed to anti-Semitism, but added: "I believe these are anti-Israel attacks, connected to the war in Gaza. "We want Malmo to be cosmopolitan and safe for everybody and we have taken action. I have started a dialogue forum. There haven't been any attacks on Jewish people, and if Jews from the city want to move to Israel that is not a matter for Malmo." Sweden has had a long record of offering a safe haven to Jews, the first of whom arrived from the east in the mid-nineteenth century. Today the Jewish population is about 18,000 nationally, with around 3000 in southern Sweden. "Jews came to Sweden to get away from persecution, and now they find it is no longer a safe haven," said Rabbi Shneur Kesselman, 31. "That is a horrible feeling." One who has had enough is Marcus Eilenberg, a 32-year-old Malmo-born lawyer, who is moving to Israel in April with his young family. "Malmo has really changed in the past year," he said. "I am optimistic by nature, but I have no faith in a future here for my children. There is definitely a threat. "It started during the Gaza war when Jewish demonstrators were attacked. It was a horrible feeling, being attacked in your own city. Just as bad was the realisation that we were not being protected by our own leaders." Mr Eilenberg said he and his wife considered moving to Stockholm where Jews feel safer than in Malmo. "But we decided not to because in five years time I think it will be just as bad there," he said. "This is happening all over Europe. I have cousins who are leaving their homes in Amsterdam and France for the same reason as me." Malmo's Jews are not the only ones to suffer hate crimes. At the city's Islamic Centre, the director Bejzat Becirov pointed out a bullet hole in the window behind the main reception desk. Mr Becirov, who arrived in 1962 from the former Yugoslavia, said that windows were regularly smashed, pig's heads had been left outside the mosque, and outbuildings burnt down — probably the acts of Neo-Nazis who have also baited Jews in the past. He said that the harassment of Jews by some young Muslims was "embarrassing" to his community. Many of them are unemployed and confined to life on bleak estates where the Scandinavian dream of prosperity and equality seemed far away. For many of Malmo's white Swedish population, meanwhile, the racial problems are bewildering after years of liberal immigration policies. "I first encountered race hatred when I was an au pair in England and I was shocked," said Mrs Popinski's friend Ulla-Lena Cavling, 72, a retired teacher. "I thought 'this couldn't happen in Sweden'. Now I know otherwise."
The poster is moderator of
|
|
MALI, A NEW HAVEN FOR AL-QAEDA
Posted by Oliver Guitta, February 22, 2010. |
|
If Mali doesn't get its act together and combat terrorism, years of good governance could give way to a hotbed of extremism |
|
PARIS, France — The Sahel — this vast semi-arid region of North Africa south of the Sahara desert — is viewed by some experts as a 'second Afghanistan.' This might be a stretch, but it is true that Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) is very active in the area, especially in Mali. Mali enjoys a very good reputation around the world. It boasts a vibrant democracy with a multi-party system, a market economy and a tradition of a moderate Islam. But things might be changing: Since 2001, worrying signs have emerged — like, for example, the proliferation of Osama bin Laden's photo in stalls at the Bamako market and the exponential increase of radio stations preaching radical Islam. AQIM has organized numerous kidnappings of Western citizens in the region. Interestingly, kidnapped hostages from all over the region usually end up in northern Mali. AQIM has been using northern Mali (in particular Timbuktu and Kidal) as a sanctuary for three reasons: First, it is a very inhospitable area with a difficult terrain making it tough for nations to monitor it; second, some Arab tribes are located there; and finally, the Malian regime is weak and has almost no financial resources. AQIM's charm offensive — which includes distributing antibiotics when children are sick and buying goats for double the going rate — has won the hearts and minds of many locals in the Sahel. AQIM buys off local tribes and forms alliances with them, often through marriage. To make matters more complicated, the area is home to the Tuaregs, a Berber group composed of 200,000 people, who are motivated by territorial claims and bad blood with the Malian authorities to side with AQIM. The first reported example of cooperation between the Tuaregs and AQIM occurred in 2003, when a group of 32 European tourists, mostly Germans, was kidnapped by the GSPC, AQIM's predecessor. Germany allegedly paid about $7.3 million in ransom to have them freed. The operation mastermind, GSPC's Abderrazak El Para, affirmed that he gave part of that ransom money to one of the mediators involved, who was a Tuareg leader. El Para added that he started investing the ransom money in the area. The partnership has proven tenuous. It lasted while the ransom money was flowing, but the Tuaregs felt that their reputation was suffering as a result of their association with AQIM. In 2006, the Tuaregs decided to turn on their former allies. They ambushed AQIM operatives, killing the number two of the Sahelian branch. But, still, AQIM thrives in the area. The situation is ambiguous at best, and, clearly, an alliance remains. Interestingly, the Tuaregs note that the Malians do not want to die fighting Al Qaeda because they see it as an Arab-Western issue. The Tuaregs, on the other hand, have their territory at stake and are therefore are motivated not to let AQIM win. Yet another factor must be taken into account. Cooperation with AQIM might not be limited to the Tuareg community. Indeed, AQIM has entered the very lucrative narco-business and has therefore attracted many recruits. For example, three alleged AQIM Malian associates were charged in December 2009 in New York with conspiring to smuggle cocaine through Africa and on to Europe. According to the complaint, AQIM finances itself in part by protecting and moving loads along smuggling corridors that run through Morocco into Spain and through Libya and Algeria into Italy. One of the defendants, Harouna Toure, said that among other things he provided AQIM with gasoline and food. He said he 'collects taxes from many rich Malian people throughout the region on Al Qaeda's behalf.' Another possible actor playing a troubled game is the Malian regime itself. For example, Algerian official media explain that AQIM kidnaps foreign citizens in other countries, and brings them right away to Mali where negotiations begin with the Amani Amadou Toure's government. The same media affirms that AQIM terrorists are protected by Malian authorities, like some Algerian extremists from the FIS (Islamic Salvation Front) and the GIA (Islamic Armed Group) have been in the past. There are examples of Malian authorities treating arrested AQIM members with leniency. For example, one of the leading emirs in the Sahel, Osama el Merdaci, was arrested in Timbuktu en route to Somalia in 2008. Since then, Malian authorities have refused to extradite him or even try him, while two Libyan terrorists were arrested and extradited almost right away. Mali is viewed as a haven because AQIM seems untouched there and its leader in the region, Mokhtar Belmokhtar, has sealed alliances with four different tribes thanks to four separate marriages. In fact, part of the deal that got the hostages released in 2003 included the granting of asylum status for Mokhtar Belmokhtar — AQIM's emir for the Sahara — in Mali. Belmokhtar promised not to perpetrate any hostile actions on Malian soil, and the Malian authorities agreed to leave him alone. Mali is very much at risk of losing its image of neutrality. Years of hard work and good governance could go up in smoke unless the current regime implements a true, cohesive counterterrorism policy. Olivier Guitta is a security and geopolitical consultant based in Europe. He is also an Adjunct Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies. You can view his latest work at www.thecroissant.com/about.html |
|
EGYPT DOING TUNNEL-BLOCKING FENCE IN GAZA; SPAIN/FRANCE WANT EU TO
RECOGNIZE A "PALESTINIAN" STATE; SYRIA REJECTS IAEA INSPECT REQUEST
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 22, 2010. |
|
EGYPT PROGRESSING ON TUNNEL-BLOCKING FENCE IN GAZA 
Older Gaza tunnel (AP/Eyad Baba) STORY AS REPORTED: Egypt is proceeding on construction of a Sinai-Gaza fence that extends downward to block smugglers' tunnels. Egyptian officials explain that they found that the tunnels were used not only for commercial goods and weaponry, but also to insinuate terrorists onto Egyptian territory, where they endanger Egypt. Hence they say they are tightening the border for their own national security. They anticipate that the fence would block 60% of the tunnel traffic. "Egypt long has helped to enforce the siege by keeping official border crossings with Gaza mostly closed, but turned a blind eye to tunnel trade." Israel praises this new Egyptian effort as a serious help in blocking terrorist movement. Hamas, however, complains that Egypt would be cutting off the people's food supply. A sign in the office of Hamas' supervisor of tunnels bans importing drugs, alcohol, weapons, people and stolen cars. "Outside, white plastic tents, each shading a separate tunnel, stretch for as far as the eye can see along the nine-mile border." The tunnels multiplied greatly after the Gaza combat. "That war began when Hamas resumed launching rockets at Israel in late 2008, after a six-month cease-fire, because Hamas felt Israel hadn't lived up to its end of the bargain by relaxing the siege (Curtis Levinson, Wall St. Journal, 2/21, A14). INTERPRETATION AND GAPS: Israel really has not had any individual wars. It has had to fight terrorism since before independence and armies since independence. Hamas has had ceasefires on and off, on when it needed time to rearm or for political reasons, off when it felt ready to fight again. That is an ancient tactic of jihad. Hamas violated its truces or, conveniently, lent its rockets to non-Hamas terrorists to fire upon Israel, making the ceasefires one-sided. Hamas claims responsibility for ruling Gaza except when other terrorist organizations use Hamas or their own weapons to attack Israel. In some instances, Hamas declared a truce unilaterally or unilaterally added a condition, and then broke the truces, claiming that Israel broke the agreement. But there was no direct agreement. In jihad, it's always the infidel's fault. Hamas exploits tunnels to promote terrorism on both sides of them, and then decries efforts to stop the tunnels as cutting off food. The Arab side of jihad cynically likes to play victim, not only about the blockade. The Wall St. Journal does not explain why the fence is expected to be only 60% effective. My earlier articles described the new fence as too shallow for some of the tunnels. My source, IMRA, has noted that the government of Israel praises anything the Arabs do that could be constructive but may be deceptive. I have noticed that when Israel does speak frankly with Egyptian officials, the Egyptians lose their tempers. If each tunnel along just nine miles is identified by a white tent, why don't Egyptian police blow up the tunnels below the tents? That would be a genuine effort.
SPAIN & FRANCE WANT EU TO RECOGNIZE A "PALESTINIAN" STATE 
The foreign ministers of Spain and France are working to get the EU to recognize Palestinian Authority (P.A.) independence within a couple of years, regardless of whether it has negotiated any agreement with Israel. The government of Israel calls the proposal a violation of the "peace process" (www.imra.org.il, 2/21). It is an answer of a sort, but not a strong one. It was strong when "you're not in the spirit of the peace process" was evoked against Israel for not appeasing the Arabs, who were violating actual requirements of the peace agreement. It was hypocritical. It also was ridiculous. There never was a peace process. There was a combination of peace agreements and Arab pursuit or support of jihad. References to "peace process" were phony. What would be a strong Israeli response? (1) Statehood would reward terrorists who, in the 17 years since the Oslo peace accords they signed, never eradicated their terrorist infrastructure; (2) Still refuse to recognize as legitimate the Jewish state, meaning they still believe in jihad to overthrow it; (3) Demand that the P.A. bar Jews but Israel let in millions of Arabs, which is another way to destroy the Jewish state. To confer sovereignty to an entity already in a state of war is a war process. In addition, the Jewish people has a stronger historical and legal claim to the disputed territories than does a non-existent "Palestinian nationality." The claim to their having a separate nationality from the Arabs was fabricated precisely to make a national claim. Odd is that claim, considering that the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan comprises 79% of the former Palestine Mandate. Spain's representative, Miguel Moratinos, has for years agitated in behalf of the Arabs and against Israel. He often sought deals and conferences at which Israel would give away the disputed territories.
SYRIA REJECTS IAEA REQUEST TO INSPECT A few days ago, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) determined that the Syrian site that Israel had bombed may have been a covert nuclear weapons facility." The report, by new IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano, prodded Syria to adopt the IAEA's Additional Protocol, which permits unfettered inspections beyond a declared nuclear site to check out any covert atomic activity. "We are committed to the non-proliferation agreement between the agency and Syria and we [only] allow inspectors to come according to this agreement," Syrian Foreign Minister Walid Mouallem said. "We will not allow anything beyond the agreement because Syria does not have a military nuclear program." (www.imra.org.il, 2/21.) Syria is within its legal rights to protect what appears to be a military program beyond its rights.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
HEBREW U. ARCHAEOLOGIST DISCOVERS JERUSALEM CITY WALL POSSIBLY BUILT BY KING SOLOMON
Posted by Chuck Brooks, February 22, 2010. |
|
This comes from IMRA — Independent Media Review and Analysis: Hebrew University archaeologist discovers Jerusalem city wall from tenth century B.C.E. |
|
Jerusalem, February 22, 2010 — A section of an ancient city wall of Jerusalem from the tenth century B.C.E. — possibly built by King Solomon — has been revealed in archaeological excavations directed by Dr. Eilat Mazar and conducted under the auspices of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. The section of the city wall revealed, 70 meters long and six meters high, is located in the area known as the Ophel, between the City of David and the southern wall of the Temple Mount. Uncovered in the city wall complex are: an inner gatehouse for access into the royal quarter of the city, a royal structure adjacent to the gatehouse, and a corner tower that overlooks a substantial section of the adjacent Kidron valley. The excavations in the Ophel area were carried out over a three-month period with funding provided by Daniel Mintz and Meredith Berkman, a New York couple interested in Biblical Archeology. The funding supports both completion of the archaeological excavations and processing and analysis of the finds as well as conservation work and preparation of the site for viewing by the public within the Ophel Archaeological Park and the national park around the walls of Jerusalem. The excavations were carried out in cooperation with the Israel Antiquities Authority, the Israel Nature and Parks Authority, and the Company for the Development of East Jerusalem. Archaeology students from the Hebrew University of Jerusalem as well as volunteer students from the Herbert W. Armstrong College in Edmond, Oklahoma, and hired workers all participated in the excavation work. "The city wall that has been uncovered testifies to a ruling presence. Its strength and form of construction indicate a high level of engineering", Mazar said. The city wall is at the eastern end of the Ophel area in a high, strategic location atop the western slop of the Kidron valley. "A comparison of this latest finding with city walls and gates from the period of the First Temple, as well as pottery found at the site, enable us to postulate with a great degree of assurance that the wall that has been revealed is that which was built by King Solomon in Jerusalem in the latter part of the tenth century B.C.E.," said Mazar "This is the first time that a structure from that time has been found that may correlate with written descriptions of Solomon's building in Jerusalem," she added. "The Bible tells us that Solomon built — with the assistance of the Phoenicians, who were outstanding builders — the Temple and his new palace and surrounded them with a city, most probably connected to the more ancient wall of the City of David." Mazar specifically cites the third chapter of the First Books of Kings where it refers to "until he (Solomon) had made an end of building his own house, and the house of the Lord, and the wall of Jerusalem round about." The six-meter-high gatehouse of the uncovered city wall complex is built in a style typical of those from the period of the First Temple like Megiddo, Beersheva and Ashdod. It has symmetrical plan of four identical small rooms, two on each side of the main passageway. Also there was a large, adjacent tower, covering an area of 24 by 18 meters, which was intended to serve as a watchtower to protect entry to the city. The tower is located today under the nearby road and still needs to be excavated. Nineteenth century British surveyor Charles Warren, who conducted an underground survey in the area, first described the outline of the large tower in 1867 but without attributing it to the era of Solomon. "Part of the city wall complex served as commercial space and part as security stations," explained Mazar. Within the courtyard of the large tower there were widespread public activities, she said. It served as a public meeting ground, as a place for conducting commercial activities and cult activities, and as a location for economic and legal activities. Pottery shards discovered within the fill of the lowest floor of the royal building near the gatehouse also testify to the dating of the complex to the 10th century B.C.E. Found on the floor were remnants of large storage jars, 1.15 meters in height, that survived destruction by fire and that were found in rooms that apparently served as storage areas on the ground floor of the building. On one of the jars there is a partial inscription in ancient Hebrew indicating it belonged to a high-level government official. "The jars that were found are the largest ever found in Jerusalem," said Mazar, adding that "the inscription that was found on one of them shows that it belonged to a government official, apparently the person responsible for overseeing the provision of baked goods to the royal court." In addition to the pottery shards, cult figurines were also found in the area, as were seal impressions on jar handles with the word "to the king," testifying to their usage within the monarchy. Also found were seal impressions (bullae) with Hebrew names, also indicating the royal nature of the structure. Most of the tiny fragments uncovered came from intricate wet sifting done with the help of the salvaging Temple Mount Sifting Project, directed by Dr. Gabriel Barkai and Zachi Zweig, under the auspice of the Nature and Parks Authority and the Ir David Foundation. Between the large tower at the city gate and the royal building the archaeologists uncovered a section of the corner tower that is eight meters in length and six meters high. The tower was built of carved stones of unusual beauty. East of the royal building, another section of the city wall that extends for some 35 meters also was revealed. This section is five meters high, and is part of the wall that continues to the northeast and once enclosed the Ophel area. Photos available via e-mail upon request and at the following link:
For further information: Jerry Barach, Dept. of Media Relations, the Hebrew
University,
Contact Chuck Brooks at chetz18@aol.com |
|
AUSTRIA 1938. AS WE ARE BEING HERDED DOWN THE SAME ROAD
Posted by Cpocerl, February 22, 2010. |
|
1938 Austria — sobering. This is called "This Truly is the Greatest Country in the World. Don't Let Freedom Slip Away" and it was written by Kitty Werthmann . Werthmann lives in South Dakota and appears to be very active in attempting to maintain our freedom. I encourage everybody to read this article and pass it along. I see so many parallels in this country-are we going to sit by and watch it happen? Spread the word; also contact your congressional reps; vote them out if they don't do what they should. If you don't want to be bothered, then you're part of the problem! Google Kitty Werthmann and you will see articles and videos. |
|
What I am about to tell you is something you've probably never heard or will ever read in history books. I believe that I am an eyewitness to history. I cannot tell you that Hitler took Austria by tanks and guns; it would distort history. We elected him by a landslide — 98% of the vote.. I've never read that in any American publications. Everyone thinks that Hitler just rolled in with his tanks and took Austria by force. In 1938, Austria was in deep Depression. Nearly one-third of our workforce was unemployed. We had 25% inflation and 25% bank loan interest rates. Farmers and business people were declaring bankruptcy daily. Young people were going from house to house begging for food. Not that they didn't want to work; there simply weren't any jobs. My mother was a Christian woman and believed in helping people in need. Every day we cooked a big kettle of soup and baked bread to feed those poor, hungry people — about 30 daily. The Communist Party and the National Socialist Party were fighting each other. Blocks and blocks of cities like Vienna, Linz, and Graz were destroyed. The people became desperate and petitioned the government to let them decide what kind of government they wanted. We looked to our neighbor on the north, Germany, where Hitler had been in power since 1933. We had been told that they didn't have unemployment or crime, and they had a high standard of living. Nothing was ever said about persecution of any group — Jewish or otherwise. We were led to believe that everyone was happy. We wanted the same way of life in Austria. We were promised that a vote for Hitler would mean the end of unemployment and help for the family. Hitler also said that businesses would be assisted, and farmers would get their farms back. Ninety-eight percent of the population voted to annex Austria to Germany and have Hitler for our ruler. We were overjoyed, and for three days we danced in the streets and had candlelight parades. The new government opened up big field kitchens and everyone was fed. After the election, German officials were appointed, and like a miracle, we suddenly had law and order. Three or four weeks later, everyone was employed. The government made sure that a lot of work was created through the Public Work Service. Hitler decided we should have equal rights for women. Before this, it was a custom that married Austrian women did not work outside the home. An able-bodied husband would be looked down on if he couldn't support his family. Many women in the teaching profession were elated that they could retain the jobs they previously had been required to give up for marriage. Hitler Targets Education — Eliminates Religious Instruction for Children: Our education was nationalized. I attended a very good public school.. The population was predominantly Catholic, so we had religion in our schools. The day we elected Hitler (March 13, 1938), I walked into my schoolroom to find the crucifix replaced by Hitler's picture hanging next to a Nazi flag. Our teacher, a very devout woman, stood up and told the class we wouldn't pray or have religion anymore. Instead, we sang "Deutschland, Deutschland, Uber Alles," and had physical education. Sunday became National Youth Day with compulsory attendance. Parents were not pleased about the sudden change in curriculum. They were told that if they did not send us, they would receive a stiff letter of warning the first time. The second time they would be fined the equivalent of $300, and the third time they would be subject to jail. The first two hours consisted of political indoctrination. The rest of the day we had sports. As time went along, we loved it. Oh, we had so much fun and got our sports equipment free. We would go home and gleefully tell our parents about the wonderful time we had. My mother was very unhappy. When the next term started, she took me out of public school and put me in a convent. I told her she couldn't do that and she told me that someday when I grew up, I would be grateful. There was a very good curriculum, but hardly any fun — no sports, and no political indoctrination. I hated it at first but felt I could tolerate it. Every once in a while, on holidays, I went home. I would go back to my old friends and ask what was going on and what they were doing. Their loose lifestyle was very alarming to me. They lived without religion. By that time unwed mothers were glorified for having a baby for Hitler. It seemed strange to me that our society changed so suddenly. As time went along, I realized what a great deed my mother did so that I wasn't exposed to that kind of humanistic philosophy. Equal Rights Hits Home: In 1939, the war started and a food bank was established. All food was rationed and could only be purchased using food stamps. At the same time, a full-employment law was passed which meant if you didn't work, you didn't get a ration card, and if you didn't have a card, you starved to death. Women who stayed home to raise their families didn't have any marketable skills and often had to take jobs more suited for men. Soon after this, the draft was implemented. It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps. During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys. They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines. When I go back to Austria to visit my family and friends, most of these women are emotional cripples because they just were not equipped to handle the horrors of combat. Three months before I turned 18, I was severely injured in an air raid attack. I nearly had a leg amputated, so I was spared having to go into the labor corps and into military service. Hitler Restructured the Family Through Daycare: When the mothers had to go out into the work force, the government immediately established child care centers. You could take your children ages 4 weeks to school age and leave them there around-the-clock, 7 days a week, under the total care of the government. The state raised a whole generation of children.. There were no motherly women to take care of the children, just people highly trained in child psychology. By this time, no one talked about equal rights. We knew we had been had. Health Care and Small Business Suffer Under Government Controls: Before Hitler, we had very good medical care. Many American doctors trained at the University of Vienna. After Hitler, health care was socialized, free for everyone. Doctors were salaried by the government. The problem was, since it was free, the people were going to the doctors for everything. When the good doctor arrived at his office at 8 a.m., 40 people were already waiting and, at the same time, the hospitals were full. If you needed elective surgery, you had to wait a year or two for your turn. There was no money for research as it was poured into socialized medicine. Research at the medical schools literally stopped, so the best doctors left Austria and emigrated to other countries. As for healthcare, our tax rates went up to 80% of our income. Newlyweds immediately received a $1,000 loan from the government to establish a household. We had big programs for families. All day care and education were free. High schools were taken over by the government and college tuition was subsidized. Everyone was entitled to free handouts, such as food stamps, clothing, and housing. We had another agency designed to monitor business. My brother-in-law owned a restaurant that had square tables. Government officials told him he had to replace them with round tables because people might bump themselves on the corners. Then they said he had to have additional bathroom facilities. It was just a small dairy business with a snack bar. He couldn't meet all the demands. Soon, he went out of business. If the government owned the large businesses and not many small ones existed, it could be in control. We had consumer protection. We were told how to shop and what to buy. Free enterprise was essentially abolished. We had a planning agency specially designed for farmers. The agents would go to the farms, count the live-stock, then tell the farmers what to produce, and how to produce it. "Mercy Killing" Redefined: In 1944, I was a student teacher in a small village in the Alps. The villagers were surrounded by mountain passes which, in the winter, were closed off with snow, causing people to be isolated. So people intermarried and offspring were sometimes retarded. When I arrived, I was told there were 15 mentally retarded adults, but they were all useful and did good manual work. I knew one, named Vincent, very well. He was a janitor of the school. One day I looked out the window and saw Vincent and others getting into a van. I asked my superior where they were going. She said to an institution where the State Health Department would teach them a trade, and to read and write. The families were required to sign papers with a little clause that they could not visit for 6 months. They were told visits would interfere with the program and might cause homesickness. As time passed, letters started to dribble back saying these people died a natural, merciful death. The villagers were not fooled. We suspected what was happening. Those people left in excellent physical health and all died within 6 months. We called this euthanasia. The Final Steps — Gun Laws: Next came gun registration.. People were getting injured by guns. Hitler said that the real way to catch criminals (we still had a few) was by matching serial numbers on guns. Most citizens were law abiding and dutifully marched to the police station to register their firearms. Not long after-wards, the police said that it was best for everyone to turn in their guns. The authorities already knew who had them, so it was futile not to comply voluntarily. No more freedom of speech. Anyone who said something against the government was taken away. We knew many people who were arrested, not only Jews, but also priests and ministers who spoke up. Totalitarianism didn't come quickly, it took 5 years from 1938 until 1943, to realize full dictatorship in Austria. Had it happened overnight, my countrymen would have fought to the last breath. Instead, we had creeping gradualism. Now, our only weapons were broom handles. The whole idea sounds almost unbelievable that the state, little by little eroded our freedom. After World War II, Russian troops occupied Austria. Women were raped, preteen to elderly. The press never wrote about this either. When the Soviets left in 1955, they took everything that they could, dismantling whole factories in the process. They sawed down whole orchards of fruit, and what they couldn't destroy, they burned. We called it The Burned Earth. Most of the population barricaded themselves in their houses. Women hid in their cellars for 6 weeks as the troops mobilized. Those who couldn't, paid the price. There is a monument in Vienna today, dedicated to those women who were massacred by the Russians. This is an eye witness account. "It's true..those of us who sailed past the Statue of Liberty came to a country of unbelievable freedom and opportunity. America Truly is the Greatest Country in theWorld. Don't Let Freedom Slip Away, "After America, There is No Place to Go" Please forward this message to other voters who may not have it. Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
COMMISSARS IN THE ISRAELI ARMY
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, February 22, 2010. |
|
This was written by Alex Klein. |
|
They are embedding lawyers at the battalion level with the Israeli Army. Now, some might find the idea of sending all the lawyers to the front lines to be appealing. Maybe they could talk the enemy to death. The erstwhile purpose of said lawyers will be to give "real time" "human rights" guidance to the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) at time of war. Yeah, right. Imagine. A Commander needs to destroy an apartment building which is housing a Terrorist missile launching platform firing on Israeli civilians and/or troops. He asks his lawyer if "it's OK". Now the lawyer's first thoughts will be for his own welfare. He knows that, after any little war that Israel is forced to launch, every closet anti-Semite in the world will call for a "Commission of Inquiry". The Commander will say that the lawyer said its was "OK", and the lawyer will have to spend years and decades defending himself against various and sundry world bodies — such as the U.N. Nor will he be able to fly anywhere, lest he face an arrest order from very two-bit local judge who hates Jews. Israel will not be able to fight. Soldiers will be demoralized. Who is setting this up? Recently, and actually for many years, Congressional investigations and hearings have shown that the CIA funds the Ford Foundation, which in turn funds the infamous "New Israel Fund". For those who are unaware, the "New Israel Fund" is reported to be the major backer of most every left-wing fringe group, and not-so-fringe group in Israel. The NIF also seems to get funds from the E.U. Their goal seems to be to weaken Israel to a point where she can be destroyed. They do their dirty work under the guise of "human rights", conveniently neglecting to recall that Jews also have a "human right" to live. They are said to have provided most of the raw material for the "Goldstone Report". It would be interesting to know if the "New Israel Fund" has a direct connection to this "Lawyers' Plot", or have they just generated an atmosphere where Israeli leaders are so afraid of their own shadows that they agree to such a ridiculous concept. What other army in the world has lawyers involved in combat decisions? By having Israel's military hamstrung by lawyers in the theatre of operations, they can severely compromise their ability to fight. These lawyers are reminiscent of the political commissars the Bolshevik Russians had in their army to insure "political correctness". 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@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
US-ISRAEL RELATIONS: A TWO-WAY STREET
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, February 22, 2010. |
|
This appeared February 22, 2010 in YnetNews |
|
The February 2010 visit to Israel by Admiral Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs-of-Staff, sheds light on the larger context of US-Israel relations, which transcends the Arab-Israeli conflict, leverages Israel's unique capabilities, and benefits both the US and Israel. The visit reaffirms that US policy toward Israel is based, primarily, on regional and global strategic interests and not on domestic politics. US-Israel relations do not resemble a one-way-street (the US gives and Israel receives), but a mutually-beneficial two-way-street. Admiral Mullen's visit to Israel centered on a series of aggravated mutual threats and on the implication of the expected US withdrawal from Iraq related to those threats: Iran's nuclearization, global Islamic terrorism, domestic and regional war in Iraq, escalation of the ballistic threat, Iran's subversion of the Gulf and the Middle East, Al-Qaeda's entrenchment in Yemen which controls key sea lanes for oil tankers, the war on the Saudi-Yemen border, the intensification of Iranian-Syrian cooperation, the enhanced Middle Eastern profile of Russia and China, the Islamization of Turkey, etc. The evacuation of US forces from Iraq could trigger a political/military volcano, with boiling lava sweeping Saudi Arabia, the Gulf and Jordan, further deteriorating the region, highlighting Israel's contribution to the national security of its most critical ally, the USA. For example, in 2010, US special operations forces in Iraq and Afghanistan leverage Israeli battle tactics and 61 year counter-terrorism experience. US Marines benefit from the Israeli-developed "Pioneer" unmanned aerial vehicle, which provides intelligence otherwise unobtainable, preempting terrorists, thus saving many lives. A US special operations colonel told me — in the office of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid — that his battalion benefited in Iraq from Israel's unique contribution in the areas of training, urban warfare, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), car bombs, booby-traps, suicide bombers, roadblocks and checkpoints, interrogation of terrorists and anti-tank missiles. According to Brig. General Michael Vane, Deputy Chief of Staff at the US Army Training and Doctrine Command, the Israeli experience played a role in defeating terrorists in Iraq's "Sunni Triangle." According to Senator Daniel Inouye, Chairman of the Appropriations Committee and its Subcommittee on Defense and a veteran of the Intelligence Committee, contends that "Israel's contribution to US military intelligence is greater than all NATO countries combined." In September 2006, Israel demolished a nuclear plant in Syria, thus dealing a blow to the anti-US Syria-Iran-North Korea axis, while upgrading the posture of deterrence and joint interests of the US and Israel. In 1982, Israel's air force was the first ever to destroy a Soviet built surface-to-air network. Israel destroyed 23 most advanced Soviet surface-to-air missile batteries, employed by Syria and considered impregnable. Israel's battle tactics and lessons, electronic warfare and other technological innovations were shared with the US, thus tilting the global balance of power in favor of the US. In 1981, Israel devastated Iraq's nuclear reactor, in defiance of brutal US and international pressure — including a military embargo — thus according the US the conventional option during the 1991 war against Iraq. It spared the US and the world a nuclear confrontation, along with its mega human losses and mega-billion dollar cost. In 1970, a Soviet proxy, Syria, invaded a US ally, Jordan, aiming to topple the Hashemite regime and activate a pro-Soviet domino scenario into Saudi Arabia and the Gulf States. US forces were overly-involved in Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia, but Israel mobilized its military, forcing a Syrian evacuation of Jordan, thus preventing a collapse of pro-US regimes, a setback to US national security, havoc in the Arab oil producing countries and a blow to the US standard of living. Israel's capability of snatching roasting chestnuts out of the fire — with no US involvement — transformed President Nixon into a supporter of enhanced US-Israel strategic cooperation, in spite of the fact that only 12% of US Jews voted for him, and irrespective of severe US-Israel disagreements over the Arab-Israeli conflict. Former Secretary of State, General Alexander Haig, a former Supreme Commander of NATO, refers to Israel as "the largest, most battle-tested and cost-effective US aircraft carrier, which does not require a single US personnel, cannot be sunk and is located at a most critical area for US national security interests." If Israel did not exist in the eastern flank of the Mediterranean — adjacent to most critical oil resources and water lanes, in the intersection of Europe, Asia and Africa — the US would have to deploy a few aircraft carriers to the region, along with tens of thousands of military personnel, costing scores of billions of dollars annually and risking involvement in additional regional and international confrontations.
THE JEWISH STATE CONSTITUTES A BATTLE-PROVEN LABORATORY, which has improved thousands of US-made military systems and technologies, sharing with the US such improvements, thus enhancing the competitive edge of the US defense industries, expanding US employment and export base, upgrading US national security and saving many US lives and mega billion of dollars in terms of research and development cost. For instance, the current generation of the F-16 includes over 600 modifications, which were introduced by Israel. If there had been an Israel-like nation in the Persian Gulf, there would not be a need to dispatch hundred of thousands of US military personnel to the region! The US-Israel strategic cooperation surged meteorically during 1949-1992, despite rocky disagreements over the Arab-Israeli conflict, entirely due to a series of mutual threats and joint interests, which are much more pertinent to US national security. In hindsight, such disagreements have been merely bumps on the road toward unprecedented strategic cooperation. On a rainy day — in the battle against Iran and other threats — Admiral Mullen prefers a "tough nut" over a "punching bag" as an ally! 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 |
|
'DAM BUTLAB DAM' — ONLY FOR SOME
Posted by Dzubow, Roberta, February 21, 2010. |
|
This below was written by Sarah Honig and it appeared February
19, 2010 in the Jerusalem Post
www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=169057 Sarah Honig was The Jerusalem Post's long-time political correspondent (as well as for years of the now-defunct Davar). She headed the Post's Tel Aviv bureau, and wrote daily analyses of the political scene as well as in-depth features. As in yesteryear, so in the 21st century, it's axiomatic that Arabs have the right to inflict incalculable harm on Jews, but the Jews' attempts to deflect such blows are evil, outrageous and deserving of merciless punishment. |
|
Terrorist arms smuggler Mahmoud al-Mabhouh's son, Abdel-Rauf, stood teary-eyed before TV interviewers and lavished praise on his deceased father. He bragged that the late lamented, who was discovered dead in Dubai, "fought the Jews, hit the Jews, kidnapped and killed Israelis. He outfitted and dispatched suicide bombers." That evidently made him an object for admiration, a source of honor and a claim to fame. Killing Jews is a noble objective, one to take pride in, to revere. So when we Israelis point to Mabhouh's gory record, it isn't just our biased say-so. It's hardly an unsubstantiated allegation, a pretext to justify assassination. His own son concedes this, indeed he crows about it as the paramount tribute he can pay his father. And it isn't a mournful son's subjective or self-serving aggrandizement either. Hamas issued an official statement celebrating its latest shahid (martyr). Prominent in the Hamas-compiled catalog of Mabhouh glories are the 1989 abduction-murders of IDF soldiers Avi Sasportas and Ilan Sa'adon. By the boastful admission of both his kin and organization, Mabhouh's hands were bloodstained. Hence, by the Arabs' own rules of engagement, he was liable for reprisal. The principal code governing these rules is dam butlab dam (blood begets blood). Because of this core premise Hamas now vows to wreak the most horrific vengeance on Israel, actual proof of Israeli culpability for Mabhouh's demise being entirely immaterial. All Israelis are therefore fair game. This is the elementary protocol of the blood feud. But here's where we encounter our enemies' cynical lopsided logic. By their own rules — assuming for argument's sake that we submit ourselves to them — we should be perceived just as entitled as they to hunt down and kill whoever killed our own. Yet our retribution is condemned a priori as illegitimate. The right to avenge Mabhouh's death is unchallenged, whereas the right to avenge Mabhouh's victims is categorically denied. What is valid, in fact a sacred duty for one side, is intolerable and entirely villainous for the other. The underlying assertion is that Mabhouh's acts were virtuous and sanctioned by absolute supernal will. Unlike our own, Arab society is unbothered by the pluralistic niceties of postmodern moral relativism. Allah is exclusively on their side and they are the only interpreters of his wishes. This isn't only Hamas ideology. The Palestinian Media Watch disseminated the text of the January 29 sermon on PATV, under the auspices of our supposed peace-partner Mahmoud Abbas. It called on all Muslims to remember that "the Jews are the Jews! The Jews are the Jews! Even if donkeys would cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl and snakes to bite, the Jews would not cease to harbor hatred towards Muslims. The Prophet said that if two Jews would be alone with a Muslim, they would think only of killing him... The Prophet says: 'You shall fight the Jews and kill them...'" There is a whole loathsome lot more, but the basis is clear: the murder of Jews is divinely decreed. In other words, Mabhouh acted morally. Those who opposed him are immoral. By this precept Jews must die and have no right to resist. That is their lot. Not only do they possess no right to avenge, they possess no right to self-defense, to fight at all. Their very existence is a provocation, a casus belli.
THIS IS key to understanding today's Mideast. As in yesteryear, so in the 21st century it's axiomatic that Arabs have the right to inflict incalculable harm on Jews — and to do so in the most sadistically inventive ways — but the Jews' attempts to deflect such blows are evil, outrageous and deserving of merciless punishment. Failure to admit how selective Arab rules of warfare are precludes making sense of anything in our region and dooms to failure any so-called peace drives and mediation initiatives. The tragedy is that not only is the fundamental asymmetry between Jewish and Arab mind-sets not comprehended abroad, but there's no inclination to even consider it. Worse yet — the Arabs' skewed standards are commonly accepted overseas. Hence the outcry whenever Israel does anything in aid of its self-preservation. Large-scale campaigns like Defensive Shield, the Lebanon War or Cast Lead are decried for "lack or proportionality." However, there was censure even for pinpointed targeting such as the recent Nablus killing (in an exchange of fire during an attempted arrest) of the three ambushers who had earlier slain Meir Avshalom Chai in a drive-by shooting. Abbas described them as "ruthlessly executed martyrs." Even the trials and convictions of murderers like Marwan Barghouti are portrayed as illegitimate. There plainly is just nothing Israel may do to secure itself. Even the most legalistically scrupulous remedies are repudiated. The Goldstone Report is part and parcel of ongoing efforts to paralyze and disallow Israeli self-defense. The mud now slung at Israel is intended to intimidate use of force in future. It's nothing new. This isn't the product of what's castigated as occupation and/or the shortage of suicidal concessions on Israel's part to appease Arab/Muslim appetites. Jewish self-defense, in its most rudimentary and literal sense, was anathema way before the Jewish state's birth and subsequent cheeky survival. In his milestone, still ever-relevant 1943 book The Forgotten Ally, Dutch-Canadian journalist Pierre Van Paassen quotes his own interview with the British Mandate's acting high commissioner Harry Luke during the countrywide Arab rioting of 1929 (most notorious for the Hebron massacre). Van Paassen told Luke: "You arrested first and foremost, in every case I investigated, the Jews who successfully defended themselves. You arrested 50 Jews in Haifa at the moment they defended themselves heroically against the attack of a mob of some 2,000 runners-amok... yesterday I saw a man brought into Jerusalem by the mounted police and recognized in him an older settler from the neighborhood of Lifta, the owner of a small canning factory who had been in this country for more than 50 years — a real pioneer. I visited this man in jail. His name is Isaac Brozen... He was arrested after he had barricaded himself in his factory... Arabs from Lifta raped and massacred his old wife and two daughters and set fire to his house across the roadway." Luke, like Goldstone eight decades later, argued that he was only looking out for Jews. Brozen, and the many others Van Paassen listed, were merely "placed in protective custody for their own good." The interviewer countered: "but they were in chains and in solitary confinement... Mr. Brozen was loaded down under chains... chains on his hands and chains on his feet, old Turkish chains at that..." The more things change, the more they stay the same. "Impartial" Brits once sought to foil Jewish defense with chains. Now "impartial" Goldstone tries to foil Jewish defense with different, no less restrictive shackles. Contact Roberta Dzubow by email at Roberta@adgforum.com |
|
U.S. CAMPAIGN FOR THE ACADEMIC & CULTURAL BOYCOTT OF ISRAEL
Posted by Roberta Dzubow, February 21, 2010. |
|
The oil rich Arab Lobby has been able to plant their version of " Israeli aggression" and "Palestinian victimhood" in the public mind. By cultivating well placed people, in government, media, universities, the spread of anti-Israel poison has permeated far and wide. Despite the actual facts, and the "truths on the ground" the Arab narrative is adopted by more and more people. Scan below and see how many names and institutions are represented. It is amazing that the only civilized society in the entire Middle East, the only democracy, the only country where human rights for all really exists, is accused of the exact opposite. And these people believe it is so. This below was sent by Alexis Worlock. |
|
Sad to see so many Jewish names on here. Among them: Adrienne Rich...celebrated feminist and writer. Regrettably I bought a book of hers some 20 years ago (never got past the beginning of it). Wish I could return it now & take the money back that went to her. What a list of ignominy and shame.
U.S. Campaign for the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel Endorsers Endorsements from Colleagues at American Institutions:
1. Elizabeth Aaronsohn, Central Connecticut State University
Endorsements from Cultural Workers: 1. Anne Marie Abowd, Norhweset Ohio Peace Coalition
Endorsements from International Colleagues: 1. Ahmed Abbes, University of Rennes 1
Organizational Endorsements: 1. 10/15 Anarchist Collective, Toledo, OH
* Cross listed as Cultural Worker and Academic
Contact Roberta Dzubow by email at Roberta@adgforum.com |
|
EX-PROSECUTOR DECRIES CIVILIAN TRIALS FOR TERRORISTS; ISRAELI TROOPS'
SPEAKING TOUR IN U.S.; P.A. POLICE DESTROY STOLEN ISRAELI CARS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 21, 2010. |
|
EX-PROSECUTOR DECRIES CIVILIAN TRIALS FOR TERRORISTS Andrew C. McCarthy, who prosecuted the blind sheikh in Manhattan for plotting to destroy municipal facilities, now is making headlines, because he finds civilian trials inappropriate for terrorism. Here are his points and his critics' rebuttal: When Mr. McCarthy was new to this, he felt he was on the "cutting edge" of the law. He came to see that the trials did not deter terrorism, and there were trials before 9/11. Marines might root out terrorists. Terrorism is a military problem, rather than a legal one. [It also is an ideological one.] A war is not a crime, but a matter of national security. Civilian courts are the wrong arena for war [especially for terrorists caught in the act]. Prosecutors are not specialists in national security. In response, Joshua L. Dratel, a terrorist defense attorney asks whether McCarthy is running for office. Attorney Gen. Holder told the Senate he was there "to talk about facts and evidence, real American values, and not the kinds of polemics that he [McCarthy] seems prone to." In one of his big cases, McCarthy's list of unindicted co-conspirators was passed on to bin Laden. Critics reply that McCarthy had not sought a pre-trial protective order, to limit the list's dissemination. When the order is obtained, there are no security breaches. Private lawyers who help detainees at Guantanamo Bay, by challenging the legality of their incarceration, are volunteering their services to the enemy. Mr. Dratel replies that private lawyers did the country a service. McCarthy has criticizes military courts, too, preferring a "national security court." (Benjamin Weiser, NY Times, 2/20, A1.) It appears that McCarthy's critics answer certain points bit resort to personal invective answering the difficult ones. When private lawyers check out whether the government had incarcerated the right people, that is one thing. When they advocate for their clients, they cross the line.
ISRAELI TROOPS' SPEAKING TOUR IN U.S. 
IDF in Nablus (A.P./Nasser Shiyoukhi) In late February and March, four Israeli veterans of the Gaza war will fan out over New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, Wisconsin, Seattle, Philadelphia, Connecticut, and San Jose, CA.. They say they will explain what the war really was like, stories that the international media missed, and correct much-publicized misconceptions, that the international media did not miss. This project is at the initiative of StandWithUs, an organization of young activists. StandWithUs remarks about those speakers, "They are part of a group that provides video testimony at (www.soldiersspeakout.com). Many feel that the media has often been skewed. Many soldiers feel a deep sense of injustice when this happens, including those who risked their own lives and lost friends in Gaza to protect Palestinian civilians." "All the soldiers we met illustrate the IDF's moral code with first-hand experiences. The soldiers are prepared to conduct interviews by request, please email info@standwithus.com or call 310-836-6140, ext. 0. (From Standwithus e-mail, 2/19.)
IRANIAN DIPLOMAT GETS ASYLUM IN NORWAY Norway granted political asylum to a diplomat and family, stationed there by Iran. Mohammad Reza Heydari resigned from his post in January, in protest over his regime's killing of eight protesters (www.imra.org.il, 2/19). When people stationed abroad resign from dictatorships, they also have to reconcile themselves to exile and possible assassination attempts on their lives.
P.A. POLICE DESTROY STOLEN ISRAELI CARS 
Already this year, Nablus police have destroyed 941 stolen cars, usually stolen from Israel. Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA asks why the Palestinian Authority P.A.) police don't return the cars to Israel (www.imra.org.il, 2/19). If this is an example of the touted P.A. police's law-and-order campaign, that is supposed somehow to enhance Israeli security, it does not do Israel any good. Rather than build trust, the P.A. effort displays spite. If 1,000 stolen cars are brought to one P.A. city in two months, is the total number brought to all P.A. cities in a year in the tens of thousands?
REGIONAL ENERGY PROJECT CASUALTY OF JIHAD Israel had reported plans to develop joint energy-producing projects, one with Egypt on solar power, and the other with Jordan, on organic waste. At a regional conference, Jordan said the project would involve the U.S., too. Egypt's Energy Minister, however, reacted with a denial that it would work with Israel on the regional energy grid now or in future (www.imra.org.il, 2/20). I did not think the Israeli announcement tactful, that Egypt would supply the site and Israel would supply the know-how. But the Israeli intent was intended to be mutually beneficial and to encourage peace.
TURKISH CHARITY WILL TRY TO BREAK GAZA BLOCKADE A Turkish charity, IHH, vowed to send a flotilla of 20 ships, laden with building materials that Israel otherwise does not let into Gaza, with other goods, and with human rights activists (www.imra.org.il, 2/20). What are they trying to do, flood Gaza with goods and bankrupt Hamas? Hamas makes sizable profits from smuggling via tunnels. So great is the smuggling, that many goods are in ample supply and many private tunnel owners are going out of business. What will Hamas do for income, if the partial blockade is overcome by ships? It never ceases to amaze how in the name of decency, evil-minded people or naifs cooperate so well to flout decency, and do nothing against terrorism.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
ONCE THEY BURNED BOOKS
Posted by Ari Bussel, February 21, 2010. |
|
The flames could be seen clearly in small streets far away from the city square. It was not the smoke or ashes, rather the sense of excitement that provided warmth and exhilaration. Jan came running in from the outside, his face red, eyes shining. His mother looked at him puzzled. Short of breath he exclaimed: They are burning books — tomorrow we are not going to school! It was many years ago in a different part of the world books were burned. Treatises on philosophy, history, culture, the arts, sciences and medicine were carefully determined inappropriate and dangerous. Their writers' only guilt, a sin as old as the Devil Himself, was their religious affiliation — they were Jews. In fact, the burners not altogether careful, every once in a while in their zeal included a book by a non-Jewish author. Over the decades it seemed such an event could not reoccur. The slogan "Never Again!" reminds us of one of humanity's darkest hours when layers were peeled off to expose only the rotten, and evil fermented and multiplied. We were clearly wrong. Most have forgotten this not-so-ancient promise and the prophecy that history will repeat itself is now being fulfilled in front our eyes. It is 2010, the dawn of a new decade. The innocence of youth mingled with inner wisdom of our ancestors' experiences guide the very young 21st century. Yet, our urge to run before we walk is too strong, like Jan's excitement while his mother shuddered. Five thousand dollars worth of detergents produced in a Jewish town in Judea and Samaria was confiscated from an Arab driving the consignment and was then destroyed. Using Israeli-made products "stands contrary to the national and moral obligations of the Palestinians." Particularly when the production takes place in Judea and Samaria. The egregious action was sanctioned by no other than Israel's "partners for peace," the Palestinian Authority. 
Once they burned books, now the Palestinian Prime Minister participates in such burning events. It might have been fruits during the event in which he participated, at the same time Jewish people around the world celebrated the New Year of the Trees. Jews build and innovate; the so-called Palestinians destroy and kill. Yesterday, the Presidents of the Major Jewish Organizations in the USA went to visit that very same Prime Minister to see if peace could be advanced. They like Jan, while like Jan's mother, fear evident in her eyes, I am amazed: Why are we those who initiate, bother, make the effort and extend a hand while our enemy, whose sights are clearly not set on peace, acts forcefully and effectively against us? Could a plea from B'nai Brith to Hitler have saved six million? Israelis have long employed Arabs. Even at the most orthodox "settlements," Arabs earn a respectable living and work alongside observant Jews, learning a trade, often treated like family. Israelis simply know no other way. Then one of those same Arabs returns with an axe and murders a young child, and attempts to kill another. Israeli doctors treat Arabs, and then a young Arab woman comes for treatment, using a special Israeli waiver allowing her passage for health reasons. She was strapped with explosives as repayment, what she believed to be an "All Merciful" type of payment. Arabs once worked in construction and to this very day are employed in numerous jobs in Israel. Is there anything wrong with this picture? Once they burned books. Today they have embarked on a very effective campaign, sophisticated propaganda against the Jewish right to the Land of Israel. The response? To achieve peace, we must better their economic conditions, claims the Israeli Prime Minister. Is everyone blind in Israel, or has everyone fallen victim to the most extraordinary campaign of deceit embarked upon since the Nazi regime? Apparently, in the Mediterranean little makes sense, history repeats itself and one should never be surprised. "Gaza Under Siege" is another aspect of the Campaign to Destroy the Jewish State. The "Siege" is so effective, indeed, that people around the world protest to this very day against the Israeli "disproportional response," "atrocities" committed and the on-going blockade. The Response? Humanitarian aid continues to flow from Israel, alongside fuel and electricity. Israel stands accused even as she continues sending Social Security funds into Gaza. Israelis are blamed for war crimes and crimes against humanity, yet they provide medical service, send an elevator to a hospital in Gaza and work to fight an outbreak of H1N1 in humans or Bird Flu among animals. Jan's mother was horrified, for her son did not know better. When humanity degrades itself to burning books, the end of days has come. I am petrified as I see the real entity under siege: Israel is being blamed for sins she never committed. Israeli doctors are being excluded from conferences and Israeli academics are not allowed into professional societies, memberships are being denied and participation is prohibited. Israeli officials, at the highest levels, are unable to land in many countries lest they be tried for imaginary crimes, wrongly accused as a means of deterrence and an excuse for hatred. Worse, Israelis are being boycotted, multinationals are beginning to divest from Israel and she may soon find herself unable to export — whether produce, goods, services or knowledge and human capital. We are still in the early stages of this campaign of evil. At present, Israeli officials are being silenced, they are not allowed to speak freely at universities around the world. The truth is unable to surface under the expanding web of lies and hatred. Will Israel be able to survive on her own, until everyone finally recognizes the true nature of the beast? Will it be too late? How is it that we just live again the horrors of the past and those who can still remember keep silent? Once they burned books, then they burned bodies, mountains of bodies of children, women and men, young and old, healthy and frail. Their only sin was being Jewish. Today they start the process again, yet the crematoriums are still cold. We must stop the process before the ovens are warmed up, for we will be unable to stop it once the ashes start spewing from the tall chimneys the world over.
In the series "Postcards from Israel," Ari Bussel and Norma Zager invite readers throughout the world to join them as they present reports from Israel as seen by two sets of eyes: Bussel's on the ground, Zager's counter-point from home. Israel and the United States are inter-related — the two countries we hold dearest to our hearts — and so is this "point — counter-point" presentation that has, since 2008, become part of our lives.
Contact them by mail at aribussel@gmail.com
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: A PARTIAL VICTORY
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 21, 2010. |
|
|
|
When I originally wrote about Prime Minister Netanyahu's plans for developing heritage sites, so that Israelis could tour the land and understand our roots here, I praised this effort. I still praise it in its essence, as it should tell our narrative and reinforce our connection to Israel. However...the heart of that ancient narrative, the core of our heritage (outside of Jerusalem) is in Judea and Samaria — that is, beyond the Green Line in territory that the Arabs are claiming. Uneasy even in my moment of praise, I advised people to write and thank the prime minister for this conceptualization, and also urge him to include sites in Judea and Samaria. Today Netanyahu unveiled his plan at the weekly Cabinet meeting. Word had it that three places beyond the Green Line — Herodion (a palace/fortress built by Herod in the Judean desert), Sussiya (an ancient city from Talmudic times in the southern desert with a synagogue whose magnificent floor mosaics can still be seen) and Qumran (the site of an ancient community, in the desert near the Dead Sea, with caves where the Dead Sea Scrolls were hidden) — would be on the list. It was said, however, that other sites — most significantly the Machpelah (Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hevron) and Kever Rachel (Rachel's Tomb outside of Bethlehem) — would not be included. But it seems that pressure worked, and both the Machpelah and Kever Rachel will be on the list. This is a signal lesson for us — that making noise does make a difference. The noise came from many sources — from protesting lobbyists, members of the government such as Uzi Landau, and members of the newly formed Knesset Lobby for the Land of Greater Israel. This is a major victory, as these sites reach back to the Torah. We are told about the cave that Avraham purchased from Ephron the Hittite for Sarah's burial, and about Rachel, who died on the way to Bethlehem, when giving birth to Benjamin, and was buried by Jacob on the side of the road. These two sites are the second and third holiest for Jews, after Jerusalem. It would be unthinkable to leave these out. ~~~~~~~~~~ But we are not done. The list, we are being told, is yet to be finally closed. And there are other sites still missing that ought be included: Shilo (an archeological site in Samaria, adjacent to the modern community of the same name). This is Biblical in source — from the time of Joshua until the building of the Temple, this is where the Tabernacle rested; it was a place of pilgrimage. Beit El (ruins of an ancient town thousands of years old in Samaria, adjacent to the modern community of the same name). This too has Torah associations: Most significantly, it is where Jacob has his dream of the ladder that went from land to heaven, with angels ascending and descending; he erected a sacred pillar there, declaring "Surely there is G-d in this place and I did not know." Even now, it is appropriate to urge Prime Minister Netanyahu to add these places to the list. This is not simply about teaching our children about our heritage — as important as it is to do this. It is also about letting the world know what our rights are and what we lay claim to. We must not abandon our heritage. Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369)
~~~~~~~~~~ Then there is another site that I know, realistically, will not be included, but which must be recognized here because of its connection to our ancient heritage and the current political situation: Kever Yosef (Joseph's Tomb) — in Shechem (called Nablus by the Arabs) in Samaria — is traditionally considered to be the burial place of Joseph's bones, which were carried out with the Israelites during the Exodus. It was this that Joseph had implored his family to do. According to the book of Joshua, the bones were buried in a "parcel of land Jacob [had] bought from the sons of Hamor, father of Shechem, for a hundred pieces of silver." This is a particularly sensitive issue. In modern times, Israel acquired the Kever in 1967 and a yeshiva was established on the site. Then, as part of the Oslo process, in 1995 the area was turned over to the Palestinian Authority, which had an obligation "to ensure free, unimpeded and secure access" to it. But Arabs promptly ransacked it, and began turning it into a mosque. This was a moment of shame for Israel. In 2002, with Operation Defensive Shield, Israel again gained control of the Kever; but it sits in a PA-administered area, surrounded by Arabs who would just as soon see Jews gone from the place. It was not until 2007 that Jews were again allowed to visit Kever Yosef. Visits are done at night, so as not to "unduly agitate" the surrounding Arab population, and under heavy IDF guard. Degrading. ~~~~~~~~~~ Follow-up on the visit of American Jewish leaders from the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations to Ramallah to hear Fayyad last week: Hard questions were submitted in writing before Fayyad spoke, but he addressed none of them, and instead spoke in platitudes. No Q & A session was permitted after he spoke, so there was no opportunity to challenge him. This was no a dialogue, but a staged event. Alan Solow, who is chair of the Conference, introduced Fayyad, according to one reliable anonymous source, in terms that were "sickeningly gracious." (Mr. Solow, an attorney, hails from Chicago, it should be noted, and has been an enthusiastic supporter of Obama.) I voice again — perhaps more explicitly this time — my distress about this visit. It strikes me as simply wrong to offer the prime minister of the PA a gesture that seems to affirm his legitimacy when the PA won't talk to the leaders of Israel. It is my understanding that with one exception everyone who was at the convention attended this meeting. Some did so, however, with considerable reluctance. I can only assume that they imagined they might have input or an opportunity to challenge Fayyad if in attendance. For those who went hoping to improve the "peace process" or "enhance dialogue" I have no words that would make a difference. ~~~~~~~~~~ You might enjoy reading JINSA Report #964, which considers all of the possibilities regarding the assassination of al-Mabhouh beyond the glib conclusion that the Mossad did it:
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
HOW & WHEN GENERAL ALEXANDER HAIG SAVED ISRAEL
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, February 21, 2010. |
|
I have been listening to main news channels eulogizing General Alexander Haig, who died today at age 85 and his considerable exploits throughout his life. For me there was something missing which should have been there. I did not hear from them about how and when General Haig saved Israel. In 1973, during the Yom Kippur War, Israel was the target of a secretly planned attack by Egypt and Syria — among other nations in the region. American intelligence knew definitely that the War was imminent but didn't tell Israel until 2 hours before the surprise attack began — when they knew Israel needed a minimum of 16 hours to mobilize her civilian army. Nixon and Kissinger threatened Israel's Prime Minister Golda Meir not to pre-empt or to mobilize — or else America would not re-supply Israel if the coming war lasted longer that the miraculous Six Days War, and Israel would have to go it alone. Israel was also not adequately prepared internally because those who planned Israel's defense had become imbued with what became known as the "conceptzia". That conception was that none of those countries mentioned above would dare attack Israel, given the losses they incurred in prior wars. The "planners" and Intel agencies that believed in the "conceptzia" were wrong! The sneak attack of October 6, 1973 was on Yom Kippur, the holiest day of the Jewish year. The surprise attack was effective. Israel had to use a Russian technique of raining down artillery shells on advancing Egyptian armor in the South and Syria in the North. Within a week Israel began to run low on all weapons' systems and munitions. They pleaded with President Richard Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger for urgent re-supply but, it was very slow in coming. I recall a report quoting or paraphrasing Henry (Heinrich) Kissinger saying: "Let them (the Israelis) bleed a bit, [presumably, then they would be more willing to surrender their Land for Peace]". But, there was one man who didn't agree with that foot-dragging and forcing the Jews of Israel to "bleed a bit". General Alexander Haig, President Nixon's Chief of Staff, began to open munition stores at American bases in America and in Germany. Out came pallets of artillery shells, TOW missiles and more which were loaded on Galaxy cargo aircraft. Those Galaxies headed toward Israel. As I recall, I had just landed at Ben Gurion Airport at about the time the Galaxies landed and were being unloaded at a fast pace. The planes were carrying artillery shells, TOW missiles and other ammunition I was informed later. (1) John Loftus, the author of "Secret War Against The Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People 1920-1992" was a first hand eye-witness on October 6th when Richard Nixon's chief of staff Gen. Alexander Haig ordered the Infantry Officer Training School at Fort Benning, Georgia to train 40 Israeli commanders to use the TOW (tube-launched, optically-tracked, wire-guided) missile system. Then Loftus briefed the Israelis on the TOW capabilities. The "kill ratio" for the TOW was 97%. Al Haig stripped every TOW missile on the eastern seaboard of America and from Germany and shipped them to Israel. They loaded every TOW in stock on planes. The Israeli commanders were back in Israel by October 14, just in time to repulse a massive Egyptian armored attack in the Sinai with the TOWs. It was the turning point of the war. Haig had saved Henry Kissinger's reputation by giving Israel the TOWs. (2) Skipping a few things and days, I found myself in the Sinai Desert, meeting with then General Ariel (Arik) Sharon in what he called: "the killing fields": burned tanks and army trucks dotted the landscape as if they were placed neatly on a giant chess board — with bodies scattered in the sand. Once you smell a dead body, cooking in the sun, you never forget. If not for General Haig's re-supply of weapons and Israel's extraordinarily brave fighters, that scene could have been repeated all the way to Tel Aviv. While the U.S. and European news neglected to tell that story on the evening news, nevertheless, it should have been on all the Israeli media. General Alexander Haig, should be eulogized in Israel, with special memorials to a great man who saved Israel — one in the South and one on the Golan Heights. Hopefully, Israel's current Prime Minister Binyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu has the sensibility to tell the Haig story about a righteous Gentile who was a true friend of the Jewish State at what was a strategically perilous time in 1973. We do need that same kind of hero today in Israel and for Israel. G-d speed dear friend, and may your name be remembered for a blessing. "THE JEW ROOM" by Emanuel A. Winston, March 2000: "I wonder how the American people would react if they suddenly found out that our most trusted Intelligence Agencies were conducting their own private war against Israel and filtered out Jewish employees or professors who just might stumble across this terrible secret. Perhaps that is why U.S. Intelligence was withheld about the imminent surprise attack by Egypt and Syria during Yom Kippur 1973, until the very last minute when it was too late. "Was it an oversight when the U.S. withheld sending counter measure equipment for Israeli aircraft when they were being knocked out of the sky by Russian SAM missiles in Egypt during the 1973 War? Was it an accident that they finally arrived without their operating manuals and Israel had to call back her electronics experts globally to reverse engineer the black boxes to get them to work? Did Caspar Weinberger as Secretary of Defense provide Saudi Arabia with satellite photos of Israel's defenses over the years?" (1.)
1. "The Jew Room" by Emanuel A. Winston, Freeman Center
for Strategic Studies March 2000
2. "The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Espionage Betrayed the Jewish People: 1920-1994 Chapter 14 — The Real Hero of Yom Kippur" pgs. 304; 315-316 by John Loftus & Mark Aarons St. Martin's Press NY 1996 BTW John Loftus, 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@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
CHILD ON MARTYRDOM ON MUSLIM TV: 'THIS YEAR MY MOTHER PRESENTED ME AS A GIFT TO ALLAH'
Posted by CPocerl, February 20, 2010. |
|
This is from The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) and is called "Indoctrination of Children". Remember the old Bill Cosby show "Kids Say The Darnedest Things?" Well, yeah, this is nothing like that.... |
|
In a recent TV children's show, aired on the Egyptian Al-Rahma TV, a child preacher, Abd Al-Fattah Marwan, recites the legend of Abu Qudama and the young boy, who died a martyr on the battlefield in the early days of Islam.In the legend, which glorifies Jihad and martyrdom, the boy, Muhammad, is said to have beseeched Abu Qudama to let him join the Jihad against the infidels despite his young age. After shooting three arrows, which killed "three Byzantine soldiers," he died a martyr's death and went to Paradise. There he met his wife-to-be, whose face radiated blinding light and whose beauty was maddening. In the program, Abd Al-Fattah Marwan — himself a child — recounts that the boy smiled in his sleep when he dreamt that he would be martyred the next day. "My father was martyred last year, and my brother and uncle the year before that," he says. This year, "my mother has presented me as a gift to Allah." Paradise is described in endearing terms, as full of "a scented bouquet of black-eyed virgins" of indescribable beauty. The mother, upon hearing the news of her son's martyrdom and when her daughter drops dead from shock, praises Allah, "who did not send any offspring of mine to the Hellfire."
To view this clip on MEMRI TV, visit
We Meet to Talk about the Love of Martyrdom Show host: "Let us begin with our son, Abd Al-Fattah Marwan, who will tell us about the love of martyrdom for the sake of Allah. Can you do this, Abd Al-Fattah?" Abd Al-Fattah Marwan: "Allah willing. [...] "We meet today to talk about the love of martyrdom for the sake of Allah. Yes, the love of martyrdom for the sake of Allah... Dearly beloved, Allah said: 'Allah has bought from the believers their lives, their property, because they shall have Paradise. They shall fight for the sake of Allah, and slay and be slain.' "Dearly beloved, a woman came to [the commander] Abu Qudama Al-Shami holding two braids of her hair, and said: 'Abu Qudama, I cut off two braids of my hair, so that you could make them into reins for your horse, for the sake of Allah. Abu Qudama took the braids from her. "Abu Qudama says: When we wanted to set out for Jihad the next day, a boy stood in my way, and said: I implore you, in the name of Allah, to take me with you on the Jihad for the sake of Allah. Abu Qudama said: You are but a child, and cannot carry a weapon. 
"My Mother Has Presented Me as a Gift to Allah This Year" "The boy said: I implore you, in the name of Allah, Abu Qudama. My mother has given me as a gift to Allah. Do not return the gift. Abu Qudama said: I will take you on one condition. The boy said: On what condition? Abu Qudama said: If Allah decrees that you be martyred, you should vouch for me before Allah. The boy said: You got it. I will vouch for you before Allah, if he decrees that I be martyred. [...] "Abu Qudama says: One day, the boy went to prepare food. He was late coming back, so I went to see that he was safe. I discovered that the boy had lit the fire, placed the pot on it, and fallen asleep next to the fire. I looked at the boy, and saw that he was smiling. Then he smiled some more. Then he began to laugh until he woke up. "Abu Qudama said: What was that about, boy? The boy said: To Allah we belong, and to Him we return. By Allah, Abu Qudama, my mother considered me [a martyr] next to Allah. My father was martyred last year, and my brother and uncle the year before that. My mother has presented me as a gift to Allah this year. [...] "The boy said: While I was asleep, I dreamt that the Resurrection had occurred, and that Allah had ordered me to enter Paradise. The boy continued: When I entered Paradise, I saw a scented bouquet of black-eyed virgins, whose beauty I could never even begin to describe, Abu Qudama. By Allah, I could never even begin to describe their beauty, Abu Qudama. "One of them looked at me, and said: This is the husband of Al-Mardhiya. I asked her who Al-Mardhiya was, and she said: Don't you know her? I said that I didn't. She said: She is your wife in Paradise. I asked her: Where is Al-Mardhiya? She pointed to one of the palaces of Paradise, and said: In that palace. Go inside, so you can see Al-Mardhiya."
Black-Eyed Virgin in Paradise: We Have a Date Tomorrow "The boy said: I knocked on the palace door, and went in. I saw a black-eyed virgin. I swear, Abu Qudama, if Allah had not ordained that we should not be blind in [Paradise], I would have become blind from the light radiating from her face. If Allah had not ordained that we should not be blind in Paradise, I would have become blind from the light radiating from her face. If Allah had not ordained that we keep our sanity, I would have gone mad from the intensity of her beauty. "I asked her: Are you Al-Mardhiya? She said: Yes, my love. I have been raised for you in the palaces of Paradise for the past 500 years. When I tried to touch her with my hand, she said: No. May Allah spare you the disgrace and the depravity. We have a date tomorrow, after the noon prayer, in the Paradise of the All-Merciful God. "Dearly beloved, Abu Qudama said: At the exact time set by the black-eyed virgin, the boy said to me: By Allah, give me three arrows. I said: You will waste them. The boy said: Allah willing, I won't. The boy took the three arrows and put them in his quiver. "During the Jihad, he said: 'May God be with you, Abu Qudama,' and he shot one arrow, killing a Byzantine soldier. Then he said it again, shot another arrow, and killed another Byzantine soldier. Then he said it a third time, shot another arrow, and killed a third Byzantine soldier. Then the Byzantines saw him and killed him. "The boy fell from his horse, and when Abu Qudama saw him, stained with the blood of martyrdom, he dismounted from his horse behind the boy, and said: Boy, don't forget your pledge. The boy said: I will not forget. I will vouch for you before God. "The boy said: By God, Abu Qudama, I ask you to take this shirt, stained with the blood of martyrdom, and bring it to my mother. Abu Qudama said: Who is your mother, boy? The boy said: My mother is the woman who gave you the two braids. Allahhhhhhh. My mother is the woman who gave you the two braids. Yes, one generation after another was brought up to obey Allah, on glory, and on fighting for the sake of the religion of Allah."
The Mother Said: "Give Me the Good News" that My Son Has Been Martyred "Abu Qudama said: When the Jihad was over, I went to the village of the boy's mother. The mother said: Give me the good news. Abu Qudama said: By Allah, he died fighting. He died killing three Byzantine soldiers. He killed them and was killed. May Allah's mercy be upon him. He sent you this shirt, stained with the blood of martyrdom, and said: Rejoice, oh mother. Your gift has been accepted, and Al-Mardhiya has been wedded to me in God's Paradise. "When his sister heard the news, she dropped dead. The mother looked at her daughter and said: Blessed be Allah, who has not sent any offspring of mine to the Hellfire." [...] 
The Grave Kept Shuddering and Ejecting the Corpse of the Boy From the MEMRI TV archives — Al-Nas TV, June 15, 2006: Egyptian cleric Sheik Muhammad Nassar [telling the story to a group of children of school age]: [...] "They dug a small ditch in the ground like a grave, and they put Sa'id in it, and covered it with earth. Then they began to walk away. All of a sudden, the grave shuddered, and they were frightened. What happened? The grave shuddered and ejected Sa'id. They said: 'Allah be praised, what's going on?' The corpse got out of the grave all by itself. They were amazed, and said: 'Allah be praised.' "Abu Qudama said to them: 'Wait just a moment. Let's try again. How can we possibly leave his corpse like this?' So they put him into the ground once again, and covered him with earth. After they covered him and began to walk away, the ground shuddered, and threw out the corpse again. They were all frightened, and began to shiver. Allah be praised. Allah Akbar. Then they all stood there in amazement. "Abu Qudama said: 'We cannot leave him like this. This is my beloved Sa'id. He instructed me to bury him when he dies, and to stay with him, and not to tell his mother anything. I must do it. I must bury Sa'id. I cannot leave him. Bury him again.' So he dug the grave himself, and said: 'My Lord, reveal this thing to us, my Lord. We want to bury him, my Lord.' They put him into the grave again, and began to walk away. Then the earth shuddered once again, and the corpse got out. So they said: 'Allah Akbar. This is Allah's doing.'"
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
FREEDOM & DEMOCRACY AT WORK IN IRAQ
Posted by Brother Shane, February 20, 2010. |
|
Sunni party drops out of Iraq's national elections (AP) AP — The Sunni wing of Iraq's leading nonsectarian political coalition said Saturday it will drop out of next month's election as a result of alleged Iranian influence on a Shiite-led vetting panel that blacklisted hundreds of candidates. Regardless who gets elected over there, will the outcome be any different? They still hate Israel and the Jews. They still have a death penalty for any Muslim converting to another religion. They still have ethnic cleansing (the Assyrians, ancient relatives of the Samaritans, and the oldest existing Christian population of Iraq, are systematically being exterminated). They still do not prosecute the murderers of Christians. They still have genocidal maniacs ready to take over. They still have a fascist constitution. Is that what our troops are dying for? More Iraqis have now died, since we invaded, than during the entire reign of Saddam Hussein...and more Americans have died there than all those killed on 9/11/2001. Terrorists are produced in mosques and madrassas...yet, when our troops attack the Taliban and al Qaeda, they're not allowed to shoot at Mosques when the enemy run & hide in them. What's the point? If we pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan then the "extremists" will just take over again. The whole thing is a joke. We're spending billion$ on sending them money, food, medical supplies, construction supplies, etc., etc. All we're doing is helping the Muslims to rebuild and repopulate quicker, once we leave. Muslims that will only do whatever their insane, Jew & Christian hating, Fascists leaders tell them to do. Our brilliant leaders are afraid to pull out because they know, once we do, things will only get worse...than before we went it. Never fails...history always repeats itself... See the following documents for specific pictures 1933 Hitler is elected Coalition Chancellor. Appears with President Hindenburg 1934 Hindenburg dies. Hitler is appointed Fuhrer and Chancellor and Commander in Chief 1935 Pogram-Nuremberg Laws removed Citizenship of Jews 1935 Pogram-Nuremberg Laws removed Citizenship of Jews 1936 Hitler illegally returned troops to the Rhineland 1936 Hitler aligns with Mussolini 1937 Prisoners arriving at Buchenwald 1937 Germans bomb the Basque city Guernica Contact Brother Shane at wisevirgin_777@yahoo.com |
|
U.S. AMBASSADOR TO SYRIA; ISRAELI ENERGY PROJECTS
WITH EGYPT/JORDAN?; OBAMA APPOINTS APOLOGIST FOR ISLAMIST CAUSES
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 20, 2010. |
|
U.S. APPOINTS AMBASSADOR TO SYRIA 
President Obama has nominated an ambassador for Syria, to "engage" it dealing with terrorism. Syria remains on the U.S. list of terrorist states primarily for sponsoring Hizbullah. The U.S. has a slim hope that it can praise Syria for constructive steps and wean it from Iran (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 1/3). What is a "constructive step?" It could be a ploy to make itself seem constructive. It could be a short-term coinciding of otherwise long-term conflicting interests that the U.S. Administration, which usually sees hope and positive steps by its enemies, would misinterpret as a realignment process. An example of this is what the U.S. calls "peace process," whereby the PLO signs agreements, but violates them and keeps moving to gain power without reforming for peace. I call it a war process. The West does not understand that Islam considers diplomacy the other side of the same coin as military means, each reinforcing the other.
GAZA BOMB WOUNDS ISRAELI SOLDIERS FACTS: An Israeli soldier was lightly wounded by a bomb planted at the Gaza-Israel border. IDF troops searched the area and found another bomb. A 16-year old Arab was arrested at the Gilboa roadblock, carrying two bombs. Terrorists threw a Molotov cocktail at an Israeli bus in the Gush Etzion area of Judea-Samaria (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/19). REMARKS: Planting bombs seems to be a major form of agriculture in Gaza. It could have been hothouse plants, left for the Arabs by the departing Israelis, but Arabs mismanaged, looted, and destroyed the hothouses. I suppose the U.S. is disappointed that Israel had not removed the
Gilboa roadblock. It cramps the Arab style of life and preserves
Israelis' life of style.
AHMADINEJAD SAYS A-BOMBS RELIGIOUSLY FORBIDDEN 
FACT: President Ahmadinejad says that Iran would not want nuclear weapons. He said his religion forbids it. REMARKS: What a relief! Too bad he did not reassure us years ago, instead of hiding most of his country's nuclear program from the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA), lying about it, taking steps that are not needed for civilian development but are needed for weaponry. With his statement, the IAEA can disregard its evidence that Iran is developing a nuclear warhead.
ISRAEL IN JOINT ENERGY PROJECTS WITH EGYPT AND JORDAN? Israel's Industry Minister Ben Eliezer discussed with Egyptian officials a huge, joint solar project in the Sinai. Egypt has a most suitable location, and Israel has advanced technology. A joint project could provide a significant portion of their national energy needs. "Mr. Salah Azzam, Director of the Bio-Fuels Division at the National Energy Research Center in Jordan, outlined his plans for the establishment of an Israeli-Jordanian bio-diesel plant by the end of 2010. The plant would be built along the border between Jordan and Israel and will be operated by representatives from both countries." "This project could serve as a great boost for establishing peace and security in the region and could promote peace efforts between Israel and its neighbors," said Azzam (www.imra.org.il, 2/19). Jointly run factories left Jordan feeling its high hopes were unrealized, and left Israelis assaulted by hostile Jordanians. Israeli border factories employing many Palestinian Arabs were attacked by terrorists and denounced by the Palestinian Authority (P.A.). Hamas attacked the gates through which trucks brought food into Gaza. Apparently, the P.A. does not like integration. As for Egypt, it could cut off the flow of electricity to Israel. This reminds me of my father's explanation of socialism. Institute socialism, he thought, and it would change human behavior for the better. It seemed to me that human behavior changed the socialist enterprises for the worse. So, here, although working together could show the Arabs that peace is possible, Muslims indoctrinated with hatred of Jews could ostracize the joint endeavors, as the professional unions of Jordan and Egypt do, now. Perhaps one should try but not raise excessive hope.
OBAMA APPOINTS APOLOGIST FOR ISLAMIST CAUSES 
President Obama has appointed "...an apologist for Islamist causes, Rashad Hussain, as U.S. envoy to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), a 57-member inter-governmental group of Muslim majority states. Hussain was quoted in 2004 in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs (WRMEA) as saying that Sami al-Arian, a Florida-based university professor sentenced in 2006 to more than four years in prison after pleading guilty to conspiring to aid the Islamist terrorist group, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), was the victim of "politically motivated persecutions" who was being prosecuted in order 'to squash dissent.'" "PIJ was designated by the U.S. government as a foreign terrorist organization in 1997, and in 2003, then Attorney-General John Ashcroft described it as 'one of the most violent terrorist organizations in the world.' PIJ has killed more than 100 Israelis in suicide bombings and other attacks, including American citizens Alisa Flatow,...and Shoshana Ben-Ishai..." "Hussain, who at the time of the cited remarks was...an editor, of the Yale Law Journal, went on to serve as a Department of Justice trial attorney and in January 2009 was appointed deputy associate counsel in the Obama White House." "In addition, Hussain appeared this year at a Leadership Training Event held by the Islamist lobby, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), an Islamist organization that has opposed security measures that target Islamist terrorism, defended convicted murderers, and some of whose senior officials have themselves been found to support terrorist groups. In a 2007 article in the Texas Journal on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights examining anti-terrorism initiatives in the U.S., Hussain opposed new security measures imposed on nonimmigrant visitors from 25 countries because 24 of them were Muslim countries, saying that the policy therefore appeared to be 'based on the notion that certain characteristics make one more likely to be a terrorist: e.g., membership in a particular religious group, having a particular national origin, and membership in a particular racial group ... Federal law should adopt a standard that protects national security while forbidding the targeting of non-citizens solely on the basis of their racial, religious, or ethnic backgrounds.' Of course, the 24 countries were targeted because that is where Islamist threats to the U.S. have emanated, not because of anti-Muslim bias." "ZOA National Chairman of the Board Dr. Michael Goldblatt said, 'We oppose the appointment of Rashad Hussain as U.S. envoy to the OIC because his record indicates that he associates with and supports Islamist apologists and apologetics, when any U.S. representative should be exposing such people and practices and fostering moderate Muslim voices.'" "We are deeply worried by a pattern with the Obama Administration of appointing apologists for Muslim extremists to positions in government dealing with national security and the Middle East." "In recent weeks, we saw the Obama Administration appoint Salam Al-Marayati to speak overseas on behalf of the U.S, including to UNESCO in Paris, despite the fact that Marayati is a vocal Israel-hater and apologist for Islamist terrorism who has called for Israel's destruction; suggested Israel be placed on a suspect list as the possible perpetrator of the 9/11 acts of terrorism; condemned already in the 1990s American air strikes of Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan and Sudan; and defended the rights of Holocaust deniers." "Last year, the Obama Administration sought to appoint Chas. W. Freeman as Chairman of the National Intelligence Council (NIC), a man with a long record of extreme anti-Israel hostility and support for tyrannical regimes like China and Saudi Arabia, which ZOA documented at the time. Freeman withdrew from his appointment..." "In 2008, while still campaigning for the presidency, Barack Obama was touting as one of his top foreign policy advisers former Senator Chuck Hagel (R-NE), one of only 12 senators who refused to formally call upon the European Union to declare Hizballah a terrorist organization and who in 2005 was one of only 27 senators who refused to sign a letter to President Bush, urging him to pressure the Palestinian Authority (PA) to ban terrorist groups from participating in Palestinian legislative elections. CAIR even praised Hagel in 2006 saying, 'Potential presidential candidates for 2008, like Hillary Clinton, John McCain, Joe Biden and Newt Gingrich, were falling all over themselves to express their support for Israel. The only exception to that rule was Senator Chuck Hagel.'" "Such an ill-conceived appointments and advisers call into question the Obama Administration's commitment to combating Islamist extremists. Indeed, in the Administration's refusal to even refer to Islamist extremists and its tendency to refer to terrorist acts perpetrated by Islamists as 'man-made disasters,' we see a deeply concerning blindness to the threat. In the appointment of Rashad Hussain as envoy to the OIC, we see further lack of seriousness about dealing with the problem." (2/18 press release by ZOA, headquartered in New York and of which I am a member.) Do these appointees represent the U.S. to the Muslims or the Muslims to the U.S.. So these appointees provide inside information on the U.S.? What does Obama thinks about this? Why do Muslim clerics not condemn Obama to death for having abandoned the faith, as they have done with others? It is getting to be a pattern for Obama. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: THE TOOTH FAIRY LIVES
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 20, 2010. |
|
Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat) I refer to the tooth fairy because — as I reported last week — Netanyahu advisor Ron Dermer, speaking at the Jerusalem Conference, said it was more rational to believe in the tooth fairy than to think that our acceding to international demands would make us more respected in the world. That "fairy" theme carries over in the piece that Caroline Glick wrote on Friday, which she entitled "The Fatah Fairy Tale." I think this column — which exposes so much — is one of the more important ones she has written in a while. The column deals with Fahmi Shabaneh — who I've written about a couple of times now. Shabaneh is the former member of PA Intelligence who gave an exclusive to Khaled Abu Toameh, in the Jerusalem Post, regarding the degree of corruption that exists in the Palestinian Authority. Glick carries it one step further, however: Her focus is not on what Shabeneh revealed (which is plenty, with regard to millions pocketed by PA officials), but rather with the fact that there has been silence concerning these revelations. Silence from the media, which would be in a frenzy of reporting if any allegations were made against Israel, silence from Obama, silence from the Europeans, and silence from the Netanyahu government. The world, you see, is so invested in the legend of its own making — that Fatah is "moderate" and a credible partner for peace with Israel — that to face the truth now would be to make a whole lot of people look very foolish indeed and to send crashing to the ground the expectation, so eagerly and foolishly embraced, that "peace" is possible now. Netanyahu, who fully understands the truth, is afraid to rock the boat, says Glick. But she argues that only Israel can force the rest of the world to face the truth about Fatah. Read it all:
~~~~~~~~~~ A meeting that American Jewish leaders had on Thursday with PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad provides troubling, even alarming, evidence of the degree to which the fairy tale of Fatah moderation continues to be embraced: The Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish American Organizations is in Israel for its annual conference, and members of the group went to Ramallah to meet with Fayyad. There is reason enough to ask in the first place why they went, when the PA is demanding the '67 lines for a state, and won't sit with Israel. But take a look at what Fayyad said to them: The PA is doing a great deal to prepare itself for statehood, but Israel's military operations in PA-controlled areas "undermine our credibility and standing. We need actions taken by the Israelis to be consistent with the notion of a state in evolution. [Israeli incursions put] the whole enterprise at risk." In a word, he wants Israel to stop going after terrorists in PA areas. ~~~~~~~~~~ It's worth taking a closer look at what's going on here. Fayyad is making a demand of Israel via American Jews. Why? Because he hopes or expects that they will communicate this to the Israeli government, or to their government, which then will presumably put pressure on Israel. Do the American Jewish leaders know they're being used this way? Do they care? More importantly, do they understand the total impropriety of Fayyad's demand? I've written several times here about the fact that the PA security forces, including those being trained by the Americans, are not up to — or not willing to fully assume — the task of taking on Hamas. The IDF does nightly incursions into PA areas to catch terrorists and uncover weapons caches and manufacturing. It is in good part because of these diligent operations that we have had a huge drop in terrorism. And Shabaneh, in his interview with Abu Toameh, made the same point. Hamas would have taken over already, he said, if it were not for the IDF. Only if the hard truth is totally ignored can there be any notion of strengthening an entity that will live by Israel's side in peace, taking out terrorists as it needs to. It's painful, and dangerous, that governments and media ignore that hard truth. But what about American Jewish leadership? I fear for where many of them stand on this, and hope to follow up. It is not yet clear to me precisely which members of the Conference were in Ramallah or how they responded. ~~~~~~~~~~ News has undoubtedly made it to many, if not most of you, regarding the fact that Dubai police have alleged that the assassins of Hamas's Mahmoud al-Mabhouh — reputedly at least 11 in number — came into the country on forged British, Irish, French and German passports. In six instances, the passports are reported to have carried the names of actual persons, olim (immigrants) from Britain, who are living here in Israel, and in an additional case there was a German-Israeli. That there were names of Israelis used on some of these passports has led to charges that this was a Mossad operation. This may or may not have been the case. (Remember that the passports were not Israeli, but British-issued.) The fact remains that al-Mabhouh deserved to be assassinated. He was tasked with overseeing the smuggling of upgraded missiles from Iran into Gaza (missiles that would have put the Tel Aviv area within Hamas sites), and was apparently involved in this undertaking when in Dubai. He came in without a security entourage and in circumstances that were suspect. Dubai officials are in quite a state of fury over what they are reporting, and are even demanding that Meir Dagan, head of the Mossad, be arrested. They certainly seem much more concerned about al-Mabhouh's murder than about the purpose of his visit in their country in the first place. The Israel position is that there is nothing definitive linking Israel to the assassinations. While the media are having a field day with this, and undoubtedly there are those who will utilize it to further demonize Israel, there are signs that the fury will fizzle. Israeli Ambassador to Britain, Ron Prosor, was invited into the British Foreign Office for a discussion of the matter, but the fact that, in diplomatic parlance, he wasn't "summoned," which suggests a reprimand, is considered significant. The Jerusalem Post editorial on this subject is on the mark in suggesting that it is a sort of moral impoverishment to refuse to acknowledge that sometimes the ends do justify the means. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
LONE-WOLF TERRORISM WARNING
Posted by Susana K-M, February 19, 2010. |
|
THE WARNING — This is delicate, and the source must be hidden. I received the following e-mail from a highly qualified person. The e-mail has been edited to disguise the individuals involved: |
|
........A friend...who works in a very high intelligence position in the national government made clear...yesterday that the most uncontrollable and unpredictable terrorism problem involves "lone wolf" operatives who get propaganda from terrorist websites that eventually lead them to commit terrorist acts. The Fort Hood killer is an example of that. Expect more such incidents. He described the likelihood of continued terrorist incidents within the US as a "certainty." He also told us that since 9/11 the government has stopped "hundreds and hundreds" of domestic terrorism efforts, none of which are known to the public or media. Many of these would have produced true catastrophes and came quite close to fruition. He indicated that Al Qaeda is currently experiencing an "upswing" in its resources and capabilities. This person travels overseas always with government-provided bodyguards. COMMENT: Please remember that warning. And remember the statement that we've stopped "hundreds and hundreds" of domestic terrorism attempts. I'm sure the left feels that each of our successes was deeply offensive to the innocent, misunderstood jihadists. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
THIS BE SATIRE: CAIR FILES COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT SUIT AGAINST AUSTIN SUICIDE PILOT
Posted by CPocerl, February 19, 2010. |
|
This comes from
|
|
The Council on American-Islamic Relations has filed a posthumous lawsuit against Andrew Joseph Stack, the man who flew his plane into an Austin, Texas IRS building on Thursday. The copyright infringement suit maintains that Stack "knowingly utilized a copyright protected technique for his own personal gain." "To me this is an open and shut case," said CAIR attorney Murray Goldstein. "Don't think so? Let's try a little free association here. If I were to say, 'Fly a plane on a suicide mission into a building', what is the first group that comes to mind? No, it's not the Shriners. Nope, not the Menonites either. And it's also not someone named 'Andrew.' Case closed." CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper had more to add. 
"Once again a Westerner has seen fit to coopt an idea from his Muslim betters," said Hooper. "What bothers me most is the utter lack of originality that Mr. Stack displayed. He could have crashed a hydrofoil into Ibrahim Hooper CAIR Files Copyright Infringement Suit Against Austin Suicide Pilotthat building. Or he could have packed himself with explosives, tucked a platypus under each arm, rented a crane, and bungee jumped through the roof as horrified onlookers screamed and debated the correct way of verbalizing the plural form of 'platypus'. Lame. The most tragic part of this whole story is had he only taken the time to convert to Islam beforehand, we'd have a glorious martyr on our hands instrad of a copyright infringing jack-hole." Related posts 1. "You May View Suicide As Your Last Chance To Shake The Pillars
Of A World That Has Turned Its Back On You"
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
"DEVOUT MUSLIM" DAD THREW HIS 3 MO OLD DAUGHTER OFF BRIDGE AFTER CONSULTING HIS IMAM
Posted by CPocerl, February 19, 2010. |
|
He reportedly drove to Jersey mosque, consulted imam immediately after abducting daughter This was written by Chelsea Schilling and appeared yesterday
in World Net Daily
|
|
A 21-year-old New Jersey man accused of kidnapping his 3-month-old daughter and throwing her off a bridge is described by his father as a devout Muslim who prayed regularly and is said to have immediately visited mosques and confessed to an imam following his crime. Shamsid-Din Abdur-Raheem, an aspiring lawyer and student at Richard Stockton College, reportedly held a leadership position in the Muslim Student Association at Stockton, according to college senior Zaw Win. The group's member and officer list has been disabled on its website. He was also an intern in Washington, D.C., with the juveniles section of the Office of the Attorney General, according to March 2009 press release from Stockton College. He was fired after only a month for missing work and not completing assignments. He lashed out during his termination, and security personnel escorted him out of the building. Abdur-Raheem allegedly forced his way into the baby's maternal grandmother's home at 4 p.m. on Feb. 16, punched the 60-year-old woman in the face and choked her. He took 3-month old Zara Malani-lin Abdur, and the grandmother chased him outside. She threw herself on the hood of a Dodge Caravan as Abdur-Raheem climbed into the passenger side, clutching his daughter, New Jersey's Star-Ledger reports. According to some reports, he left with an unidentified man at the wheel, though other accounts say he was the only man in the van. The baby's mother, Venetta Benjamin, has full custody of the baby and is not married to Abdur-Raheem. He had reportedly threatened to harm Benjamin in the week prior to the abduction because she didn't want to marry him. Benjamin was filing a restraining order against him at the time he abducted his daughter. After arriving at the Driscoll Bridge and dropping his daughter into the icy cold water of the Raritan River, Abdur-Raheem is said to have immediately driven to see Imam Amin Muhammad at the Masjid Mohammed in Atlantic City, and then to Masjid un-Nur in Camden County. His father, Muhsin Abdur-Raheem, described his son as a devout Muslim and said he prayed often. He said his son sought counsel from an imam at Masjid Muhammad following the abduction. Shamsid-Din Abdur-Raheem then visited his father, who called the police around 8 p.m. Authorities stopped Abdur-Raheem's red 2002 Dodge Caravan in Winslow Township but did not find the baby with him. Police say Shamsid-Din Abdur-Raheem told them he threw the baby off the Garden State Parkway's Driscoll Bridge. He has been charged with kidnapping and attempted murder, aggravated assault and child endangerment. The kidnapping charge carries a maximum sentence of 30 years in state prison, and the attempted murder charge carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in state prison Despite the alleged confession, he pleaded not guilty during his arraignment today. "We're all distraught about this," his father told the Philadelphia Inquirer. "We're faithful people. We don't condone any kind of violence." Despite an exhaustive search, dozens of emergency personnel have been unable to find the baby. Authorities say her chances for survival are slim at this point. Asked if he believes she may survive, the father said, "I hope it's a miracle."
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
JERUSALEM MAYOR'S PLAN TO LEGALIZE HOUSING DENOUNCED; IDF INDICATES MISSILE MENACE GREAT AND GROWING; NATIONAL HERITAGE SITES
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 19, 2010. |
|
PALESTINIAN CENTER FOR HUMAN RIGHTS CONDEMNS P.A. The Palestinian Center for Human Rights condemned Abbas' regime for harassing journalists. The Center cited a number of arrests. It suggests that journalists should not have to take sides between Abbas' Fatah and Hamas (www.imra.org.il, 2/17). The Center has condemned both parts of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) for harassing members of the other party, for police state tactics, for allowing murder, and for letting explosives be outside of arsenals and therefore explode among civilians. I have reported such Center complaints and also other forms of repression of Arabs by Arabs. I agree with the Center about this, but note its ignoring of Arab abuses of Jews' human rights. Do any Westerners care about Arab oppression of Arabs? People who express indignation against Israel for alleged abuse of Arabs rarely express indignation against Arabs for actual abuse of Arabs or of Jews. What shall we conclude about these one-sided types of indignation?
JERUSALEM MAYOR'S PLAN TO LEGALIZE HOUSING IS DENOUNCED 
FACTS: Land activist Aryeh King denounced Jerusalem Mayor Barkat's plan to retroactively legalize housing in the Silwan section of Jerusalem. Arabs have about 100 illegal houses there, built without permits and on public land. Some Jews built one house, illegally high. International pressure on Israel is to remove the Jews' one illegally built house and not the Arabs' 100. The Mayor suggests either razing them all, or, as he prefers, retroactively legalizing them all, or almost all, but requiring the Jewish owners to remove their top floor. COMPLAINT: Mr. King finds this policy discriminatory against Jews. He also objects to retroactively condoning illegal activity by Arabs. He says this is not the right way to "fight the Arabs." (Arutz-7, 2/18.) EXPLANATION: By "fight the Arabs," I think that King perceives a
return of the widespread, pre-independence, Arab effort to take over
the country. His complaint was about Arab violation of planning,
zoning, and building laws and in usurping public land. Legalizing
illegal Arab land use, which Israel does repeatedly, has not ended the
problem of it. Rather, it encourages further illegal activity, by
building an expectation that if done large-scale, and accompanied by
threats of violence, and supported by international bias against
Israel, would get the new violations legalized, too.
ISRAEL REBUFFS J STREET-LED MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 
J Street led a group of U.S. Members of Congress to Israel. The group asked to meet with the Israeli Foreign Ministry. Deputy Foreign Min. Ayalon refused, and asked other Israeli officials to do likewise. He said he believes that J Street is anti-Israel but deliberately misrepresents itself as pro-Israel. Pro-Israel activists claim that J Street presses Israel to take leftist, pro-Arab stances. The Members of Congress expressed puzzlement, being used to V.I.P. treatment. They said they are from Israel's closest ally. What do those MCs stand for? Ohio MC Mary Jo "Kilroy was a signor of the Cohen-Boustany-Carnahan letter given to US President Obama in May 2009. The letter urged Obama to become intimately involved in forcing talks between Israel and the PA, and said the creation of a Palestinian state must precede transparency of the PA government, control over security, or a stable economy." [A state, before eradicating terrorism, leaving Israel with no leverage against the terrorism?] California MC Lois Capps also signed that letter and "...co-authored a letter with Congressman Henry Hyde following the expulsion of Jews from Gush Katif in 2005, praising then-US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice for applying pressure to Israel to open the border crossing from Gaza into Israel." California MC Bob Filner also signed that letter and "...was one of just 28 Democrats who called for an immediate ceasefire between Israel and terror group Hizbullah in 2006, after the Lebanese terror organization rocketed Israeli civilian communities and attacked an IDF security convoy, abducting soldiers Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev before Israel responded militarily." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/,2/18). The Members signed or approved of other letters and measures, but those do not seem to indicate either pro- or anti-Israel sympathy. They expect red carpet treatment for blackening Israel's name? But was it wiser to give them an excuse for indignation than to meet with them, meet their arguments, and publidize the cuonter-arguments?
IDF INDICATES MISSILE MENACE GREAT AND GROWING Brig. Gen. (res.) Yossi Kuperwasser, Deputy Director General of the Ministry of Strategic Affairs emphasized at the Jerusalem Conference this week that "the main central military threat against Israel is the missile threat. Israel's security situation changes all the time. Threats of missiles are becoming more severe at an extremely quick pace". "During the Second Lebanon War, Hamas had 13,000 missiles. Today, the number of rockets and missiles spread around Israel is in the tens of thousands. The reality has changed. Moreover, if in the past missiles and rockets were weapons possessed by States and were thought of as strategic tools, today they are used also by terror organizations, and the reality is much more severe. This is because these same States removed the obstacles that they imposed before and began transferring missiles to terror organizations they support under their authority." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/,2/18).
PM NETANYAHU ON NATIONAL HERITAGE SITES Here is PM Netanyahu's lyrical statement of goals, at the Herzliya Conference on February 3, for rehabilitating Jewish heritage sites: "Today I would like to speak not of disengagement, but rather of engagement: engagement with our heritage, with Zionism, with our past and with our future here in the land of our forefathers, which is also the land of our children and our grandchildren." "I believe that this education starts, first and foremost, in the Book of Books — in the Bible — a subject that is close to my heart these days. It starts there. It moves through the history of our people: the Second Temple, the Middle Ages, the Enlightenment, leaving the ghettos, the rise of Zionism, the modern era, the wars fought for Israel's existence — the history of Zionism and of Israel. A people must know its past in order to ensure its future." "At the end of next month, on Tel Hai Day, I intend to present the government with a work plan that will reverse the neglect of heritage sites. We initiated a national plan to rehabilitate and strengthen infrastructure at heritage sites. I call it the "Heritage Plan." We are going to preserve tourist sites, archaeological sites, historic buildings and museums." Queen Victoria sent the Palestine Expedition Fund (PEF) to "...map the country, including this place. They made wonderful, accurate topographical maps, and found all the ancient places and reinstated their names. They came armed with all the most advanced measuring tools of the 19th century and with the Bible. The PEF is responsible for some of what we now know. For example, they brought Warren here, and he found Warren's Shaft and many other ancient sites in Jerusalem and across the Land of Israel." This stirred people to want to revive the ancient country. On the other hand, "Major Rishon correspondent Sofia Ron Moria reports in today's edition that the list of 'National Heritage Sites' slated to be presented at a special meeting of the Cabinet next Sunday in Tel Hai do not include the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem or City of David in Jerusalem." "...while there are almost no Old Testament sites on the list there are some New Testament sites as well as numerous churches." (www.imra.org.il, 2/18). Why did Netanyahu omit those sites, among the Jewish people's most important ones? Not out of ignorance. He seems well informed about Jewish history. Hebron and Bethlehem are in the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) area, although the Cave is under full Israeli jurisdiction. The City of David site is in the Old City of Jerusalem, on the P.A. list of immediate territorial demands. Is Netanyahu hinting at a major withdrawal from the Jewish people's most important sites?
ISRAEL'S EX-PM OLMERT: BARAK MADE GAZA WAR FAIL 
It was revealed today that former Israeli PM Olmert is writing a book in which he accuses Defense Min. Barak of manipulating data in order to make a full effort in Gaza seem too costly. As a result, the IDF soon pulled back. Because Hamas was not eradicated then, it better armed now. Olmert explains that soon after than, he found out from IDF commanders on the spot and under fire that the cost of a full effort would have been much less than Barak led him to believe. They say the IDF could have achieved its goal in little more time and with few additional casualties. In an earlier term, Barak ordered the IDF into a precipitous flight from Lebanon that left our Lebanese allies exposed to Hizbullah. [They and the IDF had kept Hizbullah at bay without heavy casualties on their part.] The result was an Israeli loss of prestige and deterrence, a growth in Hizbullah's prestige and strength. [Now Hizbullah's 40,000 rockets pose an existential threat to Israel, in combination with Hamas' forces and other allies.] [In an earlier Lebanon war, Barak ordered a unit comprising Jewish religious troops into a Syrian ambush and fouled up Defense Min. Sharon's plan for catching the Syrian Army in a pincers movement.] Barak's current job is to lead the country's defense against Iran. Woe is Israel! (www.imra.org.il, 2/18.) I remember former Foreign Min. Livni claiming that the Gaza and Lebanon wars were a success. I thought Olmert did, too.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
IRAN ONE STEP CLOSER TO THE BOMB
Posted by Kenneth Timmerman, February 19, 2010. |
|
Thursday's nuclear Iran report by the U.N.'s watchdog agency reveals an extraordinary shell game taking place in front of international weapons inspectors. While Iran is focusing the world's attention on its declared nuclear activities, where it is making a march toward weapons capability, it continues to pursue multiple clandestine programs that have intelligence analysts and the Israeli government worried that Iran will covertly cross the line between peaceful nuclear research and the bomb. "Iran may have already crossed Israel's red line," Israeli minister of infrastructure, Uzi Landau, told Newsmax in a recent interview in Jerusalem. "The question is, What is America's red line?" The report from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) revealed that Iran has taken a dramatic step closer to nuclear weapons capability in its programs, while continuing to pursue enrichment and military research it refuses to discuss with the international arms inspectors. Read the full story at
Kenneth R. Timmerman is President, Middle East Data Project, Inc. He authored "Countdown to Crisis: The Coming Nuclear Showdown with Iran" and is a contributing editor to Newsmax.com His latest non-fiction books is a thriller called Honor Killing, available at www.kentimmerman.com. Contact him by email at timmerman.road@verizon.net |
|
BY THEIR FRUITS YE SHALL KNOW THEM
Posted by Paul Rotenberg, February 19, 2010. |
|
This was written by Lori Lowenthal Marcus
|
|
Several news stories recently covered what was cast as a diplomatic faux pas by Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon. The implication was that Ayalon should apologize for not meeting with visiting members of congress for what, it was suggested, was an act of hostility towards their host, J Street, an organization whose pro-Israel bona fides he has questioned. While traveling in Israel, Congressman William Delahunt (D-Mass.), on behalf of himself and four other congressional members, harshly criticized the Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister, Danny Ayalon, who declined to meet with them if they were accompanied by the trip organizers. Delahunt was angered by the Israeli official's apparent suggestion that the delegation "would even consider traveling to the region with groups" that "[Ayalon] inaccurately described as anti-Israel." But it appears that the ones who should apologize are those hosts — the pro-Palestinian group J Street and the overtly anti-Israel Churches for Middle East Peace. They need to apologize to the Israeli government, to all Israelis and to the members of their congressional mission. They need to do that for inviting members of the US congress to sit down and chat with an Arab official who only days before publicly praised an Arab Palestinian terrorist for trying to murder an Israeli, and who congratulated the parents of the attempted murderer on their son becoming a martyr. They should also be embarrassed by their hysterical response — no doubt instigated and manipulated by J Street — to the fact that they "had" to meet with Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor instead of Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon. The Prime Minister outranks the Foreign Minister and the Deputy Prime Minister outranks the Deputy Foreign Minister. Does it really make sense to complain about meeting with a higher ranking official? Many people realize that J Street is not, as it claims to be, pro-Israel. But the other group which co-sponsored the trip and with which J Street a well-established and at times inter-connecting relationship, Churches for Middle East Peace, does not describe itself as pro-Israel — and with good reason. Yet CMEP does tout itself, as J Street does also, as "pro-peace." So guess what CMEP considers evidence of being "pro-peace"? In the 2009 CMEP conference document, all 10 points of their "2009 PRO-PEACE HILL HIGHLIGHTS" have to do with support and aid to the Arab Palestinians. The only mention of a "pro-peace" US government action having to do with Israelis is the "well-coordinated attack" by congressional leaders on Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and his policies. Stop the settlements, stop Jews from building in parts of Jerusalem, eliminate all checkpoints, open the borders to Gaza, stop destroying the Gazan tunnels systems, say J Street and CMEP, and then the Israelis and all the Middle East terrorists will skip down the yellow brick road to peace. But there is still another reason J Street should apologize to Israelis, to true lovers of Israel, and to their guest congressional delegation members. The trip itinerary, apparently arranged by J Street, included a visit on Tueday, February 16, with Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad. Two days earlier it was revealed that Fayyad visited the parents of Faiz Faraj. Faraj was killed after charging a group of Israelis in Hebron and stabbing one of them. During his "condolence" visit Fayyad "denounced in extremely harsh terms the actions of the 'occupation forces,'" which he claimed were part of the "ongoing campaign to suppress the non-violent protests of residents," according to the official Palestinian newspaper (translation by Palestinian Media Watch). It is time to recognize that J Street travels in a parallel universe in which they see nothing wrong in having a diplomacy meeting with an Arab official who just described stabbing an Israeli to be an act of non-violence, and to honoring that "non-violent" stabbers' parents for their wonderful son. In that universe, apparently, it makes sense for J Street to call itself pro-Israel. And in that universe, J Street's buddy organization which shares the same alternate universe vocabulary — Churches for Middle East Peace — calls itself that with a straight face. Editor's Note: Malkah Fleisher's article, "Deputy Foreign Min. Ayalon Rejects J Street Congressmen" (Arutz-7, today) gives us insight into the Congressmen's backgrounds. Here are excerpts: [Mary Jo] Kilroy [of Ohio] was a signor of the Cohen-Boustany-Carnahan letter given to US President Obama in May 2009. The letter urged Obama to become intimately involved in forcing talks between Israel and the PA, and said the creation of a Palestinian state must precede transparency of the PA government, control over security, or a stable economy. Paul Rotenberg lives in Toronto, Canada. Contact him at pdr@rogers.com |
|
ON THE MOVE
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, February 19, 2010. |
|
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il. Go to
|
|
WE'RE ALL THRILLED BY MOSSAD THE MOVIE
Posted by Daily Alert, February 18, 2010. |
|
This was written by Melanie Reid and it appeared
today in Times Online
|
|
Of course we should condemn extrajudicial murder, but I still can't help admiring Israel's nerve Steven Soderbergh, evidently, was only kidding when he said that there would be no Ocean's 14. He's plainly been hard at work filming in a hotel in Dubai, as we can see from the trailers running on News at Ten. With Mossad operatives filling in as movie extras. Now I know we really, really shouldn't joke about these things. I should be wearing black and have a long face and be uttering pieties about the disgraceful "extrajudicial" killing of the Hamas military chief Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, apparently by Israeli agents. All nice people, quite rightly, are adopting the proper moral stance and expressing outrage and disgust at this affront to international law and justice. But the rest of us ... well, we simply can't wait until the movie comes out. Largely thanks to the blurry CCTV pictures, there is an element to the assassination in Dubai that is appallingly irresistible. What the secret agents did — and, critically, what we saw them do — was compelling and breathtaking in its cleverness. It was also, in the darkest sense, comic — hence the feeling of Ocean's 11, 12 and 13. That the agents were using fake identities, one of them being that of Paul Keeley, 42, a bewildered Kent-born odd-job man who was living in Israel, just added to the sense that this was too good to be true. Where were George Clooney and Brad Pitt? To see the images of tubby tennis players bimbling across the hotel lobby and into the lift with the Danny Devito-like figure of Mr al-Mabhouh, and then following him so that they could note down his room number, was to know that this was an incomparable heist; a case of life imitating art imitating life. That it was a rare glimpse into the shadowy world of international espionage makes it all the more seductive. Now everything I write, of course, is on the understanding that the Israelis refuse to comment on allegations that they are responsible for the killing. But their motive, it is said, is that Mr al-Mabhouh is rumoured to have played a key role in smuggling Iranian-funded arms to Islamist militants in Gaza, and may have been on his way to Iran. And just because the Israelis haven't said that they did it doesn't mean for a minute that they weren't responsible. It is an unfashionable thing to say, but I have a considerable admiration for the Israeli way of doing things. They want something, they get it. They perceive someone as their deadly enemy, they kill them. They get hit, they hit back. They don't waste time explaining or justifying or agonising; nor do they allow their detractors to enter their country and then afford them generous welfare payments. They just act. No messing. No scruples. Not even a shrug and a denial, just a rather magnificent refusal to debate anything. This absolutism, based on their history, carries its own moral weight; one that is rather electrifying in a Western world grown flabby with niceties. Clearly, the Israelis could defend their policies if they wanted to, but they quite simply can't be bothered. It's a waste of breath. One admires them for that, too. I've felt this way ever since the Entebbe raid in 1976, an occasion when the Israelis showed Hollywood a thing or two. After two Palestinians and two Germans had hijacked an aircraft on a flight that had originated in Israel, the Israeli army simply swooped in, killed the hijackers and freed all but three of the hostages. It was decisive, bloody and clever. Lieutenant-Colonel "Yoni" Netanyahu, the older brother of the present Prime Minister, Binyamin, was the only commando killed in the fighting. They also outdid fiction after the massacre at the Munich Olympics in 1972, when they hunted down 11 Palestinians who were responsible and eliminated them wherever they were in the world. Aided by fake passports and disguises, Mossad agents employed methods including a booby-trapped telephone, a bomb planted in a bed and a raid in Beirut in which the present Defence Minister, Ehud Barak, dressed as a woman. Nobody caught it on CCTV, but on the ground that human nature can never resist this kind of stuff, Steven Spielberg made it into the Oscar-nominated 2005 movie Munich. Maybe, as the West becomes increasingly gentle and polite, and pays those monthly direct debits to Amnesty International, we need the Israelis to remind us that the world is not made according to our template. Maybe that is why we are drawn towards tales of uncompromising, ruthless derring-do. How else to explain the veneration of the SAS, the worldwide glut of books and movies on covert operations? One last point. Usually, in comedy heist movies, no one gets killed. Somewhere a family is weeping at the death of Mr al-Mabhouh and no one takes any pleasure from that. But the people who die in Mossad operations tend to be, like the Hamas leader, morally compromised. There's a side to us that acknowledges that some assassins' victims may have had it coming to them. So we're appalled, but not so appalled that we don't look forward with relish to the sequel. Ultimately, this is less about siding with the Israelis than loving winners. The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
ASSASSINS IN DUBAI STOLE ISRAELI'S IDENTITY; SMUGGLING REVIVING GAZA
ECONOMY; EU ENDS ANTI-TERRORIST FINANCIAL DATA PACT WITH US
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 18, 2010. |
|
Melvyn Adam Mildiner, residing in Beit Shemesh, Israel, awoke on Tuesday, to find Melvyn Adam Mildiner identified as one of the assassins of Hamas terrorist, Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, in Dubai. The assassins had stolen the identity of people living in Israel. Fortunately for Mr. Mildiner, the Dubai police photograph of the assassin using his name bears no resemblance to him. Nevertheless, he is making sure that this fact is publicized sufficiently to erase any misimpression (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/17). The Wall St. Journal added that the hit team had forged European passports. At least four used the names of dual British-Israeli citizens, who denied involvement. One had Mildiner's correct passport number (2/17, A11). This does not prove that Israel did not order the assassination. It does indicate the unreliability of any conclusions about who did. The theft of identity of Jew(s) living in Israel hints of an attempt to divert suspicion upon Israel. Does Hamas still want to wreak vengeance upon Israel for an assassination it does not know who ordered? The notion of Hamas taking vengeance for this assassination is foreign to my values. The deceased had murdered many people. Hamas has murdered many Arabs, too. al-Mabhouh's death is the vengeance, end of case. I look at it as a matter of crime and punishment. Consider the targeted assassinations during wars in which terrorists
hide among civilians. The U.S. and Israel both engage in it. The
tactic is accepted when the U.S. does it, provided the U.S. takes care
not to be reckless about nearby civilians. When Israel does it, and
does take care about nearby civilians, but there are civilian
casualties, the world objects. Double standard. In any case, the
tactic is a permissible act of war. Vengeance should not be taken
against ordinary military tactics.
VICTIMS OF HAMAS TERRORISM SUE IRANIAN BANKS Americans, Canadians, and Israelis who were wounded by Hamas terrorism or whose relatives were killed or wounded by it are suing Iranian banks for damages. They contend that those banks, controlled by Iran, gave Hamas $50 million, which paid for Hamas' rocket bombardment of Israeli civilian areas. The contention derives from a U.S. Treasury Dept. finding "dated October 25, 2007, which state that Bank Saderat transferred funds for promoting terror to Hizbullah from the CBI through the PLC Saderat Bank in London during the years 2001-2006." Plaintiffs note that those banks operate in Europe without restriction. This is the first anti-terrorism lawsuit against Iran's banking system (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/17).
KNESSET MAY TAKE JURISDICTION OVER ROAD USAGE FROM HIGH COURT NEWS: 39 Members of Knesset from various parties submitted a bill turning over to a Knesset committee the supervision of IDF rules for closing any roads to non-Israeli traffic. The committee presumably would give greater weight to IDF security measures than did the High Court. BACKGROUND: The bill was prompted by a Court ruling that the IDF could not bar residents of the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) from Highway 443, even though when P.A. residents were allowed to drive on it, many committed terrorism against cars with Israeli license plates. Israeli and Jerusalem Arabs have Israeli license plates, not just Israeli citizens. Some of those Arabs were victims of P.A. terrorism. The Court said that the IDF would have to ensure security some other way. Apparently, there is no other way, hence the bill (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/17). NOTE: The U.S. has more separation of powers than does Israel. It
seems unusual for a legislative committee to make administrative
decisions, as contrasted with general oversight of laws' efficacy and
for information gathering.
ISRAEL DENIES WAR PLAN AGAINST IRAN After Iran's President Ahmadinejad accused Israel of planning war by summer, Israel's PM Netanyahu denied any such intent (www.imra.org.il, 2/16). Israel's Defense Min. Barak told military graduates that in view of Iran's arming of Hizbullah and Hamas, Israel is prepared to make tough decisions (www.imra.org.il, 2/17). Barak did not specify what is open to future decision. Israeli leaders tend toward bombast, rather than bomb blast.
SMUGGLING IS REVIVING GAZA ECONOMY 
NEWS: Hamas, itself, now runs hundreds of tunnels for smuggling goods between Egypt and Gaza. The privately owned tunnels are failing. For one thing, Hamas has diverted too much business from the private owners. For another, supply now exceeds demand, and prices fell sharply, profits along with them. The two most smuggled items are gasoline and cement. Other goods are food and appliances. The supply became so great, that Gaza factories reopened and the economy started to revive (www.imra.org.il, 2/17). REMARK: The smuggling has compensated for the partial blockade. Claims of great hardship would seem more political than factual.
EU ENDS ANTI-TERRORIST FINANCIAL DATA PACT WITH U.S. Not long after 9/11/01, the EU and U.S. set up the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program giving the U.S. access to data from Swift, an international banking group. The arrangement was credited with leads that prevented some terrorist attacks, such as the 2006 Heathrow Airport liquid-bomb plot [set for the day I was leaving London] and the arrest of the Bali nightclub bomber. EU Commissioner Celia Malmstrom told the EU Parliament that the agreement does not allow improper use of data. She explained that the data remains anonymous and "only if there is reason to believe that an identified person is a terrorist can the data of that person be seen." The Parliament claimed the agreement invaded privacy. The Wall St Journal considers the rejection reflexive anti-Americanism and an effort to show power in Parliament's new authority to rule on internal security agreements. It shows that having Barak Obama as President does not carry more weight with foreign countries than did his predecessor, who set up the pact. According to the Journal, the New York Times approves the rejection as the right balance between protecting privacy and national security (WSJ, 2/17, Ed.).
TALIBAN LEADER'S CAPTURE 
Mullah Abdul Ghani Baradar of Taliban (A.P./Shakil Adil) "Pakistan's capture of the Afghan Taliban's operations chief came after months of U.S. pressure that involved showing officials details of intelligence that linked Pakistan's spy agency to Taliban attacks in Afghanistan." The U.S. also presented evidence that ISI agents, including some senior ones, reported to the Taliban on locations and movements of NATO forces in Afghanistan. The U.S. surmised that Pakistan was preserving the Afghan Taliban as a check on Indian influence in Afghanistan. Gen. Petraeus tried to convince Pakistan that the Afghan Taliban were aiding the Pakistan Taliban fighting against the government of Pakistan (Matthew Rosenberg & Siobhan Gorman, Wall St. Journal, 2/17, A8). The U.S. and non-governmental experts used to call Pakistan an ally but also suspected that the Pakistani security agency or part of it assisted terrorists against India and Afghanistan. Pakistan still denies the suspicion.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
AN AMERICAN MUSLIM HERO: DR. ALI ALYAMI
Posted by Phyllis Chesler, February 18, 2010. |
|
Below is an excerpt from the full article that can be read at
|
|
Dr. Ali Alyami is a man after my own heart. He is a Saudi reformer who is based in Washington, D.C. and the founding director of the Center for Democracy and Human Rights in Saudi Arabia. Listen to what Dr. Alyami just told me: "Democratizing Saudi Arabia is the key to democratizing all Arabs and Muslims. The best, easiest, cheapest and quickest way to achieve this formidable undertaking is to empower Saudi women who are already in the forefront in challenging their ferocious political, religious, economic, social and educational environment. Due to Saudi Arabia's centrality to Islam and its possession of the largest known oil reserves, Saudi Arabia plays a major religious and economic role in the lives of both Muslims and non-Muslims. Empowering Saudi women will resonate throughout Arab and Muslim societies." Dr. Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at City University of New York. She is an author and lecturer and co-founder of the still ongoing Association for Women in Psychology (1969). |
|
GALLOPING SHARIA
Posted by Roberta Dzubow, February 18, 2010. |
|
This is just so upsetting and disturbing. I only looked at a few links — but each one was worse than the next. I looked at the memorial design for the 9/11 Pennsylvania site — and it is a Red Crescent, facing Mecca, and with 44 glass blocks — that is a block for those heroes on the plane, the crew, AND the terrorists. This is just incredible.... and noting Hillary's Deputy Chief of Staff, one wonders how much pro-Saudi influence she has. This is from Joan Sharon. "Clinton Speaks At Saudi College Founded By U.S. Designated
Terrorist"
|
|
More Muslim outreach. If you aren't following this site yet — The Global Daily Muslim Brotherhood Report — you might want to start — their also on our blogroll (left). Their latest post reports that not only did Clinton speak at a Saudi college founded by a U.S. designated terrorist (a Bush aide spoke there as well), but that the mother of Clinton's Deputy Chief of Staff also was a founder of that school. 
Hillary Clinton Speaks At Saudi College Founded By U.S. Designated Terrorist — GDMBR Global media are reporting that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has addressed students at the Dar El-Hekma women's college in Saudi Arabia, known to have been co-founded and patronized by an individual designated as a terrorist by the U.S as well as by important Saudi bankers and members of the Bin Laden family. Read the entire piece to learn about another founder of the school, Yaseen Abdullah Kadi (aka Yassin Abdullah Kadi), who GDMBR details: On October 12, 2001, Mr. Kadi was added to the list of designated terrorists by the U.S.Treasury. As of that date, the FBI had reported that Mr. Kadi had been the owner of a large block of the shares of Ptech, a Texas software company whose employees had further ties to terror organizations. Ptech was also linked to the SAAR Foundation, a network of Islamic organizations located in Northern Virginia that was raided by the Federal government in March 2002 in connection with the financing of terrorism. The leadership of the SAAR foundation, in turn, was largely the same as that of the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT), an important part of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. 
Contact Roberta Dzubow by email at Roberta@adgforum.com |
|
'DEMAND JEWISH PRESENCE IN JERICHO'; CAVE OF MACHPELAH NOT
A HERITAGE SITE!; COURT INSISTS ON RAZING MAJ. KLEIN'S HOME
Posted by Arutz-7, February 18, 2010. | ||
|
The first story is "We Demand a Jewish Presence in Jericho" by David Lev; the second is called "PM's List of Heritage Sites Does Not Include Cave of Machpelah" by Gil Ronen; and the third is "Nationalists Appalled: Court Insists on Razing Maj. Klein's Home" by Gil Ronen. | ||
|
In 1994, Jericho was the first city in Judea and Samaria ceded to the newly created Palestinian Authority, but an Israeli group, seeking to bring a Jewish presence back to the Biblical city, will hold a march this Sunday to Jericho. The march will be held on the 7th of Adar, the day of the birth and death of Moses, who died on the other side of the Jordan right before Joshua led the Jewish nation into the land of Israel — with Jericho as their first conquest. Speaking to Arutz 7, members of the Jericho Core Group said that "we demand a return to Jericho and a Jewish presence there. We will not be satisfied with occasional gatherings. We want a permanent return to Jericho, and especially to the Shalom al-Yisrael synagogue." The synagogue, over 1,500 years old, was in regular use from after the Six Day War until Israel withdrew from the city. The group, members say, was established "based on the understanding that the current struggle over the Land of Israel must go beyond just fighting the government's edicts against building in Judea and Samaria, but must encompass the possibility of settling the whole land of Israel," group members told Arutz 7. "The Jericho Core Group was established to fight not only against the concept of 'two states for two peoples,' which we oppose, but also against the Oslo Accords and other deals. We will keep fighting until Jews are able to settle in Area A," the areas of the country under full Palestinian Authority control. The march — which will include those participating on foot, and is suitable for families, including those with baby carriages — will take place Sunday at 4:30, with marchers gathering outside the city. The group is organizing rides to the event from Jerusalem. For information and directions, call 052-607-1528 2."PM's List of Heritage Sites Does Not Include Cave of Machpelah" by Gil Ronen 'Machpelah Cave not Heritage!' The Chairman of the Council of Jewish Communities in Judea and Samaria (the Yesha Council), Danny Dayan, asked Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu Thursday to make a last minute change in the list of heritage sites that the government intends to promote and enhance, and add to it the Cave of Machpelah (Cave of the Patriarchs) in Hevron and Rachel's Tomb near Bethlehem. In recent days Netanyahu has been proudly touting a new initiative for preserving heritage sites throughout Israel. However, many who read the list of sites promulgated by the Prime Minister's Office were disappointed to find no mention of the two important sites where the nation's forefathers and fore-mothers are buried, and which are specifically mentioned in the Bible. "No one knows better than you that our continued presence on the land depends more than anything on the deep consciousness that this is the land of our forefathers," Dayan wrote Netanyahu. "What better than these two sites for passing on this consciousness to the public. The Cave of Machpelah and the Tomb of Rachel are the 'rock of our existence.'" "A list of heritage sites that does not include the Cave of Machpelah and the Tomb of Rachel completely misses its purpose," Dayan explained. "It blurs the link of the nation of Israel to its land instead of bringing it into focus; it causes one to forget, G-d forbid, rather than to remember; in disconnects instead of connecting." Christian sites included The list of heritage sites does include numerous locations of importance for Christians that will be restored and receive an annual maintenance budget. These include the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the Last Supper Room, the Hagia Maria Sion Abbey, the Church of the Gospel, a baptism site on the River Jordan, three churches in Capernaum, and many more. Arutz Sheva's Hebrew service reported that in recent days, ministers and Knesset members asked the Prime Minister's Office to add the Tomb of Rachel and the Cave of Machpelah to the list of heritage sites but received a flat 'no' in response. The Jewish sages teach that the Cave of Machpelah is one of "three places about which the nations of the world cannot deceive Israel and say 'you stole them'" (from Beresheet Rabah). The reason for this is that the Bible records the act of purchase of the cave by Abraham.
3. "Nationalists Appalled: Court Insists on Razing Maj. Klein's Home" by Gil Ronen. Nationalists expressed shock and dismay this week after the High Court demanded that the state provide a timetable for demolition of 12 houses in the HaYovel neighborhood of Eli, including the home of slain Second Lebanon War hero Maj. Roi Klein, and six houses in Haresha in Binyamin. Nationalist forces in Israel had breathed a sigh of relief in January when the state's representative told the court it was "examining alternatives" to demolition of the homes "in order to resolve the issue." On Tuesday, however, High Court President Dorit Beinisch and Judges Elyakim Rubinstein and Yoram Danziger announced that the state's answer was unacceptable. The panel ruled that the state has 60 days to complete the hearings it is conducting regarding the demolition and present a deadline for its execution. Systematic cruelty MK Yaakov 'Ketzaleh' Katz (National Union) wondered, in response, "How did we reach a situation in which an entire establishment dulls its heart to any positive, Zionist and Jewish value and despises its own people, who revile its decisions?" "President Beinisch's systematic cruelty toward the heroes of the land, pitting the IDF with its commanders against itself, its own widows and orphans, is connected to the coldness of her heart in the face of the pleas of the residents of Gush Katif, Northern Samaria and Amona, when she ruled in favor of destroying their strip of land and the fabric of their lives." The Legal Forum for the Land of Israel asked the Minister of Defense to immediately grant a permit for the home of Maj. Klein to stay standing. The process of approving the continued existence of the other houses in Haresha and HaYovel must be completed in 60 days, the Forum said. Regavim, the NGO that is most prominent in fighting for Jewish lands, said it was "shocked at the discriminatory policy led by the Supreme Court President." Beinisch, the NGO said, wants Jewish homes razed but systematically rejects completely identical motions filed by Regavim against illegal Arab construction.
|
|
OBAMA'S COUNTER-TERROR ASSWIPE: KISS UP TO HEZBOLLAH
Posted by CPocerl, February 18, 2010. |
|
This was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared yesterday in
World Net Daily
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=125376 |
|
JERUSALEM — The U.S. should encourage greater assimilation of the Hezbollah terrorist organization into the Lebanese government, argued President Obama's counter-terrorism advisor, John Brennan. Outside of al-Qaida, the Iranian-backed Hezbollah has the distinction of having killed the most Americans in terror attacks. It is also responsible for scores of terrorist actions targeting Israelis, including rocket launchings against civilian population centers. Hezbollah's attacks against the Israeli north in 2006 killed 43 Israeli civilians and wounded more than 4,000. In a July 2008 article in The Annals, a publication of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, Brennan argued it "would not be foolhardy, however, for the United States to tolerate, and even to encourage, greater assimilation of Hezbollah into Lebanon's political system, a process that is subject to Iranian influence." Continued Brennan: "Hezbollah is already represented in the Lebanese parliament and its members have previously served in the Lebanese cabinet, reflections of Hezbollah's interest in shaping Lebanon's political future from within government institutions. This political involvement is a far cry from Hezbollah's genesis as solely a terrorist organization dedicated to murder, kidnapping and violence." Also, at a press conference in August at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, Brennan declared, "Hezbollah started out as purely a terrorist organization back in the early '80s and has evolved significantly over time. And now it has members of parliament, in the cabinet; there are lawyers, doctors, others who are part of the Hezbollah organization." Maintenance of a civilian unit of doctors and lawyers by terrorist groups is not uncommon in the Middle East. Hamas has long brandished a civilian wing that provides medical care and education to the Palestinian population. According to Israeli security officials, Hezbollah and Hamas emphasize this outreach to endear their terror groups to the local population. Brennan went on to state, "Quite frankly, I'm pleased to see that a lot of Hezbollah individuals are in fact renouncing that type of terrorism and violence and are trying to participate in the political process [in Lebanon] in a very legitimate fashion." Brennan, assistant to the president and deputy national security adviser for homeland security and counterterrorism, did not cite specific examples of Hezbollah members renouncing violence. Hezbollah routinely affirms its so-called armed wing operates to target Israelis. Just yesterday, Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah threatened Israel's international airport. Hezbollah in 1983 carried out a massive attack on the American Marines barracks inside Lebanon in which suicide bombers detonated truck bombs, killing 241 American servicemen, representing the highest single-day death toll for the Marines since the Battle of Iwo Jima of World War II. Brennan has come under fire the past few days after a video surfaced showing a question-and-answer session for Muslim law students last week at New York University. At the session, Brennan stated that having a percentage of terrorists released by the U.S. return to terrorist attacks "isn't that bad," since the recidivism rate for inmates in the U.S. prison system is higher. He also criticized parts of the Bush administration's response to 9/11 as a "reaction some people might say was over the top in some areas" that "in an overabundance of caution [we] implemented a number of security measures and activities that upon reflection now we look back after the heat of the battle has died down a bit we say they were excessive, okay." Brennan is also coming under fire for previous remarks he made about jihad. "Nor does President Obama see this challenge as a fight against 'jihadists,'" said Brennan. "Describing terrorists in this way — using a legitimate term, 'jihad,' meaning to purify oneself or to wage a holy struggle for a moral goal — risks giving these murderers the religious legitimacy they desperately seek but in no way deserve. Worse, it risks reinforcing the idea that the United States is somehow at war with Islam itself. And this is why President Obama has confronted this perception directly and forcefully in his speeches to Muslim audiences, declaring that America is not and never will be at war with Islam."
Aaron Klein, WorldNetDaily's senior staff reporter and Jerusalem
bureau chief, is known for his regular interviews with Mideast terror
leaders and his popular segments on America's top radio programs. His
newly released book is "The Late Great State of Israel: How Enemies
Within and Without Threaten the Jewish Nation's Survival."
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: MESSAGES THAT MATTER
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 18, 2010. |
|
Yesterday was the final day of the Jerusalem Conference, and once more now I devote my posting to this event, providing basic themes and significant statements. But I must start with a correction (and this error, I suspect, dates me). Last time I spoke about a video message from Senator Birch Bayh. Thanks to Barbara W. who pointed out that Birch Bayh is deceased and I meant his son, Evan Bayh. I stand corrected. (The Senator, Evan, a good man, will not be running for re-election.) Yesterday there were additional video messages broadcast from members of Congress: From Senator Sam Brownback (R-KS), a good friend to Israel (who also will not seek re-election). And Congressman Howard Berman (D-CA28), who declared that "I am a proud Zionist and a proud Democrat. But I was a Zionist before I was a Democrat." This was very much the tone, as both Israelis and Americans addressed the issue of the US-Israel relationship with a "feel good attitude" and very little content. Congressman Eliot Engel (D-NY17) — who was present on the panel — made it clear that the US-Israel relationship is a bi-partisan issue on the Hill and very strong: It is an unbreakable bond, he declared, even with disagreements. Danny Ayalon (Yisrael Beitenu), Deputy Foreign Minister, echoed this when he said that Israel does not let disputes spill over into the entire strategic relationship with the US. ~~~~~~~~~~ The content of importance within this session: Congressman Engel expressed concern that Israel should maintain a qualitative edge with regard to weapons. Ambassador (ret.) James Larocco, who now lectures on the ME, addressed the same issue, saying that this edge was "absolutely essential" and that US was committed to this. The Ambassador alluded to a statement made by Chief of Staff Mullen, at the US Embassy in Tel Aviv just a few days ago: "Iran cannot have nuclear weapons." Cannot? The implications are clear, but this is not a definitive statement. There will be no definitive statement on this. Pastor Robert Stearns — who talks with great passion about Israel — spoke of the strong evangelic influence in the US for support for Israel. Evangelical Christianity, he reported, is the fastest growing branch of Christianity. However, there is now the emergence of a "new evangelical left" that is anti-Israel. This branch of evangelical Christianity is the only one that has entrèe into the White House. He recommends identifying new evangelical leaders and bringing them to the White House, and "building bridges of travel" for pastors to come with their congregations. ~~~~~~~~~~ A highlight of the Conference, for me, was the interview by Dan Diker of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs of Bernard Lewis, who, at 93, is the uncontested dean of Middle East/Oriental scholars, as well as a political analyst. With it all, Dr. Lewis maintains his sense of humor. At to Iran within the past year, Dr. Lewis observed dryly that "To treat enemies as friends is counterproductive." He sees evidence that the opposition movement is very strong and wide-spread. Actually, he says, there are two opposition movements — one within the government and one outside. For the time being, he observed, even the former will do. There is a Western misunderstanding of Islam, he told us: We assume their processes and motivations are the same as ours. We think in terms of certain dichotomies: religion/state; secular/religious. But these are unknown to traditional Islam. Islam is different from Judaism and Christianity with regard to power: Moses never got into the Promised Land. Jesus was crucified. But Muhammad succeeded in his lifetime and is associated with the power of the state, i.e., religion and power are automatically associated. Muslims still believe that they must continue the prophet's mission until all embrace Islam or submit to it. The state of war may be interrupted by truces, which represent accommodations and not ultimate peace. "Salam" to a traditional Muslim does not mean "Shalom," simply peace. "Salam Aleikem" means "Peace be upon those who follow divine guidance." This phrase, says Lewis, as uttered by Obama in his Cairo speech, implies an embrace of Islam. Because of the above understanding, it is meaningless to apply the idea of nationalism as we understand it to the Palestinian Arabs. ~~~~~~~~~~ Dr. Lewis says the Shia/Sunni issue is important. In many Muslim places Shiite Islam is unknown, and the Sunnis have always had the power even in places like Syria and Iraq, where there is a mix. But now the Shia influence is growing and Shiites are awakening to the possibility of controlling their countries. This affects Syria, part of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, etc. There is the possibility that Sunni nations, uneasy about Shia militancy and Iranian imperialism might begin to see a positive relationship with Israel as constructive. ~~~~~~~~~~ Another thought-provoking talk was given by Ron Dermer, Director of Policy Planning for the prime minister. That there is an assault on Israel's legitimacy is a given, says Dermer. The question is how to build an effective policy against it. Too many people engage in wishful thinking. On the left, people imagine it's a function of our policies — if we would abide by international expectations, the world would like us better. Belief in the tooth fairy, he says, is more realistic than this. On the right, he says there is a call for giving voice to our rights, stopping use of the language our enemies, reclaiming our narrative. While he has sympathy for this position, he suggests that the core of the problem lies elsewhere — that telling people our history will not necessarily solve the problem. (I think, myself, that telling that history and speaking for our rights is essential and works some of the time.) Dermer believes that the core problem is an assault driven by values that are anti-Western. Israel is in direct conflict with cultural relativism, the belief that the weaker party is always just, pacifism, and the conviction that what is referred to as truth and falsehood is just a matter of competing values. The issue is a Zeitgeist directed against us and other nations, most notably the US. And we are an easy target. We defend ourselves when force is considered wrong. And we are a Jewish state in a time when nationalism and religion are under attack. ~~~~~~~~~~ Within this situation, says Dermer, radical leftists and militant Islamists have joined forces. Their anti-Israel message then spreads to progressives, liberals and young people. This is a bigger problem in Europe than in the US, and in academic circles compared to the heartland. We cannot win with the hard-core. But we have to prevent their message from filtering down to the progressives and liberals, and the young people who see themselves as idealistic. Instead of defending ourselves, we must go on the offensive. The fact is that we are on the "right" side of many issues that progressives embrace, issues such as essential freedoms and — most significantly — women's rights. We need to go on the offensive, taking our message to the territory of progressives. The left must understand that Islamic fundamentalists pose the greatest challenge to their values. People in Arab societies are always struggling for freedom and rights, and no one pays attention. We must put the issues on the agenda, big time, and expose what is happening in these societies — focusing on the biggest human rights abusers. When this message is absorbed, there will be people who now attack us who will begin to see us on standing with them on the important issues. ~~~~~~~~~~ Speaking of the left, I will end with a position espoused by Caroline Glick at the Conference. The left has been weakened she says, but it still wields enough power to prevent the government from abandoning the "two-state solution." And so we maintain allegiance to a failed policy. Glick has a policy alternative, which she called the Stabilization Plan. I will say here only that it involves applying Israeli civilian law now to all areas in Judea and Samaria where there are Jewish communities, and dismantling the PA. She sees this as a way to manage a situation that cannot be totally solved at present. You can see details at:
In order to give people permission to speak out about political situations that are ridiculous, last year she started Latma, a series of satirical videos available on the Internet. They are in Hebrew, but now will always have English subtitles added. I find them extremely funny and you might enjoy them as well — and want to share them with others. See here, and scroll down a bit for the video satire:
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
PROTECTING NEGEV FARMS FROM BEDOUIN
Posted by Israel National News Staff, February 18, 2010. |
|
Yoel Zilberman, founder of the New HaShomer (Guard) organization — a renewal of the lengendary HaShomer organization that helped protect Jewish farmers in the Land of Israel in the early 1900's — spoke at the Jerusalem Conference on Wednesday. Zilberman spoke of the violent attacks by Bedouins on Jewish-owned farms in the Negev, and his organization's efforts to put an end to the phenomenon. A third-generation farmer from the Galilee, a similar situation — and attempt at solution — exists there as well. Zilberman's 10-minute Conference speech on video:
|
|
ARYEH KING: JERUSALEM MAYOR BRINGS CATASTROPHE
Posted by Gil Ronen, February 18, 2010. |
|
The Jerusalem Mayor's decision to retroactively legalize 95% of illegal Arab construction in the Shiloach (Silwan) neighborhood will lead to a catastrophe, land activist Aryeh King said Wednesday. King said the decision is a surrender that gives a prize to criminals. On Tuesday, Mayor Nir Barkat told the Knesset's Interior Committee about his plan for solving the construction dispute in Shiloach, where there are about 200 illegally-built Arab buildings and one illegally-constructed building owned by Jews — Beit Yehonatan. Barkat plans to legalize 95% of the structures but insist that they be no higher than four stories. Anything over that will be "shaved" off the building. In this way, Barkat will be legalizing the Jewish-owned Beit Yehonatan (except for its topmost, fifth floor), and avoiding a large scale confrontation with Silwan's Arab residents, at a time when such a confrontation will probably lead to a political storm and international censure. King said, however, that the legalization of Beit Yehonatan is not worth the price that the city will have to pay under the mayor's proposed deal. "Regretfully, the mayor is continuing a policy that is disconnected from the right frame of mind in dealing with the Arabs of the city. Instead of fighting them he is giving them his entire hand. This is a discriminatory policy that encourages them to continue building illegally. Meanwhile, as regards Jews, demolition orders are issued even against synagogues." Gil Ronen writes for Arutz-7, where this article was published today. |
|
EVEN THE LA TIMES KNOWS THE MESSIAH HAS REVERSE MIDAS TOUCH
Posted by CPocerl, February 18, 2010. |
|
This comes from the Los Angeles Times
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2010/02/ obama-stimulus-weatherization.html |
|
Have Obama's federal government weatherize your home for only $57,362 each 
Who could forget the $5 billion in Obama administration stimulus money that was going to rapidly create nearly 90,000 green jobs across the country in these tough economic times and make so many thousands of homes all snuggy and warm and energy-efficient these very snowy days? Well, a new report due out this morning will show the $5-billion program is so riddled with drafts that so far it's weatherized only about 9,000 homes. Based on the initial Obama-Biden program promise that it would create 87,000 new jobs its first year, that would be about 10 jobs for each home weatherized so far. Makes for pretty crowded doorways. ABC News reports that the General Accountability Office will declare today that the Energy Department has fallen woefully behind — about 98.5% behind — the 593,000 homes it initially predicted would be weatherized in the Recovery Act's very first, very chilly year. The Energy Department is run by Steven Chu, like President Obama a Nobel Prize winner. You'll never guess what the federal government blames for the lack of significant progress. RED tape. Not duct tape. Not weatherstripping. But that infamous RED tape. In the form of, well, forms. It seems that the Pelosi-Reid stimulus plan that was so quickly cobbled together and was supposed to immediately pump so much money into the sagging economy last year included an 80-year-old legal provision requiring all federally funded projects to pay a prevailing wage to workers. But what's a prevailing wage for weatherization, you ask? Who knows? So the Energy Department asked the Labor Department, which set out to calculate what a prevailing weatherization wage is in every single one of the more than 3,000 counties across these United States. There were some other things to figure out. It seems the law also requires some kind of National Trust for Historic Preservation review for most homes before any contracts could be estimated to be negotiated to be signed to be let to be begun. And states like Michigan have two people assigned to such tasks. So, good luck speeding up that work. The Energy folks did tell ABC they've so far spent $522 million Recovery Act dollars on the program. Which works out to, let's see, about $57,362 worth of very expensive weatherstripping for each home fixed up so far. Seems about right for a federal program.
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
CITIZEN ABBAS: IS ANYONE IN CHARGE OF THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY?
Posted by Michael Freund, February 18, 2010. |
|
Last month, Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas' term of office officially came to an end. Under Palestinian law, Abbas is no longer the lawful and legitimate leader of the PA.
In effect, there is no duly constituted leader of the Palestinian Authority now in place. As I point out in the column below from the Jerusalem Post, Chairman Abbas has become Citizen Abbas, and his legal authority extends no further than the edge of his desk. So the world and the Left can press Israel to negotiate with Abbas all it wants, but he is no longer a relevant address. For all intents and purposes, we might as well be discussing the future with illegal Palestinian construction workers. They, like their former chairman, currently enjoy the same constitutional clout. Comments and feedback may be sent to letters@jpost.com or to me directly at msfreund@earthlink.net thanks,
|
|
Whether the critics like it or not, under Palestinian law, Abu Mazen is no longer the lawful leader of the Palestinian Authority This past Monday, Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman raised an interesting point about Mahmoud Abbas that has not received the attention it deserves. Speaking at a session of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Lieberman intimated that the chairman of the Palestinian Authority, who is also known as Abu Mazen, may very well be little more than a has-been — not just politically, but constitutionally as well. "Abu Mazen does not represent the residents of Gaza because Hamas rules there," Lieberman said, adding, "Seeing as elections in the PA have been postponed three times, one needs to ask whom does Abu Mazen represent. It is not clear that he can supply the goods in negotiations." To be sure, those in favor of talks with the Palestinians will dismiss Lieberman's remarks as little more than rhetoric, viewing them as an attempt to minimize Abbas's importance in order to justify ignoring him. But whether the critics like it or not, the fact is that Lieberman is correct: under Palestinian law, Abbas is no longer the lawful and legitimate leader of the PA. Indeed, ever since January 24, the Palestinian chairman can no longer be said to be legally occupying his post. It was on that date, after all, that a new round of Palestinian balloting was supposed to be held to fill the post of chairman as well as elect a new Palestinian Legislative Council. But because of disagreements between Fatah and Hamas, the vote never took place, leaving the Palestinian areas in a constitutional vacuum of epic proportions. If you don't believe me, just listen to what the Palestinians themselves have to say. On November 13 of last year, Azzam al-Ahmad, a member of the Fatah Central Committee, told Agence France Presse that, "After January 25, there will be a legal vacuum because the president and parliament will no longer be legal." Various Palestinian human rights groups, none of whom can be accused of being Zionist stooges, tend to agree.
IN A position paper released on January 24, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights bemoaned the failure to hold new Palestinian elections, and pointedly noted that, "From now on, no one can claim democracy or the representation of the public will, as all must go back to the people for a new authorization." Similarly, the Palestinian Al Mezan Center for Human Rights issued a statement on January 25 declaring that "today marks the end of the mandate of the elected Palestinian Presidency and Legislative Council." It added that, "According to the Palestinian law that governs the Palestinian Authority, the presidential and PLC terms ended yesterday and therefore the Palestinian elected political institutions lost their legitimacy and constitutionality." Likewise, Professor Nathan Brown of George Washington University, in a paper entitled "Palestinian Presidential Elections" issued by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in July 2008, concluded that Abbas could not lawfully continue beyond last month. "There is no legal or constitutional basis for his continuing after January 2010," Brown wrote, "except that there may be nobody to take his place."
EVEN PRIOR to January 24, Abbas was already on shaky ground. Back in 2005, he was elected to a four-year term. Article 36 of the PA's "Basic Law" states that "the term of the presidency of the National Authority shall be four years." Ostensibly, then, Abbas's tenure was complete back in January 2009, when he should have faded off into retirement. But since Palestinian election law requires presidential and parliamentary balloting to be held simultaneously, and the Palestinian Legislative Council was voted into office only in January 2006, Abbas and his supporters claimed that this entitled him to serve an additional year. In other words, they argued that his term ended at the same time as that of the outgoing Palestinian parliament, namely on January 24, 2010. And though Abbas attempted to circumvent this conundrum by getting the PLO to extend his term beyond last month in an extra-legal fashion, the consensus is that he is no longer legally entitled to serve in his post. Three months ago, Hassan Nafaa, a professor of political science at Cairo University, assessed the position of Abbas and his supporters in an article that appeared in the Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram. His conclusion was unambiguous: "It is abundantly clear that the PA has lost much of its legal and political legitimacy as questions abound regarding the legality of Abbas staying in office past 24 January 2009." "Palestinian basic law," Nafaa pointed out, "is quite specific about the duration of the presidential term. A president is allowed a term of four years renewable once. This is why many believe that the Palestinian presidency is now legally vacant." He also criticized Abbas's maneuvering to remain in power, adding that "these measures cannot obscure the fact that the Palestinians now have a constitutional vacuum." January 2010, as we know, has come and gone, and it is clear that from a legal point of view there is no duly constituted leader of the Palestinian Authority now in place. Chairman Abbas has become Citizen Abbas, and his legal authority extends no further than the edge of his desk. So the world and the Left can press Israel to negotiate with Abbas all it wants, but he is no longer a relevant address. For all intents and purposes, we might as well be discussing the future with illegal Palestinian construction workers. They, like their former chairman, currently enjoy the same constitutional clout. Michael Freund has served as an adviser to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. He is the founder and chairman of Shavei Israel (www.shavei.org), which assists Anousim in Spain, Portugal and South America to return to the Jewish people. |
|
WHO'S GEARING FOR WAR?; MORE DELUSIONAL DELAY; US IS SUBSIDISING
TERROR; REMEMBER AND CHANGE YOUR ATTITUDE
Posted by Steven Shamrak, February 17, 2010. |
|
The Gloom of War — Who is Gearing for War? Damascus ordered a Level 4 mobilization of Syria 's army reserves for deployment to the Golan Heights on the Israeli border to meet what it calls "IDF plans of attack." In Lebanon, too, Hizballah placed "all its forces" in a state of military preparedness. Hizballah leader Hassan Nasrallah vows: "We will crush the Zionist enemy." The latest threat bares in detail the operational plans Iran, Syria and Hizballah have ready to go for striking at Israel. This was no idle talk! Syria and Hizballah are acting out the secret military cooperation pacts, which were negotiated and signed during visits to Damascus by Iran's National Security Adviser Saeed Jalili on Nov. 3 and its defence minister Ahmed Vahidi on Dec. 17. These treaties commit Syria to come to Hizballah's aid if it comes under Israeli attack, and all three signatories to respond to any Israeli military movement. Hizballah and Syria are taking advantage of the Israeli war game to test their own preparedness for attack on orders from Tehran. Iranian and military sources report the new war threats from Damascus are backed by massive Iranian airlifts for boosting Syria 's missile arsenal. Fresh supplies have also reached Hizballah and Hamas. Syria has secretly transferred the mobile, solid-fuelled, surface-to-surface Syrian-made Fateh-110 (range 250km) missile to Hizballah. Warning: Iran may lash out at Israel via its surrogates Hizballah in Lebanon and Hamas in Gaza: Hizballah would sweep across the border to capture Galilee towns backed by missile barrages and likely Syrian support. Tehran has already well advanced in training of 5,000 Hizballah fighters in special operations and urban combat tactics. Where is International Outrage? British documentary filmmaker Paul Martin was arrested by Hamas in Gaza City as he arrived to testify at the trial of a Palestinian fighter accused of collaborating with Israel. Hypocricy of the Headlines. Lebanon Accuses Israel of Escalating War Threats — What a...! As they say: "Offence is the best defence" Hamas leader says U.S. blocking Palestinian unity. — Any one to blame but themselves. Lebanon says Israel the biggest challenge to UN Resolution 1701... — Armed Islamic movement, Hezbollah, which vowed to destroy Israel and ignores UN Resolution 1701 is not? In the fight for Islamic oil, even China has joined the Israel bashing game! US Weapons Embargo on Israel — Flood of Weapons to Arabs! A new report by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA) has warned that the Obama administration has implemented a virtual weapons embargo on the Jewish State. At the same time Obams administration is conducting a massive U.S. weapons sale and projects for Arab rivals in the Middle East, which has eroded Israel's military superiority over its neighbours. Lebanese Government will be Held Accountable. The Lebanese government has made it official, announcing it will back the Hizbullah terrorist organization in another war against Israel. 'Land for Peace' is Dead. Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, head of the Israel Our Home party, says, "It's time to forget our obsession of "territory in exchange for peace; all future agreements must be based on 'peace in exchange for peace.'" (It was never alive. Arabs have always wanted all Jewish land and have never been prepared to let Israel live in peace!) Iranian Nuclear Hypocrisy Exposed. Glyn Davis, a senior U.S. envoy to the IAEA, accused Iranian leaders of hypocrisy for opting to pursue "ever more dangerous nuclear technology" instead of accepting an international plan to make sure that medical isotopes get to needy Iranian cancer patients. More of Delusional Delay. U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is calling on the international community to rally together to pressure Iran into abandoning its nuclear program. Gates believes that if the international community stands together to bring pressure on Iran there's still time for sanctions to work. Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak UN investigations are just an anti-Israel smear campaign! Even Hamas has admitted that they use civilians as a human shield. Arab terrorists pose as 'civilians' and do not wear army uniform! Do you remember the Jenin massacre accusation against Israel? The PLO dragged out dead bodies from their graves and collected bodies from hospitals to boost the number of civilian 'victims'. There was plenty of anti-Israel rhetoric and screaming prior to the cancelled, in order to avoid embarrassment, UN investigation! Fatah Policeman Murdered an IDF Soldier. The organization of terror victims — Almagor has demanded that the IDF cease cooperation with the PA police and begin a re-examination of the General Dayton Plan for training PA policemen following the discovery that a PA police officer was responsible for the murder of an IDF soldier last Wednesday. (The training of terrorists how to kill Jews must be stopped.) It's About Time! Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he will submit a bill allow Israelis living or travelling abroad to vote in national elections. The Absorption Ministry puts the number of Israeli passport holders living abroad at 750,000. Opposition leader Tzipi Livni has called the proposal "immoral". Defense Minister Ehud Barak is also opposed to the idea. (An undemocratic law, which is beneficial to Israel's self-hating political left, must end.) Anti-Semitism of USs Justice System for Spies. A Chinese-born aerospace engineer, Greg Chung Dongfan, has been jailed for more than 15 years after being convicted of selling technology related to the US space shuttle program to China. Jonathan Pollard, who gave Israel security information which the US supposed to provide to Israel, is serving the 24th year of his life sentence. (Even Soviet spies were treated better!) Kadima — Party of Traitors and Selfhaters. MK Aryeh Bibi of the Kadima party filed a motion on Monday morning for a bill granting amnesty to members of the security forces who were found guilty of violent acts during the expulsion of Jewish residents from Gush Katif. (What would Kadima propose if violence was perpetrated by the security forces against Arabs?) Quote of the Week: "I remember the Muhammad al-Durra hoax that was staged in cahoots between Palestinian and French journalists. This blood libel provoked a killing spree against Israelis even after the facts came out to reveal that: 1) the boy was killed by Arab gunfire, not Israeli; and 2) the boy wasnt killed at all. He walked off the set with his father after the director yelled "cut" (and you thought only Hollywood made movies)." — Jack Engelhard — Israel must review, introduce and enforce strong ethics in media reporting: Israeli and foreign journalists and networks who report fake news, solicit newsworthy violence, deliberately compose anti-Israel biased reports or are too lazy to check the facts should lose their media licence in Israel! It Pays to be a Terrorist. The Palestinian Authority (PA) Prime has enhanced regular monthly stipends for the families of slain terrorists. Funds are deposited into the bank accounts of the "shahids" (martyrs) families at the same time that salaries are transferred to the accounts of PA government workers. It is believed that at least part of payout is derived from the internationally-donated funds that are transferred to the PA via the Bank of Israel for humanitarian purposes only. No Concessions before Negotiations. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said at the weekly Cabinet meeting on Sunday that Israel will not make major concessions before negotiations. "First, we will conduct negotiations without preconditions. We do not accept the idea that Israel must always make extraordinary concessions..." (He should say: "Israel will not make any concessions"! The enemies of Israel have offered only rocket fire and random terror attacks as concessions.) US is Subsidising Terror. The United States announced on Thursday that it will donate $40 million to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, UNRWA, for Arabs in the Palestinian Authority-assigned areas, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria. (The American funding comes despite a report that Hamas terrorists are employed by the agency. That is why Canada decided last month to stop its UNRWA funding. The US' s huge international debt has also not stopped this stupidity!) What Diplomatic Relation? The Egyptian Journalists' Union has sanctioned two journalists who interviewed Israel's ambassador to Egypt, Shalom Cohen. Hussein Sarang, a veteran reporter, was suspended from his job for three months. Israeli officials said that the sanctions were evidence that Egypt was "trying to erase the presence of Israel from the Egyptian consciousness." (The presence Egypt has never really allowed!) Remember and Change Your Attitude!
REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of PanAm Flight 103, 12/21/88 (All 243 passengers and 16 crew members were killed) REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the World Trade Center in 2/26/93 (six people were killed and injured 1,042) REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of the Marine Barracks in Lebanon, 10/23/83 (killing 299 American and French servicemen) REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of Khobar Towers, U.S. Barracks Saudi Arabia, 6/25/88 (19 US airmen were killed in their dormitory) REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombing of U.S. Embassies-Nairobi and Dar es Salaam, Africa, 8/10/98 (blast that took the lives of over 220 people and 85 people were wounded) REMEMBER 9/11 — the MUSLIM attacks on the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and attempt to destroy the White House or Congress on 9/11/01 REMEMBER the MUSLIM the tourist district bombings in Bali 12/10/02 (202 people were killed, 152 of whom were foreign nationals) and 01/10/05 (20 people were killed and many more were injured) REMEMBER the MUSLIM bombings of 4 commuter trains in Madrid 3/11/04 (killing 191 people and wounding 1,800) REMEMBER the MUSLIM murders of at least 368 children in Beslan, Russia 9/1/04 REMEMBER the MUSLIM attack in London on 7/7/05 (52 commuters were murders and 700 were injured) AND, PLEASE REMEMBER the MUSLIM murders of at least 2,000 Israelis since Oslo was signed 9/13/93, with tens of thousands wounded — many maimed for life! REMEMBER: Muslim psychiatrist guns down thirteen unarmed soldiers at Ft. Hood, TX 11/5/2009 REMEMBER: Islamic terrorists have carried out more than 14,374 terror attacks since 9/11/01. REMEMBER Muslims killed 3,308 in America in 65 terror attacks (The question any Jew and Israel haters must ask now: "Why do I still hate Jews and support people who have clearly shown their intention to kill or convert to Islam me and my family, pursuing their goal of global domination by Islam?") Steven Shamrak was involved in the Moscow Zionist movement. He worked as a construction engineer at the Moscow Olympic Games project and as a computer consultant in Australia. He has been publishing an Internet editorial letter about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001 and has a website www.shamrak.com. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com |
|
SOMETHING BIG IN THE WHITE HOUSE IS VERY STRANGE! WHO VETTED RASHAD HUSSAIN?
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, February 17, 2010. |
|
President Barack Hussein Obama appoints a Muslim White House lawyer to be his personal representative to the Muslim World at the OIC (Organization of Islamic Conference)...WHY? Something very strange is going on in the White House...or is that an Oxymoron to begin with. On February 16th, I listened to an interview by Megyn Kelly (a news anchor on Fox News) of Monica Crowley (a Fox News analyst). They seriously discussed Obama appointing Rashad Hussain, Deputy Associate Counsel to the President, as his representative to the OIC. That Hussain is a Muslim should not matter — except for the fact that Sharia Law mandates Muslims to kill any Muslim who abandons their faith and thereby becomes an apostate. Obama does claim to be a Christian, having left the Islamic faith of his father. According to hostile Muslim clerics and the Koran this rejection of Islam could warrant a "fatwa" (Muslim religious order to kill). Wasn't Rashad Hussain vetted by the FBI before he was allowed into a position of personal trust inside the White House — let alone getting physically close to the President? I wonder why Obama, knowing this, would take such a chance — unless the work he is doing makes his being a Christian or not a Christian acceptable to Islamic "Jihadists". If I didn't know that Obama was a loyal patriotic American, it would appear that someone close to the President is planting moles at the highest levels of Government. During the interview by Megyn Kelly, Monica Crowley spoke about the fact that Rashad Hussain had spoken out in defense of Professor Sami al-Arian who was convicted of funneling money to Terrorist Muslim Arab Palestinians. Rashad Hussain was quoted in the "Washington Report on Middle East Affairs" of November 2004 as calling Sami al-Arian the victim of "politically motivated persecutions" and that "al-Arian was used politically to quash dissent". (2) These remarks by Hussain were later deleted by the editor, Delinda Hanley of the Washington Report, although the author Shereen Kandil affirmed she quoted Hussain accurately. (3) Prof. Sami al-Arian, a former professor at South Florida U., was charged in 2003 with heading U.S. operations of the Palestinian Islamic "Jihad" (war for Islam). We just had a big visible blunder when two people crashed a White House Dinner and had their picture taken with the President. The Secret Service was lambasted for this blunder. Why does there seem to be a dangerous stream of Obama appointees who have been able to by-pass vetting by the FBI and Congress? Is Obama ruling America by fiat and proclamation? How much more serious is it to have a Muslim in the White House who, in his early years, defended al-Arian, a confessed and convicted go-between for transferring money to Terrorists? Did Obama personally invite Rashad aboard as he has so many Czars and Czarinas, many of whom have rap sheets as anarchists, Socialists, Fascists, even Communists — many with an historical agenda hostile to American values and who seem to have been positioned to replace Congress in any upcoming National Emergency? I wonder why Congress has chosen to accept irrelevancy when the world of Islam has ramped up its Global "Jihad" (war for Islamic Global Caliphate) — especially threatening America. Hopefully, someone in Washington can dig up the particulars on this appointee. What are his marching orders as Obama's personal messenger to the Muslim world? Here again we observe the President lurching toward appeasement and outreach to Islam, in effect, closing the circle he began as a Muslim child, learning the basic tenets of Koranic Sharia laws in a Madrassa. Questions keep swirling around without anyone seeking real answers: Who hired Rashad? Was Rashad connected to anyone in the President's circle of friends prior to election or after elections? Who were Rashad's circle of friends at Yale? Who sponsored and funded Rashad at Yale — which is very expensive and hard to get into? Did the FBI vet him prior to his employment at the White House or was he given a 'pass'? Who does he report to officially? Unofficially? What are his duties as a legal advisor to Obama? Are his Emails and advisory memos to the President considered privileged and secret? Was he also a resource to advise Obama on Islamic affairs? Was Rashad privy to vital intelligence with respect to U.S. planning to thwart Islamic Terror in America — or confidential planning to assist Israel in defending herself? Did he attend a local Mosque and, if so, have any of its members raised a security flag? What was this Mosque's reputation? Are their other Muslims inside the White House and who appointed them? Are there legislative assistants to Congress who are either Muslim or Anglos who favor Islamic States. There are 56 Islamic States in the world of which 22 are Arab. This is a job of vetting for the FBI but, under Obama: Is vetting no longer standing policy orders to the FBI and/or CIA, etc. In conclusion, I would like to share some related thoughts to the preceding: I have been concerned for some time that Islamists, such as the Saudis, have used their enormous wealth to advance Islam on a global scale never before imagined. Those who study Arab and Muslim history know that such countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Egypt and others have this remarkable ability to retain hostility toward the "infidel" (non-Muslim) — even over a thousand years. Something big is very, very strange! ### 1. "Obama's Islamic Envoy Quoted Defending Man Charged with Aiding
Terrorists" FOXnews.com Interview by Megyn Kelly of Monica Crowley
February 16, 2010
2. Shereen Kandil Washington Report on Middle East Affairs November 2004 3. FoxNews.com http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/02/16/ obamas-islamic-envoy-disputes-report-quoting.... 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@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
'AN ATTACK ON ISRAEL IS AN ATTACK ON CANADA'; PA BEHIND
LAWFARE AGAINST ISRAEL; NEW EVIDENCE HIZBULLAH ASSASSINATED HARARI
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 17, 2010. |
|
'AN ATTACK ON ISRAEL IS AN ATTACK ON CANADA' SOLIDARITY WITHOUT A TREATY: "...an attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada," said Peter Kent, Canada's Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the Americas. He said that Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper had made that point several times. CANADA'S CONCERN: Canada long has been concerned about clerical and expansionist Iran's march toward nuclear weaponry, which, Min. Kent stated, Iranian Pres. Ahmadinejad proclaimed as his goal. Canada equally objects to Iranian repression of human rights. PROPOSALS: Canada imposes an embargo on nuclear-related materials to Iran. It proposes stronger sanctions and with universal participation, before military action is taken. It would prefer that sanctions target the offenders and not the population at large. RELATED NEWS: Israel PM Netanyahu went to Russia, in reaction to Iran's announcement that it would enrich uranium to just below weapons grade itself, and without international supervision or safeguards. He was to urge tough sanctions on Iran. Before Netanyahu reached Moscow, a Russian Minister declared that Russia would ship Iran the S300 system that can defend against missiles attacking Iran's nuclear facilities. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said he was willing to hear Netanyahu's views, because of certain close relations with Israel. Pres. Medvedev did refer to the large Israel population of Russian birth and descent. He said he would delay the sale of the S300, but did not say he would cancel it. [Tough sanctions?] U.S. Vice-President Biden, "...in a remark that upset American officials, declared last year that the United States should not stand in Israel's way if it wants to attack Iran in order to prevent it from reaching nuclear capability." "We cannot dictate to another sovereign nation what they can and cannot do when they make a determination, if they make a determination, that they're existentially threatened." "However, Biden has also said "'Israel will have to reconcile itself with the nuclearization of Iran.' (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/16). I think that Ahmadinejad disavows any quest for nuclear weapons, although his actions and threats make his quest clear, without being explicit. He realizes that sympathizers will not put two-and-two together, because they don't like four. Biden has contradicted himself before. Canada continues the Western practice of saying that sanctions should be tried before military means. Sounds sensible. But efforts to get stiff sanctions approved have been tried for years. And years. By now it is obvious that the effort will not succeed, and therefore there will be no stiff sanctions. It also should be obvious that the UN is an institution for blocking programs for international security and human rights, as dysfunctional as the U.S. Congress or New York state government. And by now, sanctions probably would be too late. To continue to hold out hope for sanctions seems to be a way of making believe the problem will go away without having to make a difficult decision. The Obama-Biden administration seems to have made its decision, which is to allow "the nuclearization of Iran" but pretend to voters that it made no decision. The government deceives the people instead of frankly giving them time to build bomb shelters.
P.A. IS BEHIND LAWFARE AGAINST ISRAEL LAWFARE: Israeli Foreign Minister Lieberman accused the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) of being the source of anti-Israel lawfare. The P.A. finances foreign lawsuits against Israeli officials for alleged war crimes. Israel sends large sums to the P.A. and cooperates with the P.A. to boost its economy [a boost that is succeeding]. Min. Lieberman finds it unacceptable for Israel to cooperate with the P.A. and help finance it, but it draws upon such funds to harass Israel with those lawsuits. [All of those suits ruled on were dismissed as beyond jurisdiction or without basis.] Wherever Lieberman goes abroad, he hears that P.A. officials do not trust Israel. He asks how can Israel trust P.A. officials, who accept Israel's help but finance dubious legal harassment against Israel. Going further, Lieberman questions the value of negotiating with Abbas. Whom does Abbas represent? Not the people of Gaza, who repudiated him in favor of rulers hostile to him. He postponed elections in Judea-Samaria several times, making one wonder whether he still speaks for the people there. [The current issue of the Jewish Political Chronicle explains that he is weaker politically than ever, because he defers war for diplomacy, but demands preconditions that preclude diplomacy. His people interpret his policy as pro-Israel. Therefore, indications are that, just as he became more recalcitrant in order to seem firm with Israel, he is planning another uprising, to keep power. Deduce what that says about his people and the chance for genuine, long-term peace with them.] LAND-FOR-PEACE IRRELEVANT: As the Arab-Israel conflict has developed more into the Muslim-Israel conflict, the notion of land-for-peace becomes ever more irrelevant to peace, Lieberman warns (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/16). It would be quite a revelation to find that the P.A. is behind those lawsuits.
DIABETES EPIDEMIC BUILDING IN JORDAN STATED FACTS: Among Jordanian adults over age 25, 80% are overweight and 30% already have diabetes. By 2050, the current trend would lead to 50% diseased (www.imra.org.il, 2/16). WHAT DOES THIS MEAN: Wow! What is causing this? How similar is the situation in the Arab nation as a whole, especially in the Palestinian Authority, many of whose families have relatives in Jordan? What are its implications? A contributing factor might be that, like Saudi Arabians, Jordanians prefer to hire foreign laborers and domestic help. The government of Jordan, like that of Saudi Arabia, strives to get employers to find and hire citizens.
IRAN WARNS THOSE WHO WOULD IMPOSE NEW SANCTIONS NEWS: President Ahmadinejad of Iran warns that Iran would reciprocate crushingly against the imposition of additional sanctions on Iran over its nuclear development. He says that the era of sanctions is over. His country's news agency claims that Iran proved its program's legitimacy to the UN, thereby removing any reason for sanctions (www.imra.org.il, 2/16). BACKGROUND NEWS: Iran lost a million jobs in the past year, presumably due to Adhadinejad's profligacy in appeasing the people. Iran's currency lost a quarter of its value, relative to foreign currencies. [This means that imports cost more, so people's savings are worth less. This is happening to the U.S., too.] An Austrian-led consortium has withdrawn from an Iranian multi-billion dollar natural gas shipping project. The Siemens company of Germany ended its long business presence in Iran. Malaysian investors gave up on a plan to market Iranian bonds abroad. A plan to build two Turkish banks to help Iran evade U.S. sanctions was abandoned. China has frozen negotiations to build nuclear power stations. Other countries are reviewing their economic relations with Iran (Amir Taheri, Wall St. Journal, 2/16, A19). Mr. Taheri also fleshes out Sec. of State Clinton's recent observation that Iran is turning into a military dictatorship. Iran had been signing numerous economic deals with foreign investors and countries. Iran's failing economy, however, cannot seem to maintain that pace. The UN does not share Iran's opinion that it proved its program proper.
IRAN HAS DEVELOPED BETTER CENTRIFUGES ran claims that it has a new generation of centrifuges that are five times as good as the earlier generation (www.imra.org.il, 2/16).
MAAN NEWS ON ARAB-ISRAEL NEGOTIATIONS Maan News reports, "A year of US efforts to revive the long-stalled peace process have failed largely due to Israel's refusal to halt the ongoing expansion of the settlements." The report refers to "...many settlements built on land taken from Palestinians after the 1967 occupation of the West Bank. Nearly half a million Israelis live in the settlements, particularly in a ring around East Jerusalem, the Palestinian capital." (www.imra.org.il, 2/16.) Abbas came up with a new, unilateral demand as a pre-condition for negotiating. For years he has abstained from negotiating. Israel is ready to negotiate. Maan News put it as if it is Israel's duty to keep meeting Arab demands or else the lack of negotiation is its fault. Maan does not question the Arab demands. "Expansion" is one of those vague terms having multiple meanings. Israel is not expanding the borders of any of its communities in Judea-Samaria. Neither has the Netanyahu regime granted new building permits since taking office. Before that, Israelis were building only within existing municipal boundaries, though the Oslo Accords do not require any limitation on Israeli building within the disputed Territories. The reference to "East Jerusalem, the Palestinian capital" is odd. There is no city called "East Jerusalem," no country called "Palestine" (and no distinctive nationality called "Palestinian"). Wishful thinking does not make fact or entitlement. "...land taken from Palestinians" is another ambiguous term. It implies that a Palestinian Arab state was conquered in 1967, and that land was taken from it for building those Jewish communities. But there was no such state. The status of Judea-Samaria was that of unallocated territory of the Palestine Mandate for a Jewish national home. In 1948, Jordan seized those territories in an act of aggression. That did not give Jordan any title to it. The Jewish communities were built on State land, which Israel was in charge of, and on private land those communities bought. Incidentally, the Arabs have been building a ring around Jerusalem. Maan News is an Arab one. Apparently, it disguises Arab claims and desires as facts.
NEW EVIDENCE HIZBULLAH ASSASSINATED LEBANESE PM 
New but not officially disclosed evidence has been published by Der Spiegel that Hizbullah agents assassinated Lebanese PM Hariri, the present one's father. The new evidence is the network of telephone calls among Hizbullah agents before the assassination. OLD EVIDENCE INADMISSIBLE: The case seemed bogged down with the release of four Lebanese generals implicated in the plot. Syria claimed vindication, but the release was due to improper prosecutorial methods that made evidence impermissible in court. [Some commentators thought the case fell prey to appeasement of Hizbullah and its allies, which dominate Lebanon now.] "Hizbullah had described Der Spiegel's report as 'fabricated lies' and a cheap attempt at influencing the June 7 parliamentary elections." (www.imra.org.il, 2/16). Hizbullah commonly treats truth as lies and lies as truth. If it knows that Der Spiegel is trying to influence Lebanese elections, it is not explaining how. Therefore, its accusation appears to be one more of many cheap tricks to evade responsibility. If Hizbullah is guilty, and Hizbullah was an agent of Syria and Iran, then suspicions of Syrian involvement are well founded. Syria and Iran sponsor Hizbullah to do their dirty work but calls itself nationalist. Radical Muslims, such as Hizbullah, really do not recognize nationality. Their religious ideology is international. Ironically, Syria calls itself the protector of Lebanon, from Israel.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
AFSI CALLS FOR PROTEST AGAINST OBAMA ENVOY WITH TIES TO U.S. MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD
Posted by AFSI, February 17, 2010. |
|
It is of utmost importance that we protest President Barack Obama's appointment of Rashad Hussain as a U.S. Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Conference. The enclosed information details Hussain's background of association with the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood, an offshoot of the organization that originated in Egypt in 1928 to introduce traditional Islamic sharia law. The Muslim Brotherhood was banned in Egypt in 1954, the same year that they attempted to assassinate Egyptian President Nasser. Following Sadat's peace treaty with Israel in 1979, the Brotherhood assassinated Sadat in 1981. The Brotherhood supports Hamas as well as the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. Their motto is:"...Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope." It is our belief that the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood should be banned in this country because of its ties to radical Islam. It is inconceivable that America's envoy should be someone with a history of support and participation in Brotherhood causes. Please call President Obama at the White House — 202-456-1111; 202-456-1414 and your Congressional Representative (Capitol Switchboard: 202-224-3121) to protest this appointment and the message of appeasement and acceptance that it sends. |
|
BREAKING NEWS: New Obama Envoy Has History Of Engagement With U.S. Muslim Brotherhood; Called Al-Arian Case "Politically Motivated Persecution"
Rashad Hussain, White House official and President Obama's newly appointed Special Envoy to the Organization of Islamic Conference, has a history of participation in events connected with the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood as well as support for Brotherhood causes, once having called prosecution of the U.S. leader of a Palestinian terrorist organization one of many "politically motivated persecutions." Mr. Hussain's official biography states: Rashad Hussain is presently Deputy Associate Counsel to President Obama. His work at the White House focuses on national security, new media, and science and technology issues. Mr. Hussain has also worked with the National Security Staff in pursuing the New Beginning that President Obama outlined in his June 2009 address in Cairo, Egypt. Mr. Hussain previously served as a Trial Attorney at the U.S. Department of Justice. Earlier in his career, Mr. Hussain was a legislative assistant on the House Judiciary Committee, where he focused on national security-related issues. Mr. Hussain received his J.D. from Yale Law School, where he served as an editor of the Yale Law Journal. Upon graduation, he served as a Law Clerk to Damon J. Keith on the U.S. Court of Appeals. Mr. Hussain also earned his Master's degrees in Public Administration (Kennedy School of Government) and Arabic and Islamic Studies from Harvard University. He attended college at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. However, in October 2000 Mr. Hussain spoke at a conference sponsored by the Association of Muslim Social Scientists (AMSS) and the Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding at Georgetown University (CMCU). The conference was titled "Islam, Pluralism, and Democracy and featured many leaders of the global Muslim Brotherhood including former German diplomat Murad Hoffman, and International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT) leaders Louay Safi, Jamal Barzinji, Hisham Al-Talib, and AbdulHamid AbuSulayman. The AMSS was founded in 1972 as an outgrowth of the Muslim Student Association and has long been associated with the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood. In June 2002, Mr. Hussain was listed as part of a Congressional Staffers panel at the American Muslim Council's (AMC) 11th annual convention. The AMC was headed at that time headed by Abdurahman Alamoudi, a leader in the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and currently imprisoned as part of a plot to assassinate the Saudi head of state, Crown Prince Abdullah. Other important leaders of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood such as Jamal Barzinji were also part of the AMC. While at Yale Law School, Mr. Hussain was listed as part of the organizing committee for an April 2004 conference organized by a student organization known as the Critical Islamic Reflections (CIR) group. Among the CIR sponsors listed on the their web site was IIIT and the Fairfax Institute, the IIIT educational arm. IIIT is an important component of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and three of the key IIIT/Fairfax leaders Jamal Barzinji, Hisham Al-Talib, and Yaqub Mirza; were also associated with what has been called the SAAR network (Safa Group), a network of Islamic organizations located in Northern Virginia that was raided by the Federal government in March 2002 and which, until at least mid 2007, had been the subject of an ongoing investigation. Also listed as a CIR sponsor was ALIM, most likely referring to the American Learning Institute for Muslims and whose list of instructors includes some of the most important leaders of the U.S./global Muslim Brotherhood including Tariq Ramadan, Jamal Badawi, and Taha Al-Alwani. In September 2004, while still a Yale law student, Mr. Hussain participated in a session at the annual conference of the Muslim Student's Association (MSA) of the U.S. and Canada. The MSA has long been associated with the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and at the session, Mr. Hussain appeared along side the daughter of Palestinian Islamic Jihad leader Sami Al-Arian and labeled Al-Arian's prosecution "politically motivated persecution." According to an archived notice in the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs: A session on civil rights called "Get up, Stand up; Stand up for your Rights: The State of Contemporary Civil Liberties" was held Sept. 5 at the annual conference for the Muslim Students Association of the United States and Canada, held alongside the Islamic Society of North America's 41st annual convention in Chicago. Laila Al-Arian, daughter of civil and political rights activist and Muslim leader Sami Al-Arian, opened the session with her father's story. She gave a heart-wrenching, emotional account of an innocent man targeted for free-speech activities, whose rights were stripped thanks in part to the PATRIOT Act. Al-Arian, who has not yet been to trial, has been held in a federal penitentiary for over a year and a half. Al-Arian's situation is one of many "politically motivated persecutions," claimed Rashad Hussain, a Yale law student. Such persecution, he stated, must be fought through hope, faith, and the Muslim vote. (It should be noted that in the latest version of the above report, the two sentences pertaining to Mr. Hussain have been removed, sometime after October 2007 according to the Internet Archive.) In 2006, Al-Arian was sentenced to 57 months in prison for conspiring to violate a federal law that prohibits making or receiving contributions of funds, goods or services to, or for the benefit of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Defense of Al-Arian and accusations of politically-motivated prosecution has been a long-time U.S. Muslim Brotherhood cause. In May 2009, Mr. Hussain was one of the speakers a Leadership Summit of the Council for Advancement of Muslim Professionals (CAMP). Many of the sponsoring organizations of that event are tied to the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood including Islamic Relief, Amana Mutual Funds, the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), the Council for American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Institute for Social Policy and Understanding. It should also be noted that in August 2008, Mr. Hussein published a paper titled "Reformulating the Battle of ideas: Understanding the Role of Islam in Counterterrorism Policy." Although a full analysis of this paper is beyond the scope of this post, it should be noted that many of the recommendations match the agenda also being pushed by the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood including:
In August 2008, the Obama campaign Muslim outreach adviser Mazen Asbahi resigned after the Wall Street Journal disclosed his U.S. Muslim Brotherhood ties based on information developed by the GMDR. Another post has discussed the background of Dahlia Mogahed, one of two U.S. Muslims appointed to the President's Advisory Council on Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. Ms. Mogahed's background also suggests ties to the global Muslim Brotherhood. (Additional Source: "AMC's 11th Annual Convention Set to Begin June 27th. Convention Program Included" accessed 7/21/2003 (no longer available) Related posts: 1. BREAKING NEWS: Al-Arian Released On Bail
Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel
advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave.,
Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax:
212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website:
www.afsi.org. Helen Freedman is Executive Director.
|
|
RESPONSE TO PROF. JOSEPH KLAFTER'S OP-ED IN JERUSALEM POST, "THE DOUBLE BOYCOTT CHALLENGE"
Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, February 17, 2010. |
|
This below was written by Mark Tanenbaum, Tel-Aviv
University (TAU) board of governors in response to Professor Joseph
Klafter's op-ed in the Jerusalem Post, |
|
Professor Klafter is mistaken if he feels members of the Board of Governors, such as myself, have a problem with free speech at the University. We don't. Even when the anti-Israel polemics are repugnant to our pro-Israel sensibilities. I DO however have a problem with these professors hiding behind the University's skirt of "free speech" while in essence, actively working to harm the State of Israel. This insidious and dangerous activity must be dealt with firmly by the TAU Administration. Allowing the professors to actively advocate and promote the anti-Israel Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions ("BDS") Movement in general, and the academic boycott of TAU in particular is unacceptable. A red line is crossed when a professor transitions from stating his or her opinion on certain political matters within an academic environment, to actively pursuing and promoting the international boycott of Israel in non-academic spheres. The latter activity should not be protected or condoned by Professor Klafter and his Administration. Furthermore, by these faculty members stating at their international Israel-bashing forums that they are TAU professors, it gives undeserved credence to their nefarious views. At the same time, it harms the University's reputation. TAU now appears as a hotbed of anti-Israel activity in the eyes of it's donors, thanks in part to the president facilitating this behavior through his inaction. Rachel Giora and Anat Matar are the two most high profile faculty extremists that fly all over the world, encouraging the academic boycott of the very university (TAU) that pays their salaries. How whacked is THAT? Both have made publicly recorded statements to the press that TAU is complicit in the "criminal", "racist" and "illegal occupation of the Palestinian's land" due to it's military research activity. Yet not a peep from the Administration defending the University against these slanderous and libelous remarks. Plus total silence from the University when Matar wrongly accused an IDF soldier of murdering a Palestinian and blasted his picture all over the Internet. The State Attorney is now looking into that incident. Matar will be speaking on February 17th at University College in London to promote the academic boycott of Israel. She made sure she was listed in the program as a faculty member at TAU. Plus there was a recent Jerusalem Post article on Matar calling for a worldwide boycott of Tel Aviv University. And again,no statement from TAU's Administration about their esteemed faculty member's efforts to destroy their beacon of academic freedom. If Matar were not such an obvious hypocrite, she would quit her job at the University she so despises, and apply for a position in Ramallah. Let's see how long the Palestinian Authority would tolerate her "right to free speech". State employees such as these faculty members at TAU, should not be able to receive a paycheck from the government with one hand, while signing anti-Israel boycott petitions with the other. One must remember that TAU is a State supported institution. As such, the president bears a fiduciary responsibility to the Israeli taxpayers and the Ministry of Education that professors at his University do not actively promote and work toward the financial destruction of their country through the BDS movement. A South Africa-like boycott, which is being promoted by these TAU faculty members, will swiftly bring Israel to it's knees by the crushing economic damage it shall inflict. Our enemies will defeat us without firing even one shot. Professor Klafter does not realize that Israel is fighting against her annihilation in a new type of war. It is a war where no tanks, or airplanes, or rockets are involved. It is a war where Israel's military might is of no avail. It is a war of delegitimization fought by our sworn enemies. It is a war to crush us through economic and political isolation. It is a war fought against us from within our borders by the these faculty members. They are aiding our enemies. And foolishly protected by Professor Klafter and his Administration. Signed, Mark H. Tanenbaum
Dear Professor Joseph Klafter, We can certainly understand the predicament you are in with regards to those faculty in your university who misuse their academic freedom. But didn't you make your life too easy by saying that the best answer is to ignore these people and continue with the important work of the university? You can initiate some simple steps which may lead to cessation of anti Israeli activities emanating from your university, without compromising academic freedom. As a starter, why don't you write a letter to your faculty, explaining to them that this type of behavior hurts the university and that you personally ask them to cease from their anti-Israel activity? Second, why don't you warn them that any political activity which enters the classroom will be dealt with harshly? If you would take a close look at the curriculum of some of the courses in your university you would see that they are political and ideological, rather than scientific. Don't you think that such misuse of academic freedom at the expense of students should and can be stopped? Third, why don't you cut off all financial support for the type of bogus research that some of these people undertake? You can make it clear that beyond the bare salary, you will stop any financial support especially for so called "research" that is used by your faculty in their war against your university and the State of Israel. You have the right to set funding priorities, you do this every day with regards to bona fide research and do not consider this to be detrimental to academic freedom. So why not use the same criteria for the bogus "research" of these people? Fourth, you do not have to support their travel abroad. You can make sure that beyond their travel funds given to them as part of their employment contract, they do not get any support from your university for travelling. You can disallow their travel if it is on account of their teaching, you may prevent other teachers from filling in for their courses, when these people try to go abroad during the academic year. Fifth: You can make sure that these people do not serve on any professional committee or other position in your university. Surely they should not be department chairpersons, or responsible for students in any capacity. Sixth: Let your university know who the offenders are, make sure that all your students know their identities. Just as students will not go to a poor lecturer, they may opt not to go to courses given by someone who is trying to undermine their university. Seventh: You need not be helpful when it comes to setting your teaching schedule. Their allotted hours should receive the lowest priority, just as you would give low priority to someone who is known to be a poor lecturer. The bottom line, these people have the right of free speech, but not anything beyond that. Academic freedom means that one has the right to free speech and to pursuing academic interests freely, without being persecuted by the law. Academic freedom does not mean your university has to support action which it deems to be detrimental. You can set clear guidelines, stating that anyone who calls for a boycott of Israeli Universities shall be treated accordingly. Your present stand, although clearly well meaning, encourages those who hate Israel and its wonderful university system to continue their actions, knowing that they will not be accountable. We are certain that if your donors see a firm stand, which, on the one hand preserves academic freedom but at the same time takes the measures needed to assure this freedom shall not be abused, they will be even more supportive and giving. Dana Barnett Dana Barnet is executive director of IAM on behalf of members of
Israel Academia Monitor. e-mail@israel-academia-monitor.com.
Dr. Klafter's dilemma Dr. Joseph Klafter has a problem. He's president of Tel Aviv University (TAU), where Dr. Anat Matar and Prof. Rachel Giora are members of the faculty, and Omar Barghouti is a graduate student. Matar, a professor of Philosophy has called the IDF a 'criminal army', agrees with the conclusions of the Goldstone report that accuses Israel of deliberately targeting the civilian Palestinian Arab population for violence, and supports the boycott-divestment-sanctions (BDS) movement — including the academic boycott of Israeli institutions. She was arrested at a violent demonstration against the security barrier in Bili'in in 2005. Giora, about whom I wrote previously, also a stalwart of the BDS movement, is member of the Linguistics Department. Her name appears first (followed, of course, by Matar's) on a petition calling for "civil society institutions as well as concerned citizens around the world" to
And Barghouti — well, he is a leader of the BDS movement, a founder of PACBI, the Palestinian Campaign for the Academic and Cultural boycott of Israel. PACBI claims to want to apply pressure to make Israel 'change its ways', but in reality its goal is to destroy the Jewish state. It is absurd that this person is benefiting from a university built from contributions given in good faith by Zionists in order to strengthen the Jewish state. And it is beyond absurd that he is studying ethics. Dr. Klafter's problem takes the form of a dilemma. On the one hand, he seems to believe that the words and actions of Matar, Giora and Barghouti are protected by the concept of academic freedom. On the other hand, some big donors to TAU have said that they will zip up their wallets if subversive academics like the above are not fired or expelled. While Klafter finds the BDS campaign and particularly the academic boycott "odious", he is opposed to taking action against the boycotters because to do so would subvert the very same principle by which we oppose the boycott and will undermine our best efforts to thwart it. If we impose severe sanctions against dissident faculty and students, we will play into the hands of those who lead the boycott drive by compromising on our own core value of academic freedom. According to Klafter, Academic freedom is an absolute value, because without it the university would not be able to perform its functions. So even if a teacher or student agitates for the destruction of the state, he or she can't be stopped. One can oppose the academic boycott itself, because it limits academic freedom. But doing anything about the perpetrators is forbidden. So the donors should fight the boycott by increasing their contributions, because this will strengthen the university and the state. Here are a few facts Dr. Klafter seems to have missed:
It's not just the BDS people. TAU is also home to Shlomo Zand, whose 'scholarship' attacks the very notion of a Jewish people, and a number of others. It's time for Israeli academia to wake up, smell the coffee, and think about what their academic freedom would be like in the Arab state that Matar, Giora and Barghouti want to replace Israel with. Vic Rosenthal
Contact Israel Academia Monitor at e-mail@israel-academia-monitor.com. The Monitor writes, "ARE YOU A DONOR TO ISRAELI UNIVERSITIES? Learn about what is happening on Israeli campuses. Be informed about what is being done with your gifts and generosity. Bear in mind and speak about anti-Israel Israeli academics when you are in touch with University officials. http://www.Israel-Academia-Monitor.com" |
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL:THE JUDEAN DESERT AT SUNRISE
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, February 17, 2010. |
|
This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. HOW I GOT THE SHOT: The coffee was cold; the companionship, warm. The light: fleeting yet divine. I could watch the sun rise every morning in the desert, bearing witness to the land slowly shedding its blanket of darkness, layer by layer. I've photographed this region of the Judean Desert above the Darja Canyon on four occasions. On my first visit, the sky was full of perfect puffy white clouds, but it was mid-morning and with my family in tow, I couldn't venture off in search of the ideal view. Inspired by that day's performance, I've returned at sunrise on three other occasions, each time looking for a new interpretation of one of Israel's classical looks. On the morning I shot this photo last month, my hiking partner and I climbed a short hill not far from the access road to watch the day awaken. The most interesting view was to the west, with the rising sun at my back. As the sun crested the mountains in Jordan, the interplay of light and shadow revealed the contours of the peaks and valleys before us. Often, I find myself making quick, spontaneous decisions in the frenetic few minutes that I know the light will be kind to the camera. In this case, as I studied the expanse of desert in front of me, my mind switched modes of thinking, from composing the photo to simply capturing the texture of the scene unfolding in the distance. "We seldom capture in a single photograph the full expression of what we see and feel," noted photographer Sam Abell. We can, however, move closer to that ideal by following our vision to our hearts and on to a truer expression of what we are feeling.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at
smile@goldenlightimages.com and visit his website: Newly available: The Koren Birchon: Praise for the Land of
Israel, featuring 75 full color photographs of Israel.
|
|
THE FAILURE OF ISRAEL'S ARAB MEMBERS OF THE KNESSET
Posted by Seth J. Frantzman, February 17, 2010. |
|
They have gone from being close advisers to government coalitions to raving, angry extremists. Israel's Arab members of the Knesset do not provide their constituents with quality representation. If one were to judge merely by their statements and antics one would conclude that they work more on behalf of Palestinians than they do on behalf of those who elected them. It is one of the great tragedies that Israel's Arabs participate in a robust democratic system and yet their elected representatives have done them little service over the last 60 years. According to the Knesset Web site there have been 45 Arab MKs since the establishment of the state (by contrast there have been 13 Druse and 872 Jewish MKs). Three of the Arab MKs have been women, although two of these were elected as members of Jewish parties (Hosniya Jabarra of Meretz and Labor's Nadia Hilou). There are nine Arab members of the current Knesset. They are Hadash's Muhammad Barakei, Hanna Sweid (Christian); United Arab List-Ta'al's Talab a-Sanaa (Beduin), Masud Gnaim, Ibrahim Sarsour and Ahmed Tibi, and Balad's Said Nafa (actually a Druse who defines himself as an Arab), Jamal Zahalka and Haneen Zoabi. The first Knesset included three Arabs; Tawfik Toubi (an extraordinary individual who was born in 1922 in Haifa and served in 12 Knessets as a Communist), Amin-Salim Jarjura, an Ottoman army soldier and mayor of Nazareth, and Seif e-Din e-Zoubi, who served as an MK from 1949 to 1979 in a variety of parties. Two of the three Arabs in the first Knesset were members of the Nazareth Democratic Party, which was part of the governing coalition. The Arab party Kidma Ve'avoda served in the second and third Knessets with two members and also participated in the governing coalition. Two other Arab parties, the Democratic List for Israeli Arabs and the Agriculture and Development Party, also supported the government in the state's early years. In the fourth to eighth Knessets (1959-1977) the Arab party Kidma Ufituah was a member of the coalition. The party Shituf Ve'ahva participated in governments and served in four Knessets. In the eighth Knesset the Arab List for Beduin and Villagers run by Hamad Abu Rabiah joined the coalition. This long list of Arabs, Muslim and Christian, who served not only in the Knesset but brought their parties into Labor's governing coalition is unique to the early decades of the state. With the Likud victory in 1977 these parties disappeared. Even when Labor reappeared as the head of the government in the 1990s it did not bring any Arab parties with it into the coalition. The reason for the disappearance of these Arab parties is that the Arab community in Israel began to elect more extreme voices from their community.
DURING THE eighth Knesset (1974-1977) the two Arab parties Kidma Ufituah and Arab List for Beduin and Villagers merged to form the United Arab List, which has survived in various forms to the present day. Hadash, which bills itself as a Jewish-Arab communist party, emerged from a coalition of Rakach (the Arab Community party) and extreme leftist Jewish allies in 1977. It has served in every Knesset since. In 1988 the Arab Democratic Party was formed by Abdul Wahab Darawshe of Iksal. Along with Taleb a-Sanaa he joined the United Arab List in the 1990s. The party's platform included recognition of the PLO, withdrawal from the territories and the establishment of a Palestinian state. In the late 1990s and early 2000s Ahmed Tibi joined the Knesset as part of the Arab Movement for Renewal (Ta'al). Also in the late 1990s Balad, under the leadership of Azmi Bishara of Nazareth, joined the Knesset. It remains in the Knesset minus Bishara, who fled Israel after being accused of spying for Hizbullah several years ago. The story of the Arab members of the Knesset is the story of a great failure. National minorities in other countries, such as the Basques, the Irish (UK), the Quebecois or African-Americans have generally elected representatives who cared about their interests and worked on their behalf. But when Tibi, in the course of condemning Holocaust denial, links the Holocaust to the suffering in Gaza ("the victim's victim") is he helping his community? When Bishara fed Hizbullah intelligence was he helping his people in Nazareth, whose members were being struck down by Hizbullah rockets? When Said Nafa of Balad met Khaled Mashaal of Hamas in Syria was he helping his constituents? Israel's Arab MKs have gone from being close advisers to the government coalition to raving, angry extremists who spend most of their time complaining about their "Palestinian brothers" and taking little interest in their actual brothers and sisters. Their failures harm the Israeli-Arab community, which deserves better but has been convinced that to be "loyal Arabs" they must vote for extreme voices rather than "collaborationist" voices of moderation. It is their loss, and their continued estrangement from Israel and the continued aspersions cast on their loyalty by some on the Israeli Right will continue as long as they refuse to awake from 30 years of electoral slumber.
Seth J. Frantzman is a PhD researcher in Islamic and Middle Eastern
Studies at Hebrew University, and is living in Jerusalem. Contact him at sfrantzman@hotmail.com
and visit his website:
|
|
WHAT A SPECTACLE THE U.S.A. MADE OF ITSELF AT THE UN HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Posted by Anne Bayefsky, February 17, 2010. |
|
At the UN's Universal Periodic Review on Iran's human rights record, the US's Posner spoke for a grand total of 2 minutes. The Obama administration revealed a major plank of its Iran plan this week at the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva. While Iranian dissidents are dying on the streets, locked up in torture chambers or corralled into show trials, the president is desperate to seem to be doing something. What better venue for keeping up appearances than the UN? Hence, during a concoction called the "universal periodic review" (UPR), Assistant Secretary of State for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor Michael Posner gave a speech on Monday critical of various Iranian abominations — for a grand total of two minutes. The UPR process is touted as the centerpiece of the operations of the Human Rights Council, the UN's lead human rights body created over Bush administration objections in 2006. Posner did not use the occasion on the world stage to mention by name the American citizens now being held hostage in Iran or to demand their immediate release. The whole UPR spectacle is structured so as to focus on one country for three hours once every four years. The country under consideration is allotted one of those precious three hours. In Iran's case, the delegation, headed by Mohammad Javad Larijani, secretary general of the High Council of Human Rights, used the UN-provided opportunity to spend over an hour regaling the world about its glorious human rights record. The delegation included two women wearing heavy chadors who were permitted to exalt women's rights in Iran, and a Christian brought in to applaud the situation of non-Muslims. In addition, 54 states raced through their two-minute remarks, having time to do little else than line up pro and anti the regime's behavior. The regime's apologists had the last word — which was actually met by a round of applause. Western states managed to list a few problems, like a criminal code which advocates stoning. On the other side, the likes of Sudan, China, Cuba, Syria and Zimbabwe spoke about Iran's commitment to democracy. NGOs were not allowed to speak. The UN secretariat from the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights took great pains not to be perceived as taking sides, since apparently the Iranian human rights record was not sufficiently clear. They managed to ensure that there were exactly 27 states on either side of the debate over Iran's human rights credentials. Council President Alex Van Meeuwen of Belgium inserted himself into the proceedings only twice. The first came after Larijani referred to "Zionist terrorists." Although the UN staff would have had the remarks in advance, only after the fact did Van Meeuwen announce that all statements should show respect. Then, without provocation, he made a similar statement following the two minutes of Israeli Ambassador to the UN Aharon Leshno-Yaar, who had merely called upon Iranian leaders to cease denying the Holocaust. The UN's idea of even-handedness.
AFTER MONDAY, there are two more steps in the UPR process. An outline of Monday morning's remarks will be prepared, including any recommendations made. Iran will then be given an opportunity to accept or reject such recommendations. And some months down the road a report containing a summary of the whole exercise will be adopted by the Human Rights Council. The council process will be carefully orchestrated to last one hour: 20 minutes' speaking time for the country concerned, 20 minutes' speaking time for states and 20 minutes speaking time for all NGOs. After that, reports are immediately gaveled through, despite the fact that all human rights abusing states routinely reject all of the genuine recommendations. Iran is not the slightest bit concerned that the council will translate Posner's two minutes into anything that bites. The council has never adopted a resolution worried about human rights in Iran; it's too busy condemning Israel more often than all the other 191 UN states combined. Back in 2002, the former commission eliminated the position of UN human rights investigator on Iran, and the chance of it reappearing as a consequence of these proceedings are zero. So when the Obama administration touts its 120-second speech as evidence of its effort to get serious about Iran, or as an excuse for having joined the UN's viciously anti-Israel Human Rights Council, be warned. Anne Bayefsky
is the director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust and a Senior Fellow at Hudson Institute.
This article originally appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
ISLAMIC AND LEFTIST ALLIES DEFEND IRAN'S HUMAN RIGHTS RECORD AT U.N. GATHERING
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, February 17, 2010. |
|
This was written by Patrick Goodenough of CNSNews.com |
|
(CNSNews.com) — As the U.N. Human Rights Council scrutinized Iran's domestic rights record on Monday, Western nations raised concerns about abuses including executions, torture and mass arrests, while Tehran's Islamic and leftist allies lined up to defend and praise the regime. The events once again highlighted the deep divisions in the Geneva-based U.N. body, which the Obama administration joined last year, citing hopes of improving it from within. After Iran presented the HRC with a 31-page report on its human rights record, the council on Monday held a three-hour "interactive dialogue," with almost 60 states making statements and Iranian delegates periodically responding. The exercise is known as the "universal periodic review" (UPR), which examines every U.N. member state once every four years. The U.S. led the criticism of Iran, with Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner voicing concern about suppression of post-election protests, restrictions on freedom of expression, violations of religious freedom, "show" trials, and reports of torture of detainees. Several Western delegates called for an international inquiry into the post-election violence, while some implied that Iran was not an appropriate candidate to join the HRC. Iran hopes to win a seat on the council in elections scheduled for May. For Iran's allies, however — many of them countries whose own human rights records draw criticism — Iran's UPR was an opportunity to shield Tehran and scold the West. The Nicaraguan envoy painted Iran as the victim of Western imperialism. "Nicaragua, as is the case for Latin America as a whole, has been a victim of the same oppressors and this is why my country recognizes this spirit of fighting and hope in the Iranian people," he said. The international community should not try to impose its principles and cultural values on others, the Nicaraguan added. "We cannot but take into account the cultural environment in this fraternal country which, like other Islamic countries, believes that it is obliged to respect the norms of the Islamic shari'a." Venezuela's representative praised Iran's achievements, which he said came despite the country being "subjected to unjust economic sanctions and an ongoing defaming media campaign." Cuba's envoy similarly said Iranian progress had been achieved despite restrictions imposed from outside. Pakistan's delegate encouraged Iran to ensure the protection of citizens' rights, then added, "Pakistan firmly believes that human rights are better served when these are pursued through a non-politicized and cooperative approach. We should acknowledge that no country in the world can claim a blemish-free human rights record." The representative of Algeria noted that the UPR process was meant to be conducted in an "objective, non-selective, constructive, non-confrontational and non-politicized manner ... unfortunately this does not seem to be the case today with Iran." 'Some sentences may seem unpleasant' Iran's large delegation was led by Mohammed Larijani, the head of the country's High Council for Human Rights, who said no Iranians were in custody for their political views; those being held faced charges of terrorism or espionage. Another delegation member, a judge, defended court rulings, saying, "Although the implementation of certain sentences may seem unpleasant on first sight, social conditions at times require their implementation." An Interior Ministry director-general called last year's widely disputed re-election of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad "an exemplary exhibition of democracy and freedom" and accused outside countries of interfering in Iran's domestic affairs. Iran's UPR process will now involve a troika of countries — Pakistan, Senegal and Mexico — compiling a document containing recommendations arising from Monday's proceedings, which the HRC will "adopt" on Wednesday. In four years' time, Iran will go through the exercise again. The UPR was touted as one of the most important reforms built into the HRC when it was established in 2006 to replace its discredited predecessor, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights. Non-governmental organizations critical of Iran said Monday's meeting showed the need for the council to take further steps, including holding a "special session" on Iran and mandating a U.N. rights monitor, known as a "special rapporteur," to investigate. "There are recognized and significant ways for the U.N. Human Rights Council to place a country on its watchlist of abusers, but this week's procedure, which all states undergo automatically every four years, is not one of them," said Hillel Neuer, director of the Geneva-based NGO, U.N. Watch. The HRC is empowered to convene a special session when faced with a particularly egregious situation, as long as one-third of its 47 members support the move. Since 2006 it has held 13 special sessions, six of them dealing with the Middle East and ending with resolutions condemning Israel (the others related to Burma, Darfur, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sri Lanka, the world food crisis, the global economic crisis, and the Haiti earthquake.) Neuer said if the HRC was serious about tackling Iranian rights abuses — "and this is an open question" — then it should use available tools, including calling a special session, and adopting a resolution condemning the violations and setting up an inquiry into the post-election clampdown. It should also reinstate a permanent special rapporteur on Iran, he said, noting that the Commission on Human Rights had abolished the position in 2002. 'Trashing' the Declaration Another NGO, the International Campaign for Human Rights in Iran, also called on Monday for the council to hold a special session. "Iran has played the blameless victim while it brutally victimizes its people," said the campaign's spokesman, Hadi Ghaemi. "The UPR shows that Iran's practices trash the principles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Iran's legal obligations, and that more needs to be done — beyond the UPR — to help it understand and implement them." Ghaemi disputed claims by Iran's delegation about the situation, especially the denial that any Iranians are imprisoned solely because of their human rights work. He named 11 people in that category, including prominent activist Emad Baghi and Mohammad Sadiq Kaboudvand. Gabrielle Goldwater is a Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)FPC REPORT EXPOSES MASSIVE CONTRADICTIONS IN EUROPEAN AID TO PALESTINIANS http://eufunding.org.uk/FPC2004Report.pdf |
|
COMPARING JUDEA AND SAMARIA AND THE RIGHTS OF THE COLONISTS
Posted by Robin Ticker, February 17, 2010. |
|
Let us review the reason why the colonies revolted against England. Wasn't there a problem about Freedom of Religion, Freedom to own property, the right to bear arms in order to protect and defend oneself? Let us compare the rights of the colonists that were violated to the rights of the citizens of YESHA that are violated. Surely, the Jews of Gush KAtif and Northern Shomron had their rights violated much worse than those that instigated the Boston Tea Party and complained of taxation w/o representation. Gush Katif and Northern Shomron Jews paid taxes but their synagogues, homes and communities were totally destroyed. If Obama had his way the same is G-d forbid slated for other communities in YESHA and Jerusalem. The main difference between Judea and Samaria revolting from the State of Israel and the colonists revolting against Israel is that Bnei Yisroel is one Nation under G-d and each of the twelve tribes is an integral part of the Nation of Israel. Therefore Judea and Samaria will never permanently detach itself from the rest of Israel. That is prophesied in the Prophets. This is the Will of G-d. The twelve tribes must be eventually united. However, it may be inevitable, if the State of israel abandons Judea and Samaria, that residents of Judea and Samaria will be forced to temporarily separate from the State of Israel and declare a Torah autonomy and Sovereignty for self preservation and for the safety and security of the State of Israel and the rest of the world. If this be the case, it would be in the best interest of the IDF and the State of Israel not to fight against its brothers in YESHA in their declaration of Independence but rather allow them to do what they must in self defense against Kassam and Yassam. With Hamas, Hizbollah, Al Qaida and FATAH all being armed by an ideologically aligned Nazi Iran, not to mention the United States and NGO's of other sorts, our declaration of G-d's Covenant with our Forefathers and our Biblical birthright is what is necessary to enlist the aid of the Almighty to fight our battles against otherwise insurmountable forces against us. How else can the lone sheep fight against the 70 wolves? This below was written by Prof. Paul Eidelberg, President, Foundation for Constitutional Democracy |
|
February 12 is the birthday of America's greatest president, Abraham Lincoln. Ponder his celebrated Gettysburg Address, which begins with these words: "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth on this continent a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." Lincoln thereby dates America's birth not with the Constitution of 1788, but with the Declaration of Independence of 1776 — and rightly so. The Declaration embodies the political philosophy — one may even say the political theology — of the American Constitution, the covenant of the American people. The Declaration was embodied in many of the State Constitutions to sanctify their spiritual origin. The meaning of the Declaration is inseparable from the monotheistic culture in which it was incubated — the Judeo-Christian culture. This culture, as we see in the words of the Declaration, posits a "Higher Law" doctrine: "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God." The Laws of Nature and of Nature's God transcends the laws of men and nations. It is from this Higher Law, but therefore from God — the Creator of heaven and earth — that we derive our "inalienable rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." There is no moral relativism, no cultural relativism, no historical relativism in the Declaration of Independence; its principles transcend space and time. That's why the Declaration imposes limits on what governments may do. Which means the Declaration affirms the principle of limited government on the one hand, and the inviolable rights of the individual on the other. Therein is the credo of the American people, a credo rooted in the Biblical principle of man's creation in the image of God. Now this credo is being denied and undermined by President Barack Obama. Like his college mentors, Obama is a cultural relativist. He rejects the credo of the Declaration. He replaces the immutable doctrine of natural rights with the evolutionary doctrine of "Progressivism." Progressivism animated his "Yes we can" presidential campaign oratory — which signifies monumental egoism on the one hand, and historical amnesia on the other — all so evident in Obama's teleprompter speeches. So Americans should take this day of February 12 to relearn the teachings of their greatest President. As in former days, let American children learn to recite Lincoln's immortal Gettysburg Address. From there let American youth learn about their biblical roots, profoundly articulated in the Declaration of Independence. Contact Robin Ticker at faigerayzel@gmail.com |
|
'PA USING OUR MONEY TO SMEAR US'
Posted by Daily Alert, February 16, 2010. |
|
This was written by Rebecca Anna Stoil and it appeared
yesterday in the Jerusalem Post
http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=168759 |
|
Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman (Photo: AP) Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman on Monday slammed the idea that territorial compromise would help to secure a peace deal with the Palestinians.
Speaking before a session of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Lieberman told MKs that "anyone who thinks that they can attain peace through territorial concessions is deluding himself and others." Lieberman repeatedly emphasized that Israel did not have a viable partner for peace on the Palestinian side. He accused the Palestinian Authority of sponsoring worldwide campaigns to delegitimize Israel, campaigns that Lieberman said were partially financed by "the funds that we transfer to the Palestinians." "The majority of claims against senior IDF officers worldwide are funded and initiated by the PA," he said. "I have no faith in someone who files suits against [Kadima chairwoman] Tzipi Livni or other Israeli officials for war crimes. In every conversation between the Palestinians and international sources, they begin the conversation with the fact that they do not believe in the honesty of our stated intents, he said. "I do not honestly believe theirs in light of their initiatives for boycotts on Israeli goods, as well as the litigations. We need to check, as a society, whether we are willing to accept conditions such as these — that on one hand, they will hold negotiations with us, while on the other hand they devote a significant amount of their resources to opposing us." Later in the meeting Lieberman reiterated that "it cannot be that we cooperate with the Palestinians on security and economic issues, and they continue to file claims against us and to incite against us." Lieberman also questioned Palestinan Authority President Mahmoud Abbas's credibility as a negotiating partner. "The question was asked who exactly the PA represents," he said. "[Abbas] does not represent Gaza — Hamas is in control there — and because the elections in the PA itself have been delayed three times. The question was asked who Abbas represents, and it is not certain if he is even capable of delivering the goods for negotiations." The conflict, according to Lieberman, had in recent years become a religious struggle — a fact that negated the possibility of peace through territorial compromise. "The conflict has transformed in recent years, since the '80s, and mostly since the beginning of the last decade, into a religious struggle. As such, there is no possibility of reaching an agreement though territorial compromise. That is why Livni and Olmert's proposal in Annapolis could not bring peace — because the struggle has become a religious one," he said. Lieberman also emphasized his party's position that population and territory exchange was a crucial element in securing peace. "We in Israel Beiteinu are willing to exchange land and territory as was written in our platform. Conflicts such as this one have no easy-out solution." The foreign minister did acknowledge that his ideas were not necessarily representative of the government of which he is a member, and said instead that it was "my position, according to how I see things. We act according to the government's guidelines, which no party agrees with 100 percent, but that is the situation as I see it." Lieberman did offer an optimistic note when he told MKs that "we are forming a pro-Israel bloc that is growing and widening. In the last year, we reached — in the case of important votes in international forums — a 'moral majority' of 18 states who vote together with Israel, and in the coming year we hope to expand it further."
The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of
Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the
Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free
daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org
|
|
"CEMETERY INTO BUSINESS CENTRE" — FROM 1945 PALESTINE POST NEWSPAPER
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, February 16, 2010. | |
|
This is from Rabbi Marvin Hier of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. It presents a newspaper article from the November 22, 1945 Palestine Post (now called the Jerusalem Post.) | |
|
Below is a news article from the November 22, 1945 Palestine Post newspaper culled from the archives of Tel Aviv University, detailing Arab plans for the Mamilla Cemetery. See the full hypocrisy of those who are challenging the unanimous Israeli Supreme Court decision in the Simon Wiesenthal Center's favor. We are only building on the former municipal car park of Jerusalem. Read what was planned for the actual cemetery itself. Rabbi Marvin Hier
Gabrielle Goldwater is a
Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: A WEALTH OF INFORMATION
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 16, 2010. |
|
This was the first full day of the Jerusalem Conference, with many excellent speakers and much of importance to share. If there is anything to be regretted it is that some sessions run concurrently, so that choices must be made and it is impossible to attend everything. Here I share highlights, in terms of issues and speakers. More than this would be impossible. Hopefully even these highlights will provide significant facts and also perspective. Perhaps they will stimulate deeper inquiries into the issues on the part of some of you. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Keynote speaker for the morning was Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz (Likud), and his news was very good: In spite of the difficult part of the world in which we exist, we withstood the financial crisis better than most nations. And so, today, throughout the world, we are recognized for the way in which we have coped during the worst of the crisis and for the fact that we began recovery sooner than most nations. Within the crisis we found opportunity — to improve our financial status, to become more stable, and to polish our image. We have focused on long-term planning and not stop-gap measures. ~~~~~~~~~~ The session on Lawfare: Goldstone, the UN, and NGOs was highly informative. Lawfare = the use of the law to demonize Israel. Moderator Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, Director of the American Center for Democracy, began by pointing out that when Goldstone's history is examined, it is clear that he tends to please political powers. Says Dr. Ehrenfeld, he aspires to be UN secretary-general. ~~~~~~~~~~ Lt. Col (res) Jonathan Halevi, Senior Researcher on the Middle East and Radical Islam for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, carefully demolished any notion that there was objectivity at work when the Goldstone committee of inquiry did its work. What is to be regretted, he says, is that the world sees this report as representing a balanced investigation. Among the things to be questioned with regard to the Report are the methodology, the fact finding, the objectivity, and the presence of an (open) hidden agenda. The Palestinian Arab version of events was always accepted. No testimony was challenged. No questions were asked about Hamas. All witnesses denied there was "resistance," and this was accepted. No alternative scenarios were ever considered. E.g., the IDF hit a mosque. Goldstone claimed the IDF intended to attack those at prayer. He never even considered that it might have been because of the presence of terrorists. Goldstone asked witnesses, how many breadwinners were hit, and not how many were affiliated with Hamas. The committee extended condolences to those witnesses who lost family in the mosque attack, when in fact those family members were members of Hamas. The military expert for the inquiry came with a bias. For example, he asked a Palestinian psychologist, "What drives Israeli soldiers to shoot parents in front of their children?" ~~~~~~~~~~ Anne Hertzberg, a legal advisor to NGO Monitor, spoke at length about the NGOs — ostensibly human rights organizations — and their campaign of vilification of Israel. This campaign stems from the NGO Forum of the 2001 Durban Conference, at which 15 NGOs declared Israel the single violator of international law. What followed was the Durban Strategy, which achieves a veneer of credibility by couching its attack in legal terms. There are attempts to drag Israel to the International Court of Justice, etc. A discernable pattern can be recognized: when Israel responds against terrorism, NGO charges follow. These NGOs are then called upon to take part in legal processes. We saw this with Jenin, building of the security fence, the Lebanon War, and Cast Lead. During the three weeks of Cast Lead, 500 statements were issued by NGOs, accusing Israel of occupation, war crimes, crimes against humanity, etc. NGOs frequently listed combatants as civilians (thereby increasing the ostensible number of civilians Israel killed). 90% of the police defined by NGOs as civilians were actually terrorists. ~~~~~~~~~~ Goldstone had strong ties to NGOs. He was on the board of Human Rights Watch (until pushed into resigning), and members of his committee of inquiry had ties to Amnesty International. The UN Human Rights Commission provided Goldstone with staff and at least one member had Palestinian solidarity connections. Ronen Shoval, of Im Tirtzu, spoke about these connections. When his group began to analyze the footnotes of the Report, it was discovered that 92% of accusations were from Israeli NGOs, with some 16 groups involved. New Israel Fund, says Shoval, had provided these groups with $7.8 million in 2008-2009. ~~~~~~~~~~ Rabbi Abraham Cooper, Associate Dean of the Simon Weisenthal Center, spoke about a different, and less known, issue regarding the World Council of Churches (WCC). This is an exceedingly important topic, which I will touch upon only very briefly here. Perhaps at some point I will return to this. Cooper explained that this is a movement of liberal Christian groups, most notably Presbyterian — and in strong contradistinction to the very solid support we have among other Christians — that seeks to erode support for Israel in the US. It says that Israel is illegitimate, the last gasp of colonialism. In 2008, theologians within the movement analyzed the theological understandings of the Bible, and reasserted replacement theology (which says that the covenant of the Jews with G-d has been superseded by Christianity, so that, among other things, the connection of the Jewish people to the Land no longer applies). Within Congress, it should be noted, there are 33 members of this group in the House and 13 in the Senate. ~~~~~~~~~~ On the huge subject of Iran there were several speakers. About the fact that Iran represents a huge danger there is unanimity. But about little else. There are different takes, for example, regarding whether the unrest in Iran now will lead to a regime turnover, and, more so, whether this is possible before Iran reaches nuclear capacity. One point of importance is that this is a regional or international threat, and not one just to Israel. Iran aims to challenge international stability, and weaken Sunni control in the area. The goal is political, says Amos Gilad, Director of Policy and Political-Military Affairs for the IDF. Gilad thinks it is inconceivable that Fatah will not fall under Hamas dominance in time. This is the model, just as Hezbollah is taking over Lebanon. He does not believe the insurgents will succeed before Iran would become nuclear. ~~~~~~~~~~ Dr. Dore Gold, Director of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (and author of a book on Iran), certainly concurs with regard to the regional threat — with Yemen, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Lebanon, Gaza, Sudan, Iraq, etc. all affected. But he put it even more starkly. Iran going nuclear, he says, will affect the entire battle against terrorism. In 2001, the US retaliated for 9/11 by going into Afghanistan. Today Iran shelters both Shia and Sunni terrorist groups. What would be possible in terms of going after them if Iran had the bomb? Dr. Gold does not believe that sanctions can be effective. They take a long time, he said, far longer than we have. What sanctions would do is signal Iran that finally the world is serious. He believes that the Obama administration has a fall-back position if sanctions don't work: deterrence. That is, the threat that if Iran used the bomb they'd get hit in turn by the US. This is what prevailed during the Cold War. But Gold does not see this model as applicable because he doesn't think that Iran would take the US threat seriously. ~~~~~~~~~~ The question of whether the US would accept a nuclear Iran in the end (assuming Israel doesn't set Iran's nuclear clock back), or resort to military power at the last moment is the greatest unanswered question. Senator Birch Bayh (D-Indiana) addressed the gathering by video. He said that it's worth trying to rally the world, but he doesn't have much hope for this, and in the end it's appropriate to use force if all else fails. This is better than a nuclear Iran. Congressmen Elliot Engel (D-NY 17) participated on this panel. He said repeatedly, "We cannot allow Iran to go nuclear." And I had the impulse to say, "Nu?" Neither Bayh nor Engel is sitting in the White House. Unfortunately. ~~~~~~~~~~ The last session I will report on here addressed the best way to handle the Israeli-Palestinian situation. I found it fascinating because there was an absolute unanimity in terms of diagnosing the situation, and incredible diversity regarding how to respond. To a person, it was agreed that the Palestinian Arabs don't really want a "two-state solution." Minister Benny Begin spelled it out neatly: There is no solution, but there is an internal need to find a solution (doing nothing doesn't "feel right"). Do we try to compromise, or take the issue off the agenda? He described much of what you read here on a regular basis: Fatah has not moderated. At their August conference, they had the opportunity to do so, but instead reaffirmed the charter that calls for Israel's destruction. Thus no agreement can be reached, and there will not be one. Things will remain as they are. To give any land to the PA would be irresponsible with Hamas waiting in the wings. We can, and should, try to improve the daily lives of the Palestinian Arabs. ~~~~~~~~~~ TV journalist Ehud Ya'ari, who has some inside connections to the Palestinian Arabs, shared some things we don't routinely hear: A former aide to Arafat said that the idea of a Palestinian state within the '67 lines is a "punitive construct designed by the US and Israel to hinder Palestinian movement." Not only is there no enthusiasm for a state within '67 lines, says Ya'ari, he was asked: "Who told you that the struggle for independence means sovereignty?" To the Palestinian mind independence and statehood are not the same thing. They are fighting "to cast off Israel." There is the battle cry of a state within the '67 lines, but no real political agenda. The Palestinian Arabs, says Ya'ari, are aiming for "reverse annexation" — attempting to swallow us up. "They [the Israelis] are collapsing into our unwilling arms." Ya'ari's "solution" for this is very strange indeed: quick, force them into interim sovereignty. As Arieh Eldad (about which more below) said, Who ever heard of forcing sovereignty on someone? ~~~~~~~~~~ Yoram Ettinger, former minister for Congressional affairs at the Israeli Embassy, said there are two elements for a nation — history and security. But what we've done is base our arguments for why we cannot have a two-state solution on security, thus removing the moral high ground of history. There can always be arguments about how we can find security within a two-state paradigm. But our history in this land is our history. "When you find yourself in a deep hole, stop digging." But our leaders keep digging: Oslo, Road Map, Annapolis, etc. It is politically correct to speak of a "two-state" solution, but this is not a territory-driven conflict. For 1,400 years there has not been peace between different Arab groups. Why do we imagine we can make peace with them now? Ettinger shared with us what Syrian president Bashar Assad had said, when asked about making a small compromise with regard to how much of the Golan Heights he would accept back: "Anyone who gives away a square inch of his land does not deserve to be respected." ~~~~~~~~~~ MK Tzipi Hotovely (Likud) also said that the idea of a Palestinian state was dead. She told a joke: "Only five people believe in a two-state solution and four of them sit in the White House." And she offered a direct quote from Ehud Barak: "Between myself and Benny Begin there is no difference regarding Palestinian intentions." But, she cautioned, don't decide not to decide. Stop playing the game and don't leave the status of Judea and Samaria in ambiguity any longer. Her solution: apply Israeli law to all of Judea and Samaria. Right now 300,00 Israeli citizens outside the Green Line live under military rule. They should not have a separate or secondary status any longer. As to the Arabs, give them citizenship, she says. The problem here, as I see it, is not demography — not an issue of getting swallowed up by Arabs. It's a question of what sort of citizens these people, who have been trained to hate us and incited to kill us, would be. There is a modified approach in line with what she suggested: apply Israeli civilian law to all of the Jewish communities outside the Green Line. Make them clearly and unequivocally ours, with our full sovereignty applying to them. ~~~~~~~~~~ MK Arieh Eldad (Ihud Leumi) said he is for ending the occupation — the occupation of our land by Arabs. He also is for a two-state solution, with the recognition that one of those states is Jordan. We would have Arab residents of Israel, but they would have citizenship in Amman. The problem with this is that Jordan wants no part of it, although it is said in some quarters that the Hashemite kingdom might be induced under the proper circumstances. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
RUBIN REPORTS
Posted by Paul Lademain, February 16, 2010. |
|
Who is Barry Rubin? Really. Who is he? What does he really stand for? His recent articles (hereinbelow) continue to promote the carving-up of the already carved-up tiny State of Israel in order to hand large parts of it to the arabs as if this were a "good thing" and a "done deal." He determinedly ignores International Law, as has Israel's blinded (or extorted?) government. Barry simply ignores our challenge for him to cease his dangerous habit of referring to any Arab found in Israel as a "Palestinian." What gives with this guy? Sometimes he fervently favors empowering the state of Israel and then in the next breath he expresses his stubborn and inexplicable desire for Israel to surrender to the improper, unjust, and Saudi-influenced imprecations of the US State Dept. We often wonder if Barry Rubin is nothing more than a committee organized by the Peres/Barak/Jimmy Carter cabal. We believe Barry Rubin's propaganda and his blind assumptions about Israel contributes greatly to Israel digging itself into a ditch. It has also occurred to us that a goodly number of Jews in Israel (sometimes referred to as "lefties") curry favor with Israel's antagonists in the hope their callow subservience will earn them a ticket to run away and be allowed to "settle" elsewhere after they help Israel dismantle itself. (Ever hear of the "running Jew" calumny? These are the words used by arrogant Euroids and particularly Poles to describe Jews — the inference being that all Jews are just cowards and shysters.) We are the SC4Z and we support a more powerful, more expansive, more determined, "Strong Horse" Israel. We need a stronger and LARGER Israel peopled by a citizenry that opposes the evils of Islam especially now that Ummah has big bucks and the financial wherewithal to raise its ugly head. We need a stronger and more determined Israel, especially because there really political fantasists who, while taking gifts from the Saudis, demand that Jews (and only Jews) be forced to behave as if all people possess at some hidden core "good souls" such that the "good Jew" must venerate and protect their worst enemies. (As if the likes of al Queda, or David Duke, or the White Supremacists, or the notorious Manson Gang, etc. don't exist in the real world.) Viva Israel from the SC4Z — (Secular Christians for Zionism). |
|
Barry Rubin's email to lademain: From: RubinReports "Why Isn't There Peace? One Reason: Few People Know How Much is
Being Offered"
I've been having a dialogue through correspondence lately with
someone describing himself as a moderate Palestinian who lives in the
United States. What most impressed me in the exchanges — both
from what my interlocutor said and how he described the views of other
Palestinians — is the total lack of comprehension on their part
— those who live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip along with those
who live elsewhere, both moderate and radical — about Israeli positions toward peacemaking that are easily available on the public record.
Among Palestinians, as more broadly with almost all of the public
in the Muslim-majority world and a lot of the elite classes in Europe,
there exists a mythical Israel, reminiscent of the fabricated
antisemitic stereotypes of the past, that has little to do with
reality. They believe Israel isn't interested in peace, doesn't offer
the Palestinians anything, opposes any real Palestinian state, intends
to keep the West Bank (until Israel's withdrawal from all of the Gaza
Strip they would have added that territory as well), and is led by
intransigent hardliners. Such a conception was comprehensible —
if not fully accurate — describing the situation in parts of the 1980s
but has nothing to do with the last 20 years.
In 2010 they have no idea what Israel actually offered in the 1990s' peace process, or at the Camp David summit in 2000, or what President Bill Clinton offered with Israel's agreement in December 2000, or what Prime Minister Ehud Olmert proffered in 2008, or what is in the current Israeli government's peace offer in 2010. All proposed the creation of an independent Palestinian state, the first three in close to 100 percent and the last three as equivalent to 100 percent (with some small, equal land swaps) in size to the pre-1967 West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Lacking any knowledge of these offers, or at least knowing only very distorted ones, they can maintain that Israel has offered "nothing" and that therefore the continuation of the conflict is not due to Palestinian intransigence but Israel's alleged opposition to the creation of a real independent Palestinian state. This reminds me of how Mahmoud Abbas, today leader of the Palestinian Authority, responded to some reasonably accurate descriptions in the Palestinian media of what Israel offered in 2000 at Camp David. It is better, he said at the time, not to talk about these things at all, presumably lest some Palestinians might think that it was a reasonable deal.
Anyone who actually lives in Israel knows that — whether
they like it or not — Israel is ready to make big conessions and take
reasonable risks to achieve peace. They know, whether or not they
agree, that the overwhelming majority is ready to accept an
independent Palestinian state as long as it is willing to end the
conflict and live side by side in peace. (Emphasis added by SC4Z)
Outside Israel, far fewer people than should do so understand this
reality. And that includes journalists, academics, and politicians. If they address the issue at all, they presume that Israel is asking the Palestinians to make some huge or unreasonable concession. Often, as noted above, their understanding of Israeli views is more than 20 years out of date.
But the Palestinians especially and these Westerners generally know even less about Israel's own demands, which is not surprising since they are never explained in the Arabic-language media and virtually never mentioned in the Western media. These include security guarantees, non-militarization of a Palestinian state, an end to the conflict, and the resettlement of Palestinian refugees in Palestine. For an analysis of Israel's current peace plan, if you would like to see what is actually on the table, see here. (Barry Rubin's book)
The above observations can produce a simple definition of the difference between moderates and radicals. The radicals, both among the Palestinians and their Western sympathizers, know — even if they pretend otherwise — that they want all the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea along with Israel's elimination. This is true whether they seek it through a two-stage process, the dispatch of a million or two Palestinians to Israel in a peace agreement, a one-state solution, or a temporary binational state.
A moderate is someone who actually thinks the Palestinians today
want a two-state solution and is genuinely fooled by the ploys
outlined above. Consequently, the moderates — few as they are
among Palestinians, more numerous in the West — can have the facts explained to them. But the radicals know precisely what they are doing and don't care about any chance for compromise.
Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). His new edited books include Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict and Crisis; Guide to Islamist Movements; Conflict and Insurgency in the Middle East; and The Muslim Brotherhood. To read and subscribe to MERIA, GLORIA articles, or to order books. To see or subscribe to his blog, Rubin Reports.
Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net. He describes himself as a Secular Christian for Zionism |
|
U.S. CHIEF OF STAFF ON IRAN & ISRAEL; NGO TRANSPARENCY & UN GOLDSTONE
REPORT; PA TO ISRAEL: RELEASE ARAB MURDERER
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 16, 2010. |
|
U.S. CHIEF OF STAFF ON IRAN NUCLEAR & ISRAEL 
U.S. & Israeli Chiefs of Staff (A.P./Ariel Schalit) On a visit to Israel, U.S. Chief of Staff Mullen said that the world must not let Iran develop nuclear weapons, but if Israel raided Iran's nuclear facilities, unintended consequences would result. He emphasized that point by noting that Iran is a neighbor of Russia. Mullen reassured Israel that if Iran did acquire such weapons, then "Despite his concerns about a military attack, he stated that all options are on the table and that 'we would operate all our forces for Israel'." He thinks that Iran is three years from having nuclear weapons. Sec. of State Clinton expressed a glimmer of hope that China would
agree to stiff sanctions
So far, China and Russia have stymied Western efforts to impose serious sanctions on Iran. Such sanctions as were watered down enough to get through the UN had no effect. Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton wrote in the New York Times recently that between Iranian determination and dogma and its proximity to its goal, sanctions no longer could work. How many more years will U.S. diplomats pretend to see a significant improvement in policy by Russia and China or, for that matter, in the Palestinian Authority as now wanting genuine peace while it continues preaching bigotry and honoring jihadists? Indeed, Russia indicated that it was about to sell Iran the S-300 system supposedly capable of preventing an Israeli raid. Russia justifies the sale as the weapon being defensive. But as an earlier article of mine explained, it would be defending the offensive nuclear capability that Iran is developing, while the top two leaders of Iran keep threatening the destruction of Israel. They qualify the threat as being in self-defense. However, totalitarians, such as Radical Muslims, Nazis, and Communists, usually define their aggression as self-defense. They also call self-defense against their aggression as aggression. Nazi Germany claimed its invasion of Poland, arranged in advance by treaty with the USSR, which invaded from the other direction, was in self-defense. The treaty divided up Europe between them. Then in self-defense, those two super-powers went on to conquer and seize other countries, which, far from being aggressors, were fearful. The Arabs call Israeli self-defense from civil war and invasion, when it declared independence as encouraged by the General Assembly and implicit in the UN Charter and League of Nations Mandate and therefore under international law, "the aggression of 1948." Hamas calls hundreds of terrorists slain by Israel "civilians." The Palestinian Authority calls Arabs who try to stab Israeli civilians, "martyrs." What upside-down notions of self-defense! They succeed, however, in persuading some of my readers, who then wax indignant against Israel as deliberately killing civilians. An ominous note was sounded by Mullen in mentioning Iran's proximity to Russia. He did not explain himself. Does that mean he is recognize a Soviet, er, I mean, Russian sphere of influence? Commentators are criticizing President Obama for seeming to do so, for example, when he refuses to take telephone calls from the President of Georgia and he abandoned plans to set up an anti-missile defense in Poland and the Czech Republic, which Russia claimed was a hostile move. How comforting to Israel is it to hear that if Iran blew up Israel, the U.S. would operate all its forces for Israel? How does a Chief of Staff come to toss out such a serious policy statement, without a treaty? I say, "treaty," because President Obama has stated that he does not honor previous memoranda of understanding between the U.S. and Israel. Most experts estimate that Iran is only months away from having nuclear weapons (assuming that it does not buy them). Iran moves faster than anticipated. Some estimates, such as the NIE, are slanted to a political desire to defer action. I think that U.S. officials should have discovered oil by now, after continually burying their heads in the sand.
NGO TRANSPARENCY & UN GOLDSTONE REPORT 
Knesset in session (A.P./Dan Balilty) Upon finding out that the Goldstone UN Report was derived largely from biased NGOs financed largely by the New Israel Fund from abroad, a Knesset committee approved a bill for transparency of donations (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/15). No further explanation of the bill, itself, was given. It sounds like a measure for disclosure of the origin of funds, rather than a prohibition of foreign financing of internal subversion, which is what those NGOs engage in. Those NGOs have some admirable statements of purpose, but what they do, in guise of humanitarian goals is pursue jihad, for propaganda.
ISRAELI DEFENSE MINISTER EXAGGERATES ARAB DEMOGRAPHIC THREAT Exaggerating the Arab population by 50%, Israeli Defense Minister Barak proposes sovereignty for the Arabs of Judea-Samaria, in order to prevent apartheid. He said there are six million Arabs between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean. Chaim Rosenberg, head of Long-Term Planning at the Israel Defense Ministry's Armament Development Authority now writes that a study published as recently as last year by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies concluded that there are only four million Arabs, distributed almost equally between Gaza, Judea and Samara, and the rest of Israel. The Arab demographic threat recently has receded, as populations in most Arab areas have followed the modern trend to fall considerably. Nevertheless, Israeli politicians known for appeasement of the Arabs, including Barak and former PM Olmert, seize upon older and even fraudulent statistics to rationalize their policy. Mr. Rosenberg compared the current populations with the greater
disparity in 1948
Conditions in 1948 are not like conditions now. Recently I read a book of population statistics of 150 years in Palestine. What impressed me was the complexity of the subject, the great skill required for accuracy, and the false conclusions that easily are drawn. Most people don't try to learn from history, but here, Rosenberg may be drawing an inapplicable lesson from it. Gaza and Judea-Samaria are not in the State of Israel but are in the Land of Israel. Israelis don't always make that distinction. Arafat was found to have double-counted and exaggerated Arab populations. Why do Israeli politicians not know that, a point made to them more than once? Likud can argue that the status quo is better than appeasement. But
the status quo does not solve the problem. Some right-wingers suggest
that Israel absorb most of the Territories, so as to retain the
historic core of the homeland, defensive borders, more strategic
depth, and water supplies, and to prevent emergence of a terrorist
state there. That would be another alternative.
P.A.TO ISRAEL: RELEASE ARAB MURDERER This updates the story of the off-duty [one supposes, as he was in civvies] Palestinian Authority (P.A.) officer who murdered an Israeli sergeant by knife. Israel captured the assailant. PA Ministry of Detainees and Ex-Detainees Affairs — Information Department Director General Osama Al-Ghoul told IMRA that the P.A. position is that Israel should release the assailant, because he was just fighting "occupation." (www.imra.org.il, 2/15), That would give a free pass to P.A. officers attempting to slay Israelis. It would help the P.A. further encourage such attempts by people who, if they return to the P.A., are welcomed as heroes. Nevertheless, the State Dept. imagines that Abbas is a man of peace. Strange demands are made in the Mideast. More absurd is to expect Israel to comply with the demand to release those who murder its people. Most astonishing are the instances of acquiescence to some of the Arab demands. Faded from political awareness seems to be the Oslo accords, in which the P.A. pledged not to commit, encourage, or allow violence against Israelis. Do folks who urge new accords not take into account P.A. violations of existing ones as if they do not exist? Based on the record, isn't the recommendation for more pacts untenable? Earlier articles explained how, for political purposes, various governments turned international law on its head to claim that Israel occupies Judea and Samaria. International law also bans terrorism. The P.A. does not differentiate between attacks on soldiers and terrorism, attacks aimed at civilians for political purposes. The Arabs claim a right to fight "occupation" by any means. They deny it is terrorism. They are trying to get the obliging world to grant their case. Apparently, terrorism is never by them, only against them, even when it is against their troops and in self-defense. So they call Israel a "state sponsor of terrorism."
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 and visit his website:
|
|
MY WILD ONE
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, February 16, 2010. |
|
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il. Go to
|
|
COMING SOON TO A UNIVERSITY NEAR YOU
Posted by Ari Bussel, February 16, 2010. |
|
GOVERNMENT OF ISRAEL MINISTRY OF FOREIGN AFFAIRS — PRESS RELEASE On Monday night, Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon was invited by the Oxford Union to speak at an event at the university. During the speech one student shouted extreme abuse at the Deputy Foreign Minister including Itbach Al-Yahud (Slaughter the Jews). The event was caught on camera and subsequently shown on Israeli television Channel Ten. The Deputy Foreign Minister is looking into the possibility of pressing charges against the student for what is tantamount to a call for genocide. Two separate events occurred at the same time on two continents. Both followed the same exact script: An Israeli figure came to a hostile campus to talk about the prospects of a better future in the region and to answer questions, including those of the most vigorous opponents. As each started to speak, he was interrupted by shouts "murderer," "Israel is guilty of ...," "Zionism is the ..." etc. A young Muslim man stood and shouted, reading from a note, was escorted out, followed a minute later by another young Muslim man who stood and shouted and the cycle repeated. At one point, the remaining members of the Muslim contingency stood in unison, walked out and continued their noisy interruptions outside, attempting to further disrupt the proceedings. In previous events they had used loudspeakers and drums. For some reason, these were missing. Had the opposite been the case, a virulent anti-Israeli speaker speaking, calling Israelis the new Nazis, claiming the Holocaust was an excuse to steal land from the Arabs or even calling for the annihilation of the Jewish State, a feeling of military control would have pervaded. Instead of the local police protecting, there would be private security brutalizing anyone who even seemed to think differently. A chilly fear would have descended, immobilizing and preventing anyone from expressing an opinion, asking a question or veering out of line. It is a most frightening scene, an even worse feeling that stays with a person for a very long time. But in both cases, the speakers came to speak about Israel's policies. In the UK it was Deputy Foreign Minister Ayalon, previously the Israeli Ambassador to the United States. In California it was the current Israeli Ambassador, Dr. Oren, himself an academic. Dr. Oren implored at one point: "We have an opportunity here to exchange ideas. We have an opportunity to hear a different perspective. This is why you have come to this campus as students. You have not come to this campus to hear one idea, you have come to hear a multiplicity of ideas. It is a humble suggestion. It is one of the inestimable values of education in this country. You have this opportunity. Don't squander the opportunity." Only members of the University holding an Oxford Union membership were allowed to attend the UK event. In California the vast majority of attendees were members of the local Jewish and Israeli community rather than students and faculty. The constant interruptions by the Muslims were called "uncivilized," "exceeding the principles of free speech" and the like. Each university has released an announcement denouncing the conduct in these events. For those participating in such a gathering for the first time, the opportunity was eye opening, traumatic. One lady remained seated well after everyone dispersed. She continued shaking, in shock. Realization dawned for the first time: The very foundations of our society are not as solid and impenetrable as we thought but are crumbling before our very eyes just as we stand by and watch. Let us look at the California event I attended. By now, many have seen it on YouTube or the news. It is worthwhile watching. The speech itself was not as captivating as the one given by the Ambassador earlier in the day at a Church across the way. Ambassador Oren was visibly nerved and reminded the Muslim objectors of Middle Eastern hospitality. When a person is invited as a guest to one's home in the Middle East, said Ambassador Oren, no harm should befall him. Muslims here are either too young to follow the traditions of their own people or have grown up in the United States under the illusion of a false reality and are thus unfamiliar with the very foundations of the culture they strive to spread (brutality, silencing, beheadings, fear and corruption, female slavery and subjugation and ethnic cleansing, essences of Sixth Century existence, alongside some of the tenants of survival in a barbaric society). Allow me to describe the setting: I arrived late from that earlier event with Ambassador Oren. There was a very long line of people waiting inside the Student Center. Almost two hundred people were being told the hall was full and they must enter an overflow room or leave. As a member of the press I was invited in, bypassing what looked like a long line at a busy airport. The airport setting analogy was most befitting. Muslims are up in arms against "Profiling," yet it is no coincidence that Muslims are perpetrating terrorist attacks. If they have nothing to fear, why not embrace profiling as a means to keep everyone safer? They should vomit from within their midst Islamists who want to destroy the 21st Century Western way of life, if indeed they oppose terrorism and Islam is truly a peaceful religion. But they do not. They fight back, insisting they suffer as a result. All too soon they — the perpetrators and their supports — will be protesting against airport checkpoints. We all suffer as a result. I cannot enter a gate without having my bottle of water confiscated, my computer turned on and half of my wardrobe removed because of what fellow Muslims do "for the sake of Allah, the All Merciful." They slash the throats of innocent flight attendants, fly into high-rise buildings or simply explode themselves among hundreds of others. Likewise at my own alma mater, the University of California, I cannot attend a lecture without having to go through multiple checkpoints and screening surrounded by police officers. Under the heading of "free speech" Muslims take away our basic rights, depriving us of legitimate discourse, civil gatherings, normalcy and sanity. Fear prevails. Jewish students are afraid to stand up. Secular Americans watch, absorb and internalize. Fear is so contagious, it can be felt. It is chilling and cannot be ignored. This new feeling is embedded in the individual and our collective memories and never leaves. Like a nightmare from which we cannot awake, it remains. I passed security and was now inside. The place was familiar: I was inside this hall before to hear another speaker a couple of years ago. The police were present then too and about a hundred members of the Muslim Student Union. Most were not students at UCI. When the audience was asked to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, they remained seated as a block. An attending Congressman wrote the next day that as guests in this country (many are here on Student or other Visas), they should have shown some basic respect to their host country, a feeling shared by many. A foreigner is not expected to recite the Pledge of Allegiance, but we expect one to at least stand up. Later they started interrupting the speaker, until the police were forced to remove a few. Then, they stood in unison, left the hallway and continued the demonstration outside, shouting, trying to create as much an interruption as possible. This is truly the modus operandi of Muslims: Silence everyone who does not think as they do. Prevent one from speaking and do not engage in discussion. Shout and pervert free speech like a lunatic. Attack (first verbally) those in front of you — not the substance of the argument but their features, heritage, traditions. If possible, threaten and do not hesitate to act. There are no consequences for this behavior. The next step — physical harm — is very easy to reach. All this will be protected under the guise of political correctness, the greatest gift ever bestowed on the Muslim world. UCI is a hotbed of anti-West activity, a hornet nest. The script is not new, although each time brings an interesting twist. Anyone standing in their way, any reasonable person with clarity of thought and knowledge of history and current events is deemed a threat and must be silenced. An effective way to do so is by utilizing the victim's mentality: "He is an Islamophob. He hates us. We are poor and weak. We want peace. We just want that to which we are entitled — free speech" — but only for us! What a twisted world. One would surely ask: 1) Why does the campus allow such inflammatory events? Speakers should be welcome, but events should only be open to students and faculty with valid IDs. Realize, outside agitators are there to exploit. As one enters, one should present his / her ID. If one is removed for unruly behavior, there should be immediate, severe consequences. Outside organizations should not be allowed to rent university facilities for such events (someone needs to cover the costs associated with increased police presence, the bad reputation to the university as an academic institution, etc.). Author and speaker Susanne Reyto observed on another occurrence how University Police "seem to protect protestors more than the audience." But it is not only the police. It is the faculty and administration, all the way up to the Regents of the UC system. There is a current of dismissal, closing one eye (and often both), acquiescence and silent agreement to look the other way. A dangerous inability to reconcile the idea such behavior can exist in a top academic institution and pose any threat to the very fabric of that institution and society at large. Excuses abound justifying the Muslim actions against Israel and the Zionists. This reflects a complete lack of understanding of the true nature of the enemy. The Muslims are not only after Israel, they are against the American way of life, the very freedoms our Constitution affords and everything the United States of America stands for and symbolizes. The Regents reflect in part the approach of the current Administration that talks and reconciliation, consensus building and appeasement can prevail. Try to negotiate with hijackers and history will bear out such folly. Negotiating through strength is the only successful method, not high hopes and dreams. The Administration has taken denial to its highest level, one that translated into movement-constricting action: The true nature of the threat cannot be discussed, ergo it does not exist. The new language of President Hussein Obama's Administration includes: These are deranged individuals, not terrorists. These are isolated incidents rather than a well-thought, very carefully planned and superbly executed campaign of war against us. Islam is a peaceful religion, and we are one of the largest Muslim countries in the world. The Islamic roots are deeply connected to those of the Pilgrims who fled to this country and created the best example of a free country on earth. Had it not been the current President of the United States of America who uttered these pronunciations during the last year, one would be justified in asking under what influence is the writer or what substances might he be consuming? Back at the UCI, the vast majority of those in the hall were non-Muslim. Their student years have long passed. There were two groups of MSU, one on either side. Each block was immediately recognizable by the head coverings of the young women and the unshaven, dark skinned Middle Eastern young men. The men had notes in their hands, inscribed with phrases they were soon to shout. The women were sitting and laughing, one orchestrating the order in which the men rose from either side of the hall. Hands were raised recording every movement, watching the audience, waiting for the cue, getting ready for the right moment. All were ready, calm, calculated, their passion controlled. They came to perform and inflict harm, and they succeeded as they did numerous times before and as they will undoubtedly do at future events. One must keep in mind the calculated, cold manner of execution and the role women play, a true testament to equality of the sexes that will never be found in Muslim countries or under Sharia Law. This was no dress rehearsal, but a very well executed performance in its mth appearance. The University has done nothing of substance to counteract this increasing tide, thus reinforcing and permitting it to gather strength. Outsiders remain in denial, thus the appearance of the Ambassador in California and his boss in the UK were merely tokens too little, too late. Other than news coverage, they achieved little at the campuses themselves. The university played into the hands of the Muslims, and if anyone won this round, it is the Muslims. The Muslim anarchists must be uprooted, extracted from the once fertile ground into which they invaded, cut into pieces, crushed and destroyed. If permitted to rise again, they will continue to defile the essence of freedom, attempt to destroy the system from within. We must protect our way of life. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs must act. Preventing free speech in universities is just a small warning sign. Israeli officials already know better than to travel freely anymore as many face the inconvenience of public arrests and trials for crimes committed against humanity if they set foot in places like — unbelievably yes, Great Britain. We as Americans, must express our disgust and act to protect our own system and ideals. This successful approach against Israeli officials can also be used not less successfully against others — perhaps a US Senator, a local businessman or a labor representative. Our very system is being undermined and Israel is just a temporary decoration. The scenery may change as quickly as from one play to the next and the victim will change while the perpetrators continue their very effective action. Wake up oh great nation. Our values and foundations are at stake, as our enemies use them to topple our system. The University of California at Irvine was just a preview of what is coming soon to a University near you. In the series "Postcards from Israel," Ari Bussel and Norma Zager invite readers throughout the world to join them as they present reports from Israel as seen by two sets of eyes: Bussel's on the ground, Zager's counter-point from home. Israel and the United States are inter-related — the two countries we hold dearest to our hearts — and so is this "point — counter-point" presentation that has, since 2008, become part of our lives. Contact them by mail at aribussel@gmail.com |
|
ISLAM IS A TROJAN HORSE
Posted by CPocerl, February 16, 2010. |
|
This was written by Amil Imani, an Iranian-born American citizen and a pro-democracy activist residing in the United States of America. He is a columnist, literary translator, novelist and essayist who has been writing and speaking out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. He maintains a website at www.amilimani.com. |
|
"Europe will be Muslim in a dozen years," promises the Islamic Republic of Iran's Supreme Guide (dictator) who is racing full-speed ahead to make as many bombs as possible with long-range missiles capable of delivering their payload anywhere in the world. This past Friday, Yunis al-Astal, a leading Muslim cleric and Hamas member of the Palestinian parliament, declared on Hamas' Al-Aqsa TV that "the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital," would soon be conquered by Islam and Rome become an advance post for the Islamic conquests, which will spread through Europe in its entirety, and then will turn to the two Americas." The Islam hydra, with Saudi Arabia and the oil-money bloated Emirs and Sheiks of the Persian Gulf leading the Sunni charge from one side and the end-of-the-worlder bomb-seeking Shiite of the Islamic Republic of Iran with its proxies of Hamas, Lebanon Hezbollah and the Sadrists in Iraq closing from the other side will devour the free world. Free people: are you listening?
Disguised as religion, Islam has penetrated the democracies with the aim of replacing civility and liberty with the barbarism of theocracy and Sharia. Islam's multi-prong attack aims to destroy all that liberty offers. It is generally assumed that religion addresses issues of importance to daily life as well as matters that transcend it. Religion claims to exercise a civilizing influence by ordering the social life and promoting spirituality, as well as advancing an array of human virtues. Zoroaster, for instance, based his faith on the triad of goodly thoughts, goodly speech and goodly deeds. Moses framed the fundamentals of his faith in the Ten Commandments, and Jesus placed love at the core of his faith. Yet, all is not well with religion. Purveyors of some religions advocate and promote ideas and practices that are harmful to the general well-being of mankind. It is imperative that a society institutes measures that guard against any and all organizations and ideologies, be they religious or otherwise that harms it. As things stand now, our lives are governed by numerous boards at all levels of government, business, and community. All these boards are charged with the responsibility of looking after the welfare of the people they serve. The Food and Drug Administration, for instance, must pass on the safety and quality of the food we eat; the Aviation Safety Board works to ensure safe flights; a local school board strives to create the environment that best serves the education and safety needs of the pupils. Every community and business of any size is served by boards. There are, however, no oversight boards that would check against things that contaminate the mind and present a clear threat of unraveling our democracy's social compact as we know and cherish it. Shouldn't these dangers to our beliefs and way of life be monitored and combated or should they be given a pass to work their damage? Presently, America is faced with a formidable enemy in a Trojan horse called Islam. This imminent danger makes it imperative to revisit the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution and make the necessary changes to legally defeat Islam's subversion of the democratic system. Muslims in Western democracies, most of them escapees of the misery of Islamic countries, exhibit such incredible gall and audacity as to shamelessly demand that their benevolent hosts surrender their liberty and legalize and adopt the Sharia in their societies. The Muslims' presence in countries such as Canada, Great Britain, the Netherlands and Sweden represents the tip of the sword of the Islamists protruding from the Trojan horse. Once Sharia is recognized to any extent, it will reach out to rule, not only on matters that concern Muslims, but also those that may involve a Muslim and non-Muslim. Under Sharia, a Muslim man married to a non-Muslim woman is able to divorce the woman at will and automatically have custody of the children. America, with a long history of protecting religious freedom, still clings to the "hands off" practice of leaving alone any doctrine or practice billed as religion. A thorny problem is in deciding what constitutes a religion and who is to make that call. The dictionary supplies a sociologically useless definition for religion: "The expression of man's belief in and reverence for a superhuman power recognized as the creator and governor of the universe." Just about anyone or any group under this definition can start a religion, and they indeed do — and some do so at significant costs to others. Islam was birthed by primitives of some 1,400 years ago and over time invaded much of the world at the point of the sword. Presently, Islamists, with their treasuries flush with petrodollars, are in a great position to realize their perennial dream of bringing the world under the rule of Muhammad's Ummeh. On the one hand, Pakistan is already a nuclear power and the Islamic Republic of Iran aims to be one before very long. On the other hand, Muslim governments and wealthy Sheikhs are funding Islamic schools, centers and front organizations in the West to work from within at the unraveling of the non-Islamic democratic systems. In a parallel attack, the "Legal Islam" is exploiting every provision of the law in free societies to promote Islam and silence its critics through expensive legal shenanigans. Islam is incompatible with democracy and subversive of the way of life that blesses this nation. It is imperative that we fight Islamofascism with the same determination that we fought other enemies of freedom such as Nazism, Fascism, and Communism. It is, therefore, imperative that the Constitution be revisited in such a manner that it no longer grants a pass to any cult simply calling itself a religion. Bluntly speaking, no one can be a faithful Muslim and an American at the same time. As more and more Muslims arrive in non-Islamic lands, as they reproduce with great fecundity, as they convert the disenchanted and minorities, and as petrodollar-flush Muslims and Muslim treasuries supply generous funds, Muslims gather more power to undermine the democratic rule. The hydra of Islam is lashing out by its jihadists, sophisticated and well-funded lawyers, terrorist groups, and terror-sponsoring governments who have the bomb and those that are racing non-stop to acquire the ultimate weapon. There is no time to waste. Steadfastly confronting Islam is the only way to defeat a fanatical enemy who does not believe in negotiation or compromise. For Islam, it is winner take all. And the way that permissive, oblivious, and well-meaning free societies are reacting does not bode well for liberty. Islam must be recognized for what it is: a Trojan horse carrying in its belly what will assuredly slaughter all who stand everything that is precious to free people. Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
ARABS BECAME REFUGEES FOLLOWING THEIR LEADERS
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik, February 16, 2010. |
|
"The radio stations of the Arab regimes kept repeating to us: 'Get away from the battle lines. It's a matter of ten days or two weeks at the most, and we'll bring you back to Ein-Kerem [near Jerusalem].' And we said to ourselves, 'That's a very long time. What is this? Two weeks? That's a lot!' That's what we thought [then]. And now 50 years have gone by." |
|
An Arab refugee in Lebanon described in an interview on Palestinian Authority TV how he and other Arabs left for Lebanon from Israel during the 1948 war, after Arab leaders said their absence would be temporary: "They [Arab leaders] said: 'A week, two weeks, approximately, and you'll return to Palestine,'" said Sadek Mufid. This refugee's testimony is yet another example of how Palestinian leaders, writers and refugees themselves have begun to speak out in recent years and openly blame the Arab leadership for the creation of the Arab refugee problem. Mufid describes a large departure to Lebanon from Israel, which led to the creation of "11 or 15 refugee camps." He does not place the blame on Israel. As Palestinian Media Watch has previously reported, other recent Palestinian accounts likewise describe a deliberate exit from Israel under orders by Arab leaders, which contradicts the Palestinian leadership's charge that the hundreds of thousands of Arabs who left in 1948 were expelled by Israel. Sadek Mufid, who left Dir Al-Qasi (Acre region) in 1948, was interviewed on PA TV's weekly program entitled Returning. Each program focuses on a different refugee camp. The following is from the text of the interview with the refugee Sadek Mufid: "We headed first from Dir al-Qasi [northern Israel] to Rmaich [Lebanon], considering what they (Arab leaders) said at the time: 'By Allah, in a week or two, you will return to Palestine.' The Arab armies entered Palestine, along with the Arab Liberation Army. We left — we and those who fled with us — and we all headed for Lebanon. Some people came to Rmaich and others came to the villages on the border, such as Ein Ibl and also to Bint Jbeil. People scattered. And we have about 11 or 15 [refugee] camps in Lebanon." [PA TV (Fatah), Feb. 9 and Feb. 12, 2010] To view PMW's earlier bulletin citing Palestinians blaming the Arab
leadership for the refugee problem, go to:
To view statements on Arab leadership's responsibility for the
refugee problem on PMW's web site, go to:
Itamar Marcus is director of PMW — Palestinian Media Watch — (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. |
|
PLAUSIBLE DENIABILITY
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, February 15, 2010. |
|
You are now entering the 'twilight zone' of "Plausible Deniability" used frequently in the world of spooks and pressure politics. Which means it's better to rely on your instincts rather than what Government with their inevitable secret agendas tell you. February 14th, we sent out an article entitled: "JINSA: OBAMA CUT OFF U.S. WEAPONS' SALES TO ISRAEL". Our three sources were credible and thus reliable, from our past experience. Last night at about midnight, JINSA emailed us to say: "There were some inaccuracies." Check out their website for their reports: www.jinsa.org. However, the issues and accusations were familiar — given that President Barack Hussein Obama through George Mitchell, Hillary Clinton, James Jones, Rahm Emanuel had, in the recent past, threatened Israel's Prime Minister Binyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu with cut-offs of loan guarantees, for instance. That's visible — while there were the less visible parts, as usual. But, the possibility/probability that Obama has threatened a cut-off of weapons' sales remains high because we can see the Israeli government and especially PM Bibi Netanyahu reacting to such threats as if they were NOT taking place but maybe behind the scenes. Obama demanded Israel's obedience in the matter of proclaiming that another "Palestinian State" was acceptable. This statement was to be accompanied with preparations to evacuate 300,000 Jewish men, women and children from Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights and the Jordan Valley. This was all to happen within the next two years and certainly before Obama's run for re-election in 2012. Plus, Jerusalem was to be put on the table (chopping block) for the Muslim Arab Palestinians to have as their State Capital all the land that Jordan had occupied and desecrated for 19 years from 1948 to 1967. That would require evicting another 250,000 to 300,000 from their homes built on Jewish-owned land and neighborhoods. Who would pay for the suicidal evacuation and relocation of some 500,000 Jewish men, women and children, assuming the Israeli people accepted this sentence? Where would they go? And why should they? Doesn't Israel have sovereignty in her own Nation/State? Israel was mandated by Obama to make a non-people with no history into a nation with Jerusalem their capital to confirm their existence where there had previously been none. Threatening Israel by using the pressure tactic with the cut-off of aviation fuel, spare parts, transfer of technology, no sales of America's newest aircraft, the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter (especially with any Israeli technology to be embedded in the aircraft), cancellation of contracts already paid for, in work — and more. Perhaps it would be preferable if Israel could create, innovate and build all of her own weapons' systems. Israel often co-built her big systems with American manufacturers, bringing hundreds and thousands of jobs to America. For instance, the Israeli jet plane, the Lavi, which was cheaper and superior to the American F-16 as an air superiority and close ground support aircraft in the 1980s. But, one vote in Yitzhak Rabin's Cabinet cancelled the Lavi because then Defense Secretary Casper Weinberger saw the test of the Lavi competing with the F16 in test flight. Weinberger applied pressure to stop the Lavi. Rabin caved, was the deciding vote against continuing — even after the American Congress had voted appropriations to continue. Thereby, Israel lost her opportunity to have a full aircraft industry. Some will recall in the 1980s when Weinberger and Admiral Bobby Ray Inman (hostile in the extreme to the Jewish State) illegally broke the Presidential MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) and cut off Intelligence exchange between America and Israel, which was vital to both nations. It was believed that they did this on their own, without consultation with President Ronald Reagan. Weinberger was eventually discharged from office but, with the excuse offered that he had to attend to his severely ailing wife. At the time, rumors in Washington was that he had a paramour in England — unconfirmed. Weinberger was a louse but not Obama has lots of little lice advising him on how to dismember Israel. When we received information from several sources quoting the very reliable J.I.N.S.A. (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs) that there was some sort of embargo by Obama, it all seemed merely an extension of prior threats. We also knew that some important prior U.S. commitments to Israel through several successive Presidencies to maintain Israel's QME (Qualitative Military Edge) were not kept. This probably began after the 1979 Camp David Accords, in which the U.S. insured that Israel maintained her Qualitative Military Edge, despite having sacrificed $17 Billion of infrastructure, surrendered the entire Sinai Desert, 2 high tech military bases, Abu Rudeis oil fields which Israel developed and which would have given Israel energy self-sufficiency. The destruction of the city of Yamit by Ariel Sharon (home to some 500 Jewish men, women and children — the first and precedent-setting evacuation of Jews from their homes.) This self-destruction demonstrated the U.S. Arabist State Department's influence over Israel's governments and weak Prime Ministers. Sharon later abandoned Gush Katif/Gaza, bulldozing Jewish homes and synagogues as he had in Yamit. This American commitment to maintain Israel's QME (Qualitative Military Edge) was, for the most part, a bogus commitment since the U.S. Military manufacturers were (then and now) selling huge tonnage of the best high tech U.S. weapons and technology to the Muslim Arab countries for the cash it brought in as well as the "preferential favor" it was supposed to bring in for Arab oil. We have heard from J.I.N.S.A., indicating that one of our normally reliable sources, MENL (Middle East NewsLine) added to a J.I.N.S.A. story the name of Prime Minister Netanyahu. J.I.N.S.A. indicates that Netanyahu's name was NOT mentioned in their reports #956, 957 and 958 from January 2010. I suspect that his name should have been mentioned but, the title of this article could be the explanation! The question in my mind is: Did Obama and his group threaten such cut-offs and, in fact, imply "cut-offs" to pressure Netanyahu into obedience, thereby giving Obama the desperately needed political win to save his sinking Presidency and the Democratic Party before the mid-term elections November 2010 and the Presidential elections of 2012? As for Netanyahu accepting such pressure and keeping it silent from his own Party and people, that would not be far-fetched. Of course, he would need to keep it quiet lest his Likud Party vote to collapse his government. We have seen him cave in before at the Wye River Conference — abandoning 80% of Hebron — with less pressure — so the suspicions remain. I will do my best to sort this out but remember, neither Obama nor Netanyahu are likely to leave a "smoking gun" lying about. But, sometimes the proof of the pudding is apparent by observing surrounding events and statements. Transparency isn't a character trait for which either of them are known. 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@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
SAUDI-FINANCED IDEOLOGY INVADES AMERICAN ACADEMIC LIFE
Posted by Susana K-M, February 15, 2010. |
|
When the Iranian Islamic Revolution succeeded in deposing the Shah and declared an aggressive campaign to spread its ideology in the Arab world and beyond, the rulers of Saudi Arabia responded to the challenge by dedicating billions of dollars to spread their poisonous Wahhabi ideology around the world. This campaign has taken many forms. For instance, the Saudis have been building mosques and cultural institutions wherever Muslims reside and have installed their radical imams to perpetuate the most radical form of Islam. In the United States, the Saudis have spread their propaganda in several ways. They have employed many retired American foreign service and military officials and they have "endowed" university Middle Eastern Studies programs at many of our institutions of higher learning. When they finance educational institutions they recruit "scholars" who are anti-Israel and apologists for Saudi Arabia. Georgetown University has been the recipient of barrels of Saudi "petrol dollars" and has dutifully served as a home to programs that serve their Wahhabi patrons. One of their more far reaching initiatives is targeted to filling the minds of American children and college students. At Campus Watch, the superb Stephen Schwartz is most enlightening on the Saudi funded Model Arab League.(It was created at Georgetown University in 1983.) Schwartz describes the mission of this program as:"The Model Arab League is offered to the educational establishment — including high schools — as a teaching device for the betterment of young Americans' knowledge of essential contemporary issues. In reality, its origins and content reveal it to be an intrusion of Saudi-financed ideology into American academic life, the appropriateness of which should be questioned.." The name of this program says much about its mission. The Arab League has been determined to undermine and destroy the State of Israel since the founding of the Jewish State. In addition, in late 2009, the Secretary General of the Arab League endorsed Iran's nuclear program. That the Model Arab League exists and is functioning in the United States should be of concern to all parents and citizens. For more detail on their agenda read Mr. Schwartz's article at Campus Watch. We also suggest you browse the Campus Watch web-site for valuable information about orchestrated campaigns to legitimize radical Islam. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: GOOD TO HEAR!
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 15, 2010. |
|
Tonight began the Seventh Annual Jerusalem Conference. A great deal more will follow in the next two days, but I'm delighted to share the beginning here: The theme for the opening plenary was "Uniting the City of Jerusalem," a theme that is welcome indeed. Nir Barkat, Mayor of Jerusalem — and a splendid mayor he is — offered the Keynote Address, in which he shared his vision for the city. The success of Jerusalem, he says, affects the success of the Jewish people. What he is working for is a new vision, with plans, renewal, and egalitarian programming with uniform rules for all segments of the population. (See below for more on the political battle in which Barkat is immersed, with regard to this.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Minister Benny Begin (Likud) spoke about the regrettable fact that for too long security issues have taken center stage when Jerusalem is discussed, while our natural and historical rights here as a Jewish people are ignored. There is no equity of peoples and religions when it comes to rights to Jerusalem, he maintains. (The equity is only in how people are treated inside the city.) We have the essential rights over the city and must maintain sovereignty. Would we expect less of Benny? No. But it's lovely to hear, nonetheless, as the opening theme for the Conference — with a position made very clear. ~~~~~~~~~~ Natan Sharansky, who now heads the Jewish Agency, gave a very personal talk. He shared recollections from the time when he was still a very assimilated Jew in the USSR — recognizing himself as a Jew only because of persecution. Somehow word filtered in about the unification of Jerusalem in 1967, and every Jew stood taller. Officials looked at them with more respect. When finally he was brought out, and came to Israel, he asked to come straight to the Kotel. Years later, when he accompanied Ethiopian Jews on the plane that brought them to Israel, he found they had no common language, no way to speak to each other. That is, until someone mentioned Jerusalem, and he saw how the Ethiopians became excited. Jerusalem, which is a bond for Jews everywhere, must be preserved as such. ~~~~~~~~~~ Journalist Nadav Shragai reminded us that Arab residents of Jerusalem are opposed to the division of the city. They don't want to live under the Palestinian Authority, because they value their freedom, their health care, their opportunities for employments and all the rest. He posed a question for our government: How is Har Habayit (the Temple Mount) seen? The perception of it, he suggests, is distorted now. For as things stand, and as the police manage matters, we Jews are not even permitted to pray there (note: so as not to upset the Arabs, who might riot). But praying there is a Jewish right. ~~~~~~~~~~ Briefly, as to the legal battle in which Mayor Barkat is immersed: Beit Yonaton, a seven-story house in the eastern Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan, was built as a residence for Jews by the organization Ateret Cohanim. Silwan is now Arab, but at one time was a community in which many Yemenite Jews lived — until they were driven out. Those who built the house saw it as an opportunity to permit the return of Jews. Because of the building's height, it does not conform to regulations. As it was put up without proper permits, a court ordered that the residents be evicted and the house sealed. Barkat replied that if this house had to come down, he would act against dozens of illegal Arab houses built in the area, evicting their residents and applying one rule for all. His alternative proposal was that means be found to legalize Beit Yonaton and at the same time to provide Arabs now living in illegally built homes new legal housing — with a park, Gan Hamelech, to be built in the area. Many across the political spectrum thought this a reasonable compromise. However, State prosecutor Moshe Lador has been fighting Barkat on this. Under duress the mayor has said he would evict the residents of Beit Yonaton, but several Arab residents of illegal housing at the same time. This has yet to play out to the end. See a more extensive description of the situation here:
~~~~~~~~~~ The bill that would require funding transparency for non-government organizations has been approved by the Knesset Law Committee. This bill, which would require organizations to declare all funding by foreign governments, is being sponsored by Ze'ev Elkin, Coalition Chair. The bill must go through several other steps before it becomes law, but this is an encouraging start. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
UNTOLD STORIES: HONORING HIRAM BINGHAM IV
Posted by Roberta Dzubow, February 15, 2010. |
|
This was distributed on the internet by Alan Molod. |
|
The following is an interesting piece of evidence about the unfortunate behavior of the Roosevelt administration toward Jews during WW II. Secretary of State Colin Powell gave a posthumous award for "constructive dissent" to Hiram (Harry) Bingham IV. For over fifty years, the U.S. State Department resisted any attempt to honor Bingham. For them he was an insubordinate member of the US diplomatic service and a dangerous maverick who was eventually demoted. Now, after his death, he has been officially recognized as a hero. Harry Bingham came from an illustrious family. His father (on whom the fictional character Indiana Jones was based) was the archaeologist who unearthed the Inca City of Machu Picchu, Peru in 1911. Harry entered the US diplomatic service and in 1939 was posted to Marseilles, France as American Vice-Consul. The USA was then neutral and, not wishing to annoy Marshal Petain's puppet Vichy regime, President Roosevelt's government ordered its representatives in Marseilles not to grant visas to any Jews. Bingham found this policy immoral and, risking his career, did all in his power to undermine it. In defiance of his bosses in Washington, he granted over 2,500 US visas to Jewish and other refugees, including the artists Marc Chagall and Max Ernst and the family of the writer Thomas Mann. He also sheltered Jews in his Marseilles home and obtained forged identity papers to help Jews in their dangerous journeys across Europe. He worked with the French underground to smuggle Jews out of France into Franco's Spain or across the Mediterranean and even contributed to their expenses out of his own pocket. In 1941, Washington lost patience with him. He was sent to Argentina, where later he continued to annoy his superiors by reporting on the movements of Nazis there. Eventually, he was forced out of the American diplomatic service completely. Bingham died almost penniless in 1988. Little was known of his extraordinary activities until his son found some letters in his belongings after his death. He has now been honoured by many groups and organizations including the United Nations and the State of Israel PLEASE honor his memory and send this forward.
Contact Roberta Dzubow by email at Roberta@adgforum.com
|
|
<>JIHADISTS AGAINST BAG SEARCHES
Posted by CPocerl, February 15, 2010. |
|
This was written by Red Square
and it appeared on the People's Cube
|
|
A new civil rights group is fighting a shameful practice: bag searches in the New York City subways that are infringing on the rights of suicide bombers to kill and maim hundreds of New Yorkers. The group that calls itself Jihadists Against Bag Searches distributed flyers today to straphangers (image, left), warning them of the erosion of civil liberties in America. Dressed in oversized trench coats and carrying heavy backpacks, the group members asked the New Yorkers a simple yet disarming question: "Is this the country you really want to live in, if it profiles a minorit that has blown up cars, buildings, buses, trains, and airplanes in the past?" "They're right," a concerned young lawyer told our correspondent." With so many people entering the subway, how can we be sure that the searches are absolutely random? There's a big chance it's all a cover-up for profiling minorities. If the police succeeds in preventing them from blowing me up on the train, it will be the end of my civil liberties. I better send another big check to ACLU — that is, if I don't wind up with both of my arms torn off in a blast." "We are not yet a Muslim nation, so aggressive police behavior won't yield world sympathy," said a female middle-aged financial analyst as she nervously packed her bag after being searched." As a Western power that places reason above emotions, we need to suffer more in order to have the world like us again — and for that I am willing to meet a horrible end with a dozen rusty bolts sticking out of my forehead." Jihadists Against Bag Searches were accompanied by ACLU observers to ensure that they are not harassed by the police or right-wing extremists. One such accident was recorded at a subway stop next to the former World Trade Center site, in which a rambling right-winger allegedly whispered, "Islamofascists had better not act up too much, or else our Hollywood will come out with more crappy movies about the menace of neo-Nazis, Christian Crusaders and the Mossad." The man has been arrested and faces charges of hate speech, harassment, and an attempt to provoke an international conflict. ACLU dispatched their best lawyers to this case and will monitor it to make sure that the perpetrator receives maximum punishment possible under the circumstances.
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
AHMADINEJAD ON A-BOMBS & IRANIAN REVOLUTION; J STREET MYSTERY
ABOUT 54 CONGRESSMEN; ILLEGAL HOUSING IN EASTERN JERUSALEM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 15, 2010. |
|
AHMADINEJAD ON A-BOMBS & IRANIAN REVOLUTION Iran's President Ahmadinejad expressed views on several matters, such as nuclear weapons and the Iranian revolution. He said that the A-bomb era is over, because nobody can use them [probably referring to the notion of mutually assured destruction]. He suggests that the world eliminate them. Ahmadinejad described the Iranian revolution as humane, its predecessor not humane, not independent, and not taking care of its people's welfare (www.imra.org.il, 2/13). If nobody can use A-bombs, why should the world become nuclear-weapons-free? If he believes that, why is his regime violating its nuclear treaty to the point of suffering sanctions, in order to take steps that appear leading to nuclear weapons? There are flaws in his logic. Nor did he explain how he would not use such weapons while at the same time he holds to a religious theory that if he brings on Armageddon, Islam would win. If the Iranian revolution is humane, why is it torturing and executing protesters against it? Again, if humane, why sponsor terrorism against Iraq, Lebanon, and Israel, among other places? He is spending much on military development, just as did the Shah before the revolution. I agree that the Shah had brutal secret police, too, but thought he was independent.
J STREET MYSTERY ABOUT 54 CONGRESSMEN Lenny Ben-David has revealed much about the J Street's secret financing, Although J Street solicits funds on the basis of being pro-Israel, "J Street has criticized Israel's military operation in Gaza, held out the option of negotiating with Hamas, called for freezing all Israeli building in east Jerusalem as well as in the West Bank, refused to support sanctions against Iran, and more." Mr. Ben-David thought that J Street might be behind the recent letter to the President by 54 Members of Congress, in which they urged pressure upon Israel to end its partial blockade of Gaza. J Street did not claim a role in the petition. Upon checking, Ben-David found that various others credit to J Street for promoting the letter. According to Ha'aretz, "In addition to members of Congress, several leftist organizations also signed the letter, including Americans for Peace Now and J Street." Wrote Michael Rosenberg, one of Israel's harshest critics, "The [54 members of Congress] deserve our thanks as does J Street and Americans for Peace Now which pushed the letter." And who appears first on the Minnesota Independent's list of the letter's backers? "Among the groups supporting the letter: J Street, The Holy Land Christian Ecumenical Foundation (HCEF), The American Task Force on Palestine (ATFP), The American Near East Refugee Association (ANERA), The Methodist Church, The Friends Committee on National Legislation (FCNL), and Rabbis for Human Rights." "With the exception of the rabbis, none of J Street's colleagues on the letter are known for their fraternal feelings toward Israel." "Is that why J Street avoids claiming credit for the letter or publicizing the fact that it trucks with some unkosher characters? Perhaps the 'pro-Israel' group wanted to avoid appearing 'pro-Gaza' on the eve of launching its national grassroots operation last week. Or perhaps J Street got burned over the last year when it was revealed that a large portion of its PAC funds (possibly close to 10 percent) were coming from individuals never known for being 'pro-Israel.' Indeed, the most recent Federal Election Commission records (for the last quarter of 2009) suggest that the J Street PAC donors with ties to Saudi Arabia, the tarnished National Iranian American Council and the Arab-American Institute didn't like the publicity and are keeping their checkbooks closed." "What Commentary's Jennifer Rubin found interesting about the letter was "the extent of the overlap between the pro-Gaza blockade lifters and the roster of J Street-supported congressmen" recently published by J Street. "At least we know the sort of congressmen that J Street supports and the sort that are only too glad to accept J Street's largess," Rubin states. And now we also know that J Street continues to try to hide its fellow travelers, just as it tried to hide the backgrounds of some of its PAC contributors, its George Soros donations, and its decision-making process. The "word on the street" now is that several members of Congress are disassociating themselves from their letter, much the same way members pulled out of J Street's national conference in October 2009 www.imra.org.il, 2/13). Lacking proof, Mr. Ben-David's questions are speculative, but they are reasonable in context. ILLEGAL HOUSING IN EASTERN JERUSALEM 
In the Kings Garden section of Jerusalem, some Jews built a house exceeding the legal height. In part of that section not zoned for housing, Arabs illegally built a number of houses on municipal land zoned for public use, such as for a park. They did not own that land privately. A court ordered the Jews' house demolished. The Mayor has threatened to demolish all the illegal houses there, if he has to demolish any. The Mayor has been working with all the residents on a plan to legalize their housing but reclaim some of the park land. Agreement is said to be near. Nevertheless, the national regime will not talk with the Mayor, they seem intent on taking down the Jews' house. In eastern Jerusalem as a whole, about 20,000 illegal Arab houses stand www.imra.org.il, 2/13). There are several issues here: (1) May a city plan the use of public land or may individuals build on it; (2) May individuals steal the land; (3) Equal application of the law; and (4) National government lack of cooperation with a mayor trying to solve a problem creatively. Those hundred Arab families and many of those in the 20,000 illegal Arab houses in eastern Jerusalem alone stole the land they built on. That fact should be taken into account by those who accuse "settlers" of stealing land. Incidentally, a reader complained recently that in the Territories, Jews are confiscating land owned by Arabs. He cited no cases. The Jews there are not taking additional land, but are building within their municipal bounds. Almost all of the land they do build on they either bought from Arabs or it is State land. Some purchases of property by Jews are of property that Arabs earlier had seized from Jewish owners, usually in Hebron and Jerusalem. Yes, Peace Now produced studies purporting to show that most Jewish villages in Judea-Samaria were build largely on land privately owned by Arabs. The studies were proved false in court, and the claimants had to pay villages fines for libel. HEBRON JEW'S ACID-THROWING FOUND UNSUBSTANTIATED In 12/08, police removed Jewish residents from a house involved in a court case over whether they or an Arab own it. Some of the residents were violent. A policeman reported that one threw acid into an officer's eye. The police were challenged to produce a witness. They never did. They never substantiated their claim which, however, had been circulated widely, on the policeman's word. It is another claim of settler violence without substantiation (www.imra.org.il, 2/13). The Jerusalem Post, which got the story from the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, retracted its accusation as unsubstantiated. The New York Times retracted its story, stated above, that most settlements were build on Arabs' private land. It changed its story to half a percent, but even that figure was not tested in court (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/14). This is a tricky subject. There used to be almost no settler violence, but after finding the legal system unfair to them, and finding the police brutal to them, and finding the Arabs encouraged by that to harass them, some Jewish youth have become more violent. Sometimes the Jewish communities try to work out a peaceful solution, but the Defense Minister does not give it a chance. The incumbent, Defense Min. Barak seems eager to win support within his leftist Labor Party by being tough on settlers, including by needless brutality. Those who object to what they consider settler violence do not seem to object to government violence against Jews. I think that it is wrong to initiate violence, regardless of by whom. To me, it is a matter of principle and of civility. To others, however, it seems to be a matter of who is violent toward whom. Past cases of alleged right-wing violence sometimes were done by government agent provocateurs or alleged by false Arab complainants who themselves were accused of violence but without police investigating those accusations.
ANOTHER ARAB KNIFE-WIELDER ARRESTED IN NORTHERN JERUSALEM For the third time in a week, an Arab carrying a knife that he admitted he intended to stab Jews with, was arrested in northern Jerusalem. In January, there were a number of attacks, too. This seems to coincide with the removal of checkpoints (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/14), in order to improve the Arabs' quality of life. It seems to improve their quality of terrorism, too. Recently, I commented on the mistaken story in the New York Times of there being almost no terrorist violence in or from the Palestinian Authority. They just don't report much of it.
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY HONORS ARAB STABBER 
Palestinian Authority (P.A.) Prime Minister Fayyad and the official P.A. daily honored an Arab, Faiz Faraj, shot trying to stab an Israeli soldier. They honored him by calling him a martyr, Islam's treasured position. Fayyad complained that the troops shot a non-violent protester. The P.A. also has called fire-bombing and stone-throwing "non-violence." (Palestinian Media Watch in www.imra.org.il, 2/13). The P.A. and especially Fayyad are said to favor peace, oppose terrorism, and be moderate. What they do and tell their own people belies this wishful thinking by Westerners. I think that is the incident that one of my readers complained of as Israeli murder of a civilian. He did not identify it, so who really knows what he meant or whether it was as he interpreted it.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
THE BELLS OF REDEMPTION ARE REVEALED IN JERUSALEM
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 15, 2010. |
|
This was written by Yehudit Katsover and Nadia Matar. |
|
Sunday, Rosh Hodesh Adar, Women in Green (Women for Israel's Tomorrow) conducted a tour throughout Jerusalem — to see, to gain an impression, and to strengthen, hands on, the so devoted activity by the redeemers of Jerusalem. The tour began in Abu Tor, in a house in which six Jewish families live. From the roof of their house we looked out at the Temple Mount, Beit Yehonatan, the King's Gardens, the infamous separation wall, and the building in Abu Dis that was supposed to become the Arab parliament but, thank G-d, did not come to pass. We received explanations from Daniel Luria, the director of Ateret Cohanim, that were both learned and extremely moving. From there we drove to Beit Yehonatan, located in "Kfar Hateimanim" (the Yemenite village also known as Silwan).It was very emotional. To go back in time 140 years. when the first Yemenite Jews arrived in Silwan and settled, initially in caves and afterwards in houses. They prayed in four synagogues. During the Arab riots they were expelled, and today Jews are returning and redeeming the area, despite all the legal and political difficulties. Beit Yehonatan is named in honor of Jonathan Pollard. We were told that Jonathan has asked that everyone visiting the house take the time to pray and learn Torah, so one of the yeshiva men who learn in Beit Yehonatan gave our group a twenty minute shiur (lesson). Then we went to the King's Gardens. We await the serious removal of all the illegal Arab construction, so they will once more be gardens befitting the royal city. The "Maaleh ha-Zetim" neighborhood, that was constructed against all odds, strengthens our hope and security. The Jews are returning and taking control of the city. This is the case in Kidmat Zion too, for which a magnificent neighborhood is planned, that will afford a panoramic view of Jerusalem, from the other side, to the Temple Mount. From there we went to Beit Orot, the first neighborhood to be established following the Six Day War, that is being developed now, and from there we passed next to the Shepherd Hotel, a large building that used to belong to Haj-Ammin Al Husseini, the mufti of Jerusalem, collaborator with the Nazis and responsible for the murder of thousands of Jews. The knowledge that the house where once this enemy of the Jewish people lived now returned to Jewish hands was very comforting. From there we drove to the Shimon ha-Tzaddik compound. The excitement was great, simply tremendous. In Shimon Hatzaddik (also known as Sheikh Jarrah), the Arabs, who benefit from Israeli democracy and the support of the left, are insolent, curse, and shout, but a group like ours isn't deterred. After an enlightening explanation by Yehonatan Yosef, the grandson of Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef, telling us the story of how the Arabs had squatted in houses belonging to Jews after the Jews had been expelled from the area in 1948, and how it was only historical justice to finally redeem these Jewish houses from the Arab thieves and return them to their rightful owners, the entire group began singing a tremendous "Am Yisrael Hai" — the Jewish People Lives! in front of the amazed Arabs. Here, there are Jews who are not scared nor impressed by their shouts. The charged encounter at the Shimon ha-Tzaddik compound undoubtedly left a tremendous impression on all the tour participants. We were all accompanied by a sense of involvement. Much has been done, but there is a long way to go. The general feeling was that the reality is changing, thank G-d. The Jews, with G-d's help, are returning, taking control, and drawing nearer to the very heart of holiness. Jerusalem is being re-acquired and is returning to its true sons. We were moved to tears at the sight of the devotion, the faith, and the activity. Thank you to our devoted photographers Gemma Blech and Abigail Browning for taking pictures and eternalizing our activities For pictures by Gemma Blech from our tour please click on: http://picasaweb.google.com/gemmablech/ 21410WIGToJEWISHEASTJERUSALEM# Link to Abigail Brownings website;
Thank you to our dear and loyal Renee Margolis and Elisheva Ginzburg who helped organize the tour by making so many phone calls. Thank you to Sharon Katz, editor of Voices magazine, who came along
with us and surely will write a wonderful article about this special
day on her new website:
Thank you to all participants of the tour, to each and one of you, who took a day out of your busy schedule to be a partner in the struggle for Jerusalem, the struggle for Erets Israel. We all came to strengthen but, as usual, came back strengthened. Lastly, thank you and yashar koach to our wonderful tour guide Daniel Luria from Ateret Cohanim who made this tour so incredibly meaningful. We strongly recommend others to organize a similar tour and ask Daniel to be your guide. His cellphone number is 054-654-4407 Join the next tour of Women in Green, on Wednesday, Rosh Hodesh Nissan, March 17. The route will be: Negohot-Amatziah-Yad Binyamin. In Negohot we will give our support to the Ben-David family, whose home has already been destroyed twice, and rebuilt a third time, with aid including that of the Yibaneh Fund founded by Women in Green. From there, to Amatziah, to meet our expelled brothers and the new construction, and to Yad Binyamin, to support the expellees by making purchases in their shopping center. Hazak, hazak, ve-nithazek — Let us be strong and resolute! Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
BARAK'S INFLATED CENSUS FIGURES SHOW FALSE DEMOGRAPHIC PICTURE
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 15, 2010. |
|
This was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu in Arutz-7. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) Labor party chairman and Defense Minister Ehud Barak earlier this month stated inflated figures on the number of Arabs in Israel in order to reach a conclusion that failure to reach a two-state solution would create "Apartheid," according to defense industry official Chaim Rosenberg. Writing in the Hebrew-language Makor Rishon daily newspaper, Rosenberg said that Barak's figures of six million Arabs living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea artificially add two milion Arabs to the population figures. Rosenberg is the head of Long-Term Planning at RAFAEL (Israel Defense Ministry's Armament Development Authority). He wrote that a study published as recently as last year by the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies concluded that there are only four million Arabs, distributed almost equally between Gaza, Judea and Samara, and the rest of Israel. Barak also stated that the supposed demographic threat is even "more threatening than Iran," but Rosenberg wrote, "Barak's conclusion is based on a dramatic error of a two million person gap." The "demographic threat" is actually non-existent when compared with the census in 1948, when the Jewish State was re-established, the defense industry official stated. Rosenberg pointed out that Jews comprised only one-third of the population between the Jordan and the Mediterranean at that time. The "defiance of odds was responsible for the 1948 establishment of the Jewish State," Rosenberg reminded readers. "In 2010, there is a solid 67 percent Jewish majority in the combined area of pre-1967 Israel and Judea and Samaria" he added. "However, some Israeli politicians employ toxic demographic assets. They inflate the number of Arabs in Judea and Samaria in order to scare the Jewish State into a retreat from a most critical area, historically and security-wise. "Current demographic bode well for the Jewish majority, which is expected to grow during the next 20 years due to a substantial rise in fertility since 1995, while Arab/Muslim fertility throughout the Middle East has declined sharply. In addition, the Arab minority has experienced an accelerated net-emigration of 580,000 from Judea and Samaria since 1967." Rosenberg also took a swipe at Barak, charging that "scrutinizing facts is not a Barak trait, as was also evident during his May 2000 disorderly withdrawal from Lebanon and his July 2000 Camp David. "negotiations with Arafat and Clinton." Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
U.S. TROOPS IN MARJAH THREATENED BY LAWYERS
Posted by CPocerl, February 15, 2010. |
|
This is from Strategy Page
|
|
As NATO and Afghan forces attacked the southern Afghanistan town of Marjah, they discovered that the Taliban understood there was no expectation of winning a conventional victory. Instead the Islamic radicals were going for an Information War win. This was anticipated, and short circuited by the NATO strategy of giving the population plenty of time to get out. That was followed by a surprise (2 AM) helicopter assault in the center of the town. Troops quickly occupied key buildings, and the Taliban found that their defense of the town had been wrecked. That wasn't the only damage. Evidence was found, and publicized, that the Taliban had burned some Korans, apparently in preparation of a photo op where the "desecration" would be broadcast to the Moslem world. But in the case, the Taliban were caught holding the match. Now, most of the 15,000 NATO/Afghan forces are slowly working their way through the mines and roadside bombs the Taliban set up around and inside the town. The few hundred diehard (and apparently not terribly bright) Taliban left behind to die for the cause, are confused, with soldiers coming at them from outside, while already inside the town. But many of the Taliban inside Marjah have some training as snipers, and are making a nuisance of themselves. While the Taliban has scored many Information War victories, Marjah is not shaping up as another of them. But the use of Information War tactics makes it much harder for the American and NATO troops, who operate under very restrictive ROE (Rules of Engagement.) The Taliban know the ROE, and exploit it as much as possible. For example, U.S. troops cannot fire on anyone unless first fired on, or shown unmistakable "hostile intent." Lawyers and journalists are standing by to crucify any foreign soldier who appears to have killed an Afghan civilian. Thus U.S. troops are threatened from all sides. The paper bullets from the media may not kill you, but they can sure make life miserable long after the fighting is over. Posted by CPocerl, February 12, 2010. |
|
FATAH LEADER: SEX, BRIBES, AND ON THE TAKE
Posted by CPocerl, February 15, 2010. |
|
This appeared in Strategy Page
|
|
February 15, 2010: Fatah leaders are scrambling to cope with a former Fatah intelligence officials recent release of evidence of corruption. The most damaging item was a 2008 video of the Fatah chief of staff demanding sex from a woman seeking help from Fatah. Many Fatah officials are calling the video a fake created by Israel. The video first appeared on Israeli TV last week (it could never get on Palestinian TV, which is controlled by Fatah). But many more Palestinians know the vid is all too real. Lawyer Fahmi Shabaneh, who released the video, and promises much more, is being denounced by Fatah as an Israeli agent. Most Palestinians believe Shabaneh, and believe that this won't make any difference. Fatah is under a lot of pressure to resume peace negotiations with Israel and work out a unity deal with Hamas. The Fatah leadership isn't really interested. Fatah is receiving over $2 billion a year in aid, mostly from the West, and the Fatah leadership are getting rich, stealing as much as they can get away with. A peace deal would cause many of the aid donors to take their money elsewhere, to more urgent crises. Fatah has to keep the pot boiling, to keep the cash coming. Israel has decided not to deploy its new Iron Dome anti-rocket system to Gaza, but to keep it in reserve so that it can quickly (within a day), be deployed against Gaza or Lebanon. This upsets the people in southern Israel, but the government points out that only a few rockets are fired out of Gaza each week, and rarely do those hit anything. But if Hezbollah started another war, Iron Dome could save lives if it was deployed quickly enough. Hamas is less likely to launch a major rocket offensive (the Israelis watch Gaza more closely), but Iron Dome missile batteries and radars can be quickly moved south. Iron Dome can handle hundreds of incoming rockets an hour, because the radar system calculates where each rocket will land, and only launches a missile against rockets that are going to hit a residential area. Over 90 percent of rockets fired, in the north or south, hit open terrain. February 14, 2010: Hamas arrested a British journalist in Gaza. During the last three years, Hamas has generally left journalists alone, since most are leftist and pro-Hamas and inclined to give the terrorist group favorable treatment. The current arrest is believed associated with a journalist who was not working on a pro-Hamas project. Some journalists are describing the arrest as a kidnapping, which was what often happened to journalists in Gaza before Hamas cracked down in 2007. In Lebanon, the government announced that its anti-aircraft guns opened fire on four Israeli aircraft making their daily reconnaissance flights over Lebanon. These guns usually do not open fire unless the Israeli aircraft are within range, which is rarely the case. It's unclear what this announcement is really about, but that's not unusual. The Lebanese government has been upset over rumors that Hezbollah has been ordered by Iran (which funds, and helped create Hezbollah) to increase attacks against Israel, or launch a major attack. This would hurt Lebanon, as Israel has warned that the Lebanese government, which has failed in its attempt to control Hezbollah, would suffer as well if Hezbollah attacked again. February 13, 2010: In the north, a feud between two Arab clans led to a large fight that sent a dozen people to the hospital. This use of clan organizations by Arabs is common throughout the region, even in Israel, where fair and impartial courts are available for settling these disputes. February 12, 2010: The Egyptian Navy arrested four Palestinian fishermen, who had moved into Egyptian waters. The Egyptians are more concerned about smuggling, than losing some fish to boats based in Gaza. Meanwhile, another rocket was fired from Gaza into Israel, where it did no damage. February 11, 2010: In Gaza, Israeli troops spotted several Palestinians preparing to fire rockets. The troops advanced 200 meters into Gaza and killed two of the Palestinians. Three civilians were wounded as well. February 8, 2010; A rocket was fired from Gaza into Israel, where it did no damage. February 6, 2010: Hamas withdrew its earlier expression of regret over any Israeli civilian casualties its rocket attacks might have caused. Hamas made that comment under pressure from the UN. But rival Fatah immediately pounced, calling for Hamas to apologize for pro-Fatah civilians in Gaza that Hamas gunmen had injured in the last three years. Both Hamas and Fatah compete to outdo each other in their appeals for Palestinians to kill Israelis (including civilians). They keep most of this out of their English language propaganda, but the Arab language media is full of it, constantly. Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
ISRAEL OPENS HEBRON ROAD TO ARABS; LEFT: STIFLE FREE SPEECH IN AMERICA; DEATH THREAT AGAINST MODERATE FRENCH MUSLIM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 14, 2010. |
|
ISRAEL OPENS HEBRON ROAD TO ARABS 
The Hebron Arab community makes no secret of its desire to drive all Jews out of that city in which Jews had lived for three thousand years except for a hiatus or two, the last resulting from an Arab pogrom during British rule. Following two Arab terrorist attacks in Hebron on the same day, each a murder on Zion Road, the road was closed to Arab vehicular traffic. About a year ago, the military commander decided to reopen the road to Arab traffic, to ease the lives of Arabs in Hebron. That contradicts the reason for having closed the road to them. Any time roads are reopened or roadblocks are removed, terrorists murder Jews. The commander promised that he would give permits to travel on it only to Arabs living along the road and that the drivers and others would undergo security checks. Hebron leaders predicted that soon the road would be reopened to all Arab traffic. The IDF promised to the community and to the Knesset that such would not be the case. But the record is, once concessions begin, they expand. Consistent with the record rather than with government promises, word came that Zion Road was to be opened to Arab public transportation, too. Military officers promised that the Hebron Jewish community representatives would first meet with top military commanders. The commanders requested meetings. Every time, the requests were rejected or ignored. Then word came that the road would be opened, despite the commanders not having met with the community. The announcement said that the opening would be a one-day, trial period for a limited number of vehicles. The IDF would recommend expanding the opening, "to ease Palestinian lives." However, about two months ago, Rabbi Meir Chai was murdered by Arabs belonging to Abu Mazen's Fatah movement," 'supposed moderates and 'peace partners.' "Two days ago an Israeli soldier was murdered by a 'Palestinian police officer, again, belonging to" the supposed moderates. The government nevertheless contends that the security situation now allows such 'risks. [Some trial period, one day and limited traffic. Terrorists are not likely to show themselves so soon. They would wait until the trial period passes and the decision to enlarge the opening is made.] " And what is happening now? Arabs are throwing rocks at Jews' residences (Hebron@Hebron.com, 2/12). In slightly later news, troops started patrolling, and the Arabs threw rocks at them, too. An Arab ambushed a soldier, but the assailant was critically shot (Hebron@Hebrohn.com, 2/12). The State of Israel does not deal with its own people with integrity. It makes assurances it does not keep and immediately gives the assured people the cold shoulder. I interpret this as deliberate deception, seeking to cool down likely protests. The people of Israel can put no stock in government assurances. The people have more wisdom than their government, having unwise ideological or sordid motivates.
LEFT: STIFLE FREE SPEECH IN AMERICA This message was disseminated by ActLeft, action list in Israel-Palestine: Urgent Action Needed! Please Distribute Widely: You may have heard of the recent event at UC Irvine with Michael Oren, the ambassador of Israel to the US. While he was invited by a student organization to speak on US-Israeli relations, the UCI Law School and the Political Science Department cosponsored the speech by Oren, a public figure who represents a state that continues to commit more human rights violations. See the MSU's [Muslim Student Union] statement regarding his presence on campus for more details: msuuci.com At the event, 11 students who chose to protest by making clear and organized statements were arrested and held in a room until after the event. The school is also currently threatening to punish the students, aiming to send a political message by selective enforcement of university policies. Contact UCI Chancellor Michael Drake NOW to declare that it is unjust to arrest these students. Supporters of the arrests are contacting administration in large numbers, and your support is needed desperately! Ask to speak with Chancellor Drake or leave a message at: (949) 824 — 5011
and email him at: chancellor@uci.edu Here are some important points to bring up:
Thank you for your support (forwarded by www.imra.org.il, 2/13).
I saw a video of the speaker and the protesters. The rationale stated above is not accurate and neither is the web statement by the Muslim Student Union.
Although 11 students were arrested, one could see a few dozen drowning out the speaker and a university official, both of whom tried to explain university dedication to freedom of speech. In American, that is reason to arrest people, for interfering with speakers' rights. Is it up to individuals to choose whom they will allow to speak and whom audiences are allowed to hear? No law and order?
Many speakers invited by the Muslim Students Union engage in slander, defamation, violation of university rules, and perhaps raising funds for terrorism, but certainly supporting terrorism, but they are not shouted down. Those speakers' evil is documented, and the Union is irresponsible in inviting them, but their right to speak is not questioned. Why do the Left and the Muslims seek freedom of speech for themselves but would deny it to others?
Civil disobedience meant disobeying laws oppressing people, not shouting down speakers. The protesters were not standing up for human rights principles. Indeed, Ambassador Oren said that if they had objection, he would call on them all to present them and he would answer. They also could have held a protest outside, to present their view. That is democracy. But the pro-Arab students must be afraid to debate, fearing that would have answers that would disprove their contentions. Alternatively, all Arab societies being non-democratic, it's the Muslim Arab way of dealing with dissident opinion by repression. That is not the American way.
Israel's frequent condemnation by the UN Human Rights Council, judging by its composition and neglect of large-scale oppression, is a mark of honor.
The Muslim Student Union website refers to the Ambassador as a so-called diplomat. Then it does not recognize Israel as a state. But the U.S. does.
The website claims that Israeli forces inflicted mass-murder, and that Oren encouraged it when he served in the IDF. These claims of massacre and oppression are vague but false. Such claims in recent years have been growing more and more extreme. They mock history. They also neglect real mass-murder by jihadists and real oppression in Arab society. But what can one expect from Radical Muslims and leftist enablers who have such a double standard that they encourage jihadists to commit terrorism against innocent civilians, while pretending they are people of principle for protesting against non-existent murder of civilians.
A moderate Muslim in France, receives death threats from Radical Muslims. So dissident Muslims also are to be denied freedom of speech? Don't call that principle, call it totalitarianism, which Radical Islam shares with Communism and Nazism.
DEATH THREAT AGAINST MODERATE FRENCH MUSLIM
WHAT I OMITTED ABOUT GOLDSTONE OF THE UN REPORT
A couple of my sources described Goldstone as an antisemite who exploited his Jewish origin to write a specious report about Israel. The sources and others and my own review found his report astonishingly specious.
The sources, however, did not document an antisemitism in Goldstone, who once was known as pro-Zionist. Neither did they document the claim that he exploited his Jewish name to get to write the Report.
For lack of documentation, I omitted those two claims which are more personal than relevant, anyway. Let us focus on the Report which, together with criticism of it, is almost a manual of how to do a baseless hatchet job.A couple of my sources described Goldstone as an antisemite who exploited his Jewish origin to write a specious report about Israel. The sources and others and my own review found his report astonishingly specious.
The sources, however, did not document an antisemitism in Goldstone, who once was known as pro-Zionist. Neither did they document the claim that he exploited his Jewish name to get to write the Report.
For lack of documentation, I omitted those two claims which are more
personal than relevant, anyway. Let us focus on the Report which,
together with criticism of it, is almost a manual of how to do a
baseless hatchet job.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: SOME BLOCKADE!
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 14, 2010. |
|
I begin with this because I consider the information important. This is with regard to the so-called "blockade" we maintain at our border with Gaza. The charges against us, which include defiance of international law and levying of "collective punishment," are seriously off base. This is an instance in which it is tremendously important to set the record straight. I recommend, first, an article written for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) on the issue by Dr. Avi Bell, who is a member of the Faculty of Law at Bar-Ilan University, and Director of the International Law Forum at the JCPA. (With thanks to my friend who called my attention to this.) While this article addressed the situation two years ago, Bell nonetheless clarifies the issues significantly: "International officials are entitled to object on political grounds to Israel imposing even limited economic sanctions in response to Palestinian terrorism. However, they err in insinuating that international law forbids Israel's actions. International law does not require Israel to supply Gaza with fuel or electricity or, indeed, with any other materials, goods, or services. However, as Dr. Bell notes: "Even if it were bound by the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel would be acting in full compliance with international law. Article 23 of the Fourth Geneva Convention permits states like Israel to cut off fuel supplies and electricity to territories like Gaza. Article 23 only requires a party to permit passage of food, clothing, and medicines intended for children under fifteen, expectant mothers, and maternity cases. Were Article 23 to apply, Israel would still be under no obligation to permit passage of electricity or fuel or any items other than food, clothing or medicine. (emphasis added) ~~~~~~~~~~ With this as background, let us then look at what is actually going into Gaza via Israel by way of a number of crossings. I have been in touch with the spokesman for the Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) and have learned that goods go into Gaza via two different avenues. Some goods go under the auspices of humanitarian organizations — UNRWA, World Food Plan, etc. Israel makes every effort to allow through all humanitarian supplies (food and medicines, etc.) that these organizations seek to bring in — although sometimes there are items that are questioned or prevented from going in. Israel has had serious issues with UNRWA with regard to allowing in building materials, for example, because Hamas might co-opt them and use them for constructing bunkers. And then, totally aside from the goods transported by humanitarian organizations — which are distributed to those in greatest need — are those permitted in commercially. The PA cooperates here in determining what the needs of local merchants are, and those goods are shipped by truck. On an average week, roughly 500 trucks will go into Gaza with such merchandise. Products allowed in include meat, fish and chicken; grains; staples such as sugar, salt, flour and yeast; spices; dairy products; legumes; fresh fruits and vegetables; cooking oil, a variety of other foodstuffs; animal feed; medicines; clothing; and hygienic supplies. What is not permitted in, in the way of foodstuff, are gourmet items, as it is felt that only Hamas people have the sort of ready cash that would allow them to purchase this. In addition, cooking gas and heavy duty diesel fuel for the power station go in. Then there are "specialty" items: [] Last November:* 12 new transformers and other pieces of electrical equipment were allowed in for the power plant in Gaza. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
PA PRIME MINISTER HONORS DEAD TERRORIST WITH CONDOLENCE VISIT
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, February 14, 2010. |
|
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has honored the terrorist who attempted to stab an Israeli soldier by paying a condolence call to his family. The terrorist was killed by Israeli soldiers after the attack Friday in Hebron. Today's official PA daily carries a front-page picture of the terrorist, glorifying him with the title "Shahid" — a holy Islamic Martyr — together with the picture of Fayyad's visit. Becoming a Shahid represents the highest religious achievement that can be attained by a Muslim. 
The following is the front page story of Prime Minister Fayyad's condolence visit as reported in the official PA daily. This article likewise glorifies the terrorist as a "Shahid": "The [Palestinian Authority] Prime Minister [Salam Fayyad] paid condolences to the family of the Shahid (Martyr) Faiz Faraj, who was killed on Friday evening by the occupation forces (Israel), having been fired upon directly in the old Al-Shalala neighborhood in Hebron. Fayyad denounced in extremely harsh terms the actions of the occupation forces, carried out as part of the ongoing campaign to suppress the non-violent protests of residents in the various regions." Itamar Marcus is director of PMW — Palestinian Media Watch — (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
FOR VALENTINE'S DAY
Posted by Teresinka Pereira, February 14, 2010. |
|
LOVE Contact Teresinka Pereira by email at tpereira@buckeye-express.com |
|
THINKING OF GILAD SHALIT
Posted by Roberta Dzubow, February 13, 2010. |
|
As we think of Gilad Shalit and his family, we know that the "human rights" faux groups do not. It is only Israeli actions that they protest. This below comes from Alexis Worlock. |
|
Captured at the age of 19; now in his 4th year in captivity and isolation. No letters. No medical attention. No Geneva Convention rights. No visits from the Red Cross to confirm that he's alright. Cynically used as a human pawn to cause emotional pain to all his nation and especially his family, and as a bargaining chip for unwarranted gain for terrorist brutes. His captors revel in tormenting Gilad's parents by pretending over and over that they are about to release him in some trade...but then they don't. They are dangling the prospect of his freedom in front of his suffering parents' eyes — along with their power to do with Gilad whatever they wish, with all the awful possibilities that that implies. It is an unconscionable story. Where are all the human rights groups from all over the 'civilized' world? Where is Human Rights Watch, Doctors Without Borders, Amnesty International? The world is strangely silent in the face of this travesty done to one quiet young man, Gilad; and his family; and his people; and all who wish to live in a world of basic human decency. Click here to watch a short presentation. Alexis Contact Roberta Dzubow by email at Roberta@adgforum.com |
|
MURDER BY PA COP; MUSLIM-JEWISH MUSEUM CONTRAVERSY; NEGOTIATING END OF ONE KIDNAPPING, HAMAS PLANNED ANOTHER
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 13, 2010. |
|
NEW STORY ON EGYPT-GAZA FENCE Egypt has been building a largely below-ground wall, ostensibly to bar smugglers' tunnels. In a new story about its progress, smugglers said they worry that Egypt would pour water down and drown them. Foreign NGOs say that the Egyptian wall descends for only 18 feet, rather than the 90 originally reported. The wall would have to reach down more than 90 feet, to reach past the tunnels. No confirmation for these new claims. Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA reports two interpretations of the Egyptian project. One that most correspondents and Israeli officials hold is that the wall is a genuine Egyptian commitment to stopping the smuggling. The other, that Dr. Lerner shares is that the wall is a pretense at taking action to stop it, a pretense that is like U.S. foreign aid for Egypt, since the U.S. is paying for the costly wall. He explains that his old suggestion, that Egypt create a no-man's zone along the border and inspect trucks approaching it, would work and be cheap. Lerner says that the correspondents and Israeli officials keep coming up with logic-defying schemes [that fail]. He suspects that they approve the wall, because it might make Israeli withdrawal, which they favor, seem feasible (www.imra.org.il, 2/10). Withdrawal from Gaza was not feasible, leading to military build-up by Hamas and war.
ISRAELI ARABS ON NATIONAL SERVICE The Arab High Monitoring Community, the Baladna Association for Arab youth, and Israeli Arab leaders have condemned national service in Israel for Arabs. 
National Rescue Service saving 2 kids (AP/Ancho Gosh) A poll shows a drop in interest in national service among Israeli Arab youth, from 77% to 54% in the past two years. Associating the same benefits with national service as with military service would draw a modest increase in Arab youth approval. [But the figures cited do not jibe.] So much for the opinion poll. What about recruitment? The National Service Administration found an increase in the number of Arab youths volunteering for national service, from 240 in 2005 to 1256 in 2009. Education Minister Saar said that more would volunteer, if the program had more funding (www.imra.org.il, 2/11). Unstated was the reason for the Arab leaders' opposition to national service for Arabs. An Israeli source of mine explains: "Israeli Arab MKs and leaders oppose national service, Jewish sovereignty and true integration, because the realization of these goals would lead their constituencies to the conclusion that it is possible to coexist peacefully within the framework of a Jewish state — something they [the leaders] greatly fear because they would lose their raison d'etre." Therefore, PM Netanyahu's policy of encouraging economic development in the P.A. is likely to make the P.A. leaders emphasize both the myth that Israel stole a country from them and a religious imperative for holy war. If they make that war when they have gained economic strength, the Netanyahu's policy will have backfired. If they trade peace for land, the Jewish people will lose the core of their homeland, to which they have a better legal and historical claim than the Arabs.
P.A. TREATMENT OF TERRORIST ATTACKERS OF ISRAELIS The Palestinian Authority (P.A.) condemns terrorist acts against Israelis consistently for not serving the current P.A. interest, not for being murder. By contrast, in the few instances of Israeli attacks on Arab civilians, Israeli leaders consistently condemn the attacks and attackers for murder. The P.A. rarely files charges against terrorists. Mostly it arrests them to feign law enforcement but really to protect them from Israeli justice. The few it sentences are not for murder but for "against Palestinian interests". Since those interests may change, "what restrictions are necessary for the arming, training, etc. of Palestinian security forces?" (www.imra.org.il, 12/31.)
MURDER BY P.A. COP: UPDATE New York Times had its own piece on the murder of an Israeli by a Palestinian Authority (P.A.) policeman in Judea-Samaria, that I reported earlier. The Times mentioned that the policeman was not in uniform and was in an area under direct Israeli security control. Reporter Isabel Kershner called the slaying "a rare instance of violence." (2/11, A16). I don't think Arab violence in Judea-Samaria is rare. Killings are rare, but attempts are more frequent. The Times does not report many of the unsuccessful attempts that my Israeli sources do. One also should count resisting arrest when Israeli security forces come to arrest wanted terrorists. One should count the weekly riots at the security fence, the attacks on Jews moving into certain areas they own, and Arab-anarchist assaults on Jewish farmers and their crops. The paper reiterated P.A. Prime Minister's Fayad's condemnation of the
murder for contradicting P.A. objectives and commitments. It did not
point out, as my Israeli source did, that such a condemnation does not
find the murder wrongful, just inconvenient for current P.A.
diplomacy. Will Times readers figure that out, or are they too busy
to ponder what they are skimming through?
MUSLIM-JEWISH MUSEUM CONTROVERSY IN JERUSALEM The Simon Wiesenthal Center plans a Museum of Tolerance to replace a parking lot built in the 1960s in western Jerusalem. Muslims are objecting. Their objection is based on earlier usage of the property as a Muslim cemetery. Last burial there was in the 1930s. The Wiesenthal Center states that no graves are left where they intend building, for all were re-interred in a nearby Muslim cemetery. The Center explains that the original parking lot was built over, not in the cemetery, as were a school, road, and park. The Center recounts that when the parking lot was proposed, the City got religious sanction for it from a Muslim cleric, who said that the site lost its sanctity for not having been used for more than 37 years. Now a highly placed Muslim cleric denies any time limit and disparages the earlier cleric for having been charged at the time with fraud over some other matter, later being convicted. In any case, there were no Muslim objections at the time the parking lot was built. Since then, thousands of Muslims have parked their cars in that lot above the former cemetery. The Center surmises that the objections coming up now are political, part of Muslim vying for control of the city and of the country. The Center's arguments attempt to show it is not gripped by disrespect (Isabel Kershner, NY Times, 2/11, A16). Similar objections are raised in that city by Jewish religious groups. In a country densely settled in ancient times, excavation always is sensitive. Archaeologists usually inspect excavated ground for artifacts. Sometimes they delay building projects to complete their studies. For comparison, the newspaper might have stated that Muslims frequently desecrate Jewish cemeteries, particularly at Hebron and the still frequented and important ancient one of about 150,000 graves at the Mount of Olives, also in Jerusalem. Jews coming to pay their respects find vicious graffiti there or tombstones knocked over. When Jordan conquered Jerusalem in 1948, its Army confiscated many tombstones to use as pavement for their latrines, adding insult to injury. Where is the Muslim Arab respect for burial when it concerns Jews? Are they interested only in respect for themselves?
WHILE NEGOTIATING END OF ONE KIDNAPPING, HAMAS PLANNED ANOTHER 
A Hamas cell was caught infiltrating into Israel, while Hamas was negotiating with Israel to release the Israeli it already had kidnapped. The cell's mission was to kidnap another Israeli soldier, murder him, and let Hamas negotiate with Israel for his release. The cell also carried explosives for bombing crowds of civilians. The capture occurred some time ago, but due to security considerations, the story was only just released (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/12). Notice the Hamas perfidy and terrorism?
NOW IRAN ADMITS IT ENRICHED SOME URANIUM President Ahmadinejad now claims that Iran already has enriched
some uranium to 20% (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/12). (For
more on Iran, go here:
Ahmadinejad was having that enrichment done while conducting his on-again, off-again offer to have that uranium enriched by foreign countries, following security regulation. A bit of diplomatic deception on his part! Let that teach Westerners not to take Iranian government assertions and its few gestures of reconciliation as anything more than stalling for time. Will Iran's defenders consider why Iran stalls for time? Obviously the stalling is to gain time to develop nuclear weapons. Otherwise, Iran's conflict with the UN over nuclear development, and inducing sanctions against itself, are pointless. Speaking of deception, think of Arafat signing peace agreements while secretly assuring fellow Muslims that this is part of his phased plan for the conquest of Israel! He and the PLO pledged non-violence and negotiations for a final peace agreement without any restrictions on Jewish construction in the disputed Territories beforehand. Arafat and Abbas have violated their agreements. One of my readers, who called himself objective while larding his comments with epithets, never admits such wrongdoing by the Arabs. Palestinian Arabs have no excuse for their rock-throwing, contrary to what some of my readers think. Those same readers who routinely call Israel "racist" and "apartheid" overlook Arab rock-throwing at Jews who purchased property in areas that the Palestinian Authority wants to control next. If that isn't apartheid or akin to racism, what is? I have challenged such readers to show that Israel is racist, and that the Arabs are not, but they do not respond. They have no case. They just like to abuse a Jewish state. It is a form of Jew-bashing. They pretend to care about the Palestinian Arabs. When I cite examples of Arab leaders oppressing their people, those readers have no indignation left to spare for the Palestinian Arab people, whom they pretend to sympathize with. Making believe they care about Arabs is just a pretext for denouncing Jews. Although not all critics of Israel, including myself, are antisemites, what else could such hypocritical readers be? To such readers, perhaps I should explain that the name of the Jewish state is "State of Israel, not "racist Israel." I give each new commenter a chance to disagree and debate. When it is clear that all the person wants to do is rave and denounce, not debate, and ignores the contents of my article and my debunking of his theories, and tries to make the controversy personal, I delete his comments. Some I delete automatically, now. I have given fair warning that the comment space is for adult discussion, not psychological venting. KENYA ASKS ISRAEL FOR COUNTER-TERRORISM ASSISTANCE 
Under threat of jihad emanating largely from Somalia, Kenya has asked Israel for help against terrorism. Kenya perceives jihad as seeking to take over all of eastern Africa. Israel, having the necessary experience, will gladly assist. Kenya, a mostly Christian country, has not been afflicted with antisemitism. About 10 % of the population is Muslim. Most of them live along the coast, where slave traders and ivory merchants settled centuries ago (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/12).
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 and visit his website:
|
|
'AGHAST' SCHOLARSHIP
Posted by Bill Warner, February 13, 2010. |
|
Claude Salhami was 'aghast' at a recent politicalislam.com newsletter-Is a Nice Muslim a Good Muslim? He replied to the newsletter with his Scourge of 'Islam Experts', but he missed my point. The point of the Nice Muslim newsletter is that the doctrine of Islam is inhuman, not that Muslims always practice the Islamic doctrine at all times. A Muslim can be a fine person in dealing with a kafir when they are not practicing Islam. A summary of the Nice Muslim argument is:
The conclusion is that there is no good in Islam for the kafir. Sure there are those 2.6% of the Koranic words that seem to be good, but in every case the so-called good verses are abrogated later. Anyone who implements the doctrine of Islam is not the friend of a kafir. If they are actually a friend, it is because of the power of the Golden Rule, not Islam. There is no good in Islam for the kafir. Note that this result was reached without the use of a single verse of the Koran (no cherry picking), but uses the systemic nature of its kafir doctrine. Mr. Salhami makes these points in his reply:
So? Christians and Muslims are people. You can prove anything you want by choosing the right member. He also has some remarks about Christianity. To which I reply: I only discuss Islam, not comparative religion.
What is meant by 'good' Muslims? Do we judge by the Islam of Medina or by the Golden Rule? If we judge by Islam of Medina, then Osama bin Laden is a good Muslim. Of course, by the Golden Rule he is not so nice. Stay with the doctrine of Islam in judging Muslims. A good Muslim is one who follows Islamic doctrine, not one who is likable.
This confuses cause and effect. Islam is the cause and Muslims are the effect. A nice Muslim does not prove a nice Islam. Learning from Muslims is Muslim-ology, a sociological personal endeavor. Learning about Islam from the Koran, Sira, Hadith and Sharia law is learning about Islam.
I will grant him this criticism and thank him for it. A much better term is Golden-Rule Muslim. Muslims, like all humans, have an innate sense of the truth of the Golden Rule and use it at times. However, this is an un-Islamic act since Islam does not have a Golden Rule. All of the nice Muslims Mr. Salhami meets in the Middle East will not teach him anything about the suffering of their kafir ancestors during the jihad invasion and the centuries of being dhimmis living under the horror of Sharia law. He won't learn how the native civilization has been annihilated and replaced with the civilization of Islam. They will not tell him about the murder of millions of innocent Christians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, animists and Hindus to create the Islamic civilization. His nice Muslim friends will not instruct him in the vision, strategy and tactics of jihad to annihilate all kafir civilizations. Nor will his nice Muslim friends ever explain Islam's dualistic ethical system, with one set of ethics for kafirs and a different set of ethics for their Muslim brothers. Mr. Salhami is aghast at the self-taught scholars in Islam. There is a good reason for their appearance. The university trained 'experts' are apologists for Islam. They are trained in denial and justification and produce the type of scholarship that allows the army to investigate Major Hasan's jihad at Fort Hood and never refer to Islam. The 'experts' give us the history of Islamic conquest and imperialism and praise it as the glorious rise of Islam. The 'experts' teach courses in women's studies and ignore Sharia law and Mohammed's treatment of women. They lecture on slavery and never mention the Muslim wholesaler who sold the slaves to the white man on the wooden ship or the Islamic slave trade in North Africa, East Africa, Europe and India. The denial goes on and on as the 'experts' drive our university policy. Is there a course in any American university system that is critical of Islamic political ideology? Indeed, the 'experts' argue that such a course would be bigotry. It is the media 'experts' that give us jihad at Mumbai, India and never mention Islam. It is the 'experts' that give us the Official Islam that Bush and Obama talk about. Nice stuff-Official Islam. Too bad it does not exist. So, it is no wonder that when we have such dhimmified professors, university trained 'experts' and media that professionals from other fields start reading the Koran, Sira and Hadith to see for themselves what the ideology actually is that drives the contradictions between current events and what we are told. When you understand that the entire doctrine of Islam is found in Koran, Sira and Hadith, you realize that Islam is simpler than the 'experts' told us. All three texts have been made readable today and any disciplined person can become well informed. The 'experts' have failed us, and we must teach ourselves. It is easy to be an expert. Know Mohammed and the Koran (the book he brought about). If what you say agrees with the Koran or Mohammed, then you are right. If it does not agree with Mohammed, then it is wrong, no matter who you are. Mr. Salhami, buckle your seatbelt and prepare to be aghast again. It is a war between the university-trained dhimmi 'experts' and the self-taught kafir scholars who stand on the doctrine found in the Koran, Sira and Hadith. We will use critical thought on the doctrine and history of political Islam. The 'experts' will talk about nice Muslims, criticize Christianity and the West, while not holding Muslims responsible for their ideology. Every Muslim must be held accountable for Islamic political doctrine and its bloody history. Bill Warner is Director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam. Contact him at bw@politicalislam.com and visit their website at http://www.politicalislam.com/ |
|
FLASHPOINT: IRAN. THE GREEN REVOLUTION: THE SECOND WAVE
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, February 13, 2010. |
|
This was written by Ilana Freedman, who is CEO and Director of
Intelligence at Gerard Group International. She has been a respected
intelligence analyst of homeland security and business intelligence
for over twenty years. For an interview or speaking engagement please
call: 800-950-4213. For more information, please visit our website at
www.gerardgroup.com or send an email to support@gerardgroup.com
This article is in Issue #58 of the Gerard Group INTEL Analysis. It
is archived at |
|
On Wednesday night I stayed up until my eyes were burning, reading the tweets coming from Iran as the uprising of February 11 unfolded. It was the anniversary of the Iranian Revolution and the day the Green Revolution had chosen to demonstrate against the repressive Iranian government. It was 4 am before I finally packed it in. Despite the eight and a half hour time difference, it was difficult to tear myself away as I watched history unfold through the magic of cyber communications. In preparation for the day, the Iranian government had attempted to shut down the lines of communication. Cell phones all over Iran were down. So was the Internet, Google e-mail, and many of the television stations. The primary vehicle for communications that night, therefore, was Twitter, which amazingly stayed open throughout the long day and the following night. The pace of conversation over Twitter was almost overwhelming, with thousands of new tweets every few minutes. There were no videos, but a constant flow of reports, conjectures, confirmations, and much repetition of information that had been tweeted before. But the energy level was high, and the chatter was remarkable. We in the West may find it difficult to understand what is now going on in Iran. We depend on the press to keep us informed and, even more than usual, the press let us down. As the streets of Iran filled with opposition Green demonstrators and the government forces who would try to beat them back, the world media barely reported anything out of the ordinary. What they did report, largely toed the government line. They played down the demonstrations, later calling them a "disappointing turnout" and a failure. According to the tweets coming in throughout the day, however, the reporters had been warned against writing anything derogatory about Ahmadinejad or his speech. In fact, as of Wednesday, 63 foreign reporters had already been arrested, and the mainstream media representatives must have understood that the stakes were high and personal. They fell in line and reported the pap demanded by the Iranian government. So on Thursday, when we should have been hearing about the demonstrations, we heard nothing, except what the Iranian government wanted us to hear, which was very little. But while the mainstream media was largely silent about what was happening in Iran, the real news came over Twitter in a flood of information. It was this newest form of electronic communication that kept us in the game, bringing us the news as it unfolded. Although many of the tweets were unverifiable, there was so much activity, with thousands of tweets coming over our Internet every few minutes, that it was possible to make sense out of most of it. It was through Twitter, for example, that we heard about how Green Movement's elderly leaders Mehdi Karroubi, former president Mohammed Khatami, and Zahra Rahnavard, the popular wife of opposition leader, Mir Hossein Mousavi, had been beaten severely by Ahmadinejad's thugs. Tweeters reported that thousands of green supporters were pouring into the streets, and, significantly, that in some places, women were removing their head scarves, in defiance of laws which require them to keep their heads covered. Another story, important in order to understand the context, reported interviews with people who helped to form the huge crowds of Iranians who came to support the government. They had been bribed with food and home goods and transported from long distances, to appear at the official demonstration in Teheran and show solidarity with the President and his regime. Tweeters also reported that the official Iranian television, broadcasting Ahmadinejad's speech at Azadi Square in Teheran, may have used a filter to wash out the green color displayed by the large numbers of opposition demonstrators who were present in the square, in order to minimize their apparent numbers. They also said that videos being aired on official television of the assembled crowd, prior to his speech, were from another year, when the sky was blue, the weather warmer, and the crowd less hostile. It must have been a pretty obvious deception; this year the sky was overcast, the temperature was a bitter 37 degrees, and opposition was definitely in the air. Ahmadinejad's speech was long and rambling. Someone tweeted that it seemed more like gossip than a speech to the nation. The "news" that had been promoted as "world changing" before the speech, was that Iran was now a nuclear nation, but the evidence he gave to back up his claim was either old news or just plain doubtful. What really happened on Wednesday, February 11 was that an arrogant, psychotic, but extremely powerful dictator used all his resources to brutally clamp down on public opposition, even including the Western press in his oppressive tactics. The repression was harsh, violent, and calculated. But despite Ahmadinejad's most cruel efforts, the groundswell in Iran is not likely to go away. This is a revolution that will appear in waves, and each wave will be larger and achieve more than the last. The first wave was memorialized by the brutal death of Neda, the beautiful young woman whose murder in the street was caught on camera and who became the symbol of that first wave of rebellion. The second wave happened this week. I believe that it will ultimately be disclosed that our media has vastly under-reported what happened in Iran on February 11. We will find that there were many more people who responded to the call to come into the street and support the Greens than our media reported. That the media failed to do their job, leaving most of us in the dark, is a disgrace. The Green movement did not expect to overturn the government on Wednesday, but they made a statement that will in time be heard around the world. I believe that the shaky government, led by a psychopathic megalomaniac, will ultimately fall because of the tenacity and courage of the Iranian people. Ahmadinejad's lies and threats will fail to gain him the power he craves, and, despite his dearest dreams, he will not conquer the world. The people of Iran are angry and full of courageous energy. They will not give up. Perhaps it is best summed up in the words of a tweeter who wrote on February 12, "My people, Sooner or later, no matter what it takes, Iran will be free, a secular democratic nation." For continuing information about events in Iran, visit www.planet-iran.com The following petition appears on-line to protest the brutal attack by government agents on non-violent citizens of Iran, whose only crime is to disagree and to protest the actions of their government. The Islamic Republic of Iran under the Ahmadinejad administration and at the behest of Ayatollah Ali Khamenie is increasingly clinging to power through the use of repression and military force against all civil and constitutional laws of Iran. The Iranian regime has engaged in all imaginable uncivil behavior and actions including outright killings, mass arrests, torture, and rape of Iranian citizens who have participated in peaceful civil demonstrations or in grieving for deaths of their loved ones. Major media have reported that on Saturday and Sunday Iranian government security forces opened fire into crowds of protesters who gathered for commemoration of T uso' and shur, killing at least 10 people, wounding 100s, and arresting over 1000 at this time. The use of violence against peaceful civilians exercising their human rights is against any international rule of conduct and against the Islamic Republics' own civil and constitutional laws. This bloody, treacherous, inhumane, and unjust conduct of the Islamic Regime against demonstrators has been the bloodiest and the largest since the June 20th fraudulent presidential election. These violent episodes are rather sad indications of desperate attempts for survival by the government, tragic reminders of the pre-1979 indiscriminate shootings of demonstrators by the nearly falling Shah's regime and, if history is any consolation, these undoubtedly would fail as well. We, the undersigned:
To read about and sign the petition,: click here. 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. |
|
IN THE FOREST OF EDEN
Posted by Norma Zager, February 12, 2010. |
|
"This solitary Tree! a living thing; How can we differentiate between a dislike of a government, some of its citizens and the country itself? The Jewish people in America are at war with one another. So many have a distaste for Israel citing reasons like accusations of bad behavior, Israel's lack of empathy for the Palestinian cause and the fact Israelis fly here by the planeload looking for handouts as if all American Jews have credit card cash machines attached to their touchas. Okay, it is obnoxious and a huge turn off. I get it. I also get the fact that humanitarian sentiment is a tenet of Judaism that is deeply engrained in our nature. Too many Jewish organizations turn off potential donors and volunteers with an attitude of elitism and, quite simply, holier-than-thou behavior toward others. Their egos and its-all-about-me mentality have taken center stage while the State of Israel suffers under the weight of their own personal agendas. The mainstream press has become anti Israel, the Arab press has won the PR war and beaten the Jewish people at a game they invented. With so much animosity toward Israel, Jews toward one another and the constant hype and propaganda spewed out of the Islamic extremist war machine, what are Israel's chances for survival? I believe we all accept that there is ultimately only one man who will make that decision. God willing, he will never have to push the button to ensure Israel's survival and prevent another holocaust. It is indeed interesting to note there is approximately the same number of Jewish people in Israel today as were killed in Hitler's camps. Think how the evil amongst us must be salivating at that knowledge. So, with the hateful rancor amongst the Jewish people, who will step up to save Israel? Can she be saved? Let's be honest. Jewish people have always been the most controversial humans on the planet. Their presence always incites arguments, debate and strong feelings. Whether you like them or hate them, the sentiments are never clouded with indifference. Blood pressure rises, tears fill eyes and fights break out among even the most rational among us. Why do they elicit such a strong response in the hearts of man, even between fellow Jews? It is difficult today to find a gathering of Jewish people who may not come to blows when the subject of Israel comes up in conversation. Shocking? Not really, that controversy was bound to spread to us eventually. Make no mistake, it isn't just Jews who battle within the ranks, Christians cannot agree on much either. I use as an example Israel. The Catholic Church is mute on the subject, and the Pope's actions seem to be predicated upon his fear of Muslim retribution and appear to be anti-Israel. Many Christians side with the Palestinians, and believe Israel is wrong thinking. Few moderate Muslims stand up against the extremists fearing retaliation and one can understand their hesitancy to do so; although the world would be better for them speaking out. So who is left? The evangelical Christian movement has stepped into fill the void left by an ambivalent Jewish population. Today, I watched a woman listening to the Israeli national anthem weep openly. What amazed me about her emotional response was the fact she was not Jewish. It has been a long time since I saw a Jewish person weep openly listening to the anthem of the Jewish State. I become so angry when I hear criticism of Christian support for Israel. There are accusations of self-serving intentions, hidden motives of conversion, using the return of the Jewish people to Israel as a means of implementing the return of the Messiah. Of course there may be some who share these goals, yet most support Israel from a sense of Christian charity, for it is a tenet they do so. They have aligned themselves in the struggle to protect Israel from her enemies, understanding it is a mutual and deadly foe we share. Sadly, many Christians have not accepted the reality their destiny is intertwined with the fate of the Jewish people or will openly admit a holy war rages between Islam and the Judeo-Christian world. It is sad for them they do not. It is also sad for all of us, whether Jewish, Christian, atheist Buddhist, Hindu and every other religion that stands in the way of the Islamicizing the entire world. As long as man is driven by religion, religion alone can either destroy or save him. This is the choice man has made and he must live within the parameters of that decision. It will remain an unresolved conflict until man either refutes organized religion or settles upon one acceptable to every man woman and child upon the planet. Today man faces the ultimate challenge. Thousands of years ago holy wars raged between Muslims and Christians. At that time weaponry consisted of swords and spears. Now man faces the same battles with a greater threat, weaponry that can destroy his planet. An arsenal so far reaching every living, breathing organism on the planet faces death and extinction. Long before global warming poses any serious threat, man will have ended his reign on earth. We are poised for the ultimate battle, the showdown of all time, Armageddon, the word is consistently put out in the universe by its evil supporters. The Christians who have seen the future clearly understand all that will remain in the forests of Eden will be its strongest trees. Jews and Christians sprouted from the same soil and root systems and although their branches grew apart, have now conjoined to form the mightiest of oaks. Alone we crumble and break under the ax of Islam, together we withstand the onslaught. Supportive Christians understand well an Israel under Jewish control affords them access and protection for their holy sites. They understand and accept the importance of the Jewish covenant with God. The cowardly who are silent in Rome, London or evil Spain know, although they won't admit it openly, Israel is the easiest target. It is merely Islam's first stop on the way to defeat an entire Christian world. With a scant 14 million Jewish people and over two billion Christians, do the math. Destroying Israel will serve to demoralize the Christians and cut off the bloodline at their religious center. The world is a different place, yet old belief systems remain, coloring our worldview and distorting a new reality. Years ago Lucy and Ethel sang about the perfect friendship as they ripped away at one another's similar dress. Jealousy seemed to overtake them in their temporary rage and cloud the blue sky of their usually wonderful relationship. And thus it was with the Christians and Jews. History colored their friendship a dark black. Now, like the pictures of schoolchildren who color a white page with bright lively shades of every hue and then cover it over with black, Jews and enlightened Christians are erasing the darkness to uncover beautiful colors beneath. Who cares what purpose a branch has for enjoining its compatriot, when once the bond is formed it will gain in strength and become unbreakable? There are still many trees in the Judeo-Christian forest standing alone basking in the solitude of the sun and soil, content to be set apart. They will succumb quickly to the blight of hatred that threatens their existence. The Christian world that has chosen to align with Israel will achieve invincible strength. For those who criticize the motivation, a flower needs no reason to grow toward the sun, a soul requires no reason for turning toward God. No one should question what nature deems necessary to sustain life. If Israel were only to rely on Jewish people for its survival it would have fallen. Too many Jews have turned their backs on what was once the most delicate flower in their garden, a source of joy. They watered it daily, showed it off to visitors and spoke of it in loving terms. Now they have let it go to seed. Christians have brought new life, new joy, pride and a sense of perpetual care. I am not only comfortable in the company of Christians who have attached themselves to us in this battle, I am gratified and thankful they are beside us. They do not criticize Israel, they praise. They do not ignore, they nurture. They do not promise, they bestow. They do not politicize, they protect. Israel has lost the hopes of Jewish people and been replaced with self-blame, ridicule, consternation and indifference. The Christians who have picked up the standard are marching not in front of us, nor behind. They are marching side by side. Together, growing in strength and power with each new ray of sun and drop of water. In the Forest of Eden, a new tree has grown from an ancient root system and is overtaking its old, weakened branches. May it thrive and blossom to strengthen the State of Israel. In the series "Postcards from Israel," Ari Bussel and Norma Zager invite readers throughout the world to join them as they present reports from Israel as seen by two sets of eyes: Bussel's on the ground, Zager's counter-point from home. Israel and the United States are inter-related — the two countries we hold dearest to our hearts — and so is this "point — counter-point" presentation that has, since 2008, become part of our lives. |
|
POSTERS FROM ISRAEL
Posted by Jack Hazut, February 12, 2010. |
|
Jack Hazut has designed over 300 posters about Israel. See his other posters at http://www.israelimage.net |
|
TERROR REVIEWS AVOID WORD 'ISLAMIST'
Posted by CPocerl, February 12, 2010. |
|
This was written by Shaun Waterman and it appeared today in
The Washington Times
|
|
Two new documents laying out the Obama administration's defense and homeland security strategy over the next four years describe the nation's terrorist enemies in a number of ways but fail to mention the words Islam, Islamic or Islamist. The 108-page Quadrennial Homeland Security Review, made public last week by the Department of Homeland Security, uses the term "terrorist" a total of 66 times, "al Qaeda" five times and "violent extremism" or "extremist" 14 times. It calls on the U.S. government to "actively engage communities across the United States" to "stop the spread of violent extremism." Yet in describing terrorist threats against the United States and the ideology that motivates terrorists, the review — like its sister document from the Pentagon, the Quadrennial Defense Review — does not use the words "Islam," "Islamic" or "Islamist" a single time. Although the homeland security official in charge of developing the review insists it was a not a deliberate decision, the document is likely to reignite a debate over terminology in the U.S.-led war against al Qaeda that has been simmering through two administrations. "There was not an active choice" to avoid using terms derivative of Islam, Homeland Security Assistant Secretary for Policy David Heyman told reporters on a conference call. President Obama had "made it clear as we are looking at counterterrorism that our principal focus is al Qaeda and global violent extremism, and that is the terminology and language that has been articulated" by Mr. Obama and his advisers, Mr. Heyman added. He declined to use the I-word. The sensitivity to terminology is not new. In April 2008, during the George W. Bush administration, an official guide produced by the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), the multiagency center charged with strategic coordination of the U.S. war on terrorism, urged officials not to use the words "Muslim" or "Islamic" in conjunction with the word "terrorism." Such usage "reinforces the 'U.S. vs. Islam' framework that al-Qaeda promotes," read the NCTC's "Words That Work and Words That Don't: A Guide for Counterterrorism Communication." Instead, the guide urges policymakers to use terms such as "violent extremists," "totalitarian," and "death cult" to characterize al Qaeda and other terrorist groups. The Obama administration has adopted "violent extremism" as its catchall phrase for terrorism. It is advice that officials at the Defense Department also appear to have taken to heart. The 128-page Quadrennial Defense Review — which like the homeland-security review is a congressionally mandated effort to ensure budgeting and other planning efforts are properly aligned against threats to the nation — also eschews words associated with Islam, employing instead the constructions "radicalism," "extremism" or "violent extremism." Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD CLERIC VERSUS PALESTINIAN "PRESIDENT": A CASE STUDY OF ISLAMISM VERSUS NATIONALISM
Posted by Barry Rubin, February 12, 2010. |
|
Forget about the moderate mythology fed the Western public by its media. Forget the comforting nonsense about reasonable masses held back from being humanitarian democrats only by manipulative dictatorships. Here's a glimpse of what the region is really like. Yusuf al-Qaradawi is one of the world's most prestigious Muslim clerics and certainly the most internationally popular Islamist cleric. Some in the West like to think of him as some kind of pragmatic, modernizing moderate. As such he was welcomed in visiting Britain. But Qaradawi is a very hardline fellow indeed. Siding with Hamas, Qaradawi, an Egyptian who lives in Qatar, gave a sermon urging Muslims to stone-in other words kill as a heretic-Palestinian Authority (PA) leader (often referred to as "president") Mahmoud Abbas. Angered by this statement, PA officials ordered West Bank imams to denounce Qaradawi for this action. One of those who did so was Raed al-Mahdawi of Ramallah who took a traditional conservative Muslim position, asking Qaradawi to apologize to Abbas and adding, "Muslim scholars should not use the podiums at their disposal to incite against any ruler or offend the feelings of any people." But those who followed PA instructions were interrupted and forced to stop by angry worshippers; congregations walked out or chased the clerics out of the mosques altogether. In response, PA police beat up and arrested those protesting. Thus, the PA was helpless, faced with this Islamist challenge, to keep its own people in line. And so what was their second line of defense? The Fatah Central Committee claimed that Qaradawi was acting as an Israeli stooge, objectively an ally with the Zionists. But such anger won't be quieted by asserting that Islamism itself is an American or Zionist plot. Rather, this incident shows the strength of Islamist appeals overriding nationalist impulses in contemporary Arab politics This event also once again demonstrates the horrifyingly powerful extremist impulses among the Arab, Muslim, Palestinian masses, just as one sees such sentiments in strong popular support for terrorism and rejection of compromises or of a permanent peace with Israel and two-state solution. This is the kind of attitude easily whipped up by rumors and ranters to produce anti-Christian pogroms in places like Pakistan, Iraq, and Egypt. . Of course, many Palestinians do support Abbas, and some are genuinely moderate. Yet it is hard for such people to stand against the energetic ferocity of the radicals, their willingness to use violence, and their manipulation of religious sentiments. Incipient fanaticism, once harnessed, has a tidal wave power. Arab regimes know this well. They don't try to counter it with liberal reform but either with ferocious repression or try to harness this energy for their own causes. Regimes often endeavor to save themselves by diverting such forces against non-Muslims, meaning the West in general or often-as in the PA's case here-against Israel. It is easy to find parallels with this story in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Iraq and Saudi Arabia, and so on throughout most of the Arabic-speaking and Muslim majority areas. This is what the innocent and naïve West is up against but doesn't want to face. Instead, while this has virtually never happened, much of the elite views its own majority citizenry as fanatics on the verge of being incited into Islamophobic mobs. 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).
His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof.
Rubin's columns can now be read online at
http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at
profbarryrubin@yahoo.com This article is archived at |
|
A ROAD IN JERUSALEM FROM 1,500 YEARS AGO IS EXPOSED
Posted by CPocerl, February 12, 2010. |
|
This comes from the February 10, 2010 Atlas Shrugged
|
|
Before there even was a Muhammad,
An IAA Archaeological Excavation in the Heart of the Old City Confirms a Description on an Ancient Map: For the First Time the Main Road of Jerusalem, from 1,500 Years Ago, is Exposed The excavations are being carried out at the initiation of the Jerusalem Development Authority, prior to rehabilitating the infrastructure Madaba Map — an ancient mosaic map in a church in Jordan from the sixth-seventh century CE, which depicted the Land of Israel in the Byzantine period, explicitly showed: the entrance to Jerusalem from the west was via a very large gate that led to a single, central thoroughfare on that side of the city. Various evidence of the important buildings in Jerusalem that appear on the map has been uncovered over the years or has survived to this day — for example the Church of the Holy Sepulcher — but the large bustling street from the period when Jerusalem became a Christian city has not been discovered until now. The reason for this is that no archaeological excavations took place in the region due to the inconvenience it would cause in stopping traffic in such a busy central location. Now, because of the need for a thorough treatment of the infrastructure in the region, the Jerusalem Development Authority has initiated rehabilitation work and is renewing the infrastructure in this area in general, and next to the entrance to David Street (known to tourists as the stepped-street with the shops) in particular. Thus it is possible for both archaeologists and the public to catch a rare glimpse of what is going on beneath the flagstone pavement that is so familiar to us all. From his knowledge of the Madaba Map, Dr. Ofer Sion, excavation director on behalf of the Israel Antiquities Authority, surmised that the place where the infrastructure will be replaced is where a main road passes that is known from the map. "And indeed, after removing a number of archaeological strata, at a depth of c. 4.5 m below today's street level, much to our excitement we discovered the large flagstones that paved the street". The flagstones, more than a meter long, were found cracked from the burden of centuries. A foundation built of stone was unearthed alongside the street on which a sidewalk and a row of columns, which have not yet been revealed, were founded. According to Dr. Sion, "It is wonderful to see that David Street, which is teeming with so much life today, actually preserved the route of the noisy street from 1,500 years ago". During the Middle Ages a very large building that faced the street was constructed on the stone foundation of the Byzantine period. In a later phase, during the Mamluk period (thirteenth-fourteenth centuries CE) elongated rooms were built inside this structure, some of which are vaulted; these were apparently used as shops and storerooms. It turns out that beneath this building — right below the street that runs between David's Citadel and David Street and leads to the Armenian Quarter — is an enormous cistern, 8 x 12 meters and 5 meters deep, which supplied water to its occupants. ' 1. Remains of the 1,500 year old street. Photograph: Assaf Peretz, courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority. 2. The cistern that was exposed below the street, between David's Citadel and David Street. Photograph: Assaf Peretz, courtesy of the Israel Antiquities Authority. 3. The region of Jerusalem as it appears on the Madaba Map (both sides of the street are marked in red).
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
EMBRACE ISLAM, OR LOSE YOUR JOB
Posted by CPocerl, February 12, 2010. |
|
This is an item from Strategy Page
|
|
February 12, 2010: Islamic terrorism comes in many different forms. Christian Filipino workers in Saudi Arabia are complaining that their employers are threatening to fire them if they do not convert to Islam. It's against the law for a Moslem in Saudi Arabia to convert to another religion. The punishment is death, and anyone attempting to convert Moslems is subject to the death penalty. This sort of double standard, and use of coercion, is a big deal in the Philippines, although the government there, and in Saudi Arabia, try to play down this particular problem. There are about 200,000 Filipinos working in Saudi Arabia, and 600,000 throughout the Persian Gulf. The forced conversions are not widespread, yet. But several hundred are believed to have occurred, and the idea is catching on with employers who are conservative Moslems. This sort of thing is political dynamite back in the Philippines because there, the Moslems are a minority, and a troublesome one at that. Various Moslem separatist groups have been fighting since the 1960s, and over 100,000 (mostly Moslems) have died. The fighting in the south is not only rebels versus the government, but also the many clan and political feuds that are common down there. The Moslem south is more violent than the rest of the country. And then there is the matter of proportion. Only about ten percent of the 92 million Filipinos are Moslem. The Christians dominate the government and the security forces. Peace negotiations with Moslem separatist groups (mainly the MILF) in the south are currently stalled because of frictions within the Moslem community. Some factions want to work out a peace deal, but others want to keep fighting for a separate Moslem state on part of Mindanao island (the southernmost large island). The problem is, Moslems are only about a third of 22 million people on Mindanao island (the "Moslem" island). The rest are Christians, who do not want to share the island with an independent, or even autonomous, Moslem state. This is especially the case when they hear about forced conversions in Saudi Arabia. Moreover, most of the Moslem population is intermixed with Christians, and the most radical Moslems want the Christians expelled. Thus the haggling is mainly over real estate. The Moslems in the south still claim "ancestral rights" (to administer, and collect taxes from) many areas that have become largely Christian in the past few decades. The Christian majority has been encroaching, on the sparsely populated areas of the Moslem south, for over a century. But this movement has accelerated as the economy has improved in the last decade. Many Moslems see their culture threatened, but armed resistance has not done much to help. The Moslems are very outnumbered, and have been losing battles for decades. Remittances from the nine percent of Filipinos who work overseas and send money home are a crucial part of the national economy. In effect, over 20 percent of the workforce works abroad, sending home money that amounts to about ten percent of GDP. Filipinos are very popular overseas workers (because of their energy, skills and ability to speak English). There are no jobs at home for all this talent because of the corruption (the Philippines is among the ten most corrupt nations, out of 180 surveyed regularly) that stifles economic growth. The Moslem south is arguably suffering more from corruption than the rest of the Philippines, and the Christians down there don't want forced conversions thrown into an already very explosive mixture. Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
OFFICERS DISCIPLINED FOR FT. HOOD MASSACRE; NEW EVIDENCE OF GOLDSTONE BIAS; EXPOSE OF NEW ISRAEL FUND
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 12, 2010. |
|
U.S. OFFICERS DISCIPLINED OVER FT. HOOD MASSACRE 
The U.S. Army has found six officers guilty of negligence that let Major Hassan stay in the service long enough to massacre people at Ft. Hood. The six failed to act on Hassan's signs of brooding trouble. Some of them were too focused on their professional work to supervise carefully. An Army attorney thought the Army was singling out a few individuals, as usual (Yochi J. Dreazen, Wall St. Journal, 2/11, A6). I have observed the tendency to find scapegoats intensifying in American society. First the society sets a dangerous climate or lack of criteria. Then when problems result, society blames the individuals nearest the outbreak and not the cause. One minute, certain behavior or standards are condoned, the next minute someone is punished for doing what had been condoned. Every week the media seem to have a case of righteous indignation against someone who, now in hindsight, is accused of failing to take precautions. Think of the economic crash. I think the climate in this case was one of political correctness and reluctance to accuse a Muslim and therefore become accused of profiling. Although there were earlier attacks by jihadist troops against other troops, the U.S. military's top levels apparently neglected to set appropriate standards. Our President and much of our media do not even use the word, "terrorist," to describe jihadists. They won't identify the enemy. Our Presidents appoint some Radical Muslims to sensitive posts. Pretending the enemy is not the enemy, they become enablers of jihad.
NEW EVIDENCE OF GOLDSTONE BIAS The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs has just revealed new evidence about the UN Goldstone report. Goldstone's mission had four members, only one having had military experience. That one was Desmond Traversq, a colonel retired from the Irish Defense Forces. He did most of the report's military assessment that led to condemning Israel for war crimes. Travers' methodology was not much reviewed. A review of it and interviews of him show bias and falsity. 1. A Fundamental Bias against the Israel Defense Forces "During the Mission's collection of testimonies from Palestinian psychologists in the Gaza Strip, Travers asked them straight out to explain how Israeli soldiers could kill Palestinian children in front of their parents. In an interview with Middle East Monitor, on February 2, 2010, he asserted that in the past Israeli soldiers had "taken out and deliberately shot" Irish peacekeeping forces in Southern Lebanon. Both of these statements by Travers are completely false. It should be stressed that one of the most vicious and unsubstantiated conclusions in the Goldstone Report is the suggestion that Israel deliberately killed Palestinian civilians." Unsubstantiated accusations of murder! "When he was asked about Hamas intimidation that affected the Mission's inquiries, he replied that that there was 'none whatsoever.' Yet the Goldstone Report itself noted in Paragraph 440 that those interviewed in Gaza appeared reluctant to speak about the presence of Palestinian armed groups because of a 'fear of reprisals.' He rejects the notion that Hamas shielded its forces in the civilian population and does not accept the idea that Israel faced asymmetric warfare." 2. False Information Reported About Weapons Systems Travers claimed "that the IDF had unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV's) that could obtain a "thermal signature" on a Gaza house and detect that there were large numbers of people inside. Incredibly, he then suggests that with this information that certain houses were 'packed with people' the Israeli military would then deliberately order a missile strike on these populated homes. The primary technical problem with his theory is that Israel does not have UAV's that can see though houses and pick up a thermal signature. More importantly, Israel used UAV's to monitor that Palestinian civilians left houses that had received multiple warnings, precisely because Israel sought to minimize civilian casualties." Travers omitted that policy from the report. [Israel telephoned warnings to civilians to evacuate and not be killed. Isn't that what Israel's critics want?] 3. Completely Inaccurate Data Travers denies that Israel began military operations in Gaza Strip on December 28, in self-defense, to stop Hamas from firing more rockets. What is his basis? He asserts "...that in the month prior to start of the war, there were only 'something like two' rockets that fell on Israel. Israeli military sources found that there were in fact 32 rockets fired from Gaza at Israel over three days alone — between December 16 and 18, 2008. He adds to his analysis that at this time Hamas sought to extend the tahdiya, or lull arrangement — which he called a cease-fire. Yet the Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades of Hamas announced on December 17 that the lull would come to an end two days later and would not be renewed. The head of the Hamas political bureau in Damascus, Khaled Mashaal, announced the end of the lull on December 14. To say that Hamas wanted to continue the lull is a complete distortion of events." [A lull is not a ceasefire, and Hamas broke its ceasefires. In any case, after years of enduring rockets, and finding no end of them, Israel finally tried to stop them. That is self-defense.] "In his Middle East Monitor interview, Travers states that he 'only came across two incidents of where there was an actual combat situation' — the exchange of fire between Israel and Hamas. Because he minimizes the possibility that Israel was engaged in real combat in the Gaza Strip, it follows that he naturally concluded that Israel was essentially attacking non-combatants during Operation Cast Lead." 4. Lack of Professionalism in Conducting Thorough Investigations "In his questioning of Palestinian witnesses in the Gaza Strip, Travers does not ask the questions that a military adviser should raise. He did not ask those giving testimony if they were member of the Izz al-Din al-Qassam units of Hamas and were combatants. He also failed to ask them straight out if their homes had been used to store munitions, like Grad rockets." Did Hamas turn mosques into forts and weapons depots? In a 10/29/09 interview with Harpers, Travers said, "We found no evidence that mosques were used to store munitions." He accused Westerners who disagree of assuming that Islam is a violent religion. [Argument, not evidence.] But his Mission checked only two mosques! Israel had evidence. "Israel produced photographic proof that large amounts of weapons were stored in mosques, like the Zaytun Mosque. How did Travers treat the Israeli proof that contradicted his conclusions from insufficient investigation? "I do not believe the photographs," they must be "spurious." "In early 2010, Colonel Tim Collins, a British veteran of the Iraq
War, visited Gaza for BBC Newsnight Recently "...addressing the role of British officers in defending Israel's claims, Travers suddenly adds: "Britain's foreign policy interests in the Middle East seem to be influenced strongly by Jewish lobbyists." Travers implies that British Jews have interests that differ from Britain's own national interests and that Prime Minister Gordon Brown's government is influenced by these considerations. This statement, unless corrected, places Travers in a position in which his views are suspect of being motivated by anti-Semitic prejudices. Even without this last statement, he clearly emerges as an individual who is not qualified to take part in any serious fact-finding mission and the U.N. should not seek his services in the future. Given his statements, Justice Richard Goldstone should repudiate Col. Travers and completely reject the conclusions that he reached as a result of his work (www.imra.org.il, 2/10). The recommendation might have cited the decades of Britain's anti-Zionist policy. The final suggestion assumes that Goldstone is less biased than Travers. Did you notice that Travers made false assertions and accused without evidence? The UN Goldstone Report has been thoroughly debunked. It has no substance. IDF reports do have substance. Anyone who cares about facts and logic would conclude that Israel did not commit war crimes in Gaza. But many people do not care about facts and logic. The seize upon any biased source of accusations against Israel to confirm their prejudice against Israel. YESHIVA STUDENTS JOIN CIVIL DEFENSE Israeli civil defense is short-staffed. Government officials and 30 Hesder Yeshivas, which train religious Jewish youth in basic training, reached an agreement. During a national emergency, youth not yet inducted would assist in civil defense. Yeshiva youth already have become known for volunteer work. During the war in Gaza, "hundreds of students volunteered to help Israelis living in the southern areas. Once the ground offensive began, these students effectively were part of the civil defense operations. They opened new bomb shelters, repaired existing shelters, occupied those in the shelters with different activities, accompanied children to school and outings, and did whatever else was needed." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/11).
P.A. CONDEMNS AND CONDONES MURDER OF ISRAELI Palestinian Authority (P.A.) policeman in murdered an Israeli soldier from an Arab-Druse village. P.A. Prime Min. Fayyad condemned the murder, because it was liable to get the P.A. involved in a military conflict now that would damage P.A. interests. Dr. Aaron Lerner of IMRA notes that the condemnation is for practical reasons, not for ethical ones. "This of course raises the obvious question: If the reason it is wrong to murder Israelis on 10 February 2010 is that it doesn't serve Palestinian interests and not that it is simply wrong to murder Israelis then what happens if on 10 March 2010 circumstances are such that it does serve Palestinian interests to murder Israelis?" "If Prime Minister Dr. Salam Fayad recognizes that Oslo commits the Palestinians not to engage in violence, then why is he insisting that Palestinians now serving time in Israeli prisons for violence carried out after Oslo be freed?" (www.imra.org.il, 2/11). The last question makes sense, but does Fayad recognize the commitment or do the Palestinian Arabs sign agreements without considering themselves bound by them? In any case, they violate them all. Note that the P.A. condemned the murder but not the murderer. This is typical. Why does terrorism not serve the P.A. interest now? Because now the diplomatic process may achieve safely some P.A. war aims, and this diplomatic process would be delayed by another war and by terrorism that might persuade Israelis that negotiation is hopeless. P.S.: Most of the terrorist murders of Israelis in the past few years have been carried out by P.A. police. Their leaders defame Israel so much, that these policemen take action (Haaretz in www.imra.org.il, 2/11).
EXPOSE OF NEW ISRAEL FUND DIVERTED 
How has the New Israel Fund (NIF) responded to criticism that it finances organizations calling for the eradication of the Jewish state? It employs the usual leftist tactic of smearing its critics as "fascists." Unfortunately, many critics of NIF are concentrating on the head of NIF. That is a mistake. It enables NIF and its supporters to divert the debate from "the fund's subversive goal (a 'new Israel,' not Jewish or Zionist." How has NIF fostered subversion of Israel? By "...donating more than $200 million thus far to hundreds of anti-Zionist organizations (Israel Harel of Haaretz, who claims to have a list of those anti-Zionist beneficiaries. E-mail from (www.imra.org.il, 2/11). The head of the organization may resign, but the ideology of the organization would remain, unless the subversion were eliminated. Another diversion from the critical issue citing NIF donations to good causes, such as women's shelters. Individuals could contribute to non-subversive charities. REFORMS PROPOSED FOR NEW ISRAEL FUND Many people contribute to New Israel Fund (NIF) without knowing of its subsidies for subversive organizations. Gerald Steinberg, head of NGO Monitor, proposes that New Israel Fund reform its award process and make the new rules and their implementation "unequivocal and transparent." He suggested that NIF not subsidize NGOs that support: 1. BDS: Boycotts, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaigns. "For an organization that claims that 'our supporters love Israel,' these red lines should be self-evident,' said Steinberg. He said that NIF has shown no interest in discussing reform (www.imra.org.il, 2/11). I do not believe that NIF is unaware of its beneficiaries' subversion. NIF must have a similar ideology to its beneficiaries'. Therefore, it is not likely to reform genuinely or permanently. But subsidizing organizations contradicting its stated goals smacks of fraud. Shouldn't U.S. prosecutors investigate and Israel bar its activities?
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 and visit his website:
|
|
REOPENING TZIR TZION — ZION ROAD -> ARAB ATTACKER SHOT BY IDF IN HEBRON
Posted by David Wilder, February 12, 2010. |
|
How many times do we need to repeat easing life for Palestinian arabs? The outcome doesn't change. |
|
A year ago I produced short movie [http://goo.gl/e3v2] concerning Tzir Tzion — Zion Road, which leads from North of Kiryat Arba, past the western gate of the Kirya, down into Hebron. It's the only access road into the 'Jewish area' of Hebron. It is very interesting that Israeli military officers, responsible for security of Jews, are more concerned about 'easing the lives of palestinians' than they are in providing security for Jews. Years ago the road was closed to Arab vehicular traffic following two terrorist attacks on the same day, leaving David Cohen and Hezzi Mualem dead, killed by Arab terrorists on that street. About a year ago the military commander in the area, Col Udi Bar Mocha told us of his decision to reopen the road to Arab traffic. He promised that only automobiles of Arabs living along that route would receive permits to travel on the road and that the drivers and others would undergo security checks. When Hebron leaders predicted that within a fairly short period of time the road would be opened to general Arab traffic we were promised and guaranteed that this would never happen. Such was promised to the select Knesset Foreign Affairs and Security Committee, which also investigated the affair. The reason for the commander's reopening of the road: 'easing of palestinian lives' in Hebron. Our argument, opposing the opening was simple. First, any time roads are reopened to Arabs, or roadblocks are lifted, Jews are killed. Two, our experience has taught us, too many times, once concessions begin, stage two is only a matter of time. Despite our massive attempts to prevent Tzir Tzion's opening to Arab, a half a year ago it was opened [http://goo.gl/7CTl] [http://goo.gl/Gf4r]. Lo and behold, about two months ago we were informed that Tzir Tzion, the Zion Road, was to be opened to Arab public transportation, buses and taxis. Following several conversations with military officers in the area we were promised that this new plan would not be implemented until we were able to meet with high-ranking military commanders in charge of Judea and Samaria. Immediately we requested such meetings with various officers. Time and time again our requests were rebuffed. More often than not, the requests were ignored. A few days ago we received notification that on Thursday the road would be open to Arab public transportation. Following urgent consultations Hebron leaders received guarantees from the highest political echelons that the road would not be opened, certainly not on Thursday. However, yesterday, at six in the morning, Col Ben Mocha received an official permit allowing Arab public transportation on the road. The first stage was designed to be a 'pilot,' a one-day trial period, during which a limited amount of vehicles would be allowed on the street. And so it was, yesterday. Presently we expect that in the near future, we expect local and national military officers, together with political figures in the defense ministry, to decide whether or not to permanently reopen the road to further Arab traffic. Clearly, the military recommendation will be in favor. Why? In their own words, 'to ease Palestinian lives' in the area. It is very interesting that Israeli military officers, responsible for security of Jews, are more concerned about 'easing the lives of palestinians' than they are in providing security for Jews. They contend that the security situation now allows such 'risks. However, about two months ago, Rabbi Meir Chai was murdered by Arabs belonging to Abu Mazen's Fatah movement, 'moderate' Arabs, our 'peace partners. Two days ago an Israeli soldier was murdered by a 'palestinian police officer, again, belonging to 'the good guys,' the moderates. What can we expect in Hebron should the army continue to loosen their hold on the Arab population, a population which does not deny, for a moment, their goal of ridding Hebron of its Jewish community?! The next stage: Complete reopening of Tzir Tzion to all Arab traffic; to be followed by a reopening of King David Street, called by the Arabs 'Shuhada.' Such 'consideration' can and unfortunately will almost inevitably, lead to further tragedy, bloodshed, and lose of life. It is very difficult to comprehend their priorities: 'easing Arab life' or protecting Jewish lives? As I've finished writing, about to post, I received word that Arabs are throwing rocks at Beit Hadassah and the neighboring buildings. A neighbor called me and asked that I photograph the window in her son's room, just broken by a rock hurled by a nearby Arab. 
As a result of the massive rock-throwing, Israeli soldiers began
patrolling in the area of the Shallalot, from where the Arabs were
hurling the rocks. Arabs began throwing rocks also at the soldiers and
one of the terrorists ambushed them and attempted to stab a soldier.
As a result he was shot and critically injured with a bullet wound in
his stomach. Israeli forces evacuated him to a Jerusalem hospital.
David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron.
You can contribute directly in Israel to The Jewish Community of
Hebron, POB105, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, email: hebron@hebron.org.il
or phone: 972-52-431-7055. In USA, write to The Hebron Fund, 1760
Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, email: hebronfund@aol.com or phone:
718 677 6886.
|
|
"TORAH QUEERIES," ANYONE?
Posted by Steven Plaut, February 12, 2010. |
|
Ok, I know that most of you secretly suspect that I just make up these stories, since such people could not possibly REALLY exist in the actual planet. I mean, come on now, a Rabbi who is specialized in what he calls Torah Queeries. But even one as warped as I could not invent such a thing. Meet "Rabbi" Andrew Sacks, who produces one of the blogs carried on
the Jerusalem Post official web page. The good "Rabbi" has a piece
this week defending the New Israel Fund (whose name should be the No
Israel Fund) and demonizing those who criticize the New Israel Fund:
Sacks seems to run something called the National Center for Sexual
and Gender Diversity. Just what is "gender diversity?" My guess is
conjuring up genders beyond the standard boring old two. As part of
his work on behalf of those additional genders, he writes a column
called "Torah Queeries," which you are invited to see for yourself
here:
Numerous interesting questions arise from this. In the good
"Rabbi's" view, just which Bible characters described as women were
actual men dressed up in drag? For answers, see this:
More generally, as numbed as we all have become to the inanity of the PC moonbatocracy, even the most tolerant amongst us must find the Left's infatuation with drag queens and "transgendered" freaks to be incomprehensible. There are now countless groups from the Left, a few from the Jewish community, promoting public funding of "trans-sexual" operations, whereby a man or woman is surgically altered to be able to pretend to be a member of one of those other genders. Now let us ponder this mystery. If someone were to enter a doctor's office and ask to have his pinkie finger cut off for no pressing medical reason, he would be sent for hospitalization in a psych ward. The entire world regards Vincent Van Gogh as clinically nuts because he cut off his ear. The world is outraged by the "female circumcisions" practiced in some of the darker parts of the Third World. But the PC fruit loops and their groupies in the "Masorti" movement seriously want us to believe that a man asking a doctor to slice off his dingdong is normal, seeking to fulfill his alternative gender identity. Ditto for male-wannbes within the female body-imprisoned. Frankly I favor a law that would jail any MD carrying out such a "surgery" for malicious assault and maiming of the patient, whether or not the patient presses charges. Those suggesting that such maiming should not only be legal but publicly financed should themselves be confined in a nice funny farm. You can see the other critters of various genders who are involved
in this "Jewish community" atrocity here: Meanwhile, the Masorti movement likes to complain about being regarded as illegitimate in Israel, but as long as it turns out fruit loops like this Sacks, it has only itself to blame. 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. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
MORE DETAINEES SEEKING HIGHER EDUCATION
Posted by Israel Academia Monitor, February 12, 2010. |
|
This was published February 3, 2010 by Saed Ban noura for IMEMC News. |
|
The Palestinian Prisoner Society (PPS) reported that more Palestinian detainees, imprisoned at the Ramon Israeli prison, are joining the Hebrew Open University. The detainees are also holding seminars and educational sessions. The PPS stated that nearly 100 detainees are currently studying at the open university while three detainees managed to obtain masters degrees despite harsh conditions and ongoing violations by the army. The PPS added 56 additional detainees participated in different courses and seminars held in the prison in the last two months. The seminars are political and education in nature. Jamal Rajoub, representative of the detainees in Ramon prison, stated that detained leaders are encouraging the detainees to read, and to join the open university. Last month, the detainees held four seminars aiming at increasing awareness among the detainees. There are several detainees who have received higher degrees, including doctorate degrees, while imprisoned by Israel. The PPS stated that there are nearly 8500 detainees imprisoned by Israel in several detention and interrogation centers. Contact Israel Academia Monitor at e-mail@israel-academia-monitor.com |
|
ISRAEL'S COMPLEXION
Posted by Paul Eidelberg, February 11, 2010. |
|
With due respect I must point out that "right-minded" critics of Israel's government are only on the surface of the surface. The trouble is that Israel has long been governed by prime ministers who are simply unequal to the challenges and enemies facing this country. They lack wisdom and intellectual integrity or courage. If proof is needed, Israel's reputedly most articulate (and American educated) Prime Minister not only endorsed the "two-state" non-solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, but is terribly anxious to resume negotiations with the PLO-Palestinian Authority — Arabs who have made one Israeli Prime Minister after another look like a jackasses. After all these years of flawed prime ministers, surely it should have occurred to some intelligent observers that all of these PMs — including Menachem Begin — lacked — TO BEGIN WITH — not only a serious Torah education, but a Torah education enriched by a rigorous science, such as physics, mathematics, or astronomy. That Israeli Prime Ministers have been no match to Arab villains is quite a commentary on the inferior nature of Israeli education — unless you're looking for a new cell phone. (That Livni could win one more seat than Netanyahu in Israeli's 2009 election almost compares with Obama's victory over McCain.) Folks, Israel can only go down, down, down with secular prime ministers; and religious ones won't do unless they have internalized the confluence of Torah and science, where the one enlarges the scope and insights of the other. It's not enough to retire Netanyahu to the political wilderness. What needs to be done is to find and rally behind a man whose stamina is inspired by the confluence of science and Torah. The essay below was written by Alex Klein It was distributed by Emanuel A. Winston. |
|
Israel's leadership set itself up for being pilloried by those who wish to seek the destruction of the Jewish people under the guise of "human rights". The Nazis also spoke in favor of "human rights", they simply defined Jews as not being human. Israel's leadership failed to use adequate force to defeat the enemy in Gaza. A war involves killing lots of people. They then realize it is not worthwhile to continue to fight. A war guided by Miss Manners, simply endangers your own soldiers while failing to achieve the desired objectives. By Israel absurdly trying to show a world [that will hate them no matter what they do], that they are being oh-so careful not hurt "civilians", only encourages this same anti-Semitic world to cry "foul" for any perceived or imagined lack of etiquette that may have been inadvertently displayed. Tsk. Tsk. Seeing that Israel was acting in a self-conscious fashion — kind of like a teen-age girl with her first pimple — they are now teasing Israel mercilessly with all sorts of claims of "human rights abuses". What was Israel supposed to do? Drop bundles of carnations on the Hamas Terrorists who fired thousands of missiles at Israel? And — who are these "civilians"? They're same ones who voted in Hamas in the first place — and who knew exactly what Hamas planned to do against Israel. Are these the same "civilians" who dress up their babies as suicide bombers and serve a "human shields" for the Terrorists to hide behind? In the next war Israel simply needs to notify all residents in the Gaza Strip [or Lebanon for that matter] to leave their homes within 24 hours. The IDF (Israel Defense Forces) will then level every "built-up" area where the Terrorists like to hide. Then everyone will be safely out of harm's way, hence no "human-rights" problems. Then the Europeans, in concert with the wealthy Arab states can then re-build Gaza — until Israel is forced to do it again. Or until the Muslim Arab Hamas learn that it is NOT worthwhile to fire missiles at Israel. Professor Paul Eidelberg is an Internationally known political scientist, author and lecturer. He is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy, a Jerusalem-based think tank for improving Israel's system of governance. Contact him at pauleid@netvision.net.il |
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: SPRING WILDFLOWERS
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, February 11, 2010. |
|
This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. HOW I GOT THE SHOT: The curtain is rising on spring in Israel as the landscape emerges from its winter watering to a drama of color that becomes an event for many Israelis. While wildflower viewing is certainly a feast for the eyes, Israelis also consider the spectacle with a deep appreciation for the miracle of God's handiwork. Someone wrote to me recently that Israel is a small country with a big attitude. That's certainly true, and nowhere is that attitude more evident than in our pride and affection for the country's natural beauty. This week's photo was captured courtesy of a hot tip from a friend whose home overlooks this vineyard. Like all landscape photos, the effort lay in scouting the location and arriving at the proper time of day, in this case, moments before the first rays of morning sunlight struck the land. There is a softness to this first light that often lasts only a couple of minutes but which makes all the difference in producing the ethereal quality of the image. These pink wildflowers, the Egyptian Campion, grow in several regions of the country, including the Judean Mountains south of Jerusalem, where this photo was taken.. I composed the picture using two guideposts. First, I wanted to stagger the vines in a way that leads the eye from the front to the rear of the photo. Secondly, I included some trees and background to give additional context to photo's setting. For an excellent resource on Israeli wildflowers, including a comprehensive library of photos sortable by flower color plus interesting history and trivia, visit www.flowersinisrael.com.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com
and visit his website:
|
|
OBAMA'S U.N. STATE OF MIND
Posted by Eye on the UN, February 11, 2010. |
|
This article was written by Anne Bayefsky and it originally appeared
in National Review Online
Anne Bayefsky is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and executive director of Human Rights Voices. The ideology that is shaping U.S. national-security policy |
|
The Obama administration and top White House counterterrorism adviser John Brennan are casting around for scapegoats after botching the treatment of al-Qaeda bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. But their decision to treat him not as an enemy combatant but to accord him American constitutional rights, as well as their plan to entitle Osama bin Laden henchman Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to his day(s) in a New York City court, were well-scripted. American counterterrorism moves are in lockstep with proclivities at the United Nations and are being duly executed by handpicked officials who have long expressed the same ideology. The idea of finding inspiration for U.S. national-security policy by looking to the U.N. is a troubling development. The world body still cannot even agree on a definition of terrorism. Islamic states continue to insist, in the words of the Islamic Terrorism Convention, that any "struggle" in the name of "liberation" is exempt. This means that at the U.N., identifying an enemy, let alone an enemy combatant, is virtually impossible. On Dec. 17, 2009, just a week before the al-Qaeda Christmas bomber almost succeeded in killing 289 people, administration officials teamed up with U.N. operators to create the new U.N. post of "Delisting Ombudsperson." This individual will be charged with helping suspected persons or groups remove themselves from a sanctions list, initiated in 1999, of Taliban and al-Qaeda members. Though there are undoubtedly thousands and thousands of al-Qaeda and Taliban forces, the list currently contains a grand total of 501 names. The U.N.'s priority? Improving the process of getting off, or staying off, the list. While Western democracies have been kept on the defensive, the states that sponsor, harbor, finance, and otherwise encourage terrorists have been on the offensive. Since 2003, the U.N. Human Rights Commission and its successor, the Human Rights Council, as well as the General Assembly, have adopted annual resolutions entitled "on the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms while countering terrorism." Countering terrorsism, from the U.N.'s perspective, is set against protecting human rights. In 2005, these annual resolutions spawned the appointment of a "special rapporteur on the promotion and protection of human rights ... while countering terrorism." He has the job of writing reports about what's wrong with efforts to counter terrorism. In 2007, for instance, Rapporteur Martin Scheinin reported to the U.N.: "[T]he international fight against terrorism is not a 'war' in the true sense of the word. ... [T]he categorization of detainees as 'unlawful enemy combatants' is a term ... without legal effect." He also urged the closure of Guantanamo Bay and promoted the use of "ordinary courts to try ... offences ... such as conspiracy and terrorism." The chief U.N. body charged with addressing terrorism, created shortly after 9/11, is deceptively labeled the Counter-Terrorism Committee (CTC). It is composed of Security Council members donning a different hat. To this day, the CTC has never managed to name a single terrorist, terrorist organization, or state sponsor of terrorism. In September 2006, the General Assembly adopted its anti-terrorism roadmap — the "global counter-terrorism strategy." The very first part of the report worries about the poor terrorist. It is called "Measures to address the conditions conducive to the spread of terrorism," and it lists items such as "poverty, and socio-economic marginalization" as well as "youth unemployment." U.N. members promise to "reduce marginalization and the subsequent sense of victimization that propels extremism and the recruitment of terrorists." U.N. members could not agree on who was a victim of terrorism, but they could agree that alleged terrorists are victims. The U.S.-U.N. two-step began on day three of the Obama administration. On Jan. 22, 2009, as a U.N. press release announced, "U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay welcomed Thursday's decision by the new U.S. administration to close the detention facility in Guantanamo Bay." Pillay declared that "those suspected of crimes are entitled to an expeditious and fair trial before the regular courts." On June 24, 2009, she continued: "There is still much to do before the Guantanamo chapter is truly brought to a close. Its remaining inmates must either be tried before a court of law like any other suspected criminal or set free." On Aug. 25, 2009, after Attorney General Eric Holder tapped a special prosecutor to investigate CIA interrogation practices at Guantanamo and elsewhere, Pillay said, "I warmly welcome this responsible decision by the U.S. government to open a preliminary investigation." With Obama in the White House, U.N. agents are doing more than directing traffic from the diplomatic lounge at Turtle Bay. On Feb. 24, 2009, the U.N.'s special rapporteur on torture, Manfred Nowak, had "several meetings" with State Department officials and some members of Congress "to discuss the latest developments relating to the closure of the Guantánamo Bay detention facilities." Nowak told the U.N. Human Rights Council on March 10, 2009: "I am happy to say that, whereas the previous United States administration ... made only half-hearted efforts to follow our recommendations ... the new administration has markedly changed the policy. ... When I recently informally met with representatives of the administration in Washington, they reassured me that all the 241 detainees remaining in the Guantanamo facilities would be subjected to a review aimed at either bringing them to justice before criminal courts in the United States, voluntarily repatriating them to their countries of origin, or resettling them in third countries." Lo and behold, on March 13, 2009, the Justice Department announced a new policy on dealing with terrorists that would "not employ the phrase 'enemy combatant.'" At the same time, Obama policymakers have been selected for their positions precisely because of a shared credo with U.N. officials. State Department legal adviser Harold Koh testified against confirming Alberto Gonzales as attorney general back in 2005. During his testimony, Koh spoke disparagingly about "so-called 'enemy combatants'" and told the senators that al-Qaeda members "are not POWs, and they should then be treated as common criminals and prosecuted." The Obama administration's hand-in-glove approach with the U.N. on handling terrorism did not materialize 50 minutes after Abdulmutallab started talking. It runs deep. To contact Eye on the UN, send an email to list@eyeontheun.org |
|
CRISIS PLAN: PRE-COMBAT HESDER STUDENTS TO MAN CIVIL DEFENSE
Posted by Rachel Sylvetsky, February 11, 2010. |
|
The Civil Defense Command and Hesder Yeshiva heads have reached an agreement in which those students who are studying at the various hesder yeshivas during the Torah learning period prior to basic training, will take on civil defense roles in the event of a national crisis. Students who have already completed army training will in all probability be called up to their units in that event, and are not included in the plan. The Association of Hesder Yeshivas will work with the Civil Defense Corps to create a list of volunteers consisting of hundreds of these students who will work within population centers in case of need. Eitan Ozeri, general manager of the Association, said: "We are proud to take part in helping Israel's citizens during emergencies." A week ago, there was a meeting of Civil Defense personnel and those in charge of volunteer projects for Hesder students, at which the idea of utilizing the period before Hesder students are assigned specific army units was raised. Over 30 yeshivas sent representatives to the meeting and agreed to the plan in case of all-out war, natural disasters, large IDF operations, and similar national emergencies. The number of Civil Defense soldiers cannot possibly meet the needs of Israel's citizens in these situations, the Civil Defense commanders stressed. They added that Hesder students are known for their volunteer work with all facets of Israeli society during their learning periods at the yeshivas. They complimented the students and expressed high hopes for the success of the program. Ozeri continued: "Hesder students are wonderful young men who are always ready to help others and have been doing it all along in many ways. This is another way they can be of help to Israeli society." Israel National News notes that during Operation Cast Lead, hundreds of students volunteered to help Israelis living in the southern areas. Once the ground offensive began, these students effectively were part of the civil defense operations. They opened new bomb shelters, repaired existing shelters, occupied those in the shelters with different activities, accompanied children to school and outings, and did whatever else was needed. Rachel Sylvetsky writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
IRAN KNOWS WHERE US BASES/MISSILES ARE; HOW POLICE TREAT ARABS
AND JEWS IN JUDEA-SAMARIA; ARABS ATTACK U.S. CHRISTIANS IN
JUDEA-SAMARIA
Poste d by Richard H. Shulman, February 11, 2010. |
|
IRAN KNOWS WHERE U.S. BASES AND MISSILES ARE Iran declared that it knows the location of regional U.S. bases and missiles (www.imra.org.il, 2/9). This is a warning. It means that the U.S. can expect a vigorous Iranian response to a U.S. attack. However, President Obama is not likely to initiate hostilities. The U.S. probably would not attack Iran unless it attacks another country the U.S. intends to help defend.
HOW POLICE TREAT ARABS AND JEWS IN JUDEA-SAMARIA How do Israeli police treat Arabs and Jews in Judea-Samaria? Here are two sets of circumstances to illustrate. According to Israeli law, Israeli police are supposed to notify people wanted for questioning, unless there is reason to believe they would be resisted. Police are prohibited from damaging cameras that other people use to photograph arrests. An Arab complained to police that certain Jews in Samaria had beaten him up. Police did not summon those suspects for questioning. They applied for an arrest warrant, but were denied. Denial is rare, indicating a poor case for warrant if not for arrest. They got a warrant, anyway, by appealing to a higher court. About a hundred special police arrived at the homes of the suspects in the middle of the night, five weeks after the alleged beating, and broke in. The made seven suspects, including a minor, get out of bed but also woke up other people, asking for I.D.. A resident filmed the action, but a police officer broke his camera. Only upon reaching the police station were the detainees informed of the charge, which all denied. Most of them soon were released. "This is just another very grave incident that is part of the known strategy of the Jewish Department of the ISA and Assistant State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan's special Judea/Samaria law enforcement team to come down hard on the Jewish residents." [I reported on this official Israeli, anti-Jewish harassment policy several years ago.] A Knesset committeeman said that Nitzan admitted that his team is biased against the Jews of Judea-Samaria. The committee suggested disbanding it. The detainees' lawyer said, "Yehuda Shimon continued: "We feel as if we're living in some kind of movie, with no basis in normal reality. We have had houses burnt down — two on Rosh HaShanah — and horses stolen, two women were stoned as they were walking here, a car was burnt — and all our complaints to the police are dismissed without any investigation. In the case of the houses, three Arabs were arrested and released, and that was the end of it. Yet here, on a five-week old charge by one man, they go to this extreme to investigate us. There is clearly a policy from somewhere in the higher echelons to persecute the Jews of this area." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/10). Nitzan's mission derives from a formerly secret policy of prejudiced harassment.
The policy encourages Arabs to file false charges against Jews. This exacerbates inter-communal strife.
ARABS ATTACK U.S. CHRISTIANS IN JUDEA-SAMARIA Five American Christian Evangelists had volunteered to help in a harvest in the Jewish town of Har Brachah in Samaria. Arabs from the nearby village of Irak Burin threw rocks at them, injuring them lightly. A security guard headed off the attack by firing a warning shot into the air. The Arabs dispersed. One of them complained to police that he had been shot in the shoulder. Police investigated the security guard (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/10). What has this story in common with many others? Arabs complain they were wounded by warning shots. Usually they are not. Why don't the police examine them, to see? What is missing from this story and from many others? Police investigate the Israeli security guard doing his duty, but not the Arabs committing crimes. Five American witnesses could have testified to the Arabs' misdeeds. Liberal Americans whom I know worry about the religious Right. They need not. The Right does not have an anti-American, anti-Israel program. Liberals should worry about the religious Left, which sides with totalitarians and tries to boycott their victims or cut off dissidents' freedom of speech. 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 and visit his website:
|
|
HATRED OF ISRAEL AND OF JEWS: WHY?
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 10, 2010. |
|
This was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg, an Internationally known political scientist, author and lecturer. He is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy, a Jerusalem-based think tank for improving Israel's system of governance. Contact him at pauleid@netvision.net.il |
|
In view of the hatred of Israel and of Jews raging abroad, even in liberal America, I felt obliged to republish an article I wrote on the subject in 2004. Ask almost any Jew, "Why Does the World Hate Israel?" and he will say: "Because Israel is a Jewish state." Wrong! The world hates Israel precisely because Israel is NOT a Jewish state! This is what we learn from the Sages. Israel-bashing is God's way of reminding Jews they are Jews. It's His way of admonishing Jews when they have strayed from the Torah, cluing them that they need to get their house in order — in this case, making their state Jewish. Let's face some seldom-faced facts. Without impugning the religious sentiments of one or two Israeli prime ministers — I have especially Menachem Begin in mind — every government of Israel, despite the participation of religious parties, has been dominated by agnostics or practical atheists. No government of Israel has pursued, as its paramount objective, the goal of making Israel a Torah-oriented state (which would require interfacing Torah with science). We live in an age of science, but nothing is less rational and less Jewish than the way Israel forms its government. With the Book of Books in mind, take a glance at Israel's governing institutions. Does the Torah prescribe a plural executive consisting of rival political parties? "There can be but one leader for a [people] and not two" (Deut. 31:7; and see Sanhedrin 8a). Does the Torah prescribe a legislature or a judiciary whose membership is based on whim and includes non-Jews? "Select for yourselves men who are wise, understanding, and known to your tribes and I will confirm them as your leaders" (Deut. 1:13). Institutions aside, who ever heard of a Torah-oriented government yielding Jewish land to a foreign entity, indeed, to a gang of terrorists? That's Oslo, concocted by a government diametrically opposed to a Jewish state. And who ever heard of deporting Jews from their homes as proposed by the government of Ariel Sharon? And you call this a Jewish state?! Do you know that the government of this so-called Jewish state has deliberately pursued a policy that allows Arab terrorists to murder an "acceptable" number of Jews? It's called the policy of "self-restraint" [embraced by Netanyahu in 1996 and by the same Netanyahu today]. To simplify matters, let us say that this policy was initiated by the government when the Oslo War erupted on September 29, 2000. But Oslo and the Oslo war and the resulting worldwide explosion of Jew-hatred would not have occurred if Israel were a Jewish state! Let's stay with Oslo for a moment. The explosion of anti-Semitism would not have occurred had the government immediately eliminated Arafat's Palestinian Authority (PA) and its terrorist network in one swift and devastating blow as it could and should have done once Oslo was violated. Do you know when Oslo was violated? How about September 14, 1993, the day after Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser shook hands on the White House lawn? Yes, and virtually every day since then! By not abrogating Oslo and destroying the PA, Israel's government enabled that terrorist organization to accumulate more and deadlier weapons, which obviously prolonged the war. Had the PA been utterly uprooted, there would have been no weekly video displays [abroad] of the government's intermittent retaliations against terrorist attacks, with the inevitable "collateral damage" that has inflamed worldwide anti-Semitism. There would have been no CNN and BBC coverage of "Operation Defensive Shield" in Jenin, for the PA would not have had the opportunity to develop bomb factories in that city. There would have been no incitement of Arabs via the Palestinian media because such media would have been shut down. All these (and other) violations of the Oslo Accords would not have occurred, and a generation of Arabs children would not have been brainwashed to emulate suicide bombers if Israel were in reality a Jewish state. Therein is the unknown but underlying cause of worldwide Israel-bashing. And this Israel-bashing is not going to stop so long as Israel is not a Jewish state. It's not going to stop so long as Israel has prime ministers who do not think and act like Torah-oriented Jews. I'm not talking about being "religious." The illustrious Rabbi Raphael Samson Hirsch has said that the word "religion" is the greatest obstacle to an understanding of Judaism. The great Maimonides and other Medieval Jewish philosophers did not regard Judaism as a "religion" but as an all-comprehensive truth-system, else they could not prefer Judaism over its "competitors" on rational grounds. Maimonides makes it clear in The Guide of the Perplexed that science is the only path to the knowledge of God. A Jewish state will of course have certain aspects that may be called "religious." But a truly Jewish state will manifest, above all, the convergence of Torah and science. When this convergence becomes a reality — when the Torah shines forth from Zion — then and then only will the world cease to hate Israel and turn with reverence toward Jerusalem. Post Script February 10, 2010 According to the Gaon (the genius) of Vilna, "To the extent that one lacks knowledge of the properties of the natural forces [hence of natural science], he will lack one hundred-fold in the wisdom of the Torah." (To understand even this sentence requires deep knowledge.) It has been said by one of his disciples that the Gaon mastered the "Seven Wisdoms" of science that included mathematics, astronomy, physics, chemistry, engineering, pharmacology and medicine, musicology, parapsychology, and the brain sciences. With the rebirth of Israel, we are approaching this confluence of knowledge. It is in this light that we are to understand the current storm of Jew-hatred and the frantic maledictions from Iran about wiping Israel off the map. Israel was created to relate God's praise (Isaiah 43:21) — His infinite wisdom, power, and graciousness in every domain of existence. But lo and behold: Israel, far from being a light unto the nations has become a black hole. No wonder we're hated by the nations. One Israeli government after another has been betraying God! Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
FOR A SAFE AND SECURE ISRAEL
Posted by Esther Levens, February 10, 2010. |
|
The very existence of the modern state of Israel is a miracle. And now it seems another miracle is needed to preserve the 2,000 year-old dream. What will we do during 2010 to counter almost insurmountable obstacles to assure Israel's continued existence? Prime Minister Netanyahu and all other Israelis need to continue to hear the loud and clear voices of Americans who support them and who worry about the self-defeating measures being imposed upon them (such as freezing the settlements, the two-state solution, and welcoming a hostile Palestinian terrorist state into their midst). Unacceptable anti-Israel, anti-Semitic rhetoric has become commonplace and fills the airways, reminiscent of the 1930s. World powers seem willing to sacrifice Israel to appease Iran, whose threats of nuclear genocide seem ready to be fulfilled. MAKE A DONATION AND GET AN "OBSESSION" DVD, AN AWARD WINNING DOCUMENTARY ON THE THREAT OF RADICAL ISLAM. Please make a donation at our secure PayPal portal or write a check payable to UCI and send to 3965 W. 83rd St., #292, Shawnee Mission, KS 66208. The inroads Islamists have made can be attributed to Saudi/Soros wealth along with successful left wing propaganda and PR campaigns. Their progress must be countered. UCI unites Americans, Israelis and other concerned citizens of the world and reveals the true picture in the Middle East. For 18 years during these hazardous times, the Unity Coalition for Israel has never been afraid to speak up and we will continue to do so. Now, more than ever, we need your financial support to continue the fight against the eradication of Israel, the spread of radical Islamic Jihad and impending establishment of a global caliphate intended to destroy all of western civilization. MAKE A DONATION AND GET AN "OBSESSION" DVD, AN AWARD WINNING DOCUMENTARY ON THE THREAT OF RADICAL ISLAM. Please make a donation at our secure PayPal portal or write a check payable to UCI and send to 3965 W. 83rd St., #292, Shawnee Mission, KS 66208. You will be helping UCI to meet this international challenge as we work on many fronts. We will continue to educate and activate many thousands of organizations and individuals, ever-broadening our outreach.
At this time of political and ideological upheaval, the world has joined forces to scapegoat Israel and the Jews once again, we cannot remain silent and repeat the folly of the '30s. We call upon you to help us. Your contribution makes the difference! Together we can fight this crucial battle as we strive to help Israel fulfill her destiny and remain as a light unto the nations. For a safe and secure Israel, Esther Levens
UCI — The Unity Coalition for Israel
(http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) — is "the largest worldwide
coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200
groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we
have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and
Secure Israel."
|
|
UPDATE ON UNRWA AND ISRAELI SOVEREIGNTY FROM ISRAELI INITIATIVE
Posted by Yoav Sorek, February 10, 2010. |
|
UNRWA is Bad For Israel Recently, UNRWA came out with its first promotional campaign geared towards Israelis. The online campaign, titled (in Hebrew) "UNRWA: Bad for Extremism," presents three questions "Israelis have asked" about UNRWA, though clearly they mean The Israeli Initiative. The first: Does UNRWA perpetuate the refugee problem? Second: Is UNRWA involved in terror? Third: Is UNRWA an anti-Israel organization?Of course, UNRWA does not truly answer the most important question about the refugees: Why doesn't UNRWA try to rehabilitate the refugees, instead of keeping them as-is? The truth is, UNRWA cannot answer that question, as it was founded shortly after the 1948 War of Independence to provide temporary aid to the refugees — "temporary" aid that has lasted for over 60 years. At the Israeli Initiative, we see this campaign as proof of the success of our public struggled against UNRWA. After we reported a deterioration of the relations between UNRWA and one of its biggest donors (Canada), it is encouraging to see that the Israeli public is starting to lose faith in the agency, as well. UNRWA is justly concerned. Confining the Palestinian Refugees in their inhumane status since 1948 threatens the existence of the Jewish state, and is a major obstacle to the peace process. There is no doubt that it is in Israel's, as well as the world's interest to stop the major funding it provides to UNRWA, and redirect it to the rehabilitation of those millions of refugees. To see UNRWA's campaign (in Hebrew):
The Bill Garners More Support A further proof of The Israeli Initiative's success comes from the Knesset. The bill that the Initiative is promoting — to apply Israeli law to municipalities in Judea and Samaria — was discussed in two different events.The first event was part of the "birthday" celebrations for the Knesset, which occur each year on Tu B'Shvat. Israeli youth was invited to give speeches in the plenum, one of which was a student from the religious girls' high school in Kfar-Pines. This young woman discussed the booklet The Israeli Initiative published to promote the law at length. The next day, at the event launching "The Lobby for the Land of Israel" in the Knesset, the Secretary-General of "Israel Beiteinu," MK Fania Kirschenbaum, referred to the high school student's speech, and emphasized that this is the most important step the Lobby can take. MK Tzipi Hotoveli specifically referred to the law as being the new lobby's top priority. This lobby is not just one of many. It includes tens of Knesset Members from many parties (Shas, Likud, Israel Beiteinu, National Union, NRP, Kadima and United Torah Judaism), and is lead by Head of Coalition Zeev Elkin, who has also signed his support on the bill. The speaker of the Knesset cannot join a lobby, but he came to the launch and spoke warmly of it. Many ministers came to support the goals of this lobby, which may be one of the strongest in the 18th Knesset. Representatives of The Israeli Initiative that attended the launch used the opportunity to give MKs and ministers copies of the booklet the Initiative published to promote the law, which is available in Hebrew on our homepage. A Two-State Solution — Delusional? We'll end our newsletter with an excerpt from a recent post on our blog: Is a two-state solution "delusional?" We at the Israeli Initiative think so, and, to our surprise, MK Daniel Ben-Simon of the Labor party seems to agree! Ben-Simon, a former writer for Ha'aretz, formerly served as head of the Labor's Knesset faction. Yesterday, he attended a meeting of the Knesset's Education Committee, where he heard about the growth of towns in Judea and Samaria. According to Arutz Sheva, Ben-Simon asked how can the State of Israel discuss establishing a Palestinian State, while the Jewish population of Judea and Samaria continues to grow. The following is a translation of Ben-Simon's remarks, as reported by Arutz Sheva: "Is our political path, talking about two states for two nations, delusional? Judea and Samaria are developing! We are delusional! I am sitting here in this meeting, and feel like I'm in a movie. My question is — Is there any coordination between policies and what is happening on the ground in Judea and Samaria?"(For the rest of the blog post, click here: theisraelinitiative.blogspot.com) Ben-Simon's words reflect the abyss between the vision of those who support a two-state solution and reality. "Instead of two states, it seems that the territory of Judea and Samaria are a state-within-a-state that is next to another state," said Ben-Simon, amazed. Ben-Simon's awakening is a good sign for Israeli politics. Politicians are slowly begin to understand, years after the idea of two states rose, that this solution is not relevant. At The Israeli Initiative, we say that not only does the Jewish population growth in Judea and Samaria not allow for there to be two states, but that the whole concept, including the hope for the rise of a Palestinian state, is not realistic. An independent Palestinian state will not be able to rise in any area that of Israel. It's simply impossible — not economically, geopolitically or because of security. It's important that, in conjunction with the slow awakening from the nightmare of two states, we continue to promote alternative, realistic ideas that will invigorate the political thought in Israel, that has been "stuck" for many years. As always, we're happy to hear your reactions and answer your questions. Sincerely, Yoav Sorek
|
|
THE CHANGING BORDERS OF ISRAEL
Posted by Victor Sharpe, February 10, 2010. |
|
From the earliest Biblical days the boundaries of the ancestral Jewish homeland expanded and shrank time and time again. But even during periods when the homeland was under alien occupation, the Jews managed to sustain, in whatever numbers they could, a physical presence. For Jews in the Diaspora the land remained forever with them as an unbroken bond. The first Jew, Abraham, was called by God to leave Haran and travel to the Promised Land around 2000 BC. His journey began when he first left Ur (situated in today's Iraq) and traveled to Haran and thence to Biblical Shechem in today's Nablus, now a center of Arab terrorism in the Palestinian Authority territories. Abraham journeyed onto Egypt because of famine throughout the land then known as Canaan. But before he left, he purchased a plot of land in Hebron from a Hittite where today the Cave of Machpela exists as the traditional burial ground of Abraham, his son Isaac, and grandson Jacob along with their wives, Sarah, Rebecca and Leah. These are the Jewish Patriarchs and Matriarchs of the Bible. Concurrent draughts and famine forced Abraham's descendants to find sanctuary and relief in Egypt. The Biblical story tells us of the Jewish nation's eventual slavery by successive Pharaohs and the miraculous Exodus under the leader and lawgiver, Moses, who brought them back to the Promised Land around 1,225 BC. From this time onwards we see how many times the boundaries of the Jewish homeland have waxed and waned up unto the present day. We should start at the borders of the land after its conquest by the Children of Israel under their general, Joshua, and its distribution amongst the Twelve Tribes. The tribes, which traced their individual history back to the sons of Jacob, were Manasseh, Ephraim, Asher, Naphtali, Zebulon, Issachar, Dan, Benjamin, Judah and Simeon. They received territory in what consists today of Israel along with Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). In addition, the tribes of Manasseh, Gad and Reuben also received vast areas of land east of the River Jordan, which today form part of the Hashemite Arab Kingdom of Jordan in which no Jews are permitted to live. Much of the territory adjoining the coastline was occupied in the south by the Philistines, known as the Sea Peoples, who it is believed originated in Crete. In the north the Phoenicians occupied the maritime lands. Around 1000-925 BC, the subsequent Kingdoms of David and his son, Solomon, expanded their borders to encompass the Mediterranean (the Great Sea) coastline from central Sinai as far north as present day Akko, (Acre). In the east, the borders extended to include present day Amman, the capital of Jordan, and Damascus in Syria. Indeed much of present day Syria was included within the borders of the Biblical Jewish kingdom. In the south, the territory reached as far as today's Eilat at the head of the modern day Gulf of Aqaba, but around 850 BC civil war broke out and the land was divided into two separate kingdoms, with Judah in the south and Israel in the north. The concomitant weakness allowed Moab and Edom to break away and a powerful new Empire, Assyria, in what is present day Iraq, began to threaten Israel from the north and east. I will bring a nation upon you from afar...it is a mighty nation, it is an ancient nation; a nation whose language you know not nor what they say. And they will eat up your harvest and your bread, which your sons and daughters should eat; they will eat your flocks and your herds; they will eat up your vines and your fig trees; they will impoverish your walled cities, in which you trust, with the sword. Nevertheless, I will not make a full end with you. Jeremiah 6, 17-18 Both Israel and Judah had shrunk to mere shadows of the glory they once were. As the Bible recounts, Israel finally succumbed to the awesome power of Assyria in 722 BC and her people were lost to history and passed into legend as the ten lost tribes of Israel. Judah held on for over a hundred years but a new Empire arose, Babylon, which defeated its Assyrian rival and eventually moved against Judah. After a long siege, the Babylonians broke into Jerusalem, sacked the Temple and carried off the Jews to Babylon in 586 BC. In turn, Babylon, the greatest city of the ancient world, was conquered by the rising empire of Persia. Its king, Cyrus, proclaimed in 539 BC that the Jewish exiles could return to their ancient land and the cry was heard, "Return to Zion! Rebuild the Land of Israel." Not all the Jews returned. Many remained in Babylon and their descendants lived there for 2,500 years until the middle of the twentieth century, when they escaped from the cruel oppression of the Iraqi Arab government during Operation Ezra and Nehemiah — after the reconstituted State of Israel came into existence in 1948. But let us return to what the earlier Zionists of their day achieved when some 50,000 Jews left Babylon to restore their homeland. In time, the Second Temple was built in Jerusalem and the land, now again named Judah, prospered. Unlike the early Persian kings, the later ones became more and more dictatorial. Persia was finally conquered by Greece. Alexander the Great was particularly kind to his Jewish subjects and many Jews fought under his banner as he carved out his Greek empire. But, again, after his death, Alexander's Ptolemaic Egyptian and Seleucid Syrian successors became increasingly difficult to live under. The Jewish homeland fell under the control of the Hellenized King of Syria, Antiochus IV. He thought he was a god and called himself Epiphanes, which means "the manifest of God." Antiochus demanded that the Jews worship him, give up their religion, and cease to keep the Sabbath holy. His cruelty and madness eventually forced the revolt of the heroic Jewish priest, Mattathias, and his five sons who are enshrined in history as the Maccabees. Against overwhelming odds, the revolt began in 167 BC and fierce battles were fought throughout Israel, Judea and Samaria. During the war, Syrian/Greek armies were thrown against the Jewish rebels but were defeated by the third son of Mattathias, Judah, who emerged as an extraordinary military leader and who went on to victories at Emmaus, Beth-Horon, and Beth-Zur. On the twenty-fifth day of the Hebrew month of Kislev, 165 BC, which usually falls in the month of December, the Maccabees, which means "hammerers," liberated and restored the Temple — an act celebrated to this day during the Jewish festival of lights — Hanukah. The successor to the Maccabees, the Hasmonean dynasty extended the boundaries of Israel again to include territory almost reaching Damascus in the north and including large areas again of modern day Jordan in the east and as far southwest as Gaza and much of the northern coastline of Sinai. In 63 BC, during rival claims to the Hasmonean throne, one of the claimants foolishly invited the looming empire of Rome to intercede on his behalf. Rome, ever anxious to spread its influence, sent its general, Pompey, with an army to besiege Jerusalem and after three months the city fell. Rome now effectively occupied the Jewish homeland, which in time became the Roman Province of Judea. It is instructive to note that at the time of Pompey's invasion there were three million Jews in Judea. Another four million lived in other parts of the Roman Empire and since the total population of the entire empire was no more than 70,000,000, one out of every ten Romans was of the Jewish faith. Jews today now number a mere thirteen million people out of a world population rapidly exceeding six billion. Over half of the world Jewish population now live in Israel. Like the earlier Persian and Greek kings, the Roman procurators and governors inflicted onerous taxes on the people and began to dictate how their religion was to be practiced. The Jews finally rose up against the Roman legions in 66-73 AD. The Roman emperor Vespasian ordered his son, Titus, to finally re-conquer Judea and besiege its capital, Jerusalem. After an epic struggle with the defenders, Titus and his legions destroyed the Temple. The revolt continued until the Jewish defenders on the mountaintop fortress of Masada committed mass suicide rather than be taken as captive slaves to Rome. Despite enormous casualties (estimates of 1,000,000 Jews killed) and countless numbers sent into slavery, the Jewish presence still remained strong in the homeland and a Second Revolt broke out against Roman occupation in 135 AD. The Jews fought under their charismatic leader, Shimon Bar-Kochba and defeated successive Roman legions sent against them. They restored their independence for three short years. The Roman Emperor, Hadrian, finally crushed Judea and renamed the land Philistia, later Syria-Palaestina, finally known as Palestine, after the Philistines who had dominated parts of the Mediterranean coastline. This was a calculated insult to the Jews whose ancient enemy had been the Philistines. Palestine remained the geographical name of the area until modern times though it was never an independent state; certainly never an independent Arab state. However, even after Jewish independence in its Biblical and ancestral homeland was obliterated in name and deed, the Jews still managed to remain throughout much of the territories. Jerusalem had been converted into a pagan city named Aeolia Capitolina in which was erected a giant statue of the pagan god, Jupiter, in place of the Temple to the One God. Though the land was lost to Jewish independence for the next two thousand years, Jews continued to yearn for a return to the Promised Land and "Zion" the mountain that became a symbol for Jerusalem. In the seventh century, the Arabs invaded the homeland under the new banner of Islam. For successive periods after Hadrian's bloody conquest, different alien invaders occupied the land including Byzantines, Persians, Arabs, Seljuks, Crusaders, Mamluks, Ottoman Turks, and the British. Though Jews remained in whatever numbers they could maintain, there was always a steady, albeit limited, infusion of Jews into the homeland fleeing persecution in Europe or from the Islamic world. For instance, during the Middle Ages, many Jewish rabbis and their disciples re-entered the land. Larger numbers began to return in the mid-nineteenth century. Neglected and barren land was purchased at great cost from absentee landlords and agricultural schools and communities began to form under the Ottoman occupation. On November 2, 1917, Jewish hopes for a restored and independent homeland were raised by the British Foreign Minister, Lord Balfour, in what became known as the Balfour Declaration. Great Britain soon conquered all of Ottoman occupied Palestine and, after the First World War, the League of Nations gave Britain control of the Holy Land with a mandate to effect Jewish self-government and a national homeland. Shortly after Britain obtained the Mandate, she tore away all of the land east of the River Jordan and gave it to the Arab Hashemite tribe; thus denying Jewish rights in four fifths of the territory. Most Arab leaders, at that time, acknowledged that they had no historical claims upon the Land of Israel. The area had never been home to an independent Arab state called "Palestine," and even when it had come under the control of the invading Arab Empire in the seventh century, it had always remained an unimportant backwater. Since 1517, the land had been occupied by the non-Arab Turks. In 1936, the British Peel Commission stated clearly that "if the Arabs were given independence in the enormous territories of the Middle East, they were willing to give "little Palestine" to the Jews." Little Palestine was now reduced to the one fifth of the Mandate or the tiny territory between the Mediterranean Sea and the River Jordan — a mere 50 miles at its widest. Arab intransigence grew as the years went by. In the end, the British gave up the struggle to keep the peace and in 1947 referred the matter to the United Nations, which voted to divide the much reduced area yet again into two states: one Arab, one Jewish. It would be wise for readers to purchase or obtain from their local libraries the remarkably clear and graphic books published by Sir Martin Gilbert, the official biographer of Sir Winston Churchill and now a Fellow at Merton College, Oxford. The two books are The Arab-Israel Conflict, Its History in Maps, and the Jewish History Atlas. From 1917 to 1947, many different suggestions were offered for the boundaries of the geographical entity known as Palestine. Britain's Colonial Office suggested plans that were to become inimical to the hoped for borders proposed by the Zionist Organization representing the aspirations of the Jews in the Diaspora. During the 1920s and 1930s, the Arabs rioted against the British Mandatory Authorities and, in the ensuing violence, many Jews were murdered. In 1929, the ancient Jewish community in Hebron was slaughtered by their Arab neighbors and twenty three defenseless Jews were slaughtered and dismembered in one house alone. In 1936, an organized Arab campaign broke out and bands of armed Arabs inflicted heavy casualties on the British forces. Eighty Jews, mostly civilians, had been killed by the time the Arabs called off their "intifada" on October 12, 1936. Britain tried to appease the Arabs by appointing a Royal Commission to look into the Mandate. The Peel Commission recommended a Jewish state and an Arab state with a British controlled corridor from Jaffa to Jerusalem. The Jews reluctantly accepted; the Arabs totally rejected. In 1937 more Arab rioting took place with yet more Jewish and Arab casualties. Many of the Arabs who sought peace and coexistence were murdered by their fellow Arabs because they were considered "collaborators" with the Jews. This same murderous activity continues in today's Palestinian Authority and in Hamas occupied Gaza. The Second World War broke out on September 3, 1939 and Britain, more than ever, needed the oil from the Arab Middle East to survive. Again, it chose to appease the Arabs and in 1940 began restricting Jewish land purchases. Before that, the infamous 1939 British Government's White Paper drastically limited Jewish immigration into Palestine for the next five years just as the Jews in Europe were falling into the genocidal clutches of Nazi Germany. In 1947, after one third of world Jewry had been wiped out, the United Nations voted to divide the land into a Jewish state and an Arab state. Again, the Jews reluctantly accepted; the Arabs rejected. The immediate response to the U.N. Partition Plan was the outbreak of yet more Arab aggression throughout Mandatory Palestine. The British still were responsible for law and order but behaved in ambivalent ways. Some police even sided with the Arabs against the Jews. The Arab violence continued with ever greater ferocity but the Jewish defense organizations became better organized and resisted the attacks until they were able to take the battle to the Arab forces. Meanwhile, British troops left and the Mandate came to an end. We now come to the period from 1948 when Israel was re-born as a Jewish State in its old homeland. And it is from this time that her borders again expanded and shrank, waxed and waned, according to relentless Arab aggression and decisions — some wise and some not so wise — made by successive Israeli leaders and their governments. In May 1948, Israel's independence was proclaimed and six Arab armies from Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Saudi Arabia invaded the new state with the intention of driving the Jews into the sea. During the War of Independence, the territory of the nascent Jewish state expanded as a direct consequence of the combined Arab assault. The coastal plain was secured, as was Upper Galilee. The Egyptians were driven out of the Negev desert in Israel's south but the Jews were driven out of the ancient Jewish Quarter in the Old City of Jerusalem. The Jordanians occupied all of Judea and Samaria. They occupied East Jerusalem where they desecrated and destroyed the ancient synagogues and homes, using the Jewish tombstones from the Mount of Olives as latrines for the Arab Legion. The Egyptians, in turn, occupied the Gaza Strip. In 1956, Gamal Abdul Nasser overthrew the Egyptian government under General Neguib and fomented aggression against Israel in the form of terror attacks into Israel as far north as Rehovot from the Gaza Strip, and by blockading Israel's maritime lifeline in the Gulf of Aqaba. Israeli forces finally retaliated by entering Gaza and the Sinai Peninsula as far as the Suez Canal. This campaign to drive out the terrorists, deliver a blow to the Egyptian army, and raise the blockade, is known as the Sinai Campaign or the Hundred Hours War. British and French forces also invaded the Canal Zone in the hope of overthrowing Nasser who had nationalized the Suez Canal, which threatened their oil supplies. However, Nasser was saved by President Eisenhower and his Secretary of State, Foster Dulles, who forced Israel to pull back from Sinai in March, 1957 leaving Nasser still in power. The French and British were also pressured to leave the Canal Zone and Nasser was able to create more mischief in the subsequent years. Indeed, Eisenhower stated many years later that forcing Israel to withdraw was a personal mistake he greatly regretted. In May, 1967, Nasser again began proclaiming that he would lead the Arab world in a bid to destroy the Jewish State. He again blockaded the strategic Gulf of Aqaba — thus crippling Israel's maritime trade with Asia — and ordered U-Thant, the U.N. Secretary General, to withdraw his buffer forces between Israel and Egypt from Sinai. He then moved Egyptian military forces into Sinai in clear contravention of earlier United Nations resolutions. At the same time, frenzied Arab mobs took to the streets of the Arab capitals calling for Israel's destruction. Jordan's King Hussein fell for the Egyptian dictator's false assurances that his forces were already nearing Tel Aviv in hot pursuit of the retreating Israeli army. He foolishly ordered an attack along his long eastern frontier with Israel even though the Israeli Government assured him that they had no wish to go to war with Jordan. Syria too increased its relentless and unprovoked bombardment and aggression on Israeli farms and villages in northern Galilee from the Golan Heights. Military units from many Arab states, as far away as Sudan, eagerly announced their participation. On June 5, 1967 Israel launched a pre-emptive strike against the air forces of Egypt, Syria, and Jordan, destroying most of their squadrons on the ground. Egypt lost its air cover and was defeated again in Sinai; Syrian forces were driven off the strategic Golan Heights, and all of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem were liberated. This was known as the Six-Day War and Israel had now expanded as a consequence of Arab aggression to its greatest size since the time of David and Solomon. Anwar Sadat replaced Nasser, upon the death of the dictator, and launched what became known as the War of Attrition against Israel from 1969 to 1970. In time, however, the Egyptian forces were ground down after spectacular Israeli raids crippled the Egyptian army's effectiveness. But Israel now had to grapple with growing PLO terror outside as well as within Israel. Yasser Arafat, who had launched his Soviet supported Palestine Liberation Organization in 1964, three years before Israel liberated Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), Gaza and the Golan Heights, fled with his PLO from Jordan after trying to set up a "state within a state." King Hussein launched a violent crackdown on the PLO killing many thousands of Arabs who called themselves Palestinians. Arafat then occupied the Lebanese border with Israel and, again, set up a "state within a state." He began launching horrific attacks against Israeli schoolchildren in northern Galilee from Lebanese territory. Meantime, Sadat secretly planned a joint attack by Egypt and Syria upon Israel on the holiest day in the Jewish religious calendar. It's still debatable if the Israeli leaders knew of the pending attack but they decided to seek international favor by holding fire. If they did have intelligence of a coming attack, it proved costly for on October 8, 1973, during Yom Kippur, the Egyptians and Syrians struck. The Egyptians initially drove the Israelis back in Sinai with great Israeli losses, and the Syrians poured across the Golan Heights to threaten northern Israel. Eventually, the tide of battle turned. The Syrians were held on the Heights after heroic resistance from a small Israeli tank force. Israel pushed back the Syrians and came to within sight of the Syrian capital, Damascus. The Egyptian Third Army was surrounded by Israeli forces and Israeli units crossed the canal into Egypt and headed for the Egyptian capital, Cairo. This was the greatest extent of Israeli territorial expansion and, again, was as a direct consequence of continuing Arab aggression. In 1973, Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty and Israel withdrew from the entire Sinai Peninsula. Syria still remains obdurate and facilitates and aids the Hezbollah Islamist terrorists who now infest the Lebanese border adjoining northern Israel and have become a major threat to Israel. Hezbollah filled this vacuum after Israel — again taking enormous risks for peace — arbitrarily withdrew from its ten kilometer wide buffer zone that had kept terrorists from infiltrating Israeli territory. Jordan too signed a peace treaty with Israel and relinquished territorial claims to Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). Despite ceaseless terror attacks, however, Israel has given the Arabs, who call themselves Palestinians, autonomy in large parts of the disputed territory. Israel is under intense pressure to give away the entire "West Bank" which will again reduce the width of its most heavily populated territory to a mere nine miles. President Bush once remarked, as he flew with Ariel Sharon over the territory in a helicopter, "... why, in Texas we have driveways longer than that." It is clear that Israel must retain as much of her ancestral land as possible, whether it be in Judea, Samaria, or the Golan Heights, (Gaza is already lost) otherwise Israel will have insufficient strategic depth to absorb future Arab aggression. This is apart from the vital spiritual and historical importance and links of the territories to the reborn Jewish state and to Jewish history and patrimony. With Iran and its Islamist allies encircling the Jewish state, it most certainly cannot survive in the pre-1967 boundaries that Israel's earlier Foreign Minister, Abba Eban, once described as the "Auschwitz borders." Victor Sharpe is a writer on Jewish history and the Islamist-Israel conflict. He is the author of Volumes One and Two of Politicide: The attempted murder of the Jewish state. This article first appeared as a chapter in Volume One. |
|
JIHAD WOMAN MONTHLY; MOHAMMED BRAND CONDOMS
Posted by CPocerl, February 10, 2010. |
|
|
|
THE PATHOLOGY OF JEWISH ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by Steven Plaut, February 10, 2010. |
|
This essay consists of three independent articles: The Plague of Jewish Anti-Semitism" by Steven Plaut; "Candidly Speaking: Confronting Jews who defame Jews" By Isi Leibler; and "Studying Hate" by Eric Herschthal. |
|
1. The Plague of Jewish Anti-Semitism"
It sounds like a contradiction in terms, an oxymoron. And if only it were. Jewish-anti-Semitism is a modern disease. In the twenty-first century the world is experiencing an explosion of it, a virtual plague. Among the most malicious and venomous of all bigots, the Jewish anti-Semites are at the forefront of each and every smear campaign against Israel and other Jews. Jews today are leaders in the campaigns to boycott and "divest from" Israel, including the "Solidarity with Terrorists" groups. They make pilgrimage to the terrorist camps of the Hamas and the Hezb'Allah, cheering on terrorist atrocities against Jews. They pioneered the smear campaign to paint Israel as an apartheid regime and denouncing Israel as equivalent to Nazi Germany is their favorite pastime. Western campuses are crawling with them. Some of the Jewish anti-Semites even hold leadership positions in Hillel houses. Many others are tenured professors. An anti-Semitic Jewish judge chaired a UN commission demonizing Israel. A Jewish member of Britain's Parliament (Gerald Kaufman) compared Hamas terrorists to Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto and denounced Israel as a Nazi entity. And a shockingly large number of Jewish anti-Semites are Israelis or ex-Israelis. Most Jews dismiss such people as "self-hating," but that term is misleading. These rogues do not hate themselves. Indeed they are masters of narcissism. They hate other Jews and wish them harm. These are not the assimilationists of Jewish descent who have simply lost interest in Jewish heritage, or those indifferent towards Jewish history and Israel. Anti-Semitic Jews often make a point out of waving their own Jewish "roots" as artillery support for their anti-Semitism. In some extreme cases they collaborate with Neo-Nazis, Islamist terrorists, and even Holocaust Deniers. No, that is not a misprint; there are today in the world Jewish Holocaust Deniers! Jewish anti-Semitism was once considered a bizarre irrelevance. It was touched upon gingerly in the 1947 Gregory Peck film, "Gentleman's Agreement," but long ignored by the organized Jewish community. Modern Zionists expected that the very creation of Israel would put an end to any neurotic self-hatred that afflicted Diaspora communities. It was expected to end not only Jewish physical insecurity but also spiritual pathology. Alas, psycho-history had a surprise up its sleeves: many of the very worst Jewish anti-Semites on the planet have emerged from the more radical fringes of the Israeli Left, its academic institutions, and its "intelligentsia"! Among the most open Israeli promoters of anti-Semitic mythology today is Professor Shlomo Sand, a hardcore communist on the history faculty of Tel Aviv University. Sand last year published a "book" with a far-leftist anti-Israel publisher claiming to prove that Jews are not and never have been a "people." Recycling myths popularized by Neo-Nazi web sites, Sand's entire book is a sort of Protocols of the Elders of Anti-Zion, a pseudo-analysis that claims that most Jews today are frauds, converts from the Khazar Turkic tribe, impersonators of Jews. All real Jews, according to the learned professor, became Palestinian Arabs centuries ago. Hence Israeli "Jews" are not Jews at all, certainly having no right to their own state. Sand travels the globe with Tel Aviv University funding to tout his book and advocate the extermination of Israel. He is surpassed in his anti-Semitism only by one other Israeli professor, now retired, Ariel Toaff, who claimed to have evidence that Jews use gentile blood in religious ritual. Other anti-Semitic Israeli academics are cataloged on the web site Isracampus.org.il. Just what makes Jewish anti-Semites tick is harder to explain. One of the few people to take a serious stab at doing so is Kenneth Levin, a psychiatrist at Harvard and an occasional contributor to these pages. He attributes Jewish anti-Semitism In part to attempts by some Jews to gain social acceptance in an environment that is hostile towards Jews. He attributes some of it to infantile attempts at self-blame resembling those in abused small children. And in part he considers it a cousin to the notorious "Stockholm Syndrome," whereby victims adopt the outlook and agenda of their victimizers. I personally believe it is a sort of infantile rage by disturbed people, resentful towards their parents for forcing them to become toilet trained. I am serious. Anti-Semitism is today the main common denominator that unites the far-Left with the Neo-Nazi ultra-Right in the United States and in Europe. There are Jewish anti-Semites to be found in the wings of the political spectrum. In the American ultra-Left many serve as columnists for the extremist "Counterpunch" web magazine, published by the ex-British Stalinist Cockburn brothers. Counterpunch is so openly anti-Semitic these days that it goes well beyond merely calling for Israel's extermination. It endorses anti-Semitic conspiracy "theories" (such as the Jews being behind the 9-11 attacks!) and increasingly publishes Holocaust Denier columnists. Some of its columnists moonlight as writers for Neo-Nazi web sites and organizations. Almost every literate Jewish anti-Semite writes for it. On the cyber-pages of Counterpunch, Jewish anti-Semites cheer on the jihad and endorse anti-Jewish terrorism. It would be difficult to find Jewish writers in Counterpunch who are NOT making the de rigueur comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany. The University of Wisconsin's Jennifer Loewenstein published there "Gaza Holocaust," in which she writes: "Israel and its US Master have long since resided in the lowest circle of Hell for betraying the name of humanity." She adds that Israel treats Palestinians as subhuman "Untermenschen," reminiscent of German treatment of Jews in the Holocaust. Then, in a quote that could easily have been printed by the Nazi newspaper Der Sturmer in the 1930s, she adds: "The Neo-Jewish Masters and their allies in the United States... have no intention of making a just peace with the lower forms of life in their midst." In Loewenstein's take on reality, Israel engages in state terror while operating a cabal that enslaves the American government and dictates its policies. Even Yom Kippur for her is nothing more than a day to be exploited to help the terrorists and demonize the Jews. Another Counterpunch anti-Semite is Richard Falk, a retired professor from Princeton, best known for serving on the UN commission that condemned Israel for genocidal war crimes even before it began its investigation of Israel's Gaza operations. Falk is not only one of the worst collaborators in the academic wars against the Jews, he is also America's leading practitioner of the Orwellian inversion. For Falk, Israel is a terrorist aggressor, while the Arab terrorist aggressors are innocent victims and peace-loving progressives. For him, Israel is a Nazi-like country seeking genocide, while the Islamofascists of the Hamas and their backers are merely protesters against social inequality inside Israel. For him, terrorist aggression against Jews is really the pursuit of peace, while self-defense by Israel is criminal, terrorist aggression and genocide. Falk has been trying for decades to get Israel obliterated. In 2007 Falk published, " Slouching toward a Palestinian Holocaust," in which he wrote that it was not an "irresponsible overstatement to associate the treatment of Palestinians (by Israel)" with the "criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity." In it, he accuses Israel of mistreating Palestinians on a scale comparable to the Nazi extermination of Jews. He writes: "Is it an irresponsible overstatement to associate the treatment of Palestinians with this criminalized Nazi record of collective atrocity? I think not. The recent developments in Gaza are especially disturbing because they express so vividly a deliberate intention on the part of Israel and its allies to subject an entire human community to life-endangering conditions of utmost cruelty. The suggestion that this pattern of conduct is a holocaust-in-the-making represents a rather desperate appeal to the governments of the world and to international public opinion to act urgently to prevent these current genocidal tendencies from culminating in a collective tragedy." One of the regular contributors to Counterpunch is an ex-Israeli anti-Semite named Gilad Atzmon. He is a saxophone player living in the UK and closely associated with Neo-Nazi and Holocaust Denier groups in Europe. While active in pro-terror organizations, Atzmon is so openly anti-Semitic that some of these anti-Israel groups shun and refuse to have anything to do with him. The well-known British writer Oliver Kamm has denounced Atzmon as an open Holocaust Denier. Atzmon has called not only for Israel to be annihilated but also for synagogues to be burned down. He heads a small clique of Neo-Nazi followers, mainly in Italy, for whom he serves as cult leader. Atzmon has repeatedly asserted that the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a historically accurate documentation of the crimes by the Jewish people. Paul Eisen, another anti-Israel Jewish extremist in the UK, is also an open Holocaust Denier. He has distributed an essay endorsing Holocaust Denial entitled "Holocaust Wars," which claims — among other things — that the gas chambers of Auschwitz are fraudulent and could not possibly have worked. Among its "sources" are David Irving and the Neo-Nazi crank Ernst Zundel, deported by Canada and now in prison in Germany. Several Jewish anti-Semites engaged in a bizarre form of Holocaust Denial on the anti-Semitic "ALEF" chat list that operates under the auspices of the University of Haifa in Israel, which is not the only forum for Jewish anti-Semites. Members of that list debated at length whether Hitler was actually guilty of anything, concluding that he was probably not. Shraga Elam, a Swiss-based ex-Israeli and a member of the same "ALEF" list, published a sycophantic letter praising Holocaust Denier David Irving as a "brilliant researcher." The most venomous Jewish-born Holocaust Denier of all is one "Israel Shamir." An èmigrè from the Soviet Union, "Shamir" moved to Israel and later left for Sweden, where he changed his name to Adam Ermash and reportedly converted to Christianity. A vulgar Jewbaiter, he regularly attends Holocaust Denial conferences. As just one example of his poison, in an interview with the Islamist Mohamed Omar in August 2009, Shamir said: "I think it is the duty of every Muslim and Christian to deny the Holocaust, to reject this belief, just like Abraham and Moses rejected idolatry. Every person who profess (sic) their (sic) faith to God should deny the Holocaust. I think it's much more serious that people deny God, isn't it?" In other cases prominent Jews endorse Holocaust Deniers while carefully tiptoeing around endorsing Holocaust Denial itself explicitly. The best known of these is Noam Chomsky, an extremist anti-American and anti-Israel professor of linguistics at MIT. Chomsky's father had been a Hebrew teacher at Gratz College in Philadelphia (which I attended in the 1960s). A longterm apologist for the Khmer Rouge, Noam is considered to be an unrepentent Stalinist. He despises Israel almost as deeply as he hates America. He considers both countries worse than Nazi Germany. Chomsky has campaigned on behalf of the French Holocaust Denier Robert Faurisson and other European Neo-Nazis. He does not only demand that this hate be protected under freedom of speech. As Professor Werner Cohn has proven, Chomsky also endorses the contents of their speech: "But in fact we saw that Chomsky justified Faurisson's Holocaust-denial, we found Chomsky publishing his own books with neo-Nazi publishers, we saw him writing for a neo-Nazi journal, we saw that the neo-Nazis promote Chomsky's books and tapes together with the works of Joseph Goebbels. It is this complex of anti-Semitic activities and neo-Nazi associations, not his professed ideas alone, that constitutes the Chomsky phenomenon." Within Israel, one of the most openly anti-Semitic Jews was the late Professor Israel Shahak, who taught chemistry for decades at the Hebrew University. He specialized in endorsing medieval anti-Jewish blood libels. He insisted that Judaism teaches Jews to worship Satan, to connive against non-Jews and to murder them. He stopped just millimeters short of saying that Jews use gentile blood for ritual purposes. He claimed that the Talmud is filled with calls to murder gentiles, and that Jews regard gentiles as subhuman. He collaborated with Neo-Nazis all over the planet. Naturally he wanted Israel to be speedily destroyed, and he was one of the first Israeli open collaborators with Palestinian terrorism, long before the Oslo "process" commenced and produced so many. In an analysis of Shahak, the British writer Paul Bogdanor notes: 'According to Shahak, the Jews think of nothing but making money for the benefit of the Jewish state ("The force of Jewish devotion in assembling money is thought to be infinite"). According to Shahak, the Jews plan to dominate much of the world through an Israeli empire ("extending from 'Algeria or Morocco' from the west to China in the east, and from Kenya or even South Africa in the south to the USSR in the north"). According to Shahak, the Jews facilitate the spread of vice in order to enslave the masses ("Part of the motivation" must be "encouraging drug addiction and thus promoting political apathy").... Shahak also found excuses for the near-genocidal Chmielnicki pogroms, which he classified as a "revolt of the oppressed."' Only marginally less openly anti-Semitic is Norman Finkelstein, who had been on the faculty of DePaul University until he was fired three years back (and has been unemployed ever since). Finkelstein has built an entire career out of smearing Holocaust survivors as frauds and liars, and cheering on Islamofascist terrorism against Jews. His personal web site is a vulgar gutter of juvenile anti-Semitic catcalls. He claims that Zionists exaggerate the dimensions of the Shoah to steal money and invent Holocaust survivors to exploit Germany. He has made pilgrimage to the Hezb'Allah terrorists and was denied entry into Israel on grounds that he is a terrorist agent. Finkelstein wrote a "book" entitled "The Holocaust Industry," today the basic textbook used by all Neo-Nazis and Holocaust Deniers. He has praised Holocaust Denier David Irving as a great and reliable historian. (Irving, in turn, claims the entire Holocaust is a Zionist hoax and that no Jews were murdered in Auschwitz.) While Finkelstein is a pseudo-academic and a fraud, dismissed as a crackpot by all serious historians, he is nevertheless celebrated by all other Jewish Anti-Semites. One Israeli academic in particular, Neve Gordon, an Israel-hating extremist who teaches political science at Ben Gurion University, has devoted much of his career to celebrating Finkelstein and endorsing Finkelstein's "ideas." When he is not denouncing Israel as a fascist apartheid terrorist regime that needs to be eliminated, Gordon has even compared Finkelstein ethically to the Prophets of the Bible. The creation of Israel was supposed to turn Jews into a "normal" people. But the psychosis of Jewish anti-Semitism has no comparable analogue among the nations, making the Jews a therapist's sui generis. The disease of Jewish anti-Semitism not only illustrates the absence of "normality" among 21st century Jewry, it threatens the very survival of Israel and of Jewish communities around the world. 2. More on Jewish Anti-Semitism
The time has come to draw red lines between legitimate criticism and initiatives seeking to demonize Israel. Richard Goldstone's infamous role as the token head of the UNHRC report accusing the IDF of war crimes is only one example of prominent Jews who exploit their origins as a way to defame their people. In fact, until recently, Goldstone was considered a respectable Jew, even a Zionist. He was blinded by hubris and ego, and allowed himself to be seduced by the bitterest enemies of his people into providing legitimization for a blood libel against the Jewish state. Unlike Goldstone, most Jewish renegades were driven by desperation to unburden themselves from what they regarded as their repressive ethnic and cultural roots. Historian Jacob Talmon described such deviant behavior as "a Jewish neurosis" in response to centuries of oppression and pariah status. The purported commitment of these Jews to universal and humanitarian values was usually belied by extreme attacks on their own people and association with sponsors who were outright anti-Semites. Streams of such Jews emerged during the 19th century in the wake of emancipation. A classic example was Karl Marx, whose anti-Semitic diatribes were reflected in outbursts like "money is the jealous god of Israel, by the side of which no other god may exist... The social emancipation of the Jew is the emancipation of society from Judaism." In czarist Russia, some Jewish social revolutionaries even endorsed pogroms against their own kinsmen, hoping that by venting their frustrations on Jews, the masses would ultimately turn on the czar. Their successors, the Yevsektsiya, the notorious Jewish section of the Soviet Communist Party, became the most vicious persecutors of their own people, frenziedly suppressing all manifestations of Jewish cultural and religious life. Ultimately they too were liquidated in Stalin's anti-Semitic campaigns. Many Jews outside the Soviet Union joined the Communist Party out of a mistaken conviction that it represented the most effective way to combat Nazism. But once in the party, they became brainwashed, and applauded as the evil Soviet regime executed their kinsmen and institutionalized state-sponsored anti-Semitism.
AFTER THE Holocaust and the struggle to create the State of Israel, most Jewish anti-Semites hibernated. As the plight of Soviet Jewry became a rallying call uniting Jews throughout the world, the few remaining Jewish communists were marginalized. Modern Israel's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, a genuine social democrat, appreciated the dangers posed by left-wing nihilists. He strove strenuously to neutralize the extremists and post-Zionists, who only became influential after his retirement and the end of Mapai-Labor Party hegemony. Today, despite representing a small fringe, the disproportionate influence of anti-Zionist Jewish extremists in global campaigns demonizing Israel has reached an all-time high. Ironically, the worst elements emanate from Israel. There is the frenzied agitation by Israeli academics who abuse academic freedom by utilizing their universities as launching pads to delegitimize their own country. Neve Gordon, a political science lecturer at Ben-Gurion University and a typical Jewish defamer of Zion, published an opinion piece last year in The Los Angeles Times calling on the international community to boycott Israel. He and others like him, funded by the Israeli government and philanthropic Diaspora Zionists, exploit their academic positions to support those seeking to destroy us. A recent study by Im Tirtzu claims that more than 90% of the allegations of Israeli war crimes originating from non-official Israeli sources cited in the Goldstone Report were provided by 16 NGOs who received close to $8 million from the New Israel Fund between 2006 and 2008 — an organization purporting to promote social integration and welfare headed by former Meretz MK Naomi Chazan. The NIF also supports (but does not fund) Arab-Israeli groups promoting a binational state and US lecture tours by Arab Israelis on Israel Independence Day promoting the Nakba. Last year Haaretz highlighted reports accusing the IDF of war crimes which were subsequently proven false. These received massive global media exposure and made a major contribution toward creating the hostile anti-Israeli climate preceding the Goldstone report.
THE ROT extends to the Diaspora, where as a matter of course anti-Israeli groups now employ Jewish spokesmen to cover up their bias and double standards. In the US, the demonizers of Zion are exploiting the eroding relationship between the Obama administration and Israel. Former American Jewish Congress director Henry Siegman described Israel as "the only apartheid regime in the Western world." Jewish students at campuses are increasingly bombarded with anti-Israel diatribes by Jewish academics such as Norman Finkelstein, who supports Iranians and terrorists, even exploiting the Holocaust suffering of his parents to delegitimize Israel. In the UK, Jewish parliamentarian Gerald Kaufman compares Hamas to Jewish fighters in the Warsaw Ghetto, disregarding the Hamas Charter which declares that the Day of Judgment will not come until all Jews are killed. In Belgium, a Jewish playwright scripted a play in which the Philistines assume the role of Israelis and Samson emerges as a heroic Palestinian using a dynamite-loaded vest to blow up his oppressors. Shlomo Sand, a political science lecturer at Tel Aviv University, achieved celebrity status in Europe by publishing a book titled The Invention of the Jewish People, a farrago of utter nonsense promoting the thesis that being the descendents of the Khazars from the Black Sea region who converted to Judaism in the eighth century, Jews have no historical affinity with the Land of Israel. This was endorsed in a recent UK Financial Times article by Tony Judt, an American historian who regards the creation of Israel as a mistake and favors a binational state. Under the title "Israel must unpick its ethnic mix," Judt expressed the hope that American Jews would detach themselves from Israel, as Irish-Americans did from Ireland. The time has come for action — not to suppress freedom of expression, but to draw red lines between legitimate criticism of government policies and initiatives seeking to demonize and delegitimize the Jewish state. The first step must be to deny tenure in government-sponsored educational institutions to academics who brazenly collaborate with our enemies. It is gratifying that opposition Kadima MKs are now calling for what will hopefully become a bipartisan investigation into the activities and sources of funding for the NIF and other NGOs. Whenever criticized, those who call for boycotts of their own country and demonize the IDF as war criminals have the chutzpah to try to defame their critics as McCarthyites and fascists, and threaten libel proceedings. It is their behavior which is morally reprehensible, and we must not be intimidated by such hypocritical tactics. Israelis and the global Jewish community should be under no illusions. The damage inflicted by Jews collaborating with Israel's enemies to demonize or delegitimize their country is immense. The only way to neutralize the impact of these renegade groups is to expose and confront them. 3 "Studying Hate"
Professor Alvin Rosenfeld, who teaches Jewish studies at Indiana University. He recently created an institute on campus to study anti-Semitism, which some critics claim might become too politicized. In recent years, Jewish intellectuals have sometimes bemoaned the anti-Zionist views heard on college campuses, and among liberal intellectuals generally, but have failed to do much about it. But that may be changing. Last month, the chair of the Jewish studies department at Indiana University in Bloomington, Alvin Rosenfeld, announced the foundation of the Institute for the Study of Contemporary Anti-Semitism. His goal is to study, in a dispassionate, scholarly way, what he thinks is just a new version of a very old kind of hate: anti-Semitism. "I don't see anything political about it," Rosenfeld said about the institute in a phone interview. "But when I looked at what was going on at academic universities in America, I said, 'This is not good,' and decided it was time to create [an anti-Semitism center] here." Not surprisingly, there are critics. Some doubt whether independent centers are necessary given the existence of courses and scholars that already specialize in the topic. Others say that the debate over whether Israel's harshest critics are actually anti-Semites is hardly settled. And many wonder whether anti-Semitism centers can truly be as independent and objective as they say. "I think there is a risk of [these centers] becoming places for advocacy," said David Myers, a professor of Jewish history at the University of California, Los Angeles. In addition, he said, "My sense is that the motivation for them comes from a misreading of anti-Semitism in America and on the college campus." He emphasized, however, that anti-Semitism demands serious study, but stopped short of endorsing a need for stand-alone centers. Rosenfeld, whose center is only the second of its kind in the U.S., after Yale established one five years ago, says that the problem is not that anti-Semitism is not studied. It's that newer forms have been ignored. And he hopes the creation of more centers that are willing to fund research on contemporary forms of anti-Semitism will attract scholars' attention. "Over the past 10 years there's been a re-emergence of anti-Semitism," he said. "But there are precious few scholars in America" who are actually studying it. Despite his calls for civility, Rosenfeld is familiar with controversy. In 2007, he was at the center of a public uproar after he published an essay attacking liberal Jewish critics of Israel, including the playwright Tony Kushner and the New York University scholar Tony Judt. In an essay titled "'Progressive' Jewish Thought and the New Anti-Semitism," published on the American Jewish Committee's Web site, Rosenfeld argued that criticizing Israel's policies in the Palestinian territories might be valid, but questioning Israel's right to exist was not. But even that view could be more finely tuned. For example, liberals sometimes advocate for a binational state, which means creating one state for both Israelis and Palestinians. But Israel's more ardent supporters say that such a proposal is tantamount to the dissolution of a Jewish state, and thus may constitute a sort of intellectual cover for anti-Semitic views. On that issue, Rosenfeld allowed some wiggle room. "There's nothing illegitimate about binationalism," he said. "It may be a misguided view, it may be an impractical view, but, no, there's nothing inherently anti-Semitic about it." Rosenfeld's institute is still in its nascent phase, and is being funded with money from the newly created Irving M. Glazer Chair in Jewish Studies, which Rosenfeld will now occupy. He said he plans to grow the institute considerably in the coming year, soliciting outside donations with the hope of being able to fund research and bring visiting faculty to teach new courses. The track record of the anti-Semitism center at Yale could prove useful. The Canadian scholar Charles Small helped establish the Yale Initiative for the Interdisciplinary Study of Antisemitism, or YIISA, in 2005. YIISA differs from Indiana's institute in that it is mainly focused on research, not teaching undergraduates, and that it existed as an independent center before affiliating with Yale. Still, it is animated by the same concerns as Rosenfeld's — a new and ignored brand of anti-Semitism. "We in the academy are turning a blind eye to it," Small said in an interview. "There is a discourse in this country that is anti-Semitic and yet we're in denial, we don't look at it straight in the face." Small originally founded the Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy in 2003, but it had no affiliation with Yale. It was based near Yale's campus in New Haven, Conn., however, and Small knew that the resources and prestige of Yale would put his center on more stable ground. In order to join the university, Small's center needed approval from an advisory board made up of Yale scholars. And though there were some concerns about its objectives, according to professors who asked to remain anonymous, it was eventually approved. "It's a policy-relevant program that's supposed to draw from across many disciplines," said Donald Green, who directs the Institute for Social and Policy Studies at Yale, where YIISA's office is now based. Still, the center's future is far from certain. Small said that he must do all the fundraising on his own, and this summer the center will be up for review. If it loses faculty approval, it can no longer be affiliated with Yale. But Small is confident, noting at least one important piece of research to come out of the center. In 2006, he and another Yale professor, Edward H. Kaplan, who teaches in the public health, engineering and business schools, published a paper that tracked the convergence of extreme positions against Israel and traditional anti-Semitic views. Titled "Anti-Israel Sentiment Predicts Anti-Semitism in Europe" and published in the Journal of Conflict Resolution, it surveyed approximately 5,000 Europeans and found that ones with hard-line views against Israel were 13 times more likely to have deep prejudices against Jews as well. "Of course not every criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic," Small said, but for those with extreme views of Israel, the overlapping with anti-Semitic ones "was off the charts." Small hopes that more scientific studies like these will quiet criticism that certain positions — like calling anti-Zionism a new form of anti-Semitism — are hopelessly subjective. But the center may still face skepticism for another reason: the way it's funded. Because YIISA is not an endowed organization and instead relies on funding on a year-to-year basis, it could face pressure from donors to produce only the scholarship they want to see. Of course, the potential for a conflict of interest does not mean there is a conflict of interest, nor is it a problem unique to YIISA, as universities across the country face tough demands from donors every day. But it is a potential challenge nonetheless, said Jonathan Sarna, a Jewish studies professor at Brandeis who has chaired several programs and departments. "I think you'll find that donors are very interested in funding anti-Semitism centers, and there's no question that it's very much donor driven," he said, referring to other anti-Semitism centers that have popped up abroad in recent years. In addition to the centers at Yale and now Indiana, there are three other anti-Semitism centers affiliated with academic institutions abroad: one at Tel Aviv University, another at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a third at the Technical University in Berlin. (Brandeis has its own center, created and endowed with a single grant by Bernard and Rhoda Sarnat, in 1998, but it has a low profile, said Small, Rosenfeld and other scholars interviewed.) Both Rosenfeld and Small said that they came up with the idea for their respective anti-Semitism centers on their own. Rosenfeld used the money donated for his own chair to found the new institute, while Small has been soliciting donors on his own. Donors like Mark Rosenblatt, a money manager in New York and graduate of Yale, said Small approached him but that he entirely agreed with Small's mission. "There's sort of a crying out for the rational study of anti-Semitism," Rosenblatt said. "There's clearly a liberal, almost a radical stance [against Israel] at a lot of universities," he said, though he did not think that was the case at Yale. And even if he hoped the center's findings would help combat new forms of anti-Semitism, he said he has never told YIISA what it should or should not do. "We've never actually had a conversation about what they study," he said. "And nor would I tell them what to study." 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. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
|
|
MORE ON GOLDSTONE REPORT/NEW ISRAEL FUND; IRAN: WE WILL STUN THE WEST; ISRAELIS REACT TO EXPOSE OF NIF
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 10, 2010. |
|
MORE ON GOLDSTONE REPORT & NEW ISRAEL FUND The Zionist Organization of New York just issued a press release condemning the UN Goldstone report and the New Israel Fund (NIF) behind it. Having reported extensively on both, I am selecting the most novel and exciting points:
What is the significance of those points?
IRAN: WE WILL STUN THE WEST 
Ayatollah Khamenei said that Iran soon will deliver a "stunning punch" to the West. Iran already did, by withdrawing its offer to let foreign countries enrich limited quantities of ore. Instead it will do its own enrichment, unsupervised. Former U.S. Ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, concludes: (1) Iran never intended to compromise about enrichment, just to stay the West's hand by talking about compromise; (2) It now is too late for a gasoline embargo to work; and (3) Only a military option is left (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/9).
EUROPEAN FREEDOM ENDANGERED BY ISLAM? 
On trial for discrimination against Islam, Dutch party leader Geert Wilders says that freedom of speech is on trial and European freedom is endangered by Islam. He told my source, "I'm fighting for one thing: the preservation of our culture, which is based on Christianity, Judaism and humanism — and not on Islam... While Islamization of our society grows, the political elite looks in the other direction and ignores the real problem, namely, the impending loss of our freedom. I am fighting not against Moslems, but against the influx of a totalitarian ideology called Islam." "Asked if he has been cited for generalizing about Moslems, Wilders responded that he does not talk about Muslims per se: 'I know the majority of Muslims are not terrorists, but are rather law-abiding citizens. Islam is the problem; in Islam, there is no room for anything else but Islam, and therefore at the end of the day, we will lose everything that we stand for. I've visited almost every Islamic country, and I know that wherever Islam is dominant, there is one common denominator, and that is a loss of freedom, especially for Jews, women, non-Muslims, etc. We have to stand up and say that whoever wants to replace our ideology and culture with Islam is not welcome to stay.'" "People must know that I, a democratically elected politician who does not employ violence and the like, am being put on trial for speaking my mind and for making a movie (Fitna) that simply quotes the Koran itself. There must only be one outcome for this trial, and that is a full acquittal — and if not, Europe will pay a heavy price." Wilders said that the Israeli-Arab conflict is not, "as some believe, an issue of territory; if Israel would give back land, nothing would change. In truth, it's a conflict of ideology. Theirs is an ideology of hatred that wants to conquer the free world; Israel is like the canary in our coal mine. We cannot afford to lose Israel." "He noted that the media in Holland is largely against him, and that his trial is not totally fair: 'Of the 18 witnesses I wished to call in my defense, the court only allowed me three — and even those three will only be heard behind closed doors. How can I defend myself under such circumstances?'" He said, "Many of our politicians in Europe are simply afraid; they are appeasers... There is a lot of fear and a lot of political correctness, and the only way to deal with this is to stand up and not be afraid and not allow yourself to be intimidated." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/9.) Establishments tend to repress dissent rather than debate it. Climatologists' illustrated this. But some totalitarian movements and their ostensibly liberal enablers go the furthest in repression. Mr. Wilders makes a great effort not to defame. Thus his movie quotes Islamic sources and cites anti-democratic Muslim actions. He does not make up anything false. Putting him on trial for telling the truth vindicates his avowed concern.
UCAL IRVINE STUDENTS SHOUT DOWN ISRAELI AMBASSADOR 
University of California Irvine students were listening to a speech by Israeli Ambassador Michael Oren, when some among them heckled so much that his presentation was curtailed and a dozen of them were arrested for disorderly conduct. They called Ambassador Oren a murderer [without evidence]. The head of the political science department chided the protesters for denying the free speech rights of the hundreds of people in the overflow audience. The protesters interrupted him, too. Two years earlier, they had given Daniel Pipes the same treatment. An Israeli parliamentarian called the student disruption the intellectual side of the war. (Actually it is anti-intellectual.) The Muslim Students Union pointed out that the UN had condemned Israel more than any other country, and Oren should have been barred. Other people, however, have pointed out that the UN ignores human rights violation in the Palestinian Authority, Sudan, S. Arabia, Syria, and Egypt. (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/9). That would account partially for the disproportionate condemnation of Israel. There was supposed to be a question-and-answer session. That is when critics could have raised pertinent objections. But that would have given Oren an opportunity to debunk them. They denied the audience an opportunity to hear this. Should students be allowed to wage war on university? Ironic, isn't it, that people who do not believe in civil liberties indignantly but falsely accuse others of violating peoples' civil liberties and, inconsistently, urge us to rescind civil liberties of those people and their American audiences!
ISRAELIS REACT TO EXPOSE OF NIF In reaction to an expose of New Israel Fund financing of the anti-Israel organizations that contributed substantially to the UN Goldstone report condemning the IDF, the Defense Minister, Ehud Barak, who heads the Labor Party, criticized the Fund for it but does not support an official probe of it, because, he said, the Fund does some good things for Israel, too. The Kadima Party will not propose a probe (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/9). 
Barak's rationale is not logical. An official probe would verify the facts and could propose a solution that does not prevent good things for Israel but halts the subversion of Israel. I think that Barak resents his Army's being unfairly criticized,
but being anti-Zionist himself, like Kadima, lets fellow leftists
proceed to subvert. The Israeli Left is more averse to Israeli
protection from subversion than to subversion.
5 REASONS AN AMERICAN WELCOMES IRAN A-BOMBS REASON 1. IF IRAN GETS NUKES, THE U.S. COULD DEFEAT TERRORISM Defense analyst Adam B. Lowther at the Air Force Research Institute personally finds that the imminent prospect of Iran acquiring nuclear weapons is good for the U.S.. Why imminent? Iran is preparing to enrich its stockpile of uranium "in order to power a medical reactor." He implies that such enrichment brings the stockpile just a short sprint from the finish line of weapons grade. Obviously, U.S. policy on Iran is failing. Since the policy does not work, he suggests viewing the result as beneficial. He has five reasons. Reason 1: If Iran acquires nuclear weapons, it would give the U.S. an opportunity to "...defeat violent Sunni-Arab terrorist groups like al-Qaida. Why an opportunity? "Iran is primarily a threat to its neighbors, not to the U.S.." The U.S. could offer those neighbors a nuclear umbrella "in exchange for economic, political and social reforms in the autocratic Arab regimes responsible for breeding the discontent that led to..." 9/11. The Arab regimes would have to fall in line, because their petroleum reserves no longer would inhibit attacks on them (NY Times, 2/9, Op.-Ed.). How much comfort shall Americans take in Lowther's hedging, that Iran is "not primarily" a menace to the U.S.? Suppose either the Arabs or Iran doubt believe U.S. threats to reply to their nuclear aggression with a nuclear attack? Hasn't the U.S. issued deadlines to Iran before, that it did not implement? Isn't President Obama refusing to pre-empt Iran's nuclear weapons? Nor is it true. Iran's stated goal is global dominance after regional dominance. Iran has threatened not only its neighbors but U.S. bases there, Europe, and the U.S.. Nuclear weapons can be delivered not only by missiles and airplanes, but Iran is building longer and longer range missiles, too, as is N. Korea. Does he view our failed anti-proliferation policy a success in N. Korea as an opportunity to get friendlier with China? I would like to see Arab regimes reform, too. The reforms Lowther recommends are not as directly responsible for 9/11 as religious ideology, which he omits. Apparently he fails to understand the problem. He also does not seem to understand that Iran works with Sunni terrorists, not only with Shiites. He wants the U.S. to take on responsibility for: (1) Dictating a new culture to the Arab world; (2) Enforcing a pax Americana by threat of nuclear war. Is that the President George Bush "new world order?" Does President Obama want more U.S. responsibility abroad? Lowther depends on unstated assumptions, as do many who propose counter-intuitive, grandiose schemes. Would and could Arab states submit to foreign dictation of their basic culture? Why would they trust the U.S. now? Suppose the Arabs instead develop their own nuclear weapons, as some already have begun doing? U.S. failure with Iran has stimulated proliferation! As if that were not enough, the U.S. is about to sign a nuclear development project with Jordan, although learning about civilian nuclear development is s short step from learning about military development. When the Arabs develop their own nuclear weaponry, what happens to the advantage of U.S. nuclear umbrella for the Arabs? Lowther refers to this umbrella as covering the Mideast. Does he include Israel? Then his plan is to remove military nuclear capability from Israel? Suppose the Arabs then attack and overwhelm Israel with non-nuclear weaponry, including other weapons of mass-destruction, such as nerve gas. Lowther's plan may be well thought out, but such thought is not evident in his Op.-Ed.. REASON 2. U.S. COULD BREAK OPEC CARTEL The second advantage for the U.S. that Mr. Lowther sees in a nuclear armed Iran is that by becoming the protector of regional security, the U.S. could break OPEC. In return for protection, the U.S. would demand an end to the cartel's policies that are illegal in the U.S.. Ending monopolistic prices would depress oil prices significantly. Again, the U.S. would be dictating, only this time, instead of doing so to end terrorism, good for the world, the U.S. would be doing so for its own financial benefit. Did Mr. Lowther take into account likely reactions from China and from Russia, which depends on income from selling weapons to the Arabs, paid for by high oil prices, and which depends on exporting oil at high prices? Why doesn't Lowther think more broadly and suggest lowering U.S. demand for oil as a sure way to help reduce oil prices? Current profligacy of consumption has raised prices. REASON 3. PALESTINIAN ARABS & ISRAEL MIGHT RECONCILE The third advantage for the U.S. that Mr. Lowther sees in a nuclear Iran is that it might reconcile the Palestinian Authority (P.A.) and Israel. He thinks they might reconcile, because: (1) Israel feels threatened by Iran's nuclear program and the Palestinian Authority Arabs should feel threatened; and (2) An Iranian nuclear strike on Israel would devastate the P.A., too. Such reconciliation "would go a long way to undercutting Tehran's animosity toward Israel, and would ease longstanding tensions in the region. Lowther does not indicate why the P.A. would reconcile with Israel over this. He does not indicate why it should undercut Iran's anti-Israel stance. He does not explain why Muslim regimes are anti-Israel. The "longstanding tensions" with the Arabs preceded Iran's clerical regime. Lowther does not seem to recognize that the conflict is over religion, whose doctrine does not change even if his program were implemented. He believes Iran's claim to disapprove of Israel partly because the P.A. is in conflict with it. The claim is a pretext. The Shah of Iran did not disapprove of Israel, despite the Arab-Israel conflict, but the clerical regime that ousted him takes the Islamic religious imperative more seriously. Would the prospect of an Iranian nuclear strike on Israel worry the P.A.? When Saddam fired Scuds at Israel, Palestinian Arabs cheered from their rooftops, even though Arabs were killed. Terrorists kill more Muslims than do anybody else. Hamas risks its civilians by putting its combatants amongst them. Don't worry, Muslim clerics have told endangered civilians, you'd be considered martyrs, with all the accompanying heavenly rewards. REASON 4. U.S. COULD SELL ARABS MORE WEAPONS The fourth advantage for the for the U.S. that Mr. Lowther sees in a nuclear Iran is: "a growth in exports of weapons systems, training and advice to our Middle Eastern allies would not only strengthen our current partnership efforts but give the American defense industry a needed shot in the arm." Otherwise, our military may decline just when a rising China may threaten us. That catastrophe could be forestalled by a nuclear arming Iran, he writes with gratitude. His argument is vague. Who are these partners and what do they want and what does he expect of them? Why would they need still more arms? Not to deal with al-Qaida, which Lowther imagines that U.S. prompting would get them to defeat. Then is it to continue their feuding? Is it to pay a visit to Israel? What wars are he and the military-industrial complex facilitating now? His reason 2 was that the U.S. would be able to reduce oil prices. Then with what income would the Arabs purchase more arms? Half the arms that the U.S. sends the Mideast our taxpayers pay for. This includes billions to Israel, Egypt, Palestinian Authority, and Jordan. I think the U.S. should discontinue that subsidy, but to be fair, the U.S. should erase Israel's debt to it, just as the U.S. erased Egypt's debt to the U.S.. Israeli high interest on its debt matches the total U.S. aid. Greater arms sales may help the U.S. arms industry (and, as explained in earlier articles, hobble the rival Israeli arms industry), but it wears out the U.S. economy. In case Lowther has not noticed, the U.S. already is declining. One reason is military over-spending and U.S. over-commitment of the type he envisages. Defense Sec. Gates is trying to curb spending on unnecessary weapons desired by Members of Congress in whose districts those weapons are made. (Unfortunately, Gates may be going too far. He may be curbing our ability to wage conventional war.) Suppose the Arabs decide to buy arms from other countries? Increasingly they make their own. Lowther may be counting on income not to be received. REASON 5. REDUCING PETRO-DOLLAR OUTFLOW The fifth advantage for the U.S. that Mr. Lowther sees in a nuclear Iran is: "stem the flow of dollars to autocratic regimes in the region. It would accomplish this not only by driving down the price of oil (by dictating the decrease) and increasing arms exports, but by requiring the beneficiaries of American security to bear a real share of its cost. And in the long run, a victory in the war on terrorism would save taxpayers the tens of billions of dollars a year now spent on overseas counter-insurgency operations." Lowther still contradicts himself by supposing that fewer oil dollars to the Arabs would enable them to buy more arms. By the time he got to this fifth reason, he forgot that his reason 1 was ending the autocracy of Arab regimes. If their autocracy ends, why should they have less money to institute the reforms their people would expect? Suppose the proud Arabs declare the U.S. demands too onerous and arrogant? I think that Lowther makes self-contradictory and dubious assumptions. The world does not work so simply as he imagines. The U.S. is not as dominant he supposes, enabling it to institute what theorists dream up without countervailing powers injecting their own influence. FINAL COMMENTS: HAS OBAMA A SECRET AGENDA? Mr. Lowther does not mention an alternative policy of military destruction of Iran's nuclear facilities. Is that because he actually prefers Iran to gain nuclear weaponry? How much of his defeatist attitude is shared by those who are supposed to develop strategy against threats to the U.S. and institute policy against it? Did the Obama Administration really want to stop Iran with even non-military measures? Winston Mideast Analysis & Commentary contends that it did not and that both the Obama and Bush administrations wanted Israel to relinquish any nuclear weapons. Emanuel Winston puts it this way, "Clearly, Obama came into office with a secret agenda — to protect an expanding hostile Islam by attacking Israel. No doubt, you will recall Obama's blatant lies to the American Jewish community, Evangelical Christians and Americans generally, when in his pre-election speeches, he assured us all that he would continue to support Israel. But, Obama has demonstrated that he is an accomplished liar and sophist. (A sophist is a person who can speak convincingly on either sides of any subject.) Obama not only lies but, has used his linguistic talent to explain away every failure of his policies. Obama's bias against Israel reflects his early Muslim roots." (2/9.) [This strong assertion is based upon Obama's statements and behavior, but is not proved.] Here is some evidence from what Obama told the Arabs on 6/4/09: "I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation — including Iran — should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal." [By that time it long had been obvious that Iran was not abiding by its responsibilities under the Treaty. Therefore, this was lip service, in other words, sophistry, an example of what Winston accuses Obama of.] Obama's dithering may appear as indecision, like many other Obama problems, but Mr. Winston suggests that it deliberately cleared the way for Iran to complete nuclear development. Obama's agenda is explained by Moshe Dann in Israelnationalnews.com, 8/14/06, forwarded by Winston. Obama accepts nuclear proliferation in one sense until there is universal nuclear disarmament, which he is pressing Israel to accept. Israel did not sign the Non-Proliferation travesty. If it did, it would have to open its facilities for inspection and become subjected to pressure to any disarm nuclear weaponry. It would lose its deterrence, whereas violators would not. The loss of Israel's deterrence, combined with Obama's other goal, Israeli withdrawal to indefensible borders, would assure Israel's destruction even by conventional means. Obama's policies, like Bush's, could be called Mutually Assured Destruction of Israel. Here is what Winston Mideast Analysis and Commentary points out is wrong with complacency and welcoming of Iranian nuclear arming. The notion of mutually assured destruction by nuclear armed foes led to the concept of nuclear assured deterrence. One country would not initiate nuclear warfare with another having a second-strike capability, lest that second strike devastate the aggressor. In addition, as Chinese nuclear testing showed, radiation from a strike circles the globe and can irradiate unintended areas. Nuclear assured deterrence worked, until now. People drew the wrong conclusion about why the policy and concept worked. They generalized that it always would work. More likely, however, it works with certain cultures and not with others. It works with emotionally rational cultures having a survival instinct. The Soviets wanted to live to see their system triumph. The West wants to survive. So does India. Probably Saudi Arabia would want its oil fields to survive and continue providing the ruling class with luxury. Egypt probably would be trustworthy in this, but how long will its regime stave off the influential but Radical Moslem Brotherhood? Israel lives under threat of attack and has been attacked, but withheld use of nuclear weapons it is believed to have, reserving such weapons as a last resort, so that enemies in a position to overrun it know it would the last thing they do. The leaders of Iran and Radical Islam have different instincts and ideology. If after a great war, some Muslims are left standing, they would consider that a triumph. If they bring on "The End of Days," they believe that the Hidden Imam would reveal himself, Allah would send all the Muslims to eternal reward, and all the non-Muslims to eternal punishment. Ahmadinejad said he'd welcome this. Once he attained nuclear weaponry, he could not be deterred. Russia is making Adhadinejad's objective easier by furnishing technology. If Iran does not act on its own, it could give nuclear weapons to terrorist proxies. Terrorists may take over countries with nuclear weapons. North Korea has an insane leader. What may he do? S. ARABIA URGES WORLD TO CONDEMN ISRAEL (FOR A CHANGE) 
Saudi Arabia urged the "international community" to oppose Israel for threatening Lebanon, Syria, and the Palestinian Authority, for inhumane practices against the Palestinian people, for "arbitrary arrests," for aerial strikes on Gaza, for judaizing Jerusalem, and for desecrating Islamic holy sites (www.imra.org.il, 2/10). These accusations are generalized. No definitions, no examples. What do they mean? How could the accused defend itself against such shadows? This is the way accusations are being leveled against Israel these days, by generalization. I receive demands to know why I defend genocide by Israel. They neither define "genocide" nor cite examples of it or of my defending it. They just condemn Israel and me. There are no examples. Not if they knew or cared what genocide is. By definition, it is mass-murder of an ethnic or religious group, with intent to exterminate it. When I explain that Israel fights in self-defense, does not target civilians, and has killed a tiny proportion of the enemy population, they do not respond. Neither do they respond when I challenge them to object to documented cases of actual genocide by the Muslim Arabs. Why don't they respond? They don't care about accuracy or issues, they just cast mud? They assemble all the anti-Israel buzz word pejoratives, regardless of what they mean? They have no information? They won't admit they are mistaken? Take your pick. A preliminary answer to S. Arabia might include at least these points: 1. Israel threatened to be harsh on those named governments if they, as intelligence services suspect, plan aggression. S. Arabia does not ask the UN to oppose those governments' threats against Israel. Hypocritical, yes? Why doesn't S. Arabia object to firing of rockets into Israel, which is terrorism, unlike Israeli bombing of Hamas military facilities? Let the UN object, instead of waiting until Israel retaliates hard, and then complain mostly about Israel? 4. What desecration of Muslim holy sites? S. Arabia probably refers to phony Arab accusations that Israel undermines the mosque on the Mount when it actually reinforces the Mount or does normal archaeological excavation at some remove from the mosque. The falsity and incitement to religious animosity of such defamation should be condemned by the UN as contributing to war. It should put people on their guard about Arab accusations, for which there is little or not basis.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: TWISTED MEDIA
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 10, 2010. |
|
On Tuesday, I heard a talk at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs delivered by Tom Gross — a well-respected journalist, as well as a media analyst — who addressed the subject of media distortion of Israel. That it's bad is no surprise, but according to Gross, it's even worse than we think. A situation that has been going on for years is growing in intensity: the sort of defamation of Israel that was once found mainly in Arab and hard left sources has now found its way into the mainstream; he displayed some hair-raising examples that provide evidence of this. Mention of Israel creeps into articles on other subjects (a review of a film that is not about Israel, a financial report, etc.). Anti-Israel cartoons show up in mainstream papers in Spain, and Greece and Italy, as well as elsewhere. ~~~~~~~~~~ Why is this happening? Two obvious answers are endemic (and growing) anti-Semitism and a well orchestrated Arab PR campaign. But Gross offered an additional explanation: The left seeks causes around which to rally. Right now the two causes that the left has embraced are global warming and the Palestinian Arabs. Support for these issues becomes like a religion, not rational and very much exaggerated. ~~~~~~~~~~ Unfortunately, the media bias in favor of the Palestinian Arabs fuels their maximalist demands, and encourages them to expect the world to pressure Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Gross, bias in British media is most significant because it is global. This is particularly true of the BBC, which has websites in several languages and, for example, currently has up on its Persian language website a picture of human organs that Israelis allegedly "harvested." ~~~~~~~~~~ Gross explained that the standards to which Israel is held by the media are not simply higher than those applied to other nations, they are impossible standards. An example: a soldier pushing — pushing, not shooting and not beating — a Palestinian Arab at a checkpoint, behavior that would get no notice in another context, but might be featured in a front page photo because it's an Israeli soldier. Thus, while other nations may get by with an occasional error or slipshod management of a media or PR situation, Israel does not have that luxury. And, as most of us are aware, Israel often falls short in this department. Gross made some very constructive comments with regard to how Israel might improve — use of people who truly understand the inside and complex nuances of the media world, and of people who are absolutely fluent in various languages. Within the last year, there has been an increased awareness within the foreign ministry of the problems with some spokespersons, but more work needs to be done here. Happily, Gross does not just give lectures on this subject, at least on occasion he's in touch with pertinent persons inside our government, in order to provide his perceptions. ~~~~~~~~~~ My own comment here is that each of us, in his or her own way, is able to help combat bias against Israel simply by promulgating the facts. Probably the most important thing these postings do is to combat falsehoods about Israel, providing not just current facts but background. As you share this information broadly, and utilize it for such things as writing letters to the editor and to your elected officials, you are doing your part to help keep Israel strong. ~~~~~~~~~~ An IDF soldier, First-Sgt. Ihab Khatib, 26, who served in the Kfir Brigade and was from the northern Druze village of Marar, was killed by a terrorist today at Tapuach Junction, in Samaria. He was sitting in his open jeep, in a traffic back-up, when his assailant came at him and stabbed him in the chest through an open window; when he tried to drive away, his jeep over-turned. Brought to the hospital, he succumbed to his chest wounds. The terrorist, please note, was a PA police officer from Yabed. According to reports, the IDF, who has him in custody, has identified him as Mahmoud al-Hattib. (Yes, I've noticed the similarity of this name to that of his victim, and checked several sources.) He was prevented from fleeing the scene when a security officer on the scene hit him with his car. Sgt. Khatib has been praised by his family as someone who had a heart of gold, who was very proud to serve in the IDF. Serving is part of the family tradition; an uncle was killed in action some years ago. ~~~~~~~~~~ PA prime minister Salam Fayyad denounced the attack, saying it "conflicts with our national interests." He said he would continue to endorse "peaceful resistance," however. The fact that the terrorist was someone who had ostensibly been trained to fighting terror as part of the PA security forces provides a warning of things to come, writ large. Again, it must be asked how the world can expect the IDF to pull back and allow PA forces to take control, when it is clear what the dangers are. There is a history of PA security forces turning on the IDF. ~~~~~~~~~~ After its major meeting in Philadelphia last week, "pro-Israel, pro-peace" J Street was talking about how it was expanding the definition of "pro-Israel." This Dry Bones cartoon says it better than anything I could write on the subject of how J Street defines "pro-Israel." 
I include here as well a link to an article by Lori Lowenthal Marcus on the lack of integrity with which J Street leadership conducted itself with regard to parameters of their event.
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il
and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
|
|
DEFINING "VICTORY" AND "PEACE": HOW THE U.S. AND ISRAEL REJECT GENERAL SHERMAN'S SOLUTION AND GET BLAMED ANYWAY
Posted by Barry Rubin, February 10, 2010. |
|
"War," said General William Tecumseh Sherman, "is Hell." He knew what he was talking about. Sherman's march through Georgia and into South Carolina at the end of the Civil War helped end the Civil War while destroying a lot of civilian homes, farms, and towns. His strategy was to inflict such terrible punishment on the South that it would surrender faster, thus saving lives. His men did things shocking to Americans even after such a bloody conflict, burning plantations and destroying everything in their wake. Ironically, though, even Sherman's deeds have been exaggerated. But Sherman was no mere brute. He was so depressed by the prospect of the Civil War — being among the few who understood how long and bloody it would be — that he had a nervous breakdown at its onset and tried to escape the responsibility of service that he ultimately knew would be impossible for him to avoid. Like other Western generals of his time, and almost up to the present day — but no longer — he simply believed, in his words, "I will ever conduct war with a view to perfect and early [that is, complete and quick] success." After the war, Sherman became commander of the U.S. army and about 1870, regarding the Franco-Prussian War but it applies generally: How are wars won? The preferred way is for one side to see that its own victory is impossible and that it will face much heavier costs by continuing than by surrendering or making peace. By making a deal sooner, the side that's losing often reasons that it can get better terms. What do you do, though, if the other side isn't going to give up? Here's what Sherman said about the French-German conflict but which also applies to America's Civil War and many other conflicts as well: "The proper strategy consists in inflicting as telling blows as possible on the enemy's army, and then in using the inhabitants so much suffering that they must long for peace, and force the government to demand it. The people must be left nothing but their eyes to weep with over the war." That's pretty terrible. Remember, though, that Sherman did say war was Hell. When it became clear that Japan was not going to surrender in World War Two, requiring a full-scale U.S. invasion of that country's homeland that would have left millions dead, President Harry Truman dropped two atomic bombs on Japan. He was right to do so. The results were horrendous, heart-breaking. Yet if Truman had not taken that tough decision far more Japanese and Americans would be dead. The damage to Japan would have been so great that the country would not have recovered, if at all, until many decades passed. Consider Sherman's analysis in a contemporary context. Western democracies, including the United States and Israel, have no desire to pursue such a strategy. If the governments did, the democratic institutions and public opinion would never stand for it. This creates a paradox: if the other side doesn't surrender, victory is impossible because that other side will not be crushed or so credibly threatened with destruction that its leaders will give in. This is one side — the other is the nature and ideology of the enemies themselves — of asymmetric warfare. By refusing to surrender, by offering up their own civilians as casualties, by courting massive destruction, by keeping the battle going and inflicting casualties on the democratic combatants, the weaker side hopes to win. True, the radicals believe that their ideology and determination makes them stronger but there's one more factor: they count on the squeamishness of their would-be victims as being too soft, in effect too democratic. The radicals using asymmetric warfare are wrong in thinking they can win but they are right in thinking they can't lose. The battle goes on as long as they choose, even if the democratic side doesn't give up. And sometimes it does, or at least they can still hope that it will and use that hope to inspire more sacrifice from its own people. Consider Israel in this context. The above explains why Israel can never "win" the conflict with the Palestinians or with the neighboring Arabs or Muslims for that matter. "Win" here means to gain such a triumph that the conflict will come to an end. But Israel can "win" by reducing the cost of the conflict to itself, going on with its national life, and reducing conflict to a minimum in terms of disruptions and casualties. Equally, the radicals can gain international sympathy and criticisms of Israel but that will never bring them actual victory, only allow them to extend the conflict indefinitely. And so, there is no peace but Israel remains the closest thing to a winner, as long as it is willing to pay a certain price, while trying to reduce that price to the lowest possible level. I am not advocating a Sherman-like policy. No one in any position of power in Israel is doing so or has ever really done so. Aside from the moral issue, the effect on Israel's own society, and the impact on its international standing, such a step simply isn't necessary. Compare the Israeli view to that of the creator and commander of the German army, not in World War Two under the Nazis, not even in World War One, but in the 1870 Franco-Prussian war. The Germans had won but the French were waging war for a time through guerrilla forces. General Moltke ordered all French guerrillas to be shot and anyone helping them be severely punished. "Experience has established that the most effective way of dealing with this situation is to destroy the premises concerned — or, where participation has been more general, the entire village...." A German officer wrote in 1870: "We are learning to hate them more every day....Atrocious attacks are avenged by atrocities which remind one of the Thirty Years War." Does this have anything to do with Israeli tactics on the West Bank or Gaza Strip? Of course not, though nothing would be easier for Israel to do in terms of capability. After 50 years of conflict, Israeli soldiers don't respond the way those Germans did after five months. That's why not a single real atrocity or massacre can be found by Israel's enemies despite massive and desperate attempts to do so over many years; even despite the fact that there have been many completely documented and deliberately planned massacres of Israeli civilians by Palestinian terrorists. And this remains true despite the fact that the "atrocious attacks" Israel faces, in terms of anti-civilian terrorism, is far beyond what that German officer in 1870 could ever have dreamed possible. Remember, too, by the way that under British rule in mandatory Palestine the mere possession of a gun was punishable by death. The British executed more Jews in two years during the 1940s than Israel has hung Palestinians who killed civilians in 50 years. In fact, Israel has not executed a single Palestinian during its existence. Fortunately, back in 1871, the French government, realizing the hopelessness of the situation, made a deal, giving up one and a half provinces and paying reparations in order to end the war. Even this did not terminate the friction between the two countries which later resulted in two world wars, though that particular peace agreement held for almost 45 years. Still, the Franco-Prussian war example shows that even a "total victory" might be less satisfactory ultimately than what for Israel is largely a victory for all practical purposes, including at least formal peace with two of its neighbors and a de facto peace — though not necessarily a permanent one of course, with the Palestinian Authority. Two points to conclude. First, there is nothing harder than to explain the above to a Western audience. They identify a good outcome only with a full and formal peace ending the conflict. This is, of course, preferable. But if it is impossible — and it is in an asymmetric conflict when international sympathy for the aggressive "underdog" allows it to go on getting its people killed and territory damaged for decades — than a practical "victory" is the next best thing. Second, it is rather ridiculous to slander Israel as a "war criminal" or bully or aggressor or the factor blocking peace when the opposite is true. If the weaker side insists on being the attacker and rejecting a reasonable peaceful solution, then that supposed "David" becomes in fact the actual "Goliath." Moreover, compared to the wars of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries there have been no massacres, summary executions, wholesale destruction of cities, large-scale looting, or anything comparable to such things. In the attempt to smear Israel, we are now down to debating whether it was right for Israeli soldiers to shoot back at enemy combatants trying to kill them who were firing from a specific building or which ammunition should have been used in doing so. And this in a situation where the other side is subject to no limits whatsoever, indeed can be expected to target civilians on purpose and execute prisoners. Defiinitely, there has been a great deal of success for groups with a long history of deliberate terrorism in lying about Israeli actions and spreading the general impression that some kind of war crimes were committed. Yet the fabrications and irresponsibility of Western institutions in doing so are far more shocking than anything that actually happened. And finally, Israel has rejected the Sherman strategy. It is the Palestinian side, along with Iran, Syria, Hizballah, and others that have embraced it. They just lack the competence to pull it off. In Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere, the United States is facing parallel issues, and this will happen even more in the future. It is understandable that democratic countries have generally abandoned the Sherman approach but there is a price to be paid for doing so. What is completely unacceptable is to pay the price for restraint and then be falsely accused of acting otherwise. At the end of the Civil War, Sherman wrote, speaking words that all democratic societies truly feel: "I confess, without shame, I am sick and tired of fighting — its glory is all moonshine; even success the most brilliant is over dead and mangled bodies, with the anguish and lamentations of distant families, appealing to me for sons, husbands and fathers....It is only those who have never heard a shot, never heard the shriek and groans of the wounded and lacerated ... that cry aloud for more blood, more vengeance, more desolation." Yet Sherman did not live to see the age of ideological warfare, no matter what the cost to their own people the radicals and Islamists do indeed call for "more blood, more vengeance, more desolution." They do so in the hope that their enemies are "sick and tired of fighting," will do anything to avoid casualties and the "anguish and lamentations," from citizens, and that fools in the enemies' camp blame the continued warfare and suffering on their own side. 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).
His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof.
Rubin's columns can now be read online at
http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at
profbarryrubin@yahoo.com This article is archived at |
|
SPAIN'S BNEI ANOUSIM GET A RABBI OF THEIR OWN
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 10, 2010. |
|
This is from the Shavei Israel Newsletter of February 2010. The introduction is: "Welcome to Shavei Israel's monthly newsletter with news of our outreach efforts to "lost Jews" around the world seeking to reconnect with their roots. We hope you enjoy!" |
|
Shavei Israel recently dispatched Rabbi Nissan Ben Avraham to Spain to serve as the organization's emissary to the Bnei Anousim (people whose ancestors were compelled to convert to Catholicism during the time of the Inquisition). He will conduct a range of educational, cultural and religious activities in four Spanish cities: Palma de Mallorca, Alicante, Barcelona and Seville. Rabbi Nissan was born in Palma into an "Apostolic and Roman Catholic" home where he was given the name Nicolas Aguilo. His parents sought to hide their Jewish roots but the children at school cursed him for being a "Chueta" — a derogatory term meaning "pig" in Catalan used to refer to descendants of Jews. He was ten years old, he says, when he "discovered that to be a Chueta was something awful, even though I did not succeed in understanding why." At home, his family never spoke about being from the Chuetas, he recalls. "We never behaved according to any Jewish custom. There weren't any explanations either. The silence was absolute. But I wanted to know." At 26, that desire to explore — and ultimately return — to his roots culminated in his packing both his bags and his heritage as he moved to Israel in 1978 and converted formally to Judaism. "If after 600 years I could not overcome the stigma of my being a Jew, why shouldn't I be a Jew?" he asks plainly. After working as a schoolteacher and a Torah scribe while studying toward his Rabbinic ordination in 1992, the 53-year-old father of 12 and resident of Shilo is now helping other Bnei Anousim in Spain like himself who are eager to discover the tradition hidden away for so many years. Spanish Jewry dates back to the early Middle Ages and it was one of the oldest and most successful Diaspora Jewish communities. But from 1391 onwards, persecution and forced conversions plagued the community, culminating in the complete expulsion of the Jews in 1492. Many of those who remained behind converted to Catholicism under duress but continued to preserve and practice Jewish tradition covertly...until this very day. Rabbi Nissan has made peace with his journey from Cheuta to rabbi; indeed he embraces it. "If I weren't a Chueta," he notes, "nothing that happened to my life would have taken place. I wouldn't have gotten the chance to develop and get to where I am, or to help others like me." Rabbi Nissan's new position has been widely covered in the news,
including articles in The Jerusalem Post, JTA and Maariv.
Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com
|
|
BRUTAL MIDNIGHT ARRESTS IN GILAD FARM
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, February 10, 2010. |
|
This is the face of the Jew hating Government of Netanyahu and Barak. All those who are a partner in this abomination are equally guilty of its crimes against the Jewish people. There is no excuse that can be offered by the "Right Wing," "Religious" or whatever that justifies continued support for goon squads, synagogue destroyers, the torturers of Rabbis, the capitulation to policies of open Jew haters and just overall boneheaded stupidity. They have to go! All of them and the sooner the better. Below is an article by Hillel Fendel that appeared today in Arutz-7
|
|
(Israelnationalnews.com) Plainclothes policemen broke into homes in Gilad Farm and Yeshivat Shiru LaMelekh in Samaria during the night and arrested five men and one minor — because an Arab complained that he was beaten up a month ago. Yehuda Shimon, spokesman for the Havat Farm near Yitzhar, who also serves as a lawyer on behalf of the Honenu Civil Rights organization, told Israel National News: "Around 4:00 this morning, nearly 100 Yassam, shabak and magav men [special unit police, Israel Security Agency agents, and Border Guard policemen] broke into homes and the yeshiva caravans, and arrested three married men and three yeshiva boys, including one minor. They pulled them out of their beds in the middle of the night, while waking up everyone else around them as well and asking for identification. One person tried to film what was going on — and a plainclothes agent broke his camera. This is clearly illegal, but we cannot identify who did it... Most notably, Shimon said, "when the police originally asked for a warrant for their arrest, Judge Nava Bechor of the Magistrates Court turned them down. This is a very rare occurrence, and shows the weakness of the case against them. Only when the police then went to a higher court did they receive the warrants... This is just another very grave incident that is part of the known strategy of the Jewish Department of the ISA and Assistant State Prosecutor Shai Nitzan's special Judea/Samaria law enforcement team to come down hard on the Jewish residents." In a Knesset committee session last month, MK Ze'ev Elkin (Likud) called for the disbanding of Nitzan's team. Members of the committee said afterwards that Nitzan admitted that his team is politically biased against the Jews in Judea and Samaria. Yehuda Shimon continued: "We feel as if we're living in some kind of movie, with no basis in normal reality. We have had houses burnt down — two on Rosh HaShanah — and horses stolen, two women were stoned as they were walking here, a car was burnt — and all our complaints to the police are dismissed without any investigation. In the case of the houses, three Arabs were arrested and released, and that was the end of it. Yet here, on a five-week old charge by one man, they go to to this extreme to investigate us. There is clearly a policy from somewhere in the higher echelons to persecute the Jews of this area." 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. He writes: "In the history of the world, no tyranny has ever voluntarily relinquished power or been replaced by peaceful means." |
|
WAS PROPHET MOHAMED A ZIONIST?; PARADOX OF UN'S REFUGEE POLICY; LIST OF MIDDLE EAST PEACE BIGOTRY
Posted by Steven Shamrak, February 9, 2010. |
|
Was Prophet Mohamed a Zionist? Land of Israel activists sought to educate Arabs regarding the Quran's teachings handed out flyers in Arabic with the relevant verses of Quran that cited on Jewish links to Land of Israel: Sura 5:20-21: "Recall that Moses said to his people, "O my people, remember G-d's blessings upon you: He appointed prophets from among you, made you kings, and granted you what He never granted any other people. O my people, enter the holy land that G-d has decreed for you, and do not rebel..." Even Fake Regret Made by Hamas is Denounced by Fatah. The 'moderate' Fatah movement attacked Hamas on Saturday for expressing regret over the deaths of Israeli civilians during Operation Cast Lead. A spokesman for Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas said he was stunned at the Islamic movement's remarks in a report to the United Nations last week and said that instead of apologizing to Israel. Food for Thought. by Steven Shamrak It is not enough for a Jew to be pro-Israel and blindly support the inept actions of an Israeli government. We must all become true Zionists! The Right Step Toward Eretz-Israel. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu completed his week-long campaign to reaffirm Israel's claim on major Jewish population centers in Judea and Samaria, and declared the Jewish city of Ariel "the capital of Samaria." He planted a symbolic tree in the city. (Next step: Hebron "the capital of Judea.") Who is "Negotiating" Partner? A week ago, Hamas issued a statement challenging the legitimacy of president Mahmoud Abbas stating that Abbas' term in office is over, and that he does not represent the so-called Palestinian people and their aspirations anymore. (They have only one aspiration — destruction of Israel!) Another Fake Friend of Israel. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi linked Holocaust victims and Arab suffering in Gaza: "just as it's right to cry for the victims of the Shoah, it's right to show pain for what happened in Gaza" (Jews in Europe did not fire rockets at German civilians and did not terrorize them with daily attacks!) At the start of a three-day visit to the Jewish state Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi stated that he hopes to bring Israel into the European Union. (NO thank you! This is another hidden agenda to destroy the Jewish state by opening it to immigration to any Muslim and other residents of Europe.) Torah Legislates Settlement of Jewish Land. Chairman of the Jewish Home party, Minister Prof. Daniel Hershkowitz said at the foundation of the parliamentary caucus for the Land of Israel, "I see that one of our goals is to promote legislation to strengthen the settlements. Such legislation already exists in the Torah, and unlike parliamentary legislation, you can not cancel it." Iranian Nukes are Profitable for the US. The Obama administration is arming Gulf States to be able to defend against an Iranian attack while delaying a push for tough sanctions against the Islamic Republic. (Arms sales to Arabs are only destabilising the region.) Quote of the Week: "I remember the Muhammad al-Durra hoax that was staged in cahoots between Palestinian and French 'journalists'. This blood libel provoked a killing spree against Israelis even after the facts came out to reveal that: 1) the boy was killed by Arab gunfire, not Israeli; and 2) the boy wasn't killed at all. He walked off the set with his father after the director yelled "cut" (and you thought only Hollywood made movies)." — Jack Engelhard — Israel must review, introduce and enforce strong ethic in media reporting: Israeli and foreign journalists and networks who report fake news, solicit newsworthy violence, deliberately compose anti-Israel biased reports or are too lazy to check the facts should lose their media licence in Israel! Why is No One Outraged by Jordan? Nearly 3,000 Jordanians of Palestinian origin were stripped of their citizenship in recent years. Almost half the kingdom's 6 million people are of Palestinian origin and Jordan fears that if Palestinians become the majority, it will disrupt the delicate demographic balance. (Let's not forget that Jordan is an illegally created state on 77% of the land that was designated for the Jewish state and most non-Palestinian residents of Jordan are refugees from Saudi Arabia!) Paradox of UN's Refugee Policy. UNRWA deals exclusively with Arab refugees, while UNHCR deals with all the other refugees around the world. In addition, the UNRWA seeks to perpetuate the Arab refugee status, while UNHCR seeks to end their refugee status. Jerusalem Afraid to Act on Illegal Arab Construction. The man, Ofir Mai, responsible for building inspections for the Jerusalem municipality said that the city is afraid to enforce laws against illegal Arab building because of the threat of disorders: "Because of security limitations, I am not able to carry out effective enforcement in the neighbourhood of Silwan (Shiloach in Hebrew), so many building violations in the neighbourhood are not dealt with. Every tour in the neighbourhood draws protests, rock throwing and disturbances." (Why does the government of Israel have no "security limitations" when it is destroying Jewish homes?) PA: Starve but do not Work with Jews. The supreme spiritual authority of the Palestinian Authority, Sheikh Taisar Tamimi, rules that Arabs who work in Jewish construction are traitors and must be imprisoned. The ruling also includes Arabs who take part in archaeological digs by the Israel Antiquities Authority in eastern Jerusalem. Israel is Only Country with More Trees. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu referred to the Tu B'Shvat festival said, "We are the only country in the world that has more trees today than it had 100 years ago and we want to increase this." In 1901, Israel had only 14,000 dunams of forested land. Currently Israel has 855,663 dunams of forests. Another Iranian Export. The beaches of Ashkelon and Ashdown, twin Israeli ports up to 25 km north of Gaza, were evacuated on Feb. 1 for fear that two large containers packed with explosives which drifted ashore were floating bombs with more on the way. Most likely the explosives are Iranian deliveries to Hamas terrorists in Gaza. An Islamic Jihad militant in the Gaza revealed that the explosives were part of a joint operation with the military wing of the American-backed Fatah ('peace loving') movement, the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. Hypocricy of the Headlines. "U.S. Asks Israel to Refrain from Retaliatory Ops" — Why have US solders been fighting in Afghanistan for eight years? Because it is the "Retaliatory Operation", isn't it? (The illegal war in Iraq is another matter) List of Middle East Peace Bigotry Since the creation of the State of Israel there were many so-called peace proposals which were focused only on accommodating Arabs insistency to grab Jewish land. After the signing of the Oslo Accords we have witnessed the escalation of recycled 'peace' proposals. But, none of them has brought real peace or at lease the cessation of Islamic terror against Jews in Israel. None of them have ever considered the rights of Jewish people to the land of their ancestors and travesty of Arab claims. It is time for Israeli government start implementation of the Sinai Option! Nothing else has ever worked and will never work.
Could you name any other international issue that would take so much time and disproportional 'dedication' of the international community? How about: Cyprus, Tibet, Korean conflict, Western Sahara, war in Congo, West Papua, Basques, Chechnya, Sri Lanka or Kashmir? Just name one! Steven Shamrak was involved in the Moscow Zionist movement. He worked as a construction engineer at the Moscow Olympic Games project and as a computer consultant in Australia. He has been publishing an Internet editorial letter about the Arab-Israel conflict since August 2001 and has a website www.shamrak.com. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak@gmail.com |
|
HOW TO DO BUSINESS IN THE NEW SOUTH AFRICA
Posted by Israel Ben-Ami, February 9, 2010. |
|
Read Carefully and Weep. The public bus service in Durban has closed down, leaving thousands of daily commuters with no way to get to work or home again. It has closed because it is insolvent. How on earth did that happen? The public bus service was run and operated by the city municipality from 1912 until 2007. It did receive subsidies from the City, but these were recovered from the Government and not from the ratepayers. In essence the public transport system ran at a profit sufficient for it to replace its own vehicles as needed. In 2007 the City Council decided that it was illegal for them to operate the public transport under the new Constitution — it had to be run and operated privately by someone from the previously disadvantaged community. The City Manager, Dr Mike Sutcliffe, then sold the public transport operation to a private company named Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd for R70 million. This sum also included the route operating licenses and all the vehicles, equipment and buildings in Alice Street where the buses were garaged, serviced and repaired. So far so good. Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd immediately sold off the buses, (mostly new vehicles), one by one, to independent "owner-operators" contracted to Remnant Alton. An owner-operator would drive their bus over allocated routes, collect the fares and use the bus garage in Alice Street as a facility for maintaining the bus. They would also buy their spares and diesel from Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd. By the end of 2008 most of the buses were in such poor condition they were unsafe. Broken down buses were the order of the day, and the service to commuters was a shambles. Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd approached the City Council for help, and the City Council lent them R40 million at a very low interest rate to restore the bus service. This was in March 2009. At the beginning of April 2009 Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd went into liquidation and ceased all operations. The R40 million was "gone", so the City Council seized the company. The 1,500 "owner-operators" then took the Council — as the new owners of the business — to the labour court, and won their case. The Council was ordered to compensate them with the same income they would have received had the service continued operating until the end of their contracts. Naturally the R40 million "loan" plus the award to the owner-operators comes out of Council revenue, paid by the ratepayers of Durban. Now the Council, who suddenly decide that it is NOT illegal to operate the bus company, spends a fortune on buying new buses and restoring the transport service to its former state. Nobody yet knows what this has cost — the bills are still coming in. But suddenly there is a "whoops". The Council can't run the buses, because it sold the licenses to operate over the routes to Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd. No problem. Just buy them back. Remnant Alton was willing to sell them back to the council, and the council was willing to buy them back. The only teensy weeny problem is that Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd had sold them to its Managing Director (an Indian — how did you know?) and he wanted slightly more for them than what Remnant Alton had originally paid. After tough negotiations the council beat him down to a lower price and bought the route licenses back for R45 million. Yes, that's right. R45 million. OK. On the income side, the ratepayers scored R70 million when the bus company was originally sold. Now, on the debit side, they have an unrecoverable loan of R40 million, written off Plus the cost of restoring the company to a good operating standard — say another R100 million Plus the cost of buying the route licenses back — R45 million Plus the cost of recompensing the owner-operators — 1,500 of them, for four months at R8,000 per month each = R48 million (note: more than a doctor earns) So the total cost to ratepayers is R233 million less R70 million = R163 million. Well, its a lot of money, but at least we will have a working bus service back. Now here is the real kicker. The Council says it doesn't have the capacity to operate the bus company, so it will be looking for a private company to operate it in the future — and they have found the perfect candidate. Yep. You guessed it. They are GIVING it away, lock, stock and barrel, completely FREE, to..... Wait for it...... Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd. I kid you not. Now, the Durban (Etekwini) Metro Council is overwhelmingly ANC, and they got VERY upset when a Democratic Alliance Councillor asked if they knew that the Managing Director of Remnant Alton (Pty) Ltd had at some stage in the past been found guilty of fraud, and served time for that offence? The response? No, we didn't know that. After more questions — Well, actually, the City Manager did know, but it was some time ago, and the "gentleman" concerned had served his time and paid his debt to society, so we didn't think it was important.... Meanwhile, the buses haven't begun running yet. Nobody has a clue when they will operate again. But the citizens of Durban can take solace in learning the new and unpronounceable street names as they walk to and from work, hoping they won't step in the turds and filth, or get mugged. They may even see our City Manager sweep by in his fancy luxury car, with a cavalcade of body guards, as he makes his way to his new luxury penthouse, valued at several million, at the Point Waterfront - smiling as he goes because the area has been declared, BY HIM, as a rates-free zone until 2014. Effectively he is totally unaffected by this huge cock-up. He doesn't even have to pay his share in his rates bill. Isn't Africa wonderful? Contact Israel Ben-Ami at farmer@012.net.il |
|
NEW ZIONIST DAILY; ETHICIST ON GAZA; MISLEADING: ARAB "REFUGEE";
SYRIA GIVE HIZBULLAH MISSILES; NEW AL-QAEDA STRATEGY
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 9, 2010. |
|
Found on the internet. |
|
BRITAIN REDUCING FOREIGN STUDENT FRAUD Tens of thousands of migrant job seekers and possibly terrorists apply for visas to Britain every year, by pretending to be students. They had been bringing relatives in with them. The total number of student visas issued last year were 240,000, a third of the total of migrants. This wave is overwhelming public facilities. Indeed, last year's drive against phony applicants resulted in such a backlog, that British officials were approving them based solely on the paperwork and without interviews. Student applicants must have a better command of English than previously required. Relatives would not be allowed in if the proposed period of study is less than half a year. Dependents of students not seeking degrees may not take jobs. The government will try to shut down phony colleges. The new rules would apply to applicants from outside the EU. The U.S. had worried about terrorists entering Britain, where much international terrorism is engendered and plotted. As for the underwear bomber who earlier had visited England, his student visa application was rejected because it named a bogus college. He was not considered a security risk, just in the periphery of Islamist circles, so the government did not alert the U.S.. Foreign college students bring in $8-13 billion a year. That is significant for Britain's economy (John E. Burns, NY Times, 2/8, A6). By the time Europeans get serious about dealing with the political correctness and extreme multi-culturalism that presents them with these dangers, their civilization may be overthrown. They should never skimp on security measures to alleviate backlogs, or is the foreign income too tempting? Not considered a security risk because he was not an activist already?
That is naïve. As February Commentary explains, terrorists go through
stages of radicalization. Someone in an earlier stage may not present
a risk at the time, but soon may. He should be treated as a risk.
NEW ZIONIST DAILY OVERTAKING OTHER ISRAELI DAILIES A fairly new, free, daily newspaper, Yisrael HaYom has surpassed Haaretz and Maariv in circulation, and aims at overtaking Yediot Aharonot. Publisher Sheldon Adelson, a frequent visitor to Israel, explains that he found Israelis' political views distorted by the existing media, which act to exclude pro-Zionist writers. He felt it his duty to compete with the established papers, based on fairness. He said he does not direct his writers what line to take. Feeling the growing competition both in circulation and in outlook, the established media proposed a law banning media ownership by foreigners. Ironically, Haaretz partly is owned by foreigners. Mr. Adelson accused them of acting dictatorial toward competition (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/8). Would the established media support proposed laws banning foreign governments from subsidizing anti-Israel NGOs? As for dictatorial policy toward competition, when my source had radio
broadcasts, the government refused to license it and shut it down,
somewhat high-handedly. That action leaves the broadcast industry
almost entirely leftist. Competition would keep that industry on it
toes. The people would benefit.
IDF ETHICIST ON PROPRIETY IN GAZA IDF ethicist Asa Kasher said, "There is no army in the world that will endanger its soldiers in order to avoid hitting the warned neighbors of an enemy or terrorist." "Israel should favor the lives of its own soldiers over the lives of the well-warned neighbors of a terrorist when it is operating in a territory that it does not effectively control, because in such territories it does not bear the moral responsibility for properly separating between dangerous individuals and harmless ones." "Compare the Gaza operation to the U.S. Marine operation in Fallujah,
Iraq, in late 2004." "During the operation, about 6,000 Iraqis,
including 1,200-2,000 insurgents, were killed. Of the city's 50,000
buildings, some 10,000 were destroyed, including 60 mosques. Thus,
the U.S. left a trail of destruction in Fallujah far greater than
anything Israel inflicted on Gaza."
(http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/8).
NO PALESTINIAN ARAB REFUGEE PROBLEM ANY MORE? 
Prof. Nitza Nachmias of the Jewish-Arab Center in Haifa University says that UNRWA perpetuates notions of a no longer extant Palestinian refugee problem. She explains that most of the so-called refugees were integrated into other countries. "Only in Lebanon are there refugees who are not allowed to work in certain professions; they are a small fraction of the total." UNRWA has become the major employer of Palestinian Arabs, 30,000 of them, directed by 100 international experts. "If people would stop calling the places in which they live 'refugee camps,' then they would see that these places are just like villages and towns anywhere else, and the inhabitants are totally rehabilitated." Real refugee camps are obviously transitory facilities, as in Haitian camps or former camps for Jewish refugees from the Arab world. Prof. Nachmias thinks that Israel's policy on this is short-sighted. "We can't simply push it off to the 'final status talks' and say, 'We don't accept the demand for the right-of-return because it will destroy the Jewish character of our state;' what do they care about our Jewish character? If they (the Arabs) deserve to be here, then it's tough luck on us! Rather, Israel should take a pro-active approach, basing itself on international law and precedents, and declare that the Palestinian refugee issue no longer exists." "According to international law," Nachmias explains, "a refugee is an individual or family that was forced to run away — but this definition does not extend to children [of the original refugees], a community or a group." For the Palestinian Arabs, the UN makes an exception. Why? "Israel must nullify the status of Palestinian refugee camps; there is no other place where the UN controls territory [aside from its headquarters in New York?]. We must send the UNRWA out and transfer the control of these places to the Palestinian Authority, and then when the status of each individual resident there is reviewed, we will see that none of them match the legal definition of a refugee, and they are established citizens." Despite the UNRWA's power and well-oiled financial network, "the world will support Israel in this case because it will also remove the onus of the refugees, and also because Israel can show, if it makes the effort, that it [the proposal] is rooted in international law." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/8). The proposal describes conditions as they are, as they are pretended to be, and they should be. I doubt that "the world" would support Israel in anything. "The world" cares about neither the welfare of the Arabs nor international law. The pretense of caring is a pretext to oppose Israel. The Arab states use the refugee issue as a spearhead against Israel and a diversion from their own failings.
SYRIA GIVES HIZBULLAH FATEH-100 MISSILES Syria secretly provided Hizbullah with Fateh-110 missiles, much deadlier than the kinds Hizbullah had. The new missiles are mobile. They use solid fuel, enabling them to be fired rapidly and then returned to bunkers, hidden and protected from Israeli bombers. The new missiles can reach almost any Israeli city. Israel had warned Syria that if it equipped Hizbullah with such missiles, it would be a cause for war. It then warned that if Hizbullah fired them, Israel would strike against Syria for having supplied them for the purpose of firing them (www.imra.org.il, 2/8). What won't Syria supply Hizbullah with? Israel rarely implements its warnings. Why should Syria take them
seriously?
SYRIA WILL STAND BY LEBANON IN ANY ISRAELI 'AGGRESSION' 
Syria's President Assad told Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri that Syria would stand by Lebanon against any Israeli aggression. "Talks during the meeting dealt with the Israeli repeated threats against countries of the region and Israeli extremism which is poised for burying any chance for reaching peace by inflaming wars in the region and taking it into the unknown." (Winston Mideast Analysis & Summary, 2/8.) Syria had occupied Lebanon, exploited its economy, and still exerts an imperialistic influence over it. That is how he stands by Lebanon. If Syria and Iran and their proxies did not stir up wars and terrorism against Israel and others, Israel would not feel threatened and, in turn, threaten powerful retaliation.
IERAN TO PRODUCE UNMANNED AERIAL BOMBERS Iran announced that it will produce unmanned aerial bombers. Recently it claimed to have radar-evading missiles (www.imra.org.il, 2/8).
NEW AL-QAIDA STRATEGY 
As the U.S. increasingly eradicates Al-Qaida leaders and commanders, the remaining ones have shifted their strategy. Eager to retaliate against the U.S., they now are resorting to short term, low-tech, harder to pre-empt, individual actions by unknown, first-time offenders (www.imra.org.il, 2/8).
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 and visit his website:
|
|
CHRISTIAN TEACHER FORCED OUT BY MUSLIM RACISM/LIBERAL ENABLING
Posted by Roberta Dzubow, February 9, 2010. |
|
This was written by Lucy Ballinger and it appeared in the
Daily Mail
|
|
Christian teacher 'forced out' after complaining Muslim pupils praised 9/11 hijackers 'as heroes' 
Racism claim: Nicholas Kafouris arriving at the tribunal hearing A Christian teacher yesterday claimed he was forced out of his job after complaining that Muslim pupils as young as eight hailed the September 11 hijackers as heroes. Nicholas Kafouris, 52, is suing his former school for racial discrimination. He told a tribunal that he had to leave his £30,000-a-year post because he would not tolerate the 'racist' and 'anti-Semitic' behaviour of Year 4 pupils. The predominantly Muslim youngsters openly praised Islamic extremists in class and described the September 11 terrorists as 'heroes and martyrs'. One pupil said: 'Don't touch me, you're a Christian' when he brushed against him. Others said: 'We want to be Islamic bombers when we grow up', and 'The Christians and Jews are our enemies — you too because you're a Christian'. Mr Kafouris, a Greek Cypriot, taught for 12 years at Bigland Green Primary School in Tower Hamlets, East London. According to Ofsted 'almost all' its 465 pupils are from ethnic minorities and a vast proportion do not speak English as a first language. The teacher claims racial discrimination by the school, its headmistress and her assistant head after they failed to take action about the comments made by pupils to him. He said there was a change in attitude of the pupils after the atrocities of September 11, 2001. They told him: 'We hate the Christians' and 'We hate the Jews', despite his attempts to stop them. He said he filled out a Racist Incident Reporting Sheet but claimed headmistress Jill Hankey dismissed his concerns. In a statement submitted to the Central London Employment Tribunal he said: 'Miss Hankey proceeded to excuse and justify the pupil's behaviour, conduct and remarks to me as if I had no right to be offended by the child's remarks and conduct. 'Amongst Miss Hankey's justifications for the child's remarks, she said, "If the child was older, say 15, I might take it more seriously. He's only nine — he's only doing it to wind you up".' He added: 'I felt the head's behaviour and conduct towards me amounted to direct religious discrimination. I was intimidated in the way she spoke to me which indicated "Don't come back with such issues again".' Mr Kafouris, a bachelor, said the comments became more frequent after the head did nothing about the initial incidents. 'In late November and December 2006, a number of unacceptable and blunt racist, anti-Semitic and anti-Christian remarks were being made by various children in Year 4 where I taught, such as, "The Twin Tower bombers are heroes and martyrs". 'Some children were expressing delight at the death and killing of people of other cultures and religions. 'In the last week of November 2006 a child was talking about stabbing another child and I told him this was dangerous talk and that a lawyer had recently been stabbed by teenagers. His reply was, "I'm glad that man died". "Why?" I asked. "Because he's a Christian and English and we're Muslim".' He claimed that during a religious education lesson about Jonah and the whale, one of the pupils asked if Jonah was a Jew, before shouting: 'I hate the Jews, they're our enemies.' Mr Kafouris said he again tried to speak to Miss Hankey about it. 'The head's response was hostile and offensive again. The very first thing she said to me was, "Oh, you again! You're the only teacher that reports these things! Nobody else does!" 'Four times she repeated, "It's because of your lack of discipline that they're saying these things".' Mr Kafouris was signed off with stress by his GP at the end of February 2007 after assistant head Margaret Coleman warned him not to challenge the pupils in class about their remarks. He says the lack of support from the school has made him clinically depressed and unable to work. He was sacked in April last year. The case continues.
Contact Roberta Dzubow by email at Roberta@adgforum.com
|
|
ISRAELI AND MIDDLE EAST OPTIONS
Posted by CPocerl, February 9, 2010. |
|
This was written by
Maj. Gen. Paul E. Vallely, US Army (Ret) and it appeared in
Family Security Matters (FSM) |
|
On 9/11, Americans were attacked and the World Trade Center's destroyed along with the deaths of almost 3,000 innocents in New York, Washington D.C. and over the fields of Western Pennsylvania. It was pre-emptive attack and a horrific unthinkable act that arose from great and thorough planning of al Qaeda and its radical Islamists followers. At this point in history, Israel is facing such a dilemma as it seriously contemplates the consequences of a threatened nuclear/missile and ground attack from Iran and her proxies. Does Israel act preemptively to potentially protect its territory and six million citizens and potentially precipitate a full-on regional conflict or anxiously wait while Iran inches closer to nuclear launch capabilities and follows through with its threats of "Death to Israel?" The media has been fraught with reports about Israel's action to this Iranian attack that appears more real each day in passing. Israel does not require a green light from the U.S. as a sovereign nation and "needs to do what it has to do." It is now a political decision for Benjamin Netanyahu and his government. With the recent successful medium-range ballistic missile test and claims of 5,000 uranium-enrichment centrifuges and additional facilities, Ahmadinejad has brought the situation to a critical tipping point as the rest of the world (to include the U.S.) sits, appeases and threatens more sanctions and provides almost no support to the Iranian Opposition. A Chamberlain-type approach historically spells disaster. It is obvious that Iran is not open to negotiation or compromise. The risk appears to have elevated since Iran's recent missile tests and their build-up of Hezbollah in Southern Lebanon. Israel has been criticized for its failed efforts during Hezbollah's war against Israel in 2006 and the Gaza withdrawal. The fact is that Hezbollah now has three times the number of missiles it possessed during the 2006 war and now has over 60,000 trained ground combat foot soldiers capable of penetrating the northern border into Israel. Intelligence also is reporting that Iran's plan is to neutralize all Israel air bases by torrential missile attacks from Southern Lebanon. Syria has reportedly shipped Fateh-110 missiles to Hezbollah, able to destroy Israeli cities and the air fields. The secret transfer of the mobile surface-to-surface Syrian-made Fateh-110 (range 250km) missile to Hezbollah sparked the prediction Friday, February 5th, from an unnamed U.S. official that cross-border arms smuggling from Syria into Lebanon outside state control was occurring. Military sources report that Israel warned Syria through at least two diplomatic channels against Hezbollah of having and using these lethal weapons, which are capable of reaching almost every Israel city. How should Israel deter an Iran, both from launching direct missile attacks and from dispersing nuclear assets from the Iran homeland and its terrorist proxies? There are obvious and real "fingerprints" all over the wall that necessitates action. This is especially significant because Ahmadinejad states that soon there will be a world without the United States and Israel. Coupled with his regular pronouncements to wipe Israel off the face of the earth, this sends serious nuclear alarm signals that must be ignored. A nuclear-armed Iran, whose president regularly calls for the annihilation of Israel, is an intolerable threat to the world and existence of the Jewish state. There is no quarter for acceptance of an Iranian bomb, which could set in motion regional proliferation to come as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey and Syria could potentially acquire nuclear capabilities. The geopolitical and economic consequences of an attack, although necessary for self-preservation, would be dire. Iran could retaliate by escalating attacks on U.S. military forces in Iraq and blocking the Strait of Hormuz and thus the flow of 25 percent of the world's oil. It could also decrease oil production and raise prices, ultimately leading to a limited global recession and unleash its proxies, Hezbollah and Hamas, in the U.S., Lebanon and Gaza. The result could be a large-scale regional conflict. However, a well-thought out strategy articulated and executed by the U.S. and Israel would serve a strong deterrence. To be sure, it is not a simple or reassuring world. Strategic doctrine is always a complex matter, and any improved U.S. plan will have to be creative as well as comprehensive. If, for any reason, Iran is permitted to "go nuclear," our re-fashioned doctrine will certainly have to identify viable options for coexistence with that unpredictable country. In turn, these options will require enemy perceptions of persuasive American power and of a corresponding American willingness to actually use this power. According to some reports, the Israeli Air Force has conducted secret training missions to prepare for a future attack which will be aided by the X-band radar system, capable of intercepting Iran's newly tested medium-range ballistic missiles, recently installed by U.S. military personnel. If Israel perceives that time is running out on Iran, it may be forced to muster the political will to defend itself from a nuclear nightmare that Ahmadinejad has repeatedly promised. We believe Iran is now nuclear capable to some degree. America's President seems to naïvely think that the way to a world without nuclear weapons is going to happen in our lifetime. Perhaps, in the best of all possible worlds, all countries could actually turn back the clock, and impose effective limits on the always-evolving technologies of destruction. But we do not yet live in such a world, and the obvious incapacity to implement any real denuclearization means that (however reluctantly) we shall still have to reconcile our own national security with expanding nuclear proliferation. What option will Israel choose and what will their strategy be? And for that matter, what will the United States and other responsible nations do? Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
NUCLEAR DETERRENCE
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, February 8, 2010. |
|
"Nuclear Weapons can deter enemies from attacking with either conventional weapons or Nuclear Weapons." The Cold War with the Soviet Union and the accepted rule of M.A.D. (Mutual Assured Destruction) proved valuable for America and the Soviet Union. Each Super-Power understood their civilizations would be destroyed. But, that was based on two intelligent but hostile nations, understood that even if one conducted a surprise nuclear attack, the radiation clouds would not only saturate the attackers' land but the entire globe. Some will recall China's above ground nuclear tests wherein the radioactive clouds circled the planet three times before dispersing and that was only one small test. But, circumstances change: It is understood when Third World nations ruled by dictators, the rationality of not using Nuclear Weapons under the M.A.D. understanding was no longer viable. Israel faces such a dilemma. She was forced to develop a deterrence against the Muslim and Arab nations who swore in their speeches and in their charters that they would destroy the Jewish State, would create a Genocide for all of the inhabitants and would occupy the Land whenever they were capable of so doing. Israel, if she had to rely on conventional weapons and a minimal manpower against a dozen or so Muslim/Arab armies who are armed with the best money can buy, could not possibly deter them from attacking and carrying out their repeated pledge of Genocide against the Jewish people and the Jewish Nation/State. Thus, Israel may have developed the bomb-in-the-basement — never to be used except in a dire emergency when threatened with an existential threat. So, what countries can be trusted or not trusted with Nuclear Deterrence? America, Britain, Israel, France, Germany....are a few examples of those who can reasonably be trusted. Countries that cannot be trusted — either because of their radical religious passions or the likelihood that regime change of governments could bring known radicals or Terrorists into power: Iran, Syria, Libya, among others, cannot be trusted. Egypt is currently somewhat stable under its present Government although, waiting in the wings are the Muslim Brotherhood[***], a most radical and dangerous group who, without a doubt, would use Nuclear Weapons — as would Iran if or when they get their hands on weaponized Nukes. Turkey is a mixed bag as Erdogan moves closer to Iran and Muslim ideology. The Saudis (unless overrun by Muslim "Jihadis" (warriors for Islam) would likely desire Nukes as a matter of protection but, unlikely to use them for fear of their cities and oil fields being destroyed in a counter-strike. At the present time, the radical Muslim Arab countries are ramping up their demand for equality with Israel to have nuclear capability. Here we find the United Nations, not so much in favor of Arab/Muslim powers having Nukes but, rather stripping Israel of her Nuclear Deterrence, knowing that, without this deterrence, the hostile Muslim Arab countries would simply overrun the minuscule Nation/State of Israel. We see this a prime goal of President Barack Hussein Obama as it was under then President George Herbert Walker Bush and Secretary of State James Baker III. Perhaps it's just a matter of time before one of the Muslim Arab nations develops a Nuclear capability. They would either use it or pass it on to their Terrorist proxies like Hezb'Allah or Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood or Al Qaeda, 'et al', who — when they used it, would cover the tracks of their provider. That could be Iran, Syria, or Pakistan, etc. Let us not forget Russia, the perennial agitator on the planet who is presently providing Iran with Nuclear capability. I suppose I should also include North Korea as another one in the Nuclear Evil Empire. If the good nations do not get control of the bad nations' growing Nuclear development, then they must accept destruction inside of their own nation. Perhaps next to be hit after Israel would be the U.S. because of Obama's appeasement out-reach to Muslim Terrorist nations. Clearly, Obama came into office with a secret agenda — to protect an expanding hostile Islam by attacking Israel. No doubt, you will recall Obama's blatant lies to the American Jewish community, Evangelical Christians and Americans generally, when in his pre-election speeches, he assured us all that he would continue to support Israel. But, Obama has demonstrated that he is an accomplished liar and sophist. (A sophist is a person who can speak convincingly on either sides of any subject.) Obama not only lies but, has used his linguistic talent to explain away every failure of his policies. Obama's bias against Israel reflects his early Muslim roots. ADDITIONAL COMMENTARY BY EMANUEL A. WINSTON [***] Note! Tariq Ramadan, who was just issued a permit to enter the U.S. although he is on the U.S. Terror list, is also the grandson of Hassan al-Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, he never denounced the radical teachings, such as those of his grandfather, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood and thus inspiration for all of today's major Islamic-based terrorist organizations: by Janice Kephart. (1) 1. "Did the President Really Tell Us That Tariq Ramadan Will Not Be Subject to Future Intelligence Assessments?" By Janice Kephart Center for Immigration Studies http://www.cis.org/kephart/tariqramadan January 27, 2010 xxxx THE REAL AGENDA: DIMONA
"I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation — including Iran — should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. That commitment is at the core of the Treaty, and it must be kept for all who fully abide by it. And I am hopeful that all countries in the region can share in this goal." As a policy statement, this means that America (or any other country) cannot deny the right of any country to Weapons of Mass Destruction. It undercuts the reasons for America's attack in Iraq, assents to nuclear proliferation and precludes any action against Iran. It also turns the focus on Israel. Amidst all of the distortions and inaccuracies of Pres. Obama's speech in Cairo, this paragraph sends chills through Israel's intelligence community. His reference was not just to Iranian nuclear weapons, but "any nation" that has or acquires them. That includes Israel. Obama's emphasis on a commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is a direct threat to Israel's security. Israel has refused to agree to that treaty because it means opening all of its facilities to inspection — including its top secret plant in Dimona. Aware of Israel's long-standing policy in this matter, Obama shifts the attack. By linking support for Israel against Iran with a halt to all settlement building, and establishing a second Arab Palestinian state, Obama has set the stage for his big prize: Dimona. Aware that no Israeli government can agree to a complete freeze in building, Obama can blame Israel for American inaction against Iran and lack of support for its war in Afghanistan. It's a perfect excuse: 'Israel didn't do enough; it's Israel's fault.' "Israeli intransigence" will be given as the reason for America's failure. 'If only Israel had evacuated more settlements, stopped building, dismantled more checkpoints, given more aid to Hamas, stopped demolishing illegal Arab buildings, etc., we could have done something,' Obama will say. But Obama's real agenda is not settlements; it is Israel's nuclear capacity. Egypt especially has been urging the US to force Israel to open its facility in Dimona. Prior to the Six Day War in 1967, Russian spy-planes flew over Dimona and, according to Isabella Ginor and Gideon Remez in Iran may even be willing to make cosmetic (and temporary) adjustments so that Obama can claim that the crisis has been defused. And Israel will pay the price: sanctions, boycotts, and diplomatic and economic isolation similar to the international pressures that broke South Africa's apartheid regime. Obama's speech is an ominous warning of what he is prepared to do in order to strip Israel of its military advantage. Along with the loss of control over Judea and Samaria, territories that are vital for Israel's security and access to water reserves, faced with Arab terrorist militias backed by Arab armies, Israel will be completely vulnerable. The face of this jihad is not one of ranting, bearded clerics, but of smooth-talking, clean-shaven smiling apostles of peace, and the Philosopher-King of Hope. CLOSING COMMENTARY BY EMANUEL A. WINSTON: Some will recall the Madrid International Conference October 30, 31, November 1, 1991 which lured then Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir into a trap. He was urged not to attend because Madrid would be a "Kangaroo Court". The agenda was mostly initiated by then Secretary of State James Baker III and those who came to be known as his "Jew-Boys" — Dennis Ross, Aaron David Miller and Daniel Kurtzer. I anticipated what they had arranged to spring on Shamir and Israel. Near the end of the Conference, as I forecast, Egypt's representative pops up with the statement that: "The Middle East must be made 'Nuclear-Free' ". Baker's Jew-Boys had done their dirty work. Perhaps President Obama's policy is a natural, direct result of having James Baker and his Jew-Boys, Ross, Kurtzer advising Obama, employing the same 'trick', the same 'language' — not unlike when they used Egypt as their spokesman to divest Israel of her Nuclear Deterrence. For some of our articles, Google Madrid Conference 1991 by "Emanuel A. Winston". This just out: Iran has just announced that they will increase their Uranium radioactivity up to 20% — which is close to weapons' grade. President Obama continues his protective dithering over sanctions and other foot-dragging and delaying tactics. I cannot help but wonder if aiding the enemy in wartime is an impeachable offense? 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@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
ANTISEMITISM: ENGLAND'S NOT SO PLEASANT ASPECT
Posted by Boris Celser, February 8, 2010. |
|
This was written by Anthony Julius and appeared in
JC.com |
|
There are many kinds of antisemitism, and among them there are four that have an English provenance, either wholly or in substantial part. The radical antisemitism of medieval England — one of defamation, expropriation, murder and expulsion — completed itself in 1290, when there were no Jews left to torment. English literary antisemitism has been continuously present from the anonymous medieval ballad Sir Hugh, or the Jew's Daughter through to present times. A modern, everyday antisemitism of insult and partial exclusion has also been pervasive, if contained, in this country. This is the common antisemitism experienced by Jews from their "readmission" to England in the mid-17th century through to the late-20th century. Finally, a new configuration of anti-Zionisms, which treats Zionism and the state of Israel as illegitimate Jewish enterprises, emerged here in the late 1960s and 1970s. This perspective, heavily indebted to antisemitic tropes, constitutes the greatest current threat to Anglo-Jewish security and morale. This fourth kind of antisemitism is now more European than English but has a particularly English history, stemming from the intimacy of association between England and the Zionist project from the mid-19th century through to the mid-1950s. It denies to Jews the rights that it upholds for other, comparable peoples. It adheres to the principle of national self-determination, except in the Jews' case. It affirms international law, except in Israel's case. It does not understand that supporting the cause of Palestinian nationhood is one thing, while denying the right of Jews to live in their own state is quite another. It is outraged by the Jewish nature of the state of Israel, but is untroubled by, say, the Islamic nature of Iran or of Saudi Arabia. It regards as racist the social inequalities between Jew and Arab in Israel, while being indifferent to the legal inequalities between Muslim and non-Muslim in Iran, Saudi Arabia, and other Muslim states. It regards Zionism as uniquely pernicious, rather than as merely another nationalism, just as earlier generations of antisemites regarded Jewish capitalists as uniquely pernicious, rather than as heterogeneous members of a much larger capitalist class. It writes out of the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict the massacres of Jews in Hebron (August 1929), Jerusalem (February 1948), and Kfar Etzion (May 1948), while treating the massacre of Arabs at Deir Yasin (April 1948) as proof of fundamental Zionist iniquity. It is reluctant to take a position on the Chinese occupation of Tibet, while holding the Israeli occupation of the West Bank an indefensible evil of global consequence. It is hostile to the United States, which it believes is dominated by Jews. It plays variations on well-established antisemitic tropes and deploys some new ones of its own — principally, that Israel may suitably be compared with Nazi Germany and/or Apartheid South Africa. It treats UN, and UN committee and council, resolutions on Israel as if passed by impartial, apolitical bodies. It denies the existence of Islamic antisemitism, save perhaps as a Western import and of no practical consequence. While it excoriates racist sentiments found among Israelis, or in the complex history of Zionism, it refuses to acknowledge the racist themes towards Jews to be found in many currents of Arab nationalism. It overstates, on every occasion, and beyond reason, any case that could be made against Israel's actions or policies, and wildly overstates the significance of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in world affairs. Longstanding antisemites now embrace "anti-Zionism" as a cover for their Jew-hatred. This is because, in relation to Israel, the antisemite finds a protected voice. The desire to destroy Jews is reconfigured as the desire to destroy or dismantle the Jewish state. The new anti-Zionism has become a cause for some English academics and political activists; it is commonly found in the universities and in student and university teacher associations. Anti-Zionism has renewed antisemitism, and given it a future. These, then, are England's gifts to Jew-hatred. The antisemitism of no other country has this density of history. The antisemitism of no other country is so continuously innovative. On many occasions in the history of antisemitism, England arrives first. Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
FROM ISRAEL: FOLLOW-UP
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 8, 2010. |
|
~~~~~~~~~~ With regard to Lieberman, he defended himself against his critics at a faction meeting today: "As the Jewish state, we extend a hand of peace — but faced with war, we must be determined [to emerge victorious]. There is no need to talk of compromises, we must liberate ourselves from the obsession with 'land for peace'; all future agreements must be based on 'peace in exchange for peace.'" I said it before and say it again, Right on! Foreign Minister Lieberman has a clear vision and I salute him. ~~~~~~~~~~ I mentioned recently a release put out by the JTA indicating that Fatah had moderated its charter. I indicated then that there was nothing to this, and that more information would follow. And, indeed, I then wrote an article analyzing the situation — it will appear in some Jewish papers in the US — such as the Intermountain Jewish News — within the next week. (If you would like me to submit this to your local Jewish paper, or want to put it on a blog, be in touch with me.) This is one instance in which I felt it was important to focus on Jewish papers, as these rely upon the JTA for information and are most likely to have run the JTA release on the subject. This is an issue of considerable importance, because when Fatah is represented, inaccurately, as having moderated, the pressure on Israel to make concessions for "peace" increases. It is critical to set the record straight. Rather than wait until it's in print, I have now put the article on my website, and I include the URL here, so that you, my readers, can see this for yourselves:
~~~~~~~~~~ Spurred by the Im Tirtzu campaign charging that NIF funds organizations that work against Israel (testifying for the Goldstone report and more), this made news today, even though it reports on something that was initiated two months ago. I have alluded to this before, but am delighted to mention it again: MK Mickey Eitan (Likud) is spearheading legislation that would require transparency with regard to foreign funding of organizations here, whether they are non-profits (which now have to report on their funding) or not. Coalition Chair Ze'ev Elkin is eager to promote this bill. He and Eitan organized a Knesset gathering in December at which it was revealed that the EU provides donations amounting to millions of Euros to groups here that have political agendas. The bill was introduced following this. ~~~~~~~~~~ As might be expected, NIF is not taking the charges leveled at it by Im Tirtzu lying down, and, in fact, there has been a minor storm surrounding this. Supporters of NIF are accusing Im Tirtzu of "McCarthy-like tactics," while the defense being advanced involves either the right to freedom of speech, which is allegedly being stifled, or the importance of defending the human rights of minorities in Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ Evelyn Gordon, writing in Commentary, says more about NIF (thanks Winkie): "New Israel Fund controversy is laying bare just how warped the 'human rights' community's definition of human rights is. But it has also showcased two particularly Israeli variants of this disease: that freedom of information constitutes 'incitement,' and that freedom of speech requires financing speech you oppose." http://www.commentarymagazine.com:80/blogs/ index.php/category/contentions/contentions?author_name= Evelyn%20Gordon ~~~~~~~~~~ I spoke the other day about the extensive research I did on Adalah — an ostensible "human rights" organization that is among those funded by NIF. I return to this now to state unequivocally how off the mark are the accusations being made by NIF supporters. Adalah maintains, for example, that having a Jewish star on the flag of Israel impinges on the human rights of Israel's Arab minority. It has advanced a constitution that would do away with the Jewish state and replace it with a "state of all its citizens." This state would eliminate "Return" for Jews, but would grant "right of return" to Palestinian Arabs on a humanitarian basis. In the cause of "human rights," Adalah advances protection for the most radical groups in Israel. When the Al Aksa Institute in Umm al-Fahm, in the north of Israel, was found to have Hamas connections and thus was closed down, Adalah referred to this as a "violation of the [right] to freedom of...religion." Adalah participated in preparatory meetings for the Durban Conference of 2001, as well as its adjunct NGO Forum, which was even more viciously anti-Semitic than the Conference. Adalah drafted language for the NGO Forum declaration, which included this: "... a basic 'root cause' of Israel's on-going and systematic human rights violations, including its grave breaches of the fourth Geneva convention 1949 (i.e. war crimes), acts of genocide and practices of ethnic cleansing is a racist system, which is Israel's brand of apartheid." ~~~~~~~~~ I, for one, am delighted that this sort of thing should finally be exposed, and that the exceedingly pertinent question of who funds Adalah should be raised. ~~~~~~~~~~ And multiply this by the large number of groups supported by NIF. One of these groups is B'Tselem, broadly touted within the international community as an Israeli human rights organization. On January 8, 2003, I attended a conference that was held in Jerusalem, on the subject of "Humanitarian and Political Aspects of the Palestinian Condition." Its stated goal was to present the situation of the Palestinian Arabs from humanitarian and political perspectives, and to that end it provided two panel discussions. Among those participating was B'Tselem. Dr. Anat Biletzki — a lecturer in philosophy at Tel Aviv University, who was then Chair of its Board of Directors — spoke for the organization. Dr. Biletzki's remarks were brief because she had relinquished part of her time for the presentation of a report. Feeling herself among friends, she said:
She went on to explain that B'Tselem is more activist than it once was, no longer just objectively gathering information. The organization must do political work through a human rights perspective, using NGOs to make political points. Activists, humanitarians, NGOs all play roles. ~~~~~~~~~~ I had hoped to write today about the so-called blockade of Gaza and the issue, poorly understood, of what international law requires us to allow in and what we actually do let in (which is greatly in excess of what is required). I am awaiting the appropriate opportunity to discuss this with the IDF spokesman for issues concerning Gaza. Hopefully this will be quite soon. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
HAMAS DOCUMENTS OWN WAR CRIMES; NIF SUBSIDIZED GOLDSTONE; HAMAS ENCOURAGES SUICIDE BOMBERS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 8, 2010. |
|
HAMAS DOCUMENTS OWN WAR CRIMES 
Hamas' web site still documents its war crimes of attacks by mortar, Qassam rocket, and Grad rocket on Israeli cities. "Al-Qassam Brigades is declaring its responsibility for the following operations as a response to Zionist aggression on the Palestinian civilians:." The web site then lists a number of Israeli cities struck. Hamas rationalizes its war crimes by: (1) Labeling the Israeli cities "military bases," as if Israel has no cities; and (2) Accusing Israel of striking Arab civilians as if the Arabs have no military men (www.imra.org.il, 2/7). False labeling is one more indication that the Islamist side routinely and deliberately lies about its actions and its accusations. How much revelation and self-revelation of such deceit will it take for the major media, governments, NGOs, and individual anti-Zionists to stop taking Arab claims seriously? Commentary has the story of how the Taliban deceived the State Dept. during the Clinton years. The State Dept. tried diplomacy with the Taliban. The Taliban dropped hints about expelling Osama from Afghanistan, to keep the State Dept. hopeful of peaceful resolution and away from suggesting military resolution until Osama destroyed the World Trade Center (February, 2000). Anti-Zionists purport to stand on high principle. Where is the principle for all that Islamist deception? What is humanitarianism about Hamas attacking Israeli civilians? How valid is Hamas' excuse, which is a false one anyway, that Israel attacks Arab civilians? Is it fair of Israel's usual critics, including the UN and Goldstone, to accept Arab civilian casualty figures in Gaza and elsewhere, when (as I reported earlier) Hamas simultaneously with boasting of terrorism and honoring slain terrorists, and denies that slain terrorists were military personnel? What ethics have those who accuse Israel of being inhumane but who say nothing, or in Goldstone's case, deny, that terrorists use their own civilian populations as human shields, the major way by which Hamas fights? What rational explanation is there for condemning restrained Israeli self-defense against terrorists who fight from civilian areas against civilian areas? Readers have told me I contradict world public opinion, in this. How can one respect a warped world public opinion, based on disinformation and bias? In the past couple of days, Hamas apologized to the UN for having committed war crimes, but offered the excuse that it wasn't aiming at cities. The excuse is absurd — Hamas fired short-range rockets into a nearby city. It knew there was no military base there. Arab excuses and pretexts should be seen through. Then Hamas denied apologizing. (I read the Hamas statement, which did admit firing into Israeli cities.) Israeli analysts surmise that a Hamas faction objected to apologizing. Hence the subsequent denial of what happened. Admissions and agreements garner positive headlines. The denials usually are ignored or downplayed, no conclusions drawn. It is a common Arab ruse and media failure. What does the ruse indicate? It indicates that many admissions and acknowledgments by Radical Islam are tactical, insincere, and unreliable. The West should seek confirmation before accepting apparent agreement. The successes of the ruse exploit a media misconception that only the beginning of a story is newsworthy, not the final outcome, not the meaning, and not the revelation that the beginning of a story was premature or a source's duplicity. I believe that new analysis of past events really is news. The Muslim-Israel conflict has been going on for generations, most people know little about it, and most of their notions are distorted by the big lie technique. If the West is to survive, it has to report events and their meaning, and develop ideology from reality. At present, its ideology usually blinds it to reality.
ISRAELI AND SAUDI ARABIAN LEADERS SHAKE HANDS At the Munich Security Conference, Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Alon objected to the seating arrangements, which separated him from Saudi Prince Turki el-Faisal, former chief of Saudi intelligence and former Ambassador to the U.S.. El-Faisal said that the seating was in reaction to Alon's having seated a Turkish Ambassador in a humiliating way. Alon suggested that they make up, and offered his hand. El-Faisal
shook it. The audience applauded
They applauded because it seemed like a step toward peace. It may be just a step toward a pact, which, like the Munich Pact, when the Nazis shook hands with the Allies, led to war and not peace. The Muslim-Israel conflict is part of jihad. The origin of jihad is a desire to conquer other religions. Radical Islam carries the Islamic sense of religious and legal superiority further, in the case of Jews, deeming them evil, the way the Nazis did. Muslims consider it ethical to deceive non-Muslims in behalf of jihad. Radical Muslims cite their holy books to justify exterminating the Jewish people. What is the practical import of those beliefs? One result of those beliefs is a series of broken pacts and shunning of Jews. Thus the Arab boycott of Israel. Thus President Mubarak does not visit Israel. Thus the Jordanian journalist guild punishes reporters who do. I know of Israeli scientists who collaborate with foreign Arab scientists on regional problems but cannot acknowledge it, lest their Arab colleagues be ostracized by their own governments. Much valuable research is not done, when bigoted Arab governments keep Israeli experts out of regional conferences. Does this Arab apartheid policy get noticed by people who routinely accuse Israel of apartheid policy? When a prominent Arab leader shakes an Israeli leader's hands, it certainly is news. Absent reformation of Islamic and especially Radical Islamic ideology, however, the gesture is not as significant as it seems.
JORDAN DELAYS WESTERN WALL WALKWAY 
The A.P. caption mistakenly calls the Western Wall Judaism's holiest site. You can see it is below the Temple Mount, which is Judaism's holiest site, not its western retaining wall. A lawsuit by the Islamic Historical Society and pressure by Jordan is delaying reconstruction of a walkway to the Western Wall and subsequent widening of the plaza below the Temple Mount. Neither the Muslim Waqf responsible for its holy site on the Mount, nor the government of Jordan, have jurisdiction over the approaches to the Mount, much less sovereignty over them. The lawsuit accuses the government of intending the walkway to undermine the mosques, so they tumble and the government can rebuild the ancient Temple in their place. The court is waiting to hear from the government. Why the government is submitting to Jordanian demands is not known. Fact is, the walkway had partly collapsed after a storm. The
government wants to repair it. The plaza and approaches need widening
to accommodate the growing crowds there
How ridiculous to suppose that an Israeli government that does not let many Jews onto the Mount or at least forbids them from audibly praying on it, wants to inflame the Arab world by felling the mosques and rebuilding a Jewish religious temple there. It would confirm decades of paranoid Muslim Arab accusation. It is paranoid. No evidence has been adduced. The sect that wants to rebuild the Temple is tiny. The government often bars its members from the Mount. But whatever excavation and construction Israel attempts on or off but near the Mount is called an attempt to destroy the mosque. Sometimes the excavation or construction is some distance from the mosque. Jordan and the Palestinian Authority are unprincipled about this. Jordan has refused to let Israel show it what it is doing and that its plans are harmless. Arab accusations should be evaluated as false propaganda, much like the Nazi and Communist accusations before them. The Arabs use these accusations also to incite their people to violence and to inhibit normal Israeli exercise of sovereignty. The Arabs, like the Nazis and Communists, do not just negotiate their demands, but they also strive to extort them, as you can see. The Nazis organized ethnic Germans in the Sudetenland area of Czechoslovakia to protest non-existent persecution, to give Germany a pretext for taking over the Sudetenland. The Arabs have a similar tactic in the Territories.
NEW ISRAEL FUND SUBSIDIZED GOLDSTONE REPORT? 
Earlier reports left it unclear how much the New Israel Fund (NIF) financed the UN Goldstone Report accusations against Israel. I found a clearer explanation on the website of Israel Resources Review. The Israeli student organization that scrutinized the Goldstone Report found that 42% of its quotations against Israel from Israeli sources contained 92% of the Israeli-based accusations against Israel, and they came from 16 NGOs subsidized by millions of dollars from NIF. Those NGOs are anti-Zionist to the point that some of them seek the destruction of Israel. Thus the Goldstone report largely is dependent upon and indirectly
subsidized by NIF Not everything about this issue is clear. One question is what percent of the Israeli anti-Zionist NGOs are financed by the New Israel Fund and the EU. Another is what other Israeli sources made anti-IDF statements used by Goldstone. A third is how many accusations came from outside of Israel, and whether they were made by committed jihadists, who are not reliable, or by UN investigators. Did Goldstone come up with much information on his own? What constructive purpose had the UN in assembling the assorted defamation already publicized by the NGOs and largely debunked? The purpose was to make the calumny seem legitimate or to give people an excuse for claiming to believe it. Jihadist organizations, and the beneficiaries of NIF largess, have been shown by earlier reports to falsify news and accusations. The Goldstone Report is based on a form of perjury. Its reliably unreliable sources remind one of the old expression about computer data, coined when I was in the field, "garbage in, garbage out."
ISRAELIS GAIN CONFIDENCE IN IDF THIS YEAR The people of Israel increased their confidence in the IDF last year from 3.61 out of 5 to 3.85. Soldiers increased their confidence in their Army from 3.88 to 4.01. This is hailed as a significant increase. The increase is attributed to the Army raising its ethical standards, refurbishing, and fighting successfully in Gaza (www.imra.org.il, 2/7). That is about a 7% increase. It does not seem significant to me. If they used a scale of 100, the small percentage change would stand out. But how can people quantify confidence, which is a non-numerical quality? It is subjective; everybody is different. I think that the IDF ethical standard in combat is sacrificially high, out of political correctness. That gives me less confidence in it. On the other hand, the IDF ethical standard toward religious and right-wing Jews, whom it often does not protect from Arab and anarchist marauders and land thieves remains low. What used to be known as an army of the people has been ordered into becoming an enemy of the people. As for the combat in Gaza, yes, the troops fought without the incompetence exhibited by their commanders in the Hizbullah war. But the Gaza war hardly is much of a test, given that Hizbullah mostly hid, observed, and reformed its own tactics and strategy. Thus it gained more from that war than did the IDF. Worse, Israel lost both mini-wars, judging by results. The defeatist heads of government held back, letting both terrorist militias survive. Now Hizbullah is a professional army and Hamas, too, has much stronger forces than before. Whereas they formerly had nuisance value, now they pose a strategic threat to Israel.
(For more on Hizbullah's invasion plan, goto:
Here is a map showing Hizbullah plans for attacking Israel, taken from U.S. intelligence: 
HAMAS ENCOURAGES SUICIDE BOMBERS The Palestinian Authority has encouraged many of its youth to become "holy" warriors, risking earthly death for eternal life. If killed in battle for the faith, the "martyr" can anticipate these rewards: "1- The Shahid's sins are forgiven Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have indoctrinated their people in this religious duty for years, Palestinian Media Watch has documented. This propaganda works. Many youths aspire to die in battle, and many parents support their aspirations (Palestinian Media Watch from Hamas web site, 2/7, sent by www.imra.org.il, 2/7). No wonder the Radicals can recruit suicide bombers! There are earthly rewards for the relatives, too. On the other hand, if parents are so proud of children's intent to commit a suicide bombing, why do their children often hesitate to inform many of them of that intent? No concern is expressed for the perversity of slaying civilians in the name of a religion that calls itself merciful. No significant difference in fanaticism between Hamas and Fatah is apparent in jihad What is the reward for women?
(To read about P.A. subsidy of "martyrs'" families,
click here.)
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 and visit his website:
|
|
THAT "COST-BENEFIT" THING: HOW U.S. INTELLIGENCE ASSESSMENTS MISUNDERATAND IRAN AND LOTS MORE IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Posted by Barry Rubin, February 8, 2010. |
|
"We continue to judge that Iran's nuclear decision-making is guided by a cost-benefit approach, which offers the international community opportunities to influence Iran." Dennis Blair, chief of U.S. intelligence in his annual threat assessment report for 2010. Forget about Nazi analogies or even Stalinist ones. Let's just use some Middle East parallels, formulated fictionally as if they'd come from the Dennis Blair school of thought: We continue to judge that the Arab world's pursuit of its conflict with Israel is guided by a cost-benefit approach, which offers the international community opportunities to bring it to an end in the near future." Annual threat assessment report for 1950. Ok, enough examples. Some — actually many — of these kinds of statements were made at the time by mainstream experts including many of those in government. Today, we have lots of equivalents, not only concerning Iran's nuclear program but also including: Syria in maintaining its close alliance with Iran; radical Islamist groups remaining moderate; the Palestinians seeking the quickest deal possible to get a state. The mistake here is not in thinking that Middle Eastern decisionmakers are rational — that is, use a cost-benefit approach — but in not understanding how they define costs and benefits. Example. Hamas attacks Israel and loses miserably. Did they make a mistake about costs and benefits? No, because they are still in power and — with considerable help from the West — have turned a military disaster into a political success by persuading the world that Israel is the bad guy. Moreover, for them the greatest benefit is to be able to continue the struggle for decades more. From a U.S. standpoint their calculation was irrational and wrong, with the cost seeming to outweigh any conceivable benefit. From their own standpoint the benefits did exceed the cost. Regarding Iran, Western leaders simply fail to understand that Iran's sole reason for seeking nuclear weapons is not just to fire them at Israel and that if the United States prevents them from doing so that will be a great American victory. On the contrary, the Iranian regime's assessment of costs and benefits is totally different and involves lots of factors that would benefit the country even if it never shoots off any nuclear weapons. Once Iran has nuclear weapons, the rulers know they will: —Increase domestic support through demagogic appeals to Iran's greatness and Islam's triumph. So let's consider what Iran's annual threat assessment report for 2010 should look like: "We continue to judge that the U.S. decision-making is guided by a cost-benefit approach in which confrontation is feared, the process of decadence continues, and almost anything is preferable to taking leadership and working hard to block our getting nuclear weapons. This offers us tremendous opportunities to seize leadership of the Muslims and of the Middle East. Since the world will do nothing that will materially hurt us the prospects are good for our obtaining Weapons of Mass Destruction and thus influencing everyone to retreat as we advance." 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).
His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). Prof.
Rubin's columns can now be read online at
http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. Contact him at
profbarryrubin@yahoo.com This article is archived at |
|
CHRISTIAN CHURCHES FED 'ISLAM LITE'
Posted by CPocerl, February 8, 2010. |
|
This was written by Michael Carl and it appeared in World
Net Daily (WND)
|
|
An expert on the advance of radical Islam in the United States says the Muslim Brotherhood is effectively employing a strategy of presenting "Islam lite" to organizations, including Christian churches. A spokeswoman for an Islamic awareness program which monitors how Islamic law motivates Muslims to participate in jihad reported she heard of a United Church of Christ congregation where an Islamic speaker was a guest. She contacted the church to see if she would be allowed to present some of the harsher truths about Islam. "The pastor pushed the material back at me and said, 'It's people like you who are responsible for an escalation of the violence,'" the spokeswoman said. She said organizations such as Hartford Seminary are sending imams "to condition members of the area churches to believe the light version of Islam." Steve Emerson, director of the Investigative Project for Terrorism, concurred. "Hartford Seminary is a place that has been compromised by the Muslim Brotherhood, and then there's the Center for Christian and Muslim Understanding at Georgetown University. The center is a de facto arm of the Muslim Brotherhood," Emerson said. The Muslim Brotherhood is the Sunni transnational movement founded in Egypt in 1928 that has spawned most of the major terrorist movements in the world, including al-Qaida and Hamas. It's aim is to make Islamic law supreme over the world. Hartford Seminary's website displays photos of smiling, hijab-wearing young women standing arm-in-arm with clergy women in clerical collars. But seminary spokesman David Barrett insists the goal is to foster open dialogue. "I don't know where to start. Interfaith dialogue and the understanding of other religions is essential to live faithfully in today's multi-faith, pluralistic world," Barrett said. "So we believe strongly and theologically that we need to understand the faith traditions of others and to relate to them and work with them to create a better and more productive, more harmonious world." That's why, he said, seminary faculty members are familiar with the teachings of Islam. "Obviously we have experts in Islamic law who are Muslim and we have Christian theologians who have studied other religions... If you're asking if we know what we're doing, the answer is yes," Barrett said. Asked about Islamic jihad, he said any religion can be misunderstood. "You can make similar comments about Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism or any other religion. You can take things out of context about any religion and make it look injurious or harmful," Barrett said. "Yes, the faculty here is aware that this is something that it is claimed that Islam promotes violence, just as you can claim that Christianity promotes violence." But some mainline-denomination churches now are facilitating worship for Muslims, Emerson and the awareness program spokeswoman agreed. "Just to show how far it's gone, two weeks ago the priest at St. Mary's Episcopal Church in Manchester, Conn., invited an area Muslim congregation to use St. Mary's Church for their Friday prayers," the spokeswoman said. A St. Mary's secretary said officials there could not comment on their actions. But a report in the local Journal-Inquirer reported the development, noting the congregation had been pleased to find ways to "work together." Even high-profile leaders such as megachurch pastor Rick Warren of Saddleback Community Church in Lake Forest, Calif., have spoken to organizations such as the Islamic Society of North America, a Muslim Brotherhood group. Saddleback officials did not respond to a request for comment. But Emerson believes it's more than just wrong; it's dangerous. "He's been deceived into believing that ... is a legitimately moderate group. In fact, it's a radical organization," Emerson said. "I think there's been a major bit of deception that's been perpetrated by these groups who pretend that they're innocent religious groups looking for affiliations with other theological movements." A former FBI agent whose expertise is in Islamic issues confirmed the success of Islamic lobbying. He asked that his name be withheld. "If you don't believe the Brotherhood has been effective at neutralizing some church groups and public advocacy groups, look at this. Common Cause and Hartford Seminary support the Islamic Society of North America. The National Council of Churches and the American Baptist Churches do too," he said. The Muslim disinformation methodology is illustrated by the 2006 controversy over a speech by Pope Benedict XVI in Regensberg, Germany. The pope quoted from Manuel II Palaiologos, a Byzantine emperor who was one of the last Christian rulers before the fall of Constantinople to the Muslim Ottoman Empire. "Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached," the pope said, citing the emperor. Objecting vehemently to the pope's remarks, a group of 38 imams wrote an open letter to the pontiff. "We would like to point out that 'holy war' is a term that does not exist in the Islamic languages," the imams said. "Jihad, it must be emphasized, means struggle, and specifically struggle in way of God. This struggle may take many forms, including the use of force." One of the imams was the Islamic scholar Nuh Ha Mim Keller, who translated the classic book on Islamic Law, "Reliance of the Traveler." The book states in section 09.0, "Jihad means to war against non-Muslims, and it is etymologically derived from the word mujahada, signifying warfare to establish the religion." The effort to co-opt Christian churches includes an attempt to water down Christian theology. 
Islamization Watch published a photo on its website of a British Muslim banner on a railing in the Wood Green section of London. The banner, which read "Jesus was a Muslim," stalled traffic and created near-riot conditions so that police had to be called. P. David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry write in their WND book, "Muslim Mafia" that Muslims want to Islamize Jesus. They report the training manual for the Council on Islamic-American Relations includes information about Jesus. Among the materials CAIR distributes in its outreach efforts in the U.S. is the book "Jesus: Prophet of Islam" by Mohammad Ata-ur-Rehman and Muslim convert Ahmad Thomson. CAIR also launched a $60,000 advertising campaign on Florida buses with the message Jesus was a Muslim. The signs read: 'ISLAM: The Way of Life of Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Muhammad." One Islamic expert who formerly worked with the U.S. government on terror said Muslims even use the writings of disaffected Christian. "Muslims are making use of Bart Ehrman's commentaries on the New Testament, books that now deny the authority of the New Testament and portray Jesus as simply a man," he said. "You will never hear a Muslim say that Jesus is the Son of God."
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: IS IT JUST ME?
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 7, 2010. |
|
Last week, Syrian president Bashar Assad, in a statement made to Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos, which was carried by Syrian media, observed that, "Israel is not serious about achieving peace since all facts point out that Israel is pushing the region towards war, not peace." This was followed by a statement Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moallem that "Israel should not test Syria's determination. ... Israel knows that war will move to the Israeli cities. ... Israel has to commit to the just and comprehensive peace requirements." This is saber rattling, with the message being that we had better start thinking about relinquishing the Golan Heights (which is the Syrian version of "just and comprehensive peace requirements"). ~~~~~~~~~~ Our Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who takes no guff from anyone, responded in a speech at Bar Ilan University on Thursday: "Assad should know that if he attacks, he will not only lose the war. Neither he nor his family will remain in power. ~~~~~~~~~~ Thus my question: Am I the only one who thinks this tough talk is just fine? Some members of the Knesset were horrified. And Netanyahu's office released a statement indicating, "that the government's policy is clear: Israel's face is directed to peace and carrying out diplomatic negotiations with Syria without preconditions." Tensions have been high between Syria and Israel, and the Prime Minister was seeking to cool things down. The question is whether "talking nice" genuinely serves our interests better than tough talk does. Lieberman would say that it does not. In an interview on Friday, in which he defended himself, he commented that, "I don't work for the media or for public opinion. "A red line was crossed like we have never seen before. A direct threat to attack population centers. What I said was at the right time in the right dosage... "I think that the Golan Heights need to remain a part of Israel..." "My response, which I made in order to clarify that the situation [with Syria] is unbearable, was immediately met with a hysterical reaction in Israel of 'how dare we anger the nobleman.' He said that he found it unfortunate the Israeli left tends to react as it does: "I think that in the Middle East, we cannot let grave things go without a response." To this, I say, Right on! When he speaks of how the left reacts, he means with an attitude of appeasement, or self-abasement. What I would questions is whether it's only the left that this is true of. It's a very bad, and fairly mainstream, mode of thinking here in Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ I far prefer the tone of Lieberman to that of Defense Minister Ehud Barak (and yes, he's on the left), who spoke last week at the Herzliya Conference. It was critical, he said, to begin negotiations with Syria soon, while Assad perceived us as being strong. "In the absence of a deal with Syria, we could reach an armed conflict that could develop into a full fledged war." But what does this mean? He seems to be suggesting that it's not enough to talk to Syria, we must reach a deal. If Syria insists that "a deal" requires us to relinquish the Golan, does that mean we relinquish it to avoid an "armed conflict" that could lead to "a full fledged war"? Hopefully this is not what Barak meant, but it sure sounds like it — sounds like he advocates our making concessions to avoid that war. This sort of talk renders us weak, not strong. There is an increase in the warlike bombast coming from Syria, and thus unease about the possibility that we're facing war to the north. Caroline Glick certainly voiced this opinion in her Friday column. Strong means delivering to Assad the sort of message that came from Lieberman: Don't even think of starting with us, or you'll be the loser. ~~~~~~~~~~ If you agree with me, you can tell Minister Lieberman you're behind him:
~~~~~~~~~~ Glick, by the way, noted that the "incendiary comments threatening Israel with war" came from the Syrian government on "the same day that the US informed Syria of its intention to send an ambassador to Damascus for the first time in five years." ~~~~~~~~~~ As to our strength, or deterrence power, I note this aside, which I've picked up from a couple of different sources now: While we are being accused of having assassinated key Hamas figure Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai last month, we are certainly not taking credit for this, and indications are that there were many others who would have been glad to eliminate him. (Latest news is that those who assassinated al-Mabhouh used Irish passports.) Whatever the case, the word on the Arab street is that we did it. And so, whether we actually did or not, the perception that we are capable of this increases our deterrence. Perception is all important. ~~~~~~~~~~ Yes, I confess, I missed it entirely, even though I had written about this in the past: Last January there was a fight between the PA and Hamas regarding when Mahmoud Abbas's term as PA president was over. Hamas said the term was for four years, and Abbas had served for four years, so he was out. The PA argued that the election for president that placed Abbas in office was held a year earlier than would be the case normally — at a time that coincided with parliamentary elections, because Arafat had died and his successor had to be chosen. Thus, went the argument, Abbas would stay in office for five years. Well, as of last month the five years was also over. But of course no elections were held because Hamas will not permit balloting in Gaza. So where does this leave Abbas now? He's a lame, lame-duck president. Or something. What, we may ask, gives him legitimacy to negotiate anything? The issue is moot with regard to the legislature, which is not meeting in any event. But Abbas is carrying on, as if... And the Obama administration, which is pushing "peace negotiations," ignores these niceties all together. ~~~~~~~~~~ Abbas, meanwhile has said he is considering the Obama proposal for indirect negotiations and will announce a decision. He indicated, however, that the PA was not willing to "offer more compromises" to get the process going. "More"? Incredible. ~~~~~~~~~~ I refer above to the speech by Barak at the Herzliya Conference and now want to return to discuss what Prime Minister Netanyahu said at the same conference, which offered a generous measure of good news. Netanyahu said — this is NOT the good news — that he had reason to believe that within weeks talks with the Palestinian Arabs would begin again, without preconditions. I have no idea what prompted him to make this announcement, which seems very far removed from the reality (unless he was referring to the "proximity" diplomacy), or why he should consider this a positive. It seems mostly pro forma, rather than something of import to him. But what did have import was his statement that: "Here in the land of our fathers, which is also the land of our children and grandchildren, in order to determine our fate we need to strengthen our collective efforts in three primary spheres: security, economy and education." He then spoke about security, and the need to strengthen the IDF, because "The weak do not survive in the difficult geographic region in which we find ourselves." And of the need to have a vibrant economy to support the defense needs. However, he said, what is also needed is a commitment from the people, and an understanding of why we are here. And for this, we must look to education, with the strengthening and deepening of "all of our connection to each other and this place...I think that this type of education begins with the Book of Books, it begins with the Bible." ~~~~~~~~~~ He added, with regard to the Bible, that "this is a subject close to my heart these days." This is clearly the case, in part, because his son, Avner, 15, just won the Jerusalem Regional Bible Quiz for state schools — which perhaps tells us something. But I think, from off-the-record information I've received, that he's coming closer to Jewish tradition for other reasons as well. Just as he says that the people need the connection to the Bible, to understand why we are here, so is his connection heartening, because it will help point him in the right direction. ~~~~~~~~~~ Netanyahu is absolutely on the mark in fingering the need for the people of Israel to understand why we are here. The education necessary for the survival of Israel, he said, starts with the Bible and moves through our history to the Zionist present. That he says this is exceedingly good news. So often I've lamented the fact that our leaders have failed to tell our narrative. But here he's prepared to recapture it. Very soon, said the prime minister, he was going to be introducing a "Heritage Plan" to preserve archeological sites and historical sites. There will also be museums, where documents and photographs and films will be preserved and made available to the public. Part of this heritage plan, said Netanyahu, would be the introduction of two Trails, to complement the already existing Israel Trail. Studies show that young people who have walked the land are highly motivated to serve in the military — they feel connected to the land. Now there will be a "Land of Israel trail, which will connect between dozens of ancient archaeological sites. Within our tiny piece of land, there are 30,000 ancient sites, 800 of which have clear national importance. Sadly, only 50 of those sites are open to the public, and even they are not in great shape. That is going to change on a huge scale. "The second trail will be the "Israel Experience" trail. This trail will include the treasures of our country, and will serve as a living Land of Israel museum. It will connect between dozens of stops celebrating the history of the Jewish Yishuv [the Jewish population before the establishment of the State of Israel]. It will include historic buildings, settlement sites, small museums, memorial sites and personal stories — all of which are part of our Zionist heritage." "I know people will ask: 'This is the topic you chose to speak of here, at a discussion about our national strength?" My answer is yes. Sometimes small steps lead to great things." This plan, if carried out, is nothing short of marvelous. ~~~~~~~~~~ You can see his entire talk here:
~~~~~~~~~~ Please, thank Netanyahu for his vision. Ask him to be sure that the plan will include archeological and historical sites beyond the Green Line, which is where much of our ancient history unfolded: Fax: 02-670-5369 (From the US: 011-972-2-670-5369)
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
THE NEW ISRAEL FUND AND PLANTING SEEDS FOR THE FUTURE
Posted by Batya Medad, February 7, 2010. |
|
I'm glad that the truth about the purpose of the New Israel Fund has finally been revealed. Its agenda isn't just a matter of civil rights. Foreign governments and international bodies have used The New Israel Fund to systematically empower and assist organizations whose aim is the weakening of the State of Israel. They used a very cleaver "fig leaf" as they helped a vast variety of NPO's non-profit organizations in Israel. A very crucial aspect/department of the NIF, Shatil, trained community and NPO leaders. Some (a very small percentage) of the organizations were truly apolitical, not at all connected with the New Israel Fund's agenda. There was a time when I worked for one of them. I went to sessions in the Shatil office in Jerusalem and was instructed in how to use their data base of foundations for fundraising. Shatil and all of the New Israel Fund's departments are highly professional. That is how the loony Left agenda has succeeded in dominating, controlling Israel's media and politicians. Our political "center" has moved far, far Left. Who would have thought that Left wing mantras like "palestinian (sic) people" and "two state solution" would become common place in all but what is today considered the very extreme Right? This is due to the professionalism and goal orientation of the Left. None of us on the Right, the Land of Israel is for Jews, has been able to mentor, guide, educate leaders, media etc. We don't have training programs. The international Left has been doing this for decades. Shatil is almost thirty years old. What do we have? Moetzet YESHA? We've been hoping that being right and nice are enough, like that pathetic slogan in the horrible time leading to disengagement. Love isn't enough, not even enough to hold a marriage together. I remember a short conversation with a cab driver after an anti-Disengagement demonstration. I had been muttering about how totally incompetent Moetzet YESHA was, wondering out loud if it could have been intentional. The cabbie had no doubts: "This Disengagement idea is so awful that if they can't get it canceled, there must be something wrong with them." It's not enough to do go the legal way against the New Israel Fund. Parallel to that we must promote our own grassroots organizations professionally. Money's not enough. We need to promote our points professionally and educate a variety of NPO's and a cadre of workers who know that good intentions aren't enough, even when you're doing G-d's work. 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 |
|
HAMAS: WE DID NOT APOLOGIZE FOR HITTING CIVILIANS
Posted by Gil Ronen, February 7, 2010. |
|
Hamas officials said Saturday that contrary to media reports, its reply to the Goldstone commission contained no apologies for targeting Israeli civilians with rocket fire, nor for the abduction of Sgt. Gilad Shalit. Hamas justice minister Muhammad Faraj Al-Ghoul told reporters "there were no apologies," and added that "the Israeli occupation was held accountable for any claims of civilian casualties because they committed the assault and the holocaust [of the people in Gaza]." Reuters reported that the document Hamas sent the Goldstone commission had addressed the Israeli public, saying: "We hope the Israeli civilians understand that their government's continued attacks on us were the key issue and the cause." The document further noted that "the Palestinian resistance... is not an organized army that possesses developed technological weapons... It may target a military site or a tank position and their fire goes astray ... and hit a civilian location, despite their efforts to avoid hurting civilians." Regarding Gilad Shalit, the document claimed that his abductors took responsibility for his capture and provided audio and video evidence that he was in good health. Allowing Red Cross visits would involve revealing his whereabouts, it said, and this would "endanger his life because Israel would likely bomb the place. Al-Ghoul said that the document was submitted by the government in Gaza, and not by the Hamas movement or any of the resistance factions. "There is a difference between these elements," he said. Al-Ghoul added that the 'Palestinians' have a right to resistance,
and said that as long as the Israeli "occupation of Palestine"
continued, the missile fire would go on.
Gil Ronen writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today.
|
|
JORDANIAN PRESSURE PREVENTING WESTERN WALL WALKWAY CONSTRUCTION
Posted by Gil Ronen, February 7, 2010. |
|
Jordanian pressure is preventing the completion of a walkway to the Temple Mount next to the Western Wall (Kotel), according to Nadav Shragai, senior researcher at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs. The Islamic Historical Society has filed suit in the Jerusalem District Court, demanding a halt to the work on widening the Kotel Plaza and the renovation of the Rambam (Mughrabim) Gate entrance to the Temple Mount. The court is awaiting a reply from the Prime Minister's Office on the matter. Islamic officials said that the walkway project is an attempt by Israel to destabilize the foundations of the mosques on the Temple Mount and to rebuild the Jewish Temple, 1940 years after it was burned down by the Romans. Shragai told Arutz Sheva's Hebrew service that the Muslim claims are completely unfounded: "The Mughrabim Bridge is a tourists' entrance to the Temple Mount and it is in Israel's possession — not the [Muslim] Wakf's. About six years ago, in a big snowstorm, the dirt ramp collapsed and parts of it fell. That is why the wooden bridge which is there to this day was built. The entire matter of renovating the bridge has turned into a political argument that has gone on for five years." The plan for renovating the walkway to the Rambam Gate has been approved, Shragai said, but the government is delaying its implementation. "At first they wanted the bridge to be suspended from support columns," the veteran former journalist explained, "but environmental groups objected. In the end it was decided that the bridge would be placed on what remains of the [dirt] ramp, in order to avoid damage to houses in the Mughrabim neighborhood. This plan currently has the necessary approvals and all that is needed is a construction permit from the Kotel Heritage Fund which answers to the Prime Minister's Office. For some reason, because of pressure from the Jordanian government, the government is not granting this permit." In the meantime, Shragai explained, the women's section of the Kotel Plaza is smaller than it should be because the wooden bridge has blocked off one-third of its area. Gil Ronen writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
CONGRESSMEN AGAINST GAZA BLOCKADE; HAARETZ CENSORS REPORTS ON
ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT? HIZBULLAH TO INVADE ISRAEL?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 7, 2010. |
CONGRESSMEN AGAINST GAZA BLOCKADE: UPDATE
The Zionist Organization of America rebukes the 54 Members of Congress who petitioned President Obama to pressure Israel to drop its partial blockade of Gaza, and its rebuke raises different points from my original article. (See below.) The petition states, "We recognize that the Israeli government has imposed restrictions on Gaza out of a legitimate and keenly felt fear of continued terrorist action by Hamas and other militant groups. This concern must be addressed without resulting in the de facto collective punishment of the Palestinian residents of the Gaza Strip ... The current blockade has severely impeded the ability of aid agencies to do their work to relieve suffering." ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, "The ZOA finds it deeply worrying that a group of Congress Members would sign a letter that ignores the genocidal doctrines of Hamas, which controls Gaza and the fact that Hamas has relentlessly assaulted Israel for years, with special intensity after Israel unilaterally withdrew from the area in 2005. It is meaningless and insincere for these Members of Congress to claim that they recognize that Israel has imposed restrictions on well-founded security grounds — then call for the lifting of those restrictions." "We also criticize the signatories for their refusal to call Hamas a terrorist group, as is evident from their phrase, 'Hamas and other militant groups.' Hamas has not only deliberately murdered hundreds of Jewish men, women and children in scores of suicide bombings and hundreds of shootings and roadside bomb attacks, but its Charter calls for the destruction of Israel (Article 15) and the murder of Jews (Article 7). It expressly justifies its self-declared war on the Jews by reference to the notorious anti-Semitic forgery, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Article 32). By any reasonable standard, it is a loathsome terrorist group. Shame on these Members of Congress for lacking the moral courage to call terrorists by their name." The Congress Members' lip service to Israel's right to self-defense is a common form of dissembling against Israel. It is inserted so the group could not be said not to recognize Israel's right to self-defense. But when critics of Israel then urges that Israel be forced not to defend itself by blockade, by targeted assassination, by raids, and by invasion, as they do, they propose giving terrorists a free hand to murder what become defenseless Jews. The critics declare their motive humanitarian. Is it? The immoral stances by critics of Israel need to be exposed. The press release shows the critics to have a false standard.
HAARETZ CENSORS REPORTS ON ARAB-ISRAEL CONFLICT? IMRA reports that the English-language edition of Haaretz omitted the result of a poll showing that only 28% of Israelis think that a continued Israeli presence in the Territories would lead to a bi-national state, and 53% thought it would not. The Left's main doctrine is that Israel should abandon land claimed by the Arabs, and then peace would ensue. The response to the poll indicates that most Israelis do not accept the Left's arguments in behalf of that doctrine, such as that Israel must evacuate from the Territories to maintain its Jewish national existence. Omitting the poll response from the English edition keeps English-language readers from finding out how far behind public opinion the Left is, while the Left constantly proclaims its doctrine approved by the majority. As for Hebrew-language readers, the poll results already had become known (www.imra.org.il, 2/6). Haaretz is so far Leftist, that it defames religious and nationalistic Jews, as by accusing them in general of responsibility for the assassination of PM Rabin, it invites terrorists onto its pages and into its favor, and proposes all manner of appeasement of the Arabs regardless of Arab insincerity. The basic leftist premise, that withdrawal from areas claimed by the Arabs, would end the conflict, is specious. First, it is inconsistent, because the Arabs make immediate demands for territory but claim all of Israel. In Arab culture, concessions appear to them as enabling them to make further demands Second, the conflict is not territorial but religious. Islam, like Nazism and Communism, seeks world domination. Gifts of territory do not end Islamic imperial designs for what it considers a divine purpose, but facilitate them. Third, it brings war. How could it reduce Arab hatred of Jews? That hatred is based partly on racial theories, somewhat embedded in the Quran, and expanded by the Nazis, of the Jews being inherently evil. Muslim Arab bigotry also is based partly on their falsified version of history, which holds that Zionism victimized them, whereas the Arabs have been committing aggression against Israel. The shame-honor syndrome makes Arabs particularly averse to admissions. Another cause of Muslim Arab outrage is that a successful non-Muslim sovereignty in their midst runs counter to their early experience, enshrined in their theology, that the current of history is to submit to Islam. Fourth, leftist arguments usually are asserted without convincing explanation. The one about bi-national state is no exception. If Israel does not grant citizenship to the Arabs of the territories, there is no reason for Israel to become a bi-national state. If concerned about bi-national statehood, then logically the Left should be insisting on expelling illegal Arab immigrants from Israel, enforcing the tax and land laws against Arab citizens so they depart, making conditions difficult for the Palestinian Authority to survive, instead of subsidizing it. Such policies may be logical deductions, but the Left is not logical. It is neurotic, denying reality, as this discussion shows, and reflecting lack of national self-respect (as has been discussed in earlier articles) Arab culture makes concessions to its demands appear to them as enabling them to make further demands. If the omission from the English edition of the polled disagreement with leftist ideology were the only such case, I would have ignored it. But there have been many such instances. They constitute an unmistakable pattern. Some may not be significant, but I do not recall Haaretz omissions that would favor its viewpoint.
HIZBULLAH TO INVADE ISRAEL?: UPDATE 
Jerusalem Post editor Caroline Glick lends credence to concern about a Hizbullah military expedition into Israel and about NGOs subsidized by the New Israel Fund undermining Israeli defense and morale. Hizbullah foresees a war that "would change the face of the region." It now has ground forces capable of doing that, if Israel does not prepare or preempt. Ms. Glick, as our earlier report, foresees an Israeli Arab fifth column backing up Hizbullah. The signs point to renewed war. Iran's President threatened new hostility and emphasized his point, experts suggest, by launching a new rocket into space, equivalent to long-range missiles that may carry nuclear warheads. The same day that the U.S. announced that it was sending an ambassador back to Syria, Syria's President and Foreign Minister also threatened Israel with war. Hamas floated barrels of explosives onto Israeli beaches. Fatah sought reconciliation with Hamas obsequiously. [Perhaps this signifies putting wartime unity before domestic rivalry]. It would not suffice for Israel to prepare against the military assault. It also must prepare against the political assault from the Left. Just as Israel neglected Iran's proxy forces that grew into formidable menaces, so, too, Israel neglected the Left's anti-Israel agitators who grew into a strategic menace. For example, NGOs subsidized by the New Israel Fund (NIF) provided most of the allegations used by the UN Goldstone report to falsely accuse vigorous Israeli self-defense of being war crimes. As a result of that and a Maariv expose of NIF, a movement arose to review the legitimacy of the NGOs. Do it merely reflect dissident opinion or is it an auxiliary enemy of the state? "NIF-sponsored groups have worked steadily to intimidate political leaders, law enforcement officials and military commanders to toe their anti-Zionist line. In the wake of the PLO-incited riots in the Israeli Arab sector in October 2000, the overtly anti-Zionist NIF-funded Adalah group agitated for the formation of the Orr Commission. Charged with investigating the police who quelled the rioting rather than the rioters whose violence forced the prolonged closure of major highways to Jewish traffic throughout the country, the Orr Commission had a devastating impact on the police's morale and organizational culture. [The government of Israel usually does not face down the combination of leftist critics and Arab threats of violence.] Im Tirtzu's revelations about the NIF outraged NIF. They attacked Im Tirtzu's financial backers and tried to inhibit Im Tirtzu by calling it "extremist, far right, racist, fascist, out-of-the-mainstream and all the other routine far-left terms used to demonize Zionists." The tactic finally failed. Moderate leftists realized the pro-NIF offensive was an anti-Israel offensive, and are fighting back. So is Netanyahu fighting back against the Goldstone report, partly by reasserting Jewish rights in Judea-Samaria. So is Kadima, whose leaders were accused by Goldstone of authorizing war crimes. "THE HARSH truth is that the main cause of Israel's poor performance in Cast Lead and the Second Lebanon War was the Olmert government's ideological dependence on the far left and its central contention that it is Israel's presence in contested areas rather than our enemies' commitment to Israel's destruction that causes wars. Owing to their allegiance to this falsehood, Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni were unable to prosecute the wars to victory militarily, justify the limited steps they did take to defend Israel diplomatically, or discredit the rising chorus of Israeli NGOs arguing that Israel had no right to defend itself politically." The notion that peace can be made with the Palestinian Arabs has been discredited time and again, more recently by their rejection of former PM Olmert's offer to withdraw from most of Judea-Samaria and from part of Jerusalem. "These developments clear the way for the Netanyahu government to take steps to neutralize the potency of these groups. The government should move swiftly to order the police and the IDF to enforce the law against these groups and their allies. It must also provide the political support to police and military commanders in the field to empower them fulfill their orders without fear that they will be persecuted for doing their jobs." Now we shall find out one and for all whether Netanyahu is patriot or appeaser. Why didn't he expose and oppose the unscrupulous leftist tactics, all these years?
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 and visit his website:
|
|
PBT OR PPT: PALESTINIAN BOGUS TERMINOLOGY OR PPT PALESTINIAN PROPAGANDA TERMINOLOGY
Posted by American1627, February 7, 2010. |
|
The "Palestinian propaganda" greased by Arab oil & boosted up by terrorizing the west, has been "busy" for decades by producing bombastic phrases, terms in order to slur the democratic 'Jewish' state, ranging from plain ridiculous to simply outrageous lies. The first more noticeable attempt was (in the 1970's) by the Arab Muslim infested anti-Jewish bigotry was to coin [instead of the outside world declaring the truth about this intolerant society, about: racism of Arabism or the bigotry of Islamism] the outrageous phrase: Zionism — racism. Using its oil & market power insinuating to other (mainly African & Asian) nations that "they better get along", they have been poisoning the international atmosphere with "the new Anti-Semitism." With time, some PPT terms have become "acceptable" as in 'Arab lobby money buying writers,' enter: Carter... ( Jimmy Carter and the Arab Lobby, How Arab money fuels Carter's hate ),'example, what anti-Israel Apartheid Arab world has coined on democratic multi-racial, pluralistic Israel & its fight for survival as: "apartheid", even though J. Carter admitted on CNN that Israel is really an equal free to all democracy ( I recognize that Israel is a wonderful democracy with freedom of speech and equality of treatment under the law between Arab Israelis and Jewish Israelis." [CNN, June 12, 2006]) and that his intention of using that radical language was ONLY to bring attention ( I use the word provocative not in a negative sense, but just to provoke debate and to provoke discussion [CNN, June 11, 2006]), yet, the damage was done. Ridiculous as it sounds the "last" word in the baloon language is "genocide", every failed attack on Israeli civilians is considered a "massacre" and if it's a few in one season it is conveniently called: "genocide", the intent is clear, to shock! As the Arab Muslim backed dictator in Venezuela "does what he is told", he (in the anti-terror op. in Gaza) accused Israel's government of "genocide" when IDF was "fed up" with 8 years of Arab "Palestinian" Hamas attacking Israeli kindergartens with missiles while recently in Gaza using Arab women & children as human shields which — naturally — cause deaths ( Synagogue attack stokes Jewish fears that Chavez is inspiring anti-Semitism in Venezuela, Venezuela's Jews Fear More Attacks — ABC News.) Or in the power grab by the Eurabia-immigrants, Arab Muslim militant "activists" getting a hold on Malmo Sweden — so strongly that in order to "have" their support the mayor of Mamlo had to say some really stupid things. ( Malmö: Muslim antisemitism, Mayor of Malmo, Sweden: Zionism is Racism, Jews flee Malmö as anti-Semitism grows) as Arab racism & Islamic Anti-semitism burns in Sweden — causing ethnic cleansing of Jews Contact American at american1627@yahoo.com |
|
MISSILES CAN REACH MOST POINTS IN ISRAEL
Posted by Cpocerl, February 7, 2010. |
|
This is entitled "Syria slips Hizballah missiles for destroying Israeli cities "
from the DEPKAfile |
|
The secret transfer of the mobile surface-to-surface Syrian-made Fateh-110 (range 250km) missile to Hizballah sparked the prediction Friday, Feb. 5 from an unnamed US official that cross-border arms smuggling from Syria into Lebanon outside state control was "very dangerous" and "paved the way to war similar to Israel-Hizballah conflict of 2006. debkafile's military sources report that Israel warned Syria through at least two diplomatic channels against Hizballah using this lethal weapon, which is capable of reaching almost every Israel city. Our sources disclose: Syria pulled the wool of Israel's eyes for the transfer by openly training Hizballah in the use of SA-2 and SA-6 surface-to-surface missiles. Israel had warned it would deem their passage into Lebanon Syrian casus belli by Syria. The Fateh-110 is still more lethal, accurate and dangerous than the SA-2 and SA-3. it confronts Israel now with a Hizballah armed with a solid-fuel propellant, road-mobile, single-stage, short-range ballistic system weighing three tons with a half-ton warhead and a range of 250 kilometers. It is not deployed in surface batteries but fired from mobile launchers, which the solid propellant renders capable of firing at speed with little advance preparation, before returning to the fortified underground silos Hizballah has sunk in mountain areas across Lebanon. These features make the Fateh-110 a very tough target for Israeli bombers to strike. According to our intelligence sources, Israel posted warnings against Hizballah using the weapon through US Middle East envoy George Mitchell who called on president Bashar Assad in Damascus on January 20 and, even more emphatically, through Spanish foreign minister Miguel Moratinos who arrived in Syria on Feb. 3 after talks in Jerusalem. The message he carried was that if Hizballah ventured to fire the Fateh-110, Israel was determined to hit back at strategic and military targets inside Syria. This warning instantly prompted the war rhetoric which emanated from Assad and his foreign minister Walid Moallem. Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman, known for his undiplomatic, blunt style, responded by warning Syria that it stood to lose the next war and the Assad family would lose its grip on power in Damascus. Prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu and defense minister Ehud Barak are presumed to have endorsed the first part of Lieberman's comment as representing their own view. But the minister added the personal threat on Syria's leaders on his own initiative. Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
"SHABAK IS THREATENING MY FAMILY"
Posted by Hillel Fendel, February 7, 2010. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) The father and wife of a Land of Israel activist have received threats from the Jewish Department of the Shabak (Israel Security Agency), warning that he'd better "cease and desist." Two months ago, Elad Meir, a resident of Haresha in the Talmonim bloc of Jewish towns in Binyamin, was detained and interrogated by the Shabak, and told to stop his nationalist, pro-Land of Israel activities. If he did not, he was told, he would be arrested. He has not been arrested — but his father and wife have received threatening phone calls. Meir told Arutz-7 that a few weeks ago, his father received an intimidating call from a Shabak agent. The father later said that the agent told him, 'Your son is involved and responsible for illegal acts,' though he did not elaborate. The agent threatened that if the activities did not stop, the Shabak would take very strong action against him — and against the father's ability to earn a living as well. Just a week ago, Elad said, "My wife received a call as well. A man identified himself as 'Ron from the Shabak,' and said, 'Your husband has received several messages from us, but has not adhered to them. If this does not stop, we will take aggressive action against him.' My wife asked the agent to elaborate, and he said, 'I'm speaking very clearly. Your husband is a citizen like everyone else, and if he does not follow the law, we will take action against him as a lawbreaker, and we will act with aggressiveness.'" Meir appears to be undaunted. "We are doing nothing illegal," he says, "and the fact is that I have not been arrested. We are engaged in protecting the Land of Israel from those who would take it from us, whether they are non-Jews or Jews. We are willing to sacrifice all for the Land of Israel. We are doing nothing to be ashamed of, but rather things that we believe in." The secretariat of Haresha publicized this statement: "We protest the threats that were sent to Elad Meir and his family — a threat to harm his father's work and a threat to his wife that her husband would be harmed. This approach is not acceptable, and is rather reminiscent of dark periods. We hope to be privileged to see more illuminative days." No response to Meir's report has yet been received from the Shabak. Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
DOOMED TO FAILURE?: THE POLITICS AND INTELLIGENCE OF THE OSLO PEACE PROCESS
Posted by Dr. Alex Grobmann, February 7, 2010. |
|
Were the Oslo Accords a state of mind? |
|
Doomed to Failure?: The Politics and Intelligence of the Oslo Peace Process
Finding a solution to the Arab/Israeli conflict has been a constant source of frustration for American administrations. Each new U.S. president assumes he can resolve this intractable dispute either through the sheer force of his personality or his unique understanding of the problems in the region. The Oslo Peace Accords — which were officially signed at a public ceremony in Washington, D.C. on Sept. 13, 1993, in the presence of PLO chairman Yasser Arafat, Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, and U.S. President Bill Clinton — is among the most glaring example of how American presidents are naive about how to settle the conflict. In "Doomed to Failure?: The Politics and Intelligence of the Oslo Peace Process," Ofira Seliktar, a professor of political science at Gratz College and adjunct professor at Temple University, analyzes the environment in which the Oslo Accords evolved, and the reasons why the agreement failed. The downfall of the Soviet Union and the defeat of Iraq in the Gulf War in 1991 were viewed by the Israeli peace activists and their supporters in the West as a sure sign that the climate was ripe to start the Oslo negotiations that lead to the Declaration of Principles. Shimon Peres, the most vigorous proponent of this view, believed that a new Middle East had emerged that would prevail over the "irrational" and "tribalist" attitudes like extreme nationalism and religious fundamentalism among the Arabs throughout the region. Once peace was achieved, peace activists expected there would be an added bonus: Israel would probably abandon its own "tribal-particularistic culture shaped by the ultraorthodox and national religious Zionists in favor of a more universalistic-secular creed." Seliktar describes how the negotiations began, the principles upon which they were based, and the Labor party's attempt to implement the accord even as Yasser Arafat's legitimacy continued to be repudiated. She explores how the Likud government attempted to effect a midcourse modification of the agreement, and Labor's efforts to circumvent and ignore PA blatant violations of the interim provisions of the Accord in order to achieve a final peace settlement. Those who want to understand the way in which Israel predicts and manages political change will find this book of special interest. Seliktar shows us why the Oslo Accords were doomed from the start. This is not an intellectual exercise. The reasons for the failure still exist: Israeli and Western academics and media continue to believe that if only Israel were to make more concessions, there will be peace. Overlooking Arab corruption and incitement to violence in the media, schools, mosques, and in the political arena to conclude a deal is a common ploy. Those who raised valid objections to the process, even in the security community, were vilified. IDF officers who questioned Oslo found their promotions blocked. Seliktar also found that the appeal of "lucrative deals" with senior Palestinian "security bosses" was sufficient for some Israelis to embrace Oslo. Inexplicably, there was little interest among the Israeli public in "exposing Oslo for what it really was." As one analyst observed, "Oslo was not a political process, but a state of mind among dreamers of dreams and peddlers of illusion who misled an entire people." It is too easy to place the blame on Israeli leaders alone. The Israeli public has to assume the greatest responsibility for going along with this farce. Israeli leaders succeeded in misleading the Israeli public because her citizens were unwilling to accept what should have been so obvious to everyone. Nothing the Arabs said or did during the Oslo period, before or since, suggests anything other than their desire for the demise of the Jewish state. Oslo was a dangerous fantasy that continues to this day among segments of the Israeli and Jewish population throughout the world. Israel can ill afford to live with such illusions and fantasy. Reading what the Arabs say, and how they act should be sufficient to appreciate their true intentions. This book provides additional insight into why the Oslo Accords failed and why we cannot assume our leaders know what is best. Dr. Grobman's most recent book is "Battling for Souls: The Vaad Hatzala Rescue Committee in Post War Europe" [KTAV]. He is also co-author of "Denying History: Who Says The Holocaust Never Happened?" (University of California Press, 2000) His next book "Zionism=Racism: The New War Against The Jews" will be published in 2005. |
|
BAH BAH BAAAAH
Posted by Steven Plaut, February 7, 2010. |
|
This past week dozens of tenured leftists in Israel decided to demonstrate their individuality by recruiting themselves in an act of totalitarian conformity in support of the McCarthyist attempts to silence the "Im Tirtzu" student activist group in Israel. Im Tirtzu is a Zionist student group, including secularist and religious Israeli students. It has been active in exposing the harassment of students by leftist faculty members when students dare to question the bias of those profs in their classrooms. Then over the past week Im Tirtzu has dominated the media in Israel because of its expose of the New Israel Fund. According to that expose, covered on the front page of Maariv and then discussed at length in all the Israeli press, 92% of the false smears against Israel contained in the UN's "Goldstone report" were provided by leftist anti-Israel groups inside Israel funded by the New Israel Fund. The Israeli academic moonbats are upset that the students are exercising their freedom of speech to denounce the New Israel Fund and its director, Naomi Hazan, who used to be a Knesset Member from Meretz. The semi-Marxist Meretz Party is down to three seats in the Knesset out of 120, yet seeks to impose its will on the entire country in an anti-democratic manner. It does so via facilitating foreign funding for seditious NGOs (non-government organizations) operated by picayune groups inside Israel enjoying virtually no support, even less than the support Meretz gets. The academic moonbats have been displaying herd mentality as they rush out to sign petitions denouncing Im Tirtzu, demanding that it be silenced, while also endorsing the shenanigans of the New Israel Fund. They insist that Israeli democracy and freedom of speech are in danger of being destroyed if non-leftist students are allowed to express opinions. Just imagine what they teach in their classrooms! The reactions of the tenured herd reminded me of the old Bing Crosby song from World War II, about the little lambs. Here are the lyrics, with slight changes: We're poor leftist lambs who have lost our way, 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. Write him at splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il His website address is
This appeared iin the Jewish Press
|
|
THE REAL BATTLE OVER SHDEMA IS STARTING NOW
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 6, 2010. |
|
The real battle over Shdema is starting now With mixed feelings of happiness and worry we came to Shdema yesterday, Friday February 5th to listen to Prof. Hillel Weiss's lecture on the literature of the first aliyah. Feelings of happiness-because of the IDF's decision to return to Shdema and set up an outpost there. Feelings of worry- worrying whether the outpost would stand firm against the international pressure against Israel. When we came down the hill at the end of the morning, a consular car was there, watching our moves. When we came near to try and see who was inside, we saw the driver was a bodyguard. Somebody was in the back.The back window was very dark. When we tried to approach the car even more to see who the person in the back was, the car fled towards Bet Sahour. We drove after them to photograph them and they fled towards Jerusalem. There is no doubt that in the car was a person who did not want us to know he was there. We think it might be the USA consul himself. A picture of the car can be seen by clicking on: http://www.yeshabulletin.com/FIGHT%20BACK/FightBack.htm The Haarets newspaper and their reporter Amira Hess [see below] came out on Thursday and Friday with articles against the IDF's return to Shdema, articles in favor of the Arabs of Bet Sahour and in favor of the illegal Arab construction at the bottom of Shdema claiming that the lands of Shdema have been taken away from the Arabs. The truth is exactly the opposite. Since the Oslo agreements most of the area has been taken away from Israel and has become area A (under full Arab control). Gush Etzion has been left with only 4% of the land and from these 4% they want to take away Shdema from us! About the second claim, i.e. that all the Arabs want is to build a hospital in Shdema that will serve "all"...we checked and saw that they have lots and lots of lands in area A on which they can build hospitals if that was what they really wanted. It is clear that the claim that they want to build a hospital there is just an excuse that sounds very "humane" when their real purpose is: to take away from Israel yet another area C under Israeli control and break the Jewish continuity between Jerusalem and Eastern Gush Etzion. On June first of 2009, Shaul Goldstein, mayor of Gush Etzion, wrote a letter to the Defense Minister explaining why one should not allow the Arabs to build a hospital in Shdema claiming rightfully that it will not end with a hospital: "the Palestinians will then continue and demand to receive the rest of the area into their hands too — claiming they need parking spaces, and areas in which to grow and expand in the future". Unlike what Haarets is trying to claim, it is clear that the IDF's decision to return to Shdema is a purely professional decision. The IDF understands the strategic importance of Shdema for the security of the area. Anybody with common sense understands one cannot abandon such an important place. The Committee for a Jewish Shdema and Women in Green will continue with its activities in Shdema as planned. Next week we will have the pleasure to hear a lecture by Emanuel Shilo, editor of the "Besheva" newspaper who will talk in Hebrew on "How to turn the plate around to our favor". The presence of each and every one of us in Shdema is now more important than ever. The support of all our members together with the constant presence of the devoted activists from Har Choma, Jerusalem. Bet Shemesh, Efrat, Gush Etzion, kiryat Arab Hevron, together with the involvement of the members of Knesset active on behalf of Shdema — is what brought progress in the struggle for a Jewish Shdema. Now we must continue and make even more of an effort to come every week. Please G-d, we will succeed. The Committee for a Jewish Shdema and Women in Green Rabbi Yaron Durani (El David Nokdim)- Tsuri Botosh (Shdema youth,Jerusalem)-Igor Bialsky (Tekoa)-Elisheva Ginzburg (Alon Shvut)-Orly Glauber (Maaleh Rehavam)-Ruthi Wallfish (Tekoa)-Ina Viniarsky (Tekoa)-Yehudit Tayar (Bet Horon)-Timna Katz (Neve Daniel)-Tomer Karazi (Nokdim military mechina)-Nadia Matar (Efrat) — Gedalya Friedman (Neve Daniel)-Yehudit Katzover (Kiryat Arba Hevron)-Eli Rodan (Elazar) For details:
*Article by Amira Hess on thursday
Other related articles on the IDF's return to Shdema:
Link to Jerusalem Post article:(english)
Link to article in Walla news (Hebrew):
Link to article in Haarets (Hebrew):
Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
POLICE WARN OF JIHAD TRAINING FOR CHILDREN
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, February 6, 2010. |
|
Some young children in Britain are being indoctrinated to hate non-Muslims and champion a holy war, according to a new documentary. This was written by Eeyore
and it appeared in
The movie can also be seen here. |
|
"No child is ever too young to be started off on Jihad training," states one document recovered by police from the North West's Counter Terrorist Unit (CTU) during raids. CTU officers, interviewed by the BBC's Inside Out team for a special programme, show the document and a film they recovered of two children aged about three and six playing with a pistol and Kalashnikov rifle. The officers say the discoveries are evidence of attempts to radicalise youngsters. The footage, which police believe was filmed in Pakistan, was uncovered on the hard drive of a suspect's computer — though investigators have not revealed when the material was seized. The video shows a girl and young boy playing with guns, which police believe are real. "What do you do with the weapon?" asks a man's voice. He answers his own question: "I want to kill the infidels." A senior CTU officer, who cannot be identified for security reasons, tells the programme makers: "We believe this was filmed abroad. We have no idea who the children are. We were shocked to find it at the house. We have no reason to believe this is faked. The guns are real." The officer said of another raid: "We found a series of flash cards and documents on how to raise Mujahid children. The cards were written in English — and instead of having M for Muhammad they had M for Mujahideen. They have the potential to indoctrinate. It just shows the mindset of some people and what we are up against." Police also found documents downloaded from an extremist website instructing parents to raise Mujahid children. The documents say: "The key is to start instilling these values in them while they are babies. Don't wait until they are seven. No child is ever too young to be started off on Jihad training." David Thompson, Assistant Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police, said the majority of the Muslim population supported the police's counterterror operations in the region. He told the BBC: "My view is that the majority of the community across the board see the threat that we're dealing with and are hugely supportive." MP Kim Howells, chairman of the parliamentary intelligence and security committee, said: "It's a dreadful thing to see and I hope I never have to see it again actually. That's as serious a piece of evidence of the kind of thing we are up against as I have ever set eyes on." Anjum Anwar MBE, who works for the church as a community dialogue development officer, said the film must not be used to implicate the rest of the Muslim world.
Gabrielle Goldwater is a
Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
|
|
SEXUAL ABUSE WIDESPREAD AMONG MUSLIMS
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, February 6, 2010. |
|
This was written by Nicolai Sennels
and it is archived at
http://europenews.dk/en/node/29775 |
|
Here we will dive into a dark and closed universe; a universe where women are forced to commit to lifelong sexual relationships with close family members, where abuse of women is seemingly extremely widespread, where girls and women are forced to hide their female beauty behind veils, long unflattering coats, burkas etc., where men are free to rape women, because women are often automatically seen as the ones at fault. Rape and forced sexual relations In the article 'A Question of Honor' in The Independent on February 10th 2009, British police were quoted estimating that nearly 17,000 women in Great Britain fall victim to honor related assaults, including rape and forced marriage, every year. Vibe Klarup Voetmann, director of the Copenhagen women's refuge Dannerhuset, said to the Danish daily Kristeligt Dagblad on the 11th of June 2008 that 70 percent of the nearly 1.400 women who contact the centre each year come from a Middle-Eastern background. As 'Dannerhuset' is just one of 40 women's refuges in Denmark, there is reason to fear that the number of Muslim women who seek shelter or counseling due to forced marriages, domestic violence or sexual abuse, is actually much higher. It is also worth taking into consideration the fact that many Muslim women keep quiet about assaults out of fear of retaliation from the family. Thus, in Denmark alone, the number of Muslim women who are abused each year is likely to exceed several thousand. Where is the honor in raping a woman or forcing her to marry a man she does not love? A forced marriage is a sexual assault When it comes to forced marriages, journalists and media still fail to understand that it is not just an assault on the woman's basic human rights, but also, and especially, on her sexuality. In a forced marriage, the fact is that the woman is forced to engage in sexual relations with a man she has not chosen herself. Furthermore, this sexual relationship often lasts a lifetime, as is divorce rarely an option for the women. The many forced marriages are only made more detestable by the fact that the women are often forced (here from Danish daily Jyllands-Posten) to marry members of their extended family: "In Pakistan it is estimated that close to 70 percent (other sources quote 60 percent) of all marriages are inter-familial marriages and in Turkey the figure is between 25-30 percent." How would you like it if you were forced to have sex with your own cousin? Forced sexual relations between close family members is not only psychologically traumatizing, but also biologically unnatural. According to the article "The inbreeding of immigrants costs millions" in the Danish daily BT on the 10th of November 2003, the consequences are often physical and mental handicaps: "When two cousins have children, the risk of having a handicapped child is doubled — and that costs the municipalities," and further, "Already in year 2000 it was calculated that while 13 percent of all children in Copenhagen were immigrants, they also made up 24 percent of severely handicapped children." Unfortunately, in many forced marriages in Muslim culture, the bride is very young. As the young girls are without any realistic possibility of resisting the marriage, it is not too much to consider these marriages institutionalized sexual abuse. Swedish researcher, Pernilla Ouis, herself a Muslim, has on behalf of "Red Barnet" produced a report of the so-called honor-related violence. The research took place in the Middle-East and Ouis' conclusion is: "early marriage can be seen as sexual abuse, as the girls involved are very young." The conclusions of the report were so damning she ran into censorship of it. Muslim culture is a paradise for horny men According to the Quran, Muslim men who die for Islam in battle will be rewarded 72 virgins, who are seemingly restored to virginity every time a martyr has penetrated her. Seen from the perspective of Western psychology, it is quite embarrassing and immature that a world religion promises sex — fair and square — and this, in addition, with sexually un-experienced women, as the highest prize. Most people who have already grown out of the hormonal waves of the teenage years, and have gained just a pinch of human maturity, will probably agree that such a goal is built on, and directed at, a very crude type of man. This is not to say that the Islamic paradise is first and foremost meant for horny and callous men, who are too insecure to deal with experienced women's free view on sexuality. However, the widespread glorification of this paradise within the Islamic environment indicates that the Muslim culture has succeeded in producing not so few of this type of man. This sexual paradise, where one can just take a woman and do with her what one wants without asking, is unfortunately also existent among living Muslim men who have not martyred themselves for their religion. In many cases, Muslim men can rape Muslim women without consequences, because the women do not dare tell the family or the police. In fact, the view on women in the Muslim culture is often that it is the women themselves, who are to blame for the rape. On the 3rd of August 2009, the Danish TV-station, "Danmarks Radio", reported (English translation of original, longer article is here) how organized gang rape is a widespread phenomenon in immigrant circles: "Young men with a different ethnic background than Danish are responsible for organized rapes of girls from their own environment and background. The young men are well aware that the girls are so frightened of the reactions from their family that they keep quiet about the rapes." Kristina Aamand, a nurse who, herself, comes from a Muslim family, has worked with immigrant girls, who have been sexually abused, at the "Centre for Rape Victims in Denmark". Today, Aamand is the manager of the counseling offer "New Virginity", which is contacted every month by one or more immigrant girls who have been sexually abused by immigrant boys or men. Aamand comments on the phenomenon: As a Muslim immigrant girl you are raised to believe that if you have pre-marital sex, you are punished by Allah. Pre-marital sex is, according to Islam, the most shameful act you can do. Some of the boys use this concept of honor against the girls, because it is the girls who bare the shame and will be punished accordingly. It is the more fervently religious families who consider the unfortunate girls guilty of their own rape. The same kind of family will often not allow female family members to be alone with men who are not members of the family. Furthermore, girls and women must always be accompanied by male family members whenever they leave the family home. Therefore, there is reason to suspect that the rapist is often a member of the family, such as uncle, brother, cousin, father, grandfather etc. The Islamic paradise for horny and perverted Muslim men received its own legal paragraph in the spring 2009 in Afghanistan. Here the Afghan President, Hamid Karzai, signed a law which actually granted men the right to rape their wives if more than four days had passed without sex. Luckily, the law was withdrawn due to international pressure. Unfortunately, the media and biographical literature is filled with accounts of Muslim men's sexual abuse and violation of girls. The beautiful, intelligent and brave Somali woman Ayaan Hirsi Ali describes this in moving detail in her books about life in Muslim society. The media can often provide more absurd examples. One of many recent examples is that of a 16-year-old Jordanian girl who was killed by her uncle with eight bullets at different places in her body — all because she had been raped. The only act of mercy, if it is even reasonable to talk about it as such, was that the uncle waited to kill his niece until after she had given birth to her rapist's child. Earlier in the summer, a girl, only eight years old, was abandoned by her Muslim parents because they wanted to save the family honor after their daughter had been raped by four boys. The Organization for Women's Refuges in Denmark has experienced a fourfold increase in the number of children and young people who seek protection from domestic abuse. Manager of the secretariat, Lene Johannesson says: Although efforts for integration has been persistent for quite a few years, young girls especially are still subjected to honor-related assaults. Muslim men's view on women is perhaps the reason that 100 percent of assault rapes (where perpetrator and victim do not know each other beforehand) in Oslo in both 2006, 2007 and 2008 were committed by immigrants with a so-called non-Western background. A particularly malicious version of this phenomenon was revealed in February 2009: An Iraqi woman had arranged the rape of no less than 80 other women. The purpose was to give the victims the impression that now that they no longer had anything to live for, becoming suicide-bombers was the only way to save their own and their family's honor. Furthermore, according to Islam, women must provide at least two male witnesses if they are to take any case to court. Should a woman in the Muslim countries which judge according to Sharia thus have the guts to report a rape, it would be impossible to win the case, as any possible male witnesses to the rape would most likely have been involved in the assault themselves. In reality, a large part of the world's almost 700 million Muslim women are thus without any real source of protection against sexual assaults by family members or other men in the surrounding environment. Only too often, this is exploited by Muslim men. When it comes to considering the actual wishes and desires of the women, the fact that a woman has any desire at all is frowned upon in many Muslim countries, even to the point of cutting off the erogenous parts of the female genitals preferably before puberty is reached. The New York Times thus related in the article 'A cutting Tradition' on the 20th of January, that 96 percent of all girls in the world's most heavily populated Muslim country, Indonesia, are circumcised before they turn 14. Disgusting! Islam perverts its followers' sexuality Why are women, and women's right to decide over their own body and sexuality, worth less than men in Islam and Muslim culture? Why are Muslim women beaten, raped and mutilated so much more often than women of other cultures? There are many possible answers, of which the Quran is the most concrete: According to Allah and his prophet Muhammad, women are simply inferior to men (The Quran, chap. 4, 34th stanza). Apart from the Quran, as a psychologist I will also point to the psychological fact that what we are afraid of, we do not like. After treating more than 100 Muslim men, it is my clear impression that Muslim men feel scared and insecure that women's sexuality is in many ways stronger than men's. Women can make love for a longer time than men, and men often feel ashamed if they cannot control their ejaculation and are thus not able to satisfy the woman. By disregarding women and their needs, these men try to handle the fact that women are stronger than men in this basic area of life. Of course it must be mentioned that this psychological mechanism is also a factor among male-chauvinists in other cultures. However, no religion or culture has succeeded in creating as pronounced a cult around female sexuality as Islam — a cult that is centered on the suppression and concealment of female sexuality and female desire. Kristina Aamand said in my interview with her, "Project New Virginity — Interview with Kristina Abu-Khader Aamand" from the 21st of September 2009: "Social control of women serves the purpose of preserving the core of the Muslim culture. For, a larger part of the core of the Muslim culture is about the female sexuality." And here, it does not matter whether the women themselves claim to have chosen to wear a scarf, a veil or a burka. The fact that the women share Islam's condescending view on women does not make things better, rather the contrary. As a professional psychologist, I thus argue that the Muslim view on women is not only harmful to Muslim women. The condescending view on women and the mass-neurotic control of their sexuality is also harmful to the psychological development of the men. The sexuality of Muslim men is perverted because they are not able to experience a relaxed and loving relationship with women, and thus miss out on the deep emotional joy and development that loving, tender and respectful love between man and woman brings. Muslim men are becoming callous, and their sexual performance becomes insensitive and without consideration for the needs and desires of the woman. And according to the women, among whom two experienced prostitutes that I have interviewed, the result is that Muslim men last a shorter time in bed and give less joy than other men. When venturing into depth-psychology, which was first explored by the Swiss Psychiatrist Carl Gustav Jung, we find the same psychological analysis. If one suppresses the female in the outer world, one correspondingly represses one's own female qualities (so-called "anima"), and one thus becomes less sensitive, creative, calm, intuitive, self-secure, social and peaceful. he rest of us, all us men who love women, and who worship the things we learn by opening up to them, and wish that women are free to chose their partners, wardrobe and lifestyle, feel that it is our duty to protect them if they are being attacked or suppressed, and can only shrug at the men who do not let their women live the way they want, and who do not have eyes for the many qualities of women. Men who do not have a relaxed relationship to women are often male-chauvinists and emotionally immature — a sign of lack of openness and real life-experience with the beautiful sex. In therapy, this type of man often shows himself to have a distorted image of his own attractiveness and sexual performance. Unhealthy sexuality This perversion of sexuality and lacking experience of equal and mutual love might be the reason why many fervent Muslim believers also have been shown to have a great interest in child porn. In the article "Link Between Child Porn and Muslim Terrorists Discovered in Police Raids" from 17th of October 2008, Times Online could thus report how British police have found lots of child porn during investigations of assumed terrorists' computers. The police was surprised to find a clear connection "between people who were followers of theocracy and Islamic fundamentalism, and their use of child porn." The pedophile terrorists' behavior is not far from that of their prophet: Muhammad married a six-year-old girl and had sex with her first time when she was nine. And yes, he terrorized his surroundings with scores of wars and gave his followers permission to rape non-Muslim women. The fact that more than half of all brides in Afghanistan are under fifteen years old is also far from the biologically and mentally more responsible Western practice, which is based on the idea that girls should not have sex before they are sexually mature. One of the more grotesque examples is an eight-year-old girl in Saudi-Arabia, who was forced to marry a 47-year-old man. With the help of her mother, the girl filed for divorce, but according to Saudi-Arabian law, which is based on the Quran, she had to stay with her husband, who was six times her age. One of Islam's highest leaders, the now deceased Ayatollah Khomeni, who lead the Islamic revolution in 1979 in Iran and who, until his death in 1989, was the highest authority of the country, both politically and religiously, also wrote the book Tahrirolvasyleh, which is a collection of Islamic rules of conduct for Muslims. Here he is quoted for: A man can quench his sexual thirst by use of a baby. The only condition is that he does not penetrate the vagina, but anal sex is okay. Elsewhere, he writes that: It is better if a girl marries so early that she gets her first period in the home of her husband rather than in the home of the father. Every father who gives his daughter away in marriage at such an early age will have obtained a place in heaven. And further: A man can have anal sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels, etc. However, he should kill the animal after ejaculating. And some words on the rights of women: A woman who has entered into a true state of matrimony does not have the right to leave the house without her husband's permission — she must be available to him and fulfill his every need and must not refuse to give herself to him unless there is a valid religious reason. Khomeni also does not think that a husband having anal sex with his own son is a valid reason for divorce: "If a man has anal sex with his son, brother or father after he is married, the marriage is to continue." Prophets, religious leaders, the Quran and culture or not, seen from a psychological perspective, sexual relationships between grown men and adolescent girls, or women who are not participating voluntarily, is an expression of a perverted sexual life and culture. It is a sign of some thoroughly depressing and dysfunctional character-traits — these character-traits are, in far too many cases, the result of growing up in the Muslim culture. Thus, many signs suggest that Islam and Muslim culture perverts men's sexual drive and desire. This is, presumably, the reason why sexual assaults on girls and women are so frequent and widespread among Muslims. The largest search-engine on the internet, Google, seems to confirm that the interest in the most perverted and traumatizing kinds of sex is largest in the Muslim world. Google Trends is a program, which can show in what countries and languages a certain word is most frequently searched for. If you write "children sex" in Google Trends, Muslim countries take up four out of five places on the top-five. The languages, in which "children sex" is most often searched for are Indonesian and Arabic. If you search for "rape sex", Muslim countries take up three out of four on the top-four. And again Indonesian and Arabic are the languages in which this type of sex is most frequently searched for. Just for fun, I tried searching for "donkey sex" and again it turned out that Muslim countries take up four out of five places on the top-five. However, this time the languages in which the search for donkey sex is most frequently executed were Turkish and Arabic. Ayatollah Khomeni would not have raised an eyebrow. Of course there can be different explanations as to why the interest in searching for these kinds of sex is so great in many of the largest Muslim countries, but it is, nevertheless, thought-provoking seen in the light of Islam and the Muslim culture's view on free sexuality and love as sick and wrong. You can try searching yourself on Google Trends. Conclusion The ability to open up to a free and giving love and sexuality between man and woman is the foundation on which mental health rests. As long as women are not seen as equal in the Muslim culture, Muslim men and Muslim society will lag behind psychologically. On this basic human level, Islam and Muslim cultural psychology can be very unhealthy for human development. The conclusion is thus that the result of this psychology is that sexual assaults are worryingly widespread among Muslims.
Gabrielle Goldwater is a
Member of "Funding for Peace Coalition" [FPC] (http://eufunding.org.uk)
|
|
I'M LOOKING OVER...
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, February 6, 2010. |
|
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il. Go to
|
|
PETITIONS FOR/AGAINST NEW ISRAEL FUND; ISRAEL TRAINING KURDS; ARAB TERRORISTS RUN ISRAELI PRISONS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 6, 2010. |
|
PETITIONS FOR AND AGAINST NEW ISRAEL FUND High-ranking Israeli reserve officers signed a petition against New Israel Fund subsidy of 16 NGOs that defamed IDF action in Gaza. The NGOs falsely accused the IDF of having committed war crimes in Gaza, but, the petition asserted, the IDF "was making superhuman efforts to avoid hurting innocent civilians. We therefore call upon the entire public to support us and strengthen the IDF and its commanders." Artists and writers circulated an opposition petition of "disgust with the campaign of incitement" against the New Israel Fund." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/5). I advised my source that it should have included at least a link to the artists' petition, so we could evaluate for ourselves whether it made any valid points. The word, "incitement," could mean ordinary criticism or incitement to violence, which may be criminal. Ordinary criticism may be valid or inappropriate. The Left often uses the term, "incitement," hysterically and as a means of smearing opponents. This usage is like the abuse of the term, "racist," to cow opponents who are not racist. Over the years and including the recent action in Gaza, the IDF has aborted missions and not pulled triggers in order to spare civilians well beyond the standard of avoiding war crimes. As a result, Israeli soldiers got killed and terrorists were spared and lived to kill, another day. I consider that restraint immoral and foolhardy. But it is an attempt at decency. On the other hand, while Israeli troops strive to be the most humane possible in combat, and their efforts are vindicated by the resulting casualty figures compared with earlier wars and with other countries' forces, it is most unfair for the IDF to be accused of doing the opposite. By contrast, Israel's Arab terrorist enemies, such as Hamas, Fatah, and Hizbullah, strive to be most inhumane possible. They try to kill as many innocent civilians as they can, and they deliberately put their own civilians at risk so as to either inhibit IDF action or get artists and writers to condemn the IDF it inflicts collateral casualties when striking at genuine military targets. Against them, one hears little indignation. Hamas got away with its cynical cost in lives to civilians on both sides. This leaves me dubious about the sincerity of ostensible humanitarian concern expressed about Israeli action and Arabs' lives. What we see are pretexts for condemning Israel. ISRAEL TRAINING KURDS 
The Kurds of Iraq and Israel admit nothing, but rumors are circulating that Israel is training the Kurds to be anti-terrorist commandos. It is a natural alliance, one that took substance before. The Kurds are a non-Arab, Sunni minority whom the Arabs of Iraq and Syria, Iran and Turkey split up control separately instead of letting them have a state in their homeland area. The rumors are that in return for their training, Kurdish commandos gather intelligence about Iran and Syria for Israel. It is said that the Kurds monitor Iranian nuclear facilities. As my source put it, "The Kurds, whose country is currently occupied by Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria, have reportedly been accepting Israeli assistance in their fight for independence, as they did many years ago." (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/5). The Kurds fought for independence from Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. Against Turkey, some Kurds committed terrorism. It is going too far to call their "country" "occupied." What country? It would be sufficient to suggest that the 40 million Kurds are a separate nationality for whom a case can be made for self-determination. This is in contrast with the Palestinian Arabs, who are not a separate nationality and for whom no case has been made for self-determination, only asserted, and who in any case have a state of their own in Palestine, called Jordan. Winston Mideast Commentary and Analysis has a general admonnition about Western training of Muslim allies. If not careful about who is recruiedt, the West train people who turn on them, as did the Mujahadeen of Afghanistan. The next likely candidates to make trouble are the Palestinian Authority troops trained by the U.S. and others. ARAB TERRORISTS RUN ISRAELI PRISONS There has been some question whether Arab terrorists establish their own conditions in Israeli prisons. The issue arose again, when it was learned that about 100 prisoners are studying under Hebrew University for college and masters degrees, at the expense of the government of Israel. "Israel's Prisons Authority has a long-standing policy of accommodating prisoners' demands in order to avoid riots and strikes, which can only be quelled violently. The Prisons Authority has stated that it is not sure it would receive the backing of the political and legal system if such actions would be necessary." Other times the issue arose was when it was discovered that Israeli prisons coddled Arab prisoners with excessive family visits, while Israeli prisoners were tied up incognito in Arab closets, and that the families and lawyers acted as messengers for terrorist organizations. The scandal was supposed to be reformed, but the issue died down. What a shame that the political and legal system may be so pro-Arab that would not allow the Prisons Authority to stop spending money on educational luxury and privileges for murderous enemies, lest those enemies riot in prison! Studies have shown that about half of released prisoners resume terrorism. If they receive education, they may become more effective against Israel. We need a study of whether the recidivists are more likely to be the educated ones, as are many of their leaders. Even if they do not return to a military role in terrorism, they may help build up the economy for supporting terrorism. Arab threats to riot also enable them to block Jews from praying on the Temple Mount, from collecting taxes, from demolishing illegally built houses, from evicting Arab squatters, etc. That is what occurs in a Jewish state. INTERNATIONAL LAW NEEDS UPDATING FOR TERRORISM Netanya Law College Dean Sinai Deutsch finds that international law needs updating for terrorism. Unlike Judge Goldstein, he affirms that regardless, international law holds terrorist organizations responsible for harm to their own civilians when they place them in harm's way. However, international law was devised when warfare meant clashes of formal armies. Now much warfare is by guerrillas and by terrorists. The rules of war need to be modified to suit dealing with terrorists, who operate from amid population centers, schools, and hospitals. Dean Deutsch does not believe that the threats of lawsuits against Israeli officers who travel abroad are serious. He said this is so for several reasons. The only one reported is that the Palestinian Authority is not sovereign, is not a signatory to the international charter of the International Criminal Court (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/5). Seems like a weak reason that biased countries and courts would evade. PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY SUBSIDIZES 'MARTYRS'' FAMILIES 
The reputedly reformist Prime Minister Fayyad of the Palestinian Authority" has increased subsidies for the families of slain terrorists, simultaneously with asking European aid givers for more funds. Fayyad has raised the pensions for the families and health and education stipends. He considers this a moral obligation. (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/5). ISRAELI NEWS REPORTS VERSUS U.S. INTELLIGENCE 
In today's news (from IMRA, 2/5), the Israeli government reports no increased tension between Syria and Israel. A few days earlier, however, Defense Min. Barak, known for having fled from Hizbullah before it was a formidable force, abandoning heavy weaponry and Lebanese allies, but without being put before a court martial for it, transferred Israeli defensive forces from the Golan, that he would like to abandon, to central Israel. Meanwhile, U.S. intelligence finds that 5,000 Hizbullah troops are training to seize five Israeli towns in northern Israel and ignite an Arab uprising there. Hamas would open another front. Syria would provide artillery support. Iran is giving the troops a high level of skill. The first Hizbullah battalion would break through the Lebanon border and seize all or part of Nahariya, a city of 55,000. Israeli defenses are lax, there, near UN peacekeepers. Think of all the hostages Hizbullah would capture! A smaller group of marines would try to reach the coast. A second battalion would seize the Israeli town of Shlomi, 300 yards from the border, in order to block Israeli reinforcements. A third battalion would drive further, to reach Arab villages where they have Hizbullah sleeper cells and also to block Israeli reinforcements. A fourth battalion would go to the Kadesh Valley, where it would fire upon the whole Galilee panhandle. "Rocket attacks from Lebanon will focus on disabling Israel's strategic military sites, such as air force bases, missile bases, its nuclear facilities and naval bases. Targeting Israeli population centers is a lower Iranian priority." Israel does not seem to be doing anything to derail this scenario, to bolster its defenses. Rather, Defense Min. Barak has opened the path for the enemy. Whereas the enemy has become inventive and proactive, Israel has become complacent, led by politically minded generals and an apparently treasonous Defense Minister and perhaps Prime Minister.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
IT'S INTER-ARAB VIOLENCE, STUPID! A CALL TO REASSESS MIDDLE EAST POLICY
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, February 6, 2010. |
|
1. An assessment of the politically-correct Western policy-making, media commentaries and conventional wisdom raises the following questions:
Since the 7th century, inter-Arab and inter-Muslim conflicts in the Muslim Middle East — between North Africa and the Persian Gulf — have been the role model of state-sponsored terrorism, hate-education, inherent domestic and regional violence, endemic unpredictability, instability, volatility, fragmentation, religious and political intolerance, suppression of human rights, nepotism and treachery. 3. Aijaz Zaka Syed, the opinion editor of Dubai's "Khaleej Times," asserts (Al Aharam weekly, Jan. 20, 2010) that "more Muslims than non-Muslims have been killed in macabre attacks carried out in the name of Islam." Nearly 50 people were killed and 500 injured during the December 29, 2009 terrorist attack on a Karachi religious procession. But more than the loss of lives — "that has long become a daily mayhem" — it is the devastation wreaked on the country's biggest city that will haunt Pakistan for a long time to come. "Thousands of businesses, shops and commercial establishments were destroyed in no time, incurring losses worth billions of dollars, [in addition to] the attack on the heavily attended volleyball match in the troubled Northwest Pakistan, which killed 75 villagers and left scores maimed..." "None of those watching the match, or attending the Karachi procession had anything to do with the wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan or Iraq. They had no sympathy or affiliation whatsoever with the US and the West. Then why have they been targeted? "How does it help the cause of these so-called defenders of Islam, when they target innocent Muslims and non Muslims? This death cult is the ultimate injustice... 4. Jordanian economist, Yusuf Mansur writes ("Creative Jordan" website, July 25, 2009) that "Arabs are ruled by a cartel of authoritarian regimes, practiced in the arts of oppression. Arab unity is as elusive as ever. Inter-Arab divisions are bitter...Hardly any of the 21 Arab states can plausibly claim to be a genuine democracy. Therefore, Arab regimes rely on repression in order to stay in power... "The political instability of the Arab world is in turn connected to another problem: the missing glue of nationhood...Egyptian diplomat, Tahsin Bashir, called the new Arab states of Middle East 'Tribes with Flags.' In countries as different as Lebanon and Iraq, ethnic, confessional or sectarian differences have thwarted programs of nation-building. That is why Iraq fell apart into Sunni, Shia and Kurdish fragments after the removal of Saddam despite decades of patriotic indoctrination. Syria could follow suit if the minority Alawi sect of the ruling Assad family were somehow to lose control of this largely Sunni country. Sudan has seen not one, but two, civil wars between its Arab-dominated centre and the non-Arab minorities in its south and west... "Up to a million citizens of the Arab world may have perished violently since 1990... The disturbing point for the future is that none of the underlying causes of conflict enumerated above has disappeared. On the contrary, each appears to be taking on the characteristics of a chronic condition...Political and social discontent is in danger of tipping into violence — even into revolution." 5. The aforementioned facts, along with current Middle East events, produce the following observations:
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 |
|
OBSERVATIONS ON THE 10TH HERZLIA CONFERENCE 2010
Posted by Barry Shaw, February 6, 2010. | |
|
TZIPI LIVNI, the Leader of the Opposition, was the opening speaker to a packed auditorium. Her points were that Israel represents the values of the United States in the Middle East being a democratic Western country. There is a difference of opinion in Israel over what are Israel's interests. This dIsagreement makes for difficulties in the decision making process. Israel and the States share a strategy against terror and are active in the war against terror. Externally, Iran presents an extreme ideology that not only threatens Israel. It also tHreatens America. In fact, it tHreatens the whole area. America must help to eNlist the moderate Arab countries who pErceive the same dangers from an extreme Iran. Peace with the Palestinians represents the interests of Israel. Israel will have no choice but to give up certain territories. It is in Israel's interest to remove Syria from the circle of extreme countries such as Iran. Again, these are shared interests with America. It is a bad policy for the Israel Government to say to America, "You help us with Iran and we will help you with the Palestinians". Iran is a global problem — not only Israel's. Peace with the Palestinians is in Israel's interest and should not be conditional on other problem areas. A peace agreement with them should not be portrayed as a favour to the U.S.. We should keep our strategic partners happy. What needs to be done? We should sit with the U.S. Administration and discuss how to work together to prevent Iran from going nuclear. Sanctions are an obvious factor. Israel needs the Security Council to impose sanctions and other steps against the Iranian regime. We need the U.S. to enlist the pragmatic Muslim world against the eXtremists. We should outline to the U.S. Administration the deal breaking options from the Israel side in nEgotiations with the Palestinians. The Palestinians have to accept that Israel is the Jewish state as a condition. Denying this leads to a continuation of a conflict between two states. The refugee problem must be solved in the context of their return to their own Palestinian state, not to Israel. There should be no nationalistic demands from Arabs living in Israel. We can not create another terrorist state on land that we transfer to them. Not only Israel but the U.S. and the whole world do not need another Islamic terror state in the Middle East or, as in Lebanon, where a radical entity controls the country and the Government is not free. We have to agree on future borders irrespective of the views of those in the audience whether settlements make you happy or angry. We should not make pronouncements of what we will or will not do in advance of peace talks. We do not make sacrifices as a favour to the Palestinians or to the President of the United States but for ourselves. I know there will be a price to pay. However, we do not hand the keys over to Hamas. DANNY AYALON, Deputy Foreign Minister, join ALFRED MOSES of UN Watch, JAMES CUNNINGHAM, the U.S. Ambassador to Israel, MALCOLM HOENLEIN, of the Conference of Major American Jewish Organizations, in a panel to address IS THE US-ISRAEL RELATIONS STILL SPECIAL? This question did not arise two years ago. It came about due to two elections in the States and Israel which introduced two new leaders. Benjamin Netanyahu's accepted a 2 State solution, an economic 'bottom up' plan for the Palestinians of the West Bank, a temporary settlement freeze, and an invitation to the Palestinian leadership to join him in peace talks, yet these gestures did not bring him any kudos. Bad relationships with the Us Administration is bad for Israel and does not help to Imprice the Israeli Prime Minister's popularity at home. However, the reverse was true with Netanyahu, whose popularity gained when he refused to accept Obama's demand to totally stop all settlement activity. In his opening remarks, ALFRED MOSES complimented the scale and scope of the Herzlia Conference saying that America does not have a conference that comes close to the Herzlia event. He felt that Obama or Netanyahu will not make much of a difference to US-Israel relations. It goes Beyind the leaders. This is critical for Israel. Israel is seen as a democratic Western country sharing American values. Support for Israel has been rock solid from 1967 to 2010 with 46% sympathetic to Israel and less than 10% sympathetic to the Palestinians among American public opinion. 30%, however, do not care for either side. People in the U.S. do not see Israel-Palestine as a central world issue. It does not make the Top 5. America, however, does see Israel as being on the right side of the war against terror that plagues Americans Increasingly. Overwhelingly American Jews support Israel despite the fact that 78% of them voted for Obama and only 22% for McCain. Traditionally, American Jews vote Democrat. Yet the US-Israel relationship remains special. DANNY AYALON said that the US-Israel relationship trancends Governments. It is a mutual admiration between peoples. Israel and the U.S. are natural partners. This goes beyond the Administration. Despite hIccups, U.S. supports the one true democracy in the Middle East. This gives the U.S. The added value. It does not change this value according to political winds as do other countries. Ayalon added that the Israeli Government sees the current U.S. Administration as a friendly one. Therefore, the special relationship is still strong. Ayalon closed by insisting that all the Israeli Coalition parties would like to see a renewal of the peace process. MALCOLM HOENLEIN asked why does this Administration differ from other Administrations? His answer was, basically, that it does not. It is still 'a work in progress'. Obama spoke about the special relationship a number of times. The U.S. may be moving towards isolationism but the numbers are still strong for Israel. JAMES CUNNINGHAM said that two new Administrations set out with new goals. Obama came in with great energy to tackle some of the biggest issues faced by a new President for decades. In Cairo, Obama told the Muslim world that the bond with Israel was unbreakable. He called on the Muslim world to recognise Israel. Dialogue with Israel includes major issues such as iran, missile defense, attempts to delegitimise israel in the light of Goldstone, and recognising Israel as the Jewish State. The peace talks, he said, have not produced a breakthrough as the U.S. had hoped. It was disappointing, Cunningham said, the President Obama did not mention Israel in his State of the Union Address. The only foreign policy issue he raised was Iran. The U.S. Ambassador was asked how Obama would respond to a unilateral move by Israel against Iran. He answered by saying that Israel has the right to defend itself. He hoped that conflict can be avoided but the U.S. will stand fIrmly with Israel. Alfred Moses said that the only effective and clear sanction would be a naval bLockade on Iran. He was not sure that this was likely. Ayalon said it was to get sanctionsworking quickly. He did not believe that China would isolate itself within the UN Security Council so he was hopeful that sanctions would be approved there. Malcolm Hoenlein said that opportunities were missed to seriously support the people of Iran who had bravely stood up against their regime. There was still time to support the Iranian people in their protests against their leadership. In a past meeting with Trent Lott (Republican) and Tom Dashell (Democrat) Dashell told him that, in the case of Israel, there were no Republicans or Democrats.
WINNING THE BATTLE OF THE NARRATIVE was a panel discussion on the subject of communicating the message, or making the case for Israel. I enjoyed the comments of JOSEF JOFFE, the editor of Die Zeit who outlined the battle of legitimacy from Durban 2 to the universities and media. "Anti-Israel is, like its cousin Anti-Semitism, endemic. "Would you have the same attention to the subject if the Israeli side were Muslim or Arabic? Probably not. This is a useful argument that exposes the anti-Semitism behind the global protests and Delegitimization of Israel. For the Palestinian Arab leadership provocation that draws massive Israeli response, fighting in densely populated civilian areas is a win-win situation for them. "Why does it take Israel so long, sometimes six to eight weeks, to come up with a response? Why wait until the conflict is over before trying to explain motives?" "Israel knows what is going to happen tomorrow so why do not they prepare themselves mediawise in advance", according to Joffe. "Goldstone comes along ... You do not sulk and pout. You prepare and act." For a positive narrative, people should read Dan Senor's book, 'Israel — The Start Up Nation'. This is essential reading for making the case for Israel. Senor tells of the twin miracle of how bereft immigrants from Eastern Europe socialist society turned into a modern dynamic and successful Western nation. Israel is the most successful country outside the U.S.. Transforming a nation is a universal message and an inspiration. IDO AHARONI from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs opened with a joke
about three Israelis who landed at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris.
Universally, Israel's DNA is defined by the conflict. When Israel is allowed to communicate to the world it's about the conflict. Literature and Israeli movies are only about the conflict. It is as if nothing else exists in Israel. You have to do beyond the conflict to win friends and influence people. Conflict management only can not help you leapfrog to a more positive narrative. In most countries the Majority do not care about the conflict. In France 26% side with Israel as opposed to only 9% for the Palestinians, but 75% do not care either way. The conflict is not a relationship builder. There is a need to restore Israel's relevance in the world by showing it as a great product. Whether it's art, weather, natural beauty, science, hi-tech, Israel has a lot to offer. EYAL ARAD said that Israel's image is like the weather. "Everyone talks about it but nobody does anything about it". The media Obsessively cover Israel. It's a fact. For media, bad news is good news. Seen how they rush to Earthquakes. Disasters sell newspapers. "Jews are news — so bad Jews make great news". If they do not exist the media has to create them", said Arad. "Let's use the opportunity that everyone is looking at us to create a better image," he suggested. The problem is that we do not know what we want. Is it Aliyah? Tourism? Investment? IDO AHARONI of the Foreign Ministry continued this theme with an anecdote from Alice in Wonderland. "When Alice fell down the hole she did not know where she was so she asked the rabbit which way to go.
Israel finds itself fighting a delegitimatisation campaign against it. It is essential to coordinate a global campaign. This needs discipline. If the message is not coordinated from within it can not be conveyed externally. A concise and constant message is required. MARTIN KACE of Empax asked "What is a brand?" He answered that a brand, when it comes to a nation, must be true. One does not go to establishing truth when one does not go to other countries to find out the truth about yourself. This can only be done from honest debate from within. "We are Preoccupied with how we are perceived," Kace explained. "We do not have narrative that is relevant today. We are not speaking with a voice that expresses what we are as Israelis." The Palestinians own the narrative and the pictures. Israel beyond the conflict is, currently, a fiction. "To say we are just like everyone else is wrong", said Kace. "We are unique". "How do you make a positive message by embracing the conflict?" he asked. "Our prowess is conducted with style. Conflict brings out the brilliance in us. An perfect example is the military field hospital in Haiti which was born out of conflict yet produced wonderful humanitarian benefits and showed us in a positive light. We are reluctant warriors who persevere and produce and develop amazing universal benefits for all ". Israel's image must be based on personality and attractiveness. Without attraction you are not in the branding business. A two-pronged agenda is needed. 1. Research and a rapid response team for conflict management. Ido Aharoni said that Israel's number one branding agency is BIRTHRIGHT ISRAEL. Their young visitors tell us that Israel is a life changing event!
WINNING THE BATTLE OF THE NARRATIVE moved into another auditorium and a new panel. DR. NOAM LOMELSHTRICK LATAR of the IDC outlined the importance of using social networking to get the message to a huge number of people.
It is vital to expand the way we communicate. "Can a Government conduct an effective campaign via the web? The answer is no," said Dr. Latar. "This would be condemned as propaganda and lack credibility. The Government must recruit NGOs in an effective campaign fand have them use social networks such as Facebook, Twitter, blogs such as this, and other such outlets. Governments have to hire professionals to adopt the message that goes out via all the social networks. LIOR CHOREV disclosed that 70,000 internet users were following the Herzlia Conference live. Discourse between human beings and not authorities succeeds in getting your point across. The Palestinians use this successfully. We have the skill but not the strategy. GIDI GRINSTEIN of the Reut Institute told us that, since World War 2, more states than collapsed politically than militarily. This is the aim and the danger of the delegitimization campagin against Israel. When under attack by social networks Israel needs to develop its own network campaign. This has not been properly exploited. The Foreign Ministry have 220 diplomats around the world with no budget. This vastly reduces the effectiveness of Israel's message. Social networking is cheap and more effective. RON PROSOR, Israel's Ambasador to Britain said that the Foreign Ministry's Hasbara does not have to be apologetic. He said there were four main warfronts in Britain: 1. Media. Britain rules the Airwaves with the BBC and Sky based in London as are the major English speaking broadsheets. In conclusion Prosor said it is impossible to fight delegimization without the resources to do so. LORNA FITZSIMONS told of her remarkable story of going from being a Labor MP for Rochdale and, as a Christian, to head the prominent pro-Israel Jewish lobby group BICOM. About Israel's narrative she said that credibility was the key word. Credibility of the messenger, and credibility of the message. Once you have your message keep repeating it constantly. It works for the Palestinians. It will work for Israel. There seems to be a better understanding in the Israeli Government for the need to seriously address Israel's image and to improve its narrative. This may be a result of the siege mentality from the growing threats of delegitimization but steps are being taken to improve Israel's strategy in facing these challenges. The highlight events of the Conference take place in the evening.
PROSPECTS OF PEACE WAS THE FINAL PROGRAM ON DAY 2. SHAUL MOFAZ said he had a master plan to instigate a two state solution. This is a two stage plan. Stage 1 will require Israel to withdraw to defenceable borders while the Palestinians will have a state with provisional borders on 60% of the West Bank containing 90% of the population. Stage 2 will give the Palestinians additional territory which will be the same size as in 1967 but not the same borders. The current Government, he said, did not have a plan and we are forced to take steps that are not in our best interest. No Israeli Government is going to remove 240,000 citizens from their homes in the West Bank. Clearly the major center there will remain as part of Israel. Negotiating with a master plan gives hope to both sides. Mofaz said he saw no signs of peace without such a plan. Hizbollah and Hamas are preparing for the next round in the conflict. Without a peace plan we will not see the current calm situation continuing. Peace with the Palestinians is the key to peace with other Arab neighbours. An interesting interchange between ELLIOTT ABRAMS and DAN KURTZER evolved around the Arab initiative. "Arab peace initiatives were not born out of sudden love of Israel", said Kurtzer "rather as a need to free up conflict management so that they can deal with the Shiite-Sunni conflict". Retrospectively, it was a mistake for Clinton in 1997/8 not to bring the moderate Arab states into the peace process. If you honor the Arab world there will be an Arab partner to facilitate the peace process for the Palestinians. On the other hand, ELLIOTT ABRAMS said that Arab support did not bring Arafat to agree at Camp David, nor Abu Mazen at Annapolis. Obama concluded that freezing all settlement activities would be a way to bring the Arab states onboard. This, it turned out, was not a realistic assessment. Abrams reminded us that no Arab leader had set foot in the West Bank. Arabs, he said, can contribute to the Palestinians society from the bottom up. It will never work at the negotiating table. Contributing to this discussion DAN SCHUEFTAN, the Director of the National Security Studies Center at the University of Haifa, said that the Saudis wanted us to sign on the bottom line their Peace Initiative without having us discuss or negotiate the terms. According to Schueftan the situation for peace is weaker today. The radicals are perceived in the Arab world as winning. The Americans have reached a dead end in the peace process. There is no new peace initiative. The global balance will be with the radicals. The unchallenged successes of Iran, Hizbollah, Hamas, Syria show that the radicals are winning. Turkey has moved towards Iran. and Syria. The West has no operative answer to this threat. As for Israel, long range rockets can reach Israel's major cities from Iran, Lebanon, and also from Gaza. Goldstone will prevent Israel from responding effectively against violence and, if Israel does respond, it will be condemned. Based on the above what can be done. "We need to change the paradyms," said Schueftan. "How did we live for generations without peace agreements? Is it tolerable to live in a state of no war and no peace? Unilateralism is not a bad policy. Is Israel better without Gaza than with it? I believe that Israeli society is stronger without Gaza than with it". DANNY ROTSCHILD said that the Arab peace intitiatives is a way for Arab nations to participate in the peace process and a good thing. Only negotiating with the Palestinisn will produce peace. Most Israelis will say that, after withdrawing from Gaza and getting rockets, they have lost trust. Israelis want to see what they will get before making any future move. No Palestinian leader is capable of taking hard decisions without the support of the Arab states. Morocco, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and Egypt have close reasons to be involved. They can guarantee the terms that must be agreed by any Palestinian leader to a peace agreement. Without this no Palestinian leader can sell a peace agreement to his people. Some of the Arab countries will also be asking for compensation for hosting Palestinian refugees for decades as part of any peace agreement. There is a clear interest of the moderate Arab states in a peace settlement due to the threat from the growing radical elements in the region. "Any Arab intervention is a win-win situtation", concluded Rotschild. AMOS GILEAD is the head of the Political-Military Branch of the Ministry of Defence. He is an important conduit between the Israeli Government and neighbouring Arab countries and is closely involved in Israel's security and defence. He reported that the unprecedented performance of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank against Hamas is to prevent a Hamastan there. They lost out big time in Gaza an they are determined that it won't happen in the West Bank. There is an unwritten war going on between the PA and Hamas. 'We should be cautious about rushing into peace negotiations too early", he warned. "Direct negotiations that fail can be worse than no negotiations at all. Failure in peace talks is a victory for the radicals." He also viewed that the PLO will not be able to sign an agreement while Hamas is strong. Israel cannot change the security arrangements in the territories as long as another Hamastan is a real threat. "Improve the condition of the Palestinians with the 'bottom up' policy and don't waste time entering into peace negotiations", was Gilead's advise. Some interesting closing remarks included ELLIOTT ABRAMS. "Israel and the Palestinians negotiated for twenty years while Israel expanded settlements so why not now? The settlements are no reason or precedent why Abu Mazen cannot continue talks with Israel." MALCOLM HOENLEIN responded with "Twenty years of settlement activity may not have impeded negotiations, but maybe they impeded an agreement". ELLIOTT ABRAMS returned with "Nothing that Barak offered Arafat at Camp David would have persuaded Arafat to sign an agreement. Nothing that Olmert offered Abu Mazen would have persuaded him to sign an agreement. The Palestinians have proven themselves incapable of signing an agreement with Israel". DANNY ROTSCHILD. "Separation from the Palestinians and final status agreement including defined borders is vital for Israe to maintain its Jewish democratic and security needs". AMOS GILEAD. "We cannot put our trust in international forces to guarantee our security. I don't want to mention countries, there may be representatives in the audience, but their contribution is worthless to our security needs". The keynote speaker for the evening was DAN MERIDOR who is the Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Intelligence and Atomic Energy. His talk concentrated on the danger of Iran and the Palestinians. In front of an audience of diplomats, including the American Ambassador, he said that there is a perception in Iran and the region that America is an empire of the past and is weakening. Nuclear Iran will cause a shift in the Arab world and this is already taking place. If Iran wins this contest with America the result be destabilisation. If Iran wins a contest against the American will this will be even more dangerous for the world as it would have defeated the greatest world power. This is a contest that America has no alternative but to win. Looking reality in the face with the Palestinians, Israel tried hard under Olmert to reach an agreement and failed. Is there an ideological rift in Palestinian society. Their demands are enigmatic. Is Abu Mazen going for 1967 borders? Or is it 1948? "It is not clear to me, even today, if it's 67 or 48", declared Meridor. Regarding the proposal to stop settlement building Meridor said "Why should Jewish construction stop and not Arab construction?" As long as the Palestinians think that outside parties will coerce Israel they will do nothing. "In fact maybe Abu Mazen thinks that doing nothing is not a bad policy for the Palestinians. He gains the world sympathy, Governments and NGOs pump billions of dollars at him, he doesn't have to be accountable for internal development. He is getting by quite nicely without a state." In conclusion, Meridor said that Israel knows how to give territory for peace.
"Begin did it with Sadat of Egypt. Rabin did it with Jordan. We will know how to make peace with the Palestinians."
This is the third day of the Conference and I have to confess that I am overwhelmed by the size and scope of the event. There is so much to cover and it is physically impossible to take it all in. The Organisers must be congratulated on the high level of local and international guest and keynote speakers and moderators. To assemble this all star cast over the four day conference must have been a daunting task. The opening event of Day 3 for me was BREAKING THE GLOBAL OIL ADDICTION. It turned out to be an enlightening and fascinating discussion. Starting proceedings was JAMES WOOLSEY. He was not sparing in his remarks. Better known as the former head of the CIA, he is now the Senior Advisor at VantagePoint Venture Partners. He opened his remarks by saying humourously "After years as a Washington lawyer and in the CIA, I am delighted to be invited into any polite company." His views on the danger and risks of oil dependency were: The 23 oil exporting states, other than export oil, export to the world less than Finland. They do nothing except oil pump. All are dictatorships or autocratic regimes. Many sponsor or support radical Islam. They support the madrassahs, incite hatred against the West. In other cases they actively finance terrorism and oppress their own people. Our economy is at the mercy of OPEC. Iran is the example of the risky path we are on. Oil Underpins a lot of our international problems. They get away with it because we are dependent on their oil. The oil wealthy Saudis control 90% of Islamic education and Incitement. If you want to know who finances international terrorism and Islamic hatred you should copy Woolsey's personal test. Next time you drive into your local gas station turn your rearview mirror until you see your eyes. You are looking at the culprit. When you fill up your car you are helping to finance the people who finance hatred, incitement, and terror. We are financing their madrassahs and the terrorism with our petrol money. America is a big offender. The U.S. imports one billion dollars a day. That's 370 Billion dollars a year in order to finance our oil habit. Oil has a 96% monopoly in transportation. The need to move away from oil must be Anchored in transportation. YOSI HOLLANDER, the Chairman of the Israel Institute for Economic Planning said: The global forecast is that oil production peak is predicted for 2020. Oil is rapidly depleting in the existing oil fields. The two alternatives are further oil exploration or finding alternatives to oil. The economic impact includes the fact that every major recession has been linked to oil prices. The U.S. trade deficit is linked to its oil import. The U.S. defense budget is more than 50% oil linked. This inlcudes the protection of oil states and facilities. If we look at poor countries such as those in Africa we can see that most are in debt to the oil producers. Like everyone, they are dependent on oil but do not have the trading abilities to pay for their oil use. While Israel's oil needs accounts for 8% of our trade balance Kenya is minus (-) 174%
This is the oil share of their trade deficits. It is oil that keeps them poor. Hollander produced some frightening statistics. 6.7 million people have been killed in oil related wars. Potential deaths as a result of oil related wars over the next twenty years is estimated to be one hundred million people. The U.S. uses 23% of the worlds oil supply. OPEC has 79% of oil reserves. People assume that OPEC has increased oil production since 1973. In fact they have reduced production by 2%. In 2008 demand for oil fell. OPEC reduced supply and the price went up. They hold the world in their control. PAIL WERBOS is Program Director of the U.S. National Science Foundation and an international expert in oil and fuels. His points were: The power of the oil industry is a great problem. The oil industry must reinvent itself. To solve the problem we have to zero out our need for oil in twenty years if we take action now. If you care about a clean climate, consider the carbon dioxide caused by transportation. Transportation is 100% dependent on oil. By Combining or Utilising three things we can solve our oil dependency, clean the climate, and save money. 1. Hybrid cars cut gas use by 50%. To achieve oil independence we must maximise flexible fuel plug-in Hybrid cars. Bring them online as fast and we can to remove our dependency on OPEC. Look to Brazil. They have an advanced Hybrid car market using alternative Fuels. If you can buy these cars in Brazil why not in America? This is not because Brazil is a richer country than America. It works for them. It can work for us. Brazil has the best of both worlds. If gasoline prices are high they switch to ethanol and vice versa. The Chinese are making batteries for electric cars for $2000 and getting cheaper. America can build cars better than China. Even if we buy the electric batteries from China at $2000 a piece for the U.S. hybrid car it will still be cheaper than importing oil. America currently produce so much bio fuel that the total use of U.S. transportation would use only 15%. It's not just bio fuel that can be used. Natural gas is also useable. In 70% of U.S. transportation and oil is 70% of that oil use is in private cars. We do not have to wait 20/30 years for the technology. It's already here. All it takes is the political will to move on the number one risk to the world. The session moved to another hall and covered Israel's Role In Breaking The Global Oil Addiction. EUGENE KANDEL, Head of Israel's National Economic Council, opined on how to break the OPEC Cartel. "Find alternatives to oil. The more alternatives there are control and then prices will become less rigid." Israel is a small country on this issue but if we can find solutions it will be a hedge against rising oil prices. The Israeli Academy of Sciences is researching electric batteries, alternative Fuels, and other solutions. They will write a report and present it to the Cabinet in a few months. We have focal points of excellence in this field both scientific and industrial. This edge we have can be at the forefront of this effort to remove the world from oil dependency. GAL LUFT of the is Executive Director Institute for the Analusis of Global Security. He said Oil interests have prevented solutions to the problems and genocides in Darfur and Sudan. Dependence on oil is an existential threat to the existence of the State of Israel! The regimes that control the oil sponsor radicalism and terror or have an anti-Israel agenda. We import a massive and growing amount of oil. We also import huge amounts of fruit and computers but these are not a strategic threat to our country. Oil is. If Israel stopped importing oil it will not affect world prices but it would contribute to our own balance of payments and it would be a moral move. Changing oil dependency is also good for Israel. We can look with our brilliance into the research and development benefits. Take the electric battery, for example. We can find ways of reducing the price of these by our inventiveness. Let Israelis who want to import electric cars do so. There are cars that you can plug in at home or the office. We do not need to wait for infrastructure. Let's do it now. MOTI HERSHKOWITZ Reminded us that we have an international track record in research. We have the technology to convert CO2 and water into fuel. Biomass will replace oil as the feedstock for future refineries and turbines. Biomass is a reasonable source for alternative Fuels. Partnership between academia and industry can rapidly produce results. $ 280 Million in nano technology put Israel on the map. We need a clear commitment for budget by the Government. ORNA BERRY, Venture Partner in Gemini Israel, divulged that two African presidents have asked Israel for help on three items: 1. Desalination. Regarding SHAI AGASSI. BETTER PLACE, his electric car project, has verbally been supported by PRESIDENT SHIMON PERES but it was large companies from overseas who had joined BETTER PLACE in their venture because they believe in his project. The Better Place business model for their electric cars was outlined by JAMES WOOLSEY. They lease you their batteries. You drive to an installation or network charging point where you can charge your battery in a reasonable time. If you have a long distance drive and no ability to recharge your battery you will have battery swapping stations. Israel may become a major leader in this. James Woolsey has a hybrid car. He reported that he drives at two cents a mile as opposed to ten cents on oil. LUCIEN YEHUDA BRONICKI, Chairman and Chief Technologist at Ormat Technologies said that Israel has done amazing things. Ben Gurion said we must develop solar enery because we do not have oil, and desalination because we do not have water. Israel can develop niche markets in alternative fuel energies in places like Africa. Industry can be involved. Reminded us that IBM and Intel did not get involved here because of Israel's massive market but because of our brain power. Others will follow on this issue. We already have world leaders in other spheres listing Teva in generic drugs, Check Point in software,Netafim drip irrigation, and Ormat in geothermal energy. He suggested mobilising and supporting universities to focus on projects, and reviving the technical schools. UZI LANDAU, the Minister of National Infrastructure, was the guest speaker at this topic. "We suffer from an addiction. To begin to go through the detoxification process we need to make a commitment. We are becoming slaves to oil. Oil is the main financial source to radical Islam. The aim is to stop the West's dependency on oil. Even a reduction of 20% to 30% will change the mentality of those who milk the world through oil. These people who want the destruction of the West are playing with us. Governments must regulate. We must regulate for electric cars. We do not have the ability of a super power but most of the investment comes from abroad. "Sometimes overseas investors believe in us more than we believe in ourselves," he said. "Small Israel can be a laboratory for the world". "A project, based in the Negev, costing $ 500 Million and producing annual revenue of $ 170 Million we can do. If we want to prove leadership we need to put money on the table. I say to our scientists' spread the word, show the world what we can do. $ 100 Million in research can produce a breakthrough. " We were reminded that Uzi Landau had recently signed a cooperation agreement for alternative fuels with Germany. From technology to politics as I attended a session on EUROPE'S ROLE IN THE MIDDLE EAST. MIGUEL ANGEL MORITANOS was the EU Special Envoy to the Middle East. he is now Spain's Foreign Minister. He reviewed the development of the EU's foreign policy. At the time of Sadat's visit to Jerusalem the EU was represented but they had no leverage, influence, or say. After seven years and the Implimentation of the Lisbon Treaty the EU began to emerge in world affairs. "We know that, in Israel, the EU was considered an enemy of Israel and not balanced. We are not an enemy of Israel. We are a friends, though sometimes friends have to say tough things to each other". "We will put our energy into peace and security for Israel. The EU and Israel share the same values and vision. We are working to that end. Tonight I visit Abu Mazen. I will try to persuade him to return to negotiations with you, but if I do not have the confidence of the Israeli Government I cannot succeed. When I speak to the Arab leaders I hear the same concerns as I hear in Israel regarding Iran. The EU will be very active in working the Arab countries and with Israel. I hope for full normalisation between Israel, the Mediterranean countries, and the Arab world ". MARTIN BARTAK, The Deputy Prime Minister of Hungary, and their Minister of Defense said that the EU's verbal response to the Gaza Conflict was not useful or effective. During the Czech Chairmanship of the EU Israel was very much in their mind. "We support the desire of Jews to live in their own homeland just as the Czechs and the Slovaks deserve theirs.". Czechs call for the upgrading of ties between the EU and Israel. "We established a closer relationship between Israel and NATO. We have firm support for Prime Minister Fayyad and the Palestinian Authority and for giving humanitarian aid to the Occupied territories. The present conditions are unbearable for the Palestinians. A Palestinian state must be established. We must coordinate a peaceful Palestinan state building process. The Palestinians have to unite in recognising Israel ". "The State of Israel is the most important ally the U.S. and the EU has in the Middle East. Any threat to Israel or eradicate them into the sea is intolerable. We are exchanging ideas in the quest for peace and security in the region. We have proposed an international conference. THE PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS. SHIMON PERES addressed a packed auditorium. He pointed to the 7% growth achieved by the Palestinians in the West Bank in 2009. "The enemy of the Palestinians is Hamas. Hamas is not only their enemy. They are ours, and Egypt's and Jordan's. It is a distasterous enemy." Globalisation. "We must adapt ourselves to globalisation. Source of income is not always linked to territory. Science is not conquered by an enemy. A lot of poor countries do not give equal rights for women. This is wrong for so many reasons. Women deserve the equal rights to education ad to work. In many poor countries women are not allowed to work. This is wrong. If they worked it would bring two Salaries to the home. Women must be an example to their children. Whoever does not condemns their homes and their countries to continuing poverty. Army Education. Turning to Israel's army Peres said "The IDF is the best school in the world. Everybody has go into the army. If our youth did not go into the army many would be lying in bed until they get up to play with the computer. Then they go out drinking and enjoying themselves through the night. They have no role in society. Instead, in the army the IDF wakes them up at six in the morning to a full days activities. They run. They are healthier and fitter. Their use of computers is for important tasks, like the security of the country. In the army they learn to take responsibility, to act in a mature way. I want to turn the camp into a campus. I want that our soldier can come out of his army service with a degree. Today, a Golani solder works with a computer. Today, wars have changed. Increasingly conflicts are between brains not bullets. The IDF is an army of values. All this can be taught in the army to our youth. The army agrees to this and intends to do a pilot plan to start this June. Israeli Technology. "If you have a small IPhone in your pocket you have the whole world in your pocket". The next fifteen years will be the most unprecedented in mankind. In the last decade computer technology has improved one million times. Nano technology is only at the threshold and Israel is the world leader. We lead in stem cell research. We are too small to be a producer or a market but we can be a laboratory. Explaining the reason for Israel's success he said, "Science and technology is not just tied to education but to character. Jews contributed something special to the world. Dissatisfaction! They are never happy with the current state of affairs. Look at Moses. What did he do after coming down from Mount Sinai with the Ten Commandments. He broke them. This dissatisfaction drives us to do things better "They have four million cows in Ethiopia. Israel's 100,000 cows produce the same amount of milk thanks to our technology." Israel's Image Abroad. Peres related a story of someone who asked him about Israel's poor image abroad. He answered that Israel is the most popular country in the world. "India has a population of 1.2 billion people and India and Israel are the best of friends. After the Mumbai terror attack they share our concerns. We now produce and supply India with the tools to fight terrorism. Christians worldwide support Israel because of our shared values. Look at the millions of Christians in America who are more passionate towards Israel than many Jews. China sdmires Israel not because of Moses, I doubt if they know who Moses was, but because of our technology and what is has contributed to Chinese agriculture. That's another 400 million people. The U.S. is Israel's stongest supporter. Russia has a respect and common bond with Israel. Over one million Jews came from there. OK, so we have a problem with Sweden. We'll get over it. Do you know of another country that enjoys such popularity? " Iran. Iran is two problems to the world: Iranian uranium and its repressive regime. "If Iran was a reasonable country maybe there would not be a problem. Iran is the peak of moral corruption. They hang people for being homosexual or for opposing the regime. They oppress their own people. They support terror. They deny the Holocaust. They threaten to eradicate us, to wipe us off the map. The authentic Persians are 50% of the country. They are a proud people. They and the youth of Iran feel that Ahmadinajad disgraces them and their country. Fighting Ahmadinajad is a moral struggle. A coalition of nations is the best method in this struggle. Israel should not monopolise this struggle. It is a world crisis. Concluding, President Shimon Peres said the Jews and Israel has suffered a lot. "They say we are God's Chosen People. We were also Hitler's chosen people. Now we are Ahamadinajad's chosen people. We have suffered, but we have also achieved a lot. Israel hopes to continue to contribute to the world ". The Herzlia Conference enticingly arranged an agenda that simply got better as the program went on.
The Presidential Address was a highlight — but there was much more to
come on Day 3.
FOLLOWING THE PRESIDENTIAL ADDRESS BY SHIMON PERES the Conference moved on to other forums including The Quest for Effective Governance and the Elderly Population in Israel. I selected THE US-EUROPE-ISRAEL RELATIONSHIP TRILATERAL concentrating on the strategic dimension. RAN CURIEL, Israel's Head of Mission to the EU and NATO said our relations with the EU is good but we suffer from delegitimization eminating out of Europe. He doubted if Israel can improve the relationship further until we have peace. He posed the question of how Europe views Israel. With the United States it is very clear. They see us as their strongest ally and the only Western democracy in the region. With Europe it is no so clear. Israel in Europe is seen as part of the problem, or part of the solution? KLAUS NAUMANN is a 4 star General and was Chief of Staff of the German Army. He is also the former Chairman of the North Atlantic Military Committee of NATO. He said that Israel's existence as the only democracy in the Middle East is essential for NATO. Israel has to cope with the same dangers as NATO. Both are forging strategic missile and cyber defenses. Naumann made a very pointed remark, Referring to Iran's recent missile testing. A missile with a range of two thousand kilometres only makes sense if it carries a weapon of mass destruction. It does not make sense for it to carry a conventional warhead. "Iran displays all the characteristics of a nuclear weapons program. Ten billion dollars for an enrichment program at Bushehr is the size of ten to fifteen power plants. It does not make sense. This is more proof that Ahamdinajad's argument that he is building a civil nuclear program is a blatant lie. Naumann talked about NATO Nuclear giving a guarantee for those under threat of nuclear attack. I asked the question of how would the NATO nuclear guarantee apply in the case where diplomacy fails to deter an aggressor who has threatened to launch a nuclear attack against a country and ignores the deterrent? "This means nuclear war!" he replied in a Dr.Strangelove type of answer that was frightening rather than reassuring. "Any aggressor must know that they will cease to exist within thirty minutes of launching a nuclear missile!" I turned to my neighbor in the hall, Yosi Hollander, and cynically told him that this would be very comforting for Israel following a nuclear attack on us. The room was full of policy advisers and politicians. Following this high powered session with some of the best international policy advisers of the nuclear threat I can tell you that it was confirmed to the Israeli policy advisers that we are really alone in having to make our own decision on the Iranian threat. THE EVENING HIGHLIGHT WAS A DOUBLE HEADER. EHUD BARAK, Israel's Defense Minister, was blunt in his remarks which were mainly addressed to the Israeli public. "The Middle East is a tough neighbourhood where there is no mercy for the weak. There is not going to be a second chance for those who can not defend themselves. Only a strong and determined Israel can make peace." He added that "A Zionist Jewish democratic state is going to be here for eternity but we must be realistic. As a political leadership we must look for ways to achieve this. With reality in mind, between the Jordan River and the sea are almost twelve million people. Seven and a half million are Israelis and over three and a half million Palestinians. Based on this reality if the majority vote we will be a binational state which will no longer be a Jewish democratic state. If we do not allow non-Israelis to vote we will be no better than an apartheid state. We must decide our future by ensuring our national identity. Nobody wants to see another Bosnia here. This is not what we dreamed about for so long. The world will not accept occupation. "Israel is strong enough to move forward. Reaching an agreement with the Palestinians is the only way of achieving the goals of a prosperous State of Israel". Barak stressed that both sides need to get down to the main details and return to the negotiating table. "I agree with Robert Frost that good fences make good neighbours. We need to know where our fences begin and theirs end. This is a prerequisite for good neighbours". To Israelis who support a Greater Israel he said, "We have had our Davidian and Hasmonean Kingdoms. We are now in our 3rd kingdom period. God promised a land to Abraham but he did not divine the borders. We have to take into consideration todays practical contraints. "I prefer concrete pratical thinking, not ideological, but doing it from the bottom up. I believe in reaching out tot the Palestinians and helping them build their society with the economy and their institutions including security. Jenin was once a hotbed of terrorism. Today it is a stable and peaceful town. We face challenges in Gaza. The Palestinian Authority does not control Gaza. This has to change ". "We completely evacuated Gaza and Lebanon. We know how to make hard choices. Negotiations will take time. It may be two years and another period to implement. People may question is Abu Mazen has the political strength or if our Prime Miniser is serious. The position of our Government is very clear. The Prime Minister has already declared that he sees our vision of a Palestinian nation with a flag, anthem, and a vibrant economy, but that would require the demarcation of specific borders. Turning to the international diplomats in the hall he said, "The Palestinians must see a united foreign front as we hope for negotiations. The U.S., EU, and the Arab world must speak with one strong voice with the security of Israel firmly anchored." Barak told the audience with a hint to Salim Fayyed that he had told Arafat and more recently Anu Mazen that the greatest difficulty that leaders have is not convincing each other but rather their own people of the sacrifices that need to be made for peace. He closed with this thought, "Churchill said that a pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity, and an optimist sees opportunity in every difficulty. The reality of peace today seems far away, but I am an optimist." SALIM FAYYAD, the Palestinian Prime Minister, took to the podium to the warmest reception of the Conference. Fayyad worked at the World Bank in the USA and was the representative of the IMF to the Palestinian territories before being reluctantly recruited into Palestinian politics. He opened his remarks by telling the audience that had expected to be invited to a round table open discussion, which he would have preferred, and not to give a speech which he had not prepared himself. However, he succeeded in giving his report without the aid of a scripted speech. He emphasised that what was needed to advance Israeli-Palestinian negotiations was the complete and unequivocal acceptance of the concept of the two state solution and the establishment of a viable, independent Palestinian state neighbouring Israel with East Jerusalem as its capital. "Palestinian Statehood should be the outcome of this political process. We are getting ready for Statehood," explaining that governance is what gave people stability and security. "The Road Map has obligations on both sides and makes a great deal of sense in the emergence of a Palestinian state and an end to the Israeli occupation". In a most telling statement he said, "It's not about declaring a state. It's about getting ready for one. The idea here is to do everything we possibly can to be ready for statehood by 2011". He pointed to matters outside of the exisiting territory currently controlled by the Palestinian Authority. "Things need to happen that suggest this occupation is about to end, and that an independent viable Palestinian state is going to occur in the areas where growing settlement activity continues. Settlement activity is wrong as it is taking place in areas that will be part of the Palestinian state. " With Ehud Barak looking on he said that this move would give Palestinians confidence that Israel really intended to end the occupation. "We hear that undivided Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. Jerusalem became Palestinian occupied territory after 1967". Regarding Gaza, Fayyad said it was essential that his country was unified and that lifting the blockade of the Gaza Strip would go a long way toward establishing the PA to reassert control there. He said that the PA could move faster toward building government institutions in Gaza than it has done in the West Bank because the area is smaller. Fayyad frequently reassured Israel in his speech of Palestinian commitment to recognising the existence of the State of Israel. "In 1993 we recognised Israels right to exist in peace. In 1988 we again reiterated Israel's right to live in peace and security. We are not wavering from that commitment." Salim Fayyad's closing remarks were "The Israeli people have a long history. They have their pain and have Ambition. Like you, we Palestinians have our own history. Right now we are going through a lot of pain and suffering. We have one key aspiration and that is to be able to live alongside you in peace, harmony, and security ". EDITOR'S COMMENT: Fayyad's true intentions were shown in an article called "Fayyad
helps burn settlement products" by Ali Waked in YNet News Shown below: 
Barry Shaw made aliyah from Manchester, England, 25 years ago with his family. He spent eleven years on various kibbutzim, ending up at Mishmar HaSharon, the same kibbutz that served as home to Ehud Barak. He now sells real estate in Netanya. He writes the "View from Here" columns from Israel. To sign up to receive his emails, contact him at netre@netvision.net.il |
|
OBAMA'S GHOST WRITER WANTS TO FOUND A 'PEACE MOVEMENT'
Posted by CPocerl, February 5, 2010. |
|
This was written by Aaron Klein, Jerusalem Bureau Chief for World Net Daily (WND). It appeared yesterday in WND entitled "Ayers seeking to create 'peace movement'." Additional research was done by Brenda J. Elliott. |
|
Former Weather Underground terrorist William Ayers, a close associate for years to President Obama, is seeking to create a "peace movement." "I think that what we need is a peace movement, and I'm trying to build one," Ayers said in a street interview Tuesday with Peter Doocy of FoxNews.com. Click here. When asked how he plans to build his "peace movement," Ayers replied: "Well, I mean, how do you build a movement? How do you build a civil rights movement or peace movement? Look at history. All kinds of ways, but what we need is to stop spending billions of dollars on war and we need to invest in being a nation among nations and giving up on the insanity of thinking we can conquer the world." Ayers previously has alluded to creating a "peace" movement to "save" Obama's presidency. "With any luck, the peace movement, the justice movement can save his (Obama's) presidency. ... So to me the injunction is to get busy and build a movement," Ayers stated in an April 2009 interview with The Commentary Factory.com. Also, in a February 2009 speech at the University of California at
Berkeley Ayers, Dohrn stir chaos in Middle East Ayers lately has been involved with pro-Palestinian activism. Last month, WND reported Ayers and his wife, Weather Underground co-founder Bernardine Dohrn, were involved in provoking chaos on the streets of Egypt in an attempt to enter the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip to join in solidarity with the territory's population and leadership. The protests were led in large part by Jodie Evans, co-founder of Code Pink, a far-left activist organization formed in 2002 to protest America's war in Iraq. The group previously met with Hamas and with leaders of the Taliban. Evans was a fundraiser and financial bundler for Obama's presidential campaign. Also protesting in Egypt was Ali Abunimah, co-founder of the anti-Israel Electronic Intifada website. WND previously reported Obama spoke at pro-Palestinian events in the 1990s alongside Abunimah. In one such event, a 1999 fundraiser for Palestinian "refugees," Abunimah recalls introducing Obama on stage. In May, Ayers and Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr., who also sparked controversy for Obama during the 2008 presidential campaign, spoke at a Chicago church to a gathering called by the Oak Park-based Committee for a Just Peace in Israel and Palestine. The talk at the church reportedly preceded a 1-mile walk of solidarity through downtown Oak Park. Close Obama associate Ayers became a name in the 2008 presidential campaign when it was disclosed the radical worked closely with Obama for years. Ayers helped launch Obama's political career with a fundraiser in his home. Obama served on the board of a Chicago nonprofit alongside Ayers. The former terrorist later hired Obama to serve as chairman of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a job Obama later cited as experience that helped qualify him to run for public office. While at the CAC, Obama and Ayers both granted funds to the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, or ACORN. WND columnist Jack Cashill has produced a series of persuasive arguments that it was Ayers who ghostwrote Obama's award-winning autobiography, "Dreams from My Father." Ayers and Dohrn were two of the main founders of the Weather Underground, which bombed the New York City Police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol in 1971 and the Pentagon in 1972. The group was responsible for some 30 bombings aimed at destroying the defense and security infrastructures of the U.S. Characterizing the Weather Underground as "an American Red Army," Ayers summed up the organization's ideology: "Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, Kill your parents." "Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon," Ayers recalled in his 2001 memoir, "Fugitive Days." "The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them." Ayers brandished his unrepentant radicalism for years to come, as evidenced by his now notorious 2001 interview with the New York Times, published one day after the 9/11 attacks, in which he stated, "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough." Ayers posed for a photograph accompanying the New York Times
piece that showed him stepping on an American flag. He said of the
U.S.: "What a country. It makes me want to puke."
With additional research by Brenda J. Elliott.
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
RESERVE GENERALS SIGN PETITION SUPPORTING STRUGGLE AGAINST NEW ISRAEL
FUND (NIF)
Posted by Gil Ronen, February 5, 2010. |
|
Senior reserve officers signed a petition Wednesday supporting Im Tirtzu's struggle against the organizations supported by the New Israel Fund that besmirched the IDF "We deplore the false claim by 16 Israeli NGOs that the IDF carried out war crimes during operation Cast Lead," the petition's text said. In fact, it said the IDF "was making superhuman efforts to avoid hurting innocent civilians. We therefore call upon the entire public to support us and strengthen the IDF and its commanders." The signatories include the former Head of the National Security Council, Maj. Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland; former Head of Southern Command, Maj. Gen. (res.) Doron Almog; former Head of Ground Forces Command, Maj. Gen. (res.) Yiftach Ron-Tal; former Head of the National Security Council and Deputy Chief of Staff, Maj. Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan; former Head of Personnel Branch Maj. Gen. (res.) Elazar Stern; former Military Secretary to the Minister of Defense, Maj. Gen. (res.) Yakov Amidror, former Navy Commander, Maj. Gen. (res.) Micha Ram, former Head Artillery Officer and President of Industrialists' Federation Brig.-Gen. (res.) Oded Tira. They added their signatures to that of Im Tirtzu's chairman and founder, Ronen Shoval, as did former UN Ambassador Dr. Dore Gold; former diplomat Yoram Etinger; former Chief of Police, Lt. Gen. (res.) Assaf Chefetz and others. Meanwhile, artists and writers signed a petition in which they expressed their "disgust with the campaign of incitement" against the New Israel Fund. The signatories include author A. B. Yehoshua, playwrights Yehoshua Sobol and Edna Mazia, sculptor Danny Caravan, as well as actors, journalists and academics. Gil Ronen writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
ARGUMENTS "AD HOMINEM" AND "BY ETHNIC IDENTITY" IN DEFENSE OF GOLDSTONE REPORT
Posted by Daily Alert, February 5, 2010. |
| This was written by Alan M. Dershowitz and it appeared February 3, 2010 in Hudson New York. |
|
Even before the Goldstone Report was released, Richard Goldstone was arguing for its credibility by invoking his Jewishness, his Zionism, his daughter's residence in Israel and his connection to Hebrew University. It was the mirror image of the classic fallacy known as the argument ad hominem, which is defined as follows: A substantive argument should not be rejected solely because of who has offered it. It follows of course from this fallacy that an argument should also not be accepted because of who offered it. A close relative of the ad hominem fallacy is what I have called "the argument by ethnic identity," which I have defined as follows: An anti-Israel argument is made stronger if offered by a Jew. ("See, even a Jews agrees that...) These are precisely the fallacious arguments being offered in defense of the Goldstone report by Richard Goldstone and his supporters. Goldstone has even elicited his daughter's help. This is what she has said: "Had Richard Goldstone not served as the head of the UN inquiry into the Gaza War, the accusations against Israel would have been harsher." She continued. "My father took on the job, for peace, for everyone and also for Israel." She told the Jerusalem Post, "My dad loves Israel and it wasn't easy for him to see and hear what happened. I think he heard and saw things he didn't expect to see and hear...." The problem is not what Goldstone saw and heard. It's what he willfully and deliberately refused to see and hear. He refused to watch videotapes, easily accessible on the internet, that show conclusively that Hamas terrorists routinely fired rockets from behind human shields. He refused to credit eye witness reports published by refutable newspapers and even admissions by Hamas leaders. He willfully refused to listen to the testimony of one of the world's leading experts on how democratic militaries fight asymmetrical warfare against terrorists who hide behind civilians, who said: "I don't think there has ever been a time in the history of warfare when any army has made more efforts to reduce civilian casualties and deaths of innocent people than the IDF is doing today in Gaza." Instead of defending the report against the many substantive arguments offered against it, Goldstone has repeatedly cited his Jewishness as both a shield against the criticism and a sword with which to continue to attack Israeli actions. Had Goldstone not been the author of the United Nations Human Rights Council report on Israel, it would be tossed in the trash barrel along with other one-sided and biased reports by this prejudice group which targets only Israel for human rights violations. But those seeking to defend this indefensible report point to Goldstone's authorship as proof that it must have credibility because a Jew wrote it ("See, even a Jew....) In a criminal trial, it is impermissible to attack the character of the defendant unless he has placed his character at issue. That is precisely what Goldstone has done in his campaign to lend credibility to his mendacious report by constantly invoking his Jewishness. The appropriate response to an ad hominem positive argument is an ad hominem negative argument. That is why, in addition to providing a 49 page substantive response to the arguments and methodology of the Goldstone report, I have raised questions about Goldstone's motivations in accepting leadership of the mission and signing his name to a report which is so demonstrably false and one-sided. In light of the hard evidence, that is easily accessible online and in the media, Goldstone cannot possibly believe that Hamas did not intentionally use human shields, have their fighters deliberately dress in civilian clothing and use mosques and hospitals to store rockets and other weapons. Videotapes conclusively prove these charges, and Hamas acknowledges — indeed boasts of — them. He cannot possibly believe that Israel used the thousands of rockets that Hamas directed against its children as an excuse, or a cover, for its real goal, namely to kill as many Palestinian civilians as possible. Nor could he possibly believe that the Israeli government made a policy decision, at the highest levels, to deliberately target Palestinian babies, young children, women and the elderly for murder. All the evidence points away from these wild charges. Yet he signed a report asserting that those demonstrably false conclusions were true. Shame on him. And even more shame on him for exploiting his Jewishness to get others to believe these defamations against the Jewish state. The Goldstone report should be rejected on its demerits. The added fact that it was authored by a Jew — selected precisely because he is a Jew with aspirations to be honored by the international community — should diminish, rather than increase, its credibility. I have challenged Goldstone to debate the substantive points in his report. I promise not make any ad hominem arguments against the report if he stops making ad hominem arguments in its favor., Or as Adlai Stevenson once promised a political opponent: "If you stop lying about me, I will stop telling the truth about you." The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
NETANYAHU DENIES PACT TO DIVIDE JERUSALEM; OBAMA MAKES PRO-TERRORIST A
U.S. SPOKESMAN; PETITIONS FOR AND AGAINST NEW ISRAEL FUND
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 5, 2010. |
|
CONGRESS MEMBERS DISPUTE ON GAZA Fifty-four Democrat Members of Congress accused Israel of inflicting "collective punishment" upon the people of Gaza. They urged President Obama to pressure Israel to end its [partial] blockade of Gaza. The 54 were challenged by a pro-Zionist group, American-Israel Action Coalition for "Israel-bashing." The Coalition represents a quarter-million Americans living in Israel. The Coalition argued: (1) The 54 should have mentioned that Israelis no longer are present in Gaza; (2) The group should have mentioned that Hamas, elected by the residents of Gaza, now is responsible for the people's welfare; and (3) Hamas received hundreds of millions of dollars worth of foreign aid, but diverts that money for the people's welfare to war and its preparation (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/3). The first two Coalition arguments by themselves are not relevant or logical. The presence of Israelis is not relevant to whether the Israeli blockade inflicts collective punishment. The responsibility of Hamas for its people is not a logical answer to accusations that a blockade is creating hardship for the Arabs there. The third argument is appropriate. It shows that Hamas harms its people and makes sense in combination with the second argument, that the people elected Hamas to do this. So the Arabs there share responsibility with Hamas for their own hardship. However, the culture and elections there are not free, and the people had a poor choice between two sets of jihadists. They rejected Fatah for its known corruption. On the other hand, the people support jihad. Therefore, we are back to the people causing their own difficulties, as has been the case with the Arabs during their whole, unnecessary conflict with the Jews. This is not a case of collective punishment of an innocent people. The world is not honest about this issue. Whatever means of self-defense Israel attempts, the world objects. If Israel made war, residents would suffer too. The world objects so much to a swift war to root out Hamas, and end the terrorism, that Israel resorts to blockade. This leaves unchallenged the question whether the blockade is proper and what sort of punishment it is. Hardship is alleged but smuggling is so extensive, that one wonders how extensive the hardship is. Little documentation is produced. Blockade is a traditional and legal means of warfare. Certainly, Israel is under no obligation to let food and medicine through its borders into Gaza, but it does. Some Israelis wonder why Israel furnishes Gazans with electricity, which assists the Hamas military manufacturing, and why Israel gives money to the Palestinian Authority that, in turn, transfers some to the enemy economy in Gaza. In any case, does the group of 54 suggest that the Jewish state has a duty to aid an enemy that oppresses its own people and tries to exterminate the Jewish people? What the 54 Members of Congress suggest, that the U.S. President pressure Israel, is improper. Perhaps they did not suggest actual pressure. When George W. Bush was President, Democrats accused him of pressuring foreign countries. That would be a good standard for themselves. Indeed, U.S. anti-Zionist policy has for decades perpetuated or at least facilitated the Arab-Israel conflict, by aiding the Arab aggressors. It is time that the U.S. determine what policies are in its national interest and not just in the interest of well-connected corporations or biased officials. When many countries blockaded the Union of South Africa, for terrorizing its own people, there was no outcry that that was collective punishment. It was recognized that this is a way to bring down the oppressive regime. Why an outcry against Israel, attempting to bring down an equally oppressive and aggressive regime? Where is the Congress Members' moral indignation against Hamas for smuggling in weapons with which to attack Israeli civilians? Their one-sided indignation is hypocritical.
NETANYAHU DENIES PACT TO DIVIDE JERUSALEM 
WorldNetDaily alleges that Israeli PM Netanyahu agreed to divide Jerusalem and has been acting on it. The Prime Minister's office denies it. The allegations include: (1) Contrary to Israeli law, Israel let Palestinian Authority (P.A.) ministries open offices in eastern Jerusalem; (2) Dmitri Ziliani, a spokesman for the Jerusalem division of Fatah, allegedly confirmed that the PA holds regular official meetings in Jerusalem in anticipation of a future PA state that would encompass the eastern portion of the city;" (3) The U.S. has been helping the P.A. set up infrastructure in eastern and northern Jerusalem. "One road sign, bearing the USAID emblem (U.S. Agency for International Development), even proclaims, 'Rehabilitation of Ramallah-Jerusalem Road. This project is a gift from the American people to the Palestinian people in cooperation with the Palestinian Authority and PECDAR. July 2007.'" (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/3). Seems like a lot of smoke for there not to be a fire. Israeli Prime Ministers tend to act deceitfully toward their own people. PM Netanyahu does not resist pressure firmly. An example is his proclaiming he would not freeze building in Judea-Samaria, but he had been freezing it for months before his deception was exposed and then he publicly froze it. Why don't some reports in Jerusalem check the area where the offices are alleged to be? Is the USAID sign there or not?
JORDAN REJECTS HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH CRITICISM 
OBAMA MAKES PRO-TERRORIST A U.S. SPOKESMAN The Obama Administration has appointed a pro-terrorist, director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC), Salam Al-Marayati, to speak in behalf of the United States abroad on freedom of religion and speech. But he works against the U.S., rather than in its behalf. "MPAC was established initially in 1986 as the Political Action Committee of the Islamic Center of Southern California whose key leaders are believed to have had their origins in the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood," which inspired leading terrorists, including some in al-Qaida. "MPAC has developed extensive relationships with the U.S. government which have included numerous meetings with the Department of Justice and the FBI." [This reflects the naivete of the Justice Dept. and FBI, which is supposed to protect us, not coddle our enemies.] Nevertheless, "MPAC has opposed virtually every counter-terrorist initiative undertaken or proposed by the U.S. government, claiming often that U.S. counter-terror efforts were aimed at the U.S. Muslim community." [None of our methods of self-defense are proper and effective? To claim that the methods were against Muslim people is exaggeration to the point of paranoia.] Salaam Al-Marayati's record (verbatim, but some sentences omitted and some comments added in square brackets, and my conclusion at the bottom):
So extreme is Al-Marayati's record that some of these statements caused Marayati's 1999 appointment to a U.S. congressional committee on terrorism to be rescinded. ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, "Such an ill-conceived decision calls into question the Obama Administration's commitment to combating Islamist extremists. Indeed, in the Administration's refusal to even refer to Islamist extremists and its tendency to refer to terrorist acts perpetrated by Islamists as 'man-made disasters,' we see a deeply concerning blindness to the threat. In the invitation to Al-Marayati to speak overseas, we see further lack of seriousness about dealing with the problem." (2/4 press release from ZOA, based in New York City and of which I am a member.) A few days ago, another source, Winston Mideast Analysis & Commentary, stated that the Pentagon report on the Ft. Hood massacre by a Radical Muslim whose behavior had shown him on that path, failed to consider or even mention Radical Islam and jihad. Apparently the U.S. military, that is supposed to protect the American people, ignored Major Hassan's record as he telegraphed his mind-set, has been overtaken by political correctness. I think that everything Obama does about Radical Islam, except for the anti-Taliban efforts, aids Radical Islam. He acts as if he were out to impose a radical leftist and pro-Islamist ideology on our country, liable to ruin its economy, override democracy, and undermine defensibility. We have had poor Presidents before, but he is the most anti-American.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
ISRAEL REPORTEDLY TRAINING KURDISH FORCES
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 5, 2010. |
|
This was written by Avi Yellin and it appeared in Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNN.com). |
|
(IsraelNN.com) According to recent media reports, Israeli military and intelligence agents are currently operating in Iraqi Kurdistan. Their primary role, according to reports, is to train elite Kurdish commandos in guerilla warfare and anti-terror tactics. The Kurds, whose country is currently occupied by Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria, have reportedly been accepting Israeli assistance in their fight for independence, as they did many years ago. Fearing an al-Qaeda backlash, Kurdish leaders have denied cooperating with the Jewish state and have refused to even issue comments on the matter. When the New Yorker asked Mark Regev, then spokesman for Israel's Embassy in Washington, to comment on allegations of Israeli-Kurdish cooperation in 2004, Regev denied the claims, telling the magazine that "the story is simply untrue and the relevant governments know it's untrue." But American intelligence officials at the time sought to expose Israel's assistance to the Kurds. "They [the Israelis] think they have to be there," a senior CIA official told the New Yorker, adding that Israel's presence in northern Iraq is widely acknowledged in the United States intelligence community. Apart from rumors of Israel training Kurdish commandos, Israeli-Kurdish relations have expanded considerably in recent years. In July 2003 the Israeli government reversed its embargo on Iraq, allowing trade between the two peoples including the export of Israeli military products to the Kurds. Kurdish commandos have also reportedly accompanied Israeli operatives across the Iraq-Iran border in recent years to install sensory devices meant to monitor suspected Iranian nuclear facilities. Like Jews, Kurds are a non-Arab indigenous Middle Eastern people seeking independence in their ancestral homeland. Active Israeli support towards a free Kurdistan is seen as a natural policy by many as well as a pragmatic one. "By aligning with the Kurds, Israel gains eyes and ears in Iran, Iraq and Syria," a former Israeli intelligence officer told the New Yorker. Recent media reports have said that Hamas is investigating the possibility of Israeli infiltration into its ranks to explain how the murder of Hamas terrorist leader al Mabhouh in Dubai could have been planned and executed by Israel, as Hamas claimed. Israel did not comment on the murder. Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
ROZ ROTHSTEIN STATEMENT AFTER ATTENDING J STREET AT PENN TONIGHT
Posted by Jen Kutner, January 5, 2010. |
| This is entitled "Questions that J Street Won't Answer" and was written by Roz Rothstein, StandWithUs International Director. |
|
There were approximately 200 people at the U of Penn tonight when J Street launched their opening event. The presentations were all well articulated, spoke of everyone's dream of peace, and how there needs to be room for debate...room for "wrestling with Israel even as we hug Israel." A great analogy indeed. I think that everyone agrees that there is room for vibrant debate about Israel. The presentations conveyed J Street positions, which include ending the Gaza "blockade," pressuring President Obama to exhibit leadership and press for a two state solution, with peace and justice for everyone. But for me, there were several unanswered questions, including the following: First, how does J Street justify pressuring the democratically elected government of another country (Israel) to change its policies, through lobbying elected officials in the United States? I tried to find out what Ben Ami thought. I asked him the three questions that were on my mind, but did not get answers. The one thing he said, was that the situation in the current state is not working. On that we agree, each of us having different interpretations as to why the conflict continues, and the question of how to bring about peace still remains the challenge. It seems that J Street wants to "force" peace, even though Israel has no partner. Also clearly missing from the presentation tonight was any reference to terrorism, incitement, or the Hamas charter. I am confused as to why J Street would ignore the present "elephant in the room" dangers. I suppose if they focus on the threats, they could not move forward with their dreamy, though dangerous agenda. 
|
|
HONOR KILLING IN TURKEY: GIRL BURIED ALIVE FOR TALKING TO BOYS...
Posted by CPocerl, January 4, 2010. |
|
This is from the Weasel Zippers website:
|
|
A 16-year-old girl was buried alive by relatives in southeastern Turkey in a gruesome honor killing carried out because she reportedly befriended boys, the Anatolia news agency reported Thursday. Acting on a tip, police discovered the body of the girl, identified only as M.M., in a sitting position with her hands tied, in a 2-meter-deep hole dug under a chicken pen outside her house in Kahta, a town in the southeastern province of Adıyaman, the news agency reported. The body was found in December, around 40 days after M.M. went missing. She is being identified by her initials because she was under the age of 18. Her father and grandfather are suspected in the murder. A subsequent postmortem examination revealed that M.M. had a significant amount of soil in her lungs and stomach, indicating that she was buried alive and conscious, forensic experts told the news agency. "The autopsy result is blood-curdling. According to our findings, the girl — who had no bruises on her body and no sign of narcotics or poison in her blood — was alive and fully conscious when she was buried," one anonymous expert said. Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: FOCUSING ON THE POSITIVE
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 4, 2010. |
|
With all of the garbage, with all that we face that causes anger, and angst, there are also good things happening. And I thought I would begin with these. Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi spent three days here this week. Yesterday, he addressed the Knesset in special session (convened to honor him), offering words of support. He strongly criticized the Goldstone Report, saying it attempted to "incriminate Israel for its legitimate response." And he stated forthrightly that the world "cannot accept" a nuclear Iran. He told those assembled: "We, the free and liberal people across the world, thank you [Israel] for your very existence." Now we haven't heard this from the leader of another nation very often (if ever). ~~~~~~~~~~ The emotional tenor of this event was heightened by the statement made by Prime Minister Netanyahu following Berlusconi's talk: He told the story of a pregnant Italian woman who had the courage to confront a German officer during the Holocaust and, at great risk to her own life, managed to persuade him to release a Jewish woman who had been arrested. "[This woman] saved the life of the Jewish woman and cast, if only for a brief moment, a scintilla of humanity and courage upon the great darkness that enveloped the whole of Europe at that time. Netanyahu then addressed Berlusconi, telling him that, "We appreciate you. We embrace you. We love you." When the two men then embraced, the Italian premier had tears in his eyes. 
We have another visitor, still here, who is a great friend: Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas; he has brought a very large contingent of people, many visiting for the first time. This, too, is heartening. The governor ran in the Republican primaries before the last presidential election, and is thinking of trying again. See here an interview with Huckabee:
~~~~~~~~~~ A follow-up to my report yesterday on the Im Tirtzu report on New Israel Fund (NIF) support for NGOs that provided information for the Goldstone Report: MK Otniel Schneller has now said that he is pushing for government authorization to create a parliamentary investigative committee to review the fund and activities of NIF, the organizations it supports, and other Israeli NGOs. Schneller believes that the allegations surrounding NIF "made it clear that red lines need to be identified." ~~~~~~~~~~ Vice Premier Moshe Ya'alon gave a speech at the Herzliya conference yesterday and addressed the issue of Iran: "I think that despite the precious time wasted on diplomatic efforts, the nuclearization of Iran can still be prevented. The Iranian regime must be told to choose between the bomb and survival... ~~~~~~~~~~ On the subject of Iran: Yesterday, French Prime Minister Francois Fillon said that: "The Iranian government has not wanted to accept our offer of dialogue. It has instead rushed forward headlong. So the moment has come to act." By "act" he means institute serious sanctions. He says he will be bringing this to the UN — something we shouldn't expect to yield significant results, but is more than Obama has said he would do. And he expects the EU to assume responsibility as well. ~~~~~~~~~~ Then we have Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, providing advice on "How to Save the Obama Presidency: Bomb Iran." He makes a very good case for how it could be done, and why:
The question, I think, is whether he's interested in "saving" his presidency, or is so much of an ideologue that he's frozen in his path. (Please, do not write to me about this. I am familiar with all the arguments.) Those of you who feel inclined might want to send the URL for Pipe's article and a comment about how the president can help himself and the country at the same time, via:
~~~~~~~~~~ Tensions with Syria... Predictions as to whether there will be "peace negotiations"... A Fatah attempt to push ahead "reconciliation" with Hamas... All of this, and more, will still be with us after Shabbat. Time, I think, to take a deep breath.
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il
and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
|
|
AMERICAN JEWS FUNDING ANTI-ISRAEL ORGANIZATIONS
Posted by AFSI, February 4, 2010. |
|
AFSI is forwarding this information about the destructive anti-Israel work of the New Israel Fund in the hopes that unwitting contributors to the grant organizations that contribute to the NIF's nefarious efforts will direct their philanthropy to organizations that truly help Israel. AFSI is preparing such a list and it should be on the AFSI website, www.afsi.org, by early next week. This below is
by Samuel Sokol and David Bedein, in World Net Daily
|
|
A U.S. organization has been receiving money from perhaps unsuspecting Jewish donors to support blatantly anti-Israel groups. American Jews wishing to donate money to Israeli causes routinely utilize local city Jewish federations as a middleman. Hundreds of millions of dollars per year are sent to Jewish federations across the country with the expectation contributions will be used to aid worthy causes in Israel. Many U.S. Jewish federations as well as individual Jewish donors give to the New Israel Fund, or NIF, a Washington, D.C.-based foundation dedicated to fostering social change and progressive causes in Israel. The NIF budget comes from a combination of donors. These include the Ford Foundation, grant organizations such as the Jacob and Hilda Blaustein Foundation and the Andrea and Charles Bronfman Philanthropies, as well as various Jewish communal federations such as the Jewish Federation in New York, the Durham-Chapel Hill Federation and the Jewish Federation of Grand Rapids. However, while many of the programs run by the NIF are considered laudable in the pro-Israel community, such as work the group does with economically disadvantaged Ethiopian immigrants, the flagship grantees of the NIF are Israeli-Arab nongovernmental organizations that openly and unabashedly dedicate themselves to removing the Jewish character of the state of Israel. The NIF disperses hundreds of thousands of dollars for the core budgets of such groups as Adalah: The Legal Center for Minority Arab Rights in Israel, Mossawa: The advocacy center for Arab citizens in Israel and I'lam (www.ilamcenter.org) media center for Arab "Palestinians" in Israel. Supporting Iran's nukes I'lam was founded in the wake of the Palestinian intifada, or terrorist war, initiated in September 2000 after then-PLO Leader Yasser Arafat turned down an Israeli offer of a state in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and eastern Jerusalem. The first director of I'lam was Hanin Zoabi, recently elected as a member of the Israeli Arab Balad Party in the Knesset. Zoabi's party spawned Azmi Bishara, the Israeli Arab Knesset member who fled Israel after he was threatened with prosecution for allegedly aiding the Hezbollah terrorist organization. Balad officials routinely condemn Israel and at times openly present themselves as representing the state of "Palestine." In April, in Zoabi's maiden interview to the Jerusalem Post as a Knesset member, she declared her open support for Iranian nuclear weapons as a counterbalance to Israel. Zoabi, in her capacity as the director of I'lam, helped draft and sign the Haifa Declaration, which called for the negation of Israel's Jewish identity and for a "comprehensive change in Israeli policy, whereby Israel abandons its destructive role towards the peoples of the region. ..." In March, I'lam's so-called empowerment coordinator, Zaher Boulos, issued a "cry of solidarity with the Palestinian people who hold strong to the establishment of a Palestinian state that is independent with Jerusalem as its capital and the return of the refugees to their homes" at the annual conference of the Forum of Journalists, an I'lam affiliate of which he is also coordinator. The conference expressed "support for the Palestinian people in their struggle for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital and the return of refugees." Also in March, I'lam issued a press release stating Israel cannot "liquidate the fact that Jerusalem is the capital of Arab culture and will be the future capital of a Palestinian state, and tomorrow will be the focal point of the Arab and Islamic world and the progressive forces in the world." The terminology in I'lam's media publications resounds with terms such as "massacre" and "ethnic cleansing," as well as accusations of war crimes and the targeted murder of journalists. Last year, the NIF-funded organization held a conference in Ramallah with journalists from the Palestinian Authority which "aimed to develop and facilitate working relationships between Palestinians journalists in Israel and in the West Bank, and to discuss the role of the Palestinian media on both sides of the Green Line" as well as "exploring strategies for Palestinian media practitioners in addressing Israeli, European and U.S.-American media." I'lam's official statements are representative of the rhetoric employed by some of the NIF's grantees. I'lam posted on its website a statement declaring, "The (Israeli) soldiers are the grandchildren of the Nazis' victims, the Nazis' survivors. They have come here to consume food quickly and consume life quickly. This is the true image of Israel." The statement was made in the context of accusing Israeli soldiers of a "massacre" against Palestinian civilians. The connection of I'lam to the PA is reflected by its current staff. Sanaa Hammoud, the current director of I'lam, was a senior official of the PA's Negotiations Support Unit in Ramallah and served in Jerusalem as a senior communications adviser for the Palestinian leadership. Wadea Awawdy, who served on the founding board of directors of I'lam, worked as a correspondent for the official PA publication Al-Ayyam, which routinely prints anti-Israel propaganda. I'lam's international relations coordinator, Nasser Victor Rego, has issued numerous statements of support for Hamas, terming the Islamist group "The Palestinian resistance," while providing a link on his blog to the website of Hamas' armed wing, the Essedeen Al-Qassam Brigades. Nasser also has called on the international community to boycott Israel. Rego would not return calls to comment on the issue. In addition to receiving funds from the NIF, I'lam is also a grantee of Al-Quds: Capital of Arab Culture, which works under the auspices of both the PA and the Arab League. Among other charges laid against Israel in materials distributed by I'lam are allegations that the Hebrew media contains, "Encouragement for killing and destruction." Other anti-Israel groups Also supported by the NIF is Adalah, which defines itself as a non-partisan human rights organization. However, its agenda differs significantly from its self-definition. Jerusalem-based researcher Arlene Kushner, in her study of Adalah published by the Center for Near East Policy Research entitled "Inside Adalah," finds that "in various venues — including the Durban U.N. conference on racism — Adalah has charged or participating in charging Israel with grave breeches of international humanitarian law, war crimes, willful killing, racism, apartheid [and] ethnic cleansing." Adalah takes the position that the Israeli government is a "junta which proves each day that it is the most fascist and racist in history." In 2007, Adalah proposed a constitution for Israel in which immigration of Jews would be banned except for "humanitarian reasons." With its demand for the right of return for so-called Palestinian refugees, Adalah sees Israel's future as one with an Arab majority, which would create another predominantly Arab-Muslim state. Another group funded by the NIF is Mossawa. Last month, Mossawa and fellow NIF grantee Coalition of Women for Peace wrote to the Norwegian government and asked "the Norwegian people to join us in our efforts and to stop investing in the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territory." Naomi Paiss, director of communications for the NIF, declined to comment for this report. Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128 (Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717); by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www.afsi.org. Helen Freedman is Executive Director. |
|
BARAK: LEAVE GOLAN; IRAN DEVELOPS ANTI-HELICOPTER WEAPON;
ISRAEL-LEBANON-SYRIA BORDER TOWN OF GHAJAR: UPDATE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 4, 2010. |
|
MURDER OF HAMAS OFFICIAL: UPDATE Dubai police claim to know the identities of several members of the hit squad that assassinated Hamas official, Mabhouh. Now Hamas said it believes that an Arab enemy of his was responsible (www.imra.org.il, 2/2). Just a couple of days ago, they had sternly accused Israel of responsibility and vowed revenge. And the bombs asre washing ashore onto Israel. BARAK: LEAVE GOLAN: PART 1 Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said: 1. If Syria and Israel go to war, they would end up discussing the same issues that came up for the past 15 years. This is peculiar logic. If Israel withdrew from its position at a natural tank trap and from which it could see Syrian forces coming in time to meet them, to a position having the disadvantage of being at the bottom of a mountain, Syria might well believe it could win a war. Withdrawal would give Syria an incentive for war. And if there were a war, why would it make any more sense for Israel to negotiate away the Golan afterward? Barak is weak [or worse] on issues of national security. He proposed other withdrawals, but withdrawals strengthened the enemy. He also opposed Israeli acquisition of submarines that can launch nuclear missiles, on the grounds that Israel doesn't need a second-strike capability (www.imra.org.il, 2/2). Barak is in the ideological rut that imagines territorial concessions to fanatical Muslim Arabs can bring peace. Actually, such concessions give fanatics more means for making war. This has been the experience of Barak, whose withdrawal from Lebanon led to the rise of Hizbullah. Nevertheless, he persists in his delusion. BARAK: PART 2. HIDDEN AGENDA? The Israeli Establishment and its foreign critics propose various surrenders of Jewish national rights, withdrawals from strategic territory, and other concessions that endanger national security. Why do Israeli Defense Ministers and Prime Ministers echo foreign critics? Those who propose these various policies of appeasement offer reasons. Those reasons, we have shown in every instance, contradict the facts, experience, and logic. Nevertheless, they keep proposing failed policies. When one set of reasons is debunked, another set is offered. Are those people stupid? I do not suggest they are, but I think it is not a matter of intelligence. I think we are seeing the aspect of human nature that offers poor pretexts for dubious proposals, because there are no good reasons. What they call justification is rationalization, poor rationalization at that. They get away with it for a while, because leaders' statements often do not get analyzed. Unfortunately, little critical thinking is devoted to proposals. News reports usually just quote what people without than assaying what is quoted. It is true, that government officials, Israelis in particular, often do not think through the consequences of their action. They do not consider the long term effects. They do not check their assumptions. But the problem is deeper. Many gentiles mistakenly assume that a Jewish leader cannot be anti-Zionist because he is Jewish. They do not know about how anti-Zionist were Jewish establishments, such that the head of British Jewry opposed the Balfour Declaration and proposed its watering down. If only more Jews were normal as those gentiles expect them to be! Why do these leaders keep making proposals against the national interest and which are not feasible? Because they are not acting in the national interest. They either are biased, suborned, or neurotic. The ones in the State Dept. are biased. I suspect that some Israeli leaders may be candidates of the State Dept. or subject to prosecution for corruption and therefore at the mercy of leftist prosecutors. More likely, some of my fellow Jews suffer from centuries of Jewish helplessness and feel a need to appease gentiles. They think that would garner approval, which they crave. It does not. I have heard gentiles expressing respect for Israel more when Israel respects itself. Some of them have internalized the antisemitism they hear, to the extent that they dislike Jewish autonomy and observant Jews or think Israel is a wrongdoer and must repent. They are not so much self-hating Jews as self-disrespecting or resentful of Jews who embrace their Jewish identity. I think much policy is determined by those unhealthy emotions. IRAN DEVELOPS ANTI-HELICOPTER WEAPON The Islamic Republic of Iran has developed a new weapon, designed to bring down the U.S.-made Apache helicopter. Having observed the helicopter to be a formidable weapons platform in Iraq and Afghanistan, Iran developed this counter-weapon to protect itself from the same treatment. Only defensive, is this weapon, Iran states (www.imra.org.il, 2/3). I believe Iran. It seems to have developed a great industry for innovating or imitating weaponry. If only defensive weapons were just defensive! How long would it be before Iran ships them to Hamas and Hizbullah? Then Hamas and Hizbullah would intensify aggression against Israel, and use those weapons to hinder IDF missions to eradicate the source of aggression. Thus the new weapon would be used to protect forces of aggression. Defensive? Only in a technical sense. ISRAEL-LEBANON-SYRIA BORDER TOWN OF GHAJAR: UPDATE New York Times reports that foreign countries want UNIFIL to patrol northern Ghajar, a border-straddling town whose southern half is in Israel and whose Lebanese half is occupied by the IDF. The occupation occurred during the recent war, started by a Hizbullah attack. Before that, Hizbullah had used the northern half to infiltrate into the southern half and attempt from there to gain access to the rest of Israel. The town came to overlap the border, because no border was delineated. The town or village just grew. The southern half is in the Golan Heights, annexed by Israel after a war with Syria. The villagers accepted Israeli citizenship but say they would prefer being reunited with Syria. The foreign countries that urge a UNIFIL take-over claim their motive is to remove this Israeli occupation as an excuse for Hizbullah to retain its militia and its war stance (2/3). Is that really their motive? Could be. But do they really imagine that removing Hizbullah's current excuses would cause Hizbullah to disarm? When Hizbullah loses one excuse, it devises another, such as Shaaba Farms and now, even, the claim that Israel plans aggression against it. It is violating the truce agreement, so it has cause for concern, but it created that cause. Jihadists are not likely to disarm voluntarily. Territorial arrangements do not resolve their religious aggression. Those same foreign countries want Israeli withdrawals all over, until Israel could not defend itself. Is that foolish appeasement or anti-Zionism? The NY Times article, like its predecessor piece, fails to put two and two together: UNIFIL failed in its mission to prevent terrorist military buildup and infiltration. Then why call on it to extend its mission instead of to withdraw? UNIFIL is temporary. When it eventually would evacuate from Ghajar, Hizbullah would move back in. Problem resumed. The Times and the U.S. ignore that likelihood. Is it too difficult for them to figure out, or have they figured it out and do not care? EVIDENCE OBAMA WAS NOT TOUGH ON IRAN The Senate just passed a tougher sanctions bill against Iran, especially against companies selling or shipping it gasoline, a critical bottleneck in Iran's economy. This bill is comparable to one that recently had passed the House of Representatives. Turns out, a Democratic Senator, probably Senator Kerry, had placed a personal hold on the bill for four months! He had hoped for a successful trip to Iran, in which he would negotiate an end to Iranian nuclear development and, in exchange, would end U.S. sanctions against Iran. Iran did not grant him a visa. Morton Klein, President of the Zionist Organization of America (headquartered in New York City and to which I belong) concludes that Sen. Kerry held up the bill at the behest of President Obama. "'The fact that the administration delayed the vote in both the House and Senate is further proof that President Obama is not doing all he can to fight the threat of Islamic terrorism against the United States,' Klein told Newsmax. 'I think Obama took his foot off the brake in part because of the message from the Massachusetts election.'" (Ken Timmerman article in ZOA e-mail, 2/3). I think that it is an abuse of democracy to allow a single Member of Congress to hold up legislation more than a couple of days. President Obama had promised to try negotiation and then sanctions, and refused to consider military action, though as if to cover himself, did not rule it out entirely. His negotiation efforts soon were stymied, but he thwarted imposition of sanctions, letting Iran continue to develop nuclear weapons, by all evidence and the logic of it. Except for a harder but inconclusive effort in and around Afghanistan, Obama's decisions seem to serve jihad more than America. He finances Hizbullah's ally, the Lebanese Army, and the pro-terrorist Palestinian Authority. He tries terrorists in civilian court¸ preventing authorities from interrogating them, removed all but one Hamas terrorist from a list not to receive U.S. funds, reversed a Bush decision to bar a couple of Islamist organizers/speakers from the U.S., etc. Some of these actions he does in secret, others in the name of fighting terrorism properly. 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 and visit his website:
|
|
SCIENTIST CONVICTED OF TRYING TO KILL AMERICANS BLAMES ISRAEL
Posted by Cpocerl, February 4, 2010. |
|
It was a news item in YNET news and is archived at
|
|
MIT-trained Pakistani scientist found guilty of assaulting American personnel in Afghanistan. Upon hearing verdict, she yells, 'This verdict coming from Israel, not America.' Also believed to be planning bomb attack in New York, Aafia Siddiqui claims she can single-handedly bring peace to Middle East — Associated Press A US-trained Pakistani scientist was convicted Wednesday of charges that she tried to kill Americans while detained in Afghanistan in 2008, shouting with a raised arm as jurors left the courtroom: "This is a verdict coming from Israel, not America." A jury deliberated three days in federal court in Manhattan before finding Aafia Siddiqui guilty in the third week of her attempted murder trial, which she often interrupted with rambling courtroom outbursts. After declaring the verdict came from Israel, she turned toward spectators in the packed courtroom and said: "Your anger should be directed where it belongs. I can testify to this and I have proof." Siddiqui, 37, was convicted of two counts of attempted murder, though the crime was not found by the jury to be premeditated. She was also convicted of armed assault, using and carrying a firearm, and assault of US officers and employees. Before her arrest, US authorities had called Siddiqui an al-Qaeda sympathizer. She was never charged with terrorism, but prosecutors called her a grave threat who was carrying bomb-making instructions and a list of New York City landmarks including the Statue of Liberty when she was captured. 'Charges no joke' The defendant a spindly neuroscience specialist who trained at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Brandeis University "is no shrinking violet," Assistant US Attorney Christopher La Vigne said in closing arguments. "She does what she wants when she wants it," he said. "These charges are no joke. People almost died." Testifying in her own defense, Siddiqui claimed she had been tortured and held in a "secret prison" before her detention. Charges that she attacked US personnel who wanted to interrogate her were "crazy," she said. "It's just ridiculous." In court, Siddiqui veiled her head and face with a white scarf and often sat slumped in her chair. She openly sparred with the judge and her own lawyers, insisted she could single-handedly bring peace to the Middle East and lashed out at witnesses in tirades that got her kicked out of the courtroom. "I was never planning a bombing! You're lying!" she yelled while an Army captain testified. In her closing argument, defense attorney Linda Moreno accused the prosecutors of trying to play on the jury's fears. "They want to scare you into convicting Aafia Siddiqui," she said. "The defense trusts that you're much smarter than that." Defense claims no ballistic evidence During the two-week trial, FBI agents and US soldiers testified that when they went to interrogate Siddiqui at an Afghan police station, she snatched up an unattended assault rifle and shot at them while yelling, "Death to Americans." She was wounded by return fire but recovered and was brought to the United States to face charges attempted murder, assault and gun charges. A chief warrant officer, who testified in uniform but did not give his name, told jurors he had set down his M4 rifle after being told Siddiqui had been restrained. He testified he was shocked when she suddenly appeared from behind a curtain wielding his M4 rifle and yelling, "Allah akbar," Arabic for "God is great." "It was pretty amazing she got that thing up and squared off," he said. "She was looking at me and aiming dead at me." Hearing the rifle go off, the officer said he followed his military training and pulled his pistol. Siddiqui was wrestling with an interpreter when he shot her in the stomach. "I operated within the rules of engagement to eliminate the threat," he said. The defense told jurors there was no ballistic, fingerprint or other physical evidence proving the weapon was "touched by Dr. Siddiqui, let alone fired by her." Siddiqui testified she was shot shortly after she poked her head around a curtain to see if there was a way she might slip out of the room where she was being held. She said she was desperate to escape because she feared being returned to a secret prison. "I wanted to get out. ... I was afraid," she said.
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com
|
|
MORE THAN 25% OF KNESSET JOINS 'LAND OF ISRAEL FORUM'
Posted by Hillel Fendel, February 4, 2010. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) A new Land of Israel Forum has been formed in the Knesset, with representation from no fewer than seven parties. It is co-chaired by coalition whip MK Ze'ev Elkin (Likud) and MK Aryeh Eldad (National Union). "The lobby will deal with strengthening the State of Israel's grasp of the entire Land of Israel," Elkin said at the lobby's opening session on Tuesday, "and especially Judea and Samaria." Among the more than 30 members are Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin, Communications Minister Moshe Kachlon, Science Minister Rabbi Prof. Daniel Herskovitz (Jewish Home), Minister-without-Portfolio Benny Begin, and MK Otniel Schneller (Kadima). "We face many challenges and we have many problems," Elkin said, "but still and all, the rate of growth in Judea and Samaria is the largest in the country. As with the Jews in ancient Egypt, the more they oppress us, the more we grow... Our purpose is to bring hearts closer together — religious, secular, hareidi. We are all united to strengthen the Land of Israel and develop Judea and Samaria." MK Eldad said, "There are black clouds over the settlement enterprise in Judea and Samaria... This lobby includes MKs from many Knesset factions to fight the Land of Israel's fight." Minister Herskovitz: "One of the goals of the lobby is to promote legislation to strengthen settlement — legislation that already exists in the Bible. Unlike parliamentary laws, this one can't be revoked. It is clear even to non-Jews with whom I meet... The problem is less with legislation and more with awareness and national [public relations], and that's where we have to focus. Every Jew has the elementary and inalienable right to live wherever he wants in our Land. If we get this message out to the whole nation, then we will once again see the Land blossoming all over." Minister Benny Begin said, "The establishment of a foreign independent sovereign state headed by the PLO in parts of the Land of Israel stands in opposition to two basic ideas that are both supported by a majority of the Knesset: the absolute historic right of the Nation of Israel to the Land of Israel and the right of the State of Israel to national security." MK Rivlin noted, "We all share this mission, we were all elected to serve in the Knesset in order to fulfill our mission, and we are all tested at times when it is not easy to do so. We face doubts and heavy international pressures, and there are moments of weakness, and fears that the majority has given up the fight. But I believe that the nationalist camp is the force that will fortify the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel and in Judea and Samaria." Minister Kachlon said, "As a Cabinet minister, I will try to serve as a mouthpiece for this lobby in the government. We know that settlement is one of Israel's strong points, and certainly not an obstacle to peace." Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
CREATING A MODERN JEWISH SOCIETY
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, February 4, 2010. |
|
— From this week's Torah portion Yitro, Exodus 18:15-18) The verses above may be a record of the birth of the first bureaucracy in the Jewish nation. But they are much more than that. They record the fist ginger steps of a nation as it realizes that it is no longer just a group of individuals, but a multi-faceted society bursting with potential that needs to find the way to run a country. How will the individual with questions get answers from Moses when there are tens of thousands of others with questions, as well? How will the court system work? How will this large group of people create a Jewish economy? How will the individual feel direct responsibility toward society in a modern state with government-run mechanisms? The Nation of Israel has returned to its Holy Land. The greatest innovation of Zionism is its demand to take responsibility, its understanding that the redemption of Israel will take place through human beings who will set very human processes in motion. Sadly, this understanding has not yet fully permeated all levels of religious Zionism. The Religious Zionists have dedicated their souls to the Zionist enterprise. But they have failed to lead it to the spiritual renaissance that is essential to the re-establishment of a Jewish State. Many people and organizations are busy bringing Jewish individuals closer to their heritage. That is excellent. But Manhigut Yehudit is the only organized movement that strives to bring the Nation of Israel, our society, back to our Jewish heritage as a modern state. Our court system must be restructured to reflect our Jewish values. (Click here for more). Our economy needs to be updated and modified to reflect Jewish ethics. We must begin to implement the laws of interest, shmittah and Jubilee on the backdrop of a vibrant, modern economy. How do we, as a society, deal with poverty? These new facets of our culture will surely open vast new horizons in the way that we relate to the Torah, how the Torah relates to our society and how we relate to G-d. There is nothing about the smooth running of our society that does not need to be re-examined through the prism of Jewish values and heritage. As the State of Israel and its values slowly fade away, this is our urgent challenge. Shabbat Shalom
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)
|
|
PROF. AUMANN: FREEZE IS IMMORAL AND STUPID
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 4, 2010. |
|
This was written by Malkah Fleisher and Yoni Kempinski and it
appeared in Arutz-7
|
|
Professor Robert J. "Yisrael" Aumann, the Israeli who won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2005 for his work on conflict and cooperation through game-theory analysis, thinks Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is not working game-theory to Israel's advantage. Professor Aumann is an Orthodox Jew who immigrated to Israel from the United States in 1956. Speaking to INN TV's Yoni Kempinski about Prime Minister Netanyahu's 10-month building freeze in Judea and Samaria, Professor Aumann said "I think it's a very, very bad idea." Professor Aumann went on to say he does not believe anyone — Jew or Arab — should be expelled from his home. He also said he is not opposed to making certain concessions to the Arabs if concessions are also given by them to Israel. However, he felt strongly that the building freeze is not an instance of appropriate diplomacy. "It's not only immoral, it's stupid!" Aumann said. "It's stupid... because it says to the Arabs, 'you can continue to be intransigent and we will make one gesture, one capitulation after another.' We're giving the wrong signal." "Just as Chamberlain gave the wrong signal to Hitler in Munich and Chamberlain brought about the Second World War — not Hitler, but Chamberlain brought about the Second World War, made it possible by his capitulation to Hitler in Munich — by sending a signal of weakness, we are encouraging intransigence and in fact, war, on the part of the Arabs. It's simply stupid," Aumann said. He strongly chastised Israel for making unilateral moves in 2005 which were harmful to Jews and were not met with simultaneous moves towards peace from the Arabs. He called the Disengagement from the Jewish cities of Gush Katif in Gaza "immoral" and "criminal", and accused the Supreme Court of hypocrisy in allowing the program to take place, when it would "never have allowed, and rightly so, to expel even a few Arab famlies from their homes." Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
RETROSPECTIVE
Posted by Lowell Gallin, February 4, 2010. |
|
It is with immense pride that we present to you this inspiring report by Dr. Navras Jaat Aafreedi on the Holocaust Films Retrospective that Navras organised in India, in Southeast Asia's Muslim heartland, from September-October, 2009. Navras Aafreedi, an Israelite prince of the Aafreedi Pathan tribe, came to study in Eretz Yisrael from the Fall of 2006 through the Spring of 2007. Navras is Indian Co-Founder and Co-Chair of the Root and Branch Association's Indian Pathan-Israel Fellowship (R&B has a Pakistani Pathan-Israel Fellowship, too). As you (should) know, Pathans (forty million of them) believe that they are descendents of the Lost Tribes of Israel. Navras the Pathan of course believes this. So do I. Read Navras' report below and marvel at what ONE PERSON, a
volunteer operating on a shoestring budget (if that!), with a good
head and a good heart, can accomplish. Austrians say, "The situation
is hopeless, but not serious". Prussians say, "The situation is
serious, but not hopeless". Count me in with the Austrians when it
comes to that "peaceful, easy feeling" state of mind
Navras took ACTION, amazing ACTION. Remember that when paper pushing, brain and heart dead apparatchiki of the Israeli "government" and E.J.O's (Establishment Jewish Organizations) tell you "We can't do this" or "We can't do that" or "We need to convene a committee" or "We need a big budget", or "We need to conduct a study" or, or, or...Just press the "delete" button! Navras brought Israel's battle to the Muslim heart of Southeast Asia. He did not ask himself, "Am I afraid?", or "Will there be a pogrom?", or "What will the goyim say?" or, or, or...It is a DIFFERENT kind of thought/perception world, that of the free Men (and Women) of the Mountains, the Fighting Israelite Pathans. Today, Lucknow. Tomorrow, UP to the hills and valleys of northern Pakistan, where Saudi Arabian, Kuwaiti and Gulf State petro-dollar profit financed Wahhabi mind murderers destroy the lives of orphan Pathan boys by attempting to turn them into suicide/murderers in Wahhabi madrassot ('schools'). Not much longer. Soon, oh so soon, the Pathans will REALLY wake up to their Israelite heritage, and SEE what the Wahhabi (primarily) Arab "imams" and "sheikhs" have done to Our People. And when the Pathans REALLY wake up, they will wipe out the Wahhabis among them, leaving none surviving. They will kill them. So, my advice to all Wahhabi murder masters at your madrassot in northern Pakistan, and Afghanistan. Get out. Flee, while you still have time. Because your time is coming to an end. Shalom from Yerushalayim,
Navras Jaat Aafreedi, Ph.D. is Indian Co-Chair, R&B Indian Pathan-Israel Fellowship Open Space Fellow, Centre for Communication and Development Studies. Send him an email at aafreedi@gmail.com |
|
First Ever Holocaust Films Retrospective in South Asia Conscious as I was of how ignorant my fellow Indians were of the Holocaust and how a section of Muslims among them denied its scale and magnitude, I had for a long time desired to do something to create awareness on the subject. Also, the fact that although Western History was taught at my alma mater, the University of Lucknow, but that the students were never told about the Holocaust, saddened me. The Open Space Fellowship from the Centre for Communication and Development Studies, Pune, emerged as the means to that end and enabled me to organise, with worldwide help and support, largely in the form of film contributions, THE FIRST EVER HOLOCAUST FILMS RETROSPECTIVE IN SOUTH ASIA. During the Retrospective, forty-six film screenings took place in fourteen days in three phases at five venues — two universities, two offices of non-profit organisations and the world's largest school — over a period of two months, September and October 2009. The films screened during the retrospective (absolutely free of charge) were seen by four thousand people. It was an event driven completely by philanthropy. All the films at the Retrospective had either been lent free of charge or donated. Almost all the films screened at the Retrospective had never been seen in South Asia before. The films Retrospective was accompanied by an exhibition of twenty posters, donated by Yad Vashem, Jerusalem. During the event, a trilingual brochure containing synopses of the films in English, Hindi (India's national language), and Urdu — the lingua franca of almost all South Asian Muslims, and a poem written exclusively for the event by the great Urdu poet, Anwar Nadeem, was distributed among the audiences, which consisted of noted intellectuals as well as academics and students. All film screenings were followed by discussions which were attended by celebrities such as acclaimed filmmaker, M. S. Sathyu; theatre personalities, Dr. Surya Mohan Kulshreshtha, Jugal Kishor, Salim Arif and Professor Thontadarya; Urdu literary figures, Professor Malikzada Manzoor Ahmad, Dr. Ayesha Siddiqui and Anwar Nadeem; educators and social activists, Professor Roop Rekha Verma and Dr. Jagdish Gandhi; religious leaders of almost all communities in India and a number of academics and university students. It was also perhaps the first event dedicated to the Holocaust to have been attended by Muslims in such large numbers. While the event was in progress, the two largest circulation Urdu newspapers of Lucknow, Rashtriya Sahara [2] and Aag [3], carried a story each denying the Holocaust and calling it "The Biggest Hoax of the Twentieth Century", which confirms the event's importance. It is highly significant that the Retrospective took place in Lucknow, which is not only a major Muslim cultural centre, but the centre of the Muslim heartland of South Asia, home to the world's largest Muslim population. Muslim demonstrations against Israel are common in Lucknow. During the American invasion of Iraq, flags of Israel and the U.S. were drawn on the floor at the entrance to Lucknow's most famous landmark, the Shi'a Muslim monument called Bara Imambara, so that whosoever visited the monument trampled the flags. Americans and Israelis were barred from entering the monument. Even India's response to the Holocaust was largely determined by Muslim attitudes towards Jews, as illustrated by the following paragraph: "the opposition to the Jews came from the Muslim leaders in India who were pro-Arab. For them the bonds of religion were stronger than the sufferings of Jews under Hitler. Keeping in view the sentiments of the Muslims towards this question, the government imposed many restrictions on the settlement of Jews in India. How far the policy of the Indian National Congress to appease the Muslims was also responsible for this stand of the government needs further study. But there is no doubt that I.N.C.'s pro-Palestinian policy encouraged the British to insist that each Jewish refugee have a guaranteed job before allowed entry into India". [4] The Holocaust Films Retrospective was inaugurated by the Mayor of Lucknow, Dr. Dinesh Sharma. During the first phase films were screened at the Babasaheb Bhimrao Ambedkar University from September 14th to the 18th. The second phase took place at the University of Lucknow from October 12th to the 15th, with a one day gap on the 14th. During the third phase films were screened at the Open Space — Lucknow office from October 22nd to the 26th, while the concluding day's screenings took place at the office of the non-profit organisation, Saajhi Duniya, on October 27th. On October 2nd, Gandhi's birth anniversary, observed as the International Day of Non-Violence as per a U.N. resolution, a Holocaust film was screened before an audience of three thousand and five hundred, at the World Convention Centre of the City Montessori School, which holds the Guinness record for the largest number of students and is also a recipient of the U.N.E.S.C.O. Prize for Peace Education 2002. I am glad that I did not succumb to pressure from various quarters to include films on other genocides, conscious as I was that doing so would be comparing the Jewish Holocaust in Europe to similar acts of genocide in the twentieth century, which could result in the obfuscation and dwarfing of the Jewish trauma. Jewish/Israelite History had always fascinated me, but I fell in love with Israel and the Jewish culture during the one academic year (2006-2007) I spent in Israel, supported by a scholarship from the Israeli Government. Now I look for opportunities to introduce my fellow countrymen to Israel and Jewish culture through various media. Also, coming from a Muslim background and being a Secular Humanist gives me the privileged position of being at once an insider and an outsider in the Muslim community. It makes me well aware of the Muslim anti-Semitism and Holocaust Denial among them. These efforts of mine are also aimed at improving South Asian Muslim attitudes towards Jews and Israel. The work is significant in many respects. The field of Jewish-Muslim relations activism has largely been focused on Arab-Israeli relations, concerned with the Arab enemy right there at the doorstep of Israel. Yet eighty per cent of the Muslim population is non-Arab, largely resident in South Asia; and they have emerged as the epicentre of Muslim anti-Semitism and violence. They have declared war against the Judeo-Christian West and certain aspects of the composite Indic civilization. The Wahhabi Taliban and Wahhabi Al Qaida have their bases in South Asia. The strongest influence the extremist and fanatic Wahhabis have anywhere outside of Saudi Arabia is in South Asia, among the Muslims there. I am of the view that ignorance gives birth to stereotypes, which ultimately leads to feelings of hatred and hostility, so evident in South Asian Muslim attitudes towards Jews. Most South Asian Muslims know Jews only through secondary sources, for example: the Qur'an, whose references to Jews are generally misinterpreted in a negative way; The biggest manifestations of Muslim anti-Semitism in the twenty-first century have all emerged in South Asia: the 9/11 attack perpetrated by members of Al Qaida, which has its base in South Asia, in Afghanistan and the tribal region of Pakistan; I have touched upon each of the above mentioned unfortunate events by organising programmes focused on them, for example: Preview Screening of the documentary New Muslim Cool at the University of Lucknow, a day before its world premiere on the American channel PBS; Besides this, I've gotten eminent Muslim scholars, such as the Anthropologist Prof. N. Hasnain, Urdu Poet Prof. Malikzada M. Ahmad and the Secretary General of the Italian Muslim Assembly, Sheikh Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi, who is the world's most prominent Zionist Muslim cleric, to speak against Muslim anti-semitism, and Jewish speakers from the US, such as Human Rights Activist Dr. Richard L. Benkin and the filmmaker and writer Sadia Shepard, and from Israel, Sharon Rappaport, Political Secretary, Israeli Embassy in New Delhi, to give messages of Jewish-Muslim reconciliation. Now I intend to invite the famous duo, Professor Judea Pearl and Professor Akbar S. Ahmad, for a Jewish-Muslim Dialogue in Lucknow, the first ever outside of the Judeo-Christian West. I have also tried to introduce Indian youth, particularly Muslim Indian youth, to: Jewish literature from India, Israel, the US, and Europe, by organising the readings of the works of Padmashri Nissim Ezekiel, Esther David, Meera Mahadevan (nee Miriam Jacob Mendrekar), Robin David, Yehuda Amichai, Sadia Shepard (Jewish, according to Halacha), Etgar Keret, and Tadeusz Borowski; One can read about my efforts for the betterment of Jewish-Muslim relations on the following sites: http://aafreedi.googlepages.com/dr.navrasjaataafreedi% 27seffortsforthebett2 ; It is my hope, going forward from this point, that others will be inspired to further elucidate the ties and commonalities between Muslims and Jews, and thereby increase understanding between these ancient peoples and faiths. Shalom from Lucknow, Navras Jaat Aafreedi, Ph.D.
Press Coverage: English Press: http://openspacelucknow.blogspot.com/search/ label/Open%20Space%20in%20Lucknow%27s%20English%20Press Hindi Press: http://openspacelucknow.blogspot.com/search/label/ Open%20Space%20in%20Lucknow%27s%20Hindi%20Press Urdu Press: http://openspacelucknow.blogspot.com/search/label/
Open%20Space%20in%20Lucknow%27s%20Urdu%20Press
Photographs of THE FIRST EVER HOLOCAUST FILMS RETROSPECTIVE IN
SOUTH ASIA can be seen on Footnotes: [1] http://aafreedi.googlepages.com [2] Qutubullah, "Holocaust: Beesveen Sadee ka Sabse Badadaa Jhoota Afsana", Rashtriya Sahara, Lucknow, September, 16, 2009 [3] "Sadee ka Sabse Badaa Jhoot? Holocaust", Aag, Lucknow, October 18, 2009 [4] Tilak Raj Sareen, "Indian Responses to the Holocaust", in Anil Bhatti and Johannes H. Voigt, eds., Jewish Exile in India: 1933-1945, Manohar in association with Max Mueller Bhavan, New Delhi, 2005, page 59 Lowell Gallin is Founder and President, The Root and Branch Association, Ltd. Visit their website at www.rb.org.il and send an email to rb@rb.org.il Mr. Gallin is author of Cracking the Qur'an Code: God's Land, Torah and People Covenants with Israel in the Qur'an and Islamic Tradition, Volume One, E-Book First Edition (Jerusalem: Root and Branch Association, Ltd., 2009, 399 pages, $12.00)http://stores.lulu.com/store.php?fAcctID=3743146 The original article has live links to additional material. |
|
THE ENEMY OF PEACE
Posted by Bill Warner, February 4, 2010. |
|
Imagine my surprise when I opened an email ad from Amazon.com and found that Edip Yuksel, a Muslim who is a leading Islamic reformer, had written a book, Peacemaker's Guide to Warmongers: Exposing Robert Spencer, David Horowitz, and other Enemies of Peace. He made my day. Bill Warner was included in the product description as an enemy of peace. I am flattered. Why does Mr. Yuksel call me an enemy of peace and a warmonger? It's simple. Partnered with Robert Spencer, I debated him in Frontpage Magazine Symposiums (here and here) and beat him like a drum using the doctrine and history of political Islam. As a result, I have gone from being an opponent in a debate to an enemy of peace. Am I an enemy of peace? Am I a warmonger? Yes, on an everyday basis and I want you to be an enemy of peace and a warmonger as well. The question must be asked: what peace are we talking about? Islamic peace. How does Islamic peace come about? Islamic peace comes after jihad and the victory of Islam. Peace is one of those words that everyone considers to be universally good, but peace is what losers (kafirs) get, while winners (Muslims) get victory. Islamic peace is all about the victory over the kafirs. Islamic peace changes a free man into a slave of Allah. We should examine the meaning of all words Muslims use, since Islam does not share a common ground of civilization with us. Islam twists all of the kafir words. To find out what "peacemaker" means we have to go to Mohammed. Mohammed was an Islamic peacemaker. In the last 9 years of his life, he was involved in an event of violence on the average of every 6 weeks. Every single neighbor of Mohammed experienced his peacemaking. Take the Jews of Khaybar, for instance. They were going about their lives when the army of Mohammed showed up. It took the murder, rape, theft, torture and becoming semi-slaves before the Jews experienced the peace of Mohammed. Once they submitted to Islam as dhimmis and agreed to live under Sharia law and give him half of what they earned, the jizyah (the dhimmi tax), they were left to live in peace. This is the peace of Islam. As long as Mohammed merely preached the religion of Islam in Mecca, he was a failure. Very few people were interested in the religion of Islam. It was only in Medina where he became a warlord that Islam succeeded, and he became a peacemaker. The natural state of Islam in relation to kafirs is jihad, not peace. If we want to discover peace in Sharia law, we must look under the general heading of jihad to find the subject of "truce". We learn that Muslims are not to call for a truce as long as they are winning. When Islam offers peace, it means that they are losing and need to gain time to prepare for the next jihad. I am a warmonger because I use the doctrine of Islam to refute the deceptions of Muslims like Edip Yuksel. Last night in Nashville, TN, a Muslim stood in front of a college crowd and said that jihad was inner struggle. Working hard to get an A is jihad. Jihad is not holy war. He is right. When you examine the hadiths about jihad in Bukhari, about 2% of them can be construed as jihad is an inner struggle. However, the other 98% of the jihad hadiths are about killing kafirs until the rest submit to Islam. Warmongering consists of asking questions to confront Islamic propaganda in this ideological war. Being a warmonger means showing up to support the Coptic Christians at a street demonstration about the jihad killing of Copts in Egypt. Warmongering means going to an interfaith bridge building and confronting the ministers and rabbis with their ignorance about Islam. Warmongering means speaking truth to the lies of Official Islam. It works like this. Unless we have enough enemies of the Islamic peacemakers, one day our civilization will experience the peace of Islam, and we will be like the historical majority Greek Christian culture of Asia Minor. Today Greek Christians are 0.3% of Turkey. They've experienced the peace of Islam-annihilation. Bill Warner is Director of the Center for the Study of Political Islam. Contact him at bw@politicalislam.com and visit their website at http://www.politicalislam.com/ |
|
FOOT-STEPS
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, February 4, 2010. |
|
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il. Go to
|
|
PALESTINIAN PRIME MINISTER TO ISRAELI AUDIENCE: YOU MAKE CONCESSIONS, WE DON'T
Posted by Barry Rubin, February 4, 2010. |
|
Imagine this. You're prime minister of a regime that isn't yet a state. You are praised in the Western media as a great moderate man of peace. You represent a people who the U.S. president says is in an intolerable situation. You supposedly want a country of your own. Indeed you've announced you will get a state in two years, something conceivable only if your negotiating partner agrees. You're dependent on contributions from Western democratic countries that want you to make a deal. Your rivals have seized almost half the land you want to rule and work tirelessly to overthrow your regime and very possibly to kill you personally. But here comes a big opportunity. You are invited by your negotiating partner to its most important meeting of the year. All the other side's top leaders and opinionmakers are listening to you. And that country's second most powerful leader has just made a very conciliatory speech praising you personally, urging peace, offering concessions, and telling his own people they must be ready to give you a lot. What do you do? Make a warm conciliatory, confidence-building speech, showing by substantial offers that you, too, are willing to compromise; stretching out your hand in order to build friendship and ensure you get a country? Hey, we're talking about the Palestinians here! And as I say over and over again: anyone who thinks the Palestinian Authority (PA) is going to make peace hasn't been paying attention to what they say and do. So here is what PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad told the audience at the Herzliya Conference, held at the Interdisciplinary Center (IDC), following Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak's conciliatory speech:
It is true that he ended by saying: "The Israeli people have a long history, they have pain, they have ambition, and like you, we Palestinians have our own history. Right now we are going through lots of pain and suffering. And we have one key aspiration, and that is once again to be able to live alongside you in peace, harmony and security." Yet he addressed none of the points in Israel's own peace plan: an official end to the conflict if there is an agreement; resettlement of Palestinian refugees in Palestine; an end to incitement (which would be easy to do) to kill Israelis; limits on the militarization of a Palestinian state; or recognition of Israel as a Jewish state alongside a Palestinian Arab Muslim state (the PA constitution says that Islam is the country's official religion). This was not an extremist speech or one seeking conflict. Fayyad is probably the most moderate guy in the PA leadership. He was doing about the best he could. But that's the point. He has no base of support, isn't a member of Fatah, and doesn't really represent Palestinian thinking. He is in office for one reason only: the Western donors demand it. Fayyad, and arguably the PA leadership as a whole, don't want a new war with Israel. But Fatah will sponsor one if it thinks such a step is advantageous or needed to out-militant Hamas. Equally, Fayyad couldn't go any further than he did because he knows that his Fatah bosses, Palestinian constituents, and Hamas enemies would throw him out if he offered the slightest concession to Israel and demanded any less than everything they want. We will see how much progress Fayyad makes over the next two years in building strong and stable institutions. Yet it should be understood that what he is doing is not a way to convince Israel that both sides can reach a compromise peace but to persuade the world to force Israel to make compromises without the PA having to do so. The irony is that it doesn't matter what Barak says, except to show the world that Israel wants real peace and to encourage Israeli voters to back Labor as a party that balances a strong desire for peace with a smart sense of security for the country. Barak warned the right-wing in Israel that it would be a mistake to oppose a genuine two-state solution, an outcome that Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu-like Barak — has accepted. But the defense minister also urged the left-wing not to be naïve. Here's a fascinating example of how the world generally interprets the situation. Read this paragraph from the Washington Post coverage carefully: "But there was a common thread, too, with each acknowledging an international consensus on the idea of two nations. Barak said that Israel risks becoming 'an apartheid state par excellence' if it does not negotiate the terms of Palestinian statehood soon, and Fayyad said the work being done in the West Bank on governance needs to be matched by political progress." The two statements are supposed to be parallel. Barak says: Israel must get rid of the West Bank for its own good. Fayyad says: progress must be made in negotiations, in the context of a speech in which he asked for a long list of Israeli concessions and offered nothing in exchange. These statemens are not parallel. A parallel statement would be if Fayyad had said something like: The Palestinians risk becoming permanently mired in violence and backwardness unless they negotiate terms for Israel feeling secure in giving up the territory. Since 1993 not a single Palestinian leader has ever made a speech to his own people like Barak's, never said that they should have to give up something to get a state, never urged the media and public debate to become more moderate. Four days before Fayyad's speech, here is the Friday prayer sermon given in Nablus by the imam appointed there by Fayyad and broadcast on the television Fayyad controls: "The Jews are the enemies of Allah and [Muhammad], the enemies of humanity in general, and of the Palestinians in particular.... Jews will always be Jews. Even if donkeys cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl, and snakes cease to bite, the Jews will not cease to be hostile to the Muslims. The Prophet Muhammad said: 'Whenever two Jews find themselves alone with a Muslim, they think of killing him.' Oh Muslims, this land, these holy places, and these mosques will only be liberated when we return to the Book of Allah, and when all Muslims are prepared to become mujahideen for the sake of Allah, in support of Palestine, its people, its land, and its holy places." How can this be reconciled with Fayyad's claim that the sole aspiration is "to live alongside you in peace, harmony and security"? Note that this is a Palestinian Authority, not a Hamas, cleric speaking. Note, too, that while Fayyad's speech is covered around the world, sermons like these are never quoted in the Western media. This is not to say that the sermon is real and Fayyad's views are fake, it is to say that the sermon is meant to shape Palestinian politics and public opinion and what Fayyad says is meant to shape Israeli and Western politics and public opinion. Fayyad, a figurehead, is not going to make anything change and he isn't even going to try. Nor does Fayyad have any control over the ruling party, Fatah, whose leadership is still hardline on goals and negotiations, though not on more immediate issues. The Israeli audience applauded Fayyad because it does want peace and prefers him to all the worse alternatives, especially Hamas but also those in Fatah. Yet few have any illusions that peace is at hand or that Fayyad is going to deliver it. 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).
His latest book is The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan).
Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at
http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html.
Contact him at profbarryrubin@yahoo.com
|
|
THE JIHADIST NEXT DOOR
Posted by Michael Freund, February 4, 2010. |
|
We would all desperately like to believe that radical Islamic fundamentalists represent just a tiny minority of Muslims. How much simpler the problem would be if the threat of Islamic extremism was in fact marginal. But as I note in the column below from today's Jerusalem Post, the numbers just don't bear this belief out. A number of comprehensive surveys and studies all reveal that there are tens of millions of Muslims worldwide who believe violence and suicide bombings against Israel and the West are justified. It would be wrong to suggest that all Muslims are extremists, but it is equally off the mark to minimize the extent to which large numbers of them do support the use of violence. This is not simply a question of semantics, it is a matter of life and death. As I suggest below, if Israel and the West continue to deceive themselves into thinking the global jihadist movement is minuscule, we will naturally fail to deploy the tactics and resources necessary to confront it. And we will persist in overlooking the mounting danger staring us all in the face. Comments and feedback may be sent to: letters@jpost.com or to me directly. thanks,
|
|
The Super Bowl may be just days away, but that hasn't stopped America's Quarterback-in-Chief from fumbling the ball. In an interview with YouTube on Monday, US President Barack Obama was asked about his plans for America's war on terror. After wisely asserting that al-Qaida needs to be fought "on all fronts" and "in very concrete ways," he then veered sharply off course, landing in a ditch alongside the road known as wishful thinking. Invoking what has become one of the central myths of American foreign policy, the president asserted that "we have to work with the overwhelming majority of Muslims who reject senseless violence of this sort." Ahh, if only that were true... Indeed, we would all desperately like to believe that just an insignificant minority actually backs the use of violence against Israel and the West. How much simpler the problem would be if the threat of Islamic extremism was marginal. We could all sleep better at night, stop worrying so much about body scanners and cavity searches, and finally get on with living. But anyone who takes an honest look at the numbers will see the level of delusion at work here. The fact is that a frightening number of Muslims across the globe support violence and jihad, and the figures are far from inconsequential. According to the Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project, 68 percent of Palestinians, 43% of Nigerian Muslims and 38% of Lebanese believe that "suicide bombings and other forms of violence against civilian targets" are often or sometimes justified. Add to that 15% of Egyptians and 13% of Indonesians who expressed support for such attacks, and you have tens of millions of Muslims who believe strapping explosives to their bodies and detonating themselves among crowds of innocents can be justified. I don't know about you, but I hardly see any source of comfort in those statistics. They give the lie to Obama's assertion about the existence of an "overwhelming majority" of peace-loving, terror-hating Muslims.
CONSIDER ALSO the findings of a wide-ranging study published last February by the University of Maryland's WorldPublicOpinion.org project. Entitled, "Public opinion in the Islamic world on terrorism, al-Qaida and US policies," the results showed that even though a large percentage of Muslims may reject al-Qaida's methods, most subscribe to its goals. According to the press release issued to mark the report's publication, "Majorities agree with nearly all of al-Qaida's goals — to change US behavior in the Muslim world, to promote Islamist governance and to preserve and affirm Islamic identity." Even among Muslims living in the US, there is cause for concern. On December 17, the Pew Center sought to reassure Americans with a report headlined, "Little support for terrorism among Muslim Americans." Citing "questions about homegrown terrorism," the study noted that 78% of US Muslims believe suicide bombings can never be justified. While that is certainly welcome news, what about the other 22%? Going by a previous Pew estimate suggesting the size of the US Muslim population is 2.35 million, that means more than 500,000 Muslims in America believe there are circumstances which may justify suicide attacks. Clearly, the challenge facing the West is far broader than a small, hazy and nebulous al-Qaida organization. It is a struggle against an ideology that is far more deeply-rooted than Obama would have us believe. Islamic extremists are not merely a small band of nut jobs hiding in caves along the Pakistan-Afghan frontier. They are part of a worldwide movement. The jihadist next door is no longer just a nightmare scenario. Sure, not all Muslims are extremists, and it would be entirely wrong and absolutely unfair to suggest otherwise. But it is equally off the mark to minimize the extent to which large numbers of Muslims do seem to support the use of violence. This is not simply a question of semantics, it is a matter of life and death. If Israel and the West continue to deceive themselves into thinking the global jihadist movement is minuscule, we will naturally fail to deploy the tactics and resources necessary to confront it. And we will persist in overlooking the mounting danger staring us all in the face. The longer Obama and others continue to underestimate the scope of the problem, the more difficult it will be to vanquish it. It is therefore time to sweep aside self-delusion and recognize reality. Even if the Taliban and al-Qaida are crushed, the battle against Islamic extremism has only just begun. Michael Freund has served as an adviser to Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. This article appeared today in the Jerusalem Post and is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/ Article.aspx?id=167698 |
|
FILMMAKER: YOU KNOW WHO'S A LOT LIKE AVATAR'S NA'VI? THE PALESTINIANS
Posted by Boris Celser, February 4, 2010. |
|
This comes from thee Mere Rhetoric website:
|
|
The Palestinians also — apparently — need to attack and expel Jews like the Na'vi attacked and expelled humans. Which is probably the first time an antisemite has ever acknowledged that Jews should be treated as "humans", but whatever: This week, a screening of "Avatar" erupted into a small ruckus in a suburb when one moviegoer loudly announced that the Palestinians should learn from this movie what to do to the Jews, causing a commotion and angering others in the audience. The opinionated moviegoer was Juliano Mer-Khamis. Born in Nazereth to a Jewish mother and Arab father, he is an accomplished actor of many years, a filmmaker as well as a political activist who is very outspoken against the occupation... "No one dares to make the real analogy. 'Avatar' is one of the bravest films made. It portrays the occupation, but people aren't making the analogy. Many would like to be like the blue people but don't understand the meaning..." I'm actually more offended by that "Avatar is the bravest film ever" crap than by the explicit call to violence. Sure genocidal mass murder is unseemly. But to pretend that some vast pro-American Hollywood groundswell is going to threaten James Cameron's career for making the highest-grossing movie of all time — that's just insulting. Since this is MR's first and probably last Avatar-related post: come on now. I don't know why the Onion even bothers caricaturing maudlin liberals. It's funny. But reality's just better at this game (h/t: SP).
Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at
celser@telusplanet.net
|
|
MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE
Posted by Emanual A. Winston, February 3, 2010. |
|
Are all Muslims taught to be candidates for becoming "Manchurian Candidates", some knowingly, some unknowingly? (The original movie by this title has American soldiers held hostage by the Chinese Communists, being brainwashed to become killers and mentally implanted with the post-hypnotic suggestion that, on a given signal, he would assassinate the American President.) When a young Muslim is taught Koranic Law in a "Madrassa" (school for strict Islam), repeating his lessons by rote day-after-day, year-after-year, these lessons of Islam’s superiority and violence are deeply implanted and never to be forgotten. Add to that the lessons he is taught about Mohammed, both his proclamations as recorded in the Koran and how he lived his life with instructions written in his "Hadith" (Oral Teachings). Few Muslim children (or adults) can resist what psychiatrists would call "post-hypnotic suggestion", otherwise called "reduced cues" or "subliminal cues". These strong inner motivations create a call to action, hence: the "Manchurian Candidate", under the post-hypnotic suggestion and instruction to attack America(ns), Israel(is), the un-believers of Europe and the rest of the "infidels" (non-Muslims). Once imprinted, such a manipulated brain cannot be cleaned. Like attack guard dogs, they cannot be de-programmed with any reliability that they will not attack when triggered. Clearly, Muslims seem to have multiple personalities that range from friendly (at times) but which can quickly change to anger and then to being willing killers. They exhibit the face they want you to see at any given time. "Jihadists" (holy warriors for Islam), such as Dr. Humam Khalil Abu al Balawi who was thought to be a reliable agent for the CIA and Jordan apparently had many faces. He used his Muslim Killer face when he exploded himself among ranking CIA agents in Afghanistan, killing 8 (7 American CIA agents and 1 Jordanian). Balawi was a Jordanian doctor — sometimes — when he was not being an Al Qaeda recruit. (1) Recall the 6 Muslim doctors who mounted failed car bomb Terror attack in Britain and Glasgow? British Police confirmed a Palestinian doctor and an Iraqi physician, plus a Muslim doctor arrested in Australia. July 2, 2007 (2) A group of 45 Muslim doctors threatened to use car bombs and rocket grenades in terrorist attacks in the United States during discussions on an ‘extremist’ internet chat site. (3) Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri was a co-conspirator with Osama Bin Laden, an Egyptian doctor who became a master of Terror — 'interested' in the use of biological and chemical warfare — like anthrax. Bin Laden paid Chechen mobsters millions of dollars in cash and heroin to obtain radiological "suitcase" bombs left over from the Soviets. (4) Our most recent 2 Muslim Terror attacks in America killed 13 American soldiers at Fort Hood by the base psychiatrist Dr. Nidal Abdul Hasan and the failed underwear bomber on Flight 253, December 25, 2009, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab whose underwear fire bomb was put out by irate and brave passengers. Did you read about the Palestinian, Mansor Mohammad Asad of Toledo, Ohio — on a Detroit-bound Delta flight in Miami who, as it was taxiing away from the Terminal, began making loud anti-Semitic comments and chanting in Arabic, saying to the Miami-Dade police: "I am a Palestinian and I want (to) kill all Jews," according to witnesses. (5) Passengers at U.S. airports have been jolted by at least two dozen disruptive security incidents since the failed Northwest #253 December 25. The TSA (Transportation Security Administration) has tallied — 24 incidents at U.S. airports from Dec. 27 to Jan. 3; 37 incidents during the previous week; and 18 the week before that. (6) We often hear from at least two Presidents coming to the defense of Islam and Muslims — usually after a Muslim Terrorist attack. Remember that all the Terror attacks in the past 2 decades have been by Muslim "Jihadi" (warriors for Islam) Terrorists. In 2009 U.S. Intelligence reports that there were at least 139 such attacks. Presumably, that does not include attacks thwarted by the FBI and others of America’s 16 Intel Agencies. Are Muslims merely ticking bombs, some awaiting instructions to go into action as "sleeper cells", while some unknowingly have altered attack brain cells, tucked into the dark recesses of their mind that springs into murderous action when circumstance calls it up. Presently, there is a new awareness in the West, namely, in America, England, France, the Netherlands, the Scandinavian countries and others about so-called home-grown Muslim Terrorists, some of them second or third generations coming out of their host countries. Seemingly ordinary, even well-educated and well-to-do young men suddenly sneak off to Yemen, Pakistan, Iran, Sudan, Somalia, Afghanistan to learn attack methods — including suicide bombers — burning for the cause of Islam. To their victims it doesn’t matter one whit if they are well-taught Manchurian Candidates or merely subliminally implanted with Koranic teachings that surface sometimes in their adult life. The Victims are dead and the radical Islamists cheer their success, handing out candy in their rejoicing — then they go on to recruit more volunteers. Some have forgotten their cheers after 9/11's ‘success’ in the Muslim communities around the world, including so-called peaceful, moderate Muslims in America. Among the Muslim Arab Palestinians, they were giving out candy and dancing in the streets, celebrating the 3,000 viciously murdered innocent souls. In places like Chicago — Flint, Michigan — Los Angeles, their parties were a bit more subdued (lest they be noticed). Many people are deeply concerned now about President Barack Hussein Obama’s birth to a Muslim father and early education as a Muslim, with all that entails. Some wonder why Obama was selected by an American black convert to Islam, Khalid al-Mansour (principal adviser of Saudi billionaire Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal), so Obama was approved to receive considerable funding to attend Harvard University. These funds reportedly came from Saudi Arabia. Why was Obama profiled for greater things by Islamic leaders? What was there in his person or personality that brought him to the attention of the Saudis — among other Muslims? We still await the full story of why Antonin Rezko, a born Syrian, who changed his name to an Italian style, Tony, was so helpful in further funding Obama. Rezko is now in jail, having been convicted for kick-backs from companies seeking State Pension fund business through Governor Blagojevich. He also assisted the Obamas in a real estate hustle. I cannot help but wonder how many Muslim Americans have been funded for education and elections because they can operate freely inside the American system? How many second and third generation Muslims who pass as typical American but harbor plans to one day destroy America from the inside? In effect, all Muslims may be potential Manchurian Candidates who can be activated to kill for the cause of Islam — unless they already have. Something is pathologically twisted in the cult of Islam through Koranic teachings that leaves them slaves to whatever violence is demanded of them. In the "Madrassas", mostly funded by the Saudis, the Mullahs and Imams speak disparagingly about the ungodly American ways, therefore, the Americans are deserving of conversion to Islam and strict "Sharia" laws. Also, that America, in its entirety, is destined to become an Islamic nation. Their preferred method of conversion is by the sword -which in today’s age of advanced technology means sophisticated bombs. But, first the sleeper cells and the programmed Manchurian Candidates must subvert the targeted nations (America), weaken her financial system, have her ;military undermined through P.C. (Political Correctness), have her Courts similarly converted to judicial decisions compatible to Islam and Sharia laws. This is happening already in England, France, Canada, the Netherlands and other supposedly democratic "Free West" nations as the critical mass of Muslims grow in those nations and pressure their governments to ‘lean’ toward Islam. In Israel, one of the key targets of the "Jihadists" (holy warriors for Islam), we observe enormous pressure coming from the regime of President Barack Hussein Obama and the Arabist U.S. State Department to accept the Arab demands to surrender to their fate. Sadly, we also see Israeli politicians accept their ‘diktats’ under U.S. pressure, to surrender Land — our Biblical Jewish Homeland, given to the Jewish people by G-d in perpetuity — including ALL of Jerusalem, our Eternal Holy Capital for 3000 years. With these surrenders, so goes our sovereignty as the only Jewish Nation/State in the world. This would be just to please Obama and the Leftists in Israel and Europe. Obama’s hostility toward Israel while he is appeasing Iran, Syria and local Muslims is no longer conjecture but solid, observable fact. How can an American President and his wife be "Manchurian Candidates" who hate American ways, America’s democratic system of government and America’s once successful, capitalistic financial system? Why has Obama been so protectively cocooned by the State Department and America’s 16 Intel Agencies? Why does Obama flaunt this protective barrier about his true life and past history? We all thought the President and the Government’s job was to protect the American people from all enemies — domestic and foreign. Do they agree that America is destined to become a Third World nation where the non-workers are to be supported by the industrious — with their entitlements written into law? Obama promised during his eloquent election speeches to "Change" America and to "redistribute the wealth". Why does he pick the pockets of industrious, hard-working Americans who built this nation and who is actually guiding his fingers? Perhaps there are many different breeds of Manchurian Candidates — each with a separate mission which, in the end, serves the ultimate Muslim goal of harnessing a once great nation to the wagon of Islam. Remember that the Muslims are taught their goal is to create a Global Caliphate for Islam. And also, remember that Not All Muslims Are Suicide Killers — But All Suicide Killers Are Muslims. ### 1. "IT WAS A MUSLIM DOCTOR WHO KILLED 7 CIA AGENTS & HIMSELF" by sheikyermami on January 4, 2010 http://sheikyermami.com/2010/01/04/it-was-a-muslim-doctor-7-cia-agents-and himself WINDS OF JIHAD by Sheik Yer’Mami 2. "LONDON/GLASGOW TERRORIST ATTACK TERRORIST ATTACKS: THE MEN IN THE DOCK" by Chris Greenwood, PA The INDEPENDENT Dec. 16, 2008 3. "45 MUSLIM DOCTORS PLANNED US TERROR RAIDS" by John Steele TELEGRAPH.CO.UK July 5, 2007 4. "THE MAN BEHIND BIN LADEN: How an Egyptian doctor became a master of terror" by Lawrence Wright THE NEW YORKER September 16, 2002 5. "MAN THREATENING JEWS HAULED OFF FLIGHT IN MIAMI" Reuters http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE60631120100107 6. "WARINESS PERSISTS AT AIRPORTS" by Melanie Trootman & Mike Esterl WALL ST. JOURNAL January 8, 2010 7. "REBUTTAL OF AIR/TRAN DENIAL & CHARGES OF HOAX OR "URBAN LEGEND" by Emanuel A. Winston Dec. 11, 2009 re: Air/Tran Flight #297 on November 17. 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@gwinstonglobal.org |
|
FROM ISRAEL: HYPOCRITICAL
Posted by Arlene Kushner, February 3, 2010. |
|
Before I begin with the topics for today, I want to provide this announcement and ask that you forward it to anyone for whom it would be appropriate. There has been a great deal of concern about the fact that J Street founder Jeremy Ben Ami will be speaking at the University of Pennsylvania Hillel in Philadelphia tomorrow — his talk is entitled "Call to Action" and will advance the J Street "pro-peace agenda." While calling itself "pro-Israel," the far left J Street, funded to a significant degree by Arab sources, in fact takes positions that are antithetical to Israel's best interests, such as negotiations with Hamas; it supported the Goldstone Report. The more it is accepted within mainstream circles as representing Israel's position, the more damage it can do. I have now received a notice from Lori Lowenthal Marcus, co-founder of Z Street, a new and staunchly Zionist group — http://www.zstreet.org:80/. Z Street will be holding a program at the same time and in the same Hillel building as the J Street program. Featured speaker will be Dr. Mitchell Bard — author of "Myths and Facts" and director of the "Jewish Virtual Library" — who will expose the J Street plan for what it is. Steinhardt Hall, University of Pennsylvania Campus, 39th and Walnut Streets, Philadelphia, at 7:00 PM. ~~~~~~~~~~ Now let's talk about hypocrisy, as epitomized by PA prime minister Salam Fayyad, who addressed the 10th Herzliyah Conference yesterday. Fayyad, who is touted in the West as clean and moderate — the PA's best hope for peace — is not exactly as he seems. A brief background, because it's important to know whom we're dealing with: [] Before Fayyad worked with the PA, he lived in the US and was with the International Monetary Fund. In 2002, the EU requested that the Fund do an audit of PA books (because of monies donated to the PA by the EU). Fayyad was the Fund official who oversaw this audit and declared everything to be in order. The EU subsequently did its own review of PA books and found that something in excess of $250 million in PA funds had likely been transferred to terrorist organizations. ~~~~~~~~~~ Fayyad is now advancing his concept of a Palestinian state, and addressed the Herzliya Conference towards that end. According to Herb Keinon, reporting for the Post, Fayyad's tone was "conciliatory," which is tremendously heartwarming for those who care. But because it's important to sort out truth from blatant distortion, I would like to look more closely at Fayyad's words. The Palestinian Arabs want to live alongside Israel in peace and security, Fayyad assured his listeners. However, continued construction in the "settlements" is causing some problems. In fact, construction in Judea and Samaria is eating up land that the Palestinian Arabs want for a state: "The Palestinian state is supposed to emerge precisely where settlements are expanding." There are serious problems with this statement. First, it posits as a given that all the land on which Israeli communities are situated in Judea and Samaria would be part of a Palestinian state one day. That is Fayyad's assumption, and Abbas's, but it sure isn't ours, and we've neither promised nor agreed to any such thing. All of the land between the river and the sea is ours by tradition, as well as historical and legal rights. At a bare minimum, our communities in Judea and Samaria should be retained. To say, for example, that we shouldn't build in Gush Etzion...or Maaleh Adumim...or Shilo...or Ariel...because it will someday belong to the Arabs is the height of nonsense. Beyond this, there is the false accusation regarding expansion of communities, when in reality this is not what is happening at all. When our government argued with the Obama administration about the understanding we had established with President Bush concerning building in "settlements," we made it clear that the agreement permitted no expansion of the perimeter of communities, but only building inside those communities. Even though Obama acknowledged no agreement, we have continued to adhere to this principle, building within existing boundaries. The use of the term "expanding" by Fayyad was not a slip. Rather, it was intended to create an impression of Israel continually "usurping" land. ~~~~~~~~~~ Fayyad's next lament is that, since we've shown ourselves "unable" to completely stop construction now, there is doubt as to whether we would be able to implement any agreement that might be reached in the future. "The political question I have is how confident can we be that once relaunched, the political process is going to be able to deliver that which needs to be delivered on the permanent status issues, on the key question of ending the occupation." Of course, the unspoken corollary here is that we must stop all construction to prove we can be depended upon. The question, first, is whether we are "unable" to stop construction completely, or do not chose to do so because of our rights. But in any event, this is garbage. In the face of what the government (Sharon's government) did with Gush Katif — which should never have happened — raising this issue is mere tactical manipulation. It's quite clear where this is going, with a "conciliatory tone": These are all efforts to appear quite reasonable with regard to demands being made, and thus to squeeze us into a complete construction freeze (which is what Abbas needs to save face). ~~~~~~~~~~ And, of course, there's more: It's time, he said, for IDF incursions into Palestinian areas to come to an end. The myth that's being promulgated is that the PA security forces are being so well trained by Gen. Dayton, and have improved so much, that they can handle security without the IDF. I shared a citation yesterday by someone who had worked in PA Intelligence, who says this is not so. The simple fact is that the IDF does nightly operations in PA areas in order to combat the terrorists. ~~~~~~~~~~ Here I would like to explain in a bit more depth why the PA security forces are not going to do the job by themselves in a manner that can be relied upon. Very simply, a Palestinian state is not the first priority for these forces — even though there are quotes from General Dayton regarding how the troops have been trained in loyalty to the Palestinian flag, etc. etc. When doing research on the training of PA forces last year, I posed this issue to Maj. Gen. (res) Yaakov Amidror, who was once Director of the Research Division for IDF Intelligence. His succinct answer: "You cannot train people to be loyal to what they don't believe in." For many of these people, immersed in a traditional society, the clan (hamula) claims first loyalty, not some notion of a state. And sometimes there are members of Hamas in the clan. When my question was posed to Dr. Mordecai Kedar, Arabic-speaking research associate at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar Ilan University, he replied that, yes, the troops can be loyal to the PA now. "However, when (not if) there will be domestic problems in the PA/Palestinian State these people will be loyal primarily to their clan rather than to the state, since they will never shoot their brothers or cousins..." And a prominent Palestinian Arab journalist I met with told me: "This is Arab society. You can't erase a centuries-old tradition — can't tamper with culture. It will never work. You can't impose a solution on anyone." But never mind all that, Fayyad wants the PA security forces to take over, moving even into areas where there is currently no PA jurisdiction. ~~~~~~~~~~ And let us not forget eastern Jerusalem. This, says Fayyad, was no less occupied in 1967 than Gaza or the West Bank. In his dreams, I say: Jerusalem, undivided, is ours. Yet, it should be noted that we didn't take eastern Jerusalem from the "Palestinians," but, rather, from the Jordanians. So it's anybody's guess how Fayyad figures it's his now. ~~~~~~~~~~ Oh, and one last issue: Gaza. Fayyad's statements in this regard were strange. We should lift the blockade, he said, because it would enable the PA to reassert control in Gaza more quickly. Frankly, this logic eludes me. It should be noted that the charges of a stringent blockade are much exaggerated. Not only are humanitarian supplies allowed in, so are many commercial goods. What is being blocked are items — such as fertilizer and concrete and iron — that might be used by Hamas for building explosives or rockets or bunkers. Should these things be allowed in, it would only strengthen Hamas. ~~~~~~~~~~ And so, my friends, please, contact Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. Remind him that he said there would be no more concessions, that it was the PA's turn now. Implore him not to cave on this for any reason.
~~~~~~~~~~ A third barrel containing explosives was found on a beach — this time at Palmachim, which is between Tel Aviv and Ashdod. Reports are that there are more out there. The Navy is on high alert. ~~~~~~~~~~ But let us turn to items of a more upbeat nature: The Lobby for Greater Israel came together for the first time in a crowded meeting room in the Knesset yesterday. There are 39 MKs in the Lobby, including 12 from Likud, as well as members of Yisrael Beitenu, Shas, Habayit Hayehudi, Ehud Leumi, United Torah Judaism and even Kadima. The Lobby is co-chaired by Arieh Eldad (Ehud Leumi) and Ze'ev Elkin (Likud). Ministers cannot be part of the Lobby, but six Likud ministers — Gideon Sa'ar, Yisrael Katz, Limor Livnat, Silvan Shalom, Moshe Ya'alon and Yuli Edelstein sent the Lobby letters of support. Additionally, Knesset Speaker Ruby Rivlin and Minister Bennie Begin attended the meeting. The Lobby's stated concern at this point is protecting all communities in Judea and Samaria. But some members said they want to hold on to all of Judea and Samaria. ~~~~~~~~~~ Returning briefly to the issue of Israeli help for Haitian orphans: The scope of the tragedy is overwhelming, with many thousands of kids suddenly without parents — and, I may add, potentially at the mercy of human traffickers who might try to smuggle them out of the country. Here in Israel, 200 couples have offered to adopt children from Haiti. MK Danny Danon, who chairs the Knesset Committee on the Rights of the Child, has said he doesn't think more than 50 of these orphans should be brought in because it has to be done with exquisite care. They are traumatized, and the right conditions would have to be in place for them. Meanwhile clearance is being done regarding the qualifications of those couples who have expressed a desire to adopt, although no formal application has been made to Haiti (in part, as I understand it, because there is no functioning government). Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
INTIMIDATION OF COSTCO TO PUNISH ISRAEL FOR ALLEGED "GENOCIDE"
Posted by Roberta Dzubow, February 3, 2010. | |
|
Funded by enormous amounts of oil money, the Arab Lobby has professional staff that contact businesses around the world, planting false stories, and asking for a boycott of anything/everything Israeli. There are 1.5 million Israeli Arabs. They have the highest standard of living, with healthier, longer-life expectancies, more live births, better education, etc. than most in the Arab world. Ignoring this, the Arabs smear Israel and spread fictitious lies. Now they claim the Israelis perpetrate crimes in Gaza. This is not so. In fact, it is the opposite of the truth. The water, electricity, fuel, much medical care keeps flowing with Israeli help. Hamas and Hezb'Allah, funded by Iran and Arab States seek worldwide domination. Getting rid of Israel is one of their main projects. Getting innocent "buyers" to accept this, and add to Israel's woes is their aim. Boy, it's kind of amazing what billions of oil-dollars can buy. I went on their site and it goes for miles. This below is via Israel News by way of One Jerusalem by The Editors on 1/30/10, | |
|
For years, we have reported on and urged action against academic boycotts of Israel in the United Kingdom. Now we are troubled to report that the latest assault on Israel has jumped across the Atlantic and has targeted the American store Costco. According to these anti-Semites, Costco is guilty of selling Israeli grown clementines. The boycott has a home on the Web and it has volunteers recruiting and instructing people on what they can do to encourage Costco to stop the sale of Israeli goods. Below is the body of a mass circulating e-mail which offers advise on who to contact at Costco:
Do not underestimate the consequences if a boycott like this has any success. If friends of Israel do not let Costco know that they support the sale of Israel it would not be a surprise if the company decides to forgo selling Israeli products. We need to contact Costco and let them know that we will shop there because they sell Israeli products. When I told my wife about the boycott, she immediately responded that she was getting a Costco membership and she will buy the clementines "Even though I don't like clementines. " Information about contacting Costco can be found here. This boycott is part of an international cultural and academic boycott of Israel, which falsely and maliciously likens Israel to Apartheid South Africa. click here. We must do all that we can to help Israel fight back.
Contact Roberta Dzubow by email at Roberta@adgforum.com
|
|
FAYYAD MAKES DEMANDS IN HERZLIYA SPEECH
Posted by Gil Ronen, February 3, 2010. |
|
Palestinian Authority Prime Minister Salam Fayyad addressed the Herzliya Conference after Israel Defense Minister Ehud Barak, and firmly presented a list of demands, while saying that the PA would declare an independent state in mid-2011 in any case. Stating that those demands include Gaza, Judea, Samaria, East Jerusalem and contiguity of those areas, he emphasized that without East Jerusalem there can be no peace. He did not mention Arab terror attacks on Jews but said that Israel must stop carrying out raids inside PA controlled territory. He demanded a complete freeze of Jewish construction in settlements, and in eastern Jerusalem. "The Palestinian state must be built in the areas where the settlements are today," he said. "The continued building worries us. One of the main ways to move forwards towards an implementation of the Road Map is by stopping Israel's infiltration into territories slated to be part of our state." He said that the Palestinians cannnot have confidence in Israel's desire for peace if after a year of American diplomacy they are still building in the area, including East Jerusalem, which he said was part of Palestinian territory until 1967. He did not mention that these areas were part of the British mandate that had been illegally annexed by Jordan and that Jordan does not consider itself Palestinian territory, instead saying that the Palestinians only want 22% of historical Palestine. He did not elaborate on what "historical Palestine" means. At the same time, he said, the PA should have "an official security presence" outside Areas A, where it is currently in charge of security. Prime Minister Netanyahu has stated that any Palestinian State would have to be unarmed and that Israel would need a security presence at the Jordan River. Fayad spoke confidently and declared: "We want to be ready for a state which is about to be established, and we are ready to establish it by 2011. We are encouraged because we are working unilaterally and have made progress in creating an infrastructure in the past two years." Gil Ronen writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
PM'S OFFICE: JERUSALEM TO REMAIN UNDIVIDED, NO PA OFFICES TO OPEN
Posted by Hana Levi Julian, February 3, 2010. |
|
The United States government is allegedly helping the Palestinian Authority re-establish an official foothold in Jerusalem, according to a report published this week by WorldNetDaily — but Mark Regev, spokesman for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu insists the report is inaccurate. According to a senior official in the office of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas quoted in the report, Israel has silently agreed to allow the PA to open official offices in the eastern section of the capital. The report alleged that in recent months, the PA government has opened a number of offices, including PA ministry offices, in eastern Jerusalem, in defiance of an Israeli law banning the opening of any official PA institution in the capital city. The previous PA headquarters in Jerusalem, Orient House, not far from Damascus Gate, was closed by the Israeli government in 2001 following a series of terrorist attacks in the capital. Security officials said at the time that Orient House had been a locus of operations for planning and funding the attacks. The report claims the U.S. has also been helping the PA develop infrastructures within the Jerusalem municipal boundaries, specifically in Arab neighborhoods such as Kfar Akeb, Kalandiya and Samir Amis, all in eastern and northern parts of the city. One road sign, bearing the USAID emblem (U.S. Agency for International Development), even proclaims, "Rehabilitation of Ramallah-Jerusalem Road. This project is a gift form [si the American people to the Palestinian people in cooperation with the Palestinian Authority and PECDAR. July 2007." Fatah: No PA State Without Jerusalem Dmitri Ziliani, a spokesman for the Jerusalem division of Fatah, allegedly confirmed that the PA holds regular official meetings in Jerusalem in anticipation of a future PA state that would encompass the eastern portion of the city. Ziliani was quoted by WND as saying, "Our political program, as Fatah, dictates that there will be no Palestinian state if these areas — all of east Jerusalem — are not included." When asked about the PA's claims, the prime minister's spokesman told WND, "The prime minister's position on Jerusalem is clear. Jerusalem will remain the united capital of Israel." But an official from Netanyahu's office, who was not named, allegedly confirmed that the prime minister "did acquiesce to a U.S. request to allow the PA to open institutions in Jerusalem." The official said that U.S. Middle East envoy George Mitchell and U.S. National Security Adviser Jim Jones had recently met with and pressed Netanyahu to freeze construction in the eastern part of the city as a "confidence-building" measure to re-start talks with the PA. Abbas has said that he will not re-enter negotiations with Israel until all Jewish construction is completely frozen in every part of Judea, Samaria and areas of Jerusalem that were restored to the city in the 1967 Six Day War. Netanyahu did not agree to a construction freeze in any part of Jerusalem, and last month coalition members announced modifications — "clarifications" — to the 10-month freeze imposed on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria. Nevertheless, the "modifications" have yet to be honored, and field inspectors have appeared to be unaware of them. Regev Firmly Denies "You show me one credible source that can point to a single official PA office really opening in Jerusalem," challenged Regev after being contacted by Israel National News. "Then you can talk about whether there is a need to deny the story." Asked to specifically clarify whether the prime minister has acquiesced, silently or otherwise, to the opening of PA offices in Jerusalem, he reiterated that there is no intention to divide the capital, now or in the future. Regev: "The prime minister's position is clear and unchanged. Jerusalem is the united capital of Israel and will remain such in the future." INN: "Does that mean that no neighborhoods will be [removed from Israeli sovereignty?" Regev: "That's exactly what I said. It will remain such in the future." Hana Levi Julian writes for Arutz-7, where this article appeared today. |
|
GAZANS POLLED ON WAR AND PEACE; JEWISH POPULATION RISING FASTER IN
JUDEA-SAMARIA; ILLEGAL ARAB BUILDING IN JERUSALEM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 3, 2010. |
|
GAZANS POLLED ON WAR AND PEACE 
Dr. Nubil Kukali of the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion took a poll of Gaza residents. He found: 67% favor a peace agreement with Israel, some just a truce; 51% consider their economic position "bad;" 62% favor a single, non-discriminatory state to include all the Arabs and Jews of "Palestine." (www.imra.org.il, 2/1.) I think that the questions were put objectively. Sounds good. It is difficult to know what the Arabs mean by peace. Combining the two sets of people in a single state would enable the Arabs to dominate. Everywhere the Arabs do, they discriminate. The Palestinian Arabs discriminate now and attempt genocide. What make one think it would be different just by signing some papers? First let the Muslim Arabs end their constant indoctrination in religious bigotry and violence! Can one image a bigger set up for tragedy and violence than taking two warring peoples and putting them into the same country? It would enlarge the war. Notice that although anti-Zionists accuse Israel of starving the Arabs of Gaza, almost half the Arabs of Gaza do not consider their economic position bad. On the other hand, how much validity do polls have when they ask respondents to rate their situations on a scale, such as bad, poor, average, fair, and good? SEABORNE ATTEMPT TO BOMB ISRAELI BEACHES 
Israelis reported a suspicious object on the beach at Barnea near Ashkelon [near the Gaza strip in southern Israel). Upon discovering that it was an explosive, police sappers searched elsewhere and found another bomb further north along the coast. Fatah and Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility for floating the bombs in (www.imra.org.il, 2/1.) They did not perceive the infamy of their deed. Neither, apparently, does the West, which sends money to Gaza and to Abbas, their head man. IDF DISCIPLINING OF OFFICERS: UPDATE Today my two New York City newspapers, Times and Wall St. Journal, weighed in on what I had reported from an Israeli source. The NY Times stated that the two officers were a general and a colonel, I had the indicated they both were generals. Both newspapers described the disciplining as "an admission of wrongdoing" in the Gaza war. In the context of the UN Goldstone Report accusing Israel of committing war crimes deliberately and of being "systematically reckless," the newspapers seem to reinforce Goldstone. "Wrongdoing," however, means either sinfulness or making a mistake. Which meaning did the IDF intend? Was it what the newspapers inferred? The officers were disciplined not for any deliberate intent to harm civilians but for exceeding their rules of combat. Their rules of combat are intended to be more humanitarian than international law requires. They acted within international law, which allows troops to fire upon enemy troops in a civilian area, if it accomplishes a military objective and is not obliterating a large civilian area to get a couple of soldiers who could be bypassed. Otherwise, the military action would be "disproportionate, as was the case in Chechnya, where Russian artillery devastated whole cities and even where enemy troops were not in action. The UN did not seem to mind that much. Firing so few shells and not aiming at civilians, the IDF in Gaza was not like Russia in Chechnya, Although the Goldstone Report is irrelevant to this violation of IDF orders, the newspaper falsely reports implied that it was and that the officers violated legal standards. The newspaper report, in my opinion, committed "wrongdoing." As for IDF standards, I think they bend over backward to micro-manage war. This benefits the criminal jihadist effort, backed by the Arab population, to exterminate the people of Israel. That is foolish of Israel. Therefore, I would call the IDF standards wrongful. The super-high IDF standards are problematic for another reason. They reduce the flexibility and initiative that the IDF once was known for. We have seen the sorry results in the past several years, as troops hesitate to fire upon terrorists while they await instructions. JEWISH POPULATION RISING FASTER IN JUDEA-SAMARIA Israel's Civil Administration pegs that the Jewish population increase in Judea-Samaria at 5.1% to 313,000. That is twice the rate of in the State of Israel. Israelis in Judea-Samaria have been assuming leadership roles in
education and in the military. MK Yaakov Katz, who assisted in their
return to the core of their homeland — Judea-Samaria — perceives in
them the old pioneering spirit that makes Israel true to itself. He
contrasts that with Prime Minister Netanyahu, whom he perceives as
breaking his promises to be true to Israel
MK Katz is a rival of Netanyahu. He is religious and nationalist. Netanyahu is not, though it suits the Establishment to call Netanyahu nationalist because of his speeches, calculated to give that impression in order to keep power, but also larded with loopholes. He had wriggled out from his promises after gaining power before, when followers asked how could he thoroughly contradict his electioneering statement of nationalist policy. He referred them to his exact wording. He may have dissembled, but they could not say he had lied. Now some people examine his wording carefully. ISRAEL NOT ENFORCING BUILDING LAW IN JERUSALEM 
Ophir May, Construction Supervisor of Jerusalem, admits that Israel does not enforce building and zoning laws in the Silwan neighborhood. He explained that whenever Israel patrols appear, and whenever his office tried to enforce the law, Arabs commenced to riot. He and the police gave up. As a result, hundreds of illegal Arab houses have been built there. That characterizes the neighborhood. The State Prosecutor wants to demolish one house there for being
one and-a-half stories higher than the law allows. It is owned by
Jews. The Mayor is resisting the demand while he tries to legalize
all the buildings in violation
The Prosecutor's demand is typical of the Left. The Left gets outraged against a single Jewish violation, but ignores wholesale Arab violations. The Mayor's solution is typical of Israel, which is to legalize retroactively wholesale Arab violations. The American notion of democracy is equal protection of the law and equal enforcement of the law. I prefer it. It would not let the violations build up into a major problem in the first place. One should bear in mind that the Arabs in Israel have resumed their struggle for control of the country, which they lost in their attempted genocide in the War of Independence. Illegal building is a deliberate war tactic encouraged by the Palestinian Authority and often financed by foreign Arabs. OBAMA'S EFFECT ON U.S. PRESTIGE Before Obama took office, U.S. policy had "...the sense that America's interests and ways were threatened by a vengeful Islamism." Obama downplayed the menace. "But while the Europeans and Muslim crowds hailed him, they damned his country all the same. For his part, Mr. Obama played along, and in Ankara, Cairo, Paris, and Berlin he offered penance aplenty for American ways." (Fouad Amami, Wall St. Journal, 2/1, Opinion.) Obama did not win over the Muslim world. Voters who had expected to gain foreign respect from the change in Presidents must be disappointed, if they think about it. The Democrats I know no longer talk about Obama. TONY BLAIR EXPLAINS IRAQ WAR 
The British Parliament conducted an inquiry into what led its country into the Iraq War. The inquiry seems ideologically motivated, less an attempt to find out something than an attempt to denounce the war and shame those who started it. The Commission interrogated former PM Tony Blair for six hours. He was proud rather than repentant, and clear-thinking rather than muddled. He said, "This isn't about a lie, or a conspiracy, or a deceit, or a deception. It is a decision." "And the decision I had to take, given (Saddam's) history, given his use of chemical weapons, given the over one million people whose deaths he had caused, given 10 years of breaking U.N. resolutions, could we take the risk of this man reconstituting his weapons program?" The Wall St. Journal editorial explains, "Every Western country, including those opposed to the war, believed Saddam had WMD. But the important point was never so much about what Saddam did or did not possess so much as it was about what he intended. And as Mr. Blair pointed out Friday, 'What we now know is that he retained the intent and intellectual know-how to restart a nuclear and a chemical weapons program when the inspectors were out and the sanctions changed, which they were going to do...]" Blair added, "Today we would be facing a situation where Iran was competing with Iran, competing both on nuclear weapons capability and competing more importantly perhaps than anything else...in respect of support of terrorist groups...If I am asked whether I believe we are safer, more secure, that Iraq is better, that our own security is better, with Saddam and his two sons out of office and out of power, I believe indeed we are." The editorial, again: The lesson from the Iraq war isn't to avoid action for fear of unanticipated consequences, which are inevitable in any war. It is to take action to prevent the most foreseeable of disasters, namely the combination in a single regime, of fanaticism, links to terrorism and nuclear weapons." Back to Blair: "The decision I took — and frankly would take again — was, if there was any possibility that he (Saddam) could develop weapons of mass destruction, we would stop him." Remember, Saddam had repeatedly invaded his neighbors and massacred his own people by the hundreds of thousands (2/1). JORDAN STRIPS SOME PALESTINIAN ARABS' CITIZENSHIP 
Human Rights Watch "...criticized Jordan on Monday for stripping the citizenship of nearly 3,000 Jordanians of Palestinian origin in recent years. Concerned about increasing numbers of Palestinians, who make up nearly half the population, Jordan began in 2004 revoking the citizenship from Palestinians who do not have Israeli permits to reside in the W. Bank." (NY Times, 2/2, A6.) The Times and the royal government studiously ignore the fact that
Jordan was part of the Palestine Mandate, whose borders were drawn
mostly to encompass the Land of Israel. Jordan was removed from the
Mandate in 1946. It had been in the Mandate about 24 years.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
A VOICE FOR THE TEMPLE MOUNT!
Posted by Robin Ticker, February 3, 2010. |
|
This essay below is by Yosef Rabin. Thank you Yosef Rabin for your heartfelt message that carries with it strong emotional pain. Har Habayit is eternally connected to Hebron. The light of the morning sun signals from Hebron to start the daily sacrifices. Yerushalyim and Hebron are linked permanently. I just listened to a fantastic lecure by HaRav Meir Goldvicht distributed by the Hebron Fund which beautifully links Hebron to Yerushalyim. Adam and Chava are buried in Hebron. When the 3 Malachim come to visit Avrohom he accidentally came across the Cave of Machpela chasing after a sheep and finds the burial place of Adam and Chava with the lights burning. Avraham connected with the past, Adam and Chava and Avrohom's life's work was a tikkun, a correction, of the original sin of Adam and Chava. Avrohom Avinu bought the property in Hebron and Efron tells him that he has the Land, the field and the tree for 400 Shekel keneged, a reminder from G-d regarding the Land of Israel which is 400 Parsa by 400 Parsa. It says in the Gemara Kicha Kicha Misdei Efron, just like the field was bought so to a marriage is acquired with buying. The tree reminds us of the Mitzvah to plant trees when we come to the Land. Hebron connects us to our G-d, our forefathers, Temple Mount and to each other. The Covenant to Abraham takes place in Hebron. The Covenant is then repeated to Yaakov at Har Hamoriah. Har Hamoriah the way it is spelled (with a vav, maleh when Shlomo Hamelech builds the Temple) is Hebron in Gematria. The first marriage in Tanach takes place in the field of Hebron with Yitzchok praying, connecting to his ancestors and to Hashem. It is not surprising that marriage is linked to the purchase of that exact place of where the first Torah marriage occurred between Yizchok and Rivka. Yehoshua and Kalev when they tour the Land start in Hebron. Judea, Samaria and Yerushalayim are eternally bound together as are Hebron and Temple Mount. Od Yeshama BeArei Yehudah Uvechutzot Yerushalyim........ We are yearning for that marriage we had at Sinai to once again occur in a monogamous relationship with Hashem linking us to our field in Chevron, Har Habayit to our Father up in Heaven to the gates of Heaven and to Gan Eden... |
|
I would like to begin with a quote from the Book of Haggai "Then came the word of the Lord by Haggai the prophet, saying: Is this the time for you to dwell in paneled houses, while this house sits in ruins?" As Israel capitulates to America and enforces a building freeze in Judea and Samaria, the words from Haggai ring loudly in our ears! Since the liberation of the Temple Mount in 1967 there has been an ironclad freeze on anything Jewish on theTemple Mount. No Jewish prayer or study and certainly no building. It is no wonder that the freeze has now spilled over to the rest of Israel. I do not blame the Arabs; I blame the Jewish Nation for not stepping forward and reclaiming the Temple Mount. How can we talk about building the Land of Israel when we have allowed its center to remain in ruins? I have been privileged to visit our Temple Mount numerous times. Each time that I go to the Mount of God, I think of the verse from Psalms 24, "Who will go up to the Mount of the Lord and who will stand His holy place? One with clean hands and pure heart." Before I can enter the Holy Mount, I am given a stern warning from the police, "If we catch you, swaying, praying, singing, dancing, bowing or closing your eyes, you will be arrested for incitement to violence." Aside from the humiliation of being barred from praying on our holiest site, we also have to go through a humiliating ritual of having to stand in a corner while all secular and non-Jewish tourists get to go up first. Once on the Mount I have to watch as the foreigners (Arabs), desecrate it. Did you know that Arab children play soccer and families gather for picnics, on the Holy Mount? So aside from the grave insult of being prevented from praying, I am forced to watch these obscenities take place. From the very place that the Temple priests brought the holy sacrifices, Arabs now gather for picnics. From thevery place that the Levites sang the sweet praises of the Lord, the Muslim leaders call for the death of our people and the destruction of our State. The place of Oleh Regel (pilgrimage) has become the place for Kadur Regel (soccer) by Arab children. Are these the type of people that should be allowed up on the Mount of the Lord? Are these the type of people who should be standing in His Holy Place? I say enough! The time has come to end this humiliation. It is time to demand that Jews be allowed to ascend and pray unrestricted on the Temple Mount! It is time to demand that the police put an end to the soccer games and the picnics, make the Arabs respect our holiest site! It is time to demand that the police arrest and put on trial the Muslim leaders who use the Mount to call for our destruction! Does the verse say "And the word of the Lord from Jerusalem" or "the word of Mohammad". Perhaps I am becoming confused? However the silence is deafening! Where are the rabbis, communal leaders and Knesset Members? Why are they not speaking and crying out? How can we remain silent as the Arabs with the consent of the Israeli government, destroy the very remains of the Temple itself? How do we justify protesting for the Sabbath, while ignoring theMount. Does not Maimonides teach "As it is written: 'My Sabbath you shall guard and my Temple you shall fear', just as guarding the Sabbath is eternal, fearing the Temple is eternal as well". We must bring the Temple Mount back into our national heart and mind and begin to restore her to her former glory. Yes this will be a long difficult path, but so was our return to Zion after 2,000 years of exile. Our parents, grandparents and great grandparents had their mission and we have ours. The question is what can we do? 1. Learn the laws of the Temple Mount and come! Bring your family and friends and strengthen Jewish presence on the Temple Mount. Yosef Rabin
Contact Robin Ticker at faigerayzel@gmail.com |
|
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY SERMON: 'THE JEWS ARE THE ENEMIES OF ALLAH..."
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 3, 2010. |
|
... The Prophet Said: You Will Fight the Jews, and You Will Kill Them' Official Palestinian Authority Friday Sermon on PA TV: 'The Jews Are the Enemies of Allah... Our Mutual Enmity With Them is a Matter of Faith More Than an Issue Pertaining To Occupation and Land'; 'The Prophet Muhammad Said: You Will Fight the Jews, and You Will Kill Them'; 'This Land Will Only Be Liberated Through Jihad' This was translated from the original by MEMRI. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is an independent, non-profit organization that translates and analyzes the media of the Middle East. MEMRI can be reached at P.O. Box 27837, Washington, DC 20038-7837; by Phone: (202) 955-9070; by Fax: (202) 955-9077. Visit its website at www.memri.org |
|
The Friday sermon delivered at Bourin Mosque in Nablus on January 29, 2010 was virulently antisemitic, with the preacher making statements such as: "Jews will always be Jews. Even if donkeys cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl, and snakes cease to bite, the Jews will not cease to be hostile to the Muslims." Palestinian Authority Minister of Religious Endowments Mahmoud Al-Habbash was scheduled to deliver the Friday sermon, but he arrived late after having been delayed. He is seen sitting in the audience during the sermon, and afterwards, he made a short statement. Following are excerpts from the sermon, which aired on Palestinian Authority TV. To view this clip on MEMRI TV, visit memritv.org 
Preacher: "Palestine was subjected to a loathsome occupation of its land and holy places by these neo-Mongols, who perpetrated, on this holy, blessed, and pure land, acts of killing, assassination, destruction, expropriation, Judaization, harassment, and the fragmentation of the homeland. "This is clear evidence of the hatred they harbor, and of their unparalleled racism. This is the Nazism of the 20th [sic] century. "The Jews are the enemies of Allah and His messenger. They are the enemies of Allah and His messenger, the enemies of humanity in general, and of the Palebeen spared their racism. "For the people who laid traps for the prophets of Allah — arrested them, killed them, and deceived them — it is a thousand times easier to lay traps for the followers of these prophets. Our mutual enmity with the Jews is a matter of faith more than an issue pertaining to occupation and land. [...] "Jews will always be Jews. Even if donkeys cease to bray, dogs cease to bark, wolves cease to howl, and snakes cease to bite, the Jews will not cease to be hostile to the Muslims. "The Prophet Muhammad said: 'Whenever two Jews find themselves alone with a Muslim, they think of killing him.' Oh Muslims, this land, these holy places, and these mosques will only be liberated when we return to the Book of Allah, and when all Muslims are prepared to become mujahideen for the sake of Allah, in support of Palestine, its people, its land, and its holy places." 
"The Prophet Muhammad said: 'You will fight the Jews, and you will kill them, until the trees and the stones speak, saying: "'Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah...'" "The trees and the stones will not say: 'Oh Arab,' or 'Where are the millions [of Arabs],' or 'Where are all the Arab people'... They will say: 'Oh Muslim, oh servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him — except for the gharqad tree, which is the tree of the Jews.' This land will only be liberated through Jihad." [...] Preacher: "Oh Allah, take the Jews."
Preacher: "Oh Allah, take the Jews."
Preacher: "Oh Allah, take the Jews and their helpers."
Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com
|
|
I SAW THE FOLLOWING SHORT STORY AT THE ECONOMIST
Posted by Boris Celser, February 3, 2010. |
|
"A British court ruled that a British couple must demolish their home in northern Cyprus, in line with a European Court ruling upholding a Greek-Cypriot claim. There may be more demands by Greek-Cypriots for demolition of holiday homes built on land they owned before Turkey's 1974 invasion of the north. That could upset talks between Greek and Turkey Cypriots aimed at unifying the island." This is like showing blood to a vampire. If Ehud Barak knows about it, he will send even more bulldozers against Jews in Judea and Samaria. I guess the British govt. and the EU consider the British couple "holiday settlers" or something, taking land from the Turkey Cypriots. However, in this case the latter want these "settlers" to stay, I presume, while the Greek-Cypriots want their houses demolished. The irony is there. It's like the "Palestinians" wanting the "settlers" to stay and the Israelis pushing to demolish their homes regardless. Will the happy couple be placed under arrest if they return to the UK after their holidays in northern Cyprus? The home demolishing madness is spreading fast. Glad I live in Western Canada. Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
THE PERFECT PEACE-PLAN
Posted by Brother Shane, February 2, 2010. |
NEHEMIAH 2:17-20 17 Then said I unto them, Ye see the distress that we [are] in, how Jerusalem [lieth] waste, and the gates thereof are burned with fire: come, and let us build up the wall of Jerusalem, that we be no more a reproach. OBADIAH 1:18-21 18 And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph a flame, and the house of Esau for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be [any] remaining of the house of Esau; for the LORD hath spoken [it]. EXODUS 15:13,14 13 Thou in thy mercy hast led forth the people [which] thou hast redeemed: thou hast guided [them] in thy strength unto thy holy habitation. Below is The Perfect Peace-Plan by Shane A. Laemmel Dear Mr. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and the Citizens of Yisra'el, and, Mr. President, Barack Obama, Mrs.Hillary Clinton, Mr. Jimmy Carter, and the Citizens of the United States of America, 
The following is what I consider to be the perfect Peace-Plan for Israel and the Middle-East region surrounding her... |
|
PART 1 — THE PROBLEM AND THE SOLUTION The problem is obvious, as is, the solution. After the 1967 war, thousands of "Palestinian" Arabs were welcomed and invited by Israel to stay and become a part of that nation's free and democratic society. But the Islamo-Fascists decided it was a better opportunity to make their own people suffer, and cause the World to view it as oppression by the host country. This would give them the chance to split the nation and "drive the Jews into the sea"...which has been their plan all along. 
Section 1 — Removal First, all Philistinian (aka, "Palestinian"), terrorist thugs from the Gaza and the West Bank must be arrested, removed and/or destroyed... and all terrorist organizations such as Hamas and Fatah must be eliminated. Their continuous and unprovoked terrorist attacks on the peaceful and innocent civilians of Israel can no longer be tolerated. (If Chicanos and illegal Mexicans fired 8,000 rockets into residential neighborhoods in the southwest U.S., over the past few years, and murdered thousands of American men, women and children in terrorist attacks across the nation, would you turn around and reward them by giving them half of the United States and half of Washington D.C.!???) War is not the answer...permanent removal is. Section 2 — Re-Settlement We suggest the remaining Philistinian civilians be re-settled within the borders of Jordan (Since this region was part of the original Balfour Agreement it should meet with the requirements of a Palestinian state within Israel). Some have suggested that they be resettled, or create their own state, in the Sinai. But Jordan was part of Palestine when the British ruled it and, was part of the original agreement in the Balfour Declaration and, was supposed to be included land in the forming of the modern nation of Israel. But since the British unlawfully gave it to the Palestinian Arabs (after approving and legally recognizing the Balfour Declaration/ Agreement thru The League of Nations), then it means Jordan is still legally (by international law), Israeli property. So, in order to fulfill your recent "Road to Peace" agreement, that calls for Israel to form a Palestinian state inside the borders of Israel, the most sensible, practical, lawful and justifiable solution would be to create this state within Jordan/Trans- Jordan/Palestine — ("East Israel")...where the majority of the Palestinian Arabs are already living. Section 3 — Land Claims Historically and Biblically a good-sized portion of NW Jordan was Israeli land that was established 3,500 years ago by the Hebrew-Israeli tribes of Reuben, Gad and Manasseh (See chart at bottom of this proposal). And, since a remnant of the tribal members of Manasseh were recently discovered in India, and brought to resettle in modern-day Israel, then i would say they'd have a more convincing and historical claim on some of that land than the Palestinian Arabs — who took it unlawfully. PART 2 — BUFFER ZONES AND BORDERS 
Next, buffer-zones need to be established in order to protect the free and democratic peoples of Israel & Lebanon. Their former foes in war; Egypt, Jordan and Syria, are no less determined to destroy Israel, and "drive her into the sea", than they were 60-80 years ago. Israel, having to defend itself from total annihilation in four unprovoked wars, in 192?, 1948, 1967 and 1973, must now re-establish their Biblical and historical boundaries that were defined by the Twelve Tribes 3,500 years ago (See chart at bottom of this proposal). Section 1 — Sinai (Simeon) In the Sinai, a buffer-zone will need to be drawn with a border line from Al-Arish, starting on the Mediterranean Sea, from Wadi al-Arish, south to Abu Uwayjilah, then continuing south, along the highway, to Al-Qusaymah, then south on the road to Ra's an-Naqb, and then onto the border just NW of Elat (Those four Egyptian towns will also need to be absorbed into the nation of Israel). These southern boundaries will afford Israel protection from reprisals of any renegade Philistinian terrorists south of Gaza. It will also allow the I.D.F. to destroy any and all tunnels used to supply terrorist factions within Israel. It will furthermore remain as an important buffer against any future attacks or attempted incursions by illegals, terrorists or invading enemy forces. Section 2 — Jordan (Reuben, Gad and Manasseh) In NW Jordan, new borders will also need to be established.. Running along the Wadi al-Mawjib, at the Dead Sea, and east to the highway (to Amman), then running north to Suwaylih, it will then run NE along the border of Al-Balqa province to the border of Az-Zarqa province, it will then run SE along the border to the highway at Ar-Rusayfah, it will then follow the highway NE & NW to Al-Mafraq, now it will run SE & NE along the highway to Mahattat al-Hafif, it will then start NE and begin circling North and NW to the eastern border of As-Suwayda province in Syria. These boundaries will re-establish the borders of Reuben, Gad and southern Manasseh. Section 3 — Syria (Manasseh) In southern Syria it will now follow the northern border of As-Suwayda province, and will also include the entire provinces of Dar'a and, Al-Qunaytirah (the Golan Heights). From there it will then follow the U.N. Disengagement line to the Lebanon border...on the south slope of Mount Herman. These boundaries will re-establish the borders of the northern part of Manasseh. Section 4 — Lebanon (Naphtali, Asher & Dan) In southern Lebanon, the border will include the entire province of An-Nabatiyah. It will also include the southeastern portion of Sayda province, running from the west side of the border of An-Nabatiyah province, starting just east of the town of Ansar, heading south in a straight line, running just east of the town of Az-Zrariyah, down to the present-day Israeli border at Hanita. These boundaries will re-establish most of the borders of Naphtali, Asher and Dan. Section 5 — Nationality All residents of these lands will be allowed to remain. They will be required to apply for Israeli citizenship and must not have any criminal record or association with any organization involving terroristic activity against Israel or Lebanon. Section 6 — Result & Outcome Banking on the tremendous historical successes of Israel, in political stability, and in the industries of technology, agriculture, finance, international trade, the arts, and science & medicine, it's easy to see how this plan will not only increase peace & democracy to the region, but will also encourage & stimulate an unlimited boon in economic growth and development. Arab peoples, who can learn to be law-abiding citizens and accept other races and religions, will also benefit from this prosperity. PART 3 — LIBERATION OF A NATION 
Lebanon was once a land of free trade, friendly neighbors and economic prosperity. Even since the times of the ancient Phoenicians it had always been so. Beirut was once called, "The Paris of the Middle East" ...referring to it's lovely cafes, museums, artistic ambiance and fine restaurants, hotels & shops. But today it is an empty shell of tired, broken and traumatized souls. Islamo-Fascists have murdered over half the Christian population. It's streets and neighborhoods have been controlled by fear, crime, terror and war for the past 30 years. Several times Israel has tried to rid Lebanon of this stranglehold, only to be thwarted and forced to withdraw by the International Socialist-Fascists in the U.N., and their puppet strong-arm, the United States. It is in desperate need of liberty, freedom and healing. Section 1 — Relief The terroristic, Islamo-Fascist organization of Hezbollah must be dissolved and eliminated. The I.D.F. will assist the Christian Lebanese military in removing all Islamic militants and rooting out any cells of terrorism and insure that no terrorists re-enter it. All remaining Islamic civilians in Lebanon will be removed to Syria. Israel will then provide financial, medical and military aid to the Christian Lebanese government. Lebanon will then be re-established as the prosperous Christian nation it once was...a "Mecca" of tourism, learning, finance and...liberty! Section 2 — Security Lebanon will become an Israeli protectorate. Israel will not take over the government but, will simply liberate the original and Christian government that has been overrun by Islamo-Fascist thugs. The I.D.F. will establish a Disengagement Observer Force along her borders to protect it's people and it's exhausted & fragile political system. Once it's Christian military has been strengthened and properly trained, to keep it's own streets & borders safe, Israel will then be able to withdraw it's troops. Section 3 — Reassurance An agreement will be adopted between the two nations that will assure a cooperative and mutually friendly relationship. This will form a lasting Lebanese-Israeli alliance to help keep both nations borders safe and their communities free from tyranny and terrorism. PART 4 — CHRISTIAN-JEWISH COALITION 
Section 1 — Rescue The I.D.F. will offer to rescue any and all Jews and (Protestant) Christians, from militant Islamic/Arabic dominated nations, who wish to resettle in Israel or Lebanon. This will include, but not be limited to (non-Roman Catholic), Egyptian Copts, Syrian Christians, Assyrian Christians in Iraq & Syria, Palestinian & Arab Christians and any Hebrews/Jews descended from Israel/Judah. Many of these peoples are on the verge of extinction or are suffering terrible persecution and threats of annihilation. Without the sympathy and compassion of a nation like Israel they have nowhere else to turn. For many years Christians around the World have been supporting and praying for Israel. It's now time for major cooperation between the two faiths. For over 19 centuries Jews and Christians have been suffering the same persecution and fate. It's now time for them to join hands and defend their stance for Liberty and Freedom together. NOTE: Any Muslim militants posing as Christians with the intent of committing terrorist activities against Israeli or Lebanese civilians will be dealt with swiftly and severely. For every civilian murdered a cruise missile will be launched to destroy a terrorist factory (aka, "mosque" or, "madrassa"), in the country the perpetrator originated from. Section 2 — Special Defense Force The I.D.F. will recruit from these various Christian groups to form units of a Special Defense Force. After three years of intensive training, they will be used to help guard and defend the borders of Israel. Example: Egyptian Christian S.D.F. will be used to help guard and defend the southern border with Egypt. Israeli Arab ("Palestinian") Christian S.D.F. will help guard the border with Jordan. Syrian Christian S.D.F. will help guard the northern border with Syria, and Assyrian Christian S.D.F. will help guard the eastern Syrian border — facing towards Iraq. They will become and remain a division of the Israeli Defense Force. Section 3 — Triple Line of Defense The I.D.F. will form a Disengagement Observer Force along all of Israel's border. This first line of defense will be maintained with roving patrols, observation towers and lookout stations. It's main duty lies in ensuring no terrorist infiltrators, illegals or enemy troops slip past the border. Various S.D.F. units will patrol a 2nd line of defense. Their duties will include searching for explosives, tunnels and anything/anyone that might have slipped past the D.O.F. A 3rd defensive line will be the establishing of I.D.F. military bases with anti-aircraft and anti-missile batteries. Islam_IsNOT_aPeaceful_religion_it_i.jpg picture by braddahshano_808 PART 5 — RELIGION 
The fruit of any religion should be that of Peace of Mind, Body and Soul. A fundamental common belief of most all religions is that what you do to your neighbor will come back to you — whether good or bad it will come back to you. Basically, love your neighbor as you do yourself. Another common belief is that you should not force your beliefs upon anyone else. Let God work on them and if it's meant to be, that they will believe, then nothing you can do or say will change that. The only so-called religions that do not follow these beliefs are considered cults or, secret societies. Satanism, devil worship, and groups that use ungodly spirits to do their bidding (i.e., demons, jinns/genies), are in this category. Many of these types of "religions" are used by government officials in high positions of authority to influence kings, presidents, other leaders, and to pacify/control the masses. Well-known political movements that've come out of them are: Nazism/Fascism, Socialism, and Communism. A few things they all have in common are; Totalitarianism (Dictatorships) — Swearing oaths of allegiance — A double-standard practice of teaching (preaching) high-morals yet living (worshipping) a life of lust and materialism - And finally...a hatred for Jews and evangelical Christians. Islam fits this category. Section 1 — Islamo-Fascism 
The practice of Islam will be outlawed in Israel and Lebanon (as will any religion that has promoted, been in close association, or allied with, any fascist organization). Islam will no longer be recognized as a religion, but, as a political movement that has deceptively used religion as a guise. For more than 1,200 years it has produced nothing but terrorism, riots, destruction of property, war, genocide, widows, orphans, torture, murder, rape, theft, deception, kidnappings, slavery, racism, suppression of truth/control of the media, ignorance/illiteracy, poverty, misery/mass suffering, sexual perversion, political corruption, totalitarian dictatorships, injustice, capital punishment, public executions, honor killings, subjugation of women, and complete intolerance of any other religious beliefs...with a particular & prejudiced hatred towards Jews and evangelical Christians. aih.png Section 2 — The Quran Because of it's totalitarian, fascist theme, and it's overtones and teachings of racial bias/prejudice, sexual degradation and religious intolerance, the Quran (and Hadiths), will be utterly banned from being printed, sold, possessed, preached or taught within the nations of Israel and Lebanon (in a religious context). Section 3 — Mosques All mosques and madrassas will be converted to free health clinics and education centers for the widows & orphans of war and Islamic violence. Some will be used as rehab centers for former Muslims who need to be gently "un-indoctrinated" and heal from their horrible experience in such an evil cult of death as Islam. The "Dome of the Rock"/al-Aqsa mosque will be bulldozed and the Temple of Solomon will be rebuilt. Animal sacrifice will not be re-instated but, instead, it will be used as a place of worship, prayer and spiritual healing for peoples of all faiths, races and nationalities. It will be a beacon of Love, Peace and Unity for the entire World. campHebrew.jpg 
Section 4 — Idolatry Idol worship of any kind will no longer be allowed or tolerated within the nation of Israel. Symbols and crosses will be allowed, but statues of gods/goddesses, Buddha, "Mary", "Saints", angels, etc. will not.. Religious paintings and photos will be acceptable but should be used sparingly or only during religious festivities while in public places. Adoration or worship of such items is discouraged. Crucifixes and portraits displaying the likeness of Jesus on the cross will only be allowed if kept inside Christian churches, private homes & buildings of worship. Displaying them in public will be forbidden. Satanism, Wicca, any form of "devil worship", Kabbala-ism, Spirit-ism, Paganism, Druidism, Thuleism, witchcraft, or any Spiritualist religion or secret societies connected to Nazism will no longer be lawful to practice. Section 5 — Grace Though Judaism will remain as the official religion of Israel, Christians and peoples of all peace-loving faiths will always be welcomed. But, in Lebanon, there will be no restrictions on Christian evangelism. PART 6 — "BIG BROTHER" 
Section 1 — Sovereignty Israel is an independent and sovereign nation. It does not recognize any foreign policing or military occupation or, interfering in it's defense of, it's land, cities or borders. The United Nations, NATO, European Union, and the United States (or, any other foriegn power), must immediately cease from any action that tries to restrict or hinder the I.D.F. from defending Israel of any and all threats to it's population. This would include the bombing of military targets in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Pakistan, or any nation that may pose a threat to Israel. This would also include ceasing from any demands that Israeli citizens stop building communities/ "settlements" in the West Bank. This is and always has been Israeli land. When America gives sovereignty (and the land), back to the American Indians then they might gain enough respect to start asking such things. But, and until then, they have no right to demand anything of Israel. Section 2 — U.S. Military Presence The United States military must dis-engage all it's active troops from the field (in the Middle-East), immediately. It must also close all military bases in Islamic nations and remove it's troops. Israel can keep the peace in all the Middle East, and keep any and all dictators, fascists, and terrorists in check, without your help. Nuclear reactors worrying you? "Here today, gone tomorrow"...the Israeli Air Force has a proven track record. Israel will recognize any U.S. military presence, in any Islamic nation, as an aggressive threat towards it's national sovereignty and security. Israel will only recognize (as friendly), invited active duty U.S. military advisers and instructors within it's borders. Section 3 — The U.N. and the N.W.O. From this day forward the United Nations will only be recognized as a biased tool of (Inter)National Socialists and a puppet of Islamo-Fascists. ..with one of it's main goals...the destruction of Israel. It must be therefore deemed a terrorist organization and an enemy of the sovereign state of Yisra'el. PART 7 — THE ALTERNATIVE 
The alternative is not considered reasonable, feasible, practical, sensible, rational or even lawful. To give over nearly half of it's nation up to thugs and terrorists, who have been teaching their tiny children that Jews are nothing but "monkeys and pigs", and to become human bombs to blow up shopping centers, schools and hospitals or, to stab to death old people, women & children in public places, or students in religious schools, is nothing short of total lunacy. At best it's a genocide-sized death wish. 
Section 1 — Let's Suppose... Imagine, if you will, that Mexicans were taught their entire life that Americans are nothing but monkeys and pigs and deserve only death and to be slaves...and that this is what their priests and churches preached to them at every mass. Their schools even teaching their young children that the only way to peace is to kill Americans. They constantly committed acts of violence and terrorism against the American people, with rapes, thefts, tortures, bombings and murders. Imagine if you had to endure 8,000 deadly rockets being shot into your residential neighborhoods. ...in just 7 years!? Imagine if you heard your child's school had been bombed with dozens of children wounded and killed...or the hospital where your loved-ones are getting treated...or the supermarket where you shop...or your grandfather getting stabbed to death on the bus. All just because you're an American or, a Christian. Then China and the U.N. tells your government they "MUST" give California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado, and Texas over to the Chicanos & illegal Mexicans who are screaming in the streets, "LA RAZA!" and, "DEATH TO AMERICAN MONKEYS AND PIGS!", and that the land belongs to them. Would the American people allow that? Or, to make it a little easier to understand... this would be the equivalent of The European Union demanding your government stop all Americans from any further building of houses or communities in, force all it's American citizens and Christians out of their homes and land in, and give over complete ownership and jurisdiction of; California, New Jersey, Delaware, Virginia, West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, North Carolina, Tennessee, Kentucky, South Carolina, Georgia, Arkansas, Missouri, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, Nevada, and half of Washington D..C. .........to Al Qaida!!! That's what you are demanding of Israel. 
Section 2 — Double Standard You even have the original inhabitants of your land still living, the American Indians (a people who actually have a legal and historical claim on the land)...yet you treat them like 2nd class citizens...most of them still living in poverty in concentration camps (aka, "reservations"), — the poorest county in America being on the Pine Ridge Oglala Indian Reservation. The legal defensive military tactics that Israel has made on the residents of Gaza is nothing when compared to the inhumane, immoral and violent, genocidal brutality that the U.S. government has committed upon the American Indians. Yet you have the audacity to demand Israel gives over half it's land to terrorists, criminals & murderers!?? Excuse me, Mr.Carter, Mrs.Clinton and Mr.Obama, but where did you get such nerve...or have you just completely lost your minds!? You have fooled millions into believing Islam is "a religion of peace and love". The next time you say that why don't you ask the children and parents of Beslan, Russia what they think. Of course, those of us with an ounce of intelligence know the only real reason you're concerned about the "Palestinians" is just to gain favor with the Saudis and their neighbors. It's all about the oil. You're not fooling all of us. Israel in Biblical Times
Section 3 — Ultimatum If the aforementioned conditions cannot be agreed upon, or, if this proposal is not acceptable, then Israel will need to forcebly re-establish it's former borders set by King David and King Solomon (Which is what God originally promised to Abraham — GENESIS 15:18). This would encompass an area from the Euphrates River, in northern Syria, along with two thirds of that country, including Damascus, most of Lebanon, most of Jordan, including Amman, and about half of the Sinai Peninsula. If that didn't work then total war would be declared on the Islamic World. For Islamic leaders from Libya to Turkey to Chechnya to Iran to Bangladesh to the Malay Archipelago have been calling for the destruction of Israel and death to Jews for many years now. Israel is tired of being the victim. Hope you like my plan! God bless you. In His' Love, Brother Shane — Lover of Truth and Justice 
"Nobody loves peace more than a Jew" 
Ancient Biblical Israeli Hebrew Towns still occupied in Modern Lebanon, Syria and Jordan Reuben (in Jordan) Present-Day name —— Ancient Hebrew name
Gad (in Jordan) Present-Day name —— Ancient Hebrew name
Manasseh (in Jordan) Present-Day name —— Ancient Hebrew name
Manasseh (in Syria) Present-Day name —— Ancient Hebrew name
Asher (in Lebanon) Present-Day name —— Ancient Hebrew name
Naphtali (in Lebanon) See also: The province of An-Nabatiyah in southeast Lebanon. This is quite obviously the modern version of Naphtali. NOTE: Some of these towns are over 3,000 years old...yet many still have the same (or very similiar), name. Check the maps...the locations are accurate (1992 Rand McNally "Todays World" Atlas / KJV Bible -Thompson Chain Referrence edition, map No. 5). The pronounciations are based on the Christian KJV Bible. The accurate Hebrew pronounciations would actually be closer to the modern Arabic pronounciations. Please also see the following links...
Ante Pavelic hand-in-hand with Ali Aganovic, right, the envoy of the Bosnian Muslim community of Sarajevo at the opening of the mosque in Zagreb, August, 1944, which Pavelic and the NDH Ustasha regime constructed.
Contact Brother Shane at wisevirgin_777@yahoo.com
An earlier version of this article appeared in the July-August 2009
edition of Think-Israel.org
|
|
PEDOPHILIA REMAINS RAMPANT IN ISLAM
Posted by CPocerl, February 2, 2010. |
|
Statutory Rape Sanctioned by Prophet
This was written by by Paul L. Williams, Ph.D. and it appeared in
thelastcrusade.org |
|
If you think Muslims and Christians share similar values and that Islam should be welcomed into the United States and Europe, you might want to catch the latest headlines from Yemen. A 12-year-old Yemeni girl, who was forced into marriage by her parents, died during a painful childbirth that also killed her baby, a children's rights group said Monday. Fawziya Ammodi struggled for three days in labor, before dying of severe bleeding at a hospital on Friday, according to Ahmed al-Qureshi, President of the Seyaj Organization for the Protection of Children. "Although the cause of her death was lack of medical care, the real case was the lack of education in Yemen and the fact that child marriages keep happening," Mr. al-Qureshi reports. Fawiya, who came from an impoverished family in Hodeidah, was forced to drop out of school at the age of eleven and to marry a 24-year-old Muslim man last year. A recent study by Sanaa University shows that more than half of all young Yemeni girls are married off before the age of 18 — often to older men, some with several wives. The issue of Yemeni child brides came to the forefront in 2008 with the report of 10-year-old Nujood Ali. Nujood was pulled out of school and married to a man who beat and raped her for weeks after the wedding ceremony. To escape from her elderly husband, Nujood for the first time in her life hailed a taxi, which transported her to a central courthouse, where she sat on a bench and demanded to see a judge. After a well-publicized trial, she was granted a divorce.
IN THE WAKE OF THE NUJOOD CASE, the Yemeni parliament tried in February to pass a law, setting the minimum marriage age at 17. But the measure has not reached the president because many parliamentarians argued it violates sharia, or Islamic law, which does not stipulate a minimum age. International Center for Research on Women now estimates that there are 51 million child brides now living on planet earth and almost all in Muslim countries. Twenty-nine percent of these child brides are regularly beaten and molested by their husbands in Egypt; twenty six percent receive similar abuse in Jordan. Every year, three million Muslim girls are subjected to genital mutilation, according to UNICEF. This practice has not been outlawed in many parts of America. The Islamic practice of pedophilia dates back to the prophet Muhammad, who amassed eleven wives and many concubines after the death of his first wife Khadijah in 619 A.D. After Muhammad's elderly wife, Khadijah, died in 619 A.D., he amassed eleven wives. He arranged the visits to the tents of his women around their menstrual cycles. His capacity for sexual congress seemed to be boundless. Sahih Bukhari, one of the most revered Islamic texts, recounts: "The Prophet used to visit his wives in a round, during the day and night, and they were eleven in number. I asked Anas, "Had the Prophet the strength for it?' Anas replied, 'We used to say that the Prophet had the [sexual] stamina of thirty [men].'"[1] For in-between treats, the Prophet kept a stable of concubines, including Reihana, his Jewish captive. His wives and mistresses were compelled by Islamic law to satisfy his sexual needs at any time of the day or night, and the Prophet reserved the right to enjoy them "from the top of their heads to the bottom of their feet."[2] This might not appear shocking to students of the Kinsley Report, except for the case of Aisha, Muhammad's favorite wife. Aisha was the daughter of Abu Bakr, the Prophet's closest friend and most faithful follower. As soon as Muhammad laid eyes on Aisha, he became to fantasize of having sex with her. There was a problem with this fantasy. Aisha, at that time, was a small child of four or five, while Muhammad was a middle-aged man of fifty.[3] Still and all, the Prophet wasted no time in making his fantasy a reality. When Aisha turned six, Muhammad asked Abu Bakr for his daughter's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr thought that such a union would be improper — — not because Aisha was a mere child but rather because he considered himself Muhammad's brother. The Prophet quickly brushed aside this objection by saying that the union was perfectly right in the eyes of Allah. Abu Bakr consented. And Muhammad took the little girl as his new bride. When they were married, Muhammad, in his mercy, permitted Aisha to
take her toys, including her dolls, to their new tent.[4] The marriage
was consummated when Aisha was nine, and the Prophet fifty-three.[5]
The three year waiting period was not caused by Muhammad's concern of
sexually molesting a child but rather by the fact that Aisha
contracted some disease which caused her to lose her hair.[6]
PEDOPHILIA WAS NOT ONLY PRACTICED BY MUHAMMAD BUT ALSO SANCTIONED BY THE QURAN. In its discussion of the waiting period required to determine if a wife is pregnant before divorce, the sacred text says, "If you are in doubt concerning those of your wives who have ceased menstruating, know that their waiting period shall be three months. The same shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated"(65:4). Those who think that modern Muslims have abandoned this teaching should study the pictures and videos that accompany this article and recall the words of Ayatollah Khomeini, the most famous Islamic cleric of the 20th Century: A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate; sodomizing the child is OK. If a man penetrates and damages the child, then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however, does not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister... It is better for a girl to marry in such a time when she would begin menstruation at her husband's house rather than her father's house. Any father marrying his daughter so young will have a permanent place in heaven.[7] Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
12-YEAR-OLD SAUDI GIRL SUCCUMBS, NOW AGREES TO DROP DIVORCE PETITION AGAINST HER 80 YEAR OLD 'HUSBAND'
Posted by CPocerl, February 2, 2010. |
|
She was 11 when this story first appeared but now that she's all 'growed up' at 12, she tells the court that her forced marriage was actually done with her agreement. AFP — A 12-year-old Saudi girl unexpectedly gave up her petition for divorce from an 80-year-old man her father forced her to marry in exchange for a $22,000 dowry, Saudi media reported Tuesday. Despite support from human rights lawyers and child welfare advocates, the girl and her mother, who originally sought the divorce, withdrew the case Monday in a court in Buraidah, in Al-Qasim province, newspapers said. The girl told the court that her marriage to the man was done with her agreement, according to Okaz newspaper. "I agree to the marriage. I have no objection. This is in filial respect to my father and obedience to his wish," (if she wants to stay alive, that is) she said. An unnamed official of the government's Human Rights Commission, which was originally asked by the mother to help in getting the marriage annulled, told Arab News they too were surprised by the mother and daughter dropping the case. Saudi Arabia has no law against child marriage, and clerics and religious judges justify the practice based on Islamic and Saudi tradition. RELATED STORIES: about-that-marrying-little-girls-thing
|
|
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
JORDAN STRIPS PALESTINIANS' CITIZENSHIP
Posted by Brother Shane, February 2, 2010. |
|
That would be like the equivalent of Mexican and Chicano gang members, west of the Mississippi, creating their own (illegal) nation, and then stripping the citizenship of the Mexican & Chicano gang members who moved there, from east of the Mississippi. What's a Jordanian? What's a Palestinian? What's the difference to other Arabs? NONE! Can you imagine the international outrage if Israel stripped as many Israeli-Arabs of their citizenship which it should? |
|
Human Rights Watch: Jordan revoked 2,700 Palestinians' citizenship recently. A US-based human rights group criticized Jordan Monday for stripping the citizenship of nearly 3,000 Jordanians of Palestinian origin in recent years. Nearly half the kingdom's 6 million people are of Palestinian origin and Jordan fears that if Palestinians become the majority, it will disrupt the delicate demographic balance. Concerned about increasing numbers of Palestinians in the country, Jordan in 2004 began revoking citizenship from Palestinians who do not have the Israeli permits that are necessary to reside in the West Bank. Human Rights Watch said Jordan stripped about 2,700 Jordanians of Palestinian origin of their citizenship between 2004 and 2008 and urged them to restore their full rights. The trend continued last year, the group said in a report released in the Jordanian capital, Amman. The Jordanian measure rendered the Palestinians "stateless," depriving them of passports, voting rights, education, travel, health care and jobs, said Christoph Wilcke, HRW researcher on Jordan. "Jordan is playing politics with the basic rights of thousands of its citizens," said Sarah Leah Whitson, Middle East director at Human Rights Watch. Jordanian officials denied any wrongdoing. Wilcke said there is "no part of Jordan's law that allows the Interior Ministry to withdraw nationality by imposing new conditions," such as having Israeli-issued residency permits for the West Bank. Those permits are extremely difficult to obtain, given Israel's restrictive policies on granting residency rights to Palestinians, Wilcke added. Jordanian Interior Ministry spokesman Karim Naber claimed that his country did not revoke anyone's citizenship but "only suspended" giving social security numbers "pending reunification of families" in the West Bank. Most Palestinians hesitate to take their cases to the courts, fearing legal steps would only finalize their loss of Jordanian citizenship, Wilcke said. A few Palestinian Jordanians have had their citizenship reinstated, often with help from the royal court, Wilcke added, but provide no definitive figure. Defending the measure, Jordanian Interior Minister Nayef al-Qadi recently said the government wants Jordanians of Palestinian origin to clarify their status by renewing permits that recognize them as West Bank citizens in order to preserve their Palestinian identity. Wilcke warned others could be at risk from a similar measure, such as 250,000 Jordanians of Palestinian origin expelled by Kuwait during the 1991 Gulf War.
Contact Brother Shane at wisevirgin_777@yahoo.com
FROM ISRAEL: FALSE IMPRESSIONS
|
|
Last week, JTA came out with an article regarding the ostensible moderation of Fatah because it's new charter — passed at the Fatah Conference this past summer — didn't call for the destruction of Israel, as had previous charters. When it showed up in the US, a reader (thanks, Michael P.) called it to my attention. By Sunday it had also appeared in the Jerusalem Post. Knowing what I do about Fatah, and about the militant tenor of that Conference (which I had previously written about), I didn't buy it for a minute. I've spent time in the last couple of days checking with people with expertise and then looking more closely at the revised charter itself. Suffice it to say there that, indeed, there is indeed nothing to it. I will follow with more information, or, if an article I've written is published, I will provide the URL. What's important here is for you to know, should you see the JTA piece — which would have appeared in a host of Jewish publications, that this is not much more than hot air. ~~~~~~~~~~ PA president Abbas is still demanding that we do a total freeze on building, including in Jerusalem, for a period of three months, and that we agree to the '67 lines for a state, so that he can save face and return to the negotiating table. Thank Heaven, our government is still refusing to do this. Abbas claims that this is our obligation under the road map and our refusal here signals a lack of sincerity with regard to beginning negotiations. Some comments are in order. First, that Abbas came to the table during Olmert's administration without building having been frozen — it's clear that this demand is selective. And then, that it has been the position of our government (a position rejected by Obama) that when we agreed to the road map (with reservations, it should be noted), there was an understanding between the Israeli government and the US government of George W. Bush regarding what is meant by a freeze on building and what we would be permitted to retain regarding communities past the Green Line. ~~~~~~~~~~ But Netanyahu's spokesman, Mark Regev, didn't go there in his response. What he said was: "The Palestinians clearly fall short of their road map obligations, most recently on the difficult issue of incitement, and they should look in the mirror before accusing others." And here a comment is called for. Yes, Palestinian incitement is horrendous. At bottom it's not even an issue of road map obligations, but rather of the fact that it's illusionary to imagine we can genuinely make peace with a population that is routinely being told that Israel isn't legitimate, Jews are evil, and jihad (terrorism against Israel) is laudatory. ~~~~~~~~~~ But what does Regev mean by "most recently"? As someone who has been monitoring that incitement for years, I can say unequivocally that there is nothing recent about it. The simple fact is that once we gave the PA autonomy, with Oslo, and Arafat was, for the first time, able to control the media and the schools in Palestinian Arab areas, the people's animosity towards us rose. This is one more ironic situation. They resented us less when we administered their lives then when we moved to give them greater independence. All a question of what they began to hear about us: They were being prepared for war, not peace. "Most recently" in this context means that this Israeli administration has finally begun — and I salute them for this!! — to challenge the PA on the issue of incitement. Previous governments ignored the issue, because taking it on would have "interfered" with the peace process. We were told, ludicrously, that once we had peace with the Palestinian Arabs this incitement would disappear. (Could it really be that PA incitement was so thoroughly ignored by previous Israeli governments, and the policy of tracking it so absent, that Regev really imagines that this, which is now being tracked, is new? Not sure, but yes, it's possible.) Whatever...we're on the right track now, and need to stay there. No cutting the PA slack any longer. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to EU Mideast envoy Marc Otte, George Mitchell's alternate plan for starting negotiations — a shuttle diplomacy effort being called "proximity talks" (don't you love the diplomatese?) — may start soon if Abbas agrees. Mitchell's mediation, it is being reported, would begin with the question of how each side perceives a two-state solution, which would, in theory, lead to some common ground. Mitchell would then attempt to convince each side that the vision was implementable. Whose "vision" is being referred to is not clear — apparently there is supposed to be an amalgamation of visions so that Mitchell emerges with just one. Well...let's leave aside for a moment the fact that there should be no "two state solution," so that the suggestion that we move ahead with this is painful. Let's just look at what's being proposed here, at least according to Otte: Purim, which falls at the very end of February this year, is a time for jesting. Many papers put out Purim editions that are simply silly. If I didn't know better, I would think that the proposal for this mediation was really intended for Purim. But, alas, that's not the case. The simple reality is that the vision of Netanyahu and the vision of Abbas are so far apart that there can be no reconciliation. The minimum that the PA intractably demands — everything past the Green Line, including eastern Jerusalem with all holy sites, return of refugees, etc. — is more than the maximum Israel will give under any circumstances. In fact, Netanyahu has spelled out parameters, including an IDF presence in the Jordan valley, that give the PA less than what it rejected from Olmert. The Obama administration, for its part, is proving intractable in its refusal to face this simple fact. If it continues to promote what cannot be, it raises Arab expectations and when there is failure there is also anger, and very likely violence. ~~~~~~~~~~ It's past time to seek alternatives to a "two-state solution" that might be viable. Some sort of civilian autonomy for Palestinian Arabs, perhaps, with Israel retaining sovereignty over the land. That is, once terrorists are eliminated and incitement is halted. ~~~~~~~~~~ What concerns me now, aside from the very real possibility that Obama may be engendering Arab violence, is this: According to Otte, Mitchell will be seeking a change in the situation on the ground, with Israel giving the PA additional "physical, political, economic and social space." This would include extending areas in Judea and Samaria where the PA had full security and administrative responsibility. Our government has said there would be no more concessions, that now it was Abbas's turn. Let us pray that Netanyahu holds tight to this. It's just one more myth, that the PA security forces are competent enough to take over full security control of areas. If you saw my report last Friday, you read about the Abu Toameh exclusive, in which he quoted Fahmi Shabaneh, who had worked for PA General Intelligence Service, and said, "Had it not been for the presence of the Israeli authorities in the West Bank, Hamas would have done what they did in the Gaza Strip." ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Amos Gilad, head of the diplomatic-military bureau of the Defense Ministry, "Hamas must disappear before peace can be reached." I would put it differently. The elimination of Hamas (which doesn't seem to be going anywhere) indeed is a necessary condition for peace, but not a sufficient one of itself. Fatah is not a peaceful movement either. But this is not the official line. ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, Abu Toameh has a piece in today's Post, in which he indicates that there are signs that Abbas may be ready to climb down from that tree he had scaled — he might be preparing to enter negotiations. ~~~~~~~~~~ Im Tirtzu, a (secular) Zionist advocacy student group, is about to issue a report of considerable significance, and for which they should be highly praised: Their claim is that 92% of the negative citations against Israel used in the Goldstone report came from 16 Israeli NGOs that allegedly received $7.8 million from the New Israel Fund in 2008-2009. The NGOs listed include Adalah, B'Tselem, Doctors for Human Rights, Rabbis for Human Rights and Machsom Watch. Said a representative of Im Tirtzu: "The Goldstone Report looks the way it does because of these 16 groups and the quotes they provided. In that vein, our goal is to remove the NIF's mask and show the public what they really are — which is a fifth column, plain and simple." ~~~~~~~~~~ Im tirtzu means "if you will it" and refers to the famous statement by Zionist visionary Theodor Herzl, "If you will it, it is no dream." (Im tirtzu, ein zo agada.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Here, too, because of my research on, and experience with, some of these groups, I can attest to their anti-Israel orientation. While assuming the guise of organizations simply promoting human rights for Israeli Arabs, they actively seek to destroy the Jewish character of Israel. And they miss no opportunity in international forums to criticize Israel. If you are interested in learning more, see my report on Adalah:
~~~~~~~~~~ The report by Im Tirtzu is being taken quite seriously, I'm delighted (no, overjoyed) to see. MK Yisrael Hasson (Kadima), who was formerly with the Shin Bet and is now a member of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, said on Sunday that it would be discussed during a special session of the Committee next week. "I want to clarify what these groups are doing. I want to check and see, in plain and simple Hebrew, that their activities are legitimate. I also want to find out where they're receiving their funding from." ~~~~~~~~~~ The fact is that, indeed, NIF is part of the funding picture. But another piece of the picture, which I have alluded to before, is that there is funding by foreign governments (in the EU) for these groups, who should be designated as foreign agents. (There is a bill on this very issue pending in the Knesset now.) ~~~~~~~~~~ Additionally, Hasson said: "I want to know if these groups are providing names of [IDF] commanders to foreign governments. It's known that [Israeli] NGOs are also responsible for these arrest warrants, and I want to find out if the groups listed in the [Im Tirtzu] report have played a role in this. Here, Hasson is referring to instances where "universal jurisdiction" laws in some European nations have been utilized to press charges against Israelis. According to the Im Tirtzu report, which has touched on this issue in several respects, "Major NIF organizations signed a letter calling on Britain to prosecute senior IDF officials for war crimes." ~~~~~~~~~~ And then we have another report, or two, actually: From a British taxpayer watchdog group, Taxpayer Alliance, come "Palestinian Hate Education Since Annapolis" and "Funding Hate Education." These reports detail the ways in which European taxpayer monies go to the Palestinian Authority and end up funding incitement (a campaign of "demonizing Israel") because of insufficient monitoring of how the money is spent. ~~~~~~~~~~ Issues of terrorism, and the threat of terrorism, continue to loom large on a variety of fronts: [] Yesterday two explosive devices, floating in barrels, showed up on the beach at Ashkelon and Ashdod. They were dismantled and the entire shoreline was combed in case there were more.Actually, there are a great many possibilities for who might have killed this man (who most definitely deserved to die). Yesterday Abu Toameh wrote that a Fatah-affiliated news agency says the possibility of an "inside job" has not been ruled out. ~~~~~~~~~~ "The Good News Corner" While the major part of the IDF medical contingent that was in Haiti has settled in at home again, we are still doing good work there. Israel Flying Aid, in cooperation with 20 Christian nuns, is currently working to rebuild an orphanage that had been destroyed by the earthquake. It has started by housing 70 girls and will ultimately accommodate 200. Orange Israel Communications is supporting this effort, and the IDF contributed supplies — electric generators, fresh water, tents, etc. — and some medical services. In thanking IFA, Haiti Minister for Culture and Communications said: "We have been watching you and your team work 24 by 7 since you arrived at the orphanage. Your quick, professional and modest action in caring for these very small and sick children has saved many lives. Israel Flying Aid rebuilt the orphanage in three days. They took children, all suffering from severe malnutrition, who had been sleeping on the cold ground and brought them to a new house, where they found soft, clean mattresses and colorful balloons. The children are receiving a host of services including nutritional food, medical care, trauma treatment, and educational services. Said IFA founder, Gal Lusky: "Israel Flying Aid is based upon the Jewish principles of the prophet Isaiah to: 'Uphold the rights of the orphan; defend the cause of the widow,' and in doing so we do not discriminate by race, nationality or religion." Israeli Flying Aid is a non profit, volunteer-based, non-governmental organization that seeks to provide humanitarian life-saving relief to communities in areas stricken by natural disaster or territorial conflicts. _____ When the IDF medical contingent returned home, they brought with them late last week a six year old Haitian boy who requires life-saving open heart surgery. It is being arranged by the Save a Child's Heart Foundation and will be done at the Wolfsohn Medical Center. He is expected to be "good as new" after the surgery.
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
JEWISH GROWTH IN JUDEA/SAMARIA TOPS THE CHARTS
Posted by Hillel Fendel, February 2, 2010. |
|
The number of Jews in Judea and Samaria has grown to 313,000 — double the growth rate of the rest of Israel — according to the latest Civil Administration report. The Civil Administration report, as quoted by Haaretz, shows that the population in Judea and Samaria grew in the past half-year by 2.75%, and by 5.1% in the past year, and now stands at 312,940. A large part of the growth is due to the hareidi-religious cities of Beitar Illit (6.3%) and Modiin Illit (9,8%) — but even without those cities, Yesha's growth rate of 3.8% more than doubles that of the rest of Israel, which stands at 1.7%. Two-thirds of the towns in Yesha grew at a higher rate than the rest of Israel (see below). MK Yaakov Katz (Ketzaleh), one of the original driving forces in the early years of the settlement enterprise, both as top aide to then-Housing Minister Ariel Sharon and as one of the founding members of Beit El, said it's just another step in the glorious return of the Nation of Israel to the Land of Israel. "The steeply-climbing number of Jews living in Judea and Samaria joins the 300,000 Jews in the neighborhoods of Jerusalem over the Green Line," Katz said, "and is proof that the eternality of the Nation of Israel is much stronger than the freeze decrees of a weak prime minister who violates his promises. We guarantee that the hundreds of thousands of Jews in Yesha will continue to multiply and will reach into the millions." Ketzaleh noted the disproportionate national contributions of the Yesha population: "The pioneers of Yesha already make up the backbone of the commanding echelons in the IDF, as well as the main educational institutions of the country: the Hesder yeshivot, the pre-military academies, the ulpanot [girls' yeshiva high school, and the university in Ariel. They are the supporting column of Israeli society. In every generation, G-d gives us heroes who lead us, from the Maccabim, to the pioneers of the Land of Israel of 100 years ago, and up to the settlers of today. These groups are the torch-bearers of the nation's most internal values: Torah, Nation, Land. They will emerge victorious over the current prime minister and his attempts to humiliate them." Sample populations in Judea and Samaria and their growth rate over the past half-year: Shomron Regional Council — 25,875, up 3.75%
Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
INAPPROPRIATE USE OF THE FOURTH GENEVA CONVENTION
Posted by Eli E. Hertz, February 2, 2010. |
|
In advising that Jewish settlements are illegal, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) went beyond its own mandate from the General Assembly without being asked to do so. In paragraph 120 of the Court's opinion [Advisory Opinion July 9 2004), the ICJ declares: "The Court concludes that the Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (including East Jerusalem) have been established in breach of international law." The ICJ based its conclusion on the inappropriate use of an article of the Fourth Geneva Convention which stipulates: "The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies." Once the ICJ has 'established evidence' that the West Bank and Gaza are unlawfully occupied territories, it then applies this status to the Fourth Geneva Conference de jure, stating in paragraph 120 of the opinion that: "As regards these settlements, the Court notes that Article 49, paragraph 6, of the Fourth Geneva Convention provides: 'The Occupying Power shall not deport or transfer parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies.' [italic by author] The Court unlawful attempts to broaden the definition of Article 49 to possibly 'fit' some wrong doing on the part of the State of Israel, all with no authority or reference to law, adding: "That provision prohibits not only deportations or forced transfers of population such as those carried out during the Second World War, but also any measures taken by an occupying Power in order to organize or encourage transfers of parts of its own population into the occupied territory." [italics by author] In the above conclusion, the ICJ fails to disclose the content of the "information provided" (information the Court based its decision on), and the anonymous 'authorities' that provided such. Anyone interested in the subject at hand is aware of the difficulties the Israeli Government faces in its decision to relocate some Israeli settlements out of the "Territories," a fact that seems to be contrary to the "information provided" to the ICJ. Professor Stone touches on the applicability of Article 49 of the Geneva Convention. Writing on the subject in 1980: "That because of the ex iniuria principle, Jordan never had nor now has any legal title in the West Bank, nor does any other state even claim such title. Article 49 seems thus simply not applicable. (Even if it were, it may be added that the facts of recent voluntary settlements seem not to be caught by the intent of Article 49 which is rather directed at the forced transfer of the belligerent's inhabitants to the occupied territory, or the displacement of the local inhabitants, for other than security reasons.) The Fourth Geneva Convention applies only, according to Article 2, to occupation of territory belonging to 'another High Contracting Party'; and Jordan cannot show any such title to the West Bank, nor Egypt to Gaza.". Support to Stone's assertion can be found in Lauterpacht's writing in 1968: "Thus Jordan's occupation of the Old City-and indeed of the whole of the area west of the Jordan river-entirely lacked legal justification; and being defective in this way could not form any basis for Jordan validly to fill the sovereignty vacuum in the Old City [and whole of the area west of the Jordan River]." Professor Rostow concludes that the Convention is not applicable to Israel's legal position and notes: "The opposition to Jewish settlements in the West Bank also relied on a legal argument — that such settlements violated the Fourth Geneva Convention forbidding the occupying power from transferring its own citizens into the occupied territories. How that Convention could apply to Jews who already had a legal right, protected by Article 80 of the United Nations Charter, to live in the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip, was never explained." It seems that the International Court of Justice "never explained" it either. For more on the subject see:
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 today@mythsandfacts.org |
|
MAKING AN AMERICAN INTO AN JIHADIST; IRAN INTENSIFIES REPRESSION; WHY
DID OBAMA OMIT ISRAEL FROM LIST HELPING HAITI?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 2, 2010. |
|
WHAT TURNS AN AMERICAN INTO A JIHADIST? Growing up as a popular and bright youth, Omar Hammami turned into a jihadist, now fighting in Somalia to impose a global caliphate upon unwilling people, including Somalis. What radicalizes such youths? American law enforcement officials were taken by surprise. America is different from Europe. America provides opportunities for its immigrants, and Muslims prosper here. [You may recall that the French Muslim youth riots were blamed on their lack of integration and jobs.] Now, dozens of Americans have enlisted in jihad. Their economic backgrounds differ. Mr. Hammami, himself, declared that his jihadist efforts cannot be attributed to his economic circumstances. The New York Times Magazine article on this puzzlement discussed two types of youth who become jihadis. One type is like Omar, being partly in the Muslim world. Although he was not raised in any religion, since his mother is a Christian, he is half Arab, his father was devout, and they had ties to relatives in Syria. The other type is converts to Islam (1/31, p. 26). Early in Omar's Odyssey, a fellow student suggests that a terrorist who attacked America should be eliminated. Omar countered with, then why not also eliminate the religious leader, Billy Graham, then alive. The fellow student explained that Billy Graham does not murder non-believers, whereas the Radical Muslims do. That seems to me a reasonable answer. But Omar retorts, "One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." That seems to me an unreasonable answer: (1) Treating if all opinions as equally valid; and (2) Omar fights against freedom. The Radical Muslim regime he strives to impose on other people restricts their freedoms. The article describes the lives of Omar and somewhat of the others, but does not state a conclusion, leaving it to readers. Here is my conclusion. For Omar's type, the problem is an identity crisis. Feeling different, Omar gets confused over who he is and what he should stand for. He studies Islam. Wanting a strong identity, he comes to feel that Muslims embroiled in war abroad are his "brothers and sisters," needing his help. Hence the resentment he and many Muslims all over the world feel at U.S. intervention in Muslim countries. The other type converts or otherwise comes under the influence of militants. Many converts are made in prison, where they do not get a thoughtful, competitive presentation. A factor may be that most American schools no longer indoctrinate in patriotism, and even indoctrinate in anti-Americanism. Now I can understand why some jihadi parents are surprised by their sons' radical turn, taken without their knowledge. But in a practical sense, admitting as immigrants non-Radical Muslims such as Mr. Hammami senior sets the stage for future risks to national security. UN GOLDSTONE REPORT FACILITATES TERRORISM The IDF Deputy Chief of Staff, Maj. Gen. Benny Gantz, said "The Goldstone report is a Trojan horse; it gives terrorist organizations legitimacy to fight us from urban populations." (www.imra.org.il, 2/1.) It does not give terrorists legitimacy but the appearance of it. In any case, the Goldstone Report does human rights a disservice under the guise of defending them. ISRAEL DISCIPLINES GENERALS OVER GAZA The government of Israel announced that it had disciplined two generals for exceeding their authority in firing three shells of white phosphorus, which accidentally exposed some Arab civilians in Gaza to it. Previously, Israel denied that the incident violated standing orders. The government cited this undisclosed disciplinary measure as an indication that it can conduct its own investigations, without UN review. It sent the UN a report refuting the Goldstone report as "totally false" (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/1). Dr. Aaron Lerner asks why didn't the IDF announce the discipline imposed, when imposed (IMRA, 2/1)? Good question. Perhaps the IDF is afraid that if they admit to a small portion of the accusations against them, while a global microscope focuses on it and ignores what terrorists do, it would incur all the more criticism. P.A. SHEIKH BANS CONTACT WITH CERTAIN JEWS kh Taisar Tamimi, highest religious authority in the Palestinian Authority — President of the P.A. Sharia Moslem religious courts — issued a fatwa banning his subjects from: (1) Working or doing business with Jews in Judea, Samaria, and the Old City of Jerusalem; (2) Building for Jews; and (3) Assisting archeological digs in the Old City. Sheikh Tamimi called Arabs who do "traitors" who must be severely punished. He said that the archeological excavations on the Temple Mount are designed to prove that the Jewish First or Second Temples had been situated there. He denies that they ever were. He did not reconcile his assertion with the Muslim Waqf pamphlet of 1925, which boasted that the Temple Mount was the site of Solomon's Temple, the First Temple. Al-Tamimi said that Jews lie in claiming that Jerusalem is or was a Jewish city. He once interrupted an interfaith meeting with the Pope in Jerusalem, to condemn Israel viciously. The religious edict, if enforced, would inflict a hardship upon Palestinian Arabs, heavily dependent upon business with Israelis in and out of Israel (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/1). Archeology is a profession, not a pretext for propaganda. The Sheikh sounds as if he is not in a profession, but in a pretext for propaganda. If the Sheikh is so sure that Jewish temples did not exist on the Mount, he should welcome excavation, for it would fail to find evidence of early Jewish society there. The evidence it does find is of early Jewish society there. Al-Tamimi's notion of interfaith relations seems counter-productive. He seeks not harmony but domination. For those who fasten upon the notion of apartheid as a club to brandish against Israel, please note that whereas Jews in the Territories are wiling to work with Arabs, and Arabs are willing to work with Jews, the P.A. wants them separate — separate and unequal. EGYPT FOILS TERRORIST PLOTS Egyptian sources revealed Sunday that a couple of months ago, the government had arrested a couple of dozen trained and armed terrorists who had plotted to blow up banks in Cairo, U.S. ships in the Suez Canal, and Jewish pilgrimages to the tomb of the 19th century rabbi, Abhatezeira. The terrorists possessed explosives like those used by Hamas (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/1). IRAN INTENSIFIES REPRESSION The government of the Islamic Republic of Iran executed two political dissidents and sentenced another seven to death. It calls those who protest election fraud "traitors" [and against God], who endanger national security and are agents of the U.S.. [In earlier news, the government claimed it had evidence that foreign agents stirred up the crowds of protestors. Otherwise, all was rosy? How did foreigners succeed in drawing massive crowds to risk beatings?] 
The government also is purging universities and other employers of disaffected employees, to make the individuals too busy to protest and to discourage others. The U.S. criticized this repression of the universal right to
peaceful protest. It warned Iran that doing so would forfeit
international respect
The U.S. argument is not likely to persuade fanatics. The regime has two immediate goals: (1) Retain power; and (2) Develop nuclear weapons. Once it has the weapons, it would become more feared, if not respected. Then it could pursue its long-range goal, regional and global hegemony for Iran and Shia. TARGET STORES REMOVE GLOBE MIS-NAMING ISRAEL Target stores sold a small globe in which the State of Israel and disputed areas were mis-named "Palestine." The stores claimed that the error was inadvertent. Jews protested it. The stores removed the globe from their shelves (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 2/1). Who identifies countries on maps, clerks or cartographers. Has to be professionals. It is difficult to assume that such errors, common in dictionaries, encyclopedias, textbooks, and even airline lists are inadvertant. consumers and activists usually get the companies to correct the erroris. The public is entitled to maps and dictionaries that are definitive and not propagandistic. WHY DID OBAMA OMIT ISRAEL FROM LIST HELPING HAITI? Israel helped stricken Haiti more than any other country except for the U.S.. Former President Clinton, co-chairing the U.S. aid mission there said, "I don't know what we would have done without the Israeli hospital at Haiti ... The Israeli hospital was the only operational facility which was able to perform surgery and advanced tests. In the name of the aid workers that operated in Haiti, in the name of the people who live there, and on a personal level I want to thank, we all want to thank, Israel from the bottom of our hearts" ('Bill Clinton hails Israeli relief mission in Haiti,' Haaretz, January 29, 2010). 
The Israeli teams arrived promptly, equipped, and organized. President Obama said, "At the airport, help continues to flow in, not just from the United States but from Brazil, Mexico, Canada, France, Colombia, and the Dominican Republic, among others ... The entire world stands with the government and the people of Haiti, for in Haiti's devastation, we all see the common humanity that we share" ('President Obama's Remarks After His Call with Haitian President Prèval,' White House Blog, January 15, 2010). Why did Obama omit Israel, which saved hundreds of lives, from the list of saviors? New Republic Editor-at-Large Martin Peretz "observes, 'I understand that Obama doesn't like Middle East narratives that do not contain 'one side and the other side' equal valence. But he couldn't have that here. The Arabs don't care a fig, not for their impoverished and backward own, and certainly not for strangers. That's why their presence in Haiti amounted to a couple of bucks from Saudi Arabia and maybe from some other sheikhs.' Israel is the first to be mentioned in any issue arising in the Middle East, whether it is connected to the issues or not. Here, however, where there is major story of an Israeli and humanitarian success, the President doesn't mention it, perhaps because praising Israel stands in the way of the current policy of talking down Arab intransigence and hostility to Israel's existence while focusing publicly on alleged (and untrue) Israeli unwillingness to make concessions?" (2/1 press release from Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), headquartered in New York and of which I am a member.) Are Peretz and ZOA being over-sensitive, or have they hit a sensitive nerve in Obama?
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 and visit his website:
|
|
SECURITY SOURCES: THREAT TO OCEAN FACILITIES GROWING
Posted by Daily Alert, February 2, 2010. |
|
This was written by Hanan Greenberg and it appeared today in
Ynet News
|
|
Security source said Monday night that the explosives which drifted onto Israel's southern shoreline, and were later claimed by Palestinian groups, indicated their growing motivation to launch terror attacks against Israeli targets. Early Monday evening, an explosive device was discovered floating just off Hofit beach in Ashkelon. Several hours later, a second device was found on Kshatot beach in Ashdod. According to the police, both explosive devices — weighing several dozen pounds each — were found hidden in barrels. They were similar in makeup and originated from Gaza Strip. The sources doubted the Palestinian groups' supposed intention to target strategic Israeli facilities at sea, but said that nevertheless, such a threat was seriously considered. The failed attack, said a defense establishment source, followed the scheme of sending out several sea-mines, which are designed to float until a collision with a vessel triggers them. "Gaza's terror groups don't really have any actual (sea-mine) capability, but given arms smuggling through the Gaza tunnels, they can upgrade the threat," he added. Earlier, a senior member in one of the Palestinian organizations confirmed that the two explosive devices found on beaches in southern Israel were meant to be used in a future terror attack on an oil rig in the south. The confirmation verified various concerns in the defense establishment, that Palestinian groups will try targeting a strategic facility in Israel. The Police National Headquarters ordered a full canvass of the shoreline, and heightened police presence is expected on all beaches. The Beaches in Israel's south will remain closed to the public on Tuesday, for swimmers and fishermen alike. A senior Palestinian source told Ynet earlier that the attacks were planned as a joint operation of Islamic Jihad's al-Quds Brigades, the Popular Resistance Committees' Salah a-Din Brigades and the Nabil Masud group, which is affiliated with Fatah's Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades. The attack, he added, was to be in retaliation of "Israel's continuous crimes," and the Dubai assassination of Hamas figure Mahmoud al-Mabhouh's, for which the groups hold Israel responsible. Sources in Gaza also told Ynet that Palestinian groups have recently began practicing underwater shooting and testing explosives at sea, and that the al-Quds Brigades have conducted training to that effect over the past few days. According to the source, a special unit made up of operatives of all three groups, was able to launch four explosive devices to Ashkelon by sea overnight Saturday. Each device, said the source, was supposed to be detonated by remote control. One of the devices had been detonated, he added. Israel Police have temporarily barred civilians from the Ashkelon and Ashdod beaches where the explosives were found. The Daily Alert is sponsored by Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations and prepared by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe to their free daily alerts, send an email to daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
THE HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL'S ROGUES GALLERY OF ADVISORS; ZIEGLER'S FOLLIES
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, February 2, 2010. |
|
Analysis and Commentary from UN Watch in Geneva
If Eleanor Roosevelt presided over the UN Human Rights Commission in its founding years, who are the illustrative figures of its successor body, the Human Rights Council, with whom the United States, as a new member, will now have to deal with? Consider this. Last Monday, Ali Hassan Majeed, the Iraqi general known as "Chemical Ali" for ordering poison-gas attacks on Kurdish civilians, was hanged in Baghdad after a special tribunal handed him his fourth death sentence for crimes against humanity during the regime of his cousin, Saddam Hussein. Responsible for the murder of hundreds of thousands of Kurds, Shiites, and other Iraqi minorities, Ali's brutality stood out even amid a regime marked by brutality. Meanwhile, at the Human Rights Council in Geneva last Monday, Halima Warzazi, the woman who personally shielded the Saddam regime from international censure over these gas attacks, received a different treatment altogether: she was seated at the dais, gavel in hand, as Chair of the 47-nation body's Advisory Committee, solemnly presiding over a week-long session. In other words, the same individual who initiated the "No Action" motion that killed a 1988 UN resolution which sought to condemn Saddam Hussein for failing to "ensure respect for human rights and fundamental freedom," urge his regime to "immediately halt the use of prohibited chemical weapons," and dispatch a special human rights investigator to Iraq, now serves as chief advisor to the highest UN body charged with protecting human rights. Click here for 1988 official UN summary. The man who preceded Warzazi, and who is still a member of the advisory committee, is the Castro regime's Alfonso Martinez, who in 1988 voted to support Warzazi's protection of Saddam. Last but not least is the man who today serves as Warzazi's vice-chair, Jean Ziegler. A few months after a Libyan-planted bomb exploded Pan Am flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, killing 270 people, Ziegler announced to the world the creation of the "Moammar Qaddafi Human Rights Prize." Click for brief video documentary. Ziegler went on to serve as vice-president of "North South 21," the Libyan-controlled front group in Geneva which manages the award. He presided over its bestowal to a rogues' gallery of dictators and Holocaust deniers, and eventually became the UN Human Rights Council's most popular official. With such advisors and such advice, it is little wonder that the UN council — whose dominant members include China, Cuba, Russia, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, and the same body that commissioned the Goldstone Report on Gaza — has routinely absolved the world's most brutal murderers, rapists and perpetrators of terrorism. For more on what all of this means for the future of human rights and of the United Nations — and to understand what was meant by Jeane Kirkpatrick, the late US Ambassador to the UN, when she described "the radical inversion of the values, expectations, identifications, and demands characteristic of Western liberal societies and politics" — we republish the Azure essay below by UN Watch executive director Hillel Neuer. ___________________________ ZIEGLER'S FOLLIES
On March 26, 2008, to cheers and acclaim, Jean Ziegler was elected by the newly formed United Nations Human Rights Council to serve as one of its expert advisers. It was hardly an unexpected development. Switzerland had announced his nomination in December 2007, beginning an unprecedented lobbying campaign by the Swiss government on behalf of its nominee, featuring, among other things, a glossy booklet sent to capitals around the world documenting his "unwavering commitment to," "excellent knowledge of," and "unstinting support for" human rights. Not for the first time, Ziegler, a former sociology professor, a member of the Swiss parliament, and currently the UN Human Rights Council's Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, stood at the center of a perfect storm of adoration and acclaim. It was one more triumph in a remarkable career. Granted tenure in 1977 by the University of Geneva, Ziegler founded and directed its Social Laboratory of Third World Civilizations. He has taught at numerous European universities, including the Sorbonne, where he served in 1984 as an associate professor of sociology and economics. In March 2004, he was awarded an honorary doctorate by Belgium's University of Mons-Hainaut, where he was hailed as "the modern-day Condorcet" — the great Enlightenment philosopher of human rights. Ziegler is also the author of more than twenty books for popular audiences, most of which are dedicated to asserting that hunger and other human miseries are the inevitable products of Western capitalism and globalization. His works The New Rulers of the World and The Empire of Shame, for example, have become European best-sellers, distributed by leading French publishing houses and discussed by Ziegler in such forums as TV5, the international French-language channel.[1] His literary success was officially recognized by the French Republic in 1994, when the Ministry of Culture named him a Knight of the Order of Arts and Letters. This prestigious honorific is awarded for contributions to the "radiance" of arts and letters in both France and the world as a whole. Not surprisingly, Ziegler lists the accolade prominently in his curriculum vitae. Ziegler has found his greatest success, however, in the European media, which considers him a highly credible and well-respected authority on human rights. Leading newspapers such as France's Le Monde, Le Figaro, Liberation, and La Croix as well as Geneva's Le Temps quote him regularly. Profiles of Ziegler have also appeared in premier European magazines, such as the German weekly Der Spiegel[2]. In Switzerland, the Foreign Press Association granted him its "Most Popular" award.[3] "You are a little miracle," declared journalist Daniel Mermet when he interviewed Ziegler in April 2007 for L-bas si j'y suis, a popular program on the public radio station France Inter. "[You have] an amazing... taste and feeling for denunciation and revolt."[4] In sum, Jean Ziegler is a darling of Europe's academic, literary, and media elite. To be sure, none of this would be problematic if Jean Ziegler were simply an innocuous idealist. But he is not. Besides being one of Europe's most successful celebrity activists, Ziegler is also one of the continent's most industrious anti-American and anti-Israel ideologues as well as a prominent apologist for a rogues' gallery of Third World dictators, including Libya's Muammar Qaddafi, Zimbabwe's Robert Mugabe, and Cuba's Fidel Castro. During Ziegler's tenure as Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, the cause of world hunger consistently took a backseat to the promotion of his anti-Western ideology. At a time when the UN is heralding the reform of its human rights apparatus, replacing the discredited Commission on Human Rights with a new council which it has described as the "dawn of a new era," the case of Jean Ziegler casts grave doubt on the possible success of this reform and reveals the precipitous and accelerating decline of the UN human rights system and the international human rights movement as a whole. Jean Ziegler was born Hans Ziegler in 1934 in the town of Thun, located in the German-speaking area of Switzerland. Ziegler's political conversion, like that of many young radicals, began in his teens, when he left the confines of his traditional Calvinist home for the allure of Paris. There he discovered Marxism and the political philosophy of Jean-Paul Sartre, changed his name to Jean, and joined a militant circle that supported the Algerian National Liberation Front (FLN) in its war against France. Ziegler's passion for the FLN and its violent campaign for Algerian independence proved so extreme that the French Communist party eventually expelled him. He later returned to Switzerland and earned a law degree, only to switch fields and obtain a doctorate in sociology. Finally, in the early 1960s, he spent two years in the Congo as an assistant to a UN special envoy. The misery he witnessed there made him resolve "never to be on the side of the executioners."[5] Eventually, Ziegler's advocacy of Algerian independence and his experiences in the war-torn Congo deepened into an all-encompassing embrace of revolutionary politics in general. He began to admire such iconic figures as the Cuban dictator Fidel Castro and the guerilla leader Che Guevara. When the latter visited Geneva in 1964 as part of a Cuban trade delegation, Ziegler served as his chauffeur. He reportedly asked Guevara if he could return with him to Cuba and join the revolution. "Here is the brain of the monster," said the rebel leader. Pointing to the affluent city in the heart of Europe, Guevara continued: "Your fight is here."[6] Ziegler stayed. By 1967, Ziegler had won a seat in the Swiss parliament as a Social Democrat, a position he held — with a brief interruption of four years — until 1999. During his long tenure, he served as president of the Swiss Third World parliamentary party and as a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, and he sat on the Executive Council of the Socialist International. In addition, he published a slew of books that leveled sensational charges against various prominent businessmen. This led to numerous successful lawsuits against him, in which he was eventually found liable for defamation. To this day, according to Ziegler, part of his earnings are used to pay for the judgments against him.[7] Yet despite Ziegler's legal troubles — or perhaps because of them — his many admirers depict him as a fearless iconoclast fighting the good fight for the wretched of the earth. As a result, today Ziegler is one of Europe's most popular exponents of revolutionary "Third-Worldism," a vaguely Manichaean ideology that sees the industrial West as an imperialist power that ruthlessly exploits the Third World, keeping it mired in poverty and suffering. Accordingly, Third-Worldists passionately support revolutionary movements and leaders opposed to Western capitalism. Of course, Ziegler's fervent stance has acquired critics as well as admirers. Indeed, even some of his most prominent defenders have acknowledged that his work is not always trustworthy. His mentor Roger Girod, head of the University of Geneva's sociology department, conceded while arguing for Ziegler's tenure that "the pamphleteer is never wholly absent" in his scholarship and that "the most penetrating analyses are marked by polemical partisanship." Moreover, Girod continued, "since he writes rapidly, Jean Ziegler does not eliminate his factual errors."[8] Girod's support notwithstanding, the 1977 decision to grant Ziegler tenure provoked outrage from several scholars and public figures in Switzerland, one of whom, the historian Herbert Lithy, carried through on a threat to return his honorary doctorate in protest.[9] Indeed, Ziegler himself has admitted that in the struggle to convey his overarching message, facts are not always his first concern.[10] He claims that as a child in Switzerland in the 1940s he witnessed a train accident in which a crashed vehicle was revealed to be carrying Nazi weapons, demolishing his youthful illusions about his country's alleged neutrality. Ziegler presents this incident as a primal, formative experience, essential to the shaping of his adult character. [Der Spiegel] has reported, however, that there is no record of such a crash, and Ziegler's own sister thinks he invented the story.[11] Indeed, Ziegler's strained relationship with the truth has led one Swiss reporter to conclude a lengthy profile of the UN Special Rapporteur by describing him as a "menteur et affabulateur" — a liar and a teller of tales.[12] Yet by dint of Ziegler's charisma, rhetorical skills, and knack for generating publicity — an easy recipe for media success in the otherwise stolid Alpine redoubt — as well as the vital support he receives from political and media figures sympathetic to his cause, his career has maintained a steady upward trajectory. To be sure, Ziegler's polemics have occasionally done some good: In the 1990s, for example, he played a key role in exposing the complicity of Swiss banks in laundering Nazi gold. In general, however, this has been the exception that proves the rule. For the most part, Ziegler's advocacy has been undertaken on behalf of dubious and troubling causes. Ziegler's fascination with political violence would seem to have begun at an early age. In a 1993 profile in l'Illustré, a Swiss version of America's Life magazine, a photograph of an eleven-year-old Ziegler appears. He is dressed in a military cadet uniform, holding what appears to be a training gun. On the opposite page are pictures of him as an adult, this time posing with real weapons. In a 1976 photograph, he is shown brandishing a Kalashnikov while on a solidarity visit with the Eritrean Liberation Front. In an image from 1979, he is in Ho Chi Minh's Hanoi, standing atop a captured American tank. A 1981 picture shows him at a podium in Managua, addressing Sandinista soldiers (Ziegler has a medal from the Sandinista National Liberation Front).[13] Finally, there is a photograph of him in a tent with armed militants from the Polisario Front, fighting for the independence of the Western Sahara — this time his 12-year-old son is holding the Kalashnikov. This affinity for the radical and violent side of politics is more than aesthetic. Ziegler has actively supplied political and diplomatic aid to some of the most brutal regimes in recent memory. Ethiopian dictator colonel Mengistu Haile Mariam, accused of widespread human rights violations and of bringing his country to starvation, handpicked Ziegler in 1986 to be one of five experts who prepared a constitution calling for one-party rule — Ziegler was the only one from outside the Soviet bloc.[14] Ziegler has also paid visits to Saddam Hussein in Iraq and Kim Il Sung in North Korea,[15] and in 2002 he fawned over Zimbabwean dictator Robert Mugabe — then in the midst of engineering mass famine through violent land seizures — saying, "Mugabe has history and morality with him."[16] Regarding Hezbollah, Zeigler has stated that "I refuse to describe Hezbollah as a terrorist group. It is a national movement of resistance."[17] Ziegler has also helped to promote and protect the careers of several European intellectuals with questionable if not disturbing reputations. In April 1996, for instance, he came to the defense of Roger Garaudy, a former French Stalinist and convert to Islam whose book The Founding Myths of Modern Israel denies the Holocaust.[18] In response to the public controversy provoked by the book, Ziegler wrote a letter of support to Garaudy, which the Committee for Open Debate on the Holocaust (codoh) — a group dedicated to the promotion of Holocaust denial — published in full on its website: I am outraged at the legal case they are making against you.... All your work as a writer and philosopher attests to the rigor of your analysis and the unwavering honesty of your intentions. It makes you one of the leading thinkers of our time.... It is for all these reasons that I express here my solidarity and my admiring friendship.[19] Ziegler has also come to the aid of Tariq Ramadan, the controversial Islamic author who has written in praise of his maternal grandfather Hasan al-Banna, the Egyptian founder of the fundamentalist Muslim Brotherhood, and Sheikh al-Qaradawi, the contemporary theologian of the human bomb.[20] Ramadan, also reared in Geneva and now a leading European intellectual, is a close friend of Ziegler and his family: He stuffed envelopes, made phone calls, and put up posters for Ziegler's parliamentary election campaigns.[21] This affection apparently is reciprocated. In 1993, Ramadan wrote an open letter protesting the staging of Mahomet — a play written in 1736 by the French philosopher Voltaire — in Geneva, on the grounds that it would offend the Muslim community. Ziegler's wife, Erika Deuber Ziegler — a member of the communist-affiliated Swiss Party of Labor and then director of the cultural affairs department for the city of Geneva — promptly blocked the performance by withholding a 310,000 franc subsidy.[22] Five years later, when his dissertation to the University of Geneva was rejected, Ramadan turned once again to Ziegler and his wife for assistance. Ramadan's thesis recast the Muslim Brotherhood as a progressive social and religious movement and excised its teachings of jihad and misogyny, not to mention its support for Nazi Germany — a position that struck Ramadan's two French supervisors as so untenable that they refused to award him a commendation.[23] After Ziegler and his wife threatened a public scandal, however, a new jury of supervisors was formed — an exceedingly rare occurrence. With the removal of a few passages, Ramadan's work was approved, giving him the academic credentials that have allowed his career to flourish.[24] Most striking, however, is Ziegler's role in co-founding, co-managing, and eventually winning the Muammar al-Qaddafi International Prize for Human Rights.[25] In April 1989, just a few months after Pan Am flight 103 was blown up by Libyan intelligence agents, killing all 259 people on board, Ziegler announced the prize's creation. It was widely believed to be a transparent attempt to change Libya's damaged international image as a terrorist state. The British newspaper The Independent, for instance, wrote: Until now, the main international peace prize has been funded by a company which manufactures explosives for weapons. If we can believe reports from Geneva, the next big award in this field will be sponsored by a regime which specializes in giving them away. According to Jean Ziegler, the Socialist MP who is Switzerland's answer to the late Abbie Hoffman, the $250,000 prize will bear the name of Colonel Muammar al-Qaddafi, who has provided a $10 million fund for it.... Mr. Ziegler said the award was designed to be the "Anti-Nobel Prize of the Third World." The Swiss gadfly is the perfect person to represent such a foundation, as he has long been a professional Third Worlder.[26] Switzerland's L'Hebdo magazine also dedicated a feature-length story to the prize under the heading "The Nobel of Qaddafi: Libyan authorities create a new human rights prize — Jean Ziegler gets involved." The article, which included a picture of Ziegler, reported that: According to Jean Ziegler, "The Nobel Prize is a permanent humiliation for the Third World." The timing couldn't be better — just as Libya is trying to restore its image. With the interest from ten million dollars — placed in a Swiss bank — it plans to create an international institute for human rights (planned in Geneva) and two "counter-Nobel Prizes." In mid-April, Jean Ziegler and ten "intellectuals and progressive fighters" thus found themselves in Tripoli to set the project on track.[27] Judging by these articles, Ziegler was not only a member of the prize's founding jury, but essentially its unofficial spokesman.[28] The propagandist uses of the prize are frequent and diverse. First, Libya cites the very existence of the Qaddafi Prize as evidence of its commitment to human rights.[29] Second, during the period when the West was attempting to contain the Qaddafi regime, the Libyan government used the prize money to fund supportive European organizations: For example, Centre Europe Tiers Monde (cetim), an anti-Western non-governmental organization that opposes economic sanctions on Libya, was awarded the Qaddafi Prize — and its hefty remuneration — in 2000. Coincidentally or not, cetim is based in Ziegler's hometown of Geneva and has published his work and praised him for heroically standing up to the United States during his tenure as a Special Rapporteur.[30] Third, and most ignominiously, Libya has used the prize to galvanize and unite prominent opponents of the United States. Among others, the award has been granted to Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and "the children of Iraq and victims of hegemony and embargoes." Finally, the prize has celebrated prominent racists and antisemites. For example, Louis Farrakhan, the Nation of Islam leader known for his black supremacist ideology and his frequent antisemitic statements, was awarded the Qaddafi Prize in 1996. Former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Bin Muhammad — who told an October 2003 meeting of Islamic nations that Jews were responsible for all the world's ills — was granted the prize in 2005. Other winners have included "the stone-throwing children of Occupied Palestine."[31] In 2002, thirteen "intellectual and literary personalities" were given the prize for their "thought and creativity." [32] One of those chosen by the prize committee was Garaudy, the French Holocaust denier.[33] Another was Ziegler himself. By this time, the Qaddafi prize was worth $750,000, and the Swiss newspaper Le Temps reported that Ziegler's share of the purse would approach 100,000 Swiss francs.[34] Even the media in Ziegler's native Switzerland — usually so reverential toward its most famous activist — raised its eyebrows. Under the pressure of public opinion, Ziegler announced — from Tripoli, where he claimed to be on an unspecified UN mission — that he had turned down the prize "because of [his] responsibilities at the United Nations."[35] The next day, he added, "I have never accepted prizes and won't start to do so now."[36] Despite these claims, Ziegler continues to be listed by the prize's own website — as well as by the Libyan state press service — as one of its 2002 laureates.[37] According to a December 2005 article in the Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung, Ziegler did in fact accept the award, although he did so as a representative of his research center at the University of Geneva.[38] The center was founded in 1989 — the same year in which Ziegler announced the Libyan leader's $10 million grant for the prize. When Ziegler was nominated for an additional UN post in 2006, an international coalition of human rights organizations — including Cuban and Libyan victims of human rights violations — sent a letter of protest to the Swiss government.[39] The appeal cited Ziegler's leadership role in founding the Qaddafi Prize as one among many examples of his support for oppressive regimes. Ziegler's response was notable: "The Qaddafi Prize?" he said, "How could I have created it? It's absurd!"[40] In the year 2000, Ziegler achieved a position of global influence well beyond that of a Geneva parliamentarian. Upon the initiative of Cuba, the UN Commission on Human Rights created the position of "Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food" and appointed Jean Ziegler to the post for a three-year term. The office of Mary Robinson, then high commissioner for human rights, put his name forward, and the appointment was assured by vigorous lobbying on the part of the Swiss government and certain Arab states. For Ziegler, it was nothing less than a dream come true: My job as Special Rapporteur was like a celestial phenomenon, an enlightenment, salvation — a gift. Finally, everything comes together. Everything I have done in my life makes sense now: My criticism of capitalism, my preoccupation with the Third World, my cries, my tears.[41] In an attempt, perhaps, to rise to the occasion, Ziegler announced that he was turning over a new leaf: "My life will change dramatically," he insisted. "The period of attacks is over; now I will have to seek consensus."[42] Unfortunately, this change of heart appears to have been largely rhetorical in nature. Over the last seven years — he has remained in office past his six-year term limit due to a technicality — Ziegler has only intensified his outspoken activism. This is especially apparent in Ziegler's relationship to the United States. On numerous occasions, he has used his UN office as a bully pulpit to express his anti-American views, usually by placing issues in a false context. For example, less than two weeks after al-Qaida's September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks against the United States, Ziegler announced his opposition to any potential American military response to the Taliban regime in Afghanistan, saying it would have "apocalyptic" consequences and spell "the end for the Afghan nation."[43] Within weeks, however, Ziegler's political opposition to the war had transformed into an objection related to food supply: He claimed, for instance, that food drops by the Allied forces violated "the key principles of humanitarian organizations and international law." In an even stranger twist, Ziegler would later oppose the drops on the grounds that they might inadvertently end up feeding the Taliban.[44] A similar sleight of hand occurred with respect to the Iraq war: In February 2003, Ziegler stated that war in Iraq should be avoided at all costs and even proposed that his native Switzerland offer sanctuary to Saddam Hussein.[45] Two months later, however, he was accusing coalition forces of violating the Iraqis' basic rights to food and water.[46] Ziegler's treatment of Cuba is particularly prominent in this regard. In nearly every report he has made to the Commission on Human Rights and the General Assembly, Ziegler has criticized America and its embargo of Cuba as a "flagrant" violation of international law in general and the right to food in particular. Ironically, during Ziegler's mandate Cuba has never appeared on the UN Food and Agriculture Organization's (FAO) emergency list.[47] In October 2007, Ziegler undertook an official mission to the communist-ruled island, hailing the Castro regime as a government "in the vanguard of the struggle for the right to food."[48] The vitriol of Ziegler's anti-Americanism is particularly striking when compared to his criticism of other countries.[49] He has referred to President Bush, for example, as "the Pinochet who sits in the White House,"[50] asserted that the American government is an imperialist dictatorship that uses "predators" and "mercenaries" to implement world domination,[51] and claimed that the United States is committing "genocide" in Cuba.[52] By contrast, Ziegler has referred to the genocide in Darfur as a mere cause for "concern", and has characterized Khartoum's role in the atrocities as "alleged."[53] Ziegler's attitude toward Israel is equally intense. As far back as 1982, during the First Lebanon War, he unsuccessfully lobbied for the expulsion of Shimon Peres, then head of Israel's Labor party, from the Socialist International.[54] Less than a year into his term at the UN, Ziegler delivered a report accusing Israel of policies that "created hunger and threaten starvation of the most destitute."[55] In January 2003, he told Al-Siyassa Al-Dawliya, an Egyptian quarterly, that the policies of "colonial repression" practiced by Ariel Sharon and other Israeli officials are "criminal and classifiable as crimes against humanity." He declared that "an international force is urgently required to ensure that no further demolition of houses and destruction of livelihood of the Palestinian people take place."[56] Later that year, after testifying before the UN Third Committee on Human Rights, Ziegler informed journalists that Israel was responsible for inflicting "some form of brain damage" upon Palestinian children.[57] The peak of Ziegler's anti-Israel rhetoric came in 2004, however, with his presentation of a report to the Commission on Human Rights describing his visit to the West Bank and Gaza — significantly, the only foreign locale he had visited that year.[58] His twenty-five-page report accused Israel of numerous violations of human rights while simultaneously exculpating Palestinian terrorist groups from any responsibility for the conflict.[59] Ziegler then swiftly issued a UN press release that "urgently" condemned Israel for destroying tunnels used by Palestinians for smuggling weapons and called for an "outpouring of condemnation" against the Jewish state.[60] The Israeli army was accused of torturing and killing civilians, and then-prime minister Ariel Sharon of committing "state terror."[61] In May of that year, Ziegler also authored a letter to Caterpillar Inc., on official UN stationery, urging the maker of bulldozers and other heavy equipment to boycott Israel, a demand soon adopted by the Arab League's Central Boycott Office in Damascus.[62] A few months later, Ziegler fired off another official UN letter, this time to the European Commission, urging it to cancel its trade agreement with Israel because of the latter's alleged violations of the Palestinians' right to food. This final missive was particularly bizarre because by the UN's own standards, the food, situation in the Palestinian territories has never come remotely close to the "catastrophe" Ziegler described, nor has it ever been ranked as one of the world's food emergencies.[63] In fact, when the UN Standing Committee on Nutrition compared nutritional risk in selected refugee populations in November 2003, the West Bank and Gaza ranked lowest. Ziegler had by this time become so identified with the Palestinian cause that when reporters in Brussels asked the Commission on Human Rights for a response to the report, they identified him as the "Special Rapporteur on Palestine" — a position Ziegler has never held.[64] Perhaps chastened by a 2004 UN Watch legal brief detailing his abuse of his mandate, Ziegler did moderate his behavior for a time.[65] This respite ended in the summer of 2005, however, when, at a pro-Palestinian rally in Geneva, he called Gaza "an immense concentration camp," and Israeli soldiers "concentration camp guards."[66] The following year, the Second Lebanon War galvanized Ziegler's renewed involvement in the region. During the war, the Human Rights Council sent a mission to the war zone to document Israeli "war crimes." In addition, four of the council's human rights experts conducted their own fact-finding mission. Yet Ziegler decided to visit Lebanon in order to conduct his own inquiry into alleged Israeli violations of the Lebanese people's right to food. While in Lebanon, he referred to Hezbollah as a legitimate political organization.[67] At the conclusion of the mission, he held a UN press conference in which he called for Israeli officers to be prosecuted for war crimes.[68] Logically, an activist against world hunger would be expected to focus his resources on the world's most acute food shortages. There is little argument over what and where these crises are. The UN's Food and Agriculture Organization constantly updates its list of "food emergencies." From the thirty-five countries on the May 2004 list, a UN Watch study selected a sample of seventeen countries, each of which suffered from a food emergency that the FAO attributed to some human action (e.g., war) rather than a natural disaster. Consequently, criticism of one or another party was entirely conceivable. The study found that in the first four years of his mandate, Ziegler used his UN position to publicly criticize the United States on thirty-four occasions. In contrast, he never criticized any party involved in fifteen of the seventeen food emergencies examined, nor did he speak out on behalf of the people suffering under these famines.[69] Regarding food emergencies in such nations as Burundi, the Central African Republic, Chad, the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Republic of the Congo, Cote d'Ivoire, Eritrea, Guinea, Haiti, Liberia, Chechnya, Sierra Leone, Somalia, Tanzania, and Uganda, Ziegler said nothing.[70] Sadly, his personal politics appear to have trumped his interest in the documented suffering of starving populations around the world — populations who are thus deprived of the benefits of the UN mechanism created expressly to serve their needs. Under international law, UN independent human rights experts are obliged to act with impartiality, objectivity, and non-selectivity — traits Ziegler has rarely displayed over the course of his tenure.[71] One can only conclude that in the case of Jean Ziegler, as his old mentor Roger Girod once remarked, the pamphleteer is always present. Despite Ziegler's problematic use of his Right to Food mandate, the Commission on Human Rights has consistently renewed his tenure, making him one of the longest-serving human rights officials at the UN. In 2003, for instance, the mandate was renewed — and Ziegler's term along with it —by a vote of fifty-one in favor. All of the democratic member countries — including European Union members Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Ireland, and Britain, as well as Canada and Japan — voted for the renewal, with only the United States opposed and Australia abstaining.[72] To be sure, even if the democratic nations had fought Ziegler's appointment, he would have won enough votes from non-democratic regimes and their allies to remain in office. However, such a fight would, at the very least, have been an official challenge to Ziegler's conduct. The fact that no such action has been forthcoming reflects a serious and deep-rooted problem within the UN. There are several reasons Ziegler's official conduct remains largely unchallenged: First, there is the role that major NGOs, such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch, play at the UN. Few people outside the institution realize just how influential NGOs have become within the UN's Byzantine human rights system. In fact, they wield immense power: They initiate the creation of new mandates, nominate the mandate-holders, and supply much of the data then cited by the newly appointed experts, who are unsalaried and understaffed. In short, the legitimacy of every UN human rights official lies in their hands. Among the major NGOs, some have openly endorsed Ziegler, while others have been complicit through silence. Many of them have refused to protest Ziegler's support for such tyrannical regimes as those of Castro and Qaddafi even after being explicitly asked to do so by dissident groups. Instead of using their enormous influence to counteract Ziegler's questionable conduct, the leading NGOs have enabled it. Second, there is the peculiar culture of the UN itself. Among European officials, more than a few may secretly admire Ziegler's forthright anti-Americanism and his rhetorical broadsides against Israel. Moreover, in what may be a strategic move on his part, Ziegler has largely refrained from criticizing specific European governments at the UN, thereby disarming potential opposition to his anti-American statements. Most important, however, is the fact that UN diplomats prefer a certain measure of vice over bad publicity for the world body as a whole, leading them to indulge even the most problematic conduct by their peers. To be a UN diplomat is to be a member of an exclusive club that has the potential to reward loyalty with lucrative jobs and benefits from an array of interconnected foundations and organizations. This practically requires that members "go along to get along" — or face the loss of their professional future. For all these reasons, UN officials such as High Commissioner for Human Rights Louise Arbour, despite repeatedly being asked to speak out against Ziegler's politicization of his mandate, have — with one exception in 2005 — chosen to remain silent. Whatever Jean Ziegler may say or do, he is still one of their own. It is this same climate of impunity that has led to such serious abuses of UN power as the Oil for Food scandal and the cycle of sexual abuse perpetrated by UN peacekeepers in Africa and Haiti. It is therefore highly unlikely that the newly formed UN Human Rights Council will change the direction set by its predecessor. Libya, for example, has recently been elected to chair the council's anti-racism program, which is scheduled to culminate in a 2009 "Durban Review Conference," likely to be a repeat of the notorious anti-Western and antisemitic colloquium held in 2001. Condemnation of Israel remains the council's first and, it often seems, only priority. So long as officials such as Ziegler are permitted to politicize
their mandates with impunity, the Human Rights Council will remain
incapable of being the objective and even-handed body it purports to
be. Taking all of this into consideration, one can only conclude that
the Swiss government's decision to nominate Jean Ziegler to the Human
Rights Council Advisory Committee may well be right: Perhaps the newly
elected Jean Ziegler is, ironically enough, the perfect man for the
job; for Ziegler is not a bureaucratic anomaly or a tolerated
annoyance — he is the product and embodiment of a distinct political
culture. His career has exemplified that culture's debased values even
as it has rewarded his adherence to them. In many ways, Jean Zeigler
is the UN Human Rights Council. He and his career are what the UN's
highest human rights body has become in microcosm. And just like Jean
Ziegler, if the UN as a whole continues on its current path, not only
its image and institutional legitimacy will suffer, but so will all
the great good which it once set out to do.
1. Jean Ziegler, The New Rulers of the World and Those Who Resist Them (Paris: Fayard, 2002) [French]; Ziegler, The Empire of Shame (Paris: Fayard, 2005) [French]. These two books, in hardcover alone, sold about seventy thousand copies each in France, where twenty thousand copies qualifies a book as a best seller. They were best sellers in Germany as well. See www.amazon.de/Imperium-Schande-Unterdr%C3% BCckung-Pantheon-Paperbacks/dp/3570550192. Ziegler's interview on TV5's l'Invite show can be seen at www.dailymotion.com/video/x14d8m_lempire-de- la-honte-jean-ziegler_events. 2. Erwin Koch, "Drummer of Outrage," Der Spiegel, January 21, 2002 [German]. 3. Koch, "Drummer." 4. The audio recording is available at
5. Koch, "Drummer." 6. Burton Bollag, "For One Swiss Professor, Vexing His Fellow Citizens Is a Duty and a Delight," The Chronicle of Higher Education, October 23, 1998. 7. Koch, "Drummer." 8. Bernard Ducret, Jeanne Hersch, Herbert Lithy, and Paul Trappe, "Criteria of Academic Appointment: I. Switzerland: The University of Geneva — A Controversy About M. Jean Ziegler," Minerva 14:4 (December 1976), p. 561. 9. Ducret, Hersch, Lithy, and Trappe, "Criteria of Academic Appointment" (Lithy makes his threat on p. 538 and carries it out on p. 565). 10. Jean-Marc Beguin, "Jean Ziegler, Retreat Under Fire," Le Temps, November 1, 1999 [French]. 11. Koch, "Drummer." 12. Beguin,"Retreat Under Fire." 13. Koch, "Drummer." 14. "A Future Ethiopian Constitution: Jean Ziegler, Expert," 24 Heures, July 11, 1986 [French]. 15. Jean-Claude Buhrer, "Jean Ziegler Before the Bar," Le Monde, July 26, 1993 [French]. The article also describes Ziegler's quiet campaign of defamation against a Social Democratic party competitor, Christianne Brunner, including his leaks to journalists about compromising photos and his persistent questioning of her morals. 16. "Mugabe Has History and Morality with Him," L'Hebdo, August 22, 2002 [French]. 17. Jean Ziegler, interview with AlAkhbar, September 18, 2006, quoted in "Second Statement Before the Human Rights Council by Israeli Permanent Representative Yitzhak Levanon," October 4, 2006. 18. Roger Garaudy, The Founding Myths of Modern Israel (Newport Beach, Calif.: Institute for Historical Review, 2000). The Institute for Historical Review is the world's largest publisher of Holocaust denial materials. See also Patricia Briel, "Jewish Invitees to the Tent of Dialogue Removed from Guest List," Le Temps, July 1, 2004: "In fact, like Jean Ziegler and Father Pierre, Michel Lelong defended Roger Garaudy in 1996, when the latter had been attacked about the publication of his revisionist book" [French]. "Revisionisme" is the standard French term for Holocaust denial. 19. "Developments in the Kingdom of Frenzy," Committee for Open
Debate on the Holocaust website,
20. Paul Berman, "Who's Afraid of Tariq Ramadan?" The New Republic, May 29, 2007. 21. Martin Beglinger, "Under Suspicion," Das Magazin,
January 7, 2006,
22. Beglinger, "Under Suspicion." 23. Beglinger, "Under Suspicion"; see also "Tariq Ramadan, Genesis of a Muslim Star," Le Temps, January 28, 2004 [French]. 24. Beglinger, "Under Suspicion"; see also Berman, "Who's Afraid of Tariq Ramadan?" 25. See Switzerland's Nominee to the UN Human Rights Council and
the Muammar Qaddafi Human Rights Prize, UN Watch Report, June 20,2006,
26. Bruce Palling, "Qaddafi Funds Peace Prize," The Independent, April 25, 1989. 27. Pierre Huguenin, "The Nobel of Qaddafi: Libyan Authorities
Create a New Human Rights Prize — Jean Ziegler Gets Involved," UN
Watch,
28. In addition, Ziegler has played a significant role in North-South 21, the Geneva group set up by the Libyans to manage the Qaddafi Prize. Tellingly, this group has been accredited by the UN as a "non-governmental" organization. See Switzerland's Nominee, p. 6. 29. See "Committee on Elimination of Racial Discrimination
Considers Report of Libya," UN press document, March 3, 2004,
30. Malik Ozden, "The Iraq War Makes the Ice Creak at the UN," Le Courrier, April 11, 2003 [French]. 31. Switzerland's Nominee. 32. See "Qaddafi Human Rights Prize Awarded to President Chavez," Jamahiriya News Agency (Jana), November 24, 2004 [French]. The article lists past recipients of the prize, including Ziegler. 33. "Swiss Human Rights Campaigner Turns Down Qaddafi Award," Agence France Presse — English, October 1, 2002; "'Qaddafi Prize for Human Rights' Stipend Refused by Jean Ziegler," Schweizerische Depeschenagentur AG (SDA) — Service de base francais, October 1, 2002 [French]. 34. "Jean Ziegler Refuses the Qaddafi Prize for Human Rights," Le Temps, October 2, 2002 [French]. 35. "Swiss Human Rights Campaigner"; "Jean Ziegler Refuses the Qaddafi Prize for Human Rights." 36. "Jean Ziegler Refuses the Qaddafi Prize." In fact, Ziegler has
accepted awards, such as the 2004 "Swiss Award" for politics. See
37. See www.gaddafiprize.org/HomePageAr.htm [Arabic]; "The Qaddafi
Prize for Human Rights," Jamahiriya News Agency (Jana), November 30,
2005,
38. "The Leader State with a New Coat of Paint," NZZ Am Sonntag, December 25, 2005 [German]. 39. NGO statement opposing Jean Ziegler's nomination to new UN
post, available at
40. Michel Jeanneret, "United Nations: Jean Ziegler at the Heart of a New Polemic," Le Matin, April 24, 2006 [French]. 41. Koch, "Drummer." 42. "Jean Ziegler: The Return," Le Temps, September 4, 2000 [French]. 43. "U.N. Swiss Envoy Warns of Apocalyptic Consequences of U.S. Strikes on Afghanistan," Swiss Radio International's Swissinfo website, September 22, 2001, cited by BBC Morning Europe, September 23, 2001. 44. "Special Rapporteurs Tell Third Committee That Events of 11 September Severely Affected Efforts to Promote, Protect Rights to Food, Religious Freedom," UN press release ga/shc/3660, November 9, 2001. 45. See "Swiss Rights Campaigner Urges Swiss Exile for Saddam," Agence France Presse English, February 5, 2003. 46. See "UN Rights Expert Demands Aid Agencies Get Access to Feed Iraqis," Agence France Presse English, April 3, 2003. 47. See FAO lists of countries facing food emergencies from
September/October 2000 to June 2005 at
48. Jean-Guy Allard, "UN Special Rapporteur Describes U.S. Blockade
of Cuba as 'Unilateral Arrogance,'" Granma International, Novevmber
12, 2007,
49. For an extensive list of Ziegler's anti-American statements,
see Jean Ziegler's Campaign Against America: A Study of the
Anti-American Bias of the U.N. Special Rapporteur on the Right to
Food, UN Watch, October 2005, p. 9,
50. "Jean Ziegler is Attacked in the U.S., at the IMM, and at the UN," Schweizerische Depeschenagentur AG (SDA)-Service de base francais, January 27, 2003 [French]. 51. Bernard Bridel, "Political Books: The Maelstrom of Globalization," Le Temps, October 28, 2002 [French]. 52. "Blockade of Cuba is Genocide, UN Rapporteur Asserts," Prensa Latina, March 20, 2005 [Spanish]. 53. "Eight Human Rights Experts Gravely Concerned About Reported Widespread Abuses in Darfur, Sudan," U.N. Press Release AFR/873, HR/CN/1065, March 29, 2004. See also Jonathan Fowler, "Nearly Twice as Many Iraqi Children Going Hungry Since Saddam's Ouster, U.N. Expert Says," Associated Press, March 30, 2005. 54. "According to the National Representative Jean Ziegler, 'Shimon Peres Should Be Excluded from the Socialist International,'" Associated Press Service Francais, August 9, 1982 [French]. 55. Jean Ziegler, The Right to Food: Preliminary Report of the
Special Rapporteur of the Commission on Human Rights on the Right to
Food, UN Commission on Human Rights, 56th sess., July 23, 2001,
56. "United Nations Rights Experts Appeal to Israel on House Demolitions," May 28, 2004, UN press release HR/4768, http://domino.un.org/ unispal.nsf/9a798adbf322aff38525617b006d88d7/bf1b3535067 bed9f85256ea200695b3b!OpenDocument&Highlight=2,ziegler. 57. "UN: Policies Cause Palestinian Hunger," United Press International, November 12, 2003. 58. Jean Ziegler, The Right to Food: Report Submitted by the
Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, UN Commission on Human
Rights, 60th sess. February 9, 2004,
59. Jean Zeigler, Mission to the Occupied Territories: Report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food, UN Commission on Human Rights, 60th sess. October 31, 2003. 60. "United Nations Rights Experts Appeal to Israel on House
Demolitions," UN Information Service, May 28, 2004,
61. "Jean Ziegler Compares Gaza Strip to Concentration Camp," (Swiss) SDA — Schweizerische Depeschenagentur AG, May 21, 2004 (citing Swiss Blick). Ziegler said, "the Gaza Strip resembles a huge concentration camp," and called on the European Union to suspend its free trade agreements with Israel to "impress Sharon." 62. "Arab Boycott Office Warns Caterpillar It Will Be Blacklisted for Selling Equipment to Israeli Military," Associated Press Worldstream, June 24, 2004. 63. At a briefing given by Ziegler in 2004 during the 60th session of the commission, I asked him to elaborate on his criteria for determining which countries merit a special mission and report. He responded that his decision was the product of lengthy consultation with civilian groups "such as the Red Cross." However, according to the Red Cross representative attending the event, Ziegler never engaged in any such consultation. 64. World Radio Geneva made the same mistake in an April 2007 broadcast. It should be noted that the Human Rights Council does have a Special Rapporteur on Palestine — Professor John Dugard — whose distaste for Israel rivals Ziegler's. 65. See Hillel Neuer, The Struggle Against Anti-Israel Bias at the
U.N. Commission on Human Rights, Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs,
Post-Holocaust and Antisemitism publication no. 40 (January 1, 2006),
66. Only after UN Watch protested did the UN leadership comment. Ziegler then became the only UN human rights expert in history to be publicly rebuked by the organization's highest officials — UN secretary general Kofi Annan and UN high commissioner Louise Arbour. See "Annan Slams UN Official," JTA, July 8, 2005; "Gaza Comments by Rights Expert Irresponsible — UN," Reuters, July 7, 2005. 67.Ziegler, interview with Al Akhbar. 68.UN press conference, October 26, 2006, http://youtube.com/watch ?v=ehUPTdNLpLA. 69.Jean Ziegler's Campaign, p. 8, "Table A: Comparison of Jean Ziegler's Treatment of the United States and Food Emergency Countries." 70.Jean Ziegler's Campaign, p. 8. 71.General Assembly resolution 48/141, December 20, 1993. 72.See Commission on Human Rights resolution 2003/25, April 22,
2003,
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
BENJAMIN NETANYAHU AND THE REALM OF HIGH AUDACITY
Posted by Michael Devolin, February 2, 2010. |
|
After reading a brief reference in Canada's National Post newspaper to Benjamin Netanyahu's attendance at a memorial service at the former Nazi death camp Auschwitz and his words, "we will never again allow the hand of evil to destroy the life of our people," I couldn't help but think of the Jewish families of Judea and Samaria who have been ordered by Netanyahu's government to cease and desist living as Jews in the land of Israel. I couldn't help feeling embarrassed for Prime Minister Netanyahu because of the fact that his government's special Yassam units have recently destructed a Jewish Synagogue in the Shomron-Binyamin community. I am not a Jew and therefore not extremely knowledgeable of Judaism and Israeli politics, but even a Gentile like me knows that for Netanyahu's government to forbid observant Jews the Zionism prescribed them in their Torah, to destroy Jewish synagogues in Israel is rather contrary to his promise, "we will never again allow the hand of evil to destroy the life of our people." I'm left to wonder which Jewish lives Prime Minister Netanyahu was referring to at that memorial in Auschwitz. Surely it couldn't be the lives of those Jewish families formerly of Gush Katif, nor could it be the lives of the Jewish families being persecuted in Judea and Samaria: When one is destroying synagogues in Israel and forbidding Jewish families their Zionist aspirations, it is utterly shameful to assume the guise that one is saving Jewish lives. How could a Prime Minister of Israel stand in such close proximity to the unimaginable cruelties of the Holocaust and make the promise to "never again allow the hand of evil to destroy the life of our people" while at the same time he insouciantly accedes to the wishes of a pro-Islamist American president by virtually negating the future of those Israeli Jews whose only inconvenience to the international community is the observance of their Torah-their Zionism? Simeon Strunsky wrote in No Mean City (1944) that "People who want to understand democracy should spend less time in the library with Plato and more time on the buses with people." Perhaps Prime Minister Netanyahu has become disjointed from the nonpareil Zionism of those courageous Jewish families of Judea and Samaria; perhaps he has been too long in the company of those political carnivores who cannibalized the life and breath of Ariel Sharon, at one time a devoted friend of the "greater Israel" movement. In E.L. Doctorow's famous novel Billy Bathgate, the main character relates how the condemned gangster Bo Weinberg insults his mob boss Dutch Shultz, how the insult "to this moment gave me to understand the realm of high audacity these men moved in, like another dimension." These same words gave me to understand the careers of both Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu: both were cozened by the populist and imprudent, non-Jewish platitude that refusing Jews their right to live in the land of Israel will conciliate those of Islam's faith who are no less implacable (and even more religious!) than the Nazis who dreamed Auschwitz into existence. Jewish historians will recount in shameful detail how both Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu chose to destroy the lives of Jewish families for the sake of political expediency. The land of Israel is expendable in the realm of high audacity these men move in. Michael Devolin is a Noachide and lives in Canada.
Contact him at devolin@reach.net.
Read his columns on
|
|
THE DRAMATIC TALE OF THE PERSIAN FALLOW DEER
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 1, 2010. |
|
This was written by Malkah Fleisher and it appeared in Arutz-7. |
|
Nearly 500 fallow deer currently roam throughout Israel. Their miraculous return — and the rebirth of so many biblical species — is a testament to the tenacity of a few determined people. This is the story of the Persian fallow deer, as reported by the Wall Street Journal: In 1962, Israel began actively protecting nature, with the passage of a conservation law. Active IDF General Avraham Yoffe, who was a founder of the Haganah militia, commander of the army division which boldly captured Sharm al-Sheikh in 1956, and ranking member of the pro-Judea and Samaria Movement for Greater Israel, was named head of the new Israeli Nature and Parks Authority. In the 1970s, Yoffe learned that a breed of fallow deer which made its home in the Land of Israel during biblical times, was alive and well in Iran. The Persian fallow deer is mentioned as a kosher animal in the book of Deuteronomy. In the Book of Kings, it is listed as one of the many animals presented to King Solomon as a tithe. The species was believed to have been hunted to extinction in the early 1900s, but was discovered in Iran in the late 1950s. Courting the Iranians General Yoffe was inspired to bring the deer back to Israel and re-establish the population. He began establishing relationships with Persian dignitaries, inviting first the Shah's brother, Prince Abdol Reza Pahlavi, then senior Iranian wildlife official Rashid Jamsheed to Israel to hunt the rare Nubian ibex. Permission to hunt the ibex was granted by then-Agriculture Minister Ariel Sharon, who made an exception to the strict hunting laws to make room for General Yoffe to entice the Persians into providing Israel with the treasured deer. In 1978, Prince Pahlavi agreed to give four fallow deer to the Israel Nature Authority. Yet when General Yoffe traveled to Iran to pick up the animals, he suffered a mild heart attack. On a stretcher bound for Israel, General Yoffe pleaded with Israel's last military attachè to Iran, Yitzhak Segev, to acquire the deer for Israel. Islamic revolution Yet the Islamic revolution in Iran was gaining momentum. Iran's Jews were preparing to flee and the Shah's family and associates went into hiding. Segev had his hands full preparing the emergency evacuation of 1,700 Israelis living in Iran. General Yoffe saw the window of opportunity closing, and sent zoologist Mike Van Grevenbroek to assist Segev in capturing and evacuating some deer before the shah's government crumpled. Armed with a blow-dart gun disguised as a cane, Van Grevenbroek landed at Tehran's Mehrabad Airport on November 28, 1978. After taking a day to gather supplies, Dr. Van Grevenbroek drove 10 hours to a game preserve on the Caspian Sea. For five days, he tracked, captured, and crated four deer while Segev applied for export licenses. During this time, the Islamic revolution was in full swing. The Ayatollah called to the Iranian people to spill blood as they marched through the streets amidst burning tires and looted shops. Segev was forced to hide his identity and sneak around Tehran in civilian clothes. "There was shooting all over the streets, and here I am, an Israeli general, going to the zoo," Segev told the Wall Street Journal. Iran's senior government veterinarian, a German named Mueller, initially refused to allow the deer to go to Israel. He ultimately granted a permit for them to travel to the Netherlands. On December 8th, the deer were loaded onto the last El Al flight out of Tehran, nestled amidst the valuables of Jews fleeing for their lives from the Ayatollah's regime. According to the Wall Street Journal, Van Grevenbroek said "I arrived to the airport in Tel Aviv, unloaded the deer and there's the big general waiting with tears in his eyes." Since then, biblical horses, antelope, and ostriches have been acquired and reintroduced into Israel's wild, in the hopes of recreating the Israel of old. In December 2009, four more descendants of General Yoffe's deer were freed in the hills of Jerusalem.
Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com
|
|
INTERNET: AL GORE CLAIMS HE INVENTED IT; WE PAID FOR IT; OBAMA IS GIVING IT AWAY
Posted by Cpocerl, February 1, 2010. |
|
This was written by Bradley A. Blakeman and it appeared yesterday in Newsmax
http://newsmax.com/Headline/obama-internet-iana-united/ 2010/01/31/id/348514 Bradley A. Blakeman was a deputy assistant to President George W. Bush from 2001-2004. He teaches public policy and politics and international affairs at Georgetown University. |
|
Without the ingenuity of America's brightest minds and the investment of U.S. taxpayer dollars, there would be no Internet, as we now know it today. Now, the Obama administration has moved quietly to cede control of the Web from the United States to foreign powers. Some background: The Internet came into being because of the genius work of Americans Dr.Robert E. Kahn and Dr. Vinton G. Cerf. These men, while working for the Department of Defense in the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency in the early 1970s, conceived, designed, and implemented the idea of "open-architecture networking." This breakthrough in connectivity and networking was the birth of the Internet. These two gentlemen had the vision and the brainpower to create a worldwide computer Internet communications network that forever changed the world and how we communicate in it. They discovered that providing a person with a unique identifier (TCP/IP)that was able to be recognized and interact through a network of servers would allow users to communicate with others. The servers woulduse a series of giant receivers to recognize the identifier and connect networks to networks, passing on information from computer to computer in a seamless real-time exchange of information. This new process of communication became know as the "information super highway," aka, the Internet. Now for the bad news: In an effort to show the world how inclusive, sharing, cooperative, and international America can be, the Obama administration set off on a plan to surrender control and key management of the Internet by the U.S. Department of Commerce and its agents. The key to the control America has over the Internet is through the management of the Domain Name System (DNS) and the giant servers that service the Internet. Domain names are managed through an entity named IANA, the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority. The IANA, which operates on behalf of the U.S. Department of Commerce, is responsible for the global coordination of the DNS, IP addressing, and other Internet protocol resources. In short, without an IP Address or other essential Internet protocols, a person or entity would not have access to the Internet. For years, the international community has been pressuring the United States to surrender its control and management of the Internet. They want an international body such as the United Nations or even the International Telecommunications Union, (an entity that coordinates international telephone communications), to manage all aspects of the Internet in behalf of all nations. The argument advanced for those seeking international control of the Internet is that the Internet has become such a powerful, pervasive, and a dependent form of international communications, that it would be dangerous and inequitable for any one nation to control and manage it. Just this past spring, within months of Obama's taking office, his administration, through the Department of Commerce, agreed to relinquish some control over IANA and their governance. The Obama administration has agreed to give greater representation to foreign companies and countries on IANA. This amounts to one small step for internationalism and one giant leap for surrendering America's control over an invention we have every right and responsibility to control and manage. It is in America's economic and national security interests not to relinquish any control. We are responsible for the control, operation, and functionality of one of the modern world's greatest inventions and most powerful communications network. What better country to protect the Internet than the United States? We invented it, and we paid for the research and implementation that made it possible. We are the freest, most tolerant nation on earth, we believe in the fundamental right of free speech, and we practice a free market of commerce and ideas. America has always been against censorship and has shared its invention with the world without fee or unreasonable or arbitrary restriction. The user fee to operate on the Internet is not one paid to the U.S. government; a consumer pays it to private Internet companies, who provide access to the Internet through servers for their subscribers. Look no further than China's recent move against Google to censor the Internet, and you can envision what can happen when other nations less free than the United States seek to control the Internet beyond even their own borders. America needs to wake up. If we lose control over the management of the Internet, we have given away one of our nation's greatest assets with nothing in return to show for it. The Obama administration's actions will set in motion a slow and complete takeover of the Internet by the United Nations or some other equally U.S.-hostile and unfriendly international body. And once it is gone, it will be gone forever. The surrender of the Internet will spell disaster for our nation, financially, as well as for safety, security and our standing as a great power that values freedom and the free exchange of ideas and information. As far as I am concerned, America is still the last best hope for a more peaceful and prosperous world and our president should not be looking for ways to weaken us. Rather, his job is to work to strengthen us and protect our nation's greatest asset our people's creativity and ingenuity.
Contact CPocerl at Cpocerl@aol.com |
|
PA SHEIKH: JAIL FOR ARABS WHO WORK WITH JEWS
Posted by Hillel Fendel, February 1, 2010. |
|
The supreme spiritual authority of the Palestinian Authority, Sheikh Taisar Tamimi, rules that Arabs who work in Jewish construction are traitors and must be imprisoned. The ruling also includes Arabs who take part in archaeological digs by the Israel Antiquities Authority in eastern Jerusalem, or who work with other Jewish organizations in the old city of Jerusalem. It goes even further by forbidding Arabs to do business or work with "settlers" — Jewish residents of Judea, Samaria or eastern Jerusalem. Sheikh Tamimi is the President of the PA's Sharia Moslem religious courts. His fatwa, or religious edict, gives special emphasis to the archaeological digs on the Temple Mount, and accuses Israel, once again, of seeking to uncover traces of the First and/or Second Holy Temples under the Temple Mount. Tamimi said that the above "traitors to Islam and to their homeland" must be punished with "severe and difficult prison sentences," as these construction and archaeological works are designed only to "Judaize Jerusalem." It is not clear how the ruling will be enforced, as Jewish construction and business provides sustenance to many Arabs in the area. Last August, Tamimi condemned Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, as well as "all Jewish rabbis and extremist organizations," for lying and asserting that Jerusalem was a Jewish city. This, despite the fact that a Waqf pamphlet from 1925 boasts proudly that the Temple Mount once housed Solomon's Temple. Al-Tamimi nearly caused an international incident last May when he disrupted Pope Benedict XVI's interfaith meeting in Jerusalem with a vicious verbal attack on Israel. Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva
|
|
REQUEST FROM GILAD SHALIT'S FATHER
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, February 1, 2010. |
|
Hamas has been holding this soldier for years.. It is time to
release him.
Surely this is a much better idea than pressuring Israel to release 1000 terrorists, many of them multiple murderers who will resume their terror activities as soon as they are freed. Noam Schalit, Gilad's father has requested this. If you agree with the above, please sign the petition which you will find at http://dogood.aish.com/gilad/ Please pass this email onward. Thank you.
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il. |
|
THE LONDON MOSQUE. A LONG STORY MUST REMAIN LONG
Posted by Susana K-M, February 1, 2010. |
|
This was written by Daniel Pipes and it appeared January
17, 2005 on the Daniel Pipes website
|
|
The Sunday Times (London) has an article today with an update on pla ns by Tablighi Jamaat to build a gigantic mosque complex, called the London Markaz, on a 10-acre site in Newham, a mere 500 yards from the site of the 2012 Olympic games. The Markaz' size and ambition are as noteworthy as Tablighi Jamaat's agenda is dubious. The project's backers hope the mosque and its surrounding buildings would hold a total of 70,000 people, only 10,000 fewer than the Olympic stadium. Its futuristic design features wind turbines instead of the traditional minarets, while a translucent latticed roof would replace the domes seen on most mosques. The complex is designed to become the "Muslim quarter" for the Games, acting as a hub for Islamic competitors and spectators. The Times says that the project is expected to cost over £100 million, with donations now being solicited in Britain and elsewhere. But British Muslim sources estimate the cost at £300 million, and note that this is not much less than the £420 million King Hassan of Morocco spent on his sea-side mosque, which is the most expensive modern mosque in the world. (The Saudis have spent considerably more renovating the mosques in Mecca and Medina.) Comments: (1) Should this project come to fruition, it will surely be the outstanding symbol of Islam in Europe, at least until an even larger and more expensive complex outdoes it. (2) Currently the London Muslim Centre in Whitechapel, opened in June 2004, holds the title for the UK's grandest mosque compound. As I earlier described it, "the six-storey building can hold 10,000 worshippers and includes a gym, a library, crèche and classrooms." But what is of greater interest is that "center members raised about £4 million (of the total £10 million), with the bulk of funding coming from taxpayers via such public agencies as the European Development Fund, the London Borough of Tower Hamlets, and the London Development Agency." One can only wonder how much the European, British, and London taxpayer will put out for the Markaz. (3) That the largest Islamic house of worship in Great Britain is already over three times larger than the largest Christian counterpart speaks volumes about the spirit and ambition of British Muslims; that they are planning one almost 25 times bigger reinforces the point many times over. (November 27, 2005) July 17, 2006 update: TheLondon Development Agency and the local town are said to be "very much in favour" of the Markaz plan, moving it closer to reality. But not everyone is pleased. "It will rival, if not exceed St Paul's, and perhaps be the most dominant [religious] site for the whole of London," notes Patrick Sookhdeo of the Barnabas Fund. "The local people have not been consulted. They are going to have their community handed over." Aug. 20, 2006 update: In the course of a major article on the Tablighi Jamaat (titled "Army of darkness"), the Sunday Telegraph provides an update on the Markaz: The Tablighi is in advanced discussions with the London Development Agency (LDA) for the construction of a giant, 70,000-capacity mosque complex — Europe's biggest and the centrepiece of an "Islamic Village" — in the east London borough of West Ham. If it goes ahead — at an estimated cost of £100 million-£200 million — it will become London's biggest religious site. Ken Livingstone, the London mayor, is a supporter, as, it appears, is the LDA and, once again, much of the money is likely to come from the Saudis. Comment: How can one resist noting that this "Islamic Village" will come into existence in a borough called West Ham? Sep. 24, 2006 update: A battle royal is developing over the Markaz, reports the Observer. Sep. 25, 2006 update: In a skeptical piece on the London Markaz, "The shadow cast by a mega-mosque," a town councillor representing the Christian People's Alliance who lives about a mile from the 16-acre site on which the Markaz is to be built, Alan Craig, notes two developments: Even though formal permission for the Markaz has not yet been given, "Muslims are moving into the area in preparation. The Savile Town area of Dewsbury where Tablighi Jamaat is currently based is now more than 90 per cent Muslim." Second, close to where the mosque location, the Kingsway International Christian Centre, Europe's biggest evangelical church, accommodating 12,000 worshippers, is being torn down to make way for the Olympic stadium. Whether or not Tablighi Jamaat will get permission to build the Markaz, because it is so large, will be decided not by the local Newham town councilors but by the London Thames Gateway Development Corporation, a public body funded by the Department for Communities and Local Government, whose board is appointed by the secretary for communities and local government, currently Ruth Kelly. Should the board corporation approve the Markaz proposal, that is that, with no right of appeal. Should it reject the plan, however, Tablighi Jamaat can appeal to the Government. Patrick Sookhdeo of the institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity notes that the outcome is a foregone conclusion: "The corporation has already said that the new mosque will make West Ham a 'cultural and religious destination'." The Conservative spokesman on planning for the London Assembly, Tony Arbour, complained: "For this major decision to be taken by a quango is undemocratic. Local residents have been shut out of the process." Nov. 5, 2006 update: Asif Shakoor, chairman of Sunni Friends of Newham, says that 2,500 Muslims living near in the area where the mosque is slated to be build have signed a petition against it. The petition text states: "We propose that when and if planning permission is granted ... that all Muslim groups be equally represented at the proposed place of worship that is to celebrate the 2012 Olympic Games in London." Shakoor adds that Tablighi Jamaat, the group behind the mosque, "is radicalising the younger generation. We have to make a stand." Tablighi Jamaat also faces a technical problem: the permission for its temporary mosque on the site expired on Nov. 2. A spokeswoman for the Newham council confirms that the organization is now in breach of the planning laws. Nov. 27, 2006 update: As moderate Muslim opposition to the Markaz builds, the Times (London) quotes Irfan al-Alawi, Europe director of the Center for Islamic Pluralism, at a recent seminar hosted by the Policy Exchange think-tank saying he is "extremely concerned" about the spread of Tablighi Jamaat. "Tablighi are not moderate Muslims, they are a separatist movement. If this mosque were to go ahead it will be strictly run by the Tablighis; there will be no room for moderates." Also today, the Conservative politician Michael Gove raised his "profound concern" in parliament about the funding of the Markaz, estimated to cost between £100 million and £300 million: The mosque, which is being built by an organisation called Tablighi Jamaat, raises profound concerns, not least because that organisation has been described by French intelligence as an "antechamber of fundamentalism." Two of the 7/7 bombers had direct links with the Tablighi Jamaat mosque in Dewsbury. Richard Reid, the shoe-bomber, had links with the organisation, as did John Walker Lindh, the so-called American Taliban. How can an organisation that, according to the Charity Commission, records an income of just £500,000 a year, afford to build a mosque that will cost anything between £100 million and £300 million? Dec. 6, 2006 update: The London Dockland News quotes Irfan al-Alawi making an even stronger statement against the Markaz: "A mosque for the Tablighi Jamaat could incite a separate movement against other cultures and religions," he observes. Jan. 5, 2007 update: Irfan al-Alawi is yet more explicit: "This mosque would lead to more violence in the U.K. I think, yes. Once the youth have been brainwashed, and been captured by the satanic ideology of the Tablighis, yes, it will come as a very hard-hitting movement." Feb. 18, 2007 update: "Communities and Local Government," a new agency of the British government headed by Ruth Kelly, is likely to block the Markaz, report Ben Leapman and Jonathan Wynne-Jones in London's Sunday Telegraph. A senior security source said that he was concerned about the proposed mosque, and expected ministers to use their powers to call in, and turn down, the planning application. The move was confirmed by a senior Government source, who said there were fears that the giant mosque could damage community relations in the area, and added: "We are going to stop it." There are clear planning grounds on which the development could be turned down. It is so close to the main Olympic venues that it may interfere with preparations for the Games. The Government source said that the planning application needed to be rejected "to give the Olympics a clear run." Ironically (and symbolically?), Europe's largest evangelical church, the Kingsway International Christian Centre, headed by Pastor Matthew Ashimolowo and boasting a capacity for 12,000 congregants, will be torn down and relocated to make way for the Olympic games. Feb. 26, 2007 update: The Greater London Authority website contains this announcement: The GLA (London Mayor's Office) is currently in the process of deciding the fate of the proposed £100m Olympic Masjid in London. The Evening Standard is running a poll of those in support and those not in support of building the Masjid. As of today, the vote is reply to "Are you in favour of the £100m mosque?" is running 58 percent yes, and 38 percent no, with some 28,000 votes counted. Apr. 30, 2007 update: Trustees of the Abbey Mills mosque which is planning to build the Markaz, have fired their architects, Ali Mangera and Ada Yvars Bravo, and issued this back-tracking statement: Sadly, following unauthorised publication of design concepts and press statements having been made in the name of trustees, it was felt that the relationship with both parties could no longer continue. We have never intended to build a mosque the size suggested in the media. Our vision is for a development that enhances the area and provides a mosque and complex that will support our work in the Muslim faith. We regret we have inadvertently allowed our opponents the opportunity to use our own naivety against us but we will now address their false and disappointing accusations directly and demonstrate to the community they have nothing to fear or oppose. In response, architects Mangera threatened to sue for breach of contract and defamation. "We were given a brief about the size of the mosque. This was discussed with Newham council and the London Development Agency and accepted by everyone. Perhaps the trustees have been frightened off by the opposition. They should have responded to the criticism by speaking to the press and public instead of remaining silent for the last three years." May 30, 2007 update: After the Blair government warned going ahead with the Markaz could "raise tensions," Tablighi Jamaat agreed indefinitely to delay plans to build the building. Quoting the London Times: More than 48,000 people have petitioned the Government to "abolish plans for the £100m mega-mosque" with a capacity for 12,000 worshippers beside the London 2012 Olympic park in Newham, East London. ... A statement in response to the petition, published on the Downing Street website, said: "We understand from Newham Council that there is no current planning permission or application for a mosque and Newham Council do not expect a planning application in the near future." A spokesperson for Tablighi Jamaat said that plans for the 18-acre site in Newham were being drawn up, but he added: "There's no expectation of any planning application before the end of the year, because of the size of the application." July 15, 2007 update: Two pieces of news reported by James Murray and Jason Groves in the Sunday Express. First, more than 200,000 people have signed a petition calling on Prime Minister Gordon Brown to stop the mosque from being built. Second, Kafeel Ahmed, who drove an explosive-laden Jeep into Glasgow Airport two weeks ago, belongs to the Tablighi Jamaat sect behind the Markaz. This comes on top of the two 7/7 suicide bombers. Mohammed Siddique Khan and Shehzad Tanweer, who had strong connections to Tablighi Jamaat. Nov. 4, 2007 update: Jane Perlez offers a roundup of recent developments in the New York Times: This summer on the Web site of Prime Minister Gordon Brown, more than 250,000 critics of the proposed mosque supported a petition initiated by a backer of the conservative British National Party. Some of them said a large mosque had no right to exist in such a prominent place in a Christian country. When, around the same time, Karen Armstrong, a historian of religion, wrote an article in the liberal Guardian newspaper commenting favorably about the mosque, the paper's Web site was deluged with complaints. 
Ground breaking has been delayed until after the 2012 Olympics, Perlez reports. Given the original plans for the Markaz, this is major news. Nov. 6, 2007 update: A "vile video" has been posted on YouTube, writes Melanie Phillips writes in "The threatening agenda of the Olympic mosque." This video implicitly threatens the life of the member of the local Newham council who has led the campaign against the mosque. Councillor Alan Craig, head of the Christian Peoples' Alliance, has sought for the past year to bring these concerns about the mosque proposal to public attention. Alan Craig is an eminently decent, civilised man who counts many Muslims among his friends and is a courageous voice against Islamist extremism and hatred. He has been unflinching in his reasoned determination to publicise the dangers inherent in this mosque. Now this video, which appears to have been put up by a man aged 23 from Stevenage called Muhammed, has appeared with the rubric "In memory of Councillor Alan Craig" on every frame, implying that he will be murdered. Even more appallingly, the video features images not just of Craig but of his wife and small children. And at least until this morning, a link to this video has actually been displayed on the Olympic mosque project's own website; under the rubric "subscribe to favourites" this website invites viewers to subscribe to "abdullah 1425," and with a couple of clicks up comes the video threatening Alan Craig and his family. The Evening Standard reports that "Mr Craig has now contacted police in fear of his family's safety and demanded that the video be taken down." In addition, the video flatly asserts that "The mosque will be built in time for the 2012 Olympic Games." Comment: The video suggests a raising of the stakes. Mar. 4, 2008 update: Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, the Indian-born co-founder of the "Muslim Parliament of Great Britain," has surprisingly come out against the Markaz. "We have too many mosques. I think it should not be built. What we need first is more integration between the existing mosques and the wider community." To which, a Tablighi Jamaat spokesman replied: "These are the view of just one man and there are other voices to be heard. We must also point out we are at a very early point in the consultation." Oct. 19, 2008 update: No less surprising is for the Church of England, in no less a person of Philip Lewis, a well-known scholar of Islam in Great Britain, to condemn the Markaz. In the first intervention by the Church in the debate, Lewis expressed a worry that Tablighi Jamaat is "isolationist," "patriarchal," and beholden to a narrow reading of Islam. He fears that the mosque would segregate Muslims: Tablighi Jamaat does not try to engage with wider society so there must be clear worries that such a mosque would lead to a ghetto. The danger is that this becomes a self-contained world, which would be vulnerable to extremists. ... If you're drawn into a minimalist reading of Islam it can turn very easily into isolationism. There's a religious supremacy in their teaching which doesn't accept other religions. It can create an us and them mentality. ... Do you want an iconic building that unwittingly privileges this reading of Islam? If one is serious about cohesion and encouraging people to live well together then Tablighi Jamaat have serious questions to answer. Nonetheless, a Tablighi Jamaat spokesman said that it is proceeding with the planning application, probably in mid-2009. Jan. 18, 2010 update: A famous victory for those opposed to the Markaz: the The Times (London) reports that plans to build it "have been halted." And not just that: "Tablighi Jamaat, the Islamic sect behind the proposal, is to be evicted this week from the East London site, where it has been operating illegally a temporary mosque." Comment: This outcome shows what determined, sustained, and intelligent opposition to an Islamist project can achieve. Contact Susana K-M by email at suanema@gmail.com |
|
BERLUSCONI DISCUSSES TERRITORY; ABBAS DIVERTS AID TO WAR; HILLEL TO HOST J STREET
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, February 1, 2010. |
|
MORE SAUDIS TO STUDY IN U.S. By year-end, the number of Saudi Arabians studying in American universities is expected to increase from 25,000 to 30,000 (www.imra.org.il, 1/30). Will they be studying democracy, feminism, and comparative religion, or military science? Some Americans are under the illusion that studying in the U.S. gives foreign youth democratic and tolerant attitudes. Not in colleges increasingly "dumbed down" and run by radicals. The illusion never was valid for people whose cultures have strong values contradicting American values. ITALY'S PM BERLUSCONI DISCUSSES TERRITORY In today's interview by Haaretz, Italy's Prime Minister Berlusconi discusses Israeli areas. He brought eight other Cabinet members for a three-day visit to Israel and a joint meeting of their Cabinets. He purported to speak as a friend of Israel. 
He suggested that Syria and Israel make a peace agreement in which Israel returns the Golan Heights to Syria, and Syria stops supporting organizations that do not recognize Israel. He praised the temporary freeze on Jewish construction in Judea-Samaria as important to convince the Arabs of Israel's goodwill. He explained, "It will never be possible to convince the Palestinians of Israel's good intentions while Israel continues to build in territories that are to be returned as part of a peace agreement." About Israel's withdrawal from Gaza, he said indirectly that it did not work out well, inasmuch as synagogues were destroyed and replaced by missile launchers that fire into Israel (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 1/31). Apparently, PM Berlusconi did not notice that the failure of Israel's withdrawal from Gaza to convince the Arabs of Israeli goodwill, and its facilitating Arab war-making, contradicts his proposing to renew the failed prescription in Judea-Samaria and Golan. Nor does he or any other leader mention the large withdrawal from northern Samaria that occurred simultaneously with the one from Gaza. Israel's attempt at goodwill in Samaria was not even noticed. So much for that prescription! PM Berlusconi did not say why the freeze shows goodwill or why it is important for Israel and only Israel to show it, and what it convinces the Arab of. Is he blind to the constant Arab incitement to bigotry and violence against Jews and repeated aggression? Those acts make Arab goodwill and interest in peace dubious. It is the aggressors who need to show goodwill, not their Israeli victims. But what officials think that deep? They parrot the shibboleths of the day. What does he mean, "territories that are to be returned?" First, what does he mean, "returned?" Palestinian Arabs never had title to them. The notion "Palestinian Arabs" is a term and concept of relatively recent contrivance for public relations. Between 1948 and 1967, Egypt illegally conquered Gaza in a war of aggression. Jordan, which is a part of the Land of Israel, a.k.a. Palestine, illegally conquered Judea and Samaria in that same war of Arab aggression. One cannot "return" something to people who never legally had it. How does he define "territories" to be "returned?" Israelis do not build outside of existing municipal boundaries in Judea-Samaria. Israel expects to retain at least the main Jewish towns there. And why not? It is their homeland. International law, as passed by the League of Nations and endorsed into the UN Charter gives Israel the best claim to it all. It was used as a base for repeated aggression against Israel, a circumstance that international law permits the victim of aggression to prevent a recurrence of by annexation, vexing as that may be to anti-Zionist. Then what is wrong with Jews building there? Berlusconi implies that that Israel should give up that entire part of its homeland. It is not his prerogative to insist upon any particular outcome. Berlusconi makes the same demand about the Golan Heights. They are in the same historical and legal situation as the Territories, except that they were removed from the Mandate before the Mandate was officially inaugurated and after repeated Syrian aggression from there, they were legally incorporated into Israel. If the Premier understands that Israel made a mistake in withdrawing from Gaza, why does he propose it compound that mistake by withdrawing from more territory, including the Heights? Why does he recommend that Israel accept as valid the proposed promise of Syria, a recidivist imperialist aggressor, to make peace? Why has he not cited a single indication that the Arabs have given up their ideology of religious conquest and taken on an ideology of peace? Why does he treat the issue as territorial, when territory is just a tool for religious aggression? His proposal would enable Syria to make a deceitful promise, get territory needed for successful aggression, and then resume its long-term goal of taking over the area. PM Berlusconi's proposals would put the Arabs in a position from which they easily could conquer Israel. A charitable conclusion is that he is a friend of Israel but does not understand the issues. DERSHOWITZ' NEW CHARGES AGAINST GOLDSTONE REPORT Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz spoke with Israeli Army Radio, today about the Goldstone UN report that accused Israel of war crimes. This is taken verbatim from Hillel Fendel's report in http://www.israelnationalnews.com/, 1/31, except for omitting summarizing.) In his internet-publicized analysis of the Goldstone report, Dershowitz wrote that it is "much worse than most of its detractors (and supporters) believe. It is far more accusatory of Israel, far less balanced in its criticism of Hamas, far less honest in its evaluation of the evidence, far less responsible in drawing its conclusion, far more biased against Israeli than Palestinian witnesses, and far more willing to draw adverse inferences of intentionality from Israeli conduct and statements than from comparable Palestinian conduct and statements." Goldstone's report, Dershowitz wrote, "is worse than any report previously prepared by any other United Nations agency or human rights group. As Maj.-Gen. Avichai Mandelblit, the advocate general of the Israeli Defense Forces, aptly put it: 'I have read every report, from Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, the Arab League. We ourselves set up investigations into 140 complaints. It is when you read these other reports and complaints that you realize how truly vicious the Goldstone report is. He made it look like we set out to go after the economic infrastructure and civilians, that it was intentional: It's a vicious lie.'" Methodology Worse than Conclusions Dershowitz said that though the conclusions are harmful and unfavorable to Israel, it is Goldstone's "methodology, analysis and substantive findings" that should be criticized. Dershowitz wrote that he has offered to debate Goldstone about his findings, but that Goldstone "has refused, as he has generally refused to respond substantively to credible critics of the report." Different Standards for Israel, Hamas Prof. Dershowitz chiefly targets two aspects of the report. One is the fact that it uses different criteria for judging Hamas actions and Israeli actions: "Its writers applied totally different standards, rules and criteria in evaluating the intent of the parties to the conflict." For instance, when faced with doubts about various incidents, in Israel's case they were resolved against Israel, "concluding that its leaders intended to kill civilians," while doubts regarding Hamas activities were resolved in favor of Hamas, "concluding that it did not intend to use Palestinian civilians as human shields." "Moreover, when it had precisely the same sort of evidence in relation to both sides — for example, statements by leaders prior to the commencement of the operation — it attributed significant weight to the Israeli statements, while entirely discounting comparable Hamas statements. This sort of evidentiary bias, though subtle, and perhaps not readily apparent to the non-legal reader, permeates the entire report." The Goldstone report also "takes a completely different view regarding the inferring of intent from actions. When it comes to Israel, the report repeatedly looks to results and infers from the results that they must have been intended. But when it comes to Hamas, it refuses to draw inferences regarding intent from results. For example, it acknowledges that some [Hamas combatants wore civilian clothes, and it offers no reasonable explanation for why this would be so other than to mingle indistinguishably from civilians. Yet it refuses to infer intent from these actions." Conclusions are Wrong Secondly, Dershowitz writes that the two central conclusions reached in the report are "demonstrably wrong." The report's two conclusions are that 1) Israel used the 8,000 Hamas rocket attacks on its citizens as an [excuse for the real purpose of the operation, which was to target innocent Palestinian civilians for death, and 2) Hamas was not guilty of deliberately and willfully using the civilian population as human shields. It found "no evidence" that Hamas fighters "engaged in combat in civilian dress," "no evidence" that "Palestinian combatants mingled with the civilian population with the intention of shielding themselves from attack," and no support for the claim that mosques were used to store weapons... As we will see, the report is demonstrably wrong about both of these critical conclusions." Dershowitz told Army Radio that he feels Israel should respond to the report by conducting its own inquiry, by a committee headed by a former Supreme Court judge. He said that he and Goldstone were friends and colleagues for a long time, "but now I see him as a traitor... It's as if they would have taken a Jew to edit the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. He uses his Jewish last name to kosher his slander of the Jewish People." I think that Dershowitz proves that Goldstone slandered the Jewish people but not that he uses his Jewish name to do it. HAMAS FOUNDER ASSASSINATION: UPDATE Hamas speculates that it was not by coincidence that Israeli Infrastructure Minister Landau visited Dubai at about the time that Hamas official Mahmoud al-Mabhouh was assassinated. Hamas claims that the visit was a cover for the assassination. The slain man's daughter said she is considering lodging a lawsuit
in Britain against Israeli officials for the deed
A lawsuit should require evidence and not speculation. But the purpose of "lawfare" is to exploit court systems that have poor standards on libel or war crimes, such as Britain's, to make adverse headlines against Israel, not to prove anything. All such cases have failed, to date. More courts are rejecting such cases without trying them. Some countries are starting to realize that they are tying up their own judicial systems with foreign propagandists. Suppose Israel did commission the assassination. If it did, it should be commended. Mabhouh was a terrorist commander responsible for murdering and kidnapping innocent people. He committed war crimes. Since the governments hosting him will not extradite him, and he is at war with Israel, Israel has the right to pursue him. International law requires countries to pursue pirates and their equivalent, modern terrorists, as scourges of mankind. His case is a different one from allegations that Israel deliberately fired upon civilians in Gaza. Those allegations have either been disproved or not proved. They do not jibe with Israeli military policy. ISRAEL'S PM RENEWING JEWISH CLAIM TO JUDEA-SAMARIA Israeli PM Netanyahu has been changing the emphasis of his policy from making goodwill concessions to bolstering the Jewish claim to Judea-Samaria. He reaffirmed "...Israel's claim on major Jewish population centers in Judea and Samaria, and declared the Jewish city of Ariel 'the capital of Samaria.'" "'Everyone who sees the geography here understands how important' Ariel and the surrounding areas are." [This is the traditional time of tree-planting.] He planted a symbolic tree in the city, as he did earlier in the week in Gush Etzion, south of Jerusalem, and Maaleh Adumin, located west of the capital and overlooking the Dead Sea. Besides putting down actual roots, he said he was planting "three
principles: Growing strength, Jewish settlement and culture in the
heart of our land of our forefathers and where we will remain and
build." "His remarks implied that the current temporary 10-month
building freeze on new homes for Jews in Judea and Samaria will remain
an interim measure, as he previously has promised."
(Compare Netanyahu's profound remarks with Italy's PM Berlusconi's remarks.(see my blog) Netanyahu's remarks contrast with U.S. government policy (see my blog) Does Netanyahu mean what he says now, as reports swirl around about his giving in to U.S. and Arab demands? As for the freeze, two months down, eight to go. It seems like 10 months ago. U.S. ARMING GULF STATES AGAINST IRAN President Bush had inaugurated $20 billion in arms sales to the Gulf Arab states. President Obama is continuing that policy, which would boost the U.S. economy. The stated objectives are to protect against Iranian aggression against them in reaction to an Israeli raid on Iran's nuclear facilities, to reassure the Gulf states that they do not need to develop their own nuclear weaponry, and to calm Israel. Recipients of the build-up are Saudi Arabia, UAE, Bahrain, Kuwait and Qatar. "A U.S. army commander said in Bahrain last year that the UAE air force alone 'could take out the entire Iranian air force, I believe.'" (The UAE air force, combined with the Saudi and Egyptian air forces, should not be taken lightly by Israel.) Whether this move would calm Israel is not clear, because, as the Washington Post noted, this is a conventional arms race. [The Gulf states are not at peace with Israel, and Saudi Arabia practically borders on Israel.] Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate, frustrated by Iran's lack of
"engagement," unanimously passed a bill punishing U.S. companies that
supply refined oil to Iran and imposing sanctions on Iranian oil
refining. The Executive branch, however, had urged the Senate to
delay the bill. It seems to be relying upon the arms program and is
not pressing for stiff sanctions against Iran. The State Dept. denies
having prepared a UN plan for sanctions
Pres. Obama based his policy on diplomacy and sanctions. Why then did he not have a sanctions plan ready for when, at year-end, his deadline for diplomacy with Iran was not met? I have mentioned the risk in arming Gulf states. It is only fair to mention that the U.S. does not have other options short of war. U.S. arming of Egypt, the Palestinian Authority, and the Lebanese Army are disguised as sales but are gifts. The U.S. gives some military subsidy to Israel, and Israel pays about as much in high interest on past U.S. loans as it gets from the U.S.. The U.S. forgave Egypt's debt to it, which was at low interest, but did not forgive Israel's debt. TAXPAYERS ALLIANCE: ABBAS DIVERTS AID TO WAR The TaxPayers Alliance, from London, will be meeting on February 1 at the Israeli Foreign Ministry to document Palestinian Authority (P.A.) misuse of foreign government donations to incite to hatred of Israel. P.A. efforts indoctrinate the younger generations against making peace (www.imra.org.il, 1/31). Foreign donors, such as the EU and U.S. know this by now, but persist. What does that say about them? The U.S. claims that it donates directly to projects, but that assumes that the projects aren't a way of hiring and therefore subsidizing terrorists, and that the funds are not diverted from those projects. Foreign donations for specific projects relieves the P.A. budget for aid to terrorism. HILLEL TO HOST J STREET The Foundation for Jewish Campus Life, known as the Hillel Jewish student organization will host the start of a J Street grassroots information and build-up campaign, on February 4 at the University of Pennsylvania in Philadelphia. J Street calls itself pro-Israel, but, "The event is vehemently opposed by counter-protest groups, among them an organization calling itself 'Z Street,' which noted that one member of the J Street Philly Host Committee 'compared Israel's treatment of Gaza with the genocide in Sudan.' Another Host Committee member is involved with ICAHD, a radical group which interferes with Israeli efforts to stop terrorism and which advocates 'Boycotts, Divestment and Sanctions against Israel.'" "'Z Street' added pointedly in an Internet posting, 'If the local
people associated with J Street have such extreme positions against
Israel, what do you think college students will learn from J Street?
Do we want Jewish college students to associate Hillel with J
Street?'"
J Street people have a peculiar way of demonstration their pro-Israel inclination such as to make themselves indistinguishable from anti-Israel activists. So, too, apparently does Hillel. Israel's more subtle enemies declare themselves friends of Israel or interested in peace with Israel. Judge them by their deeds.
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 and visit his website:
|
|
DEPUTY CHIEF OF STAFF: GOLDSTONE REPORT A TROJAN HORSE
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, February 1, 2010. |
|
Maj. Gen. Benny Gantz spoke in the Herzliya Conference about Iran,
Hezbollah and Gaza. He referred to the Goldstone report as a Trojan
horse. From:
|
|
On Sunday (Jan 31.) the Deputy Chief of Staff, Maj. Gen. Benny Gantz, addressed the 10th Herzliya Conference. He referred to the northern border, Hezbollah, Syria, Hamas and Iran. "Each player is very volatile and their threats have been growing more powerful," he explained. Hezbollah and the Northern border "Hezbollah is becoming stronger after the Second Lebanon War. They are investing a lot in deployment of arms to towns and villages," said Maj. Gen Gantz and added that, "Hezbollah is moving its military bases and capabilities throughout the entire area of Lebanon including the northern part of Lebanon." Gantz added that this is proof that the Lebanese government is allowing Hezbollah to operate in territories which they didn't before, and the IDF will hold the Lebanese government responsible for any eventuality with Hezbollah. Gaza and West Bank "In Gaza we have enjoyed one of the most peaceful years," Gantz explained. "Smuggling into Gaza is still taking place and Hamas is consolidating their grip on the Strip." Gantz also said that Gaza is a very volatile region and this reality can change at any given time. Referring to the West Bank, Gantz praised the security forces for the quietness that the West Bank has enjoyed in the past years. "Better intelligence in cooperation with the Israel Security Agency has produced better security in the West Bank." In addition, Gantz said that this security situation and the easing of restrictions by the IDF in the West Bank has allowed for a stronger economic recovery in that area. Iran "Iran is smuggling weapons from air, land and sea. Areas like Africa are mostly used to smuggle weapons by land," Gantz stated. "We will continue to observe these developments and act accordingly." He also added that the Francop ship operation is one example of missions the IDF will continue to implement to cut down on the smuggling of weapons from Iran to Hezbollah and Hamas. The Major General also spoke about the importance of the international community to strengthen sanctions against Iran. "The world and Israel cannot ignore the situation in Iran," he claimed. Gantz added that the IDF has to train for symmetrical and asymmetrical warfare. "Iran trains terror organizations with symmetrical tools for use in asymmetrical wars. The enemy is acting in urban neighborhoods and putting citizens in danger. To counter this we must always maintain conventional competence in the IDF. We must be prepared for both symmetrical and asymmetrical war. We must develop a combination of both abilities." Goldstone and Media The Deputy Chief of Staff also spoke of the importance of winning the media battle. "We must counter the way our enemies always turn from aggressors to victims." Maj. Gen. Benny Gantz referred to the Goldstone report as a Trojan horse. "The Goldstone report is a Trojan horse; it gives terrorist organizations legitimacy to fight us from urban populations." "Our moral soundness is clear after dozens of investigations and interrogations. The famous army doctor who was head of the Israeli field hospital also took part in Operation Cast Lead." "Israel must make it clear that while we share a number of values with the West, there is a basic difference. We live with our values in a war zone. This fusillade does not allow us to respond any other way. We must remove this threat. We cannot remain victims. Maj. Gen. Gantz also said that during Operation Cast Lead, his mother, who passed way five months ago, told him: "Don't stop sending food to Gaza, but don't stop fighting either." "This is the essence of it all, we must remain moral, but at the same time continue to fight in the face of the threats." |
|
THINKING ABOUT ISRAEL'S APPEASEMENT OPTION
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 1, 2010. |
|
Dr. Aaron Lerner writes about IDF brass lobbying journalists, speaking about the benefits of withdrawal from the Golan Heights. Clearly, this is a repeat of Israel's Foreign Minister Ehud Barak's campaign to evacuate the Golan Heights when he was Defense Minister under PM Ehud Olmert August 29, 2007. Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis). Contact him by email imra@netvision.net.il and visit the website: http://www.imra.org.il I must assume that Barak, once again Chief of Defense, and a deeply committed Leftist who tried to gift 98% of the Land Israel liberated in 1967 to Yassir Arafat, is at it again through the Leftist Generals who are anxious for promotion to follow his orders. At the time, he proclaimed that the Golan must be "immediately" abandoned because the Syrians could too easily overrun the Golan and kill all civilians and IDF (Israel Defense Forces) troops. Fortunately, he was ignored by the Israeli Government as an hysterical Leftist kook who was infamous for trying to surrender Judea, Samaria, Gaza, the Jordan Valley, all those parts of Jerusalem Jordan had occupied and desecrated for 19 years from 1948 to 1967 — and the Golan Heights first. Why does Israel's Prime Minister Binyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu keep someone from Olmert's corrupt, cowardly government who negotiated "secretly" with the U.S. State Department and Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah, Tanzim, Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigades — all from the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization)? Ehud Barak should have been fired years ago as an unstable person whose lack of loyalty to the Jewish people, the Jewish Nation/State and the Land G-d gave to the Jews in perpetuity makes him the quintessential clear and present danger to the State and her people all over the world. For him to get Leftist Generals to carry out his policy of abandoning the Golan would be considered a subversive act in most other nations. This excludes America where President Obama has instituted a PC (Politically Correct) foreign policy that protects Islamic Terrorists — like the Fort Hood shooter of who killed 13 American soldiers, wounding 31. Or the protector of the undie-bomber of December 25th over Detroit with enough PETN in his briefs to blow a huge hole in the plane. Why are these radical "Jihadi" (warriors for Islam) predators being protected with lawyers and Miranda rights? Why is the Obama government even broaching the possibility of trying the 9/11 Terrorists in civilian court next to civilians' residences and only blocks from Ground Zero? I guess that Ehud Barak fits with Barack Obama's crowd of Islam appeasers. |
|
IDF brass recently re-launched a campaign with Israeli journalists promoting withdrawal from the Golan in order to avoid the casualties the Jewish State could expect to suffer should Syria attack. Granted, there are people in the IDF who religiously believe (that's "believe" rather than "think" — because this is a matter of "faith" rather than "logic") that withdrawing from the Golan in and of itself would secure Israel's northern border since Syria would never attack if it had the Golan back. But is there a logic to withdrawal even if you recognize that there are countless conceivable scenarios under which Syria would opt to strike Israel even after a beautifully moving signing ceremony on the White House lawn followed by a complete Israeli withdrawal from every last centimeter of the Golan? Here are some explanations: There are gizmos on the drawing boards that would significantly reduce Israel's casualties in the event of a conflict with Syria. So it is best to postpone conflict until the gizmos are deployed by leaving the Golan. Israel would be in a considerably better diplomatic situation being attacked by Syria after signing a peace agreement and handing over the Golan than if Syria attacked in order to "liberate" the Golan. Postponement of conflict in and of itself is worthwhile. But there are problems with these arguments. Israel isn't making gizmos in a vacuum. There is no reason to assume that foreign military industries won't develop and sell gizmos to Syria that balance our gizmos out. In fact — following the Egyptian model, Syria could easily find itself being supplied with just such made in USA gizmos as a reward for agreeing to sign a treaty with Israel in return for the Golan. When it comes to nations deciding who is at fault in a conflict, the facts, unfortunately, take a back seat to other considerations. More importantly, better press — even if we enjoyed it as a result of being attacked from the Golan rather than on the Golan, wouldn't likely translate into the kind of timely military support we would require if we faced Syrian attack after leaving the Golan. Want to argue for appeasement? OK. But let's talk about it without the blinding assumption that a post-withdrawal Syria would never attack. Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
PROGRESS! IDF TO RETURN TO SHDEMA. PROGRESS!
Posted by Yaacov Levi, February 1, 2010. |
|
Dear Friends, The struggle for a Jewish Shdema is far from over, but thank G-d, progress is being made. The IDF is to return to Shdema. Below please find the details about this past Friday's event with links to pictures by Gemma Blech and a short movie by Sharon Katz of Voices. We also have a short movie by Abigail Browning which we will put up and send out in our next mailing. Please make sure to join us this coming Friday in Shdema. Now, more than ever, we need to show that even with the IDF upcoming return to Shdema, we will continue with our activities, for the army only stays in places where there are civilians. With love for Israel, Nadia Matar and Yehudit Katsover |
|
The Brigade Commander to the Committee for Jewish Shdema: "In about a week the army will return to Shdema to establish an outpost." Shaul Goldstein: "This is a sign that progress is being made. Shdema will yet be a community." The Committee for a Jewish Shdema and Women in Green: "We will continue to conduct activity at the site." This past Friday, we traveled from Har Homa to Shdema in a car convoy of more than a hundred people, in dozens of vehicles bedecked with Israeli flags, in the pre-Tu bi-Shevat event with the slogan: Connecting Jerusalem to Gush Etzion — Har Homa to Shdema. A moving morning was held at Shdema, beginning with greetings by the head of the Gush Etzion Regional Council, Shaul Goldstein. Goldstein related to the statement by the brigade commander, who announced the establishment of a military outpost at Shdema in the coming week or two, and said: "This is good news. The establishment of a military outpost at Shdema is a sign that, with God's help, Shdema will become a flourishing community, and this is due to the determined and persevering activity of the Committee for a Jewish Shdema. The Committee for a Jewish Shdema succeeded in its mission, and now can keep going forward, and become the 'Committee for Jewish Jenin' or for Jewish Shechem." Then Herzl Yehekzel, chairman of the Har Homa neighborhood administration, spoke and mentioned the importance of the linkage between Har Homa and Shdema and the Jewish continuity between them, in order to prevent the spread of the Arab construction that threatens to choke Har Homa: "This [the Jewish continuity] could become reality, just as Har Homa expanded beyond expectations and plans." Avraham Azoulay, the editor of the Le Petit Hebdo weekly, a Har Homa resident, spoke in the name of the immigrants from France of the importance of the struggle for a Jewish Shdema. The Committee for a Jewish Shdema and Women in Green will continue to conduct activity in the Eretz Israel culture center at Shdema. In the meantime, two goals have been attained: (1) the area has not been handed over to the Arabs; (2) there is a Jewish presence. A special holiday atmosphere reigned at Shdema. Eretz Israel and Carlebach songs — with Adam Tzahi and Yoni Sharon, accompanied by Eli Gilboa and his accordion — are always heartwarming. The event concluded with joyous dancing. This coming Friday at 9:00 am Prof. Hillel Weiss will lecture on "The
For Voices video clip about this past Friday's event
For Arutz-7 article:
For our movie about the struggle for a Jewish Shdema:
For the photogallery of the struggle for a Jewish Shdema by Rivka Ryback
For Abigail Browning's photo gallery:
The Committee for a Jewish Shdema and Women in Green For details: Yehudit Katsover — 050-7161818, Nadia Matar — 050-5500834 Contact Yaacov Levi by email at jlevi_us@yahoo.com |
|
ANTI-SEMITISM IN SWEDEN
Posted by Patrick Dempsey, February 1, 2010. |
|
Shabbat Shalom. This is a copy of an e-Mail I have sent to the Swedish Embassy in London. A friend of mine lives in Sweden and I would not wish for her to have to deal with this type of hatred, levelled against her and her People, the Jewish People. I have always admired Sweden's sense of fair play and integrity. I have written 3 Books on the subject of the Holocaust and have not found Sweden wanting when it comes to an altruistic benevolence. I recently endorsed a campaign against a so called art display(sic) which showed terrorism against the Jews in an inappropriate way. I was regaled for doing so when 1,000's of my correspondents followed my disgust and complained. I am here again to ask what the Swedish Government intends to do about this new rise of anti-Jewish hatred. Have not learned the lessons for the Holocaust. Did Raoul Wallenberg do all that he could so that Sweden could deliver a further assault upon Jewish existence. see the below internet reference that has been forwarded to me. Patrick Dempsey This below is entitled
Jews flee Malmö as anti-Semitism grows and it was written by
David Landes. It appeared January 27, 2010 in The Local (Swieden's News in English)
|
|
Threats and harassment are becoming increasingly commonplace for Jewish residents in Malmö in southern Sweden, leading many Jews to leave the city out of fear for their safety. "Threats against Jews have increased steadily in Malmö in recent years and many young Jewish families are choosing to leave the city," Fredrik Sieradzki of the Jewish Community of Malmö (Judiska Församlingen i Malmö) told The Local. "Many feel that the community and local politicians have shown a lack of understanding for how the city's Jewish residents have been marginalized." Last year there were 79 crimes against Jewish residents reported to the police in Malmö, roughly double the number reported in 2008, according to the Skånska Dagbladet newspaper. "That probably doesn't tell the whole story because not everyone chose to make a report. Perhaps they fear they will add to an already infected situation," Susanne Gosenius, a hate crimes coordinator with the Skåne police, told the newspaper, which has published series of articles about the growing anti-Semitism in Malmö. In addition, Jewish cemeteries and synagogues have repeatedly been defaced with anti-Semitic graffiti, and a chapel at another Jewish burial site in Malmö was firebombed in January of last year. There are currently an estimated 3,000 Jews living in the south of Sweden, with most residing in Malmö, Helsingborg, and Lund. About 700 currently belong to the Jewish Community of Malmö, but the group's membership rolls have been dropping steadily in recent years. "It's sort of a downward spiral," Sieradzki told The Local. "People want to maintain their Jewish traditions, but when they see others leave after being threatened, they begin to question whether or not they want to stay here." Skånska Dagbladet highlighted the case of Marcus Eilenberg, a 32-year-old father of two who has decided to move to Israel. "My children aren't safe here. It's going to get worse," he told the newspaper Eilenberg's family on his mother's side has roots in Malmö that date back to the 1800s, while his father's parents came to Sweden in 1945 after surviving Auschwitz. He describes for the newspaper how people call him "damn Jew" ('jävla jude') when he walks to synagogue and that his friends are frequently harassed and threatened. "Imagine that my family can't feel safe in fantastic Sweden. It's really terrible," Eilenberg told Skånskan. He blamed part of the problem on passive local politicians who he believes have failed to openly distance themselves from anti-Semitism and refuse to act when members of the Jewish community find themselves under constant threat. Sieradzki agrees that the attitudes of Malmö politicians, especially Social Democrat city council chair Ilmar Reepalu, have allowed anti-Semitism to fester. "He's demonstrated extreme ignorance when it comes to our problems," Sieradzki explained. Speaking with Skånskan, Reepalu is quick to point out that "every type of threat and oppression directed at a particular ethnic group is totally unacceptable". "Obviously children with a Jewish background shouldn't be subject to harassment. Nor it is okay to shoot an imam at a mosque," he told the newspaper. When asked to explain why Jewish religious services often require security guards and even police protection, Reepalu said much of the violence directed toward Malmö's Jewish community come from members of extremist right-wing groups, a theory which baffles Sieradzki. "I'm not saying we don't have problems with neo-Nazis, but the threats aren't as concrete," he explained. "More often it's the far-left that commonly use Jews as a punching bag for their disdain toward the policies of Israel, even if Jews in Malmö have nothing to do with Israeli politics. "It's shameful and regrettable that such a powerful politician could be so ignorant about the threats we face." In addition to the far-left, Sieradzki said that a "very small segment" of the city's growing population of Muslim immigrants from Arab countries in the Middle East are also responsible for growing anti-Semitism. "This is a small group of extremists who have decided to go after Jews wherever they are in the world and regardless of their relationship to Israel," he said. One of the things that bothers Sieradzki most, however, are Reepalu's statements about a pro-peace rally arranged by the Jewish Community in Malmö in response to the December 2008 Israeli incursions, which came under attack from members of a violent counter demonstration. According to Reepalu, the organization "sent the wrong signals" by holding the demonstration instead of distancing itself from Israel's actions. "If you read between the lines, he seems to be suggesting that the violence directed toward us is our own fault simply because we didn't speak out against Israel," Sieradzki explained. "We're a non-political, cultural and religious organization, and there are all kinds of Jews in Malmö. Sieradzki admitted he is currently "pessimistic" about the future of the Jewish community in Malmö, saying that there needs to be a "complete change in attitude" among the city's politicians if the situation is going to improve. "These issues need to be taken seriously," he said, arguing that there needs to be a dialogue involving politicians, Islamic groups, and the Jewish community. "But right now many Jews in Malmö are really concerned about the situation here and don't believe they have a future here
Patrick Dempsey writes on the Holocaust. Contact him at pd1010@hotmail.com |
|
READER-SELECTED VIDEOS
Posted by Various Readers, February, 2010. |
|
911 call with a 5-year old. Adorable. From Fred Reifenberg (28feb10) www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDARfDJw80s&feature=player_embedded Uncle Sam's China Video From Boris Celser(28feb10) During the Bubble days, when it seemed like everyone was going to get rich, people tended to let a lot of things slide. That bubble burst, and during a serious economic downturn, like the one we are plagued with now, people tend to wake up in large numbers. For example, it's unlikely that this video would have been popular five years ago. Now, they say it's a major Internet hit. http://www.brasschecktv.com/page/810.html Paul Ryan for President. From Dave Alpern (28feb10) There is some, I repeat some, light at the end of the tunnel. Problem is, it's faint, and there are so few in government like Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan for President. I was wondering if I'd ever see an actual plausible candidate again. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zPxMZ1WdINs Reminds me of that old joke about why we don't vote: If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. Honest Reporting Collection From Susana K-M (27feb10) Honest Reporting Video Collection BARACK HUSSEIN OBAMA WAS A CIA OPERATIVE THAT HELPED THE TALIBAN TO WIN THE WAR AGAINST THE SOVIETS From David M. Dastych (27feb10)
Please listen and watch to this report, published on Yutube.com. It explains much about President Barack Hussein Obama's past and his operations in Asia on behalf of the CIA. Obama was, in fact, a long-time principal CIA asset.His later political career could be also proven by this. Believe or not but certainly more facts will emerge in May 2010, at Columbia trial. www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WedxY61d60&feature=player_embedded Now we know why no one at Columbia University remembers him — he was attending Columbia's international facilities in foreign countries (compliments of the CIA). This is more than interesting. MB KLEZFIESTA 2009!! From Pedro Banchik (25feb10) .....queremos decirles que si desean experimentar una verdadera fiesta,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUWgXZTFme0 ......y también decirles que si tienen ganas...nos gustaría recibir vuestro comentario !! Nuestros mejores augurios...y mucha alegría!! Staff de la Klezfiesta. Anti-Semitism On US Campus From Yael from Road 90 (25feb10) As we are approaching Purim, all the team of Road 90 wanted to wish you a happy Purim! Let's take this occasion to all pray for Israel in these difficult times. Please take a minute to watch the news videos below and forward them around you, in order to help people see what the Israel is! Discover Israeli Music [click here] Anti-Semitism On US Campus [click here] Hamas Anti-Semitic Cartoon 2010 [click here] US-Israel Strategic Dialogue [click here] Questions and Answers with Mustafa Barghouti in Hebron [click here] The "Jewish Monkeys" [click here] International Holocaust Memorial Day, January 27, 2010 From Bruce Tuchman (25feb10) TiborSpitz.artist and witness.pps SAUDI "HOLY MAN";(pp) A GIRL AT 9 BECOMES A WOMAN From CPocerl (25feb10) Prominent Saudi Cleric Defends Marrying Off 9-Year-Old Girls, "Who Are Atheists and Christians to Tell us What to do?"... 
Fun fact: The Wahhabi Kingdom is one of the only nations on Earth where pedophilia is legal... Saudi Cleric Muhammad Musa Al-Sharif Defends the Marrying Off of Under-Age Girls in Saudi Arabia: Atheists, Christians, and Fornicators Are Responsible for Human Rights Treaties- MEMRI http://www.memritv.org/clip_transcript/en/2399.htm EXPLICIT-MUSLIM CONSUMATES HIS CRUSH ON HIS NEIGHBOR'S GOAT-GRAPHIC From CPocerl (24feb10) US Troops Catch a Talib Getting Intimate With a Jihadi Sex Machine... And by "jihadi sex machine" I mean a goat. Sorry, I can't help myself... Here's what the Ayatollah Khomeini had to say on the subject: "A man can have sex with animals such as goats, sheeps, cows, camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village; however, selling the meat to the next door village should be fine." ... I dunno, maybe sodomizing cows, goats, camels and sheep is just a muzzie thing? the intifada comes to campus From Boris Celser (22feb10) http://campusintifada.com/widget/LP_V_W.html Video evidence that the MSU behavior at UC IRVINE was COORDINATED From Jen Kutner of Stand With Us (20feb10) This is video Evidence of a coordinated effort to shut down Michael Oren at UC Irvine on February 8. This is critical now because the MSU (Muslim Student Union) CAIR and MPAC are defending these students as having NOT coordinated this disruption of free speech at UC Irvine. The students are claiming that each student stood up in an UNCOORDINATED way. StandWithUs2009#p/a/u/0/lAQsjmdqO4M By the way you did a TREMENDOUS job launching the other video. The UC Irvine video now has over 380,000 views in just over one week. You can continue to make sure that your friends have all seen it here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w96UR79TBw BUTT WHUPPIN' ON VIDEO. 67 YR OLD HONKY PUMMELS A BIG MOUTH POSER From C Pocerl (19feb10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obpODFWONOk HE'S NOT ONLY A COMMUNIST, HE IS A MUSLIM From CPocerl (19feb10) Barack Obama is essentially a communist. He wants to "redistribute wealth" and that sits well with those millionaire liberals in Congress all of whom have privatized investment accounts they deny their constituents (the "Thrift Savings Plan") because they have convinced the people they can deliver the "common good" which enables them to control the media, academe, unions, government workers, blacks and half the population. The Tea Party Movement is a powerful revolt against the Democrats and Barack Obama's assault on free enterprise, capitalism and the freedom and liberty guaranteed to each individual American by the Constitution. It is more than likely that Obama and his Democrats will suffer a great loss in November mid-terms because America is center-right not a radical leftist commune-in-the-making. Unfortunately Obama is not up for re-election in November and he poses another serious problem Americans will have to face for the next two-and-a-half years — he is a Muslim. If you doubt he is their front man catch the video http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/ on You Tube. He is using America's religious tolerance, political correctness, multiculturalism and a myriad of other devices to slip the Muslim "political organization" right past our noses. Make no mistake that unlike America their religion dictates their politics and governmental policies. Muslim countries have adopted the barbaric Sharia law that dictates beheadings, vaginal mutilation, dismemberment, honor killings, genocide for homosexuals and non-Muslims because the Koran, Hadith and their other religious texts are considered to be the actual word of God which no government or people can dispute. These people are so primitive they have a center in most cities for the public to view amputations and beheadings. They haven't progressed from the days Rome set lions loose on the Christians in the Coliseum. The have a military arm called al Qaeda that is running around the world killing non-Muslims. They use terror as the fear-inducing technique and the principle that any means justifies their end to create a world-wide Caliphate where everyone is a Muslim. It is that "any means justifies the end" that Obama is using to infiltrate Muslims into America and their rule into our culture. If you have any doubts — just view that video — Obama tells that story in his own words and deeds. The Righteous Among the Nations From Yael from Road 90 (18feb10) - Admiral Mike Mullen Reaffirms Strong U.S.-Israeli Bond in Visit to Israel [click here] Voting for the Dead Sea [click here] Mother of Martyr welcomes son's death [click here] Dany Ayalon on the Arab Israeli [click here] The Righteous Among the Nations [click here] Hebrew University 85 years of history [click here Weekly Torah Portion: Terumah [click here] Reasons Why to Support Israel From Truth Provider (17feb10) Joyce Kaufman gives 7 reasons why all of us must support Israel. Then think for a moment about the latest successes in Afghanistan in killing and apprehending some of the worst terrorists on earth and remember where was much of the technology, such as unmanned planes, invented and developed. Watch the following and marvel at Israel's latest ingenuity. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dmV1ffKP0ms http://worldfocus.org/israel-unveils-miniature-spy-plane/6665/ THERE ARE ONLY 10 STEPS TO CONVERT TO COMMUNISM From CPocerl (17feb10) 10 Conditions 4 Transition To Communism 1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.
http://communists4obama.blogspot.com/ Press meet at Press Club in New Delhi on Feb 16th From Satya D. (17feb10) bdyoutube.com/video/BsajaDjyKy4/Campaign-Against-EVM-Machine Understanding the Muslim Mindset From Robin Ticker (17feb10) Must watch this video with Dr. Mordechai Kedar of Bar Ilan U. on Al JeZeera http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VHpMhAzj-Tk Where does free speech begin and end? Ambassador Oren at UC Irvine From Maurice Ostroff (14feb10) This video clip must serve as an 11th hour wake-up call to those who have not yet seen the writing on the wall Where does free speech and academic freedom begin and end? By now you probably know that Muslim students tried to silence Israel 's U.S. Ambassador Michael Oren when he spoke at UC Irvine's Pacific Ballroom on Monday afternoon, February 8. Ambassador Oren had come to share his historical and personal perspective on the U.S.-Israel relationship. An author, professor of history, and diplomat, Ambassador Oren is politically centrist and regarded as an expert on many issues of vital interest today. But the Muslim students were determined to silence him, deny him the right to free speech, and deny the audience the right to have civil, intellectual discourse at UCI. The Muslim students had carefully planned their tactics. Shortly before the event began, large numbers of them gathered for prayers outside the Ballroom. They then entered and scattered throughout the room in order to disrupt the speech from different locations. They did. After every few of Ambassador Oren's sentences, a student would stand up and scream unintelligibly at him while the other students involved raucously clapped and howled. The student whose turn it was to disturb the event would then walk proudly out of the Ballroom, escorted by police, while glaring at the understandably upset and frustrated audience of over 500 people who had come to hear the Ambassador's remarks. The good news is that Ambassador Oren refused to be silenced. He had come to UCI to share his thoughts and did not abandon his right to free speech even as dozens of students coordinated this hostile demonstration. With his elegant manner, he remained calm, and stood his ground. He stood up for free speech. I was at UC Irvine on Monday evening and have no words to explain just how scary and saddening the situation was. It took close to an hour before the mob left the room. We need as many people to watch this video as possible. We have over 8,000 views in just 24 hours and if we can get it up to 25,000 it will be newsworthy. The more attention this issue receives, the better. The Muslim students made a huge mistake at UC Irvine on February 8th, and the administration is going to need to figure out how they intend to secure free speech at UC Irvine. All eyes are on UC Irvine right now. This is an issue for campuses around the world. Please join this effort and help us get the word out widely. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w96UR79TBw TALIBAN RAPE TAPES, A 'MUSLIM ABU GHRAIB': SERIAL RAPE THEN MURDER From Brad Thor (13feb10) With breaking news out of Palestine today that a top aide to President Mahmoud Abbas has been literally caught with his pants down, rape tapes seem to be popping up all over the pious Muslim world. And some are horrifically worse than others. Last month on the FOX Business Network, Colonel Oliver North revealed a startling piece of information. Conservative mullahs and elements within the Haqqani terror network — known as the backbone of the Taliban and Al Qaeda in the Af/Pak theater — are working to take the Haqqanis down from the inside. Their key weapon is a disturbing video that shows the serial sexual assault of several young girls. Colonel North explained that no one in American intelligence had yet seen this video. Here it is: http://bigjournalism.com/bthor/taliban-rape-tapes-a-muslim-abu-ghraib/ WHAT IS THE COLOR OF HER DRESS? LIKE MAGIC?? From CPocerl(13feb10) LEFT'S WORST NIGHTMARE-BEAUTIFUL VIDEO MUSICAL TRIBUTE TO SARAH PALIN BY THE CELTIC WOMEN From CPocerl (12feb10) Pretty Damn Cool: O America — A Video Tribute To Sarah Palin (Even If You Don't Care About The Palin Part, I Promise You Will Love The Song) american-conservativevalues.com//tribute-to-sarah-palin PHOTOS WITH THE ABILITY TO MOVE 360 DEGREES From Roberta Dzubow (11feb10) Other than the fact that the Western Wall is called the "Wailing Wall" this is really neat to see. This is very interesting and is best to watch in full screen where you can stop rotation and move the view up or down. http://www.360tr.net/kudus/aglamaduvar_tr/archives/oldindex.html Documentary of the Nazi Holocaust From UCI — IsraelUnityCoalition (11feb10) http://israelunitycoalition.org/co_site_uci.php Smile Time From Bstocksdesign@aol.com From Arny Barnie (11feb10) The Holocaust and the Establishment of the State of Israel From Yael from Road 90 (11feb10) Please see below our newest videos from Israel. We invite you to watch them and forward them to your friends. We would also like to share some good news with you all; Road 90 is expanding and will soon launch a new website, based on travelling in Israel. The Holocaust and the Establishment of the State of Israel [click here] Electric car debut [click here] Contemporary design inside and out [click here] Kind of humor: Red Band on tour with Mosh Ben Ari [click here] The Auschwitz Bombing Controversy in Context [click here] Weekly Torah Portion: Mishpatim [click here] Nokia Siemens Network STILL supports Iranian Regime From Sacha Stawski (7feb10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J76e3n9GB3E The Video was broadcast on ZDF (Second German State Television) in the news show "Frontal 21" on January 26, 2010. Support the campaign STOP THE BOMB and find out more about Siemens in Iran here: http://de.stopthebomb.net/en/start/germany/siemens.html LIL LIBERALS — DON'T MISS THIS From Cpocerle(7feb10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5O9Imbpe6Q US Jewish history From BenAmi (7feb10) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBmglA-yCCk Copts protest Muslim persecution in Egypt From Boris Celser (5feb10) jihadwatch.org/toronto-copts-protest-muslim-persecution-in-egypt Bat Ye'or: Europe's anti-Israel strategy will result in the destruction of Europe itself From Boris Celser (1feb10) When I speak of Eurabia I refer to an ideology, a strategy, a policy and a culture whose nerve-centre and way of working are exemplified by the Anna Lindh Foundation in Alexandria, linked to the Swedish Consulate. At the origin of this vision in the 1960s, one can identify Charles de Gaulle and Haj Amin al-Husseini, former Mufti of Jerusalem, whom de Gaulle saved from the Nuremberg trial in 1946. Implemented after the Kippur War, this view promoted an alliance between the European Community and the Arab world — operative at all levels of the European Community, regionally and internationally, and linked with the European Common Foreign and Security Policy. It aimed to create a strategic Euro-Arab pole hostile to Israel, supporting Arafat and the PLO, and opposed to America. Without much difficulty, France was able to carry along the rest of Europe into this programme from 1973, after the Arab oil embargo. [...] In the 1970s the EC and the Arab League went into this association with different but converging aims. Antisemitism and anti-Americanism always existed amongst the European Left-wing parties, the Communists, the Nazi and Fascist movements, and this provided Arab propaganda with a favourable ground for development. Europe believed that, thereby, it had a cheap solution to protect itself from Arab terrorism; for assuring its energy supplies; dominating Arab markets; and turning Arab jihadists against Israel and the USA by adopting a pro-Arafat stance, as well as sponsoring Palestine and hence maintaining the conflict's purulence by internationalising the Palestinian cause until Israel would wither away under a heap of infamy. The twinning of Judeophobia and anti-Americanism fitted well into the strategy of the Euro-Arab alliance and is one of its pillars. The other pillar is the war against Israel which in fact is nothing but a smoke-screen hiding the Islamization of Christian theology and the subversion of Western values. From their point of view, the countries of the Arab League and the Islamic Conference saw in this alliance with Europe the means to separate Europe from America; to divide and weaken the Western camp; to destroy Israel; to achieve technological parity with Europe; and, through the Mediterranean Partnership, to set up a vast Euro-Arab demographic, political, economic and cultural zone. In this way, with multiculturalism and immigration, Islam and Arab culture could be introduced as a force toward the Islamization on the European continent. Europe would thereby — through the combined effects of demographics, terrorist pressure and oil — become a continent, vassal of world Islam. Multiculturalism is in fact a crucial dimension of the Euro-Arab strategic alliance. Since 1975 the texts of Euro-Arab meetings and of the EU mention the agreements linking Europe to the Arab world; listing the terms of Arab and Islamic immigration to Europe; the non-integration of immigrants and the maintenance of their ties with their homelands; the establishment of cultural and political Muslim centres in European cities; and the handling of school-teaching, publications, and media. For the most recent period one can read the report of the European commission for culture, science and education presented to the European Parliamentary Assembly by Luis Maria de Puig from the Spanish socialist group (November 2002). It is within the context of multiculturalism that one must place the cultural jihad with its Judeophobic, anti-American and anti-Western character. Multiculturalism thus becomes the instrument for the subversion of Western thought, aimed at imposing on it Islamic historical and theological thinking such as, for example, the negation of the historical jihad — interpreted as a defensive rather than aggressive war — the denial of dhimmitude; or the justification of Islamic terrorism — based on a victimological perception of Muslims, the eternal victims of the Christian West and, today, of Israel, both bonded together in an essentialist vision of evil. [...] http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/02/bat-yeor-europe.html Reminder From Susana K-M (2feb10) this will chill you to the bones... watch_popup?v=tCAffMSWSzY#t=28 Journos Admit Hamas Fired From Media Buildings From Boris Celser 2feb10) Via Israel Matzav, journalist Paula Slier visited Gaza for the first time since Operation Cast Lead. She came away with a particularly startling admission from fellow reporters who were in the strip during the war: "Colleagues in our sister organisation, Russia Al Yaum, said Hamas fighters had been hiding in the basement of the media building and they couldn't go on air and admit it as otherwise they would have become targets. So, in this respect at least, when the Israeli army justified its attacks on media houses, they were telling the truth when they said fire was coming from them!" This confirms a point I recently argued in defense of Israel's wartime press restrictions. Many journalists were not "neutral observers," but "participants" (sometimes willing participants, sometimes not). If you haven't seen it already, here's a video (Nº II)of an Al-Arabiya reporter discovering that a rocket was fired from her own media building.And another video (Nº I ) of a terrorist telling the truth about the war - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mR-exJ5J7bs And this — v/JY50cktUKbA&rel=0&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en_US I AM ISRAEL From Truth Provider (1feb10) This is Israel as we, Israelis, know her. watch?v=ZprVPKi-W6s&annotation_id=annotation_252323&feature=iv And another superb clip from Haiti, this one with Diane Sawyer on ABC News. www.youtube.com/watch?v=qkmV4NOEOc8 GO ISRAEL!!!
|
| Home | Featured Stories | Background Information | News On The Web |