| HOME | Featured Stories | January 2009 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: THE GREEN OF SPRING HAS RETURNED TO ISRAEL
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, January 31, 2009. |
The Eastern Galilee: Despite very low rainfall, the green of spring has returned to Israel This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. Yehoshua Halevi writes: "HOW I GOT THE SHOT: After years of photographing people, I have no doubt that the best portraits emerge from the sessions in which I am able to forge a strong relationship with my subjects. The same holds true for landscape photography. The more familiar I become with the land of Israel, the better able I am to capture the qualities of her beauty with my camera. Does she look her best when she first wakes up in the morning or when the late afternoon sun settles over her mountains? Which camera angles are most flattering to a spring meadow or a rocky coast? I whizzed past this shot at 100 km/hour on the road connecting
Rosh Pina and the Golan Heights and drove another two kilometers
before deciding to go back and shoot. The scene caught my attention
initially because of the stark contrast between the bright green field
and the dark patterns formed by the differently-shaped trees. Most
unusual, and therefore most interesting, was the topography and how
the crest of the hill juts out between two valleys and floats like a
promontory in the middle of a vast plateau. At least that's how I made
it appear in the final image by lopping off half the photo and
cropping near the top of the front side of the hill. Shooting
mid-morning, the background was very hazy, but I was able to boost the
clarity by increasing the contrast. Often, a small tweak in lighting
or an imaginative crop — like a slight tilt of the head or lowering of
the chin — is all it takes to elevate the average to the exceptional.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com
and visit his website:
|
|
60 MINUTES, LET THE TIME RUN OUT!
Posted by Batya Medad, January 31, 2009. |
CBS's veteran news show, 60 Minutes, just had a program about Israel. They called it "Time Running Out For A Two-State Solution?"[1] Thomas Friedman also wrote an op-ed with the same theme.[2] One thing I've learned is that whenever someone tries to sell you something that must be decided on, signed for "immediately, or..." it's something bad. And the sic "Two-State Solution" is worse than bad. It'll make the Arab Hamas terrorist missile attacks from Gush Katif look like Heaven. Please look at these maps. 
Please look again. On 60 Minutes, Tsippi Livni reiterated that she was going to remove Jews like me from their homes. Here's the transcript: "It's not going to be easy. But this is the only solution," she replied. The "only solution?" And what about "law and order?" Contrary to the Arab lies Bob Simon reported on his show, the Arabs build thousands of buildings all over Judea and Samaria without the need of permits and inspections. It's rare for the Israeli authorities to destroy unsafe, unapproved or Arab terrorist homes in Israeli cities, and when they do it takes months of complicated decision-making. The Arab mansions I photographed a couple of years ago are dwarfed by the new ones. Some of you may expect me to cry, rant and rave about how Tsippi's plan would affect me personally, but I don't see it as a personal problem. I don't see it as a local Shiloh problem, nor a Shomron (Samaria) problem nor a Judea-Samaria problem. Please look again at the maps. It should be very clear that the establishment of an Arab terrorist state in Judea and Samaria would herald the destruction of the State of Israel, G-d forbid. That is the aim of the Arabs. Hamas, Fatah, Hizbullah etc all agree on it. They're all the same. In May of 1967, Israel was a poor struggling country, suffering from Arab terrorism, when Egypt, Jordan and Syria began to threaten war. Egypt demanded that the United Nations remove its "peace-keeping forces," which had been in place to prevent war. The UN quickly fled. Egypt, Jordan and Syria bragged that they would destroy Israel and shove it "into the sea." I remember all this. I wasn't a child at the time. And at the time, Israel only held parts of Jerusalem and none of Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights, nor Sinai and Gaza. The present, the post-June, 1967, Six Days War violence against Israel is part of a long history of violence against Israel. It began long before Israel took possession of our Biblical, our historical Homeland. They never wanted us here and never will want us here. There is no possible compromise. As I've said many times before, I'm a pragmatist. I'm not a dreamer. I look at the facts, at the map and at history. 60 Minutes is just a TV show. It didn't tell the truth. The Arabs who appeared on it didn't tell the truth, and Tsippi Livni didn't tell the truth either. The only one who spoke straight was Daniella Weiss. Footnotes [1] http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/01/23/60minutes/main4749723.shtml [2] http://www.mercurynews.com/opinion/ci_11547788?nclick_check=1 [3] http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rqongu6sVpo/SYSwDXyBPsI/
Batya Medad lives in Shiloh. She can
be reached by email at Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or visit her website
This article is archived at
|
|
HONEST OBAMA AND IRAN
Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, January 31, 2009. |
|
This was written by Caroline B. Glick and it appeared yesterdat
in Jewish World Review
(http://www.jewishworldreview.com/). Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. |
|
In his first week and a half in office, US President Barack Obama has proven that he is a man of his word. For instance, he was not bluffing during his campaign when he said that he would make reconstituting America's relations with the Islamic world one of his first priorities in office. Obama's first phone call to a foreign leader was to PLO chieftain Mahmoud Abbas last Wednesday morning. And this past Tuesday, Obama gave his first television interview as president to al-Arabiya pan-Arabic television network. In that interview Obama explained the rationale of his approach to the Muslim world. "We are looking at the region as a whole and communicating a message to the Arab world and the Muslim world, that we are ready to initiate a new partnership based on mutual respect and mutual interest," the new president said. Obama distanced his administration from its predecessor by asserting that rather than dictate how Muslims should behave, his administration plans, "to listen, set aside some of the preconceptions that have existed and have built up over the last several years. And I think if we do that, then there's a possibility at least of achieving some breakthroughs." In short, Obama argues that the root of Islamic world's opposition to the US is its shattered confidence in America's intentions. By following a policy of contrition for Bush's "cowboy diplomacy," and acting with deference in its dealing with the Muslim world, then in his view, a new era of US-Islamic relations will ensue. Obama's honesty was a hot subject during the presidential campaign. Many analysts claimed that he was a closet moderate who only made far leftist pronouncements about "spreading the wealth around," and meeting with Iran "without preconditions," to mollify his far left partisan base. Others argued that Obama was a man of his word. From his voting records in the Illinois Senate and the US Senate, and in light of his long associations with domestic and foreign policy radicals, these commentators predicted that if elected, Obama's policies would be far to the left of center. Judging by Obama's actions since entering office last week, it appears that the latter group of analysts was correct. Obama is not a panderer. Between his economic "stimulus" package, which involves a massive intrusion by federal government on the free market; his decision to close the US military prison at Guantanamo Bay; his dispatch of former Senator George Mitchell to the Middle East to begin pushing for a Palestinian state two weeks before Israel's general elections; his announcement that he will begin withdrawing US forces from Iraq; his repeated signaling that the US will no longer treat the fight against Islamic terrorism as a war; and his attempts to engineer a diplomatic rapprochement with Iran, Obama has shown that his policy pronouncements on the campaign trail were serious. The policies he outlined are the policies with which he intends to govern. On a strategic level the most significant campaign promise that Obama is wasting no time in keeping is his attempt to diplomatically engage with the Islamic Republic of Iran. Iran is the central sponsor of the global jihad. Hizbullah, Hamas, and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are all Iranian proxies. And, as is becoming increasingly undeniable, al Qaida too enjoys a close relationship with the mullahs. The 9/11 Commission's final report noted that several of the September 11 hijackers transited Iran en route to the US. And in recent weeks we learned that after spending the past six years in Iran where he played a major role in directing the insurgency in Iraq, Osama bin Laden's eldest son Sa'ad has moved to Pakistan. Beyond its sponsorship of terrorism, due to its nuclear weapons program Iran is the largest emerging threat to global security. Together with its genocidal rhetoric against Israel, its calls for the destruction of the US, and its incitement for the overthrow of the governments of Egypt and Jordan, among others, Iran is the single largest source of instability in the region. Moreover, as US Defense Secretary Robert Gates made clear in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday, Iran is working actively in South and Central America to destabilize the Western Hemisphere. Obama caused an uproar when during a Democratic primary debate last spring he said that he would meet with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad without preconditions. In subsequent months, he sought to soften his declaration. It is now apparent that his statement was not a slip of the tongue. It was a pledge. The Iranians for their part have reacted to the new president with a mixture of relief and contempt. On November 6, two days after the US election, Ahmadinejad sent a congratulatory letter to Obama. Ahmadinejad's letter was considered a triumph for Obama's conciliatory posture by the American and European media. But actually, it was no such thing. Ahmadinejad's letter was nothing more than a set of demands much like those he had set out in a letter to then-president George W. Bush in 2006. In his missive to Obama, Ahmadinejad laid out Iranian preconditions for a diplomatic engagement with America. Among other things, Ahmadinejad demanded that the US send all its military forces back to America. As he put it, the US should, "keep its interventions within its own country's borders." Ahmadinejad further hinted that the US should end its support for Israel and withdraw its forces from Iraq and Afghanistan. In his words, "In the sensitive Middle East region... the expectation is that the unjust [US] actions of the past 60 years [since Israel was established] will give way to a policy encouraging the full rights of all nations, especially the oppressed nations of Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan." The Western media made much of the fact that some conservative press organs in Iran condemned Ahmadinejad for sending the letter. They claimed that this meant that Ahmadinejad himself was tempering his animosity towards the US in the wake of Obama's election. But in fact, most of the conservative media in Iran viewed the letter as an attack against Obama who they attacked with racial slurs. Sobh-e Sadegh, published by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps and controlled by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei wrote in an editorial on November 10 that negotiations with Obama would only be worthwhile if, "coexistence with a nuclear Iran and acceptance of its regional role are part of the US negotiating position." On November 11, Borna News Agency, which is aligned with Ahmadinejad called Obama "a house slave." In general, Iran's government controlled media outlets reported that Ahmadinejad's letter was an ultimatum and that if Obama did not submit to his demands, the US would be destroyed. This week Ahmadinejad made Iran's preconditions for negotiations even more explicit. In statements at a political rally on Tuesday, and in a television interview given by his advisor on Wednesday, Ahmadinejad said that Iran has two conditions for engaging Washington. First, the US must abandon its alliance with Israel. In his words, to have relations with Iran, the US must first "stop supporting the Zionists, outlaws and criminals." The second condition was communicated Wednesday by Ahmadinejad's advisor Aliakbar Javanfekr. Echoing Sobh-e Sadegh's editorial, Javanfekr said Iran refuses to stop its nuclear activities. Notably, also on Wednesday, the US-based International Institute for Strategic Studies released a report concluding that Iran will have a sufficient quantity of highly enriched uranium to make an atomic bomb in a matter of months. To summarize, Iran's conditions for meeting with the Obama administration are that the US abandon Israel, (which as Ahmadinejad reiterated at his annual Holocaust denial conference on Tuesday must be annihilated), and that Obama take no action whatsoever against Iran's nuclear program. For its part, the Obama administration is signaling that Iran's conditions haven't swayed it from its path towards a diplomatic engagement of the mullahs. In her first statement as US Ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice said Tuesday, "We look forward to engaging in vigorous diplomacy that includes direct diplomacy with Iran." And in his al Arabiya interview, Obama implied that the US may be willing to overlook Iran's support for terrorism when he referred to Iran's "past" support for terrorist organizations. Obama placed a past tense modifier on Iranian sponsorship of terrorism even through just last week a US naval ship intercepted an Iranian vessel smuggling arms to Hamas in Gaza on the Red Sea. Due to an absence of political authorization to seize the Iranian ship, the US Navy was compelled to permit it to sail on to Syria. The most sympathetic interpretation of Obama's desire to move ahead with diplomatic engagement of Iran in spite of the mullocracy's preconditions is that he has simply failed to countenance the significance of Iran's demands. If this is the case, then it is apparent that Obama remains convinced that the US is indeed to blame for the supposed crisis of confidence that the Islamic world suffers from in its dealings with America. By this reasoning, it is for the US, not for Teheran to show its own sincerity, because the US, rather than Teheran is to blame for the dismal state of relations prevailing between the two countries. If in fact Obama truly intends to move ahead with his plan to engage the mullahs, then he will effectively legitimize — if not adopt — Teheran's preconditions that the US end its alliance with Israel which Iran seeks to destroy, and accept a nuclear-armed Iran. And under these circumstances, Israel's next government — which all opinion polls conclude will be led by Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu — will have to adopt certain policies. First, in keeping with his campaign rhetoric, Netanyahu will have to make preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons his most urgent priority upon entering office. And second, to withstand US pressure to allow the Obama administration time to develop its ties with Teheran, (time which Iran will use to build its first nuclear bomb), Netanyahu will need to form as large and wide a governing coalition as possible. All issues that divide the Israeli electorate between Right and Left must be temporarily set aside. In the age of Honest Obama, Israel is alone in recognizing the necessity of preventing Iran from acquiring the means to destroy the Jewish state. Consequently, Netanyahu's government will need to proceed with all deliberate speed to take whatever actions are necessary to prevent Israel's destruction. Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
THE AMERICAN LIBRARY ASSOCIATION (ALA) SUPPORTS TERRORISTS
Posted by Safe Libraries Org, January 31, 2009. |
|
The essay below is called "ALA Responsible for Every Society on
Earth!," and was posted January 29, 2009 by Annoyed Librarian in
Library Journal, The essay makes a serious point: the American Library Association [ALA] supports terrorists and should lose its 501(c)(3) tax exempt status for political actions having nothing to do with American libraries Vist our website: http://safelibraries.blogspot.com. A summary of
this essay is archived at [Editor's Note: Those surprised to learn that left-radical marxists have major influence in a group that helps to determine what we — and our children — read should examine previous Think-Israel articles on the ALA by searching the Google box at the top of Home Page; in particular read Tolkan, "The American Library Association, the P.A.'s Pal" by clicking here.] |
|
I'm sure glad I'm not on the ALA Council, if in fact I'm not on the ALA Council. (I just checked the roster and am pretty sure I didn't see "Annoyed Librarian" on it, so I think I'm safe.) It's not that there aren't many fine people on Council. I can't think of any at the moment, but there must be. It's that the Council is constantly subjected to the political harangues of people in the Regressive Librarians Guild (http://annoyedlibrarian.googlepages.com/rlg). The RLG librarians just love to harass people who don't agree with them. If you, for example, think that the American Library Association shouldn't take stands on political issues that have nothing to do with American libraries, the regressive librarians start attacking you as a "conservative" or "fascist" or whatever other nonsense pops into their heads. These people are so wacky they think anyone who isn't a Marxist is a fascist, and they really hate it when people point out how ridiculous they look, marching around in their drab grey clothes singing the Internationale. For a while they quieted down. I'm not sure if I had anything to do with it, but there was a correlation between a year or so of my publicly mocking them and picking apart their pitiful arguments and the radical wing of the ALA Council retreating into the shadows for a while. But, fortunately for me, they're back. If you read the ALA Inside Scoop blog (and it's so riveting I don't know how you can resist), you'll have seen this report on the last session of Council. Here's the relevant passage on the latest irrelevant resolution: "During the International Relations Committee report delivered by chair Beverly Lynch, Councilor Al Kagan urged that we cannot achieve peace and stop the destruction of libraries and cultural institutions in Gaza without changing the policies of the U.S. government. A resolution on the connection between the recent Gaza conflict and libraries was introduced and the perpetual debate ensued: Is it the Association's role to insinuate itself into international affairs? Councilor Elaine Harger argued that peace is a library issue, just as civil rights was in the 1960s, and Executive Board member Larry Romans cited ALA policy related to the Association's social responsibilities. Now before you get your radical panties in a twist, I'll state for the record that I don't think libraries in Gaza should be destroyed, if that's what you're thinking. You'd have to be pretty doltish to think anyone opposed to this resolution thinks that, but I don't put anything past the regressives. However, it's eminently clear this has absolutely nothing to do with American libraries or the ALA's alleged "social responsibilities" and everything to do with the regressive librarians getting the ALA Council to be a mouthpiece for their politics. If they tried to pass a resolution against Hamas firing rockets into Israel (which might destroy libraries, after all) or refusing to recognize Israel's right to exist (which also exacerbates conflict), I'd be shocked speechless, but would still be opposed. But we all know that won't happen. Since the resolution passed "with limited opposition," once again the ALA Council is a regressive librarian tool. All hail the revolution. Contact the Safe Libraries Org by email at plan2succeed@gmail.com |
|
POPULATION FIGURES: JEWS LIVING IN JUDEA AND SAMARIA
Posted by Avodah, January 31, 2009. |
|
This was posted by JoeSettler on his website
http://joesettler.blogspot.com/2009/01/more-good-news-for-jews.html. It is entitled "More Good News For the Jews." |
|
Last week a Peace Now report was released stating that their were 285,000 Jews living in Judea and Samaria (and not including East Jerusalem which pushes the number closer to 500,000). The report indicated a sharp increase in Jewish residents. While this Peace Now report would normally be considered good news, there is even better news. Right afterward, the Ministry of the Interior released their numbers, and they are even better, with 297,745 Jews living in Judea and Samaria, and over 550,000 if you include East Jerusalem. Amana (which assists residents trying to buy housing in Judea and Samaria) says the number has already surpassed 300,000. During Olmert's terms (since 2006) we saw an increase/influx of some 45-50,000 Jews, and new construction was up 43.1% in just 3 years (in Little Israel new construction was down 6.9%). There hasn't been such a jump since 1967. (You might even be tempted to say that Olmert was good for Judea and Samaria). Furthermore in 2007 (no data yet for 2008), 59,861 Arabs took a positive step to creating Peace in the Middle East, by permanently moving away to live in other countries. It is presumed that even larger numbers left the West Bank in 2008. Since 2005, 25,000 Arabs permanently left Gaza (3 times the amount of Settlers expelled in 2005), but since closing the passageway none have been able to escape to better living conditions. Certainly this is a positive indicator that Benny Elon's "Right Road to Peace" is on the right track, and if we want real peace in the Middle East, all the money being wasted right now (the Wall, UNRWA, etc.) should be given to the Palestinians to relocate instead of perpetuating them as refugees. [EDITOR'S NOTE: The Olmert-Livni Government hasn't yet permanently settled the 10,000 Jews they kicked out of their homes in Gaza in August 2005. But they continue to want to move Jews out of Samaria and Judea and some of Jerusalem. We hope that the new government will sweep this idea off the table and into the garbage.] Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
JEWS: TO THE MUSLIM GAS CHAMBER
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 31, 2009. |
|
This was written by Phyllis Chesler and it appeared on her blog on
Pajamas Media website
|
|
Today, we have grown used to seeing Palestinian and Hamas supporters goose-step, Nazi-style, shoot out their arms as they deliver the Hitlerian "Sieg Heil" salute. They also chant and scream: "Jews to the ovens," "Hitler did not kill enough of you," "Jews to the gas chambers." This is raw, rank, Jew-hatred or anti-Semitism; that much is clear. But we are also faced with a major paradox. These same Palestinian and Hamas supporters routinely hold signs that accuse Israel of being a "Nazi" state. To them, Gaza is "Auschwitz," and the Israelis have "occupied" it with "genocidal" intentions. Of course this is not factually true. According to my colleague, Dr. Barry Rubin: "In 1939, there were seven million Jews in continental Europe. At the end of the Holocaust, only one million Jews survived. There are currently 1.2 million Palestinians in Gaza. At the end of the 2009 war, 1,199,000 Palestinians are still there. The percentage of Jewish civilians killed by Germans and their allies was 86 percent. The percentage of Gazan Palestinians killed by Israelis is 0.1 percent. The number of Jewish civilians deliberately killed by Nazis and their allies is 6,000,000. The number of Palestinian civilians deliberately killed by Israelis=0." (Please see below for his additional comparisons). But the truth no longer matters. People, both Westerners, Arabs, and Muslims, (this includes the media), have all piled onto such metaphoric overkill. It is as if thoughtful and moderate voices can no longer be "heard," only shouting, shocking, attacks seem to "register." And, once someone says something, no matter how outlandish, it is deemed to be true — even if it obliterates both reason and reality. The true truth is that Hamas and Hezbollah, backed by Iran, are engaged in a serious attempt to exterminate the Jews and to wage jihad against both Jews and other infidels. The Muslims/Islamists have projected their own obvious and evil design onto their intended victims whom they portray as Christian Crusaders or Elders of Zion. This would be laughable, or only of psychiatric interest, if it were not so omnipresent and dangerous due to its widespread acceptance. In a sense, those Europeans and North Americans who support such a false Nazification of Jews, are merely continuing the Holocaust-era determination to genocidally exterminate Jews. This time, they hope that by doing so, the Islamist hordes will spare them, allow them to live as dhimmis, as inferior and subordinate citizens, in an Islamified Europe. I asked my friend, Dr. Nancy H. Kobrin, the psycho-analyst and Arabist, what she thinks is going on. She said: "If we (the Jews) exist, the Muslims might have to acknowledge their own Jewish roots. They can't do that. Therefore, they must destroy us." "So, they're trying to destroy the evidence, the living witnesses?" I replied. "Well, they are pandering to people who like Nazi insignia and the Nazi ideology. But they are also trying to drive the Jews crazy. They must know how seeing Nazi insignia makes us feel. This is very primitive, non-verbal behavior." Talk about primitive behavior! Just as certain primitive tribes have been described as literally eating their enemies hearts or other organs in order to incorporate their magical power — similarly, psychologically, the Nazi insignia-loving Jew-haters want to inherit or subsume the Jewish status as "victim" by destroying the Jews and presenting themselves, (the persecuted Muslims), as the noble "victims" of vicious Nazi Jews. Dr. Kobrin calls this "psychological splitting. They want to have it both ways." What she means is that the Palestinian propagandists and Muslim jihadists want to both identify with the Nazis as triumphant, death-cult destroyers — and also with the (past) and preferred sacred status accorded to dead Jewish victims. The Palestinians and other Islamists offer up their own babies, women, elderly, and civilian populations as human shields, human sacrifices, in order to obtain this grisly goal. They also engage in faked staged photos to approximate such Jewish-style deaths as well. Elsewhere, in a Frontpage Symposium about the resurfacing of Nazi cartoons, Dr. Kobrin reminds us that "paranoids" are obsessed with "purity" and therefore with "cleansing." This is accomplished by having a "scapegoat" upon whom one projects all the "dirty" components of oneself or of one's group-self. The use of Nazi images are meant to terrify and intimidate all who view them — especially those who have, in the past, been jailed, tortured, exiled, and wounded by those who display just such symbols. These images are forms of visual hate speech. They are meant to re-traumatize real victims and their second- and third-generation descendants and to intimidate bystanders. But those Muslims/Islamists who display Nazi imagery also feel that they are the wounded ones. They seek public redress for their real and imagined wounds. What wounds could that be? For starters: Painful, shameful, anal penetration by trusted relatives in childhood; beatings in childhood; painful, public male circumcision between the ages of 5-12; cruel parents, cruel teachers, cruel religious leaders, equally cruel peers — and a culture which takes cruelty as a given; poor nutrition, illiteracy, and/or no productive future — mainly due to Muslim and Palestinian leaders who demand reverence and obedience even as they hoard the wealth meant to alleviate their people's suffering; street theatre/political protest/mob merging as the only approved form of social life or group "orgasmic" activity. According to Lloyd DeMause, there is a "paranoid" underside to anti-Semitism. It is caused by "child abuse, paedophilia and incest." He writes: "For instance, I would like to refer to a careful survey in the journal, Child Abuse & Neglect that showed that when questioned 652 Palestinian undergraduates concluded that 19% were sexually assaulted by a family member, 36% by a relative and 46% by a stranger. Since this adds up to more than 100%, obviously many were abused by more than one person, but the overall conclusion I detailed in my Journal of Psychohistory article entitled "If I Blow Myself Up and Become a Martyr, I'll Finally Be Loved" (Spring 2006) was that most Palestinians are sexually abused, that men routinely have young boys they rape and that this is not mainly because of poverty because the college students reporting such horrible memories have upper-class families." This explains the Arab street. The Westerners who support them — ah, that is a more painful and a more curious matter. Are Westerners trying to both hide and atone for their racism by cleverly masquerading as staunch anti-colonialists and by "slumming," dressing as impoverished Arabs, marching right alongside the presumably "wretched of the earth," all fitted out in high jihadic gear? Or, is this a symbol of a Western wish to (psychologically) die, to be done with the demands of freedom, to be cleansed of all our filth — our greed and lust, our many choices? There is something else. The jihadic use of European Nazi images is essentially a total "fakeout." The jihadists are projecting all the sins of Islam towards Jews onto Christian Europe. In their use of Holocaust era imagery, the jihadists are trying to pretend that there is no long and genocidal history of Muslims towards Jews, Christians, and other infidels; they presume to deny that there is a 1400 year history of Islamic Jew hatred and genocide towards infidels — one that is still very much alive today; one that is supported by Muslim religious sources. Despite individual exceptions and moments of respite, historically, Jews were routinely and relentlessly subjected to pogroms in the Muslim world and were ultimately driven out of the Muslim Middle East. The Jewish refugee story is the larger and more hidden story of 1948-1956. The Christian Crusades took place because crusading, imperialist, and genocidal Arab Muslims were slaughtering Christians throughout the Middle East and central Asia in what was once known as Byzantium; Zoroastrians in Persia too. Christians are still persecuted by Muslims today; many have been forced to flee Muslim lands. Read the important works of Bat Ye'or and of Dr. Andrew Bostom on this subject. Matthias Kunzel focuses more closely on the Nazi-era relationship between Arabs and Nazis in his book, Jihad and Jew-Hatred: Islamism, Nazism and the Roots of 9/11. The use of Nazi images in pro-Palestinian, anti-Israeli demonstrations cannot be countered with sweet reason, fact, or truth. The hoarse demonstrators who scream hate speech slogans, who seem hypnotically in thrall to hate, are not capable of rational conversations in which any truth other than their own prevails. If one presents a jihadi True Believer with objective facts which challenge their version of reality, they will either physically and verbally threaten to attack you, actually attack you, or they will walk away. Bullies, including terrorists, must be defeated militarily. They will comprehend absolutely no other language. Israel, Hamas and the Nazis: A More Accurate Historical Comparison
Number of Jews in Continental Europe, 1939: 7 million
Number of Jews armed during most of the Holocaust: 0
Number of terrorist attacks on Jewish civilians by the Nazis: thousands
Nazi treatment of Jews: According to a Gestapo official in Warsaw: "It is permissible to take from a Jew everything....Whoever wishes may kill a Jew, and our law will not punish him for it." (Jan Karski report, 1942) Hamas treatment of Jews: It is permissible to take from a Jew everything. Whoever wishes may kill a Jew, and our law will not punish him for it. Israeli treatment of Palestinians: Soldiers subject to strict
discipline and code of behavior for whose violation soldiers are
court-martialed and sent to prison.
Nazi goal: World Conquest
|
|
NOTORIETY IN ISLAMIST CHANNEL
Posted by Naomi Ragen, January 31, 2009. |
|
Our friend Shoaib Choudhury, the courageous Bangladeshi journalist, continues to expose the Bangladeshi neo-Nazi Islamists. Naomi |
|
From Shoaib
In a television talk show titled 'Ekanto Shonglap' [Exclusive Dialogue] on Diganta Television [owned by Mir Qashim Ali of Islami Bank] at 11:30 pm [Bangladesh time], former secretary Mohammad Asaf Ud Dowlah commenting on Palestine issue said, "My soul bleed when I recall the recent atrocities on the people of Gaza and if I was a young man, I would have gone to Gaza with weapon to exterminate Israel.." He said, "Now I believe what Adolph Hitler did during Holocaust was absolutely correct. He should have done this more extensively to eliminate the total Jewish population from the world." Abdul Hye Sikder, the anchor of the program and a former leader of the Cultural front of Bangladesh Nationalist Party [now working with state owned Bangladesh Sangbad Sangstha] echoed the opinion of Asaf Ud Dowlah. Diganta Television is continuing spreading religious hatred through its programs and most of the programs in the channel are anti United States, anti-West and anti Israel. SALAH UDDIN SHOAIB CHOUDHURY
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. |
|
FEARS OF GROWING FIFTH COLUMN: MORE ARABS BOYCOTTING ELECTION
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 31, 2009. |
|
I think the time has come....a bit late but that's how it goes in these here parts, to have a new government start sending these elements to their bros in Gaza and the West Bank where settlements are not wanted. Why should we tolerate Arab settlements in Israel? This was written by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu and it appeared today
in Arutz-7
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) The number of Arab party Members of Knesset will decline from nine to four following the February 10 elections, according to a new poll carried out by Geocartographia for Globes. The survey reflects a growing trend among Israeli Arabs to boycott the Israeli democratic process and ally with radical anti-Israel groups, most notably the Islamic Movement headed by Sheikh Raad Salah. Known Arab terrorist organizations also are getting openly involved in Israel. Police on Friday shut down the Maidan Theatre in Haifa, where the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terrorist group was planning a rally for Saturday. The event was promoted as a pre-election rally, but police said information indicated that the purpose was to back the terrorist group that was headed by the late George Habash. In response, Issam Mashul, a former MK of the predominantly Arab Hadash party that includes Jewish MK Doc Khenin, called the police move "political terror." Virtually all pre-election polls show that Hadash will win four seats in the next Knesset, one more than it now holds. However, the Ra'am-Ta'al and Balad parties, along with a new party that wants to shift focus to issues other than the Arab-Jewish struggle, will not hold any seats at all in the next legislature, according to the Globes poll. Other surveys the past three days project 8-10 seats for Arab MKs. The High Court recently overturned a Knesset Elections Committee decision that Balad and Ra'am-Ta'al cannot run because of their positions that question the validity of a Jewish nation. The Geocartographia poll indicates that the committee decision touched off a negative reaction in the Arab community, according to the polling group's manager Prof. Avi Degani. The projected lack of Israel Arabs' participation in the upcoming election is a new low. "If a third of the Arab electorate fails to go the polls, that will be a danger signal," Globes noted. Forty percent of Arab respondents have not decided how they will vote or whether they will join a growing number who have said they will boycott the ballot box. If they vote for non-Arab parties, Kadima and Meretz may benefit. The latest polls project between 28 and 31 seats for the Likud, 20-23 for Kadima and 13-17 for Labor. All of the surveys agree that Shas will maintain its current level of 11 seats or will lose only one, while Israel Is Our Home (Yisrael Beiteinu) is projected with 16 MKs and Meretz 5-7 seats. The surveys also show that the Jewish Home faction, which is largely a renewal of the National Religious Party, will win 3-4 seats. The Ichud Leumi (National Union) is projected to earn 3-5 seats. United Torah Judaism (UTJ) would be represented with 5-7 MKs if elections were held now. Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
WORLD DEMONSTRATIONS
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 31, 2009. |
|
Yvette is still up almost two am, because she got upset seeing an interview show from the States showing the poor palestinians crying and blaming, and doing their prepared thing. I strongly believe it's all a planned conspiracy, and it has audiences the world over, who need someone to blame for something. Screw the Jew is nothing NEW !!! If the world's media wasn't so biased and anti Semitic, the palies wouldn't have a chance. They try everything and sad to say have gained ground due primarily to our weak kneed politicians and system. We've allowed ourselves to get involved in a war of attrition, which has no chance for victory.That appears to be the case with the rest of the western world, verses ISLAM. Think about what's been happening, all over, for decades, and the reaction has been similar to that of pre WW 2. Talk of peace while a maniacal religion spreads it's hatred. Sad, Bad, Mad mad world.....!! Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
FROM ISRAEL: WAKE UP!
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 31, 2009. |
|
Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat) I cited Dr. Bernard Lewis, the venerable dean of Islamic studies, this past week. I cite him again now. This is in the context of a 30 minute version of a longer film on radical Islam and its danger to the West, including the US. The film, called "The Third Jihad," is legitimate. The people interviewed are, in many instances, familiar to me (and deeply respected by me). They are serious, well-informed and grounded people with a clear vision about the dangers facing us. Dr. Lewis says to America: "Wake Up!" Melanie Phillips, the marvelous British commentator, whom I also cited this past week, says that "The battleground is a battleground of ideas and ideology. The West hasn't entered this battleground, it hasn't even understood that there IS a battleground." Would that America would start to get it. I urge everyone receiving this to take the time to see it, and then to share it broadly.
~~~~~~~~~~ Sociologist Gunnar Heinsohn, of the Raphael Lemkin Institute at the University of Bremen (Germany), has written an article of significance, called "Ending the West's proxy war against Israel." In Gaza, he says, there is a "youth bulge," the result of a high birth rate of six children per woman. Where there is a "youth bulge," he explains, there is typically violence, as young men are expendable. What is more, as most of the people in Gaza are registered with UNRWA — the UN Relief and Works Agency — as "refugees," they receive assistance, which is provided via donations from the US and Europe. "The West pays for food, schools, medicine and housing, while Muslim nations help out with the military hardware. Unrestrained by such necessities as having to earn a living, the young have plenty of time on their hands for digging tunnels, smuggling, assembling missiles and firing 4,500 of them at Israel since 2006. ~~~~~~~~~~ The solution, of course, is reduction in birth rates. UNRWA — unlike UNHCR, which is responsible for all refugees other than Palestinians — indefinitely maintains descendants of refugees on its rolls, now counting the fourth generation. "If we seriously want to avoid another generation of war in Gaza, we must have the courage to tell the Gazans that they will have to start looking after their children themselves, without UNRWA's help. This would force Palestinians to focus on building an economy instead of freeing them up to wage war." Then, says Heinsohn, by 2025, many boys in Gaza would be only sons. "They would be able to look forward to a more secure future in a less violent society." To achieve a state of calm even sooner than 2025, he suggests that the West might "consider offering immigration to those young Palestinians only born because of the West's well-meant but cruelly misguided aid." If in the next 15 years North America and Europe were to absorb 200,000 young Palestinians, "that would be a negligible move for the big democracies but a quantum leap for peace in the Near East."
~~~~~~~~~~ More food for thought... Jonathan Schanzer — a counterterrorism analyst and deputy executive director of the Jewish Policy Center in Washington — has written a new book, Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine. An excerpt in the Jerusalem Post magazine on Friday analyses the deep divisions and differences that exist between the Palestinians of Gaza and those of Judea and Samaria: There are two distinct economies and two distinct cultures (in part the result of historical connections to Egypt and Jordan, respectively), resulting in animosity and a growing rift. Khalil Shiqaqi, a Palestinian sociologist, describes, "a psychological barrier between the inhabitants of the two territories and...mutual suspicion [that cannot be] disregarded or ignored." Exacerbating the situation is the fact that the family or clan (hamula) often commands the greatest allegiance: "Nationalism is a recent concept in the Middle East; it was introduced by Western powers in the World War I era." And there is an absence of intermarriages between clans in Judea and Samaria and in Gaza. With the Hamas takeover there have been political breaches, as well, that may prove to be irreconcilable. ~~~~~~~~~~ The notion of Palestinian nationalism, then, is mostly honored in the breach by Palestinians. And the vision of one Palestinian state for the "Palestinian people" is no more than the figment of certain fevered imaginations. In the face of all this, one is forced to wonder, and not for the first time, what the policy heads in Washington are thinking when they make a "two-state solution" the center piece of their foreign policy. Hillel Frisch, in reviewing this book, says: "Reading Hamas vs. Fatah, one realizes that if peace is only achieved between two sides, each possessing the ability of give and take, each with a high probability of keeping its commitments, then the Palestinians have long ago ceased to be partners in a peace process... ~~~~~~~~~~ I have already reported on the leak — by Yediot Ahronot, actually — of Olmert's comments to envoy George Mitchell, with regard to what his negotiating team has been prepared to give to the Palestinians in negotiations: part of Jerusalem, uprooting of 60,000 Jews in Judea and Samaria, etc. Well, now Tzipi Livni — recognizing that this goes beyond anything that had ever been offered to the Palestinians before, and was not necessarily something that would meet with the acceptance of the Israeli people — has declared that she had nothing to do with this. What she said was that "[this] does not represent me or what I am advancing." Her claim is that Olmert was speaking only of discussion between himself and Abbas, and that she, as head of negotiations, had no part in this. This report, however, has further diminished her already very poor chances of winning the election. ~~~~~~~~~~ I have just completed a major report on Adalah, a pro-Palestinian Israeli NGO that has Israel's destruction as a Jewish state as its goal. As it receives funding from the New Israel Fund, this is of particular concern.
~~~~~~~~~~ At the Jerusalem Conference last week, I was interviewed about this report. You can see the interview here:
Scroll down to the last row of small pictures and look for the one second from the right, with a title "Arabs use non-profits to try to destroy Israel," and run that. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
WHY OPPOSING IDEOLOGIES WORK — A SPECULATION
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 31, 2009. | |
|
Below is my response to a message I received today.
| |
|
Note nothing is any longer heard about Chechnya's Moslem struggle for liberation. Then again not much is heard any longer about the series of States whose geography line runs from Iran to Russia! They are all outside America's news loops! Russia assassinates and murders Moslems about which no one reads certainly in the Western press. Russia assassinates and murders its journalists who dare seek to expose inhumane treatment and take no prisoners policies regarding Moslems at the hand of mother Russia. Russia does not answer to anyone! While apologists for Islam abound in the West! Moslems who have sought autonomy for Chechnya have not mounted terrorist attacks in Russia for a long time now have they? One must surely wonder why? Nevertheless Islamic terrorists have no compunction over attacking anywhere else on the globe. Nor infiltration of target States' infrastructure indeed full speed ahead! Any and all effort to confront Islamic terrorist sponsoring, funding, funneling on American soil are immediately objected to as in the case of CAIR using all legal means to stop interference of jihad. How odd that Islamic countries do not object, nor protest nor issue FATWA — death warrants — against Soviet agents whose system in effect to control Islamic terrorism remains unequalled in Western countries? Why are Islamic States not so chutzpadic when it comes to Russia? And why does no one in the European press or in America even speculate or wonder why? Such good relationships between Russia and Islamic terror sponsored/practicing States surely has its reasons in spite of opposing ideologies of Communism and that of Islam — the latter a religious cult that otherwise respects no boundaries or borders! Its intent: erasure. |
|
THE TWO STATE SOLUTION HAS FAILED
Posted by Hands Fiasco, January 30, 2009. |
|
This is Jinsa Report #851, published January 28, 2009. |
|
At its theoretical best, it was never two states for two people. It could have been four states — Jordan, the West Bank, Israel, and Gaza — for two-and-a-half-and-a-half people: Israelis in Israel; Palestinian arabs in the West Bank, Gaza, and Jordan; and the two halves being Arabs in Israel and Bedouins in Jordan. At its worst, it is two states — Jordan and Israel — with enclaves of irredentist Palestinians supported by Iran, Syria, Venezuela and Cuba eating at their sides. And always, there are hundreds of thousands of original refugees and their descendants festering in third countries — Lebanon, Syria and Egypt — unable to go where they want, and unwilling to go where they can. At their theoretical best, the Palestinians could have taken up President Bush's conditions for American political support of their independence: Peace requires a new and different Palestinian leadership, so that a Palestinian state can be born. I call on the Palestinian people to elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror. I call upon them to build a practicing democracy based on tolerance and liberty. If the Palestinian people actively pursue these goals, America and the world will actively support their efforts. That was very theoretical — lyrical, but theoretical. The old, terrorist-dominated Palestinian leadership wasn't interested in ceding authority to young technocrats, or interested in tolerance of either Jews or independent-minded Palestinians. It wasn't interested in liberty or practicing anything. Each gift or concession Fatah and Hamas received from Israel or the international community was turned to the furtherance of violence and the veneration of death and destruction. Cry for Palestinian children, but remember the photos on the Hamas website (now removed) of beautiful children in uniforms, pretending to be suicide bombers, marching with guns to the approval of adult men. Search the Internet for the New York Times story of August 3, 2000 by John Burns, "Palestinian Summer Camp Offers the Games of War," alerting us that even before the so-called "second intifada" that Fatah was teaching its children that death was their destiny." Cry for the Palestinian economy, but remember the greenhouses — purchased on September 3, 2005 from settlers in Gush Katif for $14 million private Western dollars; employing 4,000 Palestinians; exporting $75 million worth of fruits, vegetables and flowers annually and destroyed on September 13, 2005. Remember, too the Palestinian civil war that bifurcated leadership roughly, but not completely, along territorial lines. All the king's horses and all the king's men couldn't bring Fatah leadership back to Gaza, even if we wanted to do it. And why should we? Our new President has told us to put away childish things. One would be the idea that Palestinian nationalism ever saw its expression in two rump states straddling a strong, viable, democratic State of Israel partnered with a modern, forward-looking king in Jordan. Once we put that behind us, Israel will be more secure and the Palestinians may finally begin to look for a way out of the swamp. If they do, we should help them; if they don't... The JINSA Reports are published by the Jewish Institute for National
Security Affairs (http://www.jinsa.org).
|
|
HYPOCRICY!
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 30, 2009. |
|
This is by David A. Harris, Executive Director, American Jewish Committee. It was published January 26, 2009. |
|
Dear Ms. Trine Lilleng, You were an unknown Norwegian diplomat till this month. No longer. As first secretary in the Norwegian Embassy in Saudi Arabia, you recently sent out an email on your office account in which you declared: "The grandchildren of Holocaust survivors from World War II are doing to the Palestinians exactly what was done to them by Nazi Germany." Accompanying your text were photos, with an emphasis on children, seeking to juxtapose the Holocaust with the recent Israeli military operation in Gaza. Clearly, you are miscast in your role as a diplomat, all the more so of a nation that has sought to play a mediating role in the Arab-Israeli conflict. In fact, you're desperately in need of some education. Let's begin with your current posting. You've been in Riyadh since 2007. If you're so anguished by human rights violations, perhaps you could have begun by devoting some of your attention — and email blasts — to what surrounds you. Or were your eyes diplomatically shut? Have you failed to notice the many legal executions, including beheadings, going on in your assigned country? Have you ignored the often abysmal treatment of foreign workers, many from Asia, who also happen to be disproportionately counted among the victims of Saudi capital punishment? Have you neglected the gender apartheid that surrounds you? Did you ever look out of your car to notice that Saudi women are proscribed from driving, and that's hardly the worst of it? Have you checked the skyline of Riyadh or Jeddah lately to count the number of church spires or other non-Muslim houses of worship? Have you bothered to inquire about the fate of homosexuals? Okay, you were AWOL on those issues. Maybe you just didn't want to offend your hosts by speaking the truth, or maybe you're suffering from that diplomatic disease known as "localitis" or "clientitis." But surely a woman like you, with such capacity for empathy for those in far-away places, and especially for children in danger, couldn't remain silent about other human rights transgressions, could she? After all, could an individual so deeply moved by the plight of Palestinians in Gaza remain silent about what a New York Times columnist earlier this month described as "hell on earth" — Zimbabwe? Could a person so anguished by the fate of Palestinian children stay mum about a country where a girl's life expectancy at birth is 34, much less than half that of her Norwegian counterpart, and where the health care sector has vaporized, all thanks to the one-man rule of Robert Mugabe? Could such a dedicated humanist possibly avert her eyes from the deadliest conflict since the Second World War, which has killed over five million people, many of them children, in the Congo in the past decade — not to mention the documented and widespread use of torture, rape, and arbitrary detention? An observer of such acute sensitivity could hardly hold her tongue while Afghan girls attempting to go to school have been doused with acid by those who wish to deny young women access to education, reminiscent of the five years of Taliban rule, could she? In neighboring Pakistan, where you served in the Norwegian embassy for three years, the beleaguered human rights community must have been fortunate to have such an impassioned voice for all that's wrong in this failing state. Or was that voice, perhaps, on mute? The children of Sderot, the Israeli town near the Gaza border, have been in desperate need of just such a spokesperson as you for the past eight years. After all, their town has been in the crosshairs of literally thousands of missiles and mortars fired from Gaza. Those Israeli children live with all the signs of trauma, knowing that, with only 15 seconds warning, they could be hit at any time in their schools, their parks, or their beds. Yet, during my visit there last week, for some reason, those children and their parents had yet to hear you speak out for them. What a pity! And the children of Iran could use your help as well. According to human rights groups, Iran has no compunction about executing children or those who were children when their crimes were allegedly committed. Oh, and by the way, your compassionate help would also undoubtedly be welcomed by others under the gun in Iran, including women's rights activists, union organizers, student protesters, independent journalists, reformist politicians, and religious minorities. And let's not forget, once again, the children of Israel, who, according to the Iranian president, don't have a right to live. But wait! A Google search about you reveals nothing, not a single word, regarding your views on Zimbabwe, Congo, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Sderot, or Iran. Or, for that matter, Burma, Darfur, Syria. Shall I go on? Only Israel, faced with those who wish to destroy it, manages to prompt your impassioned correspondence and righteous indignation. Why? No less, your stunning lack of education extends beyond the contemporary world to 20th century history, specifically the Holocaust. Your invocation of the Holocaust to describe what's taken place in Gaza is, frankly, nothing short of obscene. Your claim that the grandchildren of the survivors are doing to the Palestinians exactly what was done to them goes beyond any norm of decency, much less honesty. Approve or disapprove of the Israeli military operation, but there is no basis whatsoever for such a comparison. When Israel entered Gaza in a war of self-defense in 1967, the population was 360,000. After Israel withdrew totally from Gaza in 2005, it was estimated at 1.4 million. Would that the Jewish population under Nazi rule had quadrupled! When Israel entered Gaza in 1967, life expectancy for women was 46. When it left Gaza, it was 73. Shall we even bother to discuss life expectancy for Jews under Nazi occupation? The Second World War in Europe lasted from September 1,1939 to May 8, 1945 — 68 months in all. That means an average monthly extermination rate of nearly 90,000 Jews. Compare that to the total number of victims in Gaza over three weeks — roughly guess estimated at more or less 1,000 — and recall that the majority were armed fighters committed to Israel's destruction, who used civilians, including children, as human shields, mosques as arms depots, and hospitals as sanctuaries. Believe me, Ms. Lilleng, if the "grandchildren of the Holocaust survivors" had wanted to do exactly what the Nazis did to their grandparents, they would have unleashed their full air, land, and sea power. They would have thrown the Israel Defense Forces' ethical guidelines to the wind, kicked out the UN and Red Cross personnel on the ground, stopped humanitarian transports of food, fuel, and medicine, prevented media reporting, and left absolutely nothing — and no one — standing. Unless, of course, they needed slave labor, in which case they would have carted off the able-bodied to work in Auschwitz replicas until they dropped. Or material for ghoulish medical experimentation, in which case, in the spirit of Mengele, they would have kept Palestinian twins alive temporarily. But Israel didn't do any of these things. It's a peace-seeking democracy dedicated to the rule of law — unlike so many of the countries whose horrific sins you blithely choose to overlook. What are we to make of your selective moral outrage and rank hypocrisy? You ought to take a look in the mirror and ask yourself why Israel, and only Israel, makes your blood boil and leads you to speak out, even at the risk of grossly distorting both reality and history. The answer, Ms. Lilleng, should be painfully obvious. |
|
MUSLIMS IN THE LORDS
Posted by Boris Celser, January 30, 2009. |
|
This was written by Thomas Landen and it appeared January
26, 2009 in the Brussels Journal
|
The House of Lords is a venerable British institution, but what does one get if one accepts Muslims in? This: A member of the Lords intended to invite her colleagues to a private meeting in a conference room in the House of Lords to meet the Dutch politician Geert Wilders, an elected member of the Dutch parliament, to watch his controversial movie Fitna and discuss the movie and Mr. Wilders' opinions with him. Barely had the invitation been sent to all the members of the House when Lord Ahmed raised hell. He threatened to mobilize 10,000 Muslims to prevent Mr. Wilders from entering the House and threatened to take the colleague who was organizing the event to court. The result is that the event, which should have taken place next Thursday was cancelled. Lord Ahmed immediately went to the Pakistani press to boast about his achievement, which he calls "a victory for the Muslim community." A victory for the Muslim community, but a defeat for British democracy where topics to which Muslims object cannot even be debated. That, apparently, is what one gets when one accepts Muslims into the House of Lords. Lord Ahmed is considered to be a "moderate" Muslim. The Pakistani born Nazir Ahmed became the United Kingdom's first Muslim life peer in 1998. He is a member of the Labour Party and was appointed to the Lords by Tony Blair. Lord Ahmed took his oath on the Koran. He led one of the first delegations on behalf of the British Government on the Muslim pilgrimage of the Hajj, to Saudi Arabia. In February 2005, Lord Ahmed hosted a book launch in the House of Lords for anti-Zionist author Israel Shamir. In 2007, he responded to the award of a knighthood to Salman Rushdie by stating that he was appalled, saying that Rushdie had "blood on his hands." Lord Ahmed was among the founders of The World Forum, an organization set up "to promote world peace in the aftermath of 9/11 with an effort to build bridges of understanding between The Muslim World and the West by reviving a tradition of Dialogue between people, cultures and civilizations based on tolerance." What does "dialogue" mean to those who make discussion about controversial issues impossible? Thank you, Mr. Blair, for bringing "diversity" to the House of Lords. UPDATE, February 3, 2009: by Melanie Phillips,
"Wilders has been re-invited to speak and screen his film in the Lords later this month. Parliament now has a second chance to show that jihadi thuggery will not be allowed to prevail within the cradle of democracy. But if it is really to demonstrate this, it should also surely take action against Lord Ahmed, who abused his position as a peer of the realm to threaten mass intimidation of the House in which he sits. If it fails to do so, it will be another notch on the ratchet of Britain's slide into submission." Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
OBAMA'S MESSAGE TO THE RADICAL MUSLIM WORLD'S LEADERS: HE'S RIGHT AND HE'S WRONG
Posted by Mrla, January 30, 2009. |
|
This was written by Rachel Raskin-Zrihen and it appeared on the
Political Mavens website:
|
|
President Obama's message to the radical Muslim world's leaders, he said, is that they will be judged by their people for what they build and not by what they destroy. Well, it seems to me that on the one hand he's right about that, though not necessarily in the way he meant. And he's also completely wrong. The Muslim world is judging its leaders by what they've built, all right. They're judging them on the terrorist network they've built — a vast network that spans the globe and operates almost with impunity. It's managed to terrify entire nations into giving in, a little at a time, to Islamic demands. They're also being judged on the unrivaled propaganda machine they've built. It's an apparatus that uses every conceivable cynical means to its end — it's end being the destruction of Israel, the Jews, the Christians and the West in general. This machine is succeeding beyond anything the West itself might have thought possible because, I think, the Islamo-fascists know us better than we know ourselves, and infinitely better than we know them. They know, for instance, that the West can be made to commit hara-kiri at the mere suggestion that we are somehow infringing on someone's human rights. Since this is not a burden with which the Islamo-fascists themselves are saddled, I'm sure they find it amusing to watch us take to the streets demanding Israel's destruction for civilian deaths in Gaza which were, in fact, engineered by Hamas fighters firing from civilian centers in the hope of provoking a response for exactly that purpose. The Islamo-fascists propaganda machine is also functioning to create the impression throughout the West that not bowing to its will is tantamount to denying their religious and human rights. For a group for whom human rights is Jewish-created nonsense, they seem to me to spend a lot of time demanding it from the West while simultaneously denying it to anyone not Muslim. They seem also to deny it to Muslims who step out of their very strict prescribed line of permissible behavior and thought. And the West's reaction is as interesting as it is really scary. It's a phenomenon similar to that which allows the Muslim world and its Western supporters to demand a Jew-free "Palestine," and to deny equal rights to Jews and Christians in nearly all 40-plus of the world's predominantly Muslim nations, while the very idea of an Arab-free Israel is universally condemned as racist. In fact, they have built a nearly universally accepted lie that Zionism — defined as the idea of a Jewish state in ancient Israel and Judea — is racist by nature. This, even though it is the world's only Jewish country, in which more than 1 million Arabs live. This despite its being surrounded by more than 20 Arab Muslim countries, some of which don't permit Jews even visit, let alone to live there. These countries, however, are not racist. Go figure. What the Islamo-fascists have built is massive and it's working, and the Arab street is indeed judging its leaders by this and finding them empowering. In that way, Obama is right. On the other hand, he's wrong about their not judging their leaders on what they destroy. They judge them on that, too, and also, if their reaction to destruction is any indication, find that immensely satisfying, as well. Who can forget the images of the Palestinians dancing and handing out candy after the attacks on America on Sept. 11, 2001? Radical Islamic culture celebrates death and destruction. It's why they do so much of it. It's why they believe that to raise a child to die while murdering a Jew or an American is an express ticket to paradise. It's why the greatest thing to which one can aspire in that culture, is to destroy life — their own and their victims' — and such killers are glorified in image and song. See, Obama is wrong. The leaders of the radical Muslim world are also judged by what they destroy. In fact, what they build is, mostly, all about what they can destroy. It's a completely different world view, and unless more of us catch on to that, I'm afraid we'd better get used to it. Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
EUROPE'S ANTI-SEMITISM BACKFIRES
Posted by Steve Kramer, January 30, 2009. |
|
Anti-Semitism is a double-edged sword. Obviously, it hurts Jews and can be murderous to them; less obviously, it may harm its perpetrators. For example, Hitler elevated the goal of ridding Europe of its Jews, to the point that valuable railroad cars were used to transport Jews to the ovens, instead of utilizing them to help the failing German war effort. In contemporary Europe, where anti-Semitism is quietly encouraged by some governments and acquiesced to by all, the surge in the Muslim population threatens the historic European mindset and culture. In the Middle East, the government-induced fixation with Israel and the Jews is preventing the more moderate regimes from defending themselves against a violent Iranian takeover, a la Lebanon and Gaza. There was no anti-Semitism per se until the Christian age. Up until that time, Jews had enemies, but the antagonism against them was generic and typical of the conflicts between warring peoples. The New Testament built a fundamental and everlasting enmity against Jews, beginning with the crucifixion of Christ. The columnist and rabbi Smuley Boteach wrote, "Yes, original Jewish culpability begins with the greatest lie ever told, that the Jews were responsible for killing G-d incarnate ... ." In Matt: 27: 22-25, it is written: "What shall I do, then, with Jesus who is called Christ?" Pilate asked. They all answered, "Crucify him!" "Why? What crime has he committed?" asked Pilate. But they shouted all the louder, "Crucify him!" When Pilate saw that he was getting nowhere, but that instead an uproar was starting, he took water and washed his hands in front of the crowd. "I am innocent of this man's blood," he said. ... All the people answered, "Let his blood be on us and on our children!" Pilate, Boteach wrote, "was the cruelest proconsul ever sent by Rome to Judea and crucified tens of thousands of innocent Jews for the most minor infractions." The New Testament put the onus on the Jews for crucifixion of Jesus. Matthew, St. Paul, and St. Augustine added to the narrative against the Jews, while John, the author of the book of Revelations, even called Jews the children of Satan. Things got even worse in the Middle Ages, with anti-Jewish edicts, blood libels, the Crusades, expulsions, the Inquisition, the Reformation, pogroms, and more. The worst of the abuses against Jews occurred among Christians in Europe, but Mohammed's enmity against the Jews, for failing to convert en masse to Islam, stoked similar sentiments among the Muslims, who classed the Jews (and Christians) as dhimmis, subservient to the Muslims and subject to onerous regulations, taxation, and pogroms. Modern anti-Semitism dates to 1879, when Wilhelm Mahr, a German, coined the phrase "anti-Semitism" as a tool against Jews, whom he claimed were devouring German society. This new "ism" maintained that Jews couldn't save themselves from their evil ways even by assimilating into their country's culture. Mahr founded the League of Antisemites to fight the Jews to the death, or at the least, to be expelled from Germany. From Mahr to the rise of Hitler took less than fifty years. In Europe, anti-Semitism has never lost its allure. Post-WWII Europe briefly favored recompensing the Jews for the Holocaust, to the extent that the United Nations "officially" established the right of Jews to a national state in Palestine. But the favorable attitude soon soured. Today, even the majority of Germans, whose parents and grandparents were responsible for the slaughter of six million Jews during WWII, feel no special empathy or obligation towards Israel, the Jewish nation. European governments tend to appease or ignore anti-Semitism, rather than condemn it, such as the recent anti-Israel riots that swept across Europe during Israel's retaliation against Hamas. The Scandinavian countries, Spain, Belgium, Holland, and Greece are the most anti-Semitic European countries. Most of the others are not far behind. They have welcomed Muslim immigrants from Africa and Asia and allowed millions of illegal Muslim refugees to remain in their countries, with little effort to assimilate them to European culture and mores. In fact, there is a conscious plan to allow Muslim culture to permeate Europe without European values being transmitted to Islamic countries. I'm referring to the EAD (Euro-Arab Dialogue), which gives Muslim culture a privileged place in Europe. At the same time, European leaders have allowed the cancer of reactionary anti-Semitism to flourish amidst their native populations. With the Muslim contingents in their countries burgeoning because of their high fertility rate, European governments face a two-headed menace: rising Islamic demands for Sharia law and special privileges, versus a bigoted, xenophobic segment of the population that hates both Jews and Muslims. In the next few decades, the liberal, intellectual ruling class of Europe may capitulate to the Muslims "democratically", without a fight — they show signs of that already. A clash between the Muslims and native European patriots may prevent a Muslim takeover, or follow it; in either case, an exodus of European Jews is probable. Europe, as we know it, is definitely in for some changes. The damage from fomenting anti-Semitism is more overt in the Muslim countries. Take Egypt, the largest and most powerful Arab country, and Saudi Arabia, the wealthiest Arab country. They, like all Arab countries, have used anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism as their main tools to keep their masses distracted from the excesses of the ruling class. So long as Israel and the Jews could be pointed to as the cause of all the distress and disaffection afflicting the average citizen, the ruling class of each country was insulated from their collective anger. But now there is the pressing problem of Iran, whose ambition to rule the Muslim-Arabian world dates back to the 7th century CE. Iran has deployed a proxy army (Hizbollah) in Lebanon and another (Hamas) in Gaza, plus it has made Bashar Assad's Syria into a puppet state. With these two terror forces and Syria's missile arsenal, Iran threatens to destroy Israel. But Egypt and Saudi Arabia are equally threatened by Iran's brand of militant Islam. Both countries need help from Israel (and America) to fend off Iran, which soon will attain its goal of possessing nuclear weapons. When Iran possesses even one atomic bomb, it will most likely bully its neighbors and enemies by threatening to use its new weapon. Or, Iran might supply a nuclear device to a terror ally in an attempt to deflect the disastrous consequences of using the weapon itself. Nevertheless, the Egyptian and Saudi rulers can't overtly support Israel against Iran or its allies, because they have built their regimes on the foundation of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. Nor can any of the other Sunni Arab countries threatened by Iran admit that Israel is a bulwark for them. Instead, they must continue to vilify Israel publicly even if they cheer Israel on against Iran and its proxies privately. Anti-Semitism is a useful tool for governments to funnel the anger of their downtrodden or discontented masses away from their ruling classes. But this strategy doesn't come without a price. Europe is in danger of succumbing to a Muslim takeover within two generations, while its antipathy towards Israel blinds it to the danger of Iran's growing appetite for power and influence — which stretches beyond the Middle East towards Europe and Russia. The Arab states are even more directly threatened than Europe is by the prospect of a bullying nuclear-armed Iran, but they can't stuff the anti-Semitic genie back into the bottle to join with Israel in a united front. With these trends in mind, it seems that the cultivation of anti-Semitism is a double-edged sword. Steve Kramer lives in Alfe Menashe. He has written a weekly opinion column for the Jewish Times of southern New Jersey (www.jewishtimes-sj.com) for the last ten years. He writes, "They're about history, politics, touring, or whatever excites me." |
|
EAR PLUG EYED
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 30, 2009. |
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at fred@gmail.com View
this art graphic and others at |
|
JIMMY CARTER'S MYOPIA
Posted by Michael D. Evans, January 30, 2009. |
|
Former President Jimmy Carter has just released a new book, We Can Have Peace in the Holy Land: A Plan that Will Work. Carter's solution is straightforward, Israel should embrace the Quartet. The plan is backed by a group known simply as The Elders, an idea formulated by British entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson and musician Peter Gabriel to create a world council of elders to tackle issues such as peace in the Middle East. Jimmy Carter and the Carter Center are heavily involved with this endeavor. Carter is one of three individuals appointed as Elders to the Middle East. The delegation's objectives were met with skepticism by the Israelis, but according to Mr. Carter, were eagerly embraced by the "Palestinians, peace groups and human rights activists in the region." How could he ask the Jewish people to embrace a group known as The Elders? The controversial [Editor's note: it is not "controversial." It is a proven fraud.] Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion is the biggest bestselling book in a bigoted world, and is charged with fueling anti-Semitism, from the Russian pogroms to the Holocaust. Carter's plan is to allow the Quartet to solve the Middle East problem. He calls for "peace-loving" organizations such as Hezbollah and Hamas and states like Iran and Syria to be involved in the negotiating process in order to have peace in the Holy Land. Carter refers to Jews again and again as "radicals," another word for terrorists. He called former Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin a "radical" and then goes on to describe him as the "most notorious terrorist in the region." Of course, he said the British said that, not him. Carter describes Likud Party leaderBenjamin Netanyahu as a "key political associate and naysayer" who was strongly opposed to Israel relinquishing control over the Sinai. It appears that Jimmy Carter is revising history. The Benjamin Netanyahu I know was attending college during the Camp David meetings. In fact, when I recommended him to Begin for a government job, the prime minister did not even know who Benjamin was. I have no idea how Carter was so aware of Benjamin Netanyahu's political ideology; he was selling furniture to help fund his schooling. The former president writes that Begin agreed to divide Jerusalem. I found that to be astonishing ... especially since Mr. Begin had given me a copy of the letter he wrote to Carter on Sept. 17, 1978. In the letter he wrote, "Dear Mr. President. ... On the basis of this law, the government of Israel decreed in July 1967 that Jerusalem is one city indivisible, the capital of the State of Israel." According to Begin, Carter informed him that the U.S. government did not recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital. Begin told me he responded, "Excuse me sir, but the State of Israel does not recognize your non-recognition." The former president writes that Prime Minister Begin agreed to a freeze on building Jewish settlements. Begin told me he had not agreed to a total freeze; he only agreed not to build new settlements for three months, during the negotiations. Carter gives the impression that he and Begin were close friends by saying that Begin and Sadat visited him in Plains to reaffirm the personal commitments each had made to the other. I found that quite humorous; Mr. Begin told me he had refused to meet with Carter when the president traveled to Jerusalem. At that time, he was no longer prime minister but was outraged that Carter had misrepresented the events during their meetings. Carter viewed PLO leader Yasser Arafat as a "little George Washington." He pens, "We pursued the concept of non-violent resistance of Hamas leaders and gave them documentation and video presentations on the successful experiences of Mahatma Gandhi, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., and others." Peace in the Holy Land must include Palestinian militant leader, Marwan Barghouti, the serial killer. Carter calls him the "most intriguing player in the Middle East." He has run for the presidency in the Palestinian National Authority. Begin told me of a meeting with Carter during which he gave the president a list of cities in the United States with Bible names, i.e., Shiloh, Hebron and Bethel. He asked Carter, "Could you imagine the governor of Pennsylvania would proclaim that anyone could live in the city of Bethlehem, Pa., except Jews?" President Carter agreed that such a man, if he did such a thing, would be guilty of racism. Begin replied that he was governor of the state in which the original Bethlehem, and the original Jericho, and the original Shiloh were located. He asked me, "Did Carter expect me to say that everybody could live in those cities except Jews?" Could it be that Carter's ideals are formulated by the number of zeros before the decimal on the contributions to the Carter Center by oil-rich Gulf States? These same states do not now nor will they ever allow Jews to worship freely within their borders, no matter how much land Israel relinquishes. Carter's final plea is for President Barack Obama to "shape a comprehensive peace effort between Israel and the Palestinians ... then use persuasion and enticements to reach these reasonable goals with the full backing of other members of the International Quartet [Russia, the UN, the EU, and the United States] and the Arab nations." It is likely he would call on The Elders for their expertise. The best thing Obama could do is completely ignore Carter and his plan. Michael D. Evans is the author of "Jimmy Carter: The Liberal Left and World Chaos." A television special based on the book is currently being produced. This article appeared as an Op-Ed piece January 28, 2009 in the
Washington Times |
|
IRONY AND INJUSTICE; HOW ISRAEL IS LOSING TO HAMAS; WHY CLEMENCY FOR POLLARD; CAMERA DOESN'T LIE?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 30, 2009. |
|
IRONY OF WAR Far leftists at Ben-Gurion U. denounced Israel in the neo-Nazi magazine, Counterpunch, for bombing a university in Gaza. Ironically, the magazine came out on the same day that the authors' university was closed when struck by a rocket, which the Gaza university is used to store (Prof. Steven Plaut, 1/1). That is when professors pass from being ideologues to being fools. INJUSTICE RETURNS, IN CASES OF POLICE BRUTALITY Although dozens of victims of brutality during police removal of Jews from Amona in Judea-Samaria had filed civil suits against police, the police closed almost all their investigations of criminal cases against police. Police offered "lame excuses." For example, in the filmed beating the heads of two cameramen, the case was dropped for "lack of public interest." [That is a recurrent, silly excuse.] A judge eliminated the prison sentence of a cop who had admitted wantonly attacking a fellow who had urged him to stop beating a girl. The judge left a small fine in place, but thought that the policeman's otherwise lengthy service should mitigate his sentence (IMRA, 1/2/09). Police hurt hundreds of civilians that day. It's an epidemic of brutality for political purposes. I think an example should be made of those police, of the prosecutors who favor them, and of the politicians who direct them. ARREST ARAB RIOTERS During the Gaza offensive, protesting Arabs in the Galilee rioted. Police arrested 10 Arab youths (IMRA, 1/2/09). I have complained that police often let Arabs get away with rioting. Apparently in wartime, domestic Arab violence is taken more seriously. Police did not beat the Arabs. Not that I think police should. However, why then beat Jews? HERE'S ANOTHER JUDICIAL ODDITY Jewish, left-wing protestors against Israel's part in the Gaza flare-up were barred by police unless they promised not to wave PLO flags. They sued over it. Police said they feared the flags might anger the Jewish public. The protestors said they are not responsible for crimes by passers-by (IMRA, 1/2/09). I'm disgusted but agree. I note that police give the same reason for barring Jews from praying on the Temple Mt., only it is Arab violence that the police fear. Let the police arrest the violent, not bar others! HOW ISRAEL IS LOSING TO HAMAS The war left Hamas largely intact. Most of its tunnels are operational. Using them, Hamas could restock arms and repair what was damaged. Most Hamas troops and most Hamas leaders hid. Then not much was accomplished [The IDF performed brilliantly, not as in Lebanon.] Battlefield success does not itself determine who won. The diplomatic aftermath does. [An old story for Israel, but unlearned.] Israel did not specify clear goals it could be seen to have accomplished. Israel demands that Hamas stop smuggling weapons, forego control over international borders, and stop firing missiles at Israel. Israel relinquished its bargaining from strength and its demands, when it failed to insist on controlling the borders itself. Hamas demands control over Gaza borders with Egypt and the sea. This would permit Hamas to rearm and renew attacks on Israel. Thus Hamas is not deterred from further raids on Israel. Israel failed to gain deterrence, a chief goal. Israel asks that the borders be controlled by foreigners, such as the EU, which accepts Hamas demands. The EU colluded previously with terrorists in Gaza and in Lebanon. That Israeli request also means Israeli defeat. By accepting Hamas demands, the mediators prove they are not honest brokers. By accepting such mediators, Israel guarantees its own defeat. "Hamas is an illegal terrorist organization...conducting an illegal terror war against Israel...by accepting the EU as a legitimate interlocutor, Israel itself gives credence to the view that Hamas is a legitimate actor." The only way for Israel to win would be to destroy Hamas and prevent terrorists from attacking Israel from Gaza. The Israeli regime refuses to do this. It is determined to lose, again, as it did in Lebanon. To engage in another ground offensive needlessly risks Israeli troops (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 1/2/09). Conclusion: the war was electoral campaigning by military means. This is a cynical view, but the regime's leaders betray their country repeatedly. ARAB'S REVEALING LANGUAGE A leading Egyptian parliamentarian believes that Middle East foreign affairs cannot be reformed, now, and Egypt must turn to shore up its economy against the world economic crisis. He said, "Israeli aggressions against Gaza were a result of the firing of rockets by Hamas at Israeli settlements." (IMRA, 1/3.) Hamas fired on cities in the State of Israel, but he calls them "settlements." He calls Israel's response, "aggressions." Shows non-recognition of Israel and Islamic notion that any defense against Muslim attacks is aggression. HOW TO WIN IN GAZA Israel should deploy its forces in the Philadelhi corridor between Egypt and Gaza, and widen it to protect them, block arms tunnels, and make tunnels expensive and more easily detected. 1. Gizmos and international and other non-Israeli forces failed to stop the smuggling from Egypt to Gaza before and undoubtedly would fail again. 2. The Israeli forces would be on the other side of a fence from Gazans, and therefore would not have much trouble with them. 3. The deployment and Israeli flags would show that Israel won. 4. "...Fatah can rightfully charge Hamas with responsibility for the return of Israel to the Philadephi Corridor, with the message that only responsible Palestinian leadership — in contrast to Hamas — will ever bring about conditions for Israel to leave the Philadephi Corridor." (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 1/3/09.) I don't that Israel should retain Gaza and encourage the Arabs to leave. WHY POLLARD DIDN'T GET CLEMENCY "The public aspect of the Pollard campaign for clemency — telephone calls to the White House, the faxes, the prayer rallies, the internet campaign — was only a small part of the entire operation. The major thrust of the initiative was carried out very quietly behind-the-scenes. It was an amazing operation! We had outstanding professional advisers. We had the very best lawyers. They filed an excellent petition which clearly outlined the injustice of the case and demonstrated the gross disproportionality of the sentence. We worked around the clock lobbying and making the right contacts. We had access to the White House and intensive behind-the-scenes contact. Our representatives met and spoke with high level American officials to make the case and were successful. We had the support of the American Jewish leaders. [Not too much.] We had recommendations from those who matter most in the clemency process. We had massive grassroots support and participation in the US and Israel. We left no stone unturned in doing whatever it took to present the best case to the President for commutation of Jonathan's life sentence to the 24 years he has already served." "So what was missing?" asked the show host. "The support of the Government of Israel, " replied Esther Pollard. She meant Olmert, Peres, Livni, and Barak (IMRA, 1/21). Also, Pres. Bush did not rise to the occasion, to do the right thing. I challenge Obama to uplift this mean spirit. NOT ONLY HAMAS FOUGHT ISRAEL, & BY WAR CRIME "Gaza — Ma'an — The armed wing of Fatah claimed responsibility for shelling an Israeli intelligence building in Kisufim on Saturday." (IMRA, 1/3.) HAMAS' OTHER FRONT The P.A. publicly told its partisans in Gaza to be ready to take over from Hamas, there. In response, Hamas broke the arms and shot the legs of dozens of Fatah men. Hamas put dozens of others under house arrest. Relatives of people killed by Israeli security forces broke into prison and murdered "collaborators," lest Israeli forces rescue them (IMRA, 1/4/09). Wouldn't it have been nice if the IDF got to the prisons first, and did rescue them! The P.A. was indiscreet. Hamas was brutal. The self-proclaimed foreign humanitarians did not seem to notice the murders, arm-breaking, and shooting. If Arabs are harmed not by Jews, they don't seem to care. WHEN GAZA POLICE ARE NOT POLICE BUT WORSE As part of its initial combat, Israeli forces attacked and killed a concentration of police in Gaza. [Israel's critics called them civilians, needed to keep order.] A Hamas web site proudly "said that nearly all of them were 'Izz Al-Din Al-Qassam members, who by day carried out security missions and by night engaged in jihad and attacks." (IMRA, 1/4/09.) Did the major media publicize this, or just the Arab accusations against Israel? Those "police" did not get much family life at night nor much sleep. WHAT DO YOU MEAN, THE CAMERA DOESN'T LIE? "During the 2006 Second Lebanon War, a Reuters staffer was caught faking a photograph of damage from IDF bombing in a Beirut suburb to make it appear as though Israel has massacred the neighborhood instead of using pinpoint surgical strikes as it had. The staff member was reportedly dismissed." This time, Reuters published a false Hamas claim of having kidnapped two more Israeli soldiers, without checking with the IDF (Arutz-7, 1/5/09.) The Arab side and sympathizers fomented a great humanitarian outcry against Israel with false charges of massive damage of civilian areas. They should have praised Israel for warning Sidon and Tyre residents to flee to the beaches, away from urban areas where the PLO was holed up and would be fought. 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 |
|
E-MAIL FROM DUBAI — WHAT THE HECK HAPPENED?
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 30, 2009. |
|
This email came from Bob, who writes, "This is from an e-mail friend in Dubai who is originally from Scotland. He talks about the current economic climate there." |
|
Hi Bob What the heck happened??? Simple — Greed Corruption and incompetence by a few that comprise the ruling elite of bankers politicians and CEO's Dubai is also broke and an estimated 2,000 expatriates are leaving daily — many leaving behind houses, apartments and cars that are now unsellable even at 25% price of September 2008. Officially over 3,000 abandoned cars have been collected by police but figure is probably several times that, as many cars are sitting around in various parking lots. Over 2,000 (2/3) of the official figure were classified "Luxury" BMW's, Porches Etc. Sales of new vehicles have dropped to near zero while prices of 2nd hand have dropped +50% if a buyer can be found. A 1 year old BMW is now cheaper than a new mini KIA. Personally however wold have KIA (as I do) due to far lower running and maintenance costs. + after 3 years it has been incredibly reliable with only problem a broken ashtray probably due to overuse. I regret I am a heavy nicotine addict. Dubai became the largest construction site on the planet with 20% of its tower cranes — Now a forest of "Dead and Dying Tower Cranes" and abandoned tower blocks. Having exhausted its oil (Production is now below 10% of that in 1991) Dubai became a "Cinderella State" A magic wand turned a square yard of dry salty desert sand into several thousand dollars worth of real estate. Midnight came in October 08. Over 3,000 real estate companies in this former village were in existence in October 08, a few with up to 1,000 commission paid agents ... All drove around in fancy cars and had phenomenal life styles based on cheap and easy loans in turn based on their commissions on ever increasing property prices and rents that rose over 10 fold since 2001. What an insane party they had. Over 400 tourist hotels under construction but traffic was such that it would take hours to get to them or anywhere else. Tourist and business arrivals have dropped +70% and I can now live in a hotel cheaper than renting a studio. An insane law here to encourage national to buy property was that they did not have to pay back loans unless property was rented out. Result it costs them nothing to sit on empty properties while demanding extreme rents. Result is high rents and as of Nov 08 +40% mortgages in default. Where I am living now is a Cluster of 300 apartment blocks apparently all sold yet occupancy is 10% at most and some nice looking cars are gathering dust in the car parks. Since returning from holiday in August time to drive around Dubai has about halved. Dubai property prices rose 43% in first half of last year, Rents even more so. Why should a studio apartment here have been valued higher than my 5 bedroom house in Scotland which overlooks fields and a golf course. Greed Corruption and Incompetence of a few has been a worldwide plague. Regards
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
FROM ISRAEL:WHAT WE CONTEND WITH
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 30, 2009. |
|
I ain't easy, that's for very sure, and it's only going to get worse in the months ahead. The IDF knew that there might be law suits forthcoming against IDF officers in courts in various countries with regard to what has just gone on in Gaza. And they have been preparing for it. But who could have ever anticipated this: Yesterday a court in Madrid, Spain granted a petition by the Palestinian Center for Human Rights, asking that National Infrastructure Minister and former Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer and former IAF and IDF Chief of Staff Dan Halutz be investigated for alleged "crimes against humanity" for their involvement in the 2002 assassination of Hamas terrorist Salah Shehadeh. Internal Security Minister Avi Dichter, former IDF Chief of Staff Moshe Yaalon, former GOC Southern Command Doron Almog, former National Security Council Head Giora Eiland and Brigadier-General (Res.) Mike Herzog have also been named as persons on interest in the case. Shehade — considered responsible for hundreds of lethal attacks on Israel — was the founder of Izz al-Din al-Qassam Brigades, Hamas's military wing. Israel arrested him in the 1980s and later turned over to the PA, which set him free in early 2000. When he was successfully targeted from the air in July, 2002, 14 other people were killed. Justice Fernando Andeo, a National Court of Spain Judge, is said to have decided to grant the petition "in the name of universal justice." ~~~~~~~~~~ The outrage here is every bit as great as would be expected. Ben Eliezer made this statement: "I do not regret the decision I made as defense minister to take [Shehadeh] out. He was one of the biggest murderers. A hundred Israelis were killed under his orders. At the time, suicide bombing attacks took place on buses, at coffee shops and on the street on an almost daily basis. If we hadn't assassinated him, he would have continued with the attacks and killed more and more Israelis. ~~~~~~~~~~ Defense Minister Barak, calling the Spanish court decision "delusional," commented that: "Those who call the killing of terrorists 'a crime against humanity' are living in an upside-down world. "This decision is all the more outrageous when you consider Hamas' true colors, being revealed once again these days to us and the world "All senior officials belonging to the defense establishment, past and present, acted properly and in the name of the State of Israel, out of their commitment to protect the citizens of Israel." He said he would do everything in his power to get the charges dropped. ~~~~~~~~~~ Moshe Ya'alon, expressing confidence that the State would act to protect those being investigated, said, "This is part of the propaganda against the legitimacy of the State of Israel." Indeed, it's the State that's under attack, not just the individuals named. ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, Conservative Catholic priest Floriano Abrahamowicz of Treviso in northern Italy, told the Tribuna di Treviso yesterday that "the only thing certain" about the gas chambers "was that they were used for disinfection." "The Israelis cannot say that the genocide they suffered at the hands of the Nazis was graver than that occurring in Gaza just because they killed several thousand people while the Nazis killed six million." Abrahamowicz denied that he was an anti-Semite, saying that his father was Jewish. But he referred to the Jews as god-slayers. ~~~~~~~~~~ Abrahamowicz's words made press world-wide because they followed the incident of the lifting by Pope Benedict of the excommunication of Bishop Richard Williamson, a Holocaust denier, and three others in the Church who are traditionalists and opposed changes brought about by the Second Vatican Council. This Council, which set a tone for reconciliation with the Jewish people, has been referred to by Williamson as "a separation of Catholic Authority from Catholic Truth." Presumably the Pope's decision was motivated by a desire to heal a rift between different Church factions, but it will have considerable repercussions. Several sources report that Williamson recently said in an interview that, "Anti-Semitism can only be bad if it is against the truth. But if something is true, it can't be bad." The Pope's decision has generated major tensions in the relationship between the Jewish world and the Church and seriously set back decades of inter-religious dialogue. The Rabbinate of Israel has broken off contact with the Church. ~~~~~~~~~~ Then there is a clip offered by MEMRI showing a TV show on the Sunni Islamist Egyptian channel Al-Rahma TV that featured Egyptian cleric Amin Al-Ansar speaking about the Holocaust. (Holocaust Memorial Day was this week.) First he explained that because of the Jews' deeds during and after World War I, "it got to the point that the rulers themselves had no solution but to annihilate them." Then, he screened footage of torture and killing of Jews in Dachau, Mauthausen, and Belsen, and said, "This is what we hope will happen, but, Allah willing, at the hand of the Muslims." ~~~~~~~~~~ Sometimes one feels that there is no end. But there is good news, as well. And I'm delighted to report it and provide a counterbalance: Naalin, a small Palestinian Arab village not far from Ramallah, bought a set of pictures from Yad VaShem Holocaust Museum and put them on display. Hundreds of people visited the exhibit, some learning about the Holocaust for the first time. Of course, there was the inevitable linkage: "Why should we suffer too?" But, none the less, quite unusual and encouraging. ~~~~~~~~~~ Then there's this: When Anwar Abu Arar, age seven, of the Israeli Arab village of Kalansuwa, was killed in a road accident, his father, Khaled, decided to donate the boy's organs. "Children are always children," he said. "It doesn't matter to me if they are Arabs or Jews. If it's impossible to save my son, I want to help other children. It's a matter of conscience." When he decided for organ donation, Khaled knew that the organs might go to Jews. As it turned out, two Arabs and two Jews received the boy's heart and lungs, liver, and two kidneys. Said Khaled, "I hope this contribution of my son's organs will reflect the fact that Arabs and Jews in Israel all want peace and quiet." Bless him. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
SRI LANKAN DEATHS? YAWN. ONLY WHEN JEWS KILL DOES IT MATTER TO THE WORLD
Posted by Mrla, January 30, 2009. |
|
This was written by Meryl Yourish and it appeared January
27, 2009 on Yourish's website
|
|
The world's double standard on Israel is in sharp relief today. The Red Cross reports that hundreds of civilians have been killed and wounded, and over 250,000 civilians are trapped in the fighting. Aid workers have been hurt as well. An estimated 250,000 people are trapped in a 250 square-kilometre area which has come under intense fighting. They have no safe area to take shelter and are unable to flee. Does that sound a little bit familiar to anyone who followed the Gaza war? So you would expect cries of outrage from the international community, right? The EU, the UN, all of the people who protested the Gaza war — they're all on the case, as it's defenseless civilians being murdered by an army with superior weaponry using disproportional force, right? The AP put out an article, but strangely, it hasn't been picked up by all the major news outlets. Definitely not by the thousands that pick up every story on Israel when it fights back against Palestinian terror. At least 300 civilians were wounded and scores feared killed by Sri Lankan army artillery shells fired into a designated "safe zone" for ethnic Tamils trapped by fighting between the military and Tamil rebels, a health official alleged Tuesday. The shelling comes as the rebels continue to fall back, pulling their forces and civilians into the last remaining areas of dense jungle still under their control and leaving behind ghost towns. TamilNet, a pro-rebel Web site, said more than 300 civilians were killed by the shelling on Monday. The military denied firing into the zone. The Red Cross said Tuesday that "hundreds" of people have been killed in Sri Lanka's northern Vanni region. "People are being caught in the crossfire, hospitals and ambulances have been hit by shelling and several aid workers have been injured while evacuating the wounded," said Jacques de Maio, the International Committee of the Red Cross' head of operations for South Asia in Geneva. And there's not a "disproportionate" to be found in the article. And here's the AP boilerplate to explain the war to its readers: The Tamil Tigers have fought since 1983 to create a separate state for minority Tamils, who have suffered decades of marginalization at the hands of governments controlled by the Sinhalese majority. More than 70,000 people have been killed in the civil war. Oh. It's a civil war. That's different. It doesn't matter that 70,000 have died in Sri Lanka, or millions in Darfur. These are civil wars. They're not wars of "occupation." So there will be no world outrage. The Stop The War Coalition won't protest. ANSWER will be staying home. Hugo Chavez won't break off relations with Sri Lanka. Stephen Walt won't write articles about the Sinhalese Lobby. President Obama won't promise to put the crisis in Sri Lanka at the top of his list of things to fix early in his administration. There will not be four op-eds in the New York Times chastising the Sri Lankans for murdering innocent civilians. There will be no op-eds in the Washington Post by the Tamil Tigers, explaining why they're not really terrorists, but their enemies are. Dead Sri Lankans? Who cares? Jews didn't kill them, so they don't count. Dead Palestinians, now there's a cause worth shouting over. Israeli Double Standard Time: It happens every only on days that end with a "y". Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
OBAMA JUST FLATTERS HIMSELF
Posted by Boris Celser, January 30, 2009. |
| This article was written by Charles Krauthammer. |
|
WASHINGTON — Every new president flatters himself that he, kinder and gentler, is beginning the world anew. Yet, when Barack Obama in his inaugural address reached out to Muslims with "to the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect," his formulation was needlessly defensive and apologetic. Is it "new" to acknowledge Muslim interests and show respect to the Muslim world? Obama doesn't just think so, he said so again to millions in his al-Arabiya interview, insisting on the need to "restore" the "same respect and partnership that America had with the Muslim world as recently as 20 or 30 years ago." Astonishing. In these most recent 20 years — the alleged winter of our disrespect of the Islamic world — America did not just respect Muslims, it bled for them. It engaged in five military campaigns, every one of which involved — and resulted in — the liberation of a Muslim people: Bosnia, Kosovo, Kuwait, Afghanistan and Iraq. The two Balkan interventions — as well as the failed 1992-93 Somali intervention to feed starving African Muslims (43 Americans were killed) — were humanitarian exercises of the highest order, there being no significant U.S. strategic interest at stake. In these 20 years, this nation has done more for suffering and oppressed Muslims than any nation, Muslim or non-Muslim, anywhere on earth. Why are we apologizing? And what of that happy U.S.-Muslim relationship that Obama imagines existed "as recently as 20 or 30 years ago" that he has now come to restore? Thirty years ago, 1979, saw the greatest U.S.-Muslim rupture in our 233-year history: Iran's radical Islamic revolution, the seizure of the U.S. embassy, the 14 months of America held hostage. Which came just a few years after the Arab oil embargo that sent the United States into a long and punishing recession. Which, in turn, was preceded by the kidnapping and cold-blooded execution by Arab terrorists of the U.S. ambassador in Sudan and his charge d'affaires. This is to say nothing of the Marine barracks massacre of 1983, and the innumerable attacks on U.S. embassies and installations around the world during what Obama now characterizes as the halcyon days of U.S.-Islamic relations. Look. If Barack Obama wants to say, as he said to al-Arabiya, I have Muslim roots, Muslim family members, have lived in a Muslim country — implying a special affinity that uniquely positions him to establish good relations — that's fine. But it is both false and deeply injurious to this country to draw a historical line dividing America under Obama from a benighted past when Islam was supposedly disrespected and demonized. As in Obama's grand admonition: "We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith's name." Have "we" been doing that, smearing Islam because of a small minority? George Bush went to the Islamic Center in Washington six days after 9/11, when the fires of Ground Zero were still smoldering, to declare "Islam is peace," to extend fellowship and friendship to Muslims, to insist that Americans treat them with respect and generosity of spirit. And America listened. In these seven years since 9/11 — seven years during which thousands of Muslims rioted all over the world (resulting in the death of more than 100) to avenge a bunch of cartoons — there's not been a single anti-Muslim riot in the United States to avenge the greatest massacre in U.S. history. On the contrary. In its aftermath, we elected our first Muslim member of Congress and our first president of Muslim parentage. "My job," says Obama, "is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives." That's his job? Do the American people think otherwise? Does he think he is bravely breaking new ground? George Bush, Condoleezza Rice and countless other leaders offered myriad expressions of that same universalist sentiment. Every president has the right to portray himself as ushering in a new era of this or that. Obama wants to pursue new ties with Muslim nations, drawing on his own identity and associations. Good. But when his self-inflation as redeemer of U.S.-Muslim relations leads him to suggest that pre-Obama America was disrespectful or insensitive or uncaring of Muslims, he is engaging not just in fiction but in gratuitous disparagement of the country he is now privileged to lead. Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
SPARE THE PIETIES ON GAZA
Posted by Laureen Moe, January 30, 2009. |
|
This was written by Jack Engelhard and it appeared January 7, 2009
in Arutz-7
Jack Engelhard is the author of "The Bathsheba Deadline" and "Indecent Proposal", as well as the award-winning memoir of his experiences as a Jewish refugee from Europe, "Escape From Mount Moriah". |
|
Israel is a Jewish State. Is that your problem? Frankly, given a choice, I prefer the skinheads and other brutes who express their anti-Semitism openly. In such places, we know the enemy. But please spare me the pieties and the righteous indignation of those "good people" protesting throughout Europe against Israel's defensive operation in Gaza. True, thousands have taken up banners in support of Israel. At the same time, however, the streets of Europe (and even some in America) are in an uproar. These are the "humanitarians" — the good, the noble, the refined, who chant "peace." Now you're up and about? Now you speak? Where were you when, throughout the years, thousands of jihadist bombs fell on Israel? The streets of Europe were empty. There were no pictures in the newspapers of grieving Jewish mothers and fathers. You called it "peace" as long as the Arabs were doing the killing and the Jews were doing the dying. All was well with the world. Suddenly, as Israel answered back, you found your Cause; and how self-righteous you are in your Cause. You are the best and the brightest of Europe. You are educated. You attended the finest schools. You care for the birds, the bees, the bears, the trees. You favor free speech and freedom of religion. Strange it is that the one and only place in the Middle East that shares your world-view is Israel, and it is Israel that you slander. Israel is a Jewish State. Is that your problem? At the first hint of Jewish self-defense, how quickly you show your true colors. I've seen the photos of your candlelight vigils along the streets and boulevards of Europe, all of it; all these tears in the service of those terrorists whom you call your brothers. Indeed you are related to Hamas (and Fatah) as once before, a mere generation ago, you were related to Hitler's storm. Your angelic faces are touching — and disgusting. Your hypocrisy is transparent and nauseating. You speak of disproportion. You want proportion? Give Israel a population of 300 million residing in 22 countries, similar to the Arab Muslims who surround and ambush Israel — instead of five and a half million Jews in one single country. There's plenty of "proportion" coming from your BBC, which delights in presenting one side of the story and picks up where Der Sturmer left off. Now, with this type of "news", we know how Europe was conditioned for a Holocaust. Already we see Nights of Broken Glass. Thank you, Europe, for reminding us why America was discovered just in time (and why Israel was redeemed many generations too late). You dare judge Israel? In your deportations, your expulsions, your forced conversions, your inquisitions, your pogroms, you have no moral authority over Israel or even within your own borders. You gave all that up from 1492 to 1942. To those on the Left who sought peace, well, dear peace-lovers, peace brought this on. "Land for Peace" made this happen, as Land for Peace became Land for Jihad. "Painful Concessions" caused this war. "Goodwill Gestures" backfired. Want more "peace"? Give up the Golan Heights. Give up the entire West Bank. Give up Jerusalem. Imagine the "peace." As for those "innocent civilians" in Gaza, they were given a choice and they chose Hamas. They chose this pestilence. As for those "refugee camps" — why are they "refugee camps" when Israel handed over all that territory for a nation to be built in peace and security alongside Israel? Why are all Palestinians automatically refugees even after they've been given a home? The only true refugees are the thousands of Israelis who were driven from Gaza and still live in trailer parks. No tears for them in this world that still dreams of Auschwitz. On this day, in response to a column I wrote about Theresienstadt, someone responded that I was incorrect; that Theresienstadt was not a prelude to Auschwitz, but rather "a vacation resort." I wrote back wishing this person a lifetime in such vacation resorts. I wish the same lifetime vacation resorts to all those parading throughout the streets of Europe with banners crying, "Death to Israel." God bless the IDF! Go Israel! Contact Laureen Moe at meadow-lark@telus.net |
|
TORAH CONSTITUTIONALISM
Posted by Moshe Kerr, January 29, 2009. |
|
This is the latest in a series of essays on Torah Constitutionalism. The previous essay can be read below. |
|
Torah Constitutionalism (Continued) — an excerpt from my in-process Talmud Moderni. Understanding the critical and fundamental relationship between cutting a brit and creating a soul from nothing requires developing the faith that the Universe entails more dimensions than the physical 3 plus time. The brit/soul spirituality hinges upon spiritual "domains". The notion of sabbath domains serves to teach a לשׁמנ/לשׁמ depth teaching. Accepting the yoke of heaven, the עמשׂ employs 3 Divine Names. Kabbalah teaches the mitzvah of positive time oriented commandments and their relationship with tumah. Tumah, in contrast unto tohorah, like the 613 exist only in this world but not in the world to come. Understanding the positive time oriented commandments dynamic dialectics with tumah makes kabbalah — as codified in the Sid'dur — relevant to all generations of bnai brit. This unique category of commandments do not depend upon the physical language of the Torah but rather the Oral Torah's interpretation of the Written Torah's intent or kav vanah to determine a Torah commandment! Determining the intent or kav vanah of positive time oriented commandments falls upon the shoulders of every living generation to determine. This yoke of heaven sanctifies the holiness of positive time oriented commandments as the instrument which gives spiritual identity and uniqueness to every generation of bnai brit which walks before the Elokim for ever. Affixing a place of prayer entails assigning a direction of the soul/domain unity. By the way I pray, "all my heart", affixes the soul/domain of my bnai brit peoples within the lands of Torah. "All my nefesh", affixes the soul/domain of my bnai brit people who suffer galut existence before our fathers and before the Elokim. Accepting the yoke of heaven dialectically contrasts love and anger with living within the oath/brit lands and living in galut lands. "All my might", affixes the soul/domain of my bnai brit noach peoples internationally across the face of the earth. By the way I learn, Torah spirituality rejects the static ism of an unstoppable force colliding with an immovable object, which — practically speaking — would entails favoring a 2-state solution between Israel and Arabs who entertain themselves with the fantasy called "Palestine". Dynamic leadership has a focus upon political responsibility and accountability. Conceding an Arab state with Gaza and Samaria occurs on the condition that this established Arab state would respect and maintain the dignity of a Jewish minority living within the borders of Palestine. Equally important, the settler movement requires that the lands of Torah open another gateway permitting free settler development. Changing the dessert of the Negev into a rain forest requires that the lands of Torah turns her eyes unto Africa and developing the Sahara dessert. The premise upon which this vision stands, the South Americans have destroyed the rain forests, Israel shall rebuild, replant and re-establish new rain forests starting with the Negev. Achieving this key ecological objective shall serve as the foundation for establishing an international bnai noach alliance, starting in Africa. (Technically by building a power station and harnessing its energy to convert water from the sea into hydrogen and oxygen gases and shooting these gases into the atmosphere, this could duplicate the effect of trees producing oxygen and making conditions appropriate for a rain forest to live.) Contact Moshe Kerr at moshekerr@gmail.com |
|
ISRAEL INVADING ADVOCATE — SAMANTHA POWERS — NAMED CHIEF OBAMA ADVISER
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 29, 2009. |
|
As if Israel-Hating Samantha Power Named Key Obama Adviser Here's a note to the 78% of American Jews that voted for Barack Obama. The "Other Shoe" has been thrown at Israel. The President is naming Samantha Power to a senior foreign policy/national security position ... Friends of Israel may remember Power for a different reason. She is a strong believer in the anti-Semitic notion that Jews Control foreign policy. She has also said that she would recommend that the US SHOULD SEND IN TROOPS TO IMPOSE A SOLUTION ON ISRAEL. Previous Atlas Samantha Power Posts: Atlas Shrugs: SAMANTHA POWER RETURNS: I TOLD YOU SO
Ed Lasky and Richard Baehr wrote the best piece on Samantha Power
back in February 2008 when it became clear that President Hussein was
surrounding himself with classic Jew haters. It's called "Samantha
Power and Obama's Foreign Policy Team."
This below is an extract from the Baehr and Lasky essay:
|
|
Senator Obama's supporters have uniformly ignored the role and the views of Harvard Kennedy School of Government professor Samantha Power, who is very problematic regarding Israel, Iran, and for that matter, American supporters of Israel (see below). Power left her position at Harvard to work for Obama for a year after his election to the US Senate. She is now identified as a "senior foreign policy advisor.". In the case of Power, it was Senator Obama who made the initial contact with her after reading her book on genocide. Power is now actively working for the campaign. She cannot be casually dismissed as one of Obama's many advisors, with no particular assigned role. It is not at all hard to imagine her having a senior foreign policy role in an Obama administration, perhaps as US Ambassador to the United Nations, an organization she views warmly. The problem for those who favor a strong US-Israel relationship is that Power seems obsessed with Israel, and in a negative way. Much like the authors of the Baker-Hamilton report, she believes resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is central to solving other problems in the Middle East. And it is clear that her approach to addressing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be for the US to behave in a more "even handed" fashion, which of course means withdrawing US support for Israel, and instead applying more pressure on Israel for concessions. Commentary Magazine, and in particular Noah Pollack, have done a superb job of investigative reporting regarding Power's record and views. She is a headliner for Senator Obama — a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and a professor at Harvard. Power has a column carried by TIME and she writes frequently. Indeed, it is her writing that reveals reasons to be concerned. From Commentary: Power is an advocate of the Walt-Mearsheimer view of the American relationship with Israel. In a recent interview published on the Harvard Kennedy School's website, Power was asked to explain "long-standing structural and conceptual problems in U.S. foreign policy." She gave a two-part answer: the first problem, she said, is "the US historic predisposition to go it alone." A standard reply, of course. The second problem, though, should give us pause:Another longstanding foreign policy flaw is the degree to which special interests dictate the way in which the "national interest" as a whole is defined and pursued.... America's important historic relationship with Israel has often led foreign policy decision-makers to defer reflexively to Israeli security assessments, and to replicate Israeli tactics, which, as the war in Lebanon last summer demonstrated, can turn out to be counter-productive. So greater regard for international institutions along with less automatic deference to special interests — especially when it comes to matters of life and death and war and peace — seem to be two take-aways from the war in Iraq. Power is not just assenting to the Walt-Mearsheimer view of American foreign policy, but is also arguing that Israel had something to do with the Bush administration's decision to invade Iraq in 2003: an appalling slander, and a telling one. piece Power wrote for TIME, titled "Rethinking Iran," the thrust of which rethinking involves the need to engage diplomatically the mullahs and pretend that the Iranian nuclear program is a figment of the paranoid imagination of the Bush administration. She writes: The war scare that wasn't [the recent incident between Iranian speedboats and the U.S. Navy in the Straight of Hormuz] stands as a metaphor for the incoherence of our policy toward Iran: the Bush Administration attempts to gin up international outrage by making a claim of imminent danger, only to be met with international eye rolling when the claim is disproved. Sound familiar? The speedboat episode bore an uncanny resemblance to the Administration's allegations about the advanced state of Iran's weapons program-allegations refuted in December by the National Intelligence Estimate. Does Power actually believe that the NIE put to rest concerns about the Iranian nuclear program? If she actually thinks that — and it appears she does — she deserves voluminous ridicule from thinking people everywhere. Power also advocates that America send armed military forces, "a mammoth protection force" and an "external intervention", to impose a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians. This directly contradicts her criticism of the invasion and "occupation" of Iraq and her call for the removal of American forces from that nation. On the one hand, Power abhors American efforts to remake an Arab nation, but takes the contrary view when it comes to inserting American forces in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in order to impose a settlement. These troops, if sent, would be seen as occupiers and be sitting targets for Arab extremists. The colonial image of America and charges of imperial overstretch would echo throughout the Arab world. If America sought to avoid being so tarnished — which is presumably what Samantha Power would desire — then the alternative would be for the United States to take a confrontational attitude toward Israel, so as to be seen as standing up for the Palestinians. Given her inclination to view Israel as guilty of war crimes she would probably look favorably on such an approach towards the Israelis and Palestinians. Power's views on the problems caused by the US-Israel relationship also place her in the same camp as Zbigniew Brzezinski and George Soros (an influential supporter of Barack Obama's), who also oppose the so-called "Israel lobby" and reject the participation of American supporters of Israel, including Christians, in the foreign policy discussion. Power writes of her willingness to "alienat[e] a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import; it may more crucially mean sacrificing...billions of dollars, not in servicing Israel's military, but actually investing in the state of Palestine." Power appears to support slashing, if not eliminating, military aid to our ally (surrounded by 300 million people who wish to destroy her) and giving it to the Palestinians, whose charters (whether the Hamas or Fatah version) advocate the destruction of Israel. The PA has used aid dollars to teach hate and sponsor terror, and Palestinian society has devolved into an internationally-supported welfare state characterized by enormous corruption. Why is there any reason to believe that massive amounts of additional aid be used any differently and more constructively? Power also showed her animus toward Israel in another instance, appearing to argue with the New York Times for more negative coverage of Israel in the paper. As Noah Pollak writes: "Martin Kramer points us to an interesting quote from the 2003 book Ethnic Violence and Justice, in which Samantha Power, one of Barack Obama's foreign policy advisers, asks a question of David Rohde, a reporter who covered the intifada for the New York Times. The quote is as follows:Samantha Power: I have a question for David about working for the New York Times. I was struck by a headline that accompanied a news story on the publication of the Human Rights Watch report. The headline was, I believe: "Human Rights Report Finds Massacre Did Not Occur in Jenin." The second paragraph said, "Oh, but lots of war crimes did." Why wouldn't they make the war crimes the headline and the non-massacre the second paragraph? (The article to which Power refers is here and its headline is: "MIDEAST TURMOIL: INQUIRY; Rights Group Doubts Mass Deaths in Jenin, but Sees Signs of War Crimes." Obviously, Power has misremembered the headline.) Here we have another window into the thinking of Power: Israel is accused in sensational press reports of a massacre in Jenin, and is subjected to severe international condemnation; Human Rights Watch finally gets out a report and says there was no massacre; the NYT reports this as its headline; and Power thinks the headline still should have been: Israel guilty of war crimes!" Revelations regarding Power's views of Israel can be found in her new book, Chasing the Flame: Sergio Vieira De Mello and the Fight to Save the World, a biography of the UN official killed in Baghdad in a 2003 terrorist bombing. A series of terrorist attacks emanating from the mini-terror state created in Southern Lebanon by the PLO had led to an Israeli occupation of the southern portion of Lebanon. The United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon had been inserted to quell the conflict, but was proving ineffectual. Israeli forces remained in place. Power wrote: " Israeli forces refused to comply with the spirit of international demands to withdraw and the major powers on the Security Council were not prepared to deal with the gnarly issues that had sparked the Israelis invasion in the first place: dispossessed Palestinians and Israeli insecurity". The "spirit of international demands" to withdraw? Aside from wondering what that means and the enforceability of such a spirit, how about that phrase "dispossessed Palestinians and Israeli insecurity"? The dispossessed Palestinians had left Palestine mostly at the behest of calls by their Arab brethren to step out of the way as armed forces invaded Israel upon its founding. They and their descendants were denied rights by Lebanon and were unable to assimilate — unlike the 600,000 Jews who were stripped of their possessions in Arab lands and whom Israel welcomed. The term "Israeli insecurity" makes it seem as if the Israelis were suffering from an emotional or psychological condition. In fact, it was not insecurity, per se, that the Israelis suffered from. It was Palestinian terrorism that the Lebanese government refused to prevent. There is more from Ms. Power. Israel warned UNIFIL of its upcoming move into Southern Lebanon. Power talked of this move as a "ploy" and then wrote of "humiliation" that was to come as Israel ignored UN efforts to stop them. She wrote: "Israel had thumbed its nose at the Security Council resolutions that demanded that Israel stay out of Lebanon, and in the course of invading a neighbor, its forces had trampled on the UN peacekeepers in its way". She quotes the subject of her book — really a hagiography — calling the Israelis "bastards". She writes that the degradations suffered by UNIFIL before the Israeli invasion was felt far worse after the Israelis came into Lebanon. She writes that the Israeli authorities "threatened the peacekeepers and regularly denigrated them". And now she is a senior foreign policy adviser to Presidential candidate Barack Obama, as well as occupying the Anna Lindh Professorship of Practice of Global Leadership and Public Policy. How appropriate: Anna Lindh, the late Swedish Foreign Minister, was a dedicated opponent of Israel. |
|
NYTIMES ASSESSES GAZA OFFENSIVE; HAMAS THINKS IT WON; ON ISRAELI CAMPUSES; IDF OUT, NYTIMES STILL FIRING
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 29, 2009. |
|
NY TIMES ASSESSES GAZA OFFENSIVE Ethan Bronner wrote a "news analysis" that mostly is editorial and pro-Arab. His sub-headline: "Israel Cannot Be Sure Of Lasting Deterrence." Hence, Israel lost. He starts with an incendiary recount of apparently civilian structures. He omitted IDF explanations of those structures, which may have had military usage. He adds to the emotional tilt against Israel a question, whether "...three weeks of overpowering war by Israel here weakened Hamas as Israel had hoped, or simply caused acute human suffering?" "Israel knew it could not destroy every rocket or kill every Hamas militant." Israel couldn't in a limited war. [Then it wasn't such a powerful war as he initially implied. Israel should have stuck it out and done the job, it if wanted to succeed.] Mr. Bronner questions whether Israel succeeded in getting Hamas to cease firing rockets into Israel. Answer: Israeli officials didn't think so. [Then why did they stop? Another answer: Hamas fired rockets even after having agreed to cease firing.] Another answer is that Hamas spared most of its fighters from battle. What effect did the assault have upon Gazans' view of Israel? Some resent Israel. Others resent Hamas for getting them into this. That is tempered with some of them objecting only because Hamas' provocation failed. If Hamas had found a way to conquer Israel, its Arab critics would not complain. [So much for their moderation and peace-making potential!] A Gazan complained that Israel's assault is no way to make peace (1/19, A1). Self-defense against aggression was not done against peace, the Muslim aggression was. In a companion article about the damage, the content and tone indicated that damage was pervasive, but in a subdued tone, showed that areas of Gaza City were hardly touched. The article, like the Times in general, fails to put the assault in perspective. Why doesn't the Times put it something like, "Thirteen hundred Gazans were killed out of one and-a-half million?" I don't know the actual figures, but another example might be, "500 houses were destroyed out of 500,000. How many houses were struck by mistake, not having been used by or for terrorists? 50?" That kind of perspective would deflate journalistic hyperbole. LEBANON DEFEAT LED TO THE GAZA COMBAT Hamas modeled itself on Hizbullah. Former Brig. General Eitan said that Israel's failure to win in Lebanon emboldened Hamas. The enemy is watching. A ceasefire that lets Hamas survive would end Israeli deterrent in a big way (Arutz-7, 1/1). WHERE THE IMPROVED ROCKETS CAME FROM Three countries make Grad rockets of the type used by Hamas to reach Israeli cities further away: China, Russia, and Bulgaria. The ones fired at Beersheba were imported from China by Iran or Hizbullah, were trans-shipped into Sinai, and then were smuggled into Gaza (IMRA, 1/1). Does China consider itself acting legitimately in supplying terrorists? SECURITY IN GAZA BEFORE OSLO & WITHDRAWAL & AFTER Before Oslo, most Arabs in Gaza did not have guns; the few who did were untrained in their use. After Oslo, and especially after withdrawal from Gaza, the Arabs were able to train thousands of gunmen. Now it takes an army to quell them. Poor policy, retreat and withdrawal! (IMRA, 1/1.) Gaza proved that one cannot make peace by pretending there is peace. Discerning people can learn from the Gaza combat. Arab terrorism and aggression are not prompted by Israeli presence but by Israeli withdrawal and other concessions, seen by the Arabs not as goodwill but as weakness. The conflict is not about land, which the Arabs have almost double what the US has. It is about religion (Prof. Steven Plaut). E.U. ON GAZA It issued another press release on the situation in Gaza (IMRA, 1/1). Meanwhile, persecution goes on in Africa, unabated. DIFFERENCES BETWEEN CEASEFIRES There are two kinds of ceasefires. One is long term and stable. The other is temporary, if effect while negotiating the other. Defense Min. Barak confused the people by failing to distinguish between the two, when stating Israel's goal. He was behaving as politician, rather than as commander (IMRA, 1/1). A long term ceasefire would keep Hamas in power. It is not satisfactory. It is not stable. Hamas keeps violating ceasefires, as did Arafat. HAMAS TRIES TO PERSUADE CHILDREN IT WON Hamas TV tells children that Hamas killed 80 Israelis, including 49 civilians, and lost only 48 fighters. The film shows Israelis crying for their mothers, before battle, and all getting killed in it. Observers have reported that Hamas killed 13 Israelis, including 3 civilians, and lost hundreds of fighters (IMRA, 1/19). ISRAEL WASN'T SERIOUS ABOUT WAR During combat, Israel transferred funds to Hamas, sent in sugar that Hamas converts into rocket fuel, continued to supply electricity, enabling journalists to maintain anti-Israel propaganda, and warned Hamas men to evacuate from buildings about to be bombed. The "world" forgets that what permitted this combat to erupt was Israel's withdrawal from Gaza. Israeli officials were told that this would happen. They paid no attention (Prof. Steven Plaut, 12/30). ON ISRAELI CAMPUSES Israeli Arab college students carry flags of "Palestine," as they protest in behalf of Hamas. Some leftist professors and students join them. David Grossman, Amos Oz, and A.B. Yehoshua published articles demanding that Israel stop shooting back. They did not get articles published demanding that Hamas stop firing rockets at Israeli cities. Treasonous, all! Nothing jolts the Left into reality. Far leftist Prof. Neve Gordon said the problem is that Israel doesn't abandon violence to negotiate (Prof. Steven Plaut, 12/30). Israel had negotiated, and got a peace agreement. The Arabs don't keep agreements. Hamas wouldn't extend the truce. Gordon doesn't understand Islam. He should resign or be fired from his university, for ignorance unbecoming a professor. PRES. PERES DOESN'T UNDERSTAND WHY HAMAS FIGHTS He said there is no logical reason for Hamas to fight (IMRA, 1230). Sure there is. Hamas fights for jihad. The reason is to kill Jews and take over. Persistence is Hamas' hallmark. Mental and moral defect Is Peres'. WHEN ARABS ABOUT TO GO ON CAMERA When the TV cameras approach Arabs in a hospital in Gaza, etc., cameramen and relatives tell them what to do and what to say. This is manipulation of the media by the media and for the media (IMRA, 12/30). NY TIMES CONS READERS The caption below a large photograph of a destroyed building is, "Most Palestinians (Arabs) are furious at Israel over damage like that in Rafah, in Israel's south..." (1/19, A10). Rafah earns its living from arms smuggling tunnels, a legitimate target of attack. Why didn't the article explain that? How deceptive! Residents may be furious, but undeservedly so. They got what they deserved. IDF OUT, NY TIMES STILL FIRING Israel speeded its troop withdrawal from Gaza to precede Obama's inauguration. [Was the whole operation ended for the same reason? I hope Israel didn't jeopardize its goals just to please that foreign politician who should be told to mind his own business, as the US struggles to hold its head above water.] The Times had more pictures and words to reinforce the impression of wholesale Israeli destruction in Gaza. It has paragraph-after-paragraph of Arab complaints that Israel struck civilian buildings. The writer asks why Israel did it. He included a skimpy Israeli explanation — brief, dry, and drowned out. Readers without an independent background in the subject may well overlook it. The article did state that some structures were of dual use. For example, an Arab bewailed the destruction of a university chemical laboratory. An Israeli official explained that Hamas uses chemicals to make rocket fuel. [Totalitarian regimes draft colleges to serve the cause of total war.] The article characterized decisions about whether a facility was civilian or military as "tricky." That makes this a matter of opinion, rather than a reasonable military assumption, as it was. Another Arab resentfully regretted that it is impossible to make peace with Israel, which attacks them (Ethan Bronner, 1/20, A6). Do readers swallow that distortion or recognize it for one? Israel had a ceasefire; Hamas ended it; Hamas did not recognize the peace agreement that the P.A. had made with Israel. After quoting that Arab, the newspaper, which is willing to furnish background material, should have mentioned Hamas' deliberate rejection of the Oslo agreements. If readers realize the falsity of complaints that Israel won't make peace, do they become skeptical of the veracity of Arabs' talk with reporters? The Times ombudsman probably would defend his newspaper as having presented both sides. It did, but over-balanced for the Arab side. It conferred at least as much credence for the Arabs, who natural jihadi propagandists of false accounts. Deception of the infidel is an honored tactic under Islam. We Westerners need to know that! By contrast, the IDF gives sober, factual accounts. The ombudsman would rationalize that the newspaper does not make judgments, but lets the parties make their own claims and readers may judge. What a disservice that is, when one side is of totalitarian defamers and the other side strives for accuracy. The Times leaves readers uninformed about that and without means of judging. One needs facts with which to judge'' the Times presents claims. As I point out, it presents those claims emotionally weighted by tone and quantity in favor of the totalitarian side. A disservice to America! Sometimes the reporters do purport to offer facts, but those may be statements by the warring Islamist side and its agencies, including their hospitals, toting the party line. There is no indication that the Times verifies these figures. There are many instances, more constantly being exposed [but not by the major media], of Islamists taking advantage of media bias and resulting audience ignorance to use Arab stringers to plant false statements and films. It took a long time for a private individual to get a French court to acknowledge that French TV used a staged and edited video to give the misimpression that Israeli troops murdered an Arab boy. This is a major story. The major media, however, basically ignored it. It would throw into doubt their methods in general. A fair presentation would not precede and surround a fragmented Israeli explanation with Arab complaints that set one's emotion against Israel. Instead, it first would raise the question of civilian-vs.-military targets. It would follow with about four paragraphs explaining the steps Israel took to reduce enemy civilian casualties, the extensive war crimes by which Hamas mingled its forces and usages with civilians and their structures, the legitimacy of targeting all those Hamas members and facilities, and the small proportion of damage, less than in past wars. Then it could present Arab complaints. They consequently could be seen for what they are. Times reporters might be barred from Gaza thereafter. Loss of access may deter good reporting. Once those four paragraphs covered the matter cogently and comprehensively, there wouldn't be much story left. Instead, the Times has been ranting on, and the Arabs have been raging on, for days, because the Times has yet to explain the subject coherently and fairly. If it had done so, then on subsequent days, it could simply repeat the jist of the four paragraphs. However, the Arab complaints would be seen as less newsworthy, having been answered. Probably the Arabs would stop wasting their time complaining, if the media had covered and exposed their false complaints. Readers would have become immune to them. Not to be outdone, Isabel Kershner's companion article discusses unfairly the Israeli Arab reaction to the Gaza combat. For example, "While most Jewish Israelis consider Hamas a terrorist organization that deserves to be destroyed, several Israeli Arabs noted that it won democratic Palestinian elections in 2006." Hamas didn't win and its election wasn't democratic. Suppose the election were democratic. Would that make its repressive, jihadist rule kosher? Jewish Israelis merely "consider" Hamas a terrorist organization that deserves to be destroyed? Hamas definitelyl is terrorist, as the US, the EU, and Israel have declared and as its actions prove. Terrorists are equivalent to pirates, deemed under international law to be common enemies of mankind and which countries have a duty to destroy. The Times makes the status of Hamas out to be a matter of opinion, which it is not. It is as if the Times gave equal weight to Nazis' opinions during WWII.] The Times brushed off as animosity the government's banning of the main Arab parties, Ms. Kershner offered no factual evidence for the decision, which evidence is overwhelming. Instead, she stated the reasons given by the rival political parties which submitted the petition to ban. That way, the reasons were put as mere accusations. The accusations were "incitement, supporting terrorism against Israel, and refusing to recognize it as a Jewish state." "Incitement?" That's putting deceitfully mildly the rousing of mob violence. Arab politicians went to enemy states exhorting at least terrorist war on Israel. One politician spied for the enemy during wartime. And so on. The ban of those parties should have been done years ago and with prosecution of their criminally subversive leadership. Israeli timidity encourages Arab subversion. The context is one of stoning of Jews and parades chanting "kill the Jews." The article misrepresented Israeli policy entirely as discrimination against Arabs and omitted mention of Israeli policy that discriminates against Jews. I see Israeli Arabs as the defeated enemy, sulking when silent, but silent no more. Their parties side with the enemy. It is a dangerous fifth column. Sure there are some decent people among them. But remember, in general, they tried to exterminate the Jews and never apologized or recanted. Many of them cheer on successful terrorist attacks. It is a complicated situation, but one from which there can be no harmonious exit. The Jews must extricate themselves from the blunder of trying to be tolerant of a people whose religious beliefs are cited by their clergy as justifying murder. 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 |
|
OBSESSIVE OR OBTUSE?
Posted by Hands Fiasco, January 29, 2009. |
|
Martin Sherman in the essay below offers response to what he views as insincere pro-disengagement arguments. Just when we thought that there was a limit to the intellectual dishonesty of Israel's bon-ton elite, along comes Yair Lapid to prove otherwise. In his latest article, "Stop blaming disengagement", Lapid endeavors somehow to reinstate the lost honor of the "Disengagement." The attempt to decouple the causal chain linking Israel's unilateral withdrawal in the August of 2005 to its military operation in the December 2008 is neither compelling nor convincing. |
|
Yair Lapid explains why our situation could have been much worse if it wasn't for Gaza pullout. Lapid launches into his absurd apologia, by raising the currently fashionable, albeit flimsy, argument so eagerly embraced today by other unrepentant apologists for the Disengagement: That the high-trajectory shelling from Gaza and the subterranean smuggling into Gaza existed before the Disengagement. Yet the statistics provided to support this claim, without stipulating their source, appear to be greatly at odds with the documented data on the pre- and post-Disengagement realities. While Lapid states that: "In (the) four years before disengagement, more than 5,000 mortar shells and Qassams were fired at Israeli communities," the official site of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs, quotes entirely different figures — based on a detailed study composed by Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center (ITIC) run by veterans of Israel's intelligence community. According to the study, in the entire seven year period (2001-2007) a total of around 5,000 mortars shells and Qassam were fired from Gaza — of which almost 2,500 were fired in 27 months (Sept 2005-Nov 2007.) However, in spite of Lapid's faulty data, he is correct in stating that the bombardments and the tunneling did exist prior to the Disengagement. However, least we be tempted to accept his equally faulty inferences, we should recall two factors, which some seem desperately anxious to conceal. These relate to matters of the scale and of the origins of current Palestinian military prowess. As for the former, any dispassionate observer of events is easily able to discern that Disengagement brought a quantum leap in the scale of the activities of Palestinian terror in terms of operational execution, logistical capabilities, and political empowerment. This is clearly reflected in a paper published by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) Israel's War to Halt Palestinian Rocket Attacks, authored by Israel's former ambassador to the UN, Dore Gold. It points out that although: "Qassam rocket fire did not start with Israel's Gaza disengagement...nonetheless, after disengagement, the number of confirmed rocket strikes against Israel increased by more than 500 percent. The disengagement led to the loss of Israeli control over the Philadelphi route, allowing for a significant increase in the range and quantity of rockets in the Palestinian arsenal. What is dramatically new in the rocket attacks in 2008 are the range and quantity of rockets being fired." With regard to the enhanced logistic capabilities, again the study concedes that "Palestinian organizations had used tunnels in past years to smuggle weaponry into Gaza, but, since the Disengagement, "the scale of this smuggling mushroomed". It points out that: As a result, the quantities of explosives and foreign-produced, longer-range rockets that could enter Gazan territory increased dramatically. Yuval Diskin, the head of the Israel Security Agency, told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee in early 2006 that the amount of explosives smuggled into the Gaza Strip had grown drastically — by more than 300 percent. At the same hearing Diskin also revealed that "since the disengagement, between $50-$70 million in cash has been smuggled into Gaza in order to finance the Hamas terrorist operations." As to the issue of political empowerment, while there may be some truth to Lapid's contention that "Hamas did not take power in Gaza because of the disengagement (but rather) because of the American insistence to hold free elections," he ignores the wider political impact of the disengagement that bestowed enhanced status and prestige on the radical Islamist movement, which was credited with coercing Israel into retreat. As the JCPA paper points out: "The 2005 Gaza disengagement provided Hamas with a sense of empowerment and self-confidence. Politically, this led to the victory of Hamas in the Palestinian Authority parliamentary elections in January 2006." Moreover, even if Hamas's electoral victory was not entirely due to the Disengagement — since it also won in the "West Bank" — it is highly improbable that without it, Hamas' violent take-over of Gaza in mid-2007 would have occurred. Indeed it is widely accepted among Israel's security establishment that the only thing preventing a similar overthrow of Abbas' Fatah-regime in the "West-Bank" is the presence of the IDF there! But perhaps one of Lapid's most breathtakingly brazen statements is: "there is a possibility, and it is even a realistic one, that had it not been for the disengagement, our situation today would have been much worse." It is even more galling in the light of a previous pronouncement of his: "We withdrew from Lebanon and Hizbullah is attacking us from there. We withdrew from Gaza and it is from there that the terror groups are attacking us. The only quiet areas right now are Judea and Samaria. Even the most extreme leftists are reconsidering: maybe it isn't about the occupation after all." The difference in the severity of the realities confronting Israel in the pre-Disengagement era and post-Disengagement one are so clear and stark, that to attempt to suggest that there is any equivalence between them is a ludicrous as to suggest that a mild cold and terminal pneumonia are similar simply because they can both be diagnosed "viral infections." Disengagement has been a staggering failure, at least in the conventional sense of the word. All the envisioned benefits that its proponents advanced as reasons for its implementation have not materialized. All the ominous forebodings of the dangers that its opponents warned of as reasons for eschewing its implementation, and which were scornfully dismissed by its proponents, have indeed materialized. The ascendancy of the radicals, the expanding threat to Israel's civilian population, the emerging strategic dimension of the weapons in the hands of radicals. Lapid would do well to acknowledge this, for as a public figure, this would be a far more honorable choice than his ongoing shabby and shady attempts to avoid admission of error. But wait! On second thought perhaps Lapid is right after all. Perhaps for him the Disengagement is not a failure. Perhaps for him the Disengagement did attain its intended goal. Perhaps — as he as already admitted in an earlier article — his original fiery support for the Disengagement was just a hoax. Perhaps, as he admits in that article, the motivating drive behind the Disengagement was not a desire to further the interest of nation but to undermine the interest of the settlers. Perhaps Lapid should re-examine the text of his final paragraph in which he assails the critics of the Disengagement: they don't care, because they are not interested in the truth, but rather, in the opportunity to exploit the pain and sorrow over today's victims in order to avert the next evacuation. And to that end, it is ok to lie, and to smear, and to come up with false arguments If he were to replace the word "avert" with the word "induce," he would discover how perfectly he has described himself! Contact HandsFiasco at handsfiasco@webtv.net |
|
THE GREATEST OBSTACLE TO PEACE IS THE KORAN; WESTERN NEGEV NOW; MUSLIM AGGRESSION OUTSIDE ISRAEL
Posted by Janet Lehr, January 29, 2009. |
|
THE GREATEST OBSTACLE TO PEACE IS THE KORAN which informs it's readers that the Jews and Christians are flawed and must be converted or eliminated (depending on the interpreter). Here is a link to a search-able Koran: http://quod.lib.umich.edu/k/koran/ You can type in any name or phrase and see where it appears in that book. A WOMAN ARRESTED AT THE CAIRO AIRPORT, because her identity card described her as a Christian, has been threatened for her faith by the judge in her case, according to a new report. According to the Assyrian International News Agency, a woman identified as Martha Samuel Makkar was arrested Dec. 13 as she, her husband, Fadl Thabet, and two sons were trying to leave Cairo for Russia. As WND reported, authorities in Egypt deprived the woman's two children, ages 2 and 4, of food to try to coerce her to abandon Christianity and return to Islam. A SUMMARY OF OUR RECENT TRIP TO ISRAEL
I thought that I got it. But I didn't. I mean, I've been a supporter of Israel my whole adult life. I've gone to I-don't-know-how-many rallies, parades, and demonstrations to show my support. I've argued with people who consider Israel racist and repressive and all that. I've sent each of my kids there for a summer, one of those summers being the summer of 2006 during the war with Lebanon. I'd gone there three times myself, and I'm sitting in the Tel Aviv airport right now, having concluded my fourth trip. I mean, I get it, right? No, I didn't get it. You know who gets it? Benny Vaknin, the mayor of Ashkelon, a city in southern Israel that is something like 15 miles from Gaza. He gets it. A couple of days ago, he told me and the eight others with whom I was traveling that he has been friends with the mayor of Gaza City for years. That he used to send his city engineers to Gaza City to help develop better municipal sanitation systems. Of course, he told us this while we met with him in a concrete bunker several stories underground, the place from which he is now running his city because the city that his friend used to run is now being run by people who are trying to kill the citizens of Ashkelon with missiles. The nurse in charge of the trauma room at Soroka Hospital in Beersheba, another city in the south of Israel, also gets it. She met with us in her trauma room, a 6-bed unit that, unlike any emergency room that I've been to, needs large steel doors, an air lock entry, and reinforced concrete walls and ceilings, so that it can be sealed off from the rest of the hospital (and world). Soroka Hospital is just a few minutes by helicopter from Gaza, which is a good thing for the soldiers who are severely wounded in Gaza and are brought to the trauma room there. It is also 30 seconds by missile from Gaza, which is not a good thing for the nurse and everyone else who lives there. The steel doors, concrete, and air lock are there to keep the room safe from missiles that might carry a radioactive or chemical warhead. The nurse told us that a doctor saved a soldier's life the previous day by literally cutting him open and, in order to stop the bleeding, sticking his finger in the hole that shrapnel had made in the soldier's heart. She also said that they have done similar things for Palestinian patients. She said that it is her job to help save lives, and whose life she is saving is of no concern. Oh, she gets it all right. I started to get it a little bit three days ago. Having arrived late the previous night from various parts of the US, the nine of us left our hotel in Jerusalem around 7:30 in the morning and headed west toward the Mediterranean coast. Although nobody talked about it, I think that we were all thinking the same thing. We'd all been to Israel before, some of us many, many times, some of us had even lived there for a year or more, and we'd all been on a tour bus with an Israeli guide pointing out various sites before, so it was all quite normal. And yet, we were heading to the area where missiles have fallen every day for the last two weeks, and we knew that this trip was going to be anything but normal. We were on what is called a "solidarity mission" — a trip taken to show the people of southern Israel who have been under attack that we haven't forgotten them. After about a half hour, we stopped at some 7-11 kind of place, and the guide said that we stopped here because once we passed this spot we'd be inside the 40 km zone which has been the range of the Hamas missiles. He said that stopping here would give us a chance to enjoy our coffee without worries. He also said that this was the first time he'd ever taken a tour group into a war zone, and as if that were not enough, he added that in the event of a siren — "siren" is the word that we would later discover seems to be preferable to "attack" — we would have 45 seconds to stop the bus, crouch in the aisle using the seats as protection, and put our hands over our heads as most of us had done during the drills that we did in elementary school in the 1950s. Funny, for the last 50 years I've been making fun of those drills — oh yeah, if the Russians drop an atomic bomb on us, crouching with my head covered by my hands will be a big help — and now I was trying to remember exactly how to do it and wondering how fast I could do it.. Yes, I was getting it a little bit. So much for the worry-free coffee. Another person who gets it is the guy who runs the North American desk at the Israeli Foreign Ministry. When we met with him at the Ministry in Jerusalem toward the end of our trip, he told us that when he was a kid during the Six Day war in '67, he and his classmates would write notes of support, put them in little boxes along with some cookies, and send them off to the soldiers. Later, when he was fighting in Lebanon in the 80's, he would get those boxes sent by school kids. Today, he said, he has his own school age children, and now they are sending boxes to soldiers. His great fear is that one day his children will be receiving those boxes. There are, as we would come to discover, different degrees of getting it. The Foreign Ministry guy, who is afraid of history repeating itself on his children, is at one level. Some of the parents that we met in a waiting room at Soroka Hospital are at a different level. They aren't afraid for their children's future; they are afraid for their children's present. One father — his son has been in a coma for four days since he took some shrapnel in the left side of his brain — talked to us for a while. His grief was unimaginable — as only a parent could put it, he talked about the difference in his feeling between his own service in the Yom Kippur War in '73, and his son's today. He looked directly at me — I'm about his age — and said something that indicated that I would obviously know about war since I am an American so I had been in Viet Nam, and that of course we would endure this awful experience — we, he said — because, just as our fathers had to do, fighting a war is something that we all have to do for the survival of our country. But please, God, he seemed to be saying, not our children. With tears coming down my face, I said nothing to him — for the first time in my life I felt ashamed that I never served in Viet Nam — and just gave him a big hug. He asked us to pray for his son's recovery, to ask God to "allow him to see his son's bright blue eyes again." Another father, who could not speak English well, was only able to ask us to pray for his son. He said that all that can be done for his son now is what it says on an American dollar — "In God we trust." I hugged him, and as I started to walk away, I remembered that I had some of the dollar bills that people at home had given to me to give as tzdekah (sometimes translated incorrectly as charity). I gave him one, pointed to the "In God we trust", read it very slowly to him and pointed at the words hoping that he might understand me, and gave him the dollar. I'm not sure what he said back to me but I think he told me that he would keep it and give it to his son when his son recovers. Unlike Soroka Hospital, Barzilai Hospital, in Ashkelon, does not treat the serious cases, but we found some parents worried about their children there as well. These are the mothers of premature babies, some weighing less than two pounds. The neonatal intensive care unit is on the top floor of that hospital, but since the hospital was not built to withstand a missile hit, most of the patients in the hospital (including Palestinian being treated there) had to be sent home. The babies in NICU can't be sent home, so they were moved to the basement, where a dozen or so women sit with their babies in an open, non-sterile, make-shift nursery (through which we also walked). Israel, to say the least, has been getting a pretty rough time in the press. Pictures of dead children in Gaza are heartbreaking and it is pretty easy to portray Israel as a nation of barbarians. The Foreign Ministry guy told us about the efforts that Israel has been making to get the world to understand that they are not trying to overthrow Hamas — he said that Israel has no right to determine who the government of its neighbor should be — and are certainly not trying to kill innocent Palestinians. As an example of the kind of press that they have been dealing with, he showed us a BBC interview broadcast a few days ago in which a BBC correspondent asked a Foreign Ministry spokesman if Israel wanted to apologize for "stopping medical aid from getting to children who had been trapped in their house destroyed by Israeli bombs with nothing to do for two days but stare at the corpse of their mother," and then added "How in the name of humanity can your government do that?" Yes, it is true that Israel has had far fewer deaths than have the Palestinians, but this is due in part to the fact that Israel has taken better precautions to protect its people. Nearly all Israeli apartments and houses built since the first time that Israeli civilians came under fire — in the Gulf War — have a "safe room," a room made of concrete and steel that can be sealed against explosions as well as radiation and poison. Meanwhile, the Palestinians tend to win the media war — more deaths equals more sympathetic coverage. But there is a great deal of suffering in Israel, and it tends to go unreported. At a Conservative synagogue in Beersheba, a young rabbi there talked to us about what it had been like to live with the rockets, and how much stress people there are dealing with. Everyday things, not something that one would think of, and not something reported in the news, but real, nevertheless. Schools have been closed since there is concern that there would not be enough time to get all students into a shelter. Even if that could be fixed, there is the concern that getting to and from school — when kids might have as little as 45 seconds to find shelter once the siren goes off — is too dangerous. As such, parents have to rearrange work schedules to take care of kids not in school. She herself has an extra burden — she has twin one-year-olds, and no "safe room" in her house. One of her neighbors has a safe room, but the 45 seconds of warning is not enough time for her to run to the neighbor's house carrying one child, run back, and then run again with the other child. As such, two adults have to be with the kids at all times. She also told us that the rockets have taken a terrible psychological toll on kids. They are all scared to death, and something like 50% of all 9 year olds in Beersheba are wetting their beds. Then she said something that seemed to summarize both the incredible Israeli stoicism, and the terrible-ness of the situation. She said that after all, "this is these kids' first war." Their first war! She said it as if it is a rite of passage, the way that we might say that this was one of our kids' first skinned knee. If anybody gets it, the people of Sderot get it. Sderot is about a mile from Gaza, which gives its citizens less than 15 seconds to get cover. And it hasn't been under attack for just the past two weeks. Hamas has been firing missiles at Sderot for eight years. Eight years! Something like 6,000 missiles in the past eight years. Do the math. How many times a day in the past eight years has a siren gone off? How many times have people had 15 seconds to save their lives? How many times have senior citizens — who can't even get out of a chair in 15 seconds, much less run to a safe room or down a flight of stairs to a shelter, sat helplessly where they are, wondering if they were about to die? How many times did a mother with more than one child have to choose which child to carry to a shelter and which to leave behind? (Yes, that is really happening.) We met the mayor of Sderot — of course, in his underground command center — and he is an amazing person. He told us that half of his town is deserted, that those who have someplace else to go — relatives or friends in the north — have left. The nine of us already knew that without having to be told. We were there on a beautiful, warm, sunny day. The playground was deserted. The streets were deserted. The houses were deserted. The stores were nearly all closed. It looked like a ghost town, which it is rapidly becoming. Of those people still there, 70 percent of them need psychological help. If there is someone from whom you would expect to get a "kill the Arabs" rant, it would be him. And yet he said no such thing to us. He said that he had no animosity toward the Palestinians. He said he felt sorry for their deaths. But he was absolutely clear in his support for Israel 's attacks on Hamas. He wants the attacks on his town to stop. He wants peace. The mayor of Sderot isn't the only Israeli who feels for the people in Gaza. We visited two college girls in Beersheba in their typical student apartment — lousy section of town, hand-me-down furniture, clock made of a beer can. Both spoke excellent English (turns out that each has one American parent) — and in many ways could have been typical American college kids. Except that in addition to talking about classes, friends, parties, etc, they also talked about how they were afraid to take a shower since they might not hear the siren. One of them, when she was asked how the typical Israeli college kid is viewing the "situation" — nobody here says the word "war" — said that she has to put her typical feelings on hold. I asked her what she meant by "typical feelings" and she said, "Oh you know.war is bad, people should all get along. And I know that Palestinians deserve the same things that we do — water, electricity — but we are fighting for our survival now. I can't let those other feelings get in the way." An Army captain who talked to us in Sderot made the situation pretty clear. Gaza asks for ordinary items — pipes for plumbing in houses, fertilizer for farmers to grow food, gasoline for cars and tractors. Israel can't prohibit this "humanitarian aid" from coming in. Hamas, however, cuts the pipe into two foot sections, fills them with fertilizer and sugar and a few other easily obtained ingredients (just like the ingredients used in the bomb that blew up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City), and uses the gasoline as propellant. Oh, and they throw in ball bearings and whatever other metal fragments they can find (anything that can become lethal shrapnel once the fertilizer explodes), and fire the whole thing off aimed at Sderot. (The Israelis know this is happening because they have begun putting certain marks on the pipes being sent to Gaza, and these marks are now showing up on the missiles lading on Sderot.) Of course, the missiles are fired about 30 feet from a school or mosque or someone's home. The Israelis see the launch and fire a bunch of mortars at them. They usually hit the target and kill the terrorists. Sometimes, though, they miss by a little — say, 30 feet, and now it is not only the terrorists who are dead.it is the innocent people in the house, school, or mosque next door. Just about every Israeli we talked to cared about what the world thinks of them and doesn't understand why they are being portrayed as they are. I remember one in particular. He was a kid, about 19, wounded in the fighting in Gaza, but only "lightly wounded. (Lightly wounded, by the way, includes such things as losing a toe.) We met him in the hospital where he was recovering. We talked for a little while — what sports he likes, what music he likes, the usual stuff that teenagers care about — and as we were leaving he looked at me and said "Represent us well in America." I told him that I would. I hope I am. Without fail, every person that we talked to — the Foreign Ministry guy, the mayors, the college kids, the rabbi, people on the street and people in stores — thanked us for being there and told us how brave we were. It is hard to describe how ridiculous this felt. People living for weeks, and in some cases, years, with their lives in danger, thanking us for spending a total of maybe 12 hours doing that. But nothing was as gut-wrenching as getting thanks from the soldiers that we ran into about a mile from Gaza. There were about 100 of them, resting in a field and waiting for the command to go back into battle. We had brought some neck warmers with us — they are apparently loved by the soldiers because they not only keep them warm at night, they are apparently a cool fashion statement. (Remember, even though they are soldiers, we are not talking John Wayne here — we are talking 18 and 19 year old kids, whose wardrobe, even when 99% of it is a uniform — is a big deal.) They were incredibly appreciative of them, as they were of the cookies that we had also brought (18 year old boys tend to eat a lot) but when they found out that we were Americans, that we were only in Israel for a few days, and that the reason that we came was to show support for them, they fell all over themselves thanking us. How do I describe the feeling — embarrassment, maybe? — when a kid who, unlike my kids, is not going to a party or going to a bar, is going to war, makes a big deal about my bringing him cookies. I told them this — that my little act of handing out cookies pales in comparison to what they have been asked to do. I told them that they are kids and should not be asked to give up their kid-hoods, and for the first time they stopped laughing and smiling. A couple of them grew serious and told me that I am right, that they shouldn't have to do this. They don't want to be in danger, and they don't want to put the people in Gaza in danger either. But what alternative do they have? Oh, they get it. And then there is the mother, father, and grandmother of Alex Mashvitzki. I don't know if they get it. It might just be too much for them to get. Alex, a 21-year old soldier, was killed in Gaza about a week ago, and his parents ended shiva the first day that we were in Israel. We went to visit them and there is no way that I can do justice to the pain in that house. His mother and father seemed cried out. They just sat there, looking blankly, and answering questions in a monotone. The father played a PowerPoint that Alex's fellow soldiers made, showing a montage of pictures of Alex — baby pictures, bar mitzvah pictures, high school pictures, and IDF pictures — with Eric Clapton's See You in Heaven as background music. His grandmother was not cried out at all. I wound up sitting next to her, and she did not stop crying for the 30 minutes or so that I was there. She kept saying "Life is cruel," "He was only a baby," and "How can I go on?" One of my many character faults is that I am simply awful at relating to older people. In fact, I have to admit that if I had seen her before I chose my seat, I would have sat somewhere else. And yet, I found myself not only relating to her, but I think I actually was able to give her some comfort. She reminded me of my own grandmother — her sense of sadness, of being punished by God, was overwhelming. She told me that she had been a partisan fighter against the Nazis, and then told me that she was from Bialystok ( Poland ), where my grandmother was from. For some reason that hit me hard and I started to cry. We sat there for a few minutes holding each other's hands crying, until I was able to pull myself together. Then she showed me an album filled with photos of her Alex, and pointed him out in every picture. When it was time to leave, I didn't want to go. I had to bend almost in half to hug her — she is tiny, maybe four-six — but was surprised that she hugged me back. Someone in our group later told me that I was amazing with her, and he is right. The amazing part, though, is that I know that I helped her in a small way, and I know that I have never been able to do anything like that before. Maybe I was getting it. In a place where people are often called on to do things that they aren't comfortable with, but do it because it has to be done, I had played a very small role, but I had done something to help. It is a feeling that I will never forget. In the last few days, we've been in range of the Hamas missiles for a total of about 15 hours, during which time something like 25 missiles were fired. Incredibly, we were never in the city at which they were fired. We would leave Ashkelon to go to Sderot, for example, and an hour after we left, a rocket would hit Ashkelon. Then, after we left Sderot, a missile would hit there. The radio was always on in the bus (in case we did not hear the siren), and many of us also had Blackberries, so we were constantly hearing about an attack in the place we had just been. It was eerie, and although we kept joking about it (we are being watched over, we are bad luck charms, we should split up and go over the whole country so nothing will get hit, etc.), I know that at least some of us had mixed feelings about not actually experiencing a siren. I know that I do. Of course I am happy to have made it back unharmed and yet the purpose of this trip was two-fold. We wanted to reassure the people of the South that we have them in our thoughts and prayers, and we accomplished this. But it was also to understand as best we could what it is like to actually be living in those conditions, and then report this back to everyone that we can here.. So many things that were only vague concepts to me before — what a half empty town looks like, what a hospital in a war zone feels like, what soldiers who are about to go into battle say or do — are now solid images in my memory. And yet the worst part — what must be moments of sheer terror as the siren goes off and you have those precious few seconds to find a place to keep yourself alive — is as much a mystery to me today as it was before I came. Saying that I am disappointed would not only be plain stupid — who could possibly be disappointed to have avoided such danger — it would miss the point. A more accurate phrasing, I think, would be to say that my experience was not complete, and 90 percent of me says thank God that it was not. But only 90 percent. A few hours ago we came back to Jerusalem to pack up our stuff, check out of the hotel and leave for the airport. But before we did, the nine of us got together to "debrief" each other. The intention was for each of us to share his or her feelings about what we had seen in the past three days. Not one of the first three people to speak — including me — got more than a few sentences out before we started to cry. As it turns out, we were the only ones able to hold it together enough to even get those few sentences out; nobody else said anything. I think we all got it. I can't really say for sure what "it" is — I think that it is something that we all will work out for ourselves — but it is certainly about the terrible sadness that we had just seen, about things that should not have to happen, about the world working the wrong way. Children not able to be children. Parents burying their children. People living in terror. And generation after generation after generation of people hoping that theirs will be the last generation to live this way, and fearing that it will not. Islamists use our freedoms and commitment to tolerance and multiculturalism against us THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL
I have told my personal story, of how Islamists, step by step, took over my country of Lebanon. How they used our freedoms and commitment to tolerance and multiculturalism against us to further their ultimate ends. And how they are using the same strategies and tactics against us in the West. During this first month of the New Year 2009, we have seen some stunning developments that, considered together, should leave absolutely no doubt about the rising radical Islamic threat on our doorsteps in America. I have been warning Americans since 2002 about this threat, and that the threat is not just confined to terrorism. This is not a "war on terror." Terror is a tactic, one of many in the arsenal of radical Islamists. I have been declaring, to anyone who would listen, that Islamists are well on their way to subverting and transforming Europe, and they are riding that wave here to America. I have told my personal story, of how Islamists, step by step, took over my country of Lebanon. How they used our freedoms and commitment to tolerance and multiculturalism against us to further their ultimate ends. And how they are using the same strategies and tactics against us in the West. In just the past three weeks we have seen:
My friends, the handwriting is clearly on the wall. Radical Islam is on the march, and it is growing stronger and bolder with every passing day. What elected official in Europe or the UK will now have the courage to speak out against this threat? Certainly the actions against parliamentarians Wilders and Winter will ultimately have a chilling effect on American elected officials as well. How many more "no-go zones," Muslim enclaves where non-Muslims and even police officers fear to go, will appear in Europe? We're already seeing such enclaves develop here in America right now. There's a reason why Dearborn, Michigan, is frequently referred to as "Dearbornistan." What will happen in America when 50,000 ranting, chanting Islamist demonstrators attempt to aggressively back down and chase police officers trying to maintain order? Will the police use the force necessary? If they do, we can expect howls from groups like CAIR (the Council on American-Islamic Relations). How will government officials respond? And if the police back down and run, as they recently did in Britain, what message is being sent to radical Islamists? With the recent announcements by the Obama administration regarding ending the use of certain coercive interrogation practices, will this administration have the courage and use the tools necessary to protect us from Hezbollah, Hamas and al Qaeda terrorist cells in our midst? It is becoming crystal clear that 2009 is going to be a critical year in our effort to roll back the rising tide of Islamofascism. Over the next several weeks we will be announcing various projects and programs designed so that we can more aggressively and effectively go on the offense against this threat. I am asking you to pay close attention to these announcements when they occur and to participate in every way you can. We must all come together and ACT! this year, before the worldwide momentum building behind radical Islam becomes too powerful to stop. Always devoted,
Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at janetlehr@veredart.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: DEJA VU AGAIN
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 29, 2009. |
|
Heaven forbid we should fall back into a pattern with Hamas in which they hit us with an occasional rocket, low key enough to avoid engendering a new incursion into Gaza, and we respond, but without sufficient deterrence to make them stop. But the situation may be heading that way. We left Gaza too soon. I would like to review some news items first, and then return to the final section of my report on the Jerusalem Conference. ~~~~~~~~~~ On Tuesday, a large bomb thrown from inside Gaza hit an IDF patrol at the Gaza border near the Kissufim Crossing; one soldier was killed and three others wounded, one seriously. (We don't have the name of the soldier who was killed because his family requested that it not be released. We know he was a Bedouin tracker.) This was followed by a mortar attack. We responded by air, killing the terrorist who was said to have carried out the bombing of the soldiers, and taking out a number of tunnels near the Philadelphi Corridor. ~~~~~~~~~~ On Wednesday, Hamas rejected our terms for a longer-term ceasefire, which stipulated that we would open the crossings into Gaza only if Shalit were released. Hamas says they want the crossings opened and 1,000 prisoners released for Shalit as well. If our government in its last days — possibly before the election to garner votes — agrees to this, it would undo much of what was accomplished in the fighting and set us back. I'm holding my breath. ~~~~~~~~~~ Following this, Wednesday night, a rocket was launched from Gaza into the Eshkol region. Livni made statements about how the days of restraint were over. And Haim Yalin, head of the Eshkol Regional Council called for a harsh response. He explained to the press that he and others had sat with Barak and Olmert during the war, and told them, "It does not matter at what stage the military operation ends, what matters is what Israel does after the first rocket is fired." This is correct and echoes a strong feeling on the part of many here that the beginning of rocket fire represented a moment of truth that required a particularly tough response. As it was, after midnight last night, we hit a weapons depot in Rafah inside Gaza. This morning, two Kassam rockets were fired into the Sderot area. We followed with an air attack on a vehicle in Khan Yunis, in the south of Gaza, which was carrying Mahmoud Hamdan Samiri. Was this a direct response to the second rocket attack? Seems not. It followed that attack, but Samiri was said to have been involved in the earlier attack at Kissufim. So...is that it? ~~~~~~~~~~ George Mitchell is in the area, according to various sources to gather information. He came into Jerusalem on Tuesday from Cairo, made various statements about the US being committed to peace and wanting to foster a stronger truce, and proceeded over the next couple of days to meet with President Peres, PM Olmert, Foreign Minister Livni, and Chief of Staff Ashkenazi. Tomorrow he will meet with Likud head Netanyahu and then head to Jordan. Syria is not on his itinerary. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today Mitchell went to Ramallah and met with members of the PA. In a press conference with Mahmoud Abbas, he declared that "to be successful in preventing the illicit traffic of arms into Gaza there must be a mechanism to allow the flow of legal goods, and that should be with the participation of the Palestinian Authority." We saw that coming. Olmert informed Mitchell that there would be no opening of the crossing for full flow of goods until Shalit was released. ~~~~~~~~~~ It has just been revealed, however, that when Olmert met with Mitchell, he shared with him his own vision for a "peace plan," which, according to Israel National News, would require us to surrender most of Judea and Samaria and expel 60,000 Jews from their homes. This reminds us, once again, that the greatest dangers we face are not from the outside, but rather from within. Olmert remains — in spite of his recent strength with the war — a destructive force and a loose cannon. Likud, alarmed by Olmert's position — as well it should be — has reportedly asked for an emergency session of the Knesset. MK Gidon Sa'ar declared that, "This plan is dangerous and abandons the security of Israel. It will bring Hamas' missiles to Tel Aviv and the center of the country." The Likud party made it clear in a statement that "this plan does not obligate Israel nor the Likud headed by Binyamin Netanyahu." And indeed it does not, although it will cause additional pressure to be put on us. ~~~~~~~~~~ President Obama gave his first interview on Tuesday, with Al-Arabyia originating in Dubai. "My job," he said, "is to communicate the fact that the United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect." ~~~~~~~~~~ Speaking of Dubai, is this strictly a coincidence? George Mitchell was chairman of a law firm that was paid $8 million to represent Dubai's Sheikh Muhammad bin Rashid al-Maktoum in 2006, with regard to charges that Maktoum and others enslaved boys from Africa and South Asia and brought them to Dubai to be camel jockeys in races. The firm, DLA Piper, did extensive lobbying in the Middle East, and did both lobbying and legal work for the Sheikh. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to The Guardian today, the Obama administration is working on a draft of a letter to Iran that would be conciliatory and pave the way for direct US-Iranian talks. Iran is not demonstrating pleasure with Obama, however. Ahmadinejad says "profound changes" are required. These would include an end to support for Israel and an apology to Iran. How long will it take, and how hard will he have to be pushed, before Obama realizes that his current approach to Iran will not be constructive? The one encouraging note is that Adm. Mullen, Chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has indicated that Obama has not taken the possibility of the US using force against Iran off the table. ~~~~~~~~~~ In an interview with the Jerusalem Post yesterday, EU foreign policy head Javier Solana refused to state unequivocally that the EU would continue to insist upon previously determined conditions — renouncing violence, recognizing Israel, and accepting previous agreements — before talking with Iran. This is broadly seen as a weakening within the European community with regard to recognizing Hamas. ~~~~~~~~~~ Turkey, which once was considered in the Western-tilting or moderate camp of Islamic nations, has made a worrisome shift towards the radical Islamist forces of late. At the World Economic Forum, Turkish prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has now declared that "President Obama must redefine terror and terrorist organizations in the Middle East, and based on this new definition, a new American policy must be deployed in the Middle East." This is understood to mean that Hamas and Hezbollah should not longer be considered terrorists. He'll have an opportunity to say this directly to George Mitchell, who is due in Turkey on Sunday. According to an Israeli official, Erdogan is fomenting anti-Semitism in Turkey with his uncritical acceptance of the Hamas version of what went on in Gaza. ~~~~~~~~~~ Returning to the Conference... Binyamin Netanyahu kicked off the day yesterday with a brief talk on the future of Jerusalem. Said he: "We will ignore nothing we need to do to keep Jerusalem united." Any attempt to "solve" problems here by dividing Jerusalem would have global ramifications. "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." If Jerusalem were divided, he said, Hamas, and then Iran, would move in. "Our connection to the land is precisely the reason why we are here and not somewhere else. Har Habayit (The Temple Mount) is at the center." Already the Arabs call it the "holy seat" to blur our historical connection to it. Netanyahu then recounted actions he'd taken in the past, when he was prime minister, to strengthen Jerusalem — such as the building of Har Homa in spite of Arab objections, and things he'd still like to do. What seems important here, beyond the primary concern for Jerusalem herself, is that if Netanyahu indeed becomes prime minister — as polls indicate he will — and keeps Jerusalem united, this alone would preclude a Palestinian state. ~~~~~~~~~~ Last session to be shared: "Is There a 'Clash of Civilizations'?" This is a panel that offered serious thinkers with differing philosophies, ideologies and perspectives. It provided considerable food for thought. Professor Yisrael Aumann, Nobel Laureate, speaking from the perspective of game theory, which is his special expertise, opted to pass on the broader subject of the panel — global terrorism — and address the issue of domestic terrorism and how we respond: We stimulate terrorism, said Aumann, by providing incentives. We have provided signals via the withdrawal from Gush Katif that terrorism pays. From the Gush Katif evacuation there followed the Second Lebanon War and then Hamas in Gaza and the war with this group. We destroyed the chance for peace now but can bring it in the future by avoiding concessions, gestures, and flexibility that bring war. The Arabs understood correctly what the message of Gush Katif was. We must remember that the Romans said, "If you want peace, prepare for war." They had the Pax Romana, for 400 years. Similarly, during the Cold War the US was able to move toward peace not by concessions but through strength. There were armed aircraft in the air, hovering 24/7 every day, and we were prepared to use the armaments if necessary. WWII was caused by "peaceniks" and appeasement. "Peace in our time," was followed 18 months later by Britain declaring war. ~~~~~~~~~~ Shlomo Avineri, Israel Prize laureate, then disagreed with Aumann: We don't bring terror on ourselves, the Arabs do it to us. They were killing us even before we compromised on anything. The war, said Avineri, is not between civilizations and not between the West and Islam. It is within Islam, which never underwent a change, a transformation to modernity. It is a reflection of huge frustration. The Islamic traditions of the Middle Ages deteriorated because Western models for transformation — such as liberalism and democracy — never worked for them. Thus they have attempted to renew the glory of the old days and moved to a Jihadist approach. The hatred of the West is deep. The Muslim world is regressing. They hate us because of our strength, not because of our weakness. Those Arabs who are fighting radical Islam, such as Saudi Arabia and Egypt, are not democracies. We must ally with them and turn a blind eye to what we don't like. Bush tried to enforce democracy but they don't have the foundations and it will fail. This is a complex situation but we share a political agenda. Radical Islam is more dangerous to the moderate Arabs than to us. Were Egypt, for example, to open the border with Gaza, it would cause huge problems for them. ~~~~~~~~~~ Bernard Lewis, the much venerated elder dean of Islamic scholarship, who was present but not formally part of the panel, was asked to share his perspective on this issue. His take was fascinating: All religions, he said, are triumphalist. But only two — Christianity and Islam — are exclusive. That is, only these say there is one truth and only one road to heaven. (Judaism, by contrast, only says Jews must be good Jews for a share in the world-to-come. Non-Jews can remain such and still have their share of heaven if they live moral and good lives. Everyone doesn't have to be Jewish.) Thus, a conflict between Christianity and Islam was inevitable. Islam, says Lewis, is now functioning in the early 15th century. Christianity in the 15th century was at battle within itself with because of different Christian groups. At the end of this time there was a Christian acceptance of secularism. Lewis says he's not prepared to predict if Islam will reach this stage. Jews have a religion and a culture, but are not a civilization unto themselves. Jews have been a component in the Christian and Muslim civilizations. (Ashkenazi Jews came out of Christian culture, and those called Sephardic Jews came out of the Muslim culture — and differences between these two groups is reflected in the differences in the two civilizations.) What is going on now is seen by the West as a clash of civilizations. Islam sees it as a clash of religions. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ALWAYS TROUBLE WITH THE JEWS
Posted by Boris Celser, January 29, 2009. |
|
This was written by Christian Ortner and it appeared January 8, 2009 in Die Presse. Christian Ortner is a journalist in Vienna. |
|
Why don't the Jews just let themselves be killed without resistance? After all, that's how it used to be! On the whole, Austria displays rather a lot of sympathy for the Jews, at least as long as we're talking about dead Jews. For example, today practically nobody has anything against the Jews murdered in the concentration camps. It's a bit different when it comes to Jews who are (still) alive. True, in an interview the Austrian Chancellor did condemn Hamas' rocket attacks on Israel, but in the same breath he also condemned Israel's efforts to robustly defend itself against these acts of terrorism. Presumably this resolute on-the-one-hand/on-the other attitude is entirely capable of securing a majority. As long as Israel puts up, without showing any resistance, with a situation in which a considerable proportion of its population are forced to live in air-raid shelters in order to avoid becoming the victims of a Hamas rocket, we tolerate its behavior. If they defend themselves against these attacks, we put them on the same level as the Hamas terrorist. Why can't the Jews living in Israel let themselves be killed off just as noiselessly and politely as their parents and grandparents did at the time in the European extermination camps? In contrast, as might have been expected, France showed more awareness of tradition and continuity than the stubborn Jews. While its Foreign Ministry similarly reprimanded Hamas and Israel equally, in the best Orwellian style thereby eliminating the difference between aggressor and victim, the Grande Nation made a masterly connection to the glorious days of Vichy, when proud France also had to put up with acts of Jewish insolence with impunity. By way of camouflage for their behavior, all those who expect Israel to kindly allow itself to be bombarded with rockets, without making any trouble, have recently started using the argument of "disproportionality" of Israel's resistance, in other words the fact that clearly more Palestinians fell victim to Israel's resistance than Israelis to Hamas' terror. It is an undisputed fact that the main reason for this is that Hamas sets up its rocket positions at schools, nursery schools, and hospitals, precisely in order to achieve this effect. Which is why the following question must be asked: Why do the 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza not prevent Hamas from firing rockets at Israel from their schoolyards? After all, it is hard to imagine that Hamas would be able to continue carrying out terror against Israel for even one day in the face of resistance by its own population. So far, there is no information about Hamas (elected by a majority) using force to install its rocket positions right in the middle of the civilian population. Hence the question of "proportionality" must also be asked differently. As long as the Palestinians tolerate Hamas firing rockets at Israeli nursery schools, from within their midst, from their houses and schools, they cannot really be considered "innocent civilian victims." It is not Israel's resistance which is disproportionate, but the criticism of this resistance. Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
ACCOUNT OF ISRAELI ATTACK ON UN SCHOOL DOESN'T HOLD UP TO SCRUTINY
Posted by Boris Celser, January 29, 2009. |
|
This was written by Patrick Martin and it appeared today in
the Globe and Mail
|
|
JABALYA, GAZA STRIP — Most people remember the headlines: Massacre Of Innocents As UN School Is Shelled; Israeli Strike Kills Dozens At UN School. They heralded the tragic news of Jan. 6, when mortar shells fired by advancing Israeli forces killed 43 civilians in the Jabalya refugee camp in the Gaza Strip. The victims, it was reported, had taken refuge inside the Ibn Rushd Preparatory School for Boys, a facility run by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency.The news shocked the world and was compared to the 1996 Israeli attack on a UN compound in Qana, Lebanon, in which more than 100 people seeking refuge were killed. It was certain to hasten the end of Israel's attack on Gaza, and would undoubtedly lead the list of allegations of war crimes committed by Israel. There was just one problem: The story, as etched in people's minds, was not quite accurate. Physical evidence and interviews with several eyewitnesses, including a teacher who was in the schoolyard at the time of the shelling, make it clear: While a few people were injured from shrapnel landing inside the white-and-blue-walled UNRWA compound, no one in the compound was killed. The 43 people who died in the incident were all outside, on the street, where all three mortar shells landed. Stories of one or more shells landing inside the schoolyard were inaccurate. While the killing of 43 civilians on the street may itself be grounds for investigation, it falls short of the act of shooting into a schoolyard crowded with refuge-seekers. The teacher who was in the compound at the time of the shelling says he heard three loud blasts, one after the other, then a lot of screaming. "I ran in the direction of the screaming [inside the compound]," he said. "I could see some of the people had been injured, cut. I picked up one girl who was bleeding by her eye, and ran out on the street to get help."But when I got outside, it was crazy hell. There were bodies everywhere, people dead, injured, flesh everywhere." The teacher, who refused to give his name because he said UNRWA had told the staff not to talk to the news media, was adamant: "Inside [the compound] there were 12 injured, but there were no dead." "Three of my students were killed," he said. "But they were all outside." Hazem Balousha, who runs an auto-body shop across the road from the UNRWA school, was down the street, just out of range of the shrapnel, when the three shells hit. He showed a reporter where they landed: one to the right of his shop, one to the left, and one right in front. "There were only three," he said. "They were all out here on the road." News of the tragedy travelled fast, with aid workers and medical staff quoted as saying the incident happened at the school, the UNRWA facility where people had sought refuge. Soon it was presented that people in the school compound had been killed. Before long, there was worldwide outrage. Sensing a public-relations nightmare, Israeli spokespeople quickly asserted that their forces had only returned fire from gunmen inside the school. (They even named two militants.) It was a statement from which they would later retreat, saying there were gunmen in the vicinity of the school. No witnesses said they saw any gunmen. (If people had seen anyone firing a mortar from the middle of the street outside the school, they likely would not have continued to mill around.) John Ging, UNRWA's operations director in Gaza, acknowledged in an interview this week that all three Israeli mortar shells landed outside the school and that "no one was killed in the school." "I told the Israelis that none of the shells landed in the school," he said. Why would he do that? "Because they had told everyone they had returned fire from gunmen in the school. That wasn't true." Mr. Ging blames the Israelis for the confusion over where the victims were killed. "They even came out with a video that purported to show gunmen in the schoolyard. But we had seen it before," he said, "in 2007." The Israelis are the ones, he said, who got everyone thinking the deaths occurred inside the school. "Look at my statements," he said. "I never said anyone was killed in the school. Our officials never made any such allegation." Speaking from Shifa Hospital in Gaza City as the bodies were being brought in that night, an emotional Mr. Ging did say: "Those in the school were all families seeking refuge. ... There's nowhere safe in Gaza." And in its daily bulletin, the World Health Organization reported: "On 6 January, 42 people were killed following an attack on a UNRWA school ..." The UN's Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs got the location right, for a short while. Its daily bulletin cited "early reports" that "three artillery shells landed outside the UNRWA Jabalia Prep. C Girls School ..." However, its more comprehensive weekly report, published three days later, stated that "Israeli shelling directly hit two UNRWA schools ..." including the one at issue. Such official wording helps explain the widespread news reports of the deaths in the school, but not why the UN agencies allowed the misconception to linger. "I know no one was killed in the school," Mr. Ging said. "But 41 innocent people were killed in the street outside the school. Many of those people had taken refuge in the school and wandered out onto the street. "The state of Israel still has to answer for that. What did they know and what care did they take?" EDITOR'S NOTE: February 5, 1009 UPDATE: These are excerpts from an article by Abraham Rabinovich in today's
The Australian A statement issued yesterday by the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Human Affairs acknowledged that it had wrongly blamed the deaths at the time on the "shelling of the UNRWA (Relief and Works Agency) school". Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
DUKE UNIVERSITY'S COLONIZATION PROGRAM
Posted by Seth Frantzman, January 28, 2009. |
|
The next generation of colonialists: Duke University's 'Engage' program invites young students to 'change the world' through working at NGOs throughout the world as part of their student exchange program. It gives 18-22 year old students the chance to 'intervene directly' in places, helping to make local NGOs more efficient and 'train locals'. This arrogance, that we should 'change the world' is inculcated at a young age. But this NGO-poverty-tourism is a decidedly racist worldview. Duke University has many study abroad programs. Incorporated into most of them is the chance to spend extra time participating in the 'Duke Engage' program. Its motto is 'challenge yourself: change the world.' It is a good case study in the way in which western students increasingly believe it is their duty to 'change' the entire world, an arrogant concept that smacks of racism, colonialism and the idiocy of 'the white man's burden.' To understand the idiocy it is worthwhile examining what Duke Engage students are engaged in. In Egypt's Cairo they are part of St. Andrews Refugee ministry, a "localized western model NGO." Participants "develop programs for making local NGOs more efficient....exciting opportunities to be in charge of a new program." Students in the program will, however, have to learn some Arabic to work with the locals. In Kenya "Students in the FSD program in Kenya will be individually placed with a partner organization in one of seven development subject areas, including microfinance/microenterprise, women's empowerment, environment, health, human rights, education and youth development, or community development." In South Africa "Students will spend six weeks in Cape Town, working with social agencies that are seeking to improve life in townships, document the history of District Six (a neighborhood bulldozed by the apartheid regime because it was a model of multi-racial democracy), and promote health and economic reform in the nation." In Northern Tanzania "Students will learn about healthcare technology shortcomings in the developing world and spend time directly intervening to address these challenges." In Uganda "DukeEngage students will primarily provide training on, education, and dissemination of vital medical services." In China the students will undermine the government by dealing with migrants to cities who "often underpaid, with no health or employment benefits, and subjected to a range of discriminatory practices... Interfacing with JP Morgan's Corporate Social Responsibility office in Beijing, Duke Engage Beijing students will work at one of the most successful of these places [for migrant worker children], the Dandelion Middle School (Pugongying Zhongxue). Our students will engage in a wide range of tasks, from teaching English and other subjects, to working with school staff in health, nutrition, life skills, counseling and study-to-work programs." In Vietnam however the students will be involved in some nationalism through going to "Ben Tre Province to participate in the Vietnamese Youth League's Green Summer Campaign." In Ireland "students will spend two months in Dublin working with communities of refugees and migrants. DukeEngage students will be placed with one of five different NGOs serving the migrant and refugee community [or] Duke students will work with five Belfast-based NGOs that focus on human rights." In Haiti they will be "documenting the needs and strengths of community partners in Haiti and developing cross-disciplinary partnerships, from environmental health, engineering design, and health management to clinical care; and 3. determining priorities community members, leaders and health professionals have related to the planned construction of a health and research center." In Israel "students who participate in the follow-up DukeEngage portion of the program will work in one of several organizations that promote social justice in disadvantaged communities. The organizations, which are all based in Jerusalem, focus on providing social assistance to new Ethiopian immigrants, community education, creating local leadership for social change, women's rights, and environmental justice." It all sounds well and good. But let us consider the mentality behind it. First among the mentality is the belief that "we can do it better than them." The programs don't send college students abroad to learn from locals. It doesn't say the students will observe and first learn about what the local people are doing. Instead the mentality is that a bunch of college students from the west, ages 18-22, are perfectly capable, even if their majors are in things not related to the programs, to show up and immediately begin telling the locals what to do. Is there anything more arrogant than thinking that simply by the virtue of these students being from Duke that they can suddenly take charge of a health care clinic in Haiti or perhaps running a food co-op NGO in Kenya? The insinuation is that the natives are just there to be told what to do. Isn't that, in truth, what this program is saying: "dear Westerner, come and run your own plantation with natives ready to work for you, eager to learn from you and take direction...be your own boss of some hundred savage people and whip them into shape so that they can be more efficient because you, by virtue of coming from the West, surely know more than all these savages." What does it mean to 'change the world'? It means the world needs you and only you, the westerner, can change it. It means the world needs changing and isn't good enough, isn't up to 'our standards'. It means that we must change it, not that it could, god forbid, change us. It means that we have a 'duty' to change it. This is an arrogant idea, the idea that it needs changing. But what if it is doing ok by itself. Haiti appears to need changing until one recalls just exactly who it was that has been running it for the last hundred years. Recall that Haiti was the second country in the Western Hemisphere to gain independence (after the U.S) in 1802 and recall that it did just fine in the 19th century until people began colonizing it again. Recall that since 1992 it has been run by NGOs and the U.N. So when we say we must 'change' it, we should be changing our own policy towards it. We should have long ago left it to its own ends. Poor and savage it may be, but our 'change' doesn't appear to be helping. Haitians are poorer today per capita than they were in 1802. So how is the 'change' helping? Why aren't the arrogant colonists-in-the-making sent to their own countries or places where they speak the local language at least to affect some change? Why aren't we dispatching them to the inner cities to lord it over some of our own people? Why don't we dispatch them to St. Joseph's hospital in Tucson to run the hospital for a few days? If we believe any Duke student is capable of running, without training, some clinic in Africa why not let them run a clinic, with no training, in Harlem? I mean, by Duke's logic, those people in Harlem must be equally savage as the one's in Kenya so why not let our best and brightest 18-22 year olds experiment on our own black poor people? We don't need to send them all the way to Africa, we have plenty of African immigrants here in the U.S for rich folk to experiment on with leftist notions of 'I must change them and only I can do it because they are to stupid'. But we wouldn't send some inexperienced, wet behind the ears, student go run a hospital in Harlem or Tucson, so why would we send them to Africa to do it? Do the Africans deserve so little, are they are so useless that we truly believe some 20 year old is capable of telling them what do to by virtue simply of the fact that they live in a poor African country? What do these students really know about making local NGOs "more efficient." The insinuation is that the native people running the NGOs locally are obviously corrupt and inefficient and only by bringing them the natural efficiency that any 18 year old American social science student innately has can they improve. There is another side to the Duke Engage program, that while less arrogant, is equally obnoxious. This is the belief that it is the duty of Duke to work to subvert various governments throughout the world by sending study abroad students into the country to create unrest among minorities and encourage militant activism among groups that Duke has identified as 'disadvantaged.' On the surface it seems natural for American students to want to help minorities in Ireland, China or Israel. But lets imagine a situation where some idealistic Americans show up and encourage local Chinese labourers to assert their 'rights' more and this leads to riots and then bloodshed. Imagine the situation in Israel where the Americans show up to work among the local Ethiopians and because Americans imagine that every black person everywhere must suffer terrible discrimination, they fill the Ethiopians' heads with images of the Old South, and soon these poor Ethiopians are imagining all sorts of racism where none previously existed. It is not far fetched. Westerners have a strange habit of always being more nationalistic and extreme than locals. I have witnessed western white women encouraging Arabs to be more nationalistic, telling them about their 'true claim to the temple mount', regaling Muslims with stories about Mohammed that even the Muslims didn't know and inquiring of Arab women 'why do you speak Hebrew, the language of your enemy?' I've seen white women from the west asking "where is the racism, those Ethiopians, they are the blacks here so they must be discriminated against, I am sure there is more racism than we see on the surface." Westerners need to find racism in other countries because the idea of racism as a natural part of society is ingrained in the West and the idea that "racism is everywhere" is typical of an American liberal education. Thus in India white westerners typically ask "aren't the white Indians racist against the black ones." Indians might inquire "what blacks and whites?" But westerners refuse to think that the notion of race is not easily accepted elsewhere. So westerners will mistake the Indian Hindu notion of caste for race and class, because race and class are easily understood in the West. It might surprise them to learn that caste in India transcends both dark and lighter skinned Hindus and poorer and richer ones. We cannot imagine Chinese students flooding America on foreign exchange visas and being put in charge of our rural health care centers or going among Mexican immigrants and encouraging them to fight for 'social justice'. We can't imagine African students arriving in the U.S to campaign for environmental justice. We can't imagine Russian students meeting with poor whites in the south and educating them about their 'disadvantaged position.' We can't imagine it because it would seem odd to have foreigners running around our country telling our people how to live, whipping them into a frenzy about justice, telling them how to run a health clinic and then leaving after their six weeks of poverty and social activist tourism was at an end, returning to Africa or China or Russia to talk about how they 'changed the world' and leaving a big mess behind them. The arrogance of social-justice-tourism and the evils of NGOs and those who think they have a right to run them is never ending. The Duke case is just the tip of the iceberg of a persistent liberal racism against the world, a leftist-human-rights racism that permeates our culture and makes us believe that we must 'change the world', not by first changing ourselves, but by undermining foreign governments, and imposing ourselves upon others and lording it over others. Anyone that believes that some 20 year old college student with no background and no experience who has never worked a day in his life can show up in Kenya and be placed in charge of 40 year old Africans is as bent morally as those people in the Old South who owned slaves. Contact Seth J. Frantzman at sfrantzman@hotmail.com and visit his website: http://journalterraincognita.blogspot.com These essays appeared on his website. |
|
A SELECTIVE APPROACH TO THE FACTS AT UNRWA
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 28, 2009. |
|
This was written by Melanie Phillips
|
|
The pressure group Arab Media Watch has put out a statement claiming that my observation in my Daily Mail column yesterday, that Hamas has intercepted dozens of aid trucks and confiscated food and medical supplies bound for the UN stores in Gaza is untrue. It bases its claim upon the following: AMW chairman Sharif Hikmat Nashashibi spoke on the phone with John Ging, director of the UN Relief and Works Agency in Gaza, and its spokesman Chris Gunness. Ging described the claim as 'completely untrue.' Gunness described it as 'utter nonsense,' and said he would make a statement about this to the Mail. 'It took me a few minutes to verify that this very serious claim is false,' wrote Nashashibi in a letter to the newspaper. 'Phillips could have, and should have, done the same.' Presumably, AMW will therefore have made the same complaint to Jordan's Petra news agency, which reported on January 20 that Hamas hijacked Jordanian aid trucks after they crossed into Gaza through the Kerem Shalom crossing on Tuesday. The aid was to go to UNRWA. As the truck drivers started unloading the aid, Hamas gunmen opened fire on them and forced them to go to Hamas-run stores. and to the government of Jordan, which confirmed on Tuesday that Hamas gunmen had seized the trucks shortly after they entered the Gaza Strip through the Kerem Shalom border crossing and to Fatah, one of whose officials said that on Monday night alone, Hamas gunmen intercepted 12 trucks loaded with humanitarian aid that had been donated by the Jordanian government to the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. He said that the trucks were on their way to the headquarters of the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) when the gunmen belonging to the movement's armed wing, Izaddin al-Kassam, stopped them and confiscated their contents... Last week Fatah activists and eyewitnesses in the Gaza Strip claimed that Hamas had confiscated fuel and food that was en route to hospitals and schools housing thousands of Palestinian families. Perhaps AMW might care to bring all this to the attention of John Ging and Christopher Gunness? Now here is an analysis of both these gentlemen and the body they represent, which reports that Ging accused Israel of killing the Palestinian driver of an aid truck on Jan. 7, 2009, while Israeli officials — including the medic who brought the Palestinians to a hospital in Ashkelon — said the driver's death [was] the consequence of Palestinian sniper fire...Ging acknowledged, however, that he could not be absolutely certain that the attacks came from IDF forces, telling a reporter who asked whether other combatants may have been responsible, 'There is a conflict going on.' And now let's look at UNRWA which has been supervising the Palestinian 'refugee camps' in Gaza for decades, during which time they have developed into mass production terror factories under its nose. The vast majority of UNWRA's staff in Gaza are Palestinians — and all Gazans are either supporters of Hamas or are very firmly under their thumb. But when asked at a press conference whether UNRWA was indeed a Hamas front, John Ging stalled: He was 'just not going to answer' allegations that UNRWA had been infiltrated by Hamas. No evidence had ever been provided by any authority, at any level. Absolutely no official allegation had been made. When you look at the efforts UNRWA has made over the years to ensure that none of its operatives is controlled by Hamas, no wonder he was coy. Fox News reported: UNRWA official Chris Guinness told the Jerusalem Post this week that the agency screens names of new employees against the relatively small U.N. database of Taliban and Al Qaeda figures. Extremist Palestinians, however, are far more likely to belong to organizations, such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, that are not on that watch list. In October 2004, Arlene Kushner wrote a piece documenting UNRWA's links to terrorism published by the Center for Near East Policy Research. As CAMERA records:
Now a devastating report on UNRWA by its former general counsel, James Lindsay, has just been published by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy. It concludes: At the same time, UNWRA has gradually adopted a distinctive political viewpoint that favors the Palestinian and Arab narrative of events in the Middle East. In particular, it seems to favor the strain of Palestinian political thought espoused by those who are intent on a "return" to the land that is now Israel. UNRWA's adoption of any political viewpoint is undesirable, but the one it has chosen to emphasize is especially regrettable. In addition to clashing with the objectives of the United States, this view has detracted from UNRWA's humanitarian assistance, encouraged Palestinians who favor refighting long-lost wars, discouraged those who favor moving toward peace, and contributed to the scourge of conflicts that have been visited upon Palestinian refugees for decades. Readers can make up their own minds whether one telephone call to UNRWA can really establish the truth of anything about Gaza at all. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
FIXING UNRWA: REPAIRING THE UN'S TROUBLED SYSTEM OF AID TO PALESTINIAN REFUGEES
Posted by Daily Alert, January 28, 2009. |
|
This was written by James G. Lindsay, an Aufzien fellow at The Washington Institute focusing on Palestinian refugee issues and UN humanitarian assistance, served with UNRWA from 2000 to 2007 as legal advisor and general counsel. |
|
UNRWA — is it part of the solution to the Arab-Israeli conflict or part of the problem? The humanitarian aspect of the recent conflict between Israel and Hamas has cast a fresh spotlight on the presence in Gaza of the nearly sixty-year-old United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA), raising important questions about why the UN still operates schools, hospitals, and clinics for "refugees" six decades after the partition of Mandatory Palestine. UNRWA began providing assistance to Palestinian refugees in Gaza, the West Bank, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon in May 1950, in the wake of the 1947-1949 Arab-Israeli war. Since then, the organization has survived wars, coups, uprisings, and, in Gaza and the West Bank, even the creation of the first-ever Palestinian governing body — the Palestinian Authority — which operates in parallel with, not in place of, UNRWA institutions. Over the course of its long history, UNRWA has rarely been the subject of comprehensive external evaluation, and virtually nothing has been written on the organization's strategy and operations by a senior staff member with knowledge of how UNRWA actually works. This path-breaking study by James G. Lindsay, UNRWA's former general counsel, offers one of the first insider accounts of the organization. In it, Lindsay analyzes the agency's evolution over the past half century, evaluates recent criticisms of its operations, and recommends bold new policies for the U.S. government — UNRWA's largest single-country donor — that will help repair an aid and relief system that has strayed from its original mission. 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 JEWS OF THE GATHERING NIGHT
Posted by LEL, January 28, 2009. |
|
This was written by Melanie Phillips and it appeared in the
Spectator
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/3295341/ the-jews-of-the-gathering-night.thtml |
|
One of the most agonising and tragic aspects of the current global wave of Jew-hatred is the prominent part played in this by Jews. This is not a new phenomenon. Throughout the centuries of Jewish persecution, from the medieval 'conversos' to Karl Marx and beyond, there have always been Jews who, for a variety of reasons, have been ready and willing to advance the agenda of the persecutors of the Jewish people. Today, the west is teeming with their successors — almost always on the left, very often but not always highly secularised and with a tangential or deeply conflicted relationship with their Jewish identity, they are in the forefront of the movement to demonise, delegitimise and destroy Israel. They do it to no other country; only the expression of self-determination of their own people inspires in them such frenzied and obsessive loathing. Nothing could be more inappropriate than their common soubriquet of 'self-hating Jews'; on the contrary, they usually love themselves inordinately. What they hate is the Jewish bit of themselves — or to be more precise, everything but that bit of the Jewish bit which enables them falsely to represent Jewish powerlessness as the key characteristic of Jewish peoplehood, about which they generally know next to nothing and which they generally disdain altogether until the chance arrives to dump on it with maximum venom. The fact that they are Jews — however nominally — gives a free pass to the non-Jewish Jew-haters to dress up their bigotry as high-minded conscience, while still others of good will are led to believe the hateful lies and libels about Israel in the misguided belief that, since Jews are giving voice to them, they cannot be an expression of prejudice. The result of all this is that the Arab and Muslim agenda of the destruction of Israel and genocide against the Jews is advanced every time a Jew-hating Jew spews such venom into the public sphere. On Front Page, David Solway lists some of the examples of this pathology: The late Harold Pinter won a Nobel Prize, not for his over-rated plays, but for his anti-Israeli (and anti-American) posturing. Equally influential are fellow Jewish anti-Zionists like Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, Naomi Klein, Joel Kovel, Tony Judt, Ilan Pappe, Tom Segev, Sara Roy, Henry Siegman, Avrum Burg, Jaqueline Rose and Richard Falk, to mention only a sparse handful, whose denunciation of Israel is so extreme and untextured as to be scarcely distinguishable from antisemitism. Indeed, one of the most insufferable characteristics of these Jew- hating Jews is that they claim to represent authentic Jewish morality as opposed to the supposed corruption of those principles by Zionism and Israel. They do nothing of the kind. Their claim merely advertises their profound ignorance of Jewish ethics and history, which they so badly misrepresent. They are beneath contempt; and were the situation not so desperate, their rantings would be regarded as of no more consequence than those of any other fringe sectarian groupuscule. But their position in fashionable society means they are lionised by an equally ignorant and bigoted intelligentsia — with the result that these Jews of the gathering night are significant contributors to the unconscionable agenda of our times. Contact LEL at lel817@yahoo.com |
|
EGYPT SHOULD DESTROY GAZA TUNNELS TO EARN FOREIGN AID
Posted by Jonathan Schanzer, January 28, 2009. |
|
A half-dozen U.S. military officers and engineers recently toured Egypt's border with the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian Maan News Agency reported. They reportedly are working to install high-tech sensing equipment to locate the smuggling tunnels that snake beneath the sands between Gaza and the Sinai Peninsula. Maan notes that the group is already training Egyptian security personnel to use the equipment. The need for this equipment is dire. Dozens of Gaza Strip smugglers went back to work last week, openly repairing the tunnels that supply the Hamas economy, as Israel withdrew its troops. With their help and determination, Hamas will quickly replenish the rockets and launchers destroyed by the Israel Defense Forces in Operation Cast Lead. Egypt says it will accept equipment or aid from any nation to help combat smuggling. But, with or without help, Egypt must begin to actively identify and destroy these tunnels. If it won't, Washington should consider revoking Egypt's $1.7 billion in foreign aid. Israel has complained with increasing intensity that Egypt turns a blind eye to the tunnels. Cairo originally dismissed those allegations as "old and silly." However, as Israeli protests grew louder, the U.S. House and Senate agreed to a 2008 foreign aid bill that would withhold about $100 million of Egypt's foreign aid unless Washington could certify that Egypt was doing its part to stop the smuggling. Egypt, however, still failed to deliver. In late January 2008, the Hosni Mubarak regime stood by as Hamas destroyed parts of the wall separating Gaza from the Sinai. Tens of thousands of Gazans streamed into Egypt, stocking up on food, supplies and weapons. According to Israeli security services chief Yuval Diskin, large quantities of long-range rockets, anti-tank missiles, anti-aircraft missiles and materiel for rocket production were brought into Gaza. Predictably, the Israeli government was furious. Israeli Foreign Ministry spokesman Arye Mekel stated in a BBC interview that it was "the responsibility of Egypt to ensure that the border operates properly, according to the signed agreements." Weapons Highway However, it took Egypt 12 days to close the border. Once sealed, underground smuggling returned to previous levels. One year later, despite regular diplomatic overtures from Jerusalem and Washington, the smuggling continues. The continued operation of these tunnels has wide-reaching consequences. The tunnels are the lifeblood of the Gaza economy, enabling Hamas to circumvent international sanctions. Tunnels furnish the Hamas economy in the Gaza Strip with everything from cigarettes and car parts to erectile dysfunction pills and fresh cheese. Hamas also smuggles in Iranian cash to pay the salaries of its loyalists. Additionally, Hamas collects revenue from the tunnels, which yield approximately $140 million per year. In some cases, Hamas charges the operators thousands of dollars to maintain them. In short, without the tunnels, the Hamas economy would likely collapse. The power structure would quickly follow. Notably, Egypt's refusal to shut down the tunnels directly contributes to the bloody internecine conflict between Hamas and Fatah — the two dominant Palestinian factions. The more weaponry and goods Hamas smuggles into Gaza, the stronger it will get and the more prepared it will be to confront Fatah in another round of violence. This will only ensure future instability in the West Bank and Gaza. Finally, and most obviously, the Sinai tunnels provide Hamas with the projectiles and ordnance that provoked Israel into the most recent conflict. This led to a re-inflammation of the Arab-Israeli conflict, not to mention needless bloodshed on both sides. The resumption of tunnel activity now ensures that a future round of conflict is just around the corner. Until now, Israeli efforts to get Egypt to take stronger action against the tunneling had potentially dangerous consequences. Specifically, Israel feared jeopardizing its cold peace with Egypt, which had ensured a tense regional calm since 1978. However, it is now clear that Egypt has failed to live up to its obligations. The need for additional U.S. personnel to bolster Cairo's flaccid anti-smuggling efforts is proof of this. As calls for change and accountability reverberate throughout Washington at a time when budgets are under increased scrutiny, the U.S. Congress should take a hard look at Egypt's $1.7 billion in foreign aid. More than $1.3 billion of that is military aid. Those funds must be used to better patrol the Gaza border. If they are not, U.S. foreign aid should be reconsidered. Schanzer, a former terrorism analyst at the U.S. Treasury Department, is deputy director of the Jewish Policy Center and author of "Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine." Jonathan Schanzer, a former terrorism analyst for the U.S. Treasury Department, is director of policy for the Jewish Policy Center and author of the forthcoming Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine. Contact him at jschanzer@jewishpolicycenter.org This article appeared yesterday in the Investor's Business Daily. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: THOUGHTS, HEAVY AND DEEP
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 28, 2009. |
|
From the third and final day of the Jerusalem Conference I bring you a wealth of significant information. I will begin with the last session I attended because it is so shatteringly significant. The topic: "The UN and the International Assault on Israel" From the panel I will cite three special women: Anne Bayefsky, who runs Eye on the UN; Caroline Glick, columnist (with whom many of you are familiar); and Melanie Phillips, a gusty and articulate British journalist. And I will do this by subject, although all are intertwined: The UN: Bayefsky says we must understand that the UN is the single biggest purveyor of anti-Semitism in the world today. Consider some facts. There have been ten emergency sessions of the GA; five of them have been to discuss Israel. The Human Rights Council of the UN has passed more resolutions about alleged violations by Israel than about all other nations in the world combined. The intent of Durban II, coming in April, is to turn Israel into the new S. Africa. The UN has no definition of terrorism. Its counter-terrorism unit has never mentioned a terrorist by name. Ahmadinejad spoke words of unabashed anti-Semitism at the UN and (except for the US and Israel, who weren't present) received a round of applause. Glick says the agenda of the UN is the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state. The UN is the sum of its parts; with 57 Islamic states plus EU states, there is no way for Israel to win in forums there. Some diplomats speak differently to Israelis in private. (They say, as she put it: "Oh, we didn't really mean it when we voted against you on every resolution, we think you're great.") But Israel can never take advantage of this to turn things around in UN forums, because the whole is more powerful than the intentions of these individual people who speak nicely in private. The UN charter says every nation has a right to self-defense, but this is irrelevant to the decisions made within the UN. Part and parcel of what is happening is UNRWA and its connection to Hamas. Commission-General Karen AbuZayd just said she doesn't know anything about human shields in Gaza. "Hamas leaves us alone. It respects us." ~~~~~~~~~~ What to do? Glick says we must engage in political warfare, exposing the UN to its member nations. As the UN seeks to delegitimize Israel, so must we work to delegitimize the UN, holding up a mirror to its actions. We must subvert the UN by going to separate governments and appealing to common interests to form coalitions outside of the UN. ~~~~~~~~~~ The International Community: Melanie Phillips, who is British, spoke from the perspective of her country. She says the war in Gaza unleashed in Britain intense hatred of Israel because they bought the Hamas propaganda, especially via BBC. The Jihad has come. In demonstrations Muslims were seen prostrated, praying on the streets, and crying, "Allah Akhbar." Britain took the lead in calling for a UN ceasefire. All of this happened, says Phillips, because of enormous ignorance, infantile leftism, and moral equivalence. There is a belief in "soft power": the nation-state is the problem, trans-nationalism is better. This thinking leads to the conviction that the UN is the repository of wisdom, truth and goodness. The British know nothing of the Hamas-UNRWA connection. And these ideas have taken root in the Anglican church. What we're dealing with here is a battle of the mind. We must continue to tell the truth: If Israel goes down, the West goes down. This is not about a two-state solution, but rather the destruction of Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ The US and Obama: Bayefsky says we're not prepared for what's going to happen. Obama is going to run US foreign policy through the UN because he is seeking international approval. He will inflate the importance of the UN and adopt the UN narrative on Israel: That the root cause of the conflict is settlements and that Israel will be expected to do certain things that will lead to a better situation for the West. Glick says there is a sad diminution of self-image in America. We can no longer assume the US will veto anti-Israel resolutions. Phillips says Britain is ecstatic about Obama because it understands that he represents a negation of US power. This is what American Jews don't understand. He has surrounded Hillary with enemies of Israel who deal in moral relativism. (Note from me: Do NOT assume that because someone is a Jew he or she is pro-Israel. Some of our worst enemies are Jews.) Phillips emphasized, again, that we must keep telling the truth. Glick says Israel has no desire for direct confrontation with America, because the people are with us. Bayefsky says we must say "no" to Obama, talking over his head to the American people and Congress. ~~~~~~~~~~ Bayefsky raised some questions regarding how much American Jews are with us. Israel is not high on their list of priorities and is not likely to be the determining factor in how they vote or what they support. ~~~~~~~~~~ The bottom line here, from Glick: The Israeli people are the bravest and strongest on earth. (I second this!). Our government needs to listen to the people and not the outside world. ~~~~~~~~~~ The next topic: "New Challenges of the IDF on the Battlefront and in International Law." I would like to focus first on an excellent presentation by one special man (and very proud Israel): Danny Seaman, who heads the Government Press Office. He spoke, of course, about media issues in a war. We've learned some important lessons since the Lebanon War 2-1/2 years ago, he says. We are no longer trying to appease the media, but rather doing what's right for Israel. The challenges are not challenges to the IDF, they're challenges to Israel. The IDF should address military issues only and the government must present our case and be in the forefront with the media. It's good that the media is not around in battle, because they sometimes report troop movements that put our troops at risk of enemy fire. The media doesn't like it when it is limited in its access, but they have no choice but to adhere to our rules when we declare a closed military area. On a daily basis, Hamas threatens the media. And so, those who are in Gaza are those who do what Hamas wants. ~~~~~~~~~~ TV dictates the agenda for the rest of the media. If there are pictures on a TV screen then print media follow with a story. It is expected (editors insist on it). Unfortunately, the hunger for a "good" picture causes slants in what is presented on TV, and thus later in newspapers. Seaman asked TV crews at one point why they weren't showing the suffering of the people in Sderot and related areas, who suffered trauma, disrupted lives, etc. The answer was that the rocket attacks didn't make good TV pictures. So this story was neglected. ~~~~~~~~~~ Additionally, Palestinians are experts at manipulating pictures. Either through computer doctoring or on the scene. (Seaman alluded to the possibility, as example, of dead bodies dragged out of a building that the IDF presumably killed, when in fact it's not clear where these dead came from or even — this is not an exaggeration — if they were returning bodies via the back door and bringing them out the front door a second time.) Seaman says that fraud should be addressed vigorously by Israel via existing criminal laws. Editors should know that if they knowingly let through a picture that has been manufactured, there will be consequences. This will motivate them to be more careful and check their sources. ~~~~~~~~~~ Journalists on the scene in Gaza didn't know what they were looking at. Had no background. Some asked where the terrorists were, because all they saw were "civilians." Had no perception of civilians who were also Hamas. When a briefing was held for journalists during the war, to provide some background, out of 1,200 foreign journalists in Israel, 35 came. Legal issues that are being raised have come to attention first because of the media reports — legal experts weren't on the scene. And the vast majority of journalists don't check with us to get our side. ~~~~~~~~~~ Also on this panel there was a powerful presentation by Maj.-General (res) Yossi Peled, former head of the Northern Command of the IDF and now a candidate on the Likud list (#15). Peled spoke of his great pride in the morality of the Jewish state. "The Jewish state," he said, "is a one-time gift and we have no moral right to risk it." Israel should never be taken for granted. As a child Holocaust survivor he knows this well. Other nations, he says, can lose wars and keep going. But not Israel. One defeat would destroy us. Only us. This, my friends, is where Never Again! comes in. We will not be defeated. Peled says the order of obligations of the IDF is to defend the citizens of the state, protect, the lives of the soldiers, and avoid injury to enemy civilians. He is deeply pained for the death of children in Gaza, but he knows we were not responsible and that we behaved properly. ~~~~~~~~~~ Legal issues were addressed by Colonel (res) Danny Reisner, former Director of the International Dept. of the IDF Prosecution Office. Once, he said there were two elements to a war: political and military. But now there are legal and media aspects as well and issues of "war crimes" are raised. There is, he explained, no requirement of "proportionality" in number of dead on our side and theirs. The only thing to be examined is how many were killed in a specific attack and for what goal. International law allows firing on a mosque or school if there are weapons stored inside or if our soldiers were being fired upon from these buildings. The Palestinians would like to take us to the Hague with regard to "war crimes," but the international court there has no jurisdiction. The only door to the Hague would be via the UN. What might happen, however, is that certain countries would allow Palestinians to charge us in their courts even though they had no involvement in the war. Preparations are being made for this possibility. (Point of interest: international law allows Nazis anywhere to be tried in an Israeli court. Similarly, anyone attacking a Jew anywhere can be tried in an Israeli court.) I asked the Colonel about whether international law applies to terrorists groups who are not signatory to international conventions, and he says this is Israel's position, but the terrorist groups' defense is that it does not. ~~~~~~~~~~ Tomorrow I will talk a bit about what Binyamin Netanyahu said in his talk regarding a commitment to keep Jerusalem united. And I will examine some very exciting thoughts from some very serious people regarding the "clash of civilizations" and what we're now seeing. ~~~~~~~~~~ I wasn't going to write about any current news in this posting, but this seems so relevant to what is discussed above that I will include it: Yesterday Mahmoud Abbas, the maybe president of the PA, in anticipation of Mitchell's arrival today, declared himself ready to back international efforts to prosecute Israel for war crimes: "We will do all we can to prove Israel committed crimes that would make your skin crawl We want the world to give us justice for once. "Israel does not want peace, otherwise it would not have done this. We need to understand this and tell it to those coming from Europe and America." My first response (and forgive my lack of professionalism here) is that he is scum. But this is not new. He is playing both ends against the middle, now working the Hamas side so that they'll feel he's with them, although he would gladly return to being our "peace partner (perish the thought) if he imagined this would serve him better. He's also playing the "victim" card. He wants the world to "give us justice for once," indicating that $1.3 BILLION given to him by the world last year was insufficient. And he's playing — mark this well! — to what he imagines will be a more sympathetic ear from Mitchell. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
VIRTUALLY UNNOTICED: A NEW MIDDLE EAST
Posted by Barry Rubin, January 28, 2009. |
|
It can certainly be claimed that no world area is more closely — even obsessively — watched than the Middle East. This is quite understandable for many reasons, including the fact that many of the world's crises, much of the world's violence, and most of the world's diplomatic energies are connected with that region. And yet, despite all this, a tremendous transformation has happened in that nexus of global interests while being most incompletely comprehended. In short, the Middle East is totally different from the way it had been for the preceding half-century in ways that will profoundly affect the United Kingdom and every other country in the West. To comprehend how much the region has truly changed, we need only consider its main features from the 1950s until well into the 1990s and even just past the last turn of a century. In those days, a trio of critical factors defined the tale. First, the Arabic-speaking world was dominated almost totally by Arab nationalist doctrine, with all regimes and large movements being of that persuasion. Second, much of Middle East politics consisted of dizzying maneuvers and mutual subversions among nationalist regimes seeking regional hegemony — usually Egypt, Iraq, and Syria — or those trying to play off the elephants to survive — Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the rest. Third, Arab regimes lined up in two blocs, with more radical, anti-status quo military regimes and their client movements siding with the USSR, and more conservative monarchies seeking Western support in self-defense. By the 1990s, this regional order was unraveling in the face of evidence that Arab nationalist ideology and regimes had failed. After all, they hadn't built a united Arab nation from Morocco's Atlantic coast to Saudi Arabia's Persian Gulf shore. Nor had they expelled Western influence, destroyed Israel, or generally brought their people high living standards, much less freedoms. The winds of change were blowing, but in which direction? It was easy to believe in the 1990s that moderation was on the ascendant. Iraq's defeat in Kuwait, the fall of the radicals' Soviet bloc sponsors, and start of an Arab-Israeli peace process all seemed good omens. Some dreamed democracy would replace dictatorship, outrun Islamists, and bring bright tomorrows. That was not, however, what happened. The culprit was not Western policy errors or insufficient effort. Rather it was the continuing power of traditional ideas, the regimes themselves, and the societies over which they presided. The very few liberal voices were overwhelmed by a message with far more mass appeal, that of the Islamists. Both opposition groups agreed that the existing order had failed but had opposite solutions. Moderates proposed peace with Israel, cooperation with the West, democracy, women's rights, and modernization. After all, this was the blueprint used successfully in much of the world and held as an ideal by those yearning to imitate that outcome. But it didn't work that way in the Middle East. For rulers, reform portended anarchy and the specter of Islamist takeover. For the largely traditionalist masses, liberal solutions were too dangerous and unfamiliar. To Islamists, it represented treason. They argued that failure arose from too much, not too little, Westernization. In effect, they proclaimed: you may have been hitting your head against a stone wall; your mistake was not doing it hard enough. Thus, Syrian President Bashar al-Assad ushered in the new era with an August 15, 2006 speech to his tame Journalists' Union. The West, Israel, and moderate Arabs, he claimed, wanted a region "built on submission and humiliation and deprivation of peoples of their rights." Instead there would be, "A sweeping popular upsurge...characterized by honor and Arabism...struggle and resistance." This result is the new Middle East of Assad and Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. First, everywhere Islamists seriously challenge nationalists. In seeking to seize state power and not give it back. This rivalry is spilling over among the growing number of Muslims in Europe, especially since Islamists are far more proportionately stronger there than back in the Middle East. Second, two blocs contend for regional power. The better-organized, more coherent side is led by Islamist Iran, with junior partner Syria, Lebanese Hizballah, Palestinian Hamas, and Iraqi insurgents. Also on the Islamist — but not Iranian — side are Muslim Brotherhoods and al-Qaida. All want to destroy Western influence, Arab regimes, and Israel. The other grouping consists of the other Arab states, Israel, and the West. Yet this alignment is weak, disorganized, and full of internal conflicts. Fourth, the "moderate" side's adherents have parallel interests in containing Iran, preventing Islamist revolution, and countering high levels of terrorism and instability. Unfortunately, that doesn't mean these forces are cooperating. In an interview with journalist Bob Woodward, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice senses the change but is over-optimistic about it. Rice argues there is now a high level of cohesion among regional American allies, even if those countries don't want to speak or act publicly. Yet Arab regimes are timid. They know their own people accept many radical notions (taught them by the Arab nationalists themselves for decades) and want to avoid confrontation with radicals if possible. Thus, for example, much of the nationalists' "anti-terrorist" rhetoric is a plea for gunmen to slay Israelis or Westerners rather than attack governments and institutions where they live. Consider the bizarre politics of Iraq, where — despite parallel U.S. and Saudi interests in stopping Iran — the Saudis help Sunni insurgents who kill American soldiers and try to force them out. Quite possibly, the greatest danger of Iran getting nuclear weapons is not that they would be fired at Israel — though this is a rather chilling prospect — but that these arms will turn the balance in the two-bloc struggle. Once Iran has atomic bombs atop long-range missiles, Arab states will rush to appease Tehran, Western countries be even more prone toward appeasement, and Muslim masses likely to queue up in front of the radical Islamist recruiting stations to enlist on what they perceive as the winning side. This massive struggle, not al-Qaida's sporadic terror attacks, is the real main issue for the region, perhaps the world, in decades to come. The battle will be fought out more in Arab states through terror civil war, and revolution, than on the Israeli or Western fronts. Western ability to influence events will be limited A solution will not come from concessions to a side which is roughly the Middle East equivalent of German-led fascism or Soviet-spearheaded Communism. Struggle, steadfastness, and strategic alliances are keys to victory and survival. Fresh from musings about history's end we've been thrust into a new era of traditional international power politics and ideological contention which seems set to become the twenty-first century's main feature. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East. |
|
GAZA: BATTLEFIELD VICTORY AND POLITICAL DEFEAT
Posted by Jack L., January 28, 2009. |
|
This was written by Michael Kleiner, who is currently on the Likud list for the Eighteenth Knesset. He is the former chairman of the Knesset's Land of Israel Committee |
|
In the aftermath of the Gaza war, Israel has two winners and two losers. The obvious winners are Zahal and the right wing bloc. The two losers, yet to be clearly identified as such, are the state of Israel and the Kadima party. No one denies the smashing victory of Zahal but it's not necessary to wait for the judgment of history to realize that the victory was limited to the battlefield. Zahal was blessed with a chief of staff that reminds one of old times and a minister of defense who knows how to conduct a military campaign. Zahal had the strong support of the public and was properly prepared — the result of lessons learned in the second Lebanon War. It succeeded in carrying out activity in enemy territory, like that in Lebanon, with only minor casualties. Motivation was high and the functioning of its chain of command has inspired pride. That the Israeli government was unable to convert the victory in battle into a political victory is a great pity. The army won and the state has lost. Here is a partial list of the military objectives that the political leadership did not define and failed to achieve: 1) The Philadelphi access is not in our hands. And here is a list of costs that were unanticipated on the political level: 1) A wave of anti-Semitism in the world. In a state in which the army is the heart it is difficult to understand the difference between a military and a political victory. One is therefore likely to attribute to Israel the victory in Gaza. However, logical examination of the results of the war point to a military victory which has camouflaged a bitter political loss. It is a loss which has a mother despite the fact we usually attribute failures to a male parent. With poor English and with body language that demonstrated an appearance that shifted between arrogance and neurosis, Tzipi Livni appeared time after time before the microphones, alarming the world. A foreign minister in a war has two choices; diplomatic sweet talk while the army hits hard or an attack without restraint on the hypocrisy of a world that has ignored eight years of missile attacks on Jewish communities and exhibited a double standard when reacting to any legitimate step of Jewish self-defense. Mrs. Livni selected the path of aggressive apologetics which is a definite recipe for eating rotten fish while acquiring an expulsion order from the city. While Ehud Barak took his stand with the soldiers on the battlefield, Livni abandoned her post when she abstained from acting in the UN — preferring a triple press conferences with both Ehuds (Barak and Olmert). In a war which is conducted in the midst of an election the public accepts the media exposure given a politician that results from the performance of her appointed tasks but it does not tolerate one who abandons her post and leaves the country exposed to a damaging Security Council resolution while she grabs another photo opportunity. The complete opposite to Livni's media exposure during this war is the disappearance of Benjamin Netanyah from the media. There were people who asked where has Bibi disappear to? It is not pleasant to relate that the chairman of the opposition spread a publicity umbrella over the failing activity of the foreign minister's head. Relieving Livni of her job of appearing in the media and explaining Israel's position, Netanyahu did that for her, as if he were a lowly soldier in the lines. With this he has proven that sometimes a private soldier may function much better than the public relations chief of staff. The Israeli public appreciates the lowering of one's media profile and giving support to the government from the benches of the opposition. That is one of the reasons the Likud under Netanyahu's leadership held its place in the polls while Kadima under Livni is faltering. The entire right wing bloc was strengthened by the war in Gaza with almost everyone acknowledging that the right had been correct when it warned that Oslo would bring katyushas upon Ashkelon and when it warned that the one-sided evacuation signals weakness and invites aggression from the Palestinian side. It is recognized that it was correct that any retreat from territories of Eretz Yisrael would put more and more citizens in the line of fire. Personally I cannot restrain myself from relating that the successful military action by Zahal in Gaza was carried out according to the detailed program of the Herut Party at whose head I stood — a program that I proposed even before the founding of Herut — which called for the following; the bombardment of military targets in Gaza by air, leafleting Gaza with an evacuation warning, and entry of ground forces into the territory to cleanse it from war material and military activists. The left which has by its slovenly performance led us into this war has carried out military activity that comes out of the workshop of the "extremist right," — the "hallucinating right". The successful campaign came into being because the right was proved correct and the campaign was carried out according to our methods. The public understands and knows who to reward. This is why the right wing bloc gains strength and support for the government wanes. The public is sick of governments hungry for political agreements which cast to the wind the achievement of the army and invite the next round of violence, placing Israel in an ever more difficult starting position. The public looks for a government that will take the battlefield victory and convert it into a political victory for the Jews. Contact Jack L. at yakovdov1@yahoo.com |
|
OBAMA HAILS 'ANTI-ISRAEL' ARAB PLAN
Posted by Chuck Brooks, January 28, 2009. |
|
This was written by Aaron Klein and it appeared in World
Net Daily
|
|
Initiative includes massive concessions, erosion of Jewish character JERUSALEM — Following scores of denials he would trumpet the plan, President Obama today hailed a so-called "Saudi Peace Initiative," which offers normalization of ties with the Jewish state in exchange for extreme Israeli concessions. Defenders of Israel warn the plan would leave the Jewish state with truncated, difficult-to-defend borders and could threaten Israel's Jewish character by compelling it to accept millions of foreign Arabs. WND was first to report last November advisers to then-presidential candidate Obama gave positive reception in meetings with Arab diplomats to the Saudi plan — but the reports were strongly denied by Obama's campaign. Today, in an interview with an Arab television network — his first formal interview as president — Obama trumpeted the Saudi initiative: "Well, here's what I think is important. Look at the proposal that was put forth by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. ... I might not agree with every aspect of the proposal, but it took great courage to put forward something that is as significant as that. I think that there are ideas across the region of how we might pursue peace. I do think that it is impossible for us to think only in terms of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and not think in terms of what's happening with Syria or Iran or Lebanon or Afghanistan and Pakistan." Obama said he "believes" that there are "Israelis who recognize that it is important to achieve peace. They will be willing to make sacrifices if the time is appropriate and if there is serious partnership on the other side." In November, WND quoted a top Arab diplomatic source stating Obama advisers held meetings with Arab countries in which the Saudi Initiative was "very present." The source said in most cases it was the Arab states, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, that stressed the importance of the plan. He said Obama's advisers expressed a positive attitude toward the plan, but he stopped short of confirming a London Times article that claimed Obama would make the plan a central part of his Mideast policy. Then-senior Obama Mideast adviser Dennis Ross flatly denied the Times report, which quoted a source close to Obama stating that the president-elect intended to throw his support behind the Arab plan. Ross is now Obama's Mideast envoy. One senior Obama adviser was quoted telling the Times that on a visit to the Middle East last July, Obama said privately to the Palestinian leadership it would be "crazy" for Israel to refuse the Saudi Initiative, which Obama purportedly said could "give them peace with the Muslim world." Although Ross denied Obama would trumpet the Arab plan, Israeli President Shimon Peres told the British in November that in conversations he held with the president-elect, Obama proclaimed himself "very impressed" with the the Saudi plan, which was ratified by the Arab League. Peres was responding to questions about whether he thought Obama would advance the Israeli-Palestinian peace process in general and the Saudi plan in particular. Initiative threatens Jewish state The Saudi Initiative, originally proposed by King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in 2002, states that Israel would receive "normal relations" with the Arab world in exchange for a full withdrawal from the entire Gaza Strip, West Bank, Golan Heights and eastern Jerusalem, which includes the Temple Mount. The West Bank contains important Jewish biblical sites and borders central Israeli population centers, while the Golan Heights looks down on Israeli civilian zones and twice was used by Syria to mount ground invasions into the Jewish state. The Saudi plan also demands the imposition of a non-binding U.N. resolution that calls for so-called Palestinian refugees who wish to move inside Israel to be permitted to do so at the "earliest practicable date." Palestinians have long demanded the "right of return" for millions of "refugees," a formula Israeli officials across the political spectrum warn is code for Israel's destruction by flooding the Jewish state with millions of Arabs, thereby changing its demographics. When Arab countries attacked the Jewish state after its creation in 1948, some 725,000 Arabs living within Israel's borders fled or were expelled from the area that became Israel. Also at that time, about 820,000 Jews were expelled from Arab countries or fled following rampant persecution. While most Jewish refugees were absorbed by Israel and other countries, the majority of Palestinian Arabs have been maintained in 59 U.N.-run camps that do not seek to settle its inhabitants elsewhere. There are currently about 4 million Arabs who claim Palestinian refugee status with the U.N., including children and grandchildren of the original fleeing Arabs; Arabs living full-time in Jordan; and Arabs who long ago emigrated throughout the Middle East and to the West. According to Arab sources close to the Saudi Initiative, Arab countries are willing to come to an agreement whereby Israel absorbs about 500,000 "refugees" and reaches a compensation deal with the PA for the remaining millions of Palestinians. Obama advisers back Arab plan Some top Obama current and former advisers have recently endorsed the Arab Initiative. The Times referenced a partisan group of senior foreign policy advisers who urged Obama to give the Arab plan top priority immediately after his election victory, including Lee Hamilton, the former co-chairman of the Iraq Study Group, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Democratic former national security adviser. Brent Scowcroft, a Republican former national security adviser, also joined in the appeal. Contact Chuck Brooks at chetz18@aol.com |
|
LESSONS OF GAZA
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 28, 2009. |
|
1. "The Lessons of Gaza"
The great untold story of Operation Cast Lead was the level of euphoria and national unity that gripped Israel. Those who think the era of miracles is over will have to explain this sudden wall-to-wall political consensus in Israel. In what is arguably the most contentious society on earth, public opinion polls were showing a 94% approval rating among Israeli Jews for the military action against Hamas. Almost the same percentage opposed any cease-fire that did not include the release of kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit. The emergence of this sudden national consensus came against a backdrop of an international wave of naked anti-Semitism on a level not seen in decades, and of Israeli Arabs almost uniformly expressing both opposition to the operation and outright hatred of Jews and the Jewish state. The really amazing thing, however, was that the man responsible for the surge of good feelings and patriotism among Israelis was the most unpopular and probably the most corrupt politician in modern Israeli history. Ehud Olmert already had one foot out the door of the Prime Minister's Office before the shooting started, and many believed his other foot was headed straight for prison. Olmert's approval ratings before the Gaza war were not significantly above zero. Yet within moments of his ordering the commencement of operations, Israelis were closing ranks behind him in a way that caught nearly everyone by surprise. The rest of the world may be united in denouncing Israeli "brutality" and the supposedly disproportionate level of Palestinian casualties. But Israel was just as united, at least for the moment, in celebrating the beginning of the end of its era of national self-debasement and capitulation. Israeli television stations and newspapers reported in great detail on the countless anti-Israel demonstrations all over the world, down to and including the swastikas and the chants that Hitler had been right. This only seemed to augment the sense of national unity and determination among Israelis. The devotees of Hamas could march on Western campuses all they wanted, Israelis seemed to be saying, but we will deal with the savages in our own way. The new Israeli national unity manifested itself even in the face of the distorted and maniacal denunciations of Israel for its alleged insensitivity to the plight of Palestinian civilians. Of course, the same world media that failed to challenge the lies surrounding the infamous "death" of the Gaza boy Muhammad al-Dura back in 2000 kept repeating the Hamas "estimate" as if it were a scientific finding from an unimpeachable source. In any case, clearly the bulk of the Palestinian dead were armed genocidal terrorists. The usual "human rights" organizations, which have never acknowledged that Jewish civilians in the Negev are entitled to their human rights, kept claiming that a quarter of the dead were "children." Of course, they count any 17 year old killed while firing a bazooka at Jews as a "child." My youngest son spent most of the war dodging rockets in Netivot, a town of 26,000 in the Negev near the Gaza Strip best known for serving as the spiritual center for Moroccan Jewry, with its shrines of leading Moroccan rabbis. Netivot was hit by more than its fair share of Hamas rockets. Home for a weekend, my son watched the televised images of a Palestinian man sitting on a pile of rubble that had once been his home and sobbing about how there is no justice. "You do not like having your house blown up?" my son responded to the TV screen. "So who told you to start firing rockets at me?" He speaks for nearly all Israelis. And then of course there was all the whining by the media about how Israel was preventing convoys of supplies from entering Gaza, as if the Allies in World War II had sent convoys of supplies to Berlin when it was under siege. A caller to an Israeli radio program put it rather succinctly: "So release Gilad Shalit and stop shooting rockets at us and you can have all the supplies you want; in fact you can shop in Israel and use our hospitals and beaches." Even some — though certainly not all — members of the country's dwindling far left came out in support of the operation. (I say "dwindling far left" because half have woken up to the fallacies of leftist thinking while the other half have morphed into outright anti-Zionists.) Consider the following developments, which would have been unthinkable a month ago and which are a very small sampling of the changed mindset in Israel: The novelist A.B. Yehoshua, leader of Israel's leftist literary soviet, wrote a scathing article telling off an anti-Israel columnist at the far left anti-Zionist daily Haaretz. The popular singer Arik Sinai, long associated with Tel Aviv bohemian leftism, suddenly went on a Zionist crusade, complete with bashing of leftist anti-Zionists. Street protests in Israel against the war consisted almost exclusively of Arab students and Jewish members of the pro-terror HADASH communist party. The Israeli national consensus opposing the declaration of a cease-fire by the Olmert team was almost as broad as the consensus in support of the actual fighting. * * * Within days of the new cease-fire, however, it was becoming clear that Olmert had blown the whistle before the team had finished its work. The abandonment of Gilad Shalit was just part of it. The new cease-fire would allow Hamas to re-stock its armories and replenish its rocket warehouses. Hours after the cease-fire went into effect, Hamas's smuggling tunnels were being repaired and returned to operations. Worst of all, most of the Hamas leadership remained alive. Even more worrisome, the Olmert people were reverting to the approach that had produced the rocket blitz on Israel in the first place. After eight years of a policy of restraint that had achieved absolutely nothing, turning the other cheek was being restored as the national defense policy. Olmert and Livni were back to offering land for peace, reaffirming that two decades of giving up land and getting war in return had taught them nothing. For decades Israeli leaders had agreed to one unilateral cease-fire after the next. These bought Israel nothing but demonization in the world media. After their brief incarnation as fierce Zionist warriors, Olmert and his pals were once again pretending that Mahmoud Abbas and the PA were something different from the Hamas; that they were reasonable people who yearned for peaceful coexistence with Israel and with whom deals could be struck. And Israel was again offering to release hundreds of terrorists from captivity. If there was one lesson Israel should have learned over the past eight years, it was that Israeli restraint buys neither goodwill for the country nor moderate behavior on the part of Palestinians. For eight years Hamas and its affiliates in Gaza fired rockets at Jewish civilians, while the Israeli government's main response was to turn the other cheek and order the country just to wait passively for Hamas to run out of ammunition. Israeli leaders had deluded themselves into thinking that if only the world would clearly see unprovoked Palestinian aggression and terror, Israel would enjoy a public relations Xanadu. Especially after the Israeli government, for the sake of peace, drove all Jews out of Gaza. The expectation that restraint would boost Israel's image was among the stupidest of the delusions of Israel's Osloid leadership. The world not only ignored the thousands of rockets fired at Jewish civilians, it went to contorted moral lengths to justify them. For decades Israel's leaders misunderstood and misjudged anti-Semitism and they continue to do so now. Anti-Semites and those with totalitarian ideologies always reverse cause and effect. For them, every atrocity against Jews is a righteous protest against Jewish wrongdoing and Israeli misbehavior. Every retaliation by Israel is an unprovoked criminal act of malice and Nazi-like aggression. It is exactly like claiming the Japanese were the victims of American aggression at Pearl Harbor. The real problem is that the Anti-Israel Lobby does not consider Jews to be human. Therefore Jewish deaths never matter and Jewish lives are expendable. Because Jews are not quite human, they can never be entitled to the right of self-defense or permitted to engage in it. Anti-Zionism has now been thoroughly Nazified. There can be no other word for people who insist that Jewish life is worthless and that Jewish deaths never count. If Olmert had responded to the firing of thousands of rockets at Israel by merely sneezing in the general direction of the terrorists, thousands of protesters would have take to the streets and the campuses in Europe and America to denounce this as a disproportionate response and a war crime; many would no doubt describe it as an act of biological warfare. Absolutely nothing can ever be gained by Israeli restraint, except to demonstrate weakness and fan terrorism. But that insight, clear to any reasonably intelligent seven year old, was too complicated for Israeli officials who for eight years ordered residents of Sderot and the other towns of the Negev to sit and take it. Sderot had been turned by the Israeli government into an undefended Guernica, its children traumatized, its families reduced to paupers. * * * Another delusion that fell victim to Operation Cast Lead was the notion that Israel's far left, while perhaps dangerously na.ve, is not at all anti-Semitic or self-hating. Over the past two decades a malignant plague of anti-Semitism has swept the left, including the Jewish left. It affects Jews in the United States, in Europe, and even in Israel. While 94 percent of the Israeli public was solidly behind the soldiers and the attack on the Hamas infrastructure, the Jewish left was out at the forefront of the pro-jihad Nuremberg marches, waving Hamas and PLO flags, demanding international boycotts of Israel, calling for a Hamas victory. The Jewish-born British Member of Parliament ranting about how Israel is a Nazi regime was just the tip of the iceberg. While the Arab regimes themselves were letting everyone know the contempt they felt for Hamas, Jewish leftists were out displaying their contempt for Jews, from the members of J Street to the Reconstructionist "rabbi" leading a pro-Hamas rally in Philadelphia,. Those who thought that "Jewish anti-Semite" was an oxymoron will have to think again. Increasingly, the left, and especially the campus left, produces a mass of Jewish collaborators with the enemy, the Jewish equivalents of Taliban John. Just about every Israel-bashing newspaper and Internet site now features anti-Jewish columnists and writers, many of them Israeli faculty members. But the rudest awakening of all at the end of Cast Lead came with regard to the Israeli far left, led by the academic fifth column. For years, the pursuit of leftist silliness has been just as fashionable on Israeli campuses as it's been on campuses in the U.S. and Europe. As Orwell wrote, some ideas are so stupid that only intellectuals can believe them. As the guns in Gaza began to fall silent, a number of Israeli leftists emerged from their bunkers with a vengeance, sabotaging the consensus of patriotism that had filled Israel during the war. Ben-Gurion University, the campus with arguably the largest number of anti-Israel extremist faculty members, was shut down for weeks as Hamas rockets bathed Beersheba. Several rockets landed close to the campus. Public-school buildings in Beersheba were destroyed by rockets. Yet leftist faculty members at BGU went on the warpath against Israel and in support of Hamas. In an article titled "Black January," BGU sociologist Lev Grinberg proclaimed Hamas terrorists to be the true Maccabees, struggling against the evil empire: I admit that I find the name "Cast Lead" in bad taste because of its allusion to Chanukah and the Maccabees who fought against a mighty conqueror. If indeed there is a struggle here of the weak against an occupying empire, it is the struggle of Hamas against Israel, not the other way around. Our self-image as the weak victim is utterly surreal and trapped in the mythology of the Jews as the ultimate victims, regardless of reality.... The firing of missiles by the prisoners in protest against their starvation was interpreted as aggression, while their oppression by their jailers was interpreted as self-defense. Grinberg had earlier denounced Israel's targeting of terrorist leaders as "symbolic genocide." Neve Gordon, a BGU lecturer now serving as the chairman of political science at the university, turned out one pro-terror anti-Israel article after the next for anti-Semitic and neo-Nazi websites, denouncing Israel as a criminal entity. In one, he excoriated Israel for bombing the Islamic "university" in Gaza that was serving as the storage warehouse for the very same rockets being fired at his own university campus. Oren Yiftachel, a professor of geography at Ben Gurion University who has made a career out of denouncing Israel for being an "apartheid" regime, cheered the firing of rockets at the children of Sderot and Netivot as the moral and just response of Palestinians "imprisoned" by Israel firing at their "jailers." At my own University of Haifa, left-wing faculty members exploded in a wave of outraged protests when the campus heads decided to fly Israeli flags as a gesture of solidarity with the embattled residents of the Negev towns. The leftists claimed this would be insensitive because it would offend the pro-jihad Arab students who fill the campus. The most important lesson of the past eight years, at this late stage understood by everyone except university leftists and most Israeli politicians, is that nothing will really put an end to the terror and rockets other than some good old-fashioned R&D — Reoccupation and Denazification. Everything else is a delusion. 2.
"End the Holocaust Memorials.
The ceremonies have become a substitute for acting against modern fascists."
After yesterday's Holocaust Memorial Day, I have a request: Let it be the last one, at least outside the Jewish world. Let's put an end to the shallow declarations of "Never Again," which have degenerated into denunciations against long-dead Nazis made from a safe historical distance. This is risk-free grandstanding, which German writer Johannes Gross summed up well: "The resistance to Hitler and his kind," he once wrote, "is getting stronger the more the Third Reich recedes into the past." Holocaust Memorial Day has become an annual ritual in which Europeans promise moral clarity and courage the next time it's needed. Yet the list of post-Holocaust genocides is long: the killing fields of Cambodia, the slaughter of Tutsis in Rwanda, the murder of Christians and animists in southern Sudan and the continuing destruction of Muslims in Darfur. While the world yawns, the Islamists in Khartoum are busy with their second genocide. Nor has the memorial day benefited Jews. Solemn declarations about the evils of the Holocaust have not ended Europe's booming trade with those dreaming of Israel's destruction, the mullahs in Tehran. The ceremonies deploring the West's inaction against the German fascists 60 years ago have become a substitute for action against modern fascists, predominantly Islamist. Anti-Semitism — and not only when disguised as anti-Zionism — is in vogue again in Europe. To scant media attention, and even scanter government criticism, the shouts of "Death to Jews" have filled the streets of the Continent in recent weeks, as protestors, mostly Muslims, voice opposition to the war in Gaza. Western trade unions and academics have intensified their calls for a boycott of Israel. In Italy, a trade union even called for boycotts of local stores owned by Jews. The solemn speeches around Europe yesterday mourning those who died in the Holocaust hardly mentioned these developments. Citing the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe, the Central Council of Jews in Germany stayed away from yesterday's official ceremony in the German Parliament. The United Nations also had a Holocaust memorial service yesterday. Yet just four months ago, the president of Iran was allowed to give an anti-Semitic speech at the General Assembly to enthusiastic applause from many delegations. Although talking about "Zionists," Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's use of classic anti-Semitic canards about a Jewish plot for world domination made it clear whom he really was after. Although they "are miniscule minority," he said, the Zionists "have been dominating an important portion of the financial and monetary centers as well as the political decision-making centers of some European countries and the U.S. in a deceitful, complex and furtive manner." And so on. The secretary general of the General Assembly, Miguel d'Escoto Brockmann, embraced the Iranian after his hate speech. That's the same d'Escoto Brockmann who is calling for a boycott of Israel. It's also the same man who was scheduled to open yesterday's U.N. Holocaust Memorial ceremony but backed down after Israel complained. It's easy to understand why he had wanted to be there: The more crocodile tears people like him spill for dead Jews the easier it is for them to demonize the living ones and avoid being tagged as anti-Semitic. In such hands, Holocaust memorials have become a cover to pound the Jewish state with greater moral authority. In Europe, there were a few cancellations of yesterday's annual Holocaust Memorial Day events, along with comments suggesting that Jews are the new Nazis. In Barcelona, a city official told La Vanguardia that "marking the Jewish Holocaust while a Palestinian Holocaust is taking place is not right." People in Lulea, Sweden, said Israel's war in Gaza left it unable to mourn the six million dead Jews. "It feels uneasy to have a torchlight procession to remember the victims of the Holocaust at this time," Bo Nordin, a clergyman and spokesman for a local church, told Swedish National Radio. "We have been preoccupied and grief-stricken by the war in Gaza and it would just feel odd with a large ceremony about the Holocaust." Trine Lilleng, a Norwegian diplomat — stationed in Saudi Arabia no less — spelled it out more directly in an email that found its way into the Jerusalem Post: "The grandchildren of Holocaust survivors from World War II are doing to the Palestinians exactly what was done to them by Nazi Germany," she is reported to have written. The lessons of the Holocaust are straightforward enough but they haven't been learned, as yesterday's events show. Let's stop pretending otherwise and put an end to these phony ceremonies. Mr. Schwammenthal is an editorial writer for The Wall Street Journal Europe. 3. Montreal Jews and the Anti-Israel Israeli Moonbat:
4. Ben Gurion University does, so why shouldn't UNRWA?:
5. Pipes on Israel's legacy of foolishness:
6. The Wilders Show Trial:
7. Lying about dead Palestinians:
8. Guilty until proven innocent — yet another leftist professor at
the Law School of Tel Aviv University wants Israel's "war crimes"
investigated:
|
|
AL-QAIDA AND THE PLAGUE
Posted by Olivier Guitta, January 28, 2009. |
|
In the middle of the massive coverage of U.S. President Barack Obama's inauguration, a rather troublesome news story emerged. Unfortunately, it failed to get the coverage it deserves. If confirmed, it deserves the full attention of the Obama administration: the story has to do with bio-terrorism. The story began with a Jan. 6 report in the Algerian newspaper Echorouk that a number of terrorists had died of the plague in one of al-Qaida in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) training camps in Tizi Ouzou. Another Algerian newspaper En-Nahar, affirmed that 50 terrorists have been diagnosed with the plague, 40 of whom have already died. Now some analysts dismissed outright this story saying it was totally fallacious. But a few observations at this point give credibility to this story, even though one cannot be sure of the provenance of the plague. Consider the following: 1. Algerian authorities have been totally silent. Reliable sources usually willing to share information declined to comment on this report. As can be expected, Algerians authorities were not too pleased that the story was confirmed by American sources. Indeed the Washington Times confirmed through a senior U.S. intelligence official that an incident had taken place at an AQIM training camp that had to be shut down as a result. Interestingly, AQIM did not wait long to refute this story. On Jan. 21, in a communiqué the group accused "some hypocrites who quoted their masters at the Algerian intelligence agency" of being behind this false story. The group also noted that this story was planted to dry up the well of new AQIM recruits. If indeed that is the case, it might be a very smart strategy that maybe should be copied. Another explanation for the alleged deaths of the AQIM operatives is very bad hygienic situation in the camps. Indeed, several former AQIM terrorists told the Algerian En-Nahar newspaper that living conditions are horrendous and that numerous deaths resulted from poor hygiene. They add that the AQIM emirs (chiefs) quarantine the sick right away, because the disease propagates itself very quickly. Whatever the explanation, it seems that there have been unexplained deaths among AQIM operatives. At this point, the developments of this story and its possible implications need to be closely monitored. Indeed a nightmarish scenario could unfold if one of the infected individuals boarded a flight to Paris, London or New York. This person could become de-facto the means of "delivering" the weapon.? Olivier Guitta is an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant. You can read his latest work at www.thecroissant.com/about.html |
|
THE DAY AMERICA LOST THE WAR ON TERROR
Posted by Saul Goldman, January 28, 2009. |
|
This was written by Ben Shapiro and it appeared today in www.Townhall.com. |
|
On Nov. 4, 2008, America lost the war on terror. President Barack Obama's feckless, pathetically apologetic perspective on foreign policy spells the end of the quest for liberty in the Middle East. It spells the end of America's moral leadership in the global war for freedom. And it spells the end of a hard-fought campaign to protect America. Our enemies must be happily celebrating their great good fortune in America's election of this platitudinous, morally relativistic, Jimmy Carter carbon copy in the midst of battle. On Jan. 26, 2009, Obama granted his first television interview as president of the United States to Al Arabiya, the Dubai-based television network part-owned by the Saudi government. In the interview, he demonstrated with the utmost clarity that his understanding is inversely proportional to his arrogance. He started by humbling America before the world. "(A)ll too often the United States starts by dictating," Obama said, shame for his country dripping from his lips. "So let's listen." There was no call for the Muslim world, which has sponsored genocide after genocide, terrorist group upon terrorist group, to listen. Obama apologized for President Bush's "Islamic fascism" terminology, equating Muslim terrorism with nonexistent terrorism by Jews and Christians: "the language we use matters. And what we need to understand is, is that there are extremist organizations — whether Muslim or any other faith in the past — that will use faith as a justification for violence. We cannot paint with a broad brush a faith as a consequence of the violence that is done in that faith's name." There was no call for the Muslim world to actively fight terrorism — honesty is not the Obama administration's policy. Obama repeated the Clintonian line that the Palestinian Arab-Israeli conflict could be solved by pressing Israel into negotiations with terrorists — a foolish conceit that has cost Israeli and Palestinian lives. He talked about getting rid of "preconceptions" regarding the Israeli-Arab conflict — code for embracing negotiations with Hamas. He pledged to talk with Iran — on the same day that Iran's government spokesman branded the Holocaust "a big lie." He bought into the Muslim-sponsored notion that the Palestinian Arab-Israeli conflict lies at the heart of all trouble in the Middle East. He praised the one-sided Saudi peace plan as an act of "great courage." Most sickeningly, Obama openly jettisoned his constitutional role as the caretaker for America's national interest. Instead, Obama posed himself as an honest broker between America and the Muslim world. "(T)he United States has a stake in the well-being of the Muslim world, that the language we use has to be a language of respect," he said. "I have Muslim members of my family. I have lived in Muslim countries." Obama didn't stop there. He stated that his job is to speak for the Muslim world, defending them from Americans' negative perceptions: "And my job is to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world is filled with extraordinary people who simply want to live their lives and see their children live better lives." No, Mr. President. Your job is not to communicate to the American people that the Muslim world harbors us no ill will. That is their job. The Muslim world must demonstrate with its words and actions that they do not wish America replaced with an Islamic state. They must demonstrate that they do not support terrorism against America and our allies. Your job is to protect and defend the United States of America. That is your sworn duty. And you abrogate your sworn duty every time you go on Arab television stations and apologize for America's foreign policy. You abrogate your sworn duty every time you force American allies to negotiate with terrorists. You abrogate your sworn duty every time you pledge to protect the interests "not just of the United States, but also ordinary people who right now are suffering from poverty and a lack of opportunity" — the same ordinary people who elect Hamas, prop up the Ayatollahs, supported the Taliban, recruit for al-Qaida, and live off of the beneficence of Hezbollah. Not all Muslims are "extraordinary people," and the interests of suffering Muslims do not always align with American interests. On Nov. 4, 2008, Americans elected their first international president. They elected a man who does not seek to preserve American values. Leftists perceived George W. Bush as an imperialist for American interests; by the same token, Obama is an imperialist for "global interests." In a war to save America from implacable foes, Obama's Global Interest Imperialism dooms American exceptionalism to the ash heap of history. With it may go the last, best hope of Earth. Contact Rabbi Saul Goldman at gold7910@bellsouth.net. |
|
BRILLIANT EXPLANATION: YOU TELL US...PROPORTIONATE OR DISPROPORTIONATE...!?
Posted by Boris Celser, January 28, 2009. |
|
In an interview, Professor Shalom Rosenberg from the Hebrew University in Jerusalem was asked by the interviewer about the proportion whereby only few Israelis were killed and the hundreds of Gazans that were killed; he replied in sweetness language: "Hamas itself set this proportion. If Hamas demands to free 1000 terrorists incarcerated in Israeli jails for one Israeli soldier — Gilad Shalit — then they themselves set that the life of one Israel equals to one thousand Gazans. If so, this proportionality dictates that in order to defend one Israeli soldier, we (Israel) have to attack terrorists although the risk of killing hundreds of citizens." Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
ROCKS, A FATAL WEAPON; THE MOVIE DEFIANCE; ISRAEL STILL TRYING TO FINANCE HAMAS!
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 28, 2009. |
|
TALK OF MASSACRE IS PHONY The Arabs and their sympathizers accuse Israel of seeking or committing a massacre of civilians. If Israel wanted to do that, it could have had its artillery destroy most Gaza apartment houses overnight, much cheaper than by air raids. Then the deaths would have been in the tens of thousands [or hundreds of thousands]. The accusations are defamatory and ridiculous (IMRA, 12/28). GAS DISCOVERED OFF ISRAEL Three trillion cubic feet of natural gas was discovered off Haifa. This is a significant find. It may change Israel's economy (Arutz-7, 1/18). Will the economy improve? Corrupt societies waste windfalls on luxuries that don't last ROCKS, A FATAL WEAPON An Arab youth threw a rock at an Israeli car. The rock ricocheted back onto the youth's head, killing him. (Arutz-7, 12/28). People are too comfortable, in my opinion, with Arab stoning of Jews. I think that the response to that by victims and police should be to shoot to kill. This time, the intended victim escaped and the perpetrator got what he justly deserved. THE OTHER SIDE An Arab doctor who works in Israel received much publicity in the NY Times, when his house was blown up by the IDF. The doctor claimed that he strives for mutual tolerance, and lamented loss of his house and three adult daughters in it. Israel had reports of gunfire at it from that house (Arutz-7, 1/18). I think that is poor journalism, biased towards the Arabs, as usual. The report was controversial. Generally, IDF reports are accurate and Arab claims are not. The newspaper should have awaited confirmation before it made a big human interest story out of the doctor's claims, with only a single sentence explaining the justification for the bombing. ASSESSING THE UNILATERAL CEASEFIRE Hamas continues to shoot at Israeli troops and fire rockets at Siderot, and can start restocking arms, while the IDF does nothing. This is another of the ceasefires in which only Jews die. It was a cowardly arrangement (Prof. Steven Plaut, 1/18). Someone called it an attempt to turn victory into defeat. FIFTH COLUMN FAVORED IN ISRAEL Arabs threw stones at Israeli traffic passing between Jerusalem and Modiin. Police dispersed them (IMRA, 12/29). Dispersed? Why not arrested? When Jews throw stones back at Arabs, the police arrest the Jews and not the Arabs. That may serve leftist ideology of defeatism and surrender, but it is unequal enforcement of the law and favoritism towards the Muslim fifth column. Favoring a fifth column sews future strife. ARAB REPAIRMEN Two Arab repairmen were called into an apartment in Kiryat Sefer, now called Modiin illit, most populated Jewish town in Judea-Samaria. They stabbed the residents and then two more in the street, and attacked a third before someone shot one and the other fled (Arutz-7, 12/29). Did the major media report this interesting story, itself a silent witness to the non-feasibility of allowing Muslim Arabs to live with Jews? If not, why not? The story upholds an argument for arming all Israeli Jews, especially settlers, capable of handling guns responsibly. Bi-national living has turned Israel and the Territories into the American wild West. No sheriff? People need self-defense THE MOVIE, "DEFIANCE." I saw the movie, "Defiance." It was inspiring, as I anticipated. In scene, Holocaust survivors were brutal to German troops. That was disturbing. The brutality is understandable; no sympathy is due to the Germans. I think that the Jewish partisan commander should have stopped the beating and executed the Germans. Couldn't keep prisoners, lest they escape and bring the German Army down on the whole partisan camp. When discussing gun control hereafter, I will mention that if all the Jews in Europe were armed, they could have taken a toll of their persecutors, and prevented their labor being exploited for their persecutors. It might have given pause to their persecutors. On the other hand, suppose all the Muslims in W. Europe were armed. The answer to that is not to harbor fifth columns. IMMIGRATION TO AND FROM SPAIN From N. Africa, Muslims sneak into Spain. There, an al-Qaida network based in Syria recruits some of them as suicide bombers and pays for their transportation to Iraq, where they murder civilians or assassinate foreign troops assisting Iraq (IMRA, 12/29). Spain should purge itself. The government of Syria claims innocence in the war in Iraq, but it hosts terrorist organizations that fight there. WHICH RELIGION TOLERANT OF HOLY PLACES? On December 29, Arabs rioted near Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem. They threw a pipe bomb and rocks at the Jewish holy site (Arutz-7, 12/29). Jews have never to my knowledge attacked a Muslim holy site, except when terrorists in Gaza use mosques as firing platforms or munitions dumps. Arab Muslim propagandists have been accusing "the Jews" for decades of attempting to destroy al-Aqsa mosque. Never any attempts! Totally defamatory. From such examples, of which there are many, one can build a case for which religion and which people are tolerant and peaceable. THE "INNOCENT" CIVILIANS IN GAZA The father of a boy whom terrorists murdered at a Yeshiva in Jerusalem wrote, "'When our 16 year old son was murdered ten months ago together with seven of his friends, the TV screens of the world were filled with scenes of the yeshiva library filled with blood, together with scenes of the residents of Gaza dancing in celebration and flashing "V" signs to one another for victory, handing out candies and firing into the air in celebration." The father finds the world hypocritically urging Israeli restraint about the attacks from Gaza. The need is to eradicate Hamas (Prof. Steven Plaut, 12/30) and the capability of that evil people there to mount more terrorism or conventional war. THE "LOYAL" ISRAELI ARABS & THE "IDEALISTIC" EU "The 'Itija'a' organization of Israeli Arabs, funded by the EU, has issued a statement saying that the firing of rockets by the Hamas at Israeli civilians is not a war crime, but the Israeli bombing in Gaza and targeting of terrorists is. It also accused Israel of conducting genocide in Gaza and that the rule of the Hamas in Gaza is "legitimate." The organization has not been banned and its heads have not been jailed by Israel." (Op. Cit.) ISRAEL STILL TRYING TO FINANCE HAMAS! The American head of the Bank of Israel, Stanley Fisher, and the Finance Ministry, had ordered two banks to transfer funds to Gaza. Shurat HaDin petitioned the courts to bar the transfer. The petition argued that since Hamas controls Gaza, the funds help it finance its war on Israel. The two banks ceased transfers. Gov. Fisher then demanded that Israel's postal bank transfer the funds. It balked, demanding immunity from prosecution. Can't be given. Shame on Fisher for trying to finance Hamas! (IMRA, 1/1). HUMANITARIANISM OVER GAZA The media disingenuously questions whether Israel targeted civilians. It knows very well that Israel does not do that. That biased insinuation plays into the hands of America's terrorist enemy. Israel takes risks to minimize civilian casualties. For that, it occasionally gets a slight mention in the press. That mention gets lost in the much bulkier verbiage of false accusations against Israel as seeking civilian casualties. The media doesn't know, or doesn't let on that it knows, that Israel wants perhaps most of all to be perceived as humane. Israel would not attack civilians wantonly. By contrast, few journalists openlyl question the purpose of Hamas attacks on Israel. The purpose is to kill Jews. As we've pointed out before, even before Islamo-fascism arose, jihadists sought genocide against Israel. Therefore, whereas originally the Arabs had a weak claim for the Territories and Israel, but nevertheless a claim, it has forfeited that claim. Their method is so criminal and vicious, that they have proved themselves unfit to share territory with and undeserving of diplomatic consideration. What shall we make of this? I conclude that this is not a rational world. Antisemitism and related ideologies combine with advocacy journalism to make a vast gap between what happens, what is reported, and what people believe. Israel bends over backwards. To avoid inflicting enemy civilian casualties, and to seem to be cooperating with foreign critics, Israel incurs preventable civilian and military casualties. Its regime holds its head high instead of in shame at allowing its own people to be murdered. It is acting out the Jewish neurosis of trying to please the gentiles. The gentiles don't get pleased. They don't acknowledge Israel's excessive steps to spare enemy civilians. To the contrary, the media is part of the world mob accusing Israel of deliberately targeting civilians. The media scapegoats the Jews. It knowingly wields defamation as a club to coerce and cajole Israel to defend itself less. Indeed, Israel seeks foreign troops to protect it. WHY WEREN'T ARM TUNNELS BOMBED BEFORE? An IDF press release mentions having attacked dozens of arms smuggling tunnels (IMRA, 12/30). The tunnels made possible Hamas aggression. I asked IMRA how come the IDF suddenly identified and struck dozens of tunnels. Reply of 1/20: "We knew and didn't bomb. Just as we didn't bomb many other targets before." That makes the government accomplices of Hamas rocketing! 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 |
|
CBS NEWS: "TIME RUNNING OUT FOR A TWO-STATE SOLUTION?"
Posted by Eli E. Hertz, January 28, 2009. |
|
Bob Simon of 60 Minutes: "Palestinians ... when they want to travel from one town to another, they have to submit to humiliating delays at checkpoints and roadblocks. There are more than 600 of them on the West Bank." Bob: Who is Humiliating Whom? Bob, you say Palestinian Arabs feel humiliated and harassed when Israeli authorities search them and their belongings; when they are prevented from traveling freely because of checkpoints, roadblocks, closures and curfews. You say they feel "corralled." Bob, in Israel, every Israeli is searched numerous times during the course of a single day. Israelis are asked to open their bags and purses for inspection. In most cases, they are subjected to body searches with a metal detector every time they enter a bank or a post office, pick up a bottle of milk at the supermarket, enter a mall or train station, or visit a hospital or medical clinic. Young Israeli men and women are physically frisked in search of suicide belts before they enter crowded nightclubs. As a matter of routine, Israelis' car trunks are searched every time they enter a well-trafficked parking lot. Daily, their cars pass through roadblocks that cause massive traffic jams when security forces are in hot pursuit of suicide bombers believed to have entered Israel. Israelis are searched not only when they go out for a cup of coffee or a slice of pizza, but also when they go to the movies or a concert, where the term "dressed to kill" has an entirely different meaning. These ordinary daily humiliations now extend to similar searches when Israelis go to weddings or Bar Mitzvahs. No one abroad talks about the humiliation Jews in Israel are subjected to, having to write at the bottom of wedding invitations and other life cycle events, "The site will be secured [by armed guards]" — to ensure relatives and friends will attend and share their joyous occasion. One out of four Israeli children, ages 11 to 15, fear for their lives. One out of three report they fear for the lives of their family members, and more than a third report they have changed their patterns of travel and social lives due to security concerns. Bob, these ubiquitous security checks do not exist in Arab cities and towns in Israel (or, for that matter, in Judea and Samaria) because those places are not and never have been targets of Palestinian terrorism. In fact, the average Israeli is "humiliated and harassed" by being searched far more times a day than the average Palestinian. Not one human rights group, nor you, has so much as noted this massive intrusion into the rights of privacy and person imposed on Israelis. To date, no one protests the fact that, since the 1970s, Jewish schoolchildren in Israel are surrounded by perimeter fences, with armed guards at the schoolyard gates, as if their schools were the domiciles of Mafiosi. Not one Arab village in Israel or the Territories has a perimeter fence around it. Guards are not required at Arabic shops, cafes, restaurants, movie theaters, wedding halls or schools — either in Israel or in the Territories. Palestinians also do not need armed guards to accompany every school trip, youth movement hike or campout. They are not targets of terrorism. Countless Israelis in sensitive areas within the Green Line — not only in the Territories, but also in Jewish towns, villages and bedroom suburbs — are "ghettoized" behind high fences. Many Israeli motorists avoid major arteries that pass through Arab areas of Israel, while Arab citizens and Palestinians from the Territories continue to enter Jewish cities and go about their business without peril. Israelis are told, in effect, to disguise themselves when traveling abroad — not to speak Hebrew in public and not to wear garments that reveal their Jewish-Israeli origins. Even Israel's national airline — El Al — has been forced to remove its logo from the tails of its aircraft at certain airports, out of concern for the safety of its passengers. This followed several attempts to down Israeli civilian aircraft with missiles. On the other hand, Arabs who frequent Jewish cities and towns in Israel wear their traditional Arab headgear without fear of being attacked or harassed. Bob, all this begs the question: Who are the victims and who are the victimizers? Who are the ones being harassed and humiliated? Palestinian Arabs or Israelis? 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. And visit www.mythsandfacts.org |
|
DO PALESTINIANS REALLY WANT A TWO-STATE SOLUTION? JUDGING BY THEIR WORDS AND ACTIONS THE ANSWER IS NO.
Posted by Boris Celser, January 27, 2009. |
|
This was written by Josef Joffe and it appeared in today's Wall Street Journal Europe. Mr. Joffe is publisher-editor of Die Zeit, and a fellow at the Institute for International Studies and the Hoover Institution, both at Stanford University. http://wsj.com/article/SB123301610441317741.html |
|
What if there is no solution? With the war in Gaza slipping into an uneasy truce, peacemakers will now descend on the Middle East. That includes George Mitchell, President Obama's special envoy to the region. But is peace possible? The real message of Gaza may be a bloody and cruel testimony to intractability. How shall we count the ways? Annapolis, Wye, Taba, Camp David, Oslo ... all the way back to 1947 when the Arabs refused the original two-state solution. Looking at this tale of doom, the proverbial visitor from Mars would ask in all innocence: "Could it be that the Palestinians actually don't want two states?" No, not if we listen to what Palestinian leaders say and write, especially in Arabic and with no CNN team around. It's one state from the "river to the sea," and the blood-curdling oratory is not just anti-Israel, it is eliminationist anti-Semitic echoing Hitler and Himmler. This is not hyperbole. Just read the daily compilation in English on www.memri.org and recoil in horror. But let's be statesmanlike about this ("you know, the flowery language of the Arabs") and look at the strategic games both sides play. Double-statehood is not the first prize in this game, alas. In 2005, Israel withdrew from Gaza. Our man from Mars would have thought: Now is the time for the Palestinians to really build a state, as they couldn't previously when Yasser Arafat was in charge and the Israeli army in place. Instead, the Palestinians elected Hamas, which thrust the three no's at Israel: no recognition, no negotiation, no acceptance (of the Oslo Accords). The "conversation" was not about statehood but about will. It was Kassam time, with Hamas firing the missiles and Israel tightening the blockade. This is known, in the media vernacular, as a "spiral of violence." But if the missiles were the answer to the blockade, why did Hamas target the border passages and the power plant next door that supplied Gaza with electricity? So much irrationality makes perfect sense if we posit a different strategic game. Hamas's object is provoking Israel to prove that it doesn't care about the consequences. Indeed, it wants bad things to happen to its own people. This will mobilize the "Arab street" and the world's media against Israel while demonstrating its absolute imperviousness to pain and threats of more. "Bring it on," is great for Hamas's credibility, pride and honor, but for the purpose of statehood, it would behave very differently. It would wheel and deal, cajole and dissimulate. It would play quid pro quo, not Kassams against F-16s. Naturally, Israel couldn't allow Hamas to dictate the rules, and so it began to ready a massive counterstrike by last summer. Hamas miscalculated in 2008 as Hezbollah did in 2006. Each thought it could humiliate and cow Mr. Big without triggering retaliation. Recall Hezbollah chief Nasrallah, who admitted that he never would have authorized forays into Israel if he had foreseen the reaction. Hamas was unluckier still, for Israel was a lot more successful in Gaza than in southern Lebanon in 2006. For Israel, the object was "never again." Never again would it allow deterrence to lapse, or its reputation for swift and efficient military force to suffer. With the country's credibility restored, you might ask: Isn't this precisely the moment for another Annapolis or Taba, where Arafat extracted even better terms than at Camp David in 2000? Alas, the Abba Ebban cliché about the Palestinians never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity is true. The reason is that double-statehood is not their No. 1 priority. They want it all, and if they can't get it, they would rather nurse their honor, pride and sense of righteous victimhood than engage in the sordid business of compromise. At any rate, the simple two-state solution is now off the table. Most Israelis (minus the settlers and their supporters) have come around to two states. But never again will Israel vacate territory (as in Gaza) without making sure that it won't turn into a strategic springboard against the heartland. Never again will Israel relinquish control over a border like the Philadelphi Corridor that served as entry point for Iranian missiles into Gaza. It will insist on a strategic presence in the Jordan Valley. Nor can Israel yield military control over the West Bank. What a twist of fate. Today, it is the Israeli Defense Force that guarantees the survival of Fatah and President Mahmoud Abbas against Hamas, Jihad and their Iranian sponsors. Here is the bitter irony. Fatah might want to make peace, but doesn't have the power to deliver; Hamas has the power, but it doesn't want peace, dreaming about a "final solution" that wipes Israel off this part of the map. This is why the Obama administration is looking at yet another disappointment. The upside is that today Palestine is less than ever the "core" of the Middle East conflict. The real issue is Iran and its reach for regional hegemony. The conventional wisdom has it that peace for Palestine would weaken Tehran's mischief potential, robbing it of a rallying point for the Arab masses. Actually, it is the other way round. Iran will use its power, through its proxies, to demolish whatever deal might be hashed out by Israel and the Palestinian Authority. For Iran's game is not a two-state solution, let alone peace. Rather, its object is to intimidate America's Arab supporters and to eliminate Israel as America's strongest regional ally. So for the Obama administration, Israel/Palestine has become an intractable sideshow on a vastly enlarged stage that extends from Haifa to Herat. American (and European) good offices should be designed to manage rather than to solve a conflict that still defies solution. The object of intercession ought to be a stable truce. Preventing another eruption means closing off all conduits for offensive weaponry. The U.S. and the European Union can offer Hamas a benign tit for tat: Stop the terror and gain wondrous economic benefits like copious investments and easier movement of goods and people — provided the money doesn't again disappear in the pockets of the Palestinian leadership, as it did in Arafat's days. It took Israel 40 years to push Fatah from terrorism to teeth-gnashing acceptance. The Levant will be a lot happier place if Hamas turns out to be a faster learner. Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
'CONCILIATORY' OBAMA SPEAKS TO AL-ARABIYA
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 27, 2009. |
|
This was written by Rick Moran and it appeared in the American Thinker
|
|
Will Obama be any more successful than George Bush in reaching out to Muslims? Bush confidante and friend Karen Hughes ran a high profile effort out of the State Department that was supposed to counter the propaganda coming from the Arab press about the United States while extending a hand sto the worldwide Muslim community in friendship. For a variety of reasons — not all of them Bush's or Hughes' fault — the effort fell flat on its face. Hughes not only had to counter propaganda from Muslim countries but also the hysterical and oftentimes false reporting from the western press on Bush and US intentions toward Muslim countries. In addition, the idea that Bush was supposed to "apologize" for liberating 25 million Muslims from tyranny was just never going to happen, no matter how much al-Jazeera and other Arab media demanded it. In short, it was an effort doomed to fail from the outset. Now here's Barack Obama, World Superstar, beloved of billions, inviting the less hysterical than al-Jazeera (but still dishonest) al-Arabiya TV into the White House for a chat. And the interview goes about as well as you'd expect — for Muslims. For US interests? Not so much: The interview with the Dubai-based Al-Arabiya Network was a dramatic piece of public diplomacy aimed at capitalizing on the new American president's international popularity, though it balanced America's traditional commitment to Israel, whose security Obama called "paramount.' "Echoed his campaign" against Bush? Well, I might gently point out that Mr. Obama did not run a campaign against Mr. Bush except that he tried to superimpose the former president's face on John McCain every time he opened his mouth. I get what the Politico guy is saying but I guess accuracy in media doesn't count for much in the Age of Obama. Must be that "international change in the air." Better check the water too. And aren't you a little curious what Osama Bin Laden thinks of this guy? I hardly think Osama will react the same way to criticism that our Mr. Bush did. Maybe Obama thinks he will. But it is US interests in the Middle East where the rhetorical rubber will meet the real-world road. And here, President Obama humbly begs forgiveness from Muslims for our sins in freeing the followers of the prophet in Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq, and Afghanistan from the rule of some of the less faithful followers of Islam like the Taliban and Saddam Hussein not to mention the infidel Milosevic. Somewhere in the universe, that has to count for something. Not in this White House. Not with most Muslims apparently. Instead, the order of the day is apology and humility. Now a little humility is always a good thing. But Obama goes and really makes a hash of things when he plays into the Muslim narrative that Bush and the US never listens, we only "dictate:" The occasion for this interview was the departure of Obama's special envoy, George Mitchell, to the Middle East, and a more aggressive and optimistic approach to that conflict than some argued that the circumstances dictated. The president offered no timeline for peace, but a firm view that a Palestinian state remains within reach. Man, I can just see King Abdullah and other Gulf State leaders furrowing their brows after hearing that statement. For 8 years we have spent a considerable amount of diplomatic effort and capital in ramming sanctions on Iran through the security council, warning of the danger to Iran's neighbors and the entire civilized world of an Iran with the bomb. And here's our "conciliatory" president saying "so sorry — we didn't really mean it." He also termed Iranian support for terrorists and trying build nukes " not helpful." Well, I suppose that's one way to put it. I personally would not have used that term. "Unacceptable" perhaps. Maybe even "deal-breaker" as in "It is a deal breaker regarding negotiations until Tehran stops supporting groups that want to kill innocent Americans," But that's just me. What does our Celebrity President have to say? You know, I said during the campaign that it is very important for us to make sure that we are using all the tools of U.S. power, including diplomacy, in our relationship with Iran," he said. "Now, the Iranian people are a great people, and Persian civilization is a great civilization. Iran has acted in ways that's not conducive to peace and prosperity in the region: their threats against Israel; their pursuit of a nuclear weapon which could potentially set off an arms race in the region that would make everybody less safe; their support of terrorist organizations in the past — none of these things have been helpful." Does Obama believe that Iran actually wants to be "helpful?" Obviously yes. What exactly they want to be helpful about — like wiping Israel off the map and blowing us to kingdom come — might not sit well with most of the rest of us but that's because we fear the inheritors of Xerxes ambitions. We must be like our new president and banish our fears while trusting that the fanatics in Tehran are just funnin' around and don't really mean it when they say "Death to America." Glad we got all that straightened out, aren't you? Humility has its place in international relations. Walking softly and carrying a big stick is always good advice — advice not followed always by Obama's predecessor. But abject surrender to the faux sensibilities of Muslims, who are fed a barrage of the most nauseating anti-American propaganda from a media that deliberately obscures the truth and plays to the fears of a billion people by giving space to the most idiotic conspiracy theories on the planet? Somewhere, an American president has to draw a line. In his eagerness to be loved, Obama granted legitimacy to lies, half truths, and urban legends about America that have been swallowed whole by the gullible masses of Muslims. It remains to be seen how this will play out diplomatically. But I am not confident it will do anything except raise expectations that can never be met. |
|
THE INSIDE STORY OF OPERATION CAST LEAD
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 27, 2009. |
|
This was written by Joel J. Sprayregen, and it appeared in
the American Thinker
Joel J. Sprayregen, a Chicago lawyer, returned recently from Israel where he consulted with military and academic sources. He is associated with JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs) and other think tanks dealing with international security issues. |
|
The tactical successes of Israel's recent Gaza operation, based on superb intelligence, began with air attacks on terrorist targets, which were extremely accurate and caused Hamas to go underground. The second phase, the ground attack, was a well-coordinated effort "in a fashion never done by the IDF before," according to a background briefing. There was much more of what the American military calls "jointness," or cooperation, between ground and air forces. Successful tactics included: night maneuvers with sophisticated optical equipment; senior commanders on the battlefield with the troops leading to better tactical decision-making, as well as wounding of several brigade commanders; entry into potentially booby-trapped houses was effected through the side walls, not through doors and windows; and almost all units were accompanied by a canine unit. The dogs were very effective in uncovering hidden terrorists and explosives, thus protecting soldiers; however the casualty rate among the dogs was quite high. Use of Electronic Warfare and False Casualty Reports Another innovation was the use of electronic warfare. The IDF was able to jam all radio, TV and cell phone communications. "In addition, the IDF was also able to call thousands of Palestinian homes to warn of an impending incursion," the briefer said. He noted that the psychological impact of the electronic jamming was important as well. "The Palestinians believe we could triangulate on terrorists' cell phones to find them, even when the phone was turned off," he said. "Whether we could or we couldn't or we did or we didn't doesn't matter. They believe we have the capability." An authoritative report was published indicating that Hamas had duped gullible world media by doubling the numbers of persons killed in Gaza. Every civilian death is a regrettable tragedy. But the report of an experienced Italian journalist in the respected Corriere della Serra deserves scrutiny. The reporter quoted a Palestinian doctor at the main Gaza hospital — where Hamas leaders hid in underground rooms — as saying: "The deaths could not be more than 500 or 600 at most, mainly youths who were enlisted by Hamas, which sent them to their deaths." It would not be the first time that the media accepted wildly false Palestinian casualty figures. In 2002, Palestinians claimed a "massacre" of 1500 people in Jenin. It turned out that 45 terrorists, 9 civilians and 23 Israeli soldiers had been killed. Hamas Gunmen Fled The Italian journalist quoted Gaza civilians as complaining that Hamas gunmen prevented them from leaving while firing from their homes. The gunmen told the civilians "we are all destined for paradise, are you not happy to die together?" An Israeli journalist embedded with an IDF unit said: "Hamas fighting prowess hardly inspired awe." He explained that "Hamas' Iranian-devised military doctrine was based on stopping or at least slowing the IDF outside Gaza City. But the Hamas gunmen — in full view of the people of Gaza — abandoned the arena and fled into the crowded neighborhoods where they hurriedly shed their uniforms." The areas from which rockets had been fired were quickly abandoned. "The offensive array of bunkers and tunnels and booby-trapped buildings — set for remote detonation — were captured intact." Hamas did take advantage of the fog of war to torture and kill 70 Palestinians from the rival Fatah movement; the torture included gouging of eyes of suspected informers. One of the Israeli government's goals was to ensure that the ties between Hamas and Iran are well documented, according to the briefer. "We know that the Iranians supply Hamas with sophisticated weapons and train Hamas fighters in Iran." An entire unit of Hamas gunmen trained in Iran was eliminated. The defeat of Iranian proxies, quietly cheered by many in the Arab world (though Palestinian casualties provoked indignation), is a major blow to Iran's aspirations for regional hegemony. The scheduled third-phase of the offensive that was to follow the air strikes and ground campaign was suspended when the truce commenced. Asked if there was one message he would like to convey, the briefer concluded, "There can be no return to the status quo," i.e., incessant Hamas firing on Israeli civilians. The Future is Clouded The key to peace in Gaza remains cessation of Iranian arms supplies to Hamas. It was therefore encouraging to hear leaders of six European countries — France, Britain, Germany, Spain, Italy and Czech Republic offer — in Egypt and Israel — to provide troops and technical assistance to prevent Hamas from smuggling weapons and terrorists into Gaza. French President Sarkozy said "the EU would never harm the security of Israel." Dissonant in this display of European unity was the fact that Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan could speak only in Egypt and not in Jerusalem. Erdogan's ardent backing of Hamas coupled with Iranian-type castigation of Israel, plus anti-Semitism inspired by his AKP party, has damaged Turkey's image as an aspirant for EU membership. Erdogan may have opted for leadership of the Muslim world, rather than a place in the EU. While one can understand Israel's rationale for declaring a truce after inflicting major damage on Hamas' military capabilities (this is not World War 2, where total victory can be achieved), it is likely that further pre-emptive action by Israel will be necessary. The credo of Hamas is that Israel must be destroyed. There is scant chance of durable peace with an enemy which indoctrinates children to believe there is a religious duty to kill Jewish civilians. Ending Hamas misrule would entail heavy and largely undesirable costs for Israel, including possible reoccupation. Egypt is not likely to seriously curb smuggling of Iranian arms through tunnels for several reasons, including that Egypt likes to see Israel bleed, and that cracking down on Hamas would enrage millions of Egyptian adherents of the Muslim Brotherhood, of which Hamas is an offshoot. Since Hamas continues to view Israeli civilians as targets for murder and Palestinian civilian casualties as useful sacrifices for obtaining international support, it is almost certain that we will be returning to this sanguinary subject. Israel's main achievement was demonstrating that Hamas will pay a severe price if large-scale rocketing is resumed. The tunnels can be reopened, but they can likewise be redestroyed. Ominous reports are surfacing of Iranian frogmen delivering arms to Hamas. The US Navy is supposedly monitoring this development. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: CONFERENCE UPDATE
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 27, 2009. |
|
When my posting was edited yesterday, before it was sent, a whole long phrase was accidentally cut, thus confusing some of you, who wrote to ask me what I was talking about. Let me try the offending sentence again: (Said Ya'alon) We need a "bottom-up" peace, with the elimination of incitement that teaches Palestinian children to kill us. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today a host of subjects were covered at the Conference and it is only possible for me to touch briefly on those subjects that resonate. The subject of a United Jerusalem brought together a panel of speakers who, of course, all agreed that our city must stay undivided and under our sovereignty. But each presenter had his or her own particular perspective on this issue. Uzi Arad, Head of the Institute for Policy and Strategy in Herzliya, used an expression regarding the prospect of dividing our city that was so fitting it is worth remembering. To divide Jerusalem, he said, would be like doing an amputation. It boggles his mind (as the minds of most of us) to contemplate the division of a city that is an historical unit. Dr, Eilat Elazar is a fellow at the Shalem Center Institute for the Archeology of the Jewish People, and does magnificent work. She spoke today about excavations in the northern part Ir David (City of David), the most ancient, original Jerusalem. She has found what appears to be David's palace, along with artifacts dating back 3,000 years, such as stamps containing names known from the Tanach. I cannot do justice in writing to the stunning slides she presented, but urge everyone who visits here to take a tour of Ir David. There is a sense of wonder in understanding and being able to see how deep indeed our roots in the land are. Dore Gold, former Israeli ambassador to the UN and now director of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, came to offer assurance that whatever Olmert may have offered the PA verbally with regard to dividing Jerusalem obligates us to nothing, although the world may try to obligate us. Dr. Gold shared an interesting story: When the Hebron agreement was signed as part of Oslo, Netanyahu, who was then prime minister (who says, by the way, that he was obligated to the Hebron agreement by what had preceded it) sought a quid pro quo for turning over a good part of Hevron to the PA. He sent Gold to Washington, and the deal, arranged with Dennis Ross, was that we would build the new Jerusalem neighborhood of Har Homa. The Palestinians screamed long and loud, and the US backed us. ~~~~~~~~~~ Dore Gold's most important message, however, was this: We must use diplomacy to protect our national interest. The Palestinians have constructed their own narrative to make it seem as if Jerusalem is a Muslim city. We must strengthen our historical truth, by making sure we understand it, and then talking about our historical rights and the archeology that stands as evidence. Jerusalem is a Jewish city. Moti Kedar, who teaches at Bar Ilan University in the Arabic department, provided us with a short history of how Muslims came to construct the notion that Jerusalem was theirs. Motivation was political, but the history they have constructed fits with their theology: Islam, the true religion, is believed to be the inheritor of religious tradition, superseding Judaism and Christianity. And so, Jerusalem may have been Jewish, but why, according to their thinking, should they not then "make" it Muslim. Kedar says Muslims are afraid that their illegitimate claims will be exposed. His message then, too, is that we must know our history and speak out about it. ~~~~~~~~~~ During the session on "Israel under attack and the civilians of the Gaza area respond," there was one presentation that was stunning — that moved me to tears, actually. This was by Rachel Saperstein, formerly of Gush Katif and now in a makeshift caravan in the "refugee camp" of Nitzan, near the Gaza border. I don't know that I can do justice to what she said so passionately and eloquently. But let me share just this story: The people of Gush Katif in Gaza were greenhouse farmers who performed miracles in making things grow in a region of barren sand. She says that some of the Palestinians who had worked with the Jews of Gush Katif have called their former employers and told them they are confused. They are using the same techniques they had learned from the Jews, and yet nothing grows. Why is it that nothing grows?! "Because," said Rachel, "we Jews were banished from our land, and we make things grow there." I am trying to find out if Rachel's talk can go up on YouTube, and then I'll provide a URL so that you can all hear her for yourselves. ~~~~~~~~~~ There were many other topics discussed in the course of the day, some too complex to do justice to here and now. And so I will end this section with the issue of Islamic Internet sites and how they are used to influence the world. One way in which this is done is fairly obvious: Videos are put up in Arabic to influence Arab people. Videos about the virtues of martyrdom and the evils of Israel. But there is something else that is more insidious and perhaps more dangerous. This is the matter of the information warfare, which represents a strategic threat to Israel. There are sites put up in English and European languages, that are ostensibly disseminating factual information. Some are databases offering great detail, detail sometimes not found anywhere else. This information appears legitimate, but cannot be readily checked. E.g., which houses were demolished by Israel during the Gaza operation or which Palestinians Israeli soldiers shot in an orchard in Judea. Journalists, UN agencies and others utilize this information. In some cases, history is being re-written. This sort of material comes from Arab sources and also from pro-Palestinian NGOs such as B'Tselem, which often distorts facts. We are not doing enough to counter this. ~~~~~~~~~~ Because the issue remains so very critical, and worrisome, please see this Commentary blog regarding an Obama statement on Iran. Once again, thanks to Yisrael Medad on this (hi Winkie!):
~~~~~~~~~~ What does this tell us? Tzipi Livni's brother has just volunteered to campaign for Likud. ~~~~~~~~~~ Eli Yeshai, head of Shas, has announced that his party would be supporting Likud and not Kadima in the election. ~~~~~~~~~~ When the fighting stopped in Gaza, we opened an emergency clinic at the Erez Crossing to treat Palestinians. We're now going to close it. Said, Yair Amikam of the Ministry of Health, "Despite our best intentions and the willingness of seven or eight physicians to leave their regular work places each day to help out at the clinic, less than five patients have been treated since the beginning of last week. "To the best of our knowledge, this is the result of an order given by Hamas." ~~~~~~~~~~ Noam Shalit, Gilad's father, went to France to discuss his son with French President Sarkozy. Why France? Because Shalit has dual citizenship and is also a French national. According to Noam, Sarkozy says Gilad is alive. The French have been working on securing Gilad's release. ~~~~~~~~~~ This morning an IDF military patrol near the border of Gaza, close to the Kissufim crossing, was attacked by a large bomb that killed one and injured three. Soldiers went into Gaza briefly at that point, attempting to find the attackers. What they did find were several more bombs that had been planted. This is not the end of the matter. Defense officials met to discuss what comes next and Barak announced that, "This is a difficult attack and we will respond, but there is no point in elaborating." What was made clear is that the "response" will not be closing of a crossing. "The response will not be the way it used to be," said Amos Gilad. "The equation has changed." This is critically important: we are being tested and simply must hit hard. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
BUSH REJECTED PARDONS FOR MANY, BUT LEFT POLLARD PETITION ALIVE
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, January 27, 2009. |
|
This is from the
Los Angeles Times
|
|
Washington — President George W. Bush, on his last full day in office, formally struck down the petitions for clemency of some high-profile politicians and businessmen, including former lawmakers Randall "Duke" Cunningham, Edwin Edwards and Mario Biaggi and "junk bond" financier Michael Milken, the Justice Department said today. The chief of the Justice Department's Office of the Pardon Attorney, Ronald Rodgers, confirmed the pardon rejections through a spokeswoman, in response to queries from The Times' Washington Bureau. The Justice Department said Bush also denied petitions for clemency for two men who became highly polarizing symbols of their eras. One of them was John Walker Lindh, the young American serving 20 years in prison for aiding the Taliban in Afghanistan at a time when it was fighting U.S. military forces just after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. Bush also denied one of the longest-standing petitions for clemency, for Leonard Peltier, a Native American activist sentenced to two consecutive terms of life imprisonment for the murder of two FBI agents during a 1975 shootout on the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation in South Dakota. His application had been under consideration since 1993, current and former Justice Department officials said. Such denials can be a serious setback for those intent on winning clemency. After a denial a petitioner must wait two years to reapply for a pardon and one year for a commutation of a prison sentence, although they can also circumvent the Justice Department and appeal directly to the White House whenever they want. In some cases, a presidential denial can be a setback in other ways as well, and make it harder politically for the next administration to approve it, according to several current and former administration officials involved in the pardon process. Bush, who has not spoken publicly about denying the pardons, did not make formal rulings on some other well-known figures, leaving their petitions alive. That long list includes former Illinois Gov. George Ryan; then-Vice President Dick Cheney's chief of staff I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby; Jonathan Pollard, a U.S. Navy analyst convicted of spying for Israel; media mogul Conrad Black; and telecommunications executives Bernard Ebbers and John Rigas. Bush also denied clemency last Dec. 23 for Justin Volpe, the New York City police officer convicted of sodomizing Haiti immigrant Abner Louima with a broomstick, Justice Department spokeswoman Laura Sweeney said today. Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com and visit the website: http://www.JonathanPollard.org |
|
HAMAS DEFENSE AGAINST ISRAELIS
Posted by Boris Celser, January 27, 2009. |
|
Boris Celser is a Canadian. Contact him at celser@telusplanet.net |
|
CALIFORNIA COLLEGE STUDENT: TERROR IS THE NEW COMMUNISM
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 27, 2009. |
|
This was written by Dennis Prager and it appeared in
Jewish World Review |
|
As they say on the TV show "24," the following took place last week between 9 and 10 p.m. on a flight from Los Angeles to Denver. I spoke for a few minutes to the 20-year-old woman seated across the aisle from me. She: What brings you to Denver?"
She: What do you do?
She: Who did you vote for?
She: Why?
She: Terror is the new communism.
She: The government. For the record, as I believe this to be essential to understanding this young woman's views, she is a student attending the University of California Santa Barbara. Truth is she had to be a student at a major university. She would never have come up with "Terror is the new Communism" on her own. It is a moral obscenity that one has to learn. Of course, there is an irony to this statement. Meant in the opposite way she meant it, I could largely assent to the proposition that terror is the new communism. Communism was an enslaving and murderous threat in its time and the Jihadism is such a threat in our lifetime. But that is not how this young woman meant the statement. As she has learned history and the contemporary world, communism was a bogeyman in its time and terror is a bogeyman in our time. When I told her that communism had killed 100 million people, I could not tell if she even processed the words. It was as if had I uttered a series of nonsense syllables. She either didn't believe me or didn't care. On the assumption that I had met a person with a normal conscience, the only rational explanation for her non-reaction is that she didn't believe me and regarded what I said as right-wing propaganda (just as the belief in that Islamist terror threatens us). In her belief that neither communism nor terror were/are real threats, I suspect this young woman represents many college students. If one wants to understand what left-wing dominance in university social sciences departments produces, one merely had to meet this young woman. At most universities, communism is a non-evil, indeed, largely a non-issue. The most enslaving and murderous movement in history is almost never taught as such. When communism is mentioned at all, it is usually solely in order to show how vile anti-communists were. Thus, as little as students may know about McCarthyism, most students far more readily identify it with evil than they do communism. Indeed, more could probably identify Joseph McCarthy than Joseph Stalin. Nor is this a matter of students not being taught to label anything as evil. They have no problem labeling Nazism, Fascism, George W. Bush, slavery, sexism, homophobia, Islamophobia, xenophobia, and tobacco companies as evil. It's just that they won't label communism as such. Does one in 10.000 students know of the communist terror-famine that took about 6 million Ukarainian lives. How many know about the communist Pol Pot, who butchered nearly one-third of his fellow Cambodians? Or how many innocents were murdered in the Gulag Archipelago (or could even identify it)? Or that China's communist tyrant Mao Zedong killed about 60 million of his fellow Chinese? Or that Communist North Korea is essentially a concentration camp in the guise of a country? The answer to all these questions is very few. And that, quite frankly, breaks my heart. I am currently reading Mao: The Secret Life, almost universally regarded, even in the mainstream media, as the most important book on Mao ever written. According to the authors, in 1930-31 alone, Mao and his gang developed 120 types of torture for use on innocent people he wanted to force into phony confessions so as to rule by terror. They included burning the vaginas of wives of opponents and pulling wires through men's penises, which were then attached to their ears and plucked. These poor souls have no memorial. Least of all at an American university. Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
THE NEW BLOOD LIBEL
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 27, 2009. |
|
This was written by Eli Kavon and it appeared yesterday in
the Jerusalem Post |
|
On February 5, 1840, a Capuchin monk in Damascus vanished without a trace. The missing friar's fellow monks spread a rumor that, with the approach of the Passover holiday, Jews ritually murdered the Christian and siphoned off the man's blood to bake matzah. Under pressure from the French Consul in the city, the Muslim rulers of Damascus arrested several Jews for the brutal crime. Under torture, one of the Jews confessed to the ritual murder of the monk. Alarmed by the Muslim adoption of the medieval Christian charge of ritual murder against the Jews, world Jewish notables united to protest the death of one of the Jews in Damascus under torture. Even US President Martin Van Buren protested the injustice of this "blood libel." In the end, the Muslim authorities released the surviving Jews and dropped the heinous charges. Thus, what became known as "The Damascus Affair," passed into history as just one of many libels against the Jews that repeat themselves-in a somewhat different guise-in today's world. In the 21st century, the charge of the "blood libel" against the Jews is no longer solely a European phenomenon. In a disturbing transformation, Arabs and Muslims in the Middle East are breathing new life into this charge of ritual murder against the Jews. The popular media in Arab and Islamic lands often accuse Jews of using the blood of slain non-Jewish children for filling hamentashen on Purim and for baking matzah on Passover. But there is also another version of the blood libel in the Middle East that is far more complex and more insidious than the medieval Christian accusation of ritual murder against Jews. That is the "New Blood Libel' — the charge that the modern Jewish State murders Palestinian civilians, especially children, in the name of Zionism. At rallies around the world organized by Muslims protesting Israel's recent invasion of Gaza, the chants of "baby killers" and "Israelis are Nazis!" were repeated again and again by the protestors. These sickening accusations have been picked up by Western media outlets and flashed on television and computer screens all over the world. The time has come for Jews and non-Jews-defenders of democracy and Israel's right to exist as a sovereign Jewish State-to respond to the haters of Israel and expose their new charge of blood libel to be as destructive and utterly untruthful as the medieval accusation. Is a Gaza City in partial ruins due to Israel's response to repeated Hamas rocket attacks on Israel, indeed, a "concentration camp," as was the description recently put forth by a Vatican representative? Any of us not trapped in an Orwellian world of "Newspeak" know that Gaza City is not a post-modern version of the Warsaw Ghetto. The equation of the Israeli army with the Nazi SS is absurd. German mobile killing units murdered more than a million Jews in Russia, shooting men, women, and children into mass graves. Nazi Germany transported European Jewry to death camps in Poland where the victims were gassed and cremated. The Nazi Final Solution was a systematic program to destroy the Jews of Europe and, eventually, Jews throughout the world. There are no Israeli mobile killing units today in Gaza. There are no gas chambers or crematoria in Nablus. There has never been a systematic program by the Jews of Israel to destroy Palestinians. Blockades and checkpoints are not mass murder. They are safeguards to protect Tel Aviv and Jerusalem from suicide bombers. They are repressive — but they would not exist if the Palestinians truly wanted to live in peace with Israel. The death of civilians in war is always a tragedy. The Israeli army in Gaza attempted to root out Hamas terrorists. They did not target civilians for mass execution. During World War II, German civilians were killed in Allied bombing raids on the cities of the Reich. Does that mean that the Americans and the British were war criminals? The Germans started the war and the Allies wanted to end the conflict as soon as possible through the bombing of German cities. The Palestinian civilians killed in Gaza died because the leaders they chose provoked Israel into invading territory that Israel abandoned years ago. That these facts need to be pointed out to those who accuse Jews of being Nazis is quite sad. The rhetoric of those who make these accusations does not spring from intelligent thought. They propagate this modern blood libel because they hate Jews. The enemies of Israel libel the Jews of Israel as heirs of the Nazis for one reason: they want to rob Israel of its legitimacy and ensure that, one day in the near future, the Jewish State will be wiped off the map. They equate the threat Israel poses today with the threat Nazi Germany posed to the world more than sixty years ago. If the Nazis posed a peril to the world and, therefore needed to be defeated and destroyed, the same goes for Israel. In a tragic distortion of history and the truth, these haters of Israel create the rationale for the destruction of the State of Israel. If Jews in Israel are racists and imperialists, the modern blood libel posits that Israel has no legitimate reason to exist. If the Independence War of 1948 is an example of Jewish ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians — although we all know that it was a war in which the Jews had to fight off Arab armies in battles of self-defense — then the basis of Israel's existence is in doubt. If Gaza City is the Warsaw Ghetto, as the libelers claim, then Hamas is a group of freedom fighters, heroes of the free world. How absurd are these claims! If only the Jews of the Warsaw Ghetto would have had sophisticated weaponry and rockets rather than just the pistols and homemade bombs with which they fought the Germans. If only the world would have protested the slaughter of Jews with the same vigor in which they have accused Israel of war crimes in Gaza. How pathetic it is that the Damascus Blood Libel is still alive. The new libel is as disgusting and untrue as its medieval predecessor. To combat the new accusations we must arm ourselves with the facts and counter the lies with truth. Perhaps, one day, the world will move beyond outright lies and come to know the truth. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
NOTES ON GAZA
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 27, 2009. |
|
Israel warned civilians to stay away from Hamas structures (IMRA, 12/27). The Israeli government revealed that if Hamas had maintained the ceasefire, with occasional attacks, the government would not have launched an assault on Gaza. It would have allowed Hamas to continue building up its army for a major assault on Israel (IMRA, 12/27). Sec. Rice said, "The United States is deeply concerned about the escalating violence in Gaza. We strongly condemn the repeated rocket and mortar attacks against Israel and hold Hamas responsible for breaking the ceasefire and for the renewal of violence there. The ceasefire must be restored immediately and fully respected (IMRA, 12/27). That's almost a non-sequitur. If Hamas is responsible for breaking the ceasefire and for repeated rocket and mortar attacks against Israel, why demand a ceasefire and not let Israel take out Hamas facilities so as to punish it and prevent some future attacks? Her response is typical States Dept. succor for anti-Israel forces. "Israeli intelligence was tracking, following, and marking the Hamas leadership, terrorist camps, and rocket crews for months. Hundreds of Hamas soldiers were caught in their bases. It can be assumed that aerial surveillance was able to retrace the steps of rocket crews to observe the locations of rocket warehouses and factories. As a result the Israeli Air Force attacks were remarkably accurate." The government engaged in military deception to lull Hamas into complacency. (But thousands of Hamas members escaped.) "Note this report from Bloomberg: "Most of the Palestinian dead were members of the Hamas security forces, including police chief Tawfiq Jaber and the head of the organization's Security and Protection Service, Ismail al-Jabary, said Taher Noono, a spokesman for Hamas. " "50 targets were hit simultaneously in the first wave of bombing, scoring 97% of direct hits in the space of 3 minutes. 50 additional targets were hit in the second wave. Most of the command posts, military bases, arms factories, and arsenals were damaged or destroyed. Tunnel personnel came scurrying out of their underground enterprises near the Egyptian border as the bombings shook the earth." (Prof. Steven Plaut, 12/27). Pictures from Gaza indicate this fact. Note these photos of Palestinian (Arab) security forces hit in their bases. These are uniformed combatants of a force that declared war on Israel, and they are very legitimate targets according to international law." "No military force in the world is as careful as the IDF in differentiating combatants from the civilians surrounding them." Media accusations that Israel was bloodthirsty were false. The media published pictures of supposedly wounded Arab children looking in good health. The photographer was the one for the pro-terrorist Intl. Solidarity Movement. They must have been faked — fauxtos (IMRA, 12/27). 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 |
|
ACORN TO GET FUNDS VIA STIMULUS PACKAGE
Posted by Barbara Sommer, January 27, 2009. |
|
Remember ACORN? They were the group that President Obama used to work with. During the presidential campaign their fraudulent voter registration drives were news almost every day. ACORN was famous for registering dead people, the same people in multiple counties, and even giving Mickey Mouse the right to vote. Two weeks ago I reported that ACORN may get some money out of the Democratic Party Stimulus Plan: The Democrats are rewarding ACORN for their fine Illegal work by throwing some cash their way in the Obama stimulus plan: It has only gotten worse according to the Republican Leadership it looks as if ACORN may get over $4.19 BILLION Dollars out of this Stimulus. Washington, Jan 23 — The House Democrats' trillion dollar spending bill, approved on January 21 by the Appropriations Committee and headed to the House floor next week for a vote, could open billions of taxpayer dollars to left-wing groups like the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN). ACORN has been accused of perpetrating voter registration fraud numerous times in the last several elections; is reportedly under federal investigation; and played a key role in the irresponsible schemes that caused a financial meltdown that has cost American taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars since last fall. ACORN is working hard for their money, this "non-partisan" organization is already campaigning for the stimulus: For three weeks now ACORN members have been aggressively pursuing a campaign to pass a bold, progressive Economic Recovery package in the new Congress. Working closely with allies like US Action, AFSCME, and the larger Americans United for Change coalition, ACORN members are taking a major role in building the coalition to pass this recovery package, and to create the context for it to be both stronger and more directly responsive to the situation facing working families across this country. Isn't it great the way the Democrats works hand in hand with ACORN an organization that is doing its best to destroy the electoral process with bogus voting? Folks this is an affront to our sensibilities. The Democratic Congress is telling American Tax payers that they are stupid enough to accept anything. $4.1 BILLION Dollars of YOUR money to go to a criminal organization, whose objective was to disrupt the political process. PLEASE WRITE YOUR CONGRESSMAN, YOUR SENATORS, TELL THEM TO TAKE ACORN OUT OF THE STIMULUS PACKAGE. Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com |
|
FATAH VS HAMAS: BE MY BROTHER OR I'LL KILL YOU
Posted by Barry Rubin, January 27, 2009. |
|
There was an election on Hamas's mind when it cancelled the ceasefire with Israel, leading to the Gaza war. But it wasn't the February Israeli election but rather the January Palestinian non-election. Four years ago, Mahmoud Abbas was elected leader of the Palestinian Authority (PA) for a two-year term. Two years ago, Hamas won a majority in the Palestinian parliamentary election. Hamas then made a coalition agreement with its rival Fatah, which previously controlled the PA. Shortly thereafter, Hamas staged a bloody coup and threw Fatah out of the Gaza Strip. But Fatah, and Abbas, still controls the internationally recognized PA and the West Bank. While Hamas and Israel went to war, Israel and the PA remained at peace. The war had nothing to do with Israel-Palestinian relations as such but as a response to Hamas's extremism, rejecting not only any comprehensive peace agreement with Israel but even a real truce. How, then, does this triangular relationship figure in Palestinian politics? Analysts have generally ignored the proximity of Hamas's decision for war to its impending January 2009 showdown with Abbas, Fatah, and the PA. It was widely predicted that Abbas was going to announce that, given the impossibility of holding new elections, he would simply extend his term for another year. The event was expected to mark a major widening of the rift between the two groups. Hamas, it was thought, would declare Abbas a usurper, name its own candidate for "president," and the establishment of two rival Palestinian governments would be complete. Even before that date, the PA had apparently enjoyed some real success — with Israeli help — in reducing Hamas's organization on the West Bank, ensuring any takeover bid there would be impossible, and making progress toward restoring order and even improving the economy. Hamas no doubt saw choosing war as a way of upstaging Abbas, showing that it was the real fighter for Palestinian rights (principally the right to wipe Israel off the map), and even attracting support from some Fatah men who concluded that Hamas was macho and their own organization was too meek. In effect, it was a reiteration of traditional Palestinian politics in which those who take the most extreme action, evidence the greatest intransigence, and kill the most Israelis prove their credentials for leadership. In practice, though, Hamas played into Abbas's hands. Now he has the perfect rationale to insist that elections cannot be held — which is, of course quite true — and he must remain as leader for the indefinite future. Despite this, the relationship between Hamas and Fatah remain quite complex. It seems bizarre that Hamas set off a civil war, murdered Fatah men in cold blood, and kicked the group out of Gaza yet still most of Fatah is ready to forgive it. There is a strong likelihood that if given the choice, Fatah leaders — though not necessarily Abbas himself — would prefer conciliation with Hamas, which would make any peace with Israel impossible — to making a diplomatic deal with Israel and getting a Palestinian state. From Israel's standpoint, of course, how can it negotiate any comprehensive solution with the PA when it cannot deliver half of the territory, people, and armed men who are supposed to be bound by such an agreement? Moreover, the possibility that either Hamas will overthrow Fatah at some future point or even that the two will join together in a new war against Israel rather puts a damper on Israeli willingness to make concessions. The paradox of a simultaneous blood feud and brotherly love relationship between the two Palestinian organizations is explained by the supposed sanctity of being fellow Arabs, Muslims, and Palestinians, coupled with a deep and abiding loathing of Israel. Yet this also coexists with such deep Fatah anger at Hamas that interviewed Fatah cadre told reporters that they were glad Israel was trouncing Hamas in Gaza Strip. The solution of this paradox was for the official PA line to be: it's all Hamas's fault but there should be an immediate ceasefire and Israel is behaving in a beastly way. This approach is strengthened by the fact that most Arab states and a surprising amount of the media (albeit in many cases the two are identical) are taking a similar line. Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, the smaller Gulf states and more — pretty much all the leaders except for Syria — hate Hamas. They see it as an agent of Iran, meaning a friend of their Islamist opponents. If Fatah were more adept politically, it could benefit from this situation. A clever and active policy would combine an energetic campaign to unite the Arab states behind the PA, while persuading the UN and West that they should ensure its restoration to power in the Gaza Strip as the "legitimate government." The Fatah underground in the Gaza Strip would be reinforced and figure out some way (even with a little secret coordination with Israel) to oust Hamas and seize power at least in sections of the territory. Yet both the PA and Fatah lack the will power and political skill to take advantage of such a promising situation. They are sitting back and hoping that someone — though not Israel — will give them back the Gaza Strip on a silver platter. The problem also includes their lack of charismatic leadership and failure to deal seriously with the problems that led them to being kicked out by the election: corruption, incompetence, and the failure to articulate a moderate vision of achievable peace with Israel. No outside power, including Israel, and no amount of money can make up for the shortcomings of the PA and Fatah. Thus, it is much easier for Hamas to lose the war than for the nationalist forces to win. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East. |
|
DIASPORA JEWS AND THE WAR
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 26, 2009. |
|
This is by Isi Leibler and appeared today in the Jerusalem Post Contact Isi Leibler at ileibler@netvision.net.il |
|
The virulent global response to our struggle to defend our citizens against a cruel and evil foe confirms that Balaam's biblical depiction of Jews as "the people that dwells alone" remains valid to this day. Notwithstanding unprecedented efforts to minimize noncombatant casualties among enemies ruthlessly exploiting their own women and children as human shields, we were once again demonized. Diaspora Jews had to endure a new torrent of frequently violent anti-Semitism with demonstrators displaying placards proclaiming obscene messages like "Death to the Jews," "We are all Hamas" and "Jews to the gas." Even more shocking, purportedly respectable liberals joined in some of these murderous hate fests. Despite being vastly outnumbered by Muslims (other than in the US) and enveloped in a violent anti-Semitic climate reminiscent of the 1930s, most Jewish communities maintained their support for Israel. The fact that this time Israeli spokesmen effectively articulated their case undoubtedly encouraged many of the traditionally more timid Jewish leaders in smaller communities to speak up. American Jewry, encompassing the vast majority of Diaspora Jews, remained steadfast in its support. AIPAC, despite having been the target of a radical Jewish campaign seeking to discredit it, retained its standing as a responsible and effective lobbying group supported by the leading American Jewish agencies. It was gratifying to observe that the highly vocal fringe groups like J Street, Israel Policy Forum and other left-wing clusters who had been urging the US administration to exert pressure on the government were marginalized and to date have been utterly ineffective.
ELSEWHERE, THE response of the smaller Diaspora Jewish communities was sometimes more problematic and largely determined by the attitudes of individual leaders. The vast majority displayed considerable fortitude and responded to the anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic venom with public expressions of solidarity. Most Jewish community leaders were also attacked in the media for their support of Israel by people of Jewish origin, many of whose only involvement in Jewish affairs related exclusively to Israel bashing. In Europe, the French under the leadership of CRIF, once again emerged as the most robust Jewish community. In the UK, even the Board of Deputies of British Jews which has a penchant for lying low and trying to avoid rocking the boat, responded to pressure from grassroots activists and endorsed public meetings expressing solidarity which were well attended. Predictably, the obsequious Board of Deputies launched a major appeal for funds to provide medical assistance to be equally divided between civilians in "Gaza and in Israel" presumably to demonstrate that Anglo Jewry is no less distressed concerning the plight of Palestinians than about their own kinsmen. Supporting the humanitarian needs of Palestinians is, of course, commendable. Even residents of the South who endured Hamas missile attacks for eight years contributed aid to noncombatants in Gaza. However it is doubtful whether the "noble" sentiments displaying equal concern to both parties conveyed in the Board of Deputies appeal will impress anyone, including the general British public and certainly not the supporters of Hamas. One can imagine the response during the World War II Blitz had Anglo-Jews sought to divide funds raised to alleviate the suffering of British civilians with German noncombatants.
IN CONTRAST to the UK, the Australian Jewish community has a long tradition of maintaining a proactive approach. When prime minister John Howard, renowned for over a decade as one of Israel's greatest friends, was defeated, there was considerable concern that Australia's policy toward Israel could tilt toward the European model with its propensity to endorse moral equivalence. To the relief of the Jewish community, the new Labor Party Prime Minister Kevin Rudd unequivocally maintained his predecessor's policy of friendship to Israel. However last November, his government stunned the Jewish community by endorsing a UN resolution which went to the lengths of accusing Israel of breaching the Geneva Conventions. The Jewish community rallied and protested in a robust but responsible manner. Subsequently, when the Gaza war erupted, the Australian government again emerged as one of Israel's few friends in the international arena and in the UN consistently justifying its right to take measures necessary to defend its citizens. This demonstrates how even a small Jewish community can have a positive impact if it is willing to stand up and be counted. In that context, one must commend the courageous South African Jewish Board of Deputies which was not deterred from promoting the case for Israel despite the hostile environment surrounding it.
ON THE ORGANIZATIONAL level, the poor performance of the New York-based World Jewish Congress whose Plenary Assembly opens in Jerusalem today was highly disappointing. The raison d'être of this global Jewish body is to provide leadership and direction to the smaller Jewish communities, especially during periods of crisis. To his credit, WJC president Ronald Lauder did participate in the American Jewish Presidents Conference solidarity mission to Israel. Likewise, the European Jewish Congress, an autonomous offshoot of the WJC, did encourage its constituents to support Israel. But despite the global tsunami of anti-Semitism and its obligation to raise its voice in defense of Israel, the New York head office of the WJC has been virtually invisible over the past month. Their incompetence is also exemplified by the ongoing Chavez fiasco. Last year, the WJC was criticized for groveling to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez after he had mumbled a few words about opposing anti-Semitism and signed a statement with the Argentinean and Brazilian presidents "condemning anti-Semitism and anti-Islamism." Despite being aware that Chavez remained totally committed to Iran and had been facilitating the penetration of Hizbullah into Latin America, the WJC leaders lavished him with praise and predicted that the Venezuelan ambassador previously withdrawn from Israel would soon return to Tel Aviv. When the war against Hamas erupted, Chavez accused Israel of inflicting a "holocaust" on the Palestinians, demanded that their leaders be charged with war crimes, expelled the Israeli ambassador and called on Venezuelan Jews to dissociate themselves from Israel. The head of the local Jewish community, Avraham Benshimol, courageously defended Israel and condemned Chavez. Following this, WJC secretary-general Michael Schneider was urged to speedily issue an appropriate statement and delete the lead story on the World Jewish Congress Web site which continued extolling the virtues of Chavez. Yet, weeks later, after Chavez had already formally severed relations with Israel and virtually every major Jewish organization had condemned the Venezuelan government, the WJC statements praising Chavez remain the lead story. Hopefully the global Jewish body will get its act together after its assembly. If history is to be any guide, one can expect that sooner or later there will be another upheaval that will again put the Israel-Diaspora relationship to the test. One of the prime tasks of the new government following the February elections should be to resurrect the ministry of Diaspora affairs which went into cold storage after the retirement of former minister Natan Sharansky. This ministry should become an essential instrument for the strengthening of ties between Jews everywhere in peace as well as in war. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
THE LAUGHABLE SAUDI PEACE PLAN
Posted by LEL, January 26, 2009. |
|
This is by Max Boot and appeared in Commentary
|
|
It is not only our enemies that will be testing the young new American president. So will our allies. Or should I say ostensible allies? The latest test comes from Saudi Arabia. Prince Turki al- Faisal, a member of the royal family and a former chief of Saudi intelligence, has penned an op-ed for the Financial Times with the headline: "Saudi patience is running out." The prince darkly warns Obama to adopt the Saudi peace plan for Israel...or else. The plan, in case you've forgotten, calls on Israel "to withdraw completely from the lands occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem, returning to the lines of June 4 1967; to accept a mutually agreed just solution to the refugee problem according to the General Assembly resolution 194; and to recognize the independent state of Palestine with East Jerusalem as its capital. In return, there would be an end to hostilities between Israel and all the Arab countries, and Israel would get full diplomatic and normal relations." That this is not actually a solution to the Israeli-Arab dispute should be obvious to anyone with even a modicum of understanding of the region. If Israel were actually to withdraw from the West Bank, the almost certain result would be a toppling of a corrupt and deeply unpopular Fatah administration and its replacement with a popular and fanatical Hamas administration which would never accept Israel's right to exist. Nominal recognition from a few more states such as Saudi Arabia would do nothing to solve Israel's dire security problems emanating not only from Hamas and Hezbollah, but also from their sponsors in Syria and Iran. Further Israeli territorial concessions would have the same effect as its previous withdrawals from Gaza and southern Lebanon, further emboldening its enemies to step up their attacks. Anyone who thinks that the ineffectual Saudis — any more than the ineffectual Egyptians who have already recognized Israel — would somehow protect Israel from the terrorists has been smoking a few hookahs too many. Moreover, Prince Turki's protestations of peace and goodwill are severely undercut by the rabid hostility his article exhibits toward Israel. He writes that the Israeli armed forces have "murdered more than 1,000 Palestinians" in the course of their "bloody attack on Gaza." He also refers to Operation Cast Lead as a "calamity," "butchery," "the slaughter of innocents," and a "disaster." He lays almost all the blame for what happened at Israel's feet — it was "Israeli actions that led to this conflict, from settlement building in the West Bank to the blockade of Gaza and the targeted killings and arbitrary arrests of Palestinians." And so on, in the typical way of anti-Israel zealots. Prince Turki concludes with a plea: "Let us all pray that Mr Obama possesses the foresight, fairness, and resolve to rein in the murderous Israeli regime and open a new chapter in this most intractable of conflicts." It is hard not to laugh at a representative of one of the world's most oppressive and intolerant regimes condemning the most democratic, liberal and tolerant government in the region as a "murderous... regime." It is also hard to take seriously the prince's professions of deep concern for the sufferings of Hamas, a terrorist group that is aligned with Saudi Arabia's chief enemy, Iran, and whose destruction he would no doubt be delighted to witness. This is part of the Saudi habit of trying to push new American administrations into being more "even-handed" in the Middle East — code for turning against Israel. Perhaps the Saudis really care about this issue. More likely they are eager to assert their anti-Israel credentials as a way to blunt Iran's appeal and to bolster Saudi claims to preeminence in the Muslim world. It would be deeply unfortunate if, as appears likely, Obama plays into Saudi hands and acts as if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is (a) the fulcrum of the Middle East and (b) resolvable through more American pressure on Israel. Neither proposition is remotely true, as the new president is likely to learn to his regret before too long. Contact LEL at lel817@yahoo.com |
|
ZOA CONCERNED: MIDEAST ENVOY MITCHELL BLAMES BOTH SIDES EQUALLY; RATIONALIZES PALESTINIAN VIOLENCE
Posted by Zionist Organization of America (Z0A), January 26, 2009. |
|
January 23, 2009
Wash. Post: Mitchell Plan Was Flop.
The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) has expressed concern over President Obama's appointment of George Mitchell as his Mideast envoy dealing with the Arab war against Israel. It's surprising that Obama would appoint Mitchell since, as Jackson Diehl of the Washington Post said, "The Mitchell Plan of 2001 was a flop. Why try the Mitchell approach again?" And Aaron Miller of the Woodrow Wilson International Center said this week, "The appointment of George Mitchell would be a strong suggestion that Obama is going to free himself of the exclusive relationship that the US has had with Israel." ZOA's specific concerns include the fact that Mitchell has always made it clear that he believes both sides are equally at fault for the lack of peace. He believed this even when terrorist Yasser Arafat headed the Palestinian Authority! In fact, the reason there is no progress is the Palestinian Authority's refusal to adhere to their written agreements to fight and prevent terrorism, arrest terrorists, end incitement to hatred and violence against Israelis and Jews in their schools, media, speeches and sermons, and refusal to accept its existence as a Jewish state that is the reason for the lack of progress. After all, Israel has already given the Palestinian Arabs all of Gaza and half of Judea & Samaria with little to show for it except for the greatest amount of terrorism in Israel's history. And the United States and the world has given the Palestinian Authority billions of dollars in aid — more aid per capita than any country has ever received. Evidence of Mitchell's "equal blame" thesis include statements from the Mitchell Report of April 2001:
Mitchell also inappropriately criticized Israeli actions in his Report.
George Mitchell also promotes the false anti-Israel belief that Jews living in communities in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) is the biggest obstacle to peace — not Arab terrorism or Arab incitement by quoting former Secretary of State James Baker. Baker said "I don't think there is any bigger obstacle to peace than the settlement activity that continues not only unabated but at an enhanced pace." Mitchell further states, "This policy described by Baker has been, in essence, the policy of every American administration over the past quarter century." Mitchell Explains Away Palestinian Terrorism Shockingly, Mitchell actually seemed to claim that Jewish communities existence and growth is a basis for Palestinian violence saying, "Israel has a responsibility to rebuild confidence, a cessation of Palestinian-Israeli violence will be particularly hard to sustain unless Israel freezes all settlement construction activity." Then Mitchell seemed to express again a rationale for Palestinian terrorism. He said, "We acknowledge the Palestinian Authority's position that security cooperation presents a political difficulty absent a suitable political context, i.e. the relaxation of Israel security measures combined with ongoing, fruitful negotiations. We also acknowledge the Palestinian Authority's fear that, with security cooperation in hand, Israel may not be disposed to deal forthrightly with Palestinian political concerns. We believe that security cooperation cannot long be sustained if meaningful negotiations are unreasonably defined, if security measures 'on the ground' are seen as hostile, or if steps are taken that are perceived as provocative or as prejudicing the outcome of negotiations." And as recently as December 18, 2008, at a conference in Tel Aviv of the Institute for National Security Studies, Mitchell said, "The Palestinians want an independent, economically viable and geographically integral state, that is their overriding objective." Mitchell ignores the fact that if this were true, the Palestinians could have had a state in 2000, offered by Ehud Barak. Instead, the Palestinians launched a terror war against Israel. They could have established a state from 1948-67, when they controlled Gaza & Judea & Samaria. If the Palestinians' real goal were a state and not Israel's destruction why would they have elected Hamas in Gaza and why would Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas create a new Fatah party emblem showing all of Israel as Palestine with a Kalyshnakov rifle next to it. Mitchell also ignores Abbas' public statement that "it is not required of Hamas, or Fatah, or the Popular Front to recognize Israel. (PATV, October 3, 2006)" Even Americans, in a new early January 2009 poll, show they are strongly opposed to establishing a Palestinian state. Only 31% of Americans now support such a state (Jerusalem Post, January 16, 2009). Americans understand we don't need another terrorist state in the Middle East. Statehood does not bring peace. Syria, Iran and North Korea have sovereign states — are they lovely peace-loving countries. Mitchell ignores numerous polls nullifying his theses: 54% of Palestinians reject 2-state solution in historic Palestine (September 2008, An-Najah National University Poll); 58% of Palestinians reject statehood alongside Israel (An-Najah National University poll, May 2008); 75% of Palestinians don't think Israel has right to exist and 70% of Palestinians support one-state solution (Near East Consulting poll, February 2007); 67% of Palestinians oppose Hamas recognizing Israel (PCPSR, September 2006); 61% support non-recognition policy toward Israel pursued by Hamas/Palestinian Authority government (Bir Zeit University poll, June 2006). Mitchell also made no mention of the Palestinians goals reflected in schools, speeches and the media calling for Israel's destruction as well as every official Palestinian map showing no Israel. Marty Peretz in this week's New Republic said, "Mitchell is a bit too credulous." This was evident when in answer to the talk show host Charlie Rose's question "Do you think Yasser Arafat will be able to negotiate for peace and take steps for peace." — Mitchell confidently answered, "Yes, I do." More Mitchell credulousness was revealed when he said, "The problem is that Palestinians don't believe they'll really get a state." And "they need a contiguous state," said Mitchell again ignoring Israel's offers by former Prime Minister Ehud Barak and others. ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, "The ZOA is troubled by the choice of George Mitchell as President Obama's Mideast envoy for several reasons. One, he incorrectly believes both sides are equally at fault. He gives a moral and factual equivalence between the Palestinian Arabs and the Israelis actions and goals. He refuses to distinguish between the aggressor and the victim, between right and wrong. Secondly, he incorrectly believes that "settlements are the main problem," not understanding that the main problem is the Palestinian Arabs' refusal to fulfill their obligations by ending terrorism, outlawing terror groups, ending incitement, refusing to place Israel on their official maps and recognizing Israel as a Jewish state. He seems oblivious to the fact that freezing settlements was not only not in the Oslo accords, but it would reward the Palestinians for their violence, and promote a racist agenda of Jews being banned from living in Judea & Samaria while Arabs can live in Israel. (How is it that Israel can have 15% of their population be Arabs, while the Arabs won't permit even less than 10% of their population in the territories be Jews)? Thirdly, he wants Israel to endanger itself by closing checkpoints which monitors the possibility of terrorists entering Israel, which makes as much sense as closing security checkpoints in airports. He has accepted the Arab propaganda of its alleged humiliation and frustration and phony staged killings like that of 12-year-old Mohammed al-Dura. Again, no terror, no checkpoints. Fourthly, he tries to explain away Palestinian Arab terrorism, violence and murder by claiming that Israeli behavior and actions are its cause. Finally, he strongly urges both sides to negotiate, as if that is the overriding goal in and of itself, ignoring the fact that 15 years of negotiations and concessions has only led to more bloodshed. "Mitchell seems unaware that the real issue is not settlements, or Jerusalem, or statehood, but the Arabs refusal to accept Israel as a Jewish state. And that Israeli concessions were not taken as positive signs by the Palestinians but as an indication that Israel is weak and ready to cave in to more demands. "The issue is not more concessions but making clear that unless the Palestinians transform their culture, and actions, and policies, and goals, they will not be able to get anything in terms of more concessions or international funding. "We also must remember that George Mitchell's success with the IRA-British problem doesn't translate to success with the Arab war against Israel. However extreme and murderous the IRA was, the goal was not the destruction of Britain and extermination of its people. They wanted only to remove Northern Ireland from British rule. By contrast, the goal of Hamas and the Palestinian nationalist movement is Israel's destruction and the murder of Jews, not merely the creation of a Palestinian Arab state next to it. This is not, as Mitchell once said, merely a "more complicated" conflict — it is a conflict on a different plane with different goals and motivations from the nationalist war in Ireland. We are worried that George Mitchell does not understand this." |
|
FROM ISRAEL: THE JERUSALEM CONFERENCE
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 26, 2009. |
|
This evening began the sixth annual Jerusalem Conference, a nationalist forum that brings together a large array of speakers under the aegis of IsraelNationalNews (Arutz 7) and B'Sheva newspaper. Over the course of the next three days, I will share pertinent comments from some of those speakers. You can also watch the conference live on
~~~~~~~~~~ Tonight I wish to cite Lt.-Gen. (ret.) Moshe "Bogie" Ya'alon, who, in the opening address, spoke simple truth — which is so rarely heard and so very welcome. Ya'alon — a former Chief of Staff, who was relieved of his position because of his opposition to the "disengagement" — is now Senior Fellow at the Adelson Institute for Strategic studies at the Shalem Center and a candidate for the Knesset on the Likud list (#8). ~~~~~~~~~~ This, in summary, is what he said: Even the most "moderate" of the Arab regimes has declined to recognize our right to exist as a Jewish state. They exhibit no readiness to compromise. But there has been a blurring of these facts in public debate and in the terminology we use. Why should we assume that a return to the '67 lines will lead to peace when we weren't accepted before '67, when we were inside those lines? We continue with the same approach, which leads to ambiguity and confusion. The US did not pressure Israel with regard to Oslo or the "disengagement." The impetus for this came from inside of Israel. We continue to talk in language of yesteryear, as if nothing has been learned. But all we've gotten in return for territory is rockets. It time for our leadership to say we tried, but we don't have a partner. Not only do we not have a partner now, we are not going to have a partner. We must seek other solutions. The challenge of new leadership is to provide a clear vision of where we are going. With a clear understanding of the challenges we will face. And without blurring the issues. The conflict is not territorial. We are at the forefront of the battle with Islam. We need a new strategy that eliminates the idea of territory for peace. Talk of withdrawals fuels Jihad. The Arabs export rockets to Israel instead of commercial goods to Europe. We don't need leaders coming forward with big plans, and shaking hands. We need a "bottom-up" peace, with kill us. ~~~~~~~~~~ We are speaking, says Ya'alon, about more than issues of land and security. We must also combat an ideological assault, because our legitimacy is being attacked. There is an erosion of the sense of the justice of our cause. Israeli Arabs say they are the locals and we are the colonialists. They say the rights to this land — ALL of the land — is theirs. With this the resilience of our society is being tested. We must stand strong for a Jewish home. We must know who we are. ~~~~~~~~~~ Would that every Israeli would have heard this. ~~~~~~~~~~ I will mention in passing then, just a couple of the comments of a speaker who followed Bogie. This is Ya'akov "Katzele" Katz, new head of the Ihud Leumi party — the National Union. As a man of Torah, he spoke about the understanding that religious nationalist Jews have with regard to the meaning of this land, and our need to fight for it and stand strong for it. While he acknowledged, and I certainly recognize, that there are people who are not religious who stand strong for Israel and understand our connection to this land, there is enormous wisdom in what he says. When we break with our tradition, when our roots grow shallow, we lose our way. The challenge then, is to sow deep roots and instill that sense of tradition in our young people. ~~~~~~~~~~ Perhaps it is keenly relevant to this need to instill tradition in our young people that MK Binyamin Netanyahu, head of Likud, and MK Effie Eitam, of the religious nationalist Achi party, signed a memorandum of understanding today. Netanyahu — saying that, "the gaps between the Likud and Religious Zionism are disappearing" (Netanyahu said that??!!) — pledged that Likud would provide funds for religious nationalist educational institutions. These are the educational institutions, I say without a shadow of a doubt, who build young Israelis with the strongest devotion to Israel, and the best understanding of our roots in the land. Keeping these institutions solid is critical to Israel. Netanyahu also pledged that he will prevent any further withdrawals (any further "disengagements"), and that he would speedily attend to the needs of those who were evacuated from Gush Katif — something that is urgently past due. Additionally, Netanyahu pledged to keep Jerusalem united under Israeli control and to increase the Jewish majority in the city. ~~~~~~~~~~ If Binyamin Netanyahu has pledged all of this, it means he sees that our country has moved to the right. Eitam said this was "An old dream and a historic moment." Eitam was going to formally join the Likud before the lists were set, but as I understand it, did not because of some legal complication. He expressed hope then that he would in the future. This memorandum of understanding does not put Eitam on the Likud list, rather it signals cooperation. How this impacts the success of Ihud Leumi — National Union, which Eitam was once a part of and broke with, remains to be seen. ~~~~~~~~~~ In a meeting with Tony Blair, Netanyahu made other comments about what he would do as prime minister. These were clearly highly politicized statements in anticipation of the arrival of Mitchell on Wednesday. Said Netanyahu, he would not build new settlements, but "like all the governments there have been until now, I will have to meet the needs of natural growth in the population. I will not be able to choke the settlements." Notice: It's not that he would be deliberately uncooperative, but he wouldn't be able to help this situation. This is how I see Netanyahu playing the game. No overt confrontation, but sort of sliding out sideways. Mitchell's position is a settlement freeze. He also said he would advance negotiations with the Palestinians quickly. Again, avoiding direct confrontation. But making it clear, at the same time, that he intends to focus on "economic development." ~~~~~~~~~~ Haaretz cites Likud officials as saying he would include Labor, Yisrael Beitenu and Shas in a Likud government, but not Kadima. Put simply, he wants Kadima to fall on its face. Couldn't happen to nicer people. Livni has just said on "60 Minutes" (the widely watched TV show in the US) that if she is prime minister she would move out "the settlers" for peace. Guess she said that because she hadn't yet heard Moshe Ya'alon speak about confusion and repeating the same formulas that haven't worked. (I know how horrendous that "60 Minutes" show was, and perhaps will have further comments soon.) ~~~~~~~~~~ I love it: EU Commissioner for Development and Humanitarian Aid, Louis Michel, after touring in Jabaliya in northern Gaza, told reporters that: "At this time we have to also recall the overwhelming responsibility of Hamas. I intentionally say this here — Hamas is a terrorist movement and it has to be denounced as such. "Public opinion is fed up to see that we are paying over and over again...for infrastructure that will be systematically destroyed." He charged Hamas with using civilians as "human shields," and said the years of rocket fire on Israel served as a "provocation." "When you kill innocents, it is not resistance. It is terrorism." Mushir al-Masri, a Hamas spokesman, declared himself "shocked" to hear these words. ~~~~~~~~~~ Along with all of the above, there is in the news a whole lot of "more of the same": The issues I addressed yesterday regarding rumors about what sort of deals Egypt is cooking up and what Hamas is demanding. I prefer to not re-play these, or speculate, but rather to see how matters play out. All of the reports are coming from the other side, without Israeli confirmation. I will mention that apparently there is a PLO delegation in Cairo, pumping for an agreement with Hamas, which they claim must precede a truce. Hamas is not necessarily seeing it this way. And there is a report that Egypt wants to see Hamas strike a deal for a truce before our election: This speaks volumes about what Olmert might give as compared to Netanyahu. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today, Transportation Minister Mofaz, at a Kadima conference, sent a verbal message to Hamas's Haniyeh: "Only when Gilad Shalit sees the light of day, will you see the light of day. Only when Gilad goes free will you and your friends go walk free." That sounds good. It should just be true. ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, Haniyeh sent a congratulatory message to Obama, in which he said, "Palestinians will never be content as long as they remain victims of terrorist and barbaric occupation." And our enemy, Jimmy Carter, gave a TV interview in which he declared that Hamas has to be involved in reaching peace. Carter says Hamas can be trusted because they "adhere[d] to the ceasefire fully." Two questions: What planet is this man on? And does he have Obama's ear? ~~~~~~~~~~ You might find this article, "In Egypt's Rafah, tunnel denial is
the way of life," interesting. Brenda Gazzar, writing in the Post,
quotes Rafah mayor, Gen. Sameh Issa Abdul Wahab, who says: "Any
[tunnel] that is discovered, the authorities destroy it immediately.
The executive [security] forces are in complete control."
That was my laugh for the day. ~~~~~~~~~~ But there is absolutely nothing funny about this. The new US ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, said today that the issue of a nuclear Iran will be a top priority of the new administration: "Dialogue and diplomacy must go hand-in-hand with a very firm message that Iran needs to meet its obligations as defined by the Security Council." The more I read, the worse it sounds. Trying to convince Iran to "meet its obligations as defined by the Security Council"? Get real! ~~~~~~~~~~ I would like to end with this article about how Hamas tried to break into ambulances and, more importantly, how an Arab ambulance driver describes his cooperation with the IDF, which worked to protect him. (Thanks to my daughter, Sharon Raanan on this.)
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ONLY 250 OF GAZA FATALITIES WERE CIVILIANS
Posted by Barbara Sommer, January 26, 2009. |
|
The article below was written by Hanan Greenberg and it
appeared today in YNET Israel News EDITOR'S NOTE: The cartoon on Hamas is not part of the original article. It is by Steve Breen and it appeared today in the San Diego Union-Tribune. |
Senior military sources say recent findings indicate at least 700 of those killed in Gaza offensive were gunmen. Palestinians claim only 300 armed men killed. |
|
A continuing IDF investigation into the number of civilian Palestinian casualties during the Israeli offensive in Gaza indicated that only 250 of the fatalities were civilians. The military estimates that between 1,100 and 1,200 people were killed during the offensive. Some 700 of are believed to be militants and most are believed to be Hamas operatives. The IDF is still trying to ascertain the identity of the remaining fatalities, but security sources said many would probably turn out to be militants as well. "Hamas is familiar with the numbers and is doing everything it can to concealed them," said an IDF source. The data presented by the Palestinian is vastly different: Palestinian Groups operating in the Strip have reported 92 of the fatalities as gunmen, 48 of whom were affiliated with Hamas, 32 with Islamic Jihad, 10 with the Popular Resistance Committees' Salah a-Din Brigades and two with the Mujahedeen Brigades. According to a Palestinian source, the majority of the Palestinian fatalities were killed in air raids. The Palestinians reported 200 police officers were killed in the first day of the Gaza shelling, alone. Hamas claimed that "the Israelis are concealing their losses and lying about the losses suffered by the Palestinians." 'Ratio of 1:3' The military is doing everything it can to compile accurate data regarding the identity of those killed in Gaza, including debriefing soldiers and cross-referencing their information with intelligence. Gaza Division Chief Brigadier-General Eyal Eisenberg alluded to the fact that the majority of the Palestinian fatalities were Hamas operatives, but refused to specify numbers. The IDF has yet to verify the identity of some 200 fatalities, mostly men in their 20s, whose identification is delayed because they are still buried under the rubble. The defense establishment believed many of them would prove to be Hamas men. Many of the fatalities were considered to be civilians at first, because there were no weapons found with them, said a military source, "But that method of operation is consistent with the way Hamas was hiding in the midst of civilians, moving between their strongholds with no weapons. In many cases someone thought to be a civilian casualty turned out to be a Hamas operative after we ran our checks." 
The civilian-gunman casualty ratio, he added, was one to three, proving that the IDF was targeting Hamas and not civilians. The IDF stressed that the forces took significant precautions in order to avoid harming any civilians; but considering the way that Hamas chose to involve civilians in the fighting, mounting a surgical strike resulting in absolutely no civilian casualties was impossible. Armistice likely to hold As for the ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, the defense establishment believes it is likely to hold; especially given Hamas' failure to boast about any substantial achievements, like kidnapping a soldier. "The devastation in Gaza, which is a direct result of the nature of a battlefield formed by Hamas, is enormous and it's a deterrent factor for Hamas, which finally realizes the might if the IDF," said a defense establishment source. "They don't seem to be interested in violating the ceasefire, but if the do, they will realize that (Israel) has no intention of reverting back to the days of a surgical response." The success of Operation Cast Lead, added the source, has led the military to begin implementing some of the operational patterns used in the offensive to other sectors. Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com |
|
INTERNATIONAL LAW OR INTERNATIONAL PREJUDICE?; ISRAEL LOST IN GAZA
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 25, 2009. |
|
INTERNATIONAL LAW Traditional international law was humane and fair. Under it, Israel's tactics are legal and fair, and terrorists' tactics are not. Then it embraced antisemitism (i.e., favoring aggressors over Israel). International law or at least the international order respected national sovereignty and individual liberties such as freedom of speech and religion. That is changing. First, the powers that be lie about what traditional international law holds. The media and the Europeans pervert its meaning. They exploit popular lack of information (thank the same media for that), in order to make Israel seem to violate the law. The Arabs lie about what various UNO resolutions mean. Second, the powers that be are trying to change international law. The Security Council is one instrument for it. It issues biased rulings and resolutions. The UNO as a whole is trying to control underwater resources or regulate it, to gain the power to tax what are supposed to be its boss, the member states. Going further, the Supreme Courts of the US and Israel are trying to subordinate their law, or interpret it and define its legality, by the standard of other countries' laws. That is not democratic nor wise. Many foreign governments think collective political correctness more important than individual liberties. This is bad for the economy and fatal for democracy. To a certain extent, globalization must impose rules for transparent and reliable trade. It, too, however, can become a vehicle for allowing lower environmental and health standards for manufacturing than a sovereign state's laws require of imports. Some of the international trade pacts call for totally free trade. Under free trade, a government is not supposed to subsidize its companies' products and restrain the importation of foreign products by tariffs. The notion of free trade, however, is being used to stifle domestic laws that protect a country from harmful products. Israel has a simple case. As the League of Nations recognized, the Jewish people were unjustly expelled from their homeland, and have the best historical, legal, religious, and moral right to it. That, to me, is above international law, but international law supported it. Now, however, the State Dept. is trying to hold Israel to the non-viable standard of the General Assembly when it recommended boundaries for Israel, its resolution being merely advisory. This is not international law. It would invoke a holocaust. I no longer justify Israel's position by reference to it and the warped new world order. I have confidence that Israel will continue to act decently (except towards Jews). ISRAEL LOST IN GAZA Sure enough, after leaving about 92% of Hamas forces alive, and incurring world condemnation, PM Olmert claimed that Israel had accomplished all its goals in Gaza. Did it? He did not at first specify those goals. He declared another unilateral ceasefire, since joined by Hamas. He is discussing with the US obtaining more technical assistance in detecting arms smuggling tunnels. He senses a new Egyptian determination to destroy tunnels. European monitors at the Gaza-Egypt border, chased away by the terrorists before, may be returning. Olmert accomplished little. True, Hamas' boasts that it would wreck Israeli forces proved hollow. But Hamas can regroup. It probably learned how better to react to new IDF tactics. Hamas will get foreign aid to rebuild such infrastructure as Israel destroyed. It galls me to see the international charitable impulse taxing us to restore terrorist power against Israel. I see photos of stocky Arab youths in Gaza, whom we are told are dying of hunger and thirst. Shame on media misrepresentation! Semi-skeletons in sub-Sahara Africa could use the money for sun-powered stoves, brick molds, water-saving agricultural tools, and female education. Olmert and Livni retain their anti-Zionist dependency upon foreign protection. The foreigners are hostile and usually help the enemy. This was proved in Lebanon again, recently, but Israeli leftists have a blind spot about it. Hamas could chase the foreign monitors out, again. Qatar and Mauritania are breaking relations with Israel. This shows how infirm Arab recognition is. Technical advice and gadgets from the US don't suffice. I think it is a face-saving rationalization for withdrawal. Since Egypt didn't try to reduce arms smuggling before, why expect that enemy of Israel to do so now? Indeed, Egypt still is trying to get a terrorist-unity regime in Gaza. That won't eradicate terrorism. Hamas gained in popularity. It is more likely now to seize the rest of the P.A., if Israel lets it. The ceasefire not only forfeited the opportunity to destroy Hamas but also to reclaim the destroyed Jewish communities, at least those bordering Israel, and to encourage the Arabs to leave the Jewish Territories. Israel explained its case better this time, starting before the offensive. However, it still investigates mishaps too slowly. More important, its self-hating regime does not have the independence-mindedness or courage to take the offensive in the media. Instead of waiting to be accused, even if informally, by the UNO and the media of war crimes, it merely replies. It states explanations matter of fact, instead of with indignation. Israeli soldiers should report in that they are returning fire at a UNO school, and the Israeli spokesman immediately should condemn UNRWA for lending itself to the war crime of waging war from civilian facilities, which is Hamas' main method of combat. Leave the UNO in ill repute, not 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 |
|
WALLOWING IN THE FLESHPOT AND BADMOUTHING ISRAEL
Posted by Judah Tzoref, January 25, 2009. |
|
While the Zionist movement should recognize the role of Nazism in rendering the Return to Zion as the prime existential alternative to the Jewish exile (Galut), Anti-Zionism should be indebted to the Palestinism for providing it with an effective driving force. While Nazism symbolizes the essence of anti-Semitism, Palestinism is the anti-matter of the Jewish Return to Zion. Both movements, Nazism as well as Palestinism, share the common denominator of undermining the course of the Jewish destiny. While Nazism attempted to obstruct the course of Jewish destiny by perpetrating the physical genocide of the Jews, Palestinism aspires to achieve the same goal by deprivation of the Jewish sovereign national revival in the Land of Israel, and by perpetuating the colonialistic Arab occupation of the Jewish homeland. Both movements have inevitably justified their causes on preposterous fallacies. While Nazism drew upon the Race Theory in order to instil the racial inferiority of the Jews, Palestinism has created the Palestinian myth in order to obscure the unique Jewish bond to the Land of Israel by fabricating a false Palestinian nation never known in the human history before. The ideological identity between the two movements, Nazism and Palestinism, is too obvious to deny, though each movement attempted and has been attempting to advance its anti-Jewish cause by different means, which eventually converge to the same tragic scenario of Jewish calamity with disastrous ramifications on the entire world. Indeed, history proves that the two movements have always harboured the closeness of mutual sentiments and a common cause. The notorious detractors of Israel are enraged by any suggested interpretation of their harsh anti-Israeli censure as an expression of anti-Semitic stance. However, such vitriolic critics of Israel regurgitate the most fervent Palestinistic vocabulary and instinctively adopt the Arab-Islamic agenda and historic timetable that does not regard as relevant any historical event prior to the emergence of Mohammed. The most virulent speakers against Israel would like to be regarded as the champions of constructive criticism. However their raving rhetoric, that invokes the familiar stench of abusive slogan diatribes, leaves no doubt as to their Palestino-Nazi source of inspiration. The dividing line between fair judgement of Israel and slanderous blasting against it is too obvious to be overlooked. No objective, pertinent and conscientious critic of Israel will ever be accused of anti-Semitism. Such fair critic of Israel will never be associated with the need to protest against any interpretation of his critic as an anti-Semitic stance. On the other hand, the habitual anti-Semites, that so transparently attempt to camouflage their venomous badmouthing against Israel under the veneer of constructive criticism, embark on a vociferous self-righteous campaign against their association with the suspicion of anti-Semitic motives. Be it a Jew or a Gentile, the anti-Semite is sooner or later bound to betray his anti-Semitic disorder. The lowest in the hierarchy of anti-Semitic scale are the Jewish badmouthers of Israel, in particular those living outside the country. Such Jews, who deserted their country in time of trouble for the hedonistic selfish interests of indulging the comforts of overseas fleshpot, wish to whitewash the disgrace of their moral deficiency by defaming the country they left in the lurch. Such Jewish renegades, who add insult to injury by conspiring to harm the country they deserted for the Moloch of selfishness, such Jews who are able to sink so low down to a pointless attempt to gain higher moral ground by belittling the country they betrayed, such people symbolize the abysmal bottom of human nature. Moreover, the same anti-Semitic venom, that they spit on Israel, inevitably rebounds on them as a boomerang. They bear the seeds of anti-Semitism and disseminate them wherever they crawl over the globe with their fervent message of "constructive criticism" against Israel. Dr. Judah (Yehuda) Tzoref is a scientist, trained at the Technion in Haifa and Oxford University in England. His expertise is in physics and energy engineering. He is a grass-roots activist on behalf of Israel. He lives in Rehovot. Contact him at jtzoref@netvision.net.il |
|
PA GIVING SHELTER TO JIHAD FUGITIVES
Posted by Daily Alert, January 25, 2009. |
|
This was written by Khaled Abu Toameh and it appeared in today's Jerusalem Post
|
|
Col. Radi Assidah, the Palestinian Authority's security commander in the Jenin area, said over the weekend that his force is protecting and providing shelter to Islamic Jihad fugitives. 
A number of Islamic Jihad activists wanted by Israel recently handed themselves over to the PA security forces in the city out of fear that they would be killed or arrested by Israel, Assidah said. The PA security commander's statements came in response to allegations by Hamas and Islamic Jihad that his forces were holding "political prisoners" in PA jails. Assidah said the Islamic Jihad men arrived about five months ago at the headquarters of the PA security forces in Jenin to seek sanctuary until their cases with Israel were resolved. "They sought refuge with us," he said. "Since then we have been hosting them in our headquarters. They are not prisoners and they are entitled to leave whenever they want." Assidah also revealed that the PA government of Salaam Fayad was paying the wanted Islamic Jihad men monthly salaries. The fugitives signed documents pledging to refrain from any "activities" until their cases were resolved, he said. The colonel expressed outrage over allegations that the Islamic Jihad men were being held against their will and were threatening to go on a hunger strike. "We are now discussing the problem of these men so that they could leave our headquarters," he said. "When they decide to leave, that will be done in front of the media to prove that the PA does not arrest anyone from Islamic Jihad."
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
|
|
HAMAS, GAZA, AND THE U.N.N. (UNITED NAUSEATING NATIONS)
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, January 25, 2009. |
|
No sooner was Israel reborn in the wake of the Holocaust in May 1948 as a result (on the human part of the deal, at least) of a United Nations' vote, it was attacked by a half dozen Arab nations — most of which had gained their own independence only recently as well. From that moment on, with a few (but important) rare exceptions, the U.N. would work to basically try to undo its "mistake" of permitting the resurrection of the Jew of the Nations. Can't help it...visions of the Hebrew Prophets pour though my mind. Some excerpts from Ezekiel 37:
The hand of the Lord was upon me... set me down in the midst of the valley full of bones.... very many... and, lo, they were very dry.
And He said unto me, "Son of man, can these bones live?" And I answered, "O Lord God, thou knowest."
Thus saith the Lord God unto these bones; 'Behold, I will cause breath to enter into you, and ye shall live: And I will lay sinews upon you, bring flesh upon you, and cover you with skin, and put breath in you.' "
So I prophesied... there was a noise...shaking, and the bones came together, bone to bone... sinews and flesh came up upon them, and skin covered them above: but there was no breath in them.
Then said He unto me, "Prophesy unto the wind, Son of man, and say to the wind, 'Thus saith the Lord God: 'Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.' "
So I prophesied... and the breath came into them, they lived, and stood up upon their feet....
Then He said unto me, "Son of man, these bones are the whole
house of Israel: behold, they say, 'Our bones are dried, and our hope
is lost....Therefore prophesy and say, 'Thus saith the Lord God;
Behold, O My people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up
out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel....' "
Whoa...! Heavy stuff...I still get goose bumps.. Written some twenty-six centuries or so ago, if this wasn't the resurrected phoenix of the Jews — Israel — then I'm Michelangelo. And when Jews from the remote corners of the "Arab" world — where they also didn't know what the morrow would bring and were commonly known as yahud kelb/Jew Dog killers of prophets — were gathered to be flown to Israel, with tears they recited the Hebrewprophecy predicting that they would return to Israel on the wings of eagles as they boarded the planes used in Operation Magic Carpet. One of those above 1948 Arab attackers, Transjordan, became independent two years earlier. Its army was led by British officers and, like Egypt's, was well equipped with Allied armaments left in the region after World War II. Since the Emirate's own story is crucial for understanding attempts made to try to balance conflicting Arab and Jewish claims over that part of the Turks' previous empire which emerged as the Mandate of Palestine after World War I, I frequently reference this in my work. Arabs bring up their tale of how Jews allegedly stole all of the land over and over again; hence my own need to repeatedly remind readers of the truth as well. Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill convened the Cairo Conference in 1921. As a result of this and other machinations of the latest empire (the Brits') to acquire the land of the Jews — Judaea — since the fall of the latter to Hadrian's Roman armies in 135 C.E., Britain's Hashemite Arab allies were awarded all of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine east of the Jordan River — almost 80% of the total area — in 1922. Transjordan's King Abdullah attributed this gift to an act of Allah in his memoirs. Along with other observers, Sir Alec Kirkbride, the Brits' East Bank (of the Jordan River) rep, had much to say about this as well in A Crackle Of Thorns. Not long afterwards, Abdullah's brother, Emir Faisal, was gifted with all of the Mandate of Mesopotamia — renamed Iraq. Millions of Kurds thus saw their own best chance at independence shattered on behalf of Arab nationalism and British Petroleum politics as well. The Ottoman Turkish Empire had ruled most of the region for the previous four centuries. Most of those above invading and other "Arab" states had, in turn, become Arab by the conquest, subjugation, and forced Arabization of millions of native peoples who survived earlier jihads in the wars of the Dar ul-Islam against the Dar al-Harb...another point I feel a need to stress repeatedly. Similar stories could be told all over the region...millions of native, non-Arab peoples, within the power vacuum created by the collapse of empire, seeing their own hopes for freedom and independence in the new nationaist age swept away on behalf of the Arab Nation. Some later fought alongside Arabs against the Mandatory Powers...did them little good after the French and the British left the scene (one way or the other), however. From Egypt, through North Africa into the Sudan, to Lebanon, Iraqi and Syrian Kurdistan, and elsewhere, scores of millions have all been forced to consent to this forced Arabization process. As Egypt's most famous native "Uncle Tom" Copt, the late President Sadat's Foreign Minister Dr. Boutros Boutros Ghali basically summed it up for Israel (as well as all others) in an interview with an Israeli author: if you want to be accepted in the neighborhood, you have to consent to Arabization. The post-1922 up to the current fight, therefore, has been to create a second state for Arabs in what's left of "Palestine" — not a first...the Arabs' 22nd in total spread out across over six million square miles of territory. And that state is expected, by "moderates" willing to tell the West what it wants to hear, as well as the more honest Hamas types, to replace the sole state of the Jews — not live peacefully along side it. Back to the United Nations... In 1947, another partition plan was presented which would have divided the roughly 20% of the Mandate of Palestine left after the creation of Transjordan in half between Jews and Arabs. Had Arabs accepted this, they would have wound up with some 90% of the total original area. They rejected this offer on the grounds that all was part of the Dar ul-Islam and/or their "purely Arab patrimony." The rest is history. Some things change, others never do. Israel's fight with Hamas, Fatah, and others today is the same as it was back then. Back to May, 1948... The U.N. watched its newest child brutally attacked upon birth. It did nothing to stop the onslaught and only finally stepped in after the Jews turned the tide of the battle. Afraid that they would push the Arabs back even further and take more of the non-apportioned territory of the Mandate, the U.N. finally acted. Keep in mind that, unlike Arab claims, these were not "purely Arab" territories. The armistice lines drawn up by the UN. in 1949 simply marked the point where hostilities were stopped. Amongst other things, they left Israel a mere 9-miles wide in some places, and not much more in its strategic waist — where most of its population and industry are located. Many peole travel farther than that just to go to work. It should not be a surprise, therefore, that these became known as the Auschwitz Lines — a constant invitation to Arabs to attack. The lines were never expected to be Israel's real borders, as America's own U.N. rep, Dr.Ralph Bunche, wrote about himself. Recall that as a result of the 1948 Arab assault, Transjordan grabbed the non-apportioned west bank of the Jordan River (where both Jews and Arabs had roots, owned land, and were allowed to live). Now holding both banks, it changed its name to Jordan (since it now held territory from other parts of the Mandate besides those across the river) — and made all the land it now held Judenrein (Jew free) — including east Jerusalem. Numerous age-old synagogues were destroyed, ancient Jewish tombstones were used to pave roads, build latrines, and so forth. Only two nations recognized that illegal seizure. While Jordan thus emerged above, Pharaoh — who had used Gaza to invade the land of the Jews for thousands of years — once again grabbed that coastal strip. Note that during the time Jordan and Egypt held Gaza and the West Bank (aka, Judea and Samaria, its real name) — almost two decades — no one demanded the birth of the Arabs' second state in Palestine in those areas. Not a peep from the United Nations either... As another result of the Arab attempt to nip a microscopic, resurrected Israel in the bud, two refugee situations were created...another point that needs to constantly be reemphasized. The Arabs have continued to this day to thrust the plight of their own refugees — created primariliy as a result of their own actions — into everyone else's faces — people who were pawns (willingly or unwillingly) of the Arabs' own murderous schemes that backfired. Scores of millions of non-Arab peoples also became refugees as a result of wars over the last century. Yet the folks who have received the most aid have been the biggest whiners. Arab refugees, right from the start, were made virtual wards of the world — unlike all the others above. The United Nations Relief Works Agency (UNRWA) — whose spokemen, right now, are villifying Israel over Gaza — was created just to cater to these folks — most of whom were newcomers themselves coming into the land because of its economic development by the Jews. The U.N.'s predecessor, the League Of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission, recorded numerous Arabs crossing into the Mandate from the surrounding Arab states. Many more slipped in through very porous borders under cover of darkness and were never recorded. And still many others arrived with Muhammad Ali and son Ibrahim Pasha's armies from Egypt about fifty years or so earlier and never left...all alleged "native Palestinians." Hamas's virtual patron saint (for whom those rockets Gaza has been blasting israel with are named as well as Hamas's "militant wing), Sheikh Izzedin al-Qassam, was from Latakia, Syria. Arafat was born in Cairo. Indeed, so many Arabs were recent arrivals themselves into the Palestinian Mandate that UNRWA had to adjust the very definition of "refugee" from its prior meaning of persons normally and traditionally resident to those who lived in the Mandate for a minimum of only two years prior to 1948. Now, keep in mind that for every Arab who was forced to flee the fighting that Arabs started (after all, how dare Jews want in one tiny, resurrected state what Arabs demand for themselves in some two dozen others), a Jewish refugee was forced to flee "Arab"/Muslim lands into Israel and elsewhere...but with no UNRWA set up to assist them. Why not? UNRWA has been openly hostile to Israel from the getgo. It has long allowed the promotion of anti-Western and anti-Semitic attitudes among the Arabs it serves, and has done little to help solve the problem of their refugee status — unless giving shelter and employment to those who would terrorize and destroy their Jewish neighbor counts in his regard. Before Israel's current round of fighting in Gaza, back in 2004, UNRWA Commissioner-General Peter Hansen told the Canadian Broadcasting Company "I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll and I don't see that as a crime." Solid evidence and documentation obtained from Arabs on the spot have revealed that UNRWA has turned a blind eye to Arabs setting up mortar and rocket firing positions adjacent to U.N. schools, hospitals, private homes, and so forth. Additionally, in this latest round, Israel had solid intelligence that Hamas leaders were hiding in the basement of such a hospital. Similarly, when Israel was forced to go after Hizbullah in Lebanon in 2006, it turned out that the U.N force there, UNIFIL, not only did not prevent attacks on Israel but allowed Hizbullah to set up its positions right next to UNIFIL units. After a U.N. position got hit as a result, pictures made the rounds showing just such a Hizbullah position right next to a U.N. building. Furthermore, solid evidence surfaced that UNIFIL members collaborated with Hizbullah to enable the kidnaping of Israeli troops from inside Israel proper-the move which started the war in the first place. Ahhh, the United Nations...Nice to know where many millions of American tax dollars are going to, isn't it?!?! Turning the clock back again, from 1948 to1956, Israel was attacked repeatedly by Arabs using Egyptian and Jordanian territories as their bases. In 1956, when Egypt blockaded it at the Strait of Tiran, Israel struck back hard. France and Great Britain were peeved at Egypt's Nasser as well for nationalizing the Suez Canal, so the time was ripe. In a lightening assault, Israel soon found itself on the banks of the Suez Canal. Before Western pressure forced it to withdraw — note the inaction of the U.N. to stop Arab attacks on Israel and so forth which provoked the Sinai Campaign (sound familiar?) — Israel's David Ben-Gurion received assurances that if Egypt ever played the same blockade game again, it would be recognized as a casus belli. This would become very important, once again, in the not-too-distant future. A United Nations Emergency Force was also set up in Gaza and at the Strait of Tiran to supposedly prevent such happenings again. So, tell me please...what good is a fireman who, at the first smell of smoke, disappears from sight? In Spring 1967, Egypt's Nasser must have been all sugared up once again. Pharaoh amassed 100,000 troops, but instead of chariots, he positioned planes, tanks, artillery, and so forth on Israel's border, reinstated the blockade, and ordered the U.N. force out of Gaza so his tank divisions would have an open door. Without a wink, the U.N. turned tail and ran — leaving Israel, once again, all on its own. Nasser, meanwhile, got other Arab nations to jump aboard his own latter-day Final Solution bandwagon as well. While Syria was up to its eyeballs in this right from the start, others — like Jordan's young King Hussein — had to be lured into this a bit later. Big mistake... Well, as you probably know, things didn't quite turn out as Arabs planned... In six days in June 1967, Israel destroyed several Arab air forces, left hundreds of their tanks smoldering, took thousands of prisoners, etc.and so forth...Remember Ben-Gurion's casus belli deal in 1956 regarding a renewal of blockade? Oh yes — I almost forgot... Israel also now found itself holding all of the Sinai Peninsula (in which it developed oil fields, established important air bases, and at last gained a little strategic depth) up to the Suez Canal; in control of the Strait from which it had been repeatedly blockaded; on top of the Golan Heights, from which its farm villages and fishermen on the Sea of Galilee had been repeatedly attacked; in Gaza; and back in Judea and Samaria — the "West Bank," from which all Jews were either previously slaughtered or later excluded from as a result of Transjordan's land grab in 1948. Places like Hebron — where the Hebrew Patriarchs and some of the matriarchs are buried — and elsewhere once again saw Jews. And in a rare moment (Divine guidance?), something else next happened which proved to be not par for the U.N.'s usual course. After much argument, and thanks to America and Great Britain — folks who also opposed Israel in the past — the final draft of the U.N. document, UNSC Resolution 242, which dealt with any future Israeli withdrawal, was worded in a precise way which called for the creation of secure and real borders to replace Israel's '49 Auschwitz lines. It also allowed for a necessary revision of those borders in order to undo — somewhat at least — the travesty of the '49 U.N.-imposed lines. Here's Britain's Lord Caradon on 242... It would have been wrong to demand that Israel return to its positions of June 4, 1967, because those positions were undesirable and artificial. After all, they were just the places where the soldiers of each side happened to be on the day the fighting stopped in 1948. They were just armistice lines. That's why we didn't demand that the Israelis return to them. President Ronald Reagan commented on this same subject on September 1, 1982... In the pre-1967 borders, Israel was barely 10-miles wide... the bulk of Israel's population within artillery range of hostile armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again. Regardless of the renewed pressure that will undoubtedly be coming with the new American President's administration, Israel must insist upon those territorial adjustments it was promised in order to right an historical wrong. A fair compromise must be demanded by Israel's own new leaders. The State Department opposed Israel's creation from the start and has been usually hostile ever since. Expect more of the same, if not worse, coming from the Foggy Folks with an Obama Administration. The Jews the new President appoints to work with him are as reassuring on this matter as James Baker's stick it to the Jew of the Nations "Jew Boys" were before — a good shield to deflect criticism later on from Jews who really care. I truly hope I'm wrong here...but doubt it. In fact, President Obama apparently just loves Baker's Jew Boy Dan Kurtzer — Foggy Bottom's Jew point man used to force the Jews in Israel to ignore 242 and return to their previous suicidal Auschwitz lines. The new President had already sent his well-known, anti-Israel friend and special envoy, Robert Malley (raised in a family of anti-Zionists and Communists who counted Yasir Arafat as a close friend), to Lebanon's slave master and Iran's best buddy, Syria, before he even took the oath of office. Now, pray tell, what might that be all about? Decades ago, Israel had already offered a retreat from well over 90% of the Golan Heights to Syria in return for a true peace... .....'Twasn't good enough for Iraq's Saddam Hussein's twin butchers in Damascus, the Assad boys — neither Papa nor Junior. So, guess who and what's gonna be offered up to try to wean Syria away from Iran? The same folks whose arms are going to be twisted even further than they were already by Condoleezza Rice & Co. to believe that Mahmud Abbas's latter day Arafatian Fatahniks are really the good cops. After all, President Bush had already begun arming, training, funding, and otherwise supporting those alleged doves of peace. Trust me Jew of the Nations, to such folks you should give away the store and bare the necks of your kids... Expect much more of the same (if not worse) with President Obama, close friend and associate of Rashid Khalidi and numerous other blatantly anti-Israel folks. Louis Farakhan has called him the messiah. With a final return (for now) to the United Nations, let's just say that with Arab genocidal actions being/having been waged against millions of Kurds and black Africans, and Arab murder and subjugation being waged against millions of Copts, Jews, Amazighen/Berbers, and others, the only thing that the United Nations seems capable of doing is vilifying Israel and placing it continuously under the high power lens of moral scrutiny for its determination to survive and defend itself despite the United Nations' indifference. Indeed, most of all of the latter's condemnations have been aimed solely at Israel. Perhaps it's time for Israel to seriously consider withdrawing from the United Nauseating Nations or, at the very least, make sure that it quickly elects a new generation of leaders who will know how to stand their ground and demand the fair territorial compromises Israel is entitled to and must have regardless of who's tightening the screws. Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php |
|
RAFAH TUNNELS: KEY TO DEFEATING HAMAS
Posted by Moshe Dann, January 25, 2009. |
|
Israeli military action in the Gaza Strip prompts two basic questions? How did Israel get into this mess? And how can Israel get out? In focus now, finally, are the estimated hundreds of tunnels under the town of Rafah used to smuggle everything from sophisticated weapons, to drugs, prostitutes, food and gasoline. Allowing this little town and UNRWA-sponsored jihadist camps to operate as weapons suppliers and shelters for terrorist organizations has cost the lives hundreds, maimed thousands and jeopardized the entire region. Rafah, a 4 km long Arab town that straddles the Egyptian-Gaza border, is the key to preventing Hamas from obtaining weapons and ending the conflict. Without the supply of ammunition and weapons, Hamas could not sustain a military confrontation, or fire rockets into Israeli cities. Why, then, has Israel, until recently allowed the tunnels to exist, why haven't they been destroyed completely, and when will it end? Background: In the wake of the Israeli-Arab war in 1948-9, Egypt created and occupied what came to be known as, "the Gaza Strip." Rafah was split along the international border established in 1906 between the Egypt and what was then called Palestine, dividing the town in two. After conquering Gaza and the Sinai Peninsula in 1967, Israelis built settlements in both areas; those in Sinai were destroyed when Israel returned the area to Egypt as part of peace agreements in 1979-80. Egypt, however, refused to accept responsibility for the Gaza Strip, or change the configuration of Rafah, leaving Israel holding this problematic bag. The remaining 21 settlements in the Gaza Strip, with government backing, provided a strategic method for controlling the strip, and became an economic powerhouse, providing jobs and stability to local Arabs. In the late 1980's, when the Arab "uprising" (intifada) against Israel began, terrorists in Gaza needed more weapons. Since Israel controlled the above-ground routes, tunnels were dug beneath the Egyptian border, their entrances hidden beneath buildings. Egypt did not restrict tunnel-building and smuggling; Israel was limited in its ability to detect the tunnels, reluctant to interfere with the clans that controlled the tunnel operation, since they provided money to PA officials and the local population. Following the Oslo Accords (1994), Israel turned over control of Jericho and Gaza City to the PA as the first stage of a proposed withdrawal from all Arab-populated areas in the entire West Bank (Yehuda and Shomron), which was intended to comprise a Palestinian state. From time to time, under Israeli control, the IDF tried to deal with the tunnel problem. Several solutions were proposed: (1) Israel could have unilaterally turned its part of Rafah to Egypt, placing the entire town under Egyptian control. Proposed by then PM Menachem Begin to President Sadat, it was rejected by Egypt. According to an informed source, when Israel decided to withdraw from the Gaza Strip, in the summer of 2005, Gen. Amos Gilad was sent to negotiate with the Egyptians. He focused narrowly, according to the source, only on the number and deployment of Egyptian troops that would be placed on the border ostensibly to prevent smuggling, rather than structural changes, such as widening the corridor to make it more difficult to build the tunnels and relocating the population of Rafah. Negotiations with Egypt, however, ended abruptly when then Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz announced Israel's decision to leave the Gaza Strip and the Philadelphia Corridor unilaterally, without pre-conditions. The reason for this fatal mistake has never been explained. Even those who supported withdrawal questioned the rush. Was it because of American/EU pressure? Israeli incompetence? Corruption? A recent interview in Haaretz with head of MI suggests that reports were submitted to fit political, rather than security considerations. The tunnels are big business, costing $100,000 to build — the investment is recovered in a few weeks, or less. Directly supported and financed by the PA according to documents found by the IDF, the tunnels are controlled by criminal gangs with close ties to the PA, and provide a major source of illegal funding to PA officials and local residents. In order to support the PA, the Israeli government often ignored the tunnel business, except for limited IDF action in 2004, which was a prelude to PM Sharon's withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2006 ("disengagement"). In May, 2007, Israeli Comptroller reported that the IDF failed to procure and develop technology to locate and destroy the tunnels. Only at the end of 2004, when terrorists mounted deadly attacks against IDF positions in the Gaza Strip was the issue taken seriously. Although warned by military and security experts not to abandon the critical border area with Egypt, Sharon ignored the advice. According to Israeli military sources, nearly all the tunnels are located in Rafah. A look at the map explains why: Rafah is the only town on the southern border, and therefore is the only place that can provide cover for the tunnels which stretch only a few hundred meters between the Egyptian and Gazan sides of the town. The tunnels cannot extend beyond Rafah because the distance to the nearest town, Khan Yunis, is too far and the area is uninhabited. Without Rafah's cover, therefore, tunnel smuggling will end. And without the ability to resupply its weaponry, Hamas will either be forced to focus on economic and social betterment, or implode. The problem of these tunnels can be resolved simply, cheaply, quickly and without violence: Egypt can remove the homes and build a security perimeter on its side of Rafah. A "closed military zone," with an entrance carefully watched would end tunnel smuggling. Egypt has been playing a deadly cynical game — allowing weapons to reach Hamas at Israel's expense. It's now up to Egypt to act responsibly. The author, a former asst professor of History (CUNY) is a writer and journalist living in Jerusalem. Contact him by email at moshedan@netvision.net.il |
|
CORRECTING TOM FRIEDMAN'S OP-ED
Posted by David Meir-Levi, January 25, 2009. |
|
Below is my way-too-long-to-be-published open letter to Tom Friedman about his op-ed which appeared in today's Palo Alto Daily News. It may have appeared earlier elsewhere, or it may appear over the next few days.
|
|
To: Thomas Friedman
I have long been an admirer of your work. I own all your books and have read some several times. I have until now considered you a fair-minded and perceptive analyst of the Middle East and a reasonably objective commentator regarding the Arab-Israel conflict. However, your essay today ("Two-State solution for Palestine is in Jeopardy" in the Palo Alto Daily News, Palo Alto, CA) reveals an amazing list of non-sequitors, baseless assertions, and factual errors, all of which are quite at variance with objectivity, fair-mindedness, and informed commentary. Par. 2: you assert that the two chief problems are Hamas and the "fanatical Jewish settlers in the West Bank." This is an assertion which seems to contradict reality, since the Jewish settlers (whether they are "fanatic" or not is a topic for a different discussion) have not fired 10,000 qassam rockets in to Arab civilian residences, do not plant road mines, do not carry out drive-by shootings or sniper attacks or kidnappings, do not reject any and every attempt to find peaceful resolution, do not demand the annihilation of all Muslims, and do not declare eternal war and unending hatred of the Arabs — nor do they even threaten to do so. Hamas does. I am not a supporter of the so-called "Settler movement," but I find your implied moral equivalence quite irrational. Par. 4: you assert that "No Israeli government has mustered the will to take down even the 'illegal,' unauthorized settlements..." Are you in some state of early-onset Alzheimers? Do you not recall that the "right wing" "hard-liner" "war monger" "hawkish" "former terrorist" Prime Minister Menahem Begin dismantled six Israeli communities in 1982 in the Sinai in order to accommodate the demands of Anwar es-Sadat, and thus become the first Israeli leader to achieve peace with Egypt? Do you not recall that it was the "right wing" "hard-liner" "war monger" "accused war criminal" Ariel Sharon who led the IDF when it went in to those settlements to drag out the Israeli "settlers" in handcuffs? And this is the same Sharon who supported the peace talks with Egypt and supported the ceding of all of the Sinai peninsula to Egypt, and supported his Prime Minister in this monumental gesture of peace and reconciliation with Egypt. Do you not recall that it was this same "accused war criminal" Sharon who ceded the Gaza Strip to the Palestinian Authority. On September 12, 2005 the last of almost 10,000 Israelis was forcibly dragged out of the Gaza Strip, 17 Israeli communities (aka "settlements") evacuated, along with four other communities in northern Shomron (West Bank), and the Gaza Strip was unilaterally and unconditionally turned over to the Palestinian Authority in a galactic and globally unprecedented gesture of peace and reconciliation with the Palestinian Authority? And what did Israel get for this gesture: Hamas took over and declared more endless war. Israel's unwillingness to dismantle more "settlements" is not a lack of will. It is an intelligent function of experience. In the absence of the Israeli army, Hamas took over the Gaza Strip and ratcheted up its terrorist offensive against Israel's civilian population with its qassams and suicide bombers and arms importation and drive-by shootings and kidnappings. And, to top even that, Hamas leaders again foreswore any peace with Israel, instead announcing unabashedly that they would build upon this great victory in order to increase the terrorism from the West Bank as well. No country in the world should be expected to take actions which enable its enemies to destroy it. Why do you think that Israel is at fault for not taking such action? Moreover, you may not have looked lately, but since 2002 Israel has not increased the number of communities in the West Bank. Where is the fanaticism? Where is the lack of will? What are you talking about? Par. 5: You write that "..without a stable two-state solution, what you will have is...(endless terror war)..." You assert, therefore, that with a stable two-state solution we will have something other than "...Israel behind a high wall, defending itself from a Hamas-run failed state in Gaza, a Hezbollah-run failed state in south Lebanon, and a Fatah-run failed state in Ramallah." What is your evidence for such an assertion? Hamas and Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad and the el-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades and Tanzim and Force 17 and Hizb-ut-Tahrir and Ansar-el-Islam and el-Jama'a al Islamiyeh and the Muslim Brotherhood and Fatah and the PFLP and the DFLP and the PFLPP-GC, and a number of other terror organizations whose names I don't recall at the moment, all insist that theirs is a jihad without end until Israel is destroyed and "Palestine" is free "from the river to the sea," if need be it is a thousand-year "struggle until victory or martyrdom!" No room for a two-state solution there, stable or otherwise. Par. 8: You assert that Kissinger could "..strike a deal that would hold." Odd. I can't recall any deals of Kissinger's in the Middle East or elsewhere which ever held. The only Middle East "deals" which has held are the Israel-Egypt peace treaty and the Jordan-Israel peace treaty, and these were no thanks to Kissinger. In this same paragraph you suggest that a peace maker must also be a nation builder because (as you note in Par. 9) of the need to "...make peace between Palestinians...so there is a coherent, legitimate decision-making body there..." Here I think you are correct, but you seem not to notice the inherent contradiction between your words and recent history. Every attempt at Palestinian nation building has failed. Since 1937 there have been 15 attempts, some by the UK, some by the UN, some by the USA, some by Israel, and some by a combination of these forces, to create a state for the Palestinians. Every attempt has not only failed, but has been rejected by Palestinian leaders (and some leaders of Arab nations) with a response of violence, war, or terrorism, or threats of the same. Today, as in yesteryear, the Palestinian people are led by hate-mongering jihadists whose first (but by no means last) target is the Jews of what they call "historic Palestine." These leaders vociferously oppose any peaceful resolution and declare that the destruction of Israel and the genocide of its Jews is the only resolution that will please Allah and satisfy Arab honor. And, let's not forget, today's Hamas leaders came to power by popular vote. There are no leaders without followers. And the above makes utterly ludicrous your suggestion in Par. 10 that the USA and Israel should work to bring Hamas into a Palestinian national unity government. It is common knowledge today that Abbas remains in power in the West Bank only because the Israeli army controls the West Bank and prevents Hamas operatives from deposing him and setting up a Hamas-led Palestinian Authority there. Hamas' political victory was no accident. A significant plurality, and perhaps even a majority, of Palestinians want Hamas in power. In the West Bank Abbas' ratings are lower than former President Bush's were at their worst in the USA. Let's recall too that Hamas has been locked in a power struggle with Fatah since Hamas took over the Gaza Strip in 2006. Back then they tossed Fatah people from rooftops or shot them in their beds. Today Hamas is systematically slaughtering Fatah people in Gaza, stripping them naked, parading them through the streets of Gaza City, and then shooting them in the head to the wild cheers of Gazan onlookers. So why do you think that Hamas in a "unity government," knowing that it has the support of most of the West Bank Arabs, will treat its Fatah partners any differently? Are you smoking something, or have you just gone all cracked? Par 12: you suggest that "..bringing Hamas into a Palestinian unity government ...will be tricky." Tricky??!! I never knew that you were such a master of understatement. You think it will be "tricky" to get Saudi Arabia and Egypt to influence Hamas when Hamas has the unswerving support of Hezbollah and Syria and Iran (and indirectly, Russian support as well, via Iran)? Do you think that it is merely "tricky" to get Mubarrak to help Israel and the USA when such actions will be considered treason by a significant number of his constituents, who are then likely to support the Muslim Brotherhood in its rise to power in the Egyptian parliament? Is it just "tricky" to get Iran, now a key player, to end its wild and crazy ride to Middle East hegemony, and Shi'ite dominance, and nuclear power merely because a new American president wants to "engage" it? Or is it more likely that Akhmedi-Nejad and his government will continue to play their own "tricky" game by "engaging" western leaders in an endless cycle of "draw the line in the sand and then stand quietly by as Iran crosses it," again and again, while the Iranian centrifuges are being built and the uranium enriched? Driving Hamas to moderation, talking Syria and Iran into ending their pursuit of power, making an honest government out of corruption-riddled Fatah, and getting the Palestinian people to support the leaders whom we want them to support.....that's not "tricky." That is super-hero magic. And this brings me to my last issue with your article. Your final paragraph says, in convoluted language, that such a line-up of what you call this "diplomatic Rubik's Cube" cannot be done. And here I must agree with you. There is no solution to the Arab-Israel conflict while its key players on the Arab/Muslim side are committed to terrorism until victory or martyrdom, and victory is defined as the destruction of Israel and the genocide of its Jews. No Israeli government will make the concessions you demand. No rational government will, anywhere. And there is no rational leadership on the Arab/Muslim side (there are certainly rational Arabs and Muslims, but they are not in positions of power in this conflict). So none of what you suggest is likely ever to happen. So what is the purpose of your essay? David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
NEW YORK TIMES GIVES QADDAFI A SOAPBOX
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, January 25, 2009. |
|
No one might seriously suggest the New York Times demonstrates a pro-Israel predilection, yet featuring the article "The One-State Solution", malevolently adorned by a large black and white picture featuring a sapling bursting through the middle of a mature splitting tree craftily conjuring up an image of Moses parting the Red Sea, as the marquee opinion piece in its 01/22/2008 edition, authored by that infamous 'intellect' Colonel Muammar Qaddafi is even over the top for that world renown news juggernaut now teetering on the fringe of bankruptcy. Then again, perhaps breathing rarified air atop the crumbling precipice of Catastrophe Canyon, bone yard of once mighty media outlets, has twisted the judgment of an editor or two, allowing their newspaper to so prominently display the opinion of such a fringe and indeed viciously flawed character. The homicidal Libyan strongman indeed has been responsible for financing thus enabling, among many other acts of terror, the "Black September Movement" which perpetrated the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre of eleven innocent Israeli athletes and coaches and one German police officer; the 1986 bombing of a German discotheque killing and wounding many innocent victims including more than eighty U.S. servicemen; and the downing in 1988 of the Lockerbie killing 259 innocent airline passengers. Letting bygones be bygones in this case doesn't cut it. Furthermore, providing a soap box for this maggot, letting him propose one Jewish-Palestine State he calls "Isratine", tantalizing the minds of many perhaps intelligent yet misinformed gullible readers, willing to buy into such ideas removed from any proper historical context, is a disservice to the tenets of fairness as well as logic, especially when spewed by such a maniacal messenger who somehow escapes worldwide condemnation and in fact criminal prosecution. More Jews were surely booted out of Muslim countries than Arabs who voluntarily fled Israel during the Jewish homeland's rebirth in 1948, yet that fact is never mentioned in Qaddafi's article as he attempts to justify a right of return for so-called Arab refugees, a bizarre term used to describe mostly children and grandchildren of original Arab inhabitants who for some reason were not welcomed into the Lands of presumed brethren, who for some reason over the years did not lift themselves up by bootstraps as did concurrently exiled Jews. Even Qaddafi, attempting to be reasonable thus persuasive asserts, "It is important to note that the Jews did not forcibly expel Palestinians. They were never "un-welcomed" He goes on suggesting "Yet only the full territories of Isratine... (his fantasyland where Jews and Arabs may peacefully frolic together evermore)...can accommodate all the refugees and bring about the justice that is key to peace." Again, nowhere is it mentioned that tiny Israel is the one and only place in the Middle East a Jew is extended full religious and civil liberties as every other Middle Eastern nation is defined by its exclusive and in most cases exclusionary Muslim culture. Indeed many if not most of those nations are intolerant in fact hostile to non-Muslims. Most essentially, Israel's area, less than the state of New Jersey, is about two tenths of one percent as large as all those surrounding Middle Eastern Muslim countries. How might one reasonably argue, as Qaddafi does, that in effect today's tiny Jewish Homeland should no longer exist, should become a presumably equal admixture of Arabs and Jews. Would Qaddafi also propose that each and every Arab nation similarly break down its walls, allow Jews and other non-Muslims to disseminate their cultures co-mingling with Muslims, even take part in governmental affairs like Arabs now do in Israel? The tenor of Qaddafi's argument is moderate, explaining why a two state solution will not work, condemning neither Arabs nor Jews, citing a history of the persecution of Jews, stating that Palestinians also have a "history of persecution", cleverly agreeing "The Jewish people want and deserve their homeland", yet by the very nature of his solution robs the Jewish people of that true homeland, knowing that in time Arab populations would dwarf Jewish populations, knowing that in time the erstwhile Land of Israel morphed to Isratine would become just another Muslim state perhaps with a few more Jewish neighborhoods. Again, we must not overlook the fact that the purveyor of this wisdom, granted a soapbox by the New York Times, remains a mass murderer at large. Again, we must not overlook the fact that not only is this homicidal colonel responsible for many Jewish deaths in Munich; indeed he is responsible for the death and maiming of so many others, including many Americans. Are New York Times editors so daft, so insensitive, so hoist with their own petard, so smitten by their contempt for the State of Israel, they would thrust upon their readership 'a wolf's words dressed-up in sheep's clothing' spun by this financer of butchers, as long as those words might plant a seed in the hearts and minds of similarly bent or merely naïve readers that if nurtured might grow into the killer sapling, malevolently adorning Qaddafi's article, symbolizing the destruction of the Jewish Homeland? It appears so. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
PALESTINIAN ASSASSINATES POTENTIAL AMERICAN PRESIDENT: WHAT THE HISTORY CHANNEL WON'T TELL YOU ABOUT 1968
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 25, 2009. |
|
This is from Phyllis Chesler's website and is archived at
|
|
The concerts, parties, balls, and general pageantry continues to unfold, as everyone: from our grand new President and major entertainers, to the youngest citizens along the train-and-parade route, believe they are now part of "history." Everyone has come to have their picture taken, to be part of it all, to be in the historical picture. But what does this mean if the historical record is as "cooked" as Bernie Madoff's books? What if our textbooks and our media lie outright? Or "lie" by omitting crucial information? For example: Yesterday, I watched the History Channel's documentary about the American 1960s. It featured wonderful footage of stirring, iconic moments but, as for accuracy? No way, Jose! The program showed us Martin Luther King Jr. speaking (he was wonderful then and he still is now), and focused on his noble, non-violent marches and ugly assassination; and on the assassination of Bobby Kennedy as he ran for the Presidency. Oddly enough, just like the movie Bobby, which I reviewed two years ago, the History channel "disappeared" the fact that Bobby Kennedy was assassinated by an angry Palestinian, Sirhan Sirhan, who was furious that America was helping to arm Israel. Why? Why did both the History Channel and a major feature film about the second Kennedy assassination, both fail to explain who Kennedy's assassin really was? For the historical record, let me tell you. On June 5, 1968, Palestinian Arab Sirhan Sirhan fatally shot Senator Robert F. Kennedy in the kitchen pantry of the Ambassador Hotel in Pasadena, California. Sirhan initially pleaded not guilty to one count of murder and five counts of assault with a deadly weapon, but while the jury was absent, he shouted in the courtroom, "I killed Robert Kennedy willfully...I'm willing to fight for [the Arab cause]... I'm willing to die for it." He then requested to change his plea to guilty on all counts, announcing the intention to request execution, but the court denied this. Defense witnesses testified that Sirhan had been psychologically scarred by his exposure to the Israeli war of Independence as a child in Jerusalem, where he was born in 1944. The defense also testified that Sirhan had become enraged when Senator Kennedy pledged military support for Israel ("fifty phantom jets") if necessary. Sirhan stated at trial that he "'read everything about the Arab-Israeli situation he could lay his hands on,' including publications from the Arab information center in the United States and a book on Zionist influence on U.S. policy in the Middle East." He also testified that, on seeing an advertisement for a march in support of Israel, he was "brought back to the six days in June of the previous year," and that "a fire started burning inside of him as a result of the ad." Evidence produced at trial suggested that Sirhan was insane and inclined to outlandish mysticism, and that he had an intense loathing for the state of Israel and for Jews. He was sentenced to death, but this sentence was commuted to life in prison. All attempts at obtaining parole have been denied and he remains in a California State prison. What's really interesting is that Sirhan Sirhan is a Palestinian Christian, not a Muslim — but then, so was Edward Said, that arch fiend Propagandist whose seizing the mantle of sacred victimhood for the non-existent "Palestinian" people, especially their exterminationist-terrorist leaders, has become an idee fixee in both the West and in the "Orient," to everyone's great detriment. Interestingly, both Said and Sirhan Sirhan were Palestinian Christians and were therefore considered "dhimmis," inferior, subject to "protection." (And taxation, torture, exile, and murder). Perhaps both Said and Sirhan wanted to please their superior race Masters — a variant on the court Jew phenomenon, or on the eunuch in the Islamic harem phenomenon. My dear friend, Ibn Warraq, and others have challenged Edward Said on the grounds of truth. Ibn Warraq demonstrates that Said engaged in the art of the Big Lie. Said was a sexist who stole all thunder from a nascent feminist movement within the western academy and instead, insisted, right along with the Marxists, that brown-skinned men, Arab men, Muslim men, Palestinian men, were far more nobly oppressed than....mere women. NEWSFLASH: A reader has pointed out that the very same lawyer who defended Saddam Hussein also defended Sirhan Sirhan: None other than America's very own, left-leaning Ramsay Clark. As I say: Follow the ideological alliances. |
|
NO ILLUSIONS PLEASE
Posted by Herb and Miki Sunshine, January 25, 2009. |
|
This below is from "Rabbi Meir Kahane Writings", (5732-33) (1971-73), August 25, 1972. It has been distributed by Barbara Ginsberg who writes: Anyone reading this Rav Kahane article and is not on my personal list to receive the weekly articles written by Rav Kahane and would like to be, please contact me at: barhow@netvision.net.il) Previously e-mailed Rav Kahane writings are available at |
|
The problem is that time is always on the side of the tenacious; conversely, it is the enemy of the weary. The never-ending struggle erodes the determination to search for solutions and compromises that are often more the product of the desire to rest than that of common sense. Those who are tired allow themselves to believe what freshness of vigor would label as nonsense. Exhaustion and monotony push us into self-delusion We become partners to our own destruction as we fool ourselves into believing that madness is sanity, war is peace, evil is good — all so that we might return to a life of peace and normalcy. Time is also on the side of the aggressor and works against his intended victim. For it gradually washes out of our minds the past moment of danger, the time when the aggressor sought to attack, plunder, and destroy. That moment of awful truth from which the victim was barely saved fades from his memory. And with the receding of the terrible reality comes arguments cloaked in the peculiar morality that flourishes in the rarefied air of the ivory tower. With the passing of the danger, as the waves of time roll over the stark monuments to that moment of extinction, we turn away from the men to whom we rushed for safety, the generals and soldiers who exist in the harsh world of reality, and we begin to listen to the unreal academics, whose frustrations and envy of the men of reality are too often mistaken for spiritual and moral loftiness. Our combination of weariness and forgetfulness turns us away from common sense and into the arms of the denizens of the ivory tower, the demagogues and the opportunists. It is at moments like this that we throw away sanity and lose the strength that alone can save us, that alone can enable us to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory Perhaps it is common to all people, perhaps it is more so with us Jews, the inability to withstand victory. But regardless of the ultimate roots of the problem, the fact remains that five years after 2.6 million Jews, together with their nineteen-year-old state, were saved from extinction, large and larger numbers of those who were almost slaughtered seek to return again to the moment of truth Forgotten are the 1967 pronouncements from Cairo, Damascus, Amman, Beirut, Baghdad, and Fatah. Forgotten are the pledges to throw us into the sea, wash Tel Aviv clean with Jewish blood, and eliminate the "gangster state" of Israel. Forgotten are the insanity of borders that left the coastal strip with its million Jews under the guns of Arab armies just twelve, thirteen, or fifteen kilometers away. Forgotten are the shells that swept into Masaryk Square in Tel Aviv and the Egyptian planes just minutes away from the heartland. Forgotten are our own projections of tens of thousands of soldiers, and perhaps fifty thousand civilians, dead. Forgotten are the borders that left settlements on the Huleh Plain lying naked beneath the Golan Syrian guns, the hills of Ephraim dominating Tel Aviv and its sister cities, the Sinai with its Egyptian land armada within spitting distance of our cities. Forgotten most of all are the hate, the bitter enmity, the solemn pledges of extermination, the schoolbooks with their poisonous venom, the glee and ecstasy of the days of May and early June 1967 when the mobs and potential murderers and rapists were lashing about in an agony of anticipation of the great jihad, the "holy war" that was about to begin. Forgotten is the reality of Arab refusal to recognize a State of Israel that is even one dunam square. Forgotten is the never-changing reality of "Hebronism"? What is "Hebronism"? It is the Arab policy of extermination of the Jew who seeks to live in his own land. It is the reality of that August day of 1929 that saw men, women, and children slaughtered in the streets, homes, and shops of Jewish Hebron. It is the reality of the rape and torture and gouging to death, not of "Zionists," but of yeshiva students and their families, of Ashkenazim and also of Sephardim (the latter who have suddenly become "Jewish Arabs" in the propaganda of Fatah). It is the pogroms of 1920.1921.1936-39, and 1947. In short, "Hebronism" is that policy of Arab treatment of Jews that would be the rule for us every day of the week could our enemies only accomplish it. Should we be so insane as to listen to the "doves" among us who would let them do just that? We are inundated with all kinds of illusions and delusions. Let us return this land or that land and we will have blessed peace. Let us not dare to settle Jews in Eretz Yisroel lest it anger the Arabs and jeopardize blessed peace. Let us make partial and semi partial and total and semi total agreements that call for compromise and we shall have blessed peace. Let us not move Arabs from the borders and settle Jews there; let us not dare to bomb terrorists lest we hit innocent civilians; let us be "better than they are" — and thus gain blessed peace. Let us recognize the existence of a "Palestine people" despite the refusal of every other Arab country to do so, at a time when they might at last have set up a partial "Palestine" state after 1947. Let us negotiate with our friends the mayors of Gaza and Shehem and Hebron, for they are the solution to the problem of peace. Let us, perhaps, even consider a binational state for the sake of blessed peace. Let us realize that we can reach peace and brotherhood with the Arabs by political concessions and compromises. It is time for the Jew in Israel to throw away those negative attitudes that he retains from the Galut, the exile. Chief among these is an unwillingness to look at bitter reality. We may not enjoy hearing it, but the truth is that for many years at least there will not be a sincere de jure peace with the Arabs. It may affect the tender souls of the more spiritually intellectual among us, but one can never attain either peace or security by "compromise" with bitter enemies who have no intentions of compromising with you. Those in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza who do sit down with you because they have no choice, do so only in the hope of getting rid of you as soon as possible. Our enemy, in the long run, is weariness. It is against this enemy that we must struggle. We must gird ourselves with tenacity and determination never to tire of what appears to be a never-ending struggle. For that is what it may very well become: a struggle for Jewish existence and a Jewish state that will never cease to be a struggle; a realization that between us and the Arabs stands a massive barrier that may never be breached; a determination by two peoples to live in a land that at least one will never compromise on. There will grow the weariness of having to send our children to the army without stop. There will grow the weariness of having to leave each year for reserve duty. There will grow the weariness of terrorist attacks on the borders or at the International airport or at the Tel Aviv bus terminal. There will, perhaps, again grow the weariness — and the heartbreak — of victims of a new war of attrition. There will grow the weariness of all this, rising to a crescendo with the frustrating cry: "When will it finally end?" Only the weak succumb to such frustrations; only the weak surrender to time. A strong and tenacious people know that there may never be an end to the struggle and the sacrifice. But, they also look about them and see what their refusal to surrender has accomplished: a state, and today a big one, in much of our Eretz Yisroel; a Jewish state with nearly three million souls and many more to come; the creation of a new and proud Jew. None of these things would have come about had we listened to the intellectual precursors of our modern-day intellectuals and doves. In the name of "peace" there would be no Jewish state; in the name of "morality" there would be no free Jewish nation. If we hope to survive in the literal sense of the word, let us not succumb to the siren call of easy answers and the tempting promise of "peace." Above all, let us, please, have no illusions. The Arabs intend to wipe us out; we must be strong enough to stop them. the Arabs who live with us in Eretz Yisroel, both those who have done so for twenty-five years and those for just five, do not live us and never will-and one cannot blame them. Let us not play games with them or with ourselves. We give them civil rights and political freedom, but what Jew will ever agree that they should become a majority? What Jew will ever agree to allow Arabs to come in on the same terms as Jews do today under the Law of Return? Israel was formed as a Jewish state. Arabs may have social, economic, and much political equality but, in the end, it is not their state. For the individual Arab we offer much, but for the Arab nation, Israel offers nothing. It is not an Arab state, it is a Jewish state. It came into being because Jews knew that for them there was no hope in a world that thirsted for their bodies and souls. It came into being under the realization that neither king nor republican or Marxist had the solution to the Jewish problem. That in the end it was the words of the rabbis that proved to be eternally true: "It is a law, it is known that Esau hates Jacob." And so, Eretz Yisrael, the land of the Jewish people, exists. It can never be anything but that and both we and the Arabs know it. Such a fact allows for few illusions over peace. Perhaps peace will come some day; I for one, doubt it. Until it does, let us not listen to the illusions that float down to us daily from the ivory tower or from the self-hating Left. Strength and tenacity: they and they alone assure Jewish survival. Herb Sunshine is a lawyer, qualified to practice in U.S.A. and Israel. He and his wife Miki live in Jerusalem. Contact them by email at sunshine.h@012.net.il |
|
HISTORY'S TRAGIC FARCE
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 25, 2009. |
|
Once again, Caroline Glick cleans the dirty window of a false and treacherous peace delusion and allows us to peer into a terrible reality. Where the Jew-hating Rice and State Department Left of Obama has gathered a team of expert anti-Semites who are deeply committed to a Muslim Terrorist people and where the State Department continues to run America's foreign policy — not the President — whoever he is. The article below appeared January 23, 2009 in the Jerusalem
Post
|
|
It is a fundamental truth that while history always repeats itself, it almost never repeats itself precisely. There is always a measure of newness to events that allows otherwise intelligent people to repeat the mistakes of their forebears without looking completely ridiculous. Given this, it is hard to believe that with the advent of the Obama administration, we are seeing history repeat itself with nearly unheard of exactness. US President Barack Obama's reported intention of appointing former Sen. George Mitchell as his envoy for the so-called Palestinian-Israeli peace process will provide us with a spectacle of an unvarnished repeat of history. In December 2000, outgoing president Bill Clinton appointed Mitchell to advise him on how to reignite the "peace process" after the Palestinians rejected statehood and launched their terror war against Israel in September 2000. Mitchell presented his findings to Clinton's successor, George W. Bush, in April 2001. Mitchell asserted that Israel and the Palestinians were equally to blame for the Palestinian terror war against Israelis. He recommended that Israel end all Jewish construction outside the 1949 armistice lines, and stop fighting Palestinian terrorists. As for the Palestinians, Mitchell said they had to make a "100 percent effort" to prevent the terror that they themselves were carrying out. This basic demand was nothing new. It formed the basis of the Clinton administration's nod-nod-wink-wink treatment of Palestinian terrorism since the Palestinian Authority was established in 1994. By insisting that the PLO make a "100 percent effort," to quell the terror it was enabling, the Clinton administration gave the Palestinians built-in immunity from responsibility. Every time that his terrorists struck, Yasser Arafat claimed that their attacks had nothing to do with him. He was making a "100 percent effort" to stop the attacks, after all. After getting Arafat off the hook, the Clinton administration proceeded to blame Israel. If Israel had just given up more land, or forced Jews from their homes, or given the PLO more money, Arafat could have saved the lives of his victims. Mitchell's plan, although supported by then-secretary of state Colin Powell, was never adopted by Bush because at the time, terrorists were massacring Israelis every day. It would have been politically unwise for Bush to accept a plan that asserted moral equivalence between Israel and the PLO when rescue workers were scraping the body parts of Israeli children off the walls of bombed out pizzerias and bar mitzva parties. But while his eponymous plan was rejected, its substance, which was
based on the Clinton Plan, formed the basis of the Tenet Plan, the
road map plan and the Annapolis Plan. And now, Mitchell is about to
return to Israel, at the start of yet another presidential
administration to offer us his plan again.
MITCHELL, OF COURSE, is not the only one repeating the past. His boss, Barack Obama, is about to repeat the failures his immediate predecessors. Like Clinton and Bush, Obama is making the establishment of a Palestinian state the centerpiece of his foreign policy agenda. Obama made this clear his first hour on the job. On Wednesday at 8 a.m., Obama made his first phone call to a foreign leader. He called PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas in Ramallah. During their conversation, Obama pledged his commitment to Palestinian statehood. Fatah wasted no time responding to Obama's extraordinary gesture. On Wednesday afternoon Abbas convened the PLO's Executive Committee in Ramallah and the body announced that future negotiations with Israel will have to be based on new preconditions. As far as the PLO is concerned, with Obama firmly in its corner, it can force Israel to its knees. And so, the PLO is now uninterested in the agreements it reached with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. For Israel to enjoy the privilege of negotiating with the PLO, it must first announce its willingness to expel all the 500,000 or so Israeli Jews who live in Judea, Samaria and the neighborhoods in east, south and north Jerusalem built since 1967, as well as in the Old City, and then hand the areas over, lock, stock and barrel, to the PLO. This new PLO "plan" itself is nothing new. It is simply a restatement of the Arab "peace plan," which is just a renamed Saudi "peace plan," which was just a renamed Tom Friedman column in The New York Times. And the Friedman plan is one that no Israeli leader in his right mind can accept. So by making this their precondition for negotiations, the PLO is doing what it did in 2000. It is rejecting statehood in favor of continued war with Israel. What is most remarkable about the new administration's embrace of its predecessors' failed policy is how uncontroversial this policy is in Washington. It is hard to come up with another example of a policy that has failed so often and so violently that has enjoyed the support of both American political parties. Indeed, it is hard to think of a successful policy that ever enjoyed such broad support. Apparently, no one in positions of power in Washington has stopped to consider why it is that in spite of the fervent backing of presidents Clinton and Bush, there is still no Palestinian state.
SINCE ISRAEL recognized the PLO as the "sole, legitimate representative of the Palestinian people" in 1993, the US and Israel have based their plans for peace on their assumption that the PLO is interested in making peace. And they have based their plans for making peace by establishing a Palestinian state on the assumption that the Palestinians are interested in statehood. Yet over the past 15 years it has become abundantly clear that neither of these assumptions is correct. In spite of massive political, economic and military support by the US, Israel and Europe, the PLO has never made any significant moves to foster peaceful relations between Israel and the Palestinians. Not only did the PLO-led PA spend the six years between 1994 and 2000, in which it was supposedly making peace with Israel, indoctrinating Palestinian society to hate Jews and seek their destruction through jihadist-inspired terrorism. It also cultivated close relations with Iran and other rogue regimes and terror groups. Many are quick to claim that these misbehaviors were simply a consequence of Arafat's personal radicalism. Under Abbas, it is argued, the PLO is much more moderate. But this assertion strains credulity. As The Jerusalem Post's Khaled Abu Toameh reported on Monday, Fatah forces today boast that their terror cells in Gaza took active part in Hamas's missile offensive against Israel. Fatah's Aksa Martyrs terror cells claim that during Operation Cast Lead, its terrorists shot 137 rockets and mortar shells at Israel. Abbas's supporters in the US and Israel claim that these Fatah members acted as they did because they are living under Hamas rule. They would be far more moderate if they were under Fatah rule. But this, too, doesn't ring true. From 2000 through June 2007, when Hamas ousted Fatah forces from Gaza, most of the weapons smuggling operations in Gaza were carried out by Fatah. Then, too, most of the rockets and mortar shells fired at Israel were fired by Fatah forces. Likewise, most of the suicide bombers deployed from Judea and Samaria were members of Fatah. The likes of Madeleine Albright, Powell and Condoleezza Rice claimed that Fatah's collusion with Hamas and Islamic Jihad and its leading role in terror was a consequence of insufficient Israeli support for Arafat and later for Abbas. If Israel had kicked out the Jews of Gaza earlier, or if it had removed its roadblocks and expelled Jews from their homes in Judea and Samaria, or if had prevented all Jewish construction beyond the 1949 armistice lines, then Arafat and later Abbas would have been more popular and able to rein in their own terror forces. (Incidentally, those same forces receive their salaries from the PA, which itself is funded by the US and Israel.)
THE PROBLEM with this line of thinking is that it ignores two essential facts. First, since 2000 Israel has curtailed Jewish building in Judea and Samaria. Second, Israel kicked every last Jew out of Gaza and handed the ruins of their villages and farms over to Fatah in September 2005. It is worth noting that the conditions under which the PA received Gaza in 2005 were far better than the conditions under which Israel gained its sovereignty in 1948. The Palestinians were showered with billions of dollars in international aid. No one wanted to do anything but help them make a go of it. In 1948-49, Israel had to secure its sovereignty by fending off five invading armies while under an international arms embargo. It then had to absorb a million refugees from Arab countries and Holocaust survivors from Europe, with no financial assistance from anyone other than US Jews. Israel developed into an open democracy. Gaza became one of the largest terror bases in the world. Four months after Israel handed over Gaza — and northern Samaria — the Palestinians turned their backs on statehood altogether when they elected Hamas — an explicitly anti-nationalist, pan-Islamic movement that rejects Palestinians statehood — to lead them. Hamas's electoral victory, its subsequent ouster of Fatah forces from Gaza and its recent war with Israel tells us another fundamental truth about the sources of the repeated failure of the US's bid for Palestinian statehood. Quite simply, there is no real Palestinian constituency for it. Even if we were to ignore all of the PLO's involvement in terrorism and assume like Obama, Bush and Clinton that the PLO is willing to live at peace with Israel in exchange for Gaza, Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, what Hamas's control of Gaza and its popularity throughout the Palestinian areas show is that there is no reason to expect that the PLO will remain in control of territory that Israel transfers to its control. So if Israel were to abide by the PLO's latest demand and accept the Friedman/Saudi/Arab/PLO "peace plan," there is no reason to believe that a Jew-free Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem wouldn't then be taken over by Hamas. Given that there is no chance that Israeli territorial giveaways will lead to a peaceful Palestinian state, the question arises, is there any way to compel American politicians to give up their fantasies of fancy signing ceremonies in the White House Rose Garden that far from bringing peace, engender radicalism, instability and death? As far as Mitchell is concerned the answer is no. In an address at Tel Aviv University last month, Mitchell said that the US and Israel must cling to the delusion that Palestinian statehood will bring about a new utopia, "for the alternative is unacceptable and should be unthinkable." So much for "change" in US foreign policy. 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).
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: BARUCH HASHEM
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 25, 2009. |
|
It's important to be mindful of blessings, and grateful. And so I start with this, which will bring a smile to a lot of faces: During the war, I wrote about Aharon Karov, who went off to fight less than 24 hours after he was married. Less than two weeks later, he was critically wounded, and the truth is that it wasn't certain that he would live. Now I have information on his progress, which has been astounding (undoubtedly in part because of the many prayers said for him). Professor Pierre Singer head of intensive care at the Rabin Medical Center, has expressed amazement at the rate of his improvement. When explosives went off in a booby-trapped house he had entered, Aharon suffered multiple wounds. Luckily, protective gear covered his head and trunk, but he was injured in his arms and legs as well as his face — with shrapnel piercing his forehead into his skull, his eye, his mouth, his jaw. In one day he endured 14 hours of surgery to address these various acute injuries. A week ago he regained consciousness and now knows what is happening to him. As he has suffered no permanent damage to his brain, his cognitive recovery should be complete; while still sedated because of pain, he recognizes his family. He is also showing ability to move all four limbs, and his vision is expected to return to normal. After about four weeks of rehab, he will be discharged. Is it necessary to report that his wife, who has been at his side, is overjoyed? May the two of them go on to many, many years of married bliss. ~~~~~~~~~~ Another mitzvah we can do: Jonathan Pollard, who should have been pardoned by out-going president Bush and was not, requires contact from the outside to keep his spirits up Now, more than ever. He can receive only regular snail mail — no faxes or e-mail. Letters can be short as long as they convey support. Please, take the time to write: Jonathan Pollard #09185-016
~~~~~~~~~~ Lucky us. Mitchell is coming! Reportedly, before this week is out. That's George Mitchell, new ME envoy. The "there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended" Mitchell. While he will be speaking both with members of our government and heads of the PA, he will not try to initiate any long-term arrangements until after our election. A relief, as this will deprive Olmert and Livni opportunities for any last minute "shenanigans." ~~~~~~~~~~ A former Senator from Maine, Mitchell was called upon by former president Clinton to head up a fact-finding commission in 2000 and 2001 that investigated the Second Intifada. David Bedein, writing in The Bulletin, in Philadelphia, has taken a hard look at that mission and the recommendations that followed. Among Bedein's points: "The Mitchell Commission accepted as a given that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)-led riots were based on a movement for 'independence and genuine self-determination,' without giving any credence to the PLO goal, stated in all PLO publications, maps and media outlets, even during the current Oslo process, which consistently and clearly states that 'liberation' of Palestine, all of Palestine — in stages — remained the goal. "For some reason, the Mitchell Commission characterized the rioters armed with Molotov cocktails as 'unarmed Palestinian demonstrators,' a term that they apparently borrowed from PLO information reports that were published at the time. "The Mitchell Commission took the position that Israel's security forces did not face a clear and present danger when faced with a mob trying to kill them with rocks and firebombs. "It made no mention that the Palestinian Authority (PA) has amassed 50,000 more weapons than they were supposed to have, in clear violation of the written Oslo accords. "The Mitchell Commission surprisingly accepted the notion that the PA security officials are simply "not in control" of their own tightly controlled security services. "The Mitchell Commission would not consider reliable intelligence reports that documented the PA had planned the uprising... "It said the notion the PA leadership had failed to prevent terrorist attacks against Israel as only an Israeli 'view,' ignoring consistent incitement that Arafat had conveyed to his own media for the previous seven years. "The Mitchell Commission also rejected Israel's characterization of the conflict, as "armed conflict short of war"... "...Instead of issuing a clear call to the PLO to stop sniper attacks on Israel's roads and highways, the Mitchell Commission simply 'condemned the positioning of gunmen within or near civilian dwellings,' leaving the observer to assume that PLO attacks from empty embankments would be acceptable. "The Mitchell Commission suggested that 'the IDF should consider withdrawing to positions held before Sept. 28, 2000, ... to reduce the number of friction points,' ignoring the fact that this would leave entry points to many Israeli cities without appropriate protection during a time of war." Concludes Bedein: "In short, the Mitchell Commission Report drove a nail into the coffin of any credibility that George Mitchell could ever have to serve as a potential Middle East envoy."
~~~~~~~~~~ It should be further noted that the Mitchell Report, which called for a "settlement freeze," even with regard to natural growth, was the basis for a similar call in the Road Map, two years later. Thus is Mitchell's reappearance on the scene now considered particularly bad news. As Yisrael Medad asks: "Hear the drums?" Aaron Lerner in IMRA today points out, however, that Mitchell in his report conceded that Oslo did not limit settlement construction. Mitchell was using the old, slippery and very dangerous "violating the spirit of the Oslo process" line. This was a favorite argument of Rice as well. In the name of the "spirit" all sorts of things can be demanded of us. We must be strong, and certain of our rights, and unafraid to defend them. ~~~~~~~~~~ President Barack Obama, "[underscoring] the importance of a strong US-Saudi relationship," placed a call to Saudi King Abdullah on Friday. Obama expressed his appreciation for Abdullah's support of a peace plan. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post, the PA's security commander for the Jenin area, Col Radi Assidah, says that his force is protecting and providing shelter to Islamic Jihad fugitives who came seeking shelter because Israel was after them. ~~~~~~~~~~ Negotiations are going on via Cairo for a longer term cease-fire. Latest reports are that our proposal for an 18-month ceasefire and partial opening of crossings was rejected; Hamas countered with a full opening of crossings and a one year cease-fire, which still has to be brought to Damascus for discussion. offering. Hamas spokesman, Ismail Radwan, said a long-term agreement "will kill the resistance, which is the Palestinian people's legitimate right as long as the occupation continues to exist." The issue of monitoring of crossings is key to what proceeds now. What a farce! Not even pretending to cooperate with an embargo on weapons smuggling, Hamas is declaring, "No one has the right to prevent the Palestinians from equipping themselves with weapons as long as the occupation continues." I had read one report that Hamas has agreed to a PA presence at Rafah, but only members of the PA who live in Gaza, none from Ramallah. Now Hamas is saying that Turkish presence would be acceptable. But of course. ~~~~~~~~~~ Osama Hamdan, Hamas representative in Lebanon, and a close ally of Khaled Mashaal, Hamas politburo head in Damascus, said at a rally in Beirut today that there can be no reconciliation between Fatah and Hamas until Fatah ends all security cooperation and peace talks with Israel. Reconciliation must be based on "a resistance program to liberate the territory and regain rights." He declared that the Palestinian-Israeli peace process had ended. I do wonder how "there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended" Mitchell will respond to this, and how hard he'll push us to make concessions to bring "belligerent" Palestinian groups around. ~~~~~~~~~~ A recent poll indicates that over 70% of Israelis think we'll be back fighting in Gaza in two years. Will it take that long? ~~~~~~~~~~ This is a delightful anomaly that probably gave several BBC executives near-strokes: a former British army colonel, interviewed live, who defends Israel completely with regard to actions in Gaza. We've got it on video now, so please share as widely as possible:
~~~~~~~~~~ Can this possibly be? According to yesterday's London Times, Iran may be running out of uranium for manufacturing nuclear weapons. Says the report, "France, Germany, Britain and the US have banded to stop the flow of the material to Teheran by lobbying governments in Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan and Brazil — key uranium producing states — to stop selling." ~~~~~~~~~~ According to a poll for Channel One done today, 30 % of the public sees Likud chair Binyamin Netanyahu as the most appropriate choice for prime minister, as compared to 16% Tzipi Livni of Kadima and 9% for Labor head Ehud Barak. I remain uneasy about reports that Livni, seeing this as the only chance to move to victory, might sanction a trade of 1,000 Hamas prisoners for Gilad Shalit. She's been "talking tough." And also uneasy about vague rumors regarding the possibility that Netanyahu might form a coalition with Labor to protect his party from Obama dissatisfaction. We are into election season now, two weeks and counting... Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
FREEDOM LOOMS FOR TERRORIST
Posted by Mrla, January 25, 2009. |
|
This was written by Adam Goldman and Randy Herschaft, Associated Press Writers. The AP National Investigative Team can be reached at investigate@ap.org |
|
NEW YORK — In 1973, a young terrorist named Khalid Duhham Al-Jawary entered the United States and quickly began plotting an audacious attack in New York City. He built three powerful bombs — bombs powerful enough to kill, maim and destroy — and put them in rental cars scattered around town, near Israeli targets. The plot failed. The explosive devices did not detonate, and Al-Jawary fled the country, escaping prosecution for nearly two decades — until he was convicted of terrorism charges in Brooklyn and sentenced to 30 years in federal penitentiary. But his time is up. In less than a month, the 63-year-old Al-Jawary is expected to be released. He will likely be deported; where to is anybody's guess. The shadowy figure had so many aliases it's almost impossible to know which country is his true homeland. Al-Jawary has never admitted his dark past or offered up tidbits in exchange for his release. Much of Al-Jawary's life remains a mystery — even to the dogged FBI case agent who tracked him down. But an Associated Press investigation — based on recently declassified documents, extensive court records, CIA investigative notes and interviews with former intelligence officials — reveals publicly for the first time Al-Jawary's deep involvement in terrorism beyond the plot that led to his conviction. Government documents link Al-Jawary to Black September's murderous letter-bombing campaign targeting world leaders in the 1970s and a botched terrorist attack in 1979. Former intelligence officials suspect he had a role in the bombing of a TWA flight in 1974 that killed 88 people. "He's a very dangerous man," said Mike Finnegan, the former FBI counterterrorism agent who captured Al-Jawary. "A very bad guy." The events linked to Al-Jawary happened long ago, when the conflagration in the Middle East spread around the world; he is being released into another century, one in which the scale of terrorism has grown exponentially, even bringing down two of New York's skyscrapers. Al-Jawary has long insisted that he was framed and that the government has the wrong guy. Al-Jawary declined an interview through prison officials and has since failed to answer letters mailed to him in the last year and a half, but his former lawyer, Ron Kuby, insists he "wasn't a threat in 1991 and he's not a threat now." Federal prosecutors didn't see it that way. They point to his trip to the United States in the 1970s as proof. A slender, nattily dressed man with a thin mustache, Al-Jawary walked into the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in November 1972 and applied for a visa using a phony Iraqi passport. He answered some routine questions, had his picture taken and was granted a visa. On Jan. 12, 1973, Al-Jawary flew to Boston via Montreal and then to New York City. Five days later, after the bureau's office in Tel Aviv received a tip in connection to another investigation, agents tried to locate a man who later turned out to be Al-Jawary. They found him in New York City and conducted a perfunctory interview. Where do you live? Baghdad. Why did you come here? Flight training at Teterboro Airport in New Jersey. The agent asked if Al-Jawary was affiliated with any political groups. He said he was "nonpolitical." The agent asked how long he was staying. Al-Jawary said he planned to return to the Middle East after his training ended in about a month and get a job as a commercial pilot, according to FBI documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act. Al-Jawary befriended a woman named Carol and her young son Todd. Carol and Al-Jawary grew close, with Al-Jawary taking her son on trips to Manhattan. Unbeknownst to the woman, the boy was a decoy. Al-Jawary had no interest in a relationship with her or Todd. He was scouting targets for a terrorist attack, and the presence of the boy would help him avoid suspicion. He picked two Israeli banks on Fifth Avenue and the El-Al cargo terminal at Kennedy Airport. Possibly working with two or more people, Al-Jawary rented three cars and assembled three bombs comprised of large containers filled with gasoline, propane tanks, plastic explosives, blasting caps and batteries, according to FBI and federal court records. The propane tanks were particularly diabolical, adding shrapnel to the blast. Two of the bombs used alarm clocks, but a third employed a sophisticated electronic-timing device commonly referred to as an "e-cell," said Terence G. McTigue, who worked on the New York Police Department's bomb squad. It was twice as powerful as the other two bombs. On March 4, Al-Jawary — and possibly others — readied the cars in anticipation of Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir's visit to the city. Each car contained a Hebrew language newspaper with propaganda from Black September — the terrorist organization that carried out the massacre of Israeli athletes at the Munich Olympics just months earlier — tucked inside. But the bombs failed to explode. It is not clear why. They were discovered after the two cars on Fifth Avenue were towed, and the FBI learned about the third car at JFK and notified police. McTigue disarmed the e-cell bomb at JFK and found the components for the fourth one in the car. It was cutting edge, the work of a professional. "It was a sea change because it was the first time we encountered an electronic timer rather than a simple alarm clock or mechanical timer," recalled McTigue, who would be badly injured in 1976 when he tried to dismantle a bomb left by a Croatian terrorist. McTigue also recognized something else as he examined the car bomb: a plastic explosive called Semtex from Czechoslovakia. It had been used in scores of letter bombs sent around the world the previous year, targeting Jews and Israelis and even U.S. Secretary of State William Rogers. One had killed an agricultural counselor at the Israeli embassy in London and another mangled the hands of a 26-year-old postal worker in the Bronx. McTigue knew those letter bombs. He had handled them. The letters had pressure-release firing devices and were the work of Black September, Palestinian guerrillas believed by intelligence officials to be controlled by Palestine Liberation Organization leader Yasser Arafat. Rogers called the attempted New York City attack a "disturbing development" in a confidential memo to President Richard Nixon — it was, he said, the first time Black September had "mounted an operation on American soil." As it turns out, Al-Jawary's car bombs and the letter explosives contained similarities that made authorities suspect they were linked. "The explosive material found in the rental cars was imported and found to be identical to that used in the recent worldwide letter bomb campaign," according to declassified State Department documents obtained from the U.S. National Archives in College Park, Md. The FBI began a large investigation, "one of the most intensive in the history of the FBI," called "Tribomb," deploying 300 agents and interviewing hundreds of people. The FBI lifted 60 fingerprints; they all matched Al-Jawary's. They uncovered a fake Jordanian passport behind an air conditioning duct and bomb materials from a room Al-Jawary had rented at a hotel near JFK. Agents recovered a copy of a Jordanian driver's license he had used to rent the cars. Agents quickly realized that Al-Jawary was involved in the attempted attack and issued an arrest warrant. But he had already slipped out of the country. The FBI focused on Lebanon because Al-Jawary had gotten his visa there. But Lebanon was the Wild West of the Middle East at that time, a safe haven where Arab and PLO terrorists circulated without fear of arrest. If he was there, Al-Jawary was out of reach. Al-Jawary brazenly sent postcards to Carol from Paris, Rome, Beirut. Years passed. The FBI gave up the hunt. But their elusive quarry resurfaced in 1979, not long after Israel assassinated a top Black September terrorist. Border police stopped Al-Jawary's car as he and another man tried to cross into Germany from Austria, according to federal court documents. In the trunk of the car, police found 88 pounds of high explosives, electronic timing-delay devices and detonators hidden in a suitcase. They also unearthed cash and nine passports inside a portable radio that could be used to monitor transmissions from ships, airplanes or the police. Al-Jawary was traveling under the alias "Yousif Salim Sejaan" and refused to talk. He was carrying a French passport indicating he was born in Lebanon, and riding with a man who was a PLO officer. German authorities soon learned why Al-Jawary was in the country. They had nabbed a total of 11 Palestinians and 40 pounds of explosives around the time of Al-Jawary's arrest. Two of the men admitted they were going to bomb targets in Germany — most likely, Jewish and Israeli ones. All the explosives seized from Al-Jawary and the other men bore the same wrapping from a pastry shop in Beirut which served as a front for Fatah, the military arm of the PLO. Al-Jawary's fingerprints were on the wrapping. Still, Germany released Al-Jawary long before the FBI knew that he had been taken into custody. And he disappeared once again. But those e-cell bombs did not. A group known as the 15 May Organization — named for the date that Israel was founded — began carrying out terror attacks from Lebanon, Tunis and Baghdad in the 1980s. Suitcase bombs made with e-cells were the 15 May trademark. Its leader was a skilled bomb-maker named Husayn al-Umari, commonly referred to as Abu Ibrahim. Ibrahim had an education in chemical and electrical engineering and a proclivity for targeting airliners. He also received KGB training. In one high-profile attack in 1982, an explosion rocked a Pan Am jet flying to Honolulu from Tokyo, killing a 16-year-old Japanese boy and injuring several others. Denny Kline was an explosives guru for the FBI and worked the 15 May cases. He also transported Al-Jawary's 1973 e-cell bomb to FBI headquarters in Washington. As Kline recollects, the bombs were compared. Yes, both Al-Jawary and Ibrahim had used e-cells, but that was the only common denominator. This similarity didn't mean the bombs were built by the same person, Kline said. The FBI's bomb expert worked closely with the CIA and never received any evidence or information to suggest that Al-Jawary was involved with 15 May. But other investigators have since learned of the e-cell connection and believe it's a powerful one, because they were such sophisticated devices and so few people knew how to operate and create them. "That's a big commonality especially since I don't know of anyone else using the e-cells in the bomb," said Billie Vincent, the former FAA security chief from 1982 to 1986 who studied the Ibrahim devices. CIA investigative notes obtained by the AP, based on human intelligence and communication intercepts, indicate that Al-Jawary's nom de guerre was Abu Walid al-Iraqi. The notes link Al-Jawary to a man named Abdullah Labib, aka Col. Hawari, who took his orders from Arafat. The notes say that Al-Jawary also worked as a document forger for the PLO and Hawari. Hawari, a senior Fatah security official and Arafat confidant, "inherited" elements of Black September, according to the CIA notes. Declassified State Department and CIA documents say Hawari took over 15 May in the mid-1980s while Ibrahim continued to supply his expertise. According to declassified CIA records, Hawari orchestrated the 1986 attack on a TWA flight from Rome to Athens that killed four Americans, including an infant, after they were sucked out of the plane. The explosives used in the attack were linked to Ibrahim. Hawari reportedly died in a car crash in 1991. Ibrahim, who was charged in the 1982 Pan Am attack, remains at large, possibly hiding out in Iraq. Besides the use of e-cells, Al-Jawary had another link to 15 May. Ibrahim was suspected of being Black September's bomb maker, Kline and other former intelligence officials said. Al-Jawary acted on behalf of Black September in 1973 when he rigged the car bombs in New York, federal prosecutors asserted in court documents. FBI agent Mike Finnegan didn't know any of this when he arrived at work one day in 1988 to find the entire case file — many volumes and thousands of pages — sitting on his desk with a note that said: "Find Him" — find Al-Jawary. Finnegan thought to himself: "I am screwed." It took Finnegan a year to review the entire file. He followed every lead and re-interviewed witnesses. Nothing. He asked the CIA for help. Nothing. Finnegan also looked at other terrorism cases involving bombs. There was one in particular that drew his attention: TWA Flight 841 crashed Sept. 8, 1974, in the Ionian Sea near Greece after an explosive device detonated. Seventy-nine passengers and nine crew members were killed. Among them were 17 Americans on the flight that originated in Tel Aviv and was headed ultimately for John F. Kennedy International Airport in New York. Thirteen days earlier, the same flight had landed in Rome. When a ramp agent opened the rear cargo compartment, smoke was found coming from a suitcase. The fire was extinguished. Italian authorities wrongly determined it had started accidentally when batteries inside a tape recorder caused lighter fluid to ignite. One of the flight's passengers — Jose Maria Aveneda Garcia — stepped forward and identified the bag, according to recently declassified FBI files. Garcia, who was probably using a fake Chilean passport, wasn't detained. Garcia's address in Rome was bogus. The suitcase and contents were sent to an FBI laboratory in the U.S., which concluded it was a bomb. The FBI tried to find Garcia. They never located him. The National Transportation Safety Board said the suitcase was "an attempt at the same form of sabotage" that downed the flight over the Ionian Sea. Neither attack was ever solved. The suitcase was later destroyed. Finnegan thought Al-Jawary had been behind the suitcase bomb. It employed an e-cell, according to the FBI. At that time, he was told, the use of an e-cell was a bomb signature. "It had a very distinct timing device," said Finnegan, who retired in 2004. "It was almost like a foregone conclusion. This was my guy. I desperately wanted to resurrect that case." James R. Lyons, a retired FBI agent who worked many big cases such as the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, said the use of e-cells in 1973 and 1974 would have been considered the signature of a bomb-maker, making Al-Jawary a prime suspect. "Absolutely," said Lyons, who was also an FBI bomb technician. "I'd be going after the same guy. No doubt about it." Another top FBI explosives expert, Dave Williams, said: "Look back in the '70s and '80s and there weren't too many bomb builders out there. So it was very likely that some of these bomb builders got their instructions from the same person or persons. If I were investigating it back then, I would have come to the conclusion that he was an integral part of that conspiracy." But it wasn't Finnegan's call to pursue the 1974 attack. Street agents don't make those decisions. He had to focus on the New York investigation. Finnegan had "computer-aged" pictures of Al-Jawary — ones from Al-Jawary's visits to the U.S. Embassy in Beirut in 1971 and 1972. He also had one from a Jordanian driver's license that had been obtained from the investigation. He now had a good idea what Al-Jawary looked like as a 45-year-old man, and he passed the photos along to foreign intelligence agencies. In the fall of 1990, Finnegan learned Al-Jawary was residing on Cyprus — a center of terrorism — as the PLO's "cultural attache" under the name of Khaled Mohammed El-Jassem. Finnegan finally had Al-Jawary in his sights, but then he was gone: In December, Al-Jawary escaped to Iraq, after he figured out the FBI was on to him. Finnegan was furious. Then, some luck. In January 1991, Al-Jawary left Iraq to attend a funeral in Tunis for his good friend, Saleh Khalef, the leader of Black September and Arafat deputy known as Abu Iyad who had been gunned down by a rival Palestinian group. But Al-Jawary's travel plans were derailed. He tried to go to Cyprus first but was denied entry. He was put on a plane to Athens. Again, denied entry. He flew to Italy. Finnegan alerted the Italians that Al-Jawary was on his way. As he passed through Rome, Italian authorities detained him for using a fake Jordanian passport. But the Italians were reluctant to give him to the FBI, said Robert Blitzer, who served in the FBI's International Terrorism Operations Section from 1986 to 1995. "They didn't want to release him," Blitzer said. "They were afraid to release him." After many months of diplomatic wrangling, Finnegan and Bassem Youssef, an Arabic-speaking FBI agent, flew to Rome on a military transport plane to take Al-Jawary back to the U.S. Under intense security that included the closing of the Rome airport and its air space, Al-Jawary arrived on a helicopter gunship. He had iron plates protecting the front and back of his torso. He was wearing a Kevlar hood. Inside the plane, Finnegan took off Al-Jawary's hood. Finnegan introduced himself to a bewildered Al-Jawary: "I am Mike Finnegan, New York office FBI." Youssef began speaking to Al-Jawary in Arabic. Startled, Al-Jawary responded briefly, allowing Youssef enough time to detect a Palestinian dialect along with a Libyan one. But Al-Jawary quickly switched back to English and began yelling, believing Youssef was an Israeli agent. "I am not going to talk to you," an animated Al-Jawary told Youssef. "I am not talking to the Mossad." Convinced, finally, that he was in the custody of the FBI, Al-Jawary collapsed in a chair, relieved. He allowed Finnegan to question him. Youssef listened. "The guy was definitely lying about a lot of things," Youssef said. "He did not want to telegraph anything about the truth." Al-Jawary told Finnegan he wasn't in New York when the bombs were planted. The FBI had the wrong guy. The Mossad had framed him. He's not from Mosul, Iraq. He's not an Iraqi national as the American government asserted. He's Khaled Mohammed El-Jassem, father of five and devoted husband. He's a victim of Israeli aggression and bombs, which killed his brother and an infant son. In time, he would say that he was born in Palestine in 1947 but was forced to flee from his home after Israel was established in 1948 and war erupted with its Arab neighbors. Al-Jawary claims in court filings that he grew up in refugee camps in Jordan. When he was 18, in 1965, he joined Arafat's PLO. While mired in poverty, a resourceful Al-Jawary managed to earn a bachelor's degree in Palestinian history in Deraa, Jordan, in 1972. Later, he says, he was arrested in Damascus, Syria, from September 1972 to July 1973 — the period of the New York bombing attempts — for publishing an anti-Syrian letter in a local newspaper. After graduation, Al-Jawary claims he taught history and Arabic in Jordan and married a woman named Rima Omar in 1975. In 1977 the family moved to Beirut, where Al-Jawary claims he worked as a teacher. Five years later, Al-Jawary left Lebanon, choosing to start a new life in Nicosia, Cyprus, where he operated a legitimate business importing electronic equipment from Japan and exporting it to various Middle Eastern countries. The store folded in a couple of years, according to his version. At some point, he became the PLO's cultural attache. A Brooklyn jury didn't buy any of this. It took about three hours for the jury to convict Al-Jawary in 1993 — just days after the first attack on the World Trade Center — based on evidence that included his fingerprints on one of the bombs. Judge Jack B. Weinstein sentenced Al-Jawary to 30 years in prison on April 16, 1993. Weinstein later rejected his pleas for mercy in a written opinion issued after the trial, saying the bombs would have "killed and maimed hundreds, caused large fires and terrorized thousands of people." Al-Jawary, the judge wrote, was a serious threat. "It is highly likely that were this defendant released he would continue his dangerous terrorist activities," the judge said. Since his conviction, many top Palestinian officials have written to the judge on Al-Jawary's behalf, seeking his release. There's even a death certificate in court files along with witnesses claiming Al-Jawary was killed by Israeli shelling in 1988. None of it was convincing. Al-Jawary's appeals foundered. But those countless hours behind bars are almost over. Freedom looms for this gaunt and graying terrorist who has spent about a quarter of his life in maximum-security prisons. He was transferred recently to a federal detention center in Manhattan. Al-Jawary is scheduled to be released Feb. 19 after completing only about half his term, including time served prior to his sentencing and credit for good behavior, according to the federal Bureau of Prisons. Once he's released, Al-Jawary will be handed over to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement and held until his deportation. It remains unclear where he'll go, largely because Al-Jawary's true identity remains in question — even to this day. Those who helped put Al-Jawary behind bars believe he'll pick up where he left off. "What is he going to do when he gets out?" McTigue said. "He'll be deported and received as a hero and go right back into his terrorist activities. He's had years to think about nothing else but causing havoc and destruction." Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
ORWELLIAN LANGUAGE AGAINST ISRAEL FROM THE UN'S HUMAN RIGHTS COUNCIL
Posted by Richard L. Cravetts, January 25, 2009. |
|
In the chorus of denunciation from much of the world community of Israel's defensive incursion into Gaza, nowhere was the feverish bleating more evident than from the UN's Human Rights Council, the perennially biased 47-member group of panjandrums that replaced the Israel-loathing UN Commission on Human Rights in 2005. A two-day "emergency session," seemingly held only when Palestinians are dying and not Israelis, titled "The Grave Violations of Human Rights in the Occupied Palestinian Territory including the recent aggression in the occupied Gaza Strip," leaves little doubt of the forgone conclusions to be reached during the vitriolic discussions. In few places where public diplomacy and negotiations are conducted is there such visible moral incoherence and hypocrisy as regularly occurs in Human Rights Council sessions, including this January 12th session where the resolution was adopted after only Canada voted against it, with members from the EU and West abstaining. EYE on the UN, a group at the Hudson Institute New York and the Touro College Institute for Human Rights which monitors UN activities, notes that, tellingly, "this emergency special session was the fifth the Council has had on Israel. By comparison, the Council has held nine regular sessions on human rights in all of the other 191 UN states," clearly indicating that this group has no problem ignoring egregious human rights violations, ethnic conflict, and massacres in despotic regimes worldwide. In fact, it is almost always Israel who is singled out for censure, and "in its two and a half-year history, the Council has condemned Israel more often than all other states in the United Nations combined." Underlying the ideologically-driven hatred of the Middle East's only democracy is a deadly Orwellian vocabulary which defines Israel as a pariah nation, a rogue state, an aggressive, murderous regime which is "ethnically cleansing" Palestine of its perennially-suffering third-world victims. Even the title of this wildly productive "emergency session" is coded with lies and distortions that help the Council reinforce Israel's perceived role as the world's most militaristic force and the greatest threat to world peace. But in order to excuse or obscure the barbarism of Palestinian terror, Israel's behavior in defending itself has to be framed as inexcusable, inhuman, and, in the ubiquitous phrase of the moment, "disproportionate" to the threat it faces from its jihadist foes. Thus, the January resolution, which conveniently ignores the war crimes of Hamas, "calls for the immediate cessation of Israeli military attacks throughout the Palestinian Occupied Territory," and "strongly condemn[s] the ongoing Israeli military operation" which has resulted "in massive violations of human rights of the Palestinian people." That is the relatively tame language of diplomacy, which, though one-sided, might pass for concern in a world where moral inversion was not so rampant. But this Human Rights Council session, as most do, quickly devolved into a frenzied Israel hate-fest, where one member after another struggled to escalate the rhetoric and frame Israel's current military incursion with the reprehensible and historically vile accusations that the deaths in Gaza, primarily carried out against carefully-targeted Hamas terrorists, were "massacres" tantamount to "genocide," a veritable "holocaust" in Gaza. That these words are so promiscuously used against Israel also reveals how Israel's ideological and existential enemies have no compunction about gross hyperbole when evaluating its military or political actions, and indicates that they are either ignorant of the true meaning of the slanderous terms they fling about, or want to continue heaping invective upon Israel regardless of the truthfulness of the accusations. During the three-day Human Rights Council session, for instance, the Nicaraguan representative called the Gazan situation "a new holocaust;" Syria pined for the "lives taken by Israel in the holocaust it is perpetrating," and the World Federation of Trade Unions NGO demanded "an end to this holocaust." Yemen crowed that "barbaric massacres and the genocide" in Gaza were "gross and flagrant war crimes." Venezuela denounced "the genocide and criminal action of the Israeli government." Syria drew a horrific vision of "women and children in Palestine are being buried alive" with "schools of the United Nations ... turned into mass graves ... by the "occupying authorities which commit genocide." The representatives from Bolivia, Oman, Ecuador, Libya, and Libya also used the specific term "genocide," sprinkled liberally with "war crimes," "barbarism," and "crimes against mankind" in their general condemnation of Israel. All of these accusations, of course, have the intended effect of perpetuating the image Israel as the world's bloodiest, most militaristic, and law-breaking rogue nation, incessantly creating high body counts and spilling Muslim blood. The problem with this assessment, even though it is widely held and actively promulgated by Israel's enemies who obsessively focus on the Arab/Israeli conflict as the key impediment to world peace, is that it is a complete inversion of fact. University of Bremen's Professor Gunnar Heinsohn and Daniel Pipes, director of the Middle East Forum, for instance, recently compiled statistics on all world conflicts with an excess of 10,000 deaths since 1950, just after Israeli was created. Despite the libelous accusations of the Council, the statistics show that a number of other bloody conflicts actually deserve the designation of "genocide," massacre," or even "holocaust," and that the total, though still tragic, number of deaths of Arabs and Jews in Palestine over a tumultuous 58-year period totals 51,000 — only the forty-ninth most deadly conflict. The roughly 1000 recent deaths in Gaza are indeed tragic, particularly the loss of civilian life; but in their zeal to define recent events as a genocide or a holocaust, the Human Rights Council has apparently conveniently forgotten, or wishes to overlook, say, the 400,000 deaths in Somalia since 1991; 900,000 fatalities in Rwanda; one million deaths in Saddam Hussein's 1980-88 war with Iran; the 1,900,000 souls who have perished, and continue to die, in Sudan; or the 100,000 or more who have died in Iraq since 2003 alone. So while the significance of the Israeli/Arab conflict looms large in the world's imagination, Heinsohn and Pipes note that the total deaths there "amount to just 0.06 percent of the total number of deaths in all conflicts in that period. More graphically, only 1 out of about 1,700 persons killed in conflicts since 1950 has died due to Arab-Israeli fighting," indicating that neither the particularity of that conflict nor the lethality qualify it for the obsessive attention Israel's detractors are fond of heaping upon it. More revealing, as the two study authors report, is that Muslim deaths disproportionately occur at he hands of co-religionists, that while "some 11,000,000 Muslims have been violently killed since 1948, of which 35,000, or 0.3 percent, died during the sixty years of fighting Israel, or just 1 out of every 315 Muslim fatalities ..., over 90 percent of the 11 million who perished were killed by fellow Muslims." There have been actual genocides and the horrific death of innocents across the world, many of which occurred in some of the morally-challenged member states of the UN's Human Rights Council, and conscience demands that they be identified and condemned for what they are when they flare up. But the Orwellian contortion of language that attempts to frame the current Israeli defensive incursion into Gaza as a massacre, genocide, or holocaust trivializes history and insults the memory of those souls who have perished in conflicts that could be accurately called by those names. Richard L. Cravatts, Ph.D., director of Boston University's Program in Publishing at the Center for Professional Education, is currently writing a book about higher education, Genocidal Liberalism: The University's Jihad Against Israel. Contact him at rcravatts@aol.com |
|
FASTEN YOUR SEAT BELTS — OBAMA AND ISRAEL
Posted by Mrla, January 24, 2009. |
|
In the words of the great Bette Davis "Fasten Your seat belts...." The appointment of George Mitchell as Mideast envoy is just the first official step in President Obama's middle east plan. Mitchell doesn't get it on so many levels. First there is Mitchell's comparison of the Middle East to the British Conflict with the terrorists in Northern Ireland. There is so much more that Mitchell doesn't get. Mitchell does not believe that morality or right and wrong should comes into to play in negotiations. Or to put it this way, if George Mitchell was King Solomon, that poor baby would have been cut in half. Mitchell places equal blame on Israel and the terrorists for the Middle East conflict. Just take a look at some of the things about the conflict he said in the "Mitchell Report" in April 2001:
Then there were the unfair criticisms of Israel in his report like:
George Mitchell is exactly what Barack Obama wanted and what the 78% of Jews who voted for Obama promised would never happen. Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
JENINITIS
Posted by American, January 24, 2009. |
|
Jeninitis is Islamic Palestinian Pallywood's syndrome of lying: 1) inflating numbers of casualties, collateral by-standers in Israel's anti terrorists operation (heck, they even had the audacity to add dead bodies dug out of graves), 2) Lying about the authentic percentage of combatants vs non-combatants, all as part of its staged drama hype, their strategy is, first lie, after the anti Israel bigoted tarnishing bombarding propaganda is done, whatever real facts surface later on, don't matter, as the damage to Israel is already done. In Jenin 2002, the Arab Palestinians have been exposed as inflating the numbers of casualties on Israel's operation, Saeb Erekat initially claimed on CNN that there were more than 500 dead, at the end it turned out that there were no more than (around) 50, mostly combatants. When confronted on CNN on the 'numbers', he stuttered, spun, and changed subject. So was the case in Dec.-Jan. 2009, at operation 'Cast Lead' against Palestinian Islamic terrorists Hamas (who openly seeks annihilation of all Jews in the area) rockets targeting of Israeli southern zone, where about a Million civilians were under their range, fear of terror, and using Arab civilians to mingle with them and as shields to cause as many civilian casualties, the world TV have been broadcasting constantly from Jihadists' Hamas hospitals with invented exaggerated numbers up to 1,200 and up. Later on it turned out that no more than 500-600 have died, and of course, 90% were Hamas terror combatants. Point is, that a death cult "people" that are willing to murder (directly or indirectly) its own civilians for the sake of gaining sympathy to its fake victimhood, there is never a shred of logic to take seriously anything coming from their "source", unless it's the part when they declare they want to 'kill you'. Jenin Redux: Casualty Figures Reconsidered
'Maximum 600 Palestinians died in Gaza', (Jan 22, 2009) Israel Cremonesi interviewed Gazans who echoed Israel's insistence of how Hamas gunmen used civilians as human shields. One Gazan recalled civilians in Gaza ...
Gazan doctor says death toll inflated — Ynet news
Gaza doctor: Hamas exaggerated Gaza death toll — 500 to 600 killed, mostly fighters, not 1,250
* Torture by Hamas of Palestinian opponents continues at a children's hospital, but Western media and NGOs are suddenly silent * Pro-Gaza demonstration in Ramallah canceled for a lack of protesters. Third Intifada? Not anytime soon * New polls show only a minority of Americans now think Palestinians should have their own state [This is a further dispatch on this month's Israel-Hamas mini-war. This dispatch contains various notes and comments, mainly by myself. Another dispatch with articles by others on the war's outcome, provisionally titled "Israel refuses to win," will follow over the weekend. (Previous dispatches can be read here.)
IMRA — Saturday, April 27, 2002 The Palestinians in the Jenin ...
investigate the happenings in the Jenin refugee camp, Palestinians are ... bodies recently added, those from the hospital cemetery, bring the number up ...
The Truth About Jenin [PPT]
The Big Jenin Lie
Jenin Lie
Anatomy of Anti-Israel Incitement:Jenin, World Opinion and the Massacre That Wasn't. International organizations, non-governmental agencies and many foreign ...
Jenin: Massacring Truth
Contact American at American1627@yahoo.com |
|
SHOOTING FROM UNRWA & AT UNRWA; SUBTLE INCITEMENT AGAINST ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 24, 2009. |
|
SHOOTING FROM UNRWA & AT UNRWA An Israeli official pointed out that every year, the automatic majority in the UNO passes the same 21 anti-Israel resolutions, without Israel having done anything to warrant it. Not for the first time, Israeli forces drew fire from UNRWA facilities, and fired back at them. The UNO then condemns Israel. The NY Times wonders whether Israel committed a war crime, but practically ignores whether Muslim terrorists committed a war crime. "On the one hand, Israeli officials say they recognize the vital role of the organization that provides food and other assistance to hundreds of thousands of Gaza's poor." "On the other hand, the agency is often accused by critics in Israel and beyond of perpetuating the Palestinian refugee problem, being the only UN branch dedicated to a specific refugee population, whose numbers, according to the agency's criteria, continue to grow." An Israeli official explained that most UNRWA employees in Gaza are local Arabs and many of them affiliate with Hamas (Isabel Kershner, A1.) or PLO. The UNO could somewhat redeem itself if it charged Hamas with war crimes. The numbers multiply because: (1) The UNO and Arabs colluded to keep refugees from integrating; (2) UNRWA defines those "refugees" and not of other nations as descendants of "refugees." Many of the original Arab "refugees" were falsely defined as such; and (3) When Arab refugees die, their identities or welfare cards are passed to others, to get the benefits. Why didn't the newspaper admit this, instead of making it seem as if the critics are partisan and not absolutely correct, factually? Without reporting what are the facts, how can readers reach a proper conclusion? What is the newspaper for? Figure it out. The UNO is an anti-Israel organization. It has proved itself biased. Its UNRWA exists to keep the Arab refugee problem alive rather than to solve it. Its staff is Arab and pro-terrorist. Terrorists fight behind human and civilian shields. Israel's battle reports are sincere, but late. Terrorists lie for advantage. What UNRWA's critics say makes sense. The newspaper doesn't like their import. Hence it presents the matter as "he says, she says." I conclude that UNRWA should disband. The US should drop it. As for the Times, I heard that it is up for sale. I would not mourn it. It is so biased. However, I do mourn the newspaper industry and the television industry, which for a while offered quality and convenience, until their revenue sources spread thin and young people became willing to sit all day in their computer chairs straining their eyes to gather news from sources even less reliable. WAR DAMAGE, BUT BY WHOM? A certain neighborhood "..was a scene of devastation on Thursday, filled with impromptu tank-track roads, rusting greenhouses, and blown-up houses that had been booby-trapped with mannequins, explosive devices, and tunnels." [The Arabs let their greenhouses rust, and blame Israel for their poverty.] A third of the houses were booby-trapped. The mannequins are a lure to draw fire and then to explode, forcing the Israeli soldiers down a hole in the floor, where Hamas gunmen would capture them (Ethan Bronner, NY Times, 1/16, A12). And torture them. And murder them. And hold their corpses for ransom. Since one-third of the houses are booby-trapped, and since Hamas men use civilian buildings as firing platforms in the first place, imagine how much of the "devastation" and the civilian deaths occurred by accident before combat and how much during combat should be attributed to Muslim terrorists! Terrorists, you know, the people whom "innocent civilians" "democratically elected." Was that question too difficult for Mr. Bronner to imagine? BRONNER'S LACK OF IMAGINATION, NEXT DAY He reported that more than 1,100 Arabs died in Gaza, according to the Hamas-run Ministry of Health, which estimates that 40% are women and children under 18. "Israel estimates that only a quarter of the dead are civilians. Israel, which has suffered 13 dead, 3 of them civilians, is being accused of a disproportionate use of force. Death tolls in warfare may carry a moral weight, but not a legal one." (A8.) The P.A. Red Crescent calls it a civilian casualty if not in uniform, if not fighting that day or if not in uniform. Hamas men often don't wear uniforms! No statistic should be quoted from a Hamas agency. Hamas figures, as PLO figures, are as propagandistic as Nazi and Communist statistics. They doctor statistics to serve the cause. The Muslim terrorists endanger civilians in order to either deter IDF attacks or to make propaganda against attacking IDF troops. Hamas can be expected to inflate civilian casualties (as do biased "human rights organizations). By contrast, IDF figures have been as accurate as possible. Notice the tricky juxtaposition of lopsided death statistics with the accusation that Israel uses disproportionate force, and without a definition of "disproportionate." The definition indicates that Israel does not use disproportionate force. Also tricky is the false notion that death tolls that are legal may not be moral. Not under the Geneva Conventions, which based international law on ethics. The international furor really is against Jewish defense and seeks to inhibit 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 |
|
PALLYWOOD, GAZA EDITION 2009
Posted by AA, January 24, 2009. | |
|
This appeared on the Digg.com website. | |
|
"Video of Carnage in Gaza Market is a Hoax"
We, like many other websites, posted a video allegedly showing the aftermath of an IDF air strike on a Gaza market. The video turned out to be disinformation: it was not shot three days ago, as indicated by the link, and has nothing to do with the current conflict. From Wake Up From Your Slumber I regret that I was deceived by the video I grabbed and uploaded for propagation in the original post "Israel bombs a civilian market (GRAPHIC Video)". 
Please allow me to explain. The video in question made its initial appearance on LiveLeak with the upload date January 1st. It claims to be connected to IDF strike in the recent conflict with the header "RAW (Graphic): Scene After IDF Attack In Gaza 1/1/09". This turned out to be a very inaccurate and misleading claim. Someone, likely a pro-Israel right-winger (judging his attitude rebutting criticism of Israel's response to Hamas/Gaza reminiscent of Little Green Footballs fan who sought to "minimize" the horror as reflected in reddit comment history), posted a detailed comment on Reddit that debunked the claim. Here is what the debunker by the reddit username TW9zc2Fk (who has been a registered user for only a week) said:
|
|
HOW IDF LEGAL EXPERTS SAVED ISRAELI LIVES IN HUMAN SHIELD SCENARIOS
Posted by Eleazar Ben Yair, January 24, 2009. |
|
This was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner,, Director of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il Write him at imra@netvision.net.il Unfortunately, the folks at Haaretz decided only to provide English readers a painfully short version of what may be one of the most important articles about the operation in Gaza. Friday 23 January 2009 Hebrew edition magazine article is available at
It includes the following interesting passage relating to Senator Mitchell: Question: Did the events of September 11 impact the legal situation? Former international law division head Daniel Reisner: Absolutely. When we started to define the conflict with the Palestinians as an armed conflict this was a dramatic switch and we started to defend it before the Supreme Court. In April 2001 I met the American envoy George Mitchell and explained to him that the war against terror above a certain level is war and not law enforcement. The Mitchell Committee rejected that position and in its report called on the Government of Israel to abandon the term "armed conflict" and return to the term "law enforcement". It took four months and four jets to change the opinion of the United Stattes on the matter, and if not for the four jets I am not certain that we could have developed the concept of the war on terrror to the magnitude that we have developed it to today." How IDF legal experts legitimized strikes involving Gaza civilians
By Yotam Feldman and Uri Blau. In Haaretz 22/01/2009
|
|
The idea to bombard the closing ceremony of the Gaza police course was internally criticized in the Israel Defense Forces months before the attack. A military source involved in the planning of the attack, in which dozens of Hamas policemen were killed, says that while military intelligence officers were sure the operation should be carried out and pressed for its approval, the IDF's international law division and the military advocate general were undecided. After months of the operational elements pushing for the attack's approval, the international law division headed by Col. Pnina Sharvit-Baruch gave the go-ahead. In spite of doubts, and also under pressure, Sharvit-Baruch and the division also legitimized the attack on Hamas government buildings and the relaxing of the rules of engagement, resulting in numerous Palestinian casualties. In the division it is also believed that the killing of civilians in a house whose residents the IDF has warned might be considered legally justified, although the IDF does not actually target civilians in this way. Many legal experts, including former international law division head Daniel Reisner, do not accept this position. "I don't think a person on a rooftop can be incriminated just because he is standing there," he said. One reason for the international law division's permissive positions is its desire to remain relevant and influential. Sources involved in the work of the Southern Command said that its GOC, Maj.. Gen. Yoav Gallant, is quite suspicious of legal experts and has a reputation of not attaching much importance to their advice. The Southern Command's legal adviser was not invited to consultations before the attack, and was compartmentalized when it came to smaller forums. It was actually during the action in Gaza that consideration for his opinions grew. The legal addendum to Operation Cast Lead's order shows the way the IDF's legal experts legitimized the army's actions: "As much as possible and under the circumstances of the matter, the civilian population in a target area is to be warned," it states, adding "unless so doing endangers the operation or the forces." The addendum orders commanders to be extremely cautious in the use of "incendiary weapons" (for example, phosphorus bombs), but does not prohibit their use: "Before using these weapons, the the military advocate general or international law division must be consulted on the specific case." A source who served in the division in the past says it is "more liberal than the attorney general and the High Court petitions department." "The army knows what it wants, and pressure was certainly brought to bear when legal advisers thought that something was unacceptable or problematic," an operational military source said. According to a senior official in the international law division, "Our goal is not to tie down the army, but to give it the tools to win in a way that is legal." Contact Eleazar Ben Yair at eleazar_benyair@yahoo.it |
|
FROM THE IDIOTS WHO ARE PROSECUTING GEERT WILDERS
Posted by Eleazar Ben Yair, January 24, 2009. |
|
This is from the Yid with Lid website (http://yidwithlid.blogspot.com). |
|
The Netherlands, the country that is Khalid Yasin has been quoted as: * Advocating the death penalty for homosexuality Here are some of his most special quotations: "There's no such thing as a Muslim having a non-Muslim friend. If you prefer the clothing of the kafirs over the clothing of the Muslims, most of those names that's on most of those clothings is faggots, homosexuals and lesbians...The Koran gives a very clear position regarding homosexuality, lesbianism and bestiality — that these are aberrations, they are immoralities and if they are tried, convicted, they are punishable by death." I guess this is how it works in the Netherlands If you call Gay people "Faggots," or say terrorism is justified that is NOT hate speech and you are welcome into the country. If you LIVE in the country, work for its benefit as a member of the legislature, and try to protect your country and others by using the words of the Koran to show people what Islam is all about, THAT IS HATE SPEECH !?!?!. Strange country. To read the entire article about Yasin's visit, goto
Support Geert Wilders: Help Defend Geert Wilders from The Worldwide Islamic Attempt to Stifle Criticism, and the movement to Stop YOUR Freedom of Speech The Freedom Party (PVV) and Geert Wilders Are faced with an all-out assault. Exploding legal expenses might cripple the battle for YOUR liberties. Your financial support is URGENTLY Needed Three ways of how you can donate money: 1. Paypal. More information on www.geertwilders.nl. 2. Freedom Party Foundation. Stichting Vrienden van de PVV, bank account: 67.04.72.344 International donors add: IBAN: NL98 INGB 0670 4723 44 BIC: INGBNL2A 3. Checque to:
Contact Eleazar Ben Yair at eleazar_benyair@yahoo.it |
|
A BOLD NEW MOVE
Posted by Ari Bussi, January 24, 2009. | ||
|
At this very hour, four weeks ago, Israel entered Operation Cast Lead. The following Saturday, on the eighth day of the Operation, Israeli ground forces entered Gaza. Two weeks later, Israel had declared a unilateral ceasefire (2AM on Sunday, 1/18/2009).
Contact Ari Bussel at aribussel@gmail.com and visit his blogsite: web.me.com/bussel. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: UNMITIGATED GALL
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 23, 2009. |
|
That's the gall of the new administration, and the new Middle East envoy George Mitchell. Everything has a solution, he says. And he will find "our" solution. He's coming here as quickly as he can to take care of things. Just as he took care of things in Ireland. Never mind that we're headed into an election. Or that Abbas — who heads a party that still calls for Israel's destruction in its charter — is not really president of the PA any longer but is pretending to be. Or that Hamas is still in control in Gaza. Or that the majority of the PA legislature IS Hamas. Or that Hamas will never, ever negotiate with Israel. Hey! He's coming to fix things. In due course I'll have more to say about Mr. Mitchell. ~~~~~~~~~~ Obama says he intends to work "aggressively" towards finding peace. Bad choice of word or a sign of what's to come? ~~~~~~~~~~ Earlier this week, an Israeli man, Moshe Avitan, suffered a critical gunshot wound in the head when his car was shot at from a passing car, as he was driving near Kochav Hashachar, not far from Ramallah. He was rushed to the hospital, where he underwent surgery. Yisrael Medad points out in his blog [My Right Word] that Condoleezza Rice is indirectly responsible for this. Last April, she was here and pushing hard for concessions to "strengthen" Abbas. One of these concessions was the removal of the Rimonim checkpoint near Kochav Hashachar. Security officials at the time warned that this presented a danger, as it would permit Palestinians access to roads from which they had been blocked and increase the risk of drive-by shootings. This was the result of the unmitigated gall of Rice, in demanding this when it put our innocents at risk. And now we're going to have to cope with someone else pushing for more of the same. What we need is leadership strong enough to say NO to the Americans with unmitigated gall. ~~~~~~~~~~ There has been some controversy regarding the selection by Obama of Ingrid Mattson, President of the Islamic Society of North America, to speak at a prayer service for post-inauguration festivities yesterday at the National Cathedral. Allow me then to share her own words: "The American government has not criticized sufficiently the brutality of the Israeli government, believing that it needs to be 'supportive' of the Jewish state. The result is that oppression, left unchecked, can increase to immense proportions, until the oppressed are smothered with hopelessness and rage." This was from the Center for Security Policy and was called to my attention by Judith Nusbaum. ~~~~~~~~~~ The article I cited from the Besa Center about smuggling that had no URL yet has now shown up on the Post site and you can access it here:
~~~~~~~~~~ Maj.-Gen. (res.) Giora Eiland, former national security advisor, in an interview in the Post has said the following with regard to Egypt stopping smuggling: "To be polite, the Egyptians are telling us stories and we are deluding ourselves." As to the agreement (Memorandum of Understanding) Livni signed with Rice: "...well, without being rude, it's not serious and it's not significant." We desperately need a change of government, as soon as yesterday, actually. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Yaakov Katz in the Post, Hamas has now taken over all tunnels operating under the border (yes, there are tunnels operating), tunnels normally run by local Palestinians. Apparently this is to solidify their control over Gaza. This week they took over a humanitarian supply truck so they could be seen as the ones distributing aid. They've also placed strict curfews on areas that are heavily Fatah; they shoot anyone out after hours. Fatah is lamenting that we didn't take out Hamas completely. ~~~~~~~~~~ This, at least, brings a smile: Hamas says with regard to the situation here, Obama does not represent change and is going to make the same mistakes Bush did. The Obama demand that Hamas stop firing rockets and recognize Israel is, they say, going to make Mitchell's mission very difficult. They were anticipating an Obama embrace, apparently. I don't know what they're complaining about, actually, because Obama is also in favor of opening all the crossing. ~~~~~~~~~~ This too presents a bit of a challenge to Obama and Mitchell: The Saudis, who apparently didn't notice that Obama was offering them his hand, say that their relationship with the US and the "peace process" are at risk if the Americans don't stop Palestinian suffering. This is obviously a bid to get Obama to tilt away from Israel. How much backbone will Obama have, challenged thus? ~~~~~~~~~~ Ultimately Rice fell on her face trying to "make peace" here. May Mitchell do the same. ~~~~~~~~~~ I apologize for this heavy tone before Shabbat, but what must be said must be said. There will be more after Shabbat.... Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
THE PALESTINIAN PANDORA'S BOX (I)
Posted by Yoram Ettinger, January 23, 2009. |
|
The mild reaction by Arab countries to the Hamas-driven Palestinian predicament in Gaza refutes the assumption that the Palestinian issue is a top Arab priority and that it constitutes the core cause of Arab hostility toward the West, USA and Israel. In fact, the Arab reaction has reflected overall Arab attitude toward the Palestinian issue since 1948, through the 1982 Israel-PLO war in Lebanon and the First and Second Intifadah, irrespective of the identity of the Palestinian leadership: Haj Amin al-Husseini, Shukeiri, Hammuda, Arafat, Abu Mazen or Haniyeh. Arab countries have always showered Palestinians with rhetoric, but they have refrained from significant support. During the 2009 Gaza War, Arab countries rejected the call for an emergency session of Arab leaders on behalf of Gaza. They have limited their meek support to a gathering of Arab foreign ministers, calling for a UN emergency session. Saudi Arabia dismissed the suggestion to employ oil as a weapon. Riad prohibits pro-Palestinian rallies and its religious establishment issued a weak proclamation on behalf of the Palestinian struggle. The Gulf Cooperation Council focused on economic and monetary issues during its December 30, 2008 meeting, according lips service to Gaza. A similar reaction occurred during the 1982 Israel-PLO war in Lebanon, which erupted on June 4. The Arab oil producing countries convened in August to discuss the price of oil, dismissing the proposal to use the oil weapon on behalf of the PLO. The summit of Arab leaders was deliberately delayed until September, following the expulsion of the PLO from Beirut. Arab leaders have systematically demonstrated how secondary the Palestinian issue has been in their order of national priorities. For instance, Arab financial support of the PLO was less than 10% of Arab financial support to the anti-Soviet Muslims in Afghanistan. In 1988, the Arab League convened on behalf of the First Intifadah, committing itself to $128MN immediate support, followed by $43MN monthly assistance. Less than $100MN was actually transferred to the PLO, compared with over $1BN annual support to Afghanistan during 1978-1988. In 2002, Saudi Arabia pledged $600MN for the Second Intifadah, but only $100MN has been transferred so far. Other Arab countries made a $55MN monthly commitment, but — as expected — they have once again failed to deliver. Recent precedents have led Arabs to consider the Palestinians a potential treacherous, subversive, explosive Pandora's box, which could undermine their survival. On the other hand, Palestinians blame Arab leaders for the "1948 Debacle." In 1948/9, the Arab League made it clear that the war against the Jewish State was not launched because — or for — the Palestinians. It declared the provisional Palestinian government null and void, while Egypt and Jordan expelled the Palestinian leadership from Gaza, Judea and Samaria. During the late 1950s, and in 1966, Arafat, Abu Mazen and their Fatah colleagues were evicted from Egypt and Syria for subversion. In 1970, they were decimated in Jordan, following an attempt to topple the Hashemite regime ("Black September"). In 1975/76, they were clobbered by Syria (in Lebanon), as a result of their assault on the central government in Beirut ("Black June"). In 1983, they lost their base in Tripoli, Lebanon, after they failed to challenge the dominant local militia. In 1987, Egypt killed scores of Palestinians, who demonstrated on behalf of the First Intifadah in the Rafah refugee camp in Sinai/Gaza. In 1991, Kuwait expelled 300,000 Palestinians for collaboration with Saddam's plunder of the sheikhdom. Since 2003, thousands of Palestinians have fled Iraq, due to their identification with the Butcher of Baghdad. The Red Carpet, which welcomes Palestinian leaders at the UN and in Western capitals, is transformed into a shabby rug upon landing in Arab capitals. What do Arab leaders know — about the Palestinians — which has escaped Western and Israeli policy-makers? Arab leaders have not dedicated themselves to advance the Palestinian cause. They have not regarded the Palestinian issue as a premier link in the formulation of their policies. Domestic, regional and global factors have impacted inter-Arab, Arab-Western and Arab-Israel relations much more than the Palestinian issue. Palestinians do not possess veto power over Arab policy-making. Since the 1993 Oslo Accord, Israel has subordinated its national security policy to the resolution of the Palestinian issue, switching its focus from the Israeli-Arab path to the Israeli-Palestinian path. Dozens of initiatives, conferences, summits, agreements and cease fires have yielded a series of short-lived illusions of peace and security, which were promptly crashed by an unprecedented Palestinian wave of hate-education, violation of commitments and terrorism. In fact, the roadmap toward the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict does not go through Ramallah or Gaza, but rather through Cairo, Amman and other Arab capitals, as evidenced by Israel's peace treaties with Egypt and Jordan, which have withstood Palestinian opposition and an on-going Israeli war against Palestinian terrorism. A policy which is based on an erroneous assumption — that the Palestinian issue is supposedly the crown jewel of Arab policy — constitutes an erroneous policy. It exacerbates regional instability, fuels terrorism, promotes war and diminishes the prospects for peace. Israel should base its policy, toward the Palestinians, on the track record of the last 100 years, and especially the last 15 years, which have featured the failure of Land-for-Peace on the Palestinian track. Lessons of recent history, Israel's minimal security requirements and the need to minimize motivation for Arab terrorism, highlight the necessity to solidify Israel's control of Judea and Samaria. 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 was published by YNET. It is archived at
|
|
MITCHELL, A MIDEAST ENVOY WITH A TENDENTIOUS LEGACY
Posted by David Bedein, January 23, 2009. |
|
This was published in the Bulletin (Philadelphia)
|
|
Jerusalem — Following President Obama's appointment of
former U.S. Sen. George Mitchell of Maine as his Middle East envoy, it
may be instructive to remember the tendentiousness of George
Mitchell's 2001 report titled "The Mitchell Report on the al-Aqsa
Intifadah"
This genesis of this report stemmed from President Bill Clinton's Oct. 2000 appointment of an international investigation commission to determine the causes of the Palestinian insurrection, which was deemed the Second Intifada — the Arabic term for "shaking off" — in this instance, shaking off Israel. To this commission, President Clinton named Sen. Mitchell, who is of Arab descent through his mother, as its chairman, along with a Jewish-American, former U.S. Sen. Warren Rudman, to the panel, in addition to three prominent European diplomats. The initial Israeli response to the publication of the Mitchell Commission report in May 2001 was a sigh of relief when the Mitchell Commission did not blame Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for instigating the riots in Sept. 2000 when he visited the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, which some said had sparked the Arab rioting. However, even with the Sharon Temple Mount accusation out of the way, the Mitchell Commission report accepted every Palestinian premise for the violence at the time. The Mitchell Commission accepted as a given that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO)-led riots were based on a movement for "independence and genuine self-determination," without giving any credence to the PLO goal, stated in all PLO publications, maps and media outlets, even during the current Oslo process, which consistently and clearly states that "liberation" of Palestine, all of Palestine — in stages — remained the goal. For some reason, the Mitchell Commission characterized the rioters armed with Molotov cocktails as "unarmed Palestinian demonstrators," a term that they apparently borrowed from PLO information reports that were published at the time. The Mitchell Commission took the position that Israel's security forces did not face a clear and present danger when faced with a mob trying to kill them with rocks and firebombs. It made no mention that the Palestinian Authority (PA) has amassed 50,000 more weapons than they were supposed to have, in clear violation of the written Oslo accords. The Mitchell Commission surprisingly accepted the notion that the PA security officials are simply "not in control" of their own tightly controlled security services. The Mitchell Commission would not consider reliable intelligence reports that documented the PA had planned the uprising. It also failed to relate documentation showing the PA had spent past seven years preparing its media, school system and security services for a violent confrontation with Israel. Indeed, in late May 2000, a senior official of Israeli intelligence conducted a press briefing where he revealed intelligence information that the PLO was planning riots for late Sept. 2000. It said the notion the PA leadership had failed to prevent terrorist attacks against Israel as only an Israeli "view," ignoring consistent incitement that Arafat had conveyed to his own media for the previous seven years. The Mitchell Commission also rejected Israel's characterization of the conflict, as "armed conflict short of war"; (How else would you describe an army that fires mortar rounds into Israeli cities?) The Mitchell Commission also condemned the Israel Defense Force's killing of PLO combat officers during a time of war, without giving an alternative. Instead of issuing a clear call to the PLO to stop sniper attacks on Israel's roads and highways, the Mitchell Commission simply "condemned the positioning of gunmen within or near civilian dwellings," leaving the observer to assume that PLO attacks from empty embankments would be acceptable. The Mitchell Commission suggested that "the IDF should consider withdrawing to positions held before Sept. 28, 2000, ... to reduce the number of friction points," ignoring the fact that this would leave entry points to many Israeli cities without appropriate protection during a time of war. The Mitchell Commission also demanded that Israel should transfer to the PA all tax revenues owed, and permit Palestinians who had been employed in Israel to return to their jobs, strangely recommending that Israel once again pay salaries of armed PLO personnel who were at war with Israel. Meanwhile, the Mitchell Commission took a page out of Arab propaganda when it called on Israeli "security forces and settlers to refrain from the destruction of homes and roads, as well as trees and other agricultural property in Palestinian areas," and would not relate to the possibility that some of the trees and agricultural land had been razed may have been provided cover to PA security forces during combat. The Mitchell Commission also accepted the notion that "settlers and settlements in their midst" remains a cause of the Palestinian uprising, because these Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria violate "the spirit of the Oslo process," even though not one word appears in the actual Oslo accords would require the dismemberment of a single Israeli settlement. In conclusion, the Mitchell Commission drew a strange comparison between "settlement activities" and the Palestinian inability to resume negotiations, so long as "settlement activities" continue, providing an excuse for the PLO to continue its armed conflict. In short, the Mitchell Commission Report drove a nail into the coffin of any credibility that George Mitchell could ever have to serve as a potential Middle East envoy. 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 bedein@thebulletin.us |
|
DAY 2 & SELF-DELUSION; WHEN HUMAN SHIELDING WAS CONDEMNED
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 23, 2009. |
|
DAY 2 & SELF-DELUSION
Pres. Obama is restoring military interrogation rules, to end CIA abuse. He ordered the cases against suspected terrorist detainees reviewed. What standards? I would like habeas corpus restored. People turned over to our forces by supposed allies but for a bounty should not automatically be deemed guilty of terrorism. New policy should stop keeping people imprisoned indefinitely, without knowing whether they are terrorists. Need clarification. On the Arab-Israel conflict, the new President seems ignorant, guided as he is by Martin Indyk and "Bakers' Jews." They were called "Bakers' Jews" because they Sec. Baker's dirty work against Israel. No wonder Obama appointed former Sen. Mitchell as his envoy to the P.A. and Israel. Oy! The NY Times calls Sen. Mitchell "neutral" on the Arab-Israel conflict, and someone whose recommendations were accepted by both sides. "Both sides" presumably includes Israel. But the Israeli regime is not for the Jews of Israel. It kowtows to the US and other foreign critics. It no longer defends itself thoroughly, just appears to do so whereas it smoothes the way for its own conquest. Its domestic policy often favors seditious Arabs "Neutral?" How could a decent person be neutral between Israel, that has a right to its homeland, wants peace, strives to reduce enemy civilian casualties when it has to fight back, and is tolerant, and the Arabs, who don't have a right to the Jews' homeland, want war, fight mostly by war crimes, are intolerant, fascist, seek to conquer the world, and are as anti-American as other Islamists? Imagine an envoy neutral between fascist Germany and the Jews! But Mitchell is not neutral. His recommendations were flagrantly biased against Israel. Yes, Israel accepted them. Israel also accepted Oslo, Road Map, and UN resolutions of ceasefires designed to spare the Arabs a worse defeat and to help the Arabs take defensive borders away from Israel. Israeli regimes have a defeatist and anti-Zionist ideology. It is unfair to cite their acceptance of perverse proposals as evidence that we who are not neurotic should. The Senate used to defer to Kissinger on policy towards Israel, because he is a Jew. He swore in on a Christian Bible and blocked military aid to Israel, etc.. Jewish ancestry or Israeli birth does not indicate loyalty to fellow Jews. About time we learned that! Make-believe — imagining Mitchell neutral, that neutrality is fair, that all Jews are pro-Israel and even know what being pro-Israel requires, that one can make peace with jihadists, and that the US is, and should be, in a peace process for Israel, is make-believe. The adult world is as make-believe as a child's. Westerners deceive themselves as the Arabs reputedly did. Adult knowledge is full of bunkum. Selfish agendas routinely come with an idealistic cover. The deception works before most victims realize it. PURPOSE OF A CEASEFIRE When is the purpose of a ceasefire, ostensibly humanitarian and for peace, actually inhumane and a facility for war? First, Arab marauders attack or invade Israel. Israel may restrain itself. Foreign commentators usually do, too. The Arabs, however don't — they keep coming. Finally, Israel retaliates. No longer restraining themselves, the Vatican, UNO, Media, et al, solemnly call for restraint on both sides or they condemn Israel. During a major war, while the outcome is in doubt, the "et al" restrain themselves. When Israel clearly emerges militarily ahead, the "et al" no longer restrain themselves. They demand a ceasefire. It may take a few days for the diplomats to agree upon the biased wording. But their purpose in advocating or imposing a ceasefire is to deprive Israel of a resounding military and diplomatic victory. During the three years of Hamas bombardment of Israel, with only token Israeli retaliation — i.e., insufficient to prevent a major Hamas buildup — there was little foreign agitation for ceasefire. It took an Israeli invasion to invoke such agitation. ISRAEL PULLS ITS PUNCHES, AGAIN At first, the IDF was tough in Gaza. It put military goals first, as is proper in war. It blasted enemy positions. Then it got mild, probably subdued by the anticipated, unfair criticism. Instead of pounding enemy positions with artillery, it sent in ground forces. That removes a great advantage of Israel's Army. Therefore, it risks greater casualties. Not to be moral but to quiet immoral critics. Fortunately, the troops fought so well as to incur few casualties. WHEN USING HUMAN SHIELDS WAS CONDEMNED Although Hamas fights almost entirely behind human shields, a grievous war crime, the UNO doesn't work up indignation against it. This contradicts its professed concern for those civilians when the IDF fires at Hamas and civilians get killed, as Hamas planned they would. I remember when the use of human shields was condemned. It was when Israel asked residents in P.A. areas to tell terrorists hiding in houses that they were surrounded and had better surrender. Since the terrorists wouldn't shoot neighbors, many such encounters ended without bloodshed. Should be desirable. However, Israel was faulted, even by its Supreme Court, as using human shields, and was ordered to stop. Meant more firefights and deaths. 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 |
|
GAZA-TRUTH AND CONTEXT
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, January 23, 2009. |
|
"A Gaza War Full of Traps and Trickery"
|
|
JERUSALEM — The grinding urban battle unfolding in the densely populated Gaza Strip is a war of new tactics, quick adaptation and lethal tricks. Hamas, with training from Iran and Hezbollah, has used the last two years to turn Gaza into a deadly maze of tunnels, booby traps and sophisticated roadside bombs. Weapons are hidden in mosques, schoolyards and civilian houses, and the leadership's war room is a bunker beneath Gaza's largest hospital, Israeli intelligence officials say. Unwilling to take Israel's bait and come into the open, Hamas militants are fighting in civilian clothes; even the police have been ordered to take off their uniforms. The militants emerge from tunnels to shoot automatic weapons or antitank missiles, then disappear back inside, hoping to lure the Israeli soldiers with their fire. In one apartment building in Zeitoun, in northern Gaza, Hamas set an inventive, deadly trap. According to an Israeli journalist embedded with Israeli troops, the militants placed a mannequin in a hallway off the building's main entrance. They hoped to draw fire from Israeli soldiers who might, through the blur of night vision goggles and split-second decisions, mistake the figure for a fighter. The mannequin was rigged to explode and bring down the building. In an interview, the reporter, Ron Ben-Yishai, a senior military correspondent for the newspaper Yediot Aharonot, said soldiers also found a pile of weapons with a grenade launcher on top. When they moved the launcher, "they saw a detonator light up, but somehow it didn't go off." The Israeli Army has also come prepared for a battle both sides knew was inevitable. Every soldier, Israeli officials say, is outfitted with a ceramic vest and a helmet. Every unit has dogs trained to sniff out explosives and people hidden in tunnels, as well as combat engineers trained to defuse hidden bombs. To avoid booby traps, the Israelis say, they enter buildings by breaking through side walls, rather than going in the front. Once inside, they move from room to room, battering holes in interior walls to avoid exposure to snipers and suicide bombers dressed as civilians, with explosive belts hidden beneath winter coats. The Israelis say they are also using new weapons, like a small-diameter smart bomb, the GBU-39, which Israel bought last fall from Washington. The bomb, which is very accurate, has a small explosive, as little as 60 to 80 pounds, to minimize collateral damage in an urban area. But it can also penetrate the earth to hit bunkers or tunnels. And the Israelis, too, are resorting to tricks. Israeli intelligence officers are telephoning Gazans and, in good Arabic, pretending to be sympathetic Egyptians, Saudis, Jordanians or Libyans, Gazans say and Israel has confirmed. After expressing horror at the Israeli war and asking about the family, the callers ask about local conditions, whether the family supports Hamas and if there are fighters in the building or the neighborhood. Karim Abu Shaban, 21, of Gaza City said he and his neighbors all had gotten such calls. His first caller had an Egyptian accent. "Oh, God help you, God be with you," the caller began. "It started very supportive," Mr. Shaban said, then the questions started. The next call came in five minutes later. That caller had an Algerian accent and asked if he had reached Gaza. Mr. Shaban said he answered, "No, Tel Aviv," and hung up. Interviews last week with senior Israeli intelligence and military officers, both active and retired, as well as with military experts and residents of Gaza itself, made it clear that the battle, waged among civilians and between enemies who had long prepared for this fight, is now a slow, nasty business of asymmetrical urban warfare. Gaza's civilians, who cannot flee because the borders are closed, are "the meat in the sandwich," as one United Nations worker said, requesting anonymity. It is also clear that both sides are evolving tactics to the new battlefield, then adjusting them quickly. To that end, Israeli intelligence is detaining large numbers of young Gazan men to interrogate them for local knowledge and Hamas tactics. Last week, Israel captured a hand-drawn Hamas map in a house in Al Atatra, near Beit Lahiya, which showed planned defensive positions for the neighborhood, mine and booby trap placements, including a rigged gasoline station, and directions for snipers to shoot next to a mosque. Numerous tunnels were marked. A new Israeli weapon, meanwhile, is tailored to the Hamas tactic of asking civilians to stand on the roofs of buildings so Israeli pilots will not bomb. The Israelis are countering with a missile designed, paradoxically, not to explode. They aim the missiles at empty areas of the roofs to frighten residents into leaving the buildings, a tactic called "a knock on the roof." But the most important strategic decision the Israelis have made so far, according to senior military officers and analysts, is to approach their incursion as a war, not a police operation. Civilians are warned by leaflets, loudspeakers and telephone calls to evacuate battle areas. But troops are instructed to protect themselves first and civilians second. Officers say that means Israeli infantry units are going in "heavy." If they draw fire, they return it with heavy firepower. If they are told to reach an objective, they first call in artillery or airpower and use tank fire. Then they move, but only behind tanks and armored bulldozers, riding in armored personnel carriers, spending as little time in the open as possible. As the commander of the army's elite combat engineering unit, Yahalom, told the Israeli press on Wednesday: "We are very violent. We do not balk at any means to protect the lives of our soldiers." His name cannot be published under censorship rules. "Urban warfare is the most difficult battlefield, where Hamas and Islamic Jihad have a relative advantage, with local knowledge and prepared positions," said Jonathan Fighel of Israel's International Institute for Counterterrorism. "Hamas has a doctrine; this is not a gang of Rambos," he said. "The Israeli military has to find the stitches to unpick, how to counterbalance and surprise." Israeli troops are moving slowly and, they hope, unpredictably, trying not to stay in one place for long to entice Hamas fighters "to come out and confront them," Mr. Fighel said. Today, he said, "the mind-set from top to bottom is fight and fight cruel; this is a war, not another pinpoint operation." Israeli officials say that they are obeying the rules of war and trying hard not to hurt noncombatants but that Hamas is using civilians as human shields in the expectation that Israel will try to avoid killing them. Israeli press officers call the tactics of Hamas cynical, illegal and inhumane; even Israel's critics agree that Hamas's regular use of rockets to fire at civilians in Israel, and its use of civilians as shields in Gaza, are also violations of the rules of war. Israeli military men and analysts say that its urban guerrilla tactics, including the widespread use of civilian structures and tunnels, are deliberate and come from the Iranian Army's tactical training and the lessons of the 2006 war between Israel and Iranian-backed Hezbollah in Lebanon. Hamas rocket and weapons caches, including rocket launchers, have been discovered in and under mosques, schools and civilian homes, the army says. The Israeli intelligence chief, Yuval Diskin, in a report to the Israeli cabinet, said that the Gaza-based leadership of Hamas was in underground housing beneath the No. 2 building of Shifa Hospital, the largest in Gaza. That allegation cannot be confirmed. While The New York Times and some other news organizations have local or Gaza-based Palestinian correspondents, any Israeli citizen or Israeli with dual citizenship has been banned for more than two years from entering Gaza, and any foreign correspondent who did not enter the territory before a six-month cease-fire with Hamas ended last month has not been allowed in. Israel has also managed to block cellphone bandwidth, so very few amateur cellphone photographs are getting out of Gaza. But Israeli tactics have caused civilian casualties that have created an international uproar, both in the Arab world and the West. In one widely reported episode, 43 people died when the Israelis shelled a street next to a United Nations school in northern Jabaliya where refugees were taking shelter. The United Nations says no militants were in the school. The Israelis said they returned fire in response to mortar shells fired at Israeli troops. Such an action is legal, but there are questions about whether the force used was proportional under the laws of war, given the danger to noncombatants. The backlash from the school attack is another potent example of the risks in an urban-war strategy: Israel may in fact be able to dismantle Hamas's military structure even while losing the battle for world opinion and leaving Hamas politically still in charge of Gaza. "Hamas faked casualty figures and hospital occupancy rate in Gaza"
It could be like in Jenin in 2002. Initially we spoke of 1,500 deaths. Then came out they were only 54, including at least 45 guerrillas who died fighting. Doubts about the number of victims could be 600 and not 1300 "So
the boys of Hamas we have used as targets' Gaza residents accuse the
Islamic militants: "We prevented from leaving their houses and
shooting from there" Lorenzo Cremonesi, Corriere della sera (Italy) —
22 January 2009
GAZA — 'Go, go out of here! Do you want the Israelis kill us all? You want to see die under the bombs our children? Take away your weapons and missiles, "shouted many among the inhabitants of the Gaza Strip to Hamas militants and their allies of Islamic Jihad. The bravest were organized and had barred the doors to their yards, nailed to the boards of buildings, locked up as we go along the stairs to the roof higher. But for most of the guerrillas did not listen to anyone. "Traitors. Collaborators of Israel. Fatah Spies. Cowards. The soldiers of the holy war will punish. And in any case all will die, like us. Attacking the Jewish Zionists, we are all destined for paradise, you are not happy to die together? ". And so furious shouting, breaking down doors and windows, hid in the highest floors, in gardens, used ambulances, we baracaded near hospitals, schools, buildings Assembly. In extreme cases fired against those who tried to block them the way to save their families, or beat wildly. .. And there is another fact that is emerging more and more evident by visiting clinics, hospitals and families of the victims of Israeli fire. In truth, the number appears much lower for almost 1300 deaths, in addition to about 5,000 injured, reported by the men of Hamas and repeated by the official UN and local Red Cross. "The deaths could not be more than 500 or 600. Mainly boys between 17 and 23 years recruited from the ranks of Hamas that has literally sent to the massacre, "says a doctor Shifah the hospital that will not necessarily be said, is to risk his life. One thing, however, also confirmed by local journalists: "We have already reported to the heads of Hamas. Why insist on inflating the numbers of victims? Strano, inter alia, that non-governmental organizations, including Westerners, the reporting without verification. In the end, the truth may come to light. It could be like in Jenin in 2002. Initially we spoke of 1,500 deaths. Then came out they were only 54, including at least 45 guerrillas who died fighting. As we have arrived at these figures? "Take the case of the massacre of the family of Al Samoun neighborhood of Zeitun. When the bombs hit their houses have reported that 31 had died. And so there have been an officer of the Ministry of Health controlled by Hamas. But then, when the bodies were actually recovered, the sum total is doubled to 62 and so went to the calculation of total numbers, "says Masoda Al Samoun of 24 years. He adds an interesting detail: "To confuse the water we had put the Israeli special teams. Their men were disguised as guerrillas of Hamas, with a green bandana tied in front with the inscription usual: there is no other God besides Allah and Muhammad is his Prophet. In order to create chaos. We happen to shout them to leave, feared reprisals. Later we understood that they were Israelis. And 'Just visit any hospital to understand that the accounts do not add up. Many beds are free. The same goes for "Nasser" in Khan Yunis. Only 5 of 150 beds at the private Al-Amal are occupied. In Gaza city was evacuated the Wafa, built with donations "Islamic charities" of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and other Gulf countries, and bombed by Israel and the end of December. The institute is known to be a stronghold of Hamas, were hospitalized here its fighters wounded in the civil war with Fatah in 2007. The others were at hand, Al Quds, which is bombarded the second half weeks of January. He says this fact Magah to Rachmah, 25 years, inhabitant of a few dozen meters from the four major buildings in the complex health now seriously damaged. "The men of Hamas took refuge mainly in the building that houses the administrative offices of Al Quds. They used ambulances and forced ambulanzieri and nurses to remove their uniforms with symbols of paramedics, so could be confused and better to escape Israeli snipers. This has reduced a lot of the number of beds available in health institutions in Gaza. As well, the Shifah, the largest hospital in the city, remains a far cry from the record sold out. "Hamas had hidden there the cells and the emergency room for interrogation of prisoners of Fatah and the secular face of the left who were evacuated from the prison was bombed in Sarajevo, saying the militant Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine. It 'was a war in this war between Fatah and Hamas. The local humanitarian organizations, mostly controlled tell of dozens of executions, cases of torture, kidnappings in the last three weeks' perpetrated by Hamas.. One of the most notorious cases is to Shakhura Achmad, 47 years old, resident of Khan Yunis, and brother Khaled, right-hand man of Mohammad Dahlan (former head of the security services of Yasser Arafat, now in exile) who was abducted on the orders of the Head the local secret police of Hamas, Abu Abdallah Al Kidra, and tortured, he would have torn his left eye, and then was killed January 15. The ISM are supporters of terror
To their lasting disgrace, the British media covered the war in Gaza through the prism of Hamas propaganda, repeating Hamas claims about casualty figures as if they were proven facts, failing to report the ways in which Hamas was victimising the people of Gaza by using them as human shields and failing to challenge activists and apologists for Hamas when they promoted its cause. But there appears to have been one newspaper that went even further than that. It did not just report uncritically activists' claims. It seems to have actually used an activist as a supposedly dispassionate member of its reporting team. At the end of last month, the Telegraph carried this story on its foreign news pages by Ewa Jasiewicz, reporting from Jabaliya refugee camp in Gaza. It was exclusively about the suffering of civilians and children under bombardment by Israeli air strikes. It made no reference to any Hamas terrorists in the camp. Readers were given no indication that Ewa Jasiewicz was anything other than an objective reporter. Yet the very next day, she appeared again in the Telegraph's foreign news pages — but this time being interviewed by Tim Butcher as an 'activist originally from Kingston, Surrey' and the principal source of his story about two children being killed by a bomb from an Israeli warplane, an event which she claimed to have witnessed. Indeed, Ms Jasiewicz is not a regular reporter at all. She is a highly partisan, deeply committed, experienced anti-Israeli International Solidarity Movement activist. She is an active player on the side of the Palestinians who are committing acts of terror against the Israelis — which she would describe as legitimate and justified 'resistance'. Nor was this something she had hidden. Indeed, the web is heaving with examples of her hatred of Israel. Here she is in the Guardian spraying around claims that Israel was racist, that its democracy was a myth and that it deliberately targeted Palestinian civilians and activists for slaughter. Here is the statement she made after she was detained at Ben Gurion airport on 31 August 2004 by the Israeli authorities and told that she could not speak to the media, in which she justified Palestinian terrorism as a liberation struggle — and a struggle of an occupied people that is thus justified under international law. The BBC reported on August 25 2004: An Israeli court has ordered the expulsion of a UK journalist who has been held in Tel Aviv since challenging Israel's refusal to grant her entry. The Israelis say Ewa Jasiewicz, 26, is a political activist whose journalism is biased. They denied her entry at Ben Gurion Airport on 11 August. The court said she could be exploited by militant groups as a result of her 'naivety and convictions'. Ms Jasiewicz has denounced the ruling as 'an insult to my professionalism'. Israeli authorities say Ms Jasiewicz is an activist with the International Solidarity Movement, a Palestinian led organisation which stages protests against the Israeli occupation. Tel Aviv District Court judge Drora Pilpel said Ms Jasiewicz did not pose a direct threat to Israeli security but Palestinians could manipulate her 'naiveté'. The court said: 'Although the International Solidarity Movement was established for a humanitarian cause, it has been exploited, whether consciously or unconsciously, for different and dangerous goals.' Here (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muLlFdcK3EA) is an interview with her, one day before her 'news story' from Jabaliya appeared in the Telegraph, in which she describes herself as a 'co-ordinator' of the 'Free Gaza' movement. What in heaven's name has the Daily Telegraph come to that it passes off such a person as an objective reporter writing a news story on its foreign news pages about a conflict in which she is deeply involved as an active player — and furthermore on the side of those who are perpetrating acts of terror? Also read: International Solidarity — a Terrorist Protection Movement
The ISM Summer Volunteer Program : The "International Solidarity Movement" With the PLO
The International Solidarity Movement and the Palestinian Solidarity Movement: Who They Are And What They Stand For
Solidarity with Terror by Lee Caplan
An ISM member's father speaks out — the ISM is a cult and not to be tolerated
Some Gaza eye-witnesses tell it as it is
Israel blames Hamas for using housing areas, hospitals, schools and mosques to launch attacks into Israel or against its soldiers, provoking defensive counter-fire that it says is responsible for most of the civilian casualties. Every one of the residents interviewed in eastern Jabaliya insisted that there had been no provocation from the area, no resistance fighters, and no rocket launchings. "There aren't any tunnels around here, we are not resistance," said Najah Abd Rabo. Yet not more than 20 feet away, there was just such a tunnel, which Israeli troops had unearthed. Right in the middle of the road, it had a convincingly camouflaged roof. Talal Safadi, an official in the leftist Palestinian People's Party, said Hamas fighters were firing from positions all around Al Quds Hospital in the Tal-al Hawa neighbourhood. Hamas Confirms Executing Fatah Collaborators
PA Minister of Social Welfare Mahmoud Habbash accused Hamas on Wednesday of confiscating 63 trucks loaded with humanitarian aid while they were on their way to UNRWA in Gaza. [He also said] 19 Palestinians were murdered in cold blood by Hamas during and after Israel's Gaza operation, while more than 60 others were shot in the legs. Ehab al-Ghsain, spokesman of the Hamas Interior Ministry, said Wednesday, "The internal security service was instructed to track collaborators and hit them hard....They arrested dozens of collaborators." Arrested ? Gaza Doctor: Hamas Exaggerated Gaza Death Toll —
The Italian newspaper Corriere della Serra Thursday quoted a doctor at Shifa Hospital in Gaza City saying that, despite Hamas and UN claims, most of those killed in Gaza were young men who were members of terror groups. "The number of deaths was between 500-600...most were young men between 17 and 23 who were recruited into the ranks of Hamas, which sent them to be slaughtered," he said. Journalist Lorenzo Cremonesi confirmed that only 600 people were killed, and not 1,300 as was widely reported, based on hospital visits and discussions with families of the victims. "It was strange that the non-governmental organizations, including Western ones, repeated the number without checking, but the truth will come to light in the end," said the doctor. "It's like what happened in Jenin in 2002," he said. "At the beginning they spoke of 500 dead; afterwards it was clear there were only 54 dead, at least 45 of them fighters." N.B. One unmentioned point in the concern over the Gaza victims, (whether of Israeli precision bombing or of terrorist gunmen, indifferent as to their targets). Most of the population of Gaza are under 16 years of age. Until three years ago, the average family size in the Gaza Strip was eight children. (U.N. statistics) It is still in excess of six. So a random killing of the population would result in well over half of the victims being ' children'. But the killing was not random. In addition to clear Israeli concern NOT to attack buildings where children were sheltering except when under fire, it must be recognised that years of indoctrination of very young children on the merits and rewards of martyrdom have distorted the pattern. It is these indoctrinated children who rush into battle zones to throw rocks at the foreign devils, who run errands for Hamas fighters, and who attempt to spy for their adored 'army'... Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel (www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com). Contact him at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk |
|
BACKGROUND: SEN. GEORGE MITCHELL'S BOTCHED JOB IN GOOD FRIDAY AGREEMENT
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, January 23, 2009. |
|
This is by Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il Write him at imra@netvision.net.il |
|
When President Barack Obama named former Sen. George Mitchell as his Middle East envoy today, the Good Friday Agreement was cited as an example of his experience in such activity. And that's the irony. Mitchell's first task is supposed to be related to arms smuggling and the Good Friday Agreement, drafted under the guidance of U.S. Senator Mitchell, was simply a botched job when it came to insuring that the IRA put aside their guns. Here is the critical section of the agreement from 10 April 1998: "3. All participants accordingly reaffirm their commitment to the total disarmament of all paramilitary organizations. ... to achieve the decommissioning of all paramilitary arms within two years following endorsement in referendums North and South of the agreement and in the context of the implementation of the overall settlement. " The agreement said when the "decommissioning" should be achieved ("within two years") but did not explicitly require any action before the end of two years, this when other elements of the agreement provided for the sharing of power before the end of this period. Here is how Mr. Blair explained the problem a year after the Good Friday photo opportunity: "Sinn Fein have acknowledged these obligations, but are unable to indicate the timescale on which decommissioning will begin. They do not regard the Agreement as imposing any requirement to make a start before the establishment of the new Institutions. The UUP do not wish to move to the establishment of the new institutions without some evident progress with decommissioning." Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
GENOCIDE HENCHMAN LEADING MUSLIM OUTREACH TO OBAMA
Posted by LEL, January 22, 2009. |
|
This was writen by Patrick Poole and it appeared in
Pajamas Media
|
|
In the 1990s, the extremist Muslim Brotherhood government of Sudan, led by President Omar al-Bashir, was continuing a genocidal jihad against the Christian and animist populations inhabiting the south of the country that killed nearly [1] two million people and forced another four million from their homes. In July 2008, Bashir was [2] indicted by the International Criminal Court for war crimes related to the regime's subsequent genocide in Darfur. As Bashir was waging his holocaust against the Christians during the 1990s, one of his closest advisors and top aides was Abubaker Ahmed al-Shingieti, who from 1993 to 1995 served as spokesman for Bashir's government (as he was identified in a 1994 New York Times [3] article). According to al-Shingieti's own published [4] résumé, he later served Bashir as director of public affairs for the presidency from 1995 to 1998, as the genocidal jihad against the Christians was at its height and Sudan was the [5] hub of the international Islamic terror network. As [6] reported by the New York Times, eight individuals charged in the New York landmarks bombing plot in 1993 were traveling on Sudanese passports. As a result of those arrests, Sudan was added to the U.S. State Department [7] list of state sponsors of terrorism in August 1993. That was not long after al-Shingieti's boss began [8] sheltering Osama bin Laden, who lived in Khartoum from 1992 to 1996. With the close advisory role that bin Laden had with the Sudanese president and other high-ranking officials, it is highly likely that al- Shingieti would have had regular direct contact with bin Laden, as well as a host of other terrorist leaders who regularly visited Khartoum during al-Shingieti's tenure. This is particularly relevant as al-Shingieti will be heading the U.S. Muslim outreach to the Obama administration as the president of [9] American Muslims for Constructive Engagement (AMCE), a collaborative effort by U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood front organizations to infiltrate our federal government. A recent [10] open letter signed by al-Shingieti identifies him as AMCE's president. The group states its vision as: The United States Muslim community and the United States government working together constructively in enhancing national security and national interests of the United States of America. The lead organization in AMCE, the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), which al-Shingieti serves as regional director, is the current focus of a federal [11] grand jury probe into terrorist financing. At least two other AMCE groups, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), were named by federal prosecutors as [12] unindicted co-conspirators in the recent Holy Land Foundation terrorism finance trial, which resulted in [13] convictions on all 108 counts. And the Muslim American Society (MAS) was [14] identified in federal court briefs by the Department of Justice as "the overt arm of the Muslim Brotherhood in America." Exhibits entered into evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial identified CAIR as a front group for the Palestine Committee of the Muslim Brotherhood, and ISNA was also identified as an extension of the Muslim Brotherhood. Testimony by FBI Special Agent Lara Burns during that trial [15] placed AMCE steering committee member Nihad Awad at an infamous [16] 1993 meeting of U.S.-based Hamas leadership in Philadelphia. And documents received this past August by the Investigative Project through a Freedom of Information Act request [17] revealed that AMCE steering committee member Jamal al-Barzinji and AMCE advisory council member Yacub Mirza were listed in FBI memos as "members and leaders of the Ikhwan", which is the Arabic term for the Muslim Brotherhood. Department of Homeland Security senior agent David Kane has [18] testified in a federal court affidavit that "Barzinji is not only closely associated with PIJ [Palestinian Islamic Jihad], but also with Hamas." A December 2002 Wall Street Journal [19] article relates some additional information about the terrorist connections of AMCE advisory council member Yacub Mirza: According to court records and Justice Department documents, Mr. Mirza and several associates are suspected of funding the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, which targets Israeli civilians with suicide bombers. U.S. officials privately say Mr. Mirza and his associates also have connections to al-Qaeda and to other entities officially listed by the U.S. as sponsors of terrorism. Another [20] FBI memo obtained by the Investigative Project states that al-Shingieti's organization, IIIT, was one of the "Ikhwan organizations" that "are involved in organizing political support which involves influencing both public opinion in the United States as well as the United States government." This political influence campaign was considered the first phase in a plan "to institute the Islamic revolution in the United States," according to the FBI document. It is appropriate to revisit these extensive contacts between AMCE member organizations and officials and the international Muslim Brotherhood network, and even activity by AMCE leaders in support of Islamic terrorist organizations, because another Muslim Brotherhood [21] strategic document entered into evidence by federal prosecutors in the Holy Land Foundation trial revealed that the activity of these organizations in the U.S. is part of a "grand jihad" to [22] destroy the West from within: The process of settlement is a "civilization-jihadist process" with all the word means. The Ikhwan 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. These connections and the Muslim Brotherhood's stated goal of waging a "grand jihad" inside the U.S. raise particular concerns considering statements [23] reported by the Wall Street Journal made by al-Shingieti's current boss, Jamal al-Barzinji, at a fall 2001 Organization of Islamic Conference meeting in Qatar, bragging how he and his associates had successfully infiltrated Washington: At this time, the president and his administration are continually seeking the counsel and input of American Muslim leaders. At no other time has the Muslim community in America been more effective in relation to the processes of American government. When considering the concerted and extensive effort by the Muslim Brotherhood to infiltrate the U.S. government, we can gain insight into how Abubaker al-Shingieti has transitioned from being a top official in the genocidal Sudanese Muslim Brotherhood regime, to a top official in the U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood network, to leading the U.S. Muslim community's outreach to the Obama administration as the head of American Muslims for Constructive Engagement. Investigating his background we find that despite his recent image makeover as an [4] expert in interfaith relations and reconciliation — a dramatic change from his service as a henchman to a genocidal government — that Abubaker al-Shingieti has not changed his Muslim Brotherhood allegiances in his various transitions, just merely changed employers. Many of his AMCE colleagues have made similar transitions to respectability without distancing themselves from their terrorist ties. What's a little genocide between friends? Thus we can expect that the agenda al-Shingieti carries in his contacts with the Obama administration will continue to be in service to the Muslim Brotherhood's "grand jihad" he has served for the past two decades. URLs in this post: [1] two million people: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/232803.stm [2] indicted: http://www.icc-cpi.int/press/pressreleases/406.html [3] article: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/
[4] résumé: http://www.icrd.org/index.php?option=
[5] hub: http://www.milnet.com/state/1997/mckune97.htm [6] reported: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=
[7] list: http://www.state.gov/s/ct/c14151.htm [8] sheltering: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134544,00.html [9] American Muslims for Constructive Engagement: http://
[10] open letter: http://www.islamicamagazine.com/general/Open-Letter-
[11] grand jury probe: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2008/mar/04/
[12] unindicted co-conspirators: http://www.investigativeproject.org/
[13] convictions: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/
[14] identified: http://www.investigativeproject.org/article/597 [15] placed: http://counterterrorismblog.org/2007/08/
[16] 1993 meeting: http://www1.nefafoundation.org/miscellaneous/
[17] revealed: http://www.investigativeproject.org/article/737 [18] testified: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=73719 [19] article: http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.org/CMS/Topics/
[20] FBI memo: http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/159.pdf [21] strategic document: http://www.investigativeproject.org/
[22] destroy: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/opinion/
[23] reported: http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.org/CMS/Topics/ Leaders/119111662002.htm Contact LEL at lel817@yahoo.com |
|
THE NEW ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by LEL, January 22, 2009. |
|
This was written by Claudia Rosett, a journalist-in-residence with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, writes a weekly column on foreign affairs for Forbes. |
|
America has just thrown one of the world's biggest parties, rejoicing with good reason at the fall of the racial barrier to the White House. But bigotry ebbs and flows on many fronts, and a question for President Obama as he takes up his responsibilities as leader of the free world is whether he will now champion — or at least strive to protect — another minority whose members are today the targets of resurgent prejudice. I am speaking of a minority that even in the relatively enlightened 21st century is increasingly subject both worldwide, and to a disturbing extent even inside the U.S., to double standards, slurs, threats, arson, bombings, stabbings and other attacks on their persons, shops, homes and places of worship. It is not unusual in some parts of the world to hear them described, not least by official media outlets, as apes and pigs. In some prestigious quarters, notably the United Nations, it appears acceptable — in practice, if not as a matter of official policy — for member states to promote or even issue calls for their extermination. As you have probably guessed, I am speaking of the Jews. To many Americans, that may sound overwrought. American Jews are by and large a prosperous bunch, sending their children to good schools, filling some of the top ranks in publishing, finance, medicine, academia and government. One of their own, Rahm Emanuel, is currently serving as Obama's chief of staff. What's to worry about? Plenty. They belong to a minority that just 64 years ago was subject to industrial-scale slaughter in the heart of Europe. The 6 million Jews murdered in that Holocaust are remembered and their deaths commemorated today with cries of "never again." Yet there are proliferating signs that in too many places, and too many ways, the world is tacitly coming to accept not only persecution of the Jews, but the possibility of a second genocide — not necessarily by way of active complicity, but under labels familiar from the last century: It was not our fault. There was nothing we could do. Compared with the world's population today of 6.7 billion, the entire Jewish population worldwide is infinitesimal, estimated at roughly 14 million. Some 40% of those Jews live in the U.S. Some 40% live in the world's only Jewish state, Israel. The rest are scattered from France to Canada, the United Kingdom, Russia, Argentina, Australia and beyond. Collectively, they account for no more than about 0.2% of humanity. That's also miniscule compared with a worldwide Muslim population very roughly estimated at some 1.5 billion. And Israel, for all its U.S. support, walks a lonely and beleaguered path compared to the 57- member strong Saudi-headquartered Organization of the Islamic Conference — one of the core lobbying blocs in the UN General Assembly. Many Muslims may well desire simply to live in peace. Unfortunately, some of the most vocal, politically active and militarily aggressive among them — ruling Iran and Gaza, and harbored in places such as Syria and Lebanon — are explicitly dedicated to destroying Israel. Through Internet and television propaganda, through pronouncements from the UN stage, through everything from subsidies to anti-Semitic lobbying associations to money and arms for terrorist groups, they spend considerable resources fueling movements to boycott, denigrate and attack Jews. There are many spokes in the anti-Semitic web now being re-woven around the globe, from Saudi Arabia to the Palestinian schools and media that feature maps without Israel, and role models such as a martyred version of Mickey Mouse. But as Obama takes office, two hubs stand out. One is Iran, supporter of terrorists, source of genocidal proclamations against Israel and seeker of nuclear bombs. Whatever the doubts about that bomb program raised by the U.S. National Intelligence Estimate of late 2007, Obama's pick for cabinet- rank ambassador to the UN, Susan Rice, clearly sees a problem. In her written testimony for her confirmation hearing Jan. 15, she noted that "Iran continues its illicit nuclear program unabated." The other hub is the United Nations, which, despite its own sanctions on Iran and its own 1945 charter which aims to avert such horrors as another holocaust, continues to dignify Tehran and some of its fellow anti-Semitic despotic states with a slew of important UN posts, while treating Israel as a pariah state. Though a democracy, Israel has never been allowed to hold one of the 10 rotating seats on a Security Council that in recent years has welcomed such tyrannies as Syria and Libya. Currently, Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon is fueling the problem — publicly condemning Israel's battle to stop the terrorist attacks by Hamas, touring Gaza and demanding a probe of Israeli actions, while offering no viable protection to Israelis. Don't hold your breath for a UN inquiry into weapons and training supplied to Hamas by the same Iranian regime whose nuclear bomb program the UN's leaky sanctions have failed to stop. In this, Ban is carrying on a deep-seated UN tradition of bias against Jews and Israel. That is broadly obvious from the UN's torrent of anti-Israel statements, resolutions and so forth, including plans to hold a repeat in Geneva this April of the UN's anti-Israel 2001 conference in Durban, South Africa, ostensibly convened to discuss racism. But if anyone wants more detail, an illuminating account of the UN's anti-Semitic inner circles can be found in the memoir of a former senior UN official, Pedro Sanjuan, The UN Gang, published in 2005. Sanjuan, who served at the UN in the 1980s and early 1990s, but kept in touch with it well after that, devotes an entire chapter, rich in anecdote, to "The Anti-Semitic UN Culture." Sanjuan writes that though he himself is not a Jew, what bothered him most during his years at the UN was "this unrelenting bigotry" against them. During Israel's recent battle with Hamas in Gaza, attacks both verbal and physical against Jews have risen worldwide. To cite just a small sample, there have been reports of a double shooting in Denmark, Molotov cocktails hurled at synagogues in France, a Jewish burial chapel fire-bombed in Sweden, graffiti scrawled across British buildings saying "Jihad 4 Israel" and "Kill Jews," schools and synagogues desecrated on the North Side of Chicago, and — in an echo of Germany's 1938 Kristallnacht — rocks shattering the 50-year-old stained glass windows of a Jewish temple in Knoxville, Tenn. At risk of being written off as hysterics — which the rising stack of evidence suggests they are not — a handful of journalists have tackled the story. These include syndicated columnist Mark Steyn, who in an article last week on "The Oldest Hatred, Resurgent," reeled off a staggering list of epithets, threats and physical attacks targeting Jews, including a crowd in Amsterdam chanting "Hamas! Hamas! Jews to the gas!," and Palestinian demonstrators in Florida sneering, "You need a big oven, that's what you need." From Britain, writing in The Wall Street Journal Europe, social critic Melanie Phillips describes a demonstration at which Hamas supporters showed up dressed as "hook-nosed Jews pretending to drink the blood of Palestinian babies." The message British authorities gave to pro-Israeli demonstrators who turned up at the same scene was to put away their Israeli flags because these were deemed "inflammatory." But whatever surge of anti-Semitism might have accompanied Israel's battle to stop terrorist attacks by Hamas out of Gaza, the rising prejudice and malice dates back well before that. Last year, a State Department report to Congress on "Contemporary Global Anti-Semitism" noted that "Over the last decade, U.S. embassies and consulates have reported an upsurge in anti-Semitism." That would be the decade in which Israel pulled out of Lebanon (2000), accepted the "roadmap" that sought to establish a democratic Palestinian state (2003) and withdrew from Gaza (2005). Government-affiliated studies in recent years in both Europe and Britain have reported that, in the words of a 2006 UK all-party parliamentary inquiry: "It is clear that violence, desecration of property and intimidation directed toward Jews is on the rise." A report leaked in 2003 from the former Vienna-based European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia, an independent body of the European Union, observed an outbreak of anti-Semitic acts in Europe following the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the U.S. These included conspiracy theories that Jews were behind those attacks, denial of the holocaust and "desecration of synagogues, cemeteries, swastika graffiti, threatening and insulting mail." There were "physical attacks" on Jews and Jewish temples, "often committed by young Muslim perpetrators." The study also described some of the anti-Jewish acts to young people who reportedly had no "specific anti-Semitic prejudices," but joined the Jew-baiting "just for fun." Nor are Jews in the U.S. entirely spared. In the hate-crime statistics released each year by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, attacks on Jews routinely outnumber religiously based attacks against any other group. For 2007, FBI figures show that among 1,477 religiously motivated hate crimes reported by U.S. law enforcement authorities, 9% were anti-Islamic, 9.5% were "anti-other religion," 4.4% were anti- Catholic and, by far outstripping any other category, "68.4% were anti-Jewish." While much of the world may live today in the shadow of terrorist threats, actual attacks over many years have zeroed in repeatedly and specifically on Jews. That's why one now sees Jewish centers in places such as Manhattan surrounded by security barriers. From the bombings in Argentina of the Israeli embassy in 1992 (killing 32) and Jewish community center in 1993 (killing 87), to attacks on synagogues and other Jewish watering holes in places such as Tunisia, Turkey, France and, just two months ago, the terrorist slaughter in Mumbai, which specifically included a Jewish chabad, actual attacks have zeroed in again and again on the Jews. This scene is also part of a world in which President Obama has become a symbol of what freedom, hope and virtue can do to deliver better days to a long embattled minority. What will he do about the Jews? Contact LEL at lel817@yahoo.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: IN THE WAKE OF THE WAR
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 22, 2009. |
|
Would you believe? Yes, I guess many of you would believe this AP report: Yesterday PA TV news showed footage of tunnels between Egypt and Gaza operating again. One sequence showed Palestinian smugglers filling a fuel truck with gas that had just come through a tunnel; other footage showed workers clearing blocked tunnels. We never said we got all the tunnels, just that we disabled many of them. The question now is how we're going to respond to this. First signs are not encouraging. There was some inane comment released regarding the fact that this might happen in coming days, before Egypt has a plan in place. ~~~~~~~~~~ Amos Gilad, you see, has just met with Egyptian officials to discuss a long term "truce" with Hamas (whatever Hamas will call it in Arabic), stopping the smuggling, and "lifting the siege of Gaza." Why is it that my heart is not lifted by this information? ~~~~~~~~~~ Efraim Inbar and Mordecai Kedar have written a paper for the BESA Center for Strategic Studies, entitled, "Egypt is not going to stop the smuggling into Gaza." The summary reads as follows: "Conventional wisdom posits that Egypt must and will play a central role in halting the smuggling of weapons from Sinai to Gaza. Yet this is unlikely — for strategic, political and Egyptian domestic reasons. Egypt does not mind if Hamas bleeds Israel a little; it gains domestically by indirectly aiding Hamas; gains internationally by playing a mediating role (in a conflict which it helps maintain on a "low flame"); and is incapable of stopping the Sinai Bedouins from continuing as the main weapons smugglers into Gaza. Thus, Israel would be imprudent to rely on Egypt to end the smuggling of weapons into Gaza." I have this terribly feeling that we're about to be imprudent. I received this paper as an e-mail and cannot provide a URL for it because it's not yet posted on the BESA website: http://www.biu.ac.il/Besa/perspectives.html. When it does go up, it's perspective paper #60. ~~~~~~~~~~ From Haaretz, there is this with regard to smuggling: "One of the Bedouin in the area insists that the smuggling will continue because they have no other way to earn a living. The Egyptian police operating in the area periodically blow up the Palestinian-built tunnels when they become aware of them, but they reportedly turn a blind eye to Bedouin subterranean smuggling routes. www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057661.html ~~~~~~~~~~ The more shtuyote (nonsense) I see now with regard to the aftermath of the war, the less I believe that those who led us into the war (the "triumvirate") had proper motivation (although the action itself was most proper!) and the more I am inclined to see the political purposes that likely drove them. For proper motivation during the war should and would lead to strength and resolve now. ~~~~~~~~~~ Amos Gilad is now reporting on his Cairo meeting to Defense Minister Barak. Reportedly, these are some of the matters that were addressed with regard to preventing weapons from getting into Gaza: — Sharing intelligence regarding arms en route to the Sinai. — The means (at least in theory) for stopping smuggling from the Sinai into Gaza. This is the sticky part. Egypt has 750 troops at or near the border and requested that this be increased to 2,000. The Defense Ministry says this isn't necessary. It is, if truth be told, a question of motivation. But some defense officials are saying we should let them have it: "If this is what the Egyptians want, then let them have more soldiers. This way, Egypt won't have any more excuses for why it's not stopping the smuggling." Wonderful. So this will apparently be negotiated. In addition, there are discussions planned regarding tunnel detection equipment, about which I hope to learn more. — Ways to create obstacles inside of the Sinai, so weapons never get to the border. There is talk about blocking entrance to the Egyptian Rafah via a barrier around the city and checkpoints (I alluded to this previously), but this addresses the crossing point at Rafah. What confuses me here is how that is supposed to prevent smuggling under the border on either side of Rafah. There is talk of the (remote) possibility of a moat. Egypt has these various suggestions "under study" but has made it clear that there will be no foreign troops inside of Egypt and no foreign ships patrolling at the coast of the Sinai. But never mind, the Egyptians say, "Israel knows we're doing our best." ~~~~~~~~~~ A US foreign policy statement released yesterday declares that "US President Barack Obama will make progress on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a key diplomatic priority from day one." We knew this was coming, but I had secret hopes that he'd be too busy with the economy to pay attention to us. No such luck. The president and the vice president, we're told "will make a sustained push — working with Israelis and Palestinians — to achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state in Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security." ~~~~~~~~~~ Does this phraseology sound slightly shop-worn? Why, I ponder, does Obama imagine he can accomplish this when everyone else has failed. And why does he imagine that this is an appropriate moment to achieve the goal? I do apologize if from time to time I will repeat myself — with regard, for example, to why there should be no Palestinian state. But as long as the international community insists on pushing for this, the response must be forthcoming. Obama did speak about commitment to the security of Israel, and I'll want to see exactly what he perceives as providing us with necessary security. Without knowing specifics, it's just words: perhaps he thinks we can be "secure" if we surrender all of Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians. He also declares, I'm glad to say, that he is in favor of continuing assistance to Israel and cooperation with Israel regarding development of missile defense systems. ~~~~~~~~~~ We have been informed that yesterday Obama called Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and Jordan's King Abdullah. He did this on his first day as president in order to fulfill his pledge to get involved with Middle East affairs "from day one." Abbas's people are claiming he called Abbas first. Don't know that this is true just because they say so, but it would be regrettable if he called a two-bit leader of not much ahead of heads of state. This would tell us a good deal. ~~~~~~~~~~ Obama's position on Iran, as now enunciated in the just-released foreign policy statement, quite frankly terrifies me because of its flaccidness, it's lack of strength: "[Obama] supports tough and direct diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. Now is the time to use the power of American diplomacy to pressure Iran to stop their illicit nuclear program, support for terrorism, and threats toward Israel. "If Iran abandons its nuclear program and support for terrorism, we will offer incentives like membership in the World Trade Organization, economic investments, and a move toward normal diplomatic relations. If Iran continues its troubling behavior, we will step up our economic pressure and political isolation." It's troubling behavior? Troubling? I'm sick. But perhaps we shouldn't worry. Perhaps the leaders of Iran will be so eager to join the World Trade Organization that they'll start being nice. After all, Obama is being nice. ~~~~~~~~~~ Yasser Abd Rabbo of the Palestinian Authority said today that the PA "will not allow" Hamas to create a "separate Palestinian entity" in Gaza. Apparently he hasn't noticed that there are already two Palestinian entities. So many words. How will the PA stop it? ~~~~~~~~~~ Meanwhile, Mashaal of Hamas says he's in favor of reconciliation with the PA, but on the basis of "resistance," not concessions to Israel. In other words, do it their way or not at all. Mashaal is calling for Europeans to talk with Hamas. And he speaks about gains soon to be achieved: "the lifting of the blockade and the opening of crossing points." This is precisely what worries me. We're going to be pressured big time to allow this. ~~~~~~~~~~ One thing we are doing is preventing the PA from transferring cash to Gaza to pay workers there. This undercuts PA influence in Gaza, although certainly the Israeli goal is to prevent cash from making it into Hamas hands. This sounds good: We've told the UN and other aid groups eager to be involved in rebuilding that each project has to be approved by us, and that there must be guarantees that none of the work will benefit Hamas. In truth, tough to do on the ground as UNRWA and others are in bed with Hamas, but a good policy. I'm reading, however, that Washington wants the PA involved. ~~~~~~~~~~ A Hamas spokesman announced today that Hamas will be distributing cash, starting on Sunday, to residents of Gaza hard hit by the war. In total about $37 is to be distributed in Euros (shekels being in short supply). Those whose homes were destroyed, who lost family members or were wounded will be compensated according to a schedule. Directly or indirectly, we can assume this is Iranian money. This is apparently a bid to shore up popular support for Hamas. ~~~~~~~~~~ From the Post, we have this quote from Egyptian Foreign Minister Gheit: "Whether Shalit is alive or not alive, this is a question that needs investigation now. I have no information and I believe the Israeli side has no information either." Meanwhile, Hamas is saying that there is no progress on negotiations for Shalit, and a spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees said, "The Israelis are wrong if they think the war will help them pressure us on Shalit. Our demands have not changed: The entire list of prisoners we demanded, and in addition, launching talks on lifting the siege." If ever we needed to be tough... Barak is still saying the war may lead to a break-through in securing Shalit. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ARABIST BBC LOST ITS CREDIBILITY YEARS AGO
Posted by American, January 22, 2009. |
|
Yesterday (Jan 21, 2009), BBC's gimmick was about a girl, a drama invented by Pallywood. All the sources the BBC quoted was the Hamas-nick "father" (of a wounded girl) and other family ('Abu Rabu') members, that they "saw" with their own eyes how the Israeli soldiers shot at them and eating chocolate. (Come to think of it, How can you shoot and eat at the same time?, Never mind!). As if the world hasn't seen enough Pallywood fake reports and fake images? Now, "based" on the story told by the family, the terrible biased BBC has taken and reported it as a "fact". But of course you never see the real facts in the middle east conflict, like of those Hamas Jihadists how they mingle with civilians to cause casualties, or any Israeli kids injured from Palestinians, because Israel does not exist as human beings in BBC's vocabulary, all Israeli kids are all of a sudden "tanks" — while Palestinian Jiahdists are all "civilians". Contact American at american1627@yahoo.com |
|
SUPREME COURT OF INJUSTICE; WAR CRIMES; BLIND TO EVIL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 22, 2009. |
|
SUPREME COURT OF INJUSTICE Benny Begin thinks that the present Minister of Justice is harassing the Supreme Court. He wants to restore the Court's lost prestige, because the Court is needed to protect minorities from the tyranny of the majority. The Minister of Justice set out to reform the Supreme Court. That Court forfeited its prestige, because it is self-appointed and self-aggrandizing, rules on the basis of ideology rather than of law and justice, and imposes a tyranny for the minority (Arabs and leftists) against the majority. There are no checks on that Court. That Court hampers government, including its prosecution of war. Calling Israeli Arabs a "minority," as if entitled to sympathy, ignores their subversive goals and their allegiance to the external Arab enemy. Israeli Arabs have resumed their pre-statehood struggle for the country. The Court should not defy the law and national security in order to side with the Arabs for reasons of personal doctrine. That abuses power. INAUGURAL OF WHAT? I read the inaugural address. It was inspirational, but like some of the campaign speeches. It was so balanced, as to give no clue of direction or policy. I think it inadequate for our crisis. We elected an inexperienced, unknown person. He remains unknown, starting out as President. (Next day, he did act.) I wish he had said he was offering a sense of direction and policy and starting out with accomplishment, by submitting, say, the following executive order, proposed bill, and set of clemency, pardon, and dropping of prosecution. An executive order to institute Pres. Clinton's proposed reduction in fuel usages for cars and housing and to ban private snowmobiles from national parks and public land. This would save money, non-renewable fuel, and air. He would explain that it is time to stop over-indulging. A bill to advance computerization of medical records, to reduce costs and errors. Clemency for Pollard, our political prisoner, whom the US had tortured. Pardons for Scooter Libby and Conrad Black, not for personal or partisan gain. These prisoners committed no crime and there was no crime, but prosecutors trapped them in endless questioning and confused a jury. Drop prosecution of the AIPAC people, who committed no crime and certainly did no harm, but prosecutors bullied the employer to drop legal aid for them and they forced one to testify against the others. No more Justice Dept. bullying! That would lend substance to the uttered sentiment. BLIND TO EVIL The UNO does a few good things, but even its foreign aid is mostly misguided. The UNO is a chaotic, wasteful uncontrolled bureaucracy, grasping for world domination over resources and taxation. It seeks (like the EU) to impose its rule on sovereign democracies. Its security function is stymied or controlled by a log-rolling collection of religious, leftist, or military dictatorships. Half of its security-matters time is spent favoring jihad over Israel. The other half is in protecting or botching action against other genocide. It therefore is an evil axis. My friends ruefully wish it had more power. More power for evil? Better it had less power or no power. Best it be disbanded until mankind is ready for it. Understand, it seems to lack the power to do much, because those who dominate it don't want it to thwart their schemes. The UNO is governments' excuse for inaction where action is needed. Nevertheless, the world supposes that what some country does is not legitimate unless it has UNO imprimatur, and is illegitimate if the UNO condemns it. Imagine, gaining legitimacy from the most evil organization in the world? The most evil organization? Isn't the government of, say, N. Korea, the most evil? N. Korea would not have become the menace it is, without UNO help, obstruction, and incompetence. Some for other, local menaces. WAR CRIMES World indignation against Israel's war conduct in Gaza is based on false and misleading media accounts and on audiences primed with prejudice. The US once made war crimes something for dictators to take into account. No longer. The subject has been turned over to the media process of endless, politically correct commentary, political and religious persecution, and to the lawyers. Lawyers miss the point, they pick the nit. We see this happening to Israel. Hamas, as the Muslim Arabs and Iranians in general, wage illegitimate war almost entirely by means of war crimes. Israel takes excessive precaution to avoid war crimes. What do the world and the UNO do about it? They ignore Hamas' real crimes and have lawyers misconstruing international law in order to condemn Israel for non-existent war crimes. It now is difficult for victims of Islamic aggression to defend themselves from war criminals. Lawyers restrict the IDF, and a meddling Supreme Court's second-guesses it. That Court sympathize more with Israel's genocidal enemy. 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 |
|
SAME OLD EHUD BARAK ON PALESTINIAN ARABS RESUMING SMUGGLING
Posted by Daisy Stern, January 22, 2009. |
|
There is nothing whatever preventing the arms smuggling from resuming. It has in fact resumed. The word coming from soldiers is that the tunnels are operating at full capacity as if nothing had happened. The entrances to some of the tunnels may have been damaged but the tunne Ya'akov writes: There is nothing whatever preventing the arms smuggling from resuming. It has in fact resumed. The word coming from soldiers is that the tunnels are operating at full capacity as if nothing had happened. The entrances to some of the tunnels may have been damaged but the tunnels themselves survived quite intact and the entrances were quickly repaired. I find it hard to believe that Ehud Barak really believes that Egypt will become Israel's first line of defense by stopping the weapons smuggling through the tunnels or that European observers will do anything more than observe the smuggling. He solemnly says he does and so do Olmert and Livni and clearly they want the voters to believe it. In fact, however, not many people are that stupid. If there is anyone who believes that either Egypt or Europe will take casualties to reduce a threat to Israel, I want some of they've been smoking. Furthermore, the top leadership of Hamas is still in the saddle and Hamas leadership in general seems to be intact, as also the ranks. I question how much of their arsenal the IDF was able to destroy. In sum, it appears that a lot of buildings have been destroyed, which will be quickly rebuilt with international assistance. Damage to Israeli buildings will also be repaired but with Israeli money only, just like after the Hezballah War. The Minister of De Fence is crowing about how Hamas has been sobered and will be deterred from attacking us again (as if he knows). I also want some of what he's been smoking. And the Foreign Minister is clamoring for her share of the credit for what the war accomplished, whatever that might be. This below was written by Batya Medad, who 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 |
|
Barak Barach
That has been the rallying cry against Ehud The vast majority of Israelis are disgusted and disappointed by Israel's early withdrawal from Gaza and the pre-mature cessation of Operation Cast Lead, aka the Election Campaign War. Ironically, Tzachi Hanegbi, whose mantra used to be "Barak Barach," now sounds just like him in his announcement: "Hamas militants face a simple equation," Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee Chairman Tzachi Hanegbi told Army Radio. "If the [rocket] fire resumes, we will respond with force so strong and overpowering, they will miss the day the Israel Air Force's offensive began." (hat tip IMRA) Barak's reign as Prime Minister was full of threats like that, but he never followed through, and we ended up with the worst bout of Arab terrorism ever. The media calls it "The Second Intifada," not that I remember any announcemt by the terrorists that they had ended the sic "first" one. There were periodic lulls, like when ocean water recedes between waves. Ehud Barak was elected during such a lull, and then he so mishandled the subsequent terrorism, emboldening the terrorists by his unilateral campaign promise withdrawal from Southern Lebanon, that most of the country felt under siege. We were forced to get bullet-proof vehicles or travel dressed in heavy bullet-proof vests. My sons were serving in the army at the time, and I was more nervous about their walking in Jerusalem than when they were doing their actual military tasks. Today, what frightens me is the national amnesia, which has allowed that same Ehud Barak to return to politics as head of the Labor Party and subsequently become Defense Minister. As IDF Chief of Staff, he was instrumental in downgrading the army which caused the many mistakes in Olmert's Lebanese War fiasco of two and a half years ago. And now, Ehud Barak is willing to accept continued smuggling of arms by Hamas into Gaza. All I can think of is that a deal was made via the Egyptians to keep things "quiet" until after Israeli elections. Please don't forget that one of the new U.S. President Obama's highest priority Foreign Policy aims is to establish a new Arab country in the very heart of Israel. My husband and I just spent close to a week on vacation in Eilat, sans internet. That's why I haven't posted recently. We were dependent on TV news, which gave very little real information. Now we're back. Most Israelis, Jews and concerned people all over the world are shocked that Israel ended Operation Cast Lead without the freeing of Gilad Shalit. What was the real point of that "war?" "War," "operation," "campaign," it doesn't matter what it's called. The important thing is to have a clear goal, and Israel doesn't. Our soldiers are motivated and want to to the job professionally. When we returned to Jerusalem from Eilat, we saw signs all over proclaiming that "the people have the fortitude to support the soldiers on the frontline." Our problem is that we're ruled by weak tired, selfishly ambitious and shortsighted politicians. G-d is angry with them, and that's why there's no rain. But G-d loves the people, and that's why with all of the rockets and missiles launched at southern Israel, there were so few casualties. With elections coming up, we have the opportunity to vote for true leaders. I'm voting for Ichud Le'umi, the only party which is uncompromising in its support for the People and Land and State and Security of Israel. Contact Daisy Stern by email at daisystern1@gmail.com |
|
LETTERS ARE "OXYGEN" FOR JONATHAN POLLARD
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, January 21, 2009. |
|
Disgusted? Unhappy with the situation? Disappointed with Bush? Furious with Olmert, Livni and Barak? Long to see Jonathan home? Still working for his release and also praying hard? Please write to Jonathan today. Share with him how you are feeling. It means a lot to Jonathan to read with his own eyes and feel with his own heart, just how much the people are with him at this heart-breaking time. We know of the massive support that is out there because of the volume of emails we are receiving. Although J4JP has been receiving a flurry of emails and comments, unfortunately telephone time for sharing them with Jonathan is very limited. We urge all of our friends and supporters to take pen in hand and write to Jonathan. He has always referred to the letters he receives as his "oxygen". Let's keep the life support line open. Write today. Regular mail only, please. No emails, no fax permitted. Feel free to share a copy of your letter with J4JP by email and we will (with permission) share some of the letters with our readers to comfort and inspire them as well. Please do share this message with others who may not be receiving our emails — family, friends, shul bulletins, and other lists. Thank you and G-d bless! Here is Jonathan's address: Jonathan Pollard #09185-016
Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com and visit the website: http://www.JonathanPollard.org |
|
A CHRISTIAN IN GAZA
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 21, 2009. |
|
This below was written by Lela Gilbert
and it appeared today in Jewish World Review.
It's not just Jews who continue to suffer at the hands of Hamas. |
|
On a chilly January morning, three of us drove beneath a cloud-strewn sky through forests, fields, and ancient terraces, making our way from Jerusalem to Israel's southern region where thousands of people live within range of Hamas's rockets. As we approached our destination, I noticed another cloud, a towering column of black smoke on the horizon, billowing from northern Gaza, where a battle was raging. We passed the community of Sderot-literally "on the map" because of the Qassam strikes it has endured-and soon arrived at Kibbutz Gevim, situated just a few miles from both Sderot and Gaza. We were there to assist in a temporary evacuation of the kibbutz's senior citizens. The two Christian organizations my friends represent were treating these elders to a few leisurely days in the seaside resort town of Eilat, a welcome respite from the relentless bombardment. I talked with several genial but visibly anxious men and women while they waited for the bus to arrive. Many of them had lived at Kibbutz Gevim for more than half a century. They were eagerly looking forward to getting a good night's sleep in Eilat, with no sirens and no rush to the "safe room" in their houses. "Do you think this war will make your life better?" I asked one man named Moredcai "Yes, I think so" he nodded. "And not just my life. It will also be better for the people in Gaza once Hamas is broken." A woman named Edna seemed particularly nervous, her hands in constant movement.. "Aren't you afraid to come here?" she asked me with a worried frown. "My own family won't even come to visit! I have to meet them in Tel Aviv." The sound of a large explosion startled us all and punctuated her comment. She added, "Anybody who says they aren't afraid to live here is lying." Several residents mentioned medications that made it possible for them to function — prescriptions for anti-depressants and anti-anxiety drugs are very much in demand, and for good reason. I learned that a few months before, a small boy from Kibbutz Gevim had been injured by a Qassam strike; in fact not a single child could be seen in the carefully-tended kibbutz playground. One woman described her house, which had taken a direct hit and needed extensive repairs. Other rockets had ignited fires and damaged structures. Everyone spoke of the nerve-wracking noise that never seemed to end: sirens, explosions, helicopters and warplanes. These ordinary men and women couldn't have been clearer about their dearest hopes: they want nothing more than to live out their lives in peace. Unfortunately, they face an extraordinarily hostile enemy that has fired 6,000 rockets into Israel's civilian communities over the past eight years. Hamas's actions reflect the spirit of their 1988 Charter, which calls for the death of Jews and the eradication of Israel. It's not just Jews, however, who suffer at the hands of Hamas. Getting far less media attention is the situation facing 3,000 Christians who live inside the Gaza strip. Following the Hamas coup in Gaza, a radical sheikh, Abu Sakir announced, "'I expect our Christian neighbors to understand the new Hamas rule means real changes. They must be ready for Islamic rule if they want to live in peace in Gaza.'" Months ago I had a conversation with two Gazan Christians, who had fled their homes and were hiding out in the West Bank while hoping for asylum elsewhere. Their stories exposed the dangers Christian families face under Hamas, including extortion, rape, beatings and murder. Our little gathering at Kibbutz Gevim wasn't especially religious. It amounted to an ad hoc coalition of concerned Christians hoping to make life a little easier for a group of war-weary Jews. Everything centered on life-affirming values and life-sustaining actions that are deeply rooted in both Christianity and Judaism. Yet even as we said our goodbyes, another deadly explosion shattered the morning stillness. As my friends and I headed back to Jerusalem, I thought about encroaching terrorism that has cast its terrible shadow across so many lives across the world. We are often told that its root causes are economic, territorial, ethnic and political. While these issues may indeed play their part, public declarations from groups like Hamas and Al Qaeda are almost entirely religious. By now the world has seen more than enough columns of black smoke towering above our cities, heard enough body counts, and witnessed enough of terrorism's tragic consequences. Still I can't help but wonder-are we taking seriously enough the hateful religious ideology that inflames radical Islamists? Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
THE MIDDLE EAST WAR COMES TO EUROPE
Posted by Olivier Guitta, January 21, 2009. |
|
After three weeks of war in Gaza, Israel has implemented a unilateral cease-fire. The coverage of this war has been overwhelming. From Washington to Amman to Paris and London, the images, reports and articles on this conflict have been hyper-present. While it is true that the Israeli-Arab war has been a very passionate issue, the so-called peaceful demonstrations in Europe have unfortunately turned more than often into pure Jew-bashing. And like in 2003-2004, Europe is importing the Middle East war once again. In fact, the intent of demonstrating for peace — real peace — is quite laudable. But when it comes to calling for the destruction of a democratic state acting in self-defense against a group classified as a terrorist organization by among others the United States and the European Union, then the peaceful aspect seems totally gone. Lots of demonstrations in Europe have turned quite violent physically and verbally. While it is totally acceptable to criticize Israel and deplore the Palestinian civilian victims, cries of "Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the gas" that erupted during demonstrations throughout Europe are unacceptable and show the extent of the problem Europe is once again facing. Also most of the demonstrators consider Hamas, a legitimate resistance movement that they compare to the French resistance during WWII. That disturbing comparison totally whitewashes a movement that is viewed by the large majority of European countries as terrorist. Interestingly the WWII comparisons do not stop at Hamas, but are mostly targeted at Israel, described as the "new Nazi state" committing a "holocaust." Unsurprisingly this rhetoric has pushed in some cases to calls of boycott not against Israel but against all its alleged supporters. So in one instance, Giancarlo Desiderati, the head of a small Italian union called Flaica-Uniti-Cub, called for the boycott of all Jewish-run businesses. In another case, a famous Jewish French stand-up comedian had to cancel his one-man show on Friday because dozens of pro-Hamas angry demonstrators prevented the spectators from going into the venue. In one troubling example, authorities have even played into the hands of the Islamists that were behind some of the demonstrations. For example, in the German city of Duisburg, during a pro-Palestinian protest organized by the Turkish Islamist group Milli Gorus, demonstrators demanded that the police removed an Israeli flag that was hanging out of a window. And the police complied: they broke down the door of the apartment in question and removed the flag, to the demonstrators' great satisfaction. But this is just the tip of the iceberg: in fact violence against European Jews has resurfaced. In France alone, 67 anti-Semitic acts have been perpetrated since Dec. 27. These crimes include violent aggression of Jews, burning of synagogues. The situation has been so bad that some Danish schools in largely Muslim neighborhoods are going to refuse Jewish students because they cannot guarantee their security. Some Islamist groups are also playing the terrorism card to scare off authorities and advance their agenda. For instance, anonymous posters calling for "Jihad in Palestine" have been found on walls of some London streets. It is not surprising that Europe is importing the Middle East war: indeed Hamas is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. And since the Muslim Brotherhood is very active and present among European Muslim communities through local organizations with lots of clout, such as the Union Des Organisations Islamiques de France, it is their duty to support their Palestinian peers. Even when it means to burn down synagogues. And that is exactly where the problem lies. Europe is facing an acute challenge at the moment because some in the various Muslim communities are seeing this Gaza war not as an Arab-Israeli war but rather a Muslim-Jewish war. And the most striking example of this dangerous slide is France, which hosts both the largest Muslim (about 6 million) community and the largest Jewish community (about 600,000) in Europe. That is why the Nicolas Sarkozy government is taking this threat quite seriously and monitoring some suburbs that could erupt in violence. But the French authorities, who want to avoid this tension between religious communities, have called the respective religions for help. So in a way they are reinforcing the view that the war is more of a religious war than anything else. The current escalation in France is reminiscent of what occurred in 2004 when a staggering 970 anti-Semitic incidents were registered in the country. A few years ago, Frederic Encel, a geopolitical expert not known for crying wolf, stated that France was turning into a new Lebanon. He was just observing that communities were rapidly growing apart and that tensions were increasing at a rapid pace. Today what is going on in Europe as a result of the Gaza war is a stark reminder of the challenge Europe faces. Olivier Guitta is an Adjunct Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant. You can read his latest work at www.thecroissant.com/about.html This is archived at
|
|
BUDDHIST LAMAS FOR THE ANNIHILATION OF ISLAMOFASCIST TERRORISTS
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 21, 2009. |
|
Dalai Lama: "Non-violence can't tackle terror."
NEW DELHI: The Dalai Lama, a lifelong champion of non-violence on Saturday candidly stated that terrorism cannot be tackled by applying the principle of ahimsa because the minds of terrorists are closed. "It is difficult to deal with terrorism through non-violence," the Tibetan spiritual leader said delivering the Madhavrao Scindia Memorial Lecture here. He also termed terrorism as the worst kind of violence which is not carried by a few mad people but by those who are very brilliant and educated. "They (terrorists) are very brilliant and educated...but a strong ill feeling is bred in them. Their minds are closed," the Dalai Lama said. He said that the only way to tackle terrorism is through prevention. The head of the Tibetan government-in-exile left the audience stunned when he said "I love President George W Bush." He went on to add how he and the US President instantly struck a chord in their first meeting unlike politicians who take a while to develop close ties. "Israel Scored a Tactical Victory But it missed a chance to finish off
Hamas"
On the Gaza border Atop a little hill near the beleaguered Israeli town of Sderot, a gaggle of TV crews train their cameras on the Gaza Strip, sentinels to a unilateral Israeli cease-fire that's barely 12 hours old. Earlier the same day, Sunday, Hamas fired 20 rockets into Israel, raising questions about its intentions but causing little serious damage. Later, a pair of Israeli F-15s streak over Gaza City, releasing bursts of chaff but dropping no bombs. And then comes word that Hamas has declared its own conditional, week-long cease-fire. The TV people clear out. All wars eventually end. The question most Israelis are asking is whether this one has merely gone on vacation. So why are the top echelons of Israel's political and military establishment delighted by the war's result? Long answer: They think that Israel has re-established a reputation for invincibility tarnished in the 2006 war with Hezbollah; that they bloodied and humiliated Hamas while taking few casualties; that they called overdue international attention to the tunnels Hamas uses to smuggle its arsenal; and, with the unilateral cease-fire, that they put the onus to end the violence squarely back on Hamas's shoulders. Short answer: They think the war may be a regional game changer. In a wide-ranging interview, a senior military official offers perhaps the most authoritative explanation of his government's war aims and his interpretation of its effects. "We have no desire to go back into Gaza," he says. "We decided we're not going to spend five years [in Gaza] like the five years Americans spent in Iraq." On the contrary: Far from seeking regime change in Gaza, the official seems at ease that the Palestinians will remain bifurcated between Hamastan and Fatahland for many years more, the way Germany was divided during the Cold War. The idea is that a Hamas state in Gaza — somehow deterred from mischief — could become a kind of useful negative example to the Palestinians of the West Bank, somewhat in the way East Germany served West Germany as a monument to everything that was wrong with communism. This leads the official to his second remarkable comment, after I ask whether Israel deliberately chose not to kill Ismail Haniyeh, the elected Palestinian prime minister and Hamas's political leader in Gaza. "Israel tried to target people from the security apparatus and military wing," he answers. "At this moment, we prefer that the less-radical wing will take over." The current divisions within Hamas are not the only ones the official sees as a consequence of the war. Palestinians, he says, no longer look to Hamas as the party of clean and competent government. Instead, they see a group whose leaders needlessly provoked a ruinous war they didn't have the courage to fight themselves. No wonder the third intifada in the West Bank, on which Hamas had counted, never materialized. Elsewhere, Hamas's former patrons in the Arab world have split with the group ever since it became a client of Tehran. A dozen Arab states, along with the Palestinian Authority, boycotted an emergency summit of the Arab League, which had been intended as a show of support for Hamas supremo Khaled Mashal. Then there is Egypt. For years, it took an ambivalent view of Hamas: partly worried by the threat it poses to its own secular regime, partly delighted by the trouble it causes Israel. Now the Mubarak government at last understands that Hamas is also a strategic threat to Egypt. "An Iranian base can play against Egypt the same way it played against Israel," says the official. Almost as an aside, he adds that the timing of Israel's operation in Gaza was dictated in part by the assessment that Hamas was just months away from obtaining longer-range missiles that could reach Cairo as easily as Tel Aviv.
NOW THE Israeli government is prepared to believe that the Egyptians will finally clamp down on the smuggling. Israel might even allow Egypt to deploy its army in greater force in the Sinai, despite the provisions against it in the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty. Finally there is Iran. "They have drawn a lesson," says the official. "Once again, they saw that Israel has a good air force and good intelligence, and that the combination of the two can be deadly. Unlike in 2006, they saw a well-trained ground force. They found that asymmetrical warfare does not always play for them; that we can use asymmetrical approaches to overpower an asymmetrical threat." All this, of course, could be overturned the moment Iran goes nuclear and attempts to thwart Israel's freedom of action. Nor is it foreordained that Israel will enjoy the relatively favorable international circumstances that facilitated the past three weeks of war, or that Hamas will perform poorly the next time. "Usually, the one who loses does his homework better," observes the official. Bottom line: Israel has scored an impressive tactical victory. But it has missed the strategic opportunity to rid itself of the menace on its doorstep. In the Middle East, opportunities don't always knock twice. 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
|
|
URGENT! PUMPING FROM KINNERET HALTED AS WATER DROPS TO CRITICAL LEVEL
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 21, 2009. |
|
Pumping from Kinneret halted as water drops to critical level was
written by Avi Bar-Eli and it appeared 21 January 2009 in
Haaretz
|
|
The pumping of water from Lake Kinneret, which serves as Israel's primary water reservoir, was halted on Monday as water levels reached just 40 cm above the critical "black line," below which all pumping is forbidden. Pumping was stopped as Israel suffers the driest winter season since measurements began in the 1920s. Since the beginning of the rainy season (October), precipitation throughout the country has reached only 50-70% of its average. January, the rainiest month in the season, has seen just 22 mm of rain — 10% of the multi-annual average for the month — in central and northern areas. Without a dramatic change in the meteorological picture, January 2009 is expected to be the driest in recorded history. The Water Authority said this week that there is already an unprecedented shortage in Israel's water reserves. The Dan, Banias and Snir rivers are at historic low levels, even though the rainy season is well advanced. These rivers should be pouring some 80 cubic meters of water into the Kinneret lake in January, but as of January 18, there has been almost no flow of water this month. Water sources feeding the Kinneret are also at their lowest level since measurements began. If February is not unusually rainy, the Water Authority says, the Banias and Snir rivers will nearly dry up. Suspension of pumping from the Kinneret has resulted in increased pumping from Israel's aquifers, which are also in deficit after four years of drought — and on the brink of the fifth consecutive dry year. And the question arises: What has been done to date to address the increasing water shortage? The Water Authority slashed allocations to farmers by 50% in 2008, placed a moratorium on planting new gardens and canceled all discounts on consumption for garden irrigation. Simultaneously, the Water Authority launched a public advertising campaign to encourage people to save water, which it says has resulted in the saving of 100 million cubic meters of water. Nevertheless, the campaign is heard broadcasted only from time to time. The authority plans to cut another 100 million cubic meters from its allocation to agriculture, which is already suffering the consequences of the devastating earlier cuts, place a sweeping moratorium on irrigation of public lawns — and possibly private ones as well — and increase efficiency of water consumption in the industrial sector. At present the authority is not planning to restrict household water use. As plans for additional desalination plants at Sorek and Ashdod move forward at a snail's pace, Water Authority chief Uri Shani has announced that the authority will call on international sources for information on available technology for importing water. Nevertheless, the tender for the desalination plant in Ashdod, the fifth in Israel, has raised plenty of interest from both local and international corporations. Foreign companies that will be participating tomorrow in a bidders' conference include Wacorp Hyundai India, Nhon Corporation from Vietnam, Mid-Century Beijing from China and the representative of a company based in Oman in the Persian Gulf. Israeli companies that have promised to send delegates include IDE Technologies, Housing and Constructing, Granite Hacarmel, GE and Siemens Israel. The current tender is for planning and constructing a 65-dunam (16-acre) sea water desalination plant in the northern industrial zone of Ashdod. The plant will be capable of desalinating up to about 100 million cubic meters of sea water a year, or at least 100,000 per day. The conference will present the draft tender which, for the first time, will not be for a direct franchise between the contractor and state. Instead, the plant is to be operated by Mekorot-Yizum for 25 years under a "Build, Operate,Transfer" (B.O.T.) agreement with the state. The agreement became possible after the Comptroller's department waived the need for a tender for the state-owned water company subsidiary Mekorot Yizum. The cost of the project, which is expected to begin operating in 2012, is estimated at $450 million. In a strong show of support for the project, Minister of National Infrastructure Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, Water Authority head Uri Shani, Mekorot chairman Eli Ronen, Mekorot Yizum chairman Ido Rozolio and CEO Giora Guttman will participate in the conference. Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
LETTER TO THE EDITOR: WAR ON TERROR
Posted by Yoash Tsiddon-Chatto, January 21, 2009. |
|
Here is a woman who should run for Prime Minister! Written by a housewife in New Brunswick, to her local newspaper. This is one ticked off lady. |
|
'Are we fighting a war on terror or aren't we? Was it or was it not started by Islamic people who brought it to our shores on September 11, 2001 and have continually threatened to do so since? Were people from all over the world, not brutally murdered that day, in downtown Manhattan, across the Potomac from the nation's capitol and in a field in Pennsylvania? Did nearly three thousand men, women and children die a horrible, burning or crushing death that day, or didn't they? And I'm supposed to care that a few Taliban were claiming to be tortured by a justice system of the nation they come from and are fighting against in a brutal insurgency I'll start caring when Osama bin Laden turns himself in and repents for incinerating all those innocent people on 9/11. I'll care about the Koran when the fanatics in the Middle East start caring about the Holy Bible, the mere belief of which is a crime punishable by beheading in Afghanistan. I'll care when these thugs tell the world they are sorry for hacking off Nick Berg's head while Berg screamed through his gurgling slashed throat. I'll care when the cowardly so-called 'insurgents' in Afghanistan come out and fight like men instead of disrespecting their own religion by hiding in mosques. I'll care when the mindless zealots who blow themselves up in search of nirvana care about the innocent children within range of their suicide bombs. I'll care when the Canadian media stops pretending that their freedom of speech on stories is more important than the lives of the soldiers on the ground or their families waiting at home to hear about them when something happens. In the meantime, when I hear a story about a CANADIAN soldier
roughing up an Insurgent terrorist to obtain information, know
this:
When I see a wounded terrorist get shot in the head when he is told not
to move because he might be booby-trapped, you can take it to the bank:
And oh, by the way, I've noticed that sometimes it's spelled 'Koran'
and other times 'Quran.' Well, Jimmy Crack Corn you guessed it,
If you agree with this viewpoint, pass this on to all your E-mail friends Sooner or later, it'll get to the people responsible for this ridiculous behaviour! If you don't agree, then by all means hit the delete button. Should you choose the latter, then please don't complain when more atrocities committed by radical Muslims happen here in our great Country! And may I add: 'Some people spend an entire lifetime wondering if they made a difference in the world. But, the Soldiers don't have that problem.' I have another quote that I would like to add, AND.......I hope you forward all this. One last thought for the day: Only five defining forces have ever offered to die for you: 1. Jesus Christ
One died for your soul, the other 4 for your freedom. YOU MIGHT WANT TO PASS THIS ON, AS MANY SEEM TO FORGET ALL OF THEM. AMEN! Contact Yoash Tsiddon-Chatto at Chatto@012.net.il |
|
OBAMA'S FIRST PHONE CALL TO ABBAS
Posted by Barbara Sommer, January 21, 2009. |
|
According to the following news item, Abbas was Obama's "first"
phone call to a foreign head of state.
This is archived at
|
|
RAMALLAH, West Bank (AFP) — U.S. President Barack Obama promised to work toward a "durable peace" in the Middle East during a phone call to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas on Wednesday, Palestinian officials said. Obama called the Palestinian leader a day after taking the oath of office and assured him that he intended "to work with him as partners to establish a durable peace in the region," Abbas's spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeina told AFP. Obama told Abbas that the president was the first foreign leader he called since taking office, Rudeina said. Hey! Wasn't Abbas' term supposed to end on January 9th? What's with that? Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com |
|
THE AID BATTLE BETWEEN UNRWA, FATAH AND HAMAS CONTINUES
Posted by Elders of Ziyon, January 21, 2009. |
|
This is archived at
|
|
The picture on what exactly is happening with aid trucks into Gaza is getting a little clearer, no thanks to the UNRWA which is keeping mum on the ugly details. As commenter Suzanne uncovered, last year Hamas admitted it confiscated 16 trucks of aid from Jordan, meant for the Palestinian Red Crescent, and Jordan was not happy about it: Minister of State for Information Affairs Nasser Joudeh said Hamas government on Thursday seized 16 trucks carrying emergency supplies into Gaza. Hamas claimed that it would give that aid, which presumably was paid for by the ICRC... to UNRWA. The denial that Chris Gunness gave me saying that he was unaware of any such incidents with any NGOs, and casting doubt on their having happened, seems less and less tenable. Today, the JPost adds more details to the more recent incident: (also h/t Suzanne) Hamas officials in the Gaza Strip claimed that dozens of trucks loaded with food and medicine were being held on the Egyptian side of the border at the request of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. We have here a classic turf war, where both sides are accomplished liars. If we discount everything that any Gazan says, we still have Jordanians saying that on at least two occasions their aid convoys have been confiscated by Hamas. The intriguing part is that Hamas considers UNRWA to be on its side. Given my correspondence with UNRWA's spokesman, and UNRWA's adamant refusal to say anything negative about Hamas even as it put untold thousands of civilians at risk, they may have good reason to consider UNRWA as their own. UPDATE: Palpress, which is Fatah-oriented, blames Israel for not letting ten aid trucks in from Egypt, not Fatah. |
|
A LETTER FROM AN AMERICAN CITIZEN ON JONATHAN POLLARD
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, January 21, 2009. |
|
J4JP thanks the many fine people who have been emailing to express their support and concern for Jonathan. Most people express their dismay, that even after enduring 24 years in some of the worst prison conditions in America there is no openness about why precisely Jonathan Pollard was singled out for such harsh treatment nor is their any willingness, even at this late date, to correct the injustice. Ex-President Bush's refusal to commute Jonathan Pollard's sentence to time-served came as a blow to the the solar plexus of all people of good conscience. The letter below is a example of the kind of email we have been receiving. It is reprinted with permission of the author. |
|
Jan 21, 2009: I have believed that the United States system of Justice was fair and sought the truth no matter who was involved. Sadly, I now realize that I was overlooking facts that should have alerted me to the situation. Jonathan Pollard has been a pawn in a power play between Israel and the United States. Israel is an Ally of the United States, and he passed information he learned from his work in US Intelligence department. He acted as a spy, since his superiors did not authorize release of the information. However, only Pollard has been imprisoned for so long compared to individuals, who acted as a spy for countries not friendly to the United States. There has been little explanation for the harsh treatment he receives. The question that should be answered "What was the information he passed on to Israel"? Why after all these many years is the United States unwilling to explain the supposed harm to the security of the United States he caused? Left in the dark we make up our own explanations. The State Department of the United States has its own agenda, and is using Pollard's imprisonment to show that Israel is not favored over the Arab countries. It needs to convince Arab oil producing countries that the United States does not support Israel in its fight with the Palestinians. The remarks of President Bush claiming to provide support for Israel's continued existence is just window dressing. The failure to pardon Jonathan is proof that the State Department rules our government. Ex-President Bush needs to be asked to explain his actions to the United States citizens. He, like former Presidents, will write his memoirs to define his Legacy for history. He can start with the question I raised. I know little about Jonathan Pollard, but have been impressed by his statements while in prison. While in the US Air Force during World War II as a Classification Specialist, I saw Personnel records of GI's, who were suspected of possible disloyalty, and were not to be cleared to receive classified material. I tried to learn how this information was obtained. I learned that the FBI had checked the records of those college students who attended Young Communist League Friday night dances on campus, and listed them as suspects for disloyalty. I, for the first time, questioned my government's behavior. Now 65 years later, I now question it again. I feel the government owes its citizens an explanation. Julius Romanoff
Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to justice4jp@gmail.com and visit the website: http://www.JonathanPollard.org |
|
FROM ISRAEL: SHIFTING GEARS
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 21, 2009. |
|
Now that the war is ending, and after innumerable postings on its happenings, I hope to slow down just a little. Still monitoring the follow-up to the war, of course, but also beginning to look at other matters. Today I want to offer some comments about President Barak Obama's inauguration speech. I watched him live on TV last night, but waited until today because I wanted to first see his words in printed text. It is a cause for celebration — for all Americans and especially for Americans of color — that a man with African heritage has made it to the top. I don't deny this and don't denigrate what it means. But I said from the beginning, and certainly still feel this now, that this alone does not qualify Barak Obama. It might indeed be good to have "a" black man as president, but whether he is "the" appropriate one still remains to be tested. As it is, he is beginning his presidency faced with incredible challenges, and I remain uneasy. ~~~~~~~~~~ Obama said, in the course of his speech: "To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict or blame their society's ills on the West, know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy." And I say with some degree of certainty that he is mistaken. That he believes this, worries me. For it tells me that he is measuring the radical, totalitarian leaders of the world by Western standards and values. It is a common fallacy — part and parcel of the "deep down everyone is the same" philosophy — but a fallacy it is. Cousin to the "create a better economic situation for them and they'll stop being terrorists" theory. And it is wrong. ~~~~~~~~~~ The new American president, it seems, doesn't know our common enemy. Ideology — passionate, religion-based ideology — trumps building accomplishments at home. Surely Obama knows about jihad, and the supreme value of being a shahid (a martyr), blessed by Allah. Surely he has heard, "We will win, because as much as they love life, we love death." We, the US and Israel, are not just enemies, we are the devil incarnate. And taking shots at us to weaken us matters much more than building a better society. As incomprehensible as this is to the Western mind, this is real. It is what has motivated Palestinians to use millions in international support for offensive weapons rather than economic development. And it is what moved well-educated and affluent Arabs to take down the World Trade Center. The safety and well-being of the Western world will depend in part on Obama's comprehending this, and quickly. There will be no second chances. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is something heartening about reaching out a hand to everyone. And this message of Obama's clearly resonates with a good part of the populace. It speaks to many of an elevated moral plan, a place of conciliation. But will this work to make our very dangerous world safer, or will it simply weaken America and make it a laughing stock in certain places? When we were fighting in Gaza, Obama said the fighting had to stop, and his approach would be to speak with Syria and Iran. From a place of great unease, I saw this as terribly naive. The leaders of Syrian and Iran would have lied to his face, and continued as they pleased. There is a time when a clenched fist and credible threats are called for. ~~~~~~~~~~ There are disagreements among very serious people today about whether we are fighting against Islam, or radical Islam, an aberration of Islam. But the simple incontestable reality today is that in every hot spot in the world Islamists are involved. We are not finding Hindus, or animists, or Greek Orthodox at the heart of every terror attack; we are finding Muslims. Several exceedingly knowledgeable people in recent months — I think most readily of Steve Emerson of the Investigative Project on Terrorism and Daniel Pipes of the Middle East Forum — have lamented a regrettable tendency within North America and Europe to avoid identifying terrorists as Muslims, even though they are. It has become politically incorrect to name them. We've acquired a new (very politically correct) term: Islamophobia. We'll be hearing more about this from the horrendous Durban II, scheduled for April — as if identifying terrorists as Muslims is akin to or even worse than anti-Semitism. Obama is taking special pains to be inclusive of Muslims. It did not pass unnoticed that he said, "We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and nonbelievers," and that he used his middle name, Hussein. But is this the time for his declaration: "To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect"? I think he — declining to be a hard-nosed realist — has just made it more politically incorrect than ever to call terrorists Muslims. But what we've been told is true: We cannot defeat the enemy we're afraid to even name. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
DECISION OF THE COURT OF THE SANHEDRIN IN JERUSALEM: ON MILITARY
ACTION IN THE GAZA STRIP
Posted by Daisy Stern, January 20, 2009. | |
|
|
NICK GRIFFIN FILES A POLICE COMPLAINT AGAINST LAUREN BOOTH FOOR INCITING RACIAL HATRED AGAINST THE JEWS
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, January 20, 2009. |
|
[EDITOR'S NOTE: Nick Griffin is head of the British National Party (BNP), which in recent years has removed itself from its anti-semitic past and strongly resists the islamization of Britian.] The irony of the far right accusing the left of incitement to anti-semitism shows how upside down the UK has become Distributed by: MEDIA EYE UK Nick Griffin files a police complaint against Lauren Booth for
inciting racial hatred against the Jews
This below is by Hillel Fendel and is called: "Blair's
Sister-in-Law Incites Moslems: 'We Want Israel Out!'."
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) At a rally of 10,000 Muslim men in England last week, Lauren Booth called to Israel: "You are the criminals that we detest!" Booth, sister of the wife of UK Middle East envoy Tony Blair, spoke at an anti-Israel rally held last Sunday, Jan. 11, in the large town of Blackburn, 35 kilometers north of Manchester. An estimated 10,000 people, mostly young Muslim men, were in attendance. Sources in England report that the rally was totally ignored by national media, including the BBC, despite the fact that it was "probably the largest Islamic protest march in the UK since the Bradford book-burnings against Salman Rushdie and free speech twenty years ago." So writes far-right politician Nick Griffin
Booth fired up the crowd by calling for the closing of the Israeli Embassy in London, accusing Israel of "blasting" women and children with chemical weapons, and exhorting the Moslem community to "bring 40,000" to their next anti-Israel protest in "the middle of your city." "Today we are all Palestinians," Booth ranted. "We will fight for you and your children! And we have a message to you, Israel. You're finished. That's it. No more stories about self-defense. No, no, that's over. You — you are the nation of hate! And you are the criminals — that we detest! ... We are angry, and we want Israel out of this country!" Booth said she represents the "good people of our country who are angry and disgusted now, because our country has an ambassador in Israel! Withdraw him! We do not want an Israeli embassy in London — they are criminals! Say it with me now: Israel — out! Out! Out! [Crowd screams: Out! Out! Out!]" She then entertained the crowd by asking them if they remember Tony Blair, how they feel about him as Middle East envoy — the crowd booed in response — and then said, "I have his number here, let me call him; hang on a second." As the crowd laughed with approval, Booth apparently dialed Blair's Jerusalem office, telling the crowd, "Hang on, let me put this on speaker phone," and then saying into the phone, "Hello? Hi, I have a message here from the British people for Tony Blair, about Israel and his role: Shame on you! Shame on you!" She then let the crowd's roars of agreement be heard on the phone. Griffin later filed a complaint with the local police constable, writing as follows: "I wish to make a formal allegation of incitement to racial hatred, contrary to S.5 of the Public Order Act, whereby it is an offence to use words intended or, having regards to all the circumstances, likely to incite racial hatred. The offence was, I believe, committed by Lauren Booth in the course of her speech to the Muslims for Gaza rally in Corporation Park, Blackburn, on Sunday 11th January 2009... This rally was attended by many thousands of mainly young Muslim men, already in a high state of anger as a result of media coverage of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict in Gaza. ...[H]er use=2 0of the plural in the phrase "you are the criminals we detest", juxtaposed with comments such as "we want Israel out of this country", (not, please note, "the Israeli Embassy", but simply "Israel") are clearly likely — if not intended — to be taken by those present as a green light for hatred, indeed quite possibly actual physical violence, against individual Jews and against Jewish businesses in our High Streets. The press office of Griffin's British National Party informed IsraelNationalNews that the complaint, filed on Saturday, has not yet been acted upon. Anti-Semitism on the Rise The Community Security Trust, the main Jewish body that monitors anti-Semitism in London, says there were 150 anti-Semitic incidents in the first 18 days of the conflict in Gaza, representing a steep increase. Among the incidents were a suspected arson attack in a north London synagogue, verbal abuse, offensive graffiti, and more. The Metropolitan Police agrees that it has recorded an increase in anti-Semitism in London of late. Booth's Candy Bars in Gaza 
Lauren Booth in a Gaza Well-Stocked Grocery Store Booth made headlines four months ago when she took part in an
anti-Israel stunt by arriving in Gaza aboard a ship, in a challenge to
Israeli sovereignty over the coastal waters. Egyptian and Israeli
authorities delayed her departure from Gaza. She said that conditions
in Gaza were worse than in Darfur, and compared the area to Nazi
concentration camps — yet was photographed buying candy bars and soft
drinks at a well-stocked Gaza grocery.
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com
|
|
GAZA REPORTER CAUGHT ON TAPE CONFIRMING HAMAS FIRED ROCKETS NEAR TV OFFICES
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 20, 2009. |
|
Seeing is believing (unless Israel is involved)... This was written by Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondent |
|
Footage of a presenter on the Arabic language television station Al-Arabiya apparently confirms that Hamas fired at least one rocket from close to a building used by journalists during the 22-day conflict between Israel and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The Israel Defense Forces shelled the building, drawing international condemnation, and television networks with offices in the building denied that rockets had been launched from anywhere nearby. But the recording, filmed by an Israeli and released Tuesday by Israel's Foreign Ministry, shows Al-Arabiya presenter Hanan Al-Masri saying that a Grad rocket had been fired from a location near the studios at Al-Shuruk tower in Gaza City. Al-Masri did not realize that she had been caught on camera. WATCH THE VIDEO: http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1057129.html Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
DURBAN II PREPARATIONS AND ASSAULT ON RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, January 20, 2009. |
|
This was sent out by Anne Bayefsky. Contact her at info@eyeontheun.org |
|
This is opening day of the next Durban II planning meeting and the disinformation campaign is in full swing. The obfuscation starts with the title: Intersessional open-ended intergovernmental working group to continue and finalize the process of negotiations on and drafting of the outcome document. "What we do know, despite the UN-eze," says Anne Bayefsky, Editor of EYEontheUN, "is that Durban II is widely perceived to be a serious threat to the successful international protection of human rights." "Extremists, both governmental and non-governmental, are continuing to push the substance to the limits, while weak European states are unable or unwilling to push back. The overall strategy is to keep the Durban II plan under wraps as much as possible, until just days away from the April conference itself, so that it will be too late for many democratic states to pull out," Professor Bayefsky pointed out. "They are being entrapped like spiders in a web, under the charade of combating racism." "One thing is certain," said Bayefsky, "this is no place for the United States." The first thing diplomats did on opening day was agree that the draft document before them would formally become "the basis for further negotiations as the final document for the review conference." Diplomats then deliberately worked at a snail's pace, making their way through two dozen paragraphs of the 250 paragraph document. Particularly active in these "anti-racism" discussions was Iran, whose President is a leading advocate of genocide against the Jewish people. Iran lectured: "This whole conference is to identify sources, root causes, perpetrators of racism and defend and compensate and help the victims. This should continually be borne in our mind." Iran also objected to European efforts to limit the creation of new international norms at Durban II. Iran said "We don't want to prejudge the high possibility of new forms of ideas, and doctrines based on supremacy of one race over others, or other contemporary form of racism. Then we find ourselves in lack of legislative international norms to address them properly. So let us adopt an open-minded approach to this." Everybody watching knew this was part of an attempt by Islamic states to focus on Islamophobia, insert allegations that counter-terrorism activities are racist, and invent limits on freedom of expression, but the public conversation was conducted in vague generalities, for and against new standards. In addition, there was an obvious effort by Islamic states to gang up on Denmark. Algeria responded to a Danish suggestion that a provision was not relevant with: "It's that very comment that is not relevant." Cuba made the stakes at Durban II even plainer, when it claimed — erroneously — that the "document we adopt at the Durban Review Conference will be a legal document." When European Union countries sought to stress existing standards and the 1965 Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination, Cuba responded "We understand the EU doesn't want to accept other norms in the area of racism." Whereupon, European countries retreated. Here is what we also know: 1) The UN reissued the current draft of the "outcome document" with a January 12, 2009 date. This has now formally become the basis of negotiations. The draft on the table has the following glaring, objectionable provisions (exact quotes below): ************** Provisions in the January 12, 2009 draft of the Durban II "outcome document": (a) section on Israel:
(b) counter-terrorism as racism:
(c) limiting freedom of expression:
(d) Islamophobia and the Muslim victim:
Bayefsky commented "It is incontrovertible that Arab and Islamic states are using Durban II to demonize Israel and the West, and dramatically reverse gains in the world of international human rights and freedoms. How many more so-called red lines have to be crossed before western democracies get the message that Durban II is an offense to universal values? It is imperative that they refuse to legitimize this endeavour immediately." For a complete source of information on Durban II see www.EYEontheUN.org/durban. EYEontheUN monitors the UN direct from UN Headquarters in New York. EYEontheUN brings to light the real UN record on the key threats to democracy, human rights, and peace and security in our time. EYEontheUN provides a unique information base for the re-evaluation of priorities and directions for modern-day democratic societies. We need your support to continue our crucial work. Donate to
EYEontheUN online
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: FAITH AND COURAGE
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 20, 2009. |
|
I've written so much about the war. I want very much to include a tribute to the spiritual strength of our very special soldiers. Several stories have come to me over the past several days about the eagerness of our fighting men, many not nominally "religious," to pray, to wear tzizit (ritual fringes), to carry a volume of tehillim (psalms) with them. This is the source of our power, which is from Heaven. There is, for example, the story — shared with me by readers Bud and Phyllis — of the military rabbi, Zev Roness, who, along with two other rabbis, went with our soldiers from their base to the staging area, as they prepared to enter Gaza. They carried a Torah so that they could conduct a service before the soldiers left. When Rabbi Roness asked that the Torah be passed forward from the back of the bus they were riding in, it wasn't forthcoming. He then turned and looked, to see each soldier taking it in turn, and embracing it tightly. ~~~~~~~~~~ I share these photos, discovered via jerusalemdiaries.blogspot.com (Judy Balint), with credit to YNet. I find them beautiful. ~~~~~~~~~~ We certainly need to look to Heaven, because here men and women seem to be making a good mess of things. As I surveyed the news today, I was heavy hearted, wondering how the magnificent accomplishments of our IDF could morph into the situation as it currently stands. We're caught, once again, in a world that does not confront reality, but instead deals in fantasy. Yet the reality that breathes at our backs is formidable. ~~~~~~~~~~ I read an article this morning (in the Post: "Symbolism is the substance") that spoke about what a victory it was for Olmert that several European heads of state came here to offer us support and have their pictures taken with him. But this is pathetic: First of all, while they nominally offered support, in truth they came here to make sure we stopped fighting. Yes, they are on our side, to some considerable degree (as long as we stop fighting), with regard to Hamas, but it's going to be a whole other story regarding our relationship with the PA. They are surely not going to come here and pose with our prime minister in order to back our right to our land, or our right to a united Jerusalem, or even our right to retain some land in Judea and Samaria for security purposes. They are going to pat Mahmoud Abbas on the back for being "moderate" and demand that we surrender what is ours so there can be a Palestinian state. ~~~~~~~~~~ Then I wonder WHY they (the EU, the UN, the left) even think there can be a Palestinian state now. A corrupt Fatah is in shambles: no adequate civil infrastructure is in place; they've squandered the incredible sums — billions! — received from the international community so that there is no solid economic development; the PA legislature has a solid Hamas majority (something people forget); and Abbas's term as president is challenged. ~~~~~~~~~~ I read about forging a unity government between Hamas and Fatah and wonder how they (the same "they" as above) are able to ignore this evidence that it's not going to take place: Hamas has rounded up members of Fatah in Gaza, on suspicion of "collaboration" with Israel, and brought them to schools and hospitals that have been turned into temporary interrogation centers. At least 100 have been killed, according to Khaled Abu Toameh, and many severely tortured — three have had their eyes put out and several have been shot in their legs. ~~~~~~~~~~ Additionally, we have this significant observation with regard to Hamas from Bret Stephens. There is, he says, a fundamental error in the West in characterizing Hamas as a nationalist Palestinian movement, when in fact it is nothing of the sort. Hamas, an off-shoot of the Muslim Brotherhood, does not even mention the goal of Palestinian as a state in its charter, although it does mention jihad and the Koran. For them the land is an Islamic Wakf, an Islamic trust, to be part of a pan-Islamic, totalitarian caliphate. Their issues are religious, not territorial. When we see their position from this perspective, it becomes even more clear that Hamas is not going to merge with the PA and negotiate with Israel.
~~~~~~~~~~ I would, however, add something to what Stephens has written: Just because Fatah, by comparison, seems "moderate" and nationalistic — ready to negotiate with Israel to achieve a "two-state solution" — does not mean that this is actually the case. The Fatah charter still calls for the destruction of Israel. The incitement generated by the PA — most notably in its school texts — denies the legitimacy of Israel and promotes jihad. A map of Palestine on the wall of Abbas's office, exposed by Palestinian Media Watch, does not demarcate any area for Israel. The Fatah goal, insofar as it is nationalistic, is a Palestinian state from the river to the sea. If they had truly wanted a state, side by side with Israel, they would have had it by now, as one has been offered several times. Rather, they are after parameters that squeeze us and weaken us, and a policy of "return" of refugees that would swallow us up internally. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is considerable speculation, including from Military Intelligence, that we're now in a better position to get back Shalit because we're holding hundreds of Hamas fighters that they're going to want back. First of all, I'm not sure they care that much about these fighters. What they were after were high level terrorists already in our prisons, some with blood on their hands. But the fact that I keep reading this concerns me, as if this proves we're in a good position now — even though we were in a war and concluded it without securing Shalit. This feels to me like more fantasy. I certainly don't mean to imply that all is lost, all was in vain. We have gained a considerable advantage, and scored some very solid hits. We may have changed the balance and the dynamic in this part of the world. Or may have the potential to do so. A good deal now depends on our readiness to stand strong for ourselves from this point on. There are, it seems to me, certain measures of our success in this war that are still to come: One is our ability to achieve Shalit's release, and how we do it. Two — and connected to this — is our readiness (or refusal) to fully open crossings, which certainly should not be opened as long as they hold Shalit. Livni made this link in a talk today: "We sent [Shalit] to defend the country and we have an obligation to bring him back....If Hamas thinks it wants to get something beyond humanitarian assistance, which we will give regardless, we have someone who is very important to us, and, for me, one thing is contingent upon the other." And three is our firm resolve to act decisively against Hamas every single time there is a rocket shot or evidence of a build-up or smuggling. We must not tie ourselves into some cease-fire deal negotiated via Egypt that ties our hands with regard to future response to doings inside of Gaza. On Monday, Livni said that a renewal of weapons smuggling would constitute grounds for Israel to attack. ~~~~~~~~~~ You might like to see the observations of Yossi Melman, writing in Haaretz, with regard to Israel's hope that head of Egyptian intelligence,Omar Suleiman, will work out an "arrangement" between us and Hamas:
~~~~~~~~~~ Our government, along with the Europeans, is also worried that the re-construction in Gaza will strengthen or legitimize Hamas. So, there have been suggestions offered regarding agencies that might oversee the re-construction. One suggestion that was made was that UNRWA might do it. Wait, did I get that right? Yes, I actually read this. That "Jerusalem" thinks perhaps it might be UNRWA. But, come on guys, you can do better than this. This is the same UNRWA from whose facilities terrorists operate, the UNRWA that then accuses us of attacking innocents on purpose and lying about the terrorists. This is the same UNRWA that Shlomo Dror, acting months ago as spokesman for the IDF Gaza operations, spoke to me about. He said there was reluctance to allow UNRWA to bring into Gaza building materials they had requested, for fear they would end up with Hamas. Can you begin to imagine what would happen if UNRWA even assisted in oversight with regard to building in Gaza? But perhaps this is just a ploy out of Jerusalem. For another suggestion is that the PA do it. Totally a joke, but something that Livni would probably be most pleased to facilitate. ~~~~~~~~~~ Here's a mark of our success in the war: According to Military Intelligence, Iran is now assessing where Hamas's fight — which they had engineered — had failed. * They had hoped to hit us hard with the booby traps, surprise tunnels and roadside bombs. * There had been plans to launch rockets that went farther than 40 km., but this didn't happen. * They wanted to create a "victory image" with a kidnapping or burnt-out tank, but never achieved this. The down side, and certainly expected (from Yaakov Katz in the Post): "The IDF is concerned that Hamas and Iran will try to smuggle long-range Fajr missiles into the Gaza Strip. Fajr missiles, manufactured in Iran, have a range of 70 km. and if fired from Gaza would easily reach Tel Aviv. "While the Fajr is large — 10 meters in length compared to the two-meter Grads — it is believed that it would be possible to smuggle the rockets into Gaza after it was disassembled into several components and via a tunnel dug especially large for the purpose." ~~~~~~~~~~ Two US military analysts visiting here fully concur that we have won the war, but they say we should have hit harder: Lt.-Gen. Thomas McInerney, a 35-year veteran of the US Air Force and Lt.-Col. Rick Francona, a former US Air Force intelligence officer, both now US TV military analysts, received briefings from Israeli defense officials and toured the Gaza periphery. "I think you achieved what one Israeli general called 'changing the reality' in which Hamas operates, but I think you were too restrained and could have gone deeper into Gaza," said McInerney. "The Israeli public's support for this war mutes global opinion. When a nation is united in its right to defend itself, it makes it more difficult for Europeans, the Left or the Arab media to counter that. "Your leadership is too sensitive about world opinion. I know why Israel didn't [drive deeper into Gaza] — you have an election coming up and a new [US] president taking office, but you need to gain the freedom of operation in Gaza that you have in the West Bank." Francona said he the fighting we did in Gaza was seen in the US as a healthy demonstration of Israel's abilities. "...the conversation in the US revolves around Israeli decision making...It doesn't question Israel's capabilities. You've won the battle....[This is] just the end of this round, and that seems to be Israeli policy right now." Both see Israel as prepared to take on Hamas again over the long-term. You think we might get Gen. McInerney to stay here and serve as a high level advisor to the government? ~~~~~~~~~~ Eight mortar shells were fired from Gaza today, but misfired and landed in Palestinian areas, not Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ There is concern here about the intention of certain "human rights groups" to file war crimes charges in the Hague and with European courts against certain of our military personnel. Evidence is being compiled to counter such charges. But there is a travel advisory in effect for IDF officers, who are being told to check with the Judge Advocate General's office prior to travel. Said Attorney General Mazuz: "All the questions we have to face in Gaza have already been asked [after the Lebanon war], so the military and the State have clear guidelines when it comes to matters like targeted assassinations, returning fire and harming civilians," ~~~~~~~~~~ We're turning our national attention now towards political matters. Without citing specific numbers, since polls vary, I will simply say that it is the consensus that the right wing has gained in the course of the war. Likud still runs ahead. ~~~~~~~~~~ As I began with something beautiful, let me end with good news: Standard and Poor has just upgraded Israel's credit rating to an "A," saying this reflects Israel's strong economy in the last five years. This will draw new investors. ~~~~~~~~~~ A huge deposit of natural gas — that might change the face of Israel's economy — has been discovered in the Mediterranean some 90 kilometers west of Haifa. An estimated eighty-seven billion cubic meters of high-quality gas is thought to be in three deposits some 4 miles below the surface of the water. Rights to drilling in the area belong to Yitzhak Teshuva, owner of Delek Fuel and Delek Drilling companies, who anticipates the find will "supply Israel's energy needs for many decades to come." A $20 million test drill will now be run. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
CAMERA READY VICTIMS
Posted by Mrla, January 20, 2009. |
|
Hamas practices human sacrifice; the world shrugs. This article is by Mona Charen,
a nationally syndicated columnis,
and it appeared January 16, 2009 in the National Review website:
|
|
They are estimating that as many as 1,000 Gazans (unverified) may have been killed and many more wounded by Israel's counterattack against Hamas, whose missiles have rained down on southern Israel's schools, homes, and businesses for several years. Many of those killed by the Israel Defense Forces were Hamas operatives. (Israel turns out to have excellent intelligence about their locations, and in several instances the IDF phoned its target before attacking, giving him an opportunity to save his family by leaving the house.) But many were not terrorists, because Hamas has perfected a kind of camera-ready human sacrifice — placing its launchers in playgrounds, hospitals, and neighborhoods crowded with mothers and children. Every innocent life lost is a tragedy and a horror. But if you watch the news in Brussels or Boston and certainly in Islamabad or Caracas, you will get the distorted impression that the Palestinian plight is the worst on earth — an impression that is reinforced almost daily by the United Nations. We in the United States pay almost no attention to the resolutions, findings, and advocacy of the U.N., regarding it as a font of gasbaggery, stinking hypocrisy, and cant. But the rest of the world does pay attention. According to Eye on the U.N., in 2008, 68 percent of General Assembly resolutions regarding violations of human rights targeted Israel. Afghanistan was cited in 4 percent of the resolutions, along with Azerbaijan, Georgia, the United States, and a few others. Russia, Sudan, China, and Saudi Arabia, to name just a few, were not cited at all. In 2007, 32 countries were mentioned for human-rights violations, though most just barely. Israel once again topped the list with 121 actions taken against it. Sudan came in second with 61, Myanmar third with 41. The U.S. was No. 4, with 39 actions, tied with the Democratic Republic of the Congo! Regarding the plight of Gaza, remember this: Between 1948, when Israel was created, and 1967, when Israel captured Gaza in a defensive war, the Gaza Strip was administered by Egypt. During those 19 years, the Egyptians never offered citizenship to the Palestinians living in Gaza, nor did they permit them free transit from the Strip into Egypt proper. They did nothing to encourage the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. In fact, in 1958, Egypt's President Nasser formally annulled the "All Palestine Government" — a remnant of the Palestinian state the Arabs had rejected in 1948. Egypt, like all of the other Arab states and, importantly, the U.N., chose to keep the Palestinians bereft and stateless — a permanent and growing dagger aimed at Israel. Even more instructive is this: When Israel withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Gaza's residents had a golden opportunity to begin to build the sort of state they had claimed to desire. The Israelis even left behind the infrastructure to give the Palestinians a start: roads, houses, swimming pools, fish farms, nurseries, orchards, and factories. The Palestinians chose to kill one another (see Jonathan Schanzer's new book, Hamas vs. Fatah) and to fire missiles across the border at Israel instead. Apologists like Columbia's Rashid Khalidi protest that Israel continued to control sea lanes, borders, and air space around Gaza and cut off aid after the Palestinians elected Hamas. Well, Hamas didn't seem to have any trouble importing longer — and longer-range Iranian missiles despite Israel's blockade. And in any case, despite the advice of some hardliners in Israel, the Israeli government continued to permit humanitarian supplies to come through. Since the start of 2007, 16,000 civilians have been killed in fighting. Not in Gaza, so you may have missed it. It was in Somalia, where an Islamist movement is fighting Ethiopian troops. This is the 18th year of civil strife in that country. In Sri Lanka, some 70,000 people have perished in a civil war that has flared on and off since 1983. The regime in Burma has killed thousands and forced an estimated 800,000 into involuntary servitude. In the Democratic Republic of the Congo (formerly Zaire), 45,000 people are dying every month. Nearly 5.5 million have died since 1998 in a conflict that grew out of the violence in Rwanda and spread. Half of those deaths were of children under the age of five, according to the International Rescue Committee. The violence in the Democratic Republic of the Congo has caused more human devastation than any conflict since World War II. In Darfur, Sudan, more than 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million made homeless by violence. To cite these sad data is not to suggest that suffering is tolerable in any particular case — but merely to observe that the world is strangely blinkered in choosing the tragedies to which it responds. Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
GAZA RETURNS TO RULE BY THUG
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 20, 2009. |
|
This was written by Melanie Phillips
and appeared today in the Spectator
|
|
Further evidence is surfacing that, far from having enhanced its reputation in the eyes of the people of Gaza, Hamas has been shown up as brutal thugs to their own people but cowards who run away when confronted by a proper army. The Jerusalem Post reports: From the perspective of the people of Gaza, Hamas simply abandoned the arena and fled into the crowded neighborhoods. Once there, since the second day of the campaign, Hamas fighters have hurriedly shed their uniforms. Many of them simply deserted and returned to their families, taking their guns with them. In some locations, Hamas prevented civilians from leaving neighborhoods that were in the line of fire; overall, it invested great effort in blocking civilians who wished to flee to the south of the Strip. Khaled abu Toameh reports that since the ceasefire, Hamas has been carrying out massacres of Palestinians: A Fatah official in Ramallah told the Post that at least 100 of his men had been killed or wounded as a result of the massive Hamas crackdown. Some had been brutally tortured, he added. The official said that the perpetrators belonged to Hamas's armed wing, Izaddin Kassam, and to the movement's Internal Security Force. According to the official, at least three of the detainees had their eyes put out by their interrogators, who accused them of providing Israel with wartime information about the location of Hamas militiamen and officials. And where now is the BBC or Channel Four News? Where is the UN, or Human Rights Watch? Or don't murdered or tortured Palestinians count when it's other Palestinians doing the killing? (Don't all answer at once). Now here's how Reuters reports some Gazan reactions to the war: The gains and losses of Hamas's policy are a major point of discussion among Gazans, many of whom instinctively support Palestinian resistance against Israel, but question the cost in lives and destruction of the past three weeks. 'Rockets must end. What did we gain from them?' said Lama, a secretary for a Gaza company, who would not give her full name. 'Now Hamas is negotiating a truce. They were given an offer to renew it in December but they refused. Now after thousands of casualties, how does Hamas explain that?' she asked. On the other hand, the main lesson of the war for other Gazans is to find more efficient ways of killing Jews: 'I have always been a supporter of rockets and all forms of resistance,' said Aziz, the taxi driver. "But maybe Hamas needs to renew martyrdom operations instead,' he said, referring to suicide attacks. Hassan, the father of five, said there was little point in firing rockets if they were not effective. 'Rockets — I think this issue needs to be stopped for sometime and restudied,' he said. 'Once we have a missile that can reach the heart of Tel Aviv and blow up a building, maybe they can resume fire.' In the midst of all this derangement, not least in Britain, what a relief to find one sane, decent observer — and one who knows what he's talking about. Interviewed here on the BBC during the fighting, Col Richard Kemp, former commander of British forces in Afghanistan and military adviser to the British government, said Israel had no choice but to defend its own people by such an operation. Asked about the reportedly high toll of civilian casualties, Col Kemp said this: I 't think there's 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. When you look at the number of civilian casualties that have been caused, that perhaps doesn't sound too credible: I would accept that. However, Hamas — the enemy that they are fighting — has been trained by Iran and Hezbollah to fight among the people and use the civilian population in Gaza as a human shield; and Hamas factor in the use of the civilian population as a major part of their defensive plan. So even though, as I say, the IDF is taking enormous steps to reduce these civilian casualties it's impossible, it's impossible to reduce these civilian casualties when the enemy is using them as a shield. Listen on Colonel Kemp at http://www.bicom.org.uk/videos/bbc-news--military-analysis Can you imagine British government ministers or Tory front-benchers putting Israel's actions in such rational, factual and moral perspective, or giving the IDF such an encomium? Exactly. The Britain which Col Kemp has devoted his life to defending is dying before our eyes. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
JUST SAY YOU'RE SORRY
Posted by Daisy Stern, January 20, 2009. |
|
This was written by Nadav Shragai
|
|
Now, after the war and just before the election whirlwind sucks in our politicians once again, it would be appropriate for many of them to go out of their way and visit the mobile-home sites where those uprooted from Gush Katif live. This way they can tell them one small thing: I'm sorry. Tzipi Livni, Ehud Olmert, Shaul Mofaz and Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israel Defense Forces and the police should do this — they, their agents and everyone else who initiated, implemented and aided in using force to uproot 10,000 people from their homes in Gush Katif and Northern Samaria, maliciously and without any real purpose. Everyone who saw some good in the evil of the disengagement and evil in the good of Gush Katif has turned light into darkness and darkness into light. At the very least, they are obligated to make this small apology. This includes the judges of the High Court of Justice who did not even bother to visit Gush Katif and made due with defense experts acting on behalf of the state "because that is the postion of the court since it was founded." The justices who ruled as they did because they automatically assumed that such a plan "improves the security situation" because "the evacuation reduces the desire of the Palestinians to harm the Israeli population." It would be appropriate for the honorable justices to take a vacation day as an act of forgiveness and go down south for a close-up look at the results of their decisions. This also includes the media, which provided a challenge for Ariel Sharon and allowed him to turn a prosperous agricultural land, a world full of communities, synagogues, yeshivas and magnificent educational institutions into piles of rubble. Also the heads of the IDF and Shin Bet security service who never spoke in public what they whispered in the backrooms, and the soldiers and policemen who dragged the pioneers of Kfar Darom and Neveh Dekalim from their houses while raining blows on the demonstrators who understood what would come. The apology must also include everyone who painted those who warned that the rockets from Gaza would reach Sderot, Ashdod and Be'er Sheva as delusional and opponents of peace. Everyone who promised that they would "give it to them" after the first Qassam, but in the end cried about the moral and international constraints that prevented them from doing so, and for years abandoned the south. It must include those who took the name of democracy in vain and aided Sharon in deceiving Likud members and breaking his promises to honor Likud's decisions once it became clear to Sharon that the party's members did not agree with him. You, too, who paid almost no attention to the hundreds of thousands who tried to stop the evil, who paid no attention to those who internalized the lessons of Oslo and warned that we should not give them land and guns again. You who paid no attention to those who warned of the Hamastan state, foresaw exactly the trajectories of the rockets, and understood that this was something we gave away for free, a further disintegration of our power of deterrence and an adrenaline shot for terror. Now rise and ask for forgiveness from those who paid the highest price, with their bodies, souls and property for your close-mindedness, arrogance and wickedness. Ask for forgiveness from the Gush Katif expellees, the noble souls who did not steal land from anyone, who made the empty dunes bloom as ambassadors of the State of Israel and who turned into the south's security buffer and absorbed over 6,000 Qassams and mortar shells with their bodies and belongings in the last years of Gush Katif. Ask for forgiveness from those who swore to "win with love" — who believed and sowed until the very last minute; from those who did not raise a hand against the soldiers. Apologize to those who continued to enlist in the IDF and pay the ultimate price even after they were expelled from their houses, because they understood that the state — the national homeland of the Jewish people, even within limited borders — is still bigger than any mistaken and confused government. There is no way to know if they will forgive you, but you at least need to ask. Contact Daisy Stern by email at daisystern1@gmail.com |
|
MY SON CAME HOME
Posted by HandsFiasco, January 20, 2009. |
|
I received this from Judy Balint, who writes,
|
|
My son came home from Gaza just a few minutes ago. He came home as we
had sent him off, only more tired, worn and dirty. Thank you Hashem for
bringing him home. To his wife, his brothers and sisters and his loving
brood of nieces and nephews. All of us have been waiting patiently these
past three weeks to hold him in our arms.
Barely able to wait to embrace him, I ran across the highway where his ride had dropped him off. I grabbed him in the middle of the road and cars driving into my yishuv had to veer around this sight of me standing on tiptoes reaching for my tall, handsome son's face. The drivers waved at us. A few rolled down heir windows to say "todah — thank you" to my son. I whispered Todah again to Hashem. I helped him toss his heavy bags into the trunk of the car. The heaviest among them being the one weighted down with foodstuffs that Israel's citizens sent to our soldiers. Tens of thousands of kilograms of food poured into the bases in the south. Cartons upon cartons of instant soups, nuts, pretzels, cookies and nosh of every kind. All sent by individuals, families, schools and businesses from throughout the country. We could barely lift his 'booty' and we both shared a laugh as we flung it onto the back seat. The words that had been in my heart for so long melted on my tongue. My eyes drank him in, tall, bearded now and his face and soul, a bit darker than before he left us that Sunday morning. He reached his hand to his head and apologized for the fact that he was bareheaded. In the midst of everything his kippa had fallen off. "No matter — easy enough to replace," I said as his hand slipped into mine. I reached up to grab his neck and felt his lips touch my cheek, and I knew that his presence, like this, was all that I had prayed for each day since he packed his bags and left before the sun even rose that cold morning. I pulled in front of his apartment, a few kilometers from my home, and as we descended the steps I heard him speak gently and lovingly with his wife at work, telling her how anxious he was to see her. He turned on the boiler and laughingly told me "I'm not getting out of this shower for the next hour." The bags fell to the floor and he leaned against the kitchen counter to untie his boots swiftly flinging them aside and letting his bare feet rest on the tile floor. He was exhausted and I hesitated to start with the barrage of questions that had been streaming through my head every day, every hour for these past few weeks. He smiled as he opened the bag of goodies and told me about the elementary school children from Mevasseret Zion who had attached notes with their gifts. He spoke with three of them to thank them personally. One child wrote a three page letter and the soldiers in my son's unit were grateful to learn more of this 8-year old's daily life, his favorite subjects and his fondness for playstation. When they called to speak with him, he was overwhelmed and kept calling them "gibborim" heroes. "Ima" he said, "I'm tired now, but I have to tell you how extraordinary this nation is. The children who wrote to us, the people who sent their good wishes with their packages of food, the businesses that sent truckloads of goods. The soldiers I served with, each one caring deeply about the other one. Zahal who made sure that we were well trained and well equipped for our mission. But mostly. Mostly. This was a war that was guided by the Hand of G'd. Everyday we felt His presence — whether deciding to enter a building by smashing down the back wall rather than entering through the front door, only to discover that the front door had been booby trapped, or searching rooms in a house and uncovering a tunnel under a bed we had lifted where tens of Hamas terrorists were hiding in the hopes of kidnapping one of us, or dozens more stories." I looked at this child's face and saw the extraordinary young man he had become. Filled with faith. Feeling a passion for those values that have held this nation together for thousands of years. And, his very presence. His very modesty. His deep felt pride at being part of this nation. All of this wrapped around my heart and left me humbled. Humbled and grateful. "And I will lift up my eyes unto the mountains, from where my strength will come." Contact HandsFiasco at handsfiasco@webtv.net |
|
BILL MOYERS CALLED ON HIS BLATANT ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by Marc Samberg, January 20, 2009. |
|
This below was a comment by Irving Greenberg on Bill Moyers' blantantly anti-semitic remarks. For additional information, see below. |
|
Dear Bill Moyers, I have been a long time fan of Bill Moyers and an admirer of your work in many areas — including the Genesis series in which my wife participated. For this very reason, I was deeply dismayed to read an excerpt of the transcript of your comments on the Gaza war on the Friday night Journal program. I believe that you made a serious moral misjudgment on the invasion and then compounded your error with two applications that are beyond the pale — even more so for someone of your stature and judgment. 1. You acknowledge Israel's right to defend its people but then allege that Israel's decision to invade Gaza constitutes "waging war on an entire population." You allege that "by killing indiscriminately the elderly, kids, entire families, by destroying schools and hospitals" Israel "spilled the blood that turns the wheel of retribution." You ignore that Israel has bombed only Hamas military posts, command headquarters and points of origin of Hamas fire — and does so with pinpoint accuracy. You ignore that the UN school shelling was a return of enemy fire from that school or a shell that went astray in an exchange of fire with Hamas shooters stationed nearby.[See above.] Israel has not fired on hospitals or schools deliberately — though Hamas locates headquarters, war supplies and rocket launchers in such places. You ignore the New York Times report (1/11/09) that Hamas tells civilian Palestinians to go up on the roofs of homes where their fighters are located because it knows Israel will not fire when its soldiers or planes see civilians. By leaving out these facts, you shore up the false equation which underlies your whole text: Israel striking back with military force as a last resort at a group pledged to its destruction — and which has backed up that pledge by years of terror attacks, suicide bombers, and rocket showers — is equivalent to Israel consciously targeting civilians and casually initiating these attacks, which is then morally equated to Hamas' deliberate terrorism, targeting civilians primarily. Hamas' strategy for destroying Israel incorporates the expectation that inevitable misjudgments and accidents in the course of fighting will evoke the kind of one sided outbursts such as yours which undermine Israel's world standing. I, too, feel great pain and sympathy at the enormous suffering and losses of innocent Palestinians, but it is Hamas that has deliberately put them in harm's way, not Israel as your words imply. 2. Equally distressing is your use of the phrase '[ Israel ] spilled the blood that turns the wheel of retribution". Had you used the word revenge, you would have made your point that Israel's attacks inflame Hamas and others, a cause of grave concern to Israelis and to all who seek and love peace. But the word 'retribution' really means this: justified punishment for bad behavior. That tone of justification — terror [justifiably] evokes terror — is all over your next paragraph which subtly suggests that assaults on Jews in Europe are the to-be-expected outgrowth of Israel's attacks and not the excuse used by anti-Semites to continue attacks they have been carrying on for years. 3. Most disturbing of all: You describe Gaza "as the latest battle in the oldest family quarrel on record" — as if modern day Israel was motivated not by self-defense but by the Biblical account of Isaac conflicting with Ishmael; as if Israelis are following the ancient Israelite' "leaders [who] urged violence against its inhabitants;" as if Israelis are following Deuteronomy's instruction to wipe out idolatry. Does Israel smash the religious places of the Palestinians? There is not a political figure in Israel — not even a marginalized extremist — who invokes Deuteronomy as a motivation or justification for behavior toward Palestinians. You ignore that more than two millennia have passed since Judaism, in its rabbinic development, declared that these Deuteronomic laws applied only to idol worshippers in those previous millennia; that Islam has been treated with great respect by Judaism and specifically honored as a monotheistic religion, never equated with idolatry; that in the Talmud it is ruled that the seven nations referred to in Deuteronomy's injunction to "wipe out their name from that place" no longer exist, and that these instructions may not be applied to any other nation. In short, perhaps out of ignorance, you besmirch Judaism as a blood thirsty religion — using selected texts that have long been nullified. With your words, you strengthen the hands of contemporary haters who seek to portray Judaism and Jews as blood thirsty murderers — this, in order to legitimate their unspeakable desire to actually wipe Israel and Jews off the face of the earth. 4. This brings me to your climactic disturbing comment. You follow the Deuteronomy quote with the following statement. "So God-soaked violence became genetically coded." What that means in plain language is: that Jews are genetically coded to be violent and totally wipe out their opponents. Do you believe that?; that [all] Jews are genetically coded to violence, to assault civilian populations? I cannot believe that you believe that. Then you are all the more guilty, out of anger, of willfully degrading a whole people and lending your eloquent voice and stature for the cruel mission of those who seek the destruction of my people. You may try to claim that your next sentence states: "A radical stream of Islam now seeks to obliterate Israel from the face of the earth" to argue that you were not speaking just about Jews. But in the context of the previous and ensuing paragraphs which are all about Israel's violence, you tear off that fig leaf. It comes out all Israel, all the time. You have made a shocking departure from the minimum standards of responsibility in your words — and all in the name of speaking up for victims. I plead with you to rescue your moral standing and your record of
working to improve the world. Reflect on your loss of balance.
Restore your credibility. As part of your reparation, you certainly
should apologize for labeling Jews as genetically encoded for
violence.
Yours truly,
Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com |
|
ANOTHER "ISRAEL SUCCEEDS IN SNATCHING DEFEAT FROM THE JAWS OF VICTORY"
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 20, 2009. |
|
Before the Media gets all delirious in the "Gotcha" Doctor story, there's something that has been revealed. Doctor Izzeldin Abuelaish, a Gaza physician works at Sheba Hospital near Tel Aviv. A bomb exploded at his house in Gaza, killing his 3 daughters and other family members. An MRI or CT done on his daughter's skull showed a small round object in her brain. It looks like a ball bearing. IF it turns out that it is a ball bearing, the world will know that the girl was NOT killed by the Israelis, because the Israeli shells contain no ball bearings. But, the Hamas Arab Palestinian Terrorists do use ball bearing in most of their shells and explosive bomb vests, in order to cause as much maiming and damage as possible to their civilian victims. Bomb residue from the doctor's clothes and body reveal the substance is not military grade, not used by the IDF but used by Hamas. Investigators believe the doctor's home was booby-trapped or contained explosives. It is entirely possible that the Doctor was targeted by Hamas for crossing the line by working with the Israelis at the Sheba hospital near Tel Aviv. Regardless, Hamas admits to (brags about) firing from civilian areas, even using the civilians as their "human shields" while claiming they (the Hamas Terrorists) are the civilian population. Granted, the Israelis were quick to admit guilt when accused of anything — especially by the Media. We all recall the "Al Dura" fraud by the French Media. So let's see what develops. This below is from Rav Rachamim Pauli (Rachamim47@aol.com) on January 17, 2009 |
|
The Israeli government is ordering a cease-fire. Minutes before the press conference two Grad Katyushas fell in Ashdod hitting a building and an intersection, knocking out power for a short time. In Ashkelon another fell — totaling about 20 missiles today. Five soldiers were wounded by friendly fire out of 10 and of the total 5 seriously. Battles raged between Hamas in 10 story high refugee shanties of concrete and Israeli soldiers. Poor refugee in their high rise shanties. A major tunnel network and Kassams and a front line headquarters were captured and exposed without much of a fight today. IDF: Shots fired from doctor's home Army says it fired at Gaza doctor's home, killing three daughters,
after troops were targeted by sniper fire; meanwhile, IDF says that
shell hit fuel tank near UNWRA compound Thursday, but facility itself
was not targeted Not so innocent? The daughters of a Gaza doctor were killed by the IDF after sniper fire from the family's home targeted Israeli soldiers, the army said Saturday. Earlier Saturday, Dr. Ezzeldeen Abu al-Aish convened a press conference at Sheba medical center near Tel Aviv, where he works, and demanded to know why the army targeted his home. UPDATE: From http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/report-hamas-may-have-murdered 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 |
|
PEACE NOW ANGERS ARABS; SUPREME COURT TAKING OVER ISRAEL; ISRAEL'S GOALS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 20, 2009. |
|
ISRAEL PLANS NATIONAL WAR DRILL The drill is to take place in July. Part of it is to take out the box containing the gas mask. But there is no such box! The government took back all the masks in 2006, without having replaced them. It claims the failure to replace them is due to a dispute between departments over which is to pay for them (IMRA, 12/23). The Prime Minister has great power. Why didn't he resolve the conflict? Could it be true that the government wants the Jewish people killed? Or does it just appear that way from its blundering and appeasement policies? PEACE NOW MUST PAY MA'ALE ADUMIM FOR LIBEL Peace Now had accused Ma'ale Adumim, in Judea, of having taken 86% of its land from Arab owners. The town sued Peace Now for libel. Peace Now demanded that the IDF release documents that would be definitive about this. The documents showed that only 1/2% came from Arabs. The court fined Peace Now for libel and cited its employees for lying about the town. A similar verdict was leveled against Peace Now for making a similar accusation against Revava. In both cases, the fine was only $20,000. Peace Now's report made like-minded accusations against other communities. Prof. Steven Plaut wonders whether each will have to sue Peace Now in order to get a retraction and an apology (12/24). PEACE NOW ANGERS ARABS Peace Now claims that the town of Ofra also is built primarily on Arabs' land. The accusation may not only stir up trouble between Arabs and Jews, it may endanger former Arab owners of the land, who will be exposed as having sold it to Jews (Arutz-7, 12/24). The P.A. has executed such Arabs. HAMAS ENACTS ISLAMIC CRIMINAL CODE "Penalties include amputation and crucifixion, as well as the death penalty for negotiations contrary to Hamas' interpretation of "Palestinian interests'". Also, lashes and blood revenge. Only the victim can stay the punishment, If the supposed crime has a victim. Some members of the Gaza regime deny the law was passed. Arafat put Sharia into the P.A. constitution as the inspiration for P.A. law (Arutz-7, 12/25. Islamist groups often dispute what was decided,y SUPREME COURT TAKING OVER ISRAEL In Coercing virtue, former US jurist Robert Bork found that Israel's Supreme Court and Attorney-General had imposed themselves over Cabinet and Knesset. They legislate and administer at will. There follow Bork's observations. In 1992, the Knesset carelessly gave the Supreme Court certain executive power. Now anyone could petition the Court directly, to indict any government official, without having been personally injured by that official. At that time, PM Rabin depended on a coalition partner. The Supreme Court ruled that the partner could be stripped of parliamentary immunity and tried for corruption. PM Rabin opposed the ruling. He ordered the Attorney-General, the only official entitled to appeal the ruling, to do so. The Attorney-General refused. Rabin thus lost control of the government. No other court has attained as much power as Israel's Supreme Court. It appoints its own members, took the Attorney-General from the executive branch, set aside legislative and executive action, altered the meaning of enacted law, forbidden certain government action and ordered certain government action and overrides national defense measures. The Court rules on any subject it wants. No activity is more political and therefore more appropriately done by the executive and legislative branches than war. Nevertheless, [former Chief Justice] Barak's called the deployment of troops in wartime justiciable. Imagine, leaving the conduct of war to the discretion of a non-elected court? How does the court treat national security? It dictates to the other branches according to universalistic principles regardless of Israel's particular needs. The result is to harm Israeli security [and please leftist ideologues]. The Court's imposes socialist and universalistic cultural and social values. Sounds nice. Proves "deleterious." The Court catered to Muslim sensibilities and disregarded ultra-Orthodox ones. "The court's rejection of specifically Jewish values was also evident in its decisions that the importation of non-kosher meat cannot be banned, new communities sited for defensive purposes may not be limited to Jews, and Hareidi youth groups may not be funded by the government as other youth groups are." p>The Court arrogantly emphasizes democracy over Jewishness and gets neither. "According to Barak, when the values of Israel as a Jewish state cannot be reconciled with its values as a democratic state, the decision must be made according to 'the views of the enlightened community in Israel'" (Barry Chamish, 12/25). "Enlightened?" That puts his own views on a pedestal. IRAN INVESTING IN SYRIA Iran and its businesses are pouring billions of dollars into Syria. Some of the money buys existing assets, some builds new assets, and some promotes the Shiite sect (IMRA, 12/35). ISRAEL'S GOALS & EXPECTATIONS Israel had hoped that by attacking Hamas, it would leave Fatah in a stronger position to take over Gaza. Then Israel would support foreign aid to rebuild Gazan facilities damaged by the recent combat. An Israeli official observed that most suggestions for resolving the combat depend on the goodwill of Hamas, which lacks it. Incidentally, under cover of the recent combat, Hamas executed about 70 Fatah supporters in Gaza (Isabel Kershner, NY Times, 1/15, A1). Israel's support for Fatah is puzzling. Fatah made war on Israel, too. The media calls it secular, but it wages jihad against Israel, too. What is the good of breaking down the enemy in Gaza, only to build him back up, under different leaders but the same desire to conquer and kill? NY TIMES ALMOST GETS IT Even though modern Israel came into existence months after a historic General Assembly voted in 1947 to partition Mandatory Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states, the country's first prime minister, David Ben-Gurion, famously wrote off the UN in the 1950s,..." mocking it. The UNO is outraged at Israel for inflicting casualties on it. Israel has a parallel outrage that Hamas uses civilians and civilian institutions as human shields. (Isabel Kershner, 1/16, A12). Actually it was the second partition of the Mandate, and only advisory. The UNO proposed boundaries so disconnected as to be non-viable. The Arabs rejected the proposal, but the State Dept. pretends it was law and still is valid. The Arabs made war against it, during which the UNO was one-sided in their behalf. If the Times weren't, itself, anti-Zionist, it might explain UNO bias. Part of this bias is to overlook civilians being used as human shields and to blame Israel for their casualties, just as Hamas cynically hopes. UNO outrage is unjustified. A decent UNO would resolve against Hamas. Shame on the UNO! It lives in a topsy-turvey world, where evil is good and bias rules. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: A TRIBE OF GOATS MEANDERS THROUGH NACHAL PRAT
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, January 19, 2009. |
A tribe of goats meanders through Nachal Prat
This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. Yehoshua Halevi writes: "HOW I GOT THE SHOT: While peace continues to elude residents of the Middle East, the intrepid traveler can easily find at least a few hours of silence and solitude in one of the country's spectacular deserts. Although Nachal Prat — the Prat Stream — is located less than an hour's drive from Jerusalem in the Judean Desert, I had not ventured there until recently. The canyon runs roughly parallel to the highway that descends from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea, with springs that supply the stream with water year round. I brought my family to this spot during Chanukah. We had hiked about two hours into the canyon when we paused on a shaded rock to have lunch. Suddenly and without warning, we heard the clanging of bells as a trip of goats crested the ridge on the far side of the stream and descended en masse to drink and forage. Accompanied by their shepherd, who rode on a donkey, the goats ambled through our picnic site and up the opposite ridge, the last bell finally fading after about 20 minutes. I jumped up from my meal and positioned myself midstream to allow both sides of the canyon to remain in the composition and to corral as many of the goats as possible within the frame. I pointed my camera up and down the valley, but prefer this shot in the direction of the sun, which adds a sparkle to the water and brightens the backs of the white-haired goats. I have spent limited time in the environs of the desert, so its landscapes and aesthetic remain fresh and intriguing to my photographic eye. In Biblical times, this stream marked the boundary between the tribes of Judah and Benjamin. Today, the desert remains timeless as the passage of a shepherd with his flock along ancient trails so easily proves.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com
and visit his website:
|
|
PICTURES OF VICTORY
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 19, 2009. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick
and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
On Sunday, Israelis were witness to a cavalcade of European leaders marching to Jerusalem to have their pictures taken with outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Zapatero, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi came to Jerusalem from Sharm e-Sheikh, where they had their pictures taken with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak. In both cities, they expressed their support for Israel's decision to stop fighting the Iranian-armed, financed and trained Hamas terror regime in Gaza. Olmert greeted the Europeans leaders as great friends of Israel and claimed that their presence demonstrated that Israel's operation against Hamas enjoyed massive international support. Unfortunately, Olmert's statements were wrong on both counts. The leaders who came to Jerusalem are not friends of Israel and their presence in our capital did not demonstrate that Operation Cast Lead enjoyed international backing. While sufficing with paying the most minimal lip service to Israel's inherent right to defend itself, the leaders who came to Jerusalem have been outspoken in their criticism of Israel's actual efforts to defend its citizens from Hamas aggression. None have publicly recognized that Israel has a duty to its citizens to defeat Hamas. To the contrary, all have claimed that there "is no military solution" to Israel's military conflict with Hamas. And while these leaders have repeated vacuous bromides about the "tragedy of both sides," their voters have been much less circumspect in telling the Jews what think of us. Over the past three weeks, all of their countries, and indeed, all the countries in Western Europe have hosted large-scale, violent, anti-Semitic demonstrations and riots. And rather than condemn the anti-Jewish violence and incitement at these events, the Europeans leaders who came to Jerusalem have either sought to appease the anti-Semites or ignore them. German authorities for instance permitted Hamas supporters to wave Hamas flags at their hateful "peace demonstrations" while barring Israel supporters from holding Israeli flags or even displaying them in their windows. In France, Sarkozy has equated his victimized Jewish community with the French Muslims who have been attacking them by claiming that his government "will not tolerate international tensions mutating into intercommunity violence." Given their refusal to support Israel in its fight against Hamas and their publics' growing hatred of Israel and the Jews, what made these Europeans leaders come to Jerusalem? As Gordon Brown and French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner made clear in their remarks in Jerusalem, they came here to advance a hostile agenda. They want Israel to acquiesce to Hamas's demand to open its borders with Gaza and to support the opening of Egypt's border crossing with Gaza. They also intend to start giving Hamas hundreds of millions of dollars in "humanitarian aid" to rebuild Gaza. If Europe gets its way, any gains that Israel made in Operation Cast Lead will quickly be erased. So the question then arises, why did Olmert, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak agree to have them come to Jerusalem? The short answer to this question is that Olmert, Livni and Barak view the European leaders as stage props. As they explained repeatedly since the outset of Operation Cast Lead, Israel's leaders sought to end the campaign with a "picture of victory." A group photo with Olmert, Sarkozy, Brown, Merkel, Zapatero and Berlusconi was the picture that they felt they needed. The fact that the picture came with demands that Israel cannot agree to without squandering its hard-earned gains in Gaza, is beside the point.
WHICH BRINGS us to the main point. What the parade of hostile foreigners in Jerusalem demonstrated clearly is that while the campaign in Gaza was touted by our leaders as a way to "change the security reality in the South," for our leaders, its most important goal was to change the electoral reality ahead of the February 10 general elections. Indeed, for them, the operation would have more appropriately been named "Operation Cast Ballots." Olmert, Livni and Barak claimed that by signing a memorandum of understanding with outgoing US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and due to Egyptian good will, Israel succeeded in building an international framework to prevent Hamas from rearming. But the MOU sets out no mechanism whatsoever for interdicting weapons shipments to Gaza on the high seas. And Egypt for its part has refused to agree to take any concerted action to prevent the weapons shipments from docking in its ports and transiting its territory en route to Gaza. The other operational goal that Livni, Olmert and Barak set for the campaign was to restore Israel's deterrence and so convince Hamas to stop firing its missiles on southern Israel. But, as Hamas's continued firing of missiles at southern Israel after Olmert declared the cease-fire on Saturday night showed, Israel failed to deter Hamas. But while they failed to accomplish either of Operation Cast Lead's operational goals, they did accomplish — at least for now — their main strategic goal. They succeeded in not losing. By waging Operation Cast Lead, Olmert, Livni and Barak hoped to turn the absence of military defeat into the building blocks of political triumph. The operation was supposed to secure their political futures in three ways. First, it was supposed to change the subject of the electoral campaign. As Olmert looks ahead to retirement, and as Livni and Barak vie with Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu to replace him, all three politicians wanted the elections to be about something other than their failures to defeat Hizbullah, their failure to defend the South from Hamas's growing arsenal, and their failure to contend with Iran's nuclear weapons program. This goal was accomplished by Operation Cast Lead, Their second goal — and perhaps Olmert's primary objective — was to erase the public's memory of Israel's strategic failure in the Second Lebanon War. This goal was partially achieved. The IDF performed with greater competence in Gaza than in Lebanon. And Israel achieved its aim of not being defeated in Gaza. As a result, the nation feels much more confident about the IDF's ability to defend the country.
THE MAIN difference between how Operation Cast Lead has ended and how the Second Lebanon War ended has little to do with how the IDF performed. The most important difference is Israel has not agreed to have an international force stationed in Gaza as it accepted (and in Livni's case, championed) the deployment of UNIFIL forced in South Lebanon. Since Hizbullah has used UNIFIL as a screen behind which it has rearmed and reasserted its military control over South Lebanon, the absence of such a force in Gaza is a net gain for Israel. But again, if Israel permits Europe and the UN to flood Gaza with aid money — which will all go directly to Hamas — it will be enabling a new mechanism to be formed that will shield Hamas from the IDF and enable it to rebuild its arsenals and strengthen its control over Gaza. This prospect is made all the more dangerous by the fact that Israel ended the campaign without taking control over the Gaza-Egypt border. By leaving the border zone under Hamas control, Israel left the path clear for Iran to resupply Hizbullah's armed forces with missiles and rockets. As Shin Bet Director Yuval Diskin explained on Sunday, under the present circumstances, Hamas can be expected to rebuild its arsenals in as little as three months.
THE THIRD political aim that Olmert, Livni and Barak sought to achieve in waging Operation Cast Lead was to convince the Israeli public that their worldview is correct. That worldview asserts that the world is divided between the extremist Islamic fundamentalists and the moderates. They claim that the latter group includes Arab dictatorships like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and democracies like Turkey, the EU, and Israel. The Kadima-Labor worldview also asserts that by surrendering territory to the Arabs, Israel will receive international legitimacy for any acts of self-defense it is forced to take in the event it is attacked from the territories it vacated. Although the local media, with their sycophantic celebration of Mubarak and support for Israeli withdrawals have supported this view, it is far from clear that the public has been convinced of its wisdom. Between Turkey's open support for Hamas and vilification of Israel, Egypt's abject refusal to take any concrete action to end weapons smuggling to Gaza, and Fatah's fecklessness and hostility, Israelis have been given ample proof this month that the moderate camp is a fiction. Moreover, the massive anti-Semitic riots in Europe and the US, and last week's anti-Israeli UN Security Council Resolution 1860 which the US refused to veto have made quite clear that Israel's withdrawals have brought it no sympathy whatsoever from the "moderate" camp. Just as the goal of not losing did not bring Israel victory over Hamas, so too, Livni, Olmert and Barak's bid to use the operation to increase their political cache does not seem to have succeeded. Opinion polls taken in the aftermath of Olmert's announcement of the cease-fire on Saturday night showed that Likud has maintained, and even expanded, its lead against Kadima and Labor.
IN SPITE of its obvious limitations, Israelis can be pleased with the results of Operation Cast Lead on two counts. Although Hamas was not defeated, remains in full control of Gaza and has the ability to rebuild its forces, it was harmed. The IDF's operation did knock out its central installations, reduce its capacity to fight and killed some of its key leaders. The second reason that Israelis can be pleased with the outcome is that it could have been much worse. The fact of the matter is that Operation Cast Lead was the most successful operation that Kadima and Labor are capable of leading. With their capitulationist world view, they cannot bring Israel victory over our enemies. The most they can deliver is an absence of defeat. And so long as Israel doesn't allow Europe and the UN to begin transferring hundreds of millions of dollars to Hamas, we will remain undefeated by Hamas. Looking ahead to the challenges Israel's next government will face, Operation Cast Lead gave Israel between three to six months of security in the south before Hamas will be able to renew its missile offensive. It is during that time that the next government will need to contend with Israel's two greatest challenges — preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons, and preventing the new Obama administration from undermining Israel's strategic position by selling out Israel's security to buy "pictures of victory" of its own with Iran and Syria. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
MIRACLES IN ISRAEL
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 19, 2009. |
|
This article was written by Sara Debbie Gutfreund, who lives in
Telzstone, Israel with her husband and children. Educated in America,
she is a freelance writer and is currently working on her first novel.
It is archived at
|
|
Yesterday my daughters came home from school and informed me that they all have new girls in their classes. One of the girls is from Netivot, another one is from Beer Sheva and, finally, there is Leah from Ashdod. Ever since the war began my six-year-old asks me every day: "Is the war over yet? When will it end?" Last week my eight-year-old described how they had spent a better part of the morning practicing hiding in the school shelter. We live right outside Jerusalem. Why is the school doing this? But then I heard it in my daughter's voice. She doesn't see an iota of difference between herself and Efrat from Netivot. We are all in danger. I glanced back at the picture, and felt a jolt of shock "We each have a partner, and we need to walk quietly. We aren't allowed to run," my other daughter explained as we sat down to lunch. A couple of days ago, my nine-year-old peered over my shoulder at the newspaper. "Who is that?" she asked, pointing at a picture of one of the first soldiers who was killed in the war. "He's a soldier who was killed," I told her. "No, that's not a soldier," she shook her head. "That's a boy. He's not old enough to be a soldier." As she ran off to play, I glanced back at the picture, and I felt a jolt of shock. He does look like a child! He is so very young. He could be any of our sons. Why didn't I see it before? Wasn't I graduating high school at that age? Later that day an anxious taxi driver told us that two of his sons are in Gaza. "Do you know what it's like to wait all day listening to this news?" he said as he turned up the radio. "At midnight my sons call. 'Abba, don't worry' they say. It will be okay." He shakes his head as the news crackles in. "It's not okay. It's only okay if your sons are at home." I think about the summer that I spent volunteering for the IDF. I was between my junior and senior years of college. I was idealistic and driven. I wanted to help. So there I was in full army uniform at four in the morning on a base near Tzfat getting ready to build cement boulders for the army. We worked all day in the intense summer heat. I didn't feel a thing. I was so happy. I was helping. On the last night before my return trip to NY, I was sitting with one of the real Israeli soldiers at dinner. "Do you know what the only difference is between you and me?" he asked in broken English. "What?" I asked. I felt so much a part of the country that I couldn't imagine any differences between us at all. "You are going home, and I am going to war." I was stunned, though I shouldn't have been. I had only been there for a month. And I wasn't going into battle. In fact, I didn't even know what a real war was. What was it like to graduate high school and receive a gun instead of a free pass to an Ivy League university? Back home I sat on our black leather couch, surrounded by plush gray carpeting, and I tried to focus on the conversation. It was a typical dinner party full of charismatic professionals who travel frequently. "So how was your trip?" a well-intentioned guest asked me. My mind flashed back to the cold, bare army base, and the sight of the pre-dawn sky glowing behind the mountains of Tzfat. I heard my own voice from a distance.I was describing the sights, the aromas, and the people of Israel. And then I felt a strange pang of homesickness rise up within me. It was strange because I was sitting in my own home, but my heart was clearly elsewhere. As I reminisce, my daughter suddenly brings me back to reality. The reality we need to focus on. She asks, "Does everyone believe in G-d now?" We all pause. "What do you mean?" I ask, even though I already understand what she means. "Well, after all the miracles this week... Efrat's whole family is okay even though a rocket landed right next to their building. So now everyone knows, right?" How far will we allow today's miracles to take us? I think about the Yom Kippur War. After some soldiers came back from the front, everyone gathered in one of the houses to greet them and hear about the latest news. It was a mixed crowd, with soldiers of all levels of Jewish observance. And they said: "You know how G-d promised the Maccabees that a small army would prevail over a mighty one? Well that's what happened! It was a miracle! They could have taken Tzfat. Instead they retreated. It was Biblical. A real miracle right before our eyes!" The crowd in that living room sat spellbound. So I wonder — how far will we allow today's miracles to take us? Will we watch the sun rise and then turn our back on the miraculous beginning of a new day? Will we watch hundreds of rockets fall without injuring anybody and say that it is just a coincidence? Or will we let this war change our lives? Will we see the children's faces underneath the soldiers' helmets? Will we remember that tomorrow we, too, might be running for shelter? Will we welcome each other into our homes and our hearts the way our children do? The miracles are all around us. Let's open our eyes and change our lives. Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
HOMEGROWN JIHAD: TERRORIST CAMPS AROUND THE U.S.
Posted by PRK, January 19, 2009. |
|
This was written by Jerome Gordon. Contact him
by email at jerome_gordon38@yahoo.com
This article appeared today as an Iconoclast column in New England Review
Please distribute to as many of your contacts as possible. Looks like we've being set up for another hit a la 9/11. |
|
The Christian Action Network (CAN) has produced an important new film about the 35 para-military training camps in 22 states in the U.S. and Canada. These camps are sponsored by the terrorist group Jamaat ul-Fuqra (JF) or "community of the impoverished" and its notorious Pakistani founder, Sheik Mubarak Ali Gilani. The film is entitled: "Homegrown Jihad: Terrorist Camps Around the U.S." This is an important documentary on a subject I've written about in the New English Review," Jamaat ul-Fuqra: The best positioned group to help al-Qaeda launch an attack in the US." I noted the following in the NER article on JF: The group here in the US has committed attacks and robberies, acquired contraband arms, engaging in counterfeiting activities, and proselytized effectively among Afro-American prison inmates. JF members participated in the 1993 terror bombing of the World Trade Center. Last summer an investigator with homeland security training contacted me after reading my JF piece about experiences at the JF/MoA compound in Dover, Tennessee. The Dover compound is problematic as it lies near the US Army's Fort Campbell, home of the 101st Airborne, "Screaming Eagles", Fort Donelson and a number of TVA power dams. The investigator noted in an email to me the threats to facilities in the region: 9 miles to Ft. Donelson It was apparent from even the Goggle Earth satellite pictures that JF/MoA was expanding the facility. Armed guards were posted at the entrance to the Dover JF compound and the investigator was warned away from entering. I was sent a preliminary version of this documentary by CAN to review. The premiere of the full length one hour and five minute version of "Homegrown Jihad" is scheduled for mid February. The documentary chronicles JF and Sheik Mubarek Ali Gilani's MoA terrorist training camps in the US. It exposes their vast criminal activities involving murder, assassinations, weapons smuggling, counterfeiting, drug trafficking and terrorist exploits over nearly three decades. Especially informative was a segment in the film based on interviews with Sue Fenger, former chief investigator for the State of Colorado. She discussed JF terrorist exploits, firebombing of Hindu religious centers, secreting of bomb making materials and weapons in storage facilities near several US Air Force, Army and National Guard facilities in Colorado. Fenger, who doesn't appear on camera for security reasons, describes the decision of former Colorado Governor Romer to set up a state counter terrorism team, and the studied indifference of the FBI. This is an eerie prelude to what happened to the FBI in the run up to 9/11. JF was acknowledged to be a foreign designated terrorist organization and Gilani its mastermind. The obvious question is, why didn't the State Department renew JF's terrorist designation in 2002 just after the tragic kidnapping and 'slaughter' of valiant Wall Street Journal investigator Daniel Pearl? Pearl was on his way to interview Gilani in Pakistan when he was abducted. The film notes that Gilani alleges that Pearl was setting him up for an assassination hit! The CAN film is dedicated to the memory of Pearl. The CAN team used light aircraft to overfly several of the JF/MoA compound locations in the US coupled with effective ground reconnaissance of several JF/MoA compounds. The CAN film producers use the the Gilani video ("Soldiers of Allah") to demonstrate terrorist training, from his camps in Pakistan. He dedicates the video to his MoA followers here in America. Gilani is caught on video exhorting his recruits to be "like lions and tigers" and attack the Kafirs-the infidels. He warns them not to make copies of the video to prevent it from falling into the wrong hands. The CAN team uses the video to confront JF/MoA para-military camp leaders in Jessup and Commerce Georgia, York South Carolina, Red House, Virginia and Islamberg near Hancock, New York. The film depicts varying reactions to the CAN offer to show the Gilani video. They range from denial to outright violence by the JF/MoA compound leaders. In Red house, Virginia the film depicts a protest by local citizens requesting the county council remove a street sign near the JF/MoA compound, "Sheik Marburak Gilani Lane" to no avail. The county council in Virginia was alleged by the film's producers to be fearful of Muslim reprisals. There is a tussle at one compound including an attempt by a JF/MoA compound "Mayor" to seize the CAN team camera. Then there is the 80 MPH chase of the CAN film crew by an outraged JF/MoA compound leader in South Carolina who wants them 'off their lands'. County law officials counsel the inflamed JF/MoA leader that the CAN film team were not on the compound property and were within their Constitutional rights to conduct filming. There are interviews with neighbors of several JF/MoA compounds who discuss reports of rifle firing and explosions, as well as intimidation of the local populace. Through a tip, the CAN film team discover a previously undocumented JF/MoA compound in Wayne County, Pennsylvania. Among some of the talking heads expressing concern about these JF/MoA paramilitary compounds in the US are Rep. Sue Myrick (R-NC), Frank Gaffney of Center for Security Policy, Dr. Peter Leitner of the Higgins Counter-terrorism Institute and the aforementioned Susan Fenger. The CAN producers note that several JF/MoA members were involved in the 1993 Twin Towers bombing and were planning for several simultaneous mid-air bombings of US commercial aircraft. There is a report about one JF/MoA member tried for a triple murder in the State of Washington. The film cites a 2006 Joint Counter Terrorism Task Force report about JF, its terrorist actions and the dangers posed by the more than 35 JF/MoA paramilitary training camps in 22 States and Canada. Why did the FBI refuse to get involved? We believe it is infiltration by Muslim Brotherhood front groups in the US at both the regional and national levels, ignorance about Islamic Sharia Law war doctrine and fear of being sued for discrimination. The CAN team has produced a heart pounding, riveting and engrossing production. We understand from the CAN film producers they have made an abbreviated version for possible viewing by national cable TV news outlets like FoxNews. Given what we saw in this preliminary version, we hope that the CAN documentary on "Homegrown Jihad" is viewed by Members of Congress concerned about homeland security and given a wide public viewing. Closing down the JF/MoA compounds and taking away the MoA IRS tax exemption should be priorities for counter terrorism actions by federal agencies. That is, if they are not intimidated by threats from Muslim Brotherhood front groups and free speech advocacy groups. Regards
|
|
ISRAEL'S MOST POWERFUL LONG RANGE WEAPONS; THE WRITTEN AND SPOKEN WORD
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, January 19, 2009. |
|
Many folks worldwide do not comprehend basic truths concerning the ongoing Israeli Arab conflict. A peace agreement would have been consummated long ago if extremist groups were not obsessed with the notion that Jewish Israel must not exist. Furthermore, if the late Yasser Arafat truly wanted peace, he would have put the kabash on those elements as he had the power to do so. Jewish Israeli citizens would have done and still would do almost anything for a safe and secure environment where their culture would be guaranteed. Yet, forces beyond their control prohibit such an existence; insure that conflict will continue with no end in sight. Indeed, plumes of smoke rise above the ever deteriorating dysfunctional terrorist infected Gaza Strip for all the world to witness with little comprehension of the deeper why of it all, directly yet justifiably caused by Israeli warplanes reacting to the incessant insane bombing of their homeland by out of control Arab extremists; still the Jew/Israel despising Hamas movement remains in charge, has no intention of changing its colors, will not revoke its charter i.e. its raison d'etre that screams death to Jews and Israel. Surely, Israel must flex her muscle now and then, in response to Arab extremism, lest she be viewed as weak by a multitude of hostile neighbors. Weakness and strength indeed define the most prominent motivating forces of a most primitive region of our planet, where predators, always sniffing for blood or wobbly knees, must be kept at bay by an unwelcomed Israel. Yet, her necessary show of strength only further infuriates many folks within a Muslim populace, brainwashed to believe the Jew is an eternal enemy that must be eradicated or at least exiled from their post-Ottoman domain. This catch 22 scenario of damned by much of the world, especially the Arab world, if you do fight; damned by ignoring the natural law of self-preservation if you don't fight, weighs profoundly within the hearts and souls of ill-fated Israelis, caring Diaspora Jews, and all their supporters. Can anything be done to ameliorate this conundrum? Newly elected U.S. President Barack Obama, leader of Israel's most essential ally, soon to shoulder the weight of so many globally connected problems, will initially not consider the Israeli/Arab conflict a most pressing matter. Still, Israeli leaders will need to inspire him, in conjunction with his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to at least craft policies in tune with the ever besieged Jewish State's most pressing needs. If, indeed, the Obama Administration successfully helps reverse the momentum of a perilously failing world economy, advances perceived positive changes in Iraq and Afghanistan, improves a now planet-wide tainted American image, thus enhances its own global credibility, 'Barack the Orator' could very well successfully make the case for Israel, changing the hearts and minds of at least some folks, shifting the blame for conflict from the Jewish homeland to her terrorist enemies. Israel, for her part, will need to consistently demonstrate to Obama and company, by word and action, that she will defeat hostile Middle East elements that someday could attack American interests. Quid pro quo remains as viable as ever in today's world where little is done to help thy neighbor or presumed ally without at least some reciprocation. U.S. President Obama is not an ideologue, does what works, will help other lands if it is in his nation's, thus his own legacy-minded interest. Widespread favorable changes in mind-sets that dominate general populations, in the long term, dwarf gains made through combat, although at times combat is necessary and in fact, if successful, can lead to mind-set changes among militant movers and shakers, deterring the likelihood of short term future combat. There are related natural phenomenon within many species of the higher animal kingdom where combat as well as posturing is effective in altering future behavior, the latter of course being preferable as it avoids bloodshed while attaining the same if not better results. Thus, Israel's successes on the battlefield, most recently against Hamas, are necessary for all of the reasons stated, but insufficient, as brainwashed Arab populations seethe, focus on televised images of death and destruction in Gaza, demonstrate little if any concern for the terrorized Jewish citizens in Sderot, refuse to recognize why Israel deployed her forces, and in no small way feel humiliated by perceived impotence against a militarily superior Israel. Furthermore, many if not most Middle Eastern Muslims, swayed by decades of exposure to anti-Semitic writings, visual images, and speeches, only reinforce their perceptions by current events, choose to ignore the obvious fact that Hamas militants, for propaganda purposes, put their own people in harm's way, in effect using them as human shields by fighting in civilian neighborhoods, hiding in civilian apartment buildings and homes, storing their weapons and ammunition in schools and mosques, and perhaps launching missiles at their own women and children as well as United Nations outposts, rightly presuming that humanitarian organizations and much of the media will not bother to investigate thus blame Israel. No doubt, when it comes to Israel, guilty until proven innocent is the preferred response! Since in the mind's-eye of many Middle Eastern Muslims, not a small number interspersed throughout Europe and indeed influential in their new neighborhoods, the United States and Israel are one in the same, a popular respected U.S. President Barack Obama, by demonstrating concern for ordinary Arabs while concurrently reversing the negative spin heretofore excoriating Jews and Israel, by deprogramming the effects of many decades of virulent rhetoric, by castigating the religious psychopaths and Machiavellian rulers that truly exploit the lives of the Muslim masses, can begin to break down the self-defeating hate-filled environment casting a dark cloud over a major portion of our troubled world. Furthermore, President Obama should point out that religious fundamentalist groups like Hamas indoctrinate young Arab children to hate and be willing to kill the infidel i.e. anyone not adhering to Hamas principles, especially the Jewish infidel; provide such children with the means to do so by teaching them how to use real machine guns, then arming them; instruct them on the techniques of suicide bombing and the glory that such an act would bestow upon them and their families; ban the 'egregious' act of playing musical instruments not mentioned in the Koran or even listening or dancing to unsanctioned music, crimes that could be punishable by death Taliban style (yet, I wonder if any instruments were banned when dancing and frolicking were all the rage throughout the fundamentalist Arab streets, as men, women and children praised 'role model' Arab hijackers that took down the U.S. World Trade Towers and blasted a hole in the U.S. Pentagon snuffing out thousands of lives); in effect control all aspects of an Arab's life, severely punishing or perhaps killing those who disobey. Indeed, Obama can further assert that such terrorist organizations believe Muslims can kill other Muslims, can for one 'honorably' kill a Muslim female of any age, who has been raped, for soiling the reputation of her family; and on and on thus in total prevent Muslims, secularly uneducated bound to this savagely insane philosophy, from ever competing effectively within a progressive century twenty one. Jews should never underestimate the most powerful long range weapons at their disposal; the written and spoken word. When the messenger is skillful, popular, and commands the planet's most prominent bully pulpit, chances of success multiply exponentially. This cannot be emphasized enough. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
THE ONLY THING HAMAS LIKES BETTER THAN DEAD ISRAELIS IS DEAD PALESTINIANS
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 19, 2009. |
|
This was written by Mortimer Zuckerman and it appeared today
in Jewish World Review
JWR contributor Mortimer Zuckerman is editor-in-chief and publisher of U.S. News and World Report. |
|
A detailed reminder to the next leader of the free world What the world cannot remember the Israelis cannot forget. The Israelis know the Jewish nation has been one defeat away from extinction for 70 years. They know that every partition plan in the region, from the dawn of Zionism to the present day, has failed because of the Arab failure to accept the State of Israel. They know that the Palestinian leadership is virtually hopeless, wherein the people who are moderate are not effective and the people who are effective are not moderate. Today the impossible Yasser Arafat has been replaced by the impotent Mahmoud Abbas. It was Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, who presided over the division of the Palestinians into Fatah and Hamas. Hamas doesn't want peace, and Fatah can't deliver it. Fatah is so weak that it cannot enforce the rule of law against terrorism or make compromises for fear of the radical Islamists. Indeed, without the support of the Israeli Defense Forces, even now it is under threat of being displaced by Hamas. Mahmoud Al-Zahar, a major Hamas leader, underlined Fatah's weakness when he said, "Fatah can't stop us from seizing control of those [West Bank] territories. It is only a matter of time." Israel is so small it has no margin for error. A Hamas takeover of the West Bank would put Ben-Gurion Airport and major cities like Tel Aviv in the firing line, which would render Israel virtually uninhabitable. This is not guesswork. When Israel left the West Bank, it became a base for suicide bombers, ultimately forcing the Israelis to go back at great cost. They've since built a security fence, but a fence will not protect people from rockets. The rockets and mortars launched against Israel from Gaza have gained greater lethality, accuracy, and range, going from 20 kilometers before the truce to 40 after. And without the current operation, it is estimated that within two to three months new rockets supplied to Hamas by Iran and assembled in Gaza would have been able to hit Tel Aviv. One of them just reached the outskirts. Acceptable response. Over 20 percent of the Israelis were vulnerable even before Tel Aviv came within range. No government could ignore these threats to its people. Yet Israel's belated response has been challenged as "disproportionate". This is ridiculous. In the first place, it was Hamas's intention that at least thousands of Israelis would die from its 7,000 rockets. Would it fit the doctrine of proportionality if Israel were to respond with 7,000 missiles against Gaza civilians? Or must it wait until the number of dead is piled high enough to justify a "proportioned" response. And what of the emotional trauma inflicted on the living? Men, women, and children have 15 seconds to reach a bunker, which they must do several times a day. They must live with the constant fear of death and maiming. Would America sit back if, over three years, 7,000 rockets and missiles were launched at our citizens from Mexico or Canada? We would attack these missile sites and wipe them out. End of story. The "disproportionate" criticism is a cop-out. Hamas sought this battle. It was Hamas that broke the six-month truce organized by Egypt. Both Fatah and Egypt urged its continuance; the current violence would have been avoided, as Abbas stated, had Hamas not fired its missiles. Tony Blair, now the special envoy of the Mideast quartet, concedes he understands the consequences now more than when he was prime minister of Britain: "I would hesitate to cede the West Bank to the Palestinians after the nightmare Israel has faced since the Gaza withdrawal." He recognizes that Hamas has sabotaged years of negotiation. "Land for peace," he warns, "is in itself not sufficient. Not less important is the character of the Palestinian state." Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya has made it clear what kind of state his Palestine would be. Hamas seeks nothing less than an Islamic state as its covenant describes: "To raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine." To that end, Hamas has turned Gaza into a home for every brand of radical Islamist engaged in a holy war that sanctifies bloodshed, glorifies murder, and educates children to die as shahids — martyrs. There was to be no Israel alongside a Palestinian state. Over and over again Haniya has said that Hamas will never recognize Israel nor honor any of the existing agreements with the infidels. Its founder, Abdul Aziz Rantizi, is explicit: "We will not leave one Jew in Palestine." To achieve the extermination of Israel, Hamas is ready to sacrifice its followers: "We are not," says Haniya, "seekers of office but seekers of martyrdom." The Palestinian people are like the prisoners in a hijacked plane: hostage to the death cult of radical Islamists. Hamas calculates that no state can tolerate its citizens being vulnerable day after day to the russian roulette of rocket fire that hits children, kindergartens, playgrounds, and hospitals. The attacks are designed to provoke Israel while its perpetrators hide behind their own civilians and keep women and children in their forces. They keep TV cameras at the ready to transmit every image of dead Palestinians, especially children. Except for dead Israelis, there is nothing Hamas leaders like better than dead Palestinians, given the global media's appetite for pictures — all to damage the image of Israel. Who else but Hamas leaders would put their headquarters in a hospital or move about in the street only when t hey are surrounded by children or carry them in their arms because they reckon this will protect them from the more scrupulous Israelis? They are abetted in this cynical game by the United Nations World Relief Association headquartered in Gaza, headed by and staffed by Palestinians. U.N. schools in Gaza have long ago stopped being just schools where children are taught. They are places of refuge for Hamas terrorists — and points of provocation. There is video footage of terrorists firing mortar rounds from the U.N. school and then running so that others might pay the price for their deadly work. Haniya and other Hamas leaders openly boast about the effectiveness of their human shield tactics, yet it is Israel that gets blamed when some of them die. Israeli aid. The hypocrisy of it all is manifest on the issue of humanitarian aid. Who else but Israel would suspend the war effort for three hours every couple of days to aid in the provision of humanitarian assistance? Could you imagine England doing something like that when it was being bombarded by Hitler's V-2 rockets during WWII? Israel delivers to Gaza about 2,500 tons a day of food and fuel and other vital supplies. Hamas repeatedly attacks this mercy operation. Last May I visited the border and saw firsthand the result of these attacks on Israelis whose sole purpose for being there was to place bales of humanitarian aid on big flat-bed trucks, drive them through the crossings, deposit them 150 yards on the other side, and return. A week earlier, suicide terrorists exploded bomb-laden cars adjacent to one of the crossings. The unthinking street crowds in European capitals with their Hamas flags don't give Israel credit for these humanitarian efforts nor its strenuous efforts to avoid civilian casualties: Leaflets are dropped and warnings phoned, even though this will alert the terrorists to escape. The protesters give Hamas a free pass for murder. How rare it is for the truth to penetrate the moral fog! The Czech foreign minister, Karel-Schwarzenberg, now the president of the European Union, asks a good question. Given that Hamas "deliberately puts its military targets in civilian centers," he asks, "why am I one of the few that have expressed understanding for Israel? I enjoy the luxury of being able to tell the truth." President Bush has the clearest perception of what is at stake. At Israel's 60th anniversary he said: "Israel's population may be just over 7 million. But when you confront terror and evil, you are 307 million strong because the United States of America stands with you." Alas, this pledge was shamefully compromised by one member of that audience, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. When it came to a vote at the U.N., the United States abstained. But for some reason best known to her, she drafted and urged the U.N. into supporting a resolution that called for a cease-fire without the protections of prior agreements, or the cessation of rocket attacks, or the prevention of Hamas rearming itself. In short, she was behind a resolution guaranteeing a continuance of the terrorism. Any cease-fire must include cast-iron guarantees. They must decisively end the smuggling of arms, largely through the tunnels from Egypt. They must ensure that the firing of rockets will stop — not just for now but for good. That means the guarantees must leave open not the remotest chance that Hamas can be rearmed. Otherwise, as the National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley put it, the cease-fire would be "a prescription for the resumption of hostilities at some point in the future." Hamas, in short, must be made to fail and be seen to fail. Israel is not trying to take over Gaza; it is trying to protect itself from Gaza. It is trying to preserve the possibility of a Mideast peace process. If the international community will not permit Israel to respond to ceaseless terrorism launched from land from which Israel has withdrawn, it ends any hopes for a two-state solution. What incentive would Israel have to withdraw from the West Bank were it to become a launching pad for terrorism? Hamas will fight tooth and nail to retain this terrorist option. That is why it must be defanged. The Middle East conflict must also be framed on a bigger canvas. It is not just about creating a Palestinian state. It is also about preventing the region's takeover by radical Islam, especially Iran, which has co-opted Hamas and Hezbollah. If Hamas is successful in manipulating world opinion to impose a premature cease-fire, it will proclaim victory and continue its murderous ways. Iran and the radical Islamists are out to destroy Western interests in the Middle East — and to replace Arab regimes with radical Islamic states, Iranian-style. On a visit to Sderot, President-elect Barack Obama said, "If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I am going to do everything in my power to stop that, and I would expect Israelis to do the same." As president, he should continue speaking truth to terror.
See also
Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: BALAGAN
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 19, 2009. |
|
A balagan in Hebrew is a state of confusion. And, indeed, with the end of the war in Gaza, this is what we are witnessing: a good number of strange and conflicting statements and illogical positions. It is possible for me to deal in detail with each, and here I will attempt to provide an overview. ~~~~~~~~~~ A good place to start is with Ehud Olmert. My friends, I do not intend to eat my hat because of how he is now behaving. I was careful, you see: I said I would take one day at a time. When he was conducting himself (for whatever reasons) with courage and strength, and reflected his former Zionist positions, I gave him credit for it. But now? He's back to the Ehud Olmert we've know these past few years — playing fast and loose with facts and apparently making decisions for political reasons. Already Hamas is speaking about how they will come back to strength. At a news conference today in Gaza, Hamas's military spokesman Abu Ubaida, bragged, "Manufacturing the holy weapons is our mission, and we know how to acquire weapons." What were the comments of Olmert spokesman Mark Regev in response to this? It is to be expected that Hamas would say this, he intoned. This is certainly true. Hamas is known for braggadocio. However, he explained, the IDF has "substantially destroyed the Hamas military machine" and Hamas will "think twice and three times" before resuming rocket fire. Certainly there is truth here, but how much remains to be seen. And...said Regev, the "international arms embargo" put into place by European leaders would prevent Hamas from rearming. "Iranian weapons have to reach the Gaza Strip. We have reason to believe that this is going to work." Olmert is not stupid. He simply cannot believe this. But he wants us to believe it. ~~~~~~~~~~ I have already provided ample evidence — including the fact that ships go directly from Iran to Egypt — that the plans to block weapons from getting to Egypt aren't going to work. Here I want to offer thoughts from Moti Kedar, of the Arabic Department of Bar Ilan, regarding the fact that it is vastly unlikely that smuggling of the weapons that do reach Egypt will be blocked: The Bedouins (about whom I recently wrote). They make their living in the Sinai by smuggling. As they actually kill and kidnap police, they have yet to be controlled. Bribes. Low paid Egyptian workers are eager to supplement their income — it's a way of life for them. "What do you think would be the response of an Egyptian police officer at a Sinai roadblock who earns several dozen dollars a month when a truck packed with "pipes" seeks to go through, and the driver offers him $100?" The administration. "Mubarak's decisions on almost any front are completely watered down as they pass through Egypt's administration. The number of different ranks the decision must go through is immense, and every level removes the parts it doesn't like." www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3657730,00.html ~~~~~~~~~~ Herb Keinon, in today's Post, examines all that is not clear either to the Israeli press or to the public now with regard to our government positions. The government — either for sound reasons, or possibly, I would suggest, because of fuzzy plans — is playing its cards close to its collective chest. At the Cabinet meeting yesterday, head of Military Intelligence, Maj.-Gen. Amos Yadlin, indicated that Hamas would try to carry out terror attacks or rocket attacks to diminish our achievement (something Mark Regev apparently wasn't aware of when he made his statement, above). But no information was provided for public consumption regarding what we intend to do in such instances. Writes Keinon, "no clear answers were given as to what Israel would do if it saw Hamas rebuilding factories to manufacture rockets, or continuing to dig arms smuggling tunnels, or whether Israel would hit Hamas leaders when they emerge from their hiding places." Keinon reports that when one senior Israeli source was asked who would enforce an operation against smuggling, he said: "Those who need to enforce it, will enforce it." This is not a good response. It echoes Aaron Lerner's concern about Amos Gilad's foolish response that the public doesn't need to know if smuggling is going on. Does not inspire confidence. ~~~~~~~~~~ The one situation in which being reticent may be appropriate is with regard to bringing home Shalit. Olmert is making noises about the fact that this is being advanced. I would like to believe him. ~~~~~~~~~~ The speed with which we are pulling out of Gaza is unsettling. Originally we were told that our troops would not leave until it was certain that there would be quiet, and that it would hold. But now there is another, more urgent, reason for adjusting the timetable: Olmert wants all troops out before Obama's inauguration tomorrow. As a gesture to the new president. Wow! What a good reason. This too represents the old — the appeasing — Olmert. This was announced at a meeting here in Jerusalem yesterday of several European leaders who had come to "assist" with the cease-fire. Present were French President Nicolas Sarkozy, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown, Spanish Premier Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and Czech PM, Mirek Topolánek. One news report showed Olmert sitting with Sarkozy, who said, "Israel doesn't belong in Gaza." To which Olmert replied the equivalent of words such as, "Don't worry, we're going, we're going." Not exactly what I would have said. ~~~~~~~~~~ This, however, is to Olmert's credit: Egyptian foreign ministry spokesman Hossam Zaki told the Post that the ministry was unhappy about Israel's decision to declare a unilateral cease-fire. "We expected the Israeli side to behave in a different way. We expected Israel to respond positively to [Egypt's] initiative." When Israel opted for a cease-fire, "it didn't do so in consultation with Egypt, meaning that it did not choose to abide by the terms that we were able to negotiate with the Palestinians." Bravo on this! That, of course, was the whole point of going unilaterally: not abiding by Hamas's terms. "They do not recognize that there is another party in this conflict... They call it the enemy, and that's it. They don't deal with it. {Israel is] "basically saying, it is our decision. We don't want anyone to interfere... This is not what we expected." One major sticking point in negotiations was the matter of opening of crossings, which Hamas was demanding. I think perhaps I finally have the answer I was looking for with regard to this: Israel has made no commitment on this score. ~~~~~~~~~~ Egypt is very eager to be a major player in what's happening here now, and the Egyptians do occasionally find their noses out of joint. To advance his leadership role, Mubarak has now invited leaders of Israel and Hamas to meet separately with Egyptian officials in Cairo, on Thursday, to discuss a long term cease-fire and opening of crossings. I have no words regarding any acceptances yet. Mubarak was given a boost yesterday with a summit to discuss a "durable truce" in Gaza, which he co-chaired with Sarkozy in Sharm El-Sheikh. It was attended by UN Secretary-General Ban and numerous European leaders. This is contradistinction to the recent Arab meeting in Qatar, which the Egyptians boycotted and the Iranians along with Mashaal of Hamas attended. ~~~~~~~~~~ What's clear, on the face of it, is that there are enormous fissures and tensions within the Arab/Muslim world. The foreign minister of Saudi Arabia, Saud al-Feisal, and Arab League Secretary-General Amr Musa (who is Egyptian) held a joint press conference in Kuwait — where an Arab economic summit was held today — at which they warned that the Arab world faces anarchy and an inner split because of the intra-Palestinian struggle, and "Israeli aggression and occupation." It is to be expected that Israel would be blamed, when, in fact, Israel's role is tertiary at most. There are considerable rivalries, control issues, tensions between Shiite and Sunni groups, between radical jihadist and (relatively) more moderate groups. What I think happened with the war in Gaza is that it caused a spotlight to be shined on various Arab fissures, so that the pretense of Arab unity is more difficult to maintain. This is something that I will want to discuss in more detail over time. ~~~~~~~~~~ Right now what we're looking at is the entire issue of whether Hamas or the PA will control Gaza. Egypt, as we've seen, is promoting the PA. A fascinating situation, for in previous unity-government negotiations, Egypt — which is perhaps a bit schizoid on the matter, having diverse motivations — pushed the Hamas position. Ban is also promoting the PA, of course. In Kuwait he urged the Arab League to back Abbas's attempts to reunite Judea and Samaria with Gaza. "We cannot rebuild Gaza without Palestinian unity," he declared. And, naturally, Mahmoud Abbas himself is now reaching out his hand to Hamas, with an olive branch in it, as he invites unity talks. He sees this, I am certain, as his last chance. My own conclusion, based on the evidence I've seen, and the opinions of analysts I respect, is that this will not be possible. The antipathy of Hamas for Fatah, because of their conclusion that Fatah assisted us with intelligence during the war, is enormous. And yet, Egypt imagines that after the PA takes control of crossings inside Gaza, it will be able to negotiate a new unity government. Turkey has also weighed in, and wants to negotiate with Hamas and the PA. We'll see. ~~~~~~~~~~ While I certainly want to see Hamas enormously weakened, and unable to smuggle weapons, I am solidly opposed to turning over Gaza to the PA. We would then be subject to a whole new spate of enormous international pressures regarding "peace" negotiations and a Palestinian state. The rationale would be that it was more possible, with one address for all Palestinians. I will never stop saying it: NO Palestinian state. ~~~~~~~~~~ Actually, it's starting already. The EU has announced plans to host meetings to facilitate, first, humanitarian assistance into Gaza, and, then, a "permanent peace arrangement." What is projected is a meeting with Foreign Minister Livni on Wednesday, followed by meetings with ministers from Egypt, Jordan, Turkey and the PA. Reports are that Livni might not attend. Has anyone in the EU noticed that we're having elections in three weeks? ~~~~~~~~~~ I am amused by concern expressed by PA Prime Minister Salam Fayyad that international efforts to support reconstruction in Gaza may "deepen the political rift" if they ignore the PA in the process. What he was referring to was a proposal by EU and UN diplomats to set up an international committee that would fund and organize the Gaza reconstruction. "I have a political difficulty with this mechanism. It assumes separation between Gaza and the West Bank will continue, and, in not addressing the issue of separation, it may indeed lead to reinforcing it." The point he seems to miss is that there IS separation, and the reconstruction work must begin. In any event, the idea that the severely inept and exceedingly corrupt PA should manage funds and oversee Gaza recovery strikes me as nonsensical. What the EU and the UN, and in a different context, the World Bank, are trying to do is find mechanisms for doing humanitarian work and rebuilding in Gaza that do not allow money to fall into Hamas hands. ~~~~~~~~~~ Laugh of the day (which we all need): At the Kuwait conference today, Syrian president Assad, a major promoter of terrorism, proposed that Israel be called "the terrorist entity." ~~~~~~~~~~ I am mindful of the fact that tomorrow is inauguration day in the US, and in coming days and weeks will have much to say about the new administration. Today I simply recommend an article on FrontPage that begins: "Barack Obama isn't wasting any time making an impression: he has selected the leader of a group that has been named an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case to present a prayer during his inauguration festivities. Ingrid Mattson, president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), will offer a prayer at the National Cathedral Tuesday."
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
NEW YORK TIMES DESPERATELY SEEKING FINANCING
Posted by Paul Lademain, January 19, 2009. |
|
YO! Rottweiler! Remember when I shared my thoughts about the NYT, and that I believed the (Jewish) owners were desperate for funds? So desperate they were borrowing funds from oily arab front companies and banks whose controlling shareholders were Saudis (Citigroup) and taking millions from SAAR and CAIR for full page ads and then publishing pro-Saudi propaganda to keep their "advertisers" happy? Which to my mind explained why the NYT suddenly began to diss Israel and Jews and other US allies who "trouble" the Saudis and the Muslim Brotherhood? Well, here's the latest: the NYT is desperately seeking funds to stay afloat. They are now on their knees before Carlos Slim, a Mexican billionaire of Lebanese extraction (his father emigrated to MX from Lebanon) who is married to a woman whom I suspect is hiding her "Palestinian" extraction. Slim owns Telefonos MX, the largest cell phone corporation in Latin America and MX subsidiaries of major US corporations. Slim's political leanings re: the Saudis and the middle east are still unclear. Wall Street Journal
Contact Paul Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
EXPLOSIVE DEVICE FOUND AT FLORENCE CHABAD
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 19, 2009. |
|
This news item comes from Jewish Telegraph Agency
|
|
FLORENCE (JTA) — A rudimentary explosive device was found at the entrance of the Chabad House in Florence. The device, described as being constructed from a small camping gas canister, was reportedly discovered during the day Saturday but not reported to police until Saturday night after Shabbat. The Chabad House is located half a block from the city's main synagogue. Media reports said a paper fuse apparently had been lit, but had burned out, and no damage occurred. Florence Chief Rabbi Joseph Levy said the episode was "a very serious gesture that shows how one can pass from irresponsible words to actions such as this." Tensions are high in Italy over Israel's operation in Gaza. Last week, red paint was thrown at the façade of the synagogue in Pisa. On Saturday, thousands of people, many of them Muslim, staged a pro-Palestinian march in Rome. Some of the placards showed swastikas superimposed on the Star of David. About 300 people staged a counterdemonstration in Rome's historic Jewish ghetto neighborhood. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
KAPOPHILIA
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 19, 2009. |
I realize that some might object that the term is insulting to the
concentration camp kapos, who collaborated under duress and without
choice. Neverthless, it is the best term I could come up with. Please
put this new term to good use! Consider this expose of the love of the
Guardian for Jewish anti-Semites, by Emanuele Ottolenghi: The Guardian just loves self-hating Jews "Some of us can't do enough to support our enemies"
Last Saturday, the Guardian published a letter that compared Israel to the Nazis; described the Palestinian Authority as "Palestinian Quislings"; called on Britain to recall its ambassador to Tel Aviv; and supported a boycott of Israeli goods. Before informing the readers that the images from Gaza "reminded" them "of the siege of the Warsaw Ghetto", the 78 signatories felt compelled to say: "We the undersigned are all of Jewish origin", somehow establishing a connection between what they said (Israel = Nazi) and who they were (Jews). This is not the first time the Guardian has given voice to Jews proud to be ashamed to be Jewish. In 2002, it published a letter in which 45 Jewish intellectuals denounced the Jewish state. The latest letter raises, as do its predecessors, three questions: the substance of the accusations levelled against Israel; whether being Jewish makes such opinions more compelling or more legitimate; and what purpose these individuals serve, by linking their Jewish credentials to the radical ideas they endorse. On the substance, the signatories compare Israel's actions in Gaza to the Nazis. This is not new, of course, but its repetition does not make it truer. In Auschwitz, there were around 30,000 daily deaths — all unarmed, starved prisoners. In Gaza, since the start of Israel's offensive, there have been fewer than 50 deaths a day, up to 70 percent of them Hamas fighters. Nazis took joy at massacring civilians. Israelis give warning via phone to civilians. Nazis starved their victims for months before destroying the Ghetto. Israel sends humanitarian aid in the form of food and medicines every day. Intelligent people should be able to see the difference and refrain from such comparisons. Are our friends of Jewish origins stupid or malicious? Judge for yourself. But the effect is to demonise Israel by comparing it with Nazism, the quintessential evil of modern European history. And, in the process, it ends up trivializing the Holocaust as well, much like Holocaust denial. If only 50 people a day died in the Warsaw Ghetto while the Nazis were resupplying their hapless Jewish victims with food and medicine, one cannot fault the Nazis too much. It also follows, logically, that Jews trying to turn that history into a paradigm of evil are exaggerating — for political goals perhaps? You see where this can go. Anyone with a sense of history should know better than to compare Gaza to the Warsaw Ghetto. Even in Zimbabwe things are worse than Gaza. Does that "remind" them of the Warsaw Ghetto? Or do people "of Jewish origin" evoke such comparisons only when Israel is involved? Second, is being Jewish relevant? Identity is no substitute for knowledge and expertise; religious identity does not confer authority to speak on anything. So why the invocation of "Jewish origin"? Because the Jews are the gatekeepers and once they break a taboo, others can cross that line. If you are Jewish, what you say cannot be labelled as antisemitic. If you are going to trivialize the Holocaust and demonise Israel, it therefore helps being Jewish — ask Norman Finkelstein, author of The Holocaust Industry. Had he been an Episcopalian, no one would ever have heard of him. Because he is Jewish and the son of Holocaust survivors, his lurid thesis made him a "courageous whistleblower". The same with the Guardian's Jewish letter writers. It follows that these proclamations of "Jewish origin" serve an agenda: they offer an alibi to antisemites. Shielded behind such proclamations, our enemies can call for our destruction, protected by a Jewish certificate of good behaviour that shows that what they are saying is no worse than what certain people "of Jewish origin" are thinking. 2. Treason even at Bar-Ilan University: JTA British academics: "Israel must lose" January 18, 2009 LONDON (JTA) — A group of Britain-based academics are claiming that "Israel must lose" the war with Hamas in Gaza. In a letter to the Guardian newspaper the group of more than 300 academics and writers stated that the "massacres in Gaza [are] the latest phase of a war Israel has waged against the people of Palestine for more than 60 years." The letter also states that "The goal of this war has never changed: to use overwhelming military power to eradicate the Palestinians as a political force, one capable of resisting Israel's ongoing appropriation of their land and resources." 0A The intellectuals, among them Palestinians as well as Israel-born academics Professors Haim Beresheet and Ilan Pappe, wrote: "Israel must lose," and "We must do what we can to stop Israel from winning its war. Israel must accept that its security depends on justice and peaceful coexistence with its neighbors, and not upon the criminal use of force." While it was already clear when the letter was written that cease-fire was imminent, they added: "It is not enough to call for another cease-fire, or more humanitarian assistance. It is not enough to urge the renewal of dialogue and to acknowledge the concerns and suffering of both sides. If we believe in the principle of democratic self-determination, if we affirm the right to resist military aggression and colonial occupation, then we are obliged to take sides... against Israel, and with the people of Gaza and the West Bank." Among the signatories of the letter is long-time supporter of an
academic boycott of Israelis, Prof. Mona Baker of the University of
Manchester, who in 2002 fired from the editorial board of her academic
journal two Israelis, because of their affiliation with Israeli
universities. One of them, Dr. Miriam Schlesinger of Bar Ilan
University, is a leading member of the Israeli branch of the human
rights organization Amnesty International.
Want to complain? President: Prof. Moshe Kaveh
List of Officers:
3. This is going around the web: WEST BANK STORY....TO THE TUNE OF OFFICER KRUPKE It was composed by Ruth S. King, from Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI). 4. An effective anti-terrorist policy at last! From PMW Bulletin: Hamas gangs kill Fatah members in Gaza Hamas has murdered "dozens of Fatah members" in the Gaza Strip for merely violating the Hamas-imposed house arrest. According to the Palestinian daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida the atrocities, which also included shooting people in the legs, has created a backlash in the West Bank and caused "anger, which influenced the level of popular activities carried out in solidarity with the Gaza residents in the towns Ramallah and El-Bira." In addition, the popular Palestinian singer, Jamal Najar, condemned Hamas as "gangs of anarchic security forces," describing how Hamas murdered his cousin right in front of his children for simply stepping outside. [PA TV (Fatah)] The following are excerpts from the article in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida and the transcript of the words of Jamal Najar: Headline: "Reports of persecutions and liquidation of Fatah members by Hamas members evoke anxiety and condemnation in the West Bank." Reports mentioning liquidations of Fatah members in the Gaza Strip by members of Hamas evoked popular condemnation which was added yesterday to the erupting anger, which influenced the level of popular activities carried out in solidarity with the Gaza residents in the towns Ramallah and El-Bira. The reports from Gaza pointed out the death of dozens of Fatah members caused by Hamas members. A prominent leader stated that isolated random incidents of murder have occurred, but ruled out that this is a case of organized persecution. Wafa A-Najar, Gaza resident who lives in the town El-Bira, said that her father was killed the day before yesterday and nine of her family members were injured by shooting by Hamas, among them were three small children and two young people in critical condition... According to the family's story, a squad belonging to Hamas came to her family's house in [the] Sheikh Radwan [neighborhood] in Gaza and shot at the legs of young Badran A-Najar, claiming that he was violating the house arrest which was imposed on him, at the time when he was sitting with his cousins in front of the house... A prominent leader in the Fatah movement in the Gaza Strip, Ibrahim Abu A-Naja, ruled out that this is a case of persecution by some organization, which aims at Fatah, however he pointed out that "a number of isolated incidents [of murder]" had occurred, as has been reported by the Israeli media... Abu A-Naja called for Hamas to halt any step which provides Israel the opportunity to attack us... Groups within the Fatah movement in the West Bank estimated that more than a hundred of its people in the Gaza Strip had been exposed to persecution, shooting, and liquidation." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida (Fatah), Jan. 9, 2009] Jamal Najar, popular Palestinian singer: "I express my condolences to my cousins, some of them were killed yesterday by the gangs of the anarchic [Hamas] security forces in the Gaza Strip... The father was killed right in front of his children, because he didn't stay at home, after they placed him under house arrest, he and everyone who belongs to Fatah." 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
|
|
LEGAL RIGHT AND WRONGS OF WAR; HAMAS STEALS INTERNATIONAL AID; HERO OF INDEPENDENCE WAR IS PARDONED
Posted by Steven Shamrak, January 18, 2009. |
|
LEGAL RIGHT AND WRONGS OF WAR (extract from an interview: ABC, 7:30 Report) Recently I saw an 'ABC, 7:30 Report' interview with Don Rothwell who is a professor of international law at the Australian National University. In this interview he addressed the legal questions arising from the conflict in Gaza. I have taken the liberty of removing any loaded anti-Israel biased questions and comments made by ABC Australia host Scott Bevan and present you the answers of the legal expert: 1) ... international criminal law is certainly sufficiently developed over the last few decades that there would be no reason to stop an organisation like the (UN) Security Council, for example, calling upon the recently created International Criminal Court to conduct an investigation into war crimes committed by Hamas military or Hamas political leaders. 2) ... Israel of course, as any state, has a right of self-defence in the face of ongoing armed attacks, whether it's from another state or whether it's from a non-State actor like Hamas. ... until such time as the Security Council of the United Nations has sought to intervene in the matter. (Hamas also has an obligation to stop its attacks after the UN resolution — hasn't it?) 3 ... law (the Geneva Conventions etc) basically provides that civilians are to be protected during the course of an armed conflict, but most importantly, it does need to be understood that civilians do not have absolute immunities. ... unfortunately in the context of a war there is inevitably going to be civilian casualties and the major issue is whether the combatants have sought to minimise those civilian casualties. 4) Israel can certainly point to, it would need to verify, by very, very accurate intelligence that it was facing fire coming from that facility (the UN agency school) or that it anticipated that there would be Hamas activity before it can could seek to really target that school in any way at all. (Is the same scrutiny applied to Hamas?) 5) It does make it the legitimate military target (if there are militants inside) but the point is that Israel should be able to target that facility in a way, which minimises civilian casualties as much as possible. (In the heat of the battle, when civilians are willing participants of a shield for terrorists? And the school was booby-trapped) 6) (Re: treatment of the wounded) Israel has responsibility for the security within that region. It needs to make sure that any movements within that region are appropriately secured and to that end it can say to humanitarian workers such as the Red Cross, "We're not permitting you to move throughout this area because we don't think the area is secure." (They were not in such a rush to move into a war zone in Afghanistan and Iraq! But eager to provide an additional international human shield for Hamas?) Professor Rothwell also mentioned that Israel, in compliance with international law, has been providing humanitarian corridors and treated wounded Gazans in Israels hospitals. (What was not said is that Hamas and Egypt are deliberately keeping the civilian population in Gaza to maximize the civilian casualties for propaganda purposes! I just wonder, do Hamas terrorists and thier leaders actually care about the international law of war as Israel does? You know the answer. Last time I checked, we still have not heard anything about Gilad Shalit and Hamas has not allowed the IRC visit him!) The government of Israel approved a unilateral truce as Hamas continued to attack.< FOOD FOR THOUGHT. by Steven Shamrak How many parties does Israel need? Why is political representation and national security based on age or religiosity of people? Why do Israeli voters tolerate the bunch of self-serving, pathetic idiots in the Knesset? 'Useless Nothing' is Outraged Again. A senior Israeli military officer says Israeli troops shelled the U.N. headquarters in Gaza after coming under fire from Hamas terrorists inside the compound, who had fired anti-tank weapons and machine guns. (U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon expressed "outrage" and demanded a "full explanation", but the UN has done nothing to prevent terrorists from using the UN's sponsored facilities like schools and other buildings! No "explanation" is demanded from Hamas! Hezbollah enjoyed the same UN 'tolerance' in Lebanon.) One-Sided Three-Hour Truce. While Israel again ceased fire for three hours allowing safe entry to approximately 100 trucks and distribution of humanitarian aid to Gaza last Wednesday, Hamas continued to fire rockets ignoring the ceasefires. (This is the same behaviour Hamas exhibited during the time of 'Quiet', and the same will happen when the next 'ceasefire' begins!) Fighting for the Fame of a Bigger Traitor. Outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (Labor) claims that he personally called United States President George W. Bush and told the president point blank to instruct Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice to abstain in a United Nations Security Council vote on a Gaza ceasefire resolution. Earlier, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni (Kadima) took credit for forcing Rice to change her intention to back the resolution. Where Did 'Palestinian' Refugees Came from? The first British Governor, Herbert Samuel writing in the Interim Report on the Civil Administration of Palestine to the League of Nations, June 1921, entitled "On the Condition of Palestine after the War" revealed that "There are now in the whole of Palestine (including Jordan) hardly 700,000 people." (This is after some 40 years of economic and political migration of Muslims under the Ottoman Empire! Where did those 'Palestinian' refugees mysteriously appear from just 27 years later?) Why is Israel Singled out for 'Special' Approval? The U.S. House of Representatives passed a resolution "recognizing Israel's right to defend itself against attacks from Gaza" by a majority of 390-5. (Isn't it patronising to approve that Israel is allowed the normal right of any country: to defend itself against the attacks of an enemy? ) Hamas Steals International Aid to Gaza. Hamas terrorists have hijacked at least two convoys of aid trucks, one carrying fuel and one carrying other supplies. Hamas takes a cut of all aid that arrives in Gaza from Israel. Supplies that are not kept are sold to Gaza residents to raise money for Hamas operations. Quote of the Week: "The objective of this stage is to destroy the terrorist infrastructure of the Hamas in the area of operation, while taking control of some of rocket-launching area used by the Hamas, in order to greatly reduce the quantity of rockets fired at Israel and Israeli civilians." — Israeli government statement — Sadly, the objective is not to end the treat of terror and end the conflict, only to "reduce the quantity of rockets". Did it work in Lebanon? Traditional anti-Semitic Yup from Vatican. Cardinal Renato Martino, the Pope's top official on peace and judicial issues, told an Italian newspaper, "Look at the conditions in Gaza: It looks more and more like a big concentration camp." (The Vatican's statements are always deliberate and calculated! We can't dismiss them as the talk of a drunken idiot.) War Could be Short and Easy. Israel Defense Forces (IDF) operation against terrorists in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip will be neither short nor easy, said Defense Minister Ehud Barak. Barak told the nation that Israel was not eager to wage war, but could not abandon its citizens, residents of the south, who have been victimized by Hamas rockets. (Wars are only won when clear and right objectives are set. Destroying weapons and creating a buffer zone will not resolve the existing problem. Israel had tried it in Lebanon and failed. Only the removal of the hostile population from Gaza to Sinai will end Hamas terror attacks!) HERO OF INDEPENDENCE WAR IS PARDONED.
60 years after he was sentenced to jail, Charlie Winters, an Irish Protestant from Boston, who took up the clandestine cause from his perch in Miami and helped ferry military planes to Israeli fighters, even flying a B-17 bomber across the Atlantic Ocean himself, was pardoned by President Bush last Tuesday, nearly a quarter-century after his death. In 1948 and was imprisoned for 18 months for violating the 1939 Neutrality Act and breaking an embargo on weapons to Israel by the United States. The US as a country, unlike its people, has never been a wholehearted friend of Israel! The fear of the Soviet influence pushed the US to vote for the creation of Israel. Immediately after the UN partition resolution, which was rejected by the Arabs, the United States was a willing and active participant in the international blockade of Israel. This was designed to allow the Muslim states to destroy the newly created Israel which had no army or weapons! During the Six Day war, in 1967, the US spied on Israel and had a contingency plan of invading Sinai in order to prevent Israel's advance. Even today, Jonathan Pollard is still imprisoned 22 years into a life sentence for passing information to Israel, the best ally of the United States in the ongoing fight against common enemies. This information, in accordance with the agreement between the two countries, had to be provided to Israel but was not! Isn't it time to pardon him? Even the Oslo accord, which was considering autonomy for the fake Palestinian nation, is being forsaken by the US, and the best friend of Israel is actively pushing the two-state solution and generously offering Jewish land to Islamic terrorists, perfectly understanding that even this 'generosity' will not bring peace. It will bring only more suffering to Jews in Israel, as deportation of Jews from Gaza, and even the possible demise of Israel. Not much has changed in 60 years! 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. To contribute to his website, visit http://www.shamrak.com/donations.html |
|
FROM ISRAEL: IT SMELLS
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 18, 2009. |
|
Still last night I had a bit of a "wait and see" attitude: We're still in Gaza, if Hamas hits us we may start again. Who knows. fire. Khaled Mashaal, politburo leader in Damascus, announced this on Syrian TV. According to Khaled Abu Toameh in the Post, sources close to Hamas say the group had no choice but to declare the cease-fire: "Hamas needs the lull. They have been hit hard..." Great, we're giving Hamas a lull. ~~~~~~~~~~ Abu Toameh says the two cease-fires were apparently declared independently and are not coordinated. We had declared that we would remain in Gaza until we were certain that there would be quiet. Mashaal is demanding we leave in a week. Fawzi Barhoum, a spokesman for Hamas has said, additionally, that this quiet is predicated on our opening of all crossings and the lifting of the blockade. We had better not be in a rush to open all crossings. And if we do it at all before securing the release of Shalit, things will smell even worse than they do now. According to Abu Toameh, we have said that we would not open any crossings until all hostilities have ceased. That may have been the original offer, which was rejected by Hamas. But as we ostensibly withdrew unilaterally (was it unilateral?), we should have no commitments in this regard at all. And in any event, how long do we wait before we know all hostilities have ceased? A Grad Katyusha was launched after the Hamas announcement of a cease-fire. ~~~~~~~~~~ Hamas has said it will resist all efforts at disarmament and all attempts to return the PA to Gaza. Hamas is particularly incensed with the PA at the moment because its leaders are convinced that Mahmoud Abbas and company provided intelligence that allowed us to get to Hamas interior minister Said Siam. This is entirely credible, as Siam was a major architect of the Hamas take-over of Gaza and responsible for the deaths of dozens of Fatah people. After he was killed in our airstrike, Fatah-controlled websites carried comments from people who thanked Ehud Barak. Hamas is demanding that Egypt open the Rafah crossing and I want to see how this will play out; Egypt's condition was the return of the PA there. Mubarak is demanding we open crossings. Will he keep his crossing closed? ~~~~~~~~~~ This is my considered opinion, for what it is worth: Taking down Hamas entirely — even if it might have been a desirable goal (which is itself questionable because of what might have come next) — was probably impossible for us. For there is a way that Hamas, an a-moral fighting force, bests us, the most moral and humane of nations. We were not guilty of disproportionate military actions and certainly not of war crimes. What we did in self-defense can be justified totally within international law. We knew we were right. But the killing is not palatable to us. It doesn't happen easily, and we're not glib about it. We were sad that there was collateral damage that caused deaths even of women and children on some occasions — in spite of our warnings and our extreme caution in doing pin-point operations. What we came up against is that Arab jihadist statement: "We will win, because just as they love life, we love death." Hamas does not care how many of its own people die. And so, for example, we knew which hospital many of the Hamas leaders were hiding in, but we would never hit a hospital, and they were well aware of this. Makes total defeat tough. ~~~~~~~~~~ There are analysts who believe we must content ourselves with partial victories. This is the opinion, for example, of Yoram Kaniuk, who wrote, "Lower Your Expectations," in YNet the other day: "No state has been able to defeat zealous Islamic terrorists thus far...There is no way to defeat zealous ideologies, because their leaders are willing to hide behind their children. Unpalatable in the extreme, but perhaps there's a certain truth there. If so, what's important is that we keep hammering away, and keep securing those tactical wins, until the day comes when we do have the upper hand. ~~~~~~~~~~ This is where the whole issue of deterrence comes in. It is what Brig.-General (res) Yossie Kupervasser, formerly with IDF Intelligence, whom I've cited so many times now, was basically referring to in his recent presentation: hitting hard enough, not so that they're totally defeated, but so that they decide it isn't worth it right now to keep trying to destroy us and table that goal for a distant future. Then the question becomes one of whether we hit hard enough before quitting. And the answer is in the negative. I don't think it was all wasted, and for nothing. We did give Hamas a good wallop, although we could have and should have given better. The truth of this will emerge as we see how quickly Hamas recuperates and how reticent, or not, to start with us again. Yuval Diskin, head of Shin Bet, in his report to the Cabinet this morning, confirms that Hamas took a beating. They did not expect us to come into Gaza right before an election, and we left them in a difficult position. ~~~~~~~~~~ I quote here a soldier who was serving in Gaza — referred to only as Aryeh — a member of the reserves and a former hesder yeshiva student (which combines religious study with military service). He was interviewed on Israel National Radio last week: "No one likes fighting; people want to be with their families...but at the same time, no one wants to leave now. Of all sectors, it's the soldiers who do not want a ceasefire, not because we want to fight but because we know the job is not finished yet. We don't want to have to go back again in a year or two or three. The soldiers want to stay and finish the job, they really do... I think there has to be a hard push against Hamas, even harder than we have done until now; this will take a real sacrifice, we know — but to think that we might leave and the rockets will still fall, what did we do??! Killing 900 terrorists out of 20,000 is just not enough, we have to really decimate their ranks in order that they should know that they should leave us alone... "True, Gaza is now largely in ruins, but they'll get lots of money to rebuild, and they'll use a lot of the money to get more weapons as well. We gave to go deeper and stronger, and make them understand that it's just not worth it. In addition, I think we can't leave without Gilad Shalit; it would be terrible if not." What can be added to this? ~~~~~~~~~~ But there are yet other factors that must be examined, palatable or not. One of these is the matter of international pressure. Many is the time that my blood pressure has gone up when watching the Israeli government cave under international pressure when I thought we should hold tight. When I thought what we needed was a government that was not into appeasement. A prime example is Condoleezza Rice's demand that we leave Rafah in 2005, even though we had an agreement — all the way from Oslo — that said we could stay. We caved, and we should not have, because our security people knew quite well that this was going to be trouble (as indeed it was). But I see the current international pressure as being considerably heavier than this. The international community loves to see Israel in the wrong, and the number of civilian casualties in Gaza must have had members of the community salivating with the opportunity to come down hard on us. ~~~~~~~~~~ What is more, the UN was involved. The first resolution regarding our operation in Gaza was not passed under Chapter VII, which meant there was no mechanism for applying military force to enforce its terms. But that doesn't mean there might not have been a subsequent resolution under Chapter VII. With the resolution that did pass, the US merely abstained and declining to veto it. This was already recognized as a betrayal of Israel. And that was with Bush as president. Tuesday, a new, and considerably less friendly, US president is being sworn in. (About whom I'll have plenty to say.) I believe that all of this was factored into the decision of Olmert to cut our losses in Gaza now. I think he may have felt it was better if we appeared to have been victorious, and left of our own volition. ~~~~~~~~~~ The rush to leave, however, was precipitous, and essentially dishonest. Olmert said last night: "We formulated understandings with the Egyptian government with regard to a number of central issues, the realization of which will bring about a significant reduction in weapons smuggling from Iran and Syria to the Gaza Strip." Part of our goal, as stated by him in the beginning, was making sure that Hamas could not re-arm. And so, he could not pull out without making it appear that a mechanism for preventing this was in place. I spent part of my day today trying to find out exactly what understandings with Egypt would allow Olmert to say that smuggling was less likely — say so, even if he knew it not to be the case. I could learn of no such understanding. In fact, one Arabic-speaking contact told me forthrightly, "There is no agreement with Egypt." This, my friends, is what smells most of all. This is the betrayal of what we were supposed to be doing. ~~~~~~~~~~ In fact, I would suggest that Olmert knows that there can be no effective mechanism at the border between Gaza and Egypt to stop smuggling as long as we are not there. The appeasement here is of Egypt, which is not confronted with the facts regarding the way in which it has tacitly permitted smuggling to continue, and even abetted that smuggling. Please, see Jerusalem Post editor David Horovitz's startling piece on the issue of Egyptian complicity in smuggling:
And the failure is our refusal to move back into the Philadelphi Corridor. ~~~~~~~~~~ I cited Professor Eyal Zisser yesterday, who explained how difficult it would be for the international community to stop rockets from getting into Egypt — as even Somali fisherman would be willing to carry them in their boats — and why the key to stopping smuggling lies with Egypt. Today, Dr. Aaron Lerner, director of IMRA has made it even simpler and more clear. Aaron has discovered that "Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines offers weekly container service from Bandar Abbas, Iran to Damietta, Egypt...Loads every Friday, arrival in Egypt two weeks later." As long as Egypt will not honestly and diligently work to stop smuggling, it is clear that Hamas will be re-armed. Yuval Diskin told the Cabinet today that Hamas would resume smuggling of weapons into Gaza in a few months, that they would rebuild the tunnels we destroyed. ~~~~~~~~~~ This, my friends, is what we have to hammer at, as the election approaches. The government has to answer for this inexcusable failure. Lerner, who has been right on top of this issue, the other day exposed the foolishness of defense envoy Amos Gilad, who said, in essence, that it's nobody's business what deal the government strikes with Egypt. We'll know if they are smuggling if they start launching rockets at us again. This is not acceptable. See Lerner's mockery of the government position here:
~~~~~~~~~~ At today's Cabinet meeting, Olmert declared, "The military forces in the Strip have their eyes wide open, are attentive to any rustle and ready for any order from their commanders,. The decision on the cease-fire leaves Israel the right to react and renew its military actions if the terror groups continue firing. But already, the IDF is beginning to pull out. It would take something major from Hamas, not a couple of rockets, and not a rustle, to make Olmert reverse his decision. There will be much more to say, but I'll end here today. ~~~~~~~~~~ Once again, I ask that you understand how difficult it is for me to respond to all of your many comments. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
WHY THE ISRAELI PEOPLE HAVE FINALLY HAD ENOUGH
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 18, 2009. |
|
This article was written by Ian O'Doherty.
It was published January 5, 2009 in the Independent (Ireland)
|
Enough is enough: An Israeli man stands on the scene after a rocket fired by Palestinian militants in Gaza landed near the town of Sderot So, it's genocide now, is it? Or is it actually another holocaust, something which one typically restrained Palestinian analyst described as "worse than Hitler's war against the Jews"? Are we watching the ethnic cleansing of an entire people? Are we witnessing the deliberate eradication of a race? Well, no actually, we're not. Yet the conventional dinner party wisdom which we've had to put up with in the media, both here in Ireland and generally across Britain, is that somehow Israel is the aggressor in the rapidly worsening situation in Gaza. Footage of air strikes with the ensuing photogenic explosions and dramatic plumes of smoke, quickly followed by clips of collapsed buildings and enraged mourners, makes far better copy than actually looking at the reasons why Israel has done what it's done. Anyone who devotes only a cursory glance at the news, both print and television, would be forgiven for thinking that, out of spite, might and malice, Israel has decided to destroy the Palestinian people. The problem with that conclusion — and it's not something you're going to learn from the BBC and most other outlets — is that, contrary to the currently popular belief, Israel is actually acting with a ridiculous degree of restraint. Over the last couple of years, thousands of rockets have been landing on Israeli soil and, finally, they have had enough. But behind that statistic there is a human dimension which tends to be rather ignored. I know many people in the southern Israeli town of Sderot and what is remarkable about their stories is not the number or make of rockets which have fallen on them on a daily basis for years, but the psychological carnage this wreaked upon them. One woman freely admitted to me that she hasn't had a proper night's sleep in more than two years as she and her family now basically live in their bomb shelter and it's hard to tell who she hates more — the Muslim terrorists of Hamas or the Israeli government which she thinks has abandoned them. It's a common feeling amongst residents of southern Israeli towns who have been the silent victims of a long campaign of violence, intimidation and murder carried out by Hamas. And now, finally, that the Israelis have said that enough is enough, they are somehow meant to be the aggressors? There are people of good conscience on both sides of this argument, but one of the main problems in this debate lies in the cowardly tendency of the Western media to apply equivalence to both sides. Thus, Hamas is seen to be as legitimate a government as the Israelis, and its rocket attacks across the border from Gaza are seen as being part of a yet another, intractable, interminable Middle Eastern dispute. There's just one problem with that approach — it's completely wrong. Hamas is a fundamentalist Islamic organisation intent on the eradication of the state of Israel and all its citizens; a violent fascist regime that allows honour killings and the execution of homosexuals to continue in its sphere of influence. Bankrolled by Iran, it manages to make even Hezbollah look like a moderate organisation. But Hamas is clever. As a friend of mine from Sderot pointed out, one of its favourite tactics is to launch Qassams from Palestinian schoolyards — while the schools are still in session. Hamas does this, you see, knowing that the IDF can't immediately strike back (they can vector a rocket launch site within 90 seconds) because the last thing the Israelis need is footage of a devastated Palestinian school with dead kids. And, over the last week, we have seen carefully manipulated footage of dead civilians, with the fact that they were effectively used as human shields conveniently ignored. When Israel pulled out of Gaza — ironically, the last battalion of IDF troops to leave Gaza contained some people from Sderot — they were acceding to international and internal pressure. The doves on the Left said it was to prove to Palestinians that they wanted to give Palestinians independence, the hawks on the Right — and there are some truly scary right-wingers in Israel, even as ardent a supporter of the country as I am will freely admit that — prophesied that it would lead to carnage. And, lo and behold, virtually as soon as the last jeep left Gaza the rockets started. And then the blockade began, and the whole damn mess started all over again. But there's a bigger picture here, something which Israelis have been trying to broadcast to the world, but which, thanks to their spectacular inability to accurately and sympathetically portray their point of view, has not been properly transmitted. It's this — Israel is the front line of the war between democracy and Islamic fascism. Would you rather live in a society with a free press, equal rights for women — and anyone who knows an Israeli woman will know that they're not easily suppressed, anyway — equal rights for gay people and a proud and stubborn belief in the right of the individual to lead their life in the way that they see fit or would you rather exist in a society where women who dare to speak their mind are executed, where gay people are not just shunned but murdered and where having a dissenting thought marks you out for death? The civilian deaths in Gaza are to be mourned, and anyone who says otherwise is reprehensible. But in a sick and twisted irony, they are mourned more by Israelis than by Hamas, who know that every dead Palestinian kid is worth another piece of propaganda. Here in the West, where we share the same values as Israel, we need to start standing shoulder with this tiny oasis of democracy in a vast desert of savagery. To do otherwise is moral cowardice of the most repugnant kind.
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il View
this art graphic and others at |
|
HAMAS GANGS KILL FATAH MEMBERS IN GAZA
Posted by Palestinian Media Watch, January 18, 2009. |
|
Hamas has murdered "dozens of Fatah members" in the Gaza Strip for merely violating the Hamas-imposed house arrest. According to the Palestinian daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida the atrocities, which also included shooting people in the legs, has created a backlash in the West Bank and caused "anger, which influenced the level of popular activities carried out in solidarity with the Gaza residents in the towns Ramallah and El-Bira." In addition, the popular Palestinian singer, Jamal Najar, condemned Hamas as "gangs of anarchic security forces," describing how Hamas murdered his cousin right in front of his children for simply stepping outside. [PA TV (Fatah)] The following are excerpts from the article in Al-Hayat Al-Jadida and the transcript of the words of Jamal Najar: Headline: "Reports of persecutions and liquidation of Fatah members by Hamas members evoke anxiety and condemnation in the West Bank." Reports mentioning liquidations of Fatah members in the Gaza Strip by members of Hamas evoked popular condemnation which was added yesterday to the erupting anger, which influenced the level of popular activities carried out in solidarity with the Gaza residents in the towns Ramallah and El-Bira. The reports from Gaza pointed out the death of dozens of Fatah members caused by Hamas members. A prominent leader stated that isolated random incidents of murder have occurred, but ruled out that this is a case of organized persecution. Wafa A-Najar, Gaza resident who lives in the town El-Bira, said that her father was killed the day before yesterday and nine of her family members were injured by shooting by Hamas, among them were three small children and two young people in critical condition... According to the family's story, a squad belonging to Hamas came to her family's house in [the] Sheikh Radwan [neighborhood] in Gaza and shot at the legs of young Badran A-Najar, claiming that he was violating the house arrest which was imposed on him, at the time when he was sitting with his cousins in front of the house... A prominent leader in the Fatah movement in the Gaza Strip, Ibrahim Abu A-Naja, ruled out that this is a case of persecution by some organization, which aims at Fatah, however he pointed out that "a number of isolated incidents [of murder]" had occurred, as has been reported by the Israeli media... Abu A-Naja called for Hamas to halt any step which provides Israel the opportunity to attack us... Groups within the Fatah movement in the West Bank estimated that more than a hundred of its people in the Gaza Strip had been exposed to persecution, shooting, and liquidation."
Jamal Najar, popular Palestinian singer: "I express my condolences to my cousins, some of them were killed yesterday by the gangs of the anarchic [Hamas] security forces in the Gaza Strip... The father was killed right in front of his children, because he didn't stay at home, after they placed him under house arrest, he and everyone who belongs to Fatah." — [PA TV (Fatah) Jan. 6, 2009] EDITOR'S NOTE: Alex Grobman sent this link to a video entitled:
"Chamas kill Fhatach in Gaza.wmv"
See also:
Itamar Marcus is director of PMW — Palestinian Media Watch –– (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Contact them by mail at pmw@pmw.org.il |
|
LEARN HEBREW WITH PICTURES AND AUDIO
Posted by Jacob Richman, January 18, 2009. |
|
Hi Everyone!
Today, I launched a new website called:
Learn Hebrew with Pictures and Audio
Learn Hebrew with Pictures and Audio is a free, online, educational resource to learn Hebrew words in a fun way. The site has 425 words and photographs ranging from fruit and vegetables to household items. Each Hebrew word is presented as an image with nikud [vowels]. There is an English transliteration and translation for each word and the Hebrew audio track provides you with the correct pronunciation of each word. Both the student and the teacher will find the site easy to use and very educational. As mentioned, the site is free to all. Feedback is welcome. Please forward this message to anyone that may be interested in learning Hebrew. Thank you! Have a good day,
|
|
LOW ISRAELI CASUALTIES MEANS VICTORY IN GAZA
Posted by Judith Apter Klinghoffer, January 18, 2009. |
Israel is back. The country and it's army are behaving as in the olden day. 96% of the Israelis supported the war and they acted accordingly. They opened not only their wallets (see, Companies offer benefits to southern residents) but also their homes to the resident of the South. The low Israeli casualty rate attests to the abilities of officer corp, especially chief of staff Ashkenazi. Damascus Hamas (Gaza Hamas, like the rest the Palestinians are mere canon fodder) can crow all it wants but it knows that it better watch its steps because the minimal IDF has just made the Political decision to reenter Gaza much less daunting. Note that unlike the previous cease fire agreement, Hamas did not set a time limit on this one. Moreover, I bet that the superior IDF performance in Gaza was the reason Nassrallah was in such pain to stay out of the conflict this time. 3 Israeli civilians and 10 Israeli soldiers died (4 of friendly fire) in the Gaza operation as compared to 43 civilians and 120 soldiers in the 2006 Lebanon War. Sorry to seem heartless but as John McCain so correctly predicted. Casualties is what counts. The US won in Iraq because American soldiers stopped dying there. Time Magazine asked: Can Israel win? My answer is yes,
provided one remembers that it is an imperfect (but less expensive)
21st century kind of victory, not a 20th century kind. But victory it
is, none the less.
This article appeared in
|
|
INFLAMMATORY
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 18, 2009. |
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il View
this art graphic and others at |
|
AN IDF SOLDIER SPEAKS
Posted by HandsFisasco, January 18, 2009. |
|
This was a Jerusalem Diary Item. Jerusalem Diaries II: What's Really Happening in Israel by Judy Lash Balint (Xulon) is available for purchase from www.amazon.com or by calling 1-866-909-BOOK (2665) It was written by Ron Arazi, new immigrant, IDF enlistee. His e-mail address is Arazi.Ron@gmail.com |
|
As a recently enlisted IDF soldier, I wanted to share with you my experiences during this sensitive time for Israel and her friends. During the first few weeks of the war I was in basic training for non-combat soldiers in a place called Zikkim, which is two kilometers north of Gaza. There I experienced a small taste of what the residents of Sderot have been experiencing for years: what it means to be living under fire of frequent Kassam rockets that terrorists in Gaza are currently launching — relentlessly — at innocent civilians in Israel's southern cities. The response of Israeli civilians is, as I see it, counter-intuitive. Encouragingly counter-intuitive. Instead of being further shattered by each Kassam, instead of disintegrating in fear of the next and the next and the next attack, the stress of war somehow makes us stronger. This war makes us more determined, more united, and more noble. It is humbling and inspiring to see the spirit of the Jewish People shine its brilliant colors through the cracks of its tough skin. Here is the strength I see: determination. In just a phone call, reserve soldiers all over the country leave their jobs, their wives, their kids, and go off to battle, unsure when they might return, or whether. Before infantry entered Gaza, there was an argument between the Golani Brigade and the Paratroopers Unit about who which unit would be the first to go into Gaza. Though Paratroopers Unit wanted the honor, the Golani Brigade was the first to enter Gaza. This resulted in Golani soldiers being wounded early in the war. One such Golani soldier broadcast his sentiments about what had happened: "The only thing I regret is that I'm not back there fighting with them now." The war is not only on the battle front. The brave residents of the south persevere in living daily life. Some out of necessity and others staunchly refusing to flee in fear of terrorist bullying, subsistence itself an act of dedication and faith. One Israeli newspapers featured a family in Sderot who celebrated the brit milah (circumcision) of their son. Rockets and sirens sounding, emotions pounding and firing, the father's face is displayed, taut under a prayer shawl, eyes closed, clutching his newborn son in focused concentration, clinging to his child, to God, to life — all in the face of the unceasing threat of unexpected sudden death. The strength I see displays itself in unity. I was sent to an IDF base in southern Israel to help out. When the IDF announced they were sending us, the only soldiers who were frustrated were those not being sent to assist. "We also want to go!" they pleaded. "Why are they sending only boys?!" some girls asked, determined, almost desperate to help. Some of my friends who went down South to volunteer were turned away. "We have enough volunteers here," some of the shelters told them. Soldiers are appreciated. In the supermarket there is a booth that takes food donations and delivers them to soldiers. The post office charges a quarter of the price for all packages sent to soldiers. When a vendor found out that the reason I needed to buy a digital watch was to use it in the army, he lowered the price. A man I know who lives in the South was in Tzfat shopping for a piece of artwork. After haggling for some time, the artist-merchant found out that the customer was from the south, so he settled for a lower price. This happens all over the country, as it will this Friday in Jerusalem at the vendor fair of merchants from the South. Stressful times could easily lead to more fragmentation, divisiveness. But here, now, in Israel, what I sense is camaraderie. The ability to be noble also comes from a place of strength. Today, like every day, I overheard people talking about how sad it is that innocent Palestinian women and children are victims of this war. It is natural to feel sympathy for civilian victims, as I myself do, regardless of what side of the border they live on. What moves me is that the sincere concern for innocent Palestinians comes not only from third-party observers who are safely removed from the conflict, but also from IDF soldiers and residents of the south. It would be easy to demonize everyone in Gaza, call them all enemies and condemn them all to death. And this psychological tactic may be at play against Israel and all of her civilians. But this crude thinking is not the way of the Jewish people. Many thoughtful soldiers and residents of the south, people's whose well being is threatened daily, display a tremendously mature and overwhelmingly sensitive world outlook. At the same time that they recognize the vital necessity of Israel to defend itself from Hamas' terrorism — they are the ones whose lives are being threatened! — they are still concerned with the loss of life of innocent Palestinians. It is tragic that Hamas, instead of leading its people into developing a healthy and vibrant economy, manipulated its civilians into becoming the collateral damage of its suicidal, shameful war against Israel's innocent civilians. Imagine how much strength and nobleness it takes for residents of the South and IDF soldiers, who are themselves the primary targets of Hamas, to be sensitive to people living under Hamas' leadership. Not only in its military strength is Israel great, but in its vibrant soul, a soul which yearns, even in the midst of war, for peace. The picture I painted is only a very thin slice of the complex and intricate reality and beauty of life here in Israel: words are a weak replacement for experience. But as Mayor Bloomberg understood when he came to visit Sderot in an act of unprecedented solidarity, Israel needs your support. The world does not understand how noble and pure the intentions of Israel are, that Israel is fighting for survival and peace, that it is pained with each unnecessary loss of life, that its people are unbelievably humane. On this crucial topic, silence reaffirms the status quo view echoed throughout the media, a view that replaces reality with sensational spin politics and, sometimes, backhanded anti-Israel bias. Forget, for a second, about impacting international politics. What about your family? Does your family know your views? Do they know how you feel? What you think? And why you think and feel the way you do? Do you know the views of each of your family members? What about your friends? Whether your opinion resonated or whether it clashed with what is written here, if you care, you'll explore the topic with your loved ones and maybe with your friends. I'd love to hear any responses, but please don't be insulted if I take a little while to answer: Arazi.Ron@gmail.com Contact HandsFiasco at handsfiasco@webtv.net |
|
THROW CAIR OFF THE BUS
Posted by Michael Travis, January 18, 2009. |
|
Watch AAH's shocking video filmed in Downtown Fort Lauderdale on 1/13/09, featuring:
Violence-driven members of the local Islamic community singing about
and praising Hitler, Hamas and Hezbollah...
Joe Kaufman is the Chairman of Americans Against Hate, the founder of CAIR Watch, and the spokesman for Terror-Free Oil Initiative. This is his 1/16/09 speech from AAH's successful CAIR/Hamas Bus Rally... |
|
While Israel is engaged with Hamas overseas in a deadly fight to protect the security of Israel's citizens, we find ourselves in a fight with one of Hamas's long-standing tributaries, CAIR. CAIR or the Council on American-Islamic Relations has been allowed by the Florida counties of Broward and Dade to purchase advertising on 120 of our taxpayer-funded public buses. The messages permitted to be placed on these buses are offensive in nature. Passersby read on these buses, "Islam: The Way of Life of Abraham, Moses, Jesus and Muhammad." The message presented by CAIR is that Abraham, Moses and Jesus — arguably the three most important icons of Judaism and Christianity — were Muslim. The fact that Islam was created long after both of these religions is disregarded by CAIR, just as many of CAIR's radical brethren disregard the legitimacy of the Jews' and the Christians' Bibles, which they claim are nothing more than forgeries corrupted by evil men. So while CAIR props up its religion in bold giant letters, others' religions get trampled on, stamped with the approval of both Broward and Dade's governments. And to make matters worse, the insulting messages ran all throughout Christmas and Hanukkah. Shame on the counties for allowing this to happen. Shame on the counties for approving such offensive matter to be plastered on our public transportation. The counties say that, in allowing the material to be placed on the buses, they are just being fair — that they have allowed advertising from Churches in the past. But we are not here to complain about religious advertising, nor are we here to complain about Muslims being able to advertise. We are here to say that the problem is with the message being presented. And we are here to say, as well, that the problem is with the messenger. CAIR was created by Hamas, the organization that is, as we speak, raining rockets and mortar fire down on Israeli communities, terrorizing Israel's citizens. CAIR was created by Hamas, the organization which is currently using Palestinian women and children as human shields. CAIR was created by Hamas, the organization which perpetrates gruesome acts of violence against Jews and even its own people, through such horrific means as suicide or homicide bombings. CAIR was launched in 1994 by three leaders of the American propaganda wing of Hamas, the Islamic Association for Palestine or IAP. CAIR was founded as being a part of the American Palestine Committee, a group led by then-global head of Hamas, Mousa Abu Marzook. And CAIR was established as a defense mechanism for Marzook and other Islamic radicals, who have been taken into custody by American authorities and placed in our American prisons. CAIR was indeed created by Hamas. And according to the United States Justice Department, the relationship between CAIR and Hamas existed long after the group's founding. That is the reason why CAIR was recently named by the Justice Department as a co-conspirator for a federal trial dealing with the financing of millions of dollars to Hamas. It was the largest terrorism trial in U.S. history, and in the end, all of the defendants were found guilty on all charges. CAIR likes to say that it was unindicted — an unindicted co-conspirator — but let it be understood from now until CAIR is finally shut down, "UNINDICTED" DOESN'T MEAN "NOT GUILTY." The counties of Broward and Dade have, at least up till this date, ignored our concerns. We are here to say to Broward County Mayor Stacy Ritter and the Broward County Commission and the Dade County Commission as well, enough with this idiocy! Take down the Hamas messages off of our taxpayer-funded buses now! We didn't agree to fund this trash, and we expect more from you. You were elected to protect us, not to offend us. You were elected to provide us security, not to accept money from those who wish to do us harm. And do you even know where the money you accepted is from? Take down the messages from the buses now! Throw CAIR off the bus immediately!!! Thank you. Joe Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
EYE FOR AN EYE: ARAB ATTACKER KILLED BY HIS OWN ROCK
Posted by Avodah, January 18, 2009. |
|
This was written by Maayana Miskin for Arutz Sheva
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) A Palestinian Authority Arab who stoned cars in Samaria was killed by one of his own rocks, police have concluded. A Jewish man held in connection with the death has been released. The Arab teenager hurled heavy stones at Israeli-owned vehicles along a Samaria highway last Tuesday evening. He managed to hit one car, which was driven by a resident of the nearby town of Emmanuel. Fearing further attacks, the driver fired a single shot in the air to frighten away the stone-thrower. He then contacted local security officers to report both the attack and his own response. A short time later, Israeli paramedics received a report of an Arab teen found unconscious and badly wounded next to a highway. The teen suffered a serious head injury that appeared to be a bullet wound. Medical personnel rushed to the scene but were unable to save the young Arab, who died a short time later. Police originally believed that the resident of Emmanuel who reported firing in the air had in fact fired at his attacker, killing him. The man was arrested and questioned. However, an initial forensic report showed that the attacker had not been killed by a bullet, and the detainee was released. A final forensic report, released over the weekend, showed that the attacker was killed when a stone he threw hit the car driven by the man from Emmanuel. The stone hit the car's tire and bounced back at high speed, hitting the attacker and leaving him with a fatal head injury. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
ABSOLUTELY NO SMUGGLING TO GAZA
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, January 17, 2009. |
|
Breaking News: 100% Success — Egypt to Report Absolutely No Smuggling To Gaza This is by Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il Write him at imra@netvision.net.il |
|
Break out the champagne and prepare for the elections. Considering that up to today Egyptian officials insist that absolutely no arms have ever been smuggled from Egypt to the Gaza Strip, the Olmert-Livni-Barak team can be certain that Egypt will certify that no weapons smuggling takes place since the start of the ceasefire. Will Hamas cooperate? "Cooperation" doesn't mean not smuggling. "Cooperation" means not bragging about it — at least until after the Knesset elections. And what if photographs of arms smuggling are published? The Olmert-Livni-Barak team can claim that they are old photos. And what if Hamas has a press conference showing the arms? The Olmert-Livni-Barak team can claim that they were smuggled in before the ceasefire. And what if there are rocket attacks? The Olmert-Livni-Barak team will engage in a "tit-for-tat" approach, according to which each attack is responded to on an individual basis rather than a renewal of the Israeli operation in Gaza. And what if there are many rocket attacks? This depends on the "intelligence reports" of "Generals" Mina Tzemach (Dahaf) Yitzchak Katz (Maagar Mohot Survey Institute) and the other pollsters. If polls show that Kadima and Labor are plunging as a result of the situation then the ceasefire may be dropped. On the other hand, if Kadima leads in the polls over Likud, one can expect very learned explanations from both officials as well as media commentators and reporters as to why it serves Israel's strategic interests to indefinitely continue the arrangement. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
UNITED NATIONS IMPLICATED IN WIDESPREAD CHILD RAPE, CHILD PORNOGRAPHY
Posted by Avodah, January 17, 2009. |
|
This was written by Bill Levinson and it appeared in
IsraPundit
|
|
The United Nations, which is currently enabling Hamas terrorists and possibly giving them material support, has been implicated in widespread cases of child rape in Third World countries. As reported by the Washington Times, The United Nation's "sex-for-food" scandal continues to spread. As the human rights group Save the Children documents in a new report, U.N. peacekeepers in the war-torn, refugee-rich Liberia have been accused of selling food for sex from girls as young as 8. They are the latest victims in a growing tragedy that includes girls from Burundi, Ivory Coast, East Timor, Congo, Cambodia and Bosnia, ...Similar to other U.N. missions, the scandal in Liberia seems to be the result of inadequate training, zero threat of punishment and collusion with top mission officials and NGO workers. In other words, sexual abuse of starving children is not merely the work of individual United Nations workers. Supervisory personnel also are involved. United Nations Megan's Law Warning 
Captain's Quarters Teenage rape victims fleeing war in the Democratic Republic of Congo are being sexually exploited by the United Nations peace-keeping troops sent to the stop their suffering. The Independent has found that mothers as young as 13 — the victims of multiple rape by militiamen — can only secure enough food to survive in the sprawling refugee camp by routinely sleeping with UN peace-keepers. The Times Online (also a UK publication) HOME-MADE pornographic videos shot by a United Nations logistics expert in the Democratic Republic of Congo have sparked a sex scandal that threatens to become the UN's Abu Ghraib. World Net Daily meanwhile reports, "U.N. 'peacekeepers' rape women,
children." It is no surprise that the United Nations is pushing
worldwide gun control, because a handgun is an excellent way for a
woman to stop an ape that is trying to rape her (or her daughter). The
BBC Children have been subjected to rape and prostitution by United Nations peacekeepers in Haiti and Liberia, a BBC investigation has found. It is past time for the civilized world to demand prosecution of United Nations child rapists, child pornographers, pedophiles, rock spiders, and child molesters.
Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
ISRAEL'S DILEMMA IS THE WORLD'S DILEMMA
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, January 17, 2009. |
|
Israel's dilemma is the civilized world's dilemma. Hamas led Gaza as well surrounding hostile regimes hold Israel hostage; deploying suicide bombers, firing missiles without provocation at the progressive democrat state; forcing Israel to react, build walls, and as a last resort defend her besieged citizens with armed young men and women no different than you and me. Yet, today, much of the world only sees bloodshed and destruction in Gaza thus reflexively condemns Israel, refusing to comprehend the history of the region, refusing to comprehend the ambitions of Islamic terrorists, refusing to condemn their unconscionable tactic of storing weapons and ammunition in schools and mosques, using women and children as shields, hoping an Israeli missile will hit a civilian or two just to garner worldwide sympathy. And it works! However, at their own peril, civilized folks outside the fray wearing blinders, screaming disproportionate response, spewing anti-Israeli rhetoric, refuse to recognize these terrorists don't just hate Israel; in fact dream of one day morphing our entire planet into one Islamic caliphate minus the infidel, meaning minus you and me. Furthermore, it boggles the mind that moderate Muslims don't loudly denounce terrorist groups such as Hamas, armed by nuclear emerging Iran, besmirching and exploiting their sacred Koran, committing atrocious murderous acts in the name of Allah. Israel, continuously attacked physically, should have many friends and allies, including those moderate Muslims; attacked spiritually by the same fundamentalist fanatics. In fact, enlightened world citizens of all ethnicities should support Israel now, defending her citizens in the short term, defending the entire civilized planet in the long term. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
PALESTINE. PALESTINIANS.
Posted by Janet Lehr, January 17, 2009. |
|
The term "Palestine" came from the name that the conquering Roman Empire gave the ancient Land of Israel in an attempt to obliterate and de-legitimize the Jewish presence in the Holy Land. The name "Palestine" was invented in the year 135 C.E. Before it was known as Judea, which was the southern kingdom of ancient Israel. The Roman Procurator in charge of the Judean-Israel territories was so angry at the Jews for revolting that he called for his historians and asked them who were the worst enemies of the Jews in their past history. The scribes said, "the Philistines." Thus, the Procurator declared that Land of Israel would from then forward be called "Philistia" [further bastardized into "Palaistina"] to dishonor the Jews and obliterate their history. Hence the name "Palestine." Even the word "Palestine" has no meaning in Arabic — every word in Arabic has some meaning deriving from the Koran, but the word "Palestine" does not. If anything, the name "Palestine" was associated with Jews. In the years leading up to the rebirth of Israel in 1948, those who spoke of "Palestinians" were nearly always referring to the region's Jewish residents. For example, the Palestine Post [forerunner of today's Jerusalem Post] newspaper and the Palestine Symphony Orchestra were all-Jewish. The "Palestine Brigade Regiment" was composed exclusively of Jewish volunteers in the British World War II Army. The silly rhetoric about a massive Arab presence being overrun by "invading Jews" is quickly dispelled by Mark Twain, who visited the area in 1867. From his book, The Innocents Abroad "... A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds... a silent mournful expanse.... a desolation... we never saw a human being on the whole route.... hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country." The vast majority of Arabs came to the area after these early Zionist pioneers began draining the malaria-infested swamps (above photo) and plowing the land! In doing so, these Jews created the economic opportunities and medical availabilities which attracted Arabs from both surrounding territories and far-away lands! In fact, over 90% of the Arabs migrated there within the last one hundred years. Most of the Arabs in "Palestine" were interlopers and squatters originating from Syria, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq and other lands who simply took possession of pieces of land. So much for their unfounded claims that they have been there since "time immemorial!" These Arabs came from disorganized collections of tribes with a tradition of constantly terrorizing each other and trying to seize land from their neighbors. Many of them were social outcasts and criminals who could not find jobs in their own countries so they searched for their luck elsewhere. Unfortunately, those Arab immigrants imported into the Holy Land their age-old culture of terrorizing neighbors in order to seize land. In fact, today's Arab "Palestinians", let by Arafat and his PLO (sanitized to the PA, or Palestinian Authority... which is nothing more than A Network of Murderers Masquerading As Government!) are still nothing more than street thugs, bullies and 'Little Saddams' found elsewhere throughout most of the most Arab world. Yet while the returning Jews were highly motivated to restore the land, the Arabs seethed with envy and hatred for they lacked both the leadership to inspire and motivate them for they were, in fact, historical strangers to this land! Unlike the Jews, those Arabs who immigrated there had no ancient attachments to or historical memories of this homeland ... this ancient Land of the JEWS! The real problem facing those Arabs today is not the lack of a homeland. The historical root-cause of their problem and frustration is the fact that the countries they came from have not agreed to accept them back in. This is why so many of them live, up until today, in refugee camps, in neighboring Arab countries, lacking fundamental civil rights. In their frustration they feel that the only hope and choice they have is to try and steal someone else's country! In Conclusion: There was no "Arab Palestinian" history before the Arabs manufactured one shortly after 1948, and then especially after the June 1967 Arab-Israeli War! In an interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw (March 31, 1977), PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein said "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct 'Palestinian people' to oppose Zionism. It is also been a "conceptual" war for ownership of the term "Palestinian" which has been transferred over to the Arabs whereas, before 1967, "Palestine" has always been synonymous with Eretz Israel and the Land of Israel. Archeological sites to this very day continue to yield artifacts with Hebrew writing, not some fictitious "Palestinian" or Arabic text! The so-called "Palestinian" Arabs were simply then, as they are now, Arabs no different culturally, historically or ethnically from other Arabs living in any of the 24 Arab countries from which they emigrated. The suggestion that the "Palestinians" are some sub-group of Arabs with their own unique identity is pure fiction! Great propaganda... Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at janetlehr@veredart.com |
|
TORAHISM: TORAH MANDATED CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT
Posted by Moshe Kerr, January 16, 2009. |
| A previous essay on a Torah-based Constitution can be found at http://www.think-israel.org/dec08bloged.html#dec08.153. |
|
In the Beginning ... the essential foundation upon which Torahism seeks to arouse a vision of just government rulership within the borders of the Lands of Torah, the oath/sworn lands, the substance of government as opposed to ornamental governmment institutions. The first priority of Torahism: Government established by the Torah does not authorize nor instruct public servants to focus their primary concerns upon defending the Jewish Commonwealth from foreign invasions. Rather public servants who accept the yoke of public leadership, their most holy obligation of rule centers upon protecting maintaining and defending diplomacy among conflicting interests among the bnai brit peoples which threatens a war of brothers/civil war. Torahism defines justice as intra-bnai brit diplomacy, and diplomacy as the art of making alliances/britot. The 3rd Commonwealth today stands upon the ashes of the folly of the Hashmonaim. Opportunism qualifies as a fundamental political yazir. When the Hashmonaim embraced opportunism and negated their brit with the Perushim and cut an alliance with the Tsudukim, the aristocratic land-owning priestly lap dogs of the Greeks, immediately following their military victory over the Greeks, this tragic lack of judgment caused a catastrophic chain of events: a long bitter civil war among brothers, terminating in loss of political independence, the destruction of the Temple by Titus, and a terrible galut which only culminated with the Shoah. The finest hour of Political Zionism — the Balfour Declaration of 1917, the League of Nations Palestinian Mandate of 1922, and the United Nations 2/3 majority vote of 1948 wherein the International community of nations recognized Jewish national self determination. Zionism as a movement sprang from the economic unrest consequent unto the industrial revolution in Europe. Marxist and later Leninist visions of class warfare coupled with the vision of nation state self determination greatly molded and influenced political zionism. Torahism rejects the former and openly embraces the latter. Israel received the Torah in the wilderness, because it could not uproot the societies of Canaan, with their supporting cultures, without first defining their own political and cultural mandate at Sinai. Standing in the shadows of the Hashmonaim disaster, obviously Torahism could never embrace nor support the Marxist/Leninist visions of class warfare. This logical dialectics, however, includes another corollary — land reform. Since the founding of the State all Jewish governments have favored a two state approach toward settling the Israeli/Arab dispute concerning "Palestine". All Jewish governments agree to surrender Samaria and Gaza, (even though 3 Jewish kingdoms once ruled these lands) with an aim of permitting the Arab populations to decide their own national self determination. Torahism can respect this incredibly generous eye, on condition that the same applies unto the Jewish people themselves within the borders of the Oath-sworn lands. Torahism rejects as the Tsudukim error the socialist economics of the state owning land, any land — much less all the land. It also rejects the socialist economic domination resulting from a government-mandated Central Bank of Israel. Land reform, Torahism requires that no Jewish government can own any lands within the 3rd Commonwealth political borders. Torahism mandates all Jewish governments to establish sh'meta as the means to restore and renew credit, the principal being that credit requires collateral. Land serves as the best collateral. The negation of debts every seven years thereby clears the land from any pre-existing loans and permits renewed credit. Contact Moshe Kerr at moshekerr@gmail.com |
|
FRIENDS OF ISRAEL HAVE A LOT OF REPAIR WORK TO DO — IN AMERICA
Posted by Jack L., January 16, 2009. |
|
This is by Caroline B. Glick and it appeared in
Jewish World Review
Caroline B. Glick is the senior Middle East Fellow at the Center for Security Policy in Washington, DC and the deputy managing editor of The Jerusalem Post. |
|
Outgoing Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's diplomatic spat with outgoing US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has been a bonanza for strategic minded gossips. Olmert says that Rice was "embarrassed" because she planned to vote in favor of UN Security Council Resolution 1860 which calls for an immediate ceasefire between IDF forces and Hamas terrorists. But, Olmert brags, he wrecked her plan by getting outgoing President George W. Bush to force her to abstain. As far as the commentators are concerned, Olmert's puerile attack on the American Secretary of State in the midst of a war shows that the he is still the same prideful, vain, motor-mouth that Israelis have come to know and despise over the past several years. Then too, by responding with borderline hysteria to Olmert's statement, Rice has demonstrated, once again that she remains a thin-skinned whiner. These insights make for piquant news analyses. But they miss the most important truths that the Olmert-Rice slap-down brought to the surface. Their fight tells us two crucial things. First, it tells us that when President-elect Barack Obama enters office next week, Israel's relations with the US will be at a low point. The US's abstention from the vote on Resolution 1860 is a stunning statement of US hostility towards Israel. As former UN Ambassador Dore Gold wrote in the Jerusalem Post on Sunday, Resolution 1860 is drafted in a manner that presumes moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas. Both Israel and Hamas — an illegal terrorist organization — must stop fighting it says. The resolution also draws a false moral equivalence between Hamas's illegal rocket campaign against Israeli civilians and Israel's assertion of its right to close its borders to enemy traffic. While Olmert presents the US's abstention in the vote as a major diplomatic victory for Israel, in truth it is a stunning defeat. The US was a cosponsor of Resolution 1860, along with Britain. The fact that the US sponsored such an anti-Israel resolution in the first place is a major rebuke of Israel. And the fact that Washington then allowed the deeply adversarial and dangerous resolution to pass only compounds the failure. The second aspect of the US abstention on Resolution 1860 that is deeply disturbing is the fact that Israel's leaders say they were taken completely by surprise by the move. On a simplistic level, the fact that apparently until the last moment, Israeli officials were certain that the US was planning to veto the resolution or, at a minimum force a significant delay in voting on the measure, bespeaks a remarkable incompetence on the part of Israel's UN mission and in particular, it bespeaks a personal incompetence on the part of Ambassador Gavriela Shalev. What were Israel's representatives at the UN doing in the days preceding the vote? Who were they talking to? What messages were they communicating to their UN colleagues and back home that the government could have been blindsided by the US action? And while this fiasco provides just cause for recalling Shalev to Israel, the buck on this one cannot stop with her. Shalev is not a professional diplomat. She had no notable experience in international affairs or public diplomacy to speak of before Livni — who insisted that she would only appoint a woman to the post — sent her to Turtle Bay. Shalev receives her guidance on how to deal with the US from Livni. And throughout her tenure as Foreign Minister, Livni, together with Olmert has insisted that Israel's relations with the US have never been better. But this has been anything but the case. On the issues of the most urgent importance to Israel, the US has repeatedly, and with an ever growing degree of contempt and hostility, adopted positions diametrically opposed to Israel's interests. For instance, this week the New York Times reminded us that the US has refused to sell Israel refueling planes and bunker-buster bombs necessary to attack Iran's nuclear sites. The US has also consistently refused Israeli requests to overfly Iraqi airspace. The Times' story reports that the administration answered Israeli requests to this effect with a hearty, "Hell no!" And it isn't just that the Bush administration has in recent years preferred to indulge the Iraqi leadership's kneejerk anti-Semitism over supporting Israel's need to preempt threats of national annihilation. The Bush administration has also belittled those threats and so allowed them to grow. Rice pushed the US on the road towards accepting Iran as a nuclear power when she opted to join the EU-3 in their feckless negotiations with the mullahs in May 2007. Her decision was followed by the deeply mendacious National Intelligence Estimate released in November 2007 which claimed wrongly that Iran ended its nuclear weapons program in 2003. The US's coddling of Iran at Israel's expense has also included its preference for the Hizbullah-dominated Lebanese government and military over Israel's national security. In the 2006 war between Hizbullah and Israel, the US forbade Israel from attacking Lebanese government targets and so left Israel with few good options for fighting Hizbullah to victory. The reason the US acted in this manner is because Rice wished to prolong the fiction that the pro-Western March 14 movement was in charge of the Lebanese government when in fact, they subservient to Hizbullah. When Israel became bogged down, the US forced Jerusalem to accept a ceasefire that left Hizbullah in charge of southern Lebanon and allowed it to rebuild its arsenals and present its campaign against the Jews as a strategic victory for the forces of jihad. After Hizbullah staged a putsch against the pro-Western forces in the Lebanese government last May, rather than acknowledge that Hizbullah is now in full control over the government and the military, the US has showered Lebanon with money and guns. As for the Palestinians, over the past three years, the US has been expansive, indeed obsessive in its support for Fatah — and through it for Hamas — at Israel's expense. Rather than recognize that the Palestinian voters' decision to elect Hamas to lead them in January 2006 constituted a rejection of the notion of a two-state solution on the part of Palestinian society, the Bush administration judged the move as an act of civil disobedience reminiscent, in Rice's view, of the US civil rights movement. Far from cutting the Palestinians off, the US massively increased its assistance to the Palestinian Authority. For the first time US taxpayers began financing the PA's budget and so, indirectly paying the salaries of both Fatah and Hamas terrorists. Moreover, the US began a massive effort to train Fatah commandos in Jordan. With Fatah terrorists in Gaza shooting missiles at Israel alongside their Hamas terror buddies today, it is unclear what good can come of these US-trained Palestinian special forces. In the face of all of this clear US hostility towards Israel, marked as well by the continued criminal prosecution of former AIPAC lobbyists Steve Rosen and Keith Weissman, and former Pentagon analyst Larry Franklin for their "crime" of discussing their concern about Iran's nuclear weapons program, Israel has played the role of Chicken Little. Israel has offered no significant protest against the US's moves. It has treated Rice and her colleagues at the CIA as friends and trusted allies. And Livni and Olmert have repeatedly boasted that Israel's relations with the US have never been better, when in fact they have arguably never been worse. It is because of the government's refusal to contend with difficult truths that Israel was caught by surprise at the Security Council last week. And due to the government's refusal to acknowledge the true state of Israel's relations with Washington, the government has given little consideration to either how to improve them, or how to work around Washington's hostility. This situation is liable to only get worse next week with the inauguration of President-elect Obama. Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton pledged in her Senate confirmation hearings that the new administration will immediately seek to engage Iran diplomatically. She also stated that the US intends to actively pursue better relations with Iran's Arab satellite-state, Syria. Moreover, she pledged that the Obama administration will make an immediate push to establish a Palestinian state. Clinton's testimony makes clear that Obama's major initiatives will all involve forcing Israel to pay a price. According to a source in close contact with Obama's transition team, the first price that Israel will be pressured to pay will be the Golan Heights. Obama has pledged that soon after taking office he will make a major speech in an Islamic capital to strengthen US ties to the Muslim world. And the source asserts that Obama intends to make that speech in Damascus. Moreover, he intends to exert pressure on Israel to surrender the Golan Heights to Syria as "payback" for any Syrian indication that it will weaken its ties to Iran. While Israel must treat the US with diplomatic deference, it must also base its policies towards the US on how the US is actually treating Israel and not on fictions. There is no doubt that Israel would have handled the ceasefire diplomacy at the UN and elsewhere differently if its leaders were willing to notice that official Washington views Israel's defense of its citizens and Hamas's assaults on Israel's citizens as morally indistinguishable actions. Certainly, Israel wouldn't have been taken by surprise by America's decision to allow Resolution 1860 to pass. Throughout his tenure in office, Bush has been outspoken in his warm statements about Israel. Both his advisers and the many people who have come to know him over the past eight years are unanimous in their belief that Bush truly cares about Israel and views Israel as an important US ally. He recognizes that Israel and the US share the same enemies and that our enemies seek to destroy us because we represent the same thing: freedom. But as many of his friends and advisors have ruefully noted over the years, Bush never learned how to translate his personal views into policy. As former Pentagon official Richard Perle wrote in an article this week in The National Interest, Bush was undercut on the most crucial foreign policy issues he faced by the State Department and the CIA, which either ignored his policies or openly sought to discredit them. As Perle described Bush's presidency, "For eight years George W. Bush pulled the levers of government — sometimes frantically — never realizing that they were disconnected from the machinery and the exertion was largely futile. As a result, the foreign and security policies declared by the president in speeches, in public and private meetings, in backgrounders and memoranda often had little or no effect on the activities of the sprawling bureaucracies charged with carrying out the president's policies." This reality has been apparent since at least the middle 0f 2003, and yet, Israel's leaders stubbornly refused to acknowledge it. They preferred instead to believe that Bush would never let anything bad happen to us. As if he had the power to stop it. The passage of Resolution 1860 could be a blessing in disguise if Israel is capable of learning its principal lesson: No one, not even our friends, will fight out battles for us. Contact Jack L. at yakovdov1@yahoo.com |
|
DON'T BLAME ALL OF ISRAEL'S PR PROBLEMS ON ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by Mrla, January 16, 2009. |
|
Thiis was written by Ronn Torossian, CEO of Manhattan-based
5WPR (www.5wpr.com), one of the nation's 25 largest independent
public-relations firms. He serves on the boards of several pro-Israel
organizations and is closely involved with Rabbi Yishayahu Yosef
Pinto's Shuva Israel
|
|
Like many others, I spent a lot of time this past week agonizing about Israel's public-relations battles and image problems. And I remain extremely worried. I own one of the one of the nation's 25 largest public-relations agencies and make my living building brands and enhancing images. I represent a number of major corporations, foreign governments and concerns worldwide and consult regularly with senior Israeli government officials, advocacy organizations and consulates, mainly on a pro-bono basis. Last week I spent an entire day escorting a client, a very senior foreign government official from an embattled area (outside the Middle East) from media outlet to media outlet. He met with a reporter for a large weekly newsmagazine, and after the 45-minute interview the reporter spoke heart to heart with the official, advising him to do interviews even when there's nothing going on, speak the same language as those doing the interviewing, and invite the media to events. Irrespective of the issues, it's harder to write negative about my friends, the reporter laughed. In other words, fostering relationships is a must. After graduating from college I lived in Israel in the mid 1990's and worked in public relations and politics. I soon realized that Israelis don't pay attention to the human side of journalism, nor are they flexible with the business of PR. Israeli government officials don't, and in fact can't, spend time and money entertaining reporters. The almost unbelievable reason for this is that Israeli officials aren't permitted to turn in regular expense-account bills for meals or entertaining. And in nearly all instances they pay their own cellular phone bills for calls to and from reporters. I believe Israel's PR problem is due primarily to the fact that Israeli officials view the practice of public relations not as a necessity but as a secondary thought. Similarities can be drawn to Israeli technology companies, which produce incredible products but utilize poor marketing programs. Israelis are a tough people who believe that since their cause is just, they don't need to spend time convincing others. Is it anything short of absurd that Israel's entire public-relations budget for the U.S. is under $250,000 annually? The State of Israel does not use a public-relations agency anywhere in the world and hasn't for many years. How can Israel expect to win the war for hearts and minds when its emissaries, noble as they may be, come for a few years and then leave? While Israeli diplomats undoubtedly work hard, English is not their first language. No wonder Israel's public-relations efforts always seem to be characterized by an all too palpable tentativeness and defensiveness. Primary Arab spokespersons, by contrast, tend to be longtime residents of Western countries. They are individuals who were educated in the West or have lived here for a long time and communicate in fluent English. While Israel's spokespeople may be coherent, the government doesn't pay for outside professional media training. And coherent doesn't necessarily mean compelling. What makes an army commander or a police chief suitable for worldwide media appearances? At a minimum, should they not undergo media training by outside PR agencies expert at helping people develop their messages? Israel has planes and tanks but little media savvy. Israeli leaders don't pay enough attention to the media, nor do they enlist the troops needed for today's media war. While the Arabs brilliantly started Al Jazeera (created by a $150 million grant from the emir of Qatar), Israel counters with a few very smart Foreign Military representatives who engage on Twitter and dabble in creative YouTube campaigns. In other words, a David vs. Goliath battle in the world press. I believe Israel's lack of financial investment in PR is a major mistake. Israel needs to invest as much in the public-relations battle as it does on the ground for military battle. As the owner of a PR agency, I view public relations in terms of business rather than ideology, and this allows me to be the rare Zionist who says Israel's foreign media problems aren't strictly about anti-Semitism or inherent bias. Israel's PR problem is primarily a business problem. Public relations is neither a hobby nor a pastime, and funds must be invested to garner success. Last year the Pentagon admitted spending millions upon millions to shape media coverage of the Iraq war. Yes, PR is big business, and Israel doesn't take it seriously. At the very minimum, can we at least have Israeli spokespeople who speak an engaging and articulate English? Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
HATING THE JEWS
Posted by Kyle-Anne Shiver, January 16, 2009. |
|
A little over a month ago, I was sitting with my daughter in a darkened theater, watching with dozens of other horror-struck Americans as, on the giant screen, a little Jewish boy, accompanied by his new friend, a German boy of about the same age, were herded naked, in shocked confusion to their deaths in a Nazi gas chamber. Or the "ovens" as some slang would put it. The movie was The Boy in the Striped Pajamas. For more than five minutes after the lights came on, no one in that theater moved. Barely a sound — only the muffled sobs of a few — could be heard. Then, one young man slowly stood, bowed his head, rose, and as if a signal had been given, others hesitantly followed. I heard not a single word passed between perhaps one hundred moviegoers, as somberly, one by one, we all filed out into the night to return to our warm homes and safe beds. I'll never forget that night. In fact, for days after, I dreamt about it, waking in a cold sweat reaching for my own babies. I'm not Jewish; I'm human. Or at least, I like to believe I behave as a human should. I grew up entrenched in a full-blown, segregationist, racist society. By the time I was ten, I had overheard more racist epithets than my own children will hear in their entire lifetimes. White, Southern racism, I understood by the time I was twelve, grew out of hundreds of years of a particular kind of slavery based upon skin color, and the people who continued to practice it in the nineteenth century were believing Christians. Enslaving other human beings and trying to classify them as less-than-human ran contrary to every belief, so dearly cherished by slaveholders and segregationists. Bible-belt, believing Christians all. Now, one would think that even an idiot would have seen the obvious contradiction. I did, and I was a mere child. So, when Rosa Parks and Martin Luther King appeared on the scene, it took me all of two minutes to figure out who was right and who was wrong in the black/white race thing. Making sense of the Civil Rights Movement proved far simpler than the fractions I was forced to deal with in the fourth grade. And, wouldn't you know it. It proved not all that difficult for nearly every other white person I knew then. Settled. They're right; our parents are wrong. End of discussion. Let's be friends. Let's be human. The proof is in the pudding, and a mere forty-five years later, we've elected a black man President of the entire United States of America. In public or polite company, decent folk would no more utter a racial epithet aimed at blacks than they would blaspheme audibly in a Church. It's simply not done. And no decent American would tolerate such in his presence. It's stupid. It's not Christian. It's not human. So, what is it about the Jews? Last week, in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, a woman wearing a Muslim headscarf, could be seen in this YouTube video, standing among Pro-Palestinian demonstrators on a public street, bellowing at Jewish counter-demonstrators, "Go back to the oven" and "You need a big oven; that's what you need." Clearly, she hasn't seen The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, the new version. It's the one where the little Muslim boy and the little Jewish boy make friends and head unsuspectingly for the oven, hand- in-human-hand. Quite regularly, various leaders of various Islamic terrorist groups, and even an ex-CIA agent that the NYT uses as an expert on Mid-East affairs, refer to Israel as a "cancer" on the world. Louis Farrakhan, America's best-known Jew-hater, is honored by the twenty-year church home of our first black President, and hardly more than a few bat an eyelash in disapproval. A black minister can stand in the full view of esteemed dignitaries and spew anti-Semitic tripe, and it causes barely a stir. CNN can air terrorist-inspired "news" footage, and it takes a determined conservative blog-press to highlight the truth before anyone even notices. Well, any time Israel gets the chutzpah to fight back against nonstop, deadly rocket attacks with any determination, nearly every Muslim enclave the world over can be counted upon to take to the streets in their propaganda solidarity. And leftist newspapers and television outlets the world over can be counted upon to broadcast the terrorists' anti-Jew poppycock as though no one will notice that it's woven of the same cloth. The more things change...and the beat goes on... But, really, hating Jews is as old and entrenched as, well, as old as the Bible. Long, long, long before Africans enslaved other Africans and sold them to European and American traders, there was Jew-hatred. Jew-hatred is so much older than the State of Israel that it would take a historical scholar to date it. Way, way, way, way before there was the Holocaust, there was Jew-hatred. Jew-hatred runs through the 7th century's Koran like a consistent thread. Karl Marx himself was a self-loathing Jew. George Soros is a modern day version of Karl Marx. Louis Farrakhan thinks Hitler had the right idea. So does David Duke. So does Ahmadinejad. So does that American woman in Muslim dress standing on the street in Fort Lauderdale. Isn't it about time someone, somewhere explains exactly what it is about the Jews that inspires this vile, purely diabolical hatred. Why, if even a fair number of Jews utterly despise their own Jewishness, and as this is an ancient hatred, persisting throughout the ages, there must be something pretty substantial to it. Hate this vile doesn't just spring out of pure air. Jew-hatred is the elephant in the room of humanity. Can anyone, anywhere explain why this is so? I'll have a whack at it, I think. What if that whole wallop of a tale spun in the Bible is actually true. What if there is one, indivisible, ever-living God. What if that one, indivisible, ever-living God decided — all on His own, without any consultation with humans — to reveal Himself in a burning bush to Moses. What if this one God, creator of all that is seen and all that is unseen, took it upon Himself, unbidden by humanity, to pick a people, call them His own, and then set about to reveal His own nature to them little by little, over centuries, through dire punishments and heavenly rewards and provident manna. What if these people this One God picked were the Jews? Now, supposing this is all true, then what other creature is there in the Bible that would just be madder than hell's fury at that one people, those chosen ones? Oh my goodness, Satan. Oh yeah. Now, this is what I love about my Christian faith. It takes very big, very tangled, very difficult concepts that seem to ensnare whole societies, whole rooms full of scholars and luminaries and intellectuals, and makes them all look like fools. My faith gives me the advantage of seeing through tangled webs of deceit, woven through many centuries and seemingly different ideologies. My faith tells me simply that there is only one reasonable assumption on the matter of Jew hate. It stems from God-hate. And I must admit that if I were Jewish, and I didn't even believe in God, then I would hate being Jewish more than anything I could possibly imagine. Because as long as there is God, there will be Jew hatred. And the only cure is loving God, which inspires loving every other human exactly the way one loves oneself. I'm not the first to say that. Jesus, the Jew, said it first. Interesting. Maybe, just maybe, God Himself has a litmus test. And maybe, just maybe, it's the Jews.
Kyle-Anne Shiver is a frequent contributor to American Thinker.
This article is archived at
|
|
BBC SILENT ABOUT BEING TERRORIZED IN GAZA: DISCRETION OR COWARDICE?
Posted by Mrla, January 16, 2009. |
|
Hamas took over BBC offices in Gaza last night and fired rockets from there Israeli media reports that Hamas took over the first floor of the building that the BBC offices in Gaza last night and fired rockets from there, trapping the journalists above. Despite the fact that their reporters have now escaped the building, the BBC has so far not said anything about this. When I was interviewed on the BBC last week, I commented on the pervasive intimidation of the MSM in Gaza, which is one of the reasons that there were none there when the hostilities broke out. I pointed out that the last journalist resident in Gaza, Alan Johnston, now the editor in chief, only survived because he was so openly pro-Palestinian, and even he got kidnapped and brutalized. "I'll cut that out to spare you a law suit, my interviewer said. You're impugning the integrity of a journalist, and without his credibility he can't practice his profession." I was at once struck by the combination of concern for reputation and shamelessness involved in such a "favor" to me. But here's the BBC, used as human shields by Hamas, and they won't let the public know. Now on the other hand, the Foreign Press has decided to boycott the visual material released by the Army Spokesperson's Unit (Dover Tzahal) because they object to not being allowed to go into Gaza and — get this — to the Israelis shelling buildings that hold press offices in Gaza. (I kid you not.) From: The Foreign Press Association
The FPA rejects and condemns the IDF policy of controlling the news coverage of the events in Gaza. by preventing the entry of foreign journalists into Gaza and bombing buildings housing offices of international media — contrary to IDF assurances that these media buildings would be safe — the IDF is severely violating basic principles of respect for press freedom. As a result of these unconscionable breaches, the FPA calls on all its members not to broadcast or print stills and videos the IDF provides as a substitute to independent reporting — until such time the IDF issues a formal apology for the attacks on the media buildings and offers assurances that no such event will occur in the future. From The Foreign Press Association (http://www.fpa.org.il/) It's hard to find a finer illustration of the sad truth that the media will behave in craven fashion towards those who will hurt them if the journalists displease them, and in arrogant fashion towards those who won't retaliate. Despite the many and vociferous denunciations of the Israelis in their statements during the current conflict, not one discusses misbehavior by Hamas. And the righteous indignation of the letter further illustrates my belief that, unable to admit to either their public or themselves that they are intimidated, they hid behind a pseudo-ideology that permits them to wax morally eloquent. Alas for the state of journalism. Alas for the MSM's Western public! Alas that Israel won't denounce these hypocrites. Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
SIX WOUNDED AS GRADS HIT BEERSHEBA
Posted by Daily Alert, January 16, 2009. |
|
This was written by Yaakov Lappin and is from today's
Jerusalem Post
|
|
Despite his mother's best efforts to protect him with her body, a seven-year-old boy was seriously wounded in Beersheba on Thursday when shrapnel from a Grad rocket penetrated his skull. Sderot house severely damaged in morning rocket barrage Surgeons at the city's Soroka University Medical Center were battling to stabilize Uriel Elazarov's condition during the evening, saying his life was in danger. A 43-year-old woman was seriously wounded in the abdomen by the rocket, and four other people sustained wounds described as light to moderate. Magen David Adom said 17 people were treated for shock. The Grad was one of two rockets fired at Beersheba at approximately 5 p.m. The second one hit an open area just outside the city, causing no injuries. The attack triggered sirens and prompted Uriel and his mother, Angela, to exit their vehicle and lie on the ground, as instructed by the Home Front Command. The Grad exploded nearby, sending shrapnel and metal balls that had been loaded into the warhead in every direction. 
Elazarov picked up her bleeding son from the pavement and hailed a passing vehicle for a lift to Soroka, where she works as an emergency room nurse. She placed a call to her husband, Avi, shortly after the rocket struck. "She told me she was on the ground when she suddenly heard a boom," he told Channel 1. An hour later, the air force destroyed the rocket launchers used in the attack. Elmaz Meshayev, Angela Elazaraov's sister, said Home Front Command instructions did nothing to help her nephew avoid injury. "Had they continued driving, they would have been okay," a distraught Meshayev said. But Beersheba Mayor Ruvik Danilovitch said the attack could have been worse had Elazarov not followed the directives. "The residents acted as they should have, stopping their vehicle and lying on the roadside," Danilovitch said. "Always listen to the Home Front Command. They [Hamas] will continue to fire on Beersheba as long as the war continues." Col. Yitzhak Eitan, head of the Home Front Command's Southern District, called the directives "absolute" during a conference call with journalists. "Those who get out of their vehicles and lie down will suffer fewer injuries than those who are farther away from the rocket impact zone but remain in their vehicles," he said. Eitan added that Hamas "still has limited capabilities. It fires close-range rockets most of the time, and occasionally aims far. We saw this today with Beersheba and last night with Ashdod." He asked residents of the South to "continue showing restraint and resilience over the coming week. I have no doubt it will be worth it." The rocket attack on Beersheba came after a period of calm in the city and resulted in its first serious injuries since the Gaza fighting began. Some 25 rockets were fired on southern Israel throughout Thursday. One hit the patio of a home in Sderot, causing serious damage to the building but no injuries. The Eshkol Regional Council and the Gedera region were struck by rockets in the morning.
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
|
|
NO, MR. JIHADI...GAZA ISN'T WARSAWNO, MR. JIHADI...GAZA ISN'T WARSAW
Posted by Gerald H Honigman, January 16, 2009. |
|
I was treated to a nauseating sight the other night. Fair and balanced Fox News interviewed an Arab about the Gaza thing to get that side of the current fighting. I can't remember his name. It doesn't matter. His response was typical, one that anyone who has followed the Arab-Israeli conflict over the last century could recite: The "Palestinians" (Arabs) are the new Jews, and the Jews are the new Nazis. But Arabs already have almost two dozen states on over six million square miles of territory, you reply — including one sitting on some 80% of the original 1920 Mandate of Palestine renamed Jordan. And Jews were stateless until the resurrection of their sole, tiny nation. Shhhhh...Don't ruin a fairy tale. Besides, don'tcha know, these ain't Arabs, they're "Palestinians" (so what if most came into the Mandate from elsewhere). Back to Fox News... Mr. Jihadi's version of Arab Jews and Jew Nazis is the now popular Gaza is the Warsaw Ghetto claim. For that desecration alone, if there is a Hell, he'll be there. And he'll have Adolph — er Pat — Buchanan, from the right (Gaza is Israel's concentration camp for Arabs), and zillions of lefties with similar claims keeping him company. Given ignorance and idiocy, a bit of background is in order. In 1940, the Nazis began to concentrate most of Poland's three million Jews into several ghettos. The word ghetto itself comes from a much earlier Church legacy vis-a-vis the Jews. One of the debates among the Church Fathers had to do with what should be done with the "Deicide People." Guess who they allegedly are? The "gentle" St. Augustine won out — at least at some times and in some places. So, instead of Jews being burned alive in their synagogues and such (which others suggested and which happened anyway), they were to purposely be kept alive — but in such a lowly state, that when people looked upon them, all would be reminded of their crime and recognize the Deicide People. The ghetta (today's ghetto) was where the iron foundries were located in Italy — the smelliest, most unhealthy areas of the city...Perfect for god-killers (I won't insult G_d by capitalizing the previous word), gated and locked as well. These soon spread throughout Christendom, while the "Arab" World constructed its own versions, mellahs, for its kilab yahud — Jew Dogs. Does anyone seriously wonder why Israel had to be reborn? The ghetto in Warsaw was the largest. It held about 400,000 Jews who were told that they would be "resettled" to the East or, at worse, would be going to forced labor camps to work for the Germans. By 1942, however, word of the Nazis' true plans had made it into the ghetto. The cattle cars were heading for extermination camps, part of the Final Solution. While some still kept their heads in the sand (not unlike too many Jews to this day), many faced reality and joined the resistance. This was harder for Jews since they often faced the anti-Semitism of the other folks as well — not only the Germans. The road to Auschwitz was indeed paved by many ingrained "religious" teachings... The full-fledged uprising of David vs. Goliath began in 1943 in the ghetto. Armed with some pistols, revolvers, home-made weapons and explosives, and some Polish rifles and such paid for dearly, the Jews took on their tormentors and embarrassed them profusely until the Nazis blasted every place they could possibly hide. During the Holocaust, the Nazis singled out the women and children first. The attractive of the former might be used for pleasure before being murdered. The kids were killed right away as they were of no use...unless they wound up in the labs of Nazi doctors to be turned into human guinea pigs for all kinds of grotesque experiments. All of this is well documented. One and half million of the six million slaughtered — for no other reason than they were Jews — were children. Okay, so now let's take a look at Mr. Jihadi's Gaza "Warsaw Ghetto." Unlike the Jews who weren't trying to kill any Germans, the Arabs of Gaza elected an organization dedicated to blowing both Jews and their State apart. The Arabs killed in the current fighting have been mostly fighters — despite Arab claims. The non-combatants killed have deliberately been used as human shields by their own "heroes." Where are the U.N., International Court Of Justice, academic, and other voices crying out about this blatant Arab war crime? They're as useless here as they are in stopping Arab genocide in black Africa. Unlike the Nazis who sought out every last Jew for extermination, Israel has deliberately already sent its own soldiers to their deaths on the ground, fighting door to door knowing, in advance, of booby traps waiting for them, but trying to avoid the deaths of non-combatant Arabs. I disagree with that policy. When the Allies fought the Nazis and Japan, they fire bombed German cities and nuked the latter. Israel is fighting Arabs who want it dead. No Israel, regardless of its size, is acceptable. Arab kids are brainwashed from the diaper to the camps to the schools to the mosques to murder Jews. Nothing Israel does humanely — treating Arabs in Israeli hospitals, supplying its Arab enemies (who else does that?), attempted compromises, and so forth — matters. Sad, but true. So, why waste Jewish lives? The world's hypocrites will condemn Israel's self defense anyway. Gaza should be taken care of from above. Actually, perhaps the Jews should follow the Arabs' own Hama Solution. When Syria's elder Assad had "problems," he wiped out 40,000 of his enemies in a month by leveling the town of Hama with artillery and so forth. Who screamed about that? Unlike Nazis who targeted Jews for just being Jews (as Arabs do as well), Israel has tried its best — given the Arab human shield game — to target Jihadi combatants rather than just plain Jihadis. If killing Arabs was Israel's goal, does anyone seriously doubt that it could have made Gaza Arabrein by now? Finally, as I write this, there's much talk now about a ceasefire — to give Hamas time to rearm and regroup. Not a good idea...especially since many of those tunnels delivering weapons from Egypt's Sinai are still functional. Imagine if this was reversed, and Israel allowed its territory to be used against Egypt — with which it supposedly has a peace treaty — this way? Israel should not accept any ceasefire unless it makes it very clear to all of the parties — especially an America under President Obama — that the next missiles fired against Israeli towns (as some ten thousand have already been since Israel's full withdrawal from Gaza several years back) will see Gaza turned into a remake of Dresden 1945, after the American and British fire bombing. Germany finally got the message and the war soon ended. Sometimes there's no other way — especially if your enemy has genocidal intentions. Unlike the "civilian" Arabs' murderous attitudes towards Jews and Israel which polls continuously confirm, Dresden's German and Hiroshima's Japanese civilians didn't seek the destruction of America. Arabs have had years and billions of dollars in aid to begin building that 22nd state they say they must have. They've used the time and the money to prepare for and conduct hostilities against their Jewish neighbor instead...a test of peaceful intent flunked with flying colors. All of this must be kept in mind when Israel finally decides to fight to win or to deliver, at the very least, the closest thing to a knockout punch. Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php |
|
JENNIFER LOEWENSTEIN, ACADEMIC JEW-HATER
Posted by Bryna Berchuck, January 16, 2009. |
|
This was written by John Perazzo and it appeared in Front
Page Magazine
John Perazzo is the Managing Editor of DiscoverTheNetworks and is the author of The Myths That Divide Us: How Lies Have Poisoned American Race Relations. For more information on his book, click here. E-mail him at wsbooks25@hotmail.com |
|
As it proceeds with Operation Cast Lead, Israel is under attack on two fronts. While Hamas-fired rockets bombard southern Israel, foreign critics condemn Israel's defensive reprisal as a human rights atrocity against the Palestinians. This reflexively anti-Israel tendency is particularly pronounced in Western academia, a point illustrated in the current conflict by the case of Jennifer Loewenstein, the Associate Director of the Middle East Studies Program at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Though Jewish, Loewenstein harbors a caustic hatred for Israel, a nation she views as an illegitimate entity with no right to exist. At the same time, she sees Palestinians as innocents, relentlessly oppressed and brutalized by violent, sadistic Jews. Both themes feature in an article that Loewenstein wrote on January 2, entitled "If Hamas Did Not Exist." In it, she wrote that "[t]he state terror unleashed from the skies and on the ground [by Israel] against the Gaza Strip...has nothing to do with Hamas...nothing to do with 'Terror'...or the long-term 'security' of the Jewish State." Rather it is a manifestation of Israel's quest to achieve "the wholesale enslavement" of Palestinians who "dare" to claim their "sovereign rights" and seek to free themselves from the Jewish "Empire's obscene military bases sitting on [their] cherished land." In her view, Israel's latest military campaign is rooted entirely in a "naked desire" for "hegemony," "power over the weak," and "dominion over the world's wealth." In the final analysis, she concluded, "Israel has no intention of allowing a viable, sovereign Palestinian state on its borders." On other occasions, Loewenstein has characterized the Israelis as "masters in the art of destruction" who seek to "devastate" and "decimate" Palestinian society with "record-breaking violations of international law and basic human morality"; who conduct ruthless campaigns of "state-sponsored terror" marked by "killing," "maiming," "atrocities," and "bloody and sadistic torture"; and who, "under a hideous veneer of 'security needs,'" are waging "a greedy imperial war" that inflicts "on-going brutality and barbarism" upon Palestinian civilians. Lamenting that "Gazans have not yet attained the status of human" in Israeli eyes, Loewenstein declares that Israel "and its US Master" now reside in "the lowest circle of Hell for betraying the name of humanity." Loewenstein characterizes Israel's current war against Hamas, not as a battle for national survival, but "another excuse to destroy Palestine." She wonders, with seeming bewilderment, "why Hamas, which won power in free, fair and transparent democratic elections has been deemed a criminal terrorist organization" by Israel. She suggests that Israeli officials are privately "grateful" whenever any of their countrymen die as a result of a Hamas-launched Qassam rocket (thousands of which have rained down upon southern Israel in recent years), because such casualties supposedly furnish Israel with a pretext for reigniting its "angry flames of intolerance" and assembling a "racially pure dreamland" devoid of Arabs. Moreover, Loewenstein contends, the Qassams themselves are outgrowths of the "systematic national torture and evisceration" which the Palestinians allegedly have long endured at the hands of Israel. Noting that Hamas stands as "the most popular of the opposition groups in Palestine today," Loewenstein says that any effort to destroy the organization would be immoral and counterproductive, causing "the further erosion of democratic civil society in Palestine and elsewhere." Loewenstein's assertions about Israel dovetail perfectly with her claim that life in Gaza reduces every Palestinian to "a walking human target, shadowed by hired [Israeli] killers who can destroy you and your surroundings at will." "In Gaza," she elaborates, "your livelihood is diminished each day by an impoverishment that is as deliberate as it is merciless." "The Palestinian economy has all but collapsed," she complains, "overall unemployment rates are in the region of 60 to 70 percent." Loewenstein's suggestion that Palestinian poverty is somehow part and parcel of an orchestrated Israeli plot cannot be reconciled with a number of inconvenient facts. For example, in the aftermath of the 1967 Six Day War, when five Arab armies jointly attacked the Jewish state in an effort to destroy it, Israel invested hundreds of millions of dollars toward modernizing the infrastructure, roads, sewerage, electricity, telephones, broadcasting systems, and water supplies of the West Bank and Gaza Strip — all in an effort to improve living conditions in the Palestinian territories and thus heighten the possibility of peaceful coexistence. Loewenstein's ludicrous contention is further at odds with the fact that as a result of these massive Israeli investments, the following trends emerged in the Palestinian territories between 1967 and 1994: The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) grew by an average of 13 percent annually; tourism grew exponentially while unemployment almost disappeared and incomes rose to levels far higher than those of other Arab countries; infant mortality rates were cut by 75 percent; inoculation programs led to the eradication of such childhood diseases as polio, whooping cough, tetanus, and measles; the percentage of children enrolled in school increased dramatically while illiteracy rates declined; and as a result of all these positive developments, the Arab population in the territories increased from approximately 950,000 to more than 3 million. Genocide does not typically lead to the tripling of a population. Loewenstein seems unaware of the fact that only after Yasser Arafat took the reins of the newly created Palestinian Authority in 1993 did the Palestinian economy suddenly collapse; that within nine years after Arafat's ascension, the West Bank's GDP had shrunk by fully 90 percent; and that according to a 2005 report by the UN Human Development program, the second Palestinian Intifada, which was launched in September 2000, caused Palestinian poverty rates to skyrocket further and ignited a "sharp deterioration in living standards and life chances." As David Meir-Levi puts it, "It was Arafat's war, not Israeli rule, that destroyed Palestinian prosperity and bled its people." Just as Loewenstein turned a blind eye to the evils of Yasser Arafat, she refuses to see the evils of Hamas, the vicious band of terrorists who refuse to accept any Jewish state in the Middle East. The Hamas Founding Charter, written in 1988, unambiguously affirms that "our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious...[and] should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realized"; that "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it"; that "the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [religious endowment] consecrated [exclusively] for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day"; that "there is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad"; and that "initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." Faithful to the sentiments expressed in that Charter, Hamas co-founder and foreign minister Mahmoud Zahar eagerly looks forward to a day when his map of the world "does not show Israel on it." "Even if the U.S. gave us all its money in return for recognizing Israel and giving up one inch of Palestine," he expounds, "we would never do so even if this costs us our lives. Similarly, in August 2005, Mahmoud al Zahar, the most senior Hamas member in Gaza, put it this way: "We do not and will not recognize a state called Israel. Israel has no right to any inch of Palestinian land. This is an important issue. Our position stems from our religious convictions. This is a holy land." "Let Israel die," he added for good measure. Abu Abdullah, a leading member of the Izzedine al-Qassam Martyrs Brigades, Hamas' nominal military wing, said in April 2007: "We don't recognize Israel's right to exist. We will never allow Jews to remain in our lands." In February 2008, Hamas cleric Wael Al-Zarad explained that the Islamic attacks upon the Jews "will only subside with their [the Jewish people's] annihilation." Though Loewenstein contends that the Mideast conflict boils down to a question of how to reapportion the region's real estate more equitably, Hamas' own words offer incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Characterizing Jews as a despicable "gang" that stands "apart from the rest of humanity," Hamas makes it clear that it seeks ultimately to subjugate not only the world's Jews, but indeed all of humanity. During an April 2008 speech that aired on Palestinian Al-Aqsa TV, Hamas cleric Yunis Al-Astal said: Very soon, Allah willing, Rome will be conquered, just like Constantinople was, as was prophesized by our prophet Muhammad. Today, Rome is the capital of the Catholics, or the Crusader capital, which has declared its hostility to Islam, and has planted the brothers of apes and pigs in Palestine in order to prevent the reawakening of Islam — this capital of theirs [Rome] will be an advanced post for the Islamic conquests, which will spread through Europe in its entirety, and then will turn to the two Americas, and even Eastern Europe. I believe that our children or our grandchildren will inherit our jihad.... Jennifer Loewenstein cannot see the evil in any of this. Like too many of her Ivory Tower colleagues, she believes the future of "democratic civil society in Palestine" depends, in large measure, on Hamas remaining an influential political entity in Gaza. Nor can she comprehend "why Hamas...has been deemed a criminal terrorist organization." That in itself is a telling commentary on the sad state of modern universities. What makes Loewenstein's views particularly troubling is that she is not a fringe academic figure. As the head of UW's Middle East Studies Program, she is directly responsible for an entire university department. Those parents spending thousands to have their children educated under her supervision should be aware just how extreme are the views they are helping to support. |
|
AN UNUSUAL SCENE
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 16, 2009. |
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il View
this art graphic and others at |
|
A FLICKERING OF BRAIN ACTIVITY INSIDE A.B. YEHOSHUA'S SKULL
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 16, 2009. | |
|
1. A. B. Yehoshua is the second-most renowned Israeli writer after Amos Oz, and both are the chiefs of the Israeli Literary Left. His latest novel, "Friendly Fire," was published in recent months. Yehoshua lives in my neighborhood and teaches a course on my campus, so I see him regularly and he is invariable spouting off leftist agitprop whenever anyone is conversing with him. One day I was in traffic behind a French Citroen covered with leftist bumper thinkers. Thinking to myself, who could possibly be driving such a crappy car, I got out to have a look and sure enough, it was A.B.!! He has a long history of political idiocy, not that unusual for literary figures. And while I myself suffer from congenital cynicism and skepticism about the ability of leftists to recover from their stupidity, and have probably infected you as well, I must say that I was pleasantly surprised when Yehoshua decided to tell off the ultra-traitor Gideon Levy, the Tokyo Rose-like columnist of Haaretz. Levy has never met a Palestinian terrorist he does not like, and he has never heard of a murder of a Jew that he wishes to condemn. Yehoshua is still far too nice and impressed with Levy's "moral conscience." Levy has a moral conscience that resembles that of Taliban John. When Yehoshua praises him for "risking his life to get at the truth," this reminds me a bit of the claims by Barry Chamish's cult followers that Chamish had to flee Israel from assassination attempts (as opposed to, say, fleeing Israel to avoid prosecution for drunk driving indictment after a car crash). Nevertheless, the fact that Yehoshua at last understands that Levy is an anti-Semite and not someone seeking peace is extremely impressive. Here is Yehoshua to Levy: "When I asked you after the disengagement from Gaza, Gideon, explain to me why they are firing missiles at us, you replied that they want us to open the crossings. I asked you whether you truly believe that if they fire missiles the crossings will be opened, or the opposite. And whether you truly believe that it is right and just to open crossings into Israel for those who declare openly and sincerely that they want to destroy our country. I did not get an answer from you." Pretty tame stuff coming from anyone else, but from Yehoshua this is practically being born again! Yehoshua has only recovered 10 or 15% from his moonbattery. But perhaps there is still hope even for him! The full essay is here:
2. THE ROCKET BLITZ
A fascinating question of history is what might have happened had Neville Chamberlain not resigned in May 1940 but continued on as British prime minister, with Winston Churchill never taking command. What would have happened during the blitz as bombs and rockets exploded all over London, killing and maiming men, women and children? After careful consideration, the following is a virtual history of the London blitz without Churchill: As the rockets begin to land and explode around London, Chamberlain announces that he recognizes the German Reich and the right of Germany to set up its own state in areas released from Czech and Polish occupation. Britain appeals to Hitler to arrest those enemies of peace who are launching rockets at London. Chamberlain appeals to the political leaders of the Reich to denounce the rocket terror and begin negotiations to end the attacks. Hitler insists he is trying his best to stop the violence but is having trouble controlled the radicals who have taken over the German parliament. The British foreign minister agrees. To help calm the situation, the British government agrees to send food and medicine to Germany. The RAF targets and assassinates some Luftwaffe pilots and base personnel, but several German civilians are killed; Britain is denounced for this by the international community and by the British Labor Party. Hitler speaks at a large rally in Nuremberg and exhorts the masses to remember the martyred German pilots who were killed while dropping bombs on London, and to strive to continue their mission. Chamberlain praises Hitler's speech for exhibiting moderation and restraint. He begins sending small arms to the Germans to help control the anti-peace German underground opposition groups. During a lull in the bombings, Chamberlain makes a speech in which he says he is more concerned about the invasion of Britain by Hollywood movies than he is by buzz bombs (to be echoed decades later in an Oslo-era speech by Shimon Peres in which Peres would say he is far more worried about the infiltration into Israel of cable television than the infiltration of terrorists). When more bombs explode, the calls increase inside Britain to strike back at Germany. The British Union for German Human rights denounces this as racism and bigotry. Chamberlain points out that massive retaliation would be the very worst option possible. Britain must endeavor to make peace with its German peace partners, not feed the fires of hatred. This is the only way to achieve a New Middle Europe, he insists. And besides, if Hitler is not supported and strengthened, an even more radical and violent leader will emerge in Germany. As more rockets fall, Chamberlain points out that the dead are simply martyrs for peace and Britain must carry on with its peace process, since there is no alternative. A pro-German member of the British parliament travels to Berlin and calls for Britain's annihilation. Chamberlain allows Oswald Mosley's fascist party to run in the election. Mosley's people exercise hegemony over the British universities and the media. After more rockets explode, Chamberlain loses his temper and decides to take action at last. He assigns extra police to guard the Underground stations in London. He orders British critics of his peace process to be arrested for criminal incitement against the government, accusing the critics of undermining peace efforts and endangering security. Chamberlain meets with British antiwar poets and writers and they issue an appeal to the British public to remain firm in the face of adversity and continue to strive for peace. Stiff British upper lip and all that. Chamberlain again appeals to President Hitler, as the legitimate leader of the Teutonic peoples, to arrest those responsible for the rocket aggressions. But he reminds British citizens that the unbearable alternative to negotiations with the Reich would be to send British soldiers back into the territories of Central Europe. Teams of pro-German professors from British universities tour the world demanding a boycott of all commerce and trade with Britain. More rockets land. Chamberlain proposes speeding up the peace process and disarming the Royal Navy as a show of good will. The representatives of Vichy France come for a state visit, congratulating Chamberlain and the British and German peoples for their devotion to peace in the face of provocation. Some more rockets land. Chamberlain proposes, as a retaliatory measure, arresting some pro-German spies inside Britain, but British civil rights lawyers appeal to the Court of Appeals and the ruling is overturned. The government considers proposals to turn Stonehenge over to the Germans as a goodwill gesture, since it is a holy shrine for all pagans. Even more rockets land. The British Peace Now movement notes that there would be no violence at all if the British would just disarm altogether and stop making Hitler feel insecure. Besides, they say, the British should not be occupying Scotland and Wales at all, lands in which they don't belong. Chamberlain opens secret negotiations with Germany to transfer London's East End, Greenwich and Docklands areas to German sovereignty. Many more rockets land. That's it, yells Chamberlain. The proverbial camel's back is broken. It is time to fight German terror with all means at our disposal. This is the Moral Equivalent Of War, he yells — MEOW, for short. There is no alternative. We must, he declares, initiate talks with Germany at once so that we can conduct unilateral withdrawal as quickly as possible from Devon and the Midlands.
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
|
|
JUDAIZE A JEWISH CITY?; NGOS POLITICALIZED CHRISTMAS; SELF-HATING OLMERT REPEATING MISTAKES
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 16, 2009. |
|
ADVANTAGE OF BEING BEHIND IN THE NEWS I just started reading news more than two weeks old. It gives me a perspective on Gaza. Current news emphasizes the damage in Gaza and world protests against that. The older news emphasized the escalating rocket attacks on Israeli cities. From the older news, one sees the justification for the current incursion. "JUDAIZATION' OF JERUSALEM? Now Syria is pondering how to keep Israel from Judaizing Jerusalem and destroying Islamic and Christian holy places. Why include Christianity in a concern that it does not feel for it? For propaganda. Islam Islamicized other religions' holy sites and temples, including St. Sophia's in Constantinople, the Temple Mount, and in India. Jordan destroyed all the synagogues in the Old City, upon conquering it. The P.A. and its people keep attacking Rachel's Tomb and Joseph's Tomb and trying to gain exclusive access to the Cave of the Patriarchs and Temple Mount. Intolerant Islam pretends its opponents are intolerant. By contrast, Israel does not destroy other religions' holy sites. Nor has any evidence been adduced that it does. Just rabble-rousing charges since the 1920s that the Jews are trying to destroy al-Aqsa mosque. The Jewish people, which rebuilt the whole country since then, can't seem to destroy the one mosque in all those decades. Doesn't that strike the Muslims as strange? How would they square that with Israel's recent decision, which I deplore, to restore numerous mosques abandoned during the civil war of 1947-49? Vague and false as is the charge of destroying non-Jewish holy places, even vaguer and more false is the charge of "Judaizing" Jerusalem, whose Muslims population keeps growing. This is like the defamatory charge of genocide in Israel's restrained self-defense against the Territorial Arabs, whose population keeps growing, though many don't like it there and emigrate. Seems more like genocide in reverse. I don't know what "Judaize" means, and they don't specify. But I visited Jerusalem recently. It was a largely Jewish city when I first visited it in 1971, and it remained so in 2008. Maybe the real problem is that the Muslims are trying to Islamicize it — that is, keep Jews from buying property there, from building there, and from access to their holiest site, the Temple Mount. LIVNI SHORTSIGHTED STILL When Hamas ended the truce with a bombardment of Israeli cities, Foreign Min. Livni protested to the UNO. She failed to denounce the illicit arms smuggling that her truce facilitated by ceasing to target Hamas arms. She wrote that she thought they were beginning to make peace (IMRA, 12/22). Making peace by using a respite from Israeli attacks to smuggle in the arms with which to bombard more? Israel's ruling class still doesn't get it. A truce is no good if it enables the enemy to restore its military and return to the fray. It is much better to beat the enemy and keep him down, than to let the enemy get refreshed and rise up again. The enemy's hope of victory or of at least inflicting greater damage upon Israel is a disincentive towards peace. What peace did she expect from a society that devotes itself daily to hating Israel? NGOS POLITICALIZED CHRISTMAS They issued Christmas cards and lyrics for carols that toted the Arab propaganda line against Israel. That line falsely alleges Arab suffering at Israel's hands. One ditty refers to uprooting of olive trees [but the Muslims uproot Jews' crops, not the reverse]. These British NGOs, such as War On Want and Pax Christi, whose representative claimed that the lyrics describe what is going on, condemn the security fence but not the Muslim terrorism that induced it. The representative said that for opposing Israel, he'll be called antisemitic. The NGOs made Jesus out to be a "Palestinian," rather than a Jew. [Don't Christians resent perverting his identity and role for their politics of prejudice?] They blame Israel for the exodus of Christian Arabs actually caused by Muslim oppression. [What kind of Christians are they, blaming the innocent Jews for violent bigotry against Christians by Muslim Arabs! Obviously, they don't care about their fellow Christians, all they care about is defaming Jews.] "Christian and Jewish community leaders strongly condemned the event. The Israeli Ambassador said 'it was appalling to see a church allow one of its most endearing seasonal traditions to be hijacked by hatred.'" War On Want elicited funds for outright political purposes, such as to stop the security fence. These NGOs stoke conflict (IMRA, 12/22 from NGO Monitor). Of course Pax Christi will be called antisemitic. What else is its perversion of its own religious tradition, defamation of Israel, and ignoring of P.A. terrorism and repression especially of Christians? I suppose these groups depend on the biased media, and don't solicit Israel's explanation. WHO REVEALED HIZBULLAH FRAUD During the recent war in Lebanon, Hizbullah doctored photographs and offered them as evidence of Israeli war crimes. Israeli diplomats did not expose the fraud. Individuals online did! (Arutz-7, 12/22). UNDERSTANDING THE OLMERT SELF-HATRED REGIME I found it difficult to understand the hatred of Jewish nationalism and religion that typifies the Olmert-Livni-Barak regime. Then Prof. Steven Plaut reminded me that the Chanukah story is about just that). Some people think the story is just about an oil lamp miracle. Others think it only is about resisting Greek oppression. Most of all it was a struggle between the dominant Hellenizing element among the Jews of Judea and the religious Jews. The Hellenizers repudiated their faith and identity. The Maccabees fought for faith, identity, and country. Hence we Jews exist as Jews, today. The Olmert regime, and at least the Far Left, seem to be committing national suicide, seek to be accepted by hostile foreigners, cede their national rights, and adopt alien ways of thought. Now I understand it. Where is Judah Maccabee? We need him now! OLMERT DIDN'T LEARN FROM MISTAKES After having lost the war in Lebanon, PM Olmert refused demands to step down. He argued that he was the best one to correct his mistakes. (Huh?) He claimed to have learned from them. He didn't learn. Just as he did in Lebanon, he imposed a ceasefire enabling the terrorists of Gaza extend its menace from a few missiles to thousands, and from a few thousand potential victims to a million. When Olmert committed the now demonstrated folly of evacuating from Gaza, he claimed that if terrorists there renewed attacks, Israel would enjoy international support for self-defense. The terrorists did renew attacks, proving the Olmert regime foolish. The regime preceded its attack with a public relations campaign, which is good but proves the regime knew it had blundered in evacuating. And the regime lacks international support, even against an Iranian terrorist proxy! [Guess the regime underestimated international antisemitism.] Further proof he didn't learn is his repeating his goal with Lebanon. Instead of seeking victory, he seeks to get foreigners to protect Israel from Hamas. Foreign troops in Lebanon merely enabled Hizbullah to break the truce agreement and rearm (Caroline Glick in IMRA, 12/22). Regime stupidity is profound! 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 |
|
ARE HUMAN RIGHTS FOR SOME, BUT NOT FOR OTHERS?
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 15, 2009. |
|
Liraz Madmony, a 23-year-old law student from Sderot, addressed the UN Human Rights Council Special Session on Gaza in Geneva on behalf of the European Union of Jewish Students (EUJS) on Monday, before the vote by the council that condemned Israel's military offensive in Gaza and resolved to send a fact-finding mission to investigate alleged Israeli abuses against Palestinians. 
Liraz Madmony of Sderot addresses the UN in Geneva, Monday. (Photo: Courtesy) Here is the text of her speech. Thank you, Mr. President. I come from Sderot, the city in Israel that for eight years has been terrorized, by 10,000 rockets fired against us from Gaza. As a law student, I learned — and I believe — that all human beings have the right to peace and security. But when I see today's resolution, I ask: Why is the United Nations ignoring my suffering? When the terrorists committed these 10,000 violations of international human rights and humanitarian law, why was the UN silent? Are human rights for some, but not others? The constant assault on Sderot has destroyed our ability to lead a normal life. The warning before each attack gives us only 15 seconds to run for shelter. Fifteen seconds that will decide, life or death. Mr. President, who will protect our right to life? My family does not have a bomb shelter, so we run to the most protected room, which is the shower. There is one attack I will never forget. We heard the siren at seven in the morning. We ran to the shower. The rockets fell next to my house. My little brother, who was 14, went to see if anyone needed help. He found a man whose legs were blown off, and a woman blown to pieces. My youngest brother is six. The rockets have been falling for eight years. He knows no other reality. Everyone suffers in Sderot. Fathers and mothers are afraid to go to work, creating poverty. Kids are afraid to go to school. I have missed many of my law classes. My friends are afraid to visit. The streets lie empty. I dream of the hometown that I remember. When the park near my house was filled with happy families and children playing. When people enjoyed life. I still dream of peace. It will come when the rulers of Gaza choose humanity over hate, when they stop firing on our children while hiding behind their own. We refuse to grant victory to the terrorists. We choose to live, staying strong with our faith, family and love of country. Mr. President, who will protect our most basic human rights? My country is now trying its best, and all who love life and desire peace should pray they succeed. Thank you, Mr. President. |
|
KRISTALLNACHT IN VENEZUELA?
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 15, 2009. |
|
This was written by Kathy Shaidle; she blogs at FiveFeetOfFury.com. Her new book exposing abuses by Canada's Human Rights Commissions, The Tyranny of Nice, includes an introduction by Mark Steyn. |
|
Less than a month ago, Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez joined his Argentinean and Brazilian counterparts to sign the "2008 Declaration Against Anti-Semitism", under which the three countries agreed to "condemn racism, religious intolerance, racial discrimination and related intolerance." However, it wasn't long before the Simon Wiesenthal Center and the Anti-Defamation League were obliged to issue another round of their regular condemnations of Chavez, this time for comparing Israel's counteroffensive against Hams to the Holocaust, and for expelling Israeli ambassador Shlomo Cohen shortly after that military offensive began earlier this month. Approximately one thousand protestors in Caracas celebrated Cohen's expulsion by spray painting graffiti on the Israeli consulate, smashed windows and throwing shoes and firecrackers at the building. Aimee Kligman, who covers foreign policy for Examiner.com, reported that protesters "proceeded to stamp and burn the Israeli flag" — a gesture "unheard of until now" on the streets of Caracas. Kligman also warned that a "mini-Kristallnact" might be in the works. "Sources which cannot be revealed because safety is a factor," she wrote on January 8, "have confirmed that attacks are expected on Jewish businesses, schools [and] community centers." Sure enough, the next day Pynchas Breneer, the Chief Ashkenazi Rabbi of Venezuela, told The Jerusalem Post that Chavez had recently expropriated a Jewish owned shopping mall, and that Jewish schools in the capital would be closed "for a few days." The Chavez government has targeted Jewish schools before, most notoriously in 2004, when rumors of Mossad involvement in the assassination of a Venezuelan official prompted a fruitless raid on a Jewish grade school in search of "electronic equipment, arms" and other evidence connected with the murder. At the time, the Stephen Roth Institute for The Study of Contemporary Anti-Semitism and Racism decried the raid as "a way of threatening the Jewish community" at a time when "Chavez was visiting Iran for discussions on oil, an interest common to both these anti-American states." Three years later, the Venezuelan secret police conducted another unsuccessful search for weapons, this time at the Hebraic Social, Cultural and Sports Center, the most important gathering place for the country's ever shrinking Jewish community. (The Latin American Jewish Congress estimates that Venezuela's Jewish community has gone from an estimated 22,000 when Chavez was elected in 1999, to between 12,000 and 13,000 in 2008.) No wonder, since Chavez has made numerous anti-Semitic public statements over the years, such as cautioning his opponents not to "be poisoned by wandering Jews" and calling the world's wealthy "the descendants of the same ones that crucified Christ." Last weekend, the Venezuelan President issued statements condemning Israel and the United States, addressed to both Palestinians and to Israeli anti-war activists on the left and the right. "We are not united by one nationality," said Chavez last Saturday, "Rather, what unites us is blood — the blood shed in Gaza is the blood of humanity. Venezuela kisses each and every one of you and stresses that it supports the Palestinian people and all those who suffer from the occupation." Then Venezuela sent a cargo plane to the Gaza Strip by way of Cairo, reportedly loaded with tons of medical supplies "and other materials." In a radio address, Chavez called Israel "the murder arm of the United States" and accused it of "waging a Holocaust against the Palestinian people" and promised another "humanitarian shipment" would be on its way to Gaza next week. Meanwhile, reports Aimee Kligman, those three Latin American signators of that "2008 Declaration of Anti-Semitism" are scheduled to meet again on January 19. However, Kligman says it would be "naive" to expect the leaders of Brazil and Argentina to chastise Chavez for breaching so quickly the agreement they'd all just signed. "What is even more ironic," writes Kligman, "is that the home page of the World Jewish Congress [WJC] touts a headline that demonstrates they are not keeping current with events. It reads: 'WJC welcomes clear commitment by Latin American leaders.' Someone get an alarm clock please." For years, Chavez has felt free to flout world opinion and his own signed agreements when it comes to anti-Semitism and other issues, Kligman believes, because "U.S. foreign policy, as dictated by Bush," is to avoid "engaging with our enemies." Kligman adds, "Surely, this is not a policy that should be perpetuated by the Obama leadership." Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
YOU ARE IN MY THOUGHTS, ISRAEL
Posted by ToedTemeierr, January 15, 2009. |
|
I am an American Sailor and a Washington State Soldier. The Free People of Israel are always in my mind. I am disgusted at the way my country's "main stream" media portray the conflict in Gaza. Did they report with breathless urgency every time a Hamas fired rocket landed in an Israeli suburb??? Did they painstakingly measure how many meters from an Israeli day-care each rocket hit? Has this only happened in the last week?? The answer is no. This crap has been going on for way too long. The fact of the matter is that Israel shares our values. There I said it, others have before me and I will say it too! I am not a very religious man myself, but I consider the 10 commandmants to be the best laws EVER! I am just very passoinate about my support for Israel. I can not say much more now. But if you are in Israel and reading this, you have a friend of German descent who will fight for you in America as long as he draws free breath! |
|
FROM ISRAEL: THE CRUNCH
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 15, 2009. |
|
Please know: After this posting there is not likely to be another until after Shabbat, unless something of major significance transpires by early tomorrow. ~~~~~~~~~~ It's going down to the wire soon, and I'm feeling enormous unease as to how things will finish. Hamas has not been taken down nearly enough yet, in spite of all we've done, which has been considerable. This is obvious on the face of things because they are making demands. A vanquished party doesn't do that. ~~~~~~~~~~ But beyond the matter of their demands is another issue of considerable significance Many terms and concepts are being bandied about in the media. It's important to be more specific as we look at our expectations for resolution of this war. We are definitely not working towards a permanent truce with Hamas — a permanent cessation of hostilities. Would that this could be the case! But to achieve this we would have to reach the point of unconditional surrender, as reader Don Salem has pointed out. They would have to cry "uncle!" as Japan did after WWII. Or, in the terms of General Kupervasser, be defeated sufficiently to abandon notions of destroying us — relegating this goal to a hypothetical far distant future. Not only are we not there, we're not going to get there. So, we're looking at something temporary. Preferably, long-term temporary. Egypt, as I had recently mentioned, was seeking something like 10 years. Hamas is talking about something much shorter term. This we know. But exactly what does Hamas have in mind? There are two Arabic terms for temporary cessations of hostilities. One is hudna. This is a more formal agreement that has distinct Islamic religious connotations, as Mohammad had a hudna with the Quraysh tribe. Hamas is an Islamic organization — they all know this and take it seriously. While Mohammad was observing the hudna, he did no attacking — although he was garnering strength. And, of course, it didn't last forever. Ultimately Mohammad attacked. The other is a tahadiyah. This is a less formal arrangement that is devoid of religious connotation. Because it has no religious connection, there is more of a sense that some attacking — some launching of rockets — is acceptable even during this period. From June through December last year, we had a tahadiyah with Hamas, and they continued to launch rockets, but fewer. We didn't have quiet, but, rather, "relative" quiet. There is an Islamic term — Sulkh, I believe — for a permanent cessation of hostilities. But it is not relevant in this context. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today I spoke with an Arabic-speaking researcher at MEMRI — the Middle East Media Research Institute, which monitors what Arabs are saying in Arabic and provides translations; his jurisdiction is Egyptian media. He told me that in the Egyptian media, in reports about Egyptian mediation with Hamas for ceasing fire, they are using the term tahadiyah. Only tahadiyah? I asked. Only tahadiyah, he responded. This tells us, unequivocally, that we must bring Hamas down a great deal more. ~~~~~~~~~~ I also spoke today with an Arabic speaker with Intelligence connections. This is what he told me: Even if Egypt were sincere and truly wanted to stop the smuggling, they couldn't. The Egyptian government is weak, he told me. The Sinai (which is adjacent to the Philadelphi Corridor) is run by the Bedouin, who do the smuggling, and the Egyptian army cannot control the Bedouin. This tells us, unequivocally, that we can stop the smuggling only if we do it ourselves. ~~~~~~~~~~~ These, then, are the parameters for a truly successful conclusion to the war. The international community is breathing down our necks, and the government is not of one mind on the issues. (More about this below.) At the moment we are still fighting hard, pushing deeper into Gaza City and attacking with more strength. We are in the heart of the city now and have taken three neighborhoods. Is this the third stage of the war? Is there more to come? I very much fear that we will end short of where we need to be. ~~~~~~~~~~ In my wildest dreams I never imagined I would say what I am about to say now: At the moment, Ehud Olmert is a champion in my eyes. He is holding fast to continue fighting, even as the other members of the "triumvirate" are ready to call it quits. We will not, he has declared, end up as we did after the Lebanon war, when Hezbollah was able to regain strength. We haven't fought to end up no better than this. So, call him a tentative hero, a qualified hero, but bravo to him. I cannot see into the head of this man, who not so long ago informed us that we must divide Jerusalem. There are those who say he's acting as he is because his political career is over, and he has nothing to lose (while Barak and Livni are campaigning). May be, but still it means that when he has nothing to lose he sees this as the right thing to do. It means there is a strong Zionist conviction in him, when truth is told. (A Zionist conviction that he betrayed for so long, for whatever perverse reasons.) In any event, I'm so very glad he's holding fast and give him the credit that is due him. And we'll take each day as it goes. (Please, my good friends, don't deluge me with comments about him. This is how I see it now. Who knows what tomorrow will bring.) ~~~~~~~~~~ According to reports that have leaked, it is Barak that Olmert is battling with most directly. He is particularly furious with him because Barak floated the idea of the two-week humanitarian cease-fire. As one government official explained it, "The irresponsibility of ministers — regardless of how senior they are — in leading private initiatives is unfortunate. [The publication of proposed plans] gives encouragement to Hamas, gives a shot in the arm to their backers, and has an immediate effect of the fate of a million Israelis in the south and thousands of IDF soldiers carrying out operations inside Gaza." There is also an unconfirmed report that Livni wanted to go to Washington to ask the US to help with arms smuggling. The prime minister's office has denied this. ~~~~~~~~~~ Several readers have asked me about Gilad Shalit and whether he will be part of any final cease-fire deal with Hamas. He certainly should be. The only one in the government I've seen mention this forthrightly is Justice Minister Daniel Friedman, earlier this week. Yesterday, hundreds of young people rallied in Tel Aviv, at Museum Plaza, demanding that any cease-fire settlement include Shalit's release. Said a boyhood friend of Shalit: "[His release] has to be a clear-cut goal. We will not let the government agree on a ceasefire with Hamas otherwise. Olmert, Barak, Livni — we will not let you do this. There can be no agreement without Gilad." And today, Livni met with Red Cross President Jacob Kellenberger and demanded that he push his people to make an effort to visit Shalit. Said she: [The issue of Shalit] "is a pivotal part of the Gaza [campaign]. The Red Cross has access to every prisoner around the world, but here there is a terror organization which is denying this access." This is, perhaps, on the way to, but not yet saying, that we won't stop until we have Shalit. What is suggested by "a pivotal part" is unclear. ~~~~~~~~~~ Tonight there are reports that we may strike a deal that we will open the crossing at the end of the war in exchange for reduced demands by Hamas for Shalit. I want Shalit released as much as the next Israeli does. But if this is true it is deeply unsettling. Insulting. This implies that instead of releasing 1,000 terrorists, some with blood on their hands, we'd just have to release maybe a few hundred. But why release any? If they are getting crossings opened, let them release Shalit! No Shalit, no opened crossings. Simple. So many rumors; I hope this is not accurate. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today was a tough day. UN Secretary-General Ban is in town, and he must be counted as an enemy. I am, quite honestly, proud of how our government responded to him. Everything is in place for a cease-fire, Ban said. Whether it happens or not depends on the will of Israel. Excuse me? He was informed that we were fighting in self-defense. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today we hit an UNRWA compound in Gaza City because gun shots and anti-tank missiles were fired at our troops from the building. This is according to senior defense officials. We fired artillery shells in the direction from which the shooting had come, in the process wounding three and setting a wing of the building on fire. We then brought in five fire trucks to put out the fire. Ban expressed outrage, and Olmert replied, "...this is a sad incident and I regret it, but our forces were attacked from there and our response was harsh." ~~~~~~~~~~ The most prominent military action of the day today was the killing during an air strike in Gaza City of Said Siam, Hamas interior minister. Head of several security apparatuses of Hamas, he served also as its liaison between the political and military wings. And he was one of the masterminds of the Hamas takeover of Gaza in 2007. Siam is the most senior member of Hamas to be killed so far. Killed along with him were Salah Abu Shrakh, the head of the Hamas general security service, Mahmoud Watfa, one of the commanders of the Hamas military wing, and his brother and son. ~~~~~~~~~~ Amos Gilad has returned from his consultations with the Egyptians, and is reporting to key members of the government. Last we heard, Hamas had "agreed in principle" to a cease-fire, but had stipulations. Now Egyptian media is saying Israel has "agreed in principle," but has reservations. This evening Khaled Mashaal, in Damascus, insisted that Hamas was holding to its demands (demands??) for a ceasefire: "We have informed all those exerting efforts ... for a truce that we have specific demands. First, the aggression must stop; second, the [Israeli] forces must withdraw from Gaza ... immediately, of course; thirdly, the siege must be lifted and fourth we want all crossing-points [into Gaza] reopened, first of which Rafah. "We will not accept any political movement that doesn't satisfy these demands." ~~~~~~~~~~ The Security Cabinet will meet tomorrow to decide whether to accept Cairo's proposal or continue fighting. We don't know, of course, how closely what Cairo offered to Gilad resembles what Mashaal, sitting in Damascus, is demanding. The terms of the Gaza contingent of Hamas might have been different. But there is an arrogance coming from Hamas, yet, an expectation that they can set terms, that seems to make it unlikely that we'll accept. What is more, the "security arrangements" for stopping smuggling are not in place. To stop now would be to fall terribly short of what we intend to accomplish. But I don't know what will happen... My sense of it is that it will be soon, but not yet. According to Amos Harel in Haaretz, Cairo is demanding the return of the PA to the Rafah Crossing as a condition for it being opened. That's been Egypt's position. Would Hamas accept this, when the PA in Gaza is anathema to them? I'm hearing about a year of quiet being offered. Only a year. In what terms, at what price? ~~~~~~~~~~ Obama has broken his silence and says he'll work from day one to stop hostilities between Israel and Hamas. In an interview on CBS yesterday, he reportedly said, "...we are going to take a regional approach, we're going to have to involve Syria in discussions, we are going to have to engage Iran..." Oh joy! Here it comes. Will this have an influence our government's decision regarding how long to keep fighting? Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
EUROPE REIMPORTS JEW HATRED
Posted by LEL, January 15, 2009. |
|
This was written by Daniel Schwammenthal, who edits the State of
the Union column, the Wall Street Journal,
|
|
The mythical Arab Street now reaches deep into Paris, London, Berlin and Madrid. Give Giancarlo Desiderati credit for his unintellectual honesty. While most left-wing detractors of Israel claim their animosity toward the Jewish state has nothing to do with anti-Semitism, the head of a small Italian union, Flaica-Uniti-Cub, wasted no time with such sophism. Having long called for a boycott of Israeli goods, Mr. Desiderati last week made the logical next step. "Do not buy anything from businesses run by the Jewish community," his group's Web site urged Italians. Jews around Europe are increasingly under attack since Israel decided two weeks ago to defend itself after years of rocket fire at its civilian population. There have been arson attempts on synagogues in Britain, Belgium and Germany. Police last week arrested Muslim protesters who wanted to enter the Jewish quarter in Antwerp. Several Danish schools with large Muslim student bodies say they won't enroll Jewish kids because they can't guarantee the children's safety. In France, a group of teenagers attacked a 14-year-old girl last week, calling her "dirty Jew" while kicking her. At rallies in Germany and the Netherlands over the past two weeks, protesters shouted, "Hamas, Hamas, Jews to the Gas." In Amsterdam, Socialist lawmaker Harry van Bommel and Greta Duisenberg, widow of the first European Central Bank president, marched at the front of one such "peace" demonstration. They didn't join in the background chorus calling for another Holocaust. Instead, they chanted, "Intifada, Intifada, Free Palestine." Mr. Van Bommel later insisted this wasn't a call for Jewish blood but for "civil disobedience" — a laughable defense given that terrorists during the last intifada murdered more than 1,000 Israelis. Most of the anti-Jewish violence and protests in Europe come from immigrants. In what may have been a Freudian recognition of the changing face of Europe, CNN two weeks ago used footage of anti-Israeli protesters in London in a report about the growing anger in the "Arab and Muslim world." The mythical Arab Street now reaches deep into Paris, London, Berlin and Madrid. After a burning car was rammed into a gate outside a synagogue in Toulouse last week, President Nicolas Sarkozy issued a statement that was as morally confused as his judgment of Israel's Gaza offensive. Mr. Sarkozy, who condemned both Hamas terror and Israel's attempt to stop it, also blurred the distinction between the victims and perpetrators of anti-Semitism in France. His country "will not tolerate international tensions mutating into intercommunity violence," he warned, suggesting that the violence in France comes not only from French Muslims but Jews as well. Mr. Sarkozy's comments also suggest that the fighting in Gaza is the cause for attacks on Jews in France — that is, that the Mideast conflict is fueling anti-Semitism in Europe. It is exactly the other way around. The rage against the Jews that is exploding in Europe has been carefully nurtured; it is not spontaneous sympathy for fellow Muslims in Gaza. How else to explain the silence when Muslims in other conflicts, from Darfur to Chechnya, are being killed? The depth of anti-Semitic propaganda in Palestinian and other Muslim societies is one of the most underreported facts about the Middle East. It is this anti-Semitism that predisposes Muslims in Europe to attack Jews and fuels the Mideast conflict. The hatred predates Israel's creation. To illustrate this point: The Palestinian leader during World War II, Hajj Amin al Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, conspired with Hitler to bring the Holocaust to Palestine. Luckily, the British stopped the German troops in Africa. The Mufti spent the war years in Berlin and was later indicted for war crimes but with the help of the Muslim Brotherhood escaped to Egypt. Hamas is the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Hamas and other Islamists continue what the Mufti had helped to start: a blend of European anti-Semitism and Islam-inspired Jew hatred. The rejection of Israel's right to exist is what drives their attacks. The media, though, largely ignores Hamas's ideology and its crimes of hiding its leaders and weapons among its own civilian population, and demonizes Israel's attempt to protect its citizens. Hamas and other Islamists are not even trying to hide their ideology. Just read the Hamas charter or check out Hamas TV, including children's programs, for a nauseating dose of murderous anti-Semitism. Last week, the French broadcasting authorities banned Hamas TV for inciting violence and hatred. Unfortunately, just like Hezbollah TV, which is also banned in Europe for its anti-Semitic and jihadi content, audiences here can still receive these programs due to Saudi Arabia's Arabsat and Egyptian satellite provider Nilesat. The Islamist variation of Jew hatred is now being reimported to Europe. Muslims in Europe, watching Hamas and Hezbollah TV with their satellite dishes, are being fed the same diet of anti-Semitism and jihadi ideology that Palestinians and much of the Middle East consume. This brings a unique challenge to the difficult integration of Muslims in Europe. When it comes to issues like Shariah law and terrorism, one can expect a true "clash of civilizations." There is no Western tradition that would justify "honor killings." Anti-Semitism, on the other hand, is not alien to Europe's culture — to the contrary, the Continent once excelled at it and many still share the feeling. A Pew study from September shows 25% of Germans and 20% of French are still affected by this virus. In Spain, 46% have unfavorable views of Jews. Is there really no connection between this statistic and the fact that the Spanish media and government are among Europe's most hostile toward the Jewish state? Is it just a coincidence that Europe's largest anti-Israel demonstration took place Sunday in Spain, with more than 100,000 protesters? A 2006 study in the Journal of Conflict Resolution based on the survey in 10 European countries suggests otherwise. Yale University's Edward H. Kaplan and Charles A. Small found "that anti-Israel sentiment consistently predicts the probability that an individual is anti-Semitic, with the likelihood of measured anti-Semitism increasing with the extent of anti-Israel sentiment observed." With little hope that the media coverage will become more balanced and the incitement of the growing Muslim community will abate, the Jews in Europe are facing uncertain times. Contact LEL at lel817@yahoo.com |
|
NEW HAMAS DICTIONARY
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 15, 2009. |
|
This is by Robert Arial and it appeared in Jewish World Review. |
Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
NUANCES OF PROPAGANDA; RUSSIA STILL HELPING IRAN; "DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED," LIKE HELL!
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 15, 2009. |
|
NUANCES OF PROPAGANDA "To Israel's critics abroad, the picture could not be clearer: Israel's war in Gaza is a wildly disproportionate response to the rockets of Hamas, causing untold human suffering and bombing an already isolated and impoverished population into the Stone Age, and it must be stopped." "Yet here in Israel very few, at least among the Jewish population, see it that way." The report claims that the Israeli media focuses on Israeli suffering. "...the world must be wondering, do Israelis really believe that everybody is wrong and they alone are right?" Yes, Israel is united about this. "Israelis deeply believe, rightly or wrongly, that their military works harder than most to spare civilians, holding their fire in many more cases than using it." "Because Hamas booby-traps schools, apartment buildings and the zoo, and its fighters hide among civilians, it is Hamas that is viewed here as responsible for the civilian toll. Hamas is committed to Israel's destruction and gets help and inspiration from Iran, so that what looks to the world like a disproportionate war of choice is seen by many here as an obligatory war for existence." [Israelis' view of this makes sense, but the Times tries to undermine it by treating what appears to misinformed and prejudiced Europeans on a par with informed Israelis.] Annihilation? "Rockets from Hamas could eventually reach all of Israel..." "This is a just war and we don't feel guilty when civilians we don't intend to hurt get hurt, because we feel Hamas uses these civilians as human shields..." (Ethan Bronner, NY Times, 1/13, A1). Typical of the Times, this article is carefully worded to make Israel look bad, even though the facts stated in it don't. As usual, doubt is cast upon Israel's view, but not upon the opposing view. The report states what Europeans think, and claims that Israeli media misleads Israelis. What the Europeans call "disproportionate" is a reference to international law that, if you read it, would not call Israeli action disproportionate. The Europeans are misled. Note the hyperbole, since just a few hundred Arabs were killed. Wars used to run into tens of thousands killed. It is not fair to let the terrorists get away with holding their population hostage, but the Europeans claim sympathy with that population yet do not condemn Hamas for holding them hostage and for firing upon innocent Israelis. Instead, they condemn Israel for collateral casualties. Israelis are right, Israel does try to spare civilians, whereas Hamas targets them. If the Europeans were ethical, they would side with Israel. If the Europeans had any sense, they would realize that Israel is in the front line of a jihad that aims at Europe, too, but is in an earlier stage, there. Of course the rest of the world is wrong. Isn't it often? Think of the failed appeasement of the Nazis and Communists and the antisemitism in those regimes that the rest of the world condoned! Yes, Hamas uses its people as human shields. If the Europeans cared about those people, they would condemn Hamas for that. The Europeans don't care about the Arabs, they just seek excuses for condemning Israel. So does the Times. Hamas is part of a barbaric assault on civilization. Israel tries too hard to fight in a civilized way. It suffers unnecessarily from it. If it listened to Europe, it would not use its army to protect itself. Europe would be content with rising Israeli casualties. I am not. Meanwhile, Europe tries to subvert the government of Israel and to strip it of secure borders. Tie that in with its complaints about Israeli self-defense, and come up with antisemitism. LIVNI, THEN & NOW Having returned from vacation, I started reviewing accumulated e-mail sources while reading daily newspapers. This makes for an interesting contrast between what politicians said then and what they say or is happening now. The degree of contrast is a gauge of weathervane politicians. On 12/21, Foreign Min. Livni said that if she were Prime Minister, she would destroy Hamas. Today, 1/14, the newspaper quotes her as demanding an immediate ceasefire with Hamas. Not its destruction. Indeed, a ceasefire not only would spare the bulk of Hamas forces and tunnels, it would enable Hamas to rebuild and figure out better tactics. WHY RUSSIA HELPS IRAN Here's another theory. Russia is a petro-dictatorship. Its rulers depend on the price of oil. By helping Iran roil the Mideast, Russia keeps oil prices higher (Garry Kasparov, Wall St. J., 1/12, Op.-Ed.). IRAN GETTING RUSSIAN MISSILES, AFTER ALL Iran claims it is about to receive the Russian missiles that Russia kept claiming it would not deliver or did not agree to ship. These missiles could greatly hamper Israeli attacks on its nuclear facilities (IMRA, 12/21). Can't take Russian assurances seriously nor safely consider Russia civilized. This is an example of weapons called defensive being used to defend offensive weapons. Therefore, its purpose is offensive. Reporters still don't understand that. ARMS SMUGGLING INTO GAZA Just before the IDF incursion into Gaza, Israel explained that it would attack, because Hamas violates the truce and smuggles arms in order to be able to violate it. Dr. Aaron Lerner points out that the arms smuggling was apparent from the outset. He asks, why didn't the government address the problem back then? Why wait for the problem to grow? (IMRA, 12/21). Good question. Don't governments usually wait for a problem to grow until, instead of action being thought by some to be a questionable initiative, it becomes recognized by all as a dire necessity? When the government finally acts, voters forget how much its delays made them suffer. Fools vote. THE DECEIT OF OFFERING FEWER CHOICES Thomas Friedman is back from specializing on globalization to his lifelong obsession against Jewish sovereignty. Thus his 1/14 Op.-Ed. declared that Israel has two choices, omitting the third choice of Jewish nationalism. His stated choices are to destroy Hamas or to deter it from attacking again. If Israel destroys Hamas, he contends, it then must hold on to Gaza to prevent its resurgence. Thus the Jewish state would become the steward of Muslim aspirations eventually to ruling at least that part of the Jewish homeland (in addition to their already ruling the bulk of it, in Jordan). What an unfair anomaly! And since Islam remains, absent a Reformation, mired in the socially backward mentality of its 7th century origin, this could mean a long period of baby-sitting a viper whose ultimate goal is to seize the baby-sitter's house. Deterrence, which he calls "education," assumes that Hamas would become a responsible governing power, caring for its people, therefore peaceable rather than subjecting them to war. How can he imagine that Hamas would abandon its indoctrinated fanaticism? Doesn't he know that Hamas exists solely to help impose a caliphate upon the world? It has no concern for the non-existent "Palestinian people." Calling them "Palestinians" was an Islamist fraud intended to make propaganda for the religious cause. That fraud succeeded so well that the term became politically correct. Now even patriotic Israelis reinforce the Arabs' weak claim to the country with every utterance of the term. This leaves the third, unmentioned choice. This choice would be to annex undeveloped areas and make conditions such that the Arabs gradually empty out more sections. That process would reduce terrorism completely. It would make Israel viable. It would leave the Jewish people in possession of the unallocated portion of the Mandate for a Jewish national home. Peace, security, justice. THE "DEMOCRATICALLY ELECTED" SHIBBOLETH People still describe Hamas as democratically elected to run Gaza, and as therefore warranting recognition as the legitimate rulers there. The concept is less true in fact and less valid ethically than describing Hitler as democratically elected to run Germany. How democratic was his boost by private armies terrorizing the population and intimidating the Reichstag into voting him dictatorial powers. How legitimate was his rule that he perpetuated by murdering opponents and repressing the population? His rule was anti-democratic. The P.A. electoral choice was between terrorist parties. Hamas seized Gaza in a coup. It wasn't elected democratically. What if it were? It purged opponents. Its policy is totalitarian and genocidal. It is murderous! It commits war crimes. Caution, secularists! Don't treat democracy like a god to worship. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com |
|
U.N. AGENCY THAT RUNS SCHOOL HIT IN GAZA EMPLOYED HAMAS AND ISLAMIC JIHAD MEMBERS
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 15, 2009. |
|
This was written by Joel Mowbray
and it is archived at
|
|
The United Nations agency that administers a school in Gaza where dozens of civilians were killed by Israeli mortar fire last week has admitted to employing terrorists to work at its Palestinian schools in the past, has no system in place to keep members of Hamas or Islamic Jihad off its payroll, and provides textbooks to children that contain hate speech and other incendiary information. A growing chorus of critics has taken aim at the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) in recent years, although momentum on Capitol Hill has been slow. But last week's incident, which Israel maintains was prompted by Hamas operatives firing mortars at Israelis from a location near the school, has prompted some lawmakers to scrutinize the U.N. agency. Rep. Steve Rothman, D-N.J., introduced a resolution in the fall calling for greater transparency and accountability at UNRWA. The bill called on the agency to make its textbooks available on the Internet for public inspection and to implement "terrorist name recognition software and other screening procedures that would help to ensure that UNRWA staff, volunteers, and beneficiaries are neither terrorists themselves, nor affiliated with known terrorist organizations." Rothman said he plans to re-introduce his UNRWA resolution in the coming weeks because, "as timely as this bill was before, it is even more timely now. It is urgent that Congress can be assured that U.S. taxpayer money is not being spent to support Hamas and its murderous activities." A spokesman for UNRWA adamantly said that the agency is now free of terrorist connections. "We're composed of social workers and teachers," the official explained. "We take every step possible to have only civilians inside UNRWA facilities." But the U.N. Personal History form for UNRWA employees does not ask whether someone is a member of, or affiliated with, a terrorist organization such as Hamas or Islamic Jihad. And there is no formal screening to ensure that employees are not affiliated with terrorist entities. Asked about this, the UNRWA spokesman replied, "Palestinian staff sign an undertaking confirming that they have no political affiliations whatsoever, and have not and will not participate in any activities that would violate the neutrality of the U.N." There is no formal enforcement, however, to monitor possible terrorist activities by employees after they sign the pledge at the time of hiring. UNRWA official Chris Guinness told the Jerusalem Post this week that the agency screens names of new employees against the relatively small U.N. database of Taliban and Al Qaeda figures. Extremist Palestinians, however, are far more likely to belong to organizations, such as Hamas, Islamic Jihad and al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade, that are not on that watch list. In 2004, former UNRWA Commissioner-General Peter Hansen told the Canadian Broadcasting Company, "I am sure that there are Hamas members on the UNRWA payroll and I don't see that as a crime." He added, "We do not do political vetting and exclude people from one persuasion as against another." There have been several high-profile examples of terrorists being employed by UNRWA. Former top Islamic Jihad rocket maker Awad Al-Qiq, who was killed in an Israeli air strike last May, was the headmaster and science instructor at an UNRWA school in Rafah, Gaza. Said Siyam, Hamas' interior minister and head of the Executive Force, was a teacher for over two decades in UNRWA schools. Lawmakers on Capitol Hill say they are also concerned that terrorist propaganda is being taught in UNRWA schools. A notebook captured by Israeli officials at the UNRWA school in the Kalandia refugee camp several years ago glorified homicide bombers and other terrorists. Called "The Star Team," it profiled so-called "martyrs," Palestinians who had died either in homicide bombings or during armed struggle with Israel. On the book's back cover was printed the UNRWA emblem, as well as a photo of a masked gunman taking aim while on one knee. There is evidence that students educated in UNRWA schools are much more likely to become homicide bombers, said Jonathan Halevi, a former Israeli Defense Forces intelligence officer who specializes in Palestinian terrorist organizations. Halevi has spent several years building an extensive database for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs of terrorist attacks by Hamas and other Islamic extremist groups. Though he cautioned that estimates are tricky because the identity of an attacker is not always made public, Halevi estimated that over 60 percent of homicide bombers were educated in UNRWA schools. By comparison, roughly 25-30 percent of Palestinian students in the West Bank, the origin of almost all homicide bombers since the start of the intifada in 2000, attend UNRWA schools, according to the agency's figures. A UNRWA spokesman strongly disputed any connection between the agency's schools and a greater likelihood of terrorist activity later in life. As proof, he pointed to UNRWA's "special efforts in our schools to teach tolerance, human rights and peaceful conflict resolution." UNRWA sent an eight-page brochure to FOXNews.com that speaks about the group's tolerance, human rights and peaceful conflict resolution curriculum. But it makes no mention of tolerance toward Jews or Christians or of peaceful coexistence with Israel. Rather, it is geared toward student interaction, the rights students should expect in society, and learning to express emotions through acting, painting, and storytelling. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
FIGHTERS' JEWISH SPIRIT RETURNS
Posted by Israel National News Staff, January 15, 2009. |
|
This article was written by Israel National News Staff and translated from the Hebrew by Hillel Fendel. |
|
An IDF rabbi shared this personal testimony... I had the privilege this week [the week before the ground offensive into Gaza — ed.] of accompanying the Golani Brigade's Regiment 12 soldiers. I am the regiment's rabbi, in reserves, and I was called up to serve just like the all the rest, to "aid Israel at its time of tribulation." As a long-time ba'al-teshuvah [returnee to observant Judaism], a rabbi in a yeshiva who usually walks around wearing a jacket and hat, I now had a major change of atmosphere: my black "uniform" became one of dusty dark green, the hubbub of the Torah study hall was replaced by not-so-pleasing army slang, and my wife's delicious food was given up for the "delicacies" of the mess hall, most of which I don't eat because of one stringency or another. We spent most of the week in wet tents, with the terrible cold preventing me from sleeping at night. (I apparently wasn't working as hard as the other soldiers, because they fell asleep the second they hit the pillow.) My work, as an official of the Army Rabbinate, was to give encouragement and strength to the soldiers, give out Books of Psalms [Tehillim] and distribute special prayers for those who go out to battle. Psalms for All And what did I discover down there in southern Israel? My brothers! The Golanchiks (Golani Brigade soldiers), about to go out to war, want to hold on to the Rock of Israel! There wasn't a soldier there who didn't equip himself with a Tehillim in his pocket or combat vest — but the big surprise we had was when we gave out tzitzit [four-cornered shirt with the required ritual fringes attached]. Usually only the yeshiva guys take them, but this time, every soldier there seemed to want one! "Rabbi, bring me some tzitzit, my whole tent wants." "Hey, achi [my brother], take one of these, it's better than the ceramic vest!" These were the types of calls we kept hearing over and over. Every package of tzizit that we opened was snatched up within seconds. There was one young fighter who came to the synagogue whose face fell when he heard that there were no tzitzit left. He was totally bereft, until one of the officers who wasn't going out to battle took off his own tzitzit and gave it to him, saying, "Take it, achi (in the Golani you can't say something without achi), you need it now more than I do." Click here to
see a video of tzitzit distribution in the IDF, organized
by kulanuachim The Ma'ariv evening prayer of Friday night, Parashat Vayigash, was simply unbelievable. The Rabbinate realized that the synagogue was too small to fit all the hundreds of soldiers, and so it turned the soccer field into an impromptu synagogue, with prayerbooks, Holy Ark, and everything else. Whoever did not take part in that Kabbalat Shabbat [Sabbath Welcoming] service, is like one who never took part in a Kabbalat Shabbat service in his life! Almost the entire Golani Brigade, officers and soldiers, yelling out the Kaddish and Tehillim prayers. If it wasn't for the uniform I was wearing, I could have almost thought that I was at a Yom Kippur service in one of the large yeshivot! No Questions Asked Our loving Father, too, was there, enjoying every minute of His sons gathering around Him. Our Father doesn't ask, "Where have you been until now? Why do you remember Me just when you go out to war?" He welcomes all His children and embraces them with love. After the Sabbath meal, held in an atmosphere of a great "high," we were privileged to be able to hold an Oneg Shabbat for the soldiers. Chief IDF Rabbi Avi Ronsky was with us the whole Sabbath, and he warmed our hearts with stories of the Nation of Israel, on compassion, on brotherly love, and more. We sat outside with cake and sunflower seeds in the cold, but inside our hearts it was warm. During the Sabbath, we had to travel to the places from where the soldiers would leave for Gaza. We arrived and the soldiers were imbued with combat spirit, getting ready, trying to get in a last cigarette. Many soldiers tried very hard not to smoke that Sabbath, after I explained to them the importance of observing the Sabbath. They would come up to me every five minutes and ask if the Sabbath had ended yet. We prayed Ma'ariv there, recited Havdalah [the Sabbath-ending blessing] over grape juice, a lighter [instead of a candle] and an orange [in place of spices]. And then it was time to go in. The Regiment Commander gathered everyone for last-minute words of strength, and explained to them about the "corrective experience" we were about to impart to the enemy. When he finished, the Deputy Commander read aloud the prayer before going out to battle. "Repeat after me," he ordered, and a whole regiment of hundreds of soldiers yelled out, "Ana Hashem hoshia na! Ana Hashem hatzlicha na! [O G-d, save us! O G-d, grant us success!]" After the prayer, the Deputy Commander asked me to blow the Shofar, just as thousands of years ago when we conquered the Holy Land. Perfect Coordination Though I've blown the Shofar in public before, this particular time was something that will remain with me my whole life. And then, as if I and the Israel Air Force were in perfect coordination, the very second that I finished blowing the Shofar, our planes bombed the enemy area, as if it were a signal to begin the ground offensive. The soldiers lined up in two columns, and as I parted from them with handshakes, I thought to myself, "What a special nation we have! This is how a Jewish army looks as it goes out to war — not with boastful 'We will win' stickers, but rather 'We will win with G-d's help.'" No Dispute I will just end by saying that where I live in Modi'in Illit, we have a clever interpretation of the verse 'G-d's voice is powerful' — the word for power is spelled with the letters kaf and chet, which we say are the initials of kova and chalifa [hat and suit], our usual garb. But as of this week, we now know that they are also the initials of the kumta chuma [brown beret] worn by the Golani soldiers. There, too, the voice of G-d is heard — and "lo pligi" (there is no argument between the two, both are right). 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. |
|
RESPONSES TO BILL MOYERS WARPED PROGRAM ON THE JEWS AND ARABS
Posted by Alex Grobman, January 14, 2009. | |||||
|
Professor Alvin H. Rosenfeld sent me the interchange below. He wrote a response to a Bill Moyers program and sent a copy to Judea Pearl, father of the journalist beheaded by Arab terrorists. Judea Pearl also wrote to Moyers. This is what Professor Rosenfeld sent me.
| |||||
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. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: CLOSER
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 14, 2009. |
|
Closer, that is, to the end of the war. Or so it seems. Egypt has been pushing hard on Hamas, telling them that Israel will do its third stage of the operation if they don't agree to a ceasefire, and then they will be fully crushed. One issue is the length of the cease-fire. We would prefer it to be long term or indefinite; Hamas wanted a cease-fire of just a few months. This is consistent with their whole hudna approach, which means stopping temporarily in order to regroup and start again. For the fact of the matter is that Hamas, no matter how badly hurt, has not been fully crushed, and hopes to come back to strength. Egypt proposed a ceasefire of 10 to 15 years, according to a Haaretz report, and after this was rejected, then offered a one year — renewable — cease-fire. This, Hamas is said to be considering, with certain conditions. They want to know how quickly we'll pull out of Gaza and when crossings will be opened. One year seems sorely insufficient, and I don't know if our government would accept this. ~~~~~~~~~~ What Egypt is after at this point is a cessation of fighting, with the notion that particulars regarding withdrawal, end to smuggling, and opening of crossings can be worked out thereafter. I would have been almost certain that we would not buy into this: that we would rely on our continued fighting to give us leverage. But there seems to be disagreement within the government on this issue (see more below). ~~~~~~~~~~ With regard to smuggling, one suggestion being floated now is for a barrier to be erected that surrounds the Egyptian city of Rafah, with patrolling by Egyptian soldiers to prevent smugglers from entering the city. That barrier — a double fence — would extend the length of the Philadelphi Corridor, and there would be a single monitored road that led into the city. ~~~~~~~~~~ I am highly dubious as to whether this will be put in place, and I have no reason to believe this would work — that the Egyptians would monitor with sufficient diligence. And so I do not wish to belabor this plan unduly. But I want to be certain that the complex parameters are clear: The border, running roughly nine miles, between Gaza and the Egyptian Sinai, is called the Philadelpi Corridor (only because this name was generated at random from a computer). Under this border, hundreds of smuggling tunnels had been dug, and are now being systematically destroyed by Israel. The task (it's something of a trick) is to make certain they are not re-dug and that smuggling via tunnels doesn't resume. To date, Egypt has been severely remiss in this regard. ~~~~~~~~~~ But there is also the city of Rafah (in Hebrew, Rafiah) straddling the border. Two cities, actually, as one part of Rafah is on the Egyptian side and one in Gaza. The official crossing point for goods moving back and forth is via Rafah. And so, aside from the tunnels, there is the potential for smuggling to be done above ground through that crossing. Material can be hidden deep within, or even under, large trucks that are bringing merchandise into Gaza. It's obvious then, that enormous vigilance and sincerity of purpose are required to prevent military equipment from entering Gaza. ~~~~~~~~~~ With the disengagement, we left the corridor, but were still supposed to retain control at the Rafah crossing. We pulled out, however, in deference to the PA (which then controlled Gaza), at the insistence of Condoleezza Rice. A great deal was smuggled into Gaza when the PA was in control. Until two weeks ago, Hamas was doing an enormous amount of smuggling via the tunnels. The Rafah crossing has been closed from the Egyptian side, generating much fury in Gaza. At least until now, Egypt — refusing to deal with Hamas — has insisted that it won't open the Rafah crossing until the PA is back at Rafah. ~~~~~~~~~~ My own take on the situation, based on what I've concluded as well as on what experts I respect are saying, is that we really have only two options: One is to truly defeat Hamas. There is much to be said for this, because it is likely that a Hamas undefeated will undermine agreements and do all in its power to regain strength. (What General Kupervasser, whom I've cited several times now, suggests is coming close to defeating Hamas, so that they're beaten down enough to halt attacks and smuggling.) The downside to defeating Hamas is that this may lead to an international effort to reinstate the PA in Gaza. Whether this could actually happen is dubious, but it raises the specter of increased pressure being put upon us to negotiate a state with the PA. And then, if Hamas is defeated, and the PA is rejected by the people of Gaza, there is concern that another radical element, even Al-Qaida, would move in to fill the vacuum. The other alternative would be for us to maintain a presence in Gaza, along the Philadelphi Corridor. We are the only ones we can trust with insuring that smuggling does not begin again. There are some thinkers who are coming to the conclusion that by default — because there are no other truly viable options — we may do this. ~~~~~~~~~~ At any rate, Amos Gilad may return to Cairo tomorrow, if discussions between Hamas and Egypt have progressed sufficiently. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert caused a considerable diplomatic firestorm with his comments, reported here yesterday, regarding his phone call to President Bush to get Rice not to vote for Resolution 1860. Rice came back with a scathing denial, a charge that this was 100% untrue. The White House then followed with a denial as well. It's not politic to brag publicly about controlling the US Secretary of State and causing her embarrassment. Of course, just because the US denies this, doesn't mean it didn't happen. YNet yesterday quoted PA Minister of Foreign Affairs Riad Malki, who had said one day after the vote, that, "We were told that the Americans were going to vote in favor...What happened in the last 10 or 15 minutes [before the vote was taken], what kind of pressure she received, from whom, this is really something that maybe we will know about later." According to Malki, when Rice entered the Security Council chamber, she apologized to the Saudi foreign minister, explaining that she would be abstaining but would clarify that the US supported the effort. ~~~~~~~~~~ One report I encountered said that Olmert opened his mouth in anger, because Livni had taken credit for the situation, claiming that it was her diplomatic effort that prevented Rice from voting for the resolution. ~~~~~~~~~~ What we are seeing now is tension between Olmert, on one side, and Livni and Barak on the other. Barak and Livni both want to stop fighting now. Barak wants to institute a week-long 'humanitarian" cease fire, keep our forces in place and reservists under arms, and then negotiate issues with Egypt. He has taken under advisement the view of Southern Command Maj. Gen. Yoav Galant that continued operations might end up with our deployment in Gaza over a period of time as long as a year. (Is this bad?) He also said to have his eye on Obama's inauguration next week. Livni believes, as I have reported, that we don't need to negotiate with Hamas, but pull out and rely on our new deterrence power to restrain them. She thinks we've accomplished as much as we can. I confess here my surprise that Livni is promoting a pull-out before Hamas is defeated, for it has been her express desire to reinstate the PA in Gaza. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert believes we have not done enough yet. Certainly the fact that Hamas is agreeing to cease fire only under certain conditions indicates they are not yet sufficiently vanquished. (And Khaled Abu Toameh, among others, indicates that Hamas is not broken yet.) In order to allow the fighting to continue, Olmert has refrained from calling meetings either of the "triumvirate" or the Security Cabinet, which might overrule him. Don't know how long this can go on. But right now he is forestalling a premature end to the fighting. ~~~~~~~~~~ I mention here, just in passing, that while political discussion has been tabled in good measure until after the war, there are, obviously, considerable political ramifications to these various positions. We would be naive to imagine that these ramifications are not in the minds of the members of the "triumvirate" as they stake out their various positions ~~~~~~~~~~ For the record, a clarification on the matter of SC Resolution 1860: It was not adopted under Chapter VII of the UN Charter, which provides for enforcement of resolutions. According to my UN source, "As it stands, the Resolution merely demonstrates the will of the international community to see a ceasefire enacted." ~~~~~~~~~~ A charge against Israel has been shot down (excuse the deliberate pun). Human Rights Watch had accused Israel of firing phosphorus shells, which ignite on the skin and cause extreme burns. Peter Herby, head of the mines-arms unit of the International Red Cross, has now told the Associated Press that "...it's not very unusual to use phosphorus to create smoke or illuminate a target. We have no evidence to suggest it's being used in any other way [such as burning down buildings or wounding people]." He said that using phosphorus to illuminate a target or create smoke is legitimate under international law. ~~~~~~~~~~ Irwin Cotler, former justice minister of Canada and an expert on international law, visited our southern region adjacent to Gaza yesterday, and then made a statement to the effect that Hamas fighting tactics and ideology constitute a "case study par excellence" of a systematic violation of international humanitarian law. Says Cotler, there is "almost no comparable example" in today's world of a group that so systematically violates international agreements related to armed conflict. He pinpointed six specific violations: — Deliberate targeting of civilians. — Attacks from within civilian areas and civilian structures. "Civilians are protected persons, and civilian areas are protected areas. Any use of a civilian infrastructure to launch bombs is itself a war crime." I called Professor Cotler after reading this description of Hamas violations in the Jerusalem Post, and asked him if international law applied to Hamas as it is neither a sovereign nation nor a signatory to various conventions. He said it didn't matter: international law applied to Hamas regardless. And this, he told me, was not just his opinion, but that of Alan Dershowitz as well. ~~~~~~~~~~ Professor Cotler is concerned because the international community "has been minimizing the manner in which Hamas has engaged in consistent mass-violation of international humanitarian law." He sees it as important to delineate Hamas's violations the onus of responsibility for the civilian tragedy in Gaza would be placed where it belongs. "...Clearly what is happening in Gaza is a tragedy. But there has to be moral and legal clarity as to responsibility." ~~~~~~~~~~ According to the IDF spokesman, 104,000 liters of fuel and 111 humanitarian aid trucks were transferred into the Gaza strip via the Kerem Shalom crossing today. Additionally, the IDF is looking to expand its humanitarian assistance by opening more crossings. The Karni crossing, for example, has a chute that permits a more speedy transfer of grains, and 23 truckloads of grain were sent in by that route on Monday. And Erez will be opened for cargo transfer. ~~~~~~~~~~ A clarification is in order here: Crossings have been closed frequently because of intelligence we receive that they are about to be targeted by terrorists. We've had IDF troops lose their lives at these crossing. In fact, the Karni crossing had to be closed after Monday because a tunnel was discovered that was meant to be used for a mine attack. But I am assuming that our presence inside of Gaza makes the targeting of the crossings more difficult for Hamas, and makes it more possible for us to open them. I have often pondered why the terrorists would interfere with transfer of aid to the Palestinian people by targeting the crossings. Only very recently did I find an answer: Hamas had been making money via the smuggling of goods through the tunnels, and was not eager to be undercut by goods distributed free of charge. Such is the perversity of their mind-set. ~~~~~~~~~~ An Apache helicopter pilot, who is not at liberty to reveal his full name or the details of his missions, gave an interview with AP in which he described missions he aborted to avoid civilian casualties. "The ones I remember are when I have locked in on a target and I fire and then at the last second I see a child in my cross hairs and I divert the missile," he said. "We work very hard to keep civilian casualties as low as possible,. Each missile we shoot is pinpointed to the very meter we want it to go." He has called off airstrikes, even if it meant letting a rocket-launcher get away, out of fear of harming an innocent woman or a child. When he did this, he said, he was following both his military orders and his own conscience.
~~~~~~~~~~ With all of this, EU aid commissioner Louis Michel declared this week that, "It is evident that Israel does not respect international humanitarian law." He drew this conclusion, he said, because of the number of civilian casualties and the difficulty of getting humanitarian aid to the needy. With some people, you can't win. ~~~~~~~~~~ Please see the following CAMERA article about a Norwegian doctor, Mads Gilbert, who is making libelous charges against Israel after volunteering in Gaza. Many media sources are representing him as an objective observer when in fact he is a Marxist who is so radical in his thinking that he supports the 9/11 terrorist attack.
~~~~~~~~~~ Three Katyusha rockets were launched into northern Israel, near Kiryat Shmona, from Lebanon early today. The IDF fired a number of artillery shells towards the source of fire. ~~~~~~~~~~ Once again I wish to close with a piece from Haaretz. This time, "It's not Israel's fault it has a strong, well run army," by Yoel Marcus: "I feel sorry for the people of Gaza, but I feel even sorrier for the civilian population of southern Israel, which has been bombarded by rockets for the last eight years. "I feel sorry for the kids who wet their beds at night. I feel sorry for the Color Red sirens that send our citizens on a mad dash for shelters, if there are any, in the hopes of finding cover within 15 seconds. I feel sorry about the homes that have been damaged, the cities that have been drained of their citizens and the schools hit by rockets that were miraculously empty at the time. "In the beginning, nobody took Qassams seriously...But over time, this primitive rocket has morphed into a long-range missile. So we need to be thankful for the decision to launch Operation Cast Lead, if only because the offensive has exposed the strength of these babies and pulled the wraps off the huge arsenal of rockets they have over there in Gaza, capable of reaching Be'er Sheva. If Israel had not acted now, we would have woken up one morning to find missiles in Tel Aviv, special delivery from Iran via the Philadelphi tunnels.
"Operation Cast Lead is not a reprisal raid but a defensive war meant to clip Hamas' wings before it surprises us with a Palestinian version of the Yom Kippur War. It's not our fault we have a strong, well-run army and state-of-the-art weaponry. What did Hamas think? That we were going to sit around twiddling our thumbs forever?"
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
LAW PROFESSOR: HAMAS IS A WAR CRIMES 'CASE STUDY'
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, January 14, 2009. |
|
Dear friends, In view of the persistent debate in the media on Israel's response in Gaza, I also have to be persistent. Here is another important article on the subject, this time about the allegation that Israel is responsible for "war crimes." In short: First study the law, then target your accusations to the real criminals. Your Truth Provider,
This was written by Haviv Rettig Gur
and it appeared in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
The fighting tactics and ideology of Hamas are a "case study par excellence" of a systematic violation of international humanitarian law, according to a leading expert in international law who visited the Gaza periphery region on Tuesday. There is "almost no comparable example" anywhere in today's world of a group that so systematically violates international agreements related to armed conflict, Irwin Cotler — a former Canadian justice minister, MP and law professor at Montreal's McGill University — told The Jerusalem Post on Tuesday. Hamas is committing at least six violations of international law, Cotler explained. "First, the deliberate targeting of civilians is in and of itself a war crime," he noted, referring to the Hamas rockets fired at southern towns for eight years. "A second war crime is when Hamas attacks [from within] civilian areas and civilian structures, whether it be an apartment building, a mosque or a hospital, in order to be immune from a response from Israel," he went on. "Civilians are protected persons, and civilian areas are protected areas. Any use of a civilian infrastructure to launch bombs is itself a war crime." That Hamas bears legal responsibility for the harm to civilians in areas from which it fires is enshrined throughout international law, he said: "In the general principles of customs binding on nations, in the specific international law of armed conflict [also called] international humanitarian law, in the Fourth Geneva Convention, in decisions of the International Court of Justice and the international criminal tribunals for the former Yugoslavia and Rwanda — it's all set out there." Third, he explained, "the misuse and abuse of humanitarian symbols for purposes of launching attacks is called the perfidy principle. For example, using an ambulance to transport fighters or weapons or disguising oneself as a doctor in a hospital, or using a UN logo or flag, are war crimes." The fourth violation, "of which little has been made, is the prohibition in the Fourth Geneva Convention and international jurisprudence against the direct and public incitement to genocide. The Hamas covenant itself is a standing incitement to genocide. [Similarly,] just before this fighting started, I saw Hamas leaders on television referring to Israel and Jews as the sons of apes and pigs." The fifth crime relates to the scope of the attack on civilians, which upgrades the violation to a crime against humanity. According to Cotler, "when you deliberately hit civilians not infrequently but in a systematic, widespread attack, that's defined in the treaty of the International Criminal Court and international humanitarian law as a crime against humanity." The final war crime for which Hamas is responsible is the recruitment of children into armed conflict. "Hamas is a case study of each of these six categories of war crime," said Cotler. Unfortunately, the international community "has been minimizing the manner in which Hamas has engaged in consistent mass-violation of international humanitarian law." Cotler said specifically delineating Hamas's violations was important in that it would place the onus of responsibility for the civilian tragedy in Gaza on the proper party. "The consequences [of the fighting] are tragic in human terms," he said. "Clearly what is happening in Gaza is a tragedy. But there has to be moral and legal clarity as to responsibility. When Israel responds and civilians are killed because Israel is targeting an area from which rockets were launched, then it is Hamas which bears responsibility for the deaths, and not Israel, according to international law." Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
GROWING ANTISEMITISM IN TURKEY
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, January 14, 2009. |
|
This is a guest post by Ben Cohen of Z Word on Harry's Place
|
|
Of all the countries caught up in the current wave of antisemitism, Turkey is arguably the greatest worry. While Turkey has traditionally been a reliable diplomatic ally and an even closer military partner of Israel, that hasn't prevented a rash of antisemitic statements and demonstrations in the short period since the Gaza conflict began. A number of people received the following email this morning. The writer, a Turkish Jew, has requested anonymity:
That astounding manipulation of children did take place this morning. The Turkish daily Hurriyet reports: "Turkish school students stood for a minute of silence at 11:00 a.m. (0900 GMT) in accordance with a direction issued by Education Minister Huseyin Celik. 'This show of respect damns not only the cruelty in the Palestine, but also shows solidarity with the Palestinian people,' the directive said." One has to wonder how that directive squares with this directive from the European Commission, the executive branch of the very same European Union in which Turkey seeks status as an 'honorable member': "Education should promote intercultural skills, democratic values, the respect of fundamental rights and the fight against discrimination, equipping all young people to interact positively with their peers from diverse backgrounds." The email continues: The Jewish community can do nothing in response to what has been going on for the last few weeks, except giving vague statements that the Turkish Jewish Community does not want the war to be continued any more. Ironically, as Yigal Schleifer reports, there is skepticism about the long-term impact of the Gaza crisis on Turkish-Israeli relations: "Experts say that mutual interests — particularly over regional security issues — will likely keep Turkey-Israel relations from rupturing. On the eve of the Gaza operation, which began Dec. 27, the two countries signed a $141 million deal in which Israel will provide the Turkish air force with airborne space imagery intelligence systems over the next four years." The real fear, as Schleifer says, concerns the well-being of the Jewish community which, as the above email indicates, feels directly targeted by the Gaza protests. Schleifer points out that Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's shrill condemnations of Israel are partially fired by domestic concerns and he quotes respected columnist Sami Kohen thus: "This is the first time that the public reaction has been so widespread. It's very intensive this time. There haven't been such widespread and spontaneous anti-Israel sentiments before. It's not just the Islamic circles. It's also the secularists and the nationalists. The protests have been representative of the whole of Turkish society." Indeed, if this Reuters report is accurate, Prime Minister Erdogan is now forgetting to substitute the word "Jewish" with "Zionist" or "Israeli": Erdogan said some media, which he did not name, were spreading false information about the Gaza offensive. "Excuses are found for mass killings of children at schools, hospitals and mosques, especially by Jewish-backed media," Erdogan said. Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel (www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com). Contact him at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk |
|
WAR FOR POLITICS; WHO'S WORSE? TIMES OR ITS READERS?; TIMES CALLS ITS PR ANALYSIS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 14, 2009. |
|
ASYMMETRICAL WARFARE Israel is fighting a kind of asymmetrical warfare, but not as usually meant. Terrorists exert the firepower. The IDF is kept from responding much. Instead, government officials respond with words. They threaten an invasion "soon". (I wrote this before the campaign season and therefore the incursion.) Terrorists fire rockets. The Olmert-Barak-Livni regime fires back threats. Whom do you think is winning? Oh, I forgot, the multi-cultural, politically correct view is not to seek victory. It is to seek peace by surrender. Surrender to barbarians, unfortunately, is not a salutary solution. Do Israel's threats deter the enemy? Judging by the day-to-day and year-to-year results, no. And yet, half the voters seem ready to select the very parties that fire off blustery press releases rather than blunderbusses. Here is what those voters must think. (1) I don't have faith in God, but I have faith in my leftist ideology (that allowed the enemy to build up); (2) I know my policy keeps failing, but maybe next time it will work; (3) Abbas must be a moderate, because our leaders say he is. I never heard of his praise for suicide bombers or his threats of all-out war if our negotiators don't give him everything he claims for now; (4) The right-wing parties must be extremist because the leftwing parties and their allied media tell us they are; and (5) If we give the enemy everything they demand, they will turn on a dime and accept our ideology, of making peace, rather than Islam's of using each victory to propel them into another. WAR FOR POLITICS The Gaza incursion Is less than a war in Gaza, part of the Arab-Israel conflict starting in the 1920s. It is unlikely to spread much now, because the Muslims know that Israel's ruling class does not intend to win. Commentators have remarked that the incursion is intended to impress voters with temporary relief before the election. This is politics by other means. Olmert has since then signaled his intent to lose. He said Israel is close to achieving its goals. How can that be when the IDF has killed only a few hundred Hamas gunmen out of 12,000? It can be, because Olmert seeks another ceasefire, during which Hamas will rebuild its military capacity and will resume its raids on Israel and remain part of the surrounding strategic menace to Israel. They will be able to do so, because Israel will accept Hamas' promise not to smuggle arms in or some hostile foreign forces' false promise to block smuggling. The ceasefire would get the regime re-elected, if the masses are the asses as easily manipulated as believed. ARE READERS WORSE THAN NY TIMES? Reporter Michael Slackman quoted a preacher, appointed by Egypt, "God has afflicted the Muslim nation with a people whom God has become angry at and whom he cursed so he made monkeys and pigs out of them." [Jews stand on two feet and wear clothes. How can they be taken for monkeys and pigs?] They killed prophets and messengers and sowed corruption on Earth. They are the most evil on Earth." [Exaggeration and indiscriminate blame.] As Arabs get killed in Gaza, Egyptian Muslims want their government to join in against Israel. [Why don't readers conclude from this that Egyptian Arabs are backward, prejudiced warmongers who, if they could, would break the peace treaty with Israel and that, therefore, Arab treaties with Israel don't solve the Arab-Israel conflict?] Mr. Slackman also mentioned that Egypt originally blamed Hizbullah for provoking Israel a couple of years ago into a war that damaged Lebanon. Then, as now, the government of Egypt's frankness led to a popular backlash and a reversal of government policy (NY Times, 1/10, p.1) or at least government statements. Why don't readers conclude from this that the Muslim Arab are vicious and their governments are unreliable, and that Muslim criticism of Israel is based on religious prejudice and not on the facts? Instead, readers conclude that more US pressure should be exerted on Israel. If readers gave the matter thought, they would want the US to stop building up Egypt's military, because it may fall into the hands of Islamists, who would make war with it. OR IS THE TIMES MISLEADING READERS? Taghreed El-Khodary and Isabel Kershner started with a hair-raising falsehood. "Israel's attack has razed buildings and upended families in much of crowded Gaza." The article described one family's casualties (NY Times, 1/10, A1) The attack struck a small percentage of buildings. This is the same tendentious reporting as was done in the first Lebanon War and in a later Israeli attack on a terrorist camp, I mean a refugee camp, in Jenin, P.A.. Most of the cities named suffered damage only in a small portion, but the media focused on that portion and claimed falsely that the damage was in the whole. Some of the damage was from earlier wars or Arab forces or PLO booby-trapping of buildings in Jenin. The human interest angle will produce improper indignation against Israel. NY TIMES TURNS FRANK? Both sides change tactics often and are fighting harder in Gaza. Israel [I am pleased to note] precedes an infantry charge with artillery. Its new rules of combat emphasize keeping its own casualties down. It used to give priority to keeping collateral casualties down, so Hamas employs human shields Steven Erlanger admits that Hamas hides weapons or command centers in mosques, schoolyards, houses, and a hospital. Hamas fights largely in civilian clothes. [I wish he would admit that those are war crimes.] He complains that Gaza civilians can't flee through the closed borders. [He should note that Hamas has a duty not to fight from civilian areas. Israel should let the Arabs out of Gaza, with the understanding that it would not let them back.] Israel fired at a UN school, claiming that terrorists were firing mortars from it, a typical Hamas tactic. The UNO denies it. [The UNO is biased against Israel. Everybody knows that the terrorists run UNRWA.] Mr. Erlanger says there are questions whether Israel used disproportionate force, "given the danger to non-combatants (NY Times, 1/11, A1). So Hamas would get away with firing mortars, from among civilians, at the Israeli troops. Those who raise such questions encourage such Hamas war crimes. WHAT PASSES FOR "NEWS ANALYSIS" AT THE TIMES Michael Slackman reports that Egypt and Jordan fear that instead of a two-state [non-]solution, they will have to absorb Arabs from the Territories and become destabilized. [The analysts fail to deduce that this would mean that the Territorial Arabs are so rotten, that they spoil every barrel they enter.] I think that fear is baseless, expressed more for propaganda, which the Times disseminates. Misleading readers, Mr. Slackman states that Iran and proxies oppose a diplomatic solution that Egypt and Jordan want. But they all want diplomacy and they all want to destroy Israel. Egypt wants diplomacy to easily and cheaply render Israel vulnerable to invasion, first. Hence, "two-state" is not a solution. Egypt proposed to commit to stop arms smuggling and that Hamas promise to stop firing rockets, if Israel stopped fighting and let the EU supervise reopened borders. Israel and the US welcome the proposal. Slackman ignores that the proposal was in effect, but failed. Hence the combat. Can't trust Muslims or EU. As for UNRWA, it is run by Arabs, hence terrorists fight from its facilities or near enough for counter-attacks to damage UNRWA buildings, not by design. The Times takes hypocritical, UNRWA complaints about such damage seriously. 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 |
|
PRETTY TALK AND UGLY REALITIES
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 14, 2009. |
|
As if proof was needed.....there are sensible people in this world, they're just not in political positions. Dammit, stop smooching Mrs Arafat! Control yourself! Are you listening, Hillary? This was written by Thomas Sowell |
|
No phrase represents more of a triumph of hope over experience than the phrase "Middle East peace process." A close second might be the once-fashionable notion that Israel should "trade land for peace." Since everybody seems to be criticizing Israel for its military response to the rockets being fired into their country from the Gaza strip, let me add my criticisms as well. The Israelis traded land for peace, but they have never gotten the peace, so they should take back the land. Maybe a couple of generations of Palestinians in Gaza living in peace under Israeli occupation and a couple of generations of the occupation troops squelching the terrorists — "militants" for those of you who are squeamish — would set up conditions where the Palestinians would be free to vote on whether they would like to remain occupied or to have their own state — minus terrorists and their rockets. Casualty totals alone should be enough to show that the Palestinian people are the biggest losers from the current situation, where the terrorists among them, firing rockets into Israel, can bring devastating retaliatory strikes. Why don't the Palestinians vote for some representatives who would make a lasting peace with Israel? Because any such candidates would be killed by the terrorists long before election day, so nobody volunteers for that dangerous role. We don't know what the Palestinians really want — and won't know as long as they are ruled by Hamas, Hezbollah and the like. Whatever the benefits of peace for the Palestinian population, what are the terrorists going to do in peacetime? Become librarians and furniture salesmen? So-called "world opinion" has been a largely negative factor in this situation. Nothing is easier than for people living in peace and safety in Paris or Rome to call for a "cease fire" after the Israelis retaliate against people who are firing rockets into their country. The time to cease fire was before the rockets were fired. What do calls for "cease fire" and "negotiations" do? They lower the price of launching attacks. This is true not only in the Middle East but in other parts of the world as well. During the Vietnam war, when American clergymen were crying out "Stop the bombing!" they paid little attention to the fact that bombing pauses made it easier for North Vietnam to move more ammunition into South Vietnam to kill both South Vietnamese and Americans. After Argentina invaded the Falkland Islands, if British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher had heeded calls for a "cease fire," that would have simply lowered the price to be paid by the Argentine government for their invasion. Go back a hundred years — before there was a United Nations and before "world opinion" was taken into account. An Argentine invasion of the Falkland Islands at that time would have risked not only a British counter-attack to retake the islands but also British attacks on Argentina itself. Anywhere in the world, attacks such as those on Israel today would not only have risked retaliation but invasion and annihilation of the government that launched those attacks. Today, so-called "world opinion" not only limits the price to be paid for aggression or terrorism, it has even led to the self-indulgence of third parties talking pretty talk about limiting the response of those who are attacked to what is "proportionate." By this reasoning, we should not have declared war on Japan for bombing Pearl Harbor. We should have gone over to Japan, bombed one of their harbors — and let it go at that. Does anyone imagine that this would have led to Japan's becoming as peaceful today as it has become after Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Or is the real agenda to engage in moral preening from a safe distance and at somebody else's expense? Those who think "negotiations" are a magic answer seem not to understand that when A wants to annihilate B, this is not an "issue" that can be resolved amicably around a conference table. Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
POLITICIANS SWORE GAZA PULLOUT WOULD BRING SECURITY TO SOUTH
Posted by Israel National News Staff, January 14, 2009. |
|
This article is archived at
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) Channel 2's political correspondent Amit Segal has gathered together statements made by many of Israel's leading politicians prior to the 2005 Disengagement from Gaza. Politicians rejected warnings of rocket fire from Gaza as "absurd," and many of those who now blame the retreat from Gaza for attacks on the south, actually voted for the withdrawal. Video of Pre-Disengagement Quotes
Then Prime Minister Ariel Sharon stated the purpose of the Disengagement from Gaza in his December 2003 speech to the Herzliyah Conference. He said: "The purpose of the Disengagement Plan is to reduce terror as much as possible, and grant Israeli citizens the maximum level of security...These steps will increase security for the residents of Israel and relieve the pressure on the IDF and security forces in fulfilling the difficult tasks they are faced with. The Disengagement Plan is meant to grant maximum security and minimize friction between Israelis and Palestinians." — Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Herzliya Conference, December 18, 2003 In the above video, the following members of Knesset are shown making statements from the Knesset floor: MK Meir Sheetrit, Kadima (Formerly Likud): There is an argument according to which there will be a threat... a threat and a fleeing... a threat on the Negev communities... I have never before heard such a ridiculous argument MK Ran Cohen, Meretz: The disengagement is good for security. The right wing people stood here and talked about Kassams flying from here to there... I'm telling you, whoever wants to spare not only Sderot but also Ashkelon, both of them, must understand: if we don't go out of the Gaza Strip in two or three years, maybe after one year, the range will reach Ashkelon. MK Orit Noked, Labor: I want to believe that, as a result of the evacuation, and the exiting of Gaza, the moderate Palestinian leaders will become strong, and terror will be reduced. MK Shaul Mofaz, Kadima (Formerly Likud): I am convinced the act is necessary and right, it can grant greater security for the residents of Israel and can reduce the burden on the security forces, it can break the current stalemate and open a door to a new reality that will enable, when the day comes negotiations for coexistence. MK Pines-Paz, Labor: Honorable Knesset Chairman, before I arrived in the Knesset today, I brought my son to the Tel Hashomer base, he received his first call-up order to the IDF. I must thank Ariel Sharon for the hope he gives me and my wife that my son, when he is recruited, will not have to serve the nation of Israel in the Gaza Strip. MK Binyamin Netanyahu, Likud Chairman: Make no mistake, in a referendum I will support the (disengagement) plan MK Yuval Shteinitz, Likud: I think that this plan, under the conditions, is appropriate for our confidence. It's not a simple plan, but it has a high probability of improving our geo-strategic situation. Film of Knesset roll call in one of the votes on the Disengagement
|
|
SOROS' J STREET WORKS FOR ISRAEL'S SURRENDER
Posted by Yid with Lid, January 13, 2009. |
|
Last Year George Soros funded the creation of "J Street" described as a "left wing alternative" to AIPAC. In actuality it is a group which like Soros, embraces the terrorist point of view and at times acts as a propagandist for Hamas' actions. Their propaganda has become so blatant that Even Rabbi Yoffie of the reform movement, a regular Israel critic has recently bashed the group. The lobbying group, he writes in the liberal newspaper The Forward, "could find no moral difference between the actions of Hamas and other Palestinian militants, who have launched more than 5,000 rockets and mortar shells at Israeli civilians in the past three years, and the long-delayed response of I srael, which finally lost patience and responded to the pleas of its battered citizens in the south." Its response to the Gaza war is just one example of how J Street acts as a vehicle for Israels Surrender: The essay below is called A Street Named Surrender." It was written by
John Perazzo, Managing Editor of DiscoverTheNetworks and author of
The Myths That Divide Us: How Lies Have Poisoned American Race
Relations. For more information on his book, click here. E-mail
him at wsbooks25@hotmail.com. The version on Yid with Lid
|
|
As Israel launched its recent military offensive to stamp out Gaza-based Palestinian terrorism, Jewish groups across the world rallied to the Jewish state's side. But one Jewish group refused to stand with Israel as it retaliated against Hamas. "Neither Israelis nor Palestinians have a monopoly on right or wrong," announced the leadership of J Street, the Washington, DC-based Jewish organization that styles itself as the "political arm of the pro-Israel, pro-peace movement." "While there is nothing 'right' in raining rockets on Israeli families or dispatching suicide bombers, there is [also] nothing 'right' in [Israel] punishing a million and a half already-suffering Gazans for the actions of the extremists among them," J Street declared. It may seem odd that a self-described "pro-Israel" group would fail to draw a distinction between Israel's defensive tactics and the Palestinian terrorism that made them necessary. But J Street, which left-wing financier George Soros helped to create, is not your typical lobbying group. Founded in April 2008, J Street consists of both an advocacy group that seeks to influence public opinion and foreign policy, and a political action committee (PAC) that donates money to various causes. J Street claims that its Internet website already has registered some 100,000 subscribers to receive its periodic email alerts and communiqués. The "J" in J Street's name connotes, in part, the organization's predominantly Jewish character. The name is significant also because no J Street exists among Washington's alphabetically named streets. If it did exist, it would run parallel to K Street, which is famous for the lobbyists and advocacy groups that base their activities there. J Street was founded "to promote meaningful American leadership to end the Arab-Israeli and Palestinian-Israel conflicts peacefully and diplomatically." Key to this, says J Street, will be "a new direction for American policy in the Middle East," a direction that recognizes "the right of the Palestinians to a sovereign state of their own" — where Palestine and Israel live "side-by-side in peace and security." Toward this end, J Street supports "diplomatic solutions over military ones," "multilateral over unilateral approaches to conflict resolution," and "dialogue over confrontation." Israel's partner in such a dialog would necessarily be the terrorist organization Hamas, which holds the reins of political power in the Palestinian territories and denies Israel's right to exist. Absent from J Street's high-minded ideals is any mention of the sixth sentence of Hamas' 1988 Founding Charter, a document whose genocidal objectives the terror group has never disavowed: "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." Hamas has made it very clear that it has no interest in the type of diplomacy and peaceful coexistence which J Street contends are well within reach for Israel and the Palestinians. J Street s failure to understand this suggests, first, that is not in fact "pro-Israel," and second, that it is uninterested in understanding the unsavory realities of the Palestinian position. For instance, J Street urges Israel and the U.S. to pursue "the active diplomatic resolution of existing conflicts" by "engaging with problematic leaders and states," "deploying a full diplomatic tool-box," and launching "a diplomatic surge in the region." Such efforts, says J Street, will likely help to "marginalize" Muslim extremists and terrorists. Evidently, J Street does not consider Hamas to be an extremist or terrorist organization. Moreover, such sentiments stand in stark contrast to Article 11 of the Hamas Founding Charter, which reads: "The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [religious endowment] consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be ... given up." In other words, Hamas maintains that there is no room anywhere in the Middle East for a Jewish state of any size. J Street traces the Mideast conflict chiefly to the notion that "Israel's settlements in the occupied territories have, for over forty years, been an obstacle to peace." Those settlements, adds J Street, have "undermine[d] peace prospects by making Palestinians doubt Israeli motives and commitment." Why the presence of Jews in Arab lands constitutes an obstacle to peace, while more than a million Arabs live comfortably in Israel, J Street doesn't explain. Notably, J Street is silent on whether the Hamas Charter's Article 13 — which amounts to an unambiguous declaration of war against the Jews — might similarly serve to undermine prospects for peace. Says that Article: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." Vis à vis the current conflict between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, J Street concedes that of course "Israel has the right and obligation to defend its citizens from short and long-term threats, such as [the Hamas] rocket attacks — including taking military action designed to address t he specific threat." But in the next breath, the organization warns that Israel's choice to "escalat[e] the conflict" inevitably "will prove counter-productive and only deepen the cycle of violence in the region"; "will deepen animosity between the Palestinian and Israeli people"; and "will ignite further anger across the Middle East." Meanwhile, J Street offers no explanation as to how a more tepid Israeli response to the Hamas attacks could possibly mollify a foe that states, early in its Charter: "Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious ... [and] should be supported by more and more squadrons from this vast Arab and Islamic world, until the enemy is vanquished and Allah's victory is realized." "[I]n the end," J Street assures us, "the only way to truly halt rocket fire into southern Israel is a diplomatic solution." As proof of that premise, J Street cheerfully reports that "[t]hroughout the 6-month ceasefire between Hamas and Israel that began on June 19, 2008, there was not a single Israeli casualty." Moreover, J Street scolds Israel for having squandered the opportunity it allegedly had, during the "months of calm under the June ceasefire, to lay some diplomatic groundwork that might have served to "deepen the ceasefire" by making it "more robust." Presumably we are to conclude that because none of the more-than-200 rockets and mortars that Hamas fighters lobbed indiscriminately into southern Israel during the "ceasefire" managed to kill anyone, no lasting harm was done to Israel or its citizens. Claiming that Israel should simply pursue "a more robust ceasefire the next time around," J Street cautions that "prolonging the fighting [now] is likely to make that goal less, not more, attainable." J Street does not even factor into this equation the more-than-5,000 rockets and mortar shells — some of which killed civilians — that Hamas and its comrades had launched into Israel with impunity during the two-and-a-half years preceding the June "ceasefire"; i.e., after Israel's complete withdrawal from Gaza. And nowhere in its discussion of the Israel-Palestinian conflict does J Street mention the Koranic passage, cited reverently in Article 7 of the Hamas Charter, which proclaims: "The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight the Jew, when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Moslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him." In J Street's view, there is a moral equivalence between the Palestinians, who are abiding by the Koranic injunction to slay their infidel enemies until the latter are utterly vanquished, and the Israelis, whose great desire for peaceful coexistence caused them to absorb the aforementioned 5,000 rocket attacks without retaliating. J Street also cautions against Israeli efforts to topple Hamas, on grounds that the latter "has been the government, law and order, and service provider since it won the [Palestinian] elections in January 2006 and especially since June 2007 when it took complete control." Instead, J Street seeks to persuade U.S. President-elect Barack Obama and incoming Secretary of State Hillary Clinton "to work with [their] allies and the international community to immediately re-establish a ceasefire." Indeed, J Street celebrates the recent election of Obama as a sign that Americans are prepared to choose "hope" while eschewing "the politics of fear when it comes to Israel and the Middle East." The "politics of fear," by J Street's reckoning, is a phrase that properly describes the tactics of anyone audacious enough to draw attention to militant Islam's expansionist, imperialistic motives. Preferring instead to portray Islam as a peaceful faith that unfortunately has been hijacked by a small handful of "extremists," J Street has condemned the DVD Obsession — which factually describes fundamentalist Muslims' worldwide animus toward religious pluralism and their quest to subjugate the practitioners of other faiths — as a "well-funded" production that "attempts to stoke the Jewish community's worst fears." In the past election cycle, J Street's PAC officially endorsed 41 congressional candidates, 39 of whom were Democrats. All told, the PAC distributed $578,812 to their campaigns. Among the more notable candidates to win J Street's support were=2 0several members of the Democratic Party's socialist wing, the Progressive Caucus. Those members included Representatives Keith Ellison, Bob Filner, Michael Capuano, Barney Frank, Maurice Hinchey, Charles Rangel, Jan Schakowsky, Hilda Solis, Steve Cohen, George Miller, and Robert Wexler. J Street proudly declares that it works "united with other organizations in the pro-Israel, pro-peace community." These groups include Americans for Peace Now, which alleges that Israeli provocations are responsible for the conflict with Palestinians; Brit Tzedek v'Shalom, a human rights group that is highly critical of Israel and has collaborated with George Soros' Open Society Institute to promote "Breaking the Silence" — a speaking tour of former Israeli soldiers critical of the way Israel treats the Palestinians; the Israel Policy Forum, which encourages ever-more-numerous Israeli concessions to Palestinian militants as the steppingstones needed to pave the path toward peace; and B'Tselem, which believes that Israel badly mistreats the Palestinian people. George Soros supported J Street's creation and was formally associated with the organization for a brief time after its inception. Like J Street, Soros places the lion's share of the blame for the Arab-Israeli crisis on Israel. He contends, for instance, that Israel's "refusal to recognize a Palestinian unity government that includes Hamas ... precludes any progress toward a peace settlement." He impugns Israel for having "caused great economic hardship [for Palestinians] and undermined the ability of [their] government20to function." He laments that Israel's intransigence could lead that nation to miss out" on the prospect of a two-state solution that would include "acceptance of Israel's existence by Hamas." And he bemoans that "[t]he current policy of not seeking a political solution but pursuing military escalation — not just an eye for an eye but roughly speaking ten Palestinian lives for every Israeli one — has reached a particularly dangerous point." Soon after J Street was launched, Soros stepped away from the
group, at least publically, apparently fearing that his controversial
reputation might scare off other potential supporters. But even in his
behind-the-scenes role with J Street, Soros remains a powerful
influence on the organization. Indeed, J Street's Advisory Council
includes a number of individuals with very close ties to the
billionaire. Among them are Gail Furman and Deborah Sagner, who also
serve on the board of Democracy Alliance, an enormously influential
Soros-funded coalition that supports leftist groups and political
candidates; Sheldon Drobny, who co-founded the Soros-funded Air
America Radio; Maria Echaveste, a Senior Fellow at the Soros-funded
Center for American Progress
J Street also identifies Avram Burg as one of its leading supporters. Burg says that "Israel, having ceased to care about the children of the Palestinians, should not be surprised when they [suicide bombers] come washed in hatred and blow themselves up in the centres of Israeli escapism." He also l ikens modern-day Israel to Nazi Germany. In the final analysis, J Street's leaders and friends are uniformly predisposed to blame Israeli policies for the Mideast conflict while turning a blind eye to the Palestinians' faithful adherence to the Islamic mandate for permanent jihad. Hamas co-founder and foreign minister Mahmoud Zahar puts it this way: "I dream of hanging a huge map of the world on the wall at my Gaza home which does not show Israel on it." "Even if the U.S. gave us all its money in return for recognizing Israel and giving up one inch of Palestine," he adds, "we would never do so even if this costs us our lives." In the face of such unyielding militancy, J Street insists that Israel must treat Hamas as a serious negotiating partner rather than as a terrorist group avowedly bent on its destruction. There are a number of ways to describe this position, which urges Israel to accept surrender by another name. One thing it cannot be called, however, is "pro-Israel." This comes from yesterday's column
|
|
WHERE ARE THE ANTI-DEFAMATION LEAGUE AND OTHER JEWISH DEFENSE ORGANIZATIONS?
Posted by Beth Gilinsky, January 13, 2009. |
|
New York, January 12, 2009 — The Jewish Action Alliance released the following statement this evening: Synagogues are burning, Jews are being beaten up, young girls are being accosted, rabbis are being shoved to the ground, kosher butchers and their shops are being pelted — all over the world. Even in America, there are Muslims displaying signs of "Death to the Jews" and "Jews Back In the Ovens." Yes, even here in America. Contact Beth Gilinsky at actionalliance1@yahoo.com |
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: SHALOM'S BRIT. SHALOM'S FEET
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, January 13, 2009. |
Shalom's Brit. Shalom's Feet
This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. Yehoshua Halevi writes: "HOW I GOT THE SHOT: Someone once asked me whether I have more success trying to make photographs happen — such as by pre-visualizing a composition or planning to be someplace at a specific time — or by simply being ready to shoot when an image "reveals" itself to me. It's an excellent question, because I've used both methods to produce some fantastic shots. This week's shot falls into the latter of these two approaches as the composition "revealed" itself to me as I stood shoulder-to-shoulder with guests in a packed room at a brit milah or circumcision ceremony last year. The father stood sideways next to me, wearing a long black coat and cradling his newborn son, who was wrapped in a white blanket. Amid the clutter and chaos, I honed in on the tiny pink feet framed in black and white. I wasn't expecting to see this, but grabbed it before the opportunity was lost. When I'm working in a small room, I use a two-light set up. In
this shot, light from my remote flash spills into the frame from the
top left corner, sprinkling some gentle highlights onto the baby's
toes. Back in my office, I cropped the image to a square, because the
spiraling motion of the photo's outer elements — the coat and blanket
— are better suited to this shape. Anyone who wants to feel the beauty
of Israel should attend a brit milah here in Israel during a war. For
better and for worse, opportunities for such an experience are
frequent. Witnessing this ancient ritual provides the dual
satisfaction of feeling the joy of parents with a new child and
knowing that the continuity of our tradition is, quite likely, the
ultimate weapon in our ongoing battle for survival.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com
and visit his website:
|
|
PROPAGANDA IN WALL ST. JOURNAL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 13, 2009. |
|
George E. Bisharat's Jan. 10 Op.-Ed. claims "Israel Is Committing War Crimes." Although a law professor, he issued a stream of misleading and untrue statements about war crimes and international law, defaming Israel. His propaganda warrants not just a brief letter about a couple of his many misstatements but a counter-article, if not this one, then one like it. From such a debate, readers could make up their own minds. Mr. Bisharat's key point is that the last Hamas action against Israel, by itself, is just a border skirmish that does not justify Israel in moving armored forces into Gaza. Hence he accuses Israel of committing aggression. His key point is a classical example of misleading people by omitting context and reality. Why does he count just the last Hamas menacing act and not the many that he acknowledges preceded it? For a couple of years, Israel warned Hamas that its many acts of aggression against Israel, and its building Gaza into a terrorist base with tunnels, fortifications, and thousands of rockets, constitute a significant menace, and would be dealt with. Hamas ignored the warning and continued both fighting and building up its forces, while Hizbullah rebuilt its. What is Israel supposed to do, dismiss each rocket or mortar attack as insignificant, though Mr. Bisharat admits they mount into the thousands. Must Israel absorb each one's damage, watch their range and numbers grow, and wait for a major attack? Then they would kill thousands of Israelis. Only then would the remaining Israelis be justified, in Mr. Bisharat's view, to strike back. Do Arab terrorists have a right to keep attacking and building up for a decisive battle in alliance with others, while Israel lacks the right of self-defense? Its city of Siderot is being abandoned, citizens in southern Israel often hide in shelters, and their children become traumatized. That is intolerable. Mr. Bisharat's demand that Israel tolerate it is irrational and indecent. Israeli citizens have a right not to put up with continuous bombardment, by rooting out terrorism. A supporting point states that Israel didn't suffer an armed attack "immediately prior" to its retaliation. "Immediately?" What kind of a standard is that? Mr. Bisharat unfairly holds against Israel its government's extreme patience in refraining from retaliation for so many months, before it finally started to eliminate the menace that grew from a range of perhaps 25,000 Israeli civilians to about a million. No other country would stand for such attacks and such build-up. Why should Israel? Israel violated the truce, Mr. Bisharat claims, first, because it didn't end its siege of Gaza. It had ended it, but Hamas violated the truce by attacking the gates through which Israel was letting goods into Gaza. Hence Israel had to close the gates, except for limited humanitarian shipments. Siege is an old tactic of war. It keeps the enemy from getting as much of the materiel for war. Second, he writes, Israel attacked and killed an Arab. He calls this aggression. Why didn't Mr. Bisharat acknowledge that Israel attacked because it discovered that Hamas had built a tunnel from which its gunmen were about to sally forth and surprise and kidnap Israeli soldiers. Israel was prudent to attack first, and thwart the kidnapping. This incident shows to what use Hamas put the truce. Repeatedly, Mr. Bisharat implies that Israel is in the wrong, because its attacks kill more people than have Hamas'. That is silly. To win a war, one must inflict more casualties than one suffers. Where does he come up with such an absurd standard? Was the US wrong for killing more German Army troops in WWII than those troops killed Americans? Hamas was building up a bigger arsenal of longer-range rockets that could set off Israeli fuel dumps and reach bigger cities. Then they would kill more Israelis. Mr. Bisharat is waiting for that. Why should Israel? Remember, Hamas is a religiously fanatical, terrorist organization, operating outside the rules of war, and bent on genocide. Mr. Bisharat takes no cognizance. He mentions international law but does not mention that under it, terrorists are like pirates, common enemies of mankind. All countries have a duty to eradicate them. Most deceitful is Mr. Bisharat's accusation that Israel does not differentiate between military and civilian targets. Israel fires upon mosques, which he calls part of Gaza's civilian infrastructure. Americans fighting in Iraq found out otherwise. The NY Times of 1/11 put it, "Hamas, with training from Iran and Hezbollah, has used the last two years to turn Gaza into a deadly maze of tunnels, booby traps and sophisticated roadside bombs. Weapons are hidden in mosques, schoolyards and civilian houses, and the leadership's war room is a bunker beneath Gaza's largest hospital, Israeli intelligence officials say." Captured Hamas documents direct "...snipers to shoot next to a mosque (A1.) Hamas hopes either to deter Israeli counter-fire, as it often does, because Israel has a conscience, or to provide a pretext for people such as Bisharat to pretend those are civilian structures, so they can accuse Israel of war crimes. The war crime is in militarizing those structures and endangering civilians who live there. International law, Mr. Bisharat should know, holds that the side that endangers its civilians is responsible for their casualties. Hamas men seize children for use as shields. Israeli soldiers used to get killed, hesitating to risk shooting the children. They may be less hesitant, now. In any case, the war crime is in using human shields. Why doesn't Mr. Bisharat acknowledge that Israel has suffered many casualties over the years because it tries to spare civilians around enemy troops or weapons depots? Since Israel gets criticized anyway, I think it is foolish to sustain those casualties unnecessarily. If Mr. Bisharat really were concerned about Arab civilians, as he stresses that he is, why doesn't he denounce Hamas' several practices that endanger thousands of civilians? His silence indicates that he doesn't really care. He exploits our, civilized concern for civilians to wrongfully indict Israel. He thus encourages Hamas war crimes. Mr. Bisharat's casualty figures may depend on the Palestinian Authority, notorious for attributing unrelated deaths or non-deaths to Israeli gunfire, and on B'Tselem, notorious for counting wanted terrorists as civilians if pursued and slain when not actually fighting. In addition, Hamas men tend to fight in civvies. An old canard is his allegation that 80% of Gazans "were forced from their homes [in Israel] or fled in fear of Jewish terrorist attacks in 1948! The Arab leadership set the example of flight in 1947, it being customary to flee from war zones. Invading Arab armies demanded that the Arab populace get out of their way or be considered traitors. In the past, Arabs admitted this. Very few Arabs were driven out by Israeli forces, just some in sensitive border zones or hilltops. The article is worded so that it seems as if a substantial portion were driven out. It's an old falsehood, long disproved. Another good one is that "For 60 years, Israel has denied the internationally recognized rights of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes — because they are not Jews." Such rights are not recognized. The pertinent UN resolution specifies that the people would have to come in peace. Hamas and Fatah, both genocidal, come in peace? Absurd. Millions of Arabs indoctrinated in bigotry and murder would enter to take over Israel. Does Mr. Bisharat understand that or not? If yes, he's cynical, if not, he's uninformed. The Arab states deliberately refused to integrate Arab refugees, so that they could be used against Israel. Mr. Bisharat's case is part of that attempt to destroy Israel. He is using inapplicable notions of international law to create injustice and end in mass-murder. Some humanitarian impulse! He calls Israel an "occupying power." International law defines occupation as taking an entire sovereign country or part of it. The Palestine Mandate was not sovereign. Gaza was one of the unallocated parts of the Mandate, to which Israel, as primary heir to the Mandate, has the best legal, moral, religious, and historical claim Mr. Bisharat talks about Arab children going hungry. They sure look healthy when they throw stones! Much of what they need is smuggled in. The effect of the siege is exaggerated for propaganda. It is not fair to ignore Hamas' barring of some Gaza shipments from Israel and in stealing much of the rest. In the whole P.A., the governments extort, fail to set up business law, and oppress, thereby depressing the economy from levels to which Israel had raised it. After all, the P.A. has signed a peace agreement with Israel, which called for negotiations for a final settlement. Instead, the Arabs chose to continue jihad. No excuse for that. Then Mr. Bisharat complains that Israel doesn't submit to jihad. Come on! The Op.-Ed. has an air of knowledge, ethics and international law, but it is just air. 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 |
|
WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN THE GUY ACROSS THE NEGOTIATING TABLE WANTS TO DESTROY YOU?
Posted by Newt Gingrich, January 13, 2009. |
|
Secretary of State-designate Hillary Clinton's confirmation hearings are underway in the Senate today. A good question for any senator who is interested in being honest about the real problem in the Middle East is this: "Senator Clinton, imagine that you're the Israeli Foreign Minister: What do you do when the other party at the 'peace table' is openly committed to your destruction?" This is the question that all our political and foreign policy elites who are demanding that Israel immediately agree to a "cease fire" with Hamas in Gaza should be asking. And this is the fact that the anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic mobs that are taking to the streets in London, Edinburgh, Berlin and Washington, DC should know: Hamas is openly, publicly and proudly committed to the destruction of the state of Israel. This is a negotiating partner? Hamas Charter: "There is No Solution For the Palestinian Problem Except Through Jihad" These are the words of the Hamas charter:
And here is how the founding document of Hamas treats the concept of "negotiations": "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." Two Facts of Violence in Mid-East: Hamas and Iran There are two main facts of the violence in the Middle East that all Americans — and particularly our leaders — should be aware of: The first is that Hamas exists to destroy Israel. Its leaders wake up every morning with one goal — to eliminate what they call the "Zionist entity." The second fact of violence in the Middle East is the ongoing effort by Iran (using Syria, Hezbollah and Hamas as its proxies) to undermine pro-American governments in the region. "A New Emphasis on Respect" in Relations with Iran? On ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, President-elect Obama repeated his campaign pledge to negotiate with Iran. He also promised that there would be a "new emphasis on respect" in his administration's dealings with Tehran. President-elect Obama may want respect. But Iran's theocratic rulers want victory. This is a dangerous mismatch of goals for America and a potentially nuclear, aggressor regime to have. To Understand Iran and Gaza, Obama Should Look to Lincoln President-elect Obama has expressed a welcome fondness for Abraham Lincoln. To understand the regimes in Iran and Gaza, all of us should read more Lincoln. When the southern states began to secede from the Union with Lincoln's election in 1860, Lincoln concluded that negotiating with the South would be futile. There were only two options: To make it impossible for the South to leave the Union.
Lincoln choose to "preserve, protect and defend" the Union and 620,000 Americans died implementing his policy. But in doing so, Lincoln saved the Union. And the "mystic chords of memory, stretching from every battlefield, and patriot grave, to every living heart and hearthstone" endure to this day. The Policy of the United States Must Be That Israel's Right to Survive is Unequivocal Similarly, there are no easy solutions in Gaza. But there are a few milestones that Israel should achieve — and the United States should support — before any ceasefire with Hamas is granted: 1) Hamas' capacity to inflict violence on the state of Israel must be destroyed, or at least significantly reduced. The policy of the United States of America has been and must be that Israel's right to survive is unequivocal. Therefore, the greatest danger to Israel in the long run is for it to experience violence followed by a false truce which allows its enemies time to rearm and initiate yet another cycle of violence. Iran and Hamas will not voluntarily end this cycle of violence. They must be brought to the point where they have no choice.
The article is archived at http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=30259 |
|
FROM ISRAEL: SLOWLY, SLOWLY
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 13, 2009. |
|
Prayers, please! Second Lieutenant Aharon Karov, who is from Karnei Shomron and serves in the Paratroopers Battalion, was critically injured in a booby-trapped house in Gaza last night. When Aharon was called up a week-and-a-half ago, he had been married to Tzivia Mordechai from Kedumim for less than a day. ((Yes, I know, there is the feeling that this shouldn't happen, and in certain circumstances newlyweds are cut slack in terms of reporting for duty. But this is a war of self-defense we're in.) My heart goes out, most especially, to Tzivia, in these circumstances. Aharon's father, Rabbi Zeev Karov, is a dean of a Yeshiva high school in Kedumim. The family requests prayers for Aharon Yehoshua ben Chayah Shoshana. ~~~~~~~~~~ The "triumvirate" has apparently decided for the moment not to move ahead to the third stage of the war, in order to give negotiations on a cease-fire a chance. What we've done, however, is to bring in more of the reservists, and to send more of our regular troops into Gaza City. And so, whatever we call the current operation, and whatever is still not being done, we are on the move and continuing to attack. ~~~~~~~~~~ Chief of Staff, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, reported to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee today that: "We have achieved exceptional results in damaging Hamas, its infrastructure and its military wing." Our troops are "doing an extraordinary job," in an operation that is "very complicated." ~~~~~~~~~~ And Minister of Defense Ehud Barak, speaking at an Air Force base today, said, "Yesterday, we heard, and we respect the calls of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon, and, of course, we are also monitoring developments on the Egyptian initiative, but the fighting goes on and the IDF is continuing to apply force." What Barak is referring to is a statement the Secretary-General made in NY yesterday, saying he was "very frustrated and concerned" that resolution 1860 has not been fully honored. "The fighting must stop," he said. "To both sides, I say, 'Just stop now.'" ~~~~~~~~~~ Unfortunately, Ban is due in this area tomorrow, and will be in Israel on Thursday. He has indicated that he will be meeting with Arab and Israeli leaders and insist that the recent resolution be "respected fully." I make two observations here: One, that it is all very well and good to ask us to stop, when Hamas has no intention of stopping. And two, the UN charter itself does not require us to stop. Even Chapter VII, which includes provisions for enforcing resolutions, says, in article 51: "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security." ~~~~~~~~~~ We know that Hamas is crumbling because on Monday Hamas prime minister in Gaza, Ismail Haniyeh, broadcasting on TV from his hideout, said they would "cooperate with any initiatives aimed at ending the [Israeli offensive] and bringing about the enemy's withdrawal and the reopening of the crossings" — thus signaling a readiness to work with Egypt on a ceasefire. Ismail Haniyeh at his Gaza hideout (Photo: AFP) At the same time, however, he said that while talks were going on, they would continue to fight "the occupying forces." "We are certain that eventually we will achieve victory and crush the offensive." I do believe that within Arab culture pride and honor are so significant that, were they crawling on their knees in the mud in Gaza, they would maintain they were winning. Please note that when alluding to Israel, they will never mention our Jewish state by name. It's the "occupying forces" or the "Zionist enemy," etc. ~~~~~~~~~~ Now, today, according to Al Hayat (London), Hamas has agreed to deployment of a Turkish force at the crossing at Rafah (from Gaza into the Sinai), even though previously the Hamas position had been that no foreign forces would be permitted on the soil of Gaza. And why would Turkish forces be acceptable? Because Turkey, pretty much aligning itself with Iran and Syria, has come out adamantly against the Israeli action in Gaza. Turkey, it seems, is Hamas's friend. Which makes Turkey fairly worthless as a monitor of what's going through the crossing. Don't know how this will play out. ~~~~~~~~~~ Olmert made an impassioned — and very interesting — speech in Ashkelon yesterday. He began by explaining our position in fighting the war: "If after this whole effort we discover that rockets with increasing ranges are making their way into Gaza that can reach up to 80, and even 100, kilometers, how will we see ourselves? How will our neighbors see us? Therefore, there is no question. There is no hesitation. "We want to finish, but only if the two conditions that we are demanding are met — an end to the strengthening of Hamas and to rocket fire. If these two are achieved, we will end our military operation in Gaza. "We cannot be soft. It is us or them." ~~~~~~~~~~ But then he described the process that brought about an abstention by the US during the vote on SC Resolution 1860: Secretary of State Rice had helped draft this resolution, and was planning to vote for it. When Olmert learned this, he tried too call President Bush, who was giving a talk in Philadelphia. Olmert demanded that he be put in contact with him, and Bush left the talk to take the call. After hearing Olmert's request, Bush put in a call to Rice and told her not to vote for the resolution. Said Olmert, of Rice: "She was left shamed. A resolution that she prepared and arranged, and in the end she did not vote in favor." Please see the comments of Anne Bayefsky, of Eye on the UN, with regard to what she considers a betrayal of the US in not casting a veto when this resolution was brought to a vote. She describes all of the shortcomings of the resolution.
~~~~~~~~~~ I would like to turn the focus here on Hamas, because as the world rants at Israel about our "inhumanity" in defending ourselves, it is important that the nature of this radical, jidhadist group be thoroughly understood: Palestinian Media Watch cites the Israeli Arab newspaper Kul-Al-Arab, which reported on January 9, that Hamas is using children in Gaza in combat support roles. They are even used as scouts for tracking the Israeli army. One youngster, named Khaled, was quoted: "We the children, in small groups and in civilian clothes, are fulfilling missions of support for the Resistance fighters, by transmitting messages about the movements of the enemy forces, or by bringing them ammunition and food..." The UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, ratified by 191 nations, forbids the recruitment of children in the course of hostilities, even as non-combatants. ~~~~~~~~~~ On Monday, Hamas raided 100 trucks carrying humanitarian supplies that Israel had let into Gaza during a self-imposed lull in the fighting. They stole the contents of the trucks and sold them to the highest bidders. ~~~~~~~~~~ The complexity of the booby traps that has been set by Hamas is
considerable. Every house that is abandoned is being booby-trapped. In
one instance that shocked the IDF forces a fuse was discovered in a
zoo, with the wire running past cages of animals, to a nearby school.
~~~~~~~~~~ According to Public Security Minister Avi Dichter, Hamas is using Shifa hospital in western Gaza City, in a very crowded part of the city, as a place for meetings: "...you can hear from the Palestinians who visit there — it is somewhat of an open secret — that Hamas commanders walk around the hospital, in some instances wearing doctors' robes,. In some cases the Hamas commanders kick medical teams out of rooms so that they can hold meetings." Over the weekend, Hamas even used the hospital as a salary distribution site for those commanders who were elsewhere but who could come out of hiding to collect their pay. ~~~~~~~~~~ I end today by sharing this, from a left wing writer, in a left wing publication. Bradley Burston, writing in Haaretz, in his "Gaza War Diary IV," speaks of ambivalence Israelis feel about the war: "The reasons for the ambivalence go to the complex heart of the Israeli psyche. The compartments there include well-insulated cells for past and future attempts at annihilation of Jewish people; well-justified disgust with Hamas as a barbaric, cynically mercenary, murderous agent of the ideology of extermination; and the dread that accompanies the sinking suspicion that whatever action one takes to fight radical Islam in this region, radical Islam seems to profit from it. "Another distinct cell contains images of the Palestinian civilians killed in Israeli air strikes and artillery shelling in the Gaza Strip...news footage of Palestinian casualties, infants, women and the elderly killed and wounded in Gaza, causes tremendous emotional pain to Israelis. "...In recent days, however, Israeli moderates and the center-left have been faced with a new and bizarrely troubling thought: What if this most denounced of wars actually does some good? "Lurking at the margins, are signs that this war may have positive downstream effects for Israel...Much of this hinges on the effect it may ultimately have on Iran and its satraps...the war, as horrible as many of its direct results have been, may actually serve to break the momentum of the Iranian juggernaut." What he's talking about here — from the left — has existential import for Israel. This is something that all too many still fail to perceive. Never again will we go quietly to our own destruction, nor should the world expect us to. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY PROFESSOR INVERTS REALITY
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 13, 2009. |
|
Another Israeli academic for a Hamas victory? |
|
There is a malicious piece of anti-Israel propaganda making its
rounds through the sewers of the Left, claiming there is "statistical
proof" that it is always Israel and not the Palestinians who violate
ceasefires. It was written by the maliciously anti-Semitic Anat
Biletzki, a professor of philosophy at Tel Aviv University, and two
anti-Semitic colleagues of hers from outside Israel. Biletzki knows
absolutely nothing about statistics. The piece may be read at
By exactly the same "statistical proof," one can prove that it was the US who attacked Japan at Pearl Harbor. The malicious piece of propaganda was distributed in my own university to faculty by Professor of Psychology Ramzi Suleiman, who was the first Arab Dean of anything at any university in Israel. Who is Anat Biletzki, author of the Statistical Proof that the earth is flat? See this. There is a sense of course in which it is correct that Israel always stops the ceasefires. That is because in the "ceasefires" the Pestilianians continue to shoot and engage in terror against Israel, while Israel turns the other cheek, and thus the "ceasefire" can only end when Israel shoots back. A group of British academic anti-Semites is circulating an electronic leaflet in which they explain that insists that 8000 Hamas rockets landing on Israeli civilians just do not count, because they are just symbolic protests and do not do very much damage. Therefore it is only Israeli retaliation that counts as the launching of war. Translation: dead Jews do not count because Jewish lives have no value and Jews deserve to be sent to concentration camps. Some of the Brit signatories are the usual Jewish anti-Semites. Since Jewish life does not count, it would be an unbearably disproportionate response even if Olmert were to respond to thousands of rockets fired at Israel by sneezing in the general direction of the Hamas, and the entire department of political science at Ben Gurion University would denounce this as biological warfare by Israel againt innocent Palestinians. 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
|
|
TELL A LIE OFTEN ENOUGH, IT BECOMES THE TRUTH
Posted by Ari Bussel, January 13, 2009. |
|
This was written by Norma Zager, who has written the Wall Street Journal, Columbia Journalism Review and numerous periodicals. She is a part-time instructor at California State University. Zager's "Postcards from Home" are intertwined with Bussel's "Postcards from Israel." |
|
Tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. Among the most basic morsels of wisdom passed down to each generation. Propaganda has always been a powerful tool for government's intent on spreading lies and deceptive information to the world. Used as an easy and effective way to disseminate doctored realities to suit a specific purpose, Israel has always found itself looking down the barrel of a shotgun of untruths and smear campaigns. Although many politicos have distorted the truth for deceptive purpose, its use for evil has never been as effective as in WWII. Hitler's PR machine was a vital part of the entire German plan to conquer the world and was a highly effective tool. Since a dictatorship controlled its media, lies were an integral part of government control and perpetuating Fascist philosophy. The advent of a State of Israel as an entity should have made it more difficult to spread propaganda yet it hasn't. Why? Ari Bussel related a recent incident that bears out how truly alive and well the ability of Israel's enemies to distort and corrupt the truth. Ari was at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs front office in Sderot, half a mile away from Gaza (this translates to a 15 second warning to take cover in a protected structure). He recounts the day's events: "A reporter from Oslo called to check Hamas's claim that Israel is preventing convoys of humanitarian aid from passing into Gaza. Nothing could have been further from the truth — I had witnessed a convoy en route to Gaza just an hour earlier. 93 truck loads passed each of the previous two days, along with a gift of five ambulances from Turkey. We provided the factual data both to the reporter on the phone and to every reporter who came in that day." The lies and untruths perpetrated against Israel and the Zionists are successful because of two unfortunate realities. They are told often, and of course secondly, the world seems all too eager to believe the worst about the Jewish people. Until the media in its current zeal to cover up the murder and destruction by terrorists initiates a campaign to print and disseminate truth, lies will stand, truth will be mute and the sounds of evil will be heard throughout the world. Today more than ever the words of Joseph Goebbels come to haunt us: "If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State." Contact Ari Bussel at aribussel@gmail.com and visit his blogsite: web.me.com/bussel. |
|
THE WAR AGAINST THE JEWS
Posted by Chuck Brooks, January 12, 2009. |
|
This was written by David Horowitz and it appeared in Front Page Magazine. |
|
The unspoken truth about the fighting in Gaza, which began on December 19, 2008, when Hamas rockets broke a voluntary truce, is that this is the frontline of a much larger war. This war began 30 years ago with the Islamic Revolution in Iran and is now global in scope. Its agenda is the extermination of the Jews and the destruction of the West. The Islamic terrorist organization Hamas makes no secret of this agenda. Its Egyptian founders and Palestinian inspirers were active followers of Adolf Hitler and enthusiasts of the Nazi Holocaust. The founding charter of Hamas, which promises that "Islam will obliterate Israel," memorializes=2 0the Egyptian admirer of Hitler, Hassan al-Banna, as "the martyr...of blessed memory." The same document contains the genocidal incitement of the Prophet Mohammed to "kill the Jews," to hunt them down "until they hide behind the rocks and the trees, and the rocks and trees cry out 'O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.'" In 2006, these Islamic Nazis took possession of the Gaza Strip, which is unoccupied except by Hamas and is Jew-less (because the Palestinians would kill any Jews that moved in their state). Hamas has turned Gaza into a terrorist fortress, launching rockets into Israeli schoolyards, hospitals, and townships, and launching them from Palestinian schoolyards, hospitals, and townships to ensure that the maximum number of civilians — both Jews and Muslims — would die for their cause. They will win the Armageddon they are planning, they boast, because "the Jews love life and we love death." And all around the world, and across Europe and throughout the United States, Muslim and secular radicals are rallying to this Nazi cause, supporting Hamas and attacking Israel and the Jews. The unholy alliance formed by Muslim fanatics and socialist radicals is the face of the terrorist future in the West. It is a coalition for whom no party is so evil that it does not deserve aid and comfort if i ts enemies are Israel and the United States, and if it is willing to attack them. The wars in the Middle East are the frontline of the Islamic Nazi offensive — a 60-year aggression of Muslim Arabs against the Jews, rationalized at each turn by epic lies that resonate with radicals in the West: that the Arab aggressors are the victims; that the Jews stole Arab land (Israel in fact was created out of the ruins of the Turkish empire); that there is a Palestinian entity that wants peace with the state of Israel (there is none — there is not a single Palestinian leader — who supports the existence of a Jewish state). The Palestinians are the only people in history to have a majority support a national death cult, to worship the murderers of little children (including their own), and to proclaim the murderers saints and "martyrs." The father of Palestinian Nationalism, Haj Amin al-Husseini, was an acolyte and ally of Hitler who preached the extermination of the Jews and planned to construct his own death camps for Jews in the Middle East. The miseries Palestinians have suffered are self-inflicted, the inevitable consequence of staking their national ambitions on the genocide of another people, while embracing a death cult for themselves. Their allies in the West are either stupendously ignorant or morally b lind. Here is the self-revealing declaration of the Associate Director of Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Wisconsin (both an ignoramus and a moral defective): "The state terror unleashed from the skies and on the ground against the Gaza Strip as we speak has nothing to do with Hamas. It has nothing to do with 'Terror.' It has nothing to do with the long-term 'security' of the Jewish State...." What it has to do with is the evil Jews and their evil American supporters: "Strip away the clichés and the vacuous newspeak blaring out across the servile media and its pathetic corps of voluntary state servants in the Western world and what you will find is the naked desire for hegemony; for power over the weak and dominion over the world's wealth. Worse yet you will find that the selfishness, the hatred and indifference, the racism and bigotry, the egotism and hedonism...the callousness with which we indulge in them all are endemic to our very culture; thriving here like flies on a corpse." The author of this repulsive, traitorous statement, Wisconsin Professor Jennifer Lowenstein, is herself a Jew, but obviously a self-hating member of the tribe, the likes of which have a sordid lineage going back to the "capos" who shoveled their companions into the ovens and collaborated with their murderers. Like many of her political comrades in the secular and religious Left, she=2 0has joined the forces of Islamic barbarism that are ranged against the civilized people of America and Israel. And she is only one of many. In the midst of the global war that radical Islam has declared on the West, the conflict in Gaza has revealed the presence of a fifth column in the West so detached from its own communities and civilized values that it now constitutes a clear and present danger to our survival. Contact Chuck Brooks at chetz18@aol.com |
|
THE NEED FOR A DECISIVE ISRAELI VICTORY OVER HAMAS
Posted by BESA Center, January 12, 2009. |
|
This is BESA Center Perspectives Papers No. 57 http://www.biu.ac.il/SOC/besa/perspectives57.html. It was written by PRofessor Hillel Frisch, who is a senior research associate at Bar-Ilan University's Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and an expert on the Palestinian Arabs. |
|
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: A decisive Israeli victory over Hamas — which means pursuing the enemy into its hideouts in Gaza urban areas and refugee camps and bringing about its surrender — is critical to rolling back the march of Islamic fundamentalist political power in the Middle East. Israel must reach a decisive victory over Hamas, and this victory must be "seen" and tangibly "felt." The defeat of Hamas must be palpable, conspicuous and concretely visible. Since the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza in 2005, Hamas has improved its capabilities of considerably harming Israel in a relatively short period of time. Every Grad missile that hits Beersheba and Ashdod testifies to this fact. The range of Hamas' missiles has increased from 12 kilometers to at least 40 kilometers in less than two and a half years. The meaning of the enhanced Hamas capabilities in launching rockets is clear. Within two years or less, Hamas will be able to close down Ben-Gurion Airport, Israel's only large international airport. A number of rockets even within proximity of the airport will lead to a cessation of all flights by foreign carriers. Reduced air traffic will have a major effect on the Israeli economy, as well as pose a strategic danger to the country. Hamas' enhanced ballistic capabilities have far greater political and ideological significance. Since the US occupation of Iraq, which removed the power balance against Iran, there is a widespread feeling amongst Israel's enemies that fundamentalism is in an upsurge and winning. Radical Islamic Iran and the movements it supports, Hizballah and Hamas, are thought to be on the ascent, while the power of the United States, Israel, and moderate countries are perceived to be in interminable decline. The facts supporting this perception are well known: Iran continues with its nuclear program unabated; Osama bin Laden is still at large; the Moslem Brotherhood registered relative success in the last Egyptian elections in 2005; Israel conducted an unsuccessful war against Hamas in 2006; Hamas politically and militarily defeated the Palestinian Authority in June 2007 by taking control of Gaza; Hamas breeched the border between Gaza and Egypt in January 2008 and demonstrated the ineptitude of the Egyptians; and Hizballah defeated Hana Siniora's government in Lebanon in the spring of 2008. Further afield, but of significance to an Arabic-speaking public, extremist Islamic forces vanquished moderate groups in Somalia. This long line of Islamic successes contributes to the euphoria of Islamic radicalism. It is not surprising that moderate Arab states, the United States, and many European countries want and expect Israel to hit Hamas hard in this offensive. The danger of the development of Hamas' military capability and other Islamic successes points to what should be Israel's primary goal in this offensive — a decisive blow to Hamas' organizational and military capabilities. This would be an important and long-overdue first step in rolling back the forward march of fundamentalist political Islam in the region. The achievement of a decisive military victory requires Israel to enter Gaza City and the refugee camps with full force. Israel has to dispel the belief that it is reluctant to engage the enemy in urban areas. Israel must make it clear to Hamas that there is no bunker in Gaza that is beyond IDF reach. In the 2002 Defensive Shield operation, the IDF indeed engaged the enemy in the West Bank. Since then, the IDF has succeeded in reducing terror in Judea and Samaria by 95 percent. Politically, the offensive brought the Palestinian Authority to the realization that the option of terror was no longer viable. The relative calm in Judea and Samaria during the present offensive in Gaza is the result of the military decisiveness of Defensive Shield and of the continuous IDF forays since then. Winning the campaign against Hamas must be "seen" and tangibly "felt." Israel and the West need the Arab world to watch scenes on their television screens whereby hundreds of Hamas terrorists are taken prisoner. Israel must show the surrender of at least some of the Hamas leadership as they raise white flags in defeat. The defeat of Hamas must be palpable, conspicuous and concretely visible. Through such decisiveness Israel will be able to replicate the achievements of past military victories. After the Six Day and Yom Kippur wars, Arab states understood they would be unable to destroy Israel through war, and Defensive Shield made Fatah and the Palestinian Authority realize that terror would not bring Israel to its knees. Today, Israel has a unique opportunity to begin this critically-needed educational process amongst Israel's extreme Islamist enemies, who comprise the last swath of opponents refusing to accept the existence of the State of Israel. The question remains whether Israel's leadership has the courage and the nerve to persevere in the battle, despite the possible high cost and in spite of international criticism. |
|
IGNORING THE BLOODSHED IN GAZA: THE WORLD TURNS A BLIND EYE TO THE PALESTINIAN CIVIL WAR
Posted by Jonathan Schanzer, January 12, 2009. |
|
After the first week of fighting in Gaza, the Palestinian Center for Human Rights estimated that the death toll stood at 161, including 41 civilians. That figure included 7 children and 11 women. After another week of fighting, Amnesty International upped the death toll to 350 and estimated that 2,000 people were injured. Journalists were barred from the areas of conflict, so the particulars were hazy. But as reports trickled in, the world learned that Palestinians were being shot point-blank in the legs and arms to ensure permanent disabilities. Others were pushed from tall buildings to a horrifying death. Indeed, just a few days ago, the Jerusalem Post reported that 35 innocents were executed and another around 75 were shot in the legs. Still others had their hands broken or were placed under house arrest. Readers may be surprised to learn that the violence I describe above is not the Palestinian-Israeli conflict that has dominated the headlines in recent days. Rather, these are chillingly accurate reports from an internecine conflict between two Palestinian factions: Hamas and Fatah. The Palestinian civil war erupted in June 2007. Hamas launched a bloody coup that ousted its political rival from the Gaza Strip, and has ruled the territory by fear ever since. In fact, it is for this reason that Israel is only engaged in hostilities in the Gaza Strip right now, and not the West Bank. Quietly, this war has continued unabated for a year and a half. Hamas, according to the Bethlehem-based Maan News Agency, has bombed churches and Christian schools. In some cases, the group has forced Christians to convert to Islam at gunpoint. The group has also kidnapped rival faction members. Some victims were returned to their families. Some were not. Human rights organizations have issued reports of widespread torture. In fact, Hamas actually admitted, according to a Maan News Agency report, that it had engaged in torture against Fatah members. Many informed readers have failed to learn about the conflict for the simple fact that Hamas has muzzled the media. Reporters Without Borders reported that the Islamist group refused to issue credentials to both Western and Arab journalists, and has issued threats to reporters who air content they deem questionable. Meanwhile, with rare exceptions, the Western press has filed only spotty reports on this critical conflict. When stories appear in the papers, they are often hidden on page 8 or 10. Where were the demonstrations in protest of Hamas's brutality? There were none in European capitals, none in major U.S. cities, and none in the Middle East. The only notable demonstrations were Fatah demonstrations in the Gaza Strip, where civilians complained of the harsh Hamas treatment and the Taliban-style government there. Fast forward to 2008. Another conflict has erupted in the Gaza Strip. This one, like the last one, can be blamed squarely on Hamas. The world's reaction, however, has been drastically different. When the brutal Hamas terrorist organization, in a naked quest for power, killed dozens upon dozens of Palestinians, the media coverage was virtually nonexistent. When Israel responds to rocket attacks by Hamas — at least 1,720 this year alone according to conservative estimates — the international media has flooded the airwaves. Similarly, when Hamas began killing fellow Palestinians in what can only be viewed as war crimes (shooting injured combatants and killing prisoners point blank), there were no demonstrations. Yet, when Israel responds to Hamas aggression using great care to follow the international laws of war — avoiding civilian casualties at all costs — the international community is frothing. Demonstrators are pouring into the streets of Western capitals. The condemnation of Israel is unanimous. The comparison of these two Gaza Strip conflicts yields a few sad but important observations. First, those who vilify Israel's current military maneuvers and claim to be "pro-Palestinian" were nowhere to be seen during the Palestinian civil war, a conflict with equally devastating numbers of casualties, and a conflict that truly threatens to undermine the viability of the Palestinian nationalist movement. In other words, supporters of the Palestinian cause need to reconsider their values. More importantly, those who call for "justice" appear to be in need of moral adjustment. These people yawned when Hamas violated just about every law of war. It was as if violence among Palestinians is somehow acceptable. Yet, these same people become enfuriated when Israel responds to Hamas rocket attacks in accordance with international law. Jonathan Schanzer, a former terrorism analyst for the U.S. Treasury Department, is director of policy for the Jewish Policy Center and author of the forthcoming Hamas vs. Fatah: The Struggle for Palestine. Contact him at jschanzer@jewishpolicycenter.org This article appeared January 9, 2009 in the Weekly Standard Online. |
|
FARCICAL ELECTION WAR
Posted by Steven Shamrak, January 12, 2009. |
|
When I heard that Israel had begun the bombardment of Gaza, as would any supporter of Israel, and as a Jew, I said "at last". After so many years of unanswered rocket attacks from Gaza, the Israeli government has at last taken responsibility for the safety of its citizens. I realized that it is the military-grade Katusha rocket attacks that 'persuaded' the Kadima/Labor government toward action against Hamas. At the same time, having had experience of the previous Lebanon war of 2006 and knowing the political ineptness of the current government, I restrained my optimism and expectations. It took only a couple of days for my limited optimism about this operation to evaporate completely. I realized that: 1) Air strikes have lasted for too many days. 2) The Hamas leadership has remained untouched. 3) There was as usual, no coordinated effort to present Israel's point of view to the world in the press — the "Media war" has been lost again! 4) The ground offensive was delayed for too long, incursions were too limited and there was no real objective to clear Gaza of its terror-infested enemy population, which is the source and breeding ground of anti-Israel terrorism. As a result, the Israel-'friendly' press and international community of anti-Israel 'comedians' have had time to prepare and launch their usual anti-Israel media campaign and political assault! The International Red Crystal (which is still calling itself the Red Cross) and the other relief organizations immediately joined this hypocritical mob. Most of the reports from Gaza are being submitted by Palestinian 'journalists', who are employed by the international press agencies, with the approval of Hamas. A few days ago I saw on TV one of these so-called reporters informing the world about the 'humanitarian disaster' — from the safety of a hiding place at his home! As usual, no one has even tried to discredit or question the factual validity and legitimacy of their reports! Jews are well used to this type of behaviour by anti-Semitic world organizations. During WW2, the New York Times blamed Jews for the trouble in the Warsaw ghetto during the uprising and the Red Cross made whitewash reports about the conditions of Jews in the camps and ghettos. Recently, there were no condemnations in the press while rockets from Gaza continued to terrorise Jews in southern Israel for several years. Nobody is concerned about the suffering of Jewish children and adults in Sderot from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (up to 75%). The emergency sessions of the UN Security Council were not calls to condemn Hamas! This is absolutely the same ugly behaviour the international community and press exhibited both before and during the last war in Lebanon, when Hizbolah was firing Katusha rockets at Israel and kidnapped two Israeli soldiers. They began to scream only after Israel entered Lebanon. Israel is able to end terrorism within the country quite easily. However, the biggest problem Israel has is the Israeli government and its chronic unwillingness to deal with the core source of the problem: Israel has lost its vision! What is our national goal, the one that guided Zionist pioneers toward establishment of the Jewish state on the land of our ancestors? Why are we afraid to pursue our rightful goals? Why don't we have the leadership to guide and inspire us? On the other hand, our enemies are still actively pursuing the same goals they had 60 years ago — the destruction of the Jewish state and killing Jews. We are not living in a Ghetto anymore! It is time to realise this and become masters of our own destiny. They say, that Jews are smart! One would think that after the military, moral and political fiasco of the 2006 Lebanon war, the present Kadima/Labor government would have learned the lesson. It would be easy to end all hostile attacks from the Gaza by clearing this little block of Jewish land of all enemies. But, regrettably, there is no government in Israel that is ready to put the interests of its own people first! It took Israel only six days to defeat Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon and Syria in the 1967 war. In 1973, Israel forced these enemy countries to stop pestering Israel. They still are playing anti-Israel political games, but not once militarily since then. Those days, Israel did not have the sophisticated weapons it has now. The main ingredient of the success was the patriotic, Zionist ideological enthusiasm of the Jewish citizens, not Muslim, of Israel, and their will to survive. Where are those qualities now? The main question is, why did Israel start the current Gaza operation? And the answer is disturbingly simple: The leader of the Labor party (Barak) and his comrades in the Kadima party had realised that an election is coming up and most of Israel's voters are pissed off with the corrupt and self-hating attitude of the existing governing coalition, which has done nothing to protect the people from their enemies. Likud and other pro-Zionist parties have started receiving support from the public which could bring them election victory. Therefore, this retaliation was launched not to destroy Hamas or reduce its power and rocket arsenal, not even to temporarily end the terror experienced by the Israeli population. The pure, unadulterated selfish reason of political survival was the main reason! The plan was: Make a pretence of war to show that the government is fighting enemies; and then obtain a temporary 'LULL' that would last until the election in order to manipulate public opinion! After the election, if they win it, the status quo will be restored and the sale of Jewish land will go on! There are no plans to clear the enemy population from Gaza even though it would end the terror attacks irreversibly! There is no political will to end the terrorisation of Israel's citizens by its enemies once and for all. Why? Because the ugly reality of Israel is that most of the politicians in Israel are self-serving, corrupt, disloyal individuals who do not care about the people and the future of Israel. They have been using the threats of the enemies as a tool for voter manipulation in order to stay in power, and as a justification and a smokescreen to hide their shady deals! It has worked for quite a while. When people are constantly living in fear of war they do not care about a 'little' governmental corruption, which has become the main business of the Israeli government! This must end — Vote these traitors out of power! 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 |
|
POLLARD PUSH GAINS STEAM
Posted by Hillel Fendel, January 12, 2009. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) Jews around the world are hoping that efforts to have Jonathan Pollard released from prison have begun their final week, and that outgoing U.S. President George W. Bush will in fact grant him clemency by the end of his term, only eight days from now. Rabbi Pesach Lerner, Executive Vice President of National Council of Young Israel, spoke at the Young Israel of Forest Hills last week about his recent visits to Pollard in prison with Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger, Pastor Tom Hagee, and others. He corrected the mis-impression that Pollard had been convicted of treason, saying that he was charged only with "passing classified information to an ally" — and that the charge sheet specifically added, "without intent to harm the United States." Rabbi Lerner said that Pastor Hagee told him after the meeting, "You know, I'm a man of faith. Faith is my business, and that's what I do all day. But I have to tell you: I have never seen a man of faith like that man we just left in that cell." Yehonatan ben Malka's Mother Asks A unique request was made of President Shimon Peres on Sunday when he paid a condolence call to the family of Captian Yehonatan Netanel, who was killed in battle in Gaza. The bereaved mother, Malka, told Peres, "You know, it was my son's dream that Pollard should be released. His name was Yehonatan ben [son of] Malka, and I now ask you to do all you can to ensure that Jonathan Pollard — also Yehonatan ben Malka — be freed from prison." Phone Campaign Continuing at Full Steam The phone-in campaign to the White House for Pollard is continuing at full-steam, and organizers say that the pressure must not be let up — despite the ever-increasing volume of calls. After being swamped in recent weeks with calls asking for clemency for Pollard, the White House hired an additional group of operators to handle the onslaught. Even this did not help, however, and the White House has now announced the closing of comment lines until after the inauguration of the incoming president on January 20, 2009. Organizers of the phone-in campaign encourage Pollard supporters to keep calling nonetheless, via the main switchboard number: 202-456-1414.
From: Chaim Glazer Gedolei Yisroel — including the top rabbinic leadership of Agudath Israel, in a statement dated Shvat 5767/January 2007 — have called upon members of the community to contact the White House to respectfully urge President Bush on humanitarian grounds to grant Jonathan Pollard executive clemency. In the waning days of the Bush Administration, a group of responsible askonim (community leaders) have undertaken a national grassroots campaign on Pollard's behalf. Information about the campaign is available at www.freepollardnow.com. We encourage our friends and constituents to participate in this effort.
David Zwiebel
Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Arutz-Sheva (www.Israel National News.com). |
|
A THIRD LEBANON WAR?
Posted by Olivier Guitta, January 12, 2009. |
|
ROCKETS FIRED AT ISRAEL FROM LEBANON — A man inspects the damage to a building at Nahariya in northern Israel on Jan. 8, caused by Katyusha rockets fired from Lebanon. Several rockets landed in northern Israel, causing light injuries. (Sipa photo via Newscom) While the Gaza war enters its third week, the question of a second front remains very accurate. Even though lots of experts have asserted that Hezbollah would not enter the war at this point, some troubling elements are questioning this assertion. Just last week northern Israel was hit by a few Katushya rockets just like in the summer 2006. The paternity of this act remains a question but it proves Hezbollah's ambivalence when it comes to facing off with Israel again. The most logical culprit for last Thursday's attacks on Israel is the Syrian-backed Palestinian extremist group PFLP-GC. Ahmed Jibril, its leader, is based in Damascus and was behind the June 2007 Katushya rockets — modified in Iran — attacks against Israel. The PFLP-GC has allegedly prepared more than 80 rockets of this type to bomb Israel. Even if Jibril's group is behind this latest attack, there is no way he did not get the nod from Hezbollah. In fact, nothing happens in southern Lebanon without the knowledge and blessing of Hezbollah. What does Hezbollah have in mind? Is it testing the waters? Is Hezbollah using PFLP's action as a dry run to see how UNIFIL forces and Israel would react? Possibly. When it comes to UNIFIL, the conclusion is that it is to say the least not very efficient in preventing attacks against Israel. Regarding Israel, Hezbollah could see that the Hebrew state did not wait long to retaliate: that might be food for thought. Interestingly this incident follows the discovery by the Lebanese army of eight Katushya rockets aimed at Israel and ready to be fired. These rockets were found about one mile away from the UNIFIL headquarters and about two miles from the Israeli border. Also on Friday, the Lebanese army found another cache with 34 rockets and a launcher. What does Hezbollah intend to do at this point? Interestingly, Hezbollah was quick to claim its innocence regarding Thursday's attack and assured the Lebanese government that it will not enter into a new conflict with Israel. It seems that the Siniora government and the anti-Syrian pro-Western March 14 alliance believe Hezbollah. But they should be reminded that just before Hezbollah triggered the summer 2006 war with Israel, it had promised the government it would not do anything that could ruin the very lucrative summer tourist season. So believing Hezbollah might be an error. At the same time, the March 14 alliance is troubled by the communiqué published by the Lebanese army on Thursday describing the Katyusha launches and the Israeli mortar fire retaliation as being "simultaneous." Indeed by twisting the truth are Hezbollah allies preparing the ground for an offensive? Last but not least, on the domestic level, numerous experts explain that Hezbollah has no interest to trigger a war with Israel before the very important legislative elections of June. But this argument might also be moot. In fact, the Lebanese weekly Al-Shiraa reported that Hezbollah MP Hussein Hajj Hassan allegedly told close aides that these elections would not take place. So much for the various reasons why Hezbollah will not attack Israel. In fact, Hezbollah has quickly reinforced its positions, in particular in the south of the Bekaa valley where it has allegedly dug tunnels to stock Zalzal type missiles that were transported to the area. Also Iranian experts have allegedly equipped type "Mersad-1" drones that Iran supplied to Hezbollah, that carrying large quantities of explosives, could be used against Israeli tanks, in case of an armed conflict. Also Hezbollah has completely replenished its rockets inventory and has now more than 45,000 rockets. Obviously these rockets are not going to gather dust long and at some point Hezbollah is going to use them against Israel. Because of UNIFIL's presence, Hezbollah has allegedly come up with two plans to neutralize the UNIFIL forces in case of a new conflict with Israel. The first one entails Hezbollah storming the UNIFIL posts in a peaceful manner with large waves of civilians. The second is a full-out war in case of a UNIFIL retaliation. Hezbollah units have been recently training with anti-tank missiles to handle the Leclerc tanks of the UNIFIL forces. Nonetheless, Hezbollah thinks that in case of a war with Israel, UNIFIL would remain on the sidelines. But the real decision-maker, when it comes to the timing of a Hezbollah attack on Israel, sits in Tehran. Iran is weighing what cards to play next. In light of this, last week both Ali Larijani, the speaker of Iran's parliament and Saed Jalili, Iran's national security council's secretary, met with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal and Palestinian Islamic Jihad leaders in Damascus. The next few weeks will tell us if it was decided that whether Hezbollah would intervene to help Hamas or not. Olivier Guitta is an Adjunct Fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant. You can read his latest work at www.thecroissant.com/about.html |
|
FROM ISRAEL: TIME TO BE POLITICAL?
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 12, 2009. |
|
As I indicated yesterday, I've been reticent because criticism of the government strikes me as unseemly in a time of war. Whatever the motivation of the various members of the "triumvirate," they have at long last been doing the right thing by going after Hamas and by making declarations about our right to defend ourselves no matter what the international community says. And for what they have been doing they deserve credit. But the unease that worked at me yesterday remains with me today: the sense that the government just might pull out under conditions that — despite the enormous military blow we've delivered to Hamas — are not to our long-term benefit. It is impossible to be certain of the final outcome, as there is great confusion in the air now. Consider all that follows here: ~~~~~~~~~~ Our current ground operation, stage two, is just about complete. Yet we're not pulling out and we're not bringing in all of the reserve units to move into stage three. Some reservists have been put into play and the operation late yesterday was referred to as stage 2-1/2, which may sound cute but strikes me as fairly meaningless. We keep on hearing that we are "close" to achieving our goals, suggesting that we're almost done. But those goals still have not been spelled out. Hamas is severely weakened but not out of play — still launching weapons, although many fewer than was the case a couple of weeks ago. ~~~~~~~~~~ As yet, even if we are close to finished, there is no clear exit strategy; no final arrangements for the day after have yet been put into place. A contingent from Hamas in Gaza went to Cairo at the end of last week, and Egypt is handling negotiations for a ceasefire with them. There are elements within Hamas that are desperate for a cease fire. Others remain defiant and want to persist. According to David Horovitz, the Damascus contingent of Hamas (Mashaal and company) was somewhat out of touch with how bad things had become in Gaza and was then set straight by the negotiating mission, which went to Damascus from Cairo. But there's more to it than this: In Gaza, the people's lives are on the line, and there is a need for leaders to stay hidden. In Damascus, the leadership is not coping with the same degree of stress and personal deprivation. They are content to continue to push their associates in Gaza to keep fighting. Additionally, it has been reported by Egyptian sources that Iran is pushing Hamas not to settle for a ceasefire. Two Iranian officials, Ali Larijani, speaker of the Iranian parliament, and Said Jalili of the Iranian intelligence service, met in Damascus with Hamas politburo head Khaled Mashaal and Islamic Jihad Secretary-General Ramadan Shallah. "As soon as the Iranians heard about the Egyptian cease-fire initiative, they dispatched the two officials to Damascus on an urgent mission to warn the Palestinians against accepting it," an Egyptian government official reported to the Post. "The Iranians threatened to stop weapons supplies and funding to the Palestinian factions if they agreed to a cease-fire with Israel." Thus would the Hamas contingent from Damascus be most persistent in holding out. In Al-Hayat (London) yesterday, there was a report that while Hamas is still talking with Cairo, it has rejected the notion of a long term truce. They are apparently looking for quick fix to save their necks now. ~~~~~~~~~~ Ehud Olmert, according to Barak Ravid in Haaretz, is for continuing the operation. He says that we won't stop until Hamas stops launching missiles and an end is put to smuggling. Tzipi Livni and Ehud Barak, says Ravid, would rather see us stop now. This division of attitude seems reflected in the statement that we're in stage "2-1/2" of the operation — neither here and neither there. But from another source there is information that the "triumvirate" met last night and decided to push on. Livni has indicated that she's for a unilateral pullout by us, as this means we are not tied into any agreement and can return as we wish. She maintains that the Gaza offensive has "restored Israel's deterrence" and "created a new equation...which says that when our citizens are attacked we respond with force." And, she says, we have nothing to negotiate with Hamas, which is a terrorist organization. Cannot say I would argue with this, as long as it doesn't prompt premature departure. Agreements with Hamas officials are worthless, as they don't honor their word (don't really believe they have to, as we're not Muslims). What matters is what we can impose upon them. ~~~~~~~~~~ There has been some suggestion that we might retain a presence in Gaza in a strip adjacent to our border, rather like the security zone we had for years in southern Lebanon. But there is nothing definitive with regard to this. The idea of re-taking the Philadelphi Corridor does not seem to have gained traction. ~~~~~~~~~~ THE issue, beyond the question of whether we keep hitting Hamas or call it quits, is the matter of the smuggling. Thus, when all is said and done, the most significant player here is Egypt, which is supposed to be working on a mechanism for stopping that smuggling. Theoretically, at least, it must be in place before we pull out. In the course of the day today I've read information that says Egypt's attitude has changed and we're further along now in achieving the desired result of blocking smuggling. But then I also read that there are major problems in working things out with Egypt. What we know is that Amos Gilad, who was supposed to return to Egypt today for further negotiations, has not gone. ~~~~~~~~~~ The report about a shift in Egypt's attitude is true, however: Egypt is enormously sensitive about being accused of not having done enough to stop smuggling in the past. According to my best sources, the Mubarak administration has until now resisted the idea of working with foreign troops because this implies they are not capable of doing the job on their own. Mubarak sought equipment only, with no foreign forces on his soil. When he requested this of the US, he was refused. But now he has had a visit from German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, who was also here. Steinmeier told Mubarak that Germany would supply the equipment and technical experts but make no demands regarding troops in the Sinai. This message from Germany — which essentially is an expression of confidence in Egypt — has buoyed Mubarak's willingness to help solve the issue of stopping the smuggling. This doesn't mean he will now accept foreign troops on his soil, but that he's exploring other alternatives. One of these involves foreign troops on the other side of the border. Previously, I'm told, he objected even to this. There is also talk revived of a moat at the Philadelphi Corridor, which would theoretically block the possibility of tunnels being re-dug; but there are complications with regard to ecological issues, as the canal would be filled with water. But this all seems rather moot. For Mubarak is still insisting that he will cooperate only with the PA at the border, and Hamas is insisting there will be no PA there. And no foreign troops either. ~~~~~~~~~~ NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said yesterday that NATO has no plans to send troops to supervise a ceasefire in Gaza. Hoop Scheffer was here in Jerusalem and met with both Olmert and Livni. He indicated that NATO would be willing to play a peacekeeping role only if there existed a full-scale peace agreement, consent from both sides, and a UN mandate; and he wasn't expecting this to happen any time soon. I suspect this will be more typical than not: we're not going to see foreign forces falling over themselves to come serve in Gaza — even if the situation ultimately allows for it. ~~~~~~~~~~ What is most unsettling with regard to this is a statement that was made by Amos Gilad on Israel radio yesterday. Gilad, head of the Defense Ministry's political-security branch, said with regard to arrangements with Egypt to stop the smuggling, that results of talks with Egypt were not particularly relevant, and the Israeli public would know if Hamas had smuggled if rockets were fired from Gaza. As Aaron Lerner of IMRA puts it: "It would appear that as far as Gilad is concerned, should the Olmert-Livni-Barak team he represents strike an arrangement with Egypt, critics of the arrangement should have no ability to criticize it and the failure of the arrangement can only be determined when Hamas fires the rockets it smuggles in." This suggests that the government team would consider pulling out before solid guarantees are in place, and bury the negotiating failure in secrecy. ~~~~~~~~~~ Also greatly disconcerting is the news that Kadima held a secret poll on the second day of the war to assess how the fighting would affect the coming elections. This is not the way to fight a war — and it provides one more piece of evidence that the people running the government are no leaders at all. I would hate to end up concluding that while I refrained from political observations, Olmert and Livni (most specifically Livni, who wants to be the next prime minister, I would guess) were motivated, as has been charged, by political considerations first. ~~~~~~~~~~ And yet one other mention of a political consideration here: This is from one source only, but a reliable one in the main. He is suggesting that the issue of getting Egypt to agree to foreign forces IN PRINCIPLE, whether they are ever put in place in Gaza or not, is important for Kadima, as Livni envisions doing this ultimately in Judea and Samaria. ~~~~~~~~~~ My conclusion here: While the right thing to do is the right thing to do, and the "triumvirate" is entitled to credit for what they have done in standing up for Israel at long last...when it comes election time, that credit should not accrue to them in the ballot box. They must be judged across the board and with regard to their motivations as well. Enough said, until this war is over and campaigning starts. ~~~~~~~~~~ I was going to write more about the deviousness and viciousness of Hamas — their theft of humanitarian supplies, which they then sell to Gazans, and the ways in which they booby=trap even schools. But I find I have scant tolerance for this now. Perhaps tomorrow. ~~~~~~~~~~ A matter of importance in closing: President Bush's term ends in eight days. It is still within his power to pardon Jonathan Pollard. It has been reported that the White House has been so overwhelmed by phone calls urging Bush to release Pollard, that 30 additional operators have been put on. Please! Consider joining this campaign while there is still time. Pressure must be maintained. In the States, call 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111, Monday through Friday, 9 AM to 5 PM Eastern time. Phone calls can also be made in Israel, toll free: 077-566-4305, 4 PM to Midnight Israel time. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
EX-US FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER FRIES RICE, BLAMES HER FOR HAMAS
Posted by Avodah, January 12, 2009. |
|
This was written by
Tzvi Ben Gedalyahufor Arutz-7
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) Former United States Foreign Service Officer Norman Olsen has blamed U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice for misguided policies that he and his Gaza activist son say put Hamas in power. Writing in the Christian Science Monitor, Olsen and his son Matthew also revealed that the U.S. State Department is so deeply involved in the Palestinian Authority that it financed Fatah in its election campaign against Hamas. The senior Olsen worked for the Foreign Office for 26 years, including four years in Gaza as a counselor for the American Embassy in Tel Aviv. "Hamas never called for the elections that put them in power. That was the brainstorm of Secretary Rice and her staff," he and his son, who runs peace programs, wrote in the Monitor Monday morning. Olsen maintained that Rice and her aides "had apparently decided they could steer Palestinians into supporting the more-compliant Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah faction through a marketing campaign that was to counter Hamas's growing popularity.' Reflecting the traditional career diplomat view, he added that Rice's policy ignored "continued Israeli settlement construction, land confiscation, and cantonization [sic] of the West Bank [Judea and Samaria — ed.]." The Olsen father and son team reported that their Fatah contacts in Gaza as well as Israelis are living in fear because of the current violence, "but it didn't have to be this way; we could have talked instead of fought." The writers blamed the American-sponsored PA legislative election in 2006 for leading to the Hamas coup last year that resulted in the closure of Gaza crossings and a general economic collapse in Gaza. They also revealed how deep the State Department is involved in political affairs in the Middle East. "State Department staffers helped finance and supervise the Fatah campaign, down to the choice of backdrop color for the podium where '[PA Chairman Mahmoud] Abbas was to proclaim victory," they wrote. "An adviser working for the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) explained to incredulous staffers at the Embassy in Tel Aviv how he would finance and direct elements of the campaign, leaving no U. S. fingerprints. USAID teams, meanwhile, struggled to implement projects for which Abbas could claim credit," the Olsens added. The American strategy was to pave the way for Mohammed Dahlan, Fatah's strong man and "warlord" on Gaza, to destroy Hamas's terrorist brigades. "Rice was reportedly blindsided when she heard the news of Hamas's victory during her 5:00 a.m. treadmill workout," the Olsens recalled. From that point, everything went downhill, according to their analysis. "She immediately insisted that the Quartet [the U.S., European Union, United Nations, and Russia] ban all contact with Hamas and support Israel's economic blockade of Gaza.... The isolation was supposed to turn angry Palestinians against an ineffective Hamas." As for Dahlan, who they said U.S. President George W. Bush considered "our guy," he "roamed Gaza, demanding protection money from businesses and individuals, erecting checkpoints to extort bribes, terrorizing Dahlan's opponents within Fatah, and attacking Hamas members. "Finally, in mid-2007, faced with increasing chaos and the widely-known implementation of a U.S.-backed militia, Hamas — the lawfully elected government — struck first. They routed the Fatah gangs, securing control of the entire Gaza Strip, and established civil order. " The Olsens also compared the failed American policy of trying to defeat Hamas with "Washington's Lebanese clients" who were supposed to turn on Hizbullah. Their conclusion parallels the career State Department attitude that the Americans are the only ones who can put an end to the Arab-Israeli struggle and can do so by talking with Arabs on all issues, including the status of Jerusalem, as the right formula for peace. They advised President-elect Barack Obama to name a "peace envoy" with authority over American missions in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and over American contacts with Israel and the PA. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
HAMAS HANDS OUT PAYCHECKS AT GAZA CITY'S SHIFA HOSPITAL
Posted by Avodah, January 12, 2009. |
|
This comes from the IsraelMatzav website
|
|
I've mentioned several times over the past week that senior Hamas commanders are hiding out in or underneath Gaza's Shifa Hospital. That's the same hospital where the fake atrocity video pictured at left was done. In a Monday morning interview with Israel's army radio, Public Security Minister and former General Security Services chief Avi Dichter filled in some details about that claim. "On Saturday, January 10, which is the day salaries are distributed in Gaza, several Hamas commanders who cannot come out of their hiding places were given their salaries at their hiding places. But those commanders who can move around Gaza made their way to Shifa Hospital to receive their salaries." Regarding Israeli intelligence reports that the Hamas leadership has taken refuge in Gaza's Shifa Hospital, Dichter said that the "Shifa Hospital has long ago ceased to be just a hospital, just as the UNRWA humanitarian and health services in Gaza long ago ceased to be just humanitarian services providing food and medical services." "UN schools in Gaza long ago stopped being just schools," the minister said. "All these services and places are refuge for Hamas terrorists and commanders." The former Shin Bet chief said that is was common knowledge in Gaza that Hamas hold meeting in the hospital. "Shifa Hospital, which is situated in the more wealthy western part of Gaza City, is a very big hospital, but you can hear from the Palestinians who visit there, it is somewhat of an open secret, that Hamas commanders walk around the hospital, in some instances wearing doctors' robes," he said. "In some cases the Hamas commanders kick medical teams out of rooms so that they can hold meetings." So why isn't Israel attacking Shifa Hospital? You can guess: "Shifa is in the middle of a very crowded area in Gaza and you would have to get through half-a-million Gazans to get to the hospital and arrest Hamas people there. So that's not doable. Striking the hospital is out of the question for obvious reasons. So in this case we have to just bite our lips," he said. In the old days, we would have sent Ehud Barak dressed in drag to arrest kill Haniyeh, Zahar and Siam. Too bad the IDF has lost its nerve. If you have not done so in the last 24 hours, please go here and vote for Israel Matzav as the Best Midsize Blog in the 2008 Weblog Awards. — You can visit my blog @ http://am-yisrael-blog.blogspot.com/ Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
HAMAS BARRAGES ISRAEL; REFLECTIONS ON GAZA VIOLENCE; GAZA: OUTRAGE, BLUSTER, & CONFUSION
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, January 12, 2009. |
|
HAMAS BARRAGES ISRAEL The lull over, Hamas has intensified its rocket bombardment of Israel and has had snipers open fire, too. The bombardment is so intense, that Israeli officials believe they can no longer put off a counter-attack. The question is how to do it. The government thinks it would take a few days to suppress the bombardment. Meanwhile, it fears that world public opinion would intimidate it into ending the counter-attack prematurely, leaving Hamas in power and able to rearm. Dr. Aaron Lerner remarks that it is Foreign Min. Livni's job to educate world public opinion so that it understands what Israel must do (IMRA, 12/20). The news brief implies that the government thinks the way to win over public opinion is to suffer many casualties before counter-attacking. I notice that the government mostly lets public opinion be hostile to Israel, by default. HAMAS RATIONALIZES ITS BARRAGE The supposed ceasefire ended, Hamas opened fire on Israel. The IDF fired back at a few missile launchers. Hamas calls that retaliatory self-defense "aggression." It complains about collateral civilian casualties from return-fire. As a result of Hamas' attacks, Israel threatens an "imminent invasion." To stop this escalated Israeli "aggression," Hamas threatens all out war (IMRA, 12/21). The ceasefire ended after serving Hamas' goal of building an army and defensive fortifications. It might have continued, if Israel would extend it to Judea-Samaria. Hamas' goal in extending it was to give the P.A. a free hand to build up an army and to give Hamas an opportunity to take over Judea-Samaria. Hamas' indignation against Israeli incidental injuries to civilians does not extend to the deliberate Islamist rocket attacks against civilian Israeli cities. Sometimes Hamas does attack Israeli soldiers, but they are not its main target. Neither does Hamas accept any blame for its own civilian casualties, even though it commits a war crime by fighting from amongst them. As if on their side, the Western media rarely point out these flaws in Hamas' case. The media does not bother with issues of right and wrong, unless it can pretend to find fault with Israel. Then it rediscovers ethics, or should I call it by its true name, sophistry? One lesson is to doubt Arab charges of "aggression." Another is not to equate the two sides. The Islamists fight dirty and talk falsely. The Israeli government fights too little and lamely and talks falsely, but its lies are to its own people. IS THE PURPOSE OF AN OFFENSIVE TO GET A TRUCE? "Do I think that Hillary Clinton can arrange a Gaza truce and resolve the broader conflict," I was asked. I replied, "I hope not." The goal of religious domination by any means necessary is one of Islam's key tenets. That makes conflict with others inevitable. How can one resolve the conflict while leaving intact the religious doctrine that requires conflict? One either represses Islam or fends it off until it has a Reformation. Since conflict is inevitable, a truce with Hamas will not help end the conflict. It wasn't to end conflict that Hamas requested the previous truce, but to avoid ending conflict. Islamic doctrine favors truces when its enemy is stronger, in order for Islamic forces to rebuild strength and renew fighting when they can hope to prevail. Truces with Hamas and Hizbullah did just that. They request truces when weak, and violate the truces. Since a truce with Islamist forces, when those forces are being routed, enables them to revive and return to full combat, a truce does not preserve lives but nourishes the ability to take more lives. It is inhumane and unjust. Israel is winning. If it does a more thorough job, it could eliminate Hamas. Well-meaning people who call for truces unwittingly assist terrorism and jihad. The purpose of Israel's offensive should not be to attain a truce but to attain victory. The world should urge Israel to persist and eradicate terrorism there. Clinton's view of resolution probably would involve Israeli concessions to Islamists, i.e., rewards for their aggression, eventually leading to more of it. HOW DO FOREIGN JEWS SEE THE COMBAT? Difficult to tell. In Islamic dictatorships, native Jews may be executed, if they admit to Zionist sympathies and sometimes even if they express no opinion — they are Jews and Muslims assume all Jews favor all Israeli policies. It's prejudice. In addition, all residents may be persecuted, if they criticize government policy. They lack access to fair news reporting, though many people in democracies get unfair news presentation. Truth requires research. Iran picked one Jew for membership in parliament. That Jew accused Israel of "war crimes" and of "slaughtering the innocent." The accusation does not apply to Israel but to Hamas. Did that Jew realize he was slandering Israel? We must cultivate skepticism about official opinion, dominant conclusions, and foreign opinion. We must learn not to be driven by others' opinions. BLUSTER Israel's Defense Min. Barak was quoted by German dailies as calling the combat in Gaza "war to the bitter end." That's Israeli bluster. Before and during some crisis, Israeli leaders sometimes talk tough. In ending the crisis, however, they tend to be timid. The latest two examples were: (1) Ending the Lebanon war in such a way that Hizbullah was able to dominate Lebanon and rebuild and expand its war machine; (2) ceasing fire in Gaza, enabling Hamas to rebuild and expand its war machine, requiring a bigger offensive to deal with it. OUTRAGE Arabs are "outraged" over the deaths of people in Gaza. They are not outraged over the deaths of people in Israel. By this double standard, they demonstrate their bias. Then their outrage is not a humanitarian concern. It is a partisan one. It should carry no weight. You must have noticed how much the Muslim Arabs feel and express outrage over infidel self-defense and self-expression not sycophantic towards them. The Arabs not only are misinformed about the combat. They are misinformed about who started it and who commits war crimes in it. They also are acting out their indoctrination in Islam. Muslims consider it an affront for infidels to kill fellow Muslims. When Muslims kill Muslims, the Arabs don't like it, but they aren't outraged over it. CONFUSION A friend said that Egypt and S. Arabia secretly would like Israel to destroy Hamas. That's too pat. What Egypt and S. Arabia would like is for the P.A. to be ruled by a group that does not threaten them, threatens only Israel. Egypt and S. Arabia undoubtedly dislike Hamas' growing alliance with Iran. Iran threatens the rulers in those countries, by means of aggressive proxies such as Hamas and Hizbullah. However, Iran has influence over Fatah, too. Egypt, which for years led the diplomatic effort against Israel, was the protector of Hamas. Egypt violated its non-aggression treaty with Israel by letting arms be smuggled from Egypt into Gaza. Egypt wanted Hamas to weaken Israel by attrition. Egypt's wants Israel to make territorial concessions to the Palestinian Arabs. This would render Israel's borders indefensible. Hamas' over-aggressive action, however, retards the concessions and threatens Egypt. 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 |
|
THE FALSE SYMMETRY OF UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1860
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 12, 2009. |
|
This was written by Dore Gold and appeared yesterday in the Jerusalem Post.
|
|
Most Israelis regard UN Security Council Resolution 1860 on the Gaza Conflict as a troubling development. It fails to mention the release of Cpl. Gilad Shalit who has been in Hamas captivity since 2006. The word "rocket" does not even appear, only general references to condemning "violence and hostilities directed against civilians." Reading the resolution, one would not be aware that Israel has been under constant rocket attacks since 2001, the real background to the current conflict. The resolution also suggests a diplomatic sequence that begins with an "immediate" cease-fire, and leaves for the future the efforts of UN member states to provide arrangements that "prevent illicit trafficking in arms and ammunition." Israel halts its defensive operations, but may well be left empty handed at a later stage. There is also a disturbing symmetry between Israel and the Palestinian side, which appears in Resolution 1860. Despite the language of the resolution, most international observers agree that Israeli civilians should not have to face rocket attacks from Hamas in the future, and hence Hamas must halt this activity. But in Resolution 1860 there is a demand of Israel in parallel, "to ensure the sustained reopening of crossing points" between Israel and Gaza. It is as though the cessation of rocket fire and the opening of the crossing points are symmetric demands that are increasingly mentioned in the same breath by commentators. This is like asking for a quid pro quo for Hamas stopping terrorism. THIS IS moral equivalence at its worst. Israel should not pay anything to get Hamas to stop firing rockets which is an act of outright aggression against the Jewish State. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, the UN Security Council did not seek Kuwaiti concessions alongside its demand of Iraq to withdraw. Israel is not required under international law to trade with a neighbor if it prefers not to. Resolution 1860 makes specific reference to the November 2005 Agreement on Movement and Access between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA). That problematic agreement, which was largely imposed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, is today regarded in Israeli circles as a failure, for it did not stop the movement of terrorist operatives in and out of the Gaza Strip. It was also an agreement that was reached when Mahmud Abbas and his Fatah movement exclusively controlled the Palestinian Authority. In January 2006, Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections while in June 2007 Hamas launched a military coup against the PA in Gaza. Hamas provided sanctuary to organizations like Jaish al-Islam or Jaish al-Umma which identified themselves as al-Qaeda affiliates. This put the Hamas regime in a category like the Taliban which had allowed the original al-Qaeda to grow in its domain. Given the completely changed circumstances created by the Hamas takeover, it is surprising that the Security Council came back to hold Israel to an old agreement over Gaza reached with Fatah in the past. Finally, Israel, with the backing of the Western powers, decided to embargo the Hamas regime in Gaza. Trade embargos are a state's inherent right, like the US embargo of Iran or Cuba. Hamas is a particularly severe case for it calls for Israel's destruction, engages in suicide terrorism against Israeli citizens, and brainwashes Palestinian children with anti-Semitic hatred. To compel Israel to open the Gaza crossing points is to deny Israel a valid economic instrument to exercise its right to self-defense against a regime that seeks its eradication. Perhaps underpinning Resolution 1860 is an assumption of normalized relations in the future between Hamas and the State of Israel. This makes the US abstention at the UN all the more disturbing. The Bush administration, which led the diplomatic fight against terrorism after 9/11, appears to be acquiescing to granting rights to a terror regime that in reality should not earn any more international protection than the Taliban did in 2001. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
THE PEACE PROCESS IS IN JEOPARDY? I WONDER WHY!
Posted by Barry Rubin, January 12, 2009. |
|
Whatever became of reality, at least in analyzing the Middle East? Consider the following: "With every image of the dead in Gaza inflaming people across the Arab world, Egyptian and Jordanian officials are worried that they see a fundamental tenet of the Middle East peace process slipping away: the so-called two-state solution, an independent Palestinian state coexisting with Israel."[1] So begins an article in the New York Times that explains the peace process is failing and the two-state solution slipping away. It is one more example of an obsessive narrative whose key premise is this: the Palestinians can never be responsible for anything. Of course, the Arab world's public reaction to the Gaza war is not pushing it in a more moderate direction. Yet on a governmental level — and compared to past such crises including the 1982 Lebanon war, 2000-2005 Palestinian intifada, and 2006 Israel-Hizballah war — most governments have come as close to being pro-Israel as you are ever going to see them. Privately, they make clear they want Hamas beaten. Publicly, they are far more reserved in their speech and passive in their reactions.[2] That's the big story. As for the Arab street, that much-exaggerated phenomenon, since when have governments followed its dictate? Yet there's even more to this kind of argument quoted above: the implication that only Israel is responsible for the peace process's poor prospects and a Palestinian rejection of a two-state solution, and only now is it happening. What about these historical events:
Yet none of these points, in many circles, can be seen as having any effect on the peace process — which has effectively been dead since 2000 — or the two-state solution. Only if Israel defends itself against the attack of a group which rejects peace and the two-state solution, divides the Palestinian leadership, etc., can many members of the Western intelligentsia, "experts," academics, and journalists declare the peace process and two-state solution to be jeopardized. This is ludicrous and one more reason why such people cannot understand the Middle East nor predict its direction. Of course, some of this is due to bias against Israel, certain aspects of contemporary leftist ideology, and even antisemitism. But to understand this phenomenon in terms of specific conceptions of the issue, two specific points must be made:
The basic idea, however, still remains: they have no will of their own, no goals of their own, no world view of their own. This is nonsense and dangerous nonsense at that. The peace process and two-state solutions have been disappearing neither because of anything Israel has done nor to the most recent events. The Palestinians killed them and they did so several years ago. Footnotes [1] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/12/world/middleeast/12egypt.html?hp [2] See on this point, Barry Rubin, "The Gaza War: A Small Part of The Nationalist Islamist Conflict". [3] See on this point, Barry Rubin, "If You Love The Palestinians, You Should Hate Hamas". Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East. |
|
NOW HERE'S A THOUGHT
Posted by GWY, January 11, 2009. |
|
Now here's a thought ... If you are ready for the adventure of a lifetime, try this: a.. Go to Pakistan, Lebanon, Afghanistan or Iraq illegally. Never mind immigration quotas, visas, international law, or any of that nonsense. Good luck! You'll soon be dead. It would never happen in Pakistan, Afghanistan or Iraq (or any other country in the world for that matter) except in the UK, US, Canada, Israel or Australia, because we are run by soft, politically correct politicians that are too scared to 'offend' anyone. If you agree, pass it on. If you don't, go ahead and try the above in Pakistan, Afghanistan or Iraq Contact GWY at gwy123@aol.com |
|
IRAN USING FRONTS TO GET BOMB PARTS FROM U.S.
Posted by Barbara Sommer, January 11, 2009. |
|
This was written by Joby Warrick, Washington Post
Staff Writer and is archived at
|
|
The Iranian businessman was looking for high-quality American electronics, but he had to act stealthily: The special parts he coveted were denied to Iranians, especially those seeking to make roadside bombs to kill U.S. troops in Iraq. With a few e-mails, the problem was solved. A friendly Malaysian importer would buy the parts from a company in Linden, N.J., and forward them to Iran. All that was left was coming up with a fake name for the invoice. Perhaps a Malaysian engineering school? "Of course, you can use any other company as end-user that you think is better than this," the Iranian businessman, Ahmad Rahzad, wrote in an e-mail dated March 8, 2007. The ruse succeeded in delivering nine sensors called inclinometers to Iran, the first of several such shipments that year and the latest example of what U.S. officials and weapons experts describe as Iran's skillful flouting of export laws intended to stop lethal technology from reaching the Islamic republic. Despite multiple attempts by the Bush administration to halt illegal imports — including sanctions against several Dubai-based Iranian front companies in 2006 — the technology pipeline to Tehran is flowing at an even faster pace. In some cases, Iran simply opened new front companies and shifted its operations from Dubai to farther east in Asia, the officials said. Iran in the past two years has acquired numerous banned items — including circuit boards, software and Global Positioning System devices — that are used to make sophisticated versions of the improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, that continue to kill U.S. troops in Iraq, according to documents released by the Justice Department and a new study by a Washington research institute. The deadly trade was briefly disrupted after the moves against Dubai companies in 2006, but it quickly resumed with a few changes in shipping routes and company names, the officials said. "Without doubt, it is still going on," said one former U.S. intelligence official who investigated Iran's networks. Bomb circuitry is only a small part of the global clandestine trade that continues to flourish, despite U.S. efforts to end it. A federal investigation in New York into whether banks helped customers skirt U.S. rules forbidding business with Iran and other countries turned up evidence of Iranian interests trying to buy tungsten and other materials used in the guidance systems of long-range missiles. As part of the investigation, a British bank agreed to forfeit $350 million. While illegal trafficking in weapons technology has occurred for decades — most notably in the case of the nuclear smuggling ring operated by Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan — the new documents suggest that recent trading is nearly all Internet-based and increasingly sophisticated. Many of the schemes unknowingly involve U.S. companies that typically have no clue where their products are actually going, the records show. "The schemes are so elaborate, even the most scrupulous companies can be deceived," said David Albright, president of the Institute for Science and International Security (ISIS) and co-author of a forthcoming study of black markets for weapons components. Albright said the deceptions can be even more elaborate when the target is nuclear technology. "That's where the stakes are the highest," he said. "If Iran is successful, it ends up not with an IED but with a nuclear weapon." Rare details about the illicit markets emerge in court records from the Justice Department's investigation of Iran's Dubai network, as well as in the ISIS study, which tracks four years of secret trading by Iranian and Pakistani front groups. The study includes copies of invoices and the contents of e-mails from companies looking to buy Western technology. Iran, a veteran of such schemes, appears in the documents to be increasingly adept at using front companies, which pose as schools or private laboratories conducting business through seemingly legitimate Web sites, the Justice Department records show. If discovered — as happened with the Dubai-based Mayrow General Trading in 2006 — the businesses frequently reopen under different names in other locations. According to the records, Mayrow was the hub of a procurement network that operated from early this decade until about 2006, chiefly in Dubai, which is part of the United Arab Emirates and a close U.S. ally. U.S. intelligence officials have long identified the small Persian Gulf kingdom as a center for shell companies seeking to buy weapons parts and technology for countries that cannot import them legally. Since 2006, Dubai has moved to close Mayrow and toughen export regulations. Mayrow worked in tandem with three other companies that alternated placing orders with U.S. firms for electronic parts. All four companies had the same business address and same principal managers, yet on paper they appeared to be separate and legitimate trading companies seeking parts for a variety of industrial uses, Albright said in the ISIS report, titled "Iranian Entities Illicit Military Procurement Networks." The report is due for release this week. "The trading companies effectively created a wall between the Iranian entities and the U.S. suppliers, making it difficult for the U.S. suppliers to identify the true end-user of an item," the report says. The Mayrow network resulted in the acquisition of hundreds of sensitive parts from U.S. manufacturers in California, Florida, Georgia and New Jersey during a four-year period, according to a federal indictment returned by a Florida grand jury in September. All the items were shipped from Dubai to Iran, where most appear to have been distributed among several manufacturers of IEDs. These bombs account for the majority of U.S. troop casualties in Iraq, as well as the deaths of thousands of civilians, police and troops in Iraq and Afghanistan. Examinations of unexploded bombs have confirmed the presence of circuit boards, timers and other parts of U.S. origin, federal officials confirm. Mayrow's ability to trade with Americans essentially ended in 2006 when the Commerce Department imposed extensive trade restrictions on the company and its known partners. Yet months after the sanctions went into effect, a similar network based in Malaysia began asking U.S. companies for the same kinds of technology, the Justice Department documents show. The orders were primarily from a firm that called itself Vast Solution and was headed by Majid Seif, an Iranian national. Seif was named in the federal indictment as a co-conspirator in an international plot to acquire components for Iranian-made IEDs. By 2007, the Dubai-based operation had been almost entirely replaced by the Malaysian networks, the ISIS study found. Yet, while perhaps less conspicuous than before, the Dubai network probably continues to exist, though in a different form. Typically, the new front companies will not be discovered until long after crucial technology has left American shores aboard ships ultimately bound for Iran, Albright said. "The current system of export controls doesn't do enough to stop illicit trade before the item is shipped," he said. "Having a law on the books is not the same as having a law enforced." Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: ANGST AND RESOLUTION
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 11, 2009. |
|
From the start of this war, I was determined not to criticize the government, as long as it proceeded to do the right thing — never mind that our actions in our self-defense were severely over-due (and made necessary by the grievous error of the "disengagement" that Kadima promoted) and that there might be political motivation for some of what was happening. If it's the right thing now, it's the right thing. Time for critique could come later, if and as necessary. Several times now, as we've progressed, I've expressed unease about whether the government might cave prematurely and snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. There is ample precedent for being uneasy about the resolve of Olmert and company to see through our attempts to achieve victory, however that would be defined. Each time, I've been pleasantly surprised: we're still fighting. Although again now I am uneasy (more about this following). ~~~~~~~~~~ Of course, the question of what defines a state of victory is still outstanding. There has been criticism in this country regarding a vagueness within the government about defining precisely what our goals are. But I've cut them slack on this score as well. I have considered the fact that there might be legitimate reasons for playing our cards close to the chest, as it were. ~~~~~~~~~~ Now, however, it is time, once again, to pause and take stock — look at where we've gone and where we need to go. The fighting of the IDF has been superb. Lessons have been learned from 2006, and we're a lean, mean fighting machine right now. As a result, we've dealt Hamas a really hard blow — although not yet hard enough, as I've been writing for some days now. What has been made clear is that there is a third stage that has been planned by the IDF that would hit Hamas even harder. The UN Security Council Resolution last Thursday had the potential to bring what we were doing to a halt. Our Security Cabinet opted not to accept the resolution — presumably because Hamas refused to accept it and actually responded by launching 25 rockets into our south, and because the Egyptians turned out to be all talk and — refusing foreign forces on their soil — without solid plans for stopping the smuggling. We announced that we were going ahead, and we dropped leaflets on the south of Gaza announcing that escalation could be expected. But we haven't moved additional reserve troops — who have been trained and are ready — into Gaza and we haven't begun a genuine intensification of our military actions. It's been more of the same — which can continue just so long, even though we are still hitting the houses of Hamas leaders, taking out tunnels, etc. What is being done now is to put the soldiers in a static situation, which is not acceptable. Saying we'll probably move ahead, either in the south or into Gaza City, is not the same as actually doing it. On Monday, Amos Gilad, head of the Ministry of Defense Diplomatic-Security Bureau, is going back to Cairo to discuss Egyptian plans for stopping the smuggling. For even as it's being said that we're probably going to keep going, so is it being said that if Egypt comes up with "satisfactory" plans (involving foreign forces) we'll stop. (There is some suggestion that if we do escalate our efforts, it will be to "convince" Egypt to cooperate on the matter of international forces.) ~~~~~~~~~~ So there's a feeling of "uh oh." And what has to be asked is if satisfactory plans are even possible and, if so, what they would be. Olmert is moving as if there is the possibility of satisfactory plans. I, along with many others, remain exceedingly dubious. The model of UNIFIL stares us in the face. Which international forces would risk themselves, for Israel's sake, in confrontation with those who dig tunnels and transport weapons through them? None come readily to mind. Coupled with this is the issue of Egypt resenting the implication that it cannot go it alone, so that the international forces on Egyptian soil might be loathe to point out how remiss Egypt is. There is, when all is said and done, a huge possibility that this would be a charade. ~~~~~~~~~~ And in addition there is this factor: The notion has been touted that the PA should resume its presence at the Philadelphi Corridor, which it maintained — without real success at monitoring smuggling — from the fall of 2005, when we pulled out, until June 2007, when Hamas took over. I figure PA forces would last about a day there now, because Hamas has said they wouldn't be tolerated. And Abbas knows this, too: he has now said that the PA would take control again at the crossing into the Sinai only after reconciliation with Hamas. There's no great chance of that happening any time soon, as Hamas sees the PA as complicit with Israel in the current war. Never mind that Egypt is trying to get Hamas to agree to this "plan." Abbas, for his part, is pushing for an international force inside of Gaza. This won't fly with Hamas either, as it has said that any international troops inside of Gaza would be attacked as occupiers. This over-view of the situation makes it clear what a total balagan (state of confusion) it is. ~~~~~~~~~~ And there's even more to be considered: Can we necessarily assume that if Olmert and Livni, who touted resolution 1701, say that a plan Egypt is proposing is a good plan, it truly is? I, for one, would not rely on this. Might our government seek a way out of further fighting by accepting a plan that has significant flaws? This is the question that nags at us, although we have no evidence of this now. Even with the best of intentions, are they all too ready to rely on international guarantees? Possibly. Although Olmert's position now is that we must rely on ourselves. And if we want to stop fighting, what would the parameters be for doing so? Would we actually stop unilaterally, as has been proposed? The mere suggestion of this is highly offensive. If we want Hamas to stop too, there are two ways to get it to do so. Either we beat it down sufficiently — as General Kupervasser, whom I cited last week, suggests — which necessarily means further fighting. Or we give Hamas something — that something being permanent opening of crossings from Israel into Gaza, allowing Hamas the normalization it is seeking. This would be counterproductive to all of our goals and would give Hamas the opportunity to say it has won. Would we, at a bare minimum, require return of Gilad Shalit first? It would be to our everlasting shame if we did not. Hardly a simple situation. ~~~~~~~~~~ And there is yet one other parameter to consider: Would it be a good thing for Israel if we were to totally and fully defeat Hamas? My answer to this has been, and remains, that it would not. The goal of the international community is to ensconce the PA in Gaza once again, and then to lean on us to make "peace" with the PA that would once again be in control of all "Palestinian territory." In fact, it is not only the international community that is pushing this, but also our foreign minister, Tzipi Livni. And it is with regard to this that I have absolutely no compunction about criticizing, war or no war. She has suggested on several occasions, most recently in an interview that ran in the Washington Post last week, that we are fighting so that moderate forces can be restored in Gaza, forces with whom we can make peace. And I consider the notion that we would lose a single one of our boys for any reason other than to protect our own rights an obscenity. We are not fighting for Mahmoud Abbas, and a Palestinian state would serve us only ill. This, by the way, is where I take issue with Charles Krauthammer's article on the issue, which has been sent to me by multiple persons. ~~~~~~~~~~ So, where does this leave us? Is there no answer? I think perhaps there is. This is not original with me: I am merely drawing on what seems most reasonable. First, we must hit Hamas with additional fighting power. General Kupervasser, who served with IDF Intelligence, says they can be pushed into a situation in which they will halt their aggression, whether permanently or temporarily is up for discussion. And then, we need to re-take the Philadelphia Corridor, which we should never have left. There is no way that Hamas can claim a "win" if we are sitting there. And in this instance, instead of depending on Egypt and some obscure international force to ensure that there is no smuggling of arms, we protect ourselves — which is precisely how it should be. ~~~~~~~~~~ I have no information that the IDF is planning this. But I do know that it is being promoted in significant circles. As I've previously mentioned, Maj.-Gen.(res) Yom-Tov Samia — who was head of the Southern Command of the IDF from 2001 until 2004, and is now advising the current head of the Southern Command, Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant — has urged that we return to the Corridor and stay for 25 years. David Horovitz, editor of the Jerusalem Post, seems to support this idea, as does Dr. Aaron Lerner, head of IMRA. Please see here for an analysis of this approach, with background and an extremely useful map. This is by IDF veteran and commentator on defense issues, David Eshel (with thanks to Joel Kangisser):
~~~~~~~~~~ In brief, then, today's news: Olmert, and I must give him this credit, is still saying the right things. At today's Cabinet meeting, he declared: "No country in the world, including those that preach morals to us, would have shown restraint as we have. We knew this wouldn't be simple, and what is acceptable for every other country in the world is barely accepted when it comes to Israel. "Israel is approaching the targets it has set for itself, but more patience, determination and courage are needed for us to achieve those goals in a way that will change the security reality in the south, and for our citizens to feel long-term security and stability. "We must not miss out last minute on what was achieved in an unprecedented national effort to restore the spirit of unity to the people of Israel. The Israeli public, and mainly the residents of the south in the Home Front, have the patience and will for this — as does the government. "...We have never allowed anyone to decide for us whether we are allowed to strike those that hurl bombs at our kindergartens and schools and we never will agree to that in the future. "No resolution that was made or will be made in the future that will deprive us of our basic right to defend the residents of Israel." ~~~~~~~~~~ The IDF is reporting that whole Hamas battalions have been wiped out. In addition, the Hamas fighters, who are vicious and devious, are also showing themselves to be cowardly. Not only are they in hiding, some are beginning to desert. Yesterday, we took out Amr Mansi, a rocket chief for the Gaza City area. We were able to target him because his subordinates refused his orders to come out of hiding to fire mortar shells at Israeli soldiers, so he did it himself, and was hit. ~~~~~~~~~~ Overnight, we attacked the house of Hamas military commander Ahmad Jabari in Sajiya. We also struck some 60 additional terror targets including a mosque in Rafah that was used as a training camp and a storage facility for anti-aircraft missiles. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Carmela Menashe, military correspondent for Voice of Israel radio, the IDF wants to continue the war until the end of the month and is prepared to do so. Note: This is the military intention, not necessarily what the political leaders will decide. Note also: This would bring us past the January 20th inauguration date. ~~~~~~~~~~ This is fairly astonishing, and a sign of the shift in the larger political situation in the Middle East: Israel National News reports that, according to the Saudi Gazette, Saudi Arabia has promised that it will not use oil as a weapon against Israel because of its war against Hamas in Gaza. "You can't reverse a conflict by using oil," declared the Saudi Foreign Minister. Says INN, the Gazette also stated, in a separate report, that the war in Gaza is a proxy battle between Western allies and Iran. ~~~~~~~~~~ Hamas leaders are offering their usual bluster. Mashaal, Hamas politburo head in Damascus, has declared his fighting forces to be at full strength, even as he says we are committing a "holocaust" in Gaza. He gave us a moment of unintended amusement when he announced that because of our acts we have ruined the opportunity to make peace with Hamas. ~~~~~~~~~~ Head of Shin Bet, Yuval Diskin, today reported to the Cabinet that the number of rockets launched from Gaza since the beginning of the war has been fewer than had been anticipated. Hamas is still fighting, however, and rockets — including Grad Katyushas — are being launched at our south. There have been Grads launched today at Beersheva, where a car was hit, near a kindergarten (thankfully empty!) in Ashkelon, and in Ashdod, next to an apartment building, as well as in other locations: Kiryat Malachi, Netivot, Eshkol regions, etc. The comment has been made that the miracles continue, for these rockets are lethal and yet our people in the main have escaped injury — through the grace of G-d, and care that is taken to seek shelter. May this continue. ~~~~~~~~~~ Hamas attacks, it should be noted, continued today during the three hour daily ceasefire we are honoring to allow relief to go into Gaza. Is anyone in the international community (and especially UNRWA) taking note of this? There is a perpetual double standard at work, with Palestinians, whether Hamas or Fatah, cut slack. Does anyone care when Hamas is oblivious to civilian needs, or, since they are terrorists, is it simply assumed they will act as they do? ~~~~~~~~~~ The Israeli Air Force reports that there have been attempts by Hamas to damage our aircraft, utilizing anti-aircraft missiles. Our pilots are aware of the situation and act in accordance with specified guidelines. ~~~~~~~~~~ A spokeswoman for Barak Obama denies the report that Obama will deal quietly with Hamas that appeared in the Guardian on Friday. In fact, Obama has just said that, "I think that a basic principle of any country is that they've got to protect their citizens." He has indicated that he is preparing his team to be immediately engaged, after January 20, in a Middle East peace process. ~~~~~~~~~~ Please, see this really excellent YouTube video with a different and powerful slant, and share it widely (thanks Ruthie L.):
Also please see the IDF YouTube site and bookmark it for future reference. This is not only informative, I've been advised that YouTube would just as soon take it down, using the fact that it's not being accessed as an excuse:
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
ENDING THE GAZA WAR: CHOICES, NOT SOLUTIONS
Posted by Barry Rubin, January 11, 2009. |
|
Last December, Hamas unilaterally ended its ceasefire with Israel and escalated the kind of cross-border attacks continually attempted even during the ceasefire. With massive public support, Israel struck back against a neighboring regime which daily attacked its citizens and called for its extermination. For decades, Israel's history shows a general pattern: its neighbors attack, Israel responds, Israel wins the war, and the world rushes to ensure that its victory is limited or nullified. If, as sometimes happens, the diplomatic process really improves the situation and provides progress for peace that, of course, is beneficial. Yet Israel's experience has shown that international promises made in return for its material concessions are often broken. Most recently, in 2006 the international community pledged to keep Hizballah out of south Lebanon and curb its arms' supply, failed totally, yet took no action in response to this defeat. Israel is understandably skeptical. In addition, Israelis know that Hamas is totally dedicated to their personal and collective destruction. The group will not moderate, cannot be bought off, and will not respect any agreement it makes. As a result, the usual kinds of diplomatic tools — concessions, confidence-building, agreements, moderation resulting from having governmental responsibilities, will not work. Any solution short of Hamas's fall from power will bring more fighting in future. What should happen is that the international community cooperates in the removal of the Hamas regime. It is an illegal government, brought to power by an unprovoked war against the Palestinian Authority (PA) which was the internationally recognized regime in the Gaza Strip. Hamas may have won the elections but it then seized total power, suspended representative government, and destroyed the opposition. Moreover, Hamas is a radical terrorist group which openly uses antisemitic rhetoric and actively seeks to wipe Israel off the map. It oppresses the Palestinian population and leads them into endless war. It teaches young Palestinians that their career goal should not be as a teacher, engineer, or doctor but as a suicide bomber. From a strategic standpoint, Hamas is a member of the Iran-Syria alliance which seeks to overthrow every Arab regime in the Middle East and replace it with an anti-Western, war-oriented, radical Islamist dictatorship. Hamas's survival is a big threat to both Western interests and to those of Arab nationalist regimes. Keeping Hamas in power is equivalent to an energetic Western diplomatic effort to have kept the Taliban regime in power in Afghanistan, despite its role in the September 11 attacks. If, however, the world is not going to support Hamas's fall from office, Israel cannot bring about this result by itself. At the same time, the world will be making a big mistake if it pushes for a ceasefire at any price, thus encouraging future violence and terrorism, not only regarding Gaza but also in the region generally. What then are Israel's options? Two possible outcomes are rejected: Israel will not take control of the Gaza Strip again, and Israel will not accept a return to the previous situation in which Hamas repeatedly attacked Israel under cover of a ceasefire. There are at least six major things Israel can obtain realistically: — The practical weakening of Hamas. Granted it will continue to be aggressive in future, its losses will reduce Hamas's ability to hurt Israeli citizens. Second, it is quite possible that within days or weeks of any agreement, Hamas — partly to prove to itself and others how it remains unbowed — will return to firing rockets and mortar rounds into Israel as well as trying to carry out terrorist attacks across the border. In that case, Israel will have to respond much more seriously than it has in the past to such behavior. A world which guarantees the ceasefire better be prepared to remember Israel's legitimate interests in enforcing it. Finally, as long as Hamas survives as rulers of the Gaza Strip, it will be impossible to end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The PA will be too intimidated to make compromises and cannot even deliver its own people. There can be no Palestinian state with half the territory being controlled by an organization which will never accept an agreement and will do everything possible to wreck it. "Saving" Hamas and making the main or sole priority pushing for a ceasefire at any price is a very short-sighted policy for the international community which will be paid for in future. If the Gaza war is going to be ended, it should be in the framework of solving the problems that let Hamas create the war in the first place. 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 Truth About Syria, and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East. |
|
FACTS ABOUT HAMAS AND THE GAZA WAR
Posted by Marc Samberg, January 11, 2009. |
|
This comes from the Yid with Lid website. |
|
FACTS..... HAMAS broke the cease-fire On June 17, 2008, after several months of indirect contacts between Israel and Hamas through Egyptian mediators, Hamas agreed to a cease-fire (tahadiya). Almost immediately afterward, terrorists fired rockets into southern Israel. Despite what it called a "gross violation" of the truce, Israel refrained from military action. In fact, during the six months the arrangement was supposed to be observed, 329 rockets and mortar shells were fired at Israel. While there were considerably fewer Palestinian assaults after the agreement than before, terror continued. Nevertheless, the IDF did not respond to the provocations. On the contrary, Israel significantly increased the amount of goods delivered to the Gaza Strip. During this period, Israel also expected to negotiate the release of Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier taken hostage by Hamas in June 2006. The group repeatedly increased its demands for the number of prisoners it wanted released in exchange for the lone Israeli captive, but never agreed to grant his freedom. Violence escalated in early November after the IDF carried out a military operation close to the border security fence on the Gazan side that killed seven Hamas terrorists. Israel acted after discovering that Hamas had dug a tunnel under the fence and planned to abduct more Israeli soldiers. Hamas responded by shelling Israeli towns and has continued the rocket barrage ever since. When the Hamas-imposed six-month deadline expired in December, Israel hoped an agreement could be reached to extend the cease-fire. Instead, Hamas began firing what would be hundreds of rockets into Israel. Hamas rockets came from Iran, smuggled into Gaza in pieces and assembled. When the bombardment began, it became apparent Hamas had used the lull to upgrade its arsenal with weapons that were too sophisticated to have been designed or built in Gaza. These advanced Qassam and Grad rockets, which have placed 1-in-every-8 Israelis in mortal danger, originated in Iran. They were smuggled into Gaza in pieces, assembled, and fired from launch pads well-hidden and shielded in Palestinian population centers. Once launched, hundreds of thousands of Israelis have as little as 15 seconds to reach a bunker before a rocket detonates. Hamas has turned all of southern Israel into a place that more resembles a post-apocalyptic world, rather than a modern, civilized society. Imagine never being able to step outside without remaining in sprinting distance of a concrete bunker. Imagine having to dive into the safety of a bunker 30 times a day, every day. Try to imagine the terror of the rocket whistling down, not knowing whether it will land a mile a way, or directly above your head. Can you imagine the sudden shock when you feel the impact, the relief that overcomes you that you are still alive, and the immediate sorrow and concern that follows when you realize that others like — your family and friends — may not have been so lucky this time? FACT There is NO "disproportionate force." Article 51 of the United Nations Charter reserves to every nation the right to engage in self-defense against armed attacks. As Professor Alan Dershowitz has also noted, "The claim that Israel has violated the principle of proportionality — by killing more Hamas terrorists than the number of Israeli civilians killed by Hamas rockets — is absurd. First, there is no legal equivalence between the deliberate killing of innocent civilians and the deliberate killings of Hamas combatants. Under the laws of war, any number of combatants can be killed to prevent the killing of even one innocent civilian. Second, proportionality is not measured by the number of civilians actually killed, but rather by the risk posed. This is illustrated by what happened on Tuesday (December 30, 2008), when a Hamas rocket hit a kindergarten in Beer Sheva, though no students were there at the time. Under international law, Israel is not required to allow Hamas to play Russian roulette with its children's lives." As the London Times said in response to this charge during Israel's war with Hezbollah, this criticism "is lazy and facile in several ways, especially in implying a moral relativism between the two sides that does not exist. This is not the contest between misguided equals that many in the West seem to see. One is the region's lone democracy, which for much of its existence has faced a very real existential threat and would like, if possible, to live in peace with its neighbors. The other is a terrorist organization, bent on preventing such a future." Furthermore, Since Hamas' stated objective is the destruction of Israel, isn't the appropriate response the destruction of Hamas? Wouldn't random missile strikes on Palestinian cities be proportionate to Hamas rocket attacks on southern Israel? Can you imagine any of Israel's critics accepting those responses? When Palestinian terrorists plant bombs at Israeli shopping malls and kill and maims dozens of civilians, would the "proportionate response" be for Israelis to plant bombs in Palestinian malls? No one in Israel believes this would be a legitimate use of force. Thus, Israel is left with the need to take measured action against specific targets in an effort to either deter Palestinian violence or stop it. What would America do if terrorists fired thousands of rockets targeting U.S. cities? After 9/11, we saw that America took the same type of action as Israel by launching military strikes against the terrorists. U.S. forces used overwhelming force and though they never targeted civilians, some were inadvertently killed. Americans believe in Colin Powell's doctrine, which holds that "America should enter fights with every bit of force available, or not at all." Now that Hamas has acquired long-range missiles, 900,000 Israelis are in danger. The United States uses overwhelming force against its enemies, even though the threats are distant and pose no danger to the existence of the nation or the immediate security of its citizens. The threat Israel faces is immediate in time and physical proximity, and poses a direct danger to Israeli citizens. More than 6,000 rockets have now fallen on Israel's cities and now that Hamas has acquired long-range missiles, more than 900,000 civilians are in danger. Still, Israel has not used its full might as the Powell Doctrine dictates. The use of force has been judicious and precise. Israeli soldiers do not deliberately target noncombatants. The murder of innocents is the goal of the Palestinian terrorists. In fact, what other army drops leaflets to warn people to leave an area they intend to attack even though it gives up the element of surprise and allows the bad guys to hide as well as the innocent to escape? IDF activities are governed by an overriding policy of restraint and a determination to take all possible measures to prevent harm to innocent civilians. No innocent Palestinians would be in any danger if the Palestinian Authority took steps to stop terrorism or if the international community, especially the Arab world, had pressured Hamas to stop attacking Israel. No innocent Palestinians would be in danger if Hamas terrorists did not deliberately hide among them. If the peace-seeking Palestinians prevented the terrorists from living in their midst, Israel would have no reason to come to their neighborhoods. It is a tragedy whenever innocent lives are lost, and Israelis have consistently expressed their sadness over Arab casualties. By contrast, when innocent Israelis are murdered by terrorists, Hamas holds rallies to celebrate the murders. See, e.g., http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sD_1PFbhAKI&NR=1 and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4qb2DPpBoAA&feature=related FACT Palestinians in Gaza are NOT innocent victims It is tragic that many Palestinians who are not directly involved in terrorism are suffering as a result of the actions of their leaders. While no one wants to see any noncombatants harmed, it is important to acknowledge that all Palestinians in Gaza bear some responsibility for their current predicament. After all, they voted to empower Hamas in an election in which they knew the organization's platform called for the destruction of Israel and the use of terrorism to achieve its aims. The Palestinians in Gaza have done nothing during the last three years to stop Hamas from launching rockets into Israel. At any time the people could have said, "Enough! We do not support terror." Instead of allowing rocket crews to fire Qassams from their houses, yards, or neighborhoods, the people could have said, "Stop! I will not allow you to make us a target. I will now allow you to use my family as a shield." For the last three years, the Palestinians of Gaza have said, in effect, "We don't mind if Israelis are murdered by Hamas rockets, but the world should support us." During World War II, the German people were not spared suffering from the Allied invasion because they were noncombatants or because some could claim they were not Nazis and did not support Hitler. All the German people were held to account for their failure to stop their leaders from carrying out their aggression and genocidal policies. The Palestinians now are also being held to account. What is different, however, is that unlike the Allies in World War II, Israel is doing everything possible to avoid hurting Palestinian noncombatants despite their culpability. Even now the Palestinians have the power to stop the war by demanding that Hamas cease firing rockets. Alas, they refuse to take the one step within their power to ease their suffering. IT'S A MYTH TO THINK..... that Israel's operation in Gaza will only embitter Palestinians and make them seek revenge rather than peace..... After the Blitz in World War II, the British did not worry whether Germans would hate them for bombing their cities. In fact, unlike Israel, the allies had little concern during the war for inflicting suffering on German civilians. Undoubtedly, many Germans still harbor anger toward the British and other allies for their actions during the war, but this did not prevent Germany from ultimately coming to terms with its neighbors and becoming a peaceful member of the international community. It is not Israeli actions that provoke Palestinians to choose terror over peace, it is the indoctrination of Hamas, which teaches children from an early age to hate Jews, to seek the destruction of Israel and to glorify martyrdom. IT'S A MYTH: ... to think that Israel should negotiate a cease-fire with Hamas. Hamas does not negotiate with Israel. Hamas denies Israel's right to exist. Hamas refuses to abide by previously signed agreements. Even the recently-expired six-month "cease-fire" between Israel and Hamas had to be slowly and painstakingly negotiated through Egypt because Hamas would not talk to Israel. Throughout 2008, Israel worked with the United States toward an equitable two-state solution with the Palestinian Authority while Hamas did everything in its power to disrupt and derail the peace process — firing thousands of rockets into Israeli towns and cities, firing on Israeli soldiers and civilians, and attempting to infiltrate Israel for the purpose of committing suicide bombing attacks. Hamas also continues to hold 22-year-old Gilad Shalit, the Israeli soldier they kidnapped in June 2006. Hamas made clear that the "cease-fire" was not a prelude to peace. Hamas made clear that the "cease-fire" was not a prelude to peace. On the contrary, Hamas used the time to build more tunnels to smuggle weapons and supplies from Egypt; to build more rockets and to improve the range and accuracy of its existing arsenal. A new cease-fire before the tunnels and weapons are destroyed or neutralized would simply give Hamas the opportunity to follow the example of Hezbollah and rearm and regroup for a future battle to achieve its goal of Israel's destruction. FACT Hamas DOES NOT target military objectives..... Hamas consistently judges the success of their attacks by the number of Israelis they kill — men, women, children. Hamas does not even try to attack military targets; their rockets are directed toward towns, cities and farms rather than military bases. The group's rockets land on playgrounds, apartment buildings, public parks, schools and private homes. Hamas terrorists choose not to expose themselves by firing these weapons from open areas. They construct launch pads in densely populated regions in Gaza, using the local Palestinian population as a shield because they do not care if their fellow Palestinians are killed by their own misfiring rockets (as frequently occurs) or by retaliatory strikes by Israel. The leaders of Hamas, like their ideological soul mates in Hezbollah, actually prefer that Israel hits back because they know that if civilians inadvertently are casualties, the international community will blame the Israelis. Hamas NEVER fears Israel's military might.,,,, BUT why that ? Hamas terrorists believe they are fighting a holy war against infidels and that is why no diplomatic agreement with them is possible. It is their religious conviction that they must create an Islamic state and that there is no place in the Islamic world for a Jewish state (or a Christian one for that matter). Because of their faith, Hamas foot soldiers believe Allah will welcome them to Paradise if they are killed by Israel in what they see as their defense of Islam. ¨ The Hamas terrorists' extremism goes much further. It would be one thing if they were willing to sacrifice their own lives for their beliefs, but they also are prepared to jeopardize the lives of others as well. That is why they have no reticence about using their fellow Palestinians as shields. If Israel is dissuaded from attacking for fear of killing innocents, Hamas can continue to terrorize Israelis with impunity. If Israel does attack, Hamas will use the death of any noncombatants for propaganda purposes and to rally support. At the first sign of danger, the leaders of Hamas typically run and hide. Their bravery extends to sending young disciples to become martyrs and using the rest of the population to protect themselves. Hamas has not hidden its objective of destroying Israel. It has conducted a three-year terror war since Israel's evacuation of Gaza, which followed the five-year Palestinian Intifada that claimed more than 1,000 Israeli lives. No country would show the degree of restraint that Israel exhibited as its cities were rocketed. The purpose of the Israeli operation is to reduce the possibility of Hamas threatening Israeli lives to as close to zero as possible. No one should expect that the outcome of the war will be a desire on the part of either side to negotiate with the other. Article 13 of the Hamas covenant makes clear the group's raison d'etre: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors" (Article 13). For Israel, the notion of negotiating with Hamas was best summed up by Golda Meir when she said, "They say we must be dead. And we say we want to be alive. Between life and death, I don't know of a compromise." FACT THAT CANNOT BE IGNORED ... Israel DID NOT deliberately attack a UN school. They say that truth is the first casualty of war and Israel has frequently found this to be the case. Reports of Israeli atrocities in its military operations are often out of context, misleading, half-truths, or outright fabrications. Israel often reinforces negative media reports by reacting in a knee-jerk way to accept blame when asked for a reaction to allegations. The media does not wait to learn the truth because that typically requires careful, dispassionate analysis that does not conform to journalists' need to immediately fill time and space. The lies have traveled around the world... before the TRUTH ... Can get it's boots on ... and that's mainly due to the gullible MEDIA falling head over heal... into lockstep with any Propaganda the Islamic world puts out to them... The best example of this was the infamous case that occurred during an Israeli anti-terror operation in Gaza in 2000 when a TV broadcast showed a Palestinian father shielding his son from bullets. The child was allegedly killed and Israel was immediately blamed. It took many months, but we now know Israeli troops did not kill Mohammed al-Dura. Israel faced a similar rush to judgment after reports of an Israeli attack on January 6, 2009 on a UN-run school in Jabalya. The building was not being used as a school at the time but was sheltering Palestinian noncombatants. Initial reports said at least 30 Palestinians were killed and UN officials claimed they had given Israeli forces coordinates of this building and others that they said were not associated with Hamas. The incident was immediately portrayed as a deliberate Israeli attack on innocent people. Palestinians told Associated Press they had seen terrorists firing mortar rounds close to the school. The details of what happened are still under investigation, but Israel maintains it was not aware that the building was being used as a shelter and that Israeli forces fired at the building because they were attacked by Hamas terrorists launching mortars from the area. Israel later identified two of the casualties at the site as Imad and Hassan Abu Asker, who served as heads of the Hamas mortar units in Gaza. A witness from Jabalya said that he had seen Abu Asker in the area of the school right before the attack when he answered a call for volunteers to pile sand around the camp "to help protect the resistance fighters." In addition, two residents of the area near the school told the Associated Press they had seen a small group of terrorists firing mortar rounds from a street close to the school. A series of explosions followed, indicating the presence of munitions and explosives in the building, which was not being used as a school at the time. This is not the first time terrorists have fired mortars from a school in Gaza, nor is it the first time terrorists have exploited UN facilities. UN officials in Gaza, who never condemn Palestinian terror (the UN never passed a resolution condemning Hamas terrorism), have a long record of looking the other way while Hamas carries out its activities. UN officials in Gaza are there to help Palestinians and their bias often clouds their judgment and therefore independent verification is needed before accepting their claims. We do know that through its use of civilians as shields, Hamas has brought death and destruction to the people of Gaza as well as southern Israel. The loss of life in Jabalya is tragic and would not have happened if Hamas was not rocketing Israel. The rush to blame Israel is also a reminder that first reports out of Gaza cannot be trusted. Israel has learned that its enemies will do everything they can to manipulate the media to influence public opinion during conflicts such as the one going on in the Gaza Strip. Israel will be accused of massacres, fabricated casualty figures will be distributed, photographs will be doctored and journalists will be threatened. These and other ploys will be used to create sympathy for the Palestinians and cast aspersions on Israeli forces in the hope of turning world opinion against Israel. Too often, irresponsible journalists have repeated unverified and often inaccurate information in their haste to be the first to report a story. In an effort to present an evenhanded account, some reporters have the mistaken belief that allowing an Arab spokesperson to lie and then giving an Israeli a chance to respond represents a balanced account. This is like allowing a spokesperson to accuse Israelis of beating their spouses and then inviting an Israeli to deny that they beat their husbands and wives. Israel is always put on the defensive, often through outrageous and false accusations, which are repeated by other media so lies become accepted as truth. One of the first examples of this in the Gaza war occurred after Israeli forces fired on a UN-run school on January 6, 2009. The press immediately reported that more than 30 Palestinians seeking shelter in the building were killed and the attack was portrayed as a deliberate assault on innocent people. Hours later, Israeli investigators reported that they had fired on the building because they were attacked by Hamas terrorists launching mortars from the area. Witnesses supported the Israeli account, but the initial impression was already created and reinforced by repeated claims by UN officials discounting the Israeli version. Israel was consistently victimized by Arab propaganda and media irresponsibility during the 2006 Lebanon War. Israel was accused of massacres that never happened. Reuters was duped by doctored photos and had to withdraw them. Other photos, showing Hizballah fighters setting up rockets in civilian neighborhoods were suppressed because they did not conform to Hizballah's propaganda message that Israel was indiscriminately attacking innocent Lebanese. Hamas has adopted a similar approach. As CNN's Anderson Cooper reported, "Inside Gaza, press controlled by Hamas is heavy-handed. There are few press freedoms inside Gaza and Hamas controls who reports from there and where they can go. While pictures of wounded children being brought to hospitals are clearly encouraged, we rarely see images of Hamas fighters or their rockets being fired into Israel." Israel naturally wants to shape media coverage as well, but Israelis know the first time they are caught telling the type of lies common to the other side their credibility will be shot. Moreover, while they may want to exert some influence by, for example, limiting reporters' access to troops, the other side still succeeds in making its case. As CNN's Nic Robertson noted in criticizing Israel's decision not to embed reporters during the Gaza operation, "The officials we talk to say it's for security and our safety, but it creates an impression that they don't want the suffering that's happening in the Gaza Strip right now to be witnessed by the world, but it is and right now you could make a real case that the message that's coming out is one that's essentially controlled by people that are perhaps more partisan to the situation inside the Gaza Strip than a lot of international journalists." Given the history of coverage of the Middle East conflict, it behooves journalists to take great care in how they report stories from both sides of the Gaza battlefront and it will be up to those following the coverage to hold the reporters to the highest journalistic standards. The years of the rocket barrages on southern Israel have rarely been mentioned in the media. Even before Israel initiated Operation Cast Lead, many journalists were quick to report whatever they were told by Hamas. When Hamas staged blackouts in Gaza, the media incorrectly reported that Israel was preventing the Gazans from having fuel and electricity. Israel was regularly blamed for a "humanitarian crisis" in Gaza while, at the same time, truckloads of goods were sent in from Israel each day. While Israel's air attacks on Gaza immediately made the front page of newspapers around the world, the rocket barrages on southern Israel, and the impact they have had on the population over the last three years, have rarely been mentioned. The media often turns conflicts into numbers games, keeping running tallies of casualties. Israel always is accused of disproportion because fewer Israelis typically die in confrontations. Israelis, however, are under no obligation to take greater casualties for the sake of looking better in the media box score. It also should come as no surprise that a regular army that is highly trained and is targeting terrorists will kill more people than the terrorists who are indiscriminately firing explosive rockets at civilian population centers in Israel. The casualty figures reported by Palestinians have also proven completely unreliable in the past and no one should take them as fact. We know that the Palestinians will routinely call attacks "massacres" and invent large numbers of fatalities, so journalists should be on guard for such unverified claims. Even when bodies are presented as evidence, we have learned that they are often not the victims of an Israeli attack and sometimes they are not even dead (a classic Palestinian video shows a funeral in which the pall bearers drop the stretcher with the "corpse" who then gets up and runs away). Perhaps the most dramatic example occurred when the Washington Post published a photograph during the first Lebanon War of a baby that appeared to have lost both its arms. The UPI caption said that the seven-month-old had been severely burned when an Israeli jet accidentally hit a Christian residential area. The photo disgusted President Reagan and was one reason he subsequently called for Israel to halt its attacks. The photo and the caption, however, were inaccurate. The baby, in fact, did not lose its arms, and the burns the child suffered were the result of a PLO attack on East Beirut. Early in the Gaza war, the media reported that nearly 300 Gazans were killed in the incursion. These numbers came from Palestinian sources. Moreover, what many reporters left out is the fact that even Palestinians admitted the majority of those casualties were Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists. Some reports have also cited UN officials on conditions in Gaza and these must also be treated as suspect. UN representatives in Gaza are not impartial observers; they are individuals there specifically to aid the Palestinians and are naturally sympathetic to their cause. UN operatives in Palestinian territories have often been found to be apologists for terror with an animus toward Israel. Richard Falk, the special rapporteur on the Palestinian territories, for example, has a long history of venomous anti-Israel remarks. The media is reporting how the Arab world is outraged by Israeli actions, but this is also not a complete account of the facts. First, most of the Arab world does not get its news from the Western media, which at least claims a measure of objectivity; the leading source of news for most Arabs is Al-Jazeera. This network has no pretensions that it is balanced and presents non-stop coverage from a Palestinian perspective with the aim of generating hostility toward Israel. Al-Jazeera has not been reporting on the incessant rocket fire on Israel or its impact on the population. Still, what is striking is how many Arab leaders and commentators have blamed Hamas for provoking Israel. Also, while Hamas has received some rhetorical support from Arab states, they have shown no interest in coming to the group's defense. Accurate reporting would note that for all their statements of support for the Palestinian cause, none of the Arab states are willing to do any more to defend them. It is a journalist's duty to report on every situation in as unbiased a manner as possible. To do this, reporters who interview Palestinian spokespeople or hospital officials should check their facts with other sources, including the IDF and the Israel Foreign Ministry, both of which have been historically honest in their fact-collecting. If journalists are not careful in their reporting of the situation in Gaza they will be later castigated by their colleagues, as was the case after the last Lebanon War. The IDF's International Press Branch has opened a YouTube Channel. We will be uploading IDF footage as it comes out. www.youtube.com/user/idfnadesk IDF: Army didn't fire on UN truck driver IDF: Army didn't fire on UN truck driver
The IDF was not responsible for the death of a Palestinian aid worker contracted to the UN and the wounding of two others last Thursday, the IDF Spokesperson said Saturday. "An IDF investigation has found that it was not the army who fired on a UN truck at the Erez Crossing," the Spokesperson's office said. The IDF is not sure who fired on the truck, and is still investigating. "The army further wishes to point out that the Palestinian wounded were evacuated by the Red Cross to the Israeli border, where they were taken by Israeli medical personnel for treatment at Ashkelon's Barzilai Hospital," the IDF told The Jerusalem Post. On Thursday, the Post reported that contrary to foreign press reports, it was not certain that an IDF tank shell hit the aid truck, and that in all probability, the aid workers were hit by Hamas gunfire. The foreign press reports were based on UN sources, who later admitted to the Post that they were not sure in which direction the truck was headed when it was hit, and could also not say with certainty that tank shells were responsible. Foreign press reports said the dead Palestinian and two others were hit by tank shells. RELATED Uncertainty shrouds UN driver's death An MDA medic at the scene told the Post that soldiers in the field said Hamas snipers targeted the aid workers. A Post probe revealed that the two wounded Palestinians were being treated at Barzilai for gunshot wounds. The incident occurred Thursday afternoon at the Erez crossing into northern Gaza, the main entrance used by aid agencies to funnel badly needed food and medical supplies into the Strip. The version of events which posited that the IDF had attacked an aid convoy was widely disseminated in the global media, and it was only on Friday afternoon that the IDF posited a different theory. UN officials in New York placed the blame squarely on Israel, not just for the Erez incident, but also for a separate episode in which a marked UN ambulance convoy sent to retrieve the body of an UNRWA worker killed by an air strike came under small arms fire near Beit Hanun on Thursday afternoon. No one was injured in that incident. Both incidents led UNRWA to suspend its activities regarding the collection and redistribution of humanitarian aid in Gaza. In a statement issued Friday, the UN said it would resume its Gaza operations. "In a high level meeting at Israeli Ministry of Defense Headquarters in Tel Aviv, the UN was informed that the incidents which led to a temporary suspension of UN staff movements are deeply regretted and do not reflect official government policy. The UN received credible assurances that the security of UN personnel, installations and humanitarian operations would be fully respected, including undertakings of improved liaison and more effective internal coordination within the IDF. "On this basis, UN staff movements suspended yesterday will resume as soon as possible. The UN will keep the safety and security of its staff under constant review," the UN statement said. Negotiations With Hamas Are Pointless
There is one inexplicable fact that the "kumbaya" forces in the American Government, and governments around the world for that mater, will never get... Hamas' Politburo Chief, Khaled Mashaal, slammed the door on all Gaza ceasefire proposals Saturday, saying his organization would treat any international peacekeeping force in Gaza as an occupying entity. Speaking after Hamas representatives met with international officials in Cairo to discuss ceasefire proposals, Mashaal added that Hamas would not accept the inspection of the numerous smuggling tunnels in Gaza by international observers. "The objective of the war in Gaza is to subdue the Palestinian people and to dictate its political concessions. .... Negotiations with Hamas are POINTLESS. What kind of outcome could come out of negotiations? Another lull where Hamas has a chance to rearm? Or maybe another truce where Hamas has a chance to rearm. The facts are clear, Hamas has stated their goal over and over their goal is to destroy Israel. When they are done with Israel, their goal is destroy Europe and finally the Great Satan the United States. Wake up and smell the hummus, there is no possibility of a negotiated peace between Hamas and Israel — Hamas doesnt want peace, it goes against their reason for being. In the latest Weekly Standard, David Gelernter calls it irreconcilable differences: The British Government is just as clueless about the true danger of Islam and Creeping Sharia as the Unitied States. British Blogger Lionheart, has produce this report about how the country's largest online Islamic forums, deemed "moderate" by the British government, were actually set up by Al Qaeda's Abu Hamza al-Masri, also known as the blind sheik whose track record includes being convicted on the following counts: Guilty of six charges of soliciting to murder under the Offences Against The Person Act 1861; Guilty of three charges related to "using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour with the intention of stirring up racial hatred" under the Public Order Act 1986,Guilty of one further charge of owning recordings related to "stirring up racial hatred"Guilty of one charge of possessing "terrorist encyclopaedia" under the Terrorism Act. Lionheart wrote the report below in recognition of the what Sun Tzu said over 2,500 hundred years ago: "Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril. When you are ignorant of the enemy, but know yourself, your chances of winning or losing are equal. If ignorant both of your enemy and yourself, you are certain in every battle to be in peril." Ummah.com is a front for Al Qaeda in Britain Ummah.com is one of the biggest, if not the biggest Moslem online forum in Britain that promotes itself as being a moderate Islamic forum to the wider British community, who have links with many other Government funded organisations, Islamic and non-Islamic alike. So while the Government are ploughing millions of pounds of tax payers money into these types of organisations to counteract the militant aspect of the Islamic religion that is now in our midst, these exact same organisations are able to use that money to build their infrastructure, build their Islamic agenda into the public debate, build their base of supporters and then use that power to influence the public debate, mobilise an army of Moslems to support their agenda on our streets to demonstrate against anything they perceive that is contrary to their Islamic religion, or by mass targeted letter writing campaigns to influence institutions and organisations decisions. British Government funded Al Qaeda terror being promoted under the guise of counter radicalisation and claimed to be the moderate face of Islam. There is no moderate Islam, Islam is Islam and it has two faces. I have been passed information from Glen Jenvey that clearly shows that Ummah.com and Ummah.net are one and the same website and they were both set up by Abu Hamza the spokesman for Al Qaeda's Jihad within Great Britain. The Jihad which is aimed at the eventual conquest of the British homeland, thus turning our Nation into an Islamic State, and promoting our country to be a launch pad into the America homeland which is the greatest battlefield for Moslems in the 21st Century, ones born in Britain and their International counterparts. The War is upon our shores if anyone had any doubts! So it is a fact that the forum Ummah.com was founded on the most extreme militancy contained within the Islamic religion by the leaders of the Holy War in this part of the World, leaders who actively support and promote the Global Jihad around the world. This can be seen on their 'about us' page that details their views and the militant organisations they support around the world. Abu Hamza is currently in Belmarsh prison serving 7 years for his incitement and awaiting extradition to America to face Islamic terror charges there based in part, upon Glen Jenveys intelligence which showed that he had been trying to set up terror training camps in Oregon. Abu Hamza's British supporters who can be seen on this video are promoting the Islamic conquest of the British homeland and stating that he is not guilty of any crime and would not be in prison or on trial in an Islamic State: Pharaoh had a dream So Ummah.com and its members who are now one of the biggest online Moslem forums in Britain and are promoting themselves as a moderate reflection of Islam are nothing more than Al Qaeda supporters dressed up as moderates by the Moslem 'liars and deceivers' who are using the art of Taqiya against the infidel, and their Left Wing supporters who endorse them and their 'religion of peace'. I stated in my post yesterday 'Threatened with beheading' how Moslems are using propaganda to create a false reality in the eyes and minds of the non-believers living around them, and this information about Ummah.com's denials and their inception and self promotion of the very worst form of Islamic militancy within Britain proves that point. They will deny these facts until they are blue in the face because that's what Islam teaches them to do, "so beware", and if there is any doubt about that point I have just made then watch this film and listen to their denials about every single point captured on video: Undercover Mosque And the British public believe it! Western defence services have publicly stated that now in the 21st Century the internet is another battle front in this war with the military wing of the Islamic religion that is led by Al Qaeda and Glen Jenvey has been at the forefront of this online battle within Great Britain. Glen and his counterpart Jonathan Galt were the ones who tracked Abu Hamza, Omar Bakri and Abu Izzadeen to name a few, collecting video evidence on their Islamic hatred and war that is aimed at all non-Moslems and our Countries which led to Hamza and Izzadeens successful convictions and Hamza's impending extradition, and Omar Bakris expulsion from Britain to Lebanon. Glen's work can be seen all over the internet, with him featured as an expert on several films covering this subject. Here is a youtube page containing many of his gathered videos that have been released into the public domain: Youtube Ummah.com have embarked upon a campaign to try and discredit Glen because of his intelligence gathering on them and their members, by creating lies and misinformation. Any one with an ounce of intelligence will realise that in the propaganda War discrediting your opponents is all a part of the art, so that being the case again re-affirms the point that Islam is not a 'religion of peace', it is a 'religion of war' and this is the media front for public opinion — Ummah.com Lie and deceive the infidel until you are strong enough to take over. Omar Bakris tentacles are still here in our Country with Anjem Choudry now the head of Bakri's British Islamic terror front, with him being beamed in 'live and direct' to speak to his Moslem supporters in Britain when ever they host their Al Qaeda meetings promoting the take over of our Country. Can it be anymore blatant? Choudry is the head of the Sharia Courts of Britain, he has claimed Southall as the Capital of the Islamic State upon our shores and is behind the website Islam4uk.com It is common knowledge to anyone that understands today's World War against the military wing of the Islamic religion that the internet is just as important to the Jihad (Holy War) against our Western Judeo/Christian Civilisation as the AK47, rocket propelled grenade, roadside bomb and Semtex is. It is the propaganda front that bypasses all Government controlled media outlets and reaches the masses at the click of a button from the comfort and security of their own homes and creates realities, perceptions and belief systems on the World around them. The more Moslems living in Western Nations can be reached with Jihad propaganda based on their religion then the more supporters can be mobilised for the War, either for indoctrination and recruitment to the goals and ambitions of Al Qaeda, information that teaches Islamic terror training and explosives and weapons handling manuals to the wanna be Jihadists living in Western societies, or to join and mobilise members of the wider Islamic community to try and influence political process by taking to the streets in demonstration against anything they perceive to conflict with them and their Islamic belief. Look at Ummah.com's organised demonstration against Israel as a prime example of this mobilisation in action that turned into a mini riot in the centre of London where several police officers were eventually injured. This is a taste of things to come and it is made possible by the British tax payer through Government funding being poured into the Islamic Kingdom of Great Britain, and dispersed without trace to all of the newly established tax funded Islamic organisations that are being used to mobilize and unite Moslems as a ground force that is culturally invading the Nation and converting it from within into an Islamic State. Disagree with Moslems and Islam and you're a racist Islamaphobe and there are enough powerful tax funded Islamic controlled organisation out there now who will be more than willing to take up the case and exert their influence within the 'Halls of Power' to have you and your life destroyed for criticising one of them or not employing one of them. Watch this space because I am sure Ummah.com and all of its members are not going to like my words and there will be enough Moslems amongst them connected to Islamic controlled organisations who will want me arrested for defaming Islam who will gladly take up the case against me the racist bigotted Islamaphobic Englishman. Ring Bedford Hate Crime Unit tell them to add it to the list, now that we can be arrested for our thoughts and perceptions even though they are right, because they offend the new protected species in Britain because it exposes the truth of what they are about and their intentions towards us. Ummah.com that was founded by the worst ever Moslem terrorist to have ever walked our streets is a 'cultural weapon' in the hands of the Islamic Kingdom for the Jihad in Great Britain to conquer the Nation and enforce an Islamic State upon the land. It is not politically correct to criticise such a big group of Moslems in Britain and it carries great peril on all levels, but I hope you agree that someone needs to say something because if we don't then we might as well roll over in defeat and hand our children and grandchildren's futures over now. As Sir Winston Churchill said: "Its better to die free than live as slave", will your descendents say the same or will they be slaves to Allah and the coming Islamic State of Great Britain because of your inaction? May God continue to bless the work of Glen Jenvey as he sends fear into the hearts of the Islamists and their supporters in Britain Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com |
|
NEW FUND TO PROMOTE JEWISH FARMING IN SAMARIA
Posted by Maayana Miskin, January 11, 2009. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) A new fund created by the Shomron Liaison Office encourages Jewish farming by providing young entrepreneurs with the support they need to get a start in agriculture. Several Samaria residents have expressed interest in beginning farms of their own. Members of the fund's executive board met last week to set their goals. Members include Shomron regional council head Gershon Mesika, Shivi Drori — head of Shomron agricultural committee, Eli Rosenfeld — director of Shomron National Lands Forum and David Ha'ivri, head of the Shomron Liaison Office. While the fund is new, the Liaison Office began supporting Jewish agriculture in Samaria 10 years ago, when it began providing financial support to young Jewish residents of Samaria who wished to make use of tracts of empty, unclaimed land surrounding Jewish towns. The would-be farmers did not have the collateral needed to secure a bank loan, and so could not afford the equipment and the many plants needed to get started. With loans, several farmers were able to get their businesses started. Farmers quickly realized that while local Arab farmers have focused on growing olives, the region is more suitable for growing grapes. Three farmers planted grapes and opened wineries; two have since won awards for their wine. The latest initiative has multiple goals. Liaison office coordinators are interested in creating jobs and income within Samaria, so that fewer Jewish residents of the area will be forced to travel to central Israel to work. Not only does each new farm provide income for the farmer, but many of the farmers who got their start through the office have hired other local Jews to help as their businesses expand. Board members hope that the new fund will allow the further development of local industry. The fund also aims to prevent the common phenomenon of Palestinian Authority Arabs claiming ownership of previously unclaimed lands within or immediately adjacent to Jewish towns. By claiming ownership, Arabs are able to gain access to Jewish communities, a situation that many local Jews fear poses a security risk. Several attempted infiltrations and assaults were reported in late 2008 as PA Arabs who claimed ownership of Samaria land were allowed into Jewish communities to harvest olives. In addition, the fund's backers hope to turn the barren hilltops of Samaria back into productive farmlands, according to the Biblical verse: "You shall again plant vineyards on the hills of Samaria; the planters shall plant and enjoy the fruit." (Jeremiah 31:5). The Jewish Agency used to provide funding for Samaria residents interested in starting businesses, but that fund has been dramatically reduced, leaving most young Jews with no way to obtain the approximately NIS 300,000 needed to set up a 20-dunam vineyard. The Shomron Liaison Office hopes to expand its own fund in order to allow all local Jewish farmers to start their own business in Samaria. The loan is interest-free and comes with a four-year grace period. After four years the farmers will begin to repay the loan, allowing the money to be loaned out again. So far the Liaison office has supported farmers in developing 650 dunams (162 acres) of public land. Approximately 2,000 dunams are available, and will be developed as soon as the fund is large enough to provide all interested farmers with loans.
This appeared in Arutz-7:
|
|
AN OPPORTUNITY LOST? TEN DAYS — AND COUNTING!
Posted by Ari Bussel, January 11, 2009. |
|
15 days of constant attention have focused on Gaza. Reality notwithstanding, Israel is perceived as the aggressor instead of the liberator of its residents from eight years of constant bombardment of rockets. Hamas has been elevated to new heights, its usage of its own people as human shields and its targeting innocent human beings on the enemy's side blatantly ignored. Hamas simply does not care about human life. Life in Hamas's Culture of Death is a disposable commodity, the more gruesome the death, the more it serves Hamas's purposes. The death of its own people is paraded for hours on satellite TV. The death of its enemy is a cause for celebration. Hamas wins either way (although rarely would its leaders be willing to give up their own lives — they are holed like rats in tunnels not daring to show their faces in the light of day or today's full moon). Hamas operates from mosques, kindergartens and hospitals. None of this is new — imams often call for a holy war against the Jews and other non-believers from the loud speakers in mosques, not only in Gaza but also in Jerusalem. Kids are indoctrinated in hatred from early age, taught their highest achievement in life is to become shaids. Textbooks and cartoons, songs and videos are some means of dissemination of this indoctrination. In hospitals, Hamas operatives are dressed as doctors, using ambulances as safe means of transportation, "doctors" in a cult of death. Last week I visited Soroka Hospital, 60 seconds from launch in Gaza to hit in Beer Sheva. The hospital is the embodiment of Israel — Bedouin, Arab and Jewish doctors, nurses and general staff working side by side. Jewish, Arab and Bedouin patients treated equally. All are in the same range of rockets, all likely to get hit, an equal opportunity target. In Israel Jews are dressed as doctors trying to save lives. In Israel one hospital after another shows the same: we are all part of one extended family. The world is only interested in what is happening here insofar it has heightened the general consensus Israel is the evil regime. The world is determined that Jews need to be taken to the ovens, that an ages-old mission still awaits completion. This feeling has spread like fire the world over, ignited by Israel's fight for its survival and fed by every passing day during which Israel has not yet given up. The global forces are aligning their interests. Turkey on the side of Hamas, escalating its rhetoric. Egypt and Jordan are playing a dual role, fulfilling their traditional role as a member of the Arab world but leaning toward Israel's resolve to fight Hamas. It is a mutual interest of all countries. Europe, not surprisingly, is facing an enemy from within — the spread of radical Islam — but even it has awoken. Is Israel engaging in psyops, diverting the world's attention toward Hamas and Gaza, willing to pay a very dear price — the sudden explosion of Anti-Semitism the world over — for altogether a different reason? If so, this would be the biggest deceit of all. The world has conveniently turned its attention away from the Iranian ticking nuclear clock. Some even admitted months ago the world has decided to accept a nuclear Iran as a fait accompli. Can it be that Israel has launched Operation Cast Lead after eight years of turning the other cheek to divert the world's attention from Iran? Is it possible that the next ten days will show the most brilliant, most daring operation ever attempted in recent or distant history? Israel must deal with the Iranian threat. Iran is more advanced, both scientifically and technologically, more sophisticated and more driven in its quest to become the dominant global ruler. Some may dismiss this assessment. Let us be warned. Iran is already spreading westward toward the end of the Mediterranean and possibly over the Atlantic pond. Its advance must be stopped — before it is too late. If it ever comes to it, Gaza can be obliterated in a millisecond. It does not pose the threat that Iran posses to Israel — stating (and is likely to carry out the threat) that Israel can be obliterated into nonbeing in less than a second. The past two weeks are unique in recent memory. The leadership seems to have internalized a much greater threat than Hamas in Gaza. Redlines of the past were crossed and erased: Without any hesitation mosques and schools were hit in direct retaliation to launches and terrorist activities from within these same structures. A different course of events may be indicative that silent forces are acting in the background. If Israel decides to embark on the one and only attempt to pay a visit to Iran, may the Force be with those chosen to carry out this mission. May they be focused on their mission, undeterred and unwavering in their commitment, swift as eagles and courageous as lions, may G-d the Almighty bestow His grace over them and return them safely to Israel. May G-d bless Israel. Contact Ari Bussel at aribussel@gmail.com and visit his blogsite: web.me.com/bussel. |
|
MY LUNCH WITH THE BBC
Posted by Steve Plaut, January 11, 2009. |
|
I would not exactly classify this as an earth-shaking story, but I thought you might enjoy hearing about my lunchtime interview on the BBC (radio) today. I may be the only person on the planet who got to attack the BBC for its anti-Israel bias while speaking on the BBC itself! It was the BBC itself that initiated the interview, which was broadcast Sunday Jan 11, 09 at 12:30 or so Greenwich mean time, the clock used by the BBC. It was in response to that piece I had published earlier about the comparison of Israel's war against the Hamas terror with the Sri Lankan war against Tamil terror. Somehow it reached BBC editors. They asked me if I'd be willing to debate on the air live with their announcer and with a reporter from the Daily Telegraph, concerning the comparison and the more general question of media bias. I said if you do not mind my voice being stuffy due to the flu, then ok. The Daily Telegraph is usually the most pro-Israel newspaper in the UK, although the journalist participating in the debate on its behalf was a snotty anti-Israel jerk. So I went to the Israel Broadcasting Authority offices in Haifa, which has a deal with the BBC to allow it to interview people through its studios. The BBC interviewer was in London and called Haifa to get me on the horn. In the interview I first made the point that at least a hundred times as many people died in the Sri Lanka war against terror than in the Gaza campaign, and that most of those in Gaza were armed genocidal Hamas terrorists, yet the media seemed obsessed with the Israeli campaign against terror, all but ignoring that in Sri Lanka. The guy from the Daily Telegraph then says, well, yes, but that is because the Middle East conflict has global implications and fallout, like bombs going off in Europe and all those demonstrations. The BBC interviewer says, well, yes but there are plenty of Tamils in Britain and some are noisy and hold protests. Then they let me say that there are more reasons than one for the media's obsession with the battle in Gaza and with the Arab-Israeli conflict. One of these is that it is the focus of attention by today's form of aggressive totalitarianism; just like Czechoslovakia and the Sudetenland were not ordinarily matters of global interest, but were made so by the aggressive totalitarianism of the 1930s, so today's aggressive totalitarianism (Islamofascism) focuses world attention on the Arab-Israeli conflict. And, in addition, add I, much of the media have a strong bias against Israel and against Jews. The Daily Telegraph reporter objects passionately. How can you say that? The media are being friendly to Israel and showing all sides fairly. The response of moi then comes thus: well, the Daily Telegraph is indeed one of the most balanced and fairest papers, say I on the air live, but then add — "and, I hope this will not seem ungracious of me saying so on the BBC, but the BBC is one of the worst anti-Israel biased media! Indeed the Daily Telegraph itself has been among those who have attacked the BBC for being blatantly biased." Well, that kind of shut up the clown from the Telegraph. Having cited his own paper on BBC bias, the guy from the Telegraph could not exactly come back at me with a defense of the BBC's Israel bashing. I then added that all this nonsensical talk about a "disproportionate" response by Israel is little more than anti-Israel bias in the media. I add, when Britain was under the blitz, no one thought the retaliation against Germany needed to be "proportionate," the BBC did not call on the Royal Air Force to respond only in a "proportionate" manner and did not denounce "disproportionate" British retaliation. The Daily Telegraph twit objected that raising the issue of "disproportionate response" was a legitimate issue of debate, "even if it makes the Israeli government uncomfortable." I respond that it has nothing to do with the discomfort of the Israeli government and has everything to do with intentional distortion. And, as one illustration, I point out that the number of MOSLEMS killed in the Buddhist-Hindu war in Sri Lanka is LARGER than the number of Moslems killed in the operations in Gaza, and that most of the Moslems killed in Gaza have been genocidal Hamas terrorists (the term I use on the air). At that point, the BBC interviewer called an end and thanked everyone. 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
|
|
UK MUSLIM LEADERS TO GORDON BROWN: HOLD ISRAEL ACCOUNTABLE — OR ELSE
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, January 11, 2009. |
|
This was written by Robert Spencer and it appeared in
Jihad Watch
|
|
Here is an open letter in The Guardian from UK Muslim leaders to Gordon Brown. The Guardian's editor's note, in italics below, says that the British government "should not alter its foreign policy in order to placate Islamist extremists," but there isn't any such statement in the letter itself. The letter itself is clearly saying just the opposite: that Britain should change its policies toward Israel and the Islamic world, and urge the United States to do so as well — and Britain should do this in view of the fact that "the anger within UK Muslim communities has reached acute levels of intensity." In other words, abandon Israel and lie down in front of the global jihad — or else. And it is noteworthy that one of the signers of this thinly veiled
threat of further jihad violence against Britain is none other than
the vaunted "moderate" Ed Husain, whose deceptions I discussed in
Is Ed Husain still fooling anyone? Probably, but he isn't fooling
(cue Homeric epithet) the incomparable Melanie Phillips, who deftly
eviscerates his latest deceptions about Israel and Gaza in the Spectator
The British government has invested huge hopes in Ed Husain as an attractive and plausible antidote to Islamist extremism in Britain. But how can anyone now believe anything he has ever said when he promulgates such a gross libel as the canard of Israel's 'massacre' of hundreds of 'innocent' Gazans? How can the government believe that Ed Husain will de-radicalise British Muslims when through articles such as this one he is inciting them to yet more hatred of Israel, the west's forward salient against Islamist aggression? They shouldn't, and they must not, but they probably will. "'We are witnessing a time of great danger': Leading Muslim counter-extremism advisers urge Gordon Brown to hold Israel accountable for its attacks on Gaza," from The Guardian, January 8 (thanks to Yann): More than a dozen of the government's leading Muslim counter-extremism advisers have signed a joint letter to Gordon Brown to warn that Israeli actions in Gaza are damaging the British government's efforts to tackle religious extremism at home. The 14 signatories — which include several prominent moderate Muslim community leaders — say that while the British government should not alter its foreign policy in order to placate Islamist extremists, it should also avoid taking actions which will play into the hands of radicals. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
THE GAZA WAR: A SMALL PART OF THE NATIONALIST ISLAMIST CONFLICT
Posted by Barry Rubin, January 11, 2009. |
|
A version of this article was published in the Ottawa Citizen, January 1, 2008 |
|
In decades to come, when the Middle East's history for this era is written, the current war in Gaza will be deemed a skirmish in the great Arab-Persian; Sunni-Shia; Arab nationalist-Islamist; Iran-Syria versus Egypt-Saudi Arabia conflict that is going to be the region's — and perhaps world's — main feature for the rest of our lifetimes. The Arab-Israeli conflict, as it existed from 1948 to the late 1980s or thereafter, is over. Whatever they say in public, all the Arab states except for Syria have basically withdrawn from active participation. Indeed, strong statements in speeches and media have long been a substitute for action. Egypt, Jordan, and the PLO signed peace agreements with Israel, which may not have yielded warm relations but certainly ended their direct involvement in any conflict. The Persian Gulf and north African Arab states are just not focused on it. Why has this happened? There are basically four reasons why the Middle East today is totally different from that of the previous period. First, almost all the Arab states — Syria being the exception — concluded that they could not defeat and destroy Israel. This came about both due to the experience of war and to the collapse of the Soviet bloc, their main ally in the conflict. To stir people's passions over an unwinnable conflict is profitable for rulers — to distract them from their own dictatorial government — but defeat by Israel could bring down the regimes. Even Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein turned toward trying to dominate the Persian Gulf rather than fight Israel. Second, the Arab states have become preoccupied with other problems. Those with oil — Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates — focus on making money and enjoying the good life. Those without — Egypt, Jordan, Morocco — strive to survive. Both groups need good relations with the West: the poor to get aid, the rich for markets and safe places to invest. Third, they concluded the Palestinians were incapable of defeating Israel militarily or making peace with Israel diplomatically. Once the PLO signed an agreement with Israel in 1993, intended to produce a political settlement, Arab states were freed from their obligations. They didn't even give the Palestinians much economic aid, most such help coming from the West. Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat was quite unpopular in the Arab world, being viewed as corrupt and untrustworthy. His successors were seen as weak. Why, they asked, should Arab rulers let Arafat and the PLO determine their policy? Fourth, the Arab world is beset by a new conflict which takes up much of its attention and resources: the radical Islamist challenge to Arab nationalist regimes. Â In every country, the conflict is waged, sometimes violently, at others times through propaganda battles and electoral maneuvers. The Palestinians, too, fought among themselves along these lines. After winning an election victory and then making a deal for a coalition government, Hamas turned on its nationalist rivals and drove them out of Gaza by force. Every Arab state is battling Hamas's friends inside its own borders. In Lebanon, Hizballah Shia Islamists bully Sunni Muslim, Christian, and Druze rivals. Bloody civil wars between Islamists and nationalists erupted in Algeria and Egypt; terrorist campaigns swept Saudi Arabia and Iraq. Finally, the Arab states face a powerful Iranian-Syrian axis whose clients include Hizballah, Hamas, and Iraqi insurgents. This is a danger far exceeding the largely fabricated one from Israel and Arab rulers know it. In response to the Hamas attacks on Israel, Tariq Alhomayed, editor-in-chief of Al-Sharq al-Awsat, proclaimed that Hamas is the tool of Iran and "Iran is a real threat to Arab security, as today it launched a war against Egypt, tomorrow against Saudi Arabia, and then the whole house of cards will collapse." That is how the current fighting is being viewed in the leading circles of the Arab world, not as an Arab-Israeli struggle but as part of the Islamist-nationalist conflict. Hamas and Hizballah, Egyptian Foreign Minister Aboul Gheit proclaimed, are at war with Egypt and want to bring war and chaos to Egypt as they have in their own countries. Hamas and its allies see the issue in similar terms. Why, asked deputy Hizballah leader Naim Qassem according to a MEMRI translation, "is Gaza besieged? Because the people of Gaza and Palestine have rejected the humiliating political options, and have chosen the proud political option of Jihad — "the option of resistance." What does this really mean? To accept "humiliating political options" signifies a compromise peace which would gain a Palestinian state in exchange for accepting Israel's existence. It also means getting along with the West rather than fighting against it. "Resistance" is a favorite codeword coined by Syria's regime for a program of battling for decades, sacrificing many thousand lives, using terrorism, fighting wars, and staying intransigent until final, total victory is achieved. The goal is to destroy Israel, expel Western influence from the Middle East, and make every regime a radical Islamist dictatorship. Aside from the catastrophic cost and bloody defeat that this strategy entails, Qassem is leaving out a lot more. The Palestinian Authority-ruled West Bank isn't besieged, it's prospering. There's no fighting because the nationalists there don't glorify the sacrifice of everything to carry out an ultimately losing jihad. Inasmuch as the West rescues Hamas from its own mistakes, the result will be strengthening radical forces throughout the region, demoralizing moderates, and ensuring even more violence and suffering in future. Vladimir Lenin, leader of the previous big revolutionary movement, Communism, predicted that democratic states would sell their enemies the rope that would be used to hang themselves. Radical Islamists are counting on it. Relatively moderate Arab nationalists fear it. Israel is fighting to prevent it. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). |
|
THE DEMONS OF GAZA
Posted by Dave Alpern, January 11, 2009. |
|
Plain and simple truths, written plainly and simply. That so many members of the "enlightened international community" refuse to accept them must be THEIR problem, not Israel's. Read and remember. Dave It was written by Ralph Peters of the New York Post
Ralph Peters is a retired U.S. Army officer and the author of Looking For Trouble. |
|
Israel hasn't killed a single civilian in the Gaza Strip. Over a hundred civilians have died, and Israeli bombs or shells may have ended their lives. But Israel didn't kill them. Hamas did. It's time to smash the lies. The lies of Hamas. The UN lies. And the save-the-terrorists lies of the global media. There is no moral equivalence between Hamas terrorists and Israeli soldiers. There is no gray area. There is no point in negotiations. Hamas is a Jew-killing machine. It exists to destroy Israel. What is there to negotiate? When Hamas can't kill Jews, it's perfectly willing to drive Palestinian civilians into the line of fire — old men, women and children. Hamas herds the innocent into "shelters," then draws Israeli fire on them. And the headline-greedy media cheer them on. Hamas isn't fighting for political goals. "Brokered agreements" are purely means to an end. And the envisioned end is the complete destruction of Israel in the name of a terrorist god. Safe in hidden bunkers or in Damascus, the Hamas leadership is willing to watch an unlimited number of civilians and even street-level terrorists die. Lives, too, are nothing but means to an end. And dead kids are the coins that keep the propaganda meter ticking. All Hamas had to do to prevent Israel's act of self-defense was to leave Israel unmolested by terror rockets. All Hamas needs to do now to stop this conflict and spare the Palestinian people it pretends to champion is to stop trying to kill Israelis and agree to let Israel exist in peace. Hamas didn't, and Hamas won't. Now Israel has to continue its attack, to wreak all the havoc it can on Hamas before a new American president starts meddling. If Israel stops now, Hamas can declare victory just for surviving — despite its crippling losses. While it's impossible to fully eliminate extremism, killing every terrorist leader hiding in a Gaza bunker is the only hope of achieving even a temporary, imperfect peace. The chance may not come again. And don't worry about "creating a power vacuum." Let the Palestinians pick up their own pieces. Even anarchy in Gaza is better for Israel than Hamas. Israelis, Americans and Westerners overall share a tragic intellectual blind spot: We're caught in yesterday's model of terrorism, that of Arafat's PLO, of the IRA, the Red Brigades or the Weather Underground. But, as brutal as those organizations could be, they never believed they were on a mission from God. Yesteryear's terrorists wanted to change the world. They were willing to shed blood and, in extreme cases, to give their own blood to their causes. But they didn't seek death. They preferred to live to see their "better world." Now our civilization faces terrorists who regard death as a promotion. They believe that any action can be excused because they're serving their god. And their core belief is that you and I, as stubborn unbelievers, deserve death. Their grisly god knows no compromise. To give an inch is to betray their god's trust entirely. Yet we — and even some Israelis — believe it's possible to cut deals with them. In search of peace, Israel handed Gaza to the Palestinians, a people who had never had a state of their own. As thanks, Israel received terror rockets. And the Palestinian people got a gang war. Peace is the last thing Hamas terrorists and gangsters want. Peace means the game is up. Peace means they've disappointed their god. Peace means no more excuses. They couldn't bear peace for six months. This is a war to the bitter end. And we're afraid to admit what it's about. It's not about American sins or Israeli intransigence. It's about a sickness in the soul of a civilization — of Middle-Eastern Islam — that can only be cured from within. Until Arabs or Iranians decide to cure themselves, we'll have to fight. Instead, we want to talk. We convince ourselves, against all evidence, that our enemies really want to talk, too, that they just need "incentives" (the diplomat's term for bribes). The apparent belief of our president-elect that it's possible to negotiate with faith-fueled fanatics is so naive it's terrifying. Yet, it's understandable. Barack Obama's entire career has been built on words, not deeds, on his power to persuade, not his power to deliver. But all the caucuses, debates, neighborhood meetings and backroom deal-making sessions in his past haven't prepared him to "negotiate" with men whose single-minded goal is Israel's destruction — and ours. If Obama repeats the same "peace-process" folly as his predecessors, from Jimmy have-you-hugged-your-terrorist-today? Carter through Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, he'll be devoured before he knows he's been bitten. How many administrations have to repeat the identical error of believing that, deep down inside, terrorists, gunmen and warlords really want peace every bit as much as we do? Israel's enemies aren't just looking to cut a sharp deal. They want to destroy Israel. Which part of what they shout in our faces is so hard to understand? Israel's foes have been preaching Jew-hatred for so long that even the "moderates" can't turn back now. And why does the global left hate Israel so? Why would they pull out the stops to rescue Hamas? Because Israel exposed the lie that a suffering people can't lift itself up through hard work, education and discipline. Israel didn't need the help of a hundred condescending NGOs and their misery junkies. Because the Holocaust is a permanent embarrassment to Europeans. They need to believe that Israelis are kosher Nazis. Because, from the safety of cafes and campuses, it's cool to call terrorists "freedom fighters." It makes you feel less guilty when you hit up daddy (or the state) for money. I mean, dude, it's not like you have to, like, live with them or anything, you know?
Because, above all, the most-destructive racists in the world today are mainstream leftists. Want the truth? The Left codes Israel as white and, therefore, inherently an oppressor. Israel is held to the highest standard of our civilization and our legal codes — and denied the right to self-defense. But the Left tacitly believes that people with darker skins are inferior and can't be expected to behave at a civilized level. Leftists expect terrorist movements or African dictators to behave horribly. It's the post-modern, latte-sucking version of the "little brown brother" mentality. The worst enemies of developing societies have been leftists who refuse to hold them to fundamental standards of governance and decency. But, then, the Left needs developing societies to fail to prove that the system's hopelessly stacked against them. A battered, impoverished, butchered people built a thriving Western democracy in an Eastern wasteland. Israel can never be forgiven for its success. In this six-decade-old conflict that Israel's intractable neighbors continue to force upon it, there not only are no good solutions, but, thanks to the zero-sum mentality of Islamist terrorists, there aren't even any bad solutions — short of nuclear genocide — that would bring an enduring peace to the Middle East. And even the elimination of Israel wouldn't be enough. The terrorists would fight among themselves, while warring upon less-devout fellow Muslims. All Israel can do is to fight for time and buy intervals of relative calm with the blood of its sons and daughters. By demanding premature cease-fires and insisting that we can find a diplomatic solution, we strengthen monsters and undercut our defenders. And don't believe the propaganda about this conflict rallying Gaza's Palestinians behind Hamas. That's more little-brown-brother condescension, assuming all Arabs are so stupid they don't know who started this and who's dragging it out at their expense. Gaza's people may not care much for Israelis, but they rue the day they cast their votes for Hamas. Hamas is killing them. Contact Dave Alpern at daveyboy@bezeqint.net |
|
HOW THE PALESTINIAN ARABS USE THEIR OWN CHILDREN AS SHIELDS
Posted by American, January 11, 2009. |
|
Plz Distribute these Photos showing Palestinian use of its own kids as shields. How Islamists make sure Arab kids die, so they can kill more innocent Israelis! Israelis! http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about//terrorcivilians6.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/terrorcivilians5.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/terrorchildren3.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/terrorchildren2.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/ RafahKillersWithKids.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/palhumanshields.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/ dd306/more_about/HumanShieldsFL.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/ HumanShield_6a00d834515b7869e200e55.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/gazawomen.png http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/Femalekids4.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/ more_about/20060703PalHumanShield03.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/ more_about/20060703PalHumanShield02.jpg http://s227.photobucket.com/albums/dd306/more_about/2278142.jpg |
|
And this is what they teach their children:
IMAGINE A MUSIC VIDEO teaching kids that bombs are more precious than children. This is not fantasy — this is the message of an actual Hamas TV music video. After a five-year-old finds out that her mother wore a bomb belt to a suicide terror attack, she sings: "Now I know what was more precious than us." She then swears to follow in her mother's footsteps, as a suicide bomber. This is just one example of the wide range of hateful and abusive messages on Hamas TV, designed to indoctrinate children to Hamas values. Children are taught to value violence, hatred and Islamic supremacy, and that seeking Martyrdom for Allah is the highest value, bringing "honor and glory." PMW has created a five-minute compilation of key representative segments from Hamas TV that document this indoctrination of children. 
In addition to the video featuring the daughter of a suicide bomber, this collection includes a music video depicting a boy's transition from childhood to adulthood, climaxing in his heroic Martyrdom death; a puppet show promising world Islamic supremacy, death of infidels and the conversion of the White House into a mosque; and a talk show segment featuring kindergarten kids marching in military formation, brandishing weapons and calling for Jihad and Martyrdom. Also included are statements by Hillary Clinton from her news conference with PMW in the US Senate, where she criticized Palestinian schoolbooks and television that "profoundly poison the minds of these children." (This is the second in a series of PMW background briefings on Hamas ideology. )
Contact American at american1627@yahoo.com
|
|
THE NETZARIM-TEL AVIV EXPRESS
Posted by Howard L. Dyckman, January 10, 2009. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick
and it appeared yesterday in
The Jerusalem Post
|
|
Today's war between Israel and Hamas is a remarkable case study in how leaders in democracies learn. In a nutshell, it shows that leaders only learn when we, the people, force them. As Israel battles Hamas in Gaza, all Israelis — and first and foremost our leaders — are thinking about the war with Hizbullah in the summer of 2006. That war, which was widely recognized as a military failure, forced then-IDF chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Dan Halutz and then-defense minister Amir Peretz from office. The public's refusal to forgive the IDF's operational failures in Lebanon also forced Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to finally resign from office last summer. While it is true that the proximate cause of Olmert's resignation were the criminal probes being conducted against him, had Olmert not lost the public's support and trust after the 2006 war, gifted politician that he is, he probably would have weathered the corruption scandals. With the ghost of Second Lebanon War hanging over them, both Defense Minister Ehud Barak and IDF Chief of General Staff Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi know full well that if they fail now, their heads will roll like their predecessors' did. And with this sure knowledge guiding them, they prepared meticulously for this campaign. From intelligence, to media relations, from logistics, to command and
control, operational readiness, reserve forces mobilization and doctrinal
clarity, they have clearly departed from the 2006 model of incompetence and
arrogance. For the past two weeks, Barak and Ashkenazi have led the IDF on a
course that — while more conservative and slow than most would like — is
clearly better considered than the war that Halutz, Peretz and Olmert
commanded two and a half years ago. And for this the country should respect
them.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE public is not as well served by its government when it comes to the diplomatic endgame for this war. And here, too, the war in Lebanon explains the difference. The IDF's failure to defeat Hizbullah was self-evident. Hizbullah, after all, continued to shoot rockets at Israel until the moment the cease-fire went into force. The public could see for itself that those responsible for the IDF's failure had to go. But while the public could see that the IDF had failed it, they were easily misled about the government's diplomatic performance. With the help of the media, which opposed early elections that would unseat the Left, the government presented UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which set the conditions of the cease-fire with Hizbullah, as a diplomatic triumph. Resolution 1701's architect, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, was celebrated as a genius who brought Israel its only real success in the war. Unfortunately, this characterization of 1701 was completely false. It was a massive failure for Israel. And it wasn't a case of Israel being railroaded by the Security Council into accepting a resolution against its will. Livni initiated and pushed for the adoption of 1701. The resolution favors Hizbullah over Israel. The expanded UNIFIL force, which Israel insisted be deployed along the border, has shielded Hizbullah from Israel for the past two and a half years. Under the watchful eye of UNIFIL's European commanders, Hizbullah has tripled its missile arsenal, reasserted control over south Lebanon and taken over the Lebanese government. UNIFIL's boundless willingness to shield Hizbullah was exposed most recently on Thursday morning. After Hizbullah's Palestinian underlings attacked northern Israel with Katyusha rockets, UNIFIL commanders called for all sides to exercise "maximum restraint." The absurdity of the directive, after one side launched an unprovoked attack on the other, showed how horrible Resolution 1701 truly is for Israel. By advocating and then applauding this resolution, Israel authorized UNIFIL to act as the arbiter of its own right to defend itself. The public developed an inkling of the dimensions of Israel's diplomatic failure in the Second Lebanon War last summer. After Olmert formally resigned, Barak realized that Livni was his chief political rival in their quests to lead the Left. To weaken her, Barak began explaining why 1701 is a total bust. Whereas the media had ignored similar charges from the Right for two years, Barak couldn't be ignored. But even as Barak's criticisms began chipping away at Livni's reputation as Mrs. Competent, they never were enough to force her to either acknowledge or pay a price for her incompetence. Indeed, in spite of her unmasking, the media firmly supported Livni in her bid to win the Kadima leadership primary in September and continues to support her in her bid to succeed Olmert as prime minister. In this context, it is not at all surprising that while the government and the IDF go to great lengths to distinguish the military campaign in Gaza from the campaign in Lebanon, until a few days ago, the government's clearly stated diplomatic aim was to achieve the same sort of cease-fire with Hamas — replete with a Gaza-based international peacekeeping force — that it achieved in Lebanon with Hizbullah. Interestingly, today it is not personal experience but rather political rivalry that is opening up the possibility that Israel won't reenact Lebanon's diplomatic failure in Gaza. Today, Livni and Barak both see their conduct of this war as a means of shoring up their political standing against one another ahead of the February 10 elections. Their rivalry has led them to advocate contradictory goals for the diplomatic campaign. After spending the last two and a half years presenting 1701 as a triumph, Livni has suddenly disavowed its central pillars. Today she opposes "reaching an agreement with a terrorist organization." Similarly, she argues that the deployment of international forces along the border is antithetical to the national interest. Barak has conducted a similar about-face. After castigating 1701 as a "failure," Barak now seeks to reenact it in Gaza. He supports international monitors along the border with Egypt. And he has no problem reaching an accord with Hamas. The media have made much of the disparity between the disciplined military
campaign and the confused diplomatic campaign. But they have not mentioned
the cause of this disparity. Again, the IDF is performing competently today
because its commanders remember what happened to their predecessors. The
government is incompetently handling the cease-fire negotiations because its
members are certain that there will be no political price to pay for their
failure.
ONE OF the troubling aspects shared by both the IDF campaign and the diplomatic offensive is that both ignore the principal cause of the war. As a consequence, Israel has ruled out the possibility of actually winning a true victory in its current fight with Hamas. Here, too, our leaders ignore the true cause of the war because they know that they will pay no price for doing so. Israel is not fighting Hamas today because it agreed to a six-month cease-fire with the terrorist regime in Gaza last June. And it is not fighting today because Hamas decided that it wants control over Gaza's international borders. Israel is fighting a war with Hamas today because Israel withdrew from Gaza three and a half years ago. If Israel had not withdrawn its military forces from Gaza and forcibly expelled 8,000 Israeli citizens from their homes and farms in September 2005, it would not be fighting this war today. If Israel had not withdrawn, if it had retained its forces in Gaza and retained its communities — on whose ruins the IDF now fights — in Gaza, Hamas would probably never have taken over. And even if Hamas had taken over, it would never have been able to threaten a million Israelis with missiles and rockets and mortars. When then-prime minister Ariel Sharon and his lackeys Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni began advocating the withdrawal plan in 2003, they promised that by expelling Gaza's Jews and leaving their ruined villages to Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Fatah, Israel would advance the cause of peace. They promised that no one would hold us responsible for the welfare of Gaza's population anymore. We could simply disengage. And if we were ever attacked from Gaza after we left, the entire world would rally to our side. No one would oppose our right to defend ourselves after we rendered Gaza Judenrein. The many who opposed this withdrawal scheme warned that leaving Gaza would accomplish nothing that Sharon, Olmert and Livni promised. The Palestinians would become more radical, not more moderate, after seeing Israel destroy its own towns and farms. They warned that Hamas would take over, since by expelling the Jews and leaving, Israel would show that it was collapsing. And why bother negotiating with a nation that was disintegrating? Not only would the world continue to hold us responsible for supplying Gaza with food, electricity, medical care and employment opportunities, opponents of withdrawal warned that the international community would also oppose all future steps Israel took to defend itself against Gazan aggression even more strenuously. After all, by vacating Gaza, Israel was telling the world that as far as we were concerned, we had no right to be there. And in the time that has passed since Israel "disengaged" from Gaza, the
withdrawal's opponents have been proven right, and its supporters have been
proven wrong on every single issue. And yet, unlike the public's outcry
after the Second Lebanon War, there has been no public call for an
accounting by Olmert, Livni or any of the withdrawal's supporters. No one
has paid a political price for getting this wrong. With the IDF now forced
to reconquer the ruins of Netzarim to defend Gedera, Ashdod and Beersheba,
there has been no public demand for a commission of inquiry into the
decision-making processes that led the Sharon-Olmert-Livni government to
withdraw from Gaza. Indeed, Olmert, Livni and their colleagues have been
promoted for their championing of Israel's single greatest strategic error
since 1993.
TODAY THE IDF owes its operational competence to the public's humiliation and sacking of Halutz, Peretz and Olmert. On the other hand, Israel's diplomatic incompetence, and our leadership's continued refusal to accept that Sharon was right when he said, "As goes Netzarim so goes Tel Aviv," is rendering a true victory over Hamas impossible. If we are ever to get on the right path in Gaza, as well as in Judea and Samaria and beyond, our first order of business as the public must be to force the politicians who brought us to this point to pay a price at the ballot box for their blind and dangerous incompetence. It is only by humiliating them in elections that we can be sure that their successors will be too frightened to repeat their mistakes. Contact Howard Dyckman at dyckman@dyckman.com |
|
VIDEOS ON TRUTH
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, January 10, 2009. |
|
"We desire death as you desire life" "Palestinians created a human shield of women, children and the elderly" Fathi Hamad — Hamas spokeman. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=ArJbn-lUCh4 Dear friends, Please watch and listen to the above and the following videos, so you get to know the truth. 1) Here is a video describing what really goes on in Israel:
2) Then please watch the following outrage. How a seemingly a "civilized" European President of the UN Human Rights Council chooses to respond to a valid complaint made to the Council by Hillel Neuer, Executive Director of UN Watch, titled Human
Rights Nightmare:
Can you see that all these clips have something in common? Cynical disregard to facts and truth? Do you have a better way to describe this than a new form of anti-Semitism? Here is another video titled "Letter to the World" which you should
also watch. It proves that TRUTH can be expressed by people we do not
always agree with everything they say, or was Rabbi Kahane right after all?
3) And finally, truth from the UK, not a country with truthful media when it concerns Israel. Melanie Phillips has been nominated for the UK Blog Awards. Her
columns are unparalleled, and a definite bright spot in the U.K.'s
predominantly anti-Israel media. For a sample, visit:
At the present time, Melanie is in second place, close to the number one slot. There are four days left to vote and voting once every day is permitted. http://2008.weblogawards.org/polls/best-uk-blog/ Please consider giving this information wide circulation. Your Truth Provider, Yuval. Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
THE LAST ANGRY MENSCH (A BOSTON SUPPORTS ISRAEL RALLY?)
Posted by LEL, January 10, 2009. |
|
This comes from the Solomonia website
|
|
Last night Temple Mishkan Tefilah in Newton seemed more like "The Massachusetts State Democratic Convention, The Sequel" than a rally in support of Israel which was what its billing announced. Originally scheduled as a mid-winter AIPAC meeting, the evening was highlighted by appearances, among others, by Governor Deval Patrick and Bob Haynes, the President of the Massachusetts AFL-CIO. The Master of Ceremonies was Steve Grossman, former President of AIPAC and former national chairman of the Democratic National Committee. To a SRO crowd of approximately a thousand people, the speakers affirmed their commitment to the continued existence of the State of Israel and lamented the loss of civilian life, as Mr. Grossman put it, "both Palestinian and Israeli." The evening was obviously transformed into an evening of Israel support in the face of the too- many-to-count angry and, frankly, bloodthirsty demonstrations put on by International ANSWER, the Marxist front group that has bonded with Muslim extremists. ANSWER's street theatre, oddly enough, does not feature ecumenical deploring of violence "on both sides." In front of everyone's seat at the venerable synagogue, originally founded in the South End in 1858, was a copy of the Conservative prayer book, Sim Shalom, which translated into English, means "make peace." In stark contrast to the worldwide, hateful, more often than not blatantly anti-Semitic, street throngs chanting praise to Adolf Hitler and a desire to see Israel "nuked," this evening was a replay of virtually every organizational Jewish Community meeting for the last — believe it or not — 15 years, when the so called Oslo "Peace" Process began with the famous handshake on the White House lawn. Jews pray for peace while most Arabs, Muslims and their rapidly growing left wing supporters agitate for conquest and annihilation. Stepping out of character (the world has come to expect Jews to be endless supplicants, crying for mercy from their oppressors) and permitting themselves the forbidden emotion — anger — was not much in evidence last night. Only two speakers ventured into that dangerous realm, Bob Haynes, described almost embarrassingly repetitively as a "starker" (a tough guy) by Steve Grossman and to his credit, Barry Schrage, CJP's President. The long time labor boss minced no words in recounting his visit to Sderot and the outrage he felt at witnessing the "crude, homemade" (as the BBC relentlessly dubs the deadly rockets) explode a few hundred yards away while Barry Schrage reminded us that "We are all Sderot." Mr. Haynes was cheered because he was expressing a sincere and normal human emotion — anger. I was left with, as I'm sure many in the audience were as well, a void and a question: Where are the "starkers" among Jewish leaders? Radical Islamists and their left wing supporters don't seem to have any problem recruiting legions of college students with no connection to the Middle East who will show up on a moment's notice to don their bloody, red keffiyahs and to shout murderous slogans. I don't mean to denigrate the work of the Boston JCRC or CJP or the important congressional initiatives of Steve Grossman and AIPAC. Their efforts to isolate Iran and to pressure that genocidally ambitious regime to abandon its nuclear ambitions have been fruitful and admirable. But the war to defend The Jewish State has many battlefronts. One of them is on the street. The Jewish "establishment" is ill equipped to deal with the rampant and growing anti-Semitism that is evident in the current round of public demonstrations for Hamas, whose supporters recently chanted "We need bigger ovens," not in Damascus or Teheran, but in Fort Lauderdale. Coming from a distinctly left wing heritage, most Jewish organizations have been left largely paralyzed by the anti-Israel venom spewing forth from putative left wing groups. We have been subjected to an eight year mantra of Islam's "hijacking" by fundamentalists (a debatable proposition given the many recent historo-critical works on the intrinsic themes of Jew hatred at the core of Islamic sacred texts). It's about time we recognize that a large part of the Left has willfully betrayed its core progressive principles and has allied itself with the world's most regressive movement, however "nuanced" its apologists claim it to be. The very notion that Jewish leadership feels compelled to defend the proposition that Israel be permitted to exist should be an affront to every Jew on the planet and to every so-called Progressive while true fascist regimes like Syria, Iran and Gaza are never challenged with the same set of criteria. Jewish leadership operates under the "big tent" platitude, which claims to embrace any and every putative "Jewish" group like Brit Tzedek v'Shalom whose tireless work on behalf of Palestinians has been punctuated by its "deploring" of the killing of Ahmed Yassin, Hamas' leader and chief enunciator of anti-Semitism and The Workmen's Circle whose support of the new Boston mosque, controlled by the Muslim American Society (a branch of the officially anti-Semitic Muslim Brotherhood) culminated in standing shoulder to shoulder with Mahdi Bray, the MAS leader who cheerleads for Hezbollah. There is a hunger among ordinary Jews — and millions of Christians — who love Israel deeply and who don't feel compelled to even dignify the calumny of Israel's "right to exist" (which, of course, is the other side's coded language for "Our right to destroy The Jewish State") for expressing — yes — that forbidden emotion — anger...no that's not strong enough...fury at those who would put into action that language while betraying their own Progressive principles. High level political work is indispensable for preserving Israel. Carefully scripted evenings will give the community encouragement and good feelings, but there is a grass roots movement out there that must be allowed to confront the hatemongers in the public square. Both approaches are valid and should be complimentary. The old saw, "Two Jews, three opinions" may be a staple for Jewish speakers, but in the current lethal climate, I suggest we shelve the joke for the time being and concentrate on unity. Solomon adds:
The crowd size I've heard is 1200+, with more turned away. I had to leave quite early (staying long enough for the singing of the Star Spangled Banner, HaTikvah, and the initial intro), but there was still a sizable line of people waiting to get through the extensive security almost an hour after the scheduled start time. It was packed. Why oh why do we insist on holding these things inside of Synagogues? Israel has an enormous stock of non-Jewish support, but the community insists upon sending signals that support for Israel is a matter of charitable support for American Jews, rather than reinforcing the fact that support for Israel in this matter is an issue of vital secular/non-Jewish American interest in the war of the West in defense of itself against terrorist barbarism. Get out of the Synagogues — not even necessarily on to the street — just bring it to secular ground. Christians are being driven out of the Middle East...do you think someone might be interested? There is an enormous Mosque in Boston now being run openly by the Muslim American Society — the American branch of the Muslim Brotherhood, and a sister organization to Hamas. They've been involved with every major pro-Hamas street demonstration in Boston. Is it any wonder? They're not apologizing for Hamas. They're not distancing themselves from the people at these demonstrations calling for Israel to be dismantled. That's their agenda too! It's insufficient to sit around talking to ourselves, mouthing the same old platitudes to make us feel good about each other and writing checks to people in suits. There needs to be far greater outreach, and far greater public engagement and visibility. Not surprisingly, the Boston Globe's coverage of last night's event
is a complete disgrace: Israeli, Palestinian supporters rally, try to
make case in Newton. Typical idiotic, brain-dead, morally-dense
equivalency, they report that "thousands of people gathered," and
"balance" it by giving arguably more attention to 20 of the usual
idiots storming the Israeli Consulate, "resulting in four arrests."
The article doesn't even mention the presence of the the Governor
(Say...the Governor was there, but weren't any Republicans of equal
stature able to attend? I guess since it's not an election season the
organizers' tax exempt status is safe...for now.) or the head of the
AFL-CIO, but gives plenty of space to the grievances of a handful of
radical miscreants.
Contact LEL at lel817@yahoo.com
|
|
EGYPT VERSUS HAMAS (AND THE MOSLEM BROTHERHOOD)
Posted by Dave Nathan, January 10, 2009. |
|
Hamas decided to go to war in the aftermath of the tahadiya (calm) by firing dozens of rockets into Israel each day for over a week (eventually reaching a daily count of 60). The hope was to rally the Arab/Islamic world to their side, very similar to Yasir Arafat's strategy when he turned down the Camp David peace initiative and the Clinton Outline during the second half of 2000. The Palestinian Authority's Low Intensity Conflict/Terror Offensive — better known as the "Second Intifada" in popular journalistic terminology failed miserably yet Hamas hopes to succeed as they expect an increasingly Islamicized Arab world to come to their aid. But Hamas could not do it on their own. With some 500 tunnels connecting the Egyptian border with southern Gaza at Rafiah, weapons, ammunition and massive amounts of explosives passed underground into Hamas hands. Cairo refused to take any serious action to halt the smuggling when a simple blockade to the west of Egyptian Rafiah was all that was necessary before the contraband made its way underground. It appears Egypt wanted to avoid a showdown with Hamas and its own Moslem Brotherhood who gained increased support in the last election. To allow a smoldering border war between Hamas and Israel seemed to be preferable as opposed to trying to repress the Islamists and possibly facing an explosion on the streets of Cairo. 
IDF soldiers But Hamas as a faction of the Moslem Brotherhood seeks the grand strategy of Islamicizing the Middle East and eventually the world as spelled out in their covenant. Ideologically they had no choice but to go to war. As for material well being there was no real improvement in Gaza and after a year in power Hamas has nothing to show for its "revolution". Steadfastly ideological, Hamas refused all compromises brokered by Egypt and preferred constant conflict with Israel. The Hamas diocentric leadership is steeped firmly in the belief of their own invincibility as Allah is their patron in the war against the infidels and heretics. Such logic dictates their missile offensive against Israel. To further their strategy for ultimate victory Hamas moved from being a tactical nuisance to the Jewish State to upgrading itself into a strategic threat by increasing its rocket capacity whereby the port of Ashdod serving Tel Aviv and the center of the country and the capital of the Negev, Beersheva were now victims of missile attacks. Peace is "defeat" and was never an option for Hamas. Similar to the Second War in Lebanon (2006) the West and the moderate secular Arab regimes are desperate for an Israeli victory cutting Hamas down to size. The Islamists must be perceived as losing or at least halted in their jihad against secularization in the Arab world. Public opinion shifts with the victor making any Hamas success a serious impediment to stability and a strategic threat to the Moslem/Arab world's secular states. For Hamas the Islamization of all Arab states is just one of the first steps on the way to world domination in the name of Allah. Overall Hosni Mubarak's regime leads the charge against the Moslem Brotherhood of which Hamas is one faction. Furthermore, Iran although Khomeniest Shi'ite is their staunchest ally and thereby poses a challenge to Egyptian influence in the Arab world. The issue is global and critical for secular nations in the Middle East. All this begs the question as to why Egypt allowed massive weapons and arms smuggling into Gaza. This certainly could help keep the conflict off the streets of Cairo while "marginalizing" and "compartmentalizing" it in Gaza. But allowing five hundred Rafiah tunnels to function is not "turning a blind eye" nor is it just "inefficiency" in dealing with the problem. Rather it is a pro-active policy of arming Hamas to the teeth. And Israel agreed? Knowing the Hamas Jihadist policies Mubarak helped them overstep their bounds and fall into his ambush, one where Israel would be forced into a military conflict to curb Hamas aggression. Weakening Hamas damages the Moslem Brotherhood in Egypt and throughout the Arab world. Overall, Israel quite possibly got maneuvered into doing the secular Arab world's dirty work in taking on the Islamists. The Jewish State may just be a proxy (with very few options) in the game of curbing Islamic and Iranian power in the Arab world. But in the end that might just be the grand plan for acceptance if not legitimacy in some form. Call it a confluence of interests. Egyptian power is enhanced when being called back to mediate between Hamas and Israel to arrange a cease-fire. On the other hand the Egyptians must be very careful not to overplay their hand and find an Islamic uprising in their back yard despite the setback suffered by Hamas at Israel's hands. Paradoxical as it sounds, the secularists in the Arab world need an overwhelming Israeli victory and then they will negotiate the conditions for continued Hamas control of Gaza — albeit on their terms which are very similar to those of Israel and the West. Such conditions are meant to weaken the Hamas to the point where sometime in the future they will be forced from power by the Palestinian people and a rejuvenated form of the secular Fatah movement will once again hold sway. This article may be found on our Middle East on Target website at:
Contact Dave Nathan at DaveNathan@aol.com
|
|
PRO-HAMAS DOCTORS CAUGHT FAKING A CIVILIAN DEATH — AFTER CNN AIRS FOOTAGE
Posted by Bryna Berch, January 10, 2009. |
|
This comes from the ConfederateYankee website
Mads Gilbert, the radical Marxist Norwegian doctor that was the focus of a Fox News report earlier today for being an anti-Israeli Hamas apologist, has been positively identified as one of two doctors caught faking CPR on a Palestinian boy that "died" in video featured today on CNN. The segment with Gilbert shows him and another doctor badly faking chest compressions and other life-saving measures on a live boy faking death in what can only be described as political theater. The video claims to be filmed by the brother of a Palestinian teen that claims the boy was one of two purposefully killed by a missile fired at them by an Israeli drone as they played. Lawhawk, has more on why the fake CPR is so pathetically obvious to those with actual CPR training. CNN editors who swallowed the story of the poorly-acted video unquestioningly — no doubt because it fit the anti-Israeli narrative familiar to CNN viewers and critics — have now pulled the video without explanation, correction, or retraction. It has also been determined that the videographer who filmed his brother's "death" is the general manager of a company that hosts web sites for Hamas. Dr. Gilbert was allowed into Gaza by the Israelis just 2 days ago to provide medical care. He was involved in faking war crimes less than 48 hours later. Update: The CNN cover-up continues. Saddam Hussein's favorite network has now pulled the video completely from their site, instead posting a text story that continues the propaganda. I suspect this attempt at avoiding the truth isn't going to work out very well for them. "Pro-Hamas Norwegian Doctors Caught Faking a Civilian Death"
The doctor has proven that he is willing to choose sides and fight the war against the IDF. I cannot believe that he actually has medical credentials and or had them rejected. The video of him 'faking' a civilian's death is enough to have his credentials taken worldwide for life. 1 — the "doctor" is using a technique that isn't for a child. What he is doing is more closely related to infant chest compressions. Doing compressions on a child requires one palm in the middle of the nipple line. The head must be held in the neutral position. It isn't. 2 — no one is doing breathing between compression sets. A ratio for two person CPR is 30 compressions to 2 breaths. There should be someone providing breaths by mouth mask or bag. There ain't..... According to experts, the sociopath, when found out in his totally selfish or disgustingly manipulative and cynical behavior, tries to play on the compassion of the accuser, though the sociopath has no compassion himself. Similarly, Hamas and its supporters, Muslim militants, attempt to play on Western compassion for children, by faking child mortalities,.......... yet Hamas and Muslim militants have no such compassion themselves and readily use children as human shields, suicide bombs, etc. A sociopathic social movement if ever there was one. http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=47097721709
Mads Gilbert is a Norwegian doctor and specialist in anesthesiology. However, it is not anesthesiology or any medical related questions that Mads Gilbert is known for. You are welcome to join. Contact lars@torstrand.no by email. Most people in Norway think he is a hero, but some realize the horrible truth. a copy is on YouTube: www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vfFnkMFwMY Another video of Mads Gilbert at work:
The observations of an MD I'm no military expert, but I am a doctor, and this video is bullsh-t. The chest compressions that were being performed at the beginning of this video were absolutely, positively fake. The large man in the white coat was NOT performing CPR on that child. He was just sort of tapping on the child's sternum a little bit with his fingers. You can't make blood flow like that. Furthermore, there's no point in doing chest compressions if you're not also ventilating the patient somehow. In this video, I can't tell for sure if the patient has an endotracheal tube in place, but you can see that there is nobody bag-ventilating him (a bag is actually hanging by the head of the bed), and there is no ventilator attached to the patient. In a hospital, during a code on a ventilated patient, somebody would probably be bagging the patient during the chest compressions. And they also would have moved the bed away from the wall, so that somebody could get back there to intubate the patient and/or bag him. In short, the "resuscitation scene" at the beginning is fake, and it's a pretty lame fake at that. So the question is, were they re-enacting the resuscitation scene by repeating their actions on a corpse, because the child had died earlier? It's likely that the answer is no, that child is still alive, and is just an actor pretending to be a child who was killed. Why do I say that? Because the big guy in the white coat, if he's really a doctor, nurse, nurse's aid, EMT, or any sort of health care provider at all would be entirely aware that tickling the boy's sternum doesn't really look like actual chest compressions. If the boy was dead, the man would have done a more convincing job in compressing the chest. The taps on the chest that he's doing are the sort of thing you see in bad TV dramas, when you don't want to make the poor actor playing the victim uncomfortable by really pushing on his chest. I think the man in the white coat knows this child is actually alive, and is making the simulated chest compressions gentle so as not to hurt the child. My guess is that he assumed the videographer, like those on better TV shows, would have been smart enough not to film as far down as the man's hands on the chest. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: CHAZAK! CHAZAK!
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 10, 2009. |
|
Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat) When we complete the reading of a book of the Torah, as we did this Shabbat with the completion of Breishit (Genesis), the congregation rises and says Chazak Chazak V'Nit'chazeik — Be strong, be strong, and we shall be strengthened. Never have these words seemed more meaningful than they do now, as we face our challenges. And, looking at these words, as I did this morning, with a full heart, I saw a new wisdom in them. As we are strong, so does further strength come to us. ~~~~~~~~~~ I have information on one more death: Sgt. Amit Robinson, 21, a tank crewman from Kibbutz Magal. He was killed by a sniper. His ultimate sacrifice is noted gratefully. ~~~~~~~~~~ As anticipated when I completed Friday's posting, the Security Cabinet decided not to accept the UNSC resolution regarding an immediate ceasefire. My first thought, with regard to this, was that Hamas, in launching those 25 rockets Friday, had made it impossible for us to stop fighting. But the other piece of the story is the so-called Egyptian plan to prevent smuggling from the Sinai. The statement from the Prime Ministers office immediately after the Cabinet meeting addressed both issues: "The State of Israel has never agreed that any outside body would determine its right to defend the security of its citizens. "The IDF will continue operations in order to defend Israeli citizens and will carry out the missions with which it has been assigned in the operation. This morning's rocket fire against residents of the south only proves that the UN Security Council Resolution #1860 is not practical and will not be honored in actual fact by the Palestinian murder organizations." ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Haaretz, attempts to broker a ceasefire fell apart because Israel was dissatisfied with Egyptian plans (such as they may be) to prevent Hamas from smuggling weapons. At the end of the day it turned out that Egypt would not allow foreign forces on its side of the border with Gaza, it would only accept "international technical support." A senior European diplomat reported that, "The truce talks are going nowhere at the moment. There is a growing sense that the Egyptian-French plan is not going to work." ~~~~~~~~~~ And so, the war effort in Gaza will intensify, as we enter the third stage of the operation. This is essential to our survival as a nation, and the nation is of one mind (90% of our citizens) about the need to hit Hamas hard. The heaviness of heart comes with the knowledge that some of our young men — please G-d the absolute minimum possible — will be lost defending the nation. ~~~~~~~~~~ Our Air Force has dropped leaflets warning the populace of the coming escalation: "Strip residents: Two days ago, the IDF dropped leaflets in Rafah, warning residents and instructing them to leave their homes for their safety," the leaflet read. "As Rafah residents complied with IDF instructions, civilians not involved in the fighting were spared any harm." "In the near future, the IDF will continue to attack tunnels, arms caches, and terror activities with greater intensity all across the Strip. For your safety and the safety of your families, you are required to refrain from staying near terror elements or sites where weapons are being stored." ~~~~~~~~~~ We have opened a Humanitarian Affairs Coordination Center (HACC) in Tel Aviv, which coordinate between the different organizations operating in the field and the IDF, according to the IDF Spokesperson's Unit. Its purpose will be two-fold: to expedite evacuation of foreign nationals from Gaza and facilitate the flow of food, fuel and supplies of goods to the humanitarian groups in the field. Organizations represented at the center include the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC), USAID, World Food Program (WFP), the European Commission, the United Nations Special Coordinator for the Middle East (UNSCO), United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) and the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs. Representatives from Israeli governmental agencies and various IDF departments are also located at the center. ~~~~~~~~~~ The notion of what we are responsible for in the course of this war has reached the point of the ridiculous. We are already going above and beyond. Now the Physicians for Human Rights-Israel and Adalah (a totally pro-Arab Israeli organization) have petitioned the High Court to require Israel to evacuate all wounded civilians from Gaza. We're in a war, guys! Get real! We have transferred several civilians to our hospitals, as well as two Palestinian sharpshooters (don't have the details on this). Additionally, since the war began, we've transferred 36 Gazans who are ill for treatment in Israeli hospitals. ~~~~~~~~~~ And now the Red Cross is complaining that we're not letting them have quick enough access to wounded civilians. They have alluded in particular to their inability in one instance to speedily reach four children still alive when their parents were not. Why did the IDF not permit the Red Cross speedy access? The IDF said the delay was the result of heavy fighting in the area. But, complains the Red Cross, "the Israeli military must have been aware of the situation..." Huh? ~~~~~~~~~~ This entire tone reflects a most offensive attitude: one that suggests that we are responsible for the civilian injuries and deaths, and not Hamas, which is deliberately locating in heavily populated civilian areas. And there is a further issue: That is the question of who is a civilian. The charges regarding how many civilians have been killed or wounded is dependent upon this definition. But Hamas is not a regular army with all its troops in uniforms. According to Avi Bell, a professor at Bar Ilan University Law School, the definition of combatant is different when it is regional, and does not involve two states at war — and that many see the definition as much broader in a regional situation such as we have now with Gaza. "Israel considers a combatant someone who is actively involved in planning the fighting, even if they are not armed." Combatants, he said, "can also include inactive reserve forces." ~~~~~~~~~~ This leads to a mention of the flow of accusations from the UN and specifically UNRWA. It appears that UNRWA at this point is serving blatantly as a PR mouthpiece for Hamas. I've already written about the UNRWA accusation that we shelled a school where civilians were hiding, but where the IDF says a cell of rocket launchers was hiding and from which mortar shells were being fired. But there have been two incidents since, one of which I'll deal with here: It took place on Thursday, during the self-imposed Israeli lull in fighting instituted to allow humanitarian goods to get through. A convoy of UNRWA relief trucks was making its way in Gaza, having gone through the Erez Crossing, when the driver was shot dead and two other workers were wounded. UNRWA immediately charged that the IDF has shot their driver. It's important to note that UNRWA personnel behaved as if they knew immediately and with much certainty who has shot their driver — no delay to allow an investigation. They actually responded with great drama, announcing they wouldn't send in any more relief trucks because the IDF wouldn't guarantee their safety. Of course, this made foreign press, and the damage was done. It was only later that UN sources admitted that they weren't sure which way the truck was headed when hit or if tank shells had hit it. The IDF has now released a statement, following an investigation, in which it says we did not hit the truck. The IDF says the matter of who may have shot at the truck is still being investigated. ~~~~~~~~~~ The wounded workers were evacuated to Israel and it's worth noting that the Magen David Adom workers involved in the evacuation reported that soldiers in the field had told them that Hamas snipers had targeted the UNRWA workers. UNRWA has resumed operations but its official statement in no way acknowledges even the possibility that it might not have been IDF that killed its driver. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to the Guardian, advisors to president-elect Obama are telling him to initiate low-level or clandestine talks with Hamas, because ostracizing Hamas is counterproductive. This is bad news, although not unexpected, if it is true. It is not possible to constructively negotiate with Hamas, a terror organization sworn to Israel's destruction. Strengthening this group or granting it credibility will work against what we're attempting to do now. Obama is echoing a similar refrain with regard to Iran. At a press conference he reiterated his concern that Teheran is "a genuine threat to US security," and declared that he would have more to say on the matter after inauguration. But he indicated that he believes diplomacy should be put into play more. Uh oh. Let him not do too much damage before wising up, please. ~~~~~~~~~~ Reports are that advisors to Turkey's prime minister have met with Hamas in Cairo. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to Hamas, Mahmoud Abbas is no longer president of the PA; according to Abbas, he is. The argument has arisen because PA law calls for the president and legislature to be elected together (which is why Abbas says he has a year to go, as that is when the legislative elections will occur). But the law also says that the presidential term is four years, and Abbas has completed this length of service, as he was elected to replaced Arafat, a year before the legislative elections. A great deal would have been made of this by Hamas, were it not otherwise occupied in Gaza now — as it is they've simply noted it, and have no intention of attempting to call for elections. This is something to watch down the road, however. ~~~~~~~~~~ A couple of readers have written to say that the correct number of the SC resolution on the ceasefire is 1860, and that I had it wrong. Indeed that is the case, and I stand corrected; the number I used, it seems, was the number of the UN press release announcing the resolution. Sorry. ~~~~~~~~~~ I had written last about the fact that the resolution was not binding. Several readers have written to point out that only Chapter 7 resolutions are binding. Indeed, but I was still hoping to secure information regarding the Chapter that applies to this resolution (although it becomes less relevant now). I would like to thank Salomon, who has sent me these very pertinent comments with regard to the SC resolution: "All those UN member states (mainly France and the EU) who drafted or supported UN Resolution 1860 should be ashamed for not abiding by their binding obligations to fight terror, as clearly spelled out in UN Security Council Resolution 1566, passed under Chapter VII in October 2004. Some excerpts follow (emphasis added): The hypocrisy of the UN knows no bounds. Anne Bayefsky, of Eye on the UN, notes that the Security Council managed to pass a resolution without mentioning Hamas by name. ~~~~~~~~~~ Dear friends, please understand that the volume of material I am dealing with, and the number of communications I'm receiving, make it impossible to respond personally to all of your messages to me, much as I've been in the habit of doing. ~~~~~~~~~~ With thanks to Michael Poppers, I end here with a list of wounded among our soldiers. (In the Jewish tradition prayers are said in the format of Hebrew name, son of.. and the mother's Hebrew name.) Perhaps pick one or more of the more seriously injured to pray for.
Wounded Israeli Civilians:
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
MY DEATH SENTENCE
Posted by Doris Wise Montrose, January 10, 2009. |
|
This was written by Si Frumkin, a Holocaust survivor and longtime Jewish activist, who now devotes his time to public service, lecturing, writing, and whatever else has to be done. |
|
This was the law of the lands where the swastika banner flew proudly. The 1000-year Reich lasted just 12 years; then the lights went on again all over Europe for a brighter, happier, productive future for those who had lived through it. I was just 14-years old. I had memories but, more importantly, I had hope. I had hope that what I had lived through would not be repeated, that I would live a normal life like everybody else — Jew and non-Jew, that I would acquire knowledge I could pass on to others — including, I hoped, my children and their children, that I could do something that might make my world — and everyone else's — a better place to live in. My hopes became reality after I came to America at the age of 18. I graduated college, got a job, bought a house, fathered children, made friends, became involved in humanitarian causes, and loved and appreciated the wonderful country that gave me the opportunity — and the inalienable right — to pursue happiness. It had never occurred to me that there might come a time when I and my family might be sentenced to death once again for the crime of being born Jewish. It never crossed my mind that the world would once again be hearing the shouts of "Kill the Jews" and "Jews to the ovens!" I realized that there were some who hated Jews but I was sure that this was a tiny, mindless, insignificant minority — surely smaller in numbers than those who believed the Earth was flat or that Elvis was alive. I was wrong. Hatred is with us again. The legions of haters are proudly waving their flags and flaunting their slogans around the globe. And just like the nazis of seventy years ago they are not bashful or apologetic in disseminating the ideology of mass murder. They are dedicated, enthusiastic, committed, and ready to die for their deadly doctrine. One of their religious leaders put it best: "We love death as much as the Jews and Christians love life!" A less literate, young man at a New York demonstration was even more frightening by waving a misspelled placard that demanded, "Kill All Juice!" The photo brings a smile to most that see it on the internet but it isn't funny. We know that he doesn't want to kill orange juice — he wants to kill me, my children and grandchildren and all those other "juice". In Fort Lauderdale, on December 30, hundreds of anti-Israel demonstrators protested the Israeli military operation in Gaza. Their hatred encompassed all Jews — "Go Back to the Ovens! You Need a Big Oven" and "Kill All Jews!" (this time spelled correctly), read their placards. 
Pamphlets in Denmark demand, "Kill Israel's People", and on the reverse, less correctly, "Kill Jewish People Evry Where in Ther World". In Mumbai, a city with very few Jews, the Islamic terrorists went to the trouble to find a tiny, unmarked Chabad facility to slaughter the 6 Jews there. In Britain the police are unable to guarantee security for Jewish schools. In Amsterdam, in January, a crowd at a rally chanted "Hamas! Hamas! Jews to the Gas!" In Belgium, pro-Hamas demonstrators burned a public menorah and painted swastikas on Jewish-owned shops. In Berlin, the police chief warned Jews not to wear scull caps in public and avoid "acting Jewish". In France, a burning car was rammed into a Toulouse synagogue. In southern Sweden a Molotov cocktail was thrown into a synagogue. And there is more, everywhere... The hatred is not hiding. On the official Hamas website, on 12/31/08, there were calls for attacking Jews throughout the world, "...a Jewish adolescent boy in an Australian synagogue, a Jewish minister in the Georgian government, a Jewish businessman in the New York Stock Exchange, an illiterate Jew from Ethiopia...they all belong to the same gang and the same nation..." And Al-Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahiri demanded that Jews be attacked worldwide, "...everywhere you can reach them. Support your mujahedeen brothers and children against them." The British online forum "Ummah" asks, "Have we got a list of top Jews we can target? Can someone post names and addresses?" And, in response, "Saladin1970" gives a link to 100 top British Jews. There are those who believe that this isn't anti-Semitism — just anti-Zionism. Here is a quote from a great and wise man: "When people criticize Zionists they mean Jews. You are talking anti-Semitism." (Martin Luther King, 1968). I am worried.
Doris Wise Montrose is with Children of Holocaust Surviviors Los Angeles.
Contact her at doris@cjhsla.org
Children Of Jewish Holocaust Survivors Los Angeles (CJHSLA) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to the protection of freedom and actively promotes the right of the State of Israel to not only exist, but to flourish, as a Jewish state. CJHSLA insists that the moral imperative derived from the last Holocaust commits all people of good will to prevent the next one.
Please make your tax deductible checks payable to: CJHSLA is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization that operates solely on donations, all of which are greatly appreciated.
|
|
NO MORE PHONY CEASEFIRES
Posted by Victor Sharpe, January 10, 2009. |
|
he world's leaders and the international media remained eerily silent for years while the Arab blitz by Hamas continued day after day, and the suffering of the Israeli men, women and children grew to unbearable extremes. Since 2005, when Israel foolishly withdrew from the Gaza Strip — leaving behind a thriving agricultural infrastructure for the Arabs to embrace and the chance for them to prove to the world that they were genuinely interested in living side by side in peace with Israel — Hamas terrorists have fired some 6,300 missiles deliberately aimed at Israeli civilian targets. The result has been the creation of a Hamas-occupied territory, which should be called Hamastan, in which millions of dollars worth of working greenhouses donated to them by Jewish Americans have been trashed, where the Islamist Hamas and Islamic Jihad have called endlessly for the destruction of Israel, and from where an Arab aggression has continued all along Israel's southern border to the present day. If nothing else, the Gaza experience should put to rest once and for all the prattling sermonizing that calls upon Israel to engage in "land for peace" — a suicidal policy whereby the Jewish state gives away more and more of its land, but never receives peace. We know from bitter experience that as soon as Israel could no longer bear the Palestinian provocations and finally retaliated the world would end its deafening silence, call the Israeli air strikes "disproportionate" and call for an end to the "cycle of violence." These two phrases were used against Israel in 2006 as it fought back against the massive missile bombardment from Hezbollah in Lebanon. It is symptomatic of the world's blatant pro-Palestinian bias and dislike of the Jewish state. Jews can die and be maimed for as long as it takes; not Arabs. The world hated the stateless Jews now they hate the State of the Jews. After years of vacillating, Ehud Olmert and Ehud Barak have allowed the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) to enter Gaza and eliminate once and for all the threat from Hamas. But if a nation launches a war, it must be an all out war with a permanent and advantageous outcome — namely the complete and utter defeat of the enemy. Total war is the only war that should be fought. Half-measures always lead to future disasters, as Olmert's ineffectual handling of the Second Lebanon War proved. There must be a strategy for what comes after the hostilities end. It should include the liberation of the Philadelphi Corridor and its permanent retention, for this is where all the smuggling tunnels exist between Egypt's Sinai and the Gaza Strip. Through these tunnels, in the area from which Israel was forced to withdraw by Condoleezza Rice, all the heavy and sophisticated weaponry that Hamas uses against Israel flow. These tunnels provide the oxygen that keeps the Hamas monster alive. The Egyptians, who promised to end the smuggling by the Palestinians, proved themselves knavish collaborators while the smugglers continued their dirty work. Some Egyptian police even connived with the Palestinians in the smuggling enterprise. Baksheesh, the cult of bribery, is alive and well in the corrupt Arab world, as it always has been. Yet now Israel is being asked once again to allow the Egyptians to control the border and prevent Hamas from smuggling weapons and missiles into the Gaza Strip from Egypt. So far, to its credit, the Israeli government has rejected the suggestion, aware of Egypt's past betrayals. Secondly, a small slice of territory, such as in the north of the Gaza Strip, must be liberated and permanently annexed to the State of Israel. This would send a message to the Islamists that their relentless aggression leads to loss of territory, something they fear most and which goes against their Islamic ambition to conquer land for Allah. It would also lessen the ability of Palestinian terrorists to launch Iranian-made missiles and mortar rounds into the Israeli cities of Ashkelon, Beer Sheva, Ashdod, Yavneh and beyond. Just attacking Hamas infrastructures and military targets and then accepting another phony ceasefire is a half-war and a disastrous strategy. Of course, any territory that Israel liberates from Arab occupation will create a political firestorm in the United Nations, orchestrated by the 50 or more members of the Islamic Bloc and, as always, supported by the enfeebled and hypocritical European Union, now fast sliding down into that vile pit called Eurabia. Indeed, the presidency of the EU, which is ever afraid of upsetting the sensitive Arab and Muslim world, has protested at the Israeli air strikes and predictably used the well worn term, "disproportionate." However, there were no such official European condemnations while thousands of Palestinian rockets and mortars rained down on Israel from Gaza for years in a gigantic act of premeditated and murderous terror. Sadly, under the present Israeli Government and the ruling Kadima Party, the IDF has slowly been forced to respond and hunker down instead of taking the initiative. The military maxim of attack being the best form of defense has been subordinated to the political echelons and their reliance on diplomacy. History has taught us that any army tends to react unfavorably when the spirit of initiative, which so epitomized the IDF, is allowed to die and give way to a timid "Maginot complex". However, going into Gaza with "boots on the ground" has now taken place but it must be for an irrevocable decision to gain permanent mastery of the territory and completely eliminate Hamas and all Palestinian terrorists. Israel's very future hangs upon the outcome of this struggle. Victor Sharpe is a freelance writer and the author of Politicide: The attempted murder of the Jewish state. Contact him at janvic@verizon.net |
|
U.S. REJECTED AID FOR ISRAELI NUKE RAID
Posted by Michael Travis, January 10, 2009. |
|
The author of this article, David E. Sanger, is the chief
Washington correspondent for The New York Times. Reporting for
this article was developed in the course of research for The
Inheritance: The World Obama Confronts and the Challenges to American
Power, to be published Tuesday by Harmony Books.
It appeared in the New York Times
|
|
Siding with the enemy.....again. WASHINGTON — President Bush deflected a secret request by Israel last year for specialized bunker-busting bombs it wanted for an attack on Iran's main nuclear complex and told the Israelis that he had authorized new covert action intended to sabotage Iran's suspected effort to develop nuclear weapons, according to senior American and foreign officials. White House officials never conclusively determined whether Israel had decided to go ahead with the strike before the United States protested, or whether Prime Minister Ehud Olmert of Israel was trying to goad the White House into more decisive action before Mr. Bush left office. But the Bush administration was particularly alarmed by an Israeli request to fly over Iraq to reach Iran's major nuclear complex at Natanz, where the country's only known uranium enrichment plant is located. The White House denied that request outright, American officials said, and the Israelis backed off their plans, at least temporarily. But the tense exchanges also prompted the White House to step up intelligence-sharing with Israel and brief Israeli officials on new American efforts to subtly sabotage Iran's nuclear infrastructure, a major covert program that Mr. Bush is about to hand off to President-elect Barack Obama. This account of the expanded American covert program and the Bush administration's efforts to dissuade Israel from an aerial attack on Iran emerged in interviews over the past 15 months with current and former American officials, outside experts, international nuclear inspectors and European and Israeli officials. None would speak on the record because of the great secrecy surrounding the intelligence developed on Iran. Several details of the covert effort have been omitted from this account, at the request of senior United States intelligence and administration officials, to avoid harming continuing operations. The interviews also suggest that while Mr. Bush was extensively briefed on options for an overt American attack on Iran's facilities, he never instructed the Pentagon to move beyond contingency planning, even during the final year of his presidency, contrary to what some critics have suggested. The interviews also indicate that Mr. Bush was convinced by top administration officials, led by Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates, that any overt attack on Iran would probably prove ineffective, lead to the expulsion of international inspectors and drive Iran's nuclear effort further out of view. Mr. Bush and his aides also discussed the possibility that an airstrike could ignite a broad Middle East war in which America's 140,000 troops in Iraq would inevitably become involved. Instead, Mr. Bush embraced more intensive covert operations actions aimed at Iran, the interviews show, having concluded that the sanctions imposed by the United States and its allies were failing to slow the uranium enrichment efforts. Those covert operations, and the question of whether Israel will settle for something less than a conventional attack on Iran, pose immediate and wrenching decisions for Mr. Obama. The covert American program, started in early 2008, includes renewed American efforts to penetrate Iran's nuclear supply chain abroad, along with new efforts, some of them experimental, to undermine electrical systems, computer systems and other networks on which Iran relies. It is aimed at delaying the day that Iran can produce the weapons-grade fuel and designs it needs to produce a workable nuclear weapon. Knowledge of the program has been closely held, yet inside the Bush administration some officials are skeptical about its chances of success, arguing that past efforts to undermine Iran's nuclear program have been detected by the Iranians and have only delayed, not derailed, their drive to unlock the secrets of uranium enrichment. Late last year, international inspectors estimated that Iran had 3,800 centrifuges spinning, but American intelligence officials now estimate that the figure is 4,000 to 5,000, enough to produce about one weapon's worth of uranium every eight months or so. While declining to be specific, one American official dismissed the latest covert operations against Iran as "science experiments." One senior intelligence official argued that as Mr. Bush prepared to leave office, the Iranians were already so close to achieving a weapons capacity that they were unlikely to be stopped. Others disagreed, making the point that the Israelis would not have been dissuaded from conducting an attack if they believed that the American effort was unlikely to prove effective. Since his election on Nov. 4, Mr. Obama has been extensively briefed on the American actions in Iran, though his transition aides have refused to comment on the issue. Early in his presidency, Mr. Obama must decide whether the covert actions begun by Mr. Bush are worth the risks of disrupting what he has pledged will be a more active diplomatic effort to engage with Iran. Either course could carry risks for Mr. Obama. An inherited intelligence or military mission that went wrong could backfire, as happened to President Kennedy with the Bay of Pigs operation in Cuba. But a decision to pull back on operations aimed at Iran could leave Mr. Obama vulnerable to charges that he is allowing Iran to speed ahead toward a nuclear capacity, one that could change the contours of power in the Middle East. An Intelligence Conflict Israel's effort to obtain the weapons, refueling capacity and permission to fly over Iraq for an attack on Iran grew out of its disbelief and anger at an American intelligence assessment completed in late 2007 that concluded that Iran had effectively suspended its development of nuclear weapons four years earlier. That conclusion also stunned Mr. Bush's national security team — and Mr. Bush himself, who was deeply suspicious of the conclusion, according to officials who discussed it with him. The assessment, a National Intelligence Estimate, was based on a trove of Iranian reports obtained by penetrating Iran's computer networks. Those reports indicated that Iranian engineers had been ordered to halt development of a nuclear warhead in 2003, even while they continued to speed ahead in enriching uranium, the most difficult obstacle to building a weapon. The "key judgments" of the National Intelligence Estimate, which were publicly released, emphasized the suspension of the weapons work. The public version made only glancing reference to evidence described at great length in the 140-page classified version of the assessment: the suspicion that Iran had 10 or 15 other nuclear-related facilities, never opened to international inspectors, where enrichment activity, weapons work or the manufacturing of centrifuges might be taking place. The Israelis responded angrily and rebutted the American report, providing American intelligence officials and Adm. Mike Mullen, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, with evidence that they said indicated that the Iranians were still working on a weapon. While the Americans were not convinced that the Iranian weapons development was continuing, the Israelis were not the only ones highly critical of the United States report. Secretary Gates, a former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, said the report had presented the evidence poorly, underemphasizing the importance of Iran's enrichment activity and overemphasizing the suspension of a weapons-design effort that could easily be turned back on. In an interview, Mr. Gates said that in his whole career he had never seen "an N.I.E. that had such an impact on U.S. diplomacy," because "people figured, well, the military option is now off the table." Prime Minister Olmert came to the same conclusion. He had previously expected, according to several Americans and Israeli officials, that Mr. Bush would deal with Iran's nuclear program before he left office. "Now," said one American official who bore the brunt of Israel's reaction, "they didn't believe he would." Attack Planning Early in 2008, the Israeli government signaled that it might be preparing to take matters into its own hands. In a series of meetings, Israeli officials asked Washington for a new generation of powerful bunker-busters, far more capable of blowing up a deep underground plant than anything in Israel's arsenal of conventional weapons. They asked for refueling equipment that would allow their aircraft to reach Iran and return to Israel. And they asked for the right to fly over Iraq. Mr. Bush deflected the first two requests, pushing the issue off, but "we said 'hell no' to the overflights," one of his top aides said. At the White House and the Pentagon, there was widespread concern that a political uproar in Iraq about the use of its American-controlled airspace could result in the expulsion of American forces from the country. The Israeli ambassador to the United States, Sallai Meridor, declined several requests over the past four weeks to be interviewed about Israel's efforts to obtain the weapons from Washington, saying through aides that he was too busy. Last June, the Israelis conducted an exercise over the Mediterranean Sea that appeared to be a dry run for an attack on the enrichment plant at Natanz. When the exercise was analyzed at the Pentagon, officials concluded that the distances flown almost exactly equaled the distance between Israel and the Iranian nuclear site. "This really spooked a lot of people," one White House official said. White House officials discussed the possibility that the Israelis would fly over Iraq without American permission. In that case, would the American military be ordered to shoot them down? If the United States did not interfere to stop an Israeli attack, would the Bush administration be accused of being complicit in it? Admiral Mullen, traveling to Israel in early July on a previously scheduled trip, questioned Israeli officials about their intentions. His Israeli counterpart, Lt. Gen. Gabi Ashkenazi, argued that an aerial attack could set Iran's program back by two or three years, according to officials familiar with the exchange. The American estimates at the time were far more conservative. Yet by the time Admiral Mullen made his visit, Israeli officials appear to have concluded that without American help, they were not yet capable of hitting the site effectively enough to strike a decisive blow against the Iranian program. The United States did give Israel one item on its shopping list: high-powered radar, called the X-Band, to detect any Iranian missile launchings. It was the only element in the Israeli request that could be used solely for defense, not offense. Mr. Gates's spokesman, Geoff Morrell, said last week that Mr. Gates — whom Mr. Obama is retaining as defense secretary — believed that "a potential strike on the Iranian facilities is not something that we or anyone else should be pursuing at this time." A New Covert Push Throughout 2008, the Bush administration insisted that it had a plan to deal with the Iranians: applying overwhelming financial pressure that would persuade Tehran to abandon its nuclear program, as foreign enterprises like the French company Total pulled out of Iranian oil projects, European banks cut financing, and trade credits were squeezed. But the Iranians were making uranium faster than the sanctions were making progress. As Mr. Bush realized that the sanctions he had pressed for were inadequate and his military options untenable, he turned to the C.I.A. His hope, several people involved in the program said, was to create some leverage against the Iranians, by setting back their nuclear program while sanctions continued and, more recently, oil prices dropped precipitously. There were two specific objectives: to slow progress at Natanz and other known and suspected nuclear facilities, and keep the pressure on a little-known Iranian professor named Mohsen Fakrizadeh, a scientist described in classified portions of American intelligence reports as deeply involved in an effort to design a nuclear warhead for Iran. Past American-led efforts aimed at Natanz had yielded little result. Several years ago, foreign intelligence services tinkered with individual power units that Iran bought in Turkey to drive its centrifuges, the floor-to-ceiling silvery tubes that spin at the speed of sound, enriching uranium for use in power stations or, with additional enrichment, nuclear weapons. A number of centrifuges blew up, prompting public declarations of sabotage by Iranian officials. An engineer in Switzerland, who worked with the Pakistani nuclear black-marketeer Abdul Qadeer Khan, had been "turned" by American intelligence officials and helped them slip faulty technology into parts bought by the Iranians. What Mr. Bush authorized, and informed a narrow group of Congressional leaders about, was a far broader effort, aimed at the entire industrial infrastructure that supports the Iranian nuclear program. Some of the efforts focused on ways to destabilize the centrifuges. The details are closely held, for obvious reasons, by American officials. One official, however, said, "It was not until the last year that they got really imaginative about what one could do to screw up the system." Then, he cautioned, "none of these are game-changers," meaning that the efforts would not necessarily cripple the Iranian program. Others in the administration strongly disagree. In the end, success or failure may come down to how much pressure can be brought to bear on Mr. Fakrizadeh, whom the 2007 National Intelligence Estimate identifies, in its classified sections, as the manager of Project 110 and Project 111. According to a presentation by the chief inspector of the International Atomic Energy Agency, those were the names for two Iranian efforts that appeared to be dedicated to designing a warhead and making it work with an Iranian missile. Iranian officials say the projects are a fiction, made up by the United States. While the international agency readily concedes that the evidence about the two projects remains murky, one of the documents it briefly displayed at a meeting of the agency's member countries in Vienna last year, from Mr. Fakrizadeh's projects, showed the chronology of a missile launching, ending with a warhead exploding about 650 yards above ground — approximately the altitude from which the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was detonated. The exact status of Mr. Fakrizadeh's projects today is unclear. While the National Intelligence Estimate reported that activity on Projects 110 and 111 had been halted, the fear among intelligence agencies is that if the weapons design projects are turned back on, will they know? Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
SHAME ON BUSH AND CONDI
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, January 9, 2009. |
|
This article by Anne Bayefsky originally appeared in Forbes,
|
|
Betrayal. No other word describes the reversal of American foreign policy that took place on the night of Jan. 8 when the U.S. refused to veto the Security Council resolution on Gaza. A president whose friendship and alliance with Israel once appeared honest, perceptive and unshakable, decided two weeks before leaving office to throw Israel to the wolves. The resolution calls for a ceasefire in Gaza and does not even mention the word "Hamas." There will no longer be a need for an Obama transition team on foreign policy. The outgoing president and secretary of State have done it all. Yesterday's resolution, along with another Condoleezza Rice-inspired resolution from mid-December, draws Israel into a Security Council spider web that U.N. enthusiasts have been weaving for decades. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton can simply step into George W. Bush and Condi Rice's shoes, label themselves new-age multilateralists and let the chips — in this case, remnants of Israel — fall where they may. The Security Council resolution makes a mockery of Israel's right of self-defense. In fact, it makes no mention of a right of self-defense at all. Eight thousand mortars have rained down on Israel from the Gaza Strip over a period of eight years. Israel withdrew every Israeli man, woman and child from Gaza three and a half years ago. Yet the United Nations draws an equivalence between a terrorist organization whose very modus operandi is to target civilians and a state whose aim is to protect civilians, Israeli and Palestinian. Arab states could scarcely contain their glee. The U.K. went out in front and accepted the idea of a much stronger resolution instead of a Security Council presidential statement, and Secretary of State Rice rolled over and played dead within minutes. Veto-wielding powers had reportedly given undertakings to Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that they would not permit a resolution. These promises were ignored in the face of allegedly enormous pressure from undemocratic thugs, state sponsors of terrorism and weak democracies cowering at the prospect of unhappy Muslim constituencies or a dent in their bank accounts from belligerent Arab sheiks. What, moaned U.S. officials, was poor Condi to do? Here is what she did: 1. The resolution she supported makes no mention whatsoever of Israel's right of self-defense. When it was over, Secretary of State Rice "abstained" with the following words: "this resolution, the text of which we support, the goals of which we support, and the objectives that we fully support, should indeed be allowed to go forward." These words led other ambassadors to point out that the resolution had, in effect, been adopted by consensus. For over half a century, the state of Israel and its tiny population has been on the front lines of a war against an evil that plagues every decent human being on earth. Israel has time and again sacrificed its children in freedom's cause. In leaving Israel to fend for itself in an international arena controlled by the enemies of decency and good, President Bush walks shamefully off the international stage, leaving in shambles everything he has stood for since Sept. 11, 2001. Israel's prime minister reacted to the resolution today by pointing to the obvious:
And though UN actors wish it were otherwise, "The State of Israel has never agreed that any outside body would determine its right to defend the security of its citizens." This is a universal principle with which every American — and the U.N. Charter — would agree. For more United Nations coverage see www.EYEontheUN.org. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
ISRAEL FIGHTS WEST'S WAR AGAIN
Posted by Michael Travis, January 9, 2009. |
|
Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, the Al-Aqsa Brigades and all the other proxies of Iranian murder have but one common aim. This was written by Beryl Wajsman and it appeared in Canada
Free Press (CFP)
http://canadafreepress.com and is archived at
Beryl Wajsman is President of the Institute for Public Affairs of Montreal, editor-in-chief of The Suburban newspapers, and publisher of The Metropolitain. He can be reached at: letters@canadafreepress.com |
|
This is not 2006. In Israel's second war with Lebanon, arguments were advanced that Lebanon's physical integrity should not have been breached since the aggression against Israel was committed not by the government but by Hezbollah. Yet under international norms when a government acquiesces in the violent acts of a group operating from its territory it is equally responsible. Hairs cannot be split this time. Hamas is the governing authority of Gaza and it has committed aggression against the sovereignty of Israel in the name of itself and of the political jurisdiction of Gaza. Under every international legal doctrine, including that of the UN's own "self-help", a nation is entitled to defend itself when the international community and international organizations cannot, or will not, act. To those who would argue that Israel's self-defense is not proportional, they should be aware that proportionality — though very much in vogue with politically correct talking heads — is not, and has never been, part of any normative international legal order. From Tucker to Oppenheim to Stone, it will not be found. But let us indulge the apologists of terror for a moment. Would it be proportional for Israel to bomb kindergartens in Gaza as Hamas does in Israel?
To those who would argue that this attack on Hamas is futile because Israel did not "win" its war against Hezbollah, let them know they are wrong. Israel miscalculated in 2006 and waited four weeks to send in ground troops. Israel thought it could do the job with air power alone. Yet when the army was finally sent in, 20,000 Israeli troops took the Hezbollah controlled areas of south Lebanon in 36 hours suffering only 19 casualties. And guess what? In almost 3 years Hezbollah rockets have been silent against Israel. Though fellow travelers of terror like to snatch defeat from Israel's victory, Israel win its battle with Hezbollah. Israel has learned its lesson though and this time sent in the army early. Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, the Al-Aqsa Brigades and all the other proxies of Iranian murder have but one common aim. The destruction of Israel and the killing of all "infidels", Christian and Jew. It is written in their charters and they should be taken at their word. They care not a whit for their own people because their power derives from the culture of death that they perpetrate against their own citizens using state faith as a weapon of submission. Their challenge is not only to Israel, but to the west at large. The Islamists that are marching in western cities are directed by shrewd and murderous operatives of regimes spawned in the dark ages of history. Israel is but the frontline of civilization. And Israel is once again fighting the west's war first. No nation can sit idly by while 7000 rockets over six years are hurled at it. Even Egypt closed its borders to the murderous Gazan regime. Journalists speak of Hamas as the duly elected government of Gaza. Yet they conveniently forget to mention that Hamas only got elected because they killed or drove out most of their Fatah opponents prior to the vote. It was a putsch as brutal as any the world has seen in the post war era. To those who argue for cease-fire and negotiations, let them explain how to negotiate with an enemy that swore peace if Israel withdrew from Gaza, yet attacked with greater vehemence once Israel did. To those who advocate a truce, let them answer what to do with an enemy that broke the truce brokered not by the west but by their Arab cousins in Egypt. To those who advance claims for compromise and common ground, let them respond how to find common ground with an enemy that interprets every peaceful gesture as weakness and an invitation for attack. It has been said that Hamas seeks to rebuild Gaza. Then why did it destroy all the infrastructure, waterworks, greenhouses and industrial plant left by Israel? It has been suggested that Hamas merely needs funding and it will be peaceful. Then why is it that even the Arab League, flush with petrodollars, has given nothing. The answers are simple. Hamas willingly lives in destruction and desolation because it abides by the creed of division, discord and death. And with this creed it happily terrorizes its own people and the world. This is the mirror of the "caliphate" that these theocratic tyrants and their allies would impose on the free world. President Kennedy pronounced in his inaugaural address that "civility is not a sign of weakness and sincerity is always subject to proof." Hamas has always taken civility for weakness and its sincerity has never been proven. It is time to eradicate this evil from the earth. VATICAN CALLS GAZA A 'CONCENTRATION CAMP'
Please vote for my blog, Israel Matzav, as the Best Midsize Blog in the 2008 Weblog Awards, once every 24 hours by going here. At least two of the blogs in the competition are very anti-Israel (to put it kindly). Thanks. The head of the Vatican Council, which remained silently 'neutral' while six million Jews were systematically murdered by the Nazis between 1939-45, today referred to Gaza as a 'concentration camp' (Hat Tip: Hot Air). Echoing Pope Benedict's calls for an end to the bloodshed in the Gaza Strip, Cardinal Renato Martino, head of the Vatican Council for Justice and Peace, urged Israeli and Hamas to be "more willing" to hold peace talks. He accused both sides of only thinking of their own interests while civilians paid the price. Actually, Israel has been looking at the interests of civilians: its own civilians who have endured more than seven years of nearly daily rocket fire from Hamas. Cardinal Martino expressed concern over the humanitarian situation, saying "Let's look at the conditions in Gaza: these increasingly resemble a big concentration camp." Really? Where's the forced labor? Where are the beatings and the selections and the gas chambers? Where are the marches across frozen terrain with no clothes? Where are the separated families? Where are the cattle car transports? Concentration camp? Give me a break! Were there scenes like this in a concentration camp?
Lauren Booth in a Gaza Well-Stocked Grocery Store There are plenty of supplies for Gaza. Plenty of food and fuel and medical supplies. But those supplies are being stolen by Hamas, which then re-sells them to its own populace as if it is doing them a favor. Is that Israel's fault? Israel's foreign ministry was outraged. The Israeli Foreign Ministry said that this amounted to "Hamas propaganda", and accused the cardinal of ignoring Hamas's "numerous crimes". "This does not bring the people closer to truth and peace," it said.And so was the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the foremost center of scholarship on the Holocaust. The Simon Wiesenthal Centre, which monitors anti-Semitism and tracks down Nazi war criminals, attacked Cardinal Martino for making remarks that were "untrue, distort the memory of the Holocaust and are only used against Israel by terrorist organizations and Holocaust deniers". But what is most galling about the Vatican's accusation is that it comes against the backdrop of the Vatican's own refusal to speak up to save Jews during the real Holocaust. In the spring of 1940, the Chief Rabbi of Palestine, Isaac Herzog, asked the papal Secretary of State, Cardinal Luigi Maglione to intercede to keep Jews in Spain from being deported to Germany. He later made a similar request for Jews in Lithuania. The papacy did nothing. The Vatican is now in the process of canonizing Pope Pius XII. Have
they no shame?
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
THE SURRENDER LOBBY
Posted by Jack L., January 9, 2009. |
|
This was written by
James Kirchick, an assistant editor of The New Republic
|
|
The self-styled "pro-Israel, pro-peace" organization immediately released a statement that was a parody of moral equivalence. "While there is nothing 'right' in raining rockets on Israeli families or dispatching suicide bombers," the group declared, "there is nothing 'right' in punishing a million and a half already-suffering Gazans for the actions of the extremists among them." Jeremy Ben-Ami, J Street's director, deemed the mission — supported by 81 percent of Israelis, according to a poll conducted by Channel 10 — as "counterproductive," and repeated the hoary slogan that Israel's actions would "deepen the cycle of violence." This was too much even for Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Union for Reform Judaism and one of the most prominent American liberal Jewish leaders, who condemned J Street's posturing as "morally deficient," "appallingly naive" and "out of touch" with mainstream Jewish opinion. A self-described "dove," Yoffie, writing in the Forward newspaper, acknowledged that he initially "welcomed the founding of J Street," but that its reaction to Cast Lead went too far. "Doves take note," he warned. "To be a dove of influence, you must be a realist, firm in your principles but shorn of all illusions." As its tepid response to Cast Lead implies, however, J Street is neither realist nor firm in Zionist principles (indeed, one of its most prominent Israeli supporters, as listed on its own Web site, is Avraham Burg). Worse, the group's policy prescriptions are saturated with illusions about the nature of the Arab-Israeli conflict. On J Street, Hamas can be a partner for peace — if only Israel would stop fighting. Nothing has distinguished its brief role thus far in American politics other than frequent criticism of Israel and opposition to measures meant to safeguard its security. Last year, for instance, J Street campaigned against a congressional resolution calling for tougher inspections of air and sea cargo into Iran, falsely claiming that the measure called for a "naval blockade" of the Islamic Republic. What makes J Street's pretensions to being "pro-Israel" so dubious is that it advocates policies overwhelmingly rejected by Israelis. For instance, direct negotiations with Hamas, which is opposed not just by the governments of Israel, the United States, and the rest of the Quartet, but also by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. Such negotiations would undermine the legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people, embolden a genocidal terrorist organization, further erode the credibility of the peace process, and ultimately cause more harm to the Palestinians themselves, who have suffered terribly under Hamas rule. The American Jewish Committee's latest annual survey of American Jewish opinion found that 68 percent of American Jews believe that Israel "cannot achieve peace with a Hamas-led Palestinian government." So how can J Street claim to represent "the broad, sensible mainstream of pro-Israel American Jews," as Ben-Ami repeatedly asserts, when that very constituency opposes its signature policy? And how can J Street claim to be "pro-Israel" when its capitulating stance on the first major Israeli military offensive since the Second Lebanon War is contradicted by over 80 percent of Israelis? J Street is more extreme than even the Arab League, which tacitly supports Israel's assault on the Iranian proxy. The area where J Street could be most damaging is in lobbying the United States to apply more pressure on Israel. "J Street believes the only option at this point for Israel and the U.S. is to work urgently and immediately to achieve a cease-fire now that stops the violence, ends the rockets and eases the blockade of Gaza, rather than allowing a ground campaign to proceed," Ben-Ami advised, writing in the early days of the campaign. It requires a mind either stunningly ignorant of the recent history of the situation or actively hostile to Israel (or both) to think that the United States can simply wave a wand that magically "ends the rockets" coming from Gaza. Hamas has rejected such overtures repeatedly. What could Israel and the United States do, that they haven't already tried, to bring about such a resolution? There is a qualitative difference between those who question the strategic wisdom of Cast Lead and those who question its underlying legitimacy. The former voice skepticism about whether the operation will benefit Israel's long-term interests, but ultimately prioritize the security and sovereignty of Israel in their calculation. The latter, by equating terror attacks with self-defense, delegitimize the morality of Israeli self-defense itself. For if Cast Lead — a mission to neutralize the threat from a terrorist organization responsible for the firing of some 7,000 rockets into Israel and constitutionally obligated to the murder of Jews and the destruction of their state — is unjustified, then the very principle of self-defense is unjustified. Those who counsel otherwise do not support Israel's "security." They support its surrender. Contact Jack L. at yakovdov1@yahoo.com |
|
THIS NEW UN RESOLUTION — WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW.
Posted by Zalmi, January 9, 2009. | |||
|
The UN exposed ! Today we hear of yet another anti-Israel resolution passed by the United Nations. Like most Jews, I've lost count of the total they've handed down since Israel's formation, but it must be getting close to the number of square-miles in the shrinking Jewish State. Before you give this resolution the slightest bit of credence, watch this speech given by the director of UN-Watch, Hillel Neuer, in March 2007 — and which the UN banned! To watch the video, click here. The Text is below: | |||
Contact Zalmi at zalmi@zalmi.net and visit his website
at http://zalmi.blogspot.com. This
article is archived at
|
|
HOW DO I EXPLAIN ISRAEL'S ACTIONS IN GAZA?
Posted by Sonia Nusbaum, January 9, 2009. | |
|
With what is going on I feel it's important I share with you the article below: "How Do I Explain Israel's Actions in Gaza?" by Aron Moss. I would not respond in what appears to me an apologetic tone to answer questions on Israel's right to self-defend. Further, at the office or any place: Are you speaking to fellow Jews who have been "kidnapped" by Socialists in league with Islamic strategists, our biased media and indoctrinated so as to be unable to tell right from wrong? Good from evil? Nearly unrecognizable as Jews? To non-Jews subjected to the same propaganda onslaught from enemies of Israel, of Jews and democracy everywhere? I put forward to you these 10 pts. of information to keep both yourselves and others informed of today's reality. Sonia
| |
|
Question: I am the only Jew in my office, so I face a daily barrage of questions about Israel's actions in Gaza. I don't know who appointed me as Israel's spokesman and I am not armed with the answers. Can you help? Answer: At times like this, each one of us becomes an ambassador for Israel. Even if you don't agree with everything Israel does, any decent person must stand up for Israel's right to self-defense. We can leave the military and political issues to the experts, but we should all be clear on the moral questions raised by this war. Let's look at a few of the most commonly asked questions. Q: How can Israel justify killing civilians if their intent is to crush Hamas? A: The death of innocents is a tragic inevitability of war. Our hearts go out to all those caught in the middle. The sad fact is that the Palestinian people are being held hostage by Hamas. Just as it is clear that Hamas is morally culpable for any harm done to Gilad Shalit, the Israeli hostage that they hold, so too are they culpable for the fate of Palestinian innocents amongst whom they hide. A civilian who is killed while being used by a terrorist as a human shield is a victim of the terrorist, not the Israeli army, who does not target innocent civilians. Q: Isn't Israel's response a bit disproportionate? A: If Israel's purpose was to take revenge, then perhaps the question of "proportion" would apply here. But Israel is waging a defensive war. In war, you don't measure your response to the enemy by what they have done to you in the past, but rather by what needs to be done to stop them from attacking you. Israel must destroy Hamas' capability to continue shooting rockets at Israeli cities. Israel's actions are proportionate to the present and future threat, not just the damage done in the past. Q: Doesn't Israel understand that they are just creating more terrorists? The anger and fury at Israel as a result of bombing Gaza will only make more people want to join Hamas. A: Feelings of frustration, anger, fear and rage do not make you into a terrorist. A culture of death and an education of hate does. Israel doesn't need to do anything to create terrorists — Islamic extremism does that — but Israel must act to destroy those who threaten its people. Q: Hamas indeed has a militant wing, but it also does a lot of good. They are responsible for social programs, educational projects and humanitarian work in Gaza. By destroying Hamas, Israel also destroys all the good they do. Aren't we demonizing a group that is not all bad? A: If a serial killer also happens to volunteer for his local hospital, has donated money to an orphanage, and looks after his ailing grandmother, he is still a serial killer, and he and the threat he represents must be treated as such. The danger he poses far outweighs the concern for any good he may do. Q: By using violence, how is Israel any better than its terrorist enemies? A: That is as ridiculous as saying that a woman who fights off an attacker is no better than her attacker. Israel would not touch Hamas if Hamas would stop sending rockets and suicide bombers into Israel. Israel seeks to live in peace with its neighbors; Hamas and its allies seek to destroy Israel, no matter what Israel does. There is a world of difference between the Hamas terrorists and the Israeli soldiers. The Hamas terrorist seeks violence as a way of life; his aim is to sow war and death. For the Israeli soldier, war is a necessity, and a moral duty, because Israel's citizens are being attacked and innocent lives are being threatened. The Hamas terrorist seeks to maximize civilian casualties; the Israeli soldier does everything in his power to minimize them. The Hamas terrorist fears times of peace, because then he has no purpose. The Israeli soldier dreams of a time when peace will reign. Then, the Israel Defense Force will be made joyously redundant, as "one nation will not lift a sword against another nation, and they will no longer learn to wage war". |
|
ANALYSIS: DIPLOMATIC FRONT — THE CEASE-FIRE GAME
Posted by Gerald M. Steinberg, January 9, 2009. |
|
This article appeared today in The Jerusalem Post
|
|
Every political leader and diplomat wants to be seen as the key actor, or at least a major player, in the cease-fire game. The appearance of peacemaking suggests international power and prestige, and is accompanied by meetings in exotic settings, providing excellent photo-opportunities and constant press coverage. Politicians thrive on the process, and politically correct talk about ending the "humanitarian suffering of Palestinians" gains them a major boost. As a result, the field has become more crowded, including Turkey, Russia, numerous Europeans, the UN Secretary General, Qatar, Egypt and — far more quietly — the outgoing Bush administration in the US. But most of these mediators have little to offer in terms of substance. Indeed, the gap between the public relations and the detailed negotiations towards a sustainable end to conflict is huge. In many cases, beyond the photos and press statements, these virtual mediators do not have the knowledge or resources required for this complex process. This is the case for the cease-fire initiatives of French President Nicolas Sarkozy and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, both of whom gain primarily from the media attention. Israel is playing along with the facade in part to enhance the prestige of these leaders, and in part because the appearance of a readiness to negotiate a cease-fire softens the hostile media image, particularly in Europe. In reality, a stable cease-fire requires an external actor that has the depth, power and political will to insure that the terms are implemented — otherwise, the violence will resume and escalate. In the failed Oslo process, when incitement and large scale Palestinian terror resumed, Norway was not willing to take any of the risks or pay any of the costs in confronting Arafat. In Gaza, for the three years following the Israeli disengagement, Egypt has failed to stop Hamas from acquiring weapons, and numerous summits in Cairo involving top Hamas leaders have had no visible impact. Whether this is due to the weakness of the regime or ambivalence regarding the relationship with Israel is unclear, but to be taken seriously, Egypt must clearly demonstrate that it can provide more than rhetoric. Europe in general, and France in particular, are in a similar position, as shown by the failure in implementing UN Security Council Resolution 1701, which ended the 2006 Lebanon war. Speeches and the expanded international force have not prevented Hizbullah from rebuilding and increasing its arsenal of rockets, and its ability to use them. (Skeptics dismiss UNIFIL's recent 'discovery' of some rockets near the Israeli border as a ploy — the four rockets launched on Thursday were not found in advance.) Similarly, the experiment involving European monitors at the Rafah crossing based on the 2005 agreement ended quickly when the monitors fled at the sight of the first Hamas gunmen. Europeans give advice generously, but do not have the ability or will to ensure Israeli security when the agreements they broker are violated. As a result, America remains the indispensable country, and the only potential power that can give credibility to a stable and serious cease-fire agreement. But America is overstretched in Iraq and Afghanistan, and involvement in Gaza would be limited to technical advisers on detecting and blowing up the tunnels under the Philadelphi corridor used to smuggle missiles. Thus, as in many previous conflicts, the stability of the cease-fire will be largely determined by Israeli military achievements and the decisions made by the political leadership. A premature end will simply serve as the starting point for the next and expanded round of this war. |
|
MSM MALPRACTICE AND THE JOURNALIST AS PERPETUAL ADOLESCENT
Posted by Marc Samberg, January 9, 2009. |
|
This appeared on the Shrinkwrapped.blogs.com website
|
|
If the Palestinians behave like hostile-dependent adolescents, enraged that their fantasies of Utopian peace and genocidal conquest have been continually thwarted by the hated, devalued (and unconsciously idealized) Jews, what are we to make of the behavior of the international community? Certainly there is a large part of the international community that is primarily motivated by tribal considerations. For those who identify with the Umma, there is quite literally nothing that Israel could do short of surrender that would meet with their approval; likewise there is nothing a co-religionist could do that would elicit more than the merest suggestion of concern as long as the victims included hated Westerners and, especially, Jews. This is of the nature of tribalism, and its attendant Honor-Shame culture. Another rather large component of the international community channels very thinly disguised anti-Semitism. It has been said that the Germans will never forgive the Jews for the Holocaust; I would suggest that neither will the British, French, Greeks, et al, who all have their own ignominious histories of anti-Semitism or complicity in the worst excesses of Jew hatred. Which brings us to those who in Lenin's exquisite phrasing in an only slightly different context, are "useful idiots", inadvertently advancing the goals of the worst among us all the while convinced of their own essential goodness and enlightenment. While preparing for this post I had begun to collect various posts from the Blogosphere and occasional articles in the MSM that supported the hypothesis that the MSM present a version of news from the Middle East that is highly biased against the interests of Israel. In short order I had far too many posts to list or use. The simple fact is that anyone who wants to know more about the conflict and is willing to seek information from both sides of the conflict will soon discover that the Israelis are doing everything they can to limit non-combatant casualties while the Palestinian fighters do everything they can to maximize both Israeli and Palestinian non-combatant casualties. Elder of Ziyon offers a classic formulation of this by quoting the terrorists in their own words. Terrorists brag about causing Gaza civilians to die
... Hamas and Islamic Jihad have made an official tactic out of using civilians as human shields and out of shooting at Israel as civilians. They are proud that the number of apparent (and real) civilian casualties has increased in recent days. Their war policy is to violate the Geneva Conventions brazenly and officially. Their aim is to maximize the number of civilians killed in Gaza. Please go to Elder's site to see the video and read their words for yourself, if you question his conclusion. The fact is that no careful observer can possibly be surprised by this. The reality of Hamas hiding weapons caches in schools and hospitals, aiming their rockets at Israeli schools and residential neighborhoods, their overt desire stated repeatedly to murder Jews wherever they can be found, refusal to negotiate for Peace, inhumane behavior toward both their fellow Gazans and captive Israelis, etc, etc, can no longer be denied by their apologists; most often the brutal reality of the Palestinian thugocracy (and, in fact, the brutality of Islamic violence all around Islam's bloody borders) is simply ignored by the MSM. (Please see The World's Pornographic Interest in Jewish Moral Failure, by Jeffrey Goldberg, HT: Glenn Reynolds, for some insight into the depths of ugliness that the Gazans inhabit.) As with most behavior there are multiple reasons for this. Journalists, like everyone else, are motivated by many desires. An in-exhaustive list would include: They desire glory, fame, and money. The ego ideal of the journalist is to be a modern day amalgam of Woodward and Bernstein, fighting for what is right against powerful interests. How does this affect their reporting of the Middle East? The sad reality is that in reporting on the Middle East there is no penalty and a great deal of reward for touting the conventional wisdom. Israel might (finally) restrict your access to the battlefield but your personal health and comfort will not be compromised by Western states, including Israel. On the other hand, reporting news that is unwelcome to the Palestinians (and one could substitute for Palestinian almost any Arab or Muslim government or paramilitary organization on the planet) risks not only losing your access but losing your head. Such a risk is likely to make any journalist think rather carefully about how he or she approaches the job. Further, since no one enters journalism hoping to be known as a coward, elaborate rationalizations for ignoring the news, in the service of one's survival, help convince the journalist that he is actually doing a good job by reporting that aspect of news most acceptable to the ones who are most willing to kill him for any deviations. On another level, most journalists have graduated from journalism schools that are fully imbued with the post-modernist perversion of reality known as political correctness. Those who most successfully internalize PC thinking quite literally find themselves unable to think about forbidden topics and unaware of their unconscious inhibitions. The less successful at internalization merely become cynical, but maintain their strict adherence to PC thought so as not to lose the approval of their more zealous colleagues (and editors.) In PC thought all conflicts are reducible to an oppressor-victim dynamic. There is a hierarchy of oppressors, with White Americans and Jews at the top of the list, and a hierarchy of victims, with dark skinned peoples traditionally trumping all others. Most recently, those who profess to act in the name of Islam have ascended to the top of the list of victims by virtue of the fact that if you do not treat them as victims (of Islamophobia, among other tragic ills inflicted upon them) they are likely to become violent and kill people. Journalists are nothing if not herd animals; there is safety in a herd and the risk of excommunication from the PC precincts carries incalculable risk for the journalist already worried about his financial future. An additional factor is that journalists live in a state of perpetual adolescence. They produce nothing but words (and the deeply held belief shared by journalists, academics, and others who live by the word that they are undervalued by the market economy) and are never held responsible for the outcome of their words. If Israel follows their enlightened prescriptions, tears down the fence, opens the crossing points and extends the hand of friendship to Gazans, and it goes horribly wrong (as did Oslo) no journalist will be attacked and murdered or maimed by a suicide bomber or a rocket; the journalists will be long gone to the next crisis upon which he can pontificate. Far too many journalists in the MSM today are cowards. They are not usually consciously, physical cowards, and are often willing to place themselves in harm's way for a story. However, they are moral cowards who are unwilling to confront their own assumptions, challenge their own in-group conventional wisdom, or challenge the thugs rather than the civilized power for whom telling "truth to power" has no cost. The MSM is dieing of the moral rot that has entered its blood stream; sadly their moral rot will continue to contaminate the news until real alternatives mature. Contact Marc Samberg at marcsamberg@yahoo.com |
|
IF ISRAEL DOESN'T FINISH THE JOB
Posted by Mrla, January 9, 2009. |
|
This was written by Moshe Arens and called "The Task at Hand."
It appeared in Haaretz
|
|
We have reached a crucial stage in the IDF's operation against Hamas in the Gaza Strip. If we are not careful, we may have defeat staring us in the face — another defeat, after the fiasco of the Second Lebanon War. This time at the hands of Hamas, a terrorist organization even smaller and weaker than Hezbollah. Insistent calls are being heard for a cease-fire. Some of these calls come from outside Israel and others come from within our midst. If the IDF does not complete the mission it has been assigned, of suppressing the launching of rockets from the Gaza Strip against the cities, towns and villages of southern Israel, and if the final act before a cease-fire goes into effect ends up being an avalanche of rockets fired by Hamas against Israel, not only Hamas and the Arab states, but most of the world, will consider Hamas as having succeeded in defeating Israel. This would be a repetition of what happened during the Second Lebanon War. Aside from the danger that Hamas, during a cease-fire, would equip itself with a new supply of rockets, some of even greater range than the ones currently in its arsenal, and that the civilian population in the south will continue to live under the threat of renewed rocket fire by Hamas, such a second defeat would do irreparable damage to the general security of Israel, serving as an invitation to further provocations and aggression by Israel's enemies in the years to come. All of Israel's citizens, not only those living in the south, would bear the burden of such a development. It was Henry Kissinger who said that "the conventional army loses if it does not win — the guerilla wins if he does not lose." Any terrorist group that manages to face up to the might of the IDF and survive while continuing its attacks against Israel will invariably be seen as the victor. In the present fighting in the Gaza Strip, the IDF will lose if it does not win, and Hamas will emerge as the victor. No amount of wordage in a UN Security Council resolution calling for a cease-fire, or promises offered Israel by the international community, are going to change the face of the end result. That is what happened when UN Security Council Resolution 1701 brought about the cease-fire that ended the Second Lebanon War and the deployment of UNIFIL forces in southern Lebanon. You only need to take a look at what has happened to Hezbollah, its stockpile of rockets and its position in Lebanon since the cease-fire to see what is likely to occur in the Gaza Strip in the wake of a similar cease-fire there. For some reason, it is Israel that has difficulty learning that a cease-fire with terrorists is only to the advantage of the terrorists. Terrorism has to be destroyed. Unlike the traditional Israeli position in the days of Ben-Gurion and Begin, which put Israel's security interests first, in recent years some of our politicians have become obsessed with the notion that any Israeli military activity is bound to be limited by pressure from the international community, pressure to which we presumably will have to accede even if it puts our national security at risk. In fact, the understanding in much of the world, and especially in the United States, for Israel's security, and especially for its battle against terrorism, has grown considerably in recent years. The idea that Israel may face unbearable international pressure that would limit its response against terrorist forces has little basis in fact. During the Second Lebanon War, the IDF could have had all the time it needed if it had taken effective action against Hezbollah, and such action would have been applauded in many places abroad. The same is true in the present battle against Hamas — if we are seen as being successful, we will have nothing to fear from any quarter. If there are any doubts in our midst they can be laid to rest by recalling the statements made by Mayor Michael Bloomberg, of New York, during his recent visit to Ashkelon, and those made by senior Democratic and Republican senators and by President Bush. Most of those Israeli politicians who speak of the need to stop our military activity before international pressure forces us to stop have precious little experience with the American political establishment. Our job now is to keep our eye on the ball, and not be diverted from the task at hand. The IDF must continue to pursue the mission it has been assigned and put an end to the firing of rockets from the Gaza Strip. We have the ability to do so and it must be done. The consequences of failure, regardless of the explanations offered by Israeli politicians and the wording of the relevant UN Security Council Resolution, would bode very ill for Israel. Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
THE MASSACRE OF MUSLIM CIVILIANS THAT NO ONE PROTESTED
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 9, 2009. |
|
1. The Massacre of Muslim Civilians that No One Protested I usually do not post follow-ups on previous postings, but this time is an exception. A few days back I posted a piece on the two wars against terrorism and the differences between them. Israel's battle against the genocidal Islamofascist terrorists of the Hamas, which began on the same day that the war of Sri Lanka against Tamil Tiger terrorism ended. Sri Lanka won that war. It laughingly dismissed all the nonsensical mantras about how terrorism cannot be ended with military force and it just went ahead and ended terrorism using military force. Interestingly for me, that piece got a huge amount of attention. A
bit to my own surprise. It has by now been reprinted all over the web.
The Jewish Press runs an expanded version this weekend
While preparing for that BBC interview, I did a bit more homework and I would like to draw reader attention to a few new interesting facts. The war against terrorism in Sri Lanka is a war against the Tamil Hindu minority and its terrorist separatist movement by the Sinhalese Buddhist majority of the country. So here is my current events quiz of the day. Who has killed more Muslims: Israel in Gaza or the Tamil terrorists in Sri Lanka? Huh?, you say. That must be a misprint. Didn't I mean Hindus or Buddhists in Sri Lanka? No, grasshopper, that was no misprint. Read the question again. Who has killed more MUSLIMS? The answer is that the Tamil Tiger terrorists have killed far, far more Muslims than the number of Muslims killed in Gaza during the Israeli anti-terror battle there, almost all of those Sri Lankan Muslims being innocent civilians and a few of them being policemen. In Gaza the vast majority of people killed by Israel have been armed Hamas terrorists. True, most of the 58,000. 70,000 people killed in the Sri Lanka war against terrorism were NOT Muslim, but quite a few WERE. How many exactly — is unknown. You will not find any estimates by checking the web site of the Sri Lanka Muslim Council because it is filled with web items denouncing Israel and calling for its annihilation. But how can that be?, you ask. After all, Sri Lanka is a country of Hindus and Buddhists. Well, it turns out that 8% of the people in Sri Lanka are Muslims, and the Tamil terrorists have gone out of their way to target Muslim civilians there in a brutal manner. Muslim political activists around the world have been strangely silent about all this. CAIR, the pro-terror Muslim lobby in the US, has not said a word. Not a single Western campus demonstration has protested the butchering of Muslims in Sri Lanka nor called for divestment from that country. Not a single Western leftist professor or anarchist protester has denounced Sri Lanka as a Nazi genocidal regime, nor compared its war against the Tamil separatists as morally equivalent to the extermination of the Warsaw Ghetto by the Germans. Moreover, a campaign of ethnic cleansing of Muslims living in Tamil areas has also been carried out over the past 15 years or so. Not a single article or web page has referred to it as a "Nakba." In the northern province of Sri Lanka alone, which is predominantly Tamil, 75,000 Muslims were expelled, and thousands more were expelled from other Tamil areas. The number of Muslims murdered by the Tamils has been at least in the many hundreds, and probably was in the thousands. In one incident alone, the Tamil Tiger terrorists massacred 166 Muslim civilians in a place called Palliyagodella. In another, they massacred 113 Sinhalese and Muslim policemen AFTER they had surrendered to the Tigers. The Tigers used suicide bombers and loved to plant bombs in market places and other public spaces, Palestinian style. The BBC has evidently run a total of two short stories over the years about the massacres of Muslims in Sri Lanka. Yet it has run countless stories in which Arabs and others allege that Israel is conducting a "genocidal massacre" in Gaza and also supposedly did so in Jenin. The BBC ran countless such stories after the battle of Jenin in April, 2002, in which as many as 20 Arab civilians may have died collaterally in the heavy battle in a built-up urban area, and in which 33 Israeli soldiers were killed. The BBC never apologized for describing those events as a massacre. The deputy editor of Maariv, Ben Dror Yemini (see next item below), this past week addressed the "disproportionate" charges against Israel by retelling the numbers of civilians killed by NATO forces in Serbia or by Europeans in Afghanistan. It is hardly surprising that the numbers in those two arenas make the total sum of Palestinian civilians killed in the past hundred years of genocidal aggression against Israel seem miniscule in comparison. But the fact that more Muslim civilians died in the (successful) war against Tamil terrorism than in the battle against the Hamas is a more dramatic demonstration of media bias. And the fact that no major media have made the comparison between the two wars against terrorism, not even Islamic web sites and news agencies, should teach us a tremendous lesson. I did some internet comparison internet searching this week. While doing Google and Yahoo searches I found: After two weeks of fighting in Gaza in which no massacres at all took place, there were six times as many web pages to be found on both search engines for the pair of search terms "Gaza and Massacre" than there were for "Sri Lanka and Massacre," this after years of war in Sri Lanka and a death toll more than 100 times HIGHER than the Gaza death toll. The number of web pages with "Gaza and disproportionate" is of course also far higher than those with search terms "NATO and Serbia and disproportionate" or "Afghanistan and disproportionate," in spite of the fact that far more civilians were killed in those places than in Gaza In Serbia a NATO missile went off course and hit the capital city of Bulgaria by mistake. So much for surgical strikes and the criticism of Europeans when an occasional Israel shell goes off course. The number of internet hits for the term "Israel Lobby," which barely exists at all, is far greater than the number of the "Farm Lobby," which ruthlessly dictates and controls farm policy all over the world. References to ethnic cleansing in Gaza are at least 6 times more common than to those for massacres in Sri Lanka, and of course the only ethnic cleansing that ever really took place in Gaza was the expulsion of its Jewish population by the Kadima government of Arik Sharon and Ehud Olmert. 2. This is one of the best pieces written in recent days about "proportionate vs. disproportionate" use of force. War Crimes
So what exactly is our story with the bombs and civilians injuries? Are we the most evil element in the world, as the Evil and Stupidity Front claims, from Professor Noam Chomsky and Jose Saramago, through Ahmadinejad and Nasrallah, and up to some of the moviemakers and authors, among us too, that agree that Israel commits crimes against humanity? 5/8/2006 A short historical reminder. This time we won't say a word about Muslims that butcher Muslims. We got used to it. The Muslims, especially in the eyes of the Left, are the retarded kids of the world. From them there is no need to demand responsibility, morale, international law. They are allowed. This time we will deal with the West. We won't head as far as the bombing of Dresden. we'll go to recent history. It happened in 1999. Just 7 years ago. Milosevic irritated the Free World when he tried to take control of Kosovo. NATO started bombing. Following is an incomplete list of the injuries. Just of civilian ones. On April 12th. 12 killed in a bombing of a civilian train; on April 14th. 70 refugees are killed in a 'hunt after warriors.' NATO forces admit that they find it hard to estimate the number of casualties; Apri 27th. 16 civilians are killed. Two missiles diverted from their course; April 28th. A stray missile reaches a peaceful neighborhood in Sophia, capital of Bulgaria. May 1st. 27 killed in a bombing of a bus on a bridge in Belgrade. According to other claims 47 were killed. All of them civilians; May6th. 15 civilians are killed in the town of Nis in Yugoslavia; on May 7th. the Chinese embassy in Belgrade is erroneously bombed. 3 civilians were killed; May 13th. at least 100 civilians are killed in the village of Korisa. Burnt bodies of kids are presented in the world media. NATO's spokesman announces that the bombings were against.legitimate military targets.. May 19th. NATO airplanes are bombing the Belgrade hospital. At least 3 patients end their lives; May 30th. 11 civilians are killed in the bombing of a bridge. They were on their way to the local market. On the same day the NATO bombers manage to bomb an old age home, causing the death of 20 of its residents; on May 31st another 11 civilians are killed in a bombing. NATO, by the way, spread leaflets telling the civilians that bridges are about to be bombed. Obviously that didn't help. Does this reminds something to somebody? There was a general sorrow for hurting innocents, but nobody dreamt of a cease fire. The bombings continued. It took months. Not days or weeks. The determination proved itself. Milosovic was forced to accept the international terms. We've been in this situation before Let's continue to November 2004. The Ivory Coast Air Force attacked rebel concentrations. Since when does anybody count black people at all? That's it, to the bombers. bad luck 9 French were killed by accident. Soldiers. Not civilians. The French were angry. So angry that they wiped out the entire Ivory Coat Air Force and took control of the country's airport. And that was only the beginning. When it was the natives. turn to get angry, the French were sure to enforce order in a very aggressive way, which included killing 27 protesters. Now let's go back and discuss the proportions. Milosovic didn't announce that he intends to destroy all of Europe. The Ivory Coast didn't announce that its intention is to destroy France. And yet, the reactions of NATO and French were harsh and hard. The Security Council did not call for a cease fire. Au contraire. It was obvious that it's necessary to get rid of the bad guy in the story. It took a lot of time. In the end he had to bend. We should be sorry for every innocent that gets hurt. The question is whether somebody has invented a formula in which it's possible to battle evil without hurting the innocents. In NATO they didn't find that formula. In France neither. When we get to Israel the rules are being changed. Israel is required to restrain itself. Why? After all Nasrallah is much more dangerous than Milosovic. The Hezbollah is not a guerilla organization. It's an organization that possesses long-range missiles. In normal countries the state has an army. In the case of Lebanon, Hezbollah has a state. The Hezbollah controls Lebanon and Iran controls the Hezbollah. And also develops nuclear weapons, and also announces that it wants to wipe Israel off the map. These are just declarations, the members of the Evil Front will tell us, the stupidity and reconciliation, those signed on various petitions. If we will just turn over the second cheek, Ahmandinejad and Nasrallah will send us flowers. We've been in this situation before. We have the right to prevent it from recurring. Written by Ben-Dror Yamini
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
|
|
WE ARE ALL SOLDIERS ON THE FRONT LINE
Posted by Ari Bussel, January 9 2009. |
|
Dear Friends of the Free World, Dear Friends of Israel, We are now into the 14th day of Operation Cast Lead. When I arrived to Israel 14 weeks ago, I did not know that Israel will finally find the courage to respond to almost eight years of rockets fired at it. The perception was that Hizbollah and Hamas can continue their race for armament, that Iran can continue its nuclear program and its calls to the annihilation of the Jewish State, while the world looks the other way and Israel itself has lost its deterrence, its conviction, its will to prevail. Lack of action was justly perceived as a sign of great weakness. Israelis, like the enemy, expected nothing to happen since the overwhelming focus in Israel was on the upcoming election. It looked as if, once again, Israel was submitting to an enemy whose appetite knows no boundaries. Things have finally changed — Israel's leadership is not deterred from responding. Differences were set aside, unity became the practice rather than the topic of discussion. A new equation is being formulated: Firing should stop. Re-armament must stop. A kidnapped soldier is not forgotten. Anything to the contrary will elicit a response. It has become apparent over the past two weeks that Israel will continue its efforts until it achieves the objectives of the Operation. Israel must regain its deterrence and inflict such a blow to Hamas that the lesson be remembered for years to come. By pursuing the goals of the Operation, Israel is strengthening its diminished deterrence. Thus, it must exit only when the goals have been achieved. It is likely that reaching the goals of Operation Cast Lead will open a new front or fronts. We must not be afraid, since eventually we will have to pay the price. The longer we wait, the higher the toll. Norma Zager, investigative journalist, writes a Postcard from Home: We all read Ari's postcards and it frightens me for my children, all children and all grandchildren. I desperately wish I could send him some news from here, the United States, home, that would allay his fears the war is lost. It's impossible to do. This makes me sadder. The fight has transferred to new fronts, the world over. Demonstrations throughout the USA and Europe are showing the true face of anti-Semitism, the real hatred for Israel and the Jews. Here is a report by a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles who visited Israel for the first time less than a month ago: Thanks for the updates on what has been gong on. I think a lot of us have a much better understanding of situation since our trip. Over here (in LA) we have been dealing with about three protests a week at the Israeli Consulate. It's pretty heating on both sides of the debate (Israel supporters on one side of the street and Palestinian supporters on the other). You are all soldiers on the front line. You are all fighting for the world, for all the freedoms we have grown so accustomed to enjoy. The front line in Gaza and the 26 mile radius around it — current reach of rockets — has extended. You are now involved — in Los Angeles and New York and Miami, in London and Paris and Antwerp, in South Africa and New Zealand and Australia, in Hong Kong and Japan and Taiwan — and there is no backing out. With clarity of thought and moral conviction, we march together forward. We must be victorious. I welcome your comments, thoughts and recent experiences. On behalf of Israel, thank you for taking part in this war for our continued existence. Contact Ari Bussel at aribussel@gmail.com and visit his blogsite: web.me.com/bussel, where you can read other essays on Operation Cast Lead. |
|
THIS SHOULD HAVE GONE OUT LAST NIGHT. BUT WITH 30 ROCKET ATTACKS ...
Posted by GWT, January 9, 2009. |
|
This post should have gone out last night but with 30 rockets here and there not counting the ones from Lebanon, sometimes the internet or electric lines collapse. That is what happened. Now the mail might have gone last night but in the meantime we lost Omer Rabinowitz HY"D 23 of Golani. Major Roee Rosner HY"D 27 died when he was instructing a group of soldiers in an Arab building and an RPG from an Arab in hiding came through the window. He was only married for 10 months. Tank commander Sgt. Amir Robinson HY"D 20 was shot by sniper fire when he opened his tank to get his bearings. May their memory be blessed. Useless Nudniks = UN insecurity council is meeting to support a cease fire that will allow for international terrorism to target also the US, Britain, France, Germany and will help Moslem terrorism against Moscow. Bravo to all the hypocrites there. Thursday night, Jan. 8, Israeli forces fought their way into Jebalya in the northern half of the Gaza Strip, showing they were not deterred from going forward into the adjoining densely-packed alleys of Gaza City's downtown. Significantly, most Hamas leaders hail from Jebalya. Rafah, which is split between southern Gaza and northern Sinai, is the key to control of the Egyptian border and the strategic Philadelphi border route with its smuggling tunnels. Israel's emissary to Cairo, Amos Gilead of the defense ministry, returned home Friday, Jan. 9, reporting he had found nothing in Egypt's ceasefire proposals worth his government's consideration. DEBKAfile's intelligence sources report that Thursday, Hamas leaders and commanders emerged from their underground hideouts for their first look at the devastation wrought in 13 days of Israeli aerial bombardment. They took advantage of the pause in Israel's military operations for supplies to reach the Gaza population to come out of their holes but soon headed back to safety. IDF commanders hoped their lust for battle would be cooled by the sight of Gaza in ruins and they would be shocked enough to give up and stop fighting. This would settle the serious argument among Hamas leaders in both Damascus and Gaza over Egypt's ceasefire proposals. Politburo chief Khaled Meshaal flatly rejects them and favors breaking off contacts with Cairo altogether. Mussa Abu Marzouk would accept them. He is backed by Gaza prime minister Ismail Haniyeh who maintains that Egypt is Hamas' only remaining lifeline which it dare not jeopardize. However, the military arm in Gaza and its heads, Khalil al Haya, Said Sayam and Muhammad Jabry, are strongly in favor of severing ties with Egypt and fighting on. Our sources disclose that the Hamas extremists are finding time for the brutal persecution of their rivals, the Palestinian Fatah. Under cover of the general mayhem, Hamas gangs are kidnapping Fatah operatives and executing them. Their bodies are tossed onto the mountains of uncollected garbage and their kinsmen informed where to find them. Hamas leaders are convinced their rivals are plotting to exploit the fighting to overthrow their regime. Gaza terrorists fired three Grad rockets at Ashdod on Friday afternoon, despite a three-hour temporary humanitarian truce that was supposed to have begun at 1 p.m. Yesterday about 30 rockets were fired and today over 30 rockets thanks to the Useless Nudniks. The UN insecurity Cabinet not practical says Israeli Cabinet as Hamas rejects it first. Man lightly injured in Rehovot attack Young Jenin resident arrested in central Israeli city after threatening to harm residents with axe; tells investigators he sought to avenge his friend's death in Gaza bombing Police: Pipe bomb incident in Lod terror-related
Investigation of pipe bombs thrown at building inhabited by
religious-nationaliInvestigation of pipe bombs thrown at building inhabited by
religious-nationali Be well and good Shabbos,
Contact GWY at gwy123@aol.com |
|
GAZA WAR LESSONS
Posted by Menachem Kovacs, January 9, 2009. |
|
Shalom Chaverim, One of the implicit & explicit conclusions of many analysts as a result of Hamas' effective & expanded rocket attacks on Israel even during the current war in Gaza is that the paramount goal of the Jewish government of Israel should be maximum security for the Jewish State, its People & its Land. To that end, it is imperative inter alia that (1) we retain & expand our military & civilian presence in Judah & Samaria (The West Bank), (2) that we return to Gush Katif & do the same, and (3) that we must retain the strategic Golan. These security-dictated conclusions mean that there is no place for 2 states in our one country of Eretz Yisrael, no reason to leave Gaza, & no purpose for negotiations with Syria on the Golan if we are indeed to be a viable & secure country and not a memory, G-d forbid. There is an urgent need to reframe the debate because much of the Israeli & US Jewish power elites may still be deceiving themselves with a deep Oslo mindset that giving our land to our enemy will please & appease them. They want it all & they want us out, dead or alive, preferably the former, G-d forbid. Another major lesson is that Israel is waging war not only for herself but is on the front lines against the international jihad whose goal is to destroy the civilized world. Thus, it is in the interest of the new US government and other such nations to recognize this fact & give maximum cooperation & support to destroy the threats posed by the Islamist enemies of which Iran is paramount but far from alone. We need to pray & work for theseg results based on this reality. Didan Netzach! Good Shabbos.
Rabbi Menachem Kovacs is Director of the Jewish Roots Center of Baltimore, an education and research center on Torah and social science topics. He is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Montgomery College in Maryland. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: GAMES AND RISKS
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 9, 2009. |
We suffered one additional loss yesterday: Staff-Sergeant Amit Robinson, 20, of Kibbutz Magal, was apparently killed by Palestinian sniper fire. during battle. With each loss we acknowledge the important sacrifice that has been made. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today is Friday, and Shabbat still comes early. Thus, this posting must be brief, offering only basics; more will follow after Shabbat. ~~~~~~~~~~ Late yesterday, the Security Council passed a resolution with regard to a cease-fire in Gaza. This is Resolution 9567. and was sponsored by the United Kingdom (Britain). The vote was 14-0 with the US abstaining — choosing this time not to veto. Please understand this is NOT a binding resolution, but only a recommendation. It is a question of what chapter of the UN charter the resolution falls under, and I hope to have more details on this soon from my legal advisor on these matters. Rice made a statement about how this will lead to a "durable" cease-fire. Don't believe her. The resolution was without teeth, and depends upon the details to be worked out via the Egyptian proposal. After all of the statements regarding grave concern about the humanitarian situation and escalating violence, the need for "sustained and regular flow of goods and people through the Gaza crossings" (a nod to Hamas), and condemnation of all acts of violence against civilians, what it calls for, in brief, is: "... an immediate, durable and fully respected cease-fire, leading to the full withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza." It calls on UN member states "to intensify efforts to provide arrangements and guarantees in Gaza in order to sustain a durable cease-fire and calm, including to prevent illicit trafficking in arms" and ensure the "sustained reopening" of border crossings. (Note the balanced response to demands here.) It urges international efforts to provide humanitarian aid and rebuild Gaza's economy. And it welcomes the Egyptian initiative to arrange and implement a cease-fire as well as other regional and international efforts that are underway. ~~~~~~~~~~ So, what is this? It is simply words without substance: Cut out the fighting, guys, and figure out how to make peace work. Everything theoretically depends upon the strength of the Egyptian initiative, the details of which have not been revealed and very likely have not even been structured yet. Israel should stop fighting but doesn't have to withdraw until the details are in place and the cease-fire is seen to be "sustainable." But this is not a tenable place for us. At some point we must either move ahead with attack or move out. We cannot keep troops in Gaza in static positions, waiting. ~~~~~~~~~~ This what Gerald Steinberg, Chair of the Political Studies Dept. of Bar Ilan University, has to say about what's happening: "Every political leader and diplomat wants to be seen as the key actor, or at least a major player, in the cease-fire game. The appearance of peacemaking suggests international power and prestige, and is accompanied by meetings in exotic settings, providing excellent photo-opportunities and constant press coverage. http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1231424896098&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull ~~~~~~~~~~ The Israeli delegation to Egypt, sent to discuss the plan, has returned and reported to the government leaders. Olmert, Livni and Barak have met in preliminary consultation, prior to a Security Cabinet meeting scheduled for later today. The statement Livni made this morning was this: "Israel's past, present and future actions are based solely on its considerations, the security of Israel's residents and its right to self-defense." In other words, we'll do what we decide, not what the UN thinks we should do. Please G-d, she should mean it. ~~~~~~~~~~ The decision of the Security Cabinet will be released too late for me to include it in this posting. But as things stand now, I believe there can be no question of our ceasing fire in Gaza now. Hamas has already said it would not accept a cease-fire as proposed by Egypt. Its response to the UN resolution has been to launch a major attack on our south: There have been today, as I write, 25 rockets launched in a short period of time. Grads hit areas around Beersheba and Ashkelon, Kassams hit Sderot region, mortar shells struck in Eshkol. Fighting inside of Gaza has also been heavy. ~~~~~~~~~~ Other issues to be looked at after Shabbat: the UN (and particularly UNRWA) as a PR voice for Hamas, and the fact that PA President Mahmoud Abbas's term has now expired, at least according to Hamas.
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il
and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
|
|
SULH = PEACE?
Posted by Brother Shane, January 8, 2009. |
|
This was written by Cheryl Young (cherlyyoung@yahoo.com). |
The reason that I am forwarding this photograph of the young girls in Muslim hijab carrying a sign which at first glance seems to say peace in 3 languages, Hebrew, Arabic and English is because I found it very revealing. According to my understanding, the Hebrew word "shalom" is used as a greeting when meeting a person. it is from the trisconsonantal root S-L-M. Shalom in Hebrew is written SH-L-O(vav)- M. The Arabic word that is used in the same context is "salaam." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/As-Salamu_ Alaykum and is also from a trisconsonantal root S-L-M. I looked up the word in Wikipedia and it is spelled sin-lam-alef-mim but that is not the word that is written on the sign the little girl is holding. The word that is written is another kind of "S" called sad with lam and hah so it is S-L-H.. According to Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sulh Sulh is an Arabic word that an Islamic commander offers as a respite from military jihad to the enemy who submits. It is derived from the Arabic word ''musalaha'' According to the lady I spoke with in chat at AskMoses http://www.askmoses.com/en/, there is no equivalent word in Hebrew. Tthis one sign sums up the Muslim viewpoint of peace....the only peace is submission. This is very disturbing. It is even more disturbing that the sign is held by young girls.
Contact Brother Shane at wisevirgin_777@yahoo.com
|
|
HOW THE BRITISH FOUGHT TERROR
Posted by Eli E. Hertz, January 8, 2009. |
|
This is dedicated to Mr. Tony Blair, the Quartet's envoy to the Middle East, and to Mr. Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister for the United Kingdom. Hypocrisy at its best! |
|
"Demolishing the homes of Arab civilians ... Shooting handcuffed prisoners... Forcing local Arabs to test areas where mines may have been planted..." — Rafael Medoff, April 22, 2002, The Jerusalem Post These sound like the sort of accusations made by British and other European officials concerning Israel's recent actions in Jenin. In fact, they are descriptions from official British documents concerning the methods used by the British authorities to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in Jenin and elsewhere in 1938. The documents were declassified by London in 1989. They provide details of the British Mandatory government's response to the assassination of a British district commissioner by a Palestinian Arab terrorist in Jenin in the summer of 1938. Even after the suspected assassin was captured (and then shot dead while allegedly trying to escape), the British authorities decided that "a large portion of the town should be blown up" as punishment. On August 25 of that year, a British convoy brought 4,200 kilos of explosives to Jenin for that purpose. In the Jenin operation and on other occasions, local Arabs were forced to drive "mine-sweeping taxis" ahead of British vehicles in areas where Palestinian Arab terrorists were believed to have planted mines, in order "to reduce [British] landmine casualties." The British authorities frequently used these and similar methods to combat Palestinian Arab terrorism in the late 1930s. BRITISH forces responded to the presence of terrorists in the Arab village of Miar, north of Haifa, by blowing up house after house in October 1938. "When the troops left, there was little else remaining of the once-busy village except a pile of mangled masonry," The New York Times reported. The declassified documents refer to an incident in Jaffa in which a handcuffed prisoner was shot by the British police. Under Emergency Regulation 19b, the British Mandate government could demolish any house located in a village where terrorists resided, even if that particular house had no direct connection to terrorist activity. Mandate official Hugh Foot later recalled: "When we thought that a village was harboring rebels, we'd go there and mark one of the large houses. Then, if an incident was traced to that village, we'd blow up the house we'd marked." The High Commissioner for Palestine, Harold MacMichael, defended the practice: "The provision is drastic, but the situation has demanded drastic powers." MacMichael was furious over what he called the "grossly exaggerated accusations" that England's critics were circulating concerning British anti-terror tactics in Palestine. Arab allegations that British soldiers gouged out the eyes of Arab prisoners were quoted prominently in the Nazi German press and elsewhere. The declassified documents also record discussions among officials of the Colonial Office concerning the rightness or wrongness of the anti-terror methods used in Palestine. Lord Dufferin remarked: "British lives are being lost and I don't think that we, from the security of Whitehall, can protest squeamishly about measures taken by the men in the frontline." Sir John Shuckburgh defended the tactics on the grounds that the British were confronted "not with a chivalrous opponent playing the game according to the rules, but with gangsters and murderers." There were many differences between British policy in the 1930s and Israeli policy today, but one stands out — the British, faced with a level of Palestinian Arab terrorism considerably less lethal than that which Israel faces today, utilized anti-terror methods considerably harsher than those used by Israeli forces. 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. And visit www.mythsandfacts.org |
|
THE WORLD UNDERGOES A MAJOR CHANGE
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 8, 2009. |
|
A failure of maintenance of moral standards in a time of major shifts in a technologically driven world, communication infrastructure such as the world has never seen, transportation enabling population exchanges changing the landscape of nearly every country! Certainly democracies! It is not the case in Islamic ruled States, entities on account of the xenophobic dictate of Islam! However, globalized economics fudges as well geographic boundaries and borders! While Islam's major feature — it can verily be said — is a deign to eliminate geographic borders as define European countries, Western hemisphere's geography, Asia and impose Caliphate rule, this in a sense parallels the effect of globalized economics. It as well eliminates heretofore borders and boundaries that once strictly defined countries as national entities with inherent languages and cultures. A "new world order"? A new context to point and counterpoint dialectic? Their themes, if you will, one based on Islamic deign and the other economics? Not the first time the world has undergone major change!
What is Happening in America Yes, It is the political scene in cahoots with globalized economy merchandising our lives and our democracy — burning both ends of the candle of our nation! Its' enablers in league with deniers of truth who bubble themselves against accountability to the public good and the responsibility to morality and standards. They have been hedging their bets on all scores to see if so doing would win them their goal for more money! If the public would let them get away with it? They did! Now everyone is screaming theft? Thief of what? Only money? Our national soul and the vision the founders of America had in creating our once beautiful democracy! God works in mysterious ways his miracles to perform! America came into being assuring a remnant of Jewry would survive the Spanish Inquistion, the pogroms of Russia, the oppression of European monarchs and rulers, life as dhimmis in Moslem ruled cities and occupied territories,the Shoah! Was Right from Wrong Unseen?
Yet — who is to say what the good works and wrongs of men have wrought?
Without principles,morality and integrity
Its the soul we must replenish
Sonia |
|
ON THE CNN STRATEGY
Posted by Mrla, January 8, 2009. |
|
This is by Alan Dershowitz and appeared yesterday in the National Post. Alan M. Dershowitz is a law professor at Harvard. His latest book is The Case Against Israel's Enemies (Wiley, 2008). |
As Israel persists in its military efforts — by ground, air and sea — to protect its citizens from deadly Hamas rockets, and as protests against Israel increase around the world, the success of the abominable Hamas double war crime strategy becomes evident. The strategy is as simple as it is cynical: Provoke Israel by playing Russian roulette with its children, firing rockets at kindergartens, playgrounds and hospitals; hide behind its own civilians when firing at Israeli civilians; refuse to build bunkers for its own civilians; have TV cameras ready to transmit every image of dead Palestinians, especially children; exaggerate the number of civilians killed by including as "children" Hamas fighters who are 16 or 17 years old and as "women," female terrorists. Hamas itself has a name for this. They call it "the CNN strategy" (this is not to criticize CNN or any other objective news source for doing its job; it is to criticize Hamas for exploiting the freedom of press which it forbids in Gaza). The CNN strategy is working because decent people all over the world are naturally sickened by images of dead and injured children. When they see such images repeatedly flashed across TV screens, they tend to react emotionally. Rather than asking why these children are dying and who is to blame for putting them in harm's way, average viewers, regardless of their political or ideological perspective, want to see the killing stopped. They blame those whose weapons directly caused the deaths, rather than those who provoked the violence by deliberately targeting civilians. They forget the usual rules of morality and law. For example, when a murderer takes a hostage and fires from behind his human shield, and a policeman, in an effort to stop the shooting accidentally kills the hostage, the law of every country holds the hostage taker guilty of murder even though the policeman fired the fatal shot. The same is true of the law of war. The use of human shields, in the way Hamas uses the civilian population of Gaza, is a war crime — as is its firing of rockets at Israeli civilians. Every human shield that is killed by Israeli self-defence measures is the responsibility of Hamas, but you wouldn't know that from watching the media coverage. The CNN strategy seems to work better, at least in some parts of the world, against Israel that it would against other nations. There is much more protest — and fury — directed against Israel when it inadvertently kills approximately 100 civilians in a just war of self-defence, than against Arab and Muslim nations and groups that deliberately kill far more civilians for no legitimate reason. It isn't the nature of the victims, since more Arabs and Muslim civilians are killed every day in Africa and the Middle East by Arab and Muslim governments and groups with little or no protests. (For example, on the first day of Israel's ground attack, approximately 30 Palestinians, almost all Hamas combatants, were killed. On the same day an Islamic suicide bomber blew herself up in a mosque in Iraq, killing 40 innocent Muslims. No protests. Little media coverage.) It isn't the nature of the killings, since Israel goes to extraordinary lengths to avoid killing civilians — if for no other reason than that it hurts its cause — while Hamas does everything in its power to force Israel to kill Palestinian civilians by firing its missiles from densely populated civilian areas and refusing to build shelters for its civilians. It isn't the nature of the conflict, either, because Israel is fighting a limited war of self-defense designed to protect its own civilians from rocket attacks, while most of those killed by Arabs and Muslims are killed in genocidal and tribal warfare with no legitimate aim. The world simply doesn't seem to care when Arabs and Muslims kill large numbers of other Arabs and Muslims, but a qualitatively different standard applies when the Jewish state kills even a relatively small number of Muslims and Arabs in a war of self-defense. The international community doesn't even seem to care when Palestinian children are killed by rocket fire — unless it is from Israeli rockets. The day before the recent outbreak, Hamas fired an anti-personnel rocket at Israeli civilians, but the rocket fell short of its target and killed two Palestinian girls. Yet there was virtually no coverage and absolutely no protests against these "collateral" civilian deaths. Hamas refused to allow TV cameras to show these dead Palestinian children. Nor have there been protests against the cold-blooded murders by Hamas and its supporters of dozens of Palestinian civilians who allegedly "collaborated" with Israel. Indeed, Hamas and Fatah have killed far more Palestinian civilians over the past several years than have the Israelis, but you wouldn't know that from the media, the United Nations or protesters who focus selectively on only those deaths caused by Israeli military actions. The protesters who filled the streets of London, Paris and San Francisco were nowhere to be seen when hundreds of Jewish children were murdered by Palestinian terrorists over the years. Moreover, the number of civilians killed by Israel is almost always exaggerated. First, it is widely assumed that if a victim is a "child" or a "woman," he or she is necessarily a civilian. Consider the following report in Thursday's New York Times: "Hospital officials in Gaza said that of the more than 390 people killed by Israeli fighter planes since Saturday, 38 were children and 25 women." Some of these children and women were certainly civilians, but others were equally certainly combatants: Hamas often uses 14-, 15-, 16-and 17-year-olds, as well as women, as terrorists. Israel is entitled under international law to treat these children and women as the combatants they have become. Hamas cannot, out of one side of its mouth, boast that it recruits children and women to become terrorists, and then, out of the other side of its mouth, complain when Israel takes it at its word. The media should look closely and critically at the number of claimed civilian victims before accepting self-serving and self-contradictory exaggerations. By any objective count, the number of genuinely innocent civilians killed by the Israeli Air Force in Gaza is lower than the collateral deaths caused by any nation in a comparable situation. Hamas does everything in its power to provoke Israel into killing as many Palestinian civilians as possible, in order to generate condemnation against the Jewish state. It has gone so far as firing rockets from Palestinian schoolyards and hiding its terrorists in Palestinian maternity wards. Lest there be any doubt about the willingness of Hamas officials to expose their families to martyrdom, remember that the Hamas terrorist leader recently killed in an Israeli air attack sent his own son to be a suicide bomber. He also refused to allow his family to leave the house, even after learning that he and his house has been placed on the a of Israeli military targets. The reality is that the elected and de facto government of Gaza has declared war against Israel. Under Article 51 of the United Nations Charter, it has committed an "armed attack" against the Jewish state. The Hamas charter calls for Israel's total destruction. Under international law, Israel is entitled to take whatever military action is necessary to repel that attack and stop the rockets. It must seek to minimize civilian deaths consistent with the legitimate military goal, and it is doing precisely that, despite Hamas's efforts to maximize civilian deaths on both sides.
Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com
|
|
THE DISENGAGEMENT WAR
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, January 8, 2009. |
|
Two healthy and hope-arousing phenomena have become apparent in the Disengagement War being waged at the present. The first phenomenon is the all-pervasive unity and the basic will of the nation to fight for its life. The second phenomenon is the IDF's ability to learn from past mistakes and its generally good level of professionalism. The cries of the Jews expelled from Gush Katif — "Don't call me when you return to Gaza" — have dissipated. Israelis everywhere — expellees included — have put previous bitterness aside and are running to fight in Gaza. It seems that the feeling of unity is stronger than all criticism — as justified as that criticism may be. The leaders sending our soldiers to fight in Gaza are the same cruel leaders who sealed their hearts to the pleas of the Gush Katif residents. They are the same leaders who brought the current catastrophe upon us. But for the average citizen — none of that matters. The average Israeli does not go to war to fight for Olmert. He goes to war to fight for his country. And that is very beautiful. But here is where things get complicated. When everyone is running to fight in Gaza without looking back, all that I can do is to try to forget all the articles and analyses that I have written explaining why Israel should not enter Gaza, pray for the soldiers and civilians in the South and pray that maybe I am mistaken and that something good actually will come out of this war. But only too quickly, my initial assumption is proven correct: If Israel cannot define a real goal for this war, it cannot win. All the IDF's professionalism and the arduous training with which the new Chief of Staff has equipped the army are ineffective if Israel's leaders cannot define the goal of the fighting. He who cannot define the goal cannot win. And if you can't win — it is best not to start fighting. And if you have started fighting nevertheless, you quickly find yourself entrenched in the heart of Gaza in the worst of all positions: You can't win; if you retreat you admit another defeat and a stalemate turns your soldiers into easy targets for kidnappers, suicide bombers and hate-filled murderers. Why can't Israel define the goal of this war? In the Sinai Campaign in 1956, the IDF took the city of Gaza by storm. In the battle orders distributed to the soldiers before their attack on Gaza, the following sentences were written: "The will to win is the precondition for triumph." The person who wrote these words was well aware that all the encouragement and determination to eliminate the threat of the fedayoun (the Hamas of those days) would be worthless without the simple statement that Gaza is ours, "a vital organ torn from the State of Israel." Gaza is an inseparable part of the Land of Israel. Our roots in Gaza run three thousand years deeper than our roots in Tel Aviv. Those who decide to fight in Gaza but do not intend to restore it to Israeli sovereignty, undermine their claim on Tel Aviv. If you are an American solider fighting to liberate Paris in the name of American values, that is fine and you can justifiably return to your homeland after you win. But if you are fighting for your own homeland, defeat the enemy and then give it up — you have admitted that the land was never yours in the first place and that the enemy's claim to the entire land is justified. If by your actions, you admit that the enemy is right, you will never have peace. Every retreat strengthens the enemy's claim on the entire land and sows the seeds of the next war. It arms the enemy with the most important of all weapons — the sense of justness and hope. Whoever does not say that "Gaza is a vital organ torn from the State of Israel" cannot win and bring quiet to the residents of Israel's South. It seems that the leaders of the Labor party understood this concept when, after Gaza was recaptured for the second time in the miraculous Six Day War, they established Gush Katif. Menachem Begin claimed that the Sinai was not part of the Land of Israel, thus justifying its surrender to the Egyptians. All the Grad rockets exploding in Ashdod and Ashkelon have Egyptian fingerprints. Those who supported the 'peace' agreement with Egypt can take credit for this achievement. But the real turnabout came with the Oslo Accords. That agreement surrendered the heart of Israel to foreign sovereignty in exchange for 'peace.' We didn't get peace but what we learned in the Disengagement is that peace was never the goal. In the Disengagement we learned the hard way that Israel is besieged by powerful forces that seek to disengage from the Land of Israel at any price — even without peace. And as we see today — even at the price of war. They simply do not want the Land of Israel; certainly not its Jewish identity-laden Biblical tracts and the settlers whom they despise. I call the current war the War of Disengagement because right now we are at the point where the soldiers of the IDF are giving their lives to establish the disengagement principle. Our brave soldiers march into battle with innocence and sanctity to defend their country. But their leaders have maneuvered them into a situation in which they are not fighting for their country, but rather for the ability to disengage from it and not suffer rockets in Tel Aviv. And that is impossible. The only possible option that we have now (until the day that we have leadership that believes that this is our Land) is to quickly exit Gaza and to heavily bomb any area from which rockets are launched. The problem, of course, is that Israel is beholden to the values system of the West. If we drop too many bombs on Gaza, our leaders will not be able to visit in London. But that is better than the senseless deaths of our brave soldiers in Gaza. 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) |
|
ISRAEL THROUGH A DISTORTED LENS
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 8, 2009. | |
|
This was written by Michael Coren and it appeared today as a
National Post (Canada) Full Comment.
Michael Coren appears every weeknight on the Michael Coren Show, 8 p.m., on CTS; visit his website at www.michaelcoren.com. | |
|
So we had it again. The world putting on its self-righteous coat so that it could hide its naked hypocrisy. Israel bad, violent and strong; Palestinians good, peaceful and weak. Instant demonstrations outside Israeli embassies and consulates when hundreds were killed in response to years of Hamas terror, yet not even a handful of protestors outside offices belonging to Sudan, Syria or Iran, where hundreds of thousands have been slaughtered. Of course the innocent died in the past 13 days, but in the pursuit of the guilty. As opposed to Hamas and its campaign to mass murder only the innocent. Ask why both Egypt and the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank did so little to counter Israel's actions, and may have given tacit or even active approval to the campaign. Because unlike Marxist Mary in Toronto and Jew-hating Jack in Montreal, they know the reality of the situation. Israel left Gaza and prayed that peace would be established. Hamas launched its missiles into Israeli schools, homes and hospitals within hours. Supporters of the Palestinians argued that few Israelis were being killed so there shouldn't be complaints. Finally Israel responded. One of the reasons it took so long is that it was gathering intelligence so as to harm as few civilians as possible. So why the lack of balance and the lies in the media? Any journalist who has worked in Israel and its neighbours in the past 20 years knows certain things that are seldom reported. Take, for example, the endearing hotel habits of the PLO. Reporters would stay at a grand venue just outside the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem. When they came to pay their bill they would be told that they had been guests of free Palestine, but they would be given a receipt in case they might want to claim something on their expense account. It doesn't help matters that Western journalists refer to Israeli soldiers as "Shlomo." It means Solomon but is spoken with an attempt at derisory generalization rather than admiration for wisdom. Yet in some ways the Israelis deserve it: They are dreadful at the propaganda game. Israeli officials keep journalists away from their dead and dying, while Arab officials tend to lead them by the hand to the killing fields. Never was this more acute than with the case of Samir Kuntar, the Hezbollah "militant" on top of Hassan Nasrallah's "must free" list of Israeli prisoners. In 1979, he and his gang broke into the home of the Haran family in northern Israel. They took Danny Haran and his four-year-old son Anat to the beach and bashed the boy's brains out on the rocks while his father watched. They then shot the man to death. Smadar Haran, the mother, hid in a loft with the couple's two-year-old daughter. Holding her mouth over terrified Yael's mouth in an attempt to save her, Smadar smothered her daughter to death. No photos were given to the press and this incident is never mentioned when prisoner exchange deals are discussed. Kuntar is now a celebrated guest of the Lebanese government and revered throughout Gaza. This will not be explained as we are told by journalists based in the Middle East that Israel refuses to compromise. Remember that hardly any of these journalists have apologized for describing the battle of Jenin in 2002 as "an unprecedented Israeli massacre." It was widely implied, even stated, that there were several hundreds if not thousands of dead Palestinian civilians. It was soon revealed that only 56 Palestinians had been killed, most of them heavily armed. Israel had lost 23 soldiers, mainly because they had cleared the town house by house in an attempt to save innocent Palestinian lives. Something similar is occurring in Gaza. It is staggering how quickly dead Hamas soldiers and policemen are stripped of their uniforms and transformed into social workers and poets. Detailed analyses of European media in the first seven days of the current conflict have shown that Israeli spokespeople were given a fraction of time compared to Palestinian representatives. And in countries such as Spain and Britain, the contempt for the Israeli position was almost palpable. I saw the cynicism of the Arab combatants and the fellow travelling credulity of Western reporters first-hand during the Hezbollah war in 2006, when the same bodies would appear again and again in different photos. The nuances of journalistic language say a great deal. Reporters referred last week to "American-made" helicopters and F16s. Actually, the modifications made to these machines by the Israelis are enormous, but surely their place of origin is irrelevant. It is yet another way of making Israel appear the bully. Which it isn't. It's an imperfect and besieged nation that was recreated as a Jewish homeland because the very countries now condemning it for its self-defence refused for 1,500 years to treat Jews as human beings. Just six months ago, I stood yards from where Israel is now trying to smash the Hamas military machine and asked an Israeli doctor who had been forcibly removed from Gaza by her own government if she was bitter. "No, no, no," she replied. "Not bitter, only resigned. Resigned to the fact that the fashion of turning on the Jews and judging them with a unique unfairness seems to come around every generation or so." The doctor then walked away to attend the funeral of a young mother killed by a Hamas terror attack. No journalists bothered to turn up.
Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
ISRAELIS AND PALESTINIANS: WHO'S DAVID, WHO'S GOLIATH?
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 8, 2009. |
|
This was written by Larry Elder and it appeared today in
Jewish World Review
|
|
Much of the world buys the line — peddled by the Palestinians and the Arab Muslim world and, indeed, many Western countries — that paints Israel as the bad "Goliath" that "stole" the land from the "Palestinians." Israel gave Gaza self-rule in 1994, unilaterally withdrawing the last of its citizens and soldiers from Gaza in 2005. Hamas, voted into power via free elections in 2006, fought and defeated their political and military rival, Fatah, to seize de facto control of Gaza in 2007. In the past eight years, Hamas has fired more than 10,000 rockets and mortars into Israel — 7,000 of them after Israel's 2005 withdrawal. With improved technology — reportedly assisted by Iran — Hamas' rockets can now fly 24 miles before impact and explosion, thereby threatening, injuring and killing more and more Israelis living in southern Israel. But why the "disproportionate" response by Israel? Reportedly, more than 600 Palestinians have been killed, some civilians. Set aside for the moment that Hamas' charter specifically calls for the "obliteration" of the state of Israel. And set aside the fact that the Palestinian "militants" fight in heavily populated areas, assuring, indeed encouraging (for PR purposes) civilian casualties. We turn our attention to the "stolen" allegation. Israel lies in the ancient Fertile Crescent's southwest corner, with some of the oldest archeological evidence of primitive towns and agriculture. Historians and archeologists believe the Hebrews probably arrived in the area in the second millennium Before the Common Era. The nation itself was formed as the Israelites left Egypt during the Exodus, believed to be in the late 13th century Before the Common Era The 12 tribes of Israel united in about 1050 Before the Common Era, forming the Kingdom of Israel. David, the second king of Israel, established Jerusalem as Israel's national capital 3,000 years ago. Jewish kingdoms and states existed intermittently in the region for a millennium. After conquests by Babylonians, Persians and Greeks, an independent Jewish kingdom was briefly revived but Rome took control in the next century, renaming the land of Judea "Palestine" after the Philistines, historical enemies of the Israelites'. Invading Arabs conquered the land from the Eastern Roman Empire (Byzantines) and attracted Arab settlers. Within a few centuries, the Arab language and Islam prevailed, but a Jewish minority remained. After a brief period of prosperity, waves of invasions and changes of control followed, including rule by the non-Arab empires of the Seljuks, Mamelukes and European crusaders, before becoming part of the Ottoman Empire from 1517 until 1918. The crusaders massacred thousands of Jews, along with Muslims, in the 11th century. But soon thereafter, European Jews established centers of Jewish learning and commerce. By the time the Ottoman Turks occupied Palestine in the 16th century, according to British reports, as many as 15,000 Jews lived in Safed, which was a center of rabbinical learning. Many more Jews lived in Jerusalem, Hebron, Acre and other locations. By the middle of the 19th century, Jews constituted a significant presence — often a majority — in many towns. Still, in the 19th century, the Holy Land looked mostly like a vast wasteland. When Jews began to return to their "promised land" early in the 20th century, the desert literally began to bloom under their industry. Arabs followed, coming in large numbers for the jobs and prosperity. After four centuries of Ottoman rule [The Ottomans were Muslim but not Arab, certainly not "Palestinian" Arab], Britain took the land in 1917 and pledged in the Balfour Declaration to support a Jewish national homeland there. In 1920, the British Palestine Mandate was recognized. A declaration passed by the League of Nations in 1922 effectively divided the mandated territory into two parts. The eastern portion, called Transjordan, would later become the Arab Kingdom of Jordan in 1946. The other portion, comprising the territory west of the Jordan River, was administered as Palestine under provisions that called for the establishment of a Jewish homeland. The United Nations, in 1947, partitioned the area into separate Jewish and Arab states along meandering and indefensible boundaries. The Arab world, insisting that any Jewish claim to Palestine was invalid, staunchly refused to compromise or even discuss the subject. When Israel's independence was declared in 1948, Arab forces from Egypt, Transjordan, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq combined to crush the 1-day-old country. They lost. Still, Egypt occupied most of the Gaza Strip, and Transjordan (calling itself "Jordan") held most of the West Bank and half of Jerusalem. Neither Arab country gave the "Palestinians" a state. The word "Palestinian," as employed today, is a relatively recent term. Until the end of the British mandate over Palestine, in 1948, all inhabitants of the area west of the Jordan River were known as "Palestinians." A Jewish person living in what is now Israel was a "Palestinian Jew." An Arab living in the area was a "Palestinian Arab." Likewise, a Christian was known as a "Palestinian Christian." Israel won more land after a series of wars, land since returned or offered for return in exchange for peace. The Jews "stole" nothing. Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
THE NGO FRONT IN THE GAZA WAR: OXFAM
Posted by NGO Monitor, January 8, 2009. |
|
The full report is at
|
|
From the beginning of Israel's "Operation Cast Lead" in Gaza on December 27, 2008 to January 8, 2009, 35 NGOs claiming to promote human rights and humanitarian agendas have issued more than 132 statements on the fighting, and the number increases continuously. These statements exhibit severe bias and double standards, focus overwhelmingly on condemning Israel, and ignore or pay little attention to Israeli human rights and casualties. Under the façade of morality and universality, they exploit international legal terminology and erase Hamas violations of international humanitarian law, such as the extensive use of human shields. These reports are a central part of the "soft power" war being waged against Israel, in parallel to the "hard power" rocket and terror attacks, and reflect an ideological bias which also gives excessive attention to this conflict. In contrast many international NGOs have remained silent on extensive human rights abuses occurring around the world during this period. For example, on December 27 (the start of the operation), 189 villagers were massacred by Ugandan rebels in the Congo. Yet, none of the major NGOs reported on this incident. NGO Monitor is tracking these statements to provide continual updates on the NGO public relations effort on Gaza. In order to highlight the activities of particular NGOs, NGO Monitor´s series entitled, "The NGO Front," will focus daily on different organizations, beginning with an analysis of Oxfam's role. Oxfam : "Disproportionate" Attacks on Israel
For further information, see: "EU and NIF-funded NGOs Lead Condemnations in Gaza Conflict," NGO Monitor, (Updated daily) "Did Israel Use "Disproportionate Force" in Gaza?" Dore Gold, Jerusalem Viewpoints, Vol. 8, No. 16, 28 December 2008 "International Law and the fighting in Gaza," Justice Reid Weiner and Avi Bell, MESI, December 29, 2008 The NGO Monitor organization (www.ngo-monitor.org) promotes critical debate and accountability of human rights NGOs in the Arab Israeli Conflict. Note that the full report contains dynamic links to additional material — see http://www.ngo-monitor.org. |
|
STAGED PHOTOS POURING OUT OF GAZA
Posted by Barbara Sommer, January 8, 2009. | |
|
This below is from Little Green Footballs, January 5, 2009.
It was an item in the Mideast Truth forum
| |
|
We should not forget that every television image and every news photograph coming out of Gaza right now is filtered through Hamas. The photographers filing pictures for Reuters, Associated Press, and Agence France Presse are all Palestinians, and all propagandists for Hamas — or they wouldn't be allowed to take pictures in Gaza. With that in mind, here's yet another example of news photographs
staged for propaganda purposes by terrorists and their allies: CAMERA
Snapshots: Green Helmet's Successor?
UPDATE at 1/5/09 11:06:16 am: Israellycool has another example: the same injured child being paraded around by two different men. Here are the two images at Daylife.com: This one is at http://www.daylife.com/photo/0eToeOx9YrgMg/ A_Palestinian_father_carries_his_wounded_baby_daughter 
1 month ago: A Palestinian father carries his wounded baby daughter into a hospital in Gaza City on January 4, 2009 as Israeli troops continue its ground assault in Gaza. The half dozen hospitals in Gaza cannot cope with more patients and casualties are overflowing out of regular wards into corridors as Israeli troops push deep into Gaza. At least 40 people have been killed since Israel launched the night-time offensive yesterday after eight days of air strikes in which at least 485 Palestinians died and more than 2,400 were wounded, Gaza medics said. (Photo: Ashraf Amra) This is from VOA news
Contact Barbara Sommer at sommer_1_98@yahoo.com |
|
FROM ISRAEL: DIPLOMATIC CONFUSION
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 8, 2009. |
|
Major Ro'i Rozner, of the Kfir Brigade, has been killed by mortar fire in a fierce battle in the region of the former Jewish community of Neztarim. We salute him. ~~~~~~~~~~ It was obvious yesterday that our government seemed to be on the verge of agreeing to a ceasefire — which was enormously worrisome — and then backed off. The reason given for backing off was that there were elements of the agreement that turned out to not be acceptable to us. I have since learned that there were, in essence, two versions of a ceasefire agreement being floated, and that we had actually agreed to one and then backed off because it became apparent that what was on the table was the second version, not what our government thought it was agreeing to. What is more, I have been advised that Sarkozy was at the heart of this confusion, having lead Israel to expect one thing and then offering Mubarak something else. ~~~~~~~~~~ So...we backed off, and decided to continue our operation. But we have not yet decided to expand it to the next stage, which would have involved bringing in some of the reserves who have been called up and are waiting, and sending troops into the south of Gaza. Those in the Security Cabinet who were in favor of expanding the operation with an eye to toppling Hamas were Haim Ramon, Eli Yishai, Daniel Friedmann and Rafi Eitan; eight voted against doing so. Barak, who dragged his feet with regard to starting the war, seems most eager to call a halt now. We are, in essence, in a modified holding pattern while we wait to see what develops diplomatically. Amos Gilad has been sent to Cairo to participate in discussions Still worrisome. It is not yet time. ~~~~~~~~~~ As for continuing the operation, what we did was to release flyers in the area of Rafah — near the Philadelphi Corridor — warning people to leave their homes. Five thousand people left, seeking temporary shelter in nearby schools. And last night we began bombing in the area — bombing both additional tunnels and houses. We had already destroyed at least 100 tunnels, but it is said there are some 200 more still in existence. As to the houses, not only are weapons stored in many of them, but in many cases the tunnels exit holes are inside of houses so they are not visible. The Post editor-in-chief, David Horovitz, made the point this morning that we learned from Lebanon that an army trapped in indecision is most vulnerable: the army must keep moving to avoid being a target. Indeed. The indecision, such as it exists, is totally political and diplomatic. Our troops have been exceedingly well prepared and trained and are comporting themselves excellently. ~~~~~~~~~~ While we have not yet sent troops to the south, I note that there are those who are advocating that we return to the Philadelphi Corridor and stay there. Horovitz says that Yom-Tov Sama — who is now advising the head of the Southern Command, Maj.-Gen. Yoav Galant — has urged that we return to the Corridor and stay for 25 years. ~~~~~~~~~~ Rather than even attempting to examine the elements of the various cease-fire proposals being advanced, I would like here simply to review the major issues and their import. [] There is talk of a temporary cease fire, to be followed by a permanent one. The parameters of each would have to be clearly defined, if indeed there would be two stages. There has been some suggestion that Israel should halt unilaterally, which strikes me as a horrendous idea. [] Israel must retain the right to act if Hamas either renews smuggling or again launches rockets or fires mortar shells. We cannot have a cease-fire that prevents us from responding defensively. [] The issue of opening all crossings permanently is key to what Hamas seeks. In fact, Hamas has said if it doesn't get the crossings opened, it won't agree to a cease-fire. The parameters and conditions for this would need to be carefully spelled out — if indeed we were to agree at all, which seems unlikely. Hamas is seeking normalcy while we are seeking to isolate it. (Humanitarian aid would continue to flow.) There is talk of some monitoring by Europeans of the crossings, which is likely to be fairly useless. ~~~~~~~~~~ [] The big issue for us is the matter of the re-establishment of tunnels by Hamas and its renewed smuggling of weapons in order to rearm. And the ultimate question is whether it's actually possible to set up a system that would block this from happening. There remains some serious doubt in this regard. Major Israeli defense officials are saying this won't be possible. Egypt, it goes without saying, must be a key player. The Egyptians have been vociferously denying that they have been lax in their monitoring of the situation until now, and are somewhat defensive. But evidence is that for years they might have done much more, and, in fact, blithely looked away. By agreement, since we pulled out of the Philadelphi Corridor in 2005, Egypt has had 750 soldiers stationed on its side of the border. They are requesting permission to put in more. Permission is required because our peace treaty with Egypt makes this area demilitarized. There are some US army engineers in the area now, as well, working as advisors with the Egyptian troops, and there is talk about bringing in more, to remain on a permanent basis. Presumably, they would be empowered to destroy tunnels. But a question of great sensitivity arises here regarding what any monitors/observers/advisors from another country can do on sovereign Egyptian soil. Egypt will not take kindly to suggestions that it is falling down on the job and that other forces must act. There is a parallel here with Resolution 1701, which put in place enhanced UNIFIL in Lebanon: UNIFIL is not empowered to act unilaterally against Hezbollah, only at the behest of the Lebanese army. ~~~~~~~~~~ On the other side of the Sinai-Gaza line is the Philadelphi Corridor (and Rafah). When Rice spoke this week about bringing back the PA, it was to place them here. The regrettable arrangements Rice manufactured in 2005 had us gone from Philadelphi and the PA in. She wants to return to this situation, but it is not going to work. Hamas will not stand for it — they've already said so — and the PA has not the power to withstand Hamas. This is where our presence might be invaluable. ~~~~~~~~~~ So here we are, once again, at a cross-road. Will we slow down and then agree to a diplomatic arrangement, or hit Hamas even harder than we have so far? Olmert visited the south and received a briefing today. In a statement he issued, he admitted that we have not yet reached our military goal: We are not in a place that yet assures long term peace for the south of our nation. Said he: "...the IDF hasn't been asked yet to do whatever it takes get to this point." Well, you want to ask, Why the hell not? If security for the south was our stated goal, why has action to secure it not been ordered? "This decision is still ahead of us, declared Olmert." The decision is, of course, to be made by the political echelon. To me, it's a no-brainer. We haven't reached the point of protecting our citizens adequately yet, and we have a superbly trained and functioning force ready to move ahead to achieve this. Do we stop now for a diplomatic arrangement that at best would provide dubious protection? Let us pray not. ~~~~~~~~~~ And right now, in spite of vigorous efforts to secure a ceasefire, and our potential willingness to cooperate, it looks as if Hamas attitudes and statements may move our government in the direction of further forceful action: Eight radical Palestinian movements headquartered in Damascus — primary among them Hamas and Islamic Jihad — have met to discuss the situation in Gaza. Now a spokesman for these groups has declared: "Palestinian organizations, notably Hamas, see no valid basis in the Egyptian plan for a solution to the crisis... The Franco-Egyptian initiative does not contribute towards finding a solution since it is a threat to the resistance and the Palestinian cause, allowing the enemy to continue its aggression." We cannot declare a cease-fire with ourselves. And Hamas is not ready to have one imposed. ~~~~~~~~~~ It must be remembered that Hamas leadership consists of radical, jihadist revolutionaries. They do not make compromises and they do not surrender easily. They have to be beaten to the ground. Hamas still retains some military leadership and forces, and some rocket supplies. They are defiant and arrogant in their attitude, even as they are hurting badly. Even if the political leadership of Hamas ultimately might agree to a cease-fire, the military wing is unlikely to truly honor it. "We will win, or we will die," they have said. Our defense officials say Hamas is still capable of delivering a "quality" (let us say, "serious") terror attack. To date, the IDF is reporting that engagement with Hamas forces is lighter than had been expected. This is what General Kupervasser was referring to yesterday with regard to flushing them out. Instead of doing battle, Hamas troops are going into heavily populated urban areas and melding with the civilian population. Leadership is in hiding, either in bunkers or places such as hospitals. ~~~~~~~~~~ Let me add one other factor of considerable importance here: the question of deterrence and how we appear at the end of this war. We have to come out having vanquished Hamas sufficiently so that there is no question that Israel and not Hamas is victorious. Anything that makes Hamas seem to have achieved an advantage, such as opening of crossing and normalization of the situation, in return for their holding their fire, would be disastrously counterproductive to our goals. They would broadcast to the world that they had achieved what they wanted by attacking us. And this would further motivate and energize radical jihadist forces in other places — such as Hezbollah to our north and Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. This must be a consideration in terms of how a cease-fire might be structured. ~~~~~~~~~~ Questions have been raised about securing the release of Gilad Shalit. I am not seeing this as a central issue in resolution of the war. But, off the record, it is being said that the hundreds of Hamas fighters we are capturing will give us a new advantage on this score. ~~~~~~~~~~ Our fighting stopped for three hours again today, to allow in more humanitarian supplies. A European Commission official is due to arrive soon to coordinate these humanitarian efforts. I think this is an excellent way for the EU to be occupied. ~~~~~~~~~~ A barrage of three Katyusha rockets coming from Lebanon hit the Nahariya area of northern Israel this morning; two people were lightly wounded when a rocket went through the roof of a retirement home. We returned fire. The rockets were fired from the southern town of Nakoura, where, in late December, eight Katyusha rockets pointed at Israel and ready to be fired were discovered by a local farmer. He informed the Lebanese army, which defused the rockets. What happened today is being considered an isolated incident. It is thought that these rockets were launched by a radical Palestinian group in Lebanon and not by Hezbollah. The rockets were an older model than what Hezbollah now possesses, and it would be expected that if Hezbollah were attacking there would be more than three rockets launched. The suspicion is that a Palestinian group is trying to drag Lebanon into the war. Israel, none-the-less, has let Lebanon know that it is held responsible for rocket launching. ~~~~~~~~~~ More rallies for Israel (hopefully I've gotten all that have been sent to me) St. Louis (from Paula Lemerman) Today, January 8, 7:00 PM, 2 Millstone Campus Drive Toronto (from Steve Tanennbaum) Today,Thursday, January 8, 7.30 PM, Beth Tzedec synagogue, 1700 Bathurst Street Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
HINDU-JEWISH COALITION DEMANDS THAT AMERICA STAND UP TO ISLAMIC TERRORISM
Posted by Chuck Brooks, January 8, 2009. |
|
This is by Phyllis Chesler and it appeared on the Pajamas Media
website
|
|
Rally Planned in Washington, DC on January 20, 2009. The calls for Israeli blood grow louder, both in world-wide demonstrations and diplomatically, as Hamas continues to choreograph Israeli "atrocities " by launching rockets at Israeli civilians from their carefully chosen positions in Gazan schools, hospitals, and mosques. This is an incredibly cold-blooded trick but it's one that works. The media falls for it and people of good will are, understandably horrified by the photos of dead and dying Palestinian civilians. Synagogues as well as living Jews are now being physically attacked all across Europe; they are being verbally and often physically attacked all across America. But now: For some unexpected good news. Hindus (yes, those who live in Bombay/Mumbai as well as all over the world), Jews, (yes, those who live in Israel and elsewhere around the world), Christians, and Buddhists are organizing a rally right opposite the White House on January 20th, the day of President-elect Obama's Inauguration. This "Coalition for Peace" is urging Obama to "declare Pakistan a terrorist state; stop Iran from producing an atomic bomb; stop Saudi Arabia from funding terrorism; stop Pakistan's double game with the USA; stop Hamas and Hezbollah's rocket attacks into Israel; seize Saudi Arabian assets for crimes against humanity." Sounds good to me. The Coalition for Peace are asking people to rally in Washington, DC on January 20th, right opposite the White House from 12-4pm. The Coalition writes: "The oldest traditions of the world, Hinduism and Judaism, are facing the biggest threat of our times in the form of Radical Islam. Today this problem threatens humanity itself. The brain washing of Islamic children with intolerant ideologies, is being funded by countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran. There is an urgent need to control the use of enormous oil revenues directed at efforts to Islamize the whole world." I am posting their Invitation below. I urge those of you who can, to join them. The Coalition for Peace website is back up, but if you experience any problems as an alternative, please contact Satya at Coalitionforpeace2009@gmail.com. NEWSFLASH: I HAVE POSTED ONE HALF-ILLITERATE, VULGAR COMMENT BY ONE "ALI" FILLED WITH HIS VIEWS OF THIS COALITION AND WHAT HE WOULD LIKE TO HAPPEN TO US. TAKE A LOOK. IT IS HOW THE PROTESTORS AGAINST ISRAEL AND INDIA SOUND. ALTHOUGH I HAVE REFUSED TO POST SUCH COMMENTS, I THINK IT WILL BE INSTRUCTIVE FOR YOU TO SEE AT LEAST ONE. INVITATION TO JOIN RALLY DURING OBAMA PARADE RALLY FOR ALL GROUPS TO SPEAK UP AGAINST ISLAMIC TERRORISM Dear Friends, We invite you to join our demonstration against the world-wide Islamic threat during the Obama Parade on Jan 20th, in Washington DC. Details are given at http://coalitionforpeace.org. The oldest traditions of the world, Hinduism and Judaism, are facing the biggest threat of our times in the form of Radical Islam. Today this problem threatens humanity itself. The brain washing of Islamic children with intolerant ideologies, is being funded by countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran. There is an urgent need to control the use of enormous oil revenues directed at efforts to Islamize the whole world. The recent Florida rally (details at http://coalitionforpeace.org ) where Hindus, Jews, Christians, and Buddhists came together to demonstrate against the Mumbai attack, shows that we can join together to raise our voices. The ongoing turmoil in Israel, due to eight years of Hamas rocket attacks against Israel's civilian population, is creating awareness about the true face of Islam. Let us unite at the Obama rally by speaking in one voice, asking Obama to take up this issue as an extremely urgent matter, affecting America's future as a democracy. The Hindu Jewish Summits, held in India with a leading Rabbi from Israel, Rabbi Yona Metzger, with Swami Dayananda Saraswati, followed by another such summit in Israel, shows that both of our communities can join hands to fight this dreadful and hateful ideology, militant Islam. You can see excellent coverage of that at:
Please contact us if you plan to join us at the demonstration in Lafayette Park, across from the White House, on Jan. 20, Inauguration Day. We have already secured a permit for the demonstration, to be held from 12PM-4 PM. We look forward to a fruitful partnership. Contact Chuck Brooks at chetz18@aol.com |
|
AN ENCOURAGING AND SUPPORTIVE LETTER FROM PASTOR VINEYARD
Posted by Daisy Stern, January 7, 2009. |
|
Adina wrote: DS, this Pastor is very genuine. I know him for a while, I introduced him to Tsafrir who he met several times while on his trips to Israel. He told the 4,200 ! congregations under his auspices (as a leader of a Baptist Ministry out of Oklahoma, called the Windsor Hills Baptist Ministry) that as soon as Israel World Television was up and running, that the community would get satellite subscriptions. His congregations put their money where their mouths are. They raised hundreds of thousands to rebuild the north after 2006, others came in 2005 to support Gush Katif, and now they pledged the thousands needed to help some of the soldiers with much needed longjohns-of all things. They believe in the literal promise of Israel to the Jews, and are forbidden to act as missionaries to Jews. They are good people and good friends. DS replies: That's beautiful, Adina, thank you. I feel a lot better, specially after reading Bradley Burston's nauseating prayer for the children of Gaza, in Haaretz (it wouldn't be so bad if he at least had had the decency to include OUR children; but no such luck), and reading all the bleeding heart Israelis' amen corner. This nation has been sickened as much as the arab babies; they both drank poison in their mother's milk: the arabs: Jew hatred, and the Jews: Jew hatred as well. Go check out that column, tell me if you are not disgusted. Below is a Letter from Dr. Vineyard |
|
January 7, 2009 Dear Friends: I write from a hotel room in Beersheba, Israel, which is close enough to Gaza that the war can come this way unexpectedly. We need to be in support of the hated Jews much more than we have been even up until this time. Therefore, we ought be letting them know, "Truly Born-Again Christians are solidly in their corner." And so, we Christians get the opportunity to let the Hebrew people know that we are standing 150% behind them as they deal with Hamas, HizbAllah, or whomever Satan and his gang throws at them. My, oh my, how the Devil hates these people! Let me give you a little history lesson which concerns the same Ishmaelite enemies they (Israel) are now facing. During WWI, Mr. Arthur Balfour persuaded the British Cabinet to pass what became known as the Balfour Declaration, which declared this land a national home for the Hebrews. But, a veritable "pogrom," such as was prior to then, associated with Tsarist Russia, took place in the Holy City of Jerusalem in April 1920. To anyone who was observant at that time, any onlooker could see that it was quite evident that mal-administration of the British Military Authorities had such a hostile policy that inevitably it would lead to outbreaks such as that April 1920 Pogrom. The Arabs could not be blind to the Anti-Jewish course those of the British Military, by and large, followed at that time. Consequently, this official attitude was interpreted by the hooligan element and interested schemers in the only possible way, viz., that the military authorities in Palestine were against the Jews and Zionism. The conviction began to grow, in some of the Arab minds at least, that any act calculated to deal a death blow to Zionist aspirations would not be unwelcome to those in authority in the British Military in the Holy Land. At the time, the British Military Governor in an important town was actually heard to declare in a YMCA building — in the presence of British and French Officers and of Arab waiters — that, in case of anti-Jewish riots in his city, he would remove the garrison and take up his position at a window, where he would watch and laugh=2 0at what went on. In March 1920, the following extraordinary order was issued to the British troops in Palestine: "As the Government has to pursue in Palestine a policy unpopular with the majority of the population, trouble may be expected to arise between the Jews and Arabs." That wording was very significant! It was obviously calculated to throw the blame for any trouble on the Jews, and, at the same time, represented the British government as an unfortunate victim, who, under some mysterious pressure, had "to pursue" a Zionist Policy. On Sunday, April 4, 1920, a belated crowd of Arabs from Hebron approached the Holy City by the Jaffa Gate. Fanatical agitators posted themselves on the balcony of the Municipality Building and, for the space of two hours, delivered brutally inflammatory speeches against the Jews to this mob, in the presence of British Officials who understood Arabic. The Arabs were armed and ready to do in the Jews. All at once, the members of the Arab procession formed themselves into a square, just inside the Jaffa Gate. The first thing you would have seen — had you been there — was an Jewish man, about 70 years of age, get his head split wide open with an Arab's sword, and as soon as he was down he was stoned to death. Within a few more minutes, a lot more Jews got the same treatment. For nearly 72 hours (three days, mind you) that Ishmaelites work of murder, rape, sacrilege, and pillage went on practically unchecked — all under British rule. Back here in the Holy Land, one more time, is this ole preacher-warrior standing in the corner with the Hated Hebrews. Where I am in Beersheba, this hotel is full of IDF soldiers. I'm looking forward to the next few days. When I checked in the desk clerk told me what I had to do if incoming Katyushas were directed Beersheeba wa y. You folks pray that God Almighty will keep that "hedge of protection" built about this ole man, as he tries to encourage the Sons and Daughters of Abraham who are fighting this 2009 War against Hamas. I am sincerely, gratefully, gladly, and humbly, your obedient friend and servant, JIM VINEYARD
Contact Daisy Stern by email at daisystern1@gmail.com |
|
ISRAEL NEEDS AN EXTREME MAKEOVER IN THE MIND'S EYE OF MUCH OF THE WORLD!
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, January 7, 2009. |
|
Fanning the flames of anti-Semitism bolsters corporate profits! Owners of media outlets, both Muslim and non-Muslim, in concert with less than objective manipulated journalists, noting that exploiting the tragedy of war using selective photographs, spinning events, morphing terrorists into underdogs, not asserting that Hamas militants intentionally store ammunition in and fire deadly missiles from schools and mosques, in effect hide behind the skirts or burkas of Arab women and even the small bodies of children while shooting their weapons at Israeli soldiers, arouses the inherent Jew-bashing instincts of much of the intellectually vacuous Muslim as well as general European world while increasing T.V. ratings, selling more newspapers, thus enhances sagging ad revenues; indeed spinning subtly anti-Semitic blatantly anti-Israel news is good for business! Of course Hamas strategists know their unconscionable tactics work, care little if at all about the health and safety of folks they were elected to govern, continually fire missiles from Gaza at Jewish citizens in Israel terrorizing and traumatizing peaceful families, assume that at some point the Israeli government will have to send in the troops, thus insuring the terrorist group they work for will gain the sympathy of much of the world, bolster its political power, further an insidious agenda of turning its Jewish neighbor into a pariah state, suck in more 'charitable' donations much of which will be siphoned off into personal stashes, and take one giant step toward further radicalizing Muslims and their supporters against the West, especially Jews, in a quest for planetary domination, the wet dream of every Jihadist. How ironic! Corporate media moguls and Muslim terrorists work together symbiotically, albeit without conscious intent, to further their own interests! Alas, it is more profitable to bash Jews and Israel than advocate for Jews and Israel, thus Jewish and Israeli advocacy groups remain underfunded, go out of business, and cannot compete with or exert as much heft as their cunning adversaries; at least so far. Could it be that many rich and influential Jews, particularly in the media, just don't get it, remain in a quandary overcome by their misplaced 'humanitarian' nature, being unable or unwilling to grasp the manipulative forces at work, clouded by the careless foggy thinking that defines Israel as a chronic abuser and occupier of Palestinians, not even contemplating the fact that today's tiny Jewish homeland was meant to encompass, per the Balfour Declaration, all of erstwhile Palestine, which includes what is now the Kingdom of Jordan, that all lands conquered in 1967 by Israel in her war of survival should unambiguously belong to the victor per world precedent, that the American Southwest; including Texas, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, New Mexico, and California-home of Hollywood (comprehend that Mr. Spielberg); was taken from Mexico in the 1800s under the guise of 'Manifest Destiny' still arousing not a guilty conscious among them, including many a producer who yet refuses to create a major film skewed toward Israeli interests. Is this insane or what! You mean that rich and influential Jews, and their supporters, if they overcome their muddled thoughts, stop feeling guilty, stop wringing their hands, put their minds and bucks to it, can't figure out how to win over the hearts and minds of much of the world, leaving all those Jew-bashing Israel-bashing antagonists in the dust!?! Modern battles and in fact wars are truly won and lost, not so much in the blood-drenched trenches or at sham negotiating tables, but in corporate boardrooms where strategies unfold, and in the media, where the fruits of corporate thought manifest in newsprint, through the airwaves, through the internet, on DVDs, and on the big screen. Media outlets, while informing as well as entertaining the public at large, generate conscious and subliminal messages that intertwine to enlighten, educate, raise a collective sense of awareness, mold opinions, and if truth be told persuade a large swath of that public into seeing things from a particular perspective. Why not advance the case for Israel by using such techniques aggressively throughout worldwide population centers, especially in European markets, a prime source of heretofore Palestinian funding, much of which is siphoned off by Hamas as well as equally dangerous Fatah leaders like Holocaust revisionist Mahmoud Abbas, mentored by the late billionaire Yasser Arafat, who speak out of both sides of their mouth? It is time to produce and release the compelling pro-Israeli historical docudrama 'The Jews of Sderot', featuring well-known European, Israeli, and if possible Arab actors and actresses among others, sonorously narrated in part by a distinguished individual like James Earl Jones. Expose fanatical fundamentalist intolerant Hamas and moderate secular yet cunning Fatah for what they are; allude to sections of Hamas' Jew defiling charter, surely a declaration of that jihadist organization's raison d'etre; allude to the reign of the late billionaire Yasser Arafat and if truth be told understudy clone in substance Holocaust revisionist Mahmoud Abbas whose under the radar mantra remains "Allah forbid peace with Israel or the flow of Euros including my cut might cease"; emphasize how non-compliance of the Balfour Declaration by a gutless British government, bowing to the wishes of oil rich Arab sheiks, reduced the Jewish Homeland by 80%; delineate the continuing struggles of Israelis since their homeland's inception, including their need to build a 'wall of life' to thwart suicide/homicide bombers, while still developing a first world economy and democracy; describe the Jewish State's many contributions to mankind; then enlighten the world with heart-wrenching examples of the trials and tribulations foisted upon the Jews of Sderot and neighboring venues. Choose a well known and respected European actress to play the role of a distressed mother in Sderot attempting to create a sane environment for her small children, psychologically traumatized by deadly missiles wantonly launched, in effect at them, by sadistic Arabs from a hellish land once a whole lot greener and more civilized when at least a smattering of Jews lived there. Choose a well known and respected European actor to play the role of their father, an Israeli army reservist, on a mission to protect the Land of his ancestors, now cherished by his family and neighbors. Much of their supporting cast, ethnically and nationally diverse, protagonists as well as antagonists, should also be composed of actors and actresses with serious credentials, maximizing the credibility of the messengers as well as the effect of their collective pro-Israeli message. Today, as the world slides deeper and deeper into recession, when ways to make profits become scarcer and scarcer, many corporations, like buzzards, will scavenge with more and more zeal over the entrails of whatever carcasses they might find. Concurrently, today's Diaspora Jews attempt to bury all those stereotypes that have made them the world's most reliable scapegoat over the ages, attempt to blend into a diverse world while maintaining their ethnicity without offending those who when the pusher comes to shove might yet again blame them for all that goes wrong. Still, in stressful times like these, when Israel and Jew become potentially one in the same in the mind's eye of latent anti-Semites, buzzard corporations, Muslim and non-Muslim, especially those whose medusa-like tentacles manipulate the media, will disinter from shallow graves those carcasses of anti-Semitic stereotypes, subtly or not so subtly extrapolating the greedy Bernie Madoff's (the guy who made off with billions) of the world to exemplify all Jews; extrapolating Alan Greenspan, former Jewish Chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, to exemplify all Jews; another no-good Jewish banker who played his flute and led Wall Street and the world's mesmerized governments over a cliff into the valley of death, ruining their economies; and on and on! Hence, it is incumbent now more than ever for worldwide Jews influential in the media, as well as their supporters, to do an extreme makeover of Israel's maligned image, to cast Jews in a most favorable light, to do whatever it takes to counteract a tsunami of criticism or worse that could inundate a people born to absorb the world's frustration and anger especially amplified during hard times. It pays to prepare for the worst even though we pray the worst will not materialize. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
FROM ISRAEL: A TOUGH TASK
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 7, 2009. |
|
In a different battle from the ones that claimed the soldiers I named yesterday, we lost one other soldier: St.-Sgt. Alexander Mashevizky, of the Engineering Corps. If I locate a photo of him, I will run it, for he, too, should be honored. ~~~~~~~~~~ Yesterday, Hamas terrorists stationed themselves on the grounds of an UNRWA school in the refugee camp of Jabaliya in northern Gaza and fired mortar shells at nearby IDF troops. The troops returned fire; an IDF investigation indicates that they acted according to procedures. However, what happened subsequent to this is that there was an explosion and over 30 Palestinians inside the school building — of the many more said to be hiding there — were killed. Our defense officials say that booby-trapped bombs were hidden in the school and were set off by the fighting, killing persons inside. A great deal has been made of this, and it hurts our public image. This is particularly painful because it is clearly and unequivocally Hamas that is at fault here. Yet one continues to read of the deaths "caused" by Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ I routinely point out that when Hamas conducts itself in a fashion that puts civilians at risk, that it is guilty of a war crime. Here I would like to refine this statement a bit, and in the process demonstrate how difficult it is for Israel to cope with the situation: Someone with considerable knowledge with whom I spoke this morning pointed out to me that Hamas is not a sovereign nation and is not a signatory to international agreements that define the rules of war — and what constitutes a war crime. Hamas does as it pleases, without legal entanglements or concern for the standards of the international community. And he's right. So technically what I need to say is that Hamas is behaving in a way that is defined as a war crime by the civilized international community, but Hamas does not care. The issue is how the most civilized and moral of nations, Israel, handles itself in military confrontation with a group such as this. ~~~~~~~~~~ Today I attended a special briefing at the Jerusalem Center of Public Affairs, on the issue of what constitutes victory for Israel, in both the military and diplomatic aspects. Dr. Dore Gold, who heads the Center, spoke, as well as Brigadier General (res.) Yossi Kupervasser. When the issue of Hamas willingness to sacrifice civilian lives was raised, Dr. Gold referred to Sheikh Nizar Rayyan, the Hamas terrorist leader who had been taken out by Israel recently. Rayyan's family was with him when their house was hit. Information about their refusal to leave, even after IDF warnings, had made the press. Dr. Gold, however, said that when Rayyan knew the IDF was coming after him, he actually called his family, which had been elsewhere, to join him. I have now searched the Internet for information on this, and found the following that came from Ma'an, a Palestinian news agency that interviewed Walaa, one of Rayyan's surviving daughters: "'My father raised us all to love martyrdom,' Walaa said. 'If you had the chance to ask my 4-year-old sister Aaysha, who died in the attack, she would have told you that she preferred to die martyr.' "...According to one of his four wives, Rayyan would tease his children in the days before his death, and ask them: 'Who wants to die martyr with me?' and all his children used to answer, 'Yes daddy, we all want to be with you alive or dead.' His youngest son said, 'I can't imagine that you die martyr and leave me behind unable to see you. I want to die with you.'" How to cope with this? ~~~~~~~~~~ Christopher Gunness, an official with UNRWA, has now said that UNRWA was "99.9% certain there were no militants or military activity in its school." And I am 99.9% certain that Gunness is lying. I speak as someone who has done years of research on UNRWA and has known for a long time that terrorists use UNRWA schools. (I have documented material on this and will return to the subject in due course.) I am certain because I know the IDF does not just shoot at schools and I believe what they've said here. Residents living near the school, who wisely chose to go unidentified, told AP yesterday that they saw terrorists shooting near the school. And some of those who were killed inside the school have been identified by the IDF as part of a rocket launching cell. They include senior operatives Imad Abu Askhar and Hassan Abu Askhar. We will never know how many others of the 30 allegedly killed in that operation were actually terrorists and not "innocent" civilians. Last year the IDF filmed a terrorist who was operating — and firing mortars — from an UNRWA school. They provided the video to UN Secretary-General Ban, who promised to investigate. He has yet to give an answer. Enemies of Israel are all about. ~~~~~~~~~~ General Kupervasser spoke at today's briefing about the fact that the air operation was important, but did not achieve goals that were critical. We hit some weapon storage and many weapon production sites. Some key figures were taken out, but not enough. Thus has the ground operation been necessary. Hamas tries to hit us indirectly, using booby-traps, etc., and to avoid direct confrontation. We are trying to flush them into the open. They have had Iranian training, but are not as well trained as Hezbollah. Our efforts in fighting them have been impressive and our casualties minimal. But right now there are fighters remaining and rockets remaining, and they still have the capacity to launch against us. The more the pressure is maintained on Hamas, and the more they are in isolation, the more likely that they will crumble. Every day their ability to fight erodes further. What is needed is time. ~~~~~~~~~~ Says General Kupervasser, Hamas has not yet surrendered its goal of using Gaza as a base to attack us. They are not yet convinced that there's a new game. And indeed, Hamas made a statement to this effect today, declaring that there is no intention of accepting a permanent ceasefire and they intend to keep fighting the "occupation." The general believes that given enough time we could get Hamas to that point. They have a vested interest now, he says, in holding on to control of Gaza. If they see that they must decide between losing Gaza or surrendering the fight, they might give up the practice of attacking us. Destroying us would become only a dream, for the future. Perhaps. (I and others still suspect that giving up the practice of terrorism would be only a temporary maneuver on their part.) What is clear, however, is that it is not time to stop. They are not yet on their knees. Victory is close, but not yet ours. ~~~~~~~~~~ In line with all of this, the IDF was talking today about expanding the operation to move into all of Gaza, and the Security Cabinet was supposed to meet to discuss this. Temporarily this was put on hold because of potential progress (if we can call it that) in the diplomatic arena. The diplomatic progress involves discussions between Sarkozy and Mubarak, in an attempt to come up with a cease-fire plan that is acceptable to both sides. For the first time, Rice, instead of stalling, was saying this is going in a good direction. What is more, she was talking about re-instating Abbas in Gaza. This is her own pipe-dream, a step towards the fulfillment of the negotiations she's worked on. But it's not going to happen. All-in-all, however, this was a most worrisome state of affairs. Sarkozy wanted us to stop fighting now, while this ceasefire is being discussed and shaped in its particulars. But Olmert told him, nothing doing: We haven't come this far to stop for an unknown quantity in terms of arrangements. Both Sarkozy and the PA (Abbas is most eager) have lent the impression that we're solidly on board. This is not the case. ~~~~~~~~~~ The core issue is the stopping of smuggling and how to achieve it. Egypt must be a key player here, as a major part of the action to stop it would take place on Egyptian soil. (Interestingly, talk about the Philadelphi Corridor has diminished.) Egypt for the first time today is saying it needs help, notably Israeli help, certainly with intelligence. And it is said there would be a significant contingent of US army engineers involved. ~~~~~~~~~~ But what has evolved is that there are other elements of the proposal Egypt was advancing that are definitely not to our liking: Including Hamas in discussions and opening all crossings. That being the case, the Security Cabinet has now met and said we are going forward with the battle. In the coming days, we will be continuing the operation in order to achieve our goals. Hamas must be squeezed and crushed. Our government — glory be! — is not caving. Breath a sigh of relief. Olmert has no intention of returning to a glorified version of what we had with Hamas before, and has no intention of negotiating with Hamas. He wants conditions imposed on a vanquished Hamas. Livni has said this repeatedly — negotiations with Hamas would give it credibility. We want to isolate and weaken Hamas. The mere fact that Egypt is thinking about making concessions to Hamas to get them to stop firing shows with certainty that they are not vanquished yet. Israel has expressed gratitude to France and Egypt for its efforts and will be sending a delegation to participate in discussions regarding the cease-fire. Said cease-fire is several days down the road, at least. ~~~~~~~~~~ We held a three-hour cease-fire today, at the request of Sarkozy, to allow more humanitarian supplies to come in and the civilian population to collect materials from warehouses. As soon as this time was over, Hamas hit Beersheva with two Grad rockets. ~~~~~~~~~~ More rallies: Atlanta (information from Joel Margolies) Today, Wednesday, January 7, at 7:30 PM, Ahavath Achim Congregation, 600 Peachtree Battle Ave NW Fort Lauderdale FL Tomorrow, Thursday, January 8, 5:00 PM, at US Federal Building, Broward Blvd. and Third St. For info: (305) 864-5110 Nashville Sunday, January 11, 3:00 PM, Tennessee Legislative Plaza Philadelphia Tomorrow, Thursday, 12:00 PM, noon, Love Park, Center City Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
THE GAZA STRIP-TEASE
Posted by Irwin N. Graulich, January 7, 2009. |
|
Let's strip this fight down to the actual bare facts. You elect a Nazi-like terrorist government, (and I use the comparison precisely), whose primary goal and charter is the destruction of the state of Israel. They create schools where textbooks expound on the concept of Jews and Christians being monkeys and enemies of Islam who must be destroyed. They establish summer camps that teach 7 year olds the virtues of becoming suicide bombers, actually constructing a sample vest model complete with dynamite sticks, in arts & crafts. They continue to publicly describe Jews on radio, tv and newspapers as something lower than vermin, all of whom must be exterminated. They spend all their time building tunnels and smuggling weapons to kill innocent civilians in Israel, instead of building businesses and a better life. They fire rockets regularly into Israeli towns and cities to goad Israel into a short-lived response that ultimately becomes a pr coup. They have weekly parades attended by upwards of 100,000 people screaming, "We will destroy the Zionist criminal pigs," and much worse. Then, when this moral democracy legitimately and legally responds to the thousands of rocket attacks on its cities through a serious military action, you cry like babies. Please — I need an air sickness bag. Those brave (sic) Hamas leaders run underground like sewer rats, leaving their supportive, so called "innocent civilians" to die for them. And much of the world continues to repeat the same mistakes of history. In fact, Europe learned absolutely nothing from WWII. Instead of learning that decent, moral nations must "fight evil," the Europeans learned that "fighting is evil." Europeans have decided to befriend evil, let them move into their cities with their own corrupt value system, and now Parisians, Britons, the Dutch and others are just too afraid to confront this new hate-infested, violent phenomenon. It is the French embracing the Nazis once again — kiss kiss. And please do not forget — it always begins with the Jews, but it never ends with the Jews. Next, we have the UN — that infamous massage parlor located on First Avenue in New York City. Several NYC politicians have suggested turning it into a homeless shelter, which would certainly do a great deal more good for society. Evil does not disturb the UN. Israel disturbs the UN! Unfortunately, democracies have a disastrous achilles heel in our modern, hi tech world. It is called visual media — which includes a camera, television and the Internet, devices that allow anyone to show video totally out of context. Dead Palestinian babies, wounded women and children are 24/7 on al Jazeera, in one continuous loop. Joseph Goebbels would be proud! Hamas and Hezbollah have discovered this new weapon which is more deadly than any missile or grenade launcher — the tv camera. 21st century technology has given rise to visual terrorism where one shows dead families in a UNRWA school without the context of Hamas terrorists shooting grenade launchers from windows. CNN leads this new propaganda group with names like Christian Amanpour, Ben Wedeman, Wolf Blitzer, Anderson Cooper, Rick Sanchez and Don Lemon — all of whom have shown a particular bias against Israel for defending itself from terrorism. Had these so called reporters been covering Dresden during WWII, the Allies would have been forced to stop their attacks and Americans today would be speaking German or would be lampshades. Of course, we would hear the American point of view and the Nazi point of view, a sign of media fairness. And good ol' Larry King would be interviewing Herr Hitler with all of the necessary respect he deserved. Truth be told, what did you expect would emerge from the sick soul of Ted Turner, one of the most twisted minds in America today. His "baby" is a despicable network made up of predominantly amoral fools. Has there ever been a war where the opposing army actually called civilians on the telephone, dropped leaflets, sent emails or text messages in order to warn them to get out of harms way? It sounds like something out of The Twilight Zone — yet no one focuses on this incredible moral action by Israel. I mean rubber bullets — the Israeli army invented them out of a deep sense of compassion and morality. Sorry, Americans and moral people everywhere are much smarter than that — after all, have you seen the deformed, incinerated and horrific baby pictures from Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Yet, any decent human being knows it was the Atom Bomb that ended WWII, saving many more lives in the long run. That is the sad reality of war. Who told you there is no military solution to some things? And why the uproar in the Arab and Muslim world today? Because "honor" is the most important value in their lives — and those pathetic weak Jews just keep wiping the floor with them at every turn. Israel continuously shames every Arab and Muslim country by defeating them in battle or defeating them in progress. It is obvious today that 1.5 billion Muslims in 48 countries with their big mouths and big threats about the "Poor Palestinians in Gaza" are simply afraid to intervene or militarily confront that ridiculously small Jewish state of 6 million. All those big macho armies talking tough, yet acting like frightened little girls. The lives of average citizens in most Arab and Muslim countries are horrendous. Dictators from Syria to Lebanon to Iran to Gaza need to blame their horrible living conditions on someone — and naturally it cannot be the dictators they worship and fear. Instead, who better to fault for their miserable lives than the Jews aka Israel? We don't have a flush toilet because of the Jews. We do not have freedom of the press because of those Jews — of course. And the crop this year was bad...all because of Israel. It's the Jews aka Zionists fault again and again. Yet that tiny thriving democracy of Jews continues to make medical discoveries and invent high tech products every day. How dare those despicable, arrogant Jews achieve so much in our midst, and make us look bad. Israel left Gaza completely in 2005. Checkpoints located on Israeli territory and the sea remained, with the only things not permitted into Gaza being weaponry. Everything else was welcomed — and nothing, nothing was ever built in any part of The Gaza Strip except things related to murder and destruction. I mean, a refugee camp for 60 years? The Jews have continually humiliated Hamas, the Palestinians and the entire Arab/Muslim world because of their successes — militarily and societally. And they will never be forgiven for it. It is actually an affront to Islam as well. Hamas took a page right out of the Nazi playbook by creating a party that has a terror arm and a social arm. The Nazis built roads and hospitals...and gas chambers. And the Jews learned a lesson that they needed to return to their own historical homeland and build it back up. It did not take very long, much to the chagrin of its neighbors. So my dear Hamas lowlives — you dare "tease" that hardworking, moral democracy with terrorism and rockets. What the hell did you expect? Irwin N. Graulich is a motivational speaker on morality, ethics, Judaism and politics. He is also President and CEO of a marketing, branding and communications company in New York City. He can be reached at irwin.graulich@bgwinc.com |
|
HAMAS STEALING AID SUPPLIES TO SELL TO RESIDENTS
Posted by Daily Alert, January 7, 2009. | |
|
This was written by Roee Nahmias and it appeared in
Ynet News
| |
|
Grim picture of Gazans' lives painted by reports emerging from Strip, claiming gunmen hiding in civilian homes, using residents as human shields, and hijacking trucks of humanitarian aid A government or a gang? As the Israeli operation in Gaza wears on it appears Hamas has relinquished any visage of a socio-political party, abandoning its claim to govern the residents of Gaza in favor of engaging in open war at their expense. A number of reports from the Strip paint a picture of very difficult humanitarian conditions, not least because of Hamas itself. The suspicion is that the group's operatives have seized control of any supplies passing through the crossings — including those sent by Israel and international organizations. Reports say Hamas takes a cut out of all aid that arrives, including flour and medicine. Supplies intended to be distributed without gain among the population is seized by the group and sold to the residents, at a profit to the Hamas government. One such incident was recorded Monday, when a convoy of trucks carrying supplies through the Kerem Shalom crossing was opened fire upon and seized by Hamas gunmen. Similar incidents occurred with trucks carrying fuel. 
In other cases, civilians are simply used as cannon fodder or human shields. Reports out of Gaza say residents who attempted to flee their homes in the northern area of the Strip were forced to go back at gunpoint, by Hamas men. The organization is presumably interested in increasing civilian casualties in order to give rise to international pressure against Israel. Arab media reported that in an IDF strike on a UN school 30 civilians were killed, but there is no legitimate way to prove gunmen were among those killed as Hamas tends to bury these bodies quickly, thus eliminating evidence in Israel's favor. Other civilian complaints state that Hamas gunmen pull children along with them "by the ears" from place to place, fearing that if they don't have a child with them they will be fair game to the IDF. Others hide in civilian homes and stairwells, UNRWA ambulances, and mosques. In other reported cases Hamas gunmen hold civilians hostage in alleyways in order to provide themselves with a living barricade to ward off IDF forces. Reports somewhat more difficult to verify say the group's men shot Fatah operatives in the feet to make sure the latter would not attempt a coup. No one to turn to These reports lead to the assumption that Hamas is attempting to exacerbate the atmosphere of a humanitarian crisis in the Strip, as this may promote an international ceasefire initiative. In any case the reports clearly show that the residents of Gaza have fallen prey to Hamas as well as the IDF. Reports of alarming shortages are also forthcoming, as residents appear to lack water, flour, electricity, and any sign of a capable government. Chaos reigns as no one appears to know when electricity will be available, how to obtain water or food, or whom to address in order to evacuate the injured. The "emergency numbers" given to residents have ceased to function, and citizens in need of assistance have only international organizations, the Red Crescent, and the hospitals themselves to turn to. The Hamas leaders, aside from two addresses, have not been heard from. Their speeches were broadcast a number of times, but in any case many in the Strip can no longer access televisions, radios, or internet without electricity. Despite this, no authoritative anti-Hamas sentiments have been heard from the Gazans. However Palestinian sources claim that grievances against the group are voiced in secret. The animosity towards Israel has not disappeared, say the sources, but it is now accompanied by bitterness towards the organization many are dubbing Iranian in its extremism. This was sent by Eli in response to letters denying that Hamas was stealing supplies that were supposed to given out free to the Gazan Arabs.
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 |
|
ASIA TIMES REALISTIC PERSPECTIVE
Posted by Mrla, January 7, 2009. |
|
This was written by Spengler of the Asia Times
|
|
A policeman's nightmare is the prospective suicide who forces the constable to shoot in self-defense. No matter how justified the killing, others always will wonder whether the shooter had an opportunity to avoid a fatal outcome. Peoples commit suicide as much as do individuals. The geopolitical cognate of "suicide by policeman" is Hamas' attempted suicide by Israel. Israel's objective is to eliminate Hamas rule. There are only two ways to do that: destroy Hamas' international support, or make its rule in Gaza insupportable. I hate to be the one to bring up the unpleasant things that no one else wants to talk about, but just what do you do when a substantial group of people would rather die on their feet than live on their knees? For Hamas, to live on one's knees would be to accept a permanent Jewish presence in the historic land of Israel, an outcome which Hamas was formed to prevent in the first place. One answer is that a slow-motion humanitarian disaster will gradually erode the fighting capacity and morale of Hamas and its popular base in Gaza, presuming that external sources of support can be throttled. What the International Red Cross calls "a full-blown humanitarian crisis" in Gaza is, in a certain sense, part of the solution, not part of the problem. A million and a half people have no way to live in Gaza except on the dole of the international community, in a Petrie dish for Islamist extremism. As the pro-Israeli analyst Martin Kramer observes in his blog, economic sanctions against Gaza — that is, pressure on the civilian population — are an integral and entirely legitimate aim of Israeli policy. "Were Israel to lift the economic sanctions," Kramer writes, "It would transform Hamas control of Gaza into a permanent fact, solidify the division of the West Bank and Gaza, and undermine both Israel and Abbas by showing that violent 'resistance' to Israel produces better results than peaceful compromise and cooperation. Rewarding 'resistance' just produces more of it. So Israel's war aim is very straightforward, and it is not simply a total ceasefire. At the very least, it is a total ceasefire that also leaves the sanctions against Hamas in place. This would place Israel in an advantageous position to bring about the collapse of Hamas rule some time in the future — its long-term objective." Israel's alternative would be to ignore Hamas, and instead attack Iran or Syria, Hamas' main supporters in the Muslim world. A humiliating blow against the state sponsors of Hamas would make it harder for an organization that represents itself as a non-state player to continue fighting. Last April, Israel had the opportunity to deal such a blow to Syria, and had it taken pre-emptive action against Syria at the time, it is unlikely that the present attack on Gaza would have been necessary. (Please see Ehud Olmert on the Damascus road Asia Times Online, April 15, 2009.) War with Syria or Iran, to be sure, entails far more risk for the Jewish state. As Barak Ravid wrote in Ha'aretz: "Defense Minister Ehud Barak told [a December 20 conference in Tel Aviv] that Israel is strong enough to take down the Assad regime in case of war with Syria ... However, even if Israel strikes a severe blow, he told the conference, Syria 'even when battered and weak has a significant ability to inflict damage, as a result of the weapons it has and its capacity to use Hezbollah'. Barak emphasized that in the case of a confrontation with Iran, Syria and Hezbollah would also likely join the fighting, and that it is exceedingly difficult to forecast how another war in the Middle East would play out." It is hard to fault Israel for not taking the risk of war with numerically larger, if technologically inferior, opponents, when those risks are very difficult to assess from the outside. Nonetheless, it seems clear that Israel chose to attack Gaza as a low-risk alternative. Hamas is a far softer opponent than Hezbollah during the 2006 Lebanon War. Hezbollah had received massive military support from Iran in building tunnel defenses and deploying sophisticated weapons. Hamas does not even appear to have night-vision equipment. A risk-averse strategic posture does not show Israel in a particularly strong light, whatever the merits or demerits of its present policy. If the world had wanted Israel to adopt an alternative defense strategy, it should have encouraged an Israeli attack on Iran, or Syria, or both. Both the Bush administration as well as the Barack Obama transition team (via Obama's Middle East advisor Robert Malley) favored "engaging Syria", as did Israeli Prime Minister Olmert. That idea may have reached its best-used-by-date. As Lee Smith wrote December 24 on the Hudson Institute website, "The goal of trying to wedge Syria away from Iran is to return it to the so-called 'Sunni fold,' which includes, most importantly, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The problem, however, is that over the last several years Damascus has alienated the Sunni powers, especially Saudi, whose King Abdullah has suffered multiple insults at the hands of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. When enmity becomes personal, as it often does in the Middle East, there is no telling how or when it is likely to be resolved. In other words, there is no Sunni fold for the Syrians to return to: the Sunnis are hardly eager to embrace an Arab regime that over the last four years has served as the Persians' pitbull." For the moment, Israel is treating Hamas as a state rather than as a state actor. As in any war, economic pressure on the civilian population, as well as military operations that kill civilians as collateral damage to the pursuit of military objectives, are legitimate instruments of warfare. It is hypocrisy to pretend otherwise. To insist that Israel desist entirely from military activities that have a high probability of causing civilian casualties is doubly hypocritical. That would demand, in effect, that Israel value the lives of Palestinian civilians more than those of its own civilians, who are subject to rocket bombardment. That is something no state in the world can do, and it is silly to ask it. Israel has less reason than any other on Earth to heed such a demand. Never has the state of Israel been offered mercy by its enemies, nor has it any reason to expect it. They have nothing to lose and everything to gain by following the almost-golden rule: "Do unto others before they do unto you." Israel is in the unenviable position of mopping up a problem created by the inertia of the international community. Fourth-generation "refugees" living in towns officially designated as "camps" never have existed under international law until the world community found it expedient to defer the "Palestinian problem" into the indefinite future. The Gazans cannot be economically viable on their 139 square miles of sand, and the humiliation of perpetual dependency and poverty makes a political solution unattainable. The international community could help most by finding better homes for a few hundred thousand Gazans. The best-case scenario would be a parallel to Hurricane Katrina, which forced the mass evacuation of the city of New Orleans during 2005. Displaced to Atlanta, Georgia, Houston, Texas, and other cities with a strong black middle class, the poor African-American refugees soon were earning more and living better than they had in corrupt, backward New Orleans. I reviewed the good fortune of the New Orleans refugees here (See Katrina and China's whirlwind growth Asia Times Online, April 25, 2006) and observed that the best way to help poor people is to move them out of poor regions into rich ones. The late Sam Kinison's stand-up comedy routine about world hunger applies doubly to Gaza. "You want to help world hunger? Stop sending them food. Don't send them another bite, send them U-Hauls ... we've been coming here giving you food for about 35 years now and we were driving through the desert, and we realized there wouldn't BE world hunger if you people would live where the FOOD IS!" Otherwise, the default recommendation is what I offered five years ago, (See see More killing, please! Asia Times Online, June 12, 2003). As I observed at the time, A recurring theme in the history of war is that most of the killing typically occurs long after rational calculation would call for the surrender of the losing side. Think of the Japanese after Okinawa, the Germans after the Battle of the Bulge, or the final phase of the Peloponnesian War, the Thirty Years War, or the Hundred Years War. Across epochs and cultures, blood has flown in proportion inverse to the hope of victory. Perhaps what the Middle East requires in order to achieve a peace settlement is not less killing, but more. That is horrifying, but nonetheless true, and the international community simply may have to raise its threshold of horror. Contact Mrla at Mrla26@aol.com |
|
FRENCH TV CLAIMS 2005 PHOTOS ARE FROM ISRAEL'S CURRENT OPERATION IN GAZA
Posted by Robert Spencer, January 7, 2009. |
|
This appeared today on Jihad Watch
|
|
French television claims photos from 2005 showed damage from Israel's current operation in Gaza War is Deceit, and French public television is lending a hand. "French TV claims photos from 2005 showed damage from Israel's Gaza operation," from Haaretz, January 6: French public television network France 2 on Tuesday revealed they had aired photographs that allegedly showed destruction caused by the Israel Air Force during Operation Cast Lead, which were in fact taken during a different incident in 2005, one in which Gaza civilians were killed by an explosion caused by militants in the Strip. It's much easier to air a hollow apology after the damage is done than to ensure accurate reporting in the first place: A news editor at France 2 told Le Figaro Tuesday that they had "made a mistake by airing those pictures, which he said depict events from 2005. Robert Spencer is author of eight books on Islam and Jihad. He is the director of Jiahd Watch. |
|
JEWISH ESTABLISHMENT DID LITTLE TO SAVE JEWS DURING WORLD WAR 2
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 7, 2009. |
|
Expose of the Jewish establishment and international world of doing nothing to save the Jews at risk in Europe prior and during WWII. — Sonia This comes from the vosizneias website and is archived at
|
 New York — Second Edition of Min Hameitzar by Rav Weissmandel After 50 Years New Documents: Zionism Did Little To Save Jews During WWII New York: Min Hameitzar, Rav Michoel Ber Weissmandel's heartbreaking memoir of his desperate attempts to save European Jewry during the Holocaust, and the callous, stingy and apathetic response of the Jewish establishment and international world, is now in print. The second edition was published almost 50 years after the first, and it contains many new letters and pictures. Rav Weissmandel was the greatest hero of the Holocaust. If the international and secular Jewish world would have carried out his rescue plans — which involved generous bribes to Nazi leaders and bombing the tracks to Auschwitz — millions of Jews whose lives were snuffed out in gas chambers would have lived. Very few today know of his brilliant and comprehensive efforts and rescue plans because Rav Weissmandel is intentionally ignored by Holocaust professionals the worldwide who prefer to commemorate those who talked a lot but did little. A carefully prepared documentary called "Among Blind Fools" (www.verafilm.cz) produced by two Czech film students a decade ago catalogued Rav Weissmandel's efforts together with that of the Slovakian Working Group that he assembled. This painful, informative film was rejected by Holocaust museums and film festivals all over the world. The film includes scenes of pre-war Jewish Europe, the Slovakian partisan uprisings, all the activists who worked with Rav Weissmandel and numerous interviews with survivors and activists. The book is especially noteworthy for being perhaps the first book to reveal the crimes of the Zionist leadership who preferred building their personal fiefdom in Israel to saving Jewish lives. This edition contains the Kol Koreh written by Rav Weissmandel in 1948, in which he spelled out the crimes of the new State's leaders. Despite the exposure given to these crimes at the Kastner trial, these crimes are today known by very few. The information in Min Hameitzar formed the basis for a shorter book written by Rabbi Moshe Sheinfeld which was translated into English "The Crematorium Victims Accuse" The relevancy of Rav Weissmandel's sefer is in learning of the disaster that a non-Torah leadership brings upon the Jewish people — lessons that we tragically are still forced to learn in these difficult days. Jewish soldiers are in these very days dying and being wounded fighting terrorists whom State leaders had bequeathed free terrorist bases to 3 years ago at the same time that these leaders continue to fund, assist, and encourage the terrorists with hundreds of millions of shekels in "humanitarian aid". |
|
GAZA: ANOTHER JIHADIST PLOY TO FUEL WORLDWIDE ANTI-SEMITISM
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 7, 2009. |
|
This was written by Marc Sheppard
and it appeared today in American Thinker
|
|
Recent protests against Israel's long overdue response to six months of its cities' continual barraging by Hamas missiles have displayed a far more dangerous anti-Semitic tone than did precursors. In fact, despite the claims from many on the Arab street that the only "real Holocaust" is the one currently unfolding in Gaza, cries of "Death to Israel" are now being punctuated by shouts referring to Nazi death apparatuses of "gas chambers" and "ovens." A perilous precedent indeed, particularly in a world whose populace, media, and international organizations grow increasingly sympathetic to the largely peer-orchestrated plight of Palestinians. Once again, duped media toadies have decried the "disproportionate response" of the joint Israeli armed forces while themselves offering blatant disproportion in their coverage of the event. Images such as these, one depicting a "Palestinian medic carr[ying] a child, injured during the Israeli army operation in Gaza, into Kamal Adwan Hospital in Beit Lahiya, northern Gaza Strip, Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009," and this WaPo front pager of a "wounded Palestinian child scream[ing] as she arrives at Shifa Hospital after an Israeli air strike in Gaza City" are everywhere. But just try finding a single picture of Israeli children being terrorized by incoming Katyusha, Kassam, and Grad rockets on a daily basis. Small wonder — just as did Hezbollah guerrillas in launching their Katyusha missiles from Lebanese civilian homes and apartments in July of 2006, so have Hamas terrorists intentionally provoked Israeli counterstrikes on civilian Gazan targets. And, just as over 2 years ago, the MSM are quick to emphasize the "innocent" casualties of Israel's mischaracterized "disproportionate response." As we reported then, this is a preferred tactic of Islamic terrorists, one taught to PLO leader Yassir Arafat in 1970 by a team of North Vietnamese communists who had earlier discovered the advantages of "manipulating the American and Western media to the point of having a direct impact on the US ability to wage war against North Vietnam and the Viet Cong." Israel has been forced to deal with a similar and growing "impact" on its ability to defend its borders ever since. What's more, Islamic terrorists have steadily improved their ability to exploit the Vietnamese lesson that "the west could not stomach the sight of blood and casualties." Particularly civilian. But the ploy transcends western societies and media, as nowhere is such lack of intestinal fortitude more evident and unilateral than within the ranks of the United Nations. On Monday, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon was quick to place casualty counts above culpability in condemning Israel's actions as "clearly excessive," while referring to Hamas' continuing rocket attacks as merely "terribly counter-productive." So what path to self-protection of its sovereignty would the U.N. chief actually abide — sanctions? Apparently not — back in 2007, when Israel attempted to quell similarly terrorizing daily missile attacks by reducing gas and diesel supplies to Gaza, Ban called the plan "punitive and unacceptable." So there he stood Monday responding to Secretary-General of the League of Arab States Amre Moussa's demand that the UN "put an end to this fighting and these massacres" by promising to "feed and help the men, women and children of Gaza and ease their suffering in the midst of this frightening and dangerous ordeal." Of course, simultaneously reacting to and reinforcing the Hamas-orchestrated worldwide perspective of Israel as the unprovoked bully, Ban made no such overtures regarding the suffering of its men, women and children. In fact, were it not for the United States' refusal to sign on, a Ban-backed statement calling for an immediate cease-fire in the Gaza Strip and southern Israel would have already passed the U.N. Security Council. U.S. deputy ambassador Alejandro Wolff explained that Hamas' history has proven them to be untrustworthy participants in any cease-fire agreement. Indeed, they and their ilk typically treat such accords as duplicitous opportunities to rearm and reentrench. So once again, America stands alone beside its vital Mideast partner, and once again, the ensuing floodgates of Jew-hatred crash wide open, spewing the seeds of anti-Semitism even among those the jihadists pose the greatest threat to. And each time the world by-and-large falls for this remarkably transparent ruse, the peace-at-any-cost crowd become more mobilized while the hate-mongers grow all the more emboldened. In the past, we've seen easily-impressionable Liberals respond as they did at this Boston rally [video] last week, playing follow-the-leader both in their aimless circular marching and mindless repetition of whatever a fellow unwashed rocket-scientist happened to cry out. Here the little ditty was "Resistance is justified when you are occupied," sounding all the more brilliant considering that Israel's occupation of the Gaza Strip ended in 2005 But now, these useful idiots can be seen at rallies where imagery of Mideast conflagration quickly gives way to that of Auschwitz crematoria. Check out this moron [video], Dutch Socialist Party MP Harry van Bommel, caught chanting "Intifada intifada, Palestine free" during a Saturday pro-jihad rally in Amsterdam, while the maniacs behind him clearly recite "Hamas, Hamas, Joden aan het gas (Jews to the gas)." You're probably thinking this the type of loathsome behavior one might expect in a country that has all but surrendered to the Sharia-imposing Islamofacists, and that such outrageously hateful screeds couldn't possibly happen here, where we're assured that Muslims are so well "assimilated." Think again. Take a gander at this colorful December 30th pro-Hamas rally [video], which also carried the requisite cries of "Nuke, Nuke Israel," "Israel go to Hell," and "There is no Israel!" But listen to these obviously well raised and educated "religion of peace" representatives shout out to pro-Israel demonstrators first "your mothers are whores," at 1:47, then "Go back to the oven" at 3:26 and finally, just seconds later "You need a big oven, that's what you need!" Yet this rally wasn't in Brussels, or London, or any of the growing number of European Dhimmi-dumb safe-havens for Islamic jihadists and their sympathizers. It took place in Fort Lauderdale in Broward County, Florida. These venom-filled ignoramuses in head scarves evoked threats of Nazi proportions in the midst of the fifth largest Jewish community of any county in America. Imagine, if you can, the treatment their far outnumbered counter-protestors would have received from the crowds, the police, the media, and the U.N. — adoring world, had they been equally despicable — perhaps calling Islam's a false prophet or the Koran a terror manual. Meanwhile, a new Rasmussen Poll reports that while 62% of Republicans support Israel's military action in Gaza, only 31% of Democrats agree. And just how many of Broward (Home of the dimpled chad) County's quarter million plus Jews do you suppose voted for Bush or McCain? Wake up, people! While the ten-to-one majority of those screaming the praises of Hamas to Israel supporters was typical of such recent demonstrations across the globe, this one's setting made it uniquely disturbing. With the rest of the world readily duped by these murderous Islamic conmen and reflexively siding against Israel time and time again, who, if not its Jews, will stand-up for the Jewish State here in America? Neither the call for nothing short of the "Zionist Enemy's" total annihilation in its very charter, nor its abysmal record of disregarding all prior truces appear to be of any concern to those who demand Israel once again negotiate with Hamas. Neither does Iran's mounting potential to fulfill its Palestinian proxy's mandate with an atom-bomb. Nor, apparently, does similar anti-Semitism festering alongside the growing influence of jihad-funded Islamic front groups throughout Asia, Africa and Europe. Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar declared Monday night that Israel "legitimized the murder of their own children by killing the children of Palestine," threatening that "their people all over the world" would be fair game. Somehow, American Jews remain convinced that it can't happen here. But, as last week's Nazi-inspired taunts in Fort Lauderdale must remind us all, European Jews once held similarly quixotic beliefs. Whether through counter-demonstration, blogging, correspondence, financial support, vigilance, or what have you, don't just stand there — do something. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
GAZA WAR DIARY III: IF MEXICO SHELLED TEXAS, LIKE HAMAS SHELLS ISRAEL
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 7, 2009. |
|
This was written by Bradley Burston and it appeared in Haaretz
|
|
Analogy One: A fanatical religious party wins a string of elections in Mexico's northern states, then stages a civil war to drive out the federal government and take full control. The party's charter demands the return to Mexico of the occupied territories of California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Colorado and Texas. Firing homemade rockets and more advanced projectiles smuggled in from Iran and China, the party's gunners can hit a total of one of every seven Americans, or 43,598,000 people, in a broad swath which includes Los Angeles, San Diego, Phoenix, Albuquerque, Austin, San Antonio and Houston, and Las Vegas. In all of these areas, pre-schools, grade schools, and universities are all forced to shut down. Families sleep in bomb shelters, and return to them several times a day during air raids. Businesses are shuttered, and the economy shuts down. ______________________ Analogy Two: A man comes into your home. He has a gun he made himself. He points it at your family. He fires, but misses. The gun has little accuracy. He fires repeatedly, missing again and again. You have a much better gun, made in a real factory. It is in the drawer in the bedroom. Demonstrators in London and San Francisco — who are distant relatives of the gunman — stage a protest, calling you a murderer and demanding that you keep the well-made gun in the drawer because it would be a disproportionate response. The man with the homemade gun, it turns out, is a religious fanatic who lives across the street. You were once his landlord. There is much bad blood between you. He races back across the street. He has a larger weapon that he smuggled in through his basement. He shoots from behind his younger son. He wounds your daughter. You take out a rifle. You aim for him and hit the son, killing the boy. The demonstrators are now calling you a Nazi and chant "Slaughter the Landlord!" [In his defense, the neighbor explains that you have kept him and his family locked in the house, and have at times, failed to pay his water, gas and electric bills, causing them to be turned off. This is some years after the neighbor send out his older son, nicely dressed, to knock on your door. Your older daughter opens the door. He greet her politely, and presses the detonator on a homemade bomb.] ______________________ And finally a word about... Analogy Three: Gaza as the Warsaw Ghetto Jew-haters the world over adore this one. It solves a number of problems at once: It denies and diminishes and exploits the Holocaust, does disrespect to Holocaust victims and survivors alike, alleviates European guilt over complicity with the Nazis, alleviates American guilt over inaction in the face of the annihilation machine, misrepresents both the cruel reality of the Gaza Strip and the cruel reality of the ghetto, dismisses the humanity and the vulnerability of the million Israeli Jews and Arabs within rocket range, and ignores completely the role of Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, the Popular Resistance Committees, and the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, in having sent thousands and thousands and thousands of rockets and mortars into Israel. As a bonus, pro-Palestinian demonstrators in San Francisco [where else?], referencing the the Warsaw Ghetto analogy, recently beat up a small number of pro-Israel demonstrators, reportedly shouting "Slaughter the Jew" at them in Arabic. Way to bring peace. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
GRESHAM'S LAW UPDATED
Posted by Paul Eidelberg, January 6, 2009. |
|
Some four centuries ago, English financier Sir Thomas Gresham formulated what has come to be known as "Gresham's Law," according to which coins having the least intrinsic value supplant coins having a higher intrinsic value. Gresham's Law is the dominant law in the domain of politics, where falsehoods and half-truths or "spin" drive out plain-spoken truths. The ideal of democratic politics is compromise and expedience as opposed to principles, and this seems to exclude truth. Stated another way: politics is a struggle for power, and to gain power in a democratic society one must go with the mainstream, the center of the political spectrum, where vagueness trumps moral clarity. Demoracy's political elites insist on your being a "moderate," a "centrist," a "pragmatist," a "pluralist." Why? Well, to put it plainly, there is no truth. In this democratic age, everything is "relative." To refute an opponent nowadays you don't have to examine his opinions on logical and empirical grounds; it's enough to call him a "right-winger" or a "hawk." I say "right-winger" and "hawk" rather than "left-winger" and "dove" because left-wingers and doves dominate the media, including the media of education. Thus, if you are a critic of indiscriminate freedom or of a leveling egalitarianism, the democracy's ruling elites label you a "reactionary" or a "fascist." And if you are a critic of the Middle East "peace process," they label you a "war-monger." This dishonest way of dealing with matters of life and death is typical of academics tainted by moral relativism. I have especially in mind morally neutral or "value-free" political scientists. Thus, in an op-ed piece appearing in The Jerusalem Post, one Hebrew University political scientist said that to require more than 51% in a referendum on whether Israel should withdraw from the Golan Heights is to succumb to "Kahanism." The "reason"? It would render nugatory the votes of Israel 's Arab citizens! No direct comment on this example of intellectual dishonesty or of Gresham's Law is necessary. That falsehoods and half-truths are a commonplace in political science is indicated by the fact that political scientists never refer to any politician as "mendacious." To do so is to make a "value-judgment" which "value-free" (or "worth-less") political scientists must avoid if they are to be "objective" or "scientific." A "value-free" political science must therefore be a "truth-free" political science, hence unscientific. But since "value-free" or morally neutral political science will be found only in democracies, it follows that democratic political scientists are lackeys of democracy — understandably, for democracy endows them with academic freedom. You will never hear them criticizing democracy. This suggests that morally neutral political scientists identify with the Power Elite or Establishment. Indeed, they are part of the Establishment. There is dilemma here. Morally neutral political scientists are by definition opposed to tradition, especially a religious-based tradition, which proclaims eternal truths and condemns falsehoods and half-truths. Religion is therefore the main competitor of "value-free" or "truth-free" political science. This is why the political scientist alluded to above opposes an extraordinary majority on the Golan referendum issue — opposes it because it would be a manifestation of what he calls "Jewish exclusivity." Which means he opposes Jewish peoplehood or nationhood. That's the objective of those (including nominal or assimilated Jews) who advocate the establishment of an Arab state in Judea and Samaria, the heartland of the Jewish people. Evident here is the operation of Gresham's Law: the bad driving out the good. Notice, however, that insofar as political science is "value-free" or "truth-less," it cheapens and undermines the values and truths of the society in which this political science holds sway. It renders all values equal, and it reduces truths to myths or are merely personal narratives. This is postmodern political science, and it is subversive. But inasmuch as this political science will be found only in democracies, it follows that "value-free" or morally neutral political science is subversive of democracy. The same may be said of the news media insofar as their mandarins are the products of morally neutral political science. But wait! Since the media are dominated by the Left; they are not at all morally neutral. Consider the current conflict between Israel and Hamas. A perusal of CNN or BBC reveals they are biased against Israel, which is to say they favor Hamas, a terrorist organization that uses women and children as human shields, an organization, moreover, whose Covenant calls for Israel's eradication. Dominating these media, therefore, is not moral neutrality but moral reversal. Or to put it terms of Greshem's Law, those who support Hamas would have the bad supplant the good. Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at Constitution@usa.net |
|
ISRAEL THE BEAUTIFUL: BIRYA FOREST NEAR TZFAT IN THE GALILEE
Posted by Yehoshua Halevi, January 6, 2009. |
Birya Forest near Tzfat in the Galilee
This is one of Yehoshua Halevi's Golden Light Images. Yehoshua Halevi writes: "HOW I GOT THE SHOT: For decades, Jews outside of Israel have been contributing to the Jewish National Fund's tree-planting programs. Over the last century, according to the JNF, Israelis have planted some 185 million trees, creating 280 new forests in places as diverse as the desert and sharply-sloped mountainsides. As a child, I remember — like millions of others — putting coins into the blue and white JNF collection boxes. What I didn't understand until I came to Israel was that almost all of Israel's native forests were denuded by successive conquerors up through the Ottoman Turks, who clear cut whatever forest remained to provide timber for the trans-Arabian railroad. At the beginning of the 20th century, the country was 97% bare. Today, the country abounds with vast and healthy forests of evergreens, such as those seen in this photo, taken in the Birya Forest near Tzfat. I took this shot spontaneously at the end of the day when I had already packed up my gear and clocked out. Driving back to my evening's accommodations, I caught sight of the last rays of sunlight lighting up this grove of mixed fir trees, each one seemingly a different tone of green. I pulled over, grabbed my 70-200 zoom and my tripod and fired off a few shots quickly before the interesting light faded. Using the "File Info" feature in Photoshop, I can easily recall data for the shot, including focal length (95mm), shutter speed (1/80 sec.), f-stop (7.1), ISO (200), shooting mode (manual) and whether or not a flash was fired. There are other ways of retrieving this information besides Photoshop and data is available from any digital camera. Reviewing camera settings is a great way to discover why a particular photo succeeds or fails. By comparing a series of similar shots made with different settings, you can begin to decipher the numerous abstruse features found on today's digital cameras and make the right choices when the next photo op arises.
Contact Yehoshua Halevi by email at smile@goldenlightimages.com
and visit his website:
|
|
HAMAS OPERATIVES KILLED IN UNRWA SCHOOL
Posted by Barry Shaw, January 6, 2009. |
|
The media has, in its knee-jerk fashion, roundly condemned Israel for the attack on a UNWRA school yard in Gaza. They did so automatically without checking, or accepting, the facts. The IDF were under a mortar bombardment that was launched from the schoolyard. The Israeli artillery that fired at the Hamas terrorist were responding to this mortar attack on the Israeli soldiers and were therefore, acting to defend the soldiers under attack. Hamas was firing mortars knowing there were children present in the area. To do so knowingly is a war crime. The IDF also questions to the total number of casualties and the statements that no Hamas terrorists were in the area. The western media put out the Palestinian statement that there were no Hamas operatives in the area as if it were a fact. This is a lie. See the article below From IDF Spokesperson: "Hamas Operatives Killed in UNRWA School." This same school was the site of a similar mortar attack on Israeli towns and villages in October 2007. The IDF took footage from a drone of this incident. See the youtube video below. The evidence is irrefutable that Hamas uses the protection of schools, mosques, and hospitals to launch attacks against Israeli civilian targets. This is a war crime. |
|
After an investigation that took place over the past hour it has been found that amongst the dead at the Jabalya school were Hamas terror operatives and a mortar battery cell who were firing on IDF forces in the area. Hamas operatives Imad Abu Askhar and Hassan Abu Askhar were amongst terrorists that were identified to be killed. "We face a very delicate situation where the Hamas is using the citizens of Gaza as a protective vest," IDF Spokesperson Brig. General Avi Benayahu said following the incident. Link to Video of Mortars Fired from UN School (archive) In this October 2007 footage from an unmanned plane, terrorists are seen firing mortars from the yard of an UNRWA school. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zmXXUOs27lI&feature=channel_page This is an aerial map of Jabaliya and shows how Hamas located their terrorists and attack systems in or near UNRWA schools and hospitals that they hoped Israel would hesitate to target. (Source: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/About+the+Ministry/Behind+the+Headlines/ Ttragedy_school_Jebaliya_6-Jan-2009.htm) 
Barry Shaw made aliyah from Manchester, England, 25 years ago with his family. He runs a real estate office in Netanya. He writes the "View from Here" columns from Israel. To sign up to receive his emails, contact him at netre@matav.net.il |
|
HOW THE U.N. PERPETUATES THE 'REFUGEE' PROBLEM
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 6, 2009. |
|
How the U.N. Perpetuates the 'Refugee' Problem
This is by Natan Sharansky
and it appeared in Wall Street Journal
|
|
Israel's assault on Hamas is just the latest in a long chain of military clashes, the scripts of which are always the same. On one side, there is the Israeli army. Technologically and militarily superior, its soldiers are motivated by a powerful commitment to their country's security. On the other, there are Palestinian terrorists whose aim is to kill as many innocent Israelis as possible by unleashing missiles and suicide bombers on civilian centers. Then, when Israel retaliates, they appeal to the world with gruesome images of Palestinian suffering as part of a global campaign to prevent Israel from defending itself. Sooner or later, the tactics of the Palestinian terrorists work. The voices of protest in response to Palestinian suffering grow louder until international pressure stays Israel's hand. Inevitably, some of these protests come from Israelis. Last week, before the tanks had begun rolling into Gaza, the journalist Tom Segev put it bluntly in a column he wrote in Ha'aretz. "A child in Sderot is the same as a child in Gaza," he wrote, "and anyone who harms either is evil." Mr. Segev is correct when he says that the suffering of children on either side is intolerable — this is why the pictures from Gaza make us shudder. But he is wrong to draw a moral equivalence between the two sides. In this, he lends a hand to the Palestinians' most shameful military tactic: pimping the suffering of their civilians as a weapon of war. Palestinian children are dying today not because of Israeli brutality, but because their own leaders have chosen to use their children as human shields, and their pain as a battering ram against Western sensibilities. Of course, it is easy to blame Hamas. It is they, after all, who deliberately put their weapons caches in mosques, their rocket launchers in schoolyards, and their command centers in hospitals — all with the explicit goal of maximizing the tragedy of an Israeli response. Yet Hamas is not the only Palestinian group at fault. In 2005, shortly after the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip, I met with the chief of staff to the chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas. My question to him: Now that we have uprooted thousands of Jews and empowered Gazans to be masters of their own fate, can we hope that within a year's time there will be fewer refugees in the camps? "Absolutely not," he said. "The refugees will be relocated only in the context of the final status [agreement]. How can we move them if we do not know where they will live? Maybe they will live in Israel." In withdrawing from Gaza, Israel made painful concessions for peace by forcibly removing Jews from their homes. And yet even the Palestinian Authority, the most moderate among Palestinian political groups, would not consider easing their own people's plight in the wake of Israel's compromise. This is because the suffering of the refugees is essential to their broader political struggle. How does the West respond to the obvious exploitation of Palestinian refugees? Soon after my meeting with Mr. Abbas's chief of staff, I met with the ambassador of one of the West's most enlightened countries. I asked: Why are the Palestinians not willing to help their own refugees? "I can understand them," he answered. "After all, they don't want the refugee problem to be taken off the agenda." This reflexive "understanding" for the Palestinian leaders' abuse of their own people is the heart of the problem. For decades, the international community has actively assisted in building the terrorists' unique system of control — over where Palestinians live and in what conditions, and over what they think — by allowing terrorists to turn the refugee camps into the center of the Palestinian war machine. Instead of working to relieve the refugees' misery, the United Nations has dedicated an entire agency, UNRWA, to perpetuating it. For the rest of the world's refugees, the U.N. works tirelessly to improve their conditions, to relocate them, and to help them rebuild their lives as quickly as possible. With the Palestinians, the U.N. does exactly the opposite, granting refugee status to the great-grandchildren of people displaced in 1948, doing nothing to dismantle the camps, and acting as facilitators for the terrorists' goal of grinding an entire civilian population under their thumb. Nowhere on earth do terrorists get so much help from the Free World. It is not only the refugee camps that the West has helped sustain. For years, Hamas in Gaza — like Hezbollah in Lebanon, and like the Palestinian Authority under Yasser Arafat — has been amassing huge stockpiles of weaponry, most of it under the noses of Western observers who are meant to prevent the import of such weapons. It's as if we are telling the terrorists: Go on, build your armies, prepare for war. We understand. The same can be said about the use of children as human shields. Where was the West when Palestinian leaders were actively transforming their children's classrooms into indoctrination centers for martyrdom? And so, invariably, the script is played out: Hamas fires its missiles, Israel responds with military force in Gaza, children are killed, their pictures are played countless times on televisions in the West, articles are published saying both sides are evil, and Israel is pressured to stop. Whether this war will bring about lasting change, or just provide another breather before the next battle, depends to a very large degree on the Free World. A successful Israeli campaign — in which Hamas is eliminated as the controlling force in Gaza — will bring an unprecedented opportunity for Western leaders to change the rules of the game when it comes to Palestinian civilians. It's time for the West to recognize the human rights of Palestinians — not only when they are suffering in war. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
NARIMAN HOUSE, NOT TAJ, WAS THE PRIME TARGET ON 26/11
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 6, 2009. |
|
This report was written by Somendra Sharma
and it appeared yesterday in DNA India,
|
|
Mumbai: Think 26/11, and images of the carnage at the Taj come to mind. But the terrorists themselves were in no doubt that Nariman House was the prime focus. For this was the place which housed a Jewish centre, and the fanatics from Pakistan were clear that they wanted to send a message to the world from there. The Mumbai crime branch, which is investigating the terror attacks, has found that the terrorists' handlers in Pakistan were clear this operation should not fail under any circumstances. The rest of the operations — at the Taj, Oberoi and Chhattrapati Shivaji Terminus — were intended to amplify the effect. A senior police official, told DNA on condition of anonymity, that the interrogation of Mohammed Amir Iman Ajmal (aka Kasab) revealed as much. Just before entering the city, the terrorists' team leader, Ismail Khan, briefed them once again about their targets. "But Khan briefed Imran Babar, alias Abu Akasha, and Nasir, alias Abu Umer, intensely on what to do at Nariman House," the officer said. When asked during interrogation why Nariman House was specifically targetted, Ajmal reportedly told the police they wanted to sent a message to Jews across the world by attacking the ultra orthodox synagogue. According to the statement by Ajmal, Khan told Babar and Nasir that even if the others failed in their operation, they both could not afford to. "The Nariman House operation has to be a success," the officer said, quoting from Ajmal's statement. "Khan also said that as far as Nariman House was concerned, there should not be even a minimal glitch in finding it and capturing it," the officer quoted Ajmal as saying. After the dinghy carrying the 10 terrorists reached Mumbai at the Macchimar colony opposite Badhwar Park in Cuffe Parade, it was decided that no bombs would be planted in the taxi to be used to reach Nariman House. "The idea," according to the police officer, "was that if Babar and Nasir got delayed in locating and entering Nariman House, the bomb in the taxi may explode even before they entered their target." The officer further quoted Ajmal's confession as indicating the Nariman House killers may have either lost their way or took their time entering the building to avoid failure. The dinghy reached Cuffe Parade around 8.30pm, but Babar and Nasir entered Nariman House at around 10pm. This means they took around one- and-a-half hour to locate and enter Nariman House," the officer said.Anyone who knows Colaba would have got there in 15-20 minutes. Another aspect which indicates that the Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT) did not want the Nariman House operation to fail was Fahim Ansari's revelation to the crime branch. Ansari, who was arrested for his alleged involvement in the bomb blasts at a CRPF camp in Lucknow in January last year, told the police that Nariman House was also surveyed by him last year. Interestingly, Ansari did not reveal this detail when he was arrested by the Uttar Pradesh police in February last year. "Ansari told us that he did not divulge this information earlier because it would have jeopardised the most important operation of the LeT. He had also been warned by the LeT that Nariman House was their most secret operation and must not be compromised at any cost," the officer said. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
STAND BY ISRAEL!
Posted by Rock Peters, January 6, 2009. |
|
Israel, oh Israel
Where do you begin the negotiations
How many times Israel
But when people
Are you supposed
You have every right to defend yourself
Those who forget
We know from history
Terrorists understand
What Israel is doing
For Israel
How did Hamas celebrate this Christmas?
Israel is Jewish
And we Americans
Today, tomorrow, forever! God bless Israel and America.
Rock Peters' multimedia website –– www.godsaveusa.com
–– is dedicated to fighting Muslim terrorism. It is both
factual and attractive. Contact him at rockpeters@aol.com
|
|
PALESTINE IS A GEOGRAPHICAL AREA, NOT A NATIONALITY
Posted by Doris Wise Montrose, January 6, 2009. |
|
The Arabs invented a special national entity in the 1960s (rather than a geographic delineation) called the Palestinians, specifically for political gain. They brand Israelis as invaders and claim the geographic area called Palestine belongs exclusively to the Arabs. The word Palestine is not even Arabic. It is a word coined by the Romans around 135 CE from the name of a seagoing Aegean people who settled on the coast of Canaan in antiquity — the Philistines. The name was chosen to replace Judea, as a sign that Jewish sovereignty had been eradicated following the Jewish Revolts against Rome. In the course of time, the Latin name Philistia was further bastardized into Palistina or Palestine. During the next 2,000 years, Palestine was never an independent state belonging to any people, nor did a Palestinian people, distinct from other Arabs, appear during 1,300 years of Muslim hegemony in Palestine under Arab and Ottoman rule. Palestine was and is solely a geographic name. Therefore, it is not surprising that in modern times the name 'Palestine' or 'Palestinian' was applied as an adjective to all inhabitants of the geographical area between the Mediterranean and the Jordan River — Palestine Jews and Palestine Arabs alike. In fact, until the 1960s, most Arabs in Palestine preferred to identify themselves merely as part of the great Arab nation or citizens of "southern Syria." The term 'Palestinian' as a noun was usurped and co-opted by the Arabs in the 1960s as a tactic initiated by Yasser Arafat to brand Jews as intruders on someone else's turf. He presents Arab residents of Israel and the Territories as indigenous inhabitants since time immemorial. This fabrication of peoplehood allowed Palestinian Arabs to gain parity with the Jewish people as a nation deserving of an independent state. In a March 1977 interview in the Dutch newspaper Trouw, Zahir Muhsein, a member of the PLO executive committee, admitted: "Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism." Historically, Before the Arabs Fabricated the Palestinian People as an Exclusively Arab Phenomenon, No Such Group Existed Countless official British Mandate-vintage documents speak of 'the Jews' and 'the Arabs' of Palestine — not 'Jews and Palestinians.' Ironically, before local Jews began calling themselves Israelis in 1948 (the name 'Israel' was chosen for the newly-established Jewish state), the term 'Palestine' applied almost exclusively to Jews and the institutions founded by new Jewish immigrants in the first half of the 20th century, before independence. Some examples include:
If you watch the blockbuster 1960 hit movie "Exodus," based on the novel by Leon Uris, you will see how recent this appellation is. The hero, a native-born Jewish pioneer called Ari ben Canaan, talks of his love for Palestine. Encouraged by their success at historical revisionism and brainwashing the world with the 'Big Lie' of a Palestinian people, Palestinian Arabs have more recently begun to claim they are the descendants of the Philistines and even the Stone Age Canaanites. Based on that myth, they can claim to have been 'victimized' twice by the Jews: in the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites and by the Israelis in modern times — a total fabrication. Archeologists explain that the Philistines were a Mediterranean people who settled along the coast of Canaan in 1100 BCE. They have no connection to the Arab nation, a desert people who emerged from the Arabian Peninsula. As if that myth were not enough, Arafat has also claimed "Palestinian Arabs are descendants of the Jebusites" displaced when King David conquered Jerusalem. Arafat has also argued that "Abraham was an Iraqi." One Christmas Eve, Arafat declared that "Jesus was a Palestinian," a preposterous claim that echoes the words of Hanan Ashrawi, a Christian Arab, who in an interview during the 1991 Madrid Conference said: "Jesus Christ was born in my country, in my land," claiming she was "the descendant of the first Christians" — disciples who spread the gospel around Bethlehem some 600 years before the Arab conquest. If her claim were true, it would be tantamount to confessing that she is a Jew! Contradictions abound, Palestinian Arab leaders claim to be descended from the Canaanites, the Philistines, the Jebusites and the first Christians. They also co-opt Jesus and ignore his Jewishness, at the same time claiming the Jews never were a people and never built the Holy Temples in Jerusalem. There has Never Been a Sovereign Arab State in Palestine The artificiality of a Palestinian identity is reflected in the attitudes and actions of neighboring Arabs nations who never established a Palestinian state. It also is expressed in the utterances and loyalties of so-called Palestinians. Only twice in Jerusalem's history has it served as a national capital. The first time was as the capital of the two Jewish Commonwealths during the First and Second Temple periods, as described in the Bible, reinforced by archaeological evidence and numerous ancient documents. The second time is in modern times as the capital of the State of Israel. It has never served as an Arab capital for the simple reason that there has never been a Palestinian Arab state. The rhetoric by Arab leaders on behalf of the Palestinians rings hollow, for the Arabs in neighboring lands, who control 99.9 percent of the Middle East land, have never recognized a Palestinian entity. They have always considered Palestine and its inhabitants part of the great 'Arab nation,' historically and politically as an integral part of Greater Syria — Suriyya al-Kubra — a designation that covered both sides of the Jordan River. In the 1950s, Jordan simply annexed the West Bank, since its population was viewed as brethren of the Jordanians. Jordan's official narrative of "Jordanian state-building" attests to this fact: "Jordanian identity underlies the significant and fundamental common denominator that makes it inclusive of Palestinian identity, particularly in view of the shared historic social and political development of the people on both sides of the Jordan.... The Jordan government, in view of the historical and political relationship with the West Bank ... granted all Palestinian refugees on its territory full citizenship rights while protecting and upholding their political rights as Palestinians (Right of Return or compensation)." The Arabs never established a Palestinian state when the UN offered a partition plan in 1947 to establish "an Arab and a Jewish state" (not a Palestinian state, it should be noted). Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades prior to the Six-Day War when the West Bank was under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control; nor did the Palestinians clamor for autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule. Well before the 1967 decision to create a new Arab people called 'Palestinians,' when the word 'Palestinian' was associated with Jewish endeavors, Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, a local Arab leader, testified in 1937 before a British investigative body — the Peel Commission — saying: "There is no such country ! Palestine is a term the Zionists invented! There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries, part of Syria." In a 1946 appearance before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, also acting as an investigative body, the Arab historian Philip Hitti stated: "There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not." According to investigative journalist Joan Peters, who spent seven years researching the origins of the Arab-Jewish conflict over Palestine (From Time Immemorial, 2001) the one identity that was never considered by local inhabitants prior to the 1967 war was 'Arab Palestinian.' Eli E. Hertz
A safe and secure Israel is vital to America's national interest. A safe and secure Israel is a prerequisite to genuine peace in the Middle East. Visit us at www.cjhsla.org Children Of Jewish Holocaust Survivors Los Angeles (CJHSLA) is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization dedicated to the protection of freedom and actively promotes the right of the State of Israel to not only exist, but to flourish, as a Jewish state. CJHSLA insists that the moral imperative derived from the last Holocaust commits all people of good will to prevent the next one. Please make your tax deductible checks payable to: CJHSLA is a non-profit 501(c)(3) organization that operates solely on donations, all of which are greatly appreciated. Contact Doris Wise Montrose at doris@cjhsla.org |
|
CASTRO, DISPROPORTIONATE FORCE AND PROTESTORS
Posted by Seth Frantzman, January 6, 2009. |
|
This is Issue 68 from my website: Terra Incognita
|
|
1. "Fifty Years of Lies" December 30th, 2008 Fifty Years of Lies: Cuba is celebrating 50 years since Castro's 'revolution.' A person born the day that Castro came to power would thus be 50 years old today. The media tells us Castro overthrew an 'American backed dictatorship run by Batista.' But Batista was a 'dictator' for only 8 years. Which is better, 8 years, or an entire lifetime. There is nothing revolutionary about Cuba, it is a monarchy of Fidel and his brother, a cult of personality. The revolutionaries chanted 'Viva Cuba libre.' But Cuba has been imprisoned for fifty years, fifty years of lies about a socialist romantic utopia. Cuba is 'celebrating' 50 years of lies. Fifty years ago a 'small rebel band' based in the Sierra Maestra swept away the 'American armed dictator Batista'. So we learn from news reports. Castro is ailing so his brother, Raul, is presiding over the country. A Cuban born when Castro took Havana would today be fifty years old. We must pause and consider this. A Cuban who was twnety years old would today be seventy. Thus there are few adults that can truly remember a time without Castro. It is interesting that news reports style Fulgenico Bautista as a 'dictator'. He didn't dictate much or for very long. Batista was first in power as an elected president from 1940-1944. In 1952 he launched a coup and took over the government once again. He served for 8 year. Eight years. Someone born when he took power would thus have been 8 years old when he was overthrown. Today that person is 58. Eight years. That's all. If the people of Cuba, say those in their twenties who are now old and decrepid, could be given a choice today as to whether they wanted their entire lives to be taken up living under one pompous arrogant man, or whether they preferred the former 'dictator' it would be interesting to know what they would choose. They had no idea at the time, in their youth, that they were witnessing the end of history, the end of their way of life, the end of their freedom, and a long national, fifty year, nightmare where they would live in an island prison camp, a place where only one man and his family could do as they pleased. One man and his family. That is what we worshipped for so long as being romantic. Another monarchy in place in Cuba consisting of Castro and his brother. When I was in high school in Arizona we were subjected to periodic lectures about the glories of Cuba. Some of my compatriots were encouraged to volunteer in Cuba, to clear sugar cane and 'experience the revolution'. They were told about the island paradise of universal health care and 'democracy' where 'factory workers debate their boses.' My parents even told me about how romantic Castro had been. When I was in college I was the sole dissenter on the student senate which funded the 'American Socialist Club' to visit Cuba and participate in a world council of socialists. These American socialists felt the U.S was a dictatorship But doesn't the romance ever wear off? Doesn't it ever get old. How many lifetimes must a man and his family rule a country before it stops being romantic and it stops being a socialist utopia and it starts looking like a dark tunnel? How many times must the charade of 'democracy' be pushes aside. If it were a democracy there would have been elections. If Castro were popular and the people wanted to live their entire lives under one man, listening to his endless eight hour speeches and watching him wear a uniform that never seems to decay, then they could have voted again and again for him. In the U.S there are elections every four years. In Mexico it is every five. They could have voted ten times. Those who describe U.S democracy as a charade, such as Noam Chomsky and Gore Vidal, who have both referred to the American presidency as a form of "four year dictatorship" should be happy its not a fifty year dictatorship with the succession going to family members, like in a kingdom. Cuba is a Communist Socialist utopia. A true democratic monarchichal utopia. Its like the utopias of old in Europe, with a king and his brother, no free speech and a prison camp on an island (the Isle of Pines, incidentally the same prison used by Batista and where Castro himself was imprisoned). Vidal himself has visited Cuba and along with other "cultural figures" has condemned the U.S embargo of the island. It would be nice, just once, for someone who condemns the U.S for its "four year dictatorships" to condemn a fifty year dictatorship being handed over to someone's brother. Whose next in line? Raul Castro's son? How romantic is that? How is Cuba 'revolutionary'? Its just an old style monarchy with a 1930s cult of personality. When they shout 'viva la revolution, viva Fidel, viva la Cuba Libre' they are lying. There is no revolution. There is no free Cuba and no people should be forced to shout 'long live' one mna for fifty years. Fifty years of lies. 2. "A short history of disproportionate force"
A short history of disproportionate force: Disproportionate force is not defend in international law. It is defined in criminal law and in domestic police procedures. But while excessive force is illegal (i.e shooting unarmed thieves in the back), the police use disproportionate force to stop criminals (i.e surrounding banks that are being robbed.) In war disproportionate force is the way a country wins a war. The 30 years war was proportionate, one massacre after another. That's why it lasted for thirty years. Is that better than a short, massively disproportionate war designed to end a conflict? Within hours of Israel launching massive air strikes on the Gaza strip in response to Hamas' firing of over a hundred rockets in three days, the international community was already reverting to form in its complaints that Israel was using "disproportionate force." On Saturday, December 27th, not long after Israel began striking Hamas police stations and terrorist infrastructure in Gaza, the European Union condemned "the disproportionate use of force." This cycle of terrorism, Israeli reactions and condemnations of 'disproportionate force' is common in the Middle East. In July of 2006 the UN Humanitarian chief, Jan Egeland complained that Israel had used disproportionate force. On July 13th the EU claimed Israel was using such force in Lebanon. On July 27th the Prime Minister of Turkey did the same, regarding Gaza. Mati Vanhanen, the Prime Minister of Finland, said the same thing. In 2004 it was Kofi Annan complaining that Israel needed to cease using "disproportionate force in densely populated areas." Israel isn't the only country accused of using disproportionate force. During Russia's war with Georgia in 2008 it was also accused by the U.S and Nato of using disproportionate force. Where did this idea that disproportionate force is wrong come from? Do the western nations and leaders that complain about such use of force really live up to such preaching in their own countries? What is the history of the use of such force in war? One of the problems with the term 'disproportionate force' is that it has no accepted definition in international law or elsewhere. George Fletcher, Cardozo professor of jurisprudence, in 'Sense and nonsense about disproportionate force' wrote in 2006 that had the British bombed Buenos Aires in the Falklands war " in that context [bombing] would have been unnecessary and therefore could not possibly qualify as proportionate." However he notes that whereas criminal law deals with proportionate force in self defense, international law has never dealt with this question; "I know of no case in the international version of shooting escaping looters where a court has affirmed that the use of force was necessary but not proportionate." In response to Washington's condemnation of Russia's use of force in George, Dmitry Rogozin, Russia's ambassador to Nato, claimed that "the use of force to defend one's compatriots is traditionally regarded as a form of self defense" and claimed Nato and the U.S had used disproportionate force in Bosnia, Iraq and Afghanistan. But this brings us no closer to what constitutes disproportionate force or if it should even be considered wrong. Proportionate force in theory should be proportional to the threat. Thus shooting unarmed thieves by a civilian is considered wrong. Police are accused from time to time of using too much force when taking down criminals. But no one claims that directly proportionate force should be used by civilians or the authorities. Thieves do not need to be punished by having people steal from them. Rapists are not raped. Hostage takers don't have their families taken hostage. No one would logically think that Hamas' rocket fire from Gaza should be counteracted through the use of equally indiscriminate rocket and mortar fire by Israel. The history of warfare shows that it has never been fought in a proportionate manner. Winning wars requires not being proportional. Consider the Second World War. The American army at the end of the war numbered some 9 million men under arms. The U.S was churning out more planes and tanks in a month in 1944 than the Germans were making in a year. The Soviets massed some 20,000 tanks before the battle of Berlin in 1945. In the First Gulf War the U.S used disproportionate air power to crush the Iraqi army. In the Nato campaign in Kosovo in 1999, Nato employed more than 1,000 airplanes against a Serbia that had virtually no air force. When General Grant brought the full might of the Federal army to bear on the South in 1864 he outnumbered the confederates by 2 to 1 and more in almost all battles. Hardly proportionate. It is in law enforcement where we see the greatest use of disproportionate, but necessary, force. One criminal with a handgun can result in the arrival of dozens, if not hundreds, of officers to a crime scene. In a 1997 North Hollywood shootout, two armed bank robbers shooting at the police resulted in the arrival of 300 law enforcement members, 13 of whom were eventually wounded by the bank robbers. Disproportionate force is the way in which crime is prevented and criminals are brought to justice. Is it also the way wars are ended. All the great causes of history, such as the abolition of slavery or the de-segregation of the south, were brought about through the use of disproportionate force, in the latter example the use of the national guard to secure rights for black Americans. Nazism would not have been defeated had the allies relied on proportionate force. Proportionate force is the recipe for unending war, for the endless victimization of civilians at the hands of terrorist aggressors. Fighting crime, like terror, and Nazism, requires disproportionate force. 3. "The protestor, the democracy and the terrorist" December 30th, 2008 The protestor, the democracy and the terrorist: No one protested the Mumbai terror attacks. 200 dead and no one protested. But when 200 Gazans died in the first day of the First Gaza War in December of 2008 the world began to erupt in protests. Why is it that democracies produce protestors and dictatorships don't? Why is it that no one protests terror but they protest wars against it? Between the 26th and 29th of November a total of 173 people were murdered in Mumbai by terrorists. There were no worldwide protests. No one protested against terrorism, against Islamic extremism or against Pakistan, the nation from whence the terrorists came and where they were trained. Such is the fate of the victims of terror. Candle-light vigils and people claiming they will 'fight terror' by living life as normal and 'not letting it affect us.' Between December 27th and 30th some 260 Palestinians were killed in the Gaza strip by Israeli bombs. Even when the death toll was closer to 200, in the first day of the bombing, protests swept the world. In London and Greece there were riots outside Israeli embassies with Europeans and their Muslim allies holding signs that declared a 'genocide', 'Holocaust' and 'massacre' in Gaza. The U.N secretary general and others called it a 'disproportionate' and 'excessive' display of force. Gideon Levy, the leftist Israeli writer, described Israel as the 'neighbourhood bully strikes again'. Yossi Sarid called on Israel to 'stop' the operation. David Grossman, an Israeli author, wrote that Israel was "imprisoned in the familiar ceremony of war....stop. Hold your fire. Try for once to act against the usual response, in contrast to the lethal logic of belligerence." In Israel there were small riots and protests by Arabs across the country. Leftist wealthy Israelis in Tel Aviv marched through the city protesting and on December 29th 'human rights' activists protested at Israeli universities. In Chicago a Jewish house of worship was firebombed. Let us contrast these two situations. In both the death tolls were quite similar. But there is no condemnation by the UN of the terror in Mumbai. There is no emergency meeting. There is no condemnation by world leaders of disproportionate force being used by the terrorist or excessive force. There are no protests, anywhere in the world, against terrorism or its host country. There are no fire bombings of mosques. There are no calls by poet laureates in Pakistan to 'stop' the terrorism and stop bullying civilians in India. There are no riots. There are not white Europeans holding placards calling accusing Islamic terrorism of 'genocide' or a 'Holocaust' or a 'massacre'. The European does not care about those 173 dead Indians. There are no leftist Pakistanis or leftist Muslims in India to immediately begin a 'human rights' protest. Why is one man's life worth more than another? Why is there a difference? What can we say is the essential difference between India and the Gaza strip? One is a big fat pluralistic democracy. The other is an over-populated Islamist dictatorship. But one has the support of the blond European women at universities throughout the Western world. One does not. When hundreds die in one place they are memorialized throughout the world by protests and riots and assaults on the religion of those perceived to have caused their deaths. When hundreds die in another place no one cares, not even the countrymen abroad. No Hindus in Washington or Europe protested outside the Pakistani embassy. Not one. What does Democracy do to the soul that creates people who do not care when their own people are massacred? Why does democracy create a disjointed society where people have no passion to riot when their own people are slaughtered? Why does terrorism always succeed? Why is there never any condemnation of it, anywhere, and anyone who will stand up to it. Where are the well bred leftist authors and their gated communities to protest it and write letters condemning it? Before Israel's bombing campaign against Gaza began there were hundreds of rockets fired against Israel. Yet Levy and Grossman and other leftist wealthy Israeli intellectuals did not write letters and condemn them. There were no protests against them by the leading students at universities or in Tel Aviv. Why? Because the inhabitant of Tel Aviv and the wealthy writer lives far away from where the rockets fall and they see no connection between themselves and the swarthy poor people who are forced to live under the rocket fire. Wealthy people in democracies live in islands of prosperity and because of their secularism they do not seem themselves connected to their own compatriots. Yet in the other society, the Muslim dictatorship, we do not see this. Muslims around the world see themselves personally connected to the people in Gaza. Muslims in Europe, whatever their path in life, whether religious or secular or poor or wealthy, see themselves connected to the dead in Gaza. Wealthy Muslim secular Communist women from Jerusalem see themselves directly connected to the Islamists in Gaza, even if they know that they personally hate Hamas, the government of Gaza. Such is their deep connection. Democracy and secularism's central problem is in its elites and its fragmentation of society. The lack of faith and social cohesion lead to a feeling that people are only affected if they are affected personally. Thus David Grossman or Gideon Levy is only affected by terrorism if his house or car is blown up. Otherwise he lives above it. The same is apparently true in the Hindu Indian diaspora. While Hindus may feel annoyed that their country has been attacked and they may complain at home and say 'we hate Pakistan', their emotional connection does not manifest itself in a 'human rights rally' or a protest against the massacre of Indians. This is primarily because the victims of terrorism are not seen to have been massacred. And this is the other side of the coin. Not only democracy and secularism have failed to protect the victims, terrorism also elicits no anger from its victims. The victims of terror and their compatriots express themselves in candle-light vigils and sing song hippie dreamy eulogies. They express themselves by claiming, falsely, that they are 'fighting terrorism' by 'not letting it change our way of life.' But the Muslim who sympathizes with his 'brothers' in Gaza allows the 200 dead to change his life. He allows it to take some time from his day to go protest. He allows it to make him unhappy and angry and desire to seek 'justice'. Such concepts are not found among the victims of terror, especially when they are in a democracy. The central problem with the fight against terror is that it does not provoke anger from the victims. Even in Pakistan, no matter the number dead, no one cares. Blow up thousands of Pakistanis and they will do nothing. They simply will not be angry about it. One of the problems with terrorism is that we expect the government to solve it for us. The idea is that the government will take revenge for us. We rely on the government and we therefore resolve that we will not 'change our way of life' to fight terror. But a more healthy response is the response shown by Muslims to the Gaza bombing. The healthy response is the realization that the government cannot and does not stop terror. We must personally fight terror and we must allow it to change our way of life. The idea that a stiff upper lip is always the right response to being assaulted is some strange remnant of the Christian idea of 'turning the other cheek'. The idea that one always does nothing in the face of tragedy and in doing nothing 'overcomes' the tragedy and 'shows the enemy' that he has not affected us is mistaken. The process of 'going about your life as usual' is the mentality of a slave. Slaves were taken from their parents at a young age, sold in markets, stripped naked and checked like animals, whipped, raped, taken from their wives, forced to work all day everyday and never given time off or given a chance to celebrate or cultivate their own holidays, religion or tradition. There was no record of their birth or death. They were expected to always go about their life as normal, regardless of their treatment, hardship and the unbearable circumstances they had to work in. Secularism and democracy was supposed to free us from the slave mentality, but it has oddly enough internalized modernity and terrorism to the extent, in its fragmented society where every man is an island, that the slave mentality persists among people. So long as the victims of terror go about their lives as usual and so long as the dictatorship and its extremists receive the support of their compatriots abroad and use terror to achieve their goals, the democracy will slowly fail and Islamism will slowly succeed. There is much that can be learned from Islam in terms of the rational response to death and suffering. There is little that can be learned from the response to the Mumbai bombings. Contact Seth J. Frantzman at sfrantzman@hotmail.com and visit his website: http://journalterraincognita.blogspot.com These essays appeared on his website. |
|
I DIALED ALL BY MYSELF, MA!
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, January 5, 2009. |
|
I dialed all by myself, Ma! And I told the operator: Free Jonathan Pollard! 
Call the White House for Jonathan Pollard! DIAL: 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111 Monday to Friday 9 AM to 5 PM EDST Leave a message for President Obama: Free Jonathan Pollard now!
Reach Justice for Jonathan Pollard by sending an email to
justice4jp@gmail.com and visit the website: http://www.JonathanPollard.org
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: PAIN AND PROGRESS
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 6, 2009. |
|
Our boys are in the toughest of fights now, since the beginning of this war. 
In addition, 24 were wounded. This happened in Saja'iya, when a contingent of our troops hid in an empty house and the house was hit by one of our own shells. This happens, but it's tough, tough stuff. In the course of the day, yesterday, another 12 soldiers had been wounded in other action; I understand most of these injuries were light to moderate. For our part, in intense gun battles, we killed 100 Palestinian terrorists and captured 80, who will be interrogated. That interrogation should be greatly helpful in securing intelligence for our operations. All and all, we are moving as had been planned and are said to be making good progress. ~~~~~~~~~~ According to the Post's Khaled Abu Toameh, a very reliable source, Hamas desperately needs the fighting to stop, but is searching for some way to turn this into a "victory." At this point, what Abu Toameh describes is a rather schizoid situation, with some leaders wanting to call it quits and others wanting to keep fighting in order to "score some kind of 'military victory.'" Hamas is on the verge of collapse. Hamas's leaders in Gaza have thrown away their cell phones and gone into hiding. They cannot be reached, and are no longer in direct communication with Hamas leaders in Damascus, or with their patrons in Damascus and Teheran. The leadership in Gaza knew nothing about the decision, made in Damascus, to send a mission to Cairo to discuss a cease-fire. All in all, the military wing of Hamas, Izza al-Din al-Qassam — which is what we are now fighting, is in control of Gaza, as the political elements in Gaza have abdicated. The fighters have been charged with doing everything possible to prevent the collapse of the Hamas regime. But because they have no guidance from local leadership, the result is chaos and anarchy: except for some long-distance communication from Syria, the gunmen are in charge on the street. Hamas as a local governing body has collapsed. This has implications not only for our ultimate victory, but for what lies in store for Gaza after the war. ~~~~~~~~~~ Reports are surfacing that if matters continue to go as intended, we might be finished in 78 hours. It is not clear if this is what was intended, if we're progressing faster than had been expected (which seems to be the case), or if this is all the time it is estimated we will have before the international community intervenes. ~~~~~~~~~~ About that international community: The Foreign Minister of the Czech Republic, which chairs the EU at the moment, said in a press conference: "We didn't have a specific plan for the cease-fire because the cease-fire must be concluded by the parties. We can help it, mediate, assist a solution, but it not up to us to propose the conditions of the cease-fire." And so there is speculation by some analysts and diplomats that the visit of the EU delegation, and the separate visit of Sarkozy, were meant in part for domestic consumption. Certainly, "we think you should stop, but you have to work it out, we can't tell you what to do," does not seem to be a major threat to our military progress. ~~~~~~~~~~ Sarkozy, without a doubt, has been a thorn in our side, however. Where did he go as soon as he came to this area? To Ramallah, to meet with President Abbas. And standing next to Abbas (talk about playing to the Arabs), he declared that the fighting must stop "as soon as possible." He said he would be delivering the message that the violence must stop when he came here. But it seems to me that Olmert handled him as well as he might have. Yesterday he appealed to him to block a Security Council resolution for a ceasefire. France currently holds the rotating presidency of the Council. Said Olmert: "We defined from the very beginning a limited goal — to change the security situation in the South and to free thousands of citizens from the threat of terror. I do not know what Sarkozy said to Olmert, other than offering a vague promise to keep working on the issue with him, but I would not hold my breath with regard to his cooperation in the matter. It would be nice to be pleasantly surprised here. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Security Council is scheduled to meet and discuss the situation in Gaza later today (well after this will have gone out). French Foreign Minister Bernard Koucher (who is no friend to Israel) will be presiding over this meeting. The goal enunciated by some parties is to promote an immediate ceasefire. But it's not going to happen so fast. Said Zalmay Khalilzad, US Ambassador to the UN, there should not be "false expectations": "Practical arrangements have to be put in place in which everyone has confidence that it will be maintained, it will be respected, it will be observed," and these will take more than "a day or two." In any event, Israel has no expectations with regard to what the UN might do, and intends to proceed as necessary. "We're fed up with empty gestures," Olmert has said. ~~~~~~~~~~ President George Bush has been a sterling friend during this process. He said: "I understand Israel's desire to protect itself and that the situation now taking place, in Gaza, was caused by Hamas...I know people are saying, let's have a cease-fire. And those are noble ambitions. But any cease-fire must have the conditions in it so that Hamas does not use Gaza as a place from which to launch rockets." ~~~~~~~~~~ The US is currently working on international channels outside the UN for establishing a "meaningful" ceasefire. The goal is said to be to end rocket fire by Hamas, secure opening of crossings, and insure that no further smuggling of arms is done. In some contexts I have read that Bush wants Hamas held responsible. Olmert has spoken about disarming Hamas, but I see no mention of this. And, while Shalit is not being mentioned here (and should be!), I have read that Israel will not agree to normalization — which refers to crossings being opened — until Gilad Shalit is returned. ~~~~~~~~~~ I would like to examine in some more detail the entire notion of observers or monitors at the Philadelphi Corridor to prevent smuggling of weapons. We have destroyed perhaps the better part of 100 tunnels running under that Corridor, but it is perfectly possible for many to be dug again, and for Hamas to bring in even more weaponry, if not prevented from doing so. In general, the notion of international monitors is a joke. UNIFIL "supervised" in Lebanon while Hezbollah re-armed under the noses of these troops. Actually, the situation has been so ludicrous that UNIFIL does patrols that deliberately avoid Hezbollah strongholds. Egypt was supposed to be monitoring on its side of the Corridor, but, pleased to allow Hamas to harass Israel, has pretty much turned a blind eye to weapons smuggling. When we pulled out of Gaza for the "disengagement" in late August 2005, we were supposed to remain at the Philadelphi Corridor (which, technically, is a sort of no-man's land between Gaza and the Sinai). But then along came Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, and pressured us to leave the Corridor. We should have said no — our security people knew it was a bad deal. This was about giving the PA more control, you see. A deal was worked out in which the PA supervised on its side of the Rafah Crossing between Egypt and Gaza. (The Corridor is the entire length of the Gaza-Sinai border, Rafah is an actual crossing facility.) European observers were stationed there and theoretically information was supposed to be transmitted to us by computer informing us of who was crossing — there was a desire by Israel to keep out terrorists and the suitcases full of money they sometimes carry. This, too, was a huge joke. All the Europeans did was "observe." And not only did we not reliably receive information in a timely fashion, we had no way to stop someone we objected to from getting through. Then Hamas took over, and it all fell apart. ~~~~~~~~~~ So why should we have the remotest confidence now that any international forces will be effective there? And what will Israel ultimately agree to? The Reuters report that Olmert was demanding monitors with real enforcement responsibility was encouraging — forces that were armed and trained and able to take out new tunnels. Best of all would be our returning to the Corridor. ~~~~~~~~~~ Lastly here now, I want to look at Livni's comments yesterday on the arrival of the European mission. She said some very good things. For example: "...a necessary war on terror does not end with an agreement. We don't sign agreements with terror; we fight terror." But she also said, "The region is divided between moderates and extremists. Each person in the region must pick a side to work with. Hamas works with Iran." And she concluded that signing an agreement with a terror organization would prevent Israel from advancing the "peace deal." The corollary: Allow us to take down Hamas properly, because you all want peace here, and then we'll be able to achieve it. A very dangerous and erroneous conclusion. But this is the way Livni is headed. She envisions a situation in which Hamas is destroyed, and Gaza is turned over to the PA — after which she is elected prime minister and manages to negotiate "peace." No, the Fatah is not Hamas. But it's goals are not so different. It too wants us gone and seeks all of the land. We are not about to have "peace" with the PA. This approach is something that must be monitored, and protested, vigorously, once the war is done. The catch here is that, Livni's goals not withstanding, there is solid reason to believe that radical forces in Gaza would never accept the PA. That is certainly the opinion of some very savvy analysts. The question, then, is who will be in power in Gaza at the end of the day. The mistake that fueled this situation was our leaving in 2005. What is certain is that the struggle will not end on the day the fighting stops. ~~~~~~~~~~ After I posted yesterday, I received this information from Minka Goldstein and put it out now for all those in the Washington DC area who want to attend a rally for Israel: Today, Tuesday, January 6, at 12:30 PM at the Israeli Embassy, 3514 International Dr. NW, DC
Wednesday, January 7, at 12:00 PM at the Sixth and I Historic Synagogue
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il
and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info
|
|
ART OF WAR 101
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 5, 2009. |
|
From Jack:
Thomas Mcinerney, Lt. General (USAF, Ret.) is co-author of The Endgame: Winning the War on Terror. General McInerney is retired Vice Chief of Staff of the U.S. Air Force. Paul E. Vallely, MG (US Army Ret.) is an author, military strategist, chairman of Stand Up America USA and co-author of The Endgame: Winning the War on Terror |
Triumph and Victory: "Enough is Enough" is by LTG Thomas McInerney MG Paul Vallely The world is advancing closer to a solution that requires Triumph and Victory over global radical Islam, world-wide terror operations and the likes of Hamas. Radical Islamic goals and their leadership call for the destruction of Israel and continuing decimation of democracy and freedom. This militant ideology has created worldwide conflict and disruption. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!! The world, Israel, Palestinians and other Muslims have suffered enough. Israel is at war simultaneously on several fronts: Hamas in Gaza; the home front in the ever-expanding radius around Gaza (currently 26 miles); Hezbollah on the northern front, Syria, Iran, and the public policy front. Here it is important to recall just what Hamas as well as Hezbollah really are. Hamas is an illegal terrorist organization and an Iranian proxy that is conducting an illegal terror war against Israel. The EU and UN are arguably committing a war crime by accepting Hamas as a legitimate side to a dispute. In turn, by accepting the EU as a legitimate interlocutor, Israel itself gives credence to the view that Hamas is legitimate. Stand up now to these Radical Islamists who have hijacked a religion and turned it into their own ideology that has killed more Muslims in the last seven years than anyone else. Because they are fanatics similar to the Nazis and SS in their methods, the only choice is neutralize them, their organizations, their infrastructure, their support and their ideology just as Nazism was destroyed. What must be done? The United States and Israel now need to re-evaluate the very meanings of power in world politics, with particular reference to principles that seek victory in warfare that is not prolonged. The first principle, "Objective," states: "When undertaking any mission, Commanders should have a clear understanding of the expected outcome and its impact." Today we call it the "endgame." Following Clausewitz and Sun-Tzu, political and military commanders at every level need to identify tangible ends and to understand precisely how military application can best achieve these goals. There is another section of the Art Of War that can especially help Israel and the United States. This is Sun-Tzu's repeated emphasis on the "unorthodox" or, as the Pentagon calls it today, Irregular Warfare. We must, from a high-level strategic view, look at this current global war as combating an enemy who fights in a completely unorthodox manner, and we must fight him the very same way, but more cleverly and more effectively. We must use our full military and intellectual arsenal as a super power to bring victory _sooner rather than later._ This can be done only with a specific endgame in mind, and with a corollary commitment to victory. Military Objectives: A full scale ground invasion into Gaza is required by Israeli Defense Forces. For Israel and the United States, the "unorthodox" should now be fashioned not only on the battlefield, but also long before the battle. For now, every enemy state knows almost exactly how the Conventional Warfare leaders will initiate and conduct major military action, and how it will respond to armed attack and armed conflict. If, however, the United States and Israel did not always signal perfect rationality to its enemies, it could significantly enhance both its overall deterrence posture and its essential capacity to carry out certain preemption options. This same lesson applies to diplomacy and politics, which are also too often mired in complete predictability. So, yes, "war is hell," potentially more hellish today than at any time in history, which is why we must never lose when fighting an enemy who will never quit. Israel and the West have no choice but to fight the terrorists, aggressively, unapologetically, with an absolute commitment to win on every front. And that fight must be on our time-schedule ... never the enemy's. These steps need to be taken during the current (as we watch) Israeli offensive operation that as begun:
Israel, for its part, has been less clear in stating its operational goals. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Livni and Barak have said that the goal of Operation Cast Lead is to compel Hamas to end its attacks against Israel, but they haven't said how they intend to affect that outcome. They have rejected Hamas's demand for control over Gaza's land and sea borders and in turn demanded that Hamas end its weapons smuggling operations across the Egyptian border. The only way to accomplish this objective is to do what we outlined above. Hamas's objective is to destroy Israel, consequently Israel must destroy Hamas. No amount of diplomacy will deter Hamas and history has shown appeasement will never satisfy these radicals who now represent the Nazi's of the 21st Century. Denial is no longer an option and Hope is not a strategy. Corollary: For those who object to the civilian casualties entrained with the obliteration of Hamas: You got a problem wit' dat?
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il
|
|
THE NEXT DANGEROUS PHASE OF THE GAZA WAR
Posted by Olivier Guitta, January 5, 2009. |
|
Ehud Barak, Israel's defense minister, told the French daily Le Monde six months ago, regarding the ceasefire with Hamas in Gaza: "It is unclear how long it might hold, two days or two months. Historically, we are in a curve of a collision with Hamas." And he was right: the ineluctable military conflict is unfolding in front of our eyes. After a week of aerial strikes, Israel has implemented its plan with a dangerous ground incursion. Where do we go from here? Did Israel fall into the Hamas/Syrian/Iranian trap? Possibly. Syria thinks that Israel is getting into a messy quagmire. Hamas and Hezbollah clamor that the only reason Hamas broke the ceasefire is that they are now totally ready to face Israel militarily. In fact, in the past few months, Hamas put in place a war cabinet headed by Ahmad al-Jabari, one of the leaders of its Ezzedine al-Qassam branch, and Said Siam, its former interior minister in the Palestinian government. While Hamas is no Hezbollah as far as firepower, sophistication and know-how, it seems that they have greatly improved and learned a lot from the summer 2006 war between Israel and Hezbollah. First, hundreds of Hamas members went to training camps in both Syria and Iran. Second, Hamas has built an extensive network of tunnels and bunkers where its most prized leaders are hiding. Third, like Hezbollah, Hamas has at its disposal very mobile small units that communicate via hand-held radios. Also and most worrisome is the possibility reported by Al-Seyassah last year that chlorine-laden weapons had been delivered to Hamas in Gaza by Iranian Revolutionary Guards to be used against Israel in the event of a military strike against Iran. If this is true, Hamas could decide to use these chemical weapons against Israel now. While media coverage seems to present this war as an only Israel-Hamas conflict, it is far from the overall picture on the ground. Even if Hamas is the most formidable enemy Israel has to fight in Gaza, there are several other very dangerous extremist Palestinian groups. Starting with some Fatah splinter groups such as the Abu Rich brigade. Its leader, Abu Harun, told Le Monde last year: "Israel will never defeat us because, unlike them, we are not scared of death. We even compete to find out who will die first." Abu Harun prides himself of the effect the Qassams rockets his group builds and fires into Israel, have been pushing people in Sderot to leave. He added:" We push them north [in Israel], toward Hezbollah. They are sandwiched. In less than 10 years, they will disappear." It is true that at the moment, because of their short flight span, Qassam rockets cannot be intercepted and therefore constitute a huge threat to the security of Israeli civilians. Another extremist Palestinian group, Islamic Jihad is also getting ready to fight off Israel. According to the leader of the Saraya al-Quds (Jerusalem Brigade), the armed wing of Islamic Jihad, the six-month truce has allowed his organization to strengthen its operational capacity. Commenting about an Israeli incursion in Gaza he said:" The invasion could only be limited and very expensive. It will be a massacre. We have the means to defend ourselves. No more helicopters show up, because they know that we have Stinger missiles. This time, we will no longer use handmade rockets against Israel, and the death toll among Israeli civilians will be heavy." Last but not least, al-Qaida offshoot groups have come to life in Gaza in the past three years. Most of them are former Hamas members who were against Hamas joining the government and the truce concluded with Israel, something they viewed as "a crime against Islam." Also alongside the local jihadists, according to Western intelligence services, there are a few dozen foreign "fighters" who entered Gaza in January 2008, during the 11 days when the border with Egypt was forced open. Among them were a half-dozen French, some of Algerian origin; this information was confirmed by official sources in Paris. In fact, since al-Qaida has been quite extensively defeated in Iraq, foreign fighters have left first and foremost to Afghanistan but could also possibly end up in Gaza. In fact, on jihadist forums, calls to "defend the sacred mosque of al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem" have recently multiplied. Interestingly Hamas has played the al-Qaida card to scare off the West: "As long as Hamas remains strong, al-Qaida has no chance to enter. But if one day we are defeated, then these groups will thrive," said Ahmed Youssef, political adviser to Hamas leader Ismael Haniyeh. But it is doubtful that Hamas has also the other extremist groups present in Gaza under control. Especially when it comes to the Army of Islam, a 400-men strong radical faction mostly composed of members of a large and influential clan, the Doghmoush, plus some foreign fighters. The Army of Islam has control over tunnels in Rafah on the Egyptian border and has rockets they sometimes launch against Israel. These jihadist groups could decide on their own or with Hamas' blessing to perpetrate suicide attacks against Israeli tanks or soldiers. There is much more at stake to the Gaza war than meets the eye. Although Israel has the military advantage, it is nevertheless facing a daunting task on the ground. And although Israel is only fighting on one front (at the moment), it is ultimately engaged in a fight against multiple groups who are mixed in among a large segment of the civilian population. Olivier Guitta, an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and a foreign affairs and counterterrorism consultant, is the founder of the newsletter The Croissant (www.thecroissant.com). This article appeared in MidEast Timeswww.metimes.com/International/2009/01/05/ the_next_dangerous_phase_of_the_gaza_war/2749/ |
|
DON'T STOP UNTIL HAMAS IS DESTROYED
Posted by LEL, January 5, 2009. |
|
This was written by Ralph Peters
It appeared on the IsraPundit website:
|
|
ISRAELI ground troops have gone into Gaza. But can they rip out Hamas before international Israel-haters save the terror machine? To provide its citizens even with temporary safety, Israel had no choice but to face a ground campaign's risks to its soldiers and the inevitable global criticism. To provide security that might be measured in years, rather than weeks or months, Israel has to shatter Hamas, slaying enough rank-and- file terrorists to break their grip on Gaza's population. Above all, it's essential to kill the terrorist leaders. (Israel's worst blunder so far was not taking them out in the first wave of strikes, before they could go into hiding.) The Israeli government denies that it seeks regime change in Gaza — what else can it say? But nothing short of removing Hamas will make an enduring difference. The terrorist organization only needs to survive to declare victory. If it finds its back against the wall, Hamas may pretend to accept a truce to save itself, but it will never accept real peace with Israel. Hamas exists to kill Jews. Peace would erase its purpose — threatening all the power and perks its leaders and gunmen enjoy. Here's the bitter truth: Israel can't stop its own bleeding without drowning Hamas in blood. That's Hamas' choice, not Israel's. No negotiations, no compromises, and no shuttle-diplomacy bargains will ever placate terrorists who believe their god wants tributes of Jewish blood. Israel may never get another such chance as this to rip the heart out of Hamas. But Israel needs the fortitude to accept painful friendly casualties on the ground and to resist international pressure — which will be fierce. Torn between the need to "beat the clock" and the competing requirement to operate methodically and minimize casualties, the Israel Defense Forces staff designed a multiphased ground operation in which success will build on success. The move into northern Gaza over the weekend followed at least three, and possibly four, concentric axes of advance, cutting off the local Hamas forces. The initial mission for Phase One was to envelop Gaza City and its satellite towns, then encircle the Jabalya refugee camp — a key base for Hamas. The north was the obvious first target, since it's been the prime launching area for terror rockets. The IDF wanted to avoid biting off too much at once, so its planners chose a classic carve-up-the-pie technique, chewing one slice of Gaza before taking on the next helping. This isn't so much a piecemeal approach as a methodical one, letting the IDF concentrate resources in one zone at a time. The inherent weakness? Such an approach — cleaning out the terrorists bit by bit — is slow and grinding. There's going to be ugly fighting ahead, as the terrorists set layers of ambushes while using Palestinian civilians as human shields. Hamas will strive to bog down the IDF, which needs to maintain battlefield momentum — a challenge in any urban environment. (And let's be absolutely clear: Except for dead Jews, there's nothing Hamas leaders like better than dead Palestinian women and children, since the global media's appetite for dead kids verges on necrophilia.) After cleaning out the first cluster of objectives, the IDF can push southward into central Gaza. Such a move to the south would be complemented by another flank attack into Gaza from Israeli territory, creating a series of hammer-and-anvil traps for Hamas gunmen. Alternatively, the IDF could "bookend" Gaza by striking next at the strip's southern end, but Israel may have cut a deal to create an Egyptian zone of influence below Khan Younis. Time will tell. Meanwhile, there's grueling, bloody fighting awaiting Israeli soldiers constrained by the laws of war and civilized standards, while facing opponents who revel in atrocities. Fighting in dense slums and clearing high-rise buildings is just about the toughest work an infantryman can do. Effective combined- arms tactics — the infantry, tanks, engineers, artillery and special operators working together — reduce the risks somewhat, but, in the end, an infantry squad has to clear that basement or gauge the level of risk behind the apartment door. (Is there a booby trap, an ambush — or a family?) Despite a superb performance by the IDF's pilots last week, we're learning, yet again, that 21st-century warfare remains the province of the soldier on the ground. What was true in the first Israelite kingdom remains true today: Warfare's a human endeavor. Technology changes combat's external features, but man remains war's essence. Meanwhile, Israel must confront not only its flesh-and-blood enemy in all his ruthlessness, but a perverse global media, busybody diplomats seeking personal glory, a worrisome incoming US administration, and the West's historically illiterate intelligentsia conditioned to bleat that "war is never the answer!" Over the past 5,000 years, war may not have been the perfect answer, but there have been countless times when it was the only answer. This is one of those times. BUT Max Boot in a Wall Street Journal op-ed notes problems facing Israel in Gaza: Achieving total victory would require waging war in the way that America fought Germany and Japan — all out and on many fronts until the enemy has no more capacity to resist. Then it would have to occupy the ruined land, imposing a peace at gunpoint to ensure that Gaza could never again be a launching point for attacks on Israel. None of this is beyond the Israelis' military capacity (and Israel could do it without using nuclear weapons). They could also impose a peace at gunpoint. That is, essentially, what they did between 1967, when the Gaza Strip was won from Egypt, and 1994, when the Palestinian Authority was created. They could do it again if necessary. Yet the odds are they won't. To understand the improbability of the total war scenario sketched above, all you have to do is recall how many people perished in Israel's last major military operation, the war against Hezbollah in 2006. The generally accepted estimate is that no more than 1,200 Lebanese died, half of them Hezbollah fighters. Even that relatively minuscule toll of 0.03% of Lebanon's population of 3.9 million — probably comparable to the damage now being inflicted on Gaza — evoked world-wide condemnation and accusations that Israel was committing war crimes. Such denunciations by themselves do not have the capacity to stop a determined military machine. The Russians have inflicted World War II- level carnage in Chechnya since the mid-1990s, and they don't care what anybody else says. But Israel is not Russia — or Algeria or Burma or Syria or any other state that has taken a scorched-earth approach to counterinsurgency in recent decades. Israel is a liberal democracy in the modern age whose military operations are conducted under the intense scrutiny of lawyers, judges, opposition politicians, reporters and human-rights activists. And those are just its own internal watchdogs. To these must be added the "international community," which monitors Israeli actions with a degree of interest and antipathy reserved for no other state in the world. For all the accusations of brutality that are routinely flung at Israel's armed forces, their conduct has been exemplary by historical standards. They have shown far less propensity for indiscriminate killing or torture than did European states in the 1950s when confronting insurgencies in such places as Kenya, Cyprus, Vietnam and Algeria, where the stakes for them were considerably less. The only comparable example of restraint is the conduct of the U.S. armed forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. The United States, too, earns world- wide opprobrium for alleged brutality rather than approbation for its humanity. Whether it gets credit or not, however, the U.S. has been right to use very limited firepower because in the kind of war it is fighting — a classic counterinsurgency — brutality can be counterproductive. Killing too many people, especially if they are the wrong people, risks jeopardizing popular support for elected governments that are likely to be important American allies in the future. The tragedy for Israel is that a strategy of bolstering indigenous allies is not an option in Gaza. Hamas is, for all of the flaws of the electoral process, the choice of the people. No matter how much of a beating it suffers, there is little reason to think that Fatah could or would come in and effectively administer the territory in a way that would safeguard Israel's security. In the current, feverish atmosphere of Palestinian politics, those who would act with restraint toward the "Zionist entity" are branded as "collaborators" and liable to be killed. That leaves only one option if Israel wants a friendly, or at least nonhostile, administration in Gaza: It would have to provide that governance itself. Before the first intifada broke out in 1987, Israel was able to administer both the Gaza Strip and West Bank at astonishingly low cost. But the intifada effectively made Israelis feel ashamed of themselves and ended their willingness to bear the costs of "occupation." In 2005, Israel evacuated its settlers from the Gaza Strip in no small part to wipe clean its moral slate. Contact LEL at lel817@yahoo.com |
|
GAZA — KEY FACTS
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, January 5, 2009. |
|
This comes from Geoffrey Smith, Director, Christian Friends of Israel 2nd January 2009 There are six questions that many people are asking about the conflict between Israel and Hamas. These questions provide context to the news from Gaza and can be helpful in replying to questions in your church or fellowship and as a guide to prayer. |
|
1. Who started it? On December 19th Hamas declared it would not renew a 6-month ceasefire agreement. Instead, Hamas stepped up the firing of rockets from Gaza into Israel. On Christmas Eve it fired over 50 rockets and on Christmas Day over 80 rockets and mortars against Israeli civilians. No country could ignore rockets being fired against its people. 2. Is Israel's response disproportionate? What is a proportionate response? In the last 3 years Hamas has fired 5800 rockets and mortars randomly against Israeli civilians. What would be the world's response if Israel fired 5800 missiles randomly into Gaza? Instead Israel has targetted Hamas fighters and infrastructure, and tunnels from Egypt. Israel has repeatedly offered that if the rockets stop it would also stop its bombardment. But Hamas continues firing rockets and there is no sign yet that Hamas would agree to a ceasefire. The leadership of Hamas vigorously denied early reports they had offered a ceasefire. 3. What is needed to end the conflict? There needs to be a change to the security situation in Gaza. Hamas used the last 6-month ceasefire period to smuggle longer-range Iranian made rockets into the Gaza Strip. These have hit a school in Beersheva and apartments in Ashkelon and Ashdod 25 miles away. If Israel accepts another ceasefire without destroying this stockpile of rockets or putting controls in place to prevent new and even longer range rockets being smuggled into Gaza it could face a repetition whenever Hamas decided to renew hostilities. Next time Tel Aviv could be within range. 4. What is the reaction of the Arab powers? No Arab nation would have allowed a neighbour to fire rockets into its sovereign territory. Any Arab state would have reacted far more strongly and not been so concerned as Israel to minimise civilian casualties! Many Arab states recognise that Hamas is acting as an agent for Iran. They do not want Iranian power to increase in the Middle East and are secretly pleased that Israel is taking on Hamas. 5. What about the humanitarian situation in Gaza? The people of Gaza are living under a despotic regime. Hamas expelled its opponents by throwing them off the roof of high-rise buildings or shooting them in the streets. Hamas does not permit other voices in civil society and persecutes the small Christian minority. Israel is allowing daily deliveries of 50 to 100 truckloads of supplies to Gaza and has not cut off power supplies from the generating station at Ashkelon even when it is under fire. 6. Is Gaza hopeless? No, its people have a high rate of adult literacy — over 92%. Infant mortality is low and the expectation of life from birth is over 72 years. If the administration of Gaza focussed on development rather than using all its resources for attacking Israel they could have a brighter future. Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel (www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com). Contact him at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk |
|
ON THE LIGHTER SIDE: THE WISE MEN OF CHELM RESOLVE WORLD CRISES
Posted by Israel Zwick, January 5, 2009. |
|
Prior to World War II, there was a town in Eastern Europe called Chelm. The elders of the town were known as the Wise Men of Chelm because of their renowned aptitude for solving daily problems. As a result of the turbulence in Europe during world War II, the Wise Men of Chelm relocated to Geneva, Switzerland where they established the Dialogue for Regional and Economic Cooperation, commonly known as DREC. The group was frequently called on to use their unique wisdom to resolve world crises. CN Publications has been able to obtain a transcript of their last meeting. |
|
Chairman: We are convening today by special request of the distinguished representative of Hamastan, Professor Ahmed Kheshbon, who is concerned about the attacks on his territory from neighboring Yidenland. Professor Kheshbon would like us to intervene and put an immediate stop to the attacks on Hamastan. Shmeryl: Mr. Chairman, before we begin the meeting, I would like to request that the window be closed, it's very cold outside. Chairman: Yes, Shmeryl, I am aware that it is cold outside, but if I close the window, would it get any warmer outside? I'm sorry but I have to deny your request because it makes no sense. Before we continue with today's agenda, I would like to call on the Secretary to read the minutes of the last meeting. Secretary: The first item on the agenda was a complaint that the funds that were given to Hamastan to build schools, hospitals, and housing were being abused and misdirected. Apparently, one of the contractors hired to build housing cut down some logs on top of a mountain and instead of rolling the logs down the mountain, he hired his family members to carry them down. So to avoid accusations that our funds were being misappropriated, we provided more funds to carry the logs back up the mountain and then roll them down. Then we discussed the problems with the food program that we provided to feed the poor, suffering, hungry Hamasniks. Apparently, thieves broke into the warehouse that stored the food, carted it away on trucks, then sold it in the open market. So we appropriated more funds to buy more food but this time we built concrete walls around the food so that the thieves couldn't get in. The only problem was that the legitimate administrators of the food program couldn't get to the food either. So we appropriated more funds to buy ladders that were placed all around the concrete walls. This satisfied everyone and the problem was resolved. Chairman: Now we would like to hear Prof. Kheshbon from Hamastan University explain why he asked us to convene this special meeting. Prof. Kheshbon: Well apparently, several groups of a few bad boys were shooting some homemade firecrackers across the border into Yidenland, you know how boys can behave. The Yiden became overly upset about the small amount of damage and casualties that these firecrackers caused and started bombing our buildings, inflicting heavy damage and casualties. Now, we can accept that the Yiden might want to retaliate a bit, but it should be proportionate. Chairman: What do you mean by proportionate? Prof. Kheshbon: Well according to my calculations, there are about 1.5 million Hamasniks living in Hamasland, while there are about 6 million Yiden living in Yidenland. That's four times the amount. So if the Yiden killed 500 Hamasniks, then we should be allowed to kill 2000 Yiden, which would be proportionality. So you should insist that the Yiden stop shooting at us until we can kill 2000 Yiden with our homemade firecrackers. Chairman: But Prof. Kheshbon, wouldn't it be easier and a lot less messy if you just stopped those bad boys from shooting the firecrackers at the Yiden? Prof. Kheshbon: But that would be very difficult because these boys are justifiably angry and frustrated over the continuing occupation of our territory and everyone knows that anger and frustration can lead to violence. Chairman: You mean the Yiden are occupying your land? Prof. Kheshbon: Well, they're not exactly occupying, but they are controlling access by land, sea, and air, all because of a handful of wayward boys that are shooting off some firecrackers. Chairman: So wouldn't it be a lot more effective to just stop shooting the firecrackers? Prof. Kheshbon: No we need to get to the root cause of the problem, which is the anger, frustration, suffering, and oppression caused by 60 years of brutal occupation of our lands. Chairman: So what do you propose? Prof. Kheshbon: We need to have a completely independent sovereign state with complete access to all borders so we defend ourselves from the violent aggression perpetrated by the Yiden. An independent state of Hamastan, without any Yiden, would definitely solve the crisis. Chairman: But how can we be sure that an independent Hamastan would live peacefully next to Yidenland? Prof. Kheshbon: Well, that would solve the root cause of the problem, the wayward boys would no longer be angry, and there would be peace, harmony, and cooperation throughout the region, if only we had our own sovereign state. Shloimy: Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask a question. The Hamasniks belong to a large league of 22 independent states that share the same religion, culture, and language, why do they need another micro-state which may be a cause of strife in the region? Chairman: There you go asking your silly questions again. Prof. Kheshbon explained that if you get at the root cause of the problem and remove the occupation and anger, the problem would be resolved. Shloimy: I still don't understand. The world contains almost 5000 distinct ethnic and minority groups living in 190 countries. There are over 100 active autonomist and secessionist movements going on around the world. Why don't they get their own independent states also? Chairman: Shloimy, your silly questions are a disgrace to our reputation for wisdom, understanding, and promotion of humanitarian rights. You're going to have to stop it. Shloimy: I just don't understand how the establishment of an independent Hamastan micro-state would lead to peace and harmony in the region. There is no historical evidence to support that contention. Wouldn't it be a lot easier and cheaper to provide economic incentives for the Hamasniks to relocate to other states in their league to live a life free of suffering and deprivation? Chairman: Shloimy, I can't believe what you are saying! Are you promoting the ethnic cleansing of the Hamastan population? Shloimy: Absolutely not, I'm just merely suggesting another way that the overcrowded, disadvantaged Hamasnik population might be able to enjoy a better life with greater comforts and free of ethnic strife. Chairman: Shloimy, if I let you continue this, you are going to ruin the reputation of our DREC organization. Everyone in the world knows that the best way to resolve this crisis is the two-state solution that would give the Hamasniks their own independent state. Shloimy: I'm just suggesting that perhaps we should also discuss some creative alternative solutions that might better resolve the crisis. Chairman: Shloimy, if you continue this questioning, and challenge our renowned wisdom, I will have to hold you in contempt and have you removed from these chambers. You are completely out of order. Contact Israel Zwick at israel.zwick@earthlink.net and visit his website at www.cnpublications.net |
|
GAZA OUTCOME: WHO DECIDES WHO RULES?
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 5, 2009. |
|
If you think that the war against Hamas in Gaza is indicative of a change in the plans of Israel's current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (resigned due to imminent criminal indictments but, still in power), Defense Minister Ehud Barak, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and President Shimon Peres, think again. After eight years of military restraint putting the citizens of Southern Israel at risk of death, injury and continual Terror of 7,500 Kassam Rockets, Katyusha Missiles and Mortars from Hamas in the Gaza Strip, the Olmert Kadima government finally launched the necessary, retaliatory attack. But, most Israelis know that choosing this late hour to put Hamas down is directly linked to the coming February 10th elections. The U.S. Administration agrees that the attack against Hamas was necessary to stop the intolerable Rocket bombardment. But, they want more in terms of weakening Hamas so Fatah can pretend that it's back in power in Gaza and ready for a "second state". Now, let's look ahead and contemplate what is being planned for after the current Gaza operation is over.
That means that either the Olmert's corrupt, inept, weak caretaker government or Bibi Netanyahu will go along with surrendering Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and those parts of Jerusalem (north, east and south) that were occupied and desecrated by Jordan for 19 years from 1948 to 1967, including two vital sources (3/4ths) of irreplaceable water. From the State Department perspective and their Middle East team appointed to advise Obama, forcing Israel to abandon the areas mentioned for another fake Gaza-like "Peace". Having Israel knock out Hamas, there is the dumb idea that the PLO/Fatah under Mahmoud Abbas (aka Abu Mazen) would re-occupy Gaza and control Hamas. By the way, today's English news in Israel on the IBA (Israel Broadcasting Authority) quoted John Bolton, former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, saying we should look to a "three-state" approach, where Gaza is return to Egyptian control and the "West Bank" in some configuration reverts to Jordan sovereignty and Egypt should control the Gaza Strip. (1) However, as Bolton points out, neither Egypt (who fears a stronger Muslim Brotherhood) nor Jordan want this "retrocession" of what they view as trouble from their Palestinian brethren. But, as Bolton says, "either we do better, conceptually and operationally, or Iran will be happy to fill the vacuum." (2) While I admire John Bolton's thinking, I do not believe he has looked far enough ahead. It's just a matter of time before Jordan's King Abdullah is overthrown by the dominant Palestinian population in Jordan, making that 75% of the former Palestinian Homeland, which was cut off in 1922 to become the Kingdom of Jordan in 1945. That land would now become a deadly enemy should it have any control over the "West Bank" of the Jordan River which geographically Judea and Samaria. Egypt has a worse problem, given that President Hosni Mubarak is old, ill and burdened with the Muslim Brotherhood poised to take over Egypt which has $70 Billion in advance high tech U.S. arms. The "pretense" would be that Fatah is a "moderate" Palestinian movement and could be relied upon to keep the peace with Israel. Abbas is about to lose his elected position or simply be assassinated by his zealous opponents. Remember that Abbas was Yassir Arafat's partner, companion, Terror Chief second in command, financier, planner for 40 years. His mind set is identical to Arafat's — in a nice suit. Moreover, Fatah still retains Terrorist organizations — like the Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigades which the State Department and Media avoid mentioning. Given the record of the Arab Muslim Terrorist Organizations and the Muslim Arab nations, the likelihood of their abandoning their Charters to eliminate Israel is negligible. What is needed to complete a sham political scheme is a Left-Leaning Israeli, the reduction or elimination of Hamas influence and a temporary quiet from Fatah so Israel will relinquish the above territories mentioned for a two-state entity West of the Jordan. At this moment the Arab Muslim states plus the other Muslim countries (totaling 57), led by the Muslim Arab League are enraged at Israel for daring to thwart Arab Muslim Terrorists. These same nations cheered as Hamas successfully launched missiles that hit buildings and civilians in Israel. An interesting development has been the outpouring of Muslims and their supporters in London, Paris, American cities like New York, Chicago, Fort Lauderdale, Los Angeles, etc. This should be a visual wake-up call for citizens around the world that, living among them are Muslims in numbers that become a "critical mass" which could erupt against those cities for other reasons. Should the Islamists decide to do another 9/11 or other attacks, those who are now pouring into the street against Israel's righteous retaliatory strike are a dangerous "Fifth Column" who will rise up to assist in the attack. Seeing the masses of Islamists in the streets of Western cities is, indeed, a wake-up call displaying the enemy within. America should have learned a lesson in Iraq and Afghanistan that agreements with Arab and/or Muslim states are generally not worth the paper or the ink. Whether it's the culture or Koranic law, relying upon agreements or promises from a culture that wishes to rule the world as a giant Islamic Caliphate, cannot be reliable partners. On the propaganda front, most of the Media focuses in on women and children victims or families of victims, ignoring the fact that Hamas and all Muslim Arab nations deliberately use civilians as "Human Shields". Moreover, those so-called civilians not only willingly protect the Terrorists among them, they cheer wildly, dance in the streets and pass out candy in sheer joy when there is a successful Terrorist operation. One more matter with which Jews in Israel and around the world should concern themselves. We watched with consternation the current Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice as the voice the U.S. State Department spill her bile against the Jewish State. Be assured, she and all those she represents (including Big Oil) will not allow all the dirty work against Israel to go unused under Barack Obama's Middle East team of advisors — especially incoming Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Despite knowing about the killing Charters of the Arab League, the PLO/Fatah/Hamas will never be revoked or torn up, Rice and Obama's team will bleed Israel for vital defense territory that could handicap Israel so much, she would face a second Holocaust. No matter what is negotiated, signed with the U.S. or Europe acting as guarantors, they will never move pre-emptively to save the Jewish State from destruction — G-d forbid. The team of advisors to Obama represent the most dedicated and documented adversaries of the Jewish State since the 7 Arab Muslim Armies converged on the newly born State in 1948. We see assembled the likes of Zbigniew Brzezinski, James Baker III's Jew Boys (Dennis Ross, Aaron David Miller and Daniel Kurtzer). Add to that crew Martin Indyk of the Leftist Saban Center. General James Jones, Obama's proposed National Security Advisor has made himself clear both during the Bush-Rice Administration and now. At 6'4" he could easily remind one of the Philistine Goliath who challenged the Jews and was himself challenged by the boy David with his sling-shot. The U.N. Security Council is meeting to draft condemnation of Israel although the U.S. vetoed the first draft because it did not mention Hamas Rockets. There is talk of putting U.N. observers in Gaza not unlike the laughable observers in Lebanon who acted as partners to Hezb'Allah. What U.N./E.U. observer would dare to challenge Hamas as it digs more tunnels from Egypt with President Mubarak's knowledge and approval, in order to smuggle into Gaza more explosives, and Terror operatives as well as bigger missiles with greater range? Mubarak is reluctant to interfere with the tunnel digging and the missile smuggling. Why? Perhaps he is afraid of the influence an angry Muslim Brotherhood would have on his reign. ### 1. "The Three-State Option" by Amb. John Bolton IBA Israel Broadcasting Authority Jan. 5, 2009 2. "The Three-State Option" by Amb. John Bolton Washington Post January 5, 2009 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 |
|
THE JEWISH INTERNET DEFENSE FORCE (JIDF)
Posted by For The Love Of Israel, January 5, 2009. |
|
Dear Friends, Please find the new Jerusalem Post article bout the JIDF below. Each time we are mentioned in the media, we are thrilled, as we do not have a professional PR department to help us in that realm, yet. The Jewish Internet Defense Force (JIDF) depends upon contributions in order for us to continue to be the leading organization fighting antisemitism and jihadism online. It also helps us continue to be one of the most cutting-edge pro-Israel advocacy organizations, effectively using email, Twitter, Myspace, Facebook, YouTube, Digg, Del.icio.us, and other areas of the web in order to spread important news and information about Israel. This work is especially important during times of war. As you'll read in the following Jerusalem Post article, even the IDF is beginning to use these tools! (Proudly, the JIDF was the very first "follower" of the IDF on Twitter!) Because of our own frustrations with the Jewish establishment, we try to do things differently (ie. efficiently, effectively, and in an innovative manner.) Thus, we have decided to not set ourselves up as a 501c organization for the time being, as we feel we would have to alter our message. In this day and age we feel that clear, concise, direct, and honest messages are very important and we want our people to know exactly where we stand on the issues. Therefore, we face unique challenges, and even as little as $5/month could help keep us going strong. As we try to be different, we hate to even have to ask our supporters for money, so please — no pressure whatsoever! Only support us if you truly believe in what we are doing, by visiting our site and clicking in the "Support the JIDF" section on the left-hand side where you click oh your level of support, which will then take you to PayPal. If you have any thoughts, questions, suggestions, or would just like to correspond, please do not hesitate to contact me, as another major difference is our personalized approach. Each one of our members and supporters is infinitely valuable to us, no matter how you show your support! Thanks again for your support and consideration (and please don't forget to read the new article below!) Am Yisrael Chai! Sincerely, David
|
|
Twitter, Facebook users show solidarity with QassamCount
January 4, 2009 As soon as Operation Cast Lead began to take shape just over a week ago, Dan Peguine started the program QassamCount, a system that updates users' statuses on Facebook with the number of Kassams that hit Israel. Within the first three days, 10,000 people had donated their statuses to the cause. Peguine first started a program counting Kassams about a week before the operation in Gaza began. He used Twitter, which sends users' statuses to all their "followers," to help people understand how often rockets hit the South. "When you live in Tel Aviv and you read at the end of the day, '20 Kassams hit Sderot, Ashkelon,' you do not really understand what it means to live through this," Peguine told The Jerusalem Post. "So by having a feed that pops up every time a Kassam hits, I thought it would be a good way to convey this." After recognizing the quick success of the Twitter program, to which 600 followers had subscribed in three days, Peguine decided to apply the same form to a larger social network. He partnered with Arik Fraimovich and set up the application on Facebook. "I think that the Internet is a medium that needs to be used to reach audiences that are not usually aware of the situation in Israel," Peguine said. "We hope to bring to the world's attention the fact that Hamas fires rockets at Israel daily," he said. The Jewish Internet Defense Force (JIDF) is another group that has been active in fighting anti-Semitism and terrorism throughout the Internet. "When it comes to bias against Israel, it's very easy for our enemies to be on the constant attack," said David, the spokesman for the JIDF, who asked that his last name not be published. He said he had received death threats since beginning his activities. The JIDF formed in response to the second intifada in 2000 and functioned on a grassroots level, mainly through e-mail campaigns. The group then began operating on various Web sites to spread news about Israel and Jewish issues. The IDF itself has also begun an Internet effort, making use of YouTube and a blog to post official army videos and information about the situation in Gaza. The site on YouTube had nearly 11,500 subscribers as of Sunday, and its videos had been viewed over 750,000 times. "Throughout the years, we have tried to help shape public opinion with our own brand of Israel advocacy on-line, and it's very refreshing to see Israel taking an active on-line role," David said. "The videos on YouTube showing secondary explosions have had a major impact, as do the videos and photos of all the humanitarian effort." Israel and the Jewish People have always faced bias in the media, he said, adding that anti-Semitism and a false perception of Israel as an aggressor have played a role. Contact For The Love Of Israel at fortheloveofisrael613@gmail.com |
|
TEL AVIV MORE CROWDED THAN GAZA
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, January 5, 2009. |
|
http://israel-like-this-as-if.blogspot.com/2008/04/ sounds-of-music-in-city-more-crowded.html Some people will tell you that Gaza is the most crowded place on earth. Actually, Tel Aviv (aerial view at right) is much more densely populated than Gaza. The first modern Hebrew city, not quite 100 years old, has already managed to cram almost 400,000 residents into its 51.8 square kilometers. This makes Tel Aviv more densely populated than Hong Kong or Singapore, which in turn are much more crowded than Gaza. (A note on comparative crowding appears below, at the end of this post.) The other night at the seder, we sang loudly and made other noise. Some 20 of us, representing three generations, sat around a ping-pong table covered with white tablecloths in a central Tel Aviv backyard and sang Passover songs. No neighbors complained about the noise. From time to time, we could hear singing from other buildings. A guest at the table remarked that nowhere but Israel would you hear voices from house after house, all singing the same traditional songs. Whether or not this is the case, it is true that sounds from apartments can be heard around the neighborhoods of Tel Aviv, especially in the mild months when windows are open. In a one-block stroll, you may hear my neighbors playing piano, various woodwinds, drums or electric guitar. A trumpet player in the neighborhood used to walk down to the Mediterranean at night to find an empty place on the beach where he could play without an audience. One afternoon he was playing at home, fooling around with some improvised passages, and another trumpet answered from elsewhere in the neighborhood. The windows were open, and a fellow trumpeter had overheard his experimentation. He never found out who the other, unseen musician was. The beach no longer offers much solitude at night. Tourists and local people in growing numbers visit the beachfront after dark. A cafe on a northern stretch of beach now stays open around the clock. Even the rooftops of Tel Aviv don't provide much privacy. One recent day, a musician stood alone on a roof in the next block, playing jazz on a saxophone. Attracted by the sound, I listened from the rooftop where I live, 75 meters away. It was a special event. I have heard this saxophonist perform with groups in concert halls, festivals, night spots and other venues. In years of living in the neighborhood, I had never seen him up on the roof before. If he had gone up there in search of privacy, he picked the wrong place. A telephone rang and I went inside to answer it. When I got back
outside moments later, the music had stopped and the other roof was
empty. I don't know if the saxophonist had noticed that he had an
audience, or whether he simply had finished what he wanted to play. I
wonder if others in our crowded city got to enjoy his rooftop solo,
too.
A note on crowded places The canard that Gaza is the most crowded place on earth continues to circulate. The UK politician George Galloway wrote in The Glasgow Record last month that the Gaza Strip is "the most densely populated piece of earth on the planet." Galloway wrote that 1.5 million Palestinians live there. Daoud Kuttab, a Palestinian journalist currently teaching at Princeton, wrote March 26 that Gaza is "one of the most densely populated places on earth, with 3,823 people per square kilometre." Kuttab's figure is in line with recent Gaza population estimates of 1.4 million. If Galloway's estimate of 1.5 million Gaza population is correct, this is almost 4,200 people per square kilometer. The Central Intelligence Agency projects that the Gaza population will reach 1,537,269 in July. This would bring the density to 4,270 people per square kilometer. Both Singapore and Hong Kong have more than 6,000 people per square kilometer. Tel Aviv has more than 7,000 people per square kilometer. If you count the suburbs of Tel Aviv, the metropolitan area with its population of 2.3 million has a density of more than 5,000 people per square kilometer, which is considerably more crowded than the Gaza Strip as reckoned by Galloway or Kuttab or the CIA. Selected estimates of population density: Mumbai
Kolkata
Tel Aviv
Hong Kong
Singapore
London
5,100 people/sq km
Tel Aviv metro area including suburbs
Moscow
Tokyo/Yokahama
Warsaw
Gaza Strip per CIA projection
Gaza Strip per George Galloway
Gaza Strip per Daoud Kuttab
The numbers for London, Tel Aviv metro area, Moscow, Tokyo/Yokohama and
Warsaw are from the City Mayors site.
And so now begins the second and most difficult stage. Inside Israel,
there is both determination and dread as tens of thousands of Israel's
conscript army are called to the front. Untold numbers of these soldiers
will lose their lives as the result not merely of the genocidal aims of
Hamas (and its Iranian puppet-master) but also the indifference and
pusillanimity towards Palestinian terror displayed by world governments
over the past six decades of Israel's fight for survival, along with the
active encouragement of genocidal Islamists by leftists, Jew-haters,
Muslims and useful idiots who were on such thuggish display yesterday in
the co-ordinated demonstrations in British and other western cities.
Such people have made no protest at the bombardment of Israeli towns
by more than 6000 rockets in the past six years, deliberately targeting
innocent civilians. They have made no protest at the way Hamas has used
Gazan civilians as human shields, situating its murderous arsenals
beneath apartment blocks, in schools and hospitals and mosques in order
to maximise the numbers of civilians killed (in order to manipulate
all-too pliable western opinion). No, their protest only starts when
Israel finally takes the military action aimed at stopping this
genocidal barrage.
The worst thing is the moral inversion, in which the murderous
victimisation of innocent Israelis is ignored while their murderers are
described as 'civilians' when they are finally killed by the Israelis —
who are demonstrably taking care to avoid civilian casualties wherever
possible. Tragically, civilians always die in wars; and unfortunately
there will undoubtedly be more civilian casualties in Gaza — along with
deaths among Israeli troops — as the war goes on. But the frenzied
misrepresentations, double standards and moral inversion fuelling a
hysteria in the west which in turn can only incite more genocidal
violence are simply depraved.
Particularly striking in its malice is the way in which the treatment
of wounded Palestinians in Israeli hospitals is ignored — while news of
the barbaric behaviour of Hamas in Gaza's hospitals is airbrushed out of
the picture. At WSJ's Opinion Journal, James Taranto noted that a report
of this scene in a Gaza hospital briefly appeared in the New York Times
a couple of days ago:
Armed Hamas militants in civilian clothes roamed the halls. Asked
their function, they said it was to provide security. But there was
internal bloodletting under way. In the fourth-floor orthopaedic
section, a woman in her late 20s asked a militant to let her see Saleh
Hajoj, her 32-year-old husband. She was turned away and left the
hospital. Fifteen minutes later, Mr. Hajoj was carried out by young men
pretending to transfer him to another ward. As he lay on the stretcher,
he was shot in the left side of the head. Mr. Hajoj, like five others
killed at the hospital this way in 24 hours, [my emphasis] was accused
of collaboration with Israel. He had been in the central prison awaiting
trial by Hamas judges; when Israel destroyed the prison on Sunday he and
the others were transferred to the hospital. But their trials were
short-circuited...
You won't find that passage now on the New York Times website
because, soon after it appeared, it unaccountably vanished into the
ether. Nor will many in Britain or the west be aware of this:
Dozens of Gaza Arabs are being treated in Ashkelon's Barzilai
Hospital at the same time terrorists are bombarding the city. The
medical facility, the largest on the southern coast, is in the line of
rocket fire, and medical staff often have to stop caring for patients
and run for cover during air raid warnings. The 500-bed Barzilai
Hospital has close ties with Gaza City's Shifa Hospital, Barzilai deputy
director Dr. Ron Lobel told the Associated Press. 'It might seem
completely absurd, but we have the privilege to be doctors. Our medical
ethics do not distinguish between patients. We treat whoever needs to be
treated,' he said
One Gaza Arab woman refused to identify herself to AP [Associated
Press] because of fear of retribution by terrorists if it were known
that her two-month-old granddaughter is being treated in an Israeli
hospital. 'I am very sad and hurt. We want peace, not war,' she said as
Israel began retaliating after hundreds of Arab rocket and mortar
attacks, some of them lethal.
The moral inversion in the west is so egregious, so monstrous, that
the better Israel is shown to behave the worse the vilification that
rains down upon it. What other country in the world would show such
restraint in the face of more than 6000 rocket attacks upon its citizens
— 6000! — that it took seven years before going to war to put a stop to
it? What other country would treat individuals — including proven
terrorists — from that enemy territory in its own hospitals? What other
country would continue to provide essential foodstuffs and other
supplies to those enemies who continued to fire rockets at it? What
other country, when finally forced to go to war to stop the attacks,
would show such concern to avoid the loss of civilian life that it
contacts the population in enemy territory — even households containing
identified terrorists — to warn them to flee from the imminent
bombardment? And what other country would, for showing such unparalleled
moral scrupulousness, be vilified and libelled as Israel is?
Israel's behaviour is moral, legal and proportionate. This
conflict is revealing just who is on the side of morality, decency and
sanity and who is not. The President of the Czech Republic, who is
also the incoming president of the EU, has emerged in the former camp,
declaring stoutly that Israel's behaviour is both just and necessary.
France's president Sarkozy, however, has called upon both sides to
stop hostilities — a moral equivalence which effectively gives Hamas
victory by requiring Israel to abandon the defence of its citizens.
Similarly in Britain, Foreign Secretary David Miliband has repeated
his call for an immediate cease-fire — while Prime Minister Gordon
Brown, according to this Telegraph piece, has apparently complained to
Israel's Prime Minister Olmert that too many people have died
Would that be, perhaps, too many Hamas terrorists who have died?
Would Brown have preferred that more of them continued to live so that
they could carry on murdering more Israelis?
In startling contrast Farid Ghadry, President of the Reform Party of
Syria, has written:
So while we abhor violence of all kind, Israel's campaign against
Hamas must continue to the bitter end not only for the sake of peace but
also to help Arabs realize they have a choice: Destroy like Gaza or
develop like Dubai. Will this happen soon? Maybe not, but if a wake-up
call and a nudge, once in a while, to pierce through the fog of deceit
perpetrated by Syria and Iran is what it takes to see the light, then we
stand by the West and Israel in the only hope that an Arab Renaissance
in the Levant may actually have a chance of resurrection.
Alas, many in the west don't stand with Farid Ghadry. They stand
instead with Hamas. Whatever platitudes they mouthe, it is clear that
they really don't want Israel to survive at all.
The moral dividing line in this battle is very clear. Those who stand
with Israel are on the side of morality, justice, and civilisation.
Those in the media and public life who denounce Israel for having the
temerity to defend its people are the fellow-travellers of barbarism.
Having done so much to embolden and strengthen Hamas and Iran, who are
playing them for suckers, they are continuing to stoke the fires of
irrational hatred and genocidal hysteria. As Israeli soldiers die, along
with the Palestinian victims of Hamas whether as 'collaborators' or
human shields, their blood will be on these hypocritical western hands.
MP TO COMPLAIN ABOUT BBC
Three cheers for Tory MP Michael Fabricant, who says he has been
'horrified and angered' by the BBC's coverage of the Gaza conflict, and
will be making a formal complaint to the Chairman of the BBC Trust about
it:
While paying scant regard to the provocation of 10,000 rockets fired
at Israeli civilians from Gaza over the last seven years, the BBC has
chosen to broadcast 'human interest' stories reminiscent of salacious
photos in the cheaper red top newspapers. Thus I heard a heart rending
report from a Palestinian in Cyprus how he imagined — yes: IMAGINED! —
Gaza's streets would be running with the blood of dead Arab children.
After that, the BBC located individuals in Gaza who have taken the
opportunity of repeating over the BBC what they have already said on Al
Jazeera. No balance there then. And today I heard an 'unbiased report
from a British aid worker in Gaza, from Islamic Relief'. Oh come on!
But perhaps the worst interview of all was with the Foreign Minister
of the Czech Republic who dared to suggest that every country has a
right to defend its citizens, that Hamas had walked away from
negotiations, that they had resumed firing rockets into Israel
unprovoked, and that Israel's actions are therefore defensive and not
offensive. The ire and vitriol of the BBC interviewer was extraordinary.
Paxman and Humphreys are pussy cats in comparison. The Czech minister
sounded shell shocked. And so was I.
Presumably, the Islamic Relief worker to whom he refers was Hatim
Shurrab, about whom I wrote here yesterday, pointing out that Islamic
Relief Worldwide was affiliated to Hamas; here is further evidence of
its links. But Shurrab didn't just pop up yesterday on the BBC. For the
past eight days, the BBC website has been publishing an 'aid worker's
diary' by Shurrab which is chock-full of manipulative rubbish about
conditions in Gaza. So the BBC is putting out systematic pro-Hamas
propaganda (as is the Guardian, which is running Shurrab's 'video diary'
— but nothing new there).
Nor is Shurrab exactly on the side of his Palestinian brothers against
fascist terror. He appears to approves of Hamas killing Fatah
'collaborators', as he said here in 2007:
One good thing is that Hamas targeted many collaborators who worked
for Israel and committed many crimes — such as killing Palestinians
just because they had beards and blowing up supermarkets and houses
linked to Fatah even though When Palestinians kill their brothers it
is very bad. I have had a friend killed from such incidents and I know
how hard it is.
But not bad or hard enough, apparently, for him to stand against the
killing of Palestinians by Hamas. It's only Israel, of course, which is
the oppressor of his people. Palestinians killing other Palestinians
doesn't count. And this is the person being presented by the BBC day
after day as a neutral observer of the situation in Gaza.
Commendable as is Fabricant's reaction, it is not enough for him to
write to the Chairman of the BBC Trust. The BBC's collusion with Hamas,
along with coverage whose incendiary distortions cannot but have incited
hatred of Israel among its viewers and listeners, should be the subject
of an emergency debate in Parliament. It would be interesting to know
whether the Tory front bench agree with Michael Fabricant — or think
there is nothing wrong with the BBC's coverage. Those MPs from whatever
party who understand just what is at stake in Gaza for western
civilisation — alas, there aren't many of them but there are some — and
the deeply alarming role being played in this by the BBC should now
raise the alarm.
Simon McIlwaine is with Anglican Friends of Israel
(www.anglicanfriendsofisrael.com).
|
|
IRAN'S HORRIBLE, HIDDEN AGENDA IN GAZA
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 5, 2009. |
|
We pass this on without comment. Let's hope it will not come to pass. The author is anonymous. |
|
Absolutely no one has been able to come up with a plausible motivation for Hamas provoking Israel to attack. No one can figure out what Hamas has to gain and its losses are overwhelming. Some Israeli casualties? Showing they "are tough enough to take it"? Even with their stated goal of destruction of the State of Israel, this is certainly not the way to do it. The most likely scenario is for a weak Israeli government, under pressure from various world political figures, to call off its offensive at some premature stage, followed by negotiations. These negotiations will lead to the same kind of cold "truce" (Hudna) that there was before. At some point Hamas — or one of the splinter Islamic organizations which are effectively controlled by Hamas, will start shooting rockets again. After awhile, depending on how weak the Israeli leadership is at the time, Israel will be forced to again invade Gaza inflicting significant damage. This could go on indefinitely. Except Hamas could eventually get more powerful rockets, with Chemical, Biological or Nuclear warheads. Since Hamas sequesters its launching facilities in densely packed residential areas, Israel will be forced to literally level every built up population center in Gaza. But that won't be enough. Hamas will have hidden rocket launchers in caves. Since the Hamas operatives hide themselves in civilian clothing, Israel will be forced to destroy large portions of the civilian population. The Israeli government, especially the Leftist who control Israel, do not want to do this. They will be forced into it and have no choice if they wish to survive. Ironically, those very world political figures who are trying to force a premature truce on Israel will share a large measure of blame for what will happen in Gaza. By not giving the Israelis the time and support to complete their work, they virtually guarantee that Israel will have to take catastrophic measures in the future. Who gains by this horrible scenario? The Islamic fundamentalists who believe that the large scale destruction of their fellow Muslims is the best way to provoke the coming of their messianic Imam — the Mahdi. Though this belief is rife throughout the Arab world, Iran has the resources to provoke it. They will, no doubt, undertake similar provocative actions through mass-casualty terror attacks against Europe and the United States. This is why the efforts of the West to negotiate with, or merely change the behavior of the Arab fundamentalists have been so unsuccessful. How do you threaten someone who wants to die? 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).
|
|
NEXT STAGE OF GAZA OP: 'ROOT CANAL' FOR TERROR
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, January 5, 2009. |
|
This is a news item from Ynet
|
|
After ground forces reach target destinations inside Strip, their main objective is now to search and destroy terror infrastructure, kill gunmen. IDF sees drop in rocket fire after forces seize most areas used to launch rockets. IAF strikes some 30 targets overnight; soldier lightly to moderately injured in ground operation Second night in Gaza Strip: After IDF forces managed to reach their target destinations inside Gaza, soldiers have started searching the area for weapon caches, terrorist infrastructure and terrorists. The incursion into Gaza, which was launched Saturday evening, has already claimed the life of one soldier, Staff-Sergeant Dvir Emanuelof of the Golani brigade. Some 40 soldiers were wounded in clashes, and over 50 Palestinian gunmen were killed in the first day of the fighting, according to the Israeli army. The Israel Air Force struck some 30 targets in the Gaza Strip on Sunday night, including a mosque, a suspected antiaircraft machine gun and several tunnels on the Philadelphi Route. The Navy attacked posts belonging to Hamas' naval force and a bunker where Grad missiles were being stored. An IDF soldier was evacuated from the Gaza Strip overnight after being lightly to moderately injured. He was rushed to the Soroka Medical Center in Beersheba for medical treatment. Since entering the Strip, tanks and armored vehicles have been moving towards their pre-set destinations. According to the IDF, the forces are now facing their main mission — to conduct a 'root canal' treatment on the terror infrastructure in Gaza, and to search and destroy rocket launching pads and terrorists. 
Military sources said that the clashes in the sector were expected to continue throughout the night and even escalate with dawn. decline in rocket fire Defense establishment officials estimated Sunday that the ground incursion has led to a reduction of long-range rocket fire into Israel, and added that should the operation continue as planned, rocket fire at Ashdod, Netivot, Beersheba and Ofakim would be substantially reduced soon. However, they stressed that Hamas was still capable of targeting these towns. On Sunday's cabinet meeting, the ministers were informed that 220 of the 300 rockets fired on Israel's south in the last week — 73% — were launched from areas that have been seized by the army in the last 24 hours. This fact, coupled with the shutting down of a great number of the tunnels used for smuggling weapons and the heavy damages inflicted on Hamas' arms storages, workshops and rocket production facilities, has contributed to the decrease in rocket fire on Israel. However, security officials believe that the terror group still posses a great number of short-range rockets. It is also possible that Hamas has reduced rocket fire for tactical reasons and will resume the attacks at a later stage of the fighting. Seeking intelligence, bargaining chips Another objective of the forces is to arrest Hamas operatives in Gaza and bring them for questioning in Israel. This is aimed to serve two purposes: Obtaining new intelligence from the detainees that could be used by the forces on the ground; and using the captives as bargaining chips in future negotiations. The IDF has set up a facility near the Strip in which captives will be held and interrogated. The army has also begun preparing for the possibility that the operation will be expanded and reserve units have already started training on Saturday, in the event that they will be needed in Gaza. Meanwhile, the transferring of humanitarian aid into the Strip is expected to be renewed Monday after being halted during the first day of the ground operation.
Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com
|
|
BLOODY RIOTS IN LONDON. CARS TORCHED IN PARIS.
Posted by Gabrielle Goldwater, January 4, 2009. |
|
The very same LOT of useful idiots ..... will NEVER demonstrate for Jews being attacked ... nor do we see this LEFT LOT ... come out for Darfur ... or for any other cause... ONLY AGAINST ISRAEL The Israel Hate ... is more acceptable THAN EVER In todays world they would support HITLER... THEY obviously will be happy to support SHARIA AND ISLAM Europe ... is it going to be lost ????? Both of these items were posted on the Gateway Pundit website. |
|
LONDON http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/ pro-hamas-protesters-riot-at-israeli.html Bloody Protests in London...
Palestinian supporters rioted outside the Israeli Embassy in London after a massive protest in the streets of London today. Protestors throw a barrier at police as they clash outside the Israeli embassy in London, Saturday, Jan. 3, 2009. Demonstrators hurled shoes at the tall iron gates outside the British prime minister's residence in London on Saturday. (AP) The anti-Israel protesters clashed with London police today. Pro-Hamas protesters waved Palestinian and Hezbollah flags outside the Israeli Embassy. The Times Online reported: THERE were bloody clashes outside the Israeli embassy in London today as protesters threw fireworks, stones, shoes and glass bottles at riot police. PARIS http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/01/
Surprise!... Pro-Hamas "Youths" Torch Cars After Paris Protest 25,000 Pro-Hamas protesters turned out for a march in Paris led by Communist and left-wing politicians today. Demonstrators shout anti-Israeli slogans near a car set on fire during a protest against the ongoing Israeli military action in the Gaza Strip, in Paris, Saturday Jan. 3, 2009. Thousands of protesters across Europe march, rally and even hurl shoes or stones to demand an end to Israel's week-old campaign of air attacks on the Gaza Strip. (AP/Thibault Camus) In London today the pro-Hamas protesters torched Israeli flags. In Paris they torched cars. Like beached turtle, cars were flipped before being torched... After the Paris rally 500 of the protesting "youths" turned violent, throwing objects at police, burning Israeli flags, overturning and torching cars, and vandalizing several shops. Ten police officers were injured in the clashes and 20 protesters arrested. This followed the 1147 burnt-out cars on New Year's Eve. They must want jobs. Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
WOW! ISRAEL HAS ITS BEYTSIM BACK!
Posted by Arlene Peck, January 4, 2009. |
|
For the past couple of years, I haven't felt like even reading the paper. Not only because the news was so bad but there has been absolutely no leadership. Not here in America and, especially not, in Israel. That, folks has bothered me. Finally, the politicians, not statesmen, who have been at the helm in Israel, seem to have awakened. I was astounded to see that, finally, they remembered the 'rule of retaliation'. Someone must have told them that a country that is being attacked by vicious terrorists, day after day, year after year, actually has the right to fight back. The timing of their incursion into Gaza was brilliant! Everyone has been so busy in celebrating their holiday season that I can hardly find any news about what's happening in the Middle East on the evening news. However, I have also noticed that many of the journalists who have been reporting on the "war in Gaza" have Arab names and are anything but impartial in their reporting. I find their reactions so predictable they are almost comical. For instance, today's LA Times had an article written by two Arab journalists who wrote, "the mounting toll of civilians has alarmed world leaders. Prompting what they call a disproportionate response to Hamas attack and to urge renewal of a truce that "unraveled' last month." Let's see, how did it 'unravel'? Could it be that Hamas absolutely, positively refused to stop the terrorist attacks or to stop lobbing their steady stream of missiles into nearby Israeli towns? And, the benevolent guys from the United Nations were thrilled when their leader, Secretary-General Ban Ki-mon was quoted as saying, "I have continuously stressed the need for a strict observance of international humanitarian law". I don't think so. This group is usually ready to pass out sweets and candies whenever Israel is attacked. In six years, I don't remember one comment, much less 'demand', that the Palestinians stop their constant bombing of Israeli towns. Do any of your remember any of their emergency meetings? The only difference is the Israelis do everything they can to avoid hitting civilians. While the Palestinian enemy set up shop and mortars in the middle of busy civilian streets, hospitals and schools. The mosques that I'm delighted to see are finally being bombed are usually weapons warehouses. Frankly, I don't give a diddly-squat. As 'politically incorrect" as I tend to be I'd move them all out and keep the lights turned off. The only humanatarian aid I've give would be to help them pack and get out. Transfer? It's not the dirty word it once was and, I'm all for it! Frankly, I find it difficult to feel any remorse for a people who elect an organization with its goal of destroying Israel. It doesn't bother them, however, that Hamas won the Palestinian parliamentary elections in 2006, yet Western governments have shunned them as a terrorist organization. Not the least because of their constant refusal to change their charter devoted to the demise of Israel or to formally accept Israel's right to exist. When I say these people are savages, I know from which I speak. I was in Beirut for a few weeks during the Lebanon War in June of 82. And again to Gaza as a journalist posing as a "Christian writer" because sometimes I'm too curious for my own good. The impression that I gained from that 'rat hole' was the boredom and hate-filled eyes of the children. Truly, I have never seen such 'old eyes' in kids in my life. All the teenagers seemed to have to do was burn tires. I remember, I drove in with an Arab cab driver and even his car was stoned. And speaking of that, the older ones were sitting around everywhere smoking that 'laughing water'. I believe they are trained from birth as terrorists. I remember when Egypt was offered Gaza and they didn't want it because they knew what trouble these people are. Obama says he is a strong alley of Israel despite rumors that he would be more receptive to the Palestinian position. During the election, I was appalled that the Jewish community here was the financial base of his success. I won't even go into my disgust that I felt about the Israeli community here who told me non-stop how politically incorrect I was. It was an election that you lost friends over. Now, nothing would make me happier to say that I was wrong. It's happened beforeJ my being wrong that is. But, one thing I'm sure of. That being, that no matter what, Israel shouldn't give any credence to what the world has to say when it comes to the Jewish state defending itself. I know what would happen if the residents of Tiajuana would suddenly start lobbing rockets into San Diego. Amazingly, I know that what 'they' think is always such a big issue. And, I'll admit, a few years back it was a big concern. But that, folks, were before the rest of the world found out what the Jews have known about the culture of Islam for a long, long time. Then, the news reports and radio talk shows were dominated by the 'plight of the poor Palestinian'. Since then, however, the Sunday people have experienced the terrorists attacks also and now realize what a cruel and barbaric nation we're dealing with in this war. Instead of hearing about the use of 'excessive' force, I'm listening to the reporters and call-in stations expound on how every country has the right to defend itself. Even Israel! I'm not hearing a lot of sympathy for the Arab side this time around. And, the same way that I could even be wrong about Obama, who knows? Olmert, a man disgraced bycorruption charges has surprised me. Maybe the Three Stooges learned from the past war in Lebanon. At least, so far they've seemed to put a muzzle on Peres. "This is something I never even dreamed of (said a Gazan who only gave his name as Samch)."We expected some retaliation from Israel, but not like this." Well, to tell the truth, neither did I. But I couldn't be more delighted. Israel finally has her beytsim backJ This is a video of my interview of Wafa Sultan: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=haDnKKpI2yU Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com |
|
FAIR WITNESS PRESS RELEASE: CHURCHES' RESPONSES TO ISRAEL'S ATTACK ON GAZA
Posted by Alex Grobman, January 4, 2009. |
|
This is from
|
|
Christians for Fair Witness on the Middle East ("Fair Witness") is greatly disturbed by the escalating violence in Israel and Gaza and the tragic loss of innocent Palestinian and Israeli lives. As many church leaders in the U.S. demand an immediate cease fire however, we challenge them to acknowledge not only the human suffering, but the political realities in the region. "In November 2001, Hamas, which openly declares its commitment to the destruction of the State of Israel, began a terror campaign launching rockets from Gaza into civilian targets within Israel," says Rev. Dr. Bruce Chilton, the Bernard Iddings Bell Professor of Religion at Bard College in Annandale, New York. "It was Hamas that chose not to extend the existing cease-fire on December 18, resuming hundreds of attacks on the civilian population in Southern Israel. It is Hamas that chooses, with the Israeli army sitting right outside Gaza, to continue to target civilian areas in towns behind the army." "Maybe people don't realize what has been going on in Israel for the past seven years," says Rev. James Noland, Senior Pastor of Reveille United Methodist Church in Richmond, Virginia. "I was in Sderot in October 2007. Six Qassam rockets hit the town just before we arrived. We saw three blimps in the air that circulate 24 hours a day seven days a week to detect incoming rockets. When the sirens go off people have twenty seconds to get into a bomb shelter. Kids couldn't sleep, everyone was afraid to leave their homes, people died, people had their legs blown off. It was especially disturbing to see these Qassams up close — they were built not to cause damage to structures, but to kill and maim human beings. It was terrifying. How many years are people supposed to live like that before putting a stop to it?" Rev. Dr. Scott Ickert, pastor of Resurrection Lutheran Church in Arlington, Virginia, says "I have to put myself in the shoes of the people of Sderot and ask if some foreign country started throwing rockets at the town where my family and I live what would I expect my government to do to protect me? I think only after we answer that question in an honest way can we presume to judge what constitutes an appropriate and adequate response to Hamas' provocations." Rev. Dr. Peter Pettit, Director of the Institute for Jewish Christian Understanding at Muhlenberg College says "Hamas has claimed its place as the liberators of Palestine and the implacable foes of the State of Israel — not only of Israeli occupation, but of Israel's very existence. We do not condone or encourage violent resolution of political conflicts, but we question some church leaders who condemn only Israel's military action while ignoring Hamas' courting and conduct of this war. We have to question church leaders who condemn Israel for a disproportionate response, while failing to set this action in the context of a long-term course of violent struggle to which Hamas has committed itself in defiance of Israel's legitimacy as a nation." 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. |
|
WINSTON CHURCHILL: WITHOUT VICTORY, THERE IS NO SURVIVAL
Posted by Gabriel Goldwater, January 4, 2009. |
|
This was posted on Jihad Watch by Robert Spencer: |
|
Comments by David G. Littman, historian, whose last
article can be found at
After Andrew Bostom's very comprehensive article on Hamas, in which I find myself praised and nicely portrayed in the excellent company of the true Wizard of Jihad Watch here, I wish to add a foreword and a postscript on the Hamas syndrome. Churchill's words nearly 70 years ago, in a moment of great crisis for Great Britain and Europe, will serve to illustrate the situation today, where it is Israel, its leaders and people who stand for us all against tyranny. Israel's ground forces have moved into Gaza to stop the ongoing Jihad war, as defined by Hamas in its 'slogan' article 8 above, an exact copy from the foundation slogan of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, founded by Hassan al-Banna in 1928, who became a devout admirer of Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime (he is quoted in the preamble to the Hamas Charter as saying "Israel will exist and continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it."). Israel's government would do well to meditate the concluding words by Winston Churchill's first speech nearly 70 years ago in the House of Commons as prime minster (May 13, 1940), and draw the logical conclusion at this epic moment for Israel — and for the world. I would say to the House, as I have said to those who have joined this Government: "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat." (...) You ask, what is our policy? I will say: It is to wage war, by sea, land, and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. * * * * * It is time for democratic societies worldwide to stand firmly behind Israel at this moment of truth for the future of all who recognise that "the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family [which] is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world" — as expressed in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Jihad till Kingdom Come should not be the sworn rule of law for any part of humanity! Gabrielle Goldwater lives in Switzerland. Contact her at III44@aol.com |
|
ON THE GROUND IN GAZA
Posted by Barry Rubin, January 4, 2009. |
|
Israel didn't want to attack the Gaza Strip from the ground or from the air. Hamas, which had long broken the ceasefire, canceled it altogether. Then it began large-scale attacks on Israel. This is a war of defense. And it is being conducted just 30 miles from here, Israel's main city. According to the just-released Israeli government statement on the offensive: "The objective of this stage is to destroy the terrorist infrastructure of the Hamas in the area of operation, while taking control of some of rocket launching area used by the Hamas, in order to greatly reduce the quantity of rockets fired at Israel and Israeli civilians. Even as the 2006 war was continuing, the Israel Defense Force was evaluating the mistakes made in Lebanon — helicopters needed better short-range munitions, improved air-ground coordination, care in using tanks unsupported by infantry, and so on. But contrary to the insistence of armchair strategists now, it would not be easy to seize control of all the Gaza Strip and govern it for an extended period of time. Hamas is not going to go away. International support for Israel is limited. Fatah and the Palestinian Authority will not react strongly to try to take Gaza back for itself. There are about one million people in the Gaza Strip and Hamas will make every attempt to ensure there are civilian casualties — and pretend there are even more. So "total victory" is not easy, if it is even possible. The irony is that Israeli policy is based on the idea that there is no military solution to these issues. But since there is no diplomatic solution either, force must be used to protect Israel and its citizens. It should be remembered that Israel withdrew completely from the Gaza Strip, dismantled all settlements, and wished the Palestinians good luck. The Palestinian Authority (PA) was not up to the challenge. It could and would not change its corrupt and incompetent ways. U.S. policy insisted that Hamas be allowed to run in the elections, even though it did not meet the standard of accepting the 1993 Israel-PLO agreement. Hamas won. But Hamas invoked the radical Islamist policy of "one man, one vote, one time. " It staged a coup and kicked out its PA and Fatah rivals. Rather than focusing on economic development or even maintaining peace to build up its own power, Hamas pursued its strategy of permanent war against Israel. Children's programs taught the kiddies that they should grow up to be suicide bombers and kill Jews. Hamas soldiers, or their junior allies, fired rockets and mortars at Israel. And of course Hamas staged a cross-border raid and kidnapped an Israeli soldier. In spite of this, many in the West think Israel has some kind of choice in this matter, that diplomacy was an option, that Hamas could be reasoned with. Those people have clearly never heard a Hamas leader speak or read anything on the group's Arabic-language websites. In a real sense, Hamas is more extreme than Usama bin Ladin, who periodically offers his enemy the chance to repent. Hamas's goal is genocidal. This has nothing to do with being dovish or hawkish, left or right. For those who are the biggest peaceniks — and this is true in Israel — know that Hamas must be defeated if Israel is ever to make peace with the PA. Even the PA knows it, and that's what they say in private, no matter what they say in public. The offensive is only going to last so long. It would be nice to believe that Hamas will be overthrown, less extreme Palestinians will take over, or Israel will just sit in the Gaza Strip for months or even years to come without any major problem. These are not real options. Hamas wants nothing more than to be able to organize an underground to launch daily attacks on Israeli patrols going through the center of refugee camps. It should be remembered that, for better or worse, it was the Israeli military — not the politicians — who wanted to withdraw from the Gaza Strip for tactical reasons. It was easier to hold a defensive line in strength than to play into Hamas's strong points by trying to control all the territory. Clearly, this didn't take into account the rockets but it is easy to think that if Israeli forces had been in the Gaza Strip every day since the withdrawal, Israeli casualties would have been a lot higher while Fatah and Hamas would be fighting side to side against Israel, and international diplomacy would have been far more hostile to Israel. No one should have any illusions that this conflict is going to go away. The peace process era, 1993-2000, taught us that Iran, Syria, Hamas, Hizballah, and radical Islamist groups meant what they said. They will never accept peace with Israel. Israel will be involved in a struggle with these extremist groups for decades. Yet that does not mean Israel cannot — and does not — prevail. It prevails by maintaining good lives for its citizens, developing its economy, and raising living standards, progressing in technology and science and medicine. In this context, Israel will not listen to those many who counsel it to commit suicide, but it also has no illusions of a victory, of a war that will end all wars. And in a real sense that is Israel's true strength: it is not naïve about either concessions or force. If you have realistic expectations, if you aren't disappointed, then you never give up. Often, nowadays, it seems as if all history is being rewritten when it comes to Israel. In World War Two, allied air forces carpet-bombed cities even though there were no military bases in civilian areas. In France alone, tens of thousands of civilians were killed by allied bombs that fell on their intended targets. Even the Nazis didn't put ammunition dumps in houses and use human shields. And up until now the blame for doing so would fall on those who deliberately and cynically sought to create civilian casualties in order to gain support for themselves Up until now, a country whose neighbor fired across the border at its people and even staged cross-border raids had the right of self-defense. Up until now, there has been a capability of understanding which group is inciting hatred, trying to turn children into robotic terrorists, calling for the extermination of another people, and committing aggression. Many people, many journalists, many governments, and even many intellectuals still understand the most basic principles of right and wrong as well as of the real world. Unfortunately, too many don't or at least don't when Israel is the target. Finally, it is of the greatest importance to understand that this is not an issue of Gaza or of Israel alone. The great issue of our era, of our remaining lifetimes, is the battle between radical Islamism — whether using the tactic of terrorism or not — and the rest of the world. To isolate this question as merely something about Israel is to misunderstand everything important about the world today. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), with Walter Laqueur (Viking-Penguin); the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan); A Chronological History of Terrorism, with Judy Colp Rubin, (Sharpe); and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley). |
|
EVEN-HANDEDNESS EQUALS MORAL EQUIVALENCE
Posted by Professor Paul Eidelberg, January 4, 2009. |
|
No one should be deceived by the allegedly "even-handed" reporting of the war in Gaza by any media such as FOX News. Even-handedness between Israel and Hamas is but a euphemism for moral equivalence, since it places a civilized country like Israel on the same level as Hamas, terrorist organization whose Charter unambiguously calls for Israel's destruction. John Bolton, former US ambassador to the United Nations, points out in his book Surrender is Not an Option, that "moral equivalency" permeates the State Department. To be even more accurate, the policy of the State Department, hence of the United States government, toward Israel and its enemy, the Palestinian Authority, has ever been dominated by moral reversal. It should be borne in mind that Yasser Arafat, the godfather of international terrorism, was a most frequent guest of the Clinton White House — and this, despite the known fact that he was responsible for the murder of two State Department officials in Khartoum. Another thing about "even-handed" coverage of the war in Gaza. What is a FOX reporter to say when he or she interviews Arabs who are notorious liars? But ponder the following conundrum. The late Professor Y. Harkabi, a student of Islam and a former head of Israel Military Intelligence, advocated negotiations with the PLO and the creation of a "Palestinian state" even though he said in Arab Attitudes to Israel that mendacity is "second nature" to the Arabs, and that one may rightly regard "falsehood as an expression of [Arab] national character." To support his contention, he quotes the liberated Arab-born sociologist Sonia Hamady, who said "Lying is a widespread habit among the Arabs, and they have a low idea of truth." So, all the talk about even-handed reportage of the Israel-Hamas conflict is utter nonsense or itself an exercise in intellectual dishonesty. Professor Paul Eidelberg is President of the Foundation For Constitutional Democracy. He can be reached by mail at 244 Madison Avenue, Suite 427, New York, NY 10016, Tel: 212-372-3752, and by email at Constitution@usa.net |
|
THE ANNIHILATION OF THE TERRORISTS THAT NO ONE PROTESTED
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 4, 2009. |
|
1. The jets bombed the bejeebers out of them. The ground forces invaded. They at long last suppressed the terrorists, who had conducted a long campaign of suicide bombing and planting bombs, and put an end to any notion that the terrorists and their sponsors would be granted their own state. Many civilians were killed and wounded, yet not a single protest was made against the invasion anywhere. I am of course referring to the conquest by the army of Sri Lanka over the past few days of the last hold-out city of the Tamil independence rebels. Kilinochchi was the last town held by the Tamil "Tiger" Rebels, considered to be a terrorist group by the United States. With it fell the last Tamil hope of setting up an independent state or even of getting autonomy inside Sri Lanka. The Tamils have their own state inside India but were not satisfied with that manifestation of "self-determination." Kilinochchi, 579 kilometers north of Sri Lanka's capital Colombo, was until recent months the center of political power for the rebels. Over the years, 65,000 people have been killed in the war with the Tamils in Sri Lanka. Meanwhile not a single Solidarity-with-the-Tamil-Tigers protest has been organized on a single Western campus or in a single downtown square. Jewish leftist kapos have not taken to the streets to demand and end to the war of aggression against the Tamils. Leftist web sites have not proclaimed every injury of a Tamil civilian to be a Nazi-like war crime and an act of genocide. Eurocrats have not pontificated about how the Sri Lankan response to the terror was out of proportion. The International Solidarity Movement has not sent in protesters from the West to try to defend the terrorists. Communists and fellow travelers have not organized flotillas of boats carrying aid to the terrorists. Israeli politicians have not lectured the Sinhalese of Sri Lanka about how the whole problem is that they are insensitive to the needs of the "Other." Ehud Barak did not demand that the Sri Lanka government enter talks with the Tigers and provide them with guns and funding. Israeli professors did not organize petitions of solidarity with the Tamil suicide bombers. Haaretz columnists have not turned out column after column explaining that the suicide bombings by the Tamils are all because they are under an inhumane siege and hungry. Writers David Grossman, Amos Oz and A.B. Yehoshua have not produced poems and essays demanding that the demands of the Tamil Tigers be met. Not a single Sri Lankan professor who had a family member killed by the Tamil terrorists has come out in endorsement of the demands of the terrorists. No movement of self-hating Sinhalese favoring a Holocaust of Sinhalese has emerged. Not a single Sinhalese public figure has proposed that Sri Lanka be dismembered and stripped of its Sinhalese symbols. None have proposed a change in the national anthem. None have proposed dividing Colombo and handing over half to the Tamils. Virtually no one knows that 65,000 civilians have died in the fighting and the media have no interest in covering the story. But then again, Sri Lanka is just not as advanced a country as is Israel..
2. The queen of bovinity, the Hollywood airhead Roseanne
Barr, diversifies into treason, declares Israel to be a "Nazi" state:
Following fast in her hoofprints is Ed Asner, the "star" of the highly forgettable B-dram "Lou Grant," a long-time Jewish assimilationist far-leftist. See http://thejewishpress.blogspot.com/2008/12/lou-grant-left-wing-mountebank.html Not every Jewish leftist is rallying for the Hamas. I am as
disgusted at "Rabbi" Eric Yoffie, a member of the Reform synagogue's
leftist SWAT team, as you are. In recent years the Reform movement
under Yoffie has been FAR more interested in promoting homosexual
"marriage" than it has been in Israel's survival. But in the
Forward this past Friday he writes an article that is about 87%
sensible. It is worth reading: http://www.forward.com/articles/14847/
There he denounces Jewish self-hating pro-Hamas traitors like "J
Street.". Just goes to show you that even the worst Jewish sinners can
repent and return in "Tshuva" sometimes.
3. From Tom Gross: Even in Fort Lauderdale, Florida... "The Jews need a big oven" and "nuke, nuke Israel" scream pro-Hamas demonstrators. Video here:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=j3Xl68kP4wo
4. Zeev Tzahor is the President of Sapir College,
supposedly a historian of Israeli history. Sapir College is located in
Sderot and his been hit repeatedly by Hamas shells. At least one Sapir
student has been murdered 5. Anti-Zionist Tel Aviv University professor Professor
Moshe Zuckerman (history) tells German radio that Israel has murdered
400,000 Palestinians during the Gaza conflict. See Vienna-based veteran journalist and media critic Karl Pfeifer slammed Deutschlandradio for its interview with Israeli historian and sociologist Moshe Zuckermann on Friday. Zuckermann told a widely-heard radio program that Israel had killed 400,000 Palestinians during the Gaza conflict. At the time of interview, the reported number of deaths was about 400. Speaking to the Post, Pfeifer criticized the radio interviewer, Birgit Kolkmann, for failing to "interrupt" Zuckermann. "Any serious journalist would have asked the question" regarding the accuracy of the number of deaths, he said. Pfeifer said Deutschlandradio only corrected its on-line transcript eight hours after the broadcast and he demanded that Kolkmann be sacked. Thomas Wische, an editor with Deutschlandradio, told the Post that Zuckermann's comment was a "bad mistake." He said he spoke to Zuckermann following the revelation and that Zuckermann had been embarrassed by it. Wische added that Kolkmann "did not notice" the error, and there is no "bad intention or ideology" behind the broadcast of 400,000 deaths. But the broadcast can be heard on-line, and Wische said Deutschlandradio would not be modifying the live broadcast. Zuckermann writes for the aggressively anti-Zionist left-wing paper junge Welt. Journalist Ivo Bozic, who writes for German weekly Jungle World, has written that junge Welt has become the "central German newspaper of Hamas" during the conflict. When asked about Zuckermann and junge Welt, Wische said the Deutschlandradio sought to "document a piece of the opinion spectrum" with its Zuckermann interview. *** Want to tell the heads of Tel Aviv University what you think of Zuckerman's activities? Contact Tel Aviv University:
Rector: Prof. Dany Leviatan
American Friends Offices of Tel Aviv University:
Other "Friends of" Groups: http://www.tau.ac.il/friends-eng.html 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
|
|
GAZA AND ME
Posted by Tsvi November, January 4, 2009. |
|
The first book of the Bible mentions Gaza (Aza in the original Hebrew) as one of the locales where Abraham grazed his herds. Indeed, Gaza has always been part of the Land of Israel until the Israeli government expelled the Jews and, in essence, turned it into an independent Arab mini-state. Way back in 1799 Napoleon, who has subdued Egypt the previous year, launched his campaign to outflank the British in the eastern Mediterranean and cut their lines to India. Napoleon marched up the coast to Akko which, thanks to Sir Sydney Smith, the British fleet's commander, he failed to conquer. But Napoleon had no trouble defeating the inadequate Turkish defenses in Gaza city. Thanks to the detailed journals kept by several of Napoleon's officers we know that the total population of Gaza city at that time did not exceed 10,000. In 1948 the Egyptian army, following the Arab League's decision to invade Palestine and abort the Jewish state at its birth, took the same coastal route on its way to Tel Aviv but was stopped by Israel's primitive resistance. Between 1948 and 1967 Egypt ruled the Gaza strip (365 square kilometers in all) but never annexed it, nor was citizenship granted to its residents nor was any efforts made to improve living standards. On the contrary, Egyptian and Arab actions were designed to perpetuate the Arab refugee problem. Of course the Arab refugee problem could have been referred to the UN's High Commissioner for Refugees which has over the decades rapidly resettled millions of refugees around the world. But the Arabs insisted on creating UNRWA (United Nations Relief Works Agency) in 1951 to house and sustain the Arab refugees permanently. UNRWA, supported by hundreds of millions of US and West European taxpayers' dollars every year does not rehabilitate or re-locate anyone. The Arab refugees in Gaza could have been, during the past 57 years, resettled amongst their brethren in some or all of the 22 sovereign Arab countries and thereby substantially decrease Arab-Israeli tensions, not to mention the humanitarian side of the problem. In 1988 I did my annual army reserve duty at the Rafiah (Rafa) border crossing. As usual, my unit was briefed on Gaza. We learned about the tunnels under the border fence used to smuggle in guns and enable wanted terrorists to escape to Sinai. Obviously, each and every tunnel exited in Egyptian territory but the Egyptians claimed they knew nothing about the tunnels or contraband that moved through them even though they have several checkpoints on the road that leads back into Egypt proper. In those days, the cooks at out base were Arabs from Gaza city and the Erez crossing point a few kilometers south of Ashkelon, which is heavily fortified today, was just a bar across the road. At the briefing, I remember seeing a jeep that had been bombarded by rocks and blocks thrown down from buildings. Its heavy steel hood and roof were bashed in by the potentially lethal attacks. The first Intifadah war continued on until 1993 when Shimon Peres had the "brilliant" idea of bringing Yassir Arafat and his terrorist gangs to Gaza and Jericho. The rest is history. Over the years, the stones and bricks have been replaced with guns, bombs, rockets, anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles. Instead of PLO/Fatah terrorists we now have 20,000 Hamas fighters imbedded in their neighborhoods firing rockets at one million Israelis living within range of their missiles and mortars; most of which are aimed at schools and apartment houses. Hamas is a religious movement with a military arm just like Hezbollah in Lebanon. Both are well funded by the Iranians and are engaged in jihad (a holy war for Allah's sake) against Israel. Their objective is to destroy Israel. Fighting for Islamic principles is a win-win option because they are either victorious or they achieve martyrdom and go straight to heaven. The current Israeli operation in Gaza is eight years behind schedule. My niece's husband (35 years old and the father of four) has been called up and I pray for his safety and a return to the relatively quite days before the "peace process" began. With very best wishes,
Contact Tsvi November at tsvinov@gmail.com |
|
EVERY SOLDIER A HERO
Posted by Shaul and Aviva Ceder, January 4, 2009. |
|
This was written by Chana (Jenny) Weisberg
and it was on the Aish website archived at
Chana Jenny Weisberg is the author of One Baby Step at a Time: 7 Secrets of Jewish Motherhood (Urim) as well as the creator of the popular Jewish Mom Video Series that can be viewed on her website www.JewishMom.com. |
|
The inspiring story of the hero of the Merkaz Harav massacre. On March 6, 2008 at 8:36 PM, 29-year-old Israeli Paratrooper Major David Shapira had just finished giving his two young children a bath and putting them to bed when he heard an explosion. At first Shapira thought he was hearing firecrackers of children getting an early start on their Purim celebrations. But when Shapira opened his window and heard screaming accompanied by more explosions, he realized there had been a terror attack. He grabbed his gun and ran across the street to the Merkaz Harav Yeshiva, where he had been a student for many years. What followed were among the most dramatic moments of Shapira's life. Shapira asked the policeman guarding the yeshiva's entrance if he knew where the terrorist was located. The policeman told Shapira what he knew, and advised him to put on the bulletproof vest in his police car before entering the yeshiva. But Shapira heard the constant firing from the terrorist's Kalashnikov and the young students screaming for help. There was no time for precautions — every moment of delay could mean more murdered children. Five minutes later Shapira had found and killed the terrorist in the yeshiva's library. Eight young students were murdered, filling their holy books with their own blood. The selfless bravery of Shapira, as well as yeshiva student Rabbi Yitzchak Dadon, had saved the lives of hundreds of students who were at the yeshiva that night. Afterwards, for personal reasons and on account of his humility, Shapira refused all requests for interviews. But this past Chanukah, as part of an annual festival saluting the contribution of Israeli soldiers, Shapira agreed to his very first interview to share his incredible story. When interviewer Ilana Dayan from Israeli Army Radio asked Shapira if there was any connection between his heroism on that terrible night and the yarmulke on his head, Shapira nodded. "It's clear," he explained, "that God is in control of everything. Everyone has a mission in the world. [Risking my life to kill the terrorist] was my mission from God at that moment." After shooting the terrorist, Shapira continued inspecting the rest of the yeshiva in case there was another terrorist in hiding. Next to the library he came across a locked classroom with 15 students still barricaded inside. When Shapiro knocked on the door, the students were terrified to open the door. In order to identify himself, Shapira recalls with emotion, "They asked me to recite the 'Shema' to prove that I was a Jew." Interviewer: "So after they asked you, did you say Shema Yisrael?" Shapira: "At every single moment, when I was running there and entering the yeshiva, these were the words that were running through my head: "Shema Yisrael Hashem Elokaynu Hashem Echad..." "The words that follow the opening line of the Shema are 'And you will love God, your Lord, with all of your heart and with all of your soul.' There is a story told about Rabbi Akiva who asked what it means to 'love God with all of your soul.' When the Romans found out that Rabbi Akiva had been teaching Torah illegally, they decided to execute him, and as he lay dying, Rabbi Akiva told his students that at that moment he understood what it means "to love God with all of your soul." Shapira continued: "And that night, as I ran into the yeshiva, I also understood what it means to love God with all your soul... I knew these might be my last moments alive. But I also knew that this was what I had to do." Our Soldiers in Gaza After 15 years in my homeland, my love for Israel still grows by the day. I love living here. I love being the mother of Israeli children. And I love knowing that if my ancestors, who prayed every day to return to Zion during the cruel centuries of exile, could see me today they would look at me with tears of wonder welling up in their eyes. And I know that none of this would be possible if not for the self-sacrifice of Israel's soldiers. Soldiers like David Shapira. When I was 18 years old in my sophomore year of college, my greatest worries were about my GPA and what country to select for my junior year abroad. At that same age, Israeli teenagers are setting aside several years to serve their country, not knowing if they will survive that service to celebrate their 20th birthday. Over 22,000 of these young Israelis have lost their lives fighting so that you and I and every Jew in the world will always have the ability to fulfill the yearning of countless generations. The headlines tell us "The Israeli Army is at war in Gaza." But we cannot let ourselves forget that an army is made up of soldiers. Soldiers who at the moment of truth have said, "I know this might be my last moment alive. But I know that this is what I have to do." Every Israeli soldier is a brother, a father, a son. And in my eyes, every Israeli soldier fighting today is, like David Shapira, a hero. Please pray for the safety of Israel's soldiers. Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
A PROUD AMERICAN MOTHER OF AN IDF SOLDIER
Posted by Jerry Gordon, January 4, 2009. |
|
When I read reports about the brave IDF soldiers entering Gaza today, I reached out to a friend, Allyson Rowen Taylor, in Los Angeles. I knew that her son, Zachary "Zach" Rowen-Taylor, a Sgt. Commander, trained expert sharpshooter and member of an elite Givati brigade unit would be among the first to enter Gaza in the ground phase of Operation Cast Lead. Zach had called his mother Allyson last night and told her that he had handed in his cell phone — a sure sign that his unit was going into Gaza. Allyson also received a call from Zach's Israeli girlfriend Nechama expressing her love, pride and concern for Zach's safety as we all would for children in military service whether it is in Israel, or with U.S. Forces in Iraq or Afghanistan. Zach and his American counterparts are all engaged in fighting the 'long war' with Islamic Jihad. Zach made Aliyah to Israel as a teenager, studied in a Yeshiva, served a tour in the IDF as a Mahal (Volunteer), and then re-enlisted in the regular Israeli Army. Zach is 23 years old. Allyson Rowen Taylor is an independent activist like me. She was a co-founder of Stand with Us and edits Shariah Finance Watch. Given the outburst of protests by Muslim Brotherhood Fronts here in North America, she endeavored to spread the alarm to activists and supporters of Israel, through postings via a Facebook site, Lipstick Haganah. She was one of the organizers for yesterday's Support Israel Rally at the Los Angeles Federal Building and Israeli Consulate. There were other support rallies and counter protests in Chicago, Fort Lauderdale and New York. Activists from the United American Committee and Act! For America chapters in Northern Virginia and Maryland rallied in Support of Israel at the Washington, DC Israel Embassy today. View pictures from the Los Angeles Times report on yesterday's rally, here, here and here. Note the picture of a contingent at today's DC rally. On the way to the rally at the Los Angeles Israeli Consulate, Allyson carried a sign saying: "Proud Mother of an IDF Soldier." As she passed a line of Arab counter protesters behind L.A.P.D. barricades, they gave her the stiff armed 'Heil Hitler' salute favored by Hamas and Hizbollah. Here is what Allyson wrote about her courageous son, Sgt. Commander Zachary Rowen Taylor: My son, Zachary Rowen Taylor, 23, is my hero. He went to Israel after high school to study at a Yeshiva. He decided to fight for Israel after his trip there for his bar mitzvah at the Kotel. He was the first person in my family to be a bar mitzvah, as my family was made up of very secular Jews. Kol Hakavod (all honors) to Sgt. Commander Zachary Rowen Taylor and his adoring mother, Allyson, my fellow activist. Contact Jerry Gordon at jerry_gordon38@yahoo.com
This article is archived at
|
|
THE RALLY AGAINST DECENCY BY THOUSANDS
Posted by Marion DS Dreyfus, January 4, 2009. |
|
The photo was supplied by Rock Peters (rockpeters@aol.com) and were taken across from the Israeli Consulate. |
|
Attended two counter-protests today, one at Times Square, where an endless snake of hijab'ed women and swathed-with-keffiyahs men and youths screamed and cursed and hurled invective at the tiny band of peaceful, non-screaming pro-Israel supporters, no more at any time than 40 or so. And the other at the Israeli Consulate, 42nd & 2nd. We stood bemused and stunned at the 3,000-4,000-strong bandana'ed shriekers, their signs a cruel inversion of the truth, in fact, the antithesis of what is happening in the strip called Gaza. They entirely omit the 8 years of bombardment visited in daily t3rr0r on so many cities in Israel, where one could not take a shower, go to the loo, make love, or eat in peace, without the siren signaling a scant 15 seconds to a safe place. That signal comes 10-80 times a day, every day. 
Then I went to the Israeli Consulate, 42nd and 2nd Avenue, where the small band was even smaller as the weather chilled from a bright, hard-sunny 32 F to cooler than that, as the sun dipped behind the city's spires and evening fell. We were alone for a while, leafletting and flyering, waving a flag or two, chatting with the excellent men in blue who protected us. But. Soon, the throngs from Times Square arrived in their fearful multiplicity, amplified voices via loud-speakers and bull-horns, curled fists pumping at us, various Hamastan flags and epithets and insults spat out, the police endeavoring to stop them from crossing the street and provoking fights with the tiny few of us. Not a word of acknowledgment that Israel has sent in hundreds of tonnes of food and supplies, medication and a constant supply of electricity and water. No recognition that no nation on Earth is at war with an implacable enemy yet keeps them supplied with basics and electricity...whoever heard of such a thing? Yet they keep screaming: Starvation. Racism. Darkness and other rubbish. Not a hint that the hamas/iran-bought guns and missiles and qassams are placed in mosques and living rooms, hoping that the more civilians — women and children — are hit, the better for their pictures and false tears. They hope for their vulnerable to die — whereas the IDF works meticulously to call the targeted buildings and tell them to leave; emails and drops leaflets to warn them. Yet they ignore these warnings and seek to earn public credibility from ''innocent'' deaths. They picked the Sabbath so few would attend, as Orthodox will not travel from Brooklyn, Queens or NJ, Connecticut or Pennsylvania to desecrate the holiest day, and even Conservative or Reform Jews might not travel to midtown on the New Year's 4-day weekend. So there were few but robust rally-ers in support of Israel's self-defense. It was more frightening when one took stock of the violence and hatred in their eyes, realized they were living here in the freedom-enabling country of the USA, yet all over the country, such lowlife crawled out and protested about ''massacre'' and ''genocide'' that did not exist except in the PR sloganeering fantasies of the well-paid minions. No acknowledgment that the Gazans had provoked this for year after year of random shelling aimed solely at civilians in kindergartens, schools, hospitals, synagogues, parks, restaurants and theatres. Their placards were not for the faint of heart. They wished for the end of Israel. they wished for the death of the US. They advocated for the conquest of "Palestine" from "the river to the sea." That is, the end of the nation of Israel. There was not a single American flag in the three- or four-thousand crowd. The thought that similar thousands were facing the rest of the country, with utter disregard for their unwholesome support of a pure destructive brigandry of death advocates, was deeply troubling. Stomachs turn and acids churn: What do these people do when they are pretending to like America, in their
jobs in our midst, quiet yet (fairly obviously) deadly?
Marion Dreyfus is a writer and travelor; she has taught English in
China on the university level. She can be contacted at
mdsdm@rcn.com
|
|
A PRAYER FOR EVERY SOLDIER
Posted by Avodah, January 4, 2009. |
|
This is by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu and it appeared in Arutz-7
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) Two modern rabbis are continuing a tradition that Torah sages say dates back 3,500 years ago, when a person was designated to pray and learn Torah for soldiers sent by Moses to fight the Jews' enemies. Jewish tradition states that King David also continued the practice. The counterterrorist operation "Cast Lead" is being accompanied by "Operation Tefillah, Torah and Troops," initiated by Rabbi Simcha HaCohen Kook, the chief rabbi of Rehovot, and Rabbi Levi Yitzchak Horowitz, the Bostoner Rebbe who now lives in the Har Nof community of Jerusalem. In an open letter to Jews, the rabbis "ask soldiers and/or their relatives who would want a 'partner' in Torah and Tefillah [prayer] to e-mail maortlmo@gmail.com or fax 972-8-9450027 and give their Hebrew name and mother's Hebrew name without any other particulars such as family name or other identifying factors." The rabbis will distribute the names "among those who heed the call to add Torah and Tefillah for the sake of those who find themselves in jeopardy." The same tradition was put into practice in the Second Lebanon War two years ago, when more than 50,000 people participated in the campaign co-sponsored by National Council of Young Israel. "Every tefillah that is said on behalf of a soldier will make a difference, regardless of where a person may be in religious observance, said Young Israel Executive Vice President Rabbi Pesach Lerner. "Each soldier who is putting his or her life on the line to defend the land of Israel and safeguard the Jewish nation deserves to have someone praying for their well being and safe return," he added. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
FROM ISRAEL: INSIDE GAZA
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 4, 2009. |
|
Barry Rubin, in his latest piece, "On the Ground in Gaza," observes how upside down and incomprehensible this world has become. His observations are a good way to begin today's post: "Often, nowadays, it seems as if all history is being rewritten when it comes to Israel. In World War Two, allied air forces carpet-bombed cities even though there were no military bases in civilian areas. In France alone, tens of thousands of civilians were killed by allied bombs that fell on their intended targets. ~~~~~~~~~~ This leads us directly to a video from the IDF with regard to our current operations — and why they are necessary — that is well worth seeing and sharing broadly:
~~~~~~~~~~ Inside Gaza: We have large numbers of troops in the north of Gaza, so that Gaza is in essence divided, as I am reading it, into three sections, which prevents movement of weapons and fighters. There have been reports of numerous tanks cited in the area of the former Jewish community of Netzarim, which is south of Gaza City. (No, I am not suggesting we are re-taking it for Jewish settlement purposes.) Apparently we have approached the outskirts of Gaza City. We are said to be aiming to control areas which were being used for launching of rockets, and to do damage to the military wing of Hamas, which hasn't been heavily damaged in the air attacks. Our very finest fighters are involved here: Paratroopers Brigade, Givati Brigade, and Golani Brigade. It seems that there is no intention of getting bogged down in the sort of house-to-house search (such as was done in Jenin in 2002) that is so dangerous to our boys, and is just what Hamas would like — not in Gaza City and not in the huge Jabaliya UNRWA refugee camp. Much terrorist activity emanates from Jabaliya, and rockets are often fired in its vicinity. ~~~~~~~~~~ Last night, 30 of our boys from the Golani Brigade were wounded in a mortar shell attack, two seriously, three moderately, and the rest lightly. It has now been reported that one of those seriously wounded has succumbed to his injuries: St.-Sgt. Dvir Emanuelof, 22, from Givat Ze'ev. Today an additional three were wounded. Fighting is intense. According to Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi, fighting has been mainly carried out from close range. "I spoke to the brigade and regiment commanders on the ground, and I'm encouraged by their determination and willingness to complete the mission." The IDF has placed an embargo on the details of the fighting. ~~~~~~~~~~ Along with the ground operation, we are continuing air attacks. In a strike on Khan Yunis, we took out senior Hamas terrorist Hussam Hamdan, who was in charge of Grad-rocket launches into Beersheba and Ofakim, and senior Hamas terrorist, Muhammad Hilo, who was in charge of the Hamas special forces in Khan Yunis. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Cabinet, in its weekly meeting today, was briefed on the war. Prime Minister Olmert offered remarks at the beginning of the meeting, and in the course of which he addressed parents and family of our soldiers and security personnel: "I have thought about you a lot since the operation began, especially since the decision about a ground operation approached. I asked myself and my ministerial colleagues if there was some other step, outlet or effort that we had not yet tried before sending our boys into a place fraught with such risks — from which some of them may not return. This morning, I can look each one of you in the eyes and say that the Government did its utmost before deciding on the operation. He ended with these words: "We will behave as a responsible and reasonable society, the way we know how to behave in times of decisions of national importance. My heart and the hearts of the people of Israel are with its fighters. ~~~~~~~~~~ The reports delivered at the Cabinet meeting by security heads are encouraging: According to Shin Bet head, Yuval Diskin: "There are first signs that Hamas is toning down its views in regards to a possible ceasefire...The Hamas leadership abroad is stressed, working to obtain a ceasefire and disappointed by the Arab countries failing to stand by its side. The situation of the leadership in Gaza is similar. A real threat exists today on the Hamas enterprise in the Gaza Strip. The leaderships in Gaza and abroad feel an existential threat." The message from Military Intelligence chief Major-General Amos Yadlin was even stronger: "Hamas understands that violating the lull was a strategic mistake. It suffered a great blow. Dozens of headquarters have been damaged, the ammunition warehouses and production infrastructure were destroyed. The ability to smuggle through the tunnels was damaged. According to Chief of Staff Ashkenazi, we have killed about 400 in our operations, most of them Hamas. "Not much is left from the Hamas government." (A note here: the IDF is saying that about 40 civilians have been killed, roughly one in ten of those taken out.) ~~~~~~~~~~ There is strong feeling here that Livni's diplomatic efforts in making our case are paying off. In any event, the US is running interference for us at the UN, and blocked Libya's move to call for an immediate cessation of our effort. Rice is coming to New York to spear-head efforts to cobble together an acceptable cease-fire resolution. She and Bush both say it must be a balanced and sustainable cease-fire. Israel has made it clear that there is no point in stopping if we will have to go in again very soon. This sustainable cease-fire will not be easy to achieve. Livni has made a further point that she doesn't want a cease-fire that elevates Hamas and gives it legitimacy, she wants a cease-fire imposed upon Hamas. ~~~~~~~~~~ Hamas resumed its barrage of rockets last night, after a temporary lull. Today over 30 — including both Kassams and Grads — have been launched, with four injured and a house that took a direct hit destroyed. ~~~~~~~~~~ UN Secretary-General Ban has called Olmert to declare himself "extremely disappointed" with Israel ground incursion." He's not nearly as disappointed as we are, perennially, with the UN itself. He "insists" that we cease operations immediately, which carries no weight whatsoever here. There is no further Security Council meeting scheduled until Wednesday. What is particularly notable, from my perspective, is that YNet this morning reported that according to "top diplomatic officials" we need not concern ourselves unduly even if a resolution that works against us were to be passed at that time: "There have already been precedents, for example Operation Defense Shield [in Judea and Samaria in 2002]. A Security Council resolution will not necessarily stop Israel from proceeding with the ground operation in Gaza. It is in Israel's sovereignty to make such decisions, since it is operating in self defense." If we are in a place where we are no longer running to appease those who oppose us, this alone is a much welcomed sign of increased strength. ~~~~~~~~~~ On Friday, before our ground invasion, UN Special Coordinator for the Middle East Peace Process, Robert Serry, called for a "truce" that will "require bringing Gaza back into the fold of the Palestinian Authority through arrangements on the ground and renewed efforts to reunite Gaza and the West Bank." He did not clarify exactly how this state of affairs would be brought about. I'm reading about some notion of placing the PA in charge of the Rafah crossing into the Sinai — a stipulation of Egypt for allowing the crossing to be opened. But as long as Hamas is standing, I do not imagine them tolerating this, or the PA having the strength to withstand what would ensue. ~~~~~~~~~~ In the meanwhile, French president Sarkozy is coming tomorrow. What a disappointment he has been: there was expectation when he first assumed the presidency that he would be more amenable to understanding Israel's situation. But, I imagine, he's playing to the Muslim population and the anti-Israel sentiment within his nation: He has condemned what we're doing. Following Sarkozy, an EU delegation is expected. ~~~~~~~~~~ Dr. Max Singer, writing for the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, today address the issue of victory for Israel that I had raised yesterday. We must face the fact, he says, that total victory is not possible because we are not prepared to totally occupy the Palestinians, as Japan was occupied after WWII, for long enough "to change their society into one that is ready to live in peace with Israel." And we cannot destroy the Palestinians. "Therefore after any war, Palestinian enemies will still be there seeking ways to attack Israel, and Israel will have to live with the continued existence of the Palestinians on our borders." But "temporary" victories are very possible — victories that can be critical: "Our basic task is to defeat each and every kind of attack that the Palestinians devise. Each of our victories will lead, some time later, to a new Palestinian attack which must be defeated in turn...we must go from victory to victory," until the day when the political situation changes. Dr. Singer concludes that the current victory against Hamas is one that "Israel can win because it must win, regardless of the cost. There is no substitute for this victory." What will this victory do for us? "It will demonstrate to everyone that Israel is still — or again — capable of doing whatever is required to win the battles it needs to win to protect the country. It will show what some have come to doubt, that we are prepared to take whatever casualties, and whatever international condemnation, that we have to take to achieve our military missions, and we will undertake whatever military mission is necessary to protect our country."
Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
SUPPORT FOR ISRAEL AND GET NEIGHBORHOOD BULLY TO NO. 1
Posted by Emma Shaw, January 4, 2009. |
|
Hi all.... I'm very sick and tired and the anti-Israel bias especially in the British media and have started to do a campaign to get Neighbourhood Bully to number one, as I hope it make a different on peoples ignorant attitudes towards Israel! Show your support for Israel and get Neighborhood Bully to No. 1
Kind Regards
|
|
"ALTERCATION." "LOOKING DOWN, SEEING UP"
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, January 3, 2009. |
|
|
Contact Fred Reifenberg by email at freify@netvision.net.il View
this art graphic and others at |
|
HAMAS'S MARCH TO VICTORY
Posted by Daisy Stern, January 3, 2009. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared January
1, 2009 in the Jerusalem Post at
This is the Glick column I told you about. I hope she is wrong but I'm sure she is not. |
|
George Orwell once quipped, "The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it." Since Tuesday it has become clear that the Olmert-Livni-Barak government has decided to end the war with Iran's Hamas proxy army in Gaza as quickly as possible. That is, the government has decided to lose the war. Most Israelis are unaware of this state of affairs. In an obvious attempt to bolster the popularity of Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak ahead of the February 10 general elections, the local media have spent the six days since the government launched Operation Cast Lead praising the government's competence and wisdom, and declaring victory over Hamas after every IAF sortie in Gaza. What the media have declined to notice is that the outcome of the war will not be determined by the number of Hamas buildings the IAF destroys. The outcome of this war — like the outcome of all wars — will be determined by one factor only: Which side will achieve the goals it set out for itself at the outset of the conflict and which side will concede its goals? Depressingly, the current machinations of the Olmert-Livni-Barak government demonstrate that when the fighting is over, Hamas and not Israel will be able to declare that it accomplished its goals. Hamas reinstated its attacks against southern Israel on December 19. It did so after a six-month hiatus that it used to restock its arsenals and strengthen its military forces. As it resumed its terror offensive against Israeli cities, Hamas announced that it will continue its current round of terror war until it wins full control over Gaza's land and sea borders. Israel, for its part, has been less clear in stating its operational goals. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Livni and Barak have said that the goal of Operation Cast Lead is to compel Hamas to end its attacks against Israel, but they haven't said how they intend to affect that outcome. They have rejected Hamas's demand for control over Gaza's land and sea borders and in turn demanded that Hamas end its weapons smuggling operations across the Egyptian border. Somewhat disconnectedly, the Olmert-Livni-Barak government has demanded that in the event it reaches some sort of mediated accord with Hamas, an international monitoring force must be deployed to Gaza to enforce its terms. Since Wednesday, this appears to have become Israel's main demand in relation to any mediated cease-fire talks with Hamas. As for cease-fire talks, as the IAF finds fewer and fewer targets to hit, those hypothetical talks have become the government's new focus. On Monday and Tuesday, Turkey, Egypt and the EU all began offering various truce arrangements between Israel and Hamas. On Tuesday, Israel opted to pursue the European track. On Thursday, Livni travelled to Paris to discuss it with French President Nicolas Sarkozy ahead of his trip to the region on Monday. Apparently the government's decision to go with Europe is based on aesthetics. The Europeans have been more polite to Israel than Turkey or Egypt have. But the fact is that there is little substantive difference between any of the cease-fire offers now being bandied about. Hamas, for its part, has accepted all of the proposals on the table, and this makes sense. The Europeans, the Egyptians and the Turks have all adopted Hamas's demand for control of its land and sea borders as a starting point. None has included any demands for Hamas to disarm, end its weapons trafficking or commit itself to a permanent cease-fire. In an apparent bow to Israel, the EU's draft that Livni is now negotiating also speaks of the EU's willingness to deploy monitoring forces to Gaza's borders with Israel and Egypt, and presumably to its coast. The EU foresees the deployment of monitors following the model developed by the EU monitors who were deployed at the Rafah terminal two months after Israel withdrew from the zone in September 2005, and who fled in June 2007 after Hamas took over Gaza. According to its draft cease-fire proposal, the EU has agreed to return European monitors to Rafah, and is "willing to examine the possibility of extending its assistance to other crossing points."
BEFORE THE Olmert-Livni-Barak government accepts the EU cease-fire, it is worth noting three strategic problems with what they are doing. Taken together and separately, all three will lead Israel to defeat in this confrontation with Hamas. The first problem with the EU proposal is that it takes for granted that all of Hamas's demands must be met in full. That is, Israel is beginning these negotiations from a point of weakness whereby it has already effectively accepted Hamas's demands and conceded its own. The second problem with the decision to accept EU mediation is that by doing so, the government is compelled to ignore and indeed justify the EU's underlying and deep-seated hostility toward Israel. The very fact that the EU accepted Hamas's demands from the outset demonstrates clearly that the EU cannot be an honest broker between the warring factions. Here it is important to recall just what Hamas is. Hamas is an illegal terrorist organization and an Iranian proxy that is conducting an illegal terror war against Israel. The EU is arguably committing a war crime by accepting Hamas as a legitimate side to a dispute. In turn, by accepting the EU as a legitimate interlocutor, Israel itself gives credence to the view that Hamas is a legitimate actor. On a practical level, by accepting the EU's authority to mediate under these conditions, Israel has effectively foregone from the outset any chance of achieving its own cease-fire demands. After all, to reach a cease-fire with Hamas that includes Israel's demands that Hamas end its weapons smuggling operations, forgo control over international borders and end its missile offensive against Israel, the EU would have to throw out the draft it just voted to accept. And it would have to reverse its political direction and abandon Hamas in favor of Israel. The chance that this will happen is quite close to zero. The third strategic failure inherent in Israel's decision to negotiate a truce is Israel's demand for an international monitoring force to verify compliance with the cease-fire agreement. This demand is self-defeating because such a force will only harm Israel's national interests. This is the clear lesson of both the EU's past monitoring mission at the Rafah terminal and of UNIFIL forces in southern Lebanon. In the case of the EU monitors at Rafah, as The Jerusalem Post recalled in an editorial on Wednesday, during the period when they were deployed at the terminal, the EU monitors turned a blind eye to the very terror traffic they were supposed to be preventing. At the same time, they condemned Israel for taking any action to defend itself and downplayed the threat Hamas constitutes for Israel. In short, the EU monitors sided with Hamas against Israel at every turn. In the case of UNIFIL forces in Lebanon, the situation is little different. UNIFIL routinely condemns the IAF for carrying out reconnaissance flights over Lebanon aimed at keeping tabs on Hizbullah arms smuggling operations that UNIFIL does nothing to prevent. They also demand that Israel surrender the town of Ghajar to Lebanon despite the fact that it is part of sovereign Israel. Beyond that, UNIFIL forces have sat back and allowed Hizbullah to rearm and reassert control over some 130 villages along the Israeli border. Far from enforcing the UN-mediated cease-fire, UNIFIL acts as a shield behind which Hizbullah prepares for its next round of war against Israel.
IN LIGHT of all of this, it is apparent that today the Olmert-Livni-Barak government is conducting cease-fire negotiations from a position of great weakness. It has accepted the mediation of a hostile interlocutor. And its primary demand in those negotiations is antithetical to the national interest. The fact of the matter is that negotiating with Hamas is a fool's game. There are only two ways for a state to impact its enemy's behavior. It can take away its desire to attack, or it can deny its enemy the ability to attack it. In the case at hand, Livni, Barak and Olmert claim that the IAF strikes against Hamas targets in Gaza have been so successful that the Islamist group is now compelled to reassess its desire to attack Israel, and that this is why it makes sense to negotiate a cease-fire today. But the facts on the ground do not back this assertion. By maintaining its demand for control over the borders, Hamas has made clear that it has not changed its calculations of its interests. And this makes sense. Israel's air attacks have not degraded Hamas's ability to maintain control over Gaza in any significant way. IAF attacks have only destroyed between five and 10 percent of Hamas's smuggling tunnels, and so Hamas can still restock its arsenals. The IAF has caused no significant damage to Hamas's 20,000-man army, which went to ground before the operation began. Hamas's military and political leaders are also all safely in hiding. Moreover, Israel's willingness to begin negotiations based on a draft that favors Hamas shows Hamas that far from losing this war, it is winning. So why would it reconsider its desire to attack Israel? In truth, given Hamas's commitment to Israel's destruction at all costs and its indifference to the lives of its Palestinian subjects, there is only one way for Israel to secure its territory from Hamas attack. It must destroy Hamas's ability to wage war. The only way Israel can achieve its aim is by conquering Gaza, overthrowing Hamas's regime and destroying its military forces. Since the Olmert-Livni-Barak government has already stated that it will not launch such an attack, it is obvious that Hamas will end this war with its ability to attack Israel more or less intact. All of this leads us to a very nasty conclusion. The Olmert-Livni-Barak government now leading Israel in its war against Hamas is no different from the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government that led Israel in the 2006 war against Hizbullah. Our leaders have learned nothing from their prior failure. Indeed they are reenacting it in Gaza today. The only thing the public can hope for, and indeed demand at this stage, is for Olmert, Livni and Barak to forego any ground operation in Gaza. There is no reason for our soldiers to place their lives in jeopardy in a campaign that the government that has already decided to lose. Contact Daisy Stern by email at daisystern1@gmail.com |
|
ISRAEL FINALLY FLEXES HER MUSCLES!
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, January 3, 2009. |
|
Who are we kidding? Even journalist Jackson Diehl, not exactly prone to display pro-Israeli sentiments, in an article entitled 'Gaza represents Olmert's final failure', published in the opinion section of the 12/30/2008 edition of the Newark Star Ledger, suggests Mahmoud Abbas, per the journalist's sources, like his mentor Yasser Arafat, when confronted with a "far-reaching Israeli offer" by Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, "well beyond what Israel agreed to at the Camp David talks of 2000",.... "refused to sign on to a compromise that the world would have hailed." Per Diehl, Olmert offered Abbas the equivalent of Israel's first born, namely a right of return of "thousands of Palestinian refugees" to the Jewish homeland "over a period of years" as well as dividing "Jerusalem between Israel and Palestine." It boggles the mind that Abbas would not jump on these, some might say, treasonous concessions, unless of course the double-dealing well dressed Arab smoothie, consistent with the mind-set of his mentor Arafat, has absolutely no intention of ever negotiating any sort of peace treaty with Israel. "Allah forbid peace with Israel' could very well be the under the radar mantra of this Holocaust revisionist, different in style but not substance to blatantly anti-Semitic anti-Israeli Hamas leaders; thus if truth be told even more dangerous. Since controlling forces in the Middle East refuse to bargain in good faith; since controlling forces within an international community, for the most part, ignore Israel's plight, tend to believe Arab spin doctors either for the sake of oil, out of stupidity, because of their anti-Semitic natures, or because they have come to disdain Israel's superpower ally America; since Israel must fight mentally and at times physically each and every day to survive and prosper; a coherent prescient strategy ought to be developed and scrupulously followed by her leaders to counteract all those negative forces. First and foremost, the treasonous concept of 'land for peace' should be trashed. Next, the terms occupier and settler should be replaced by landlord and Israeli citizen. All lands justifiably conquered, per world precedent, in 1967 by Israel as she thwarted Arab armies attempting to destroy her belong to Israel; period! Indeed, Israeli leaders should loudly declare that fact, putting the world on notice. Next, the concept of a Palestinian state within the boundaries of Jordan, land that rightly belongs to Israel per the disrespected Balfour Declaration, should be marketed worldwide in an effective manner. Israeli leaders must comprehend that if negotiating with the Arab world was fruitful, by now, after 60 years of intermittent attempts, before and after 1967, to create an environment where citizens of the tiny Jewish homeland, two tenths of one percent as large as her surrounding Muslim neighbors, could dwell in peace devoid of outside threats, a substantial breakthrough would have already occurred. Israel has always been a convenient scapegoat, cast in a most unfavorable light by Middle East Muslim autocrats to absorb the anger of their exploited masses otherwise directed at them. Israel has always been a convenient punching bag for leaders of terrorist organizations primarily to bolster their own status and maintain their positions of power. Furthermore, Israel, a nation whose scientists, engineers, writers, educators, and statesmen have contributed so much to mankind, receive little credit or indeed respect for their achievements, exemplified by the fact that British academics even proposed to boycott academics from Israel, a state they obviously loathe, a state perceived by them that abuses poor Palestinian waifs who if truth be told have little initiative, have contributed so little to the world, have collectively assumed no responsibility whatsoever for the wretched conditions they in fact choose to live in. Would Jews have latched on to the Scarlet 'R' for 60 years, dwelling in 'refugee' camps instead of improving their lots in life? Indeed, more Jews were booted out of Muslim nations then Arabs that left Israel when the Jewish State was founded, yet are any such Jews living in squalid refugee camps? Might the outer world recognize this obvious fact? In the dysfunctional Middle East, where military might i.e. shock and awe is tacitly respected even if verbally condemned, where willingness to compromise is viewed as weakness thus entices a predatory response, Israel's current substantive attacks on Gaza in order to neuter her mortal unyielding missile launching enemy Hamas is in fact the only logical response she could offer. It is quite notable to witness the lack of military support Hamas receives while it is pummeled by Israel, especially from other terrorist organizations such as Hizbullah. No matter what Hizbullah's Big Kahuna Hassan Nasrallah spews from his safe and secure Lebanese bunker, he apparently is not willing to risk his army on his muscle flexing Jewish neighbor, perhaps sensing that the term 'disproportionate response' no longer carries sway. Not that Arabs, not formally associated with terrorist organizations, living in territories of disputed sovereignty deserve the misery inflicted upon them by virtue of being in a war zone, but why did they not even protest the fact that Hamas militants, democratically elected to be in charge of their currently failed state, continued to shoot deadly rockets at innocent peaceful Israeli men, women, and children? Why did they not contemplate the consequences of an inevitable day of reckoning, surely aware of Israel's intrepid soldiers and technologically advanced weaponry? Why did they allow their democratically elected officials to set the stage for the pounding they would eventually receive? Populations with choices have responsibilities to resist or at least condemn inhumane, oppressive, as well as stupid governments. That is what democracy is supposed to be all about; unless of course, in this case the population of Gaza, for the most part, condones Hamas' missile launchings into Israel, in fact enjoys seeing innocent Jewish victims terrorized, maimed, or murdered. Then again, what indeed might we say about a population and kindred spirits that collectively danced in the streets after insane Arab hijackers inflicted so much pain and suffering on innocent United States citizens, residents, and visitors during the infamous 9/11 massacre? What indeed might we say about a population and kindred spirits that celebrated and honored one sorry excuse for a human being Lebanese terrorist Samir Quntar, bizarrely released from an Israeli prison, who among other acts of savagery shows no remorse for destroying a peaceful Jewish family, including bashing in the head of a four year old child? Jackson Diehl, not unlike other Western journalists, perhaps sincere in his belief that there is a peaceful solution to the so-called Israeli/Palestinian conflict, implicitly denounces in his article the "Jewish settlement movement in the West Bank" as well as asserting "Despite his bold intentions, Olmert proved unwilling or unable to stand up to (that movement)....failed to dismantle even those outposts it has repeatedly declared illegal." Implicit in Diehl's rhetoric is the notion that Jews should not reside within territories mostly populated by Arabs. Yet Arabs reside in core pre-1967 Israel, maintain their civil liberties as well as the right to observe their religious gospel, and even elect Arab legislators to represent them in the Israeli Knesset. Would a Jew ever be allowed to live as freely let alone similarly participate in any government within any Muslim nation? When elephants learn to fly I suppose. Again, this double standard for Jews does not raise eyebrows although it should. Might any journalist pose what should be an obvious question; why Jews cannot build homes on parcels of land bearing no title of ownership that happen to be located on lands of disputed sovereignty, say in Judea and Samaria; why such Jews should not be protected by local Arab authorities? In many developing nations, uninhabited parcels of land belonging to no particular owner may be inhabited by those willing to properly tend to that land. The United States Homestead Act of 1867 for one, consistent with Jordanian law, allowed citizens to farm untended land and eventually claim ownership. The bottom line is many if not most Arabs do not want Jews to live anywhere within the Middle East, including Israel! Indeed, they only wish that the Jewish Homeland of Israel would no longer exist. In such a hostile environment, ceding land for any peace treaty is worse than foolish, as Muslim extremists will not be quelled no matter what, and in fact will never allow Israel to peacefully coexist with Muslim nations within their envisioned neo-Ottoman Empire, the dream of each and every jihadist. Thus Israel must always assert herself, give not an inch, and do whatever it takes to insure her survival in this Middle East jungle. Until and unless an extreme epiphany takes hold worldwide, especially within this dysfunctional region, respecting Jewish culture, condemning intolerant violent Islam, there must be one mantra that resonates within the Jewish State of Israel; 'Always be strong, never let your guard down, give up no land, and always be wary of those that exhort you to compromise in any way those policies that are vital to the security of your nation.' Anything less would be a sellout to future generations of Israeli citizens. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at larose@snip.net |
|
FROM ISRAEL: WE'RE IN!
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 3, 2009. |
|
Motzei Shabbat (After Shabbat) Late this afternoon — in line with a Security Cabinet decision yesterday to expand our actions against Hamas — IDF ground operations began in Gaza. This followed a heavy artillery bombardment to soften things up. Large numbers of troops from the Infantry Corps, Engineering Corps and Armored Corps have entered at several points, accompanied by intelligence units, in the north of Gaza. (Reports are being received of three different fronts advancing.) Our troops have engaged with Hamas fighters already and it is believed that more than 30 Hamas people have been killed. As I write there have been no Israeli casualties. This is significant because there had been dire predictions of booby-trapped ground that awaited our troops entering on foot. Either those predictions were erroneous or the "softening up" we did with artillery took care of it. An IDF official has stated that, "For the time being, we are facing several hubs of resistance, yet we are not dealing with massive resistance." Tens of thousands of additional reservists have been called up, to be utilized as needed. At the moment, for whatever it means, there are no rockets being launched from Gaza. There are expectations that launchings may well start again and even intensify for a period. Our navy has established a blockade at sea, to prevent Hamas from being aided in that direction. ~~~~~~~~~~ Prime Minister Olmert has said, briefly, "The time has come for Israel to do what Israel must do." Defense Minister Ehud Barak gave a brief statement tonight in which he said, "it won't be easy, it won't be short." "We have been biting our lips for long enough, but now we must provide our citizens with what every citizen deserves — peace and quiet." All Barak said about the aim of the operation was that it was to hit Hamas and its infrastructure hard. We know that there was no specific goal of taking out Hamas enunciated in the Security Cabinet decision — because both Eli Yishai (Shas) and Haim Ramon (Kadima) abstained in protest of the fact that it was not. ~~~~~~~~~~ There has been a good deal of criticism of the "triumvirate" of Olmert, Barak and Livni for not being more explicit with regard to the goals of this operation. But at this point I am holding my peace. Two things seem possible to me: One, that they know exactly what they would like to do, but are being careful not to set a goal publicly that might not be met — which would bring the accusation that we had failed. And two, that they have tiered goals, so that how far we move towards more difficult goals depends on how successful we are with the first goals. For example (and this is just my example), perhaps we will try to substantially weaken Hamas, but if we find that goes well might eventually move on to take out Hamas. The goal here, besides weakening Hamas, is to declare victory over Hamas. There is a vast political, diplomatic, public relations element at work here — not just the military. If we fail to achieve what we said we would achieve, it's hard to claim that victory. If a fairly vague "hitting Hamas hard" is the stated goal, we're well on our way to achieving it. Barak is saying with a tone of assurance that we'll come out ahead this time. This is desperately important. ~~~~~~~~~~ I will make no comments here, no predictions, regarding what this operation will look like, or where it will lead our troops within Gaza. Will they enter Gaza City? Go south? Don't know. ~~~~~~~~~~ This seems like a good point to review our situation: Since we pulled out of Gaza in 2005 — an act that was supposed to bring peace to the area and an opportunity for the Palestinians to develop the region — more than 6,000 Kassam rockets, mortar shells (and, until recently, in only small numbers, Katyusha rockets), have been fired at us. In June 2006, terrorists associated with Hamas kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit. An IDF operation into Gaza at that time was not successful in rescuing him. Sderot and surrounding areas have been enduring attacks for a long time. Rockets were launched by Hamas even when the PA was in charge of Gaza, but the intensity of the attacks increased after Hamas took Gaza in June 2007. Since they took over, there have been more than 6,000 rocket launchings and mortar shell firings by Hamas and associated terrorists organizations. This past year, 2008, there were more than 3,200. In addition, during the period that Hamas has been in control in Gaza, it has been smuggling in from the Sinai vast quantities of weapons of increasing sophistication, as well as training troops to establish an army. From the time of the Israeli operation in June 2006, in response to the Shalit kidnapping, until this time, there have been only brief Israeli incursions inside Gaza or air actions, in response to particular rocket attacks. A weapons storage facility or a launching site would be taken out. This past June, Israel and Hamas arranged an informal period of quiet (know as a tadiyeh ). Understood as part of this agreement, during which Israel was committed to cease any actions inside of Gaza, was that Hamas would stop smuggling of weapons and engage in serious negotiations for the release of Shalit. Hamas failed to honor either of these stipulations, and in fact some rockets continued to be launched during the six months of ostensible quiet — but in lesser numbers. Ultimately, in December, it was Hamas that opted not to negotiate a renewal of the six month period of quiet. And it was Hamas that began to launch — or sanctioned the launching by related groups — of larger numbers of rockets, including, now, more of the sophisticated Grad Katyushas, with a great range and precision. At least 1 million Israelis are within a range of these rockets. No nation in the world can tolerate such a situation. Hamas is sworn to our destruction. ~~~~~~~~~~ And yet, in spite of this, there is opposition internationally to our operation. There are major demonstrations in various places. There are places in the world where Israel simply cannot be right. The ultimate irony — a very bitter irony — is something I saw cited on YNet: A demonstrator in the Netherlands called out, "Ann Frank is turning in her grave." Ann Frank would have been standing on a chair cheering us, for had there been an Israeli army in her day, she would not have died in a concentration camp. The point here is that we're never going the way of Ann Frank again, and that is what Hamas seeks. But this is not the whole picture: we are gratified for much support. Right now the White House is quiet. The head of the EU, the president of the Czech Republic, said via a spokesman that "from the perspective of the last days, we understand this step as a defensive, not offensive, action." At present, the UN efforts to require us to stop are stalemated, as the Arabs are still pushing a one-sided resolution that will not pass. ~~~~~~~~~~ While much of the world loves to cast us as heartless monsters, the fact is that our humanitarian stance is extraordinary. Who but us behaves in this careful fashion: On Thursday, when we were preparing to hit the home of Sheikh Nizr Rayyan, we placed a phone call to that home first, warning the family (which ultimately opted not to leave). Before our ground operation started today, leaflets were dropped advising civilians to move out of the way. Earlier this week, a Gazan boy with a serious head injury was rushed through into Israel and taken to Schneider Children's Medical Center in Petah Tikva. We had been scheduled to open the Kerem Shalem crossing tomorrow for movement of other wounded Gazans into Israel, but I will assume this has been co-opted by the ground operation. ~~~~~~~~~~ On Thursday, Col. Moshe Levi, commander of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA), flatly rejected Palestinian claims that there is a humanitarian crisis in Gaza: In the course of one week, we facilitated the passage into Gaza of more than 330 trucks carrying food, medical supplies and medicines, even as our south was being bombarded with missiles from Gaza. We also facilitated the transfer of 10 ambulances and 2,000 units of blood. On Friday, we allowed 300 Palestinians in Gaza who have citizenship elsewhere to come through into Israel. ~~~~~~~~~~ It is important to remember, as we begin the ground operation, that Hamas, totally oblivious to the welfare of its own people, uses those people as human shields, by storing weapons and launching attacks inside civilian population areas. Deaths of civilians that will result, in spite of major Israeli efforts to avoid them, will be on the head of Hamas. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
FIGHT FOR ISRAEL BY PARTICIPATING IN TALKBACKS
Posted by Daisy Stern, January 3, 2009. |
|
The IDF's working hard — ARE WE? The IDF is working hard, trying to pound the terrorists that took over the former Gush Katif. But we need to work hard, as well. We need to IMMEDIATELY change the tide of public opinion, otherwise, Israel's foolish politicians will keep right on going after the elections next month. These politicians, mostly graduates of the Oslo and Gush Katif fiascos, will go right ahead to set up a Palestinian state, and leave the Golan, after which, yes, there will be rockets not only in Beer-Sheva and Ashdod, but also in Jerusalem, Tel-Aviv, Ben-Gurion Airport and Haifa. So, this is an emergency http://the18.org/video.html. Can little people like us change public opinion? Yes we can. And we must. In the electronic age, even an individual can do a great deal — by adding "talkbacks" on Internet. .... TIPS on how to enter talkbacks efficiently: 1. Pick your favorite talkback above, and copy it into lots of different articles in lots of different sites! 2. After you add a talkback to one article, click on "home" (or similar) to get back to the home page, which will allow you to click on another article within the same site! 3. If you try to add a talkback and nothing happens, the site is probably overloaded (millions of people are using these news-sites). Try another website, or wait till later. 4. Try late at night — or early in the morning. The news sites might respond faster at those times. 5. If a particular article has more than 150 talkbacks already, just find another article. ... Contact Daisy Stern by email at daisystern1@gmail.com |
|
THE FOURTH (ISLAMIST) REICH IN AMERICA: "ATTACK" PROTESTERS ON THE MOVE
Posted by Sonia Nusenbaum, January 2, 2009. |
|
This below was written by Phyllis Chesler and is posted on
her website:
|
|
The war against Israel has gone global, not at the United Nations, (that's old and terrible trouble), but at a new, grassroots level. The goon squad demonstrations against Israel that are taking place on every continent are not composed of peaceful demonstrators. The hate-Israel and hate-America protesters are essentially attackers on the march who are spoiling for a hot verbal and even hotter physical confrontation with their opponents. They mean to empty the streets of anyone with views that differ from their own. Now, not only is Hamas launching an increasing number of rockets deeper into Israel but grassroots "attack" groups, organized by mosques, Muslim student and civil rights groups and by their left-wing allies, are on the march. They curse, they scream, their faces are contorted by rage, they make hand gestures which approximate "shooting" and "throat cutting." After praying together in public, which they often do, these protesters become even more inflamed and ready for mob action. How ironic, really, how tragic, that Islam, known as the religioun of peace, is dishonored in this way! Oh yes. And without shame, and with great pleasure, the protestors call Jews: pigs, apes, donkeys, vermin, and faggots. They hurl curses at their far more sedate opponents. They threaten to rape their opponent's mothers and visit a slow and painful death upon their opponents' wives and children. "Nuke Israel" screamed one young woman in hijab, over and over again in Ft. Lauderdale. "F — k you Jew" was also a favorite chant. I guess that wearing hijab does not necessarily make a woman modest or kind. By and large, the world media is watching Hamas's back and presenting the case for terrorism, not for democracy or the rule of law. The potential menace of these mobs has flown far below the mainstream media's radar as well. I began writing about this kind of unleashed Nazi-like "brownshirt" behavior in 2003-2004, right after I first encountered it when I lectured on campus. What was once contained on campus, has now taken to the streets. These demonstrators are clone-versions of the speakers and organizers of the International Solidarity Movement's annual conference, (a pro-Palestinian terrorist support group), but they are now on the march, no longer confined to a single campus; a version, perhaps, of an Islamist street mob, whipped into a frenzy by prayer, sermons, and televised propaganda that then surges out into the street, burns American and Israeli flags, kills Christian Arabs, Christian Africans, and Christian south Asians, but also lynches, rapes, and stones Muslim and Christian women to death. Thank God for small mercies: The Jewish women are mainly gone, exiled, the Muslim lands are essentially all "judenrein." But Israel is surrounded by enemies who think like this. As long as we allow hate sermons to flourish in mosques and hate speech to dominate both the campus and the public square in America — the closer we are to The Fourth (Islamist) Reich in America. This ugly reality has already come to parts of Europe. EUROPE In the last few days, loud, ugly, hate-fest marches against Israel have taken place all across Europe, from England to Germany to Greece. Hate demonstrators tried to storm the Israeli Embassy in London and mocked and abused a British police officer. Allow me to focus only on Belgium. In Antwerp, on December 30, 2008, the Arab European League organized an anti-Israel Intifada — but against Flemish Jews! First, they marched. Then, they "got completely out of hand." After the protest disbanded the demonstrators marched towards the Jewish neighborhood in Antwerp, clashing with the police, smashing car windows, trams and buses. The police had to seal the Jewish quarter up, beef up their forces, outrun and outwit the marchers who were intent on harming or killing Jews. To protest an alleged assault upon innocent civilians (each one hiding a Hamas operative intent upon launching rockets at innocent civilians in Israel), the Islamic-left mob assaults other innocent civilians in Antwerp. In any event, the Jews have been warned to avoid certain areas. According to Michael Freilich, of the Jewish newspaper Hodds Actueel, many Jews "don't dare anymore to go out on the streets in the area of the demonstrators. They fear vandalism and violence." Jews have been told to avoid the Diamond district and certain other areas. THE MIDDLE EAST AND ASIA Twenty thousand people formed mobs in at least three cities across Egypt to demonstrate against Israel; the demonstrators were mainly organized by the (banned) Muslim Brotherhood. Ten thousand Muslims marched against Israel in Indonesia. Some Iranian Jews, (there are about 30,000 still held captive by the maniacal mullahs), also demonstrated against the "Zionist" assault upon the Iranian-backed terrorist organization, Hamas. Demonstrations against Israel also took place in the Philippines. (I would have imagined demonstrations here would be against Saudi Arabia for torturing and indenturing their citizens who work in the Kingdom; I am such a dreamer). One placard in Melbourne, Australia read: "Stop the Subhuman Zionist Land grabbing Barbarian's Mass Murder in Occupied Palestine." (Hat tip for this to Pamela Gellar of Atlas Shrugged). SOUTH AMERICA Of course, of course: In Chavez's Venezuela, where else? The signs, in Spanish, describe what Israel is doing as a "massacre" and as "genocide." SOUTH PACIFIC AND NORTH AMERICA Anti-Israel demonstrations have taken place all across Canada and across the United States. I have previously written about such demonstrations in Boston, Ft. Lauderdale, New York City, San Francisco, and Los Angeles. I now have more information in about similar demonstrations in Dearborn, Michigan (there were at least 1,000 Muslims and their supporters against one lone Christian Zionist); Lexington, Kentucky (organized by CAIR, the Islamic Society of Central Kentucky, and the Kentucky Muslim Student Association); Minneapolis, Minnesota; Norfolk, Virginia; Phoenix, Arizona; and Tampa, Florida. More such hate-fest demonstrations are being planned for this weekend in New York City, (again), Boston, (again), Washington D.C., Christiansburg, Virginia, St. Petersburg, Florida, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Chicago, Illinois, Lawrence, Kansas, Minneapolis, Minnesota (again), Springfield, Missouri, Youngstown, Ohio, San Francisco, (again) and Seattle, Washington. What is important is what the signs are saying and what the hate-protestors are chanting. Pamela Gellar/Atlas has sent around some of the signs that will be used tomorrow in yet another protest against Israel which will start in the early afternoon on 42nd St in NYC. Every single sign is tantamount to a 'blood libel" against the Jewish people. The signs include: "Stop the Massacre — Boycott Israel;" "Stop Israeli War Crimes;" "Stop the Genocide;" "Yes We Can! Stop the Genocide in Gaza;" "Yes We Can! Stop US Military Aid to Israel;" "Zionism=Racism;" "Israel=Apartheid South Africa." Israel is committing no war crimes (only Hamas is), nor is Israel committing "massacres" or "genocide" in Gaza. Finally, Israel is not an apartheid state. What are the possible results of so many people taking to the streets, again and again, to show and chant Big Lies? With a little help from the media, it might indoctrinate even more people. It might also frighten and demoralize some Jews and some Israelis. It might also encourage the haters to exercise more ugly "muscle" in the public square. However, I doubt that such close-minded "haters" represent more than a small percent of Americans. There is still time to reach the non-haters in our country. In fact, these demonstrations may actually backfire. If enough democracy-minded Americans go out and take note that such haters are living amongst us, in our midst, they might begin to understand how Israelis might feel, day and night, surrounded by irrational and hostile forces that do not want to compromise or negotiate, but only to scream hatred and to launch homicide bombers and rockets against the objects of their excessive hatred. In turn, Americans may begin to ask themselves whether they want the "Arab street" and the "Arab mob" to really take over America. I have no problem with Muslims who live here and who want to assimilate into an "American" way of life and who choose to practice their religion privately and quietly. Please understand: I have been told, time and again, that these new hard-line Muslim leaders cannot and will not do this. They want America to become an Arab Middle Eastern country and they want to live here as if that is already the reality. Thus, I have a serious problem with mosques, universities, and international propaganda groups which indoctrinate and unleash such lynch-mob potential within their followers. Don't you? |
|
REVEALING SILENCE AT THE GAZA-EGYPT BORDER
Posted by Richard Landes, January 2, 2009. |
|
At about 1:10 on Sunday, December 28, 2008, the BBC anchor Peter Dobbie found out, along with his audience, that there were [1] 40 Egyptian ambulances ready to evacuate wounded, and lorries full of medical goods sent by Qatar to restock Gazan hospitals, waiting at the border crossing in Egypt. (According to another source there were also [2] 50 Egyptian doctors ready to go into the Strip to help.) Since Dobbie and his audience had heard the repeated complaint from the people in Gaza that the hospitals were overwhelmed by the injured and desperately lacking in supplies, one would have expected the border to be full of purposeful activity. Instead, nothing was happening. The [2] Gazan side lay silent. A real journalist, someone with a smell for revealing anomalies, would have immediately recognized this as an important story to follow up on. After all, Dobbie had not hesitated to interrupt and challenge Israeli spokesmen on precisely the issues at stake: the disproportion between Israeli-caused fatalities and Israeli-suffered fatalities, the inevitable suffering of innocent civilians when such a bombing campaign takes place in so densely populated an area. "The math doesn't work," said Dobbie, implying what commentators emphasized elsewhere — the "disproportionate use of force" the Israelis were employing. So here was a perfect issue with which to challenge Hamas spokesmen: If they were so distraught at the loss of life of their own people, why didn't they take care of them? What on earth would possess Hamas not to avail themselves of what they pleadingly told the world they so desperately needed? As the honest and courageous Egyptian blogger [3] Sandmonkey put it, "My head hurts." Alas, the BBC did nothing of the sort. The next six hours saw nothing but canned footage repeating Palestinian complaints, voiced not only by Hamas spokesmen and BBC reporters, but UN officials like Chris Gunning and human rights advocates, and, of course, [4] others in the Western MSM. Indeed, one might characterize the basic "frame" of the MSM Gaza story: Israeli Goliath creates Palestinian David humanitarian crisis. Four out of five stories tell this story in one way or another, including the interviews with Israeli officials asking them to justify their deed. (Ironically, that's about the ratio of Hamas men to civilian casualties in the first days.) Too bad. Had the BBC behaved like real journalists instead of parroting Palestinian narratives, they might have taken the "golden" (read excremental) thread that leads out of the labyrinth and straight to the "real story." That story, of course, is the dreadful Palestinian strategy, taken to new heights by Hamas in the early 21st century — play the victim card at any cost. In this case, create a genuine humanitarian crisis. Hamas initially [2] offered two reasons for not allowing the wounded out: 1) the roads were too dangerous to venture out on, and 2) they were composing a list of the wounded. Both of these are just the kind of lame excuse that, had they been voiced by Israeli spokesmen, the BBC interviewers would have jumped all over them. Israelis have targeted only military and government sites; no ambulances have been hit and the roads are full of cars bringing wounded (past cameras) to hospitals. As for making up a list of 600 wounded before evacuating any, surely you must be kidding. Then Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum, speaking to Khaled Abu Toameh, [5] denied the Egyptian allegation that Hamas was to blame, "claiming that many of the wounded rejected an Egyptian offer to receive medical treatment in Cairo in protest against Cairo's 'support' for the IDF operation. He accused the Egyptians of taking part in the 'siege' on the Gaza Strip by refusing to reopen the Rafah crossing." Hamas even delivered before the cameras a group of "family members" who claimed they refused to let their wounded go because of their anger at Egypt's behavior. On the contrary, as [6] Ma'an News Agency reported, Hamas would allow no passage of wounded until the border was completely open. More hollow claims. Gazans don't hesitate to accept medical aid from the Israelis, the people who in their minds actually inflict the wounds. So why not take Egyptian aid? And of the 600 wounded (according to Palestinian sources) all of them, suffering in a ludicrously crowded and understaffed hospital, refused to go to Egypt? Although the reasons are hollow, they do tell us about Hamas priorities, and the overwhelming message of this refusal is that helping their own civilians survive ranks very low on their scale, well below revenge and public relations concerns. Indeed, as with Israel, so with Egypt: they hold their people hostage to maximalist demands. Some say Hamas doesn't care about their people. The evidence suggests far worse. They [7] actively seek the victimization of their own people. Indeed, the enormous resources they have expended on the constant, if largely ineffective, barrage of rockets on Israeli civilians is actually quite staggering. Not only have they lavished much of their meager resources to this vicious and gratuitous activity, but, as a result of those attacks, guaranteed that their borders would be closed and their people would continue to suffer — hostages to their hatred. Thus, the phony excuses offered for the border snafu disguise something far more sinister: [8] Hamas wants the crisis; they want civilians dying dramatically in wretched hospitals. On the face of it, it seems absurd that a government would actively victimize its own people. What advantage in making an already miserable people suffer even more? There are two major explanations here. First, Hamas, like many other Palestinian groups, is addicted to violence against Israel. Anything they can do, no matter how small, to make Israelis suffer, they will do, whatever the cost. As the Israeli satirical program, Eretz Nehederet (like Saturday Night Live) had Hamas leader [9] al-Zahar explain to Ehud Barak, "Kassams are like cigarettes ... you can't just quit all at once." Thus, they have spent virtually all their resources on smuggling and firing weapons while their people suffer their government's neglect and Israeli retaliatory blockades. But the second explanation is far more disturbing, because it involves the media. Hamas only gains a real advantage to having Palestinians suffer if they, who do so much to inflict that suffering, can blame it on Israel. It would be absurd for Hamas to stand in front of the world and say, "Look at how much we make our own people suffer; join us in hating Israel." So the game is intensely hypocritical. It depends on getting public opinion, both in the Arab-Muslim world and in the West, to accept a scapegoating narrative — the [10] Palestinian Guernica — that deflects responsibility. And the pathetic thing is that it works. In the Arab world gory images of dead and wounded play round the clock, inciting furious demonstrations. But, alas, it also works in the West. And it works primarily because of the behavior of the Western media, who systematically frame the conflict in terms of the Israeli Goliath and the Palestinian David, who do not hesitate to challenge Israeli spokesmen, interrupt them, contradict them — but who fail to do anything of the sort with their Arab interlocutors. Thus, for hours and days after the story of idling ambulances first broke, BBC never mentioned it. On the contrary, they continued to run footage of complaints from Gaza about the terrible condition of the hospitals and calls for international intervention to save the poor people of Gaza. This enables the worst kind of hypocrisy, of demopathic behavior — accuse others of violations of a humanitarian code which you flout, not only with your enemies, but [11] with your own people. The next day, when Christian Fraser finally got some more airtime again, the border was open even if sluggish. No mention of the earlier, revealing incident ensued. Kristy Lang, the anchor, begins with a leading question that does not allow for much elucidation: KL: "I'm with BBC correspondent Christian Fraser who's at the Rafah crossing between Egypt and Gaza. This, just to remind you, this is a crossing that has been closed for the last few days. They are letting some people through, isn't that right Christian?" Meanwhile, the headliner at the bottom of the screen reads: "Palestinian medical officials: 10 killed in latest attacks. ... Palestinian medics say 360 people have died. ... UN says 62 women and children killed." Nor is this kind of discreet silence passed over Hamas behavior restricted to the Beeb. CNN didn't even mention the story, despite their anchors citing material from the wire services, where all the major ones covered it. Similarly, when a young girl described waking up in bed next to her dead sisters and then [12] blamed it on Hamas — "Hamas is the cause, in the first place, of all wars" — ABC ran the footage [13] without including the final, devastating comment. Why? Because it didn't make sense to them? Because it violated the "grand narrative" and would only confuse the public? The moral irony here is almost unbearable. While Hamas systematically and deliberately victimizes its people in order to court Western support in outrage at the suffering of her people, the media get indignant about how Israel makes the Palestinians suffer. The very values that underlie the media's rebuke — the value of human life — are values that Israel and the Western media share and Hamas has contempt for. And in so doing, they make Hamas' revolting calculus of inflicting suffering on their own people pay off. And in so doing, [14] the media not only enable the greatest victimizers of the Palestinians; they also fuel the hate and rage that increasingly fills the streets not only of the Arab and Muslim world, but the West as well, [15] even among Jews. To take a typical example of someone whose outrage disproportionately exceeds his understanding, take [16] Chris Hedges' latest: Can anyone who is following the Israeli air attacks on Gaza — the buildings blown to rubble, the children killed on their way to school, the long rows of mutilated corpses, the wailing mothers and wives, the crowds of terrified Palestinians not knowing where to flee, the hospitals so overburdened and out of supplies they cannot treat the wounded, and our studied, callous indifference to this widespread human suffering — wonder why we are hated? Are they fools or knaves? Or are they knaves for being such fools? URLs in this post: [1] 40 Egyptian ambulances:
[2] 50 Egyptian doctors ready to go:
[3] Sandmonkey put it:
[4] others in the Western MSM:
[5] denied the Egyptian allegation:
[6] Ma'an News Agency reported:
[7] actively seek the victimization of their own people:
[8] Hamas wants the crisis:
[9] al-Zahar explain to Ehud Barak:
[10] Palestinian Guernica:
[11] with your own people:
[12] blamed it on Hamas: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fLIdxF-GHWw [13] without including the final:
[14] the media not only enable the greatest victimizers of the
Palestinians:
[15] even among Jews:
[16] Chris Hedges' latest:
This article appeared in Pajamas Media: (http://pajamasmedia.com)
and is archived at
|
|
ISRAELI LEAFLETS URGING GAZANS TO COOPERATE
Elder Of Ziyon, January 2, 2009. |
| This is a news item from Ma'an. |
|
Israeli airplanes dropped leaflets calling for Gazans to inform the Israeli military of the whereabouts of projectile launchers in return for aid and assistance. The papers were found by the thousands all over Gaza Friday morning, and bear the signature of the Israeli military forces. The leaflet reads: Dear people of the Gaza Strip, The line that Ma'an translates as "The future of the massacre is in your hands" seems wrong; the autotranslation from Firas Press is "With a tragedy has become a present to you" which sounds to me that the real translation is more like "You have the opportunity to be part of the solution to this tragedy." As we have seen, the intelligence from Gaza has been very effective — reports indicate that Israel only destroyed weapons smuggling tunnels and not the ones that were used for consumer goods, and the videos of the air strikes on mosques showed secondary explosions that proved that they were stockpiling weapons, for example. There are plenty of Gazans who do not want to live under Hamas rule. This article is archived at
|
|
OPERATION CAST LEAD: THE WINDS OF WAR — DAY SEVEN
Posted by Ari Bussel, January 2, 2009. |
|
There comes a moment in one's life that is a defining moment. It changes a person forever. Time is measured by that moment: what was before and what came after. Much of Israel is not feeling a sense of "war" yet. Technically Operation Cast Lead cannot be considered war since Gaza is not a foreign country and Hamas is a terror organization. Anyone outside a 26 mile radius of the Gaza strip, may not be comprehending the feeling that a missile can explode any minute, that one cannot go anywhere without thinking where is the nearest shelter and where are one's kids at this — at every — moment. In comparison, those inside the war zone are now well versed in the language of the war that was forced upon them. Israel is at war simultaneously in several fronts: Hamas in Gaza; the Home Front in the ever-expanding radius around Gaza (currently 26 miles); the Fifth Column of Israeli Arabs, now acting like the Islamists in Europe; and the world public opinion in the Public Diplomacy Front. In all fronts, the enemies are aided and abated by Jews and Israelis. In all fronts — we lose. Hamas needs to do nothing more than continue what it does now with little or no effort:
The world is fighting unabashedly on behalf of Hamas, with fierce determination. Israeli Arabs are holding violent demonstrations, trying to excuse the ever increasing violence as the youthful indiscretions. Israelis — a fringe of the political left — are doing all they can to destroy Israel from within. Early this morning I took the bus to Sderot where I spent the day. The feeling was of a deserted city of its regular inhabitants. Young volunteers wearing white shirts distributing presents to the residents, female soldiers from the Home Front Command distributing Israeli flags, Fire and Rescue Service personnel, police, military, numerous others — none from Sderot. Foreign journalists came in hoards as well, one even asking with some disgust: Are we in any imminent danger? "No," I replied, we came shopping for Chala-bread for Shabbat. The picture is surreal. On the bus to Beer Sheva, I was the one passenger who went off in Sderot. Other than one soldier and two others, the bus was empty. The bus station made of cement, also acts as a shelter. You start looking at these things, the next COLOR RED siren can be announced any second. You have exactly 15 seconds to take cover. In the city of Ashkelon 30 seconds, in the port city of Ashdod 45 seconds, in Beer Sheva 60 seconds. Mal functions are possible, so never take a chance — it is a life and death situation. Interestingly, I realize in retrospect that I have seen no children in Sderot today, only adults. The locals have lived through this hell for eight years. We come, take a glimpse into their lives, say how horrible it must be, take some pictures and we rush to leave as soon as the purpose for which we came had been accomplished. Many come for photo-ops, others to interview a family whose house was hit, yet others to see what is Israel doing, not so much interested in the ongoing plight of the residents but how can they twist anything they see to Hamas's advantage. Earlier today Hamas came out in a statement to the foreign press that Israel is preventing the transfer of humanitarian aid to Gaza. Over the last few days, Israel has transferred all aid sent by international organizations. On Monday, 23 trucks with food, medicines and medical supplies were transferred via Kerem Shalom Crossing into Gaza. On Tueday 63 trucks and five ambulances, on Wednesday 93 trucks and the same on Thursday. There is so much aid that the receiving organizations have declined any further aid at the moment — the warehouses are over flowing. While we had to take cover, running to the nearest shelter, Gazans are given advance warning by the IDF. Surrealism at its best. The IDF gives ample opportunity to vacate buildings that are about to be hit. A telephone call from the IDF is received telling one that the building will be hit in a few minutes since there is an explosive lab or an ammunition cache or a terrorist in hiding. Sure enough, the building is bombarded and hit. Where else does an army warn its enemy of an incoming strike to avoid any unnecessary innocent casualties? Where else would human beings use hospitals and mosques as operation centers, hiding places, and warehouses for explosives, ammunition and advanced weaponry? Many Gazans are indeed involuntary participants: They do not agree with Hamas, yet if they object they will be shot as traitors and if they cooperate they become human shields. Hamas wins either way — human life has no consequence to it — neither the lives of its enemy nor the lives of its own people. The situation is reminiscent of a chess player playing solitarily. All moves must be considered. First one needs to take care of one's own, then one needs to take care of the enemy, since the enemy does not care about its own (unless in their death, sorrow and misery they can be made to reflect badly on Israel). Minister Avi Dichter stated: "All countries should open their eyes and see very carefully what is really happening. If Israel will not block Hamas and Hizbollah who serve the interests of Iran, they will face a very tough problem in the years ahead." He added, "Israel knows very well how to go forward with both air strikes and ground operations." Minister Dichter's statement is not much different than Senator McCain's: Israel is the canary in the coal mine. We went on a "hill" overlooking the area. We saw the power plant in Ashkelon supplying some of the electricity to Gaza, a constant target of the racketeers (rocket-eers); the area that used to be green houses employing Arabs and exporting fruits, vegetables and flowers from the desert, now terrorist training camps and launching areas to rockets; a black and white kitten eating oblivious to anything happening around it; protection structures built around public schools now empty; houses which were once occupied and are now a mere shadow of yesteryears; and an inner strength of those of suffered for eight years but stayed and the urge to run away by those of us who only came to spend a few hours. When one says "no sane country would have allowed it unto its citizens," one must wonder how to make the world understand that Israel's Operation Cast Lead is justified, is the only resort it was given, and must be continued to its conclusion. We must not give up. We must not give in. We must continue our fight. It is just. It is the only route open, and the exit game is simple: Give such a blow to the enemy it will not dare ever again fire at children and women — on our side or its own side. Hit the enemy so that he will know that talk is cheap and actions have a price. Levy such a hefty toll on the enemy it will remember, for decades to come, that good will always prevail. Hiroshima and Nagasaki will forever remind us what was required when war was taken onto the shores of the United States of America. Six million Jews remind us the price we had to pay before good was allowed to re-emerge from ashes — what a horrible price. Hamas, Hizbollah and the enemy from within beware. Iran pay attention and listen. You continue hitting Israel, extracting a toll that seems to go unnoticed. Israel pays, the world condemns Israel but it comprehends that the evil must be stopped from spreading unchecked. You will be eradicated, whatever the cost. Israel will eventually find the inner strength to wake up and roar, and that roar will wake us all up, returning world order to a balance — with the sun out in the middle of the day and the moon at night. In the meantime, residents and forced visitors to Sderot, have a safe night and a blessed Shabbat; soldiers awaiting in their tanks and airplanes — may God keep you safe and ready. Contact Ari Bussel at aribussel@gmail.com and visit his blogsite: web.me.com/bussel, where you can read other essays on Operation Cast Lead. |
|
ISRAEL SHAKES UP THE INFORMATION WAR
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 2, 2009. |
|
This was written by Andrew Ian Dodge and it was posted yesterday. |
|
December 29, 2008, might go down in history as one of the days the mainstream media truly started to lose their grip. It was an historic day online for both social media and citizen journalists. You won't hear about it from the mainstream media, of course, because they are probably rather peeved at the run around them directly to bloggers and social media commentators. What was this earth-shattering occurrence you probably didn't hear of, unless you are interested in the subject involved? Well, in fact it was two events that were part of a campaign to sidestep the mainstream media. The Israeli government and military, mindful that they are not getting a fair shake in the press virtually anywhere in the world, set up a couple of things to get to the bloggers and other online types. First of all, Monday afternoon saw the Israeli consulate in New York hold a press conference on Twitter on their own "hashtag" stream for anyone to read and listen to. It's called simply [1] AskIsrael (http://search.twitter.com/search?q=AskIsrael).. What was more impressive is that they were taking questions for those "listening in." In fact, your author managed to get a question answered on the subject of the current situation in Gaza. Alas, they didn't get my name right in response, but it's early days of the technology for all. To their credit they took all comers, no matter how irate and obviously viscerally biased against them. The discussion, as you might imagine, was heated. It was a fascinating piece of online news gathering for me and the thousands of others who followed its process. The unfiltered nature of the event might have changed a few minds or caused a few people to consider their positions and consider how those positions were arrived at. At the same time the Israeli Defense Forces launched [2] its own channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/idfnadesk) on YouTube to display their view of events on the ground. Aping the Americans and British in Iraq and Afghanistan, we had missile and gun views of the targets they were going after. Several sites, when they discovered this, went off the handle and declared it too "disgusting," amongst other things. YouTube, to their shame, has limited the viewing of the site. You have to confirm your age to view the site and the videos thereon. This is most interesting, as I have never had to enter my age to watch a jihad video of coalition troops being killed or some imam spewing hate against Jews. But we expect this sort of double standard from many of the giants of the computer age. I suspect Twitter got loads of complaints from the usual suspects about the Twittercast by the Israelis yesterday. Thankfully they stuck to their aim of free and open discourse. Whether this remains if the Israelis try to do it again is open to question. On the basis of the success of the engagement with Twitter users, Israel has added all their various embassies and consulates in the U.S. to Twitter. This is quite an interesting development for a country that does not get its fair shake in the media anywhere in the world. Now Israel can go directly to bloggers and other social media users to make their case without the biased filtering that takes place in all but a few outlets in the mainstream media. It is clear that this will be the future for many organizations tired of being misrepresented in the press and of prejudiced members of the media always doing them down. Not the final death blow of the mainstream media, for sure, but it would quite likely send a shiver down a few spines of journalists already worried for their future in this economic situation if they were smart enough to notice.  URLs in this post: [1] AskIsrael: http://search.twitter.com/search?q=AskIsrael
Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
ON THE OTHER SIDE FROM CIVILISATION
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 2, 2009. |
|
This was written by Melanie Phillips
|
|
When Ed Husain famously renounced Islamism [see his article "How a
British jihadi saw the light", TimesOnLine, 21 April 2007, I was wrong. With first this press release from the Quilliam Foundation soon after the start of the current Israeli operation in Gaza, and now his poisonous piece on the Guardian's Comment is Free today, Ed Husain has shown that in the great battle to defend civilisation against barbarism he is on the wrong side. Disgustingly, he draws a moral equivalence between Palestinian human bomb attacks and Israel's operation in Gaza, which he calls Israel's massacre of innocent Palestinians But this is totally untrue. The vast majority of Gazans who have been killed were Hamas terrorists. According to today's UN figures, 364 have been killed of whom only 62 were civilians. Israel has been targeting only the Hamas infrastructure and its terror-masters, as detailed here. While some civilian casualties are unfortunately inevitable, Israel is clearly attempting to minimise them. It is Hamas which deliberately targets Israeli civilians when it fires its rockets and detonates its human bombs specifically at Israeli civilian targets. It is Hamas which deliberately turns its own civilians into targets by siting its rockets and other military equipment under apartment blocks and in centres of densely crowded population. Hamas tries to kill as many Israeli innocents as possible; Israel's military operation is conducted solely to defend its people against such attack and is designed to minimise the loss of civilian life in Gaza. To draw an equivalence between the two is obscene. Ed Husain argues that this war will strengthen Hamas in Gaza and radicalise yet more Muslims. It is surely rather more likely that many Palestinians, who have themselves been terrorised by Hamas, will blame Hamas for the current situation, just as Fatah and Egypt have done. Moreover, since any measure Israel takes to defend itself against mass murder — and for that matter, any and every military action in defence of the west by Britain or America — is used to radicalise Muslims, he is in effect saying that Israel should never take any military action to defend itself, even after being attacked by 5000 rockets in three years. Indeed, since the very existence of Israel is used to radicalise Muslims, it also implies that Israel should cease to exist at all. Which is implicitly to endorse a second genocide of the Jews. But then Ed Husain comes perilously close to doing just that in this article. Having declared I've spoken out in support of Israel's right to exist — big deal! — he vitiates even this by saying he is now having second thoughts: "But Israel's cold, politically timed killing of more than 300 Palestinians makes me, and millions more, rethink our attitude towards Israel." 'Cold politically timed killings'? But Israel only launched this offensive because — as Mahmoud Abbas has said — Hamas ended its 'truce' and started lobbing dozens of rockets at Israel. And the fact that he can even apparently entertain the idea that Israel might no longer have 'the right to exist' puts him outside the moral pale altogether. Does he say China has no right to exist on account of Tibet? Syria on account of the thousands it killed in Hama in one weekend in 1982? Iran on account of its barbaric killings of women, gays and political dissidents? No, of course not — only Israel. He goes on: Israel's calculated killing and attempts at deception cannot be overlooked. How can the children of Holocaust survivors become such brutal killers? And during the Sabbath? This takes the blood libel onto another plane still. The implication that the victims of brutal killing have themselves become brutal killers — when all they are doing is trying to prevent another Holocaust, explicitly threatened in the foundational charter of the people against whose genocidal onslaught Israel is merely defending itself — is unconscionable. And the dig at Jewish religious practice is as ignorant as it is gratuitous. Wars of self-defence, as this one is, to save innocent lives threatened by murderous aggression, take precedence in Judaism over sabbath observance. How telling that Ed Husain, ostensibly condemning Israel over the conduct of a war, cannot resist having a sly poke at Judaism itself. Then there's his lamentable historical illiteracy. He writes: I've sat in homes of poor, hospitable Palestinians who still yearn to return to their homeland, taken by force from them in the turmoil after Britain hurriedly left Palestine in 1948...At schools across the Arab world children are taught about the Balfour Declaration of 1917 and the Sykes-Picot agreement of 1916. Here in Britain, we might want to forget this imperial past, but ask any Arab and they will reel off these dates and confirm Britain's involvement in creating Israel. As a country, we have a moral duty to right our historical wrongs. We helped create Israel. We must now help create a Palestine. For goodness sake! To repeat for the nth time: Israel was never the Palestinians' 'homeland'. It was never taken from them 'by force'. On the contrary, they tried to take the Jews' homeland from them by force — and are still trying. It was the Jews alone for whom historically 'Palestine' was ever their national homeland. On account of that history and the inalienable right to the land that it conferred, Britain was given a mandate to re-establish that national home and establish accordingly 'close settlement' of the Jews within the whole of Palestine — which included what is now Israel, the West Bank and Gaza. To appease Arab violence, the Arabs who lived there were offered their own state around the areas where they were concentrated. But they refused and, backed by neighbouring Arab states, went to war to destroy at birth the Jewish state established by the UN under international law — a war that has continued uninterrupted to this day. There is only one way to de-radicalise people who are being brainwashed by murderous lies, and that is to tell them the truth. If Ed Husain were really interested in de-radicalising Britain's Muslims, he would tell them that they have been fed a diet of incendiary lies and blood libels about Israel and the Jews, and that justice demands they are taught instead the truth. But instead, he has now adopted the very narrative and rhetoric that are driving Muslims to mass murder. The issue of Israel sits at the very apex of the fight to defend civilisation. Those who wish to destroy western civilisation need to destroy the Jews, whose moral precepts formed its foundation stones. The deranged hatred of the Jews lies at the core of the Islamists' hatred of America, the 'infidel' west and modernity, and is the reason why they wish to destroy Israel. Unless people in the west understand that Israel's fight is their own fight, they will be on the wrong side of the war to defend not just the west but civilisation in general. The British government has invested huge hopes in Ed Husain as an attractive and plausible antidote to Islamist extremism in Britain. But how can anyone now believe anything he has ever said when he promulgates such a gross libel as the canard of Israel's 'massacre' of hundreds of 'innocent' Gazans? How can the government believe that Ed Husain will de-radicalise British Muslims when through articles such as this one he is inciting them to yet more hatred of Israel, the west's forward salient against Islamist aggression? Of course, his arguments are — tragically, appallingly — replicated in large measure amongst the British intelligentsia, media and indeed members of the government itself and the broad political class. Indeed, this is a far, far wider problem than one not-so-reformed-after-all Islamic extremist. It is a profound moral corruption that has infected the British body politic. The fact that so many among Britain's educated class think like this means that they too are on the wrong side in the great battle to defend civilisation. And it's not just Israel that in their moral confusion they are thus preparing to throw to the Islamist wolves. It is their own society too. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
HAS ISRAEL GONE TOO FAR?
Posted by C.A. Fulghum, January 2, 2009. |
|
I would like to confirm my support for Israel and the eloquent way in which Gary Bauer expresses the same. This appeared on Jan Markel's Olive Tree Ministries website (jan@olvetreeviews.org). Gary Bauer is the president of American Values. Contact him at gary.bauer@mail.amvalues.org. And visit the website: http://www.ouramericanvalues.org Jan Markell write: "We are in agreement with Gary Bauer and this ministry asks that readers continue to pray for a besieged Israel facing worldwide condemnation. She faces elections in mid-February." |
|
To judge by much of the world's response to Israel's actions since being besieged by Hamas rocket attacks is to answer in the affirmative. But while much of the media and political Left continue to present the radical Islamists as "David" and Israel as "Goliath," a closer look shows that Israel waited as long as it could before responding to an enemy whose sole reason to exist is to ensure that the Jewish State won't. For months, Hamas thugs in Gaza have fired missiles and mortars into southern Israel, subjecting hundreds of thousands of Israelis to a campaign of 24-hour terror. This was done in clear violation of an Egyptian-negotiated cease-fire to which Hamas had agreed. Hamas ended the truce even against the wishes of some Muslim heads of state. Then after pounding Israel for a week, and after Israel warned it would respond, Hamas did nothing but continue bombing, targeting civilian centers across southern Israel. So while the world collectively yawned during months of Hamas attacks against Israel, when Israel did what any sovereign nation would do under the same circumstances — striking back at those responsible for the aggression — it was met with a chorus of condemnation. The American Left is planning to hold "Gaza solidarity" rallies today in 26 states; thousands demonstrated in Washington D.C.; protestors met outside the Israeli embassy in London; and 2,000 Germans demonstrated against Israel in Berlin. The Israel-bashers argue that, since most rockets and mortars fired by Hamas into Israel have missed their targets, Israel should not respond effectively. But under international law, any nation can respond at a level sufficient to meet the threat. Hamas rocket attacks are destroying normal life and have made daily routines impossible for countless Israelis whose children cannot go to school. Israel has every legal and moral right to demolish the terror infrastructure that supports the daily rocket attacks on its people. Of course, we've seen this movie before. The same scenario has been played out numerous times. In August 2005, Israel spent billions of dollars relocating thousands of its own citizens from settlements in Gaza, only for that act of beneficence to be interpreted by Hamas as validation of their brutal terrorism. Gaza was transformed into, in Benyamin Netanyahu's words, "a huge base for terror." In February 2007, Hamas used Gaza to launch thousands of rockets that hit civilians in Ashkelon. And, just as night follows day, each time Israel responds with force, it is condemned for its "disproportionate response." This time around, more than 300 Palestinians have been killed, against four Israelis. But here's why. Gaza is one of the most densely populated areas of the world, and Hamas is infamous for hiding among its constituents, using them as human shields. Weapons are being stored in mosques. The only university in Gaza has turned its labs over to the terrorists, who are using them to make bombs and mortars. These cowards intentionally set up their bases near schools and hospitals to maximize the number of casualties to gain sympathy in the media. Gaza is hell, but not because of Israel. Its conditions are unbearable because its people elected Hamas — an organization with no economic plan, no educational ideas, nothing to offer at all except to kill the Jews, kill the infidel and destroy Israel. Gaza, in recent years, has been turned into "Gazastan," an Islamic republic that educates its own children to seek death in martyrdom operations. Gaza TV airs children's shows that teach six and seven year-olds to kill Jews. The Gaza government just instituted a new legal code based on Sharia Islamic law that permits crucifixion for certain crimes against Islam. Hamas exists to wreak havoc and destroy Israel. And it has acted accordingly since its inception. Between 2000 and 2004, Hamas was responsible for the deaths of 400 Israelis, according to the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Hamas charter states that "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." And, "[t]here is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors." Hamas also is a proxy of Iran, whose president denies the Holocaust and vows to "wipe Israel off the map." Tuesday, Israel rejected international pressure to end air strikes against Hamas, which continues to hit Israeli civilian centers across Southern Israel. Though the number of Israeli casualties may be small, Hamas doesn't really mind if its missiles fail to hit their targets. As long as Israel hits its targets, and as a consequence more Palestinian civilians are killed, Hamas is content, because images of dead Palestinians helps Hamas in the eyes of its real target, public opinion. The New Year will bring nothing new to Gaza so long as Hamas is allowed to perpetuate the same old vicious cycle of provocation, reprisal and international outrage against Israel. Contact C.A. Fulghum lives in Pinehurst North Carolina. Contact him at chasful@gmail.com |
|
DISPROPORTIONATE, HUH?
Posted by Barbara Taverna, January 2, 2009. |
|
This is by Ruth S. King, a freelance writer who writes a
monthly column in OUTPOST, the publication of Americans for a Safe
Israel (AFSI). This article appeared today in Family Security Matters (FSM).
|
|
First of all, what is the definition of proportion before we call something disproportionate? Well, the dictionary says it is comparative relation between things and magnitude as to size, quantity, number and extent. So what is disproportionate? Again, the dictionary: "out of proportion as in size and number." Second: Indulge me. The Jewish population of the world is now about 12,000,000 after losing one third of the world's Jews in the Holocaust. Jews are truly disproportionate in their contribution to science, culture, the arts, theater, entertainment, technology, philanthropy, and social institutions. Don't believe me? Just go to the operas, concerts, hospitals, museums and research institutions throughout the United States even in areas with a tiny Jewish population. Okay, I hear you. They are also disproportionate among financial crooks and disproportionate in the grief and opprobrium that these scoundrels elicit from their coreligionists. Trust me. They don't hate Kenneth Lay or Vladimir Putin as much as they hate Bernard Madoff. Third: The Jewish people, with the sole exception of India, have created the only post colonial democracy in the world in a sliver of land that is disproportionately small and resource poor in comparison to the Muslim Arab world surrounding them and panting for a Jihad against them. There are disproportionately more institutions in Israel and among Jews concerned with the rights of the Arabs then there are throughout the Arab/Muslim world. And, there are no — repeat, no — institutions among Arab nations which support any Jewish or Christian grievances. Fourth: The United Nations should change its name to the United Islamic and Dhimmi Nations, since it is disproportionately populated by Muslim Nations and their European acolytes whose anti-Israel resolutions are disproportionately numerous compared to any against Sudan or Rwanda or Somalia....the real perpetrators of atrocities. Fifth: There are a disproportionate number of so called Palestinian refugees who still squat in Arab perpetrated squalor camps and receive a disproportionate amount of help from UNRWA and the disproportionate number of UN organizations dedicated to perpetuating their misery as a tool in the utterly disproportionate global bashing of Israel. Since the advent of those refugee camps, now five generations old, hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of refugees have been relocated throughout the world where they have learned new languages, new mores, new customs and forged new lives. But these so-called refugees get a disproportionate amount of international concern. Sixth: Israel has been truly disproportionate in territorial concessions in its quest for peace. As a result of the Camp David Accords, 92% of the territories acquired in the war of 1967 were returned when Israel surrendered the Sinai Peninsula, the locus of a disproportionate number of terrorist acts against Israel before 1967. Egypt has obliged by permitting a disproportionate number of sermons, school books, and government controlled media cartoons and editorials libeling and threatening Israel and world Jewry. Seventh: Do you remember the assassination of Theo Van Gogh in Holland in 2002 because he made a "controversial film depicting Islam?" Or what about the murderous rampages throughout the Muslim "street" elicited by 12 cartoons deemed to be offensive to the Prophet, published in a Danish newspaper? Reactions started with public demonstrations and escalated to violence throughout the world; fires set to American flags in the Arab "street;" fires set in Danish embassies in Syria, Lebanon and Iran: storming European buildings; marches in Pakistan and Indonesia and throughout the Moslem world which incidentally included many placards of crude threats to Israel and the United States; and from Gaza the Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar a call for death to the infidels. The violence resulted in hundreds injured and at least an equal number dead. Hmmm. That all sounds a tad disproportionate. Eighth : In February 2005 Ariel Sharon offered the release of 900 Arab prisoners in exchange for some promises from Abbas. In June of 2006 Israel released 429 Arab prisoners in exchange for some more promises. In July of 2007, Israel released 255 prisoners for a few more promises which were withheld until that September when 90 more were sprung for more promises. In August of 2008 another 198 prisoners were released for some more promises and just a month ago 224 Arab prisoners were released in exchange for more promises. Okay, here is the tally: Prisoners released since 2005: roughly 1,500. Arab promises kept: 0. Hmmm. That too sounds a tad disproportionate since a disproportionate number of the prisoners released returned to terrorism. Ninth: The prisoners released by Israel all looked fit and well fed. Not a hand chopped in the bunch. That's an example of disproportionately mild punishment for murderers in a section of the world that abets "honor killings" and stoning for adultery and beheadings for "infidel' behavior. Tenth: The mainstream media is disproportionately biased and ignorant. This will come as no surprise to anyone who knows the history and facts of the ongoing Jihad against Israel. It will come as no surprise to those who are stunned by the disproportionate reluctance of the media to confront militant Islam and the disproportionate sensitivity of media apologists to anything that may smack of "Islamophobia." Eleventh: Check out the number of terrorist incidents, including those that have been thwarted in the world, in every continent, from Argentina, to the Philippines to India to London, to Paris to the United States. Are there not a disproportionate number of er...ah...Muslims among them? And, are there not a disproportionate number of silent imams and mosques and Islamic fraternal organizations that fail to condemn them? Twelfth: Let's get to Gaza now. In 2005, when the Israelis removed Jewish population from Gaza, Jewish philanthropists bought 3,000 homes and disproportionately productive farms and greenhouses for the Arabs. These greenhouses used highly advanced agricultural technology and insect control and harvesting systems and temperature and moisture regulation. They also supplied Israel with more than half of its daily produce. The Arab response was trashing, looting and destruction of every home, greenhouse and farm including hoses, irrigation systems, water pumps and plastic sheathing. Then, talk about disproportionate chutzpah, the Arabs demanded and got food from Israel. Thirteenth: President-elect Barack Obama said that he could not sit by while his kids in their beds were victims of continued rocket attacks. I don't expect him or a Hillaried State Department to stand by that strong statement. There is a disproportionate amount of Arab money and influence on our government. Just see the disproportionate amount of big bucks former Presidents and legislators get from the Arabs. Finally, here is one thing that I know. Americans are smarter and better than those whose columns they read, or whose programs they watch, or their legislators who make and remake policies. We are a people who are disproportionately fair. Outside of the fringes in the left and right, the largest proportion of Americans understand Israel's dilemma and are rooting for Israel in its existential struggle against Jihad. That is why I love being a proud Jewish American. Contact Barbara Taverna at bltaverna@yahoo.com |
|
TERRORISTS HIDING IN HOSPITALS AND MOSQUES; NO HUMANITARIAN CRISIS IN GAZA
Posted by Daily Alert, January 2, 2009. |
|
This was written by Yaakov Katz.
It appeared in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
Hamas terrorists are using civilian infrastructure in the Gaza Strip — including hospitals, mosques and areas next to offices of international aid groups — to conduct terrorist activity and fire rockets at Israel, Col. Moshe Levi, commander of the IDF's Gaza Coordination and Liaison Administration (CLA), said Thursday. Levi, who is in charge of coordinating humanitarian efforts in the Gaza Strip, told The Jerusalem Post that since Sunday over 330 trucks carrying food, medicine and medical supplies had been allowed into the Gaza Strip despite the daily rocket barrages against the South. In addition, the CLA has facilitated the transfer of 10 ambulances and 2,000 blood units to Gaza, and has approved a Palestinian request to allow three Gazans wounded in the fighting into Israel for medical treatment, Levi said. He rejected Palestinian claims of a humanitarian crisis in the Gaza Strip. "Hamas is trying to create the appearance of a humanitarian crisis, but together with the international organizations, we are preventing this from happening," he said. Levi said Israel was prepared to accept additional wounded Palestinians for medical treatment, but that the Palestinians had not submitted a request. He said 80 wounded had been allowed into Egypt for treatment as well. The CLA commander said it was possible that Hamas was preventing wounded from leaving Gaza for medical treatment, but that either way, the health system in Gaza was "stabilizing" and that there were 2,200 beds available for the wounded. "We asked if they wanted to send us more, and they said they were managing," Levi said. "In recent years, the hospital system has improved in Gaza, and today there are hospitals in every district in the Strip." Levi backed up comments made by Shin Bet (Israel Security Agency) chief Yuval Diskin that Hamas operatives were conducting operations inside Gaza's Shifa Hospital and in mosques. "Hamas uses civilian infrastructure to shoot at us," he said. "They fire from next to buildings that belong to international organizations and from within urban centers." The Palestinian people, he said, understood that Hamas was responsible for Operation Cast Lead and that Israel had made this clear by launching only surgical air strikes at Hamas targets. "The IAF is focused on Hamas installations and Hamas officials who are known to the Palestinian people," he said. "The Palestinian street knows that our operations are directed solely against Hamas." 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 |
|
FROM ISRAEL: DAY SEVEN
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 2, 2009. |
|
The time has not yet come for the ground incursion, if indeed it will come as is predicted. I will not report on all of the various comments made — many contradictory — on what this incursion would be like. Only those truly on the inside know. ~~~~~~~~~~ On Wednesday, a draft resolution presented to the UN Security Council by the Arab League was rejected, primarily because of the US. It was totally one-sided, not mentioning Hamas at all. Work is being done on a "balanced" resolution. Because of this, and other efforts afoot, it is felt pressure will build on us to reach a "diplomatic resolution" of the conflict. Now is the time for Olmert and company to stand strong. Whether we'll ever see a resolution in the UN is in doubt, however: As Hesham Yossef, chief of staff for the League's secretary-general, explained, it is not certain that the League would accept any reference to Hamas rockets in a resolution. ~~~~~~~~~~ In spite of this, I continue to see encouraging signs of a split in the Arab world, with countries like Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey leveling criticism at Hamas at one level or another. Muhammad Bassiouny, head of the Egyptian parliament's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, for example, has asked, during a TV interview, "Where are the Hamas leaders now, when the residents of Gaza are getting killed? All of Hamas's leaders are in the bunkers." In a response to Ismail Haniyeh, who said that "the Arab people have proven the Palestinian issue is in their hearts," Bassiouny said, "No one [ i.e., among the Arabs] cares at all if the Palestinians are destroyed. What kind of talk is this?" Tough talk from Bassiouny. He was telling a truth that is rarely spoken. ~~~~~~~~~~ Tension is high between Egypt and both Hezbollah and Syria, with regard to Gaza. First came criticism by Nasrallah concerning Egypt's reluctance to open the Rafah crossing to Gazans, which infuriated Mubarak. And now there are reports that Syria wanted a Security Council resolution that would force Egypt to open that crossing. Mubarak says he will not give Hamas this legitimacy. Additionally, Egypt's foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, has said that any resolution for a cease-fire must require Hamas to stop firing rockets. Otherwise (note the wording, which is standard) Israel will be given an excuse to attack. Egypt intelligence has information that a Hamas terror cell had infiltrated Egypt, and it is being sought. Other Palestinians that Egyptian security has picked up are being returned to Gaza ~~~~~~~~~~ Within Fatah itself there is a split with regard to what's happening in Gaza. From Ramallah, Khaled Abu Toameh reports, in the Post, that Ziad Abu Ein, a deputy minister in the PA, called on Hamas to return the weapons it had confiscated from Fatah members in Gaza (during the Hamas take-over) so they could help fight in the IDF ground incursion. There are according to Abu Ein 70,000 Fatah loyalists still in Gaza who would help. Some members of Fatah are accusing the PA leaders of "collusion" with Israel so that a return to Gaza will be possible. They point to the fact that the PA is not permitting demonstrations supporting Hamas. An aide to Mahmoud Abbas, PA president, bitterly attacked Hamas, calling it a puppet of Iran. He vociferously denied that Abbas intends to return to Gaza "on an Israeli tank." ~~~~~~~~~~ Among the actions we took last night was the bombing of a mosque in Jabaliyah in the north of Gaza. The IDF says this was a storage site for a large number of Katyusha rockets, which is why several secondary explosions followed the attack. ~~~~~~~~~~ There was a barrage of seven Grad Katyusha rockets launched at Ashkelon this morning — where one woman was injured; another landed in Ofakim. There are Kassams, as well, with eight hitting in Sderot alone, as well as in other localities; reportedly portions of Sderot are without electric power. ~~~~~~~~~~ As would be expected, in various places internationally there is heightened Arab-Jewish tension, and some instance of violence against Jews. What follows here was called to my attention by Celia Sacharow. On the "Boker Tov, Boulder" blog, there are two videos of a nasty pro-Hamas demonstration in Fort Lauderdale FL. Especially see the bottom video, which shows an Arab supporter (or an Arab?) screaming at Jews: "Go back to the oven. You belong in the oven!" Chilling. Not Paris, not London. Fort Lauderdale, for heaven's sake. Should make everyone sit up and take notice.
~~~~~~~~~~ Several readers called this to my attention, and so, with the help of Jeff Daube, I tracked it down. President-elect Obama said this back in July, when he was here in Israel and visited Sderot, and he was campaigning. "If somebody was sending rockets into my house where my two daughters sleep at night, I would do everything in my power to stop that, and would expect Israelis to do the same thing." You think now, when the implications are real, and he's in the States, and not Israel, and he's been elected, you think he would say this now? I pray so. ~~~~~~~~~~ A typo caught by Judith Nusbaum: The founder of Hamas was Sheikh Yassin, not Dassin. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
SIXTEEN TONS, WHADDA YOU GIT
Posted by Steven Plaut, January 2, 2009. |
|
1. The news headline is that a leading Hamas terrorhoid, Nizar Rayan, was recycled yesterday in Gaza, along with two of his wives and some of his offspring, when a one-ton bomb demolished the building he was in. So I know what you are thinking, so come join me in singing:
2. Israel's Policy Is Perfectly 'Proportionate'
Israel's actions in Gaza are justified under international law, and Israel should be commended for its self-defense against terrorism. Article 51 of the United Nations Charter reserves to every nation the right to engage in self-defense against armed attacks. The only limitation international law places on a democracy is that its actions must satisfy the principle of proportionality. Since Israel ended its occupation of Gaza, Hamas has fired thousands of rockets designed to kill civilians into southern Israel. The residents of Sderot — which have borne the brunt of the attacks — have approximately 15 seconds from launch time to run into a shelter. Although deliberately targeting civilians is a war crime, terrorists firing at Sderot are so proud of their actions that they sign their weapons. When Barack Obama visited Sderot this summer and saw the remnants of these rockets, he reacted by saying that if his two daughters were exposed to rocket attacks in their home, he would do everything in his power to stop such attacks. He understands how the terrorists exploit the morality of democracies. In a recent incident related to me by the former head of the Israeli air force, Israeli intelligence learned that a family's house in Gaza was being used to manufacture rockets. The Israeli military gave the residents 30 minutes to leave. Instead, the owner called Hamas, which sent mothers carrying babies to the house. The Opinion Journal Widget Hamas knew that Israel would never fire at a home with civilians in it. They also knew that if Israeli authorities did not learn there were civilians in the house and fired on it, Hamas would win a public relations victory by displaying the dead. Israel held its fire. The Hamas rockets that were protected by the human shields were then used against Israeli civilians. These despicable tactics — targeting Israeli civilians while hiding behind Palestinian civilians — can only work against moral democracies that care deeply about minimizing civilian casualties. They never work against amoral nations such as Russia, whose military has few inhibitions against killing civilians among whom enemy combatants are hiding. The claim that Israel has violated the principle of proportionality — by killing more Hamas terrorists than the number of Israeli civilians killed by Hamas rockets — is absurd. First, there is no legal equivalence between the deliberate killing of innocent civilians and the deliberate killings of Hamas combatants. Under the laws of war, any number of combatants can be killed to prevent the killing of even one innocent civilian. Second, proportionality is not measured by the number of civilians actually killed, but rather by the risk posed. This is illustrated by what happened on Tuesday, when a Hamas rocket hit a kindergarten in Beer Sheva, though no students were there at the time. Under international law, Israel is not required to allow Hamas to play Russian roulette with its children's lives. While Israel installs warning systems and builds shelters, Hamas refuses to do so, precisely because it wants to maximize the number of Palestinian civilians inadvertently killed by Israel's military actions. Hamas knows from experience that even a small number of innocent Palestinian civilians killed inadvertently will result in bitter condemnation of Israel by many in the international community. Israel understands this as well. It goes to enormous lengths to reduce the number of civilian casualties — even to the point of foregoing legitimate targets that are too close to civilians. Until the world recognizes that Hamas is committing three war crimes — targeting Israeli civilians, using Palestinian civilians as human shields, and seeking the destruction of a member state of the United Nations — and that Israel is acting in self-defense and out of military necessity, the conflict will continue. Mr. Dershowitz is a law professor at Harvard. His latest book is "The Case Against Israel's Enemies" (Wiley, 2008). 3. We recently told you about Nurit Elhanan-Peled. After her own daughter was murdered by a Palestinian suicide bomber, she rededicated her life to promoting the agenda of the terrorist bombers. Well, she is not the only Israeli leftist anti-Israel academic who responds to a family member being murdered by Palestinians by recruiting himself on behalf of the terrorist agenda. Meet Yossi Amitay, a lecturer in Arab history at Ben Gurion University (gosh, what a surprise that he teaches THERE!). It seems that his own sister was murdered by a suicide bomber. That
did not stop Amitay from pursuing his Bash-Israel agenda. Please read
this: Yossi Amitay of Ben-Gurion University does the Shimmy-Dhimmi Cocoa Pop
And especially this: 'Amitay has been active in the "SERUV" group that promotes mutiny and insurrection among Israeli soldiers. He was one of the cheerleaders for Tali Fahima, a Jewish woman jailed for assisting Palestinian terrorists plan attacks on Jews. After his own sister was murdered by Palestinian terrorists in an attack in Ramat Gan, Amitay gave an interview to the Tel Aviv weekly Ha-Ir, in which he said: "Nehama became part of the cycle of bloodshed, a cycle of Jewish-Israeli and Palestinian-Arab victims. We are all among the victims and the killers; if we ever tried to do something for peace, we must now ask ourselves: did we do enough? That is what I said on Nehama's graveside. It was difficult to say these things, but I did say them."' 4. Israel's treasonous Left is upset — the police are not letting them
carry PLO flags at their protests:
Just to put this into perspective, when pro-Israel students at the University of Haifa held a rally this week to respond to the Solidarity-with-Hamas rally held 2 days earlier by Arab students and leftist faculty members, a Druse guard at one gate of the campus refused to allow them to enter while waving an Israeli flag. 5. If you have ever watched the Muppets Show (and movies), you are familiar with the two puppets who play crotchety old geezers sitting in the balcony and making cynical comments about the rest of the show. Well, every time I see the news show on Israel's Channel 10 of Moti Kirschenbaum and Yaron London, I flash back to the Muppets geezers. Kirschenbaum and London are conceited affected leftist geezers whose news show consists largely of their mouthing off their own biased opinions to one another like the Muppet geezers. Kirschenbaum used to run the news department at Israeli state-owned Channel One back when it was the only TV station in the country and he openly bragged about turning it into an instrument of leftist indoctrination in which no non-leftist opinion would be heard. London used to be a Haaretz columnist but his writing was so infantile that even Haaretz evidently no longer wanted him. The Kirschenbaum-London "news show" is one of the worst insults to the intelligence of Israeli viewers, and that is saying a lot in a country where every second Hebrew show is a "reality show." Well, Israel is not only getting rid of a lot of Hamas terrorists this week, it is also getting rid of the Kirschenbaum and London geriatric muppets at long last. Seems the Metamucil Duo were demanding astronomical amounts in salary from the station, which has been losing money, being in the Red in both senses of the term. My personal opinion is that K&L should only be aired if they pay ME to watch them a high enough amount. They were off the air starting last night. It is already a happy 2009. 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
|
|
CURRENT SITUATION DIRECT RESULT OF BAD POLICY
Posted by Dave Alpern, January 2, 2009. |
|
This is Dr. Aaron Lerner's Weekly Commentary for this week. Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA, Independent Media Review and Analysis, an Israel-based news organization which provides an extensive digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events relating to the Israeli-Arab conflict. Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il Write him at imra@netvision.net.il "Bad"??!! Dr. Lerner has a real talent for understatement! |
|
The Palestinian rockets slamming into Ashdod and Beersheba were not inevitable. They are the direct result of a long history of bad left wing policy recommendations that were unfortunately implemented by a series of Israeli governments. Before Yasser Arafat was welcomed into Gaza and the West Bank by the geniuses who came up with Oslo, the little terror that there was consisted mostly of knifing incidents and in the highly unusual event of a shooting incident, the Palestinian gunmen were severely handicapped by a lack of training and experience. And while there was griping in the Israeli left about the "cost of the occupation," the size of the forces deployed in Gaza and the West Bank to maintain security were fairly small. It was only thanks to Oslo that the security situation of the Jewish communities in the Gaza Strip deteriorated — leading in turn for a need for more forces and pressure to withdraw. And it was only thanks to Oslo that elementary security interests (control of weapons smuggling and manufacture, etc.) in Gaza took the back seat to political and "diplomatic" considerations. It was only thanks to the retreat from the Gaza Strip that Hamas and others were enabled to launch a massive unprecedented arming program. And it was thanks to the "cease-fire" that Hamas and others were able to accelerate this process to the level were face today. At each step of the way, the left wing policy advocates refused to either concede or learn from past mistakes. And it is no different today, as even those in the Left who recognize the need for a strong IDF response in the current conflict with Hamas push for a variety of house-of-cards arrangements to conclude this episode. No remorse. No shame. No modesty. They won't change. One can only hope that the results of the upcoming Knesset elections takes them out of the decision making process. Contact Dave Alpern at daveyboy@bezeqint.net |
|
BACK TO GAZA
Posted by Shaul Ceder, January 1, 2009. |
|
This essay is by Rabbi Pinchos Lipschutz. |
|
The news from Eretz Yisroel fills our hearts with worry. We see Israel pounding its enemies in Gaza. Every day more rockets rain down on Israeli towns and cities. We think of the Lebanon War of 2006 and fearfully wonder where all this will lead. It's déjà vu all over again. Once again the tiny country of Israel feels that it has no choice but to fight back against a neighbor whose unremitting acts of terror give it no other choice. After standing by and absorbing kassam after kassam in quiet acquiescence, the elected leaders of the country are now pounding their murderous Gazan enemies. For too long, they permitted the lethal terrorist organizations to build up an awesome arsenal of rockets and artillery. Now the time has come to admit the failure of the Gaza eviction and rid the place of its ability to wage war against the innocent citizens of Israel. The entire world, including both the friends and enemies of the Jewish people, had claimed that if Israel were interested in peace, all it had to do was clear out of the Arab territory it was occupying. In Lebanon they did just that and vacated the security buffer zone they had set up on Israel's northern border. The move was certified by the United Nations, which passed a resolution calling on the government of Lebanon to disarm Hezbollah and take over the border area. It goes without saying that the resolution was ignored. In 2005, in an act that defied logic and history, every inch of Gaza was turned over to the Palestinian Authority. Democratic elections were held; the Palestinians' supposed dream for Gaza was fulfilled. Thousands of Jews were mercilessly thrown out of their homes in the pursuit of a policy which guaranteed that such radical moves would bring relief from the constant terror. To say that the misguidedness of that policy is self-evident is an understatement. The idyllic Jewish towns in Gaza were taken over by terrorists and are now being used as bases of terror. Daily barrages of kassam rockets rain down on nearby towns. Finally, with elections fast approaching, the Israeli government decided that they must act if they have any hope of beating back Netanyahu. For them, he is more dangerous than Hamas, for he can evict those in power from their thrones, while Hamas can only terrorize the poor people who live within the ever-expanding range of their rockets. What is the world's response? Even after witnessing countless atrocities at the hands of Islamic terrorists, the world condemns Israel for fighting back. Self-righteous voices call upon the beleaguered country to halt its actions. President Bush stands out among all major heads of state for championing Israel's right to defend herself. Our brothers in the Israeli army have always denigrated their Arab enemies and proudly viewed themselves as being intellectually and militarily superior in the series of wars with their enemies. Going back to the war of liberation in 1948, though the lone sheep has been surrounded by a pack of wolves, with all the odds stacked against survival, Israel has successfully beaten back enemy armies and emerged triumphant. Religious people recognized the hand of G-d in each of Israel's victories; countless soldiers had miraculous tales to retell when they returned home. The Six Day War of 1967 had such an obviously miraculous outcome that it spawned a teshuvah revolution whose repercussions are still felt today. The world ignored the gathering strength of Hamas much as it does nothing about Iran's race toward nuclear capability. A ruthless, cruel group of murderers with no regard for human life is defended by spokesmen of civilized countries who play into the hands of these barbarians. Armed to the hilt by Syria and Iran, they have developed a fighting machine trained to kill Jews. As the world condemns Israel for its "disproportionate" and "excessive" response, it cares not a wit that Israel was attacked by a group bent on destroying the free world. It is so predictable. I must admit that it is very hard for me to feel bad for the people of Israel this time around. Yes, they are our brothers and sisters, yes, they are suffering way beyond what any innocent human being should have to suffer. But why can't they learn their lesson? How long will it take for them to realize that they are going down the same failed path, time after time? How can it be that Livni and Barak have even one percent support in their bids for the premiership of the lonely Zionist state? Meanwhile, innocent people suffer, more Jews are cut down senselessly and there is no end in sight. Feckless politicians operate for the cameras and for public opinion. They keep the army on a leash, and don't allow it to deliver the knockout blows necessary to finish off this menace. Let's bomb here a little, bomb there a drop more and then let's sit back and hope that the Arab mentality has changed and they will decide to welcome us with peace. They fool themselves into thinking that a few bombs on a few buildings will effect a change on the entire Arab psyche and mode of thought. They are still impressed with what the UN says and what the president of France has to say. When will they return to their senses and act responsibly with the good of the country, rather than their own personal political careers, uppermost in their stratagem? When will they study the patterns of Jewish history and recognize that without Divine intervention there is no hope for victory? When will the truth become their guiding light? Shallowness and complacency are dangerous for the human spirit even in peacetime, but in times of combat they are even more perilous. No matter where we are and what we are engaged in, we must be wary of allowing superficial considerations to guide us. Proper focus and clarity of vision are essential for every aspect of existence. Nations will topple without a vision and political leaders can fall to the most inexperienced challengers when their vision becomes skewed. Superficiality and small-mindedness combined with myopic focus on our own interests without seeing the big picture can be catastrophic. As Asarah B'Teves approaches and we watch this Gaza operation unfold while we chart the daily economic declines, we must never sink into yiush, despair. We must never give up hope. We know that everything that transpires is part of Hashem's master plan. History has shown that pain and tragedy often give birth to nechamos. May we merit to see sustained peace and the fulfillment of the comforting words of Yeshayahu Hanovi speedily in our days. May we merit to see these days of mourning and sadness be transformed into days of happiness and celebration speedily in our day. Contact Shaul and Aviva Ceder at ceder@netvision.net.il |
|
HAPPY NEW YEAR
Posted by Moshe Kerr, January 1, 2009. |
|
Karen and I are happy to receive your emails. The economy across the planet has made for economic hard times. The ongoing conflict is really very mild beyond all the hysteria and hype. The sirens have just sounded, a missile is on its way. There's the bang! One exploded about half a mile from our house the other day, but Dassi's having a great time. Be'er Sheva is a very large city and a grad missile or two which Hamas fires really make more noise than damage. Israel's precision bombings have had a far more damaging effect. Gaza is under a blockade, and with the fence its very hard for Arabs to make suicide attacks. The Hamas leadership by firing long range rockets has completely abandoned the non lethal violence tactics employed by the 1st and most successful intifada. As long as the Arabs fire rockets indiscriminately, the international community has little strength to impose a foreign cease fire upon the Jewish State. Precision missile attacks require patience. Amassing troops on the border compels Hamas military personnel to respond in kind. Once a military position is located, in comes the precision bombs. Hamas military personnel enjoy immense advantages in an immediate ground war. But should Israel maintain the discipline of cat and mouse all the advantages go to the IDF. This has forced the Hamas soldiers to remove their military uniforms and replace them with civilian clothes. Israeli drone surveillance, satellites and balloons greatly negate these attempt to hide the identities of military personnel. Plus Israeli Intelligence knows the home address of all Hamas political and military leadership. The poor puppies really have very little where to go other than if severly threatened escape unto Egypt. Arabs very much resemble Mexicans in their personalities. Machoism strongly influences their decisions and behavior. In this conflict that's very bad for them. Now that it's got into a shooting situation, for them to agree to stop means they lose face. As long as they continue to fire a rocket here and there, Israel can ignore the pleas of the international community of busybodies. Precision bombing causes the French argument of disproportionate force to fall flat. In this conflict Israel has learned that employing cluster bombs better serves the propaganda services of the enemy than do these same bombs IDF interests. The foreign press can fume and rant all it wants but by barring these headline seekers, their pictures can not be used and doctored for propaganda purposes like that which occured 2 years earlier in Lebanon. The arab civil war that divided the PLO from Hamas has greatly damaged the 2-nation settlement process. Discussing settlement terms more accurately depicts the much overblown "peace" process rhetoric which foreign nations so much spout. When did the UN become an independent nation? Listening to UN pronouncements, a person could easily assume that this international assembly of diplomatic personnel qualifies as an independent nation who can express its own opinion. Hannuka just ended, its a very minor festival that celebrates the burning of the menorah lights. The Jewish prayerbook called the Sid'dur understands this trivial moment in time and gives it allot of respect. It's not like the victors were particularly righteous men, they were not. The Maccabees called Hashmonaim in Hebrew upon assuming power immediately abandoned the principals and first causes of the conflict against the Greeks and their Jewish land-owning priest aristocratic allies. Once the Hashmonaim enjoyed power they immediately switched sides and made an alliance with the Jewish land-owning priestly aristocracy. This ultimately destroyed the 2nd Commonwealth and initiated the 2200 year exile/galut that culminated in the systematic destruction of 1/3 of world Jewry in about 3 years. Why then does the tradition called mesorat in hebrew give such respect to Hannuka? The land owning aristocratic priestly class represented assimilated Jewry. Assimilation has plagued the Jewish people throughout our entire history. Under Titus the Roman general who burned Jerusalem, the Temple flames equally consumed this aristocratic land-owning assimilated class of priests. It's important not to view this time period with modern "glasses". The society then was an agriculturally based society not an industrially based society. The economy functioned around the land and slaves working these same lands. Foreign governments that ruled over the Jews — be they the Babylonians, Persians, Greeks or Romans — required a ruling class that would do their bidding. The Temple worship practiced by the ancient Jews and the monopoly of Cohonim/priests to work in this institution could immediately serve the interests of foreign rulers. Clearly these rulers did not consider the Torah as functioning in the status of being the Constitution of the Jewish state. Instead these conquered lands followed the dictates of their dominant foreign governments which ruled over vast empires. The Greeks like the Persians and the Babylonians before favored the establishment of a docile aristocratic ruling class that would obey their decrees. Had the Maccabees not made an open alliance with the teachers of the Oral Traditions, who ideas thrive to this day in the codified Talmud and other famous midrashic texts, and overthrown the Greeks, a very high likelyhood existed that the 2nd Commonwealth would have slowly assimilated into a Greek polis city. After the Hashonaim kings betrayed their alliance for political opportunism, as did the foreign empires before them, the teachers of Oral Torah, none the less, enjoyed a much stronger position and could even thrive through the some 110 years of Jewish civil wars that followed until the Romans were "asked" to resolve the dynastic dispute of the brothers Hashonai! The sid'dur, which serves as one of the 2 most primary texts of "kabbalah" or mesorat or tradition, interprets Hannuka as defining "Redemption". Avraham when he 1st made a brit with Heaven, this brit significantly weighed upon exile/galut. Defining "Redemption", is part of understanding a significant component of Jewish spirituality. The Hannuka lights celebrate the concept of redemption; the teachers of Oral Torah could better prosper under Hashonaim opportunists than they could under fanatical Greek kulture supported by an assimilated land-owning priest aristocratic class. Redemption will gladly settle for half a loaf! This concept of redemption, the sister religions do not know, Hamas now has gotten itself into a pickle. Israel has a far stronger diplomatic and military hand. This current conflict really does not compare with Lebanon of 2006. Israel controls the press, the seas, the air and the borders. It has slowly put a siege upon the Hamas government for 2 years. As long as Hamas fires rockets, their diplomatic rhetoric can only call Israel names and hope that the world believes them. The Bush administration shall not support any UN security council cease fire. Obama doesn't get sworn in until my birthday and even then the man needs time to put his government together. America faces critical problems on the domestic front. The slow strangulation of Hamas serves American diplomatic foreign policy interests. Should the Hamas government collapse, then that would permit the return of the PLO to Gaza. If the PLO returns, its mandate shall be very weak. Many Palestinians shall accuse it of being a pawn of the Jewish state and western powers, which in fact it is! The centralist Jewish parties of Kadima and Likud shall now enjoy a higher probability of establishing a settlement with the Palestinian Arabs. A Palestinian state built on this cracked and fractured foundation will be very weak for possibly generations. Establishing a Palestinian state all Jewish government seek,[Editor: not a fact.] on the condition that such a state would not be openly or blatantly hostile to the Jewish state. A weak, fractured Palestinian state opens the question: would such a state permit Jewish settlements as does the Jewish state permit arab populations within its authority? [Editor: the Arab states have a Judenfrei policy.] Israel can not forcibly uproot Jewish settlements, such a move would most probably cause a civil war. The Hannuka fiasco of Hashonaim opportunism Jews remember every year. Redemption honors and respects the half loaf, but never confuses a half loaf for a full one! Happy New Year
Contact Moshe Kerr at moshekerr@gmail.com |
|
THE HUMANE ASPECT OF ANTI TERROR AIRSTRIKES IN GAZA
Posted by American, January 1, 2009. |
|
How does Israel's humane army manage to cause only a few hundreds deaths (w/ 90% terrorists) after so many strikes in 5 days? Let's see, 5 days of continues bombardment of (specific terrorists' targets) — hundreds of air strikes, and only about 400 are dead? How does the cool and humane Israel army manage to avoid so many casualties, each bombing (coming from that famous "strong Israeli army" which the Arabs keep reminding us) could at least kill a few hundreds if one is not very careful. This relative success — While the terrible Muslim radicals (Hamas or Hezbollah, etc.) keep tricking in civilians into dying (Let alone the sad fact of "densely populated" Gaza), especially little kids, for the goal of appearing as "victims" and tarnishing Israeli who is in fact the only party in the entire neighborhood that couldn't care less about image but about saving lives, on both sides. Yet, all the biased CNN, BBC can talk about is: "civilians" deaths. Contact American at american1627@yahoo.com |
|
J STREET — A DEAD END
Posted by M.S. (Steve) Kramer, January 1, 2009. |
|
What's J Street and why is it heading in the wrong direction? Actually, I include with J Street an entire group of American "peace" organizations, including Americans for Peace Now, Brit Tzekek v'Shalom, and the Israel Policy Forum. Each one of these groups has defended Israel's right of self-defense against Hamas terror attacks. Nevertheless, I object to their call for a hasty cease-fire, which I believe to be totally contrary to Israel's benefit. According to the above groups, Israel's long-term security is being damaged by its overly militaristic response to Hamas, which is counter-productive to achieving peace. They want to resume the "cease-fire" (calm or lull in Hamas' interpretation) that recently ended. They're anxious to invite the US and the international community to intervene, in order to persuade Israel that an end to using force will be beneficial. I can't fathom why the peace organizations pursue these tactics to promote peace. Have they forgotten that Israel removed every settler and soldier from Gaza in 2005, leaving the agricultural infrastructure behind for the Palestinians to utilize? The "J Streeters" (used collectively) were sure then that a Palestinian mini-state would blossom in Gaza, the model for a full peace deal between Israelis and the Palestinians. Instead, misguided prodding by the US produced a "democratic" election among the Palestinians that ended with the Hamas terrorists in charge in Gaza and poised to take over in the West Bank (if not for Israel's protection of Mahmoud Abbas' government). It's instructive to look at the Hamas Covenant, to see how amenable Hamas may be to negotiations with Israel and the West. From the Preamble: "Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it." From Article 13: "[Peace] initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement ... Those conferences are no more than a means to appoint the infidels as arbitrators in the lands of Islam ... There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility." In the past, totalitarian movements have used well-meaning people, often intellectuals, to promote their "-ism". But the idealists didn't realize the implications of adopting the "-ism". For example, Soviet sympathizers in Western countries were called "useful idiots", a derogatory description usually attributed to Lenin. The phrase implies the cynical use by the Communists of naïve people who they manipulated. I see a similarity between the useful idiots of the post-WWII era and the J Streeters today. The Hamas Covenant is available for them to read, but even if they do take the trouble to read it, they won't believe it. They're adept at making excuses for the enemies of the West. In fact, this attitude is contemptuous of the Muslims in general and the Jihadists in particular, because the J Streeters muddy what the Jihadists make perfectly clear. Jeremy Ben-Ami, executive director of J Street, said, "... we believe that real friends of Israel recognize that escalating the conflict will prove counterproductive, igniting further anger in the region and damaging long-term prospects for peace and stability." Israel, which has plenty of J Streeters of its own, can't afford this naiveté. The anger in the region hasn't increased because Israel is standing up for itself. Muslim anger exists because the Jews dare to have a sovereign country on "Arab land". Nor are prospects for stability in the region damaged by Israel's strong military response; the opposite is closer to the truth. Stability in the Middle East was undermined by the evacuation of Israeli troops from the Lebanese "security zone" in 2000, shortly after which Hamas began to rocket Israel from Gaza. This tactic was further accelerated by the removal of all Israelis from Gaza in 2005, and the half-hearted war against Hezbullah in 2006. Only a strong Israel can hope to achieve security for its citizens. As Israel's perceived deterrent factor diminishes, violent acts against it increase. To put the Gaza conflict into perspective, one must realize that Iran is the puppet master behind Hamas. The Iranians are using sympathetic Arabs to help Iran become the Middle Eastern superpower. They have Syria firmly under their wing through their control of the weak dictator, Bashar Assad. They control Hezbollah in Lebanon, which does Iran's bidding and has veto power over the Lebanese government. They bankroll, arm, and train Hamas in Gaza, which subjugates the Gazans who aren't their followers. Meanwhile, Hamas schemes with Iran to take power in the West Bank. While Israel is criticized wall-to-wall (the US and a few others are exceptions) for using "disproportionate force" against Gaza, the diplomatic offensive against both Hamas and Iran could be a lot stronger. Arab countries, like Saudi Arabia and many of the Western countries, are actually pleased to see Hamas being thrashed. But this attitude is not one that those countries want to publicize. That goes double for Egypt, which borders on Gaza. The irony is that the Arab rulers, who demonize Israel to divert the masses from their benighted condition, are in danger of being overthrown if they show support for Israel's fight against Iran and its puppets. It's true that, ultimately, a political accommodation will have to be made to avoid the Israel Defense Forces having to reoccupy Gaza, like the IDF did in the West Bank in April 2002. But Hamas must first take a military bashing to put Gazans into the frame of mind which will allow for some type of negotiations. Up to now, Gazans have thought that they could rocket Israel with impunity. They were taught this by Israel's three-year forbearance to an onslaught of more than 6,000 rockets. Now isn't the time to ease up on Hamas. It's not a question of who is a "real friend" of Israel. It's simply a matter of recognizing that Israel faces an implacable enemy who must be deterred. Only the humiliation of Hamas and a major reduction of its power will restore Israel's formerly fearsome status. That may or may not lead to the acceptance of Israel by the Arabs, but it will keep the wolf away from the door for the foreseeable future, provided that a solution is found for Iran's appetite for nuclear weapons and Israel's destruction. Steve Kramer lives in Alfe Menashe. He has written a weekly opinion column for the Jewish Times of southern New Jersey (www.jewishtimes-sj.com) for the last ten years. He writes, "They're about history, politics, touring, or whatever excites me." |
|
ANTI-ISRAEL RIOTS IN FT. LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA, USA
Posted by Helen Freedman, January 1, 2009. |
|
Dear friends, This is very scary material that Naomi Ragen has sent. Please watch the videos and disseminate this information. There is a LOT of work to do. Perhaps we have to start with our reps in Congress. I'm not sure. It's already late in the game. All concrete suggestions are very welcome. Write me at ghfree@aol.com The photos below were sent in by Saul Goldman (gold7910@bellsouth.net). They were from a group of photos taken by Tom Trento of the Watch Obsession Organization. Contact Trento by email at Tom@WatchObsession.org or at the website: www.WatchObsession.org Helen 
|
|
Friends, I am getting many shocked and horrified e-mails concerning the vicious anti-Semitic and anti-Israel demonstration that took place in Fort
Lauderdale, Florida on December 30, in the heart of Jewish Broward County.
The "nuke Israel" signs, and the anti-American signs, the chants of "Go to Hell" aimed at the small group of Jewish counter-demonstrators waving Israeli flags, was certainly not surprising to anyone aware of the Jihadist elements that have infiltrated America and are now growing like a malignant tumor in all her towns and cities and colleges. In the last election, Jews preferred to ignore that. The majority of Jews in Florida voted for the same candidates as did the Jihadists. I couldn't understand it then. I don't understand it now. One of these groups is going to be very disappointed. I'm sorry that this has all come as a big surprise to the Jews of Florida. It shouldn't be. pro-Israel demonstration will face their enemies with larger numbers, and American Jews will wake up from their numbed sleep and take back their country and their pride. The videos can be seen here at the BokerTov, Boulder website. This demonstration was apparently organized by A.N.S.W.E.R, an extremist anti-semitic leftist group. ANSWER stands for Act Now to Stop War and End Racism. 
Helen Freedman is withAmericans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, 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. Contact Freedman at ghfree@aol.com |
|
U.S. INTELLIGENCE OFFICIAL "BREAKS SILENCE" ON ISRAEL SITUATION"
Posted by LEL, January 1, 2009. |
|
31 December 2008: Northeast Intelligence Network director Doug Hagmann interviewed a highly-placed U.S. intelligence official late yesterday who not only confirmed rumors about escalated and more intensive Israeli military operations against the Muslim terrorists in Gaza, warned of the increasing probability of abandonment of Israel by the U.S. and other Western countries based on what he termed "malicious intelligence." "Remember that term," advised this well-placed intelligence official, "you'll be hearing it again." "This is just the beginning," stated this intelligence official, who wished to remain anonymous. This official stated that the possibility for a much more protracted ground war is more likely today than at any other time in the past, adding that Israel is exercising her right to protect herself from her enemies in Gaza. But there is a catch, noted this official, and a big one at that: Israel could be about to lose the support of the United States. "I have every reason to believe, based on what I've seen at my level of [security] clearance especially over the last several years, that Israel will soon be completely on their own... or worse." When asked what could be worse than losing the support of the United States, he stated: "when our administration provides more support to Arab countries [with] financial and military aid, undercutting Israel's defense efforts all while pushing Israel to succumb to the pressure of unreasonable demands designed to end with their political annihilation as a nation." According to this official, the U.S. has been slowly proceeding down this road. He cited the 2005 surrender of Gush Katif to the Palestinian Authority as one critical example of the slow dismantlement of Israel as a viable nation. "Despite critical intelligence outlining in every possible manner imaginable that this would be a disastrous move leading to the events we are seeing today, it was done anyway," he stated. "We are seeing the very scenario play out today that was outlined in intelligence briefs three and four years ago. Knowing that, there is something very wrong with this picture," he stated. He added that Western media is also playing a very big role in the current war in the Middle East, thanks, in part, to carefully worded statements prepared by political officials in Washington. Officials in the current administration, like some previous administrations, submit carefully crafted informational releases to a media that is controlled by those having special interests that are contrary to a legitimate peace in the Middle East. "The game is rigged. At the highest levels of power in the U.S. and even by some in power in Israel, the game is rigged," he emphasized. The next obvious question in this interview was, of course, "how is it rigged?" followed by "how are you in a position to know?" This official responded by stating that he has spent the last two decades serving in "an unfortunate position where intelligence and politics meet and often collide." Now, merely days away from retirement, he stated that he is looking forward to leaving his position after conducting over 20 years of intelligence work "that has been molded and massaged to advance the agendas of a select few." He continued: "When an intelligence work product that has been thoroughly and properly vetted is submitted to those in Washington, and I see a completely different and entirely inaccurate product intentionally submitted and aired in the media, only to be told 'that is the way it must be,' then I know it's time for me to leave." "It is obvious to me that most Americans don't understand or don't care what is actually happening in the Middle East relative to Israel. People don't understand history, or have been subjected to revisionist history based on lies and more lies. Add to that a media that fails to provide an accurate assessment of what is taking place in Israel, in Gaza, and you end up with a very bad situation for Israel," stated this source. He added that the disinformation coming and going to and from Washington is getting worse, as is the media bias against Israel. The events currently taking place in Israel are extremely perilous for Israel and especially perilous for the national security of the United States, according to this source. Contrary to the accepted assessments of "Middle East experts" in the news, our intelligence services have "ample evidence to prove active collusion and support between HAMAS and other terrorist organizations, both Sunni and Shite. Further, there is a level of Iranian complicity in this war that is not being talked about, or being dismissed out of hand because of the schism between the Sunni and Shia sects," stated this source. More from this interview, in addition to an interview arranged by
this intelligence official with a high-ranking Israeli IDF official
conducted on 31 December 2008 is available at
Aryeh Zelasko adds, " The only major addendum I would state is that there have always been powerful and high level forces in the US that wanted Israel destroyed. The active animosity of the US State Department is well known. The military, especially the Pentagon bureaucrats, have never been happy with the 'special relationship' and often have undermined it. Every American administration as been more or less dragged, kicking and screaming into helping Israel. It has been their love and loyalty to America that forced them to overcome their intrinsic hostility to the Jewish State. The benefits to America were so overwhelming, what could they do? So it should come as no surprise that under an Obama regime we will see an actively hostile America." Contact LEL at lel817@yahoo.com |
|
PONZI POLITICS; PONZI NEWS
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, January 1, 2009. |
|
With gusto they avoid the truth
From Kenya to Mumbai,
Wasn't it just yesterday, that there were gardens in Gaza, plowshares
Remember there were Jews in Gaza before 1929 and before and before
HAMAS is using Real War while the rest of the world is using PONZI POLITICS
Israel has finally gained consciousness,
PONZI POLITICS silences the masses posing as the multitudes, the
Let PONZI POLITICS and PONZI NEWS
Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, Twins, because their hearts were softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, Generations, because the lion wears stripes." Contact her at haze@rcn.com. |
|
FROM ISRAEL: THE GUESSING GAME
Posted by Arlene Kushner, January 1, 2009. |
|
On this, the first day of 2009, I want to begin by thanking all of those who have written offering wishes and prayers of support for Israel. This is no small thing and is much appreciated. ~~~~~~~~~~ I would also like to address some of the questions that have been raised. Readers wonder why we have to supply all of this humanitarian aid to an enemy, and whether it does not end up in Hamas's hands. In response to the first part of the question: We very specifically have declared war against Hamas and not against the people of Gaza. Yes, I know there is a way in which this is an artificial distinction, as the people of Gaza voted for Hamas and in many instances sympathize with Hamas. But this is the distinction that has been promoted, and a solid case can be made for the morality of being certain the people, at least some of whom are innocent, do not suffer unduly. It's above and beyond, but we do above and beyond — what would be expected of no other nation. There is no cost to us for the material going in — it is paid for/supplied internationally or by relief groups, primarily UN-affiliated. We facilitate the transfer to Gaza. There is however, also a pragmatic reason for doing this. This literally buys us the sufferance of the world. They love to attack us by criticizing the harm we do to civilians — that's the way the Arabs structure the fighting situation and their PR. The more we demonstrate that we're very good to the civilians, the less the basis for criticizing us and the more the world will look the other way while we deliver our blow to Hamas. ~~~~~~~~~~ Tuesday, Turkey, praising Israeli cooperation, sent in five ambulances and 130 tons of flour. Yesterday, 93 trucks carrying food, medicine and medical supplies donated by Jordan went into Gaza. The same amount went in again today. Officials of the UN World Food Program contacted the IDF yesterday to say their stockpiles were full and would last for another two weeks; they were not going to be transferring any more food into Gaza for a while. (Remember this when you read about Gazans starving.) ~~~~~~~~~~ But then we have UNRWA: Also yesterday, this agency, which attends to ostensible Palestinian refugees, severely criticized Israel. United Nations Humanitarian Coordinator Maxwell Gaylar declared that, "We desperately need Karni to open, today, to get wheat grain in. UNRWA has no wheat grain for the 750,000 people who need it. The wheat grain warehouses are empty. We need to get that wheat grain in now. This is a must." "A must." The problem, however, is that Karni could not be opened because there were warnings that terrorists were planning to bomb there. (As I've noted before, UNRWA doesn't seem to care if IDF manning the crossing gets bombed.) Karni has conveyor belts that UNRWA prefers to use. The offer had been made to UNRWA by IDF officials to have them load the wheat grain on to trucks so it could go through Karni. Israel was not refusing to send it in. I tell this story now because it's a familiar refrain. I've heard the same story in the past. I've been told my IDF spokespersons that UNRWA would rather lament the lack of food than go to the trouble of transferring it in a manner that is less convenient for them; then of course Israel is to blame. As to this being an emergency: If the World Food Program has stockpiles for two weeks and Turkey sent in 130 tons of flour, what does it mean for the people that UNRWA's grain warehouse is empty? UNRWA is the organization that loves to dramatize and then fault Israel. I know from my long-term research on this group how much they've been linked with Hamas, and I don't consider this a coincidence. ~~~~~~~~~~ As to whether some of the material is being confiscated by Hamas, undoubtedly this is the case. And there is nothing to be done for it. What we needn't concern ourselves about is that Hamas's securing of humanitarian aid is going to make a significant difference in our winning the war. We're not trying to starve them out, but rather bomb them to kingdom come. ~~~~~~~~~~ As to what the result at the end of this war will be... We may speak about what would be good. I have voiced my opinion that it might be best if Hamas were on its knees but not taken all the way out. And, yes, I have received messages from some of you who speak fervently about making sure Hamas is finished. But it is in the hands of Olmert, Barak, Livni and Ashkenazi. And this is where "The Guessing Game" comes in. We're at a crossroad and it's difficult to read what will follow: The IDF is prepared to go in, and waiting for the go-ahead, which has not yet taken place. Weather slowed things down, and I understand that there have been other legitimate considerations as well. I've heard suggestions in several quarters that when and if we do go in, it will be something that will push Hamas off balance, and not just a matter of sending in tanks and troops to go house to house (an unpalatable prospect). The Security Cabinet yesterday rejected France's suggestion of a 48 hour ceasefire (which message Livni officially delivered in Paris today) and it has been said by Olmert that we're going ahead until the job is done. ~~~~~~~~~~ And yet...and yet. There have also been inklings now of intention by Livni and Olmert to go the "international route." The mere thought of this could give one pains in my stomach. Been there, done that. Remember 2006 and resolution 1701? That's what stopped the War in Lebanon and put in place that marvelously effective international force called UNIFIL, which stood by and watched while Hezbollah re-armed. Today, Olmert said: "We have no interest in conducting a protracted campaign. We are not longing for a wide-scale war, but we want quiet and we want the lives of southerners to change so that our children can grow up in security, without fear and nightmares." What is more, there was a report in Haaretz that Olmert "is interested in the establishment of an international supervision and enforcement mechanism for any cease-fire between Israel and Hamas, [and] has made that a precondition of any deal." Precisely which international forces would effectively enforce a cease-fire with Hamas? What the presence of foreign troops would do is simply deprive us of our full sovereignty. Enforce the cease-fire? First reduce Hamas sufficiently so that they're begging for it, and then let them know that if there are rockets, we're coming after them again. ~~~~~~~~~~ But, on the other hand, Olmert indicated that "we're not there yet," in terms of a cease-fire, and that conditions must mature. Today he also said, "This time, as opposed to in the past, there is no feeling of caving in. There is a sense of dealing with problems and responding quickly...We don't want to use our full might, but we will if we need to." One savvy analyst I spoke with believes Olmert is in it for the long haul. Bush, after discussing the situation with Olmert, is talking about a "sustainable cease-fire." Olmert's message is that he won't stop until he's sure Hamas won't start again. He seems, in essence, to be saying to the international community: "These are my conditions. You want us to call a ceasefire. Can you guarantee Hamas won't start again?" Seen thus, his talk about international supervision is a sort of "put your money where your mouth is" statement that might help the international community better understand the parameters of our situation. ~~~~~~~~~~ And so we'll wait, and watch the outcome. What seems fairly certain to me from Olmert's statements is that he's not intending to take out Hamas completely — the comments of Gabriella Shalev and others notwithstanding. ~~~~~~~~~~ We achieved a major strike today when we hit the home of Sheikh Nizr Rayyan, and killed him and several others (including two of his four wives) in the process. As the religious leader of Hamas, he was considered the successor to Sheikh Ahmed Dassin, the founder of Hamas, whom we assassinated in 2004. But it seems he was also a commander of the military wing of Hamas, Izzadin Kassam. Said to be one of the most fanatical of the commanders — a strong advocate of suicide bombings — he was often seen in uniform and was associated with a number of terrorist attacks. This is the sort of man who deserved to be killed war or no war. My distinct impression is that this hits Hamas much harder psychologically then does destruction of their buildings, even headquarters and control centers. He is the fourth Hamas leader to have been targeted since the war began, but is the most senior. Rayyan's home was also hiding a tunnel opening (tunnel openings are often concealed inside of homes) and a cache of arms, and was a communications center. ~~~~~~~~~~ Homes of three other terrorist leaders were hit today, but their occupants were absent. Nizr Rayyan was an exception because he had sworn not to leave his home, and his family, even in spite of warnings, also refused to leave. There was the home of Mohammad Baroud, a top Popular Resistance Committees operative, who was the head of all rocket cells in northern Gaza. The IDF reported anti-tank missiles, rockets and bombs in this house. A second home belonged to Hasim Drili, a northern Gaza Hamas operative, who operated a manufacturing plant for rockets, mortar shells and missiles within his house. Yet another home belonged to Tafik Abu Raf, a Hamas terror operative. The IDF reported a weapons laboratory in this house. Altogether, 20 targets were hit today. ~~~~~~~~~~ Hamas, which had been cited as saying it would accept the French suggestion of a cease-fire "under certain conditions," now denies having said this. ~~~~~~~~~~ Here in Israel the rockets keep coming and there is a growing area in central Israel that is considered potentially at risk of attack. Precautions are now being put in place for Tel Aviv skyscrapers, as well as for Rishon LeTzion, Rehovot, and Ramat Beit Shemesh. What is happening is not that we're terrorized and eager to call it quits. Rather, our national back is stiffened: our people want tough action against Hamas and no ceasefire soon. It is at times like this that you see the best of Israelis, too. Homes are being opened for families in range of rockets to come for a respite. Some municipalities are making offers on a larger scale. Hotels are reducing prices for beleaguered families. ~~~~~~~~~~ Polls indicate that any temporary gain Kadima had with the start of the war has already been lost. But, as before, there are discrepancies in various polls. A poll that ran in Globes gives Likud 38 and Kadima 22; a poll that ran in Haaretz gives Likud 32 and Kadima 27. ~~~~~~~~~~ The Iranian news agency — reporting by Internet, and carried by IMRA — says that, "Director General of domestic media at the Culture and Islamic Guidance Ministry said 'Kargozaran' newspaper was shut down over a media offense on Wednesday." Why? Because the paper "[published] an article justifying anti-human crimes of the Zionist regime and calling Palestinian resistance as terrorism and claiming that Palestinian combatants take position in kindergardens and hospitals and so cause the deaths of children and civilians." How about that? An Iranian newspaper telling the truth. Here's an instance, I think, where making a distinction between the people and the leadership is very valid. Contact Arlene Kushner at akushner@netvision.net.il and visit her website: www.ArlenefromIsrael.info |
|
HAMAS SPIRITUAL LEADER FORCED HIS KIDS TO DIE WITH HIM
Posted by Avodah, January 1, 2009. |
|
The full article is at the Elder of Ziyon website
|
|
Sheikh Nizar Rayyan, a senior Hamas leader and cleric was killed along with several others on Thursday when an IAF aircraft dropped a bomb on his Jabalya home, the IDF said. Channel 10 reported that Rayyan was the "mufti" of Hamas's military wing and had replaced Sheikh Ahmed Yassin as the organization's top clerical authority after Yassin's assassination in 2004. In addition, the IAF bombed the homes of three senior Gaza terrorists. One of the homes belonged to Mohammad Baroud, a top Popular Resistance Committees operative. The army said that there were anti-tank missiles, rockets and bombs in the home. Another of the homes destroyed belonged to Hasim Drili, a northern Gaza Hamas operative. The army said that he had a manufacturing plant in his home for rockets, mortar shells and missiles. The third home belonged to Tafik Abu Raf, a Hamas terror operative in the central Gaza Strip. The IDF said that he had a weapons laboratory in his house. Palestine Today* says that Sheikh Rayyan knew very well that his house was a target: Over the past two days, Israeli aircraft bombed a number of the homes of Hamas leadersin the Gaza Strip, but most of the houses were empty Ma'an adds: Local witnesses told Ma'an that Rayyan had not evacuated his house despite a warning from the Israeli military. As sickening and twisted as the sheikh was, one can grudgingly admire someone who chooses not to hide from certain death. But when he purposefully sentences his children and (one of) his wives to the same death — or he uses them as human shields to protect himself — he proves himself to be pure, unadulterated evil. Dr. Aaron Lerner from IMRA: "Israel Television Channel 2 reported that Israel warned Rian on the phone to evacuate the building with his family but Rian opted to stay with his family in his house. "The IAF attacked the house of Nizar Rian, a senior Hamas terror operative, in Jabaliya. The attack was carried out based on IDF and ISA intelligence. Many secondary explosions were identified as a result of the attack, thus proving that the house was used for storing weaponry. It was also used as a communications center. In addition, a tunnel was located under the house and was used for the escape of terror operatives." Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com and visit his website:
|
|
THE SYMPATHY SPIN
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, January 1, 2009. |
|
For years the Muslim Arab Palestinians have launched Terrorist attacks against Israel without so much as a peep of true sympathy for Jewish victims from the world's nations and media. On occasion when the Terrorists achieve a spectacular suicide attack, as the Sbarro restaurant massacre of teens and families, or the Park Hotel Pesach Seder slaughter of elderly couples, then even the BBC or the New York Times might offer a straight, brief report sans the sympathy. But, when Arab Muslim Terrorists are killed by Israelis, then there is a virtual gusher of stories vomiting out sympathy for the dead Terrorists. Soon they will interview his mother, replete with pictures of a howling fat woman, surrounded by other howling fat women, saying how unfair it was to "Kill the Killer" merely because he murdered Jews. Add to that the howling of the nations who make up the U.N., the Arab and Muslim nations — with their spokespeople all trained to deny any Arab or Muslim role in such Terror. Then there is the international Media who like to roam about the world without being kidnaped, tortured or killed so they work hard at appeasing the Muslim Arab world. In Israel, Arabs and Muslims are free to go almost anywhere and attack the Jewish State in print or TV, assured that they will not be arrested. (I personally would have taken away their identity cards and send them back to their countries of origin.) In Israel Arab Muslims are free to vote, pray, speak — even against the government — and have 10 Arab Muslims in the Israeli Knesset (Parliament) who are not required to pledge their allegiance to the Jewish State. I just watched a CNN review, claiming they were being "fair" as they loaded their interview with a not subtle tilt to the Hamas Palestinians. When they interviewed Israel's spokesperson, Mark Regev, they walked on his answers, interrupted with other news and, in effect, insured that Israel's position seemed weak. So much for CNN's fairness in reporting. Then they went on to interview Cynthia McKinney, former defeated Congresswoman. McKinney was well-known as extremely anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian throughout her term of office. She was on a ship, purportedly carrying some boxes of medical supplies for Hamas in Gaza. Clearly, the ISM (International Solidarity Movement) ship was to create a photo-op, with so-called "Peace Activists" running an Israeli blockade during a war. The ship was interdicted and damaged. This was NOT a mercy mission but, a propaganda mission, aided by CNN's disinformation. Then there is the French proposal by French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner for a 48 hour cease-fire, knowing the Hamas would use the time to re-stock and position their rocket launchers. The French have long been accused of being the 'prostitutes' of Europe, always ready to fall on their knees before the enemy. They want Israel to follow their lead. What will happen if Israel's Defense Minister Ehud Barak and current Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (who resigned but remains in power) accept a 48 hour truce or even one that stretches out longer? Will it take a few weeks, a few months for Hamas to re-gather their forces and re-build their missile and rocket stocks — much the same as Hezb'Allah did in Lebanon after the failed 34 day Lebanon War of Summer 2006? I do not trust Olmert, Barak, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni or President Shimon Peres because they have shown themselves to be weak and harnessed to foreign interests. Hamas will not go away — nor will their suppliers, Iran and Syria — unless they are roundly defeated. If Barak and Olmert do not complete the mission in a very short time and before the February 10th elections, they should be dragged from their offices as Quislings who are a clear and present danger to the Jewish nation and to world Jewry. 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 |
|
MIDEAST ON TARGET: LESSONS OF WAR
Posted by Jack L., January 1, 2009. |
|
This is by Elliot Chodoff, who will be in the States from January 6, all through February and until March 5. If you are interested in having Elliot speak in your community, please contact him at ellichod@hotmail.com |
|
The assault on Hamas in Gaza that began this week has rocked that organization back on its heels and sent a powerful message to others around the Middle East and the world: Israel has learned the tactical lessons of the Second Lebanon War of 2006. To be sure, the operation is still in its early stages and much can go wrong along the way, as is the case in any military campaign, but the indicators so far clearly indicate that the IDF and the government have taken those lessons to heart. It is less clear that the strategic lessons have been learned as well. High scores in tactics go to the intelligence services, the IAF and its targeting capabilities, and to the government. The attack began with a series of deceptions, from permitting humanitarian goods into Gaza on Friday through declaring that the final decision would be made on Sunday. This time, instead of hitting empty buildings in the idle of the night, the air attacks began late Saturday morning, a regular workday in the Muslim world, catching Hamas off guard with its institutions teeming with activity. The results were stark and immediate hundreds of Hamas terrorists killed and wounded, with a minimum of non-combatant casualties. IAF precision bombing, while certainly evident in Lebanon n 2006, was enhanced by close coordination with intelligence, providing the air force with high quality targets. While some were obvious choices and easily marked, like headquarters buildings and training camps, the air strike that destroyed 40 tunnels in 4 minutes could only have been the fruit of Hollywood-style spy-craft. Although the air operation has been successful, it is clear, as was the case in Lebanon, that air attacks alone cannot achieve the desired results of crippling Hamas' rocket launching capabilities. This objective can only be achieved by a ground operation, and the IDF has moved a large force to the Gaza area for just this purpose, as well as calling up a limited number of reserves. Having trained for this scenario since the end of the Lebanon war, the IDF is as prepared as can be for this operation. Now it remains to the government to give the order to advance. Strategically, the government seems to have made the same mistakes that were made in 2006: failing to link the battlefield operations to a clear path to achieve its stated objectives. A short term weakening Hamas has certainly been achieved, but if the campaign ends with rockets landing in Beersheba and Gedera, the terrorist organization can reasonably claim victory. Given that it has stood alone against the might of the IDF, it may well emerge strengthened in the long run. The fact that the government is even considering a cease fire, (48 hours, unilateral, and for humanitarian reasons), stating that if Hamas stops shooting, so will we, clearly indicates that the Israeli leadership has no strategic concept of why it went to war. Hamas has responded as expected, recovering quickly after the shock of the initial air strikes, and firing more rockets at deeper targets in Israel. Following Hizbullah's successful 2006 playbook, Hamas aims to show by intensifying its rocket barrages, that it has not been vanquished so that any cease fire will appear as if Israel has quit under the pressure of the rocket attacks, a for fear of the consequences of the ground operation that it has threatened to launch. Israel will emerge from this scenario as a paper tiger, and Hamas as heroic fighters who strikes fear in the hearts of the Zionist enemy. Meanwhile, in the north, Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah is now caught on the horns of a dilemma. Witnessing the drubbing his Sunni ally in Gaza is taking from the IDF, he has little inclination to subject his fighters to a similar fate. Conversely, after years of taunting Israel and prodding Hamas to do the same, he risks scorn and ridicule from his terrorist allies if he decides to stay safely on the sidelines. Stay tuned... Contact Jack L. at yakovdov1@yahoo.com |
|
READER-SELECTED VIDEOS
Posted by Various Readers, January, 2009. |
|
>The Forgotten Refugees: The Jews from the Arab countries.
From Anabelle Pimienta (January 30, 2009) A film about the mass exodus of Jews from the Middle East and North Africa in the 20th century _ The Forgotten Refugees. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nwI2hzPjrA Part 1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GBHc0yvtrDw Part 2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=969cMq8rIzc Part 3 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYkQlTfWIvc Part 4 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TJfEf5UMSI Part 5 http://www.theforgottenrefugees.com
Buried beneath the headlines of the Middle East conflict is the nearly forgotten story of the region's indigenous Jewish communities. In 1945, up to one million Jews lived in the Middle East outside of the Palestine Mandate. Within a few years, only a few thousand remained. The Forgotten Refugees explores the history and destruction of Middle Eastern Jewish communities, some of which had existed for over 2,500 years. It chronicles the impact of the Arab Muslim conquest, the development of Judeo-Arab culture, and the modern rise of Arab nationalism that drove out hundreds of thousands of Jews from their homes and communities. This destruction is a significant loss for the Jewish people and for the Middle East. Featuring testimony from Jews who fled Egypt, Libya, Iraq, Yemen, Morocco and Iran, the film explores the rich heritage and destruction of the Middle East's age-old Jewish communities. Personal stories of refugees are interspersed with dramatic archival footage, including the mission to rescue Yemenite Jews. The film represents a unique approach to educating the public about an integral but little known aspect of Middle East history. Produced by The David Project & IsraTV Dissimulée derrière les gros titres du conflit au Moyen-Orient, se trouve l'histoire oubliée des communautés juives de la région. En 1945, un million de juifs vivaient au Moyen-Orient en dehors des frontières de la Palestine mandataire et en Afrique du nord. Quelques années plus tard, ils n'étaient plus que quelques milliers. Voici l'histoire de ces milliers d'individus qui ont fui leur maison, qui ont connu les camps de réfugiés et qui gardent aujourd'hui, en silence, la mémoire d'une civilisation détruite. "Les réfugiés oubliés" raconte l'histoire et la destruction de ces communautés juives orientales, certaines d'entre elles ayant existé pendant plus de 2500 ans. A travers les témoignages de ces Juifs qui ont fui l'Egypte, la Libye, l'Iraq et le Yémen, les histoires personnelles de réfugiés sont entrecoupées par des images d'archives exclusives, montrant notamment les missions de secours des Juifs yéménites et iraquiens. "Les réfugiés oubliés" a été diffusé sur PBS en Californie, PBS in Virginia, WHRO-TV, RTVi,... Le film a également été projeté au Congres américain en Juillet 2007 et àl'ONU en Mars 2008. Hamas, see how they think, how they operate
On March 3th 2003, A suicide murderer , a Hamas terrorist exploded on city bus 37 in Haifa Israel killing 17 people, Men, Women and children, mainly children. Nine out of the 17 killed were school children on their way back from yet another day at school. One of the killed children is my son, Asaf, known to all his friends as Blondi (www.blondi.co.il) A few days later two of the terrorists involved in the attack were arrested, others were killed in fights with the IDF forces that came to arrest them. British TV channel 4 made later a documentary called "Inside the mind of a suicide terrorist" trying to understand why and how they operate. Among others they chose to interview the two terrorists that murdered my son. If one needed a demonstration of hatred and indifferent to human lives, that documentary shows the way Hamas terrorists think and operate. The next three clips are short excerpts from the one hour documentary. I urge you to see them, it will make anyone better understand what are we facing in Israel every day. what are we dealing with in trying to protect our children. First clip — is it OK to kill an old lady? -
Second clip — eye for an eye -
Third clip — it's us or them -
Yossi, Asaf's (Blondi) father
Asaf's (Blondi) memorial web site: www.Blondi.co.il
The Third Jihad -a must see video
Friends, The maker of the film, The Third Jihad, is a devout Muslim, who is devoutly against terror. In this remarkable and chilling film, he explains what the West faces, and how dangerous things really are- and why, as an American Muslim against terror, he stands alone. Watch this and spread it around. It is in English with French subtitles. http://blip.tv/play/AdmXMI6nSg IDF Officer Speaks To Arab World In Arabic About Gaza
DO NOT let YouTube remove this video! The IDF broadcasting on You Tube, presented by Capt. Avichai Adraee, an Israel officer speaking Arabic, showing and explaining in full clarity what is really going on in Gaza and how Hamas terrorists operate from the midst of civilian neighborhood, schools and mosques and how they used a United Nations school as shelter while firing mortar bombs at Israeli soldiers, thus endangering Palestinian civilians. This clip actually shows a missle being fired directly from the school itself, while U.N. representatives in Gaza and around the world protect the terrorists and criticize Israel for "bombing innocent schoolchildren" in their schools. However, YouTube wants to remove this video by using the excuse that not enough many people are logging in. So please watch the video once, twice and three times and also forward this e-mail to as many people so they also log in and the IDF will be able to have its voice heard. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=~p=24B346594DCE3F37&index=5 More Shameful Footage Of Hamas Supporters Attacking Our Police
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=E_ihOOPBS4I&feature=related New Video From Michael Fenenbock, Founder Of The 18
As someone who signed up as a friend of the18 and the campaign to stop the rush to a 2-state solution, we are excited to share with you a link to a new compelling video, just released on the well-respected blog, Little Green Footballs. the18 video on LGF: Questions About America's Role in a Palestinian State As suggested in the video, contact President Obama with your concerns about the creation of a Palestinian terror state on Israel's border. One look at the headlines from this past week makes it clear we are facing an urgent situation. Here is how you can help Please share the link to the video with your friends and family and urge them to watch -- and think about everything that is at stake. And encourage them to join with us. Join the18 (http://the18.org/signup.html) Thank you for your support of our "No on 2-State" campaign. You will be hearing from us again soon. Signed,
a Palestinian state will put all of Israel's big cities into rocket range
32582_Video-_Questions_About_Americas_Role_in_a_Palestinian_State Brigitte Gabriel style: The Third Jihad
A must see! Moishe Israel's operation against Hamas: Defeating Terror, Promoting Peace
Israel's operation against Hamas: Defeating Terror, Promoting Peace - An MFA presentation Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs has created a tutorial explaining the Gaza conflict. View this illuminating presentation here: http://www.mfa.gov.il/NR/~/MFAHamasOpPresentation.pdf Christian Zionists
Earl Cox in Israel http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ChoI2ztTPAM I Wish I Could Look & Not Believe it
If you haven't seen this, you'd best take a look and get ready for the fight of your life. EVERY PERSON NEEDS TO WATCH THIS AND SEE WHAT HAS HAPPENED IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD. Islam is NOT a religion and should not be treated as such.
http://perfectlyhuman.multiply.com/video/item/8 video of what is happening in London
Concern about what is currently happening in London - Europe This nothing short of shocking! Beware of foul language, but it is a must-see. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=97hyDRjdXCE Back to the situation that occurred a month ago.
Shalom Everyone, This morning (GMT), an Israeli soldier was killed and three others were wounded due to an explosive device detonated near their patrol on the Gaza border. At this time, Israel didn't retaliate... we are back to the situation that occurred a month ago... Let's hope for the best, but prepare for the worse. - First step to peace: destroy terrorism
- IDF gives Hamas a lesson in human shields
- High Tech in Israel
- Obama defends Israel?
- Beautiful Shema Israel
- An Israeli and the War
- The ancient city of Tel Dan
What happened when Hamas ambushed Golani troops
Amazing piece of footage coming out of the Gaza conflict. http://zalmi.blogspot.com/2009/01/inhuman-shield.html BBC get the shock of their lives
Friends, Watch this youtube of former British army colonel interviewed about Israeli actions in Gaza by BBC. You are going to be amazed BBC aired this. I guess it was live and they had no choice. Kudos Colonel!
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/ Jews Undercover - Iran
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fcDtmv5gmM Mr. Obama, don't forget Road 90
Shalom Everyone, Shalom everyone, The war in Gaza is now over, but as all the media are now focused on the United States and on their now officially new president; no one pays attention anymore to the rockets that are still falling on the south of Israel. - CNN Israeli double standard
- Rockets: after Sderot, Tel Aviv?
- Singing with Israeli soldiers in Jerusalem
- Hamas Uses Schools and Ceasefire to Shoot Rockets at Israel
- Young Gazan Cancer Patients Enter Israel for Treatment
- Rebirth (MUST SEE)
- Israeli hasbarah
Watch and Fear The Islam Religion
Perfectly Human's Subterranean Circus http://perfectlyhuman.multiply.com/video/item/8 The Truth About Hamas and Palestinians
"I'll appreciate if you send it to friends to realize the truth, assome in the TV and Radiomedia are sometimes biased.." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I1M4eH9Kk7I&eurl http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ada_1181673107 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=of7w0sZfcMU&feature=related http://multimedia.heritage.org/content/wm/Lehrman-092706a.wvx IPT Video Report Exposes Anti-Semitism And Support For Terrorism At U.S. Gaza Protests
http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=QOyRipFULNY Jihad in Academia
WATCH THIS ..... Watch till the end - it is worth it! http://www.terrorismawareness.org/jihad-academia Alburquereque Counter Anti-Israel Rally - Video Report
Friday's protest in front of the UNM bookstore
I think you'll find the video interesting, although it's kind of long. Maybe you'll find my account interesting, and maybe not —I did, anyways J Amazing video footage of Hamas atrocities against fellow-muslims!
LISTEN Carefully! Narrated by an Arab who argues FOR Israel! It doesn't end when it appears to end. Watch past the Gaza and Jerusalem Arabs dancing in the streets after 9/11. It's worth the few minutes to gain insight into Hamas activities. http://mypetjawa.mu.nu/archives Watch now. They keep removing this fellow from YouTube, etc. WONDER WHY? Death to the Jews
Israelis, probably like you today, don't understand the decision of Olmert to stop the fight before the job is done. We will wait a few days before to take conclusions, but today, in Israel, especially for our soldiers who did a great job, the time has stop... Like you will see below, the world today is sick, even in the US. But Israelis keep their excellent humor, a must seen! "Hamas supporters in LA: 'Put the Jews back in the Ovens'"
In Ashdod. Incredible, for those we says "Cartisanal rockets"
MUST SEE THIS: Israel/Gaza: satirizing world media
The HAMAS, the one that the world supports
Hamas Blog - Ismail Haniyeh
Tribute to IDF soldiers in Gaza
Understanding the islamic jihad against the Jews of Israel - A Great Video!
This excellent, very professional video can help put the current islamic jihad against Jews into a historical perspective that the media doesn't understand, or deliberately chooses to omit. PLEASE FORWARD WIDELY. To understand why Israel needed to defend itself in Gaza, click on: http://fun.mivzakon.co.il/flash/video/2673/2673.html Muslims handicapped for life for refusing to join Hamas
Terrorists of Hamas shoot at the legs of their palestinian "brothers" who are amputated and handicaped for live for refusing to join Hamas. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7w5es_le-hamas-attaque-ses-freres-palesti_news
Israel is winning the war in Gaza
- Life and death in southern Israel
- Hamas Booby Trapped School and Zoo
- Bombing the Hand that Feeds You
- IDF Reserves Entering the Gaza Strip
- Hamas Exploitation of Civilians as Human Shields
- Change your mind, learn how Tefilin are Made
Hamas Brags That It Uses Human Shields
A Hamas representative in the PA legislative council, takes pride in the fact that women and children are used as human shield in fighting Israel. He describes it as part of the "Death Industry" at which they excel, and explains that the Palestinians "desire death" the same way Israelis "desire life". The following is the full text: ''For the Palestinian people death became an industry, at which women excel and so do all people on this land: the elderly excel, the Jihad fighters excel, and the children excel. Accordingly [Palestinians] created a human shield of women, children, the elderly and the Jihad fighters againset the Zionist bombing machine, as they were saying to the Zionist enemy: We desire death as you desire Life. '' http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTu-AUE9ycs Way to Go, Joe. Great PR
http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/up/player/popup/?rn=~4226714&src=news instructive Videos
I just received this. Have so far only looked at first video, but it is Instructive. Wanted to get these out to you. "The commentary is a little halting and slow at times, but the interesting thing is that it's an indictment of Hamas and its brutal methods by an Arab! I'm not sure if he is Palestinian himself, although it is likely since Hamas has killed scores of Fatah Palestinians so far." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9i57PrvlCWo&NR=1 For those of you who understand French, watch this amazing report that shows the Fatah victims of Hamas thugs, many shots in the legs on purpose, resulting in multiple amputations. Now they're praying to be evacuated to Israeli hospitals! http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x7w5es_le-hamas-attaque-ses-freres-palesti_news I don't recall seeing any Red Cross representative going publicly on TV foaming at the mouth like this one who accused Israel of war crimes for not taking care fast enough of four Palestinian orphans lost in the middle of a war zone!.... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7x6rgmvg8c&feature=related Finally, if you want to watch how a slimy journalist can be overly aggressive and has the nerve to demand an apology from the Israeli government even before all the facts have been established, watch this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BCWL3UwCv-s&feature=related It's great! Pass it around. http://fun.mivzakon.co.il/flash/video/2686/movie.html Hatikva sung in Trafalgar Square
http://zalmi.blogspot.com/2009/01/hatikva-btrafalgar-square.html Understanding Hammas (and Islamist "Palestinian" mindset)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7_OGhj43GAE "Hamas: In Their Own Voices"
From MEMRI, Special Announcement No. 89. MEMRI is today releasing a new and exclusive viral video, titled "Hamas: In Their Own Voices." The video, a compilation of MEMRI TV clips that aired prior to the current Gaza crisis, includes statements by Hamas leaders calling for the annihilation of Israel and of all Jews, for death to America, and for the Islamic conquest of the world. Featured are Hamas leader Khaled Mash'al, Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniya, Hamas MPs Mushir Al-Masri and Fathi Hamad, Hamas MP and cleric Yunis Al-Astal, Palestinian Legislative Council acting speaker Sheikh Ahmad Bahr, and Hamas clerics Wael Al-Zarad and Muhsen Abu 'Ita. Viewers will also witness Hamas military training for adults and children, anti-American speeches at rallies including burning of the American flag and calls of support for "The Afghan Mujahidin", Hamas Al-Aqsa TV children's shows, and more. http://www.memritv.org/video.html "Vice Presidential Candidate Gov. Sarah Palin (AK) Full Speech at the Republican National Convention (RNC)."
Vladimir Putin recently cut off energy supplies to thousands of innocent Europeans. For anyone who thinks Sarah Palin doesn't understand foreign policy (especially in her vital area of energy expertise) listen to 23:18 TO 23:60 in this youtube video from her RNC speech. It is chilling. There is actually more but this takes very little of your time and is probably the most important as it relates to our situation. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UCDxXJSucF4&featu So you want to boycott Israel?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNCGEwjbgDk Twinkle, twinkle, little star
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eTGbP55HGi8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3c5uWIDBXY&NR=1
SEE AND SEND ALL OVER THE WORLD ...! Subject: YOU MUST SEE AND SEND ALL OVER THE WORLD ...! http://www.aish.com/movies/15seconds.asp http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Im4KE3nkGA0 Save the poor, starving Gazans" (send to all your bleeding-heart-liberal friends)
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=83aJj72UjlM Pro-Hamas demonstration in Fort Lauderdale, FL
Among other things on this video, one Palestinian woman shouts repeatedly, "Jews go back to the ovens". These people are not kidding around, this is not merely street theater. http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=j3Xl68kP4wo No, they are not kidding. Note that they are ones calling US "Nazis." The other thing I note is that one of the things they shouted out repeatedly was "Nuke Israel." Either they know absolutely nothing about the geography of this place or they don't care that nuking Israel would also kill more than eight million Arabs, including their precious "Palestinians." The issue here is not at all what is "being done to the Palestinians."... Steven Plaut has pointed out (see below) the similarities between Israel's war against terrorists and Sri Lanka's war against terrorists who are ostensibly ethnic Tamil separatists but whose real goal seems clearly to be the destruction of the Sinhalese state of Sri Lanka. Plaut notes that Sri Lanka's war has elicited no interest by the world, contrary to Israel's wars, in which every shot fired elicits condemnation as "disproportionate" and "genocide" and "worse than the Nazis." Similar parallels and examples are legion. (See a piece I wrote long ago, below.) Call me "paranoid" but I am led to the conclusion that the world will not accept the right of Jews to defend ourselves and certainly not to inflict casualties in doing so. Palestinian protests bring Gaza fighting to San Francisco
This comes from Zombie Time
"I'm a little spooked": Palestinian protests bring Gaza fighting to San Francisco For nearly every day of the last week, San Francisco has seen street protests about the fighting in Gaza between Israel and Hamas. Hundreds of Palestinians, as well as left-wing activists organized by ANSWER, have marched and chanted in and around downtown San Francisco starting on December 30, and continuing (with a break on New Year's Day) every day since, with no end in sight. I have been unable to attend and document these protests in person, but KTVU Channel 2 filmed the protest on January 2, 2009 and made some of the raw video available on its site. Because the KTVU video page does not display or load properly on many computers, I have downloaded the raw video and, after editing out a section at the beginning where not much happens, uploaded it to YouTube so more people can get a flavor of what these protests are like. Here is the YouTube version of the KTVU video of the January 2 protest: Note in particular the moment at the 0.22 mark in the video when the Palestinian protesters reach across the barricades to attack the five pro-Israel protesters, and have to be restrained by police. At the end, one of the pro-Israel protesters, who were vastly outnumbered, declined to be interviewed by the cameraman, saying, "I'm a little spooked." After watching this video, I think we're all a little spooked! It's as if the battle in Gaza has come to San Francisco. If you want to watch the full five-minute video, you can see it either here on the KTVU site http://www.ktvu.com/video/18403230/archives/oldindex.html or (if that doesn't work) , directly on its own page (which may display more easily for most users) Media link(s) found in '18403230/archives/oldindex.html': mms://a1613.v129480.c12948.g.vm.akamaistream.net This full KTVU video shows how, after this incident, the police were forced to escort the pro-Israel protesters inside a building — to keep them safe from the Palestinian protesters, who could not be controlled. (Thanks to Joo-Liz and Eclectic Infidel for technical help with this video.) Meanwhile, at an earlier San Francisco Gaza protest on December 30, the Palestinian protesters (according to this post at the "At the Back of the Hill" blog) chanted the following slogans in Arabic: "Itbach al Yahud" (slaughter the Jews)
At the Back of the Hill noted, While the Arabs screamed their desire to exterminate Jews, the English-monolingualists simply stood there happily smiling their approbation. From The Israeli Side (January 4, 2009)
Hi Everyone! Today I viewed (thanks YK) a very good, short (two and a half minutes), YouTube video explaining Israel's position: Lets Play Pretend
You can also watch videos from the IDF Spokesperson's Unit at:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5b1aeMky90 You may also want to read: Blogs
http://muqata.blogspot.com/
Twitters:
You can search Twitter for recent posts about Israel via:
Please pray for the safety of our soldiers.
Shavua Tov,
The Situation In The South Of Israel
Shalom Everyone, This is our second email about the situation in the south of Israel. Yesterday, after Shabbat, the Israeli Defense Forces started a ground operation in Gaza, in order to destroy the launching sites that Hamas terrorists use to fire rockets on Israeli civilians. Here are some of the newest videos we have about the situation, and let's all pray and have a thought for those soldiers risking their lives to protect Israeli children. As always, you can contribute by forwarding these links, and help Israel win the "war of images". - IDF Hits Dozens of Hamas Terrorists
- Myths and Facts about Gaza
- Hamas admit using humans shields a part of strategy
- Palestinian protesters in SF
- Weapons in Gaza Mosque Struck by Israel Air Force 1 Jan. 2009
- Jordanian deputies burn Israeli Flag
- Interesting Exchange Regarding Israel/Palestinian Conflict
Waiting to see you on Road 90.
Terrorism Awareness Project Feature Presentation
This slide show is excellently done. The real story. http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/ A Mainstream Journalist Calling A Lying Arab A Liar.
Fox News tells off Palestinian legal adviser. It is so refreshing and encouraging to discover a mainstream journalist calling an Arab a liar. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jSUSoPrICqQ Pictures of our Israeli Soldiers and a Prayer
Hi Everyone! I posted on my website recent pictures of our soldiers stationed near Gaza. I also posted the Hebrew prayer for the IDF and its English translation. http://www.jr.co.il/pictures/israel/army/archives/oldindex.html Please pray for the safety of our soldiers. Shabbat Shalom,
Sderot
5 Families, 15 children, 1 bomb shelter
Gibraltar Volunteer Experiences 'Red Color" Alert
Pro-Hamas Demonstration - Fort Lauderdale FL
"United Torah Bloc"
Australian Friends of Gush Katif & Shomron believe that there is currently NO leadership for worldwide Jewry. The last true leader was the Lubavitcher Rebbe and although he is no longer with us physically has given us all guidelines for our lives both on an individual and world wide basis. The Rebbe screamed out for Shleimus Haaretz....but where is that scream now?????? Silence is a Sin. Throughout the world Rabbis, Zionist Organisations and other mainstream Jewish Organisations purportedly representing the view of Jews world wide are absolutely silent....this same silence prevailed at the time of the unilateral, suicidal disengagement from Gush Katif and the violent expulsion of our youth from Amona and is now present as the "psychotics" Barak and Olmert forcibly expelled the 20 peace loving families from the legally purchased "Peace House" in Chevron. While Olmert calls the "Peace House" expulsion a "pogrom" by Jews we all sit back in silence. We have just produced a powerful You Tube video titled a "United Torah Bloc" which simply shows the only answer to rid Israel of a corrupt government is to vote for a "United Torah Bloc" giving us true Torah Leadership. Please share our website - www.unitedtorahbloc.net - with your friends. http://www.unitedtorahbloc.net/ Do the Media Give Credibility to Terrorists?
Do the Media Give Credibility to Terrorists? Remember the "Gaza blackout." Never happened. "The Terrorists' Cease Fire"? Never happened. http://www.honestreporting.com/a/who_speaks_for_israel.asp From Daisy Stern January 19, 2009 Watch a powerful speech by Brigitte Gabriel, followed by a video of poor Gaza Muslims having a taste of their own medicine and crying foul. So tell me, dear Muslims, how does it feel to receive back what you gave?? "If this does not keep you at the edge of your seat, nothing will. While I disagree with some of the principles of The Heritage Foundation and some statements made by this lady; she has a very compelling story. Take the time to watch the whole thing. It will be worth it."
http://multimedia.heritage.org/content/wm/Lehrman-092706a.wvx
And now this:
Speaker: Israel Defense Forces Vlog: Hamas is a Terrorist Army, Lt. Barak Raz
http://www.youtube.com/idfnadesk And this parody. Great, and short: worth a watch! In difficult economic times. It's called "Help Save The Lifestyle Of An Executive." http://www.think-israel.org/jan09pix/SponsorAnExecutive.wmv From Barry Shaw (January 1, 2009) FOX NEWS Proper Journalists! we need much more of them. Why can't we have an honest journalist on British television, for example ? Here is one anchor who knows what he is talking about and refusing to accept the lies of a Palestinian legal adviser... The BBC and Channel 4 can learn from Fox.. Warms the heartstrings... http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=jSUSoPrICqQ&feature=channel_page From Yael from Road 90 December 28, 2008 (contact@road90.com) How do you like it...?
Merry Christmas in Israel...
Sderot: What can you do in 15 seconds?
Sderot: Red Alert
The real story of Israel
http://www.terrorismawareness.org/what-really-happened/ From Tsila (tsilagroup@yahoo.com) (December 18, 2008) I think it is time to once again recall the Nobel Prize originally
given Arafat and declare the Oslo Accords a failure/null and void
Brachot/Blessings Of Torah;
http://torahjudaismandisrael.blogspot.com http://7lawsofnoah.blogspot.com Chanukah
Just Jew It - True Chanukah Story:
Meaning behind Chanukah:
Adam Sandler: Chanukah Song:
Focus: volunteer to fight for Israel: The Machal volunteers:
Arab call to arms:
Focus: Israel: Jerusalem Time-lapse:
Amazing Advanced Solar Cell from Israel:
Investigation into the Palestinian Myth:
What does creating a Palestinian state entail?
From "The 18" organization. What does creating a Palestinian state entail? What does it mean to the American taxpayer? Michael Fenenbock is the speaker. http://www.the18.org/archives/oldindex.html In the second video, Fenenbock asks: what did Mumbai have to do with borders? There will no Jewish State if the 2-State solution is imposed. See this movie captured by the IDF at Hamas's office in the town of Jeballiah:
http://www.think-israel.org/jan09pix/gekken.in.irak.wmv From Jenny Weisberg (January 16, 2009) Shalom! It took me a few weeks to get the permission I needed from a bunch of different Israeli army officials to make this video, but, thank G-d, it finally exists. It's about Major David Shapiro, the hero of the Merkaz Harav massacre, and today a hero leading troops in Gaza. I want to get it's inspirational message about Israel's soldiers out to the world. If you do as well, please send it on to your lists! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UkFKUvNFkg4 or, to bypass You Tube
May we hear good news from all our soldiers!
In Gaza, the IDF is going home to home to clean up Hamas's hordes
of explosives, RPG, arms and ammunition.
In Gaza, the IDF is going home to home to clean up Hamas's hordes of explosives, RPG, arms and ammunition. This one second video shows where the Gazans hide these treasures; at home under the bathroom sink! Do we need to see anything else to understand why the IDF is going house-to-house and destroy the homes of those claiming to be "innocent"? http://www.think-israel.org/jan09pix/HamasCivillians.wmv |
| Home | Featured Stories | Background Information | News On The Web |