| Home | Featured Stories | June 2004 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
|
WHAT IT'S REALLY ABOUT
Posted by Yocheved Golani, June 30, 2004. |
|
Defenseless passengers on an Air France plane, a BOAC aircraft, a Japanese jumbo jet, KLM, Lufthansa, Pan Am, Sabena, TWA and other airliners were not "occupying" the planes conveying them to innocuous destination when Islamic terrorists kidnapped, terrorized and slaughtered them throughout the 1960s and 1970s. The civilian victims scattered across the countryside of Lockerbie, Scotland in 1988 had not "occupied" Pan Am 103, either. Vacationing Christian, Puerto Rican tourists weren't "occupying" Ben Gurion airport on May 20, 1972 when pro-Islamic terrorists ambushed and sprayed them with bullets upon arrival. Sleeping Israeli athletes invited to 1972's peace-promoting competitions in Munich were not "occupying" the Olympic Village when Arab radicals besieged and murdered them, disrupting the games promoting international friendship and trust. Unarmed children at Ma'alot weren't "occupying" their school the day Arab terrorists forced them to jump to their deaths from the building during interrupted celebrations of 1974's Israel Independence Day. Elderly Dora Bloch and her fellow travelers were not "occupying" Athens airport in 1976 when Arab terrorists hijacked a planeload of passengers to Uganda, resulting in Dora's murder and the rescue of her terrorized former companions. Wheelchair-bound tourist Leon Klinghoffer was not "occupying" the Italian ship Achille Lauro when fundamentalist terrorists humiliated, then drowned the man by throwing him overboard, on October 7, 1985. Teen hikers Yosef Ish-Ran and Koby Mandell of Biblical Tekoa did not seek to "occupy" the cave they were dragged to in 2001, and where their captors bludgeoned them to a terrifying death, then smeared their blood on the walls. The employees of various faiths and ethnic backgrounds who reported for work that day weren't "occupying" New York's Twin Towers when they were shocked, burned, smothered, blasted and shattered to death by Arab terrorists on September 11, 2001 Daniel Pearl was not "occupying" Pakistan when he researched the links between Richard Reed and bin Laden before he was betrayed and beheaded for being a Jew and therefore an "enemy" of Islam in 2002. Entrepreneur Nicholas Berg was not "occupying" Iraq when Arab terrorists slowly, agonizingly, carved his Jewish head off his neck for public intimidation in 2004. The American businessmen murdered in Saudi Arabia were minding their own business when they were doing business with Muslim colleagues. So why are they all dead? Is it truly because the Jews of Israel will not cede land to the rabble that, prevented by their compatriots from returning to their native countries in 1948, now fraudulently claims to be Palestinians? No. There are two glaring contradictions to the specious argument. One: In 1948, Arab leaders wouldn't permit Arabs unwilling to live among Jews to live in any Arab state. The artificially created refugees were used and abused by their own brethren as violent political pawns against a nascent Israel. Two: Sharon promised in June 2004 to "evacuate" disputed land before 2005. Within hours of that announcement, Arafat and Hamas respectively swore to annihilate and kidnap/murder military and civilian Jews. Clearly the problem is not about "giving back" land which never legitimately belonged to Arabs anyway. The chaos, murder and mayhem are not about the merits or demerits of democracy, the West, or Christianity, or international law. It's not about the Jews "controlling" the very same "media" which incongruously condemns Judaism, its practices and the Knesset. It's not about Israel inside or outside red, green, yellow or blue lines. It's not about the Israeli Right, or Jewish settlers (they'd be called "citizens" in any other society that inherited, purchased, won and/or annexed land). It's not about present-day Israel versus the borders of ancient Israel nor about the alleged occupation of Arab lands. It is about armed insanity, the calculated manipulation of public opinion via propaganda, coercion and attacks against unarmed civilians and their political leaders. And the scale of horror stands to rise now that Iran has saluted the world with nuclear arms. A mutual and implacable enemy is closing in on Jews, Israel, their supporters and all non-Muslims. That same enemy makes global headlines as it strikes increasing numbers of far-flung, far-fetched targets. It's the same enemy that sends journalists, essential personnel in freedom-loving societies, home in coffins and into the headlines (see Reporters Without Borders at http://www.rsf.fr/rubrique.php3?id_rubrique=20). It's not about the best place to be a reporter. It's about the worst places for access to the truth, where individual freedoms such as yours are routinely denied, and about the existence of a centuries-old opposition to non-Muslim social structures. It's about the antipathy of the murderous culture, of which the Abu Sayyaf is a member, that stole missionaries like Martin and Gracia Burnham from civilization, altering their lives and those of many of their colleagues, forever. It's about a heartless social system that steals property, pillaging and maiming females, children, the elderly and anyone else caught in the merciless trap of savages preying on the defenseless. It's about a people that cannot appreciate the noble intentions and efforts that non-Muslims made to rebuild an Iraq nearly bereft of all necessary resources. It is about an alleged spirituality that shuns kindness, takes no prisoners, brooks no negotiations, accepts no limits, respects no property lines, and preaches murder and mayhem. It's about warped minds preying on the physically unprepared, hoping that they are also mentally vulnerable. It's about Koran-thumping barbarians who value death above life and live in opposition to peace-loving societies. Islam seeks to place its claws and poison into any target of opportunity, wherever it may be and whenever an opportunity is available. It's about bloodthirsty monsters abusing an UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees) ambulance to transport terrorists (a technique used with civilian and specially commissioned emergency medical vehicles in the past) and to steal the body parts of slain Israeli soldiers in May 2004. The numbers of Arabs residing within European Union nations gives rise to the question, "How many of them are functioning as enemies of their host countries?" The EU Monitoring System on Racism and Xenophobia declined to release its damning 2004 report regarding manifestations of Islamic antipathy within the EU to date. Holland tops the list at www.jihadwatch.org. Spain, which has "occupied" its real estate for centuries, cowered and ran from the enemy after it stung a railroad. Israel's government, an EU wannabe, is retreating in fear (Mitzpeh Yitzhar was dismantled in May 2004 and much more land is similarly endangered), fomenting a civil war between its patriotic citizens and those willing to shed their Jewish identities. As the Coalition Forces indicate their willingness to withdraw from Iraq, they've also served notice that intimidation works, especially with Sarin. Yocheved Golani can be reached at www.yochevedgolani.com or www.ygolani.com. |
|
TYRANNY OF THE MAJORITY
Posted by Itamar Weisbrod, June 30, 2004. |
|
In a weekend interview with the Jerusalem Post, Shimon Peres was asked what would happen if his Labour party decided to join the government, and several of their ministers did not want to. He answered, "They are members of the party, and have to accept its authority. They can't sit inside and outside of the party, and that is not acceptable to me. If they take part in the debate, they have to accept the results of the debate. Every party has a minority, but in a democracy the majority decides. They are not above democracy." While in this instance he may be correct about the necessity of party unity, his answer does reflect his overall attitude towards democracy. In other parts of the interview, Peres expressed his opinion in favour of expelling the Jews from Gaza and handing over the assets to our enemies. He views the government decision to uproot the Jews there as moral and democratic, and shuns opposition to this belief by stating that people of a minority opinion "aren't above democracy". Peres, a man who was not raised in a truly democratic and free society, and who has strong links to former communist and socialist regimes, does not surprise me when he expresses his total lack of understanding of a Liberal Democracy. One of the less commonly known aspects of the flaws of democracy is the tyranny of the majority. John Stuart Mill, in his essay "On Liberty" speaks of the tyranny of the majority and says, "Like other tyrannies, the tyranny of the majority was at first, and is still vulgarly, held in dread, chiefly as operating through acts of the public authorities. But reflecting persons perceived that when society is itself the tyrant- society collectively, over the separate individuals who compose it- its means of tyrannizing are not restricted to the acts which it may do by the hands of its political functionaries. Society can and does execute its own mandates: and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression, since, though not usually upheld by such extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself." Mill's essay "On Liberty" is known to be the philosophic cornerstone of democratic morality and present a search for the true balance between the rights of the individual and power of the state. Indeed this situation we face now in Israel is sadly one that falls under tyranny of the majority. Despite the results of Likud internal elections on the disengagement plan, we in the opposition to disengagement should not kid ourselves and realize that a majority of Israelis would be in favour of expelling Jews from Gaza. Despite the fact that the Likud referendum on disengagement was illiberal in essence, polls have shown that the slim majority of opinion in Israel is contrary to the referendums results. This does not mean however, that the Israeli government has the right to expel Jews from their homes just because the majority of Israelis want his to happen. This is not how a Liberal Democracy behaves. Can you imagine if a majority of citizens in the US decided they wanted to reintroduce slavery? And what if a referendum was held on the issue and it won? The Shimon Peres' of America (in this hypothetical situation) would say that this is what the people want, and "in a democracy the majority decides. They aren't above democracy." Mill points out this that is a total abuse of democracy and we must be aware of it to fight against it. Firstly, Sharon's choice to ignore the illiberal referendum that he called for, and lost, and his firing of two cabinet ministers to ensure a majority, definitely falls under what Mill describes as "chiefly operating through acts of the public authorities." Sharon and other pro-disengagement MK's are falsely labeling their acts of pushing through their own agendas as "democratic" and misleading the young country into believing this is how a Liberal Democracy works. "Society can and does execute its own mandates: and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political oppression?" Mill is pointing out that yes, on most issues in a Liberal Democracy, the majority decides. However, if the issue that is to be decided upon can be infringing on the rights of a minority, or discriminate against a minority opinion because of its ethnic or religious identity, the majority has no mandate to decide on this issue. There is a fine line between what a majority can decide upon in a Liberal Democracy, and what is not up for discussion. That is why in most democratic countries there is a constitution in order to protect minorities and ensure them their basic rights, even if the majority does not respect them. When Mill points out just how evil tyranny of the majority is, one of the reasons given was that it is because "it leaves fewer means of escape." To paraphrase what Golda Meir was quoted saying about Sharon, "If Sharon does not get his way in Knesset, he would line up tanks and surround the Knesset until he did." Indeed this is true of Sharon and of tyranny. What are we to do to escape this tyranny of the majority on the settlers of Gaza? Like a traitor, who acts falsely in the name of the people in order to gain a better angle in which to commit his actions, the tyranny of disengagement is being bulldozed through the Knesset and the driving force behind it is telling the public that what they are doing is democratic and good for the country. They have also waged a propaganda war against the Gaza settlers, with Peres being quoted as saying, "Everyone wants peace except the right-wing extremists" and new leftist slogans like "The majority has decided: Leave Gaza and start talking." Peres' comments are dismissive of his opposition to the point where he lies about what the other side wants. No one on the right wing denies the fact that left wingers want peace. We all know that how to achieve it is the point of contradiction. Right wingers want peace just as much, maybe more, than Shimon Peres does, but they have a different opinion of how to attain it properly. However, Peres is dismissive of this fact and chooses to attempt to trick the public into believing that only people agreeing with him truly want peace. I think no matter what your opinion is on how to achieve peace in the Arab/Israeli conflict, it is never justifiable in a liberal democracy and of course in a Jewish state, to create war between brothers. Demonizing the settlers will only create more of a rift in an already splintered Jewish people, and concealing these illiberal acts and passing them off as democratic will surely, as Mill said, "penetrate much more deeply into the details of life, and enslave the soul itself." Itamar Weisbrod is with Magshimey Herut. |
|
FORMER MEMBER OF KNESSET KLEINER IN U.S. TO PROMOTE ALTERNATIVE PLAN
Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman, June 30, 2004. |
|
This was written by Naomi Klass Mauer and appeared in the "Jewish
Press", February 13, 2004. It is just as pertinent today. Nothing much
changes politically in Israel, except sometimes it is worse than other
times.
It is also painfully unfortunate that the only person that truly makes sense could not get enough votes in the last election to obtain even one seat in the Knesset. Former Israeli Knessent member Michael Kleiner was on a mission in the United States to, in his words, help save Israel from itself. As Kleiner puts it, "It is time to call upon our friends, American Jewry, to save Israel, because Sharon's plan will bring Israel to what Abba Eban once termed 'Auschwitz' borders" Kleiner was elected to the Knesset in 1982 as a member of the Likud party under then Prime Minister Menachem Begin. He left the Likud after the 1998 Wye Agreement, as a matter of principle, together with Benny Begin and former prime minister Yitzchak Shamiir. They formed the Herut faction which, together with the Moledet and Tekuma parties became the National Union Party. Eventually Kleiner also left that party and remained in the Knesset as Herut's sole representative. In the 2001 election he fell a few thousand votes short of the two Knesset seats that a new law stipulated as prerequisite for Knesset membership. "The way I see it," Kleiner said during a visit to The Jewish Press, "the government is channeled into a dead end situation because of demographics, and they think that running away is the only way. It is something like having an illness and amputating limb after limb until eventually there is nothing left to remove, which is what they did in Lebanon. Demographics are a serious problem but there is another way to tackle it." Jewish Press: It almost seems that no one in the government knows what to do? Kleiner: That is the worst part. The religious party and the National Union stay in the government, so the population thinks that either this is not so terrible, or that there is no other solution. Do you have an alternative plan? The Herut party has a radical solution. It is a three-part plan. The first part is to encourage emigration to Arab countries by families who want emigrate. The money being spent on the fence, which in the end will not be able to prevent terrorism anyway, could be put into a fund and given to families for relocating. According to a recent item, on the Arutz-7 news service, a poll revealed that 37 percent of Arabs would emigrate to other countries if! they were paid to do so. More than 150,000 have already left. They were the wealthy ones. Now, if 37 percent admit that they would leave, you can imagine that the number is much larger - but the others are afraid to openly say so. Why do you think that the wall will not be useful in preventing terrorism? Most of the recent terrorist acts have been cornmitted by terrorists who were driven past the security checkppints. Others have climbed over the wall, and as we see in Gaza, it is possible to dig underneath. Of course, the wall will not block Katyushas. That is why I say that encouraging families to move to another country is a much better idea in the long run. What is the second part of your plan? The Knesset should pass a law that every Israeli has to pledge allegiance to a Jewish state. Israel was created as a Jewish state and there is no reason that we should not have this pledge of allegiance, similar to other countries. It would be very difficult for any citizen who did not want to recite this. If you do not pledge allegiance to Israel as a Jewish state, you cannot be a citizen. One could remain a resident, but they would not be entitled to the benefits of citizenship, as residents. And part three? A symbolic proposal that the prime minister that the prime minister of Israel must be Jewish. When I tried to present this in the Knesset, I was told that it was racist. In the United States, they have a law that the president must be American-born No one considers this racist or against, any other country. Israel was created to be a Jewish state and it stands to reason that the prime minister should be a Jew. There is nothing racist about this. To whom are you presenting this program here in the United States? I want to tell you a piece of history that you might not be familiar with. In 1942 a group of Zionist American Jews met in the Biltmore Hotel in New York City to influence the direction of the Jews in Israel. They forced the Jewish leadership in Israel to acknowledge that they needed an army and could not just rely on the Briish army plus a few guards around each yishuv. The concept of the Haganah was born from that meeting, which eventually became the Israel Defense Forces when the state was declared. I am here to promote these three bills via American Jewry. It is time once again for those American Jews who care deeply about the State of Israel to help the derailed Zionist movement. Israel seems incapable, at the present time, of stating her case before the world. We have totally lost in the field of public relations. I do not blame President Bush for pushing peace plans mind and a Palestinian state. I blame Sharon. What you're saying is, why should an American president and Congress be more pro Israel than the Israelis themselves? Exactly. And it is pathetic how little of history people really know, In 1920 the League of Nations gave Britain authority to create a homeland for the Jews. They would never have approved of Israel for the Jews if another people had staked claims of ownership over that land. Of course, I believe that the other side of the Jordan River belongs to Israel also. After all, Jordan represents three quarters of historic Eretz Yisrael, as well as three fourths of the mandate given to the British to create Israel. In 1922 the British took away that three fourths of the land and gave it to the Hashemite family, who created the country of TransJordan, ostensibly for the Arabs of Palestine. In 1948 Jordan took over the West Bank. Interestingly, only Britain and Pakistan recognized this occupation, and in 1988 King Hussein relinquished it. How many people do you think realize that we are now talking about splitting a big part of the last remaining one-fourth of all the land that was mandated to be a country for the Jews? That point should be emphasized over and over again to the public. That is what we are trying to do. We have reactivated the Herut movement here and all over the world. We are attracting young people in the US. and as far away as the Ukraine and Hungary who believe in the ideology of Zionism and aliyah. We want to start a grassroots movement here to support our bills. There are so many people who are pro-Israel and Zionistic. We should all be united. Can Sharon's government survive if it continues along its current course? That is why we have to work hard and act quickly. I would like to bring my program to every home in Israel. I know that I would have a lot of support among the people, if I could do that. However, I cannot afford to send it to every home. Yossi Beilin was able to do that with his Geneva plan because it was paid for with European money. But with the help of good Jews who care deeply about Israel we shall succeed. Jerome S. Kaufman hosts Israel Commentary website: http://www.israel-commentary.org. |
|
KASSAM ROCKETS AND THE WALL IN ISRAEL
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, June 30, 2004. |
|
The date June 28th 2004 will go down in history for two different but interrelated reasons. While the world focused on how America turned over "sovereignty" to the Iraqis - and it was reported in Israel too - the really big story that most of the media missed (except in Israel) was, that Kassam rockets fired from Gaza finally killed two people in Israel. The Oslo War that Yasser Arafat started in September 2000 has moved to the next level. Three-year-old Afik Zahavi and 50-year-old Mordechai Yosepov were killed and at least 20 other people were injured - including youngsters - when a Kassam rocket hit next to a nursery school in Sderot. At last count, Arabs from Gaza have fired almost 4,200 rockets or mortars on Jewish towns in Gush Katif-Gaza alone. They have fired over 300 Kassam rockets since the start of the Oslo War, with over 70 striking Sderot. After killing people in Sderot, Kassams were fired at the town again the next day, injuring three more people. Sderot, by the way, is a town of over 20,000 people, situated in the western Negev in pre-1967 Israel, about 8 kilometers from Gaza. It is not in so-called "occupied territory". Israeli security officials believe that Israeli Prime Minister Sharon's Sycamore Ranch home, which is located close to Sderot and about 10 kilometers from Gaza, is the real target of many of the Kassam rockets, which are unguided and frequently inaccurate. The Kassam rockets fired into Sderot - that killed the two people - were the "Nasser-3" type, a recently improved version. Although it has no guidance system, it is a weapon of terror, and as we can see can be deadly. The Kassam weighs 30 kilograms (66 lbs), has a range of 6-7 kilometers (3.7-4.3 miles) that could be extended, and carries a 10-kilogram warhead. It is made more deadly by the shrapnel packed into it, which includes nuts and bolts as well as metallic balls, the same ingredients used by suicide bombers in their bomb belts. Israeli army officials stated that the improved 1.5 meter (yard) long 90mm rocket, carries powerful TNT - not homemade explosives - as was the case in the past, this gives it a more powerful and deadly explosion on impact. Some senior security officials are talking about the eventual deployment of the "Nautilus System" in the Gaza-Negev area. Officially known as the Mobile Tactical High Energy Laser, it's a high-energy laser defense system jointly developed by the US and Israel. It's meant to destroy incoming Katyusha rockets from southern Lebanon into northern Israel. But, it won't be ready until 2007. After the recent attacks on Sderot, National Union Party leader and former government minister, Avigdor Lieberman warned, "If the [Gaza] disengagement plan is carried out, Kassam rocket attacks will be the lot of cities from Ashkelon to Ofakim [also inside Israel], and will become a daily occurrence." Lieberman, who was forced out of the government recently by Sharon, when he objected to the disengagement plan, called on the government to reconsider. Residents of Sderot have also rejected the prime minister’s plan to withdraw from Gaza. They - like Lieberman - say that the abandonment of Gaza is a move that will make such rocket attacks a regular occurrence not just in Sderot but also across the western Negev and the Ashkelon area. About the West Bank security fence - the "Wall" - that Israel is slowly but surely building, I wrote back in August 2003, (The Wall In My Heart): "...If Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the other terror groups can't access pre-1967 Israel anymore - if the security fence is that good - then their motivation to improve their missile technology will grow exponentially. Remember, that as many times as Israeli politicians point out the "impenetrability" of the Gaza security fence and how it's prevented terror attacks originating from Gaza, they never mention the growth of Kassam missile technology and the increasing vulnerability of Negev towns, on the "right side" of the fence, from Gaza. They've even shot Kassams at Ashkelon. Although no Kassams have yet been fired in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank), you can be sure that if suicide bombers are kept out by the security fence, they'll start. Jerusalem and Tel-Aviv will then be within range. Imagine more accurate missiles - maybe even eventually with chemical or biological warheads - suicide-bombers will be child's play in comparison." Till now, Kassam rockets have caused few injuries and only minor damage, but much fear. We have now seen the first deaths from the "Palestinian's" ultimate terror weapon. The Israeli government waited - as usual - until some serious problem - two deaths - developed. But now post-June 28th, the Israeli government needs to take swift, firm, and consistent action in the Palestinian Authority areas that are used to launch the rockets, against the terror groups throughout Gaza that make and use them, and against the PA itself. Disengagement is a suicide plan. Sharon should have learned from the 1973 Yom Kippur War, the debacle called the "Bar-Lev Line," that passive defense with walls, fences, sensors, lasers, won't work. If Israel doesn't succeed in stopping the use of Kassams as a tactical weapon of terror, it will most likely be faced with them as a strategic weapon, possibly even of mass destruction. The world should have focused more on what happened June 28th in Israel, and they should have learned the lesson being taught. If the Islamic fanatics of Gaza prove that simple rocketry can become a strategic weapon, how long will it take al-Qaeda and others to do the same in Iraq and throughout the world? Or will al-Qaeda provide Hamas with WMD materiel? Instead, after attending the NATO meeting held in Turkey, the next day, American President George Bush speaking at Istanbul's Galatasary University focused on the early transfer of power in Iraq and the need for democratic reform in the Middle East. "Terrorist murderers" are preventing a Palestinian state from emerging, Bush said, grouping "Palestinian" terrorists with extremists from around the world, including those in Iraq and Iran. "We see it in the Holy Land, where terrorist murderers are setting back the good cause of the Palestinian people, who deserve a reformed, peaceful, and democratic state of their own," Bush said. Bush and other western leaders continue to perpetuate the mistaken idea that somehow if we just got rid of the "bad guys," those "terrorist murderers," "Palestine" would become a peaceful haven of co-existence with Israel. Sharon, though not that confused, still hasn't exhibited the will to end the game. Wanting to withdraw behind a strategically defensible wall, into his new hi-tech ghetto, Sharon still speaks of disengagement from Gaza and the West Bank. According to Sharon, that includes expelling Jews from their homes and withdrawing the Israeli Army from all of Gaza and areas of northern Samaria. How pray tell is that going to stop the "Palestinians" from shooting rockets into Israel? Yet, after these latest attacks, Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz admitted "The initial solution is to take over the areas from which the terrorists launch the rockets...We will stay in the Beit Hanoun and Jabalya refugee camp areas in northern Gaza as long as is necessary." Mofaz continued, "I am sure that after this takeover, the ability to launch Kassams will be diminished." In regards to the more than 300 molds Israeli Army operations have destroyed in their continuing activities against Kassam factories in Gaza, Mofaz added, "We will carry out further operations to damage the infrastructure for manufacturing the rockets and continue operations necessary to prevent the carrying out of the shootings." The current military activity in northern Gaza shouldn't be seen as one fixed operation but rather as a change in the Israeli army's method of operations involving ongoing periodic incursions into the area from which the rockets are fired, according to army sources. They expect to continue operating in the northern Gaza Strip on and off for the next few months. When asked how the Israeli Army will deal with the Kassam threat after disengaging from Gaza, Mofaz replied that a different reality would be created after the withdrawal. "The chances that terror will diminish after the disengagement exist. However, the IDF will retain its freedom of movement," he said. That doesn't sound like disengagement... So why does Prime Minister Sharon continue to mislead Israelis and the world into accepting the expulsion of Jews from Gaza, it won't lead to true separation anyways? As long as any Israeli military presence continues in Gaza, the terror groups will continue justifying their attacks on Israel, as "fighting the occupation". And if Israel removes it's troops completely, they are likely to "create" some new reason to continue shooting rockets. Hizbollah has done the same in Lebanon - refusing to accept the UN recognized Israeli withdrawal from South Lebanon - Hizbollah continues to use the "Sheba Farms" as a justification to attack Israel whenever it wants to. Then again, if Israeli troops leave Gaza and parts of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) never to return, how will they prevent increasingly deadly rocket attacks on Israeli population centers, possibly in the future, with nuclear, chemical or biological warheads? Will the date June 28th one day be seen as the turning point? Will Israelis eventually see it as their 9/11? Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations and Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko |
|
ALICE OF WONDERLAND IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Posted by Barry Rubin, June 30, 2004. |
|
The Middle East has given new evidence that it is the real-life equivalent of the "Alice in Wonderland" universe. Consider these developments, both serious and farcical: --A few months ago, France, Britain, and Germany proudly announced their agreement with Iran that would allegedly stop Tehran from developing nuclear weapons. They would help Iran build nuclear energy for peaceful purposes in exchange for Iran stopping its program. Why Iran would need nuclear power plants when that process has been discredited elsewhere in the world (Italy is closing down all its reactors; the Chernobyl meltdown of a reactor was a major catastrophe) and it has huge oil and gas reserves is, of course, an interesting question to ask. One French parliamentarian announced that the deal proved the European policy of compromise was superior to the American strategy of confrontation. Now Iran has announced it will resume building equipment making it possible to develop nuclear weapons in a way that openly breaks the agreement. (What it is doing secretly no doubt goes well beyond this.) Will Europe now spring into action to fight against Iran's plans? --The death toll in Iraq continues to rise as insurgents prove three things. First, they are quite willing to wreck the country in order to seize power. Second, while they complain about the U.S. occupation, they seem determined to make sure it is harder to end. Third, while they claim to want an independent Iraq, they are doing everything possible to sabotage the creation of such an entity. Readers are free to draw parallels to other, similar situations in the region. --Former President Bill Clinton's autobiography completely bears out the account of Camp David and the collapse of the peace process put forward by this writer and others. Yasir Arafat's refusal to make peace was the cause of the problem. Foolish or dishonest people will no doubt continue to promulgate the idea that this failure was Israel's fault but they have no interest in the evidence anyway. Clinton did, however, criticize former Prime Minister Ehud Barak for not accepting a Syrian offer that if he accepted Damascus's view of where the border should be it would consider revising the precise line of demarcation. Syria was demanding territory on the Sea of Galilee, something it never possessed legally in the post-1948 border, which would have let it claim half the lake and endangered Israel strategically. There is a problem, borne out by Israel's experience, in agreeing in principle to a dangerous demand with the implication that some compromise would be made later. Barak was right to reject this proposition. --Most of the world believes that the Palestinians are fighting only because they want an end to Israel's presence in the West Bank and Gaza Strip as well as a state of their own. Unfortunately, this is not true or the conflict would have been ended long ago (and certainly in the year 2000). Now still another poll shows the sad truth. According to surveys taken by the Jerusalem Media and Communication Center, whose head is a minister in Arafat's cabinet, 45 percent of Palestinians believe that the intifada's goal is to wipe Israel off the map, while 42 percent see the immediate goal as only forcing Israel out of the West Bank and Gaza Strip (which does not restrict there being a second round to get the rest). Sixty-five percent favor continued violence against all Israeli targets. Meanwhile, a poll by Bir Zeit University's Development Studies Program shows that 54 percent doubt that a Palestinian state could co-exist with Israel even if there was a comprehensive peace treaty, while 38 percent favor coexistence. Sixty-one percent advocates continued armed struggle even if Israel pulls out of all Gaza. Apologists argue that the poll's timing--at a time of relatively high violence--explain these results but the outcome is consistent with earlier surveys. They also claim that if Israel shows it wants peace the numbers would change dramatically. But why should this happen if Palestinians continue to be told by their leaders, preachers, activists, and media that all-out struggle is necessary and that total victory is both possible and the only proper patriotic and Muslim policy? If Israel withdraws from all the Gaza Strip and dismantles all the Jewish settlements there will this spark some change of heart on the Palestinian side? --The day after my column appeared last week pointing to the BBC's strong anti-Israel bias, I turned on my radio and got a shock, albeit not from static electricity. A BBC official being interviewed insisted that the network was tough on Israel. He concluded, "We are not pro-Israel. We are not anti-Palestinian." Was this some kind of BBC admission of bias? Alas, it was a defense against demands for even more anti-Israel bias! A left-wing media center claimed that the British media was slanted in Israel's favor. For years, researchers with well-documented cases about anti-Israel bias in the British media have been ignored, ridiculed, and kept out of the media. Now the radio programs and newspaper columns are thrown open to those insisting that the media is pro-Israel with no equal time for the other side. What better proof could there be of the real bias and misrepresentation going on? All of this is happening at a time when it is clear that the intifada has failed to win a victory--this is true since the Palestinian leadership opposes the Israeli withdrawal from Gaza even while claiming it as a victory--and that of violence and extremist demands has failed. Yet there is no sign, and will be none as long as Arafat lives, of any change in this losing strategy. Professor Barry Rubin is Director of The Global Research in International Affairs Center (GLORIA) and Editor of Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA). |
|
CONGRESSMAN: EGYPT PREPARING FOR WAR WITH ISRAEL
Posted by Jerusalem Newswire Editorial Staff, June 30, 2004. |
|
Egypt's military buildup in preparation for a future war with Israel can and must be halted by cutting off US aid to Cairo, Congressman Tom Lantos said this week. Lantos, the ranking Democrat in the House International Relations Committee, plans to introduce legislation that would phase out the $1.3 billion Egypt receives annually in US military aid, Middle East Newsline reported Tuesday. The senior California representative noted that while Egypt has no serious external threats to its sovereignty, Cairo continues to add weaponry and additional units to its massive war machine. Past Egyptian buildups have always resulted in invasion and attempted annihilation of the Jewish state. The 1979 Camp David peace accord notwithstanding, statements made by Egyptian officials and state-controlled media indicate Cairo still views Israel as an enemy. "Egyptian military exercises are ominously geared toward an Israeli enemy that doesn't obviously exist," Lantos said. Hostile peace Egypt's state-controlled media regularly demonizes the Jewish state in newspaper editorials and anti-Semitic television programs, despite being one of only two Arab states to have signed peace treaty with Israel. That incitement has led to several US Congress debates over the past few years regarding the prudence of providing Egypt with advanced arms and the funds to purchase them. Additionally, Israeli military sources have reported that Egyptian war games consistently feature the IDF as the enemy force. Israelis have taken advantage of their 25 years of "peace" with Egypt to visit that nation en masse and take in its culture. During that same period, Egyptian tourism to the Jewish state has been virtually nonexistent. Clear-headed Lantos While American administrations traditionally ignore geopolitical realities in deference to diplomatic sensibilities, Lantos this week chose to buck that trend and called Cairo out on its unnecessary military buildup. "I intend to support the Egyptian people by introducing legislation to phase out military assistance for Egypt over the next three years," Middle East Newsline quoted the congressman as saying. Lantos pointed out that Egypt recently supplemented its navy with 11 new battle units, in addition to other weapons procurements. And this despite the fact Cairo has no serious external threats to its sovereignty. The clear target of this military buildup is Israel, Lantos said. "Egyptian military exercises are ominously geared toward an Israeli enemy that doesn't obviously exist," he explained. "This is a policy choice" of the Mubarak regime. Lantos' bill would see the $1.3 billion in annual US military aid converted to economic assistance. Steinitz told you so. Most Israelis have long chosen to overlook Cairo's continued hostility towards the Jewish state, but one lawmaker has made warning his nation of the unchanged Egyptian threat the cornerstone of his political career. Likud MK Yuval Steinitz has on numerous occasions cautioned his government against relying on Egypt to assist Israel in creating a region free from Muslim terrorism. Steinitz, the current chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, has been joined by senior military officials in recognizing Cairo's policy of perpetuating a situation where the Israelis and "Palestinians" continue to bleed each other, while massing an overwhelming military force aimed at one day conquering the holy land. In 1948, 1967 and 1973, Egypt together with other Arab nations attempted to eradicate the sovereign Jewish state. "Jerusalem Newswire is a Gentile-run newsgathering and dissemination service based out of Jerusalem, Israel, that exists to provide users with the top daily news stories culled from a wide variety of Internet sources." Their website address is http://www.jnewswire.com. This article is archived at http://www.jnewswire.com/library/article.php?articleid=262 |
|
PA DENIES VOTING RIGHTS TO REFUGEES FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, June 30, 2004. |
A striking decision by the Palestinian Authority (PA) will deprive
Palestinian occupants of refugee camps of their basic democratic right
to vote in the upcoming local elections. This is another step in the
long history of Arab leaders abusing camp residents as pawns for
political gain.
Since Israel's creation the Arab world has actively prevented a
humanitarian solution for Arab refugees who left Israel during
Israel's War of Independence. For example, Lebanon still prohibits
camp residents from owning homes or businesses outside the camps,
condemning them to perpetual economic and social hardship.
According to the PA leadership this denial of the right to vote is
being done to highlight the "unique status" of the refugee camps.
The following statement in the PA daily by the Supreme National
Committee for the Protection of the Right of Return also reiterates
the PA policy of preventing the integration of the refugee camps into
urban housing units, calling it a "danger".
"The Supreme National Committee for the Protection of the Right of Return - announced yesterday that it opposes the participation of the refugee camps in the local elections that are expected to take place in the Palestinian territories. The committee justified its objection as protecting the unique status of the refugee camps in Gaza and the West Bank, considering them testimony to the crime that the occupation state made against our nation for 56 years. The committee warned of the dangers of integrating the refugee camps into the urban housing units..." Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
CHINA- SYRIA- LIBYA - NORTH KOREA: MISSILES AND NUKES
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 30, 2004. |
|
It was reported that Bashar Assad, the young President of Syria went to China to secure massive funding for a free trade port at Latakiya to supposedly market Chinese merchandise in the Middle East. [This part of the report came from DEBKAfile, June 28th.] Latakiya is a city in Syria on the Mediterranean coast with Alawite Muslims as the controlling population. With the readers indulgence I will offer some thoughts. Several years ago I wrote some articles about Latakiya when Bashar's father Hafez was alive, although very ill. I pointed out that the Assads along with the small but ruling clique of Generals were the Alawites, a minority Muslim group, ruling the majority Sunni Muslims of Syria. Lakatiya was not unlike Saddam Hussein's Takrit, a home base. Latakiya received the best military equipment out of what the Soviets sold to Syria. It was to be the city fortress for the Alawite ruling minority, should they have to escape if the government in Damascus fell. Why would Bashar be anxious to build up Latakiya as a major port in his father's get-away redoubt fortress? Is Bashar expecting a Sunni 'coup d'etat' where he and his Alawite Generals would need to find safety. Bashar and his Generals, like his father before him, kept the Sunnis under their thumbs. Like Saddam suppressed the Shi'ite Muslim majority to insure they would not be able to rise up and overthrow his minority rule. Perhaps it was only a trade deal with China that Bashar sought but, given the rule of the Assads and the hatred they engendered, I wonder. With the defeat of Saddam's army and Saddam's capture, the dictators of the Arab Muslim nations are feeling more than uneasy. Regrettably, what will replace them may be far more dangerous than mere tyrannical dictators. If you haven't noticed, all the Arab and Muslim nations are ruled in a dictatorial manner with the populations kept quiet by the threat of force. Islam, as demonstrated in Afghanistan with the Taliban rule, is a cruel and deadly religious rule. It is a toss up as to whether it is better for Muslims to have a dictatorial government or a religious Islamic rule under rigid Islamic Shari'a law. It is a lose-lose choice. Which brings us back to Bashar Assad and his visit to China. He apparently left China abruptly when the Chinese refused his demand for massive funding to build up Latakiya in exchange for Assad's economic cooperation. Latakiya was to be a sales/distributing port for Chinese products to then be distributed throughout the Middle East. I would 'guess' that the products he expected to sell were NOT Chinese toasters. It would be more likely that Bashar was soliciting various missiles and other military products which are manufactured in China. As a relevant aside, I recall that it was Caspar Weinberger, then Secretary of Defense, who set up Egypt to manufacture and distribute American M1A1 Abrams Battle Tank without Congressional authorization and which would by-pass Congressional overview. International investigators are presently examining whether Syria acquired nuclear technology and expertise through the black market network operated by the Pakistani head scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, according to a U.S. official and Western diplomats. Khan and some associates visited Syria in the late 1990s and later held clandestine meeting with Syrian nuclear officials in Iran. It is unknown IF Syria has or had centrifuges which would have come from Khan's network. The ring was exposed this year after Libya turned over Pakistani-supplied centrifuge components and related documents when Moammar Gaddafi [supposedly] abandoned his nuclear weapons program. Syria maintains one of the Mid East's largest arsenals of ballistic missiles, developed in cooperation with China, North Korea and other countries. Analysts also believe that Syria possesses chemical and biological weapons. (2) Latakiya would also, no doubt, be a port for missiles from North Korea. Was all this 'just' a matter of business or is Bashar Assad looking into the future with the fall of his government and an escape into the Alawite city, Latakiya - like Tikrit. By the way, a relevant aside: John Loftus, attorney, Nazi prosecutor for the Justice Department, commentator on FOX NEWS, author of several books, said in October 2003 at the First Jerusalem Summit held in the King David Hotel that Saddam's WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) would be found buried in Syria. (Michael Evans was there also.) I am guessing it will in time for an October 2004 surprise, before the November presidential elections. As you read this, please keep in mind that Syria has been under the quiet protection of the U.S. State Department and specific Presidents, namely George Herbert Walker Bush, Sr. and his Secretary of State James Baker. I have been pondering this strange relationship for over 20 years. Why were our highest political executives so tied up with first the father, Hafez al Assad and now Bashar? Why are Saddam's WMDs in Syria? ### 1. "Assad cut short Beijing trip when Chinese officials refused massive funding," DEBKAfile, June 28, 2004 [Debka.com] 2. "Syrian Link to Pakistan Nuke Sales Investigated," by Douglas Frantz, Chicago Tribune, June 25, 2004 also "Black Market Nuclear Probe Focuses on Syria," by Douglas Frantz in Istanbul, Los Angles Times and imra-owner@imra.org.il. 3. "Saddam's WMDs are in Syria," by Michael D. Evans, WorldNetDaily.com June 29, 2004. Michael D. Evans wrote "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move," an Amazon #2 and a NYT best-seller. There is mounting evidence that at least some of Saddam Hussein's missing weapons of mass destruction are in Syria, smuggled there by the Iraqi dictator for safekeeping before the beginning of the war. Part of the stockpile the coalition forces have so far failed to find in Iraq was probably destroyed; part is likely still hidden. But a massively lethal amount of Iraq's chemical and biological weapons is stored alongside Syria's own stockpiles of WMDs. 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). |
|
US FOUNDING FATHERS AND REPATRIATION
Posted by Ruth Matar, June 30, 2004. |
|
Dear Friends,
Last week's Letter from Jerusalem generated a lot of interest. I received literally hundreds of emails from you, my "cyberspace friends". I myself find the Founding Fathers a fascinating subject, and I appreciate the additional information provided in your emails. Thank you Gilbert Simons for sharing the following information as to what the Founding Fathers thought about "repatriation" or the "right of return": (They apparently faced the same situation we face in Israel today. Arabs were encouraged to flee by the attacking Arab countries in the 1948 War of Independence. They were promised that they would come back as soon as the Jews were defeated, and that they would inherit all Jewish property. Now, they portray themselves as unjustly displaced refugees and want to return with their children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren, who were born in Arab countries and have never even set foot in Israel.) "During the American Revolution, many colonists who remained loyal to the Crown fled to Canada. In the peace negotiations, the British pressed the United States to permit the loyalists to return and to reclaim their property. But the U.S. Congress was adamant. "On Oct. 18, 1782, Congress instructed John Adams, the U.S. minister plenipotentiary in the peace negotiations: 'That with respect to those persons who have either abandoned or been banished from any of the United States since the commencement of the war, he is to make no stipulations whatsoever for their readmittance; and as to an equivalent for their property, he may attend to propositions on that subject only on reciprocal stipulation that Great Britain will make full compensation for all the wanton destruction which the subjects of that nation have committed on the property of the citizens of the United States.' "On November 26, 1782, four days before the preliminary treaty, Benjamin Franklin wrote Richard Oswald, the British negotiator: 'Your ministers require that we should receive again into our bosom those who have been our bitterest enemies and restore their properties who have destroyed ours; and while the wounds they have given us are still bleeding!'" Thanks also to LYNN who pointed out that Hebrew almost became the official language of the United States! Also, thanks to all the financial wizards who figured out today's value of $638,000, which the U.S. Government never repaid to Hayim Salomon. The value of $638,000 today differs, depending on what interest rates are used, but it seems to be either in the billions or in the trillions! Boggles the mind, doesn't it? Many Americans feel that we are between "a rock and a hard place". We agree with the policies of President George W. Bush with regard to most issues, except for his plan to divide the Holy Land, and to carve out a Palestinian state from Land promised by Hashem to the Jewish People. Most Americans are also appalled at President Bush's support for Ariel Sharon's Plan to expel 8,000 Jews from their homes in Biblical Gaza. (This Plan, which does not have the support of the Israeli Knesset, the Israeli People, or even Sharon's Likud party, has already emboldened the Arab terrorists in Gaza, who are now daily shooting rockets into southern Israel. On Monday, the Israeli town of Sderot was hit by four Kassam rockets. Amongst others, a four year old little boy was killed entering his kindergarten, and his mother, who brought him there, lies mortally wounded in the hospital.) On the other hand, we do not agree with John Kerry's stand on any of the important issues. As a matter of fact, many people are not able to figure out what his positions are, he flip flops so often! His past record does not show that he is a great friend of Israel! Most of us agree with the direction of President George W. Bush, with the exception of one very important issue, his stand on the Promised Land. He apparently has been led to believe that dividing the Holy Land and carving out a Palestinian state, from the Land promised by the Almighty to the Jewish People, will bring peace to the Middle East. However, a large part of his constituency believes that this would be a reward for terror, and, in addition, that expelling Jews from their homes in Biblical Gaza, is diametrically opposed to the Word of G-d, and the principles of American democracy. It is interesting to note that belief in the Judeo-Christian Bible does not enter as a factor in political discussions of the media, at least not on Fox TV, which I watch daily with great interest. This is difficult to explain, since Evangelical Christians account for about a quarter of American voters, according to a University of Akron survey taken after the 2000 election. Hence, it is very important that Bible believing Christians and Jews use their power! The November 2004 Presidential election has great importance for the fulfillment of G-d's Word, as set forth in the Bible. WHAT TO DO? Many of the emails I received suggest that the solution may be to PRAY for President Bush and his Advisors, so that they will realize that the Saudi sponsored Road Map is not only dangerous for Israel, but is in effect politically counterproductive for United States interests as well. It is not possible to fight worldwide terror and insist that we will not fight those who are responsible for much of this terror! We must face the fact that the "foreign fighters" who kill American soldiers in Iraq, are in effect members of Hamas, Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad, the very same terrorist groups who have killed more than 1,400 Israeli civilians and maimed thousands. Prayer is important, but in addition, a different sort of Prayer is also necessary. Hashem needs to see that we are worthy of his miracles. My good friend, Rabbi Benny Elon, always used to say to me: "Ruth, it is not enough to pray with your mouth, you must pray with your feet as well!" In other words: "Pray and Act!" (Rabbi Benny Elon was until recently Israel's Minister of Tourism, until Ariel Sharon fired him for not agreeing with the Plan to expel Jews from their homes in Biblical Gaza, Judea, and Samaria. Rabbi Benny Elon is currently in the United States, working together with Christian organizations against Sharon's Disengagement Plan.) At this point, it looks like its going to be a very close election.
The other day I watched Fox News. It had a panel discussion on the
campaigns of John Kerry and George W. Bush, respectively. It seems
that since March 12, when Kerry became the official Democratic
candidate, he has been outdoing Bush 2 to 1 in small donations -
meaning $100 or less. The Democrats are using this fact for their
propaganda that Kerry is the grassroots candidate for the average
American, whereas Bush is the candidate of the rich, the "Fat Cats".
We need to remind President Bush that there is a large constituency
out there to whom the fate of the Holy Land is very important, just as
important as the economy, the price of oil, the price of medical care,
social security, etc.
Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow
(Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their
website address is http://www.womeningreen.org
|
|
WITH PEACE PARTNERS LIKE EGYPT, WHO NEEDS ENEMIES?
Posted by Stephen M. Asbel, June 30, 2004. |
|
The IDF, as expected, is making a major push into Gaza to attempt to
prevent more missile attacks such as the ones in which terrorists
murdered little Afik Zahavi and his grandfather, Mordechai Yosefov.
However, does this really get at the root of this security problem. It
is well and good to go into Gaza and destroy missiles, factories and
the terrorists who launch them. This type of operation may be the
equivalent of yanking dandelions out of the ground. The top may be
gone but the root remains and the weed will grow back. These weapons
are coming into Gaza from somewhere. The somewhere is Egypt, a state
with which Israel supposedly has a treaty of peace. Egypt is doing
nothing to stop these weapons from reaching the border and, I am told,
at least some of this weaponry, is probably coming from Egyptian
stocks. Given this situation, one might wonder whether the peace
treaty with Egypt is even worth the paper on which it is written.
Stephen M. Asbel is an attorney outside Philadelphia, Pennsylvania and he is the author of the Yeshayah 62:1 Israel News and Views weblog which can be viewed at http://www.bermanlaw.com/weblogs/sma2 |
|
WHAT THE JEWS OF EUROPE SHOULD DO
Posted by Ben Ronn, June 30, 2004. |
|
It took a non Jewish, international businessman and a friend to
respond to a circulated article about the continued danger and
physical abuse that the Jews living in EU to day are been subjectd to
on a daily basis. His message was: "Don't whine! create vigilantee
groups and go after the perpetrators with venom equal to theirs and
than some." The Jews In Israel undestand that approach. The survivors
of the holocast and their decendents who live in Israel understand
that approach. It is time the Jews who chose to live outside of Israel
learn that if they will not help themselves their future will be the
same as that of the other 5 million jews.
I would like to see some attempt by organizations such as yours to get this message across to the Jews, wherever they reside, UNDER THE HEADING OF "NEVER AGAIN!" Ben Ronn can be reached at his website: http://www.roteva.com |
|
THE JEWISH POLITICAL CHRONICLE AND GAZA
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 30, 2004. |
|
The current editor of the "Jewish Political Chronicle" has an interesting way of introducing each edition of about 50 pages of articles. He divides it into the several main themes of the period. He initiates them with an editorial that neatly ties them together and defends his theses. I think his is the type of brilliance too circumscribed by tendentiousness to grasp the situation properly. The sparks fly, but the metal is insufficiently forged. One such spark in the May-June issue is the observation that Israel treated Gaza as if temporarily held and only for military security. He is right. For the most part, the same observation applies to Judea-Samaria. In his tendentiousness, that is, in his amenability to surrender parts of the Jewish homeland because there are more Arabs in them and he doesn't know how to get them out or perhaps want to or perhaps think Israel could, he fails to note that security needs against the Arabs are not temporary and that the area belongs to the Jewish people. He spares Israel's leadership from what should be scathing criticism for having let this come to pass. Shame on those whom he cites for calling the patriots who oppose appeasement/surrender, "Far Right," as if something were wrong with them rather than the "realists" whose Oslo got hundreds murdered? He misses the point altogether, in taking President Bush's initial assurance to PM Sharon about there not being an Arab "right of return" and about letting Israel retain settlement blocs. This assurance, he asserts, now is US policy. "? the US that is now duty bound by highly visible and public written and verbal Presidential commitments." It most certainly is not bound! Nor does the US take its actual commitments to Israel seriously when put to the test. By now an editor should see through Bush's great initial speeches that lead nowhere but lead people on. Pres. Bush's statement to PM Sharon made no assurances. It just mildly verified the reasonableness of Sharon's contentions about Arab "return" and settlement retention. Hardly was the statement made, when US diplomats assured the Arabs that no promise was made to Sharon. Indeed, the State Dept. then ratcheted up demands for more withdrawal than Sharon had indicated, citing the revised Road Map that calls for a total withdrawal, except for some inconvenient rock or tree here or there. It is a fuller withdrawal than required by Security Council Resolution 242 when and if the Arabs turn to peace, which they did not. The Map is phony. Why believe politicians such as Bush and Sharon? People believe them, or claim to, because they prefer to. Why do Bush and Sharon toy with us this way? They want to get the Jewish state to surrender without resistance. That is clear about Bush and probable about Sharon. In Sharon's case, there may be elements of conceit and blackmail, not all duplicity. Editor David Schimmel goes on to suggest that Israel not focus on whether to abandon Gaza. It should work on getting the Arab terrorist infrastructure demolished and the Arabs "in abject defeat" and on defining "Jewish population centers" in Judea-Gaza so as to retain more of them. He makes a good point for a fall-back position. Although it sounds tough, however, it really is a cover for weakness. If Israel withdrew, the Arabs would proclaim victory. That is how the Arabs behave, heedless of casualties along the way. In the long run, they would be right. Demolishing P.A. forces before leaving would not accomplish much, either. The Quartet and Egypt are planning to refurbish the P.A. security forces. Considering the traditional military hostility of Egypt and Britain to Israel, that refurbishment would make a stronger terrorist infrastructure. A more valid point is the theme that the US must realize it is in a world war that will take time to win and should not be fragmented by partisan politics. Why shouldn't Israel, too? He considers that in this world, the UN is a necessary evil. I understand the "evil" part but not the "necessary" part. Evil is not necessary. The UN acts as a legitimizer for evils such as terrorism and antisemitism. It constrains countries, such as the US, that might resist them, and provides excuses for other countries not to resist. The excuse is to leave it to the UN, which leaves victims to their fates. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
THE JUDGMENT ON THE SEPARATION FENCE
Posted by Gabriella Goldwaer, June 30, 2004. |
|
Who needs the Hague (ICJ) court Judgment ... when Israel's own Courts are against their own citizens - against her security - against preventing murder and mayhem ... Who needs enemies with such Supreme Court Judgment ... Is it that the worst enemy in Israel is the one we cannot see properly.. ?
Yossi Belein and his lot with their EU and other funding smile and keep filling their pockets, and most likely will become once more Knesset members. [Penal Code 97 to > 100 will just be on paper only] What a Joy indeed. What follows is an Abstract of the Judgment Regarding the Separation Fence [HCJ 2056/04] - From The Court Administration Spokesperson's Office See IMRA (www.imra.org.il) For full text: Text Supreme Court Judgement Regarding The Security Fence (1 of 3) www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=21369 Text Supreme Court Judgement Regarding The Security Fence (2 of 3) www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=21370 Text Supreme Court Judgement Regarding The Security Fence (3 of 3) www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=21371 ] This petition was submitted by several Palestinian villages and their inhabitants. It attacks the legality of orders issued by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) Commander in the West Bank. The orders were to take possession of plots of land for the purpose of erecting a separation fence. The path of the portion of the Fence discussed in the petition is approximately forty kilometers long and located west and northwest of Jerusalem (starting in the west at Maccabim and Beit Sira villages, going through Har Adar, Beit Sourik, and Bidu villages, and ending at Giv'at Ze'ev township and Beit Daku village). The petition attacked the legality of eight separate orders, each referring to several kilometers of the Fence and together comprising the entire forty kilometers at issue. The Supreme Court delivered today (June 30, 2004) a judgment concerning the challenged portion of the Fence. The judgment was written by President (Chief Justice) A. Barak; Vice-President E. Mazza and Justice M. Cheshin concurred. The Court divided its discussion into two parts, each addressing a separate question. The first question concerns the legal authority of the IDF Commander to build a fence in the West Bank. The second question concerns the proportionality of the Fence's path (i.e., assuming that the IDF Commander has the authority to build the Fence, does the Fence's path reflect a proper balance of security considerations and humanitarian considerations). Petitioners and respondents did not deal with the question of authority exhaustively. The Court found that this complex question was not adequately developed by the parties and, in its own discussion, referred only to the arguments that the parties did bring. The Court ruled that, were the reasons for building the Fence political, then the Fence would violate public international law. But the Court rejected petitioners' claim that the reasons for building the Fence were political. The Court accepted respondents' claim that the Fence was built for reasons of national security. Those reasons could justify taking possession of plots of land in the West Bank. Even with the authority to build the Fence, the IDF Commander still has a legal duty to balance properly between security considerations and humanitarian ones. This duty relates to the second question, the question of proportionality, to which the Court devoted the bulk of its discussion. The Court held that the legal duty of proportionality is found in both Israeli administrative law and public international law. The Court accepted the IDF Commander's position regarding the security aims of the Fence, rejecting the contrary position of the Council for Peace and Security (a private organization composed of retired military commanders that submitted a brief on the appropriate security aims, and hence the proper path, of the Fence). The Court did so because the IDF Commander is accountable to the general public, while the Council is not. The Court ruled, however, that the IDF Commander did not exercise his discretion proportionately. Although he took account of the grave security considerations at stake, he did not take adequate account of the Fence's infringement on the lives of 35,000 local inhabitants. Building the Fence requires seizing thousands of dunams of land. The Fence's current path would separate landowners from tens of thousands of dunams of land, and the planned regime of authorizations to access that land would not substantially reduce the harm. The Fence's current path would generally burden the entire way of life in petitioners' villages. Both petitioners and the Council offered alternative paths. Respondents claimed that those paths would exact substantial costs in terms of national security. The Court held that this reduction in security must be endured for the sake of humanitarian considerations. The additional margin of security achieved by the current path of the Fence is not equal to the current path's additional infringement on the local inhabitants' rights and interests. The current balance between security considerations and humanitarian considerations is disproportionate. The Court ruled that the IDF Commander should reduce the infringement upon the local inhabitants, even if it cannot be totally avoided, by altering the path of the Fence in most areas complained of in the petition. Given this reasoning, the Court accepted the petition with regard to six of the orders (Order No. 104/03, 103/03, 84/03 (the Western part), 108/03, 109/03, 110/03 (the part concerning Beit Daku village)). Those orders are void due to disproportionality. The petition was denied with regard to one order (Order No. 105/03) concerning the Western part of the path. The last order (107/03), concerning Har Adar village, was returned to respondents for further consideration in light of the principles developed in the judgment. Gabrielle Goldwater is an internet correspondent and commentator; see http://goldwater.mideastreality.com/. |
|
TODDLER OR 'BRUTAL OCCUPIER'?
Posted by Bruce S. Ticker, June 30, 2004. |
|
Infuriating is too weak a word to describe my feelings when I learned of the deaths of Afik Zahavi and Mordechai Yosopov. That reaction has been a near-daily state of being since September 2000, but Monday's level of infuriating rates an "orange alert," as Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge would put it. Terrorists murdered a 4-year-old boy and a 49-year-old grandfather of five who were going about their business in Sederot, two miles from northeast Gaza. Afik was being dropped off at his nursery school and Mordechai was helping his daughter take his grandchild to the school. A Qassam missile fired across the border exploded near the child and the man. Mordechai was apparently killed on impact and Afik died on his way to a hospital. His mother, Ruth, was hospitalized in serious condition. These poor, oppressed Palestinians (Hamas claimed responsibility) certainly knew what they were doing. They had lobbed 200 to 350 rockets over the border into Sederot and environs since this cruel and stupid war began in September 2000, and fortunately nobody had been hurt. This was not about settlements, not that that even justifies such killings. Anyone who claims now that all Palestinians want is nothing more than their own state is kidding themselves. Not every Palestinian is so vicious and certainly the Palestinians have legitimate concerns which need to be addressed. However, enough of them form a dangerous core segment with the single-minded goal of killing every Jew in Israel until they can seize control of all the land. Many apologists for the terrorists insist that they cannot dictate how the Palestinians "resist" Israel's "brutal occupation." The publisher of CRISIS ISRAEL has personally heard this excuse. Yeah, Afik Zahavi and Mordechai Yosopov were brutal occupiers. It gets even more infuriating, in the other direction, when you read Sederot Mayor Eli Moyal's eye-opening disclosure to a New York Times reporter. He said he had been appealing to the government for years for an ambulance fully equipped to handle major trauma, among other emergency measures. Many residents wondered if Afik's life might have been saved had such an ambulance been available. The Israeli government, which has plenty of money for settlements, bypass roads and ultra-Orthodox religious education programs, has had plenty of time to think about Sederot's request for an ambulance. They know very well that Sederot's proximity to Gaza makes this city of 24,000 one of the most vulnerable communities in Israel proper. Too late for two of Sederot's citizens who were buried on Monday. Contact Bruce Ticker at his website: http://www.crisisisrael.com |
| PM SHARON COMES TO SDEROT
Posted by Harvey Tannenbaum, June 30, 2004. |
|
Ariel Sharon came to Sderot. He said, "Kassam rockets will not return
to Sderot ever again, when we're through with our current IDF
actions." (Direct quote of Sharon to Sderot leaders at 4pm, June 29,
2004.)
Two minutes later 3 kassam rockets were fired and fell very close to the Prime Minister with his mouth open in dismay. The Shabak and secret service ran him out of there like a bat in hell. Too bad those guards could not have saved the life of Afiki Zahavi, the 4 year old miracle baby murdered yesterday instead of wasting time with an old PM who has sold out his country for a casino and wants to transfer Jews out of their homes onto trucks to holding camps. Harvey Tannenbaum can be reached at protexia@netvision.net.il |
|
THE KINDER-TRANSPORT OF ISRAEL
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, June 30, 2004. |
|
The transports came roaring up the road, kicking up dust as they rocked from side to side. The Jews had been baking all morning, waiting out in the scorching June sun. They were rounded up early by the soldiers and told to line up in an orderly fashion. But how long could that last? Babies were crying, and little children were running this way and that, playing, while frightened mothers kept one eye on their kids and another on the soldiers guarding them. The trucks pulled up to the crowd and stopped. Several soldiers got out and walked over to the huddled, frightened group of mothers and children. The soldiers barked orders to all the children, to get back in line by their mothers. The crying grew louder. The commanding officer walked over to the group and ordered them to take out their ID cards. "This is the last check before leaving," he said. "We wouldn't want to leave anybody behind..." Somewhere in Europe in 1944? No, this is Gaza, in 2005... Ever since Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon annunciated his policy of turning Gaza into a "Judenrein Zone," they knew it was coming to this. Most of the people had left much earlier. The men were either taken off to jail, or had left for work or shopping and then not let back into their towns. Most of the women left peacefully after their men-folk were expelled, but some hardcores stayed. This was the last group of Jews in Gaza, and Commander X - all the soldiers involved in the expulsions covered their faces and were called X - due to threats of reprisals. Not from the "settlers" I might add, but from their supporters throughout the land. The Rabbis had already called on soldiers not to participate in these evil deeds. Hundreds of religious soldiers - those first called into action - were already languishing away in military prisons. The Army wanted to ferret out those most likely to disobey, so they at first, sent in only religious soldiers. They told the soldiers and "settlers" that this way they have nothing to fear. No beatings, no violence; they would be taken out by their own kind. But when the soldiers refused to carry out the "operation," they were hauled off to prison and replaced by club wielding anti-religious secularists, multi-generational leftists, and their Arab helpmates. It didn't take long - only a few weeks - to empty most of the towns, after they had turned the water and electricity off, blockaded those left inside, stopped the food shipments and bus service, and started dropping teargas and sleeping gas on them. But these were the hardcores; settler women driven with messianic zeal, and ferocious motherly love for their young, frightened by the prospects of the future unknown. Huddled together and cowered, they didn't look so threatening when Commander X was barking orders at them, now. PM Sharon was keeping his promise to the nation, and to the Americans. He said he wouldn't let sentimentalism get in the way of the Roadmap and he kept his word. He proclaimed early on, that "painful concessions" would be necessary to keep the agreement with the Palestinians, and moving Jews out of parts of their historic homeland would happen. Yasser Arafat was probably rolling in his grave with joy. Sharon was a man of his word, and even when Hamas started rocket attacks on his farm in the Negev, near Gaza, Sharon didn't veer from his plan. He earned every kilo of his nickname, "The Bulldozer". He bulldozed the very towns and cities that once in his youth he helped to plan-out and build. "We all must make sacrifices," he would remind the nation, even as he sifted through the rubble of his ranch house. "I intend to bring security and peace to this troubled land," he would bellow, always thinking, always planning. Sharon was the true father of the settlements, and he was the true father of the "peace" that would come, with their destruction. Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko |
|
IT'S ALL ABOUT JEWS
Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, June 30, 2004. |
|
I have an older friend, a Russian immigrant, who grew up in a Jewish family that was unobservant almost to the point of atheism, but keenly aware of their Jewishness, mostly due to the anti-Semitism permeating everything around them. As a very young child, my friend learned that Jews were a tiny, insignificant, completely unnecessary bunch of misfits that could be credited with absolutely nothing of value for humankind, while being directly responsible for countless unspecified troubles they had caused. Television was unavailable in the region where my friend's family lived at the time, but the walls of their tiny apartment were lined with bookshelves densely packed with volumes collected by at least two generations. My friend became a ravenous reader. When he was 8, a distant relative who had converted to Christianity gave him a Bible. Recalling his unsupervised attempts to navigate it, he told me how surprised he was to discover that it was all about Jews. If our civilization still exists 2,000 years from today, Jews will be still around even then, and, obviously, where there are Jews, there are child prodigies. If such a Jewish child prodigy with a knack for ancient history reads about our times, she is bound to experience the same surprise, because today, just like it was in biblical times, it is still all about Jews. Probably, no collection of historic evidence makes the exceptional importance of Jews to the humankind as obvious as the annals of the United Nations. Compare, for example, two ancient nations, China and Israel. About a quarter of the world's population are Chinese. China is occupying Tibet and is waiting for an opportunity to gobble up Taiwan. Its systematic, daily human rights violations have by far surpassed the atrocities committed by Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union combined, which is quite an extraordinary achievement. It is the only country in the world that routinely executes thousands of convicts every year in order to harvest their organs for sale. Jews, on the other hand, barely amount to one quarter of one percent of the world's population. The number of Jews in Israel is just about one one-thousandth of all people on earth. For more than half of its long history, Israel was banished from its homeland. In the last 2,000 years, it never committed or even contemplated an act of aggression. It never occupied even a square inch of foreign land illegally. Whatever territory it has gained by force was won in defensive wars, which, according to international law, makes the winner legally entitled to keep it - unless the winner is Israel, of course. Obeying its special status according to this rule, Israel has voluntarily ceded most of its gained territories to its enemies, hoping to assuage their hostility; as we know, that didn't work. Needless to say, Israel has never attempted to force its enemies to compensate it for the terrible losses inflicted on its people by the ongoing Arab aggression. Nevertheless, UN resolutions depict Israel as the source of all evil on earth, while China looks as innocent of any digression and as disinterested in world domination as the Yanomami Indians of the Amazon rain forest. China is not the only member of the UN granted blank immunity from any criticism. A few days ago, the Saudi police killed four men they said were responsible for the murder of Paul Johnson. Unlike President Bush, I have no close personal ties with the Saudi rulers, so I hope you find my doubts understandable. To the best of my knowledge, the word of the Saudi government is the only indication of the dead men's involvement in the beheading of the American hostage. The Saudis themselves offered at least two different versions of the events that had led to the shootout. So, let me suggest the possibility that by killing four randomly selected people the Saudis have closed a potentially embarrassing case and demonstrated what unbelievably terrific allies they are in our war in terror. That's how you kill two birds with four bullets. Having said that, I am sure the victims weren't really picked randomly. Why lose such a brilliant opportunity to eliminate someone who is capable of causing damage, for example, by disclosing ties between the royal family and terrorists? After all, there must be a reason why the FBI has never been allowed to freely interrogate those arrested for the Khobar Towers explosion 8 years ago or, for that matter, any other terrorist suspect in Saudi custody. In any case, the killing of the four clearly qualifies as extrajudicial. But have you heard anyone refer to it as such? Of course, not. The term extrajudicial is used exclusively to describe Israel's execution of known (in stark contrast to the Saudi case) terrorists. Evidently, in the eyes of the United Nations and the vast majority of its members, killers of Jews deserve special leniency. Neither Saudi Arabia, nor other Muslim countries, nor Cuba, nor North Korea, nor most of the other habitual human rights abusers have been seriously, consistently criticized for their violations. It's perfectly understandable: how can a country violate something that does not exist within its jurisdiction? It's harder to understand why countries like that, that don't even have words in their vocabularies for the concept of human rights have been sitting on the UN human rights commission. It is obvious that the UN policy is not designed to promote human rights where they are most brazenly oppressed. Instead, it is used to harass those few countries that protect the rights of their citizens without waiting for the UN to show them the way. Luckily, I am a citizen of one of those countries, so I don't need to worry about the UN-sponsored perversions of my rights. There is a problem however: recently, the UN decided to address the problem of anti-Semitism. It's all about Jews, remember? Don't take me wrong. I hate anti-Semitism as much as the next Jew. But I know three things if I know anything at all. First, as surely as death will exist as long as there is life, anti-Semitism will survive on this planet until the day it becomes judenrein. If World War II didn't eliminate it, we have no choice but to conclude that this plague is incurable, and only a truly final solution of the Jewish problem may cleanse the humankind of it. As usual, a few Jews are bound to fall through the cracks and survive, but impatient historians, without waiting for them to become extinct, will offer incontrovertible evidence that Jews have never existed, that they were a myth, and, therefore, the genocide was a myth as well. I'm curious though whom they will begin to exterminate next. Someone is definitely in for a nasty surprize. Second, the simplest, most efficient way for the UN to make a substantial dent in anti-Semitism would be to call in all its people - both the staff and foreign representatives, seal all the exits and set the building on fire. Alternatively, Kofi Annan could contact his friends in the Arab world and ask them to slam the next highjacked airliner into the UN headquarters in New York City. I know it sounds cruel and cynical, but not as cruel and cynical as the UN, which, as a universally recognized international body, is in a unique position to effectively discredit and discourage anti-Semitism. Instead, it has been the leading force promoting it, and so, without the UN, Jews could've breathed a bit easier. Third, it doesn't take a genius to figure out why the UN, famous for its anti-Israeli policy, decided to address the problem of anti-Semitism it helped create. It is pursuing the same two goals as the recent European conference devoted to the same eternal topic. The short-term goal is to be able to respond to accusations of anti-Semitism, "You must be kidding! Haven't we strongly denounced it at our recent conference?" The long-term goal is to redefine anti-Semitism in such a way that it won't include anti-Zionism. That will help them present the destruction of Israel and the new Holocaust that will inevitably accompany it as positive developments. Not so long ago, plenty of people in the United States refused to consider themselves racists; they had nothing against "niggers" as long as those "niggers" knew their place. Today, most people have nothing against Jews; they hate Zionists instead, because Zionism, according to the UN, is racism, and racism is as bad as Nazism, and Nazis must be exterminated. So, don't be surprised if the UN creates a committee to monitor the progress of anti-Semitism (or anti-anti-Semitism) in the world and, following its own example with the human rights, assigns Syrians, Iranians and Ukrainians to run it. By the way, contrary to what you may have heard, in the Soviet Union, where my immigrant friend was born, there was no anti-Semitism whatsoever. In pleasant unison with the UN stance on universal human rights, its constitution declared all Soviet citizens perfectly equal regardless of their ethnicity, religion, sex, and other petty distinctions that still existed between individuals, despite all the efforts of the Communist Party and Soviet Government. Actually, the Soviet Union went one step further than the UN: its criminal code specifically recognized anti-Semitism as a crime punishable by a labor camp term. Nice, isn't it? Makes you wonder why Jews kept running from the Soviet Union instead of desperately trying to get in. Here's a story that may give you a hint. When my friend was 8 days old, his father, over vigorous objections of his mother and both grandmothers, but with somewhat uncertain support of the only surviving grandfather (the other one was killed in the Great Patriotic War), without inviting anyone, even close relatives and friends, brought home an elderly man in a wrinkled black suit who, amidst the general discomfort of all present, performed an abbreviated rite of bris, accepted a meager payment, and was escorted to the taxi cab waiting outside. Despite all the conspiratorial precautions, a neighbor reported the incident to the authorities. As a result, my friend first met his father a couple of years after he began perusing the Russian Orthodox Bible, because his father had spent the ten years following the bris on the wrong side of the Ural Mountains cutting trees in the taiga, where the Communist Party had decided to build yet another happy city of the future. His crime? You see, anti-Semitism wasn't the only unusual article in the Soviet criminal code. Zionism was also a crime in the good old USSR. My friend's father was found guilty of Zionism for doing something Jewish, probably, for the very first time in his whole life. Soviet Muslims, who circumcised their sons openly, could do so unmolested. It's nice to know what serves the UN as a source of its justice and wisdom. Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com This article was written for the Forwerts. |
|
DUMP SHARON NOW
Posted by Michael Freund, June 30, 2004. |
|
This is an article of mine from the Jerusalem Post about recent
Palestinian rocket attacks into Israel and the need to hold Ariel
Sharon accountable for his failure to stem Palestinian terror.
It's entitled "Eliminate the Menance" and is archived at
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/
ShowFull&cid=1088486384069&p=1006953079865
This past Monday yet another Jewish family was destroyed, joining the dreaded list of those who have fallen victim to our enemy's thirst for blood and our leadership's indifference. Mordechai Yosefov, 49, and three-year-old, Afik Zahavi, were killed outside a kindergarten when Palestinian terrorists in Gaza launched Kassam rockets into the southern Israeli city of Sderot. Zahavi's mother, Miriam, was seriously injured in the attack, and is struggling to recover in a local hospital. She and her husband made aliya from the former Soviet Union, undoubtedly seeking a better life, one free of anti-Semitism and full of opportunity. In an instant that dream was shattered. Instead of watching her beloved child participate in his end-of-the year celebration, Miriam saw what no parent should ever have to see: her young son die before her eyes. And little Afik's classmates, who heard the rocket's explosion outside their school, are now confronting issues no four- or five-year old should ever have to tackle, such as why someone they have never met would possibly want to do them harm. The state has dispatched specially trained psychologists to tend to the children, and I don't envy their task. Try explaining to a group of 20 kindergarten children how and why such a thing could happen. But those kids, like the rest of us, deserve an answer, and it is time we stopped pretending that we don't know what it is. Afik and Yosefov and the more than 1,000 other innocent Israelis who have been killed in terror attacks in the past four years, all died because Palestinians bent on our destruction have tossed aside diplomacy, preferring to use violence as the means of achieving their goals. We must never, ever forget that this conflict was imposed upon us against our will, and that Israel did everything it possibly could to bring about a peaceful resolution of the Middle East dispute. But there is another reason why so many Jewish men, women and children have been ruthlessly slaughtered, and why the killing has not come to an end. That answer has a name, and it is Ariel Sharon. For all his talk and bluster about fighting terror, the fact is that Sharon failed to take a strategic decision to eliminate the menace of Palestinian terror once and for all, essentially subjecting the Israeli populace to a protracted, and needless war of attrition. Monday's attack was hardly the first time Palestinian terrorists have fired rockets at Israeli communities. Indeed, over 4,160 missiles and mortar shells have been launched by Palestinians against Jews in Gush Katif in the 45 months since the violence began in September 2000. That averages out to the Palestinians firing three rockets per day, every day, for a three-and-a-half year period against Gaza's Jews. THAT PALESTINIAN terrorists can still carry out such assaults, in broad daylight no less, demonstrates the extent to which Sharon's tactics and strategy have proven to be a clear and unequivocal failure. For, rather than reasserting complete military control over the territories, dismantling the Palestinian Authority and uprooting the terrorist infrastructure, Sharon has chosen to project weakness, signaling his intention to withdraw, as though hiding from the problem will somehow make it go away. In so doing, Sharon has abdicated his primary responsibility as prime minister, which is to protect and defend the safety and well-being of Israel and its citizens. Simply put, by failing to crush the terror, Sharon has allowed it to fester. And by choosing to reward it with withdrawal, he is seemingly encouraging the terrorists to intensify their attacks. In recent years Sharon had ample opportunity, and justification, for reversing the disaster brought on by the Oslo Accords. He could easily have made a convincing case to the public about the need to retain Judea, Samaria and Gaza, and to stand firm in the local manifestation of the global war on terror. Sure, there would have been protests, and even outrage, but had Sharon deployed the IDF to wage a long-term and relentless battle against terror, had he quelled the rocket attacks and suicide bombings with an unyielding counter-terror campaign, he could at least have claimed that he had done all in his power to protect Jewish life and limb from those who seek to destroy it. Instead, guided by complacency and shortsightedness, Sharon has brought Israel to a new low. Three years after he assumed power, even Jewish children attending kindergarten can no longer feel safe. For that alone Sharon should be toppled, using all the legal and democratic tools at our disposal. His disastrous handling of Israel's security cannot, and should not, be forgotten. Now, more than ever, Ariel Sharon has got to go. The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications and Policy Planning under former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. |
|
THE CROUCHING LION
Posted by IsrAlert, June 29, 2004. |
|
This article was written by
Yanki Tauber, and appeared today at
http://chabad.org/article.asp?aid=143835
For more Torah study and inspiring articles, please visit:
http://www.chabad.org/magazine
He crouches and lies like a lion, like a lioness; who will dare rouse him? (From Balaam's blessings, Numbers 24:9) It's always nice to receive a compliment from a friend or a loved one. But praise that we truly savor is praise that comes from an adversary. When a rival at work, a business competitor or an outright enemy says something like, "I must say, you guys have something there!" -- that's the kind of vindication we relish most of all. Little wonder, then, that we Jews have such a warm place in our heart reserved for Balaam's blessings. As the Torah tells it (in Numbers 22-24), the prophet and sorcerer Balaam, an archenemy of the people of Israel, was summoned by King Balak of Moab (an even bigger enemy) to curse the Israelites. But when Balaam opened his mouth to curse, blessings came out instead. He tried three times, each time with the same result. And then he finished off with a prophecy describing the triumph of Israel in the "end of days." And what beautiful blessings they are! The verses uttered by Balaam are amongst the most delicious poetry in the bible. Balaam's blessings include the Mah Tovu ("How goodly are your tents O Jacob, your dwellings, O Israel...") -- a verse we love so much that, three hundred sixty-five days a year we start our morning prayers with it. They include the most explicit reference in the Chumash (the five books of Moses) to Moshiach, the Jewish leader who will bring about the full and ultimate redemption. And they include the verse we cited at the beginning of this article ("He crouches and lies like a lion, like a lioness; who will dare rouse him?") which, as the Lubavitcher Rebbe explains, is a most powerful and meaningful description of the Jewish people in the state of galut -- a state in which we've found ourselves for much of our history. * * * * Every once in a while an item makes an appearance in the newspapers. The details differ somewhat (a tiger raised in a Brooklyn apartment, a trained circus lion "losing it" in the ring), but the basic story is the same: a large cat, of the sort that rightly belongs in the savannah or the steppes, raised and supposedly "trained" as a pet or performer, "suddenly" sheds its domesticated persona and...well, you don't want to be in its way when that happens. Interestingly, the Talmud (the repository of Torah law compiled 1500 years ago) and the Shulchan Aruch (the "Code of Jewish Law" put to writing about 1000 years after that) includes a law that all would-be lion "trainers" should take to heart: according to Torah law, there's no such thing as a "domesticated" lion. Other animals can be "owned", and be legally classified as such. So if your ox or goat goes berserk and inflicts damage, there are numerous stipulations as to when, and to what extent, you are liable, reflecting the extent to which you are expected to anticipate your animal's behavior under the given circumstances. No such qualifiers have any legal standing in the case of a wild cat. A lion remains, by nature, a free creature, and never accepts the yoke of ownership or "domestication" -- no matter how many years these states have been imposed upon it. This, says the Rebbe, is the deeper significance of Balaam's metaphor of the crouching lion applied to the people of Israel. For much of our history we have been in a state of galut -- exiled from our homeland, enslaved by other nations, subjected to alien cultures, "trained" to perform in accordance with the dictates of what "the world" expects and desires from us. At times, the subjugation may seem quite real, at least to the cursory perception of the circus audience. But it is never real. The lion may crouch or lie in seeming docility, but it has not been conquered. It remains free. If it is docile, it is docile by choice, not by nature. It remains free, and is never more than an instant removed from the seemingly "sudden" assertion of its innate freedom. In the words of Rabbi Sholom DovBer of Lubavitch (words quoted by his son, Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak, as the latter stood on the platform of the Leningrad train station on a summer day in 1927, moments before boarding the train that would take him into the exile decreed upon him by the Communist rulers of the land for his work to preserve and strengthen Jewish faith): "We did not depart from the Land of Israel of our own free will, nor will we return to there by virtue of our own capabilities. G-d, our Father and King, has sent us into exile, and it is He who will redeem us and gather in the dispersed of Israel from the four corners of the earth, and cause us to be led back firmly and proudly by Moshiach, our righteous redeemer -- may this occur speedily, in our times. "This, however, all the nations of the world must know: Only our bodies were sent into exile and subjugated to alien rule; our souls, however, were not given over into captivity and foreign rule. We must therefore proclaim openly and before all, that any matter affecting the Jewish religion, Torah, and its mitzvot and customs is not subject to the coercion of others. No one can impose his belief upon us, nor coerce us to conduct ourselves contrary to our beliefs..." IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
LET ISRAEL DO IRAN
Posted by Irwin N. Graulich, June 29, 2004. |
|
George Bush can do the world a big favor. Let Israel do Iran! Or should Ariel Sharon simply wait for disaster, culminating in beautiful obituaries at the UN and sanctions placed on the Tehran regime? The Supreme Leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khameni has officially declared war on Israel through his use of serious verbal threats and direct funding for the Hezbollah/Hamas terrorist organizations. The reticence of democracies to declare preemptive wars unless they have been seriously attacked, plays well into the hands of al Qaeda operatives and the Saddams of the world (no linkage). Waiting for a September 11th style event to occur, or a nation like Kuwait to be raped and pillaged, is a mistake of immense proportions. Unfortunately, it was an American president who was instrumental in resisting military action, thereby cultivating this terrorist monster. Jimmy Carter, peanut farmer extraordinaire and most likely the worst president in American history, allowed Iran to fall into evil hands after the American embassy takeover and kidnappings of 1979. Thus President Carter became the greatest contributor to 9/11 sans Osama bin Laden. After amputating the first leg of the "axis of evil" in Iraq (the Baathe Party), gangrene has spread throughout the second leg, conveniently located right next door. With almost 150,000 troops ready, willing and able to "operate," the scalpel should be passed to Israel, whose particular specialty has been excising military enemy cancers in the region. The secret to the enduring Palestinian situation is that they are not a state, and thus cannot be dealt with in the appropriate, harsh manner. Once they become a duly recognized member of the UN, they would certainly go the way of Egypt, Syria and Jordan on the battlefield, should the situation warrant it. Arafat understood this quite well, which is the primary reason he rejected Barak's offer outright. The messy aftermath in Iraq will not follow an Israeli victory over Iran. The Iranian populace has a particular warmth for Western democracy. In addition, the 1967 and 1973 wars clearly showed that humiliation by a tiny Jewish state is a vital part of a true victory. Otherwise, Abu Ghraib-type propaganda will be used to cloud the situation. The Iranian army can easily defeat eight British soldiers with pistols in a small boat that veers off course. What a great Islamic triumph, capturing non combative soldiers, blindfolding them and creating a false international incident for Arab/Muslim media consumption. Let's see what those tough Iranians do when Jews show up with F-16's. Iran is a terrorist organization with a flag and an example of virtually everything that could possibly be wrong with a government--totalitarian, autocratic, religious, fundamentalist and a tyranny over its populace. Why would a religious leadership express such hatred for Israel and America, while announcing that they would "happily be willing to exchange the nuclear deaths of 100 million Muslims for the 5 million Jews in Israel?" Under the Koran, once a place has instituted Muslim sovereignty, which the Jewish state had experienced for a brief time in history, it can never lose Muslim sovereignty. Muslim hatred is based solely upon the reality of strong and successful Christians/Jews, a fact of life which disturbs and humiliates Islam. Allah cannot possibly permit the infidels to succeed over religious Muslims. Iranian fundamentalists have severe Jew and Christian hang-ups, which reinforce the idea that American and Israeli power somehow invalidates Islam. The rhetoric of a "nuclear free Middle East" simply means a Middle East free of Israel. The recent diatribes by Iranian Foreign Minister Kamal Kharrazi about Israel's nuclear weapons are living proof that his country clearly understands that one wrong step against Israel and Tehran could glow in the dark for many years to come. Today, the battle for Western civilization is largely being fought in the Middle East. The world is divided into three groups. Those who would like Israel destroyed. Those who support nations (directly or indirectly), that want Israel destroyed. And the United States of America. Prime Minister Sharon must announce immediately that Israel "does not need a permission slip from anyone...except the United States." Israel's previous victories coupled with the American experience in Afghanistan and Iraq are part of a developing new strategy. If all these valuable lessons are employed militarily, change throughout the Middle East is imminent. The only serious problem remaining will be, "What the heck to do with Europe and Scandinavia?" Irwin N. Graulich is a motivational speaker on morality, ethics, religion 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@verizon.net |
|
MILITANT ISLAM
Posted by Bruce Tuchman, June 29, 2004. |
|
This was sent me by a friend who lives in Florida.
This past Friday evening Phyllis and I attended services at Temple Bethel in Palm Beach. We went there specifically to listen to a lecture by Dr. Khaleel Mohammed. Dr. Mohammed is a professor of Islamic Studies at the University of San Diego. He received his Ph.D. at the University of Riyadh in Saudi Arabia and is an Imam schooled in the Wahabi-Sunni tradition of Islam. The title of the lecture was "Can Militant Islam Coexist with the state Of Israel?" What we heard was blood chilling, but not at all surprising. His opening statement was, "The people of the United States worry about Osama. He is nothing but a tiny offshoot of the problem. The main problem is (and I quote) "EVERY SINGLE MOSQUE IN THE USA ESPOUSES FROM THE PULPIT THAT EVERY SINGLE JEW (not just Israel) IN THE WORLD MUST BE ANNIHILATED. No! ifs ands or buts!! And these mosques don't even consider themselves militant. Trading land for peace. A big joke! The Koran states (as he quoted) that any treaty between a Muslim and a non-Muslim nation is not binding and is meant to be broken once the Muslim nation becomes stronger than the non-Muslim nation with whom the treaty was made. So all the treaties with Israel to be made in the future will eventually (and must) be broken once the Muslim nation feels it is strong enough. It took 200 years for the Crusaders to be vanquished and driven from the Holy Land. Israel is a mere 50 years old. Islam has patience. Dr. M. has received numerous death threats and is constantly booed and driven off the pulpit in the many mosques that he lectures in because he espouses peaceful co-existence with Israel. The frightening aspect of this is that there a huge 5th column right
here in the USA
Bruce Tuchman is with the New York Coalition Against Terrorism
(http://www.nycat.org/). To subscribe, send an email to
nycat@nycat.org |
|
UN'S NUCLEAR CHIEF: ISRAEL SHOULD DISARM, IRAN 'NOT A CONCERN'
Posted by Lewis Lipkin, June 29, 2004. |
|
This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com).
The head of the United Nations nuclear watchdog agency, Mohamed El Baradei has suggested that Israel get rid of its nuclear weapons. At the same time, El Baradei insists that Iran's documented pursuit of nuclear capabilities are "not a concern." El Baradei, who is scheduled to visit Israel next month, told reporters that Israel should take steps to disarm in order to reduce frustration in the region about "what is seen to be a widespread imbalance". "We need... to rid the Middle East of all weapons of mass destruction," El Baradei told Reuters. "Israel agrees with that, but they say it has to be... after peace agreements. My proposal is that maybe we need to start to have a parallel dialogue on security at the same time when we're working on the peace process." El Baradei said that he would like to see Israel, along with other Middle East countries, open up their nuclear facilities to inspections by the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency. In a speech today (Tuesday), the same El Baradei who called for a "Nuclear-free Middle-East" took a different tone - this time dealing with Iran's nuclear program. El Baradei told reporters that he was unconcerned by Russia's construction of a nuclear reactor in Iran, brushing aside US allegations that the facility could be used to develop nuclear weapons. America, which says Iran is part of an "axis of evil" seeking nuclear weapons to terrorize the free world, has strongly criticized Russia for pushing ahead with construction of the $800 million reactor near the Iranian port of Bushehr. The American Government has said that Iran could use Moscow's atomic know-how to develop nuclear weapons. El-Baradei has adopted the Iranian claim, announcing today that, "Bushehr is a project to produce nuclear energy," and should not be the "center of international concern." Recent satellite photos have led many to claim Iran is attempting to mislead the UN agency, hiding the fact that it has been trying to develop weapons of mass destruction. According to a report in The New Yorker magazine about the nuclear weapons black market, the IDF's elite intelligence unit known as Unit 8200 broke a "sophisticated Iranian code" a number of years ago permitting the monitoring of communications between Iran and Pakistan regarding Iran's nuclear program. |
|
A HUMAN CHAIN FROM JERUSALEM TO GUSH KATIF
Posted by Dror Vanunu, June 29, 2004. |
|
The Hof Aza Regional Council, along with the Settlers Committee Headquarters decided to commence the second stage of the struggle for Gush Katif. According to this plan we intend to strengthen and broaden the campaign that was so successful during the earlier stage during which residents went from house to house, city by city and explained the historical, Biblical, economic, agricultural, security and political importance of the Katif region. The central goal is to advance public relations of the region and to bring about popular support. In addition to giving attention to each and every Israeli city and town, and having events in support of Gush Katif, we are planning a number of big projects. A Human Chain from Jerusalem to Gush Katif: On Sunday, the seventh of Av, July 25th, 2004 at five in the afternoon, on the eve of Tisha B'Av, the anniversary of the day when the First and the Second Temples were destroyed and on which, during the ages many terrible tragedies befell the Jewish people, we are planning a human chain which is to stretch from the Western Wall to Gush Katif. At one end shall be Shmuel Cahane, who founded Kfar Darom in 1946 as one of the eleven Negev settlements and at the other end will be a girl from Gush Katif who will insert a note into the Wall. This chain is an unambiguous statement that we are not prepared to bring about an additional destruction and the expulsion of Jews from their land. Gush Katif is the gate and the defensive wall of Jerusalem and as such no government in Israel has the right to uproot it. In order to bring about this human continuum, we need 150,000 people. You can be a part of this chain. Individuals and groups interested in participating are invited to contact me. An additional expression of the Prime Minister's complete disconnection from our values and our roots is the decision (if his disengagement plan is passed) to complete the withdrawal by the 14th of August 2005. The Prime Minister and his cronies apparently did not take the trouble to peruse the Hebrew calendar, which would have revealed the fact that this date is Tisha B'Av 5764. Will Sharon join the "honor roll" of those who bring about destruction on the Ninth of Av? The Gush Katif Music Festival: On the 15th of Av (August 2nd and 3rd, 2004) we are planning a big song festival for the eighteenth year running, with the participation of the best performers of Hebrew and Hassidic music. This year, more than ever, we will turn this event into a massive display of support for Gush Katif with tens of thousands of participants. Additional details will follow. Signature of the Majority: We plan to gather the signatures of around two million people demanding that the government of Israel completely abandon the program to expel the settlements of the Katif region. This project is supposed to be completed by the beginning of the winter session of the K'nesset. For the purpose of this operation, we have acquired dozens of signing booths to be set up all over Israel. We are beginning this campaign without resources as these were all invested in the earlier campaign. Today, more than ever, we understand that we do not have the right not to act with the greatest strength of purpose in the fight for the whole of the Land of Israel. We shall be the first to jump in, as was the Biblical Nachshon and, G-D willing, we believe that many will help and join in with us. Dror Vanunu is spokeman for the Gush Katif Community in Gaza. He can be reached at gkatif@netvision.net.il To contribute to the Campaign to save the Gush Katif community from expulsion from their homes, you can send donations to AMERICANS FOR A SAFE ISRAEL/AFSI; 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128; Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717; afsi@rcn.com; www.afsi.org. |
|
URGENT ACTION ALERT FOR THE RESIDENTS OF GAZA, JUDEA AND SAMARIA
Posted by Unity Coalition For Israel, June 29, 2004. |
|
CLICK HERE to send the following message of encouragement and support to the residents in the communities of Gaza, Judea and Samaria. Your message will automatically go to the mayors of twenty communities, to President Bush, Prime Minister Sharon, their Cabinet Members, and Leaders of our Congress and the Knesset. As we celebrate Independence Day, July 4, 2004, we are mindful that we are privileged to live in our Judeo-Christian society, with our many guaranteed rights and privileges. We live under our Constitution within a governmental system that must be responsive to our wishes. Among our rights of "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness" is our ability to speak our own minds without fear. Today, we are exercising our freedom of speech by sending our encouragement and support to the residents in the communities of Gaza, Judea and Samaria. We are perplexed at Prime Minister Sharon as he ignores the will of his party who voted against the disengagement plan in the recent Likud referendum. We also question the political influence and pressure brought to bear on the Cabinet Members (two of whom were dismissed to change the vote), the Knesset and President Bush. In addition to these acts intended to circumvent the will of his party, we question the wisdom of the Jewish Agency in agreeing to spend charitable monies to transfer Jews from their homes. We respectfully submit these concerns to the officials of the Israeli government and our own government and speak for fellow Zionists around the world, both Christian and Jewish. All of us have a tremendous stake in the future of Israel. We salute the 8,000 residents, modern day pioneers of the land of Israel, who risk their lives on a daily basis against the terrorist onslaught of the jihadists. Their unwavering commitment to Israel assures that Israel will remain the one foothold of democracy within the volatile Middle East. As we celebrate our many blessing on this Independence Day, we express our appreciation and concern for the safety of the communities in Gaza, Judea and Samaria and over our cherished holy sites. Our hearts and prayers are with them and all of Israel. The National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" |
|
'I LOVE YOU, MY DEAR BOY. I WILL SEE YOU EVERYWHERE'
Posted by Jerusalem Newswire Editorial Service, June 29, 2004. |
|
These are two stories about the death of a young child murdered by
terrorists in S'derot. The first was published yesterday on our website:
http://www.jnewswire.com. The second was published today by the
International Christian Embassy Jerusalem (ICEJ).
The first is archived at
http://www.jnewswire.com/library/article.php?articleid=260; the second
is archived at
http://www.icej.org/cgi-local/view.cgi?type=
headline&artid=2004/06/29/569038634
June 28, 2004 JERUSALEM - An angered and distraught father Monday lamented the senseless death of his child as a result of the lack of security provided for Israel's Jews by the government of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Standing by the grave of his murdered four-year-old son Monday evening, Yitzhak Ohayon whispered through his tears, "I love you, my dear boy. I will see you everywhere." Afik Zahavi's young life was mercilessly cut short earlier in the day when a Kassam rocket fired by "Palestinian" terrorists slammed into the sidewalk outside his kindergarten in the Negev town of Sderot. A 49-year-old grandfather was also killed. Zahavi's mother was unable to attend the funeral as she fought for her own life at Beersheva's Soroka Medical Center. Distraught father Just hours after his son's murder at the hands of Palestinian Arab rocket crews Monday, Ohayon spoke to reporters about the death of his beloved child. "We were supposed to go to his end-of-year party in kindergarten tomorrow... and now instead we'll be going to his funeral," he said. "I waited 15 years for this child... I cannot grasp this disaster," Ma'ariv quoted him as saying. Angered by the lack of security for Israel's Jews, Ohayon laid the blame for his son's untimely demise at the doorstep of the Sharon government. "The prime minister has a bodyguard. The president has a bodyguard. But who guards our children? They are our future, but who's watching over them? No one. That's my message to the prime minister," cried the distraught father. Ohayon said he didn't want to go into the whole issue of Sharon's Gaza retreat plan, "but I just want to tell our government to take action." Emotional graveside Standing over his child's fresh grave Monday evening, an overwhelmed Ohayon whispered through his tears, "I love you, my dear boy. I will see you everywhere." Though the funeral had ended, Ohayon refused to leave Afik's graveside. The child's mother was unable to attend the funeral as she battled for her own life at Beersheva's Soroka Medical Center. Muslim barbarism Taking credit for the murder, the Islamic Hamas terrorist organization issued a statement Monday saying that "with the help of Allah, two Zionists were killed and a number of Zionist settlers were injured." June 29, 2004 "A Father's Farewell: Sderot Buries Its Victims From Kassam Barrage" Filled with angst and confusion, Yitzhak Ohayon embraced the lifeless body of his three-year old "miracle child," Afik Zahavi, at his funeral in Sderot Monday afternoon, just hours after a Palestinian rocket killed the son he had waited so long to have. Yitzhak and his wife, Ruth Zahavi, were a middle-aged Israeli couple that had tried for 15 years to have a child. They finally opted for in-vitro fertilization and young Afik was their "miracle". Afik was walking with his mother, Ruth Zahavi, to nursery school yesterday morning when Hamas terrorists in northeast Gaza launched a barrage of advanced Kassam rockets at Sderot. Both were severely injured when one of the missiles landed just outside the kindergarten. Within moments, neighbors rushed to the scene to aid the wounded and found the mother and child lying next to each other, life draining from their bodies. Afiki's backpack, along with candies he was bringing to his final day of nursery school, were scattered about drenched in blood. After providing the name of her child to a neighbor, the mother passed out. Afik also lost consciousness before paramedics arrived. Both were rushed to hospital in Be'er Sheva, where the boy was pronounced dead and his mother endured over ten hours of surgery and remains in critical condition. Days earlier, Yitzhak had beamed as only a father can when his boy handed him an invite to the end-of-the-year party at the kindergarten, planned for 11:00 am yesterday morning. But instead of heading to the school, Yitzhak was now speeding to the hospital, tense from sketchy reports of a rocket strike near his son's nursery. "I waited 15 years for this child," he told waiting media after learning of his son's death. "I cannot grasp this disaster." Hours later, Yitzhak leaned over his son's body and said a painful farewell. "Just tell me good night," he pleaded. As friends and relatives led the father away sobbing, he said, "I just wanted him to tell me "Good night, Daddy?" The mother, her critical condition somewhat stabilized today, has still not been told of her son's funeral. In her absence stood hundreds of family members and friends who came to mourn the death of innocence. Standing over the child wrapped in burial shrouds, Mayor Eli Moyal expressed grief and anger. "What can I tell you, little boy?" he said. "You didn't know anything about war or peace. You were pure, but we have neighbors, little boy, who are animals, murderers that kill little children. We will not forget, we will not forgive." Sderot has endured over 70 Kassam rocket attacks in the past three years, but until Monday no one had died. One rabbi speaking at the funeral of the other victim of Monday's attack, 49-year-old Russian immigrant Yosefov Ohayon, lamented, "Each time a home was hit and not a person, we said, 'It's a miracle; God is watching over us.' But today, what can we say? We are praying that You continue to work miracles and to bring us peace." On Tuesday, Sderot was struck by six more Kassam rockets, now being built with a longer range and more lethal payload than in the past. One Israeli man was moderately wounded in today's strikes. Several landed during a visit by Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who owns the Sycamore Ranch just outside the town. "Jerusalem Newswire is a Gentile-run newsgathering and dissemination service based out of Jerusalem, Israel, that exists to provide users with the top daily news stories culled from a wide variety of Internet sources." Their website address is http://www.jnewswire.com. "In 1980, Christian supporters of Israel established the International Christian Embassy Jerusalem as a practical expression of the desire of believers throughout the world to bless and comfort Zion." Their email address is icej@icej.org |
|
HEZBOLLAH PROFITING FROM AFRICAN DIAMONDS
Posted by Eliezar Edwards, June 29, 2004. |
|
This was written by Edward Harris, Associated Press Writer and appeared today in the Washington Times (www.washingtontimes.com). KOIDU, Sierra Leone (AP) -- Lebanon's Hezbollah guerrilla movement is siphoning profits from West Africa's diamond trade, in part by threatening Lebanese diamond merchants, U.S. diplomats charge. The allegations, supported by independent analysts, describe more pervasive, organized and coercive Hezbollah profiteering from West Africa's diamond trade than most U.S. officials have previously acknowledged. "One thing that's incontrovertible is the financing of Hezbollah. It's not even an open secret; there is no secret," said Larry Andre, deputy chief of mission for the U.S. Embassy in diamond-rich Sierra Leone. "There's a lot of social pressure and extortionate pressure brought to bear: 'You had better support our cause, or we'll visit your people back home,"' Andre told The Associated Press, citing interviews by embassy staff with Lebanese merchants. More than 100,000 Lebanese live in West Africa, where they have made up the core of the merchant class for over a century and have long handled much of the diamond business. Many Lebanese retain strong business, cultural and family ties to their homeland. Lebanon-based Hezbollah fought a guerrilla war against Israeli troops in south Lebanon over almost two decades, until the Israelis pulled out in 2000. Today the border is tense but mostly quiet; Hezbollah remains armed and hostile to Israel. The movement is also known for the bombings of the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut in 1983 and of the U.S. Embassy annex in Beirut in 1984 - earning it a slot on the U.S. State Department's list of terror groups. Until the Sept. 11 attacks, Hezbollah was estimated to have killed more Americans than any other terror group. In recent years, Hezbollah is alleged to have funneled hundreds of thousands of dollars to the Palestinians' Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, funding attacks that have killed civilians in Israel. Hezbollah also has political and charity wings and funds the building of schools, clinics and mosques. Its social programs help win the group support among Lebanese at home and abroad, as does its reputation among many Lebanese as a defender of Arabs against Israel. Most Lebanese do not believe Hezbollah is dangerous. Only 6,000 Lebanese are thought to remain in Sierra Leone after this country's 1991-2002 war for control of the eastern diamond fields surrounding Koidu, West Africa's richest-known deposits. West Africa's so-called blood diamonds helped buy arms and fighters in insurgencies that roiled the region in the 1990s. With the end of fighting and the advent of an industry-backed certificate of origin program, Sierra Leone estimates its legal exports of diamonds have soared from $1.4 million in 1999 to $76 million last year. The U.S. Embassy in Sierra Leone says between $70 million to $100 million worth of rough gems still are smuggled out of the country each year. It's due largely to the illegal trade that Hezbollah can extract cash by threats, beatings and destruction of property, analysts say. Victims, many of whom may have business dealings they do not want exposed, have little legal recourse. "They're (Hezbollah) asking for contributions and they're going to use the culture card and the nationality card," says Joseph Melrose, former U.S. ambassador to Sierra Leone. "Will they use threats? Sure." The amount of money is huge: in December 2003, an airliner that crashed off Benin had a courier on board carrying $2 million in Hezbollah-bound funds, diplomats and news reports said. In Lebanon, a Hezbollah official refused any comment when contacted by The Associated Press. One of Sierra Leone's top diamond exporters denied any ties to Hezbollah. "This is a lie. There's never been any connection between these people and Hezbollah," said Kassim Basma, who was born in Sierra Leone to a Lebanese family. "For me, I couldn't support them. For what? To cause myself problems?" Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy says stepped up enforcement in South America drove some Hezbollah activists to West Africa. As a result, the group's illegal fund-raising efforts in the region - including protection rackets and threats - may be on the rise, said Levitt, a former FBI agent. "As we crack down on one part of the world, things will crop up elsewhere," he said. In Koidu, indigenous Sierra Leoneans make up only about 35 of the roughly 200 legal diamond buyers, said Prince Saquee, chairman of the Diamond Dealers Association. Most of the rest are Lebanese, he said. Among Koidu's burned-out, bullet-pocked buildings, hundreds of diamond buyers run heavily guarded storefronts with signs emblazoned with enormous, glittering cut diamonds. Many in the State Department and officials at U.S. embassies in West Africa have long played down any West Africa conduits to Hezbollah, saying any contributions to Hezbollah appeared to be voluntary donations by individuals. Alex Yearsley, of London-based Global Witness, alleges that the CIA and FBI long had tried to publicly minimize links between conflict diamonds and Islamic militant groups, including al-Qaida. The U.S. security agents feared exposure of their own longtime links with Charles Taylor, the ousted Liberian leader who played a main role in West Africa's insurgencies and blood diamond trade, Yearsley said. Taylor received CIA payments until January 2001, Yearsley claimed in a telephone interview. Diplomats and some independent experts have questioned some of Global Witness's allegations about links between West Africa diamonds, al-Qaida and Hezbollah, saying they are short on proof. The fate of West Africa's diamonds ultimately bridges faiths and rivalries: Sold by the Lebanese merchants, many of the gems are brokered via Jewish or Israeli traders in Antwerp, Belgium, and Tel Aviv, ending up in the United States. "To us, we don't see Christian or Muslim or Jew," said Basma. "We're businessmen." |
|
ISRAEL'S WAYWARD PRIME MINISTERS
Posted by Lori Lowenthal Marcus, June 29, 2004. |
|
This article was written by
Daniel Pipes (www.DanielPipes.org), director of the Middle East
Forum and author of "Miniatures" (Transaction Publishers).
It appeared today in Front Page Magazine
(http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14004).
One point: Pipes suggest Israel will continue to be plagued by Prime Ministerial spinelessness "until Israelis elect a modest prime minister." Forget about modesty, I hope Israel will elect a PM who will maintain his/her spine and do what needs to be done. We all know what that is, as does Pipes. Forget about mentioning it. Just do it. Two patterns have shaped Israel's history since 1992 and go far to explain Israel's predicament today. First, every elected prime minister has broken his word on how he would deal with the Arabs. Second, each one of them has adopted an unexpectedly concessionary approach. Here is one example of deception from each of the four prime ministers: * Yitzhak Rabin promised the Israeli public immediately after winning office in June 1992 that "with the PLO as an organization, I will not negotiate." A year later, however, he did precisely that. Rabin defended dealing with Yasir Arafat by saying he had found no other Palestinians to do business with, so to "advance peace and find a solution," he had to turn to the PLO. * Binyamin Netanyahu promised before his election in 1996 that under his leadership, Israel "will never descend from the Golan." In 1998, however, as I established in The New Republic and Bill Clinton just confirmed in his memoirs, Netanyahu changed his mind and planned to offer Damascus the entire Golan in return for a peace treaty. * Ehud Barak flat-out promised during his May 1999 campaign a "Jerusalem, united and under our rule forever, period." In July 2000, however, at the Camp David II summit, he offered much of eastern Jerusalem to the Palestinian Authority. * Ariel Sharon won a landslide victory in January 2003 over his Labor opponent, Amram Mitzna, who called for "evacuating the settlements from Gaza." Sharon ridiculed this approach, saying that it "would bring the terrorism centers closer to [Israel's] population centers." In December 2003, however, Sharon adopted Mitzna's unilateral withdrawal idea. Prime ministers sometimes complain about other ones breaking their word. Netanyahu, for example, pointed out in August 1995 that Rabin had "promised in his election campaign not to talk with the PLO, not to give up territory during this term of office, and not to establish a Palestinian state. He is breaking all these promises one by one." Of course, when he got to office, Netanyahu also broke his promises "one by one." What prompts each of Israel's recent prime ministers to renege on his resolute intentions and instead adopt a policy of unilateral concessions? In some cases, it is a matter of expediency, notably for Netanyahu, who believed his reelection chances improved via a deal with the Syrian government. In other cases, there are elements of duplicity - specifically, hiding planned concessions knowing their unpopularity with the voters. Yossi Beilin, one of Barak's ministers, admitted during the Camp David II summit that he and others in the government had earlier concealed their willingness to divide Jerusalem. "We didn't speak about this in the election campaign, because we knew that the public would not like it." But expediency and duplicity are just part of the story. In addition, sincere aspirations inspire Israeli prime ministers to abandon strong policies for weak ones. Here we leave the political domain and enter the psychological one. Being prime minister of Israel, a country surrounded by enemies, is a weighty one. It is only too easy for the officeholder, having been elected leader of his people, immodestly to believe that he has a special talent to resolve his country's great, abiding, and potentially fatal problem, that of Arab hostility. Not for this great man is it enough to plug away at the dull, slow, expensive, and passive policy of deterrence, hoping some distant day to win Arab acceptance. His impatience invariably leads in the same direction - to move things faster, to develop solutions, and to "take chances for peace." If the prime minister's initiative succeeds, he wins international acclaim and enters the Jewish history books. If it fails - well, it was worth the try and his successors can clean up the mess. Grandiosity and egoism, ultimately, explain the prime ministerial pattern of going soft. This brings to mind how, for centuries, French kings and presidents have bequeathed grand construction projects in Paris as their personal mark on history. In like spirit, Israeli prime ministers have since 1992 dreamed of bequeathing a grand diplomatic project. The problem is, these are undemocratic impulses that betray the electorate, undermine faith in government, and erode Israel's position. These negative trends will continue until Israelis elect a modest prime minister. Lori Lowenthal Marcus is President, Zionist Organization of America Greater Philadelphia District (Eastern PA, Southern NJ, Del.). Contact her at http://www.zoaphilly.org. |
|
SECRETARY-GENERAL'S EASY WAY OUT
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 29, 2004. |
|
Secretary-General Annan does the easy part well. With Elie Wiesel at his side, he preaches against antisemitism in New York. "It is harder to send an Arabic-speaking special advisor to express such sentiments to a meeting of, say, the Organization of Islamic States." "As it happens, Mr. Annan did send Mr. Brahimi last week to the OIC meeting in Istanbul, where he carried a speech that stressed that Israel should 'refrain from further violations of international law' and end its 'use of violence'" against Arabs." "Over the past several decades, the UN has fashioned itself into perhaps the foremost global platform for antisemitism," said Columbia U. law professor Anne Bayefsky." (Benny Avni, NY Sun, 6/21, p.7.) The Arabs initiate the violence. Annan was asked whether the Arab campaign to kill off and drive the blacks out of the Darfur region of Sudan and let them starve to death is genocide or ethnic cleansing. He replied, "There are massive violations of international humanitarian law, but I am not ready to describe it as genocide or ethnic cleansing yet." The US estimates that 300,000 more of those people will die soon unless emergency relief is sped to them. The attacks are so massive and coordinated as to be nothing else! So reports not only Human Rights Watch but UN experts about a "reign of terror." "For a UN that couldn't describe Saddam Hussein as the mass-murderer he was, for a UN that took no action to stop last decade's Rwanda genocide and Bosnia ethnic cleansing, perhaps Mr. Annan's moral relativism should not be surprising." (NY Sun, 6/21, Ed..) In condoning Islamic terrorism in Sudan and in Israel, the UN violates international law. MURDERING THEIR COUNTRYMEN TO MAKE A POINT While Americans and Iraqis struggle to restore electricity, other Iraqis struggle to wreck it and them. This unpatriotic reaction by fanatics shows the futility of attempting to win them over by appeasement. There is some question whether the non-fanatics can be won over. In a last attempt at appeasement and pretense at a political success in foreign policy, Pres. Bush is sacrificing Israel to the anti-Zionist State Dept. and S. Arabia, in behalf of Arafat's Arabs. The resulting "agreement" for Israeli surrender of Yesha is presented as a step towards peace. Actually, advancing that key phase of PLO jihad, and depriving Israel of secure borders, is a step towards widening the war. Pres. Bush should be working to bolster Israel, the only advanced and pro-Western country in the Mid-East (Winston Mid East Analysis, 6/14, e-mail). Instead he is bolstering jihad, which also is being waged against the US. Now isn't that short-sighted! Some foreign policy success! SPYING ON SETTLEMENTS British and Egyptian (and Soviet) intelligence built Arafat up in the first place. Britain shaped P.A. diplomacy and public relations. British military intelligence helped provoke the 1987 Intifada (and the 1920 pogrom). Now it conducts surveillance of Israeli settlements. Allied to British military intelligence are the P.A. troops' Egyptian trainers, also intelligence experts. Arafat and King Abdullah resent Egyptian influence. To help counter it, Jordan's king is offering high P.A. officials free mortgages to buy villas in Amman. (The Arabs of western Palestine are being jockeyed over by other Arabs, as they were in 1947.) When Israel Radio reported that British intelligence officials in Jenin were monitoring Jewish settlements, it did not discuss whether this was clandestine or was authorized and by whom. Britain's Prime Minister gave Pres. Bush and other diplomats a secret intelligence report (Winston Mid East Analysis, 6/14, e-mail). Paid by Finland, Peace Now spied on Yesha Jewry, advised the P.A., and terrorists utilized that intelligence to kill Jews. US diplomats spy on Yesha Jewry, too. If Israel were self-respecting, it would expel or jail the spies. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
THEY ARE ONLY FOLLOWING ORDERS; TAKING ORDERS FROM ARAFAT
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 29, 2004. |
|
"Taking Orders From Arafat" appeared today on Front Page Magazine
(http://frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=14006).
1. "They Are Only Following Orders" If there were any longer any doubt as to the inability of the "Security Wall" to protect Israeli children from Palestinian terror and fascism, yesterday removed it. After some 300 attacks on Israel by the PLO using Kassam rockets, none of which previously killed anyone, yesterday's attack murdered a four year old toddler in the Negev town of Sderot and the child's grandfather. Such is the reward for Israel having exercised "restraint" and turning the other cheek after each of the previous 300 rocket attacks. Thus goeth the ridiculous leftist canon holding that the PLO will reach some sort of emotional catharsis by firing rockets at Israel for a while and then cooling down to make peace. SO much for the view that Israel can just build a wall and then forget about them, without utilizing military control of the ground on the other side of the fence. I have argued for years that Israel should massively retaliate for each and every ATTEMPTED murder by the PLO as if the murder actually "succeeded". My government thinks that would be insensitive and offend the politically correct folks. So what is my government offering instead? More talk about the RRH doctrine. RRH stands for "realy really hard". After each atrocity, my government threatens that if the attacks do not stop, Israel will respond "really really hard". Apparently my government wants to defeat the terrorists by making them laugh themselves to death. SO how is the government responding to yesterday's double murder? By threatening a RRH retaliation soon. Get ready for a new attack on an empty PLO building at night. 2. "Taking Orders From Yassir" In recent days, the pro-terror far-leftists and self-proclaimed "anarchists" from the ISM, or International Solidarity Movement, have been making both increased trouble and headlines here in Israel. They have repeatedly attacked Israeli police and soldiers, using violence, as part of their campaign to show their support for the violent Palestinian terrorists. They attempt to vandalize and sabotage Israel's security fence, to show their opposition to all attempts by Israel to protect its children from mass murderers and suicide bombers. Israelis have long been at a loss to explain the reluctance of their government to send these Western pro-terror "peace activists" packing or to imprison them. In the past, some pro-terror "activists" have gone so far as to hide wanted terrorists in their offices and to hide arms used by them. This week, in an uncharacteristic decision but hopefully one showing a new direction, the Tel Aviv District Court ordered American leftist activist Ken O'Keefe deported for trying to enter the Gaza Strip illegally. O'Keefe was caught trying to cross the separation fence into the Gaza Strip near the settlement of Dugit after arriving in Israel three weeks ago, and after having signed a statement pledging not to enter the Gaza Strip. District Court Judge Sarah Gadot determined, based on intelligence reports, that O'Keefe was a security risk and had violated military orders by infiltrating an area controlled by the army, after he had been warned against it and stated his intention to retry. The judge also determined that O'Keefe had ignored a sign in English indicating the location of the border. O'Keefe claimed that the border was not a recognized international frontier and the sign was misleading. In other words, he was of the rather common opinion that leftists should be exempt from obeying the law. O'Keefe claims he had organized hundreds of Americans and citizens of other Western countries to act as "human shields" in Iraq. O'Keefe said he had come to Israel at the beginning of the 2003 Iraq war to advance "peace" (or at least the leftist interpretation of the term) between Israelis and Palestinians. His attorney, Yael Barda from the Far-Left anti-Zionist organization Gush Shalom, claimed that although her client was eccentric, he was not a security risk. But the true face of these "caring peace lovers", in the Middle East to support the terrorists, was unmasked this week in a different development. According to a news story in the Israeli leftist daily Haaretz this week, it was revealed that the "international solidarity protesters" and the rest of the Far-Leftist demonstrators, in town trying to sabotage Israel's security fence, are taking their orders and directions directly from Yassir Arafat. They met with Arafat this week in his terrorist headquarters in Ramallah to hear his orders and instructions for them regarding how they should run their "peace" protests against Israel's security fence. Arafat ordered them to escalate the violence of their demonstrations, especially at two locations, near Jerusalem and near the Jewish town of Ariel, and to escalate the level of the protests just before the "World Court" in the Hague is to meet to discuss Israel's fence. In sum, the terrorist Arafat is dictating tactics and timing to the Western peace poseurs and solidarity-meisters for the Islamic revolution. On the other hand, this week witnessed one of the most successful anti-terror actions by Israel to date, and it was one that will have a greater impact on the terror and on the pro-terror leftists than the construction of the security wall itself. Israel carried out a sort of Godfather-movie set of hits on the number-one leaders of all three major terrorist organizations in Nablus. Not only were the three terrorist dons all killed in a single day, but so were seven other terrorists with them; several were also in leadership positions. The peace-loving and caring Left of course will be outraged and will escalate its violent protests against Israeli self-defense. After all, how dare Israel assassinate the Palestinian terrorists instead of capitulating to them? Protesters scuffle with an Israeli soldier during a demonstration against the construction of the Israeli security barrier, near the West Bank village of Iskaka, June 17, 2004. Part wall and part fence, the barrier, if completed, will run for 640km (397 miles) through the West Bank. Israel hopes the barrier will prevent suicide bombings. REUTERS/Ammar Awad. Arab protester punches soldier during a demonstration against the construction of the Israeli security barrier. "Peace protester" kicks soldier's knee during a protest against the construction of the Israeli security barrier. Arab "peace protester" kicks soldier who refuses to use his gun. Arab protesters attack soldiers while European ISM members push attackers forward. Arab peace protestors attack soldiers trying to protect civilians. Foreign ISM activist arrested by Israeli police during a protest in the
West Bank village Iskaka against the construction of Israel's separation
barrier.
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of
business administration at Haifa University and author of "The
Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically -
on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website
address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com.
|
|
"STOP THE GENOCIDE AND FREE THE SLAVES" DEMONSTRATION AT SUDANESE EMBASSY
Posted by Keith Roderick, June 29, 2004. |
|
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Christian Solidarity International (CSI), together with Sudan Campaign partners, marched on the Sudanese Embassy in Washington D.C., protesting against state-sponsored genocide and slavery. Two Sudan Campaign members, former Congressman Rev. Walter Fauntroy and radio talk show host Joe Madison, were arrested by Secret Service agents protesting through non-violent civil disobedience. Wrapping yellow "Crime Scene" police tape around the entrance Madison declared the embassy a crime scene, noting that the racist Government of Sudan is guilty of genocide and slavery against black Sudanese. The Sudan Campaign demonstration was timed to coincide with Secretary of State Colin Powell's visit to western Sudan where government-sponsored ethnic cleansing raids have resulted within the past twelve months in the displacement of over one million Black Africans, the death of tens of thousands and the enslavement of others. The genocide process in Sudan has progressed in tandem with a U.S. supported peace initiative directed by the newly appointed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, former Sen. John Danforth. In October 2002, President George W. Bush and both Houses of Congress, including Sen. John Kerry, identified the Government of Sudan as a perpetrator of acts of "genocide". But since then, the U.S. government has taken no further punitive measures against Khartoum. U.S. government officials have warned that hundred of thousands may die in the coming months. CSI and Sudan Campaign partners urged the United States to work closely with Sudan's oppressed democratic opposition to restore respect for human rights; mobilize international forces to guarantee the safe return of survivors of ethnic cleansing; and to stand in the vanguard of efforts to suspend the Government of Sudan's membership of the United Nations. CSI's Executive Director, Dr. John Eibner, issued call to action, stating: "I commend the many people of good will throughout this county, people of every race and religion who are not prepared to stand idly by when the lives of fellow human beings are destroyed en mass by the evil forces of genocide and slavery. Let us all join together to STOP the GENOCIDE and FREE the SLAVES!" The Rev. Walter Fauntroy, declared, "Enough is enough!" He said, "It is our hope and expectation that the action we take today will spur people of conscience to come to this place everyday, week and month, for however long it takes until the killing stops." Other speakers included Nina Shea, Freedom House Director for the Center for Religious Freedom, Faith McDonnell, Institute on Religion and Democracy, Rabbi David Saperstein, Director of the Religious Action Center for Reformed Judaism, and Dr. Charles Jacobs, President of the American Anti-Slavery Group. CSI Washington Representative, the Rev. Dr. Keith Roderick concluded the demonstration, calling for the international community to stop sweeping the crimes of the Sudanese government under the rug. "Lies and denial cannot protect the Sudanese government any longer from its complicity with evil." You can contact Keith Roderick at 202 498 8644 or keith.roderick@csi-usa.org |
|
SUB-SHARAN AFRICA BLOOMS WITH ISRAEL'S COOPERATION
Posted by IsrAlert, June 28, 2004. |
|
This was written by
Nahun Finkelstein, June 20, 2004, and is archived on
http://www.israel21c.com/bin/en.jsp?enPage=HomePage
One wouldn't necessarily imagine a Jewish Israeli professor and a Moslem African vegetable farmer striking up a friendship. But Prof. Dov Pasternak, from Ben-Gurion University of the Negev has formed a unique partnership and a special personal relationship with Issaka Dandakoye from Niamey, Niger. For the past five years, Pasternak has been busy in Niger - in the sub-Saharan area of Africa called the Sahel - developing a horticultural production system called the African Market Garden (AMG) for farmers with small parcels of land. Known throughout the land affectionately as 'Professor Dov', the former head of the university's Institute for Agriculture and Biology developed the system, based mainly on vegetables, with a few fruit trees placed in the field. It is irrigated with a gravity (low-pressure) drip irrigation system, with field size is limited to about 500 square meters. When 'Professor Dov' was looking for farmers to experiment with the AMG, he approached Dandakoya, a 4th generation vegetable farmer in the area. Dandakoya volunteered to set one up in one of his fields, and was duly impressed with the results. As a result of that experiment, at the end of April, Pasternak and Dandakoya inaugurated a four-acre AMG vegetable farm in the presence of the General Secretary of the Ministry of Agricultural Development of Niger featuring the first farmer operated pressurized drip irrigation system in Niger, and probably in all of West Africa. The inauguration provided dramatic proof of the success of a three-year campaign to demonstrate the AMG concept in one of the poorest countries in the beleaguered continent faced with grinding poverty and lack of food security. Pasternak sees the AMG as a way a way of optimizing the use of scarce arable land through the production of high-valued crops, such as vegetables and fruit, with high efficiency, thereby providing the farmer and his family with a steady source of income. From the beginning, Yitzhak Apt of Mashav, the Foreign Ministry's Center for International Co-operation, grasped the significance of the concept and threw the Ministry's weight behind the project. The AMG is based on drip irrigation, which Israeli farmers developed in the early years of the State, when it was faced with the challenge of feeding the flood of impoverished immigrants from its arid lands, and scarce water resources. In drip irrigation, water is directed to the crop through tubes laid along the rows in which the crop grows. Orifices that pierce the tubes at intervals along their length deliver a continous, drop-by-drop, flow of water directly to the roots of the plants. The efficiency of water use is about 50% higher than by other methods of irrigation. If fertilizers are added to the water, they too are used more efficiently and more effectively because they are delivered directly to the roots of the plant. The variant of drip irrigation used in the AMGs, Gravity Drip Irrigation, is adapted to the primitive conditions found in much of Africa - no electricity, no pumps, technically unsophisticated farmers. The design of the system was carried out in the light of a wide experience of drip irrigation and the deep knowledge of the requirements of the particular crops. The water flows under gravity from a simple tank standing one meter (40 inches) above the level of the field, and fitted with a filter and a tap. The tank is designed to deliver the exact amount of water that the crop loses by evaporation, and the flow rate of the water is controlled to prevent its leaching nutrients from the soil. The operating procedure is simple. The farmer cleans the filter every day, fills the tank using buckets, and opens the tap. This takes very much less time than the traditional method of bucket irrigation, thus freeing the farmer for other tasks. In order to maintain the condition of the soil and supply nutrients to he plants, he top-dresses the soil with manure and mixed fertilizers before planting. The World Bank provided the funds for a two-year demonstration of the AMG in Niger. A number of the NGO's that were active in the country were recruited to guide the selection of farmers, and to act as liaisons between them and the Israeli technologists. 850 AMG units were set up, 200 hundred of them on one-eighth-acre lots, and 700 on one-twentieth of an acre. A variety of vegetables, melons, and some fruit was planted. According to Pasternak, 80 percent of the original AMG's are still operating a year after the end of the two-year demonstration period. He pointed out that the yield and the quality of the produce of the AMG's is markedly higher, and the revenue at least four times that given by traditional farming methods - a single farmer working a one-eighth acre lot can earn $4,000 per annum in a country where the per capita GDP is $800. USAID is sponsoring the introduction of the system in neighboring Bukina Fasso and Ghana. A total of 400 of the one-eighth-acre AMGs will be installed. The training of the NGO agents and the first group of farmers started at towards the end of this month. At the other end of the continent, Mashav, and the South African NGO, Ikamva Labantu have introduced AMGs in a depressed, semi-arid region near the town of Cradock. 140 members of the Masizakhe Farmers Association work separate eighth-acre AMGs, and collaborate in marketing the surplus produce. The early results are impressive. Alex Goniwe, one of the Association's leaders told ISRAEL21c, "We are very, very happy with it. We are planting vegetables throughout the year, instead of once. Before, we struggled with the water. This help from the Israeli Embassy has really put us forward. We are doing well." He is confident that the AMGs will be profitable, but also expects that they will contribute to the solution of the community's severe social problems. AIDs sufferers have been allocated two plots and disabled youth another two. In order to encourage the youth to return to agriculture, plots have been set aside in which pupils of the local school can work. Encouraged by the promise of the Cradock project, Ikamva Labantu is planning to set up similar enterprises in other parts of the country. The guiding spirits behind Israel's efforts to improve agricultural practice in Africa, Pasternak and Apt, agree that the introduction of AMG's only represents the first stage of the work that requires to be done. The next stage is to introduce fruit trees and optimal varieties of the traditional crops. To this end, IPALC has set up an experimental station in Niger with the aim of selecting the strains of vegetables and fruit best adapted to the climate and soil conditions of the region. A similar function will be performed in South Africa by the Israeli agronomist who is responsible for the technical management of what promises to be a large enterprise. Yitzhak Apt put the AMG potential in a broader context. "Subsistence farming, on which 45% of Africa's rural population depends, is less sustainable than it once was. Because of population pressure, farmers can no longer allow their land to recover its fertility by lying fallow for several years between crops." Gravity Drip Irrigation, with the judicious application of fertilizers, allows the available arable land to support more people. Abt believes that the technology will also alleviate another of Africa's growing problems, the exodus of rural people to the cities. By revitalizing the rural areas it will lessen the need to seek work elsewhere; if it is adopted in the peri-urban areas, will help increase the food security of the growing urban populations, and provide employment for some of the migrants. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
SYMPTOM OR DISEASE
Posted by Dr. Asher Eder, June 28, 2004. |
|
Recently, Arafat said in a speech addressed to the world, "Terrorism is a symptom, not a disease". That is to say, he defends terrorism as a means of curing the disease. In the ideology and propaganda of the Jihad fanatics, Israel and the Jewish People are depicted as the disease, even as an embodiment of the "Cosmic Evil" of which the earth should be purged. Already in 1943, Mufti Amin el-Husseini, ally and friend of Nazi Germany, said in a broadcast from Radio Berlin: "Kill the Jews wherever you find them -- this is pleasing to Allah"; and called upon the Muslim world to wage a Jihad against the Jews. (Note: Amin el-Husseini issued this call several years before the establishment of the State of Israel. That is, Israel's establishment in 1948 and the refugee problem resulting from the Arabs' war against Israel are the result of Arab enmity, not the cause]. Arafat's statement quoted above, that "terrorism is a symptom, not a disease", describes precisely the situation. The Jihadists' anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, anti-Zionist stance is an awful disease, sheer madness, a sickness of soul, that goads them into actions perceived in the civilized world as terror. Jihadists present this insanity of theirs as pleasing to Allah, as the crowning glory of Islam; they promise their suicide bombers (with their minced bodies!) unlimited sex with 70 (or 72) virgins in Paradise, ill-using their victims' death (of Jews; and since September 11 also of others) as a kind of entrance ticket to this paradise. Arafat serves as the figurehead for that Jihad. This assumed name sustains this drive, is in fact a campaign slogan, a nom de guerre, adopted by him for that purpose. "Oslo" did not change the wolf into a lamb -- on the contrary. As Feisal al-Husseini (a close relative of the above mentioned Amin el-Husseini) said shortly before he (Feisal) died: "In Oslo we did not get everything we wanted, but at least we succeeded in getting Arafat into Israel's house as Trojan horse...First we accept what they [= Israel] give us, and the rest we will take". This was not merely the private opinion of that Israel-hater. From the very first day of "implementing" the Oslo Agreements, Arafat transgressed and violated them as follows: a) acquiring far more weapons than conceded by the Agreement; b) building up an armed force much bigger than conceded; c) introducing into the P.A. territories a malicious anti-Jewish and anti-Israel curriculum and propaganda unparalleled so far; d) "de-Judaizing" the Temple Mount; e) dubbing the armed uproar as "Al-Aqsa Intifada", a term which exposes more clearly than anything else the Jihad-against-Israel core of this struggle, in which the Palestinian Arabs and their sufferings are simply exploited to that end. This may raise the question: Is Islam as such anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, anti-Zion? In other words: Are we, and the rest of the world, engaged in a basically religious confrontation in which only one side can be right before the Almighty? A confrontation in which, consequently, one of the two opponents would have to vanish? While the Jihadists claim just that, it is not so, at least not according to the Qur'an and Tannach (Jewish Bible). The Jihadists' hatred and hostility are a willful mis-interpretation of these Scriptures, forged for their ends. Their armed struggle against Israel is a crime against Islam and -- from the legal point of view -- a crime by all standards against international law. From the psychological point of view, it is a terrible disease, terrorism being its symptom. Arafat, however inadvertently, described the situation correctly. Shavua Tov from Liberated Yerushaliyim, Dr. Asher Eder is the Jewish Co-Founder and Co-Chairman, Islam-Israel Fellowship, Root & Branch Association, Ltd. He is author of "The Star of David: An Ancient Symbol of Integration" (Rubin Mass, Jerusalem, 1987) |
|
THE NATIONAL RELIGIOUS PARTY (NRP) SAVED THE SHARON GOVERNMENT TODAY
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 28, 2004. |
|
The Sharon dictatorship almost fell today. It was rescued from defeat by the Notoriously Repugnant Politicians of the party that represents Israel's Government Clerics. As is the rule in all matters of national importance, private monetary considerations always take priority over any other consideration. After all why are all these parties created and sustained if not for the short term benefit of their members. The fact that the nation just might sink into anarchy, revolution, civil war or any other such minor issues can not distract one from the prime directive: Grab as much as you can as fast as you can and then run. This news item was in today's Arutz-7 (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=64787). Government Survives 3 Additional No-Confidence Votes (IsraelNN.com) The National Religious Party saved the Sharon government from defeat today by not voting against the coalition in three no-confidence motions today. The motions were voted on in the plenum, presented by the opposition parties. NRP supported the government after the cabinet approved an agreement pertaining to pension plans of employees of religious councils. Funds aimed at rehabilitating the fiscally ailing councils were already released by the treasury today. NRP members either voted along with the government or abstained, permitting Sharon to emerge victoriously from the votes, although by a slight margin. The votes were defeated by 55-54, 54-52, and 53-44. In an act of profound timing, the prime minister during the weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday announced the transfer of NIS 26 million for religious councils had been approved. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. |
|
THE NINTH OF AV AND THE GAZA DEBACLE
Posted by Bob Martin, June 28, 2004. |
|
The Ninth of Av and the Gaza Debacle Steven Plaut (splaut@econ.haifa.ac.il) wrote: "The Ninth Day of the month of Av in the Jewish religious calendar, or "Tisha B'Av", is the day of serial tragedy in Jewish history. Even if they change the date for cosmetic purposes, the fact that they chose it in the first place tells us from whom they get their inspiration. Will Jews sit by and argue while Jews are removed from their homes? Reform, Reconstruction, and Conservative "Jews" certainly will do this. Although they'll be glued to CNN or FOX for the latest reports and casualty figures. Way too many "Jews" are exactly like the people in a currently running commercial (I saw it on Lou Dobb's Moneyline) who watch a person choking to death as they all discuss the proper way to perform the Heimlich maneuver. a person not in their group gets up from his table and performs the life-saving maneuver. and they all go back to their dinner, probably of oysters and pork. We have to look to similar situations in history - like the Bar-Kokhba revolt in 132 C.E. - to understand what we each need to do RIGHT NOW. See (http://www.us-israel.org/jsource/Judaism/revolt1.html). This was distributed by Communaute-Juive-France. |
|
YOU'RE PROBABLY WAITING FOR THE RIGHT TO TAKE TO THE STREETS
AGAINST YOU
Posted by Leah Wolf, June 28, 2004. |
|
Dear Prime Minister Sharon, After so many years out on the streets fighting the Rabin-Peres disaster which brought about the Oslo War, we find ourselves now having to take to the streets against your Judenrein policies. You, Arik Sharon. Who would have believed? Interesting, that you totally ignore all principals of democracy, you ignore the decisions of your own party and you don't even bother trying to explain how expelling Jews from their homes and livelihood that they've built up over 3 generations of sweat and blood and tears, could possibly be good for anyone in Israel!!! History will remember you for your immoral destruction of Yamit and for your attempt to expel Jews from Israel. That's the sad truth. Your friends in the extreme Left may dominate the political and certainly the judicial scene in Israel today but they don't have a monopoly on writing history books. Too sad and too bad. A young grandfather is buried with his toddler grandson in Sderot today, a small taste of what's to come with your new policy, and all you can say is that you're going to plow forward with your evacuation plans of the Jews of Gush Katif. We haven't heard such inane responses since the Left was in power, determined to give Arafat more and more as he murdered more and more of our Jews. HaShem Hoshia HaMelech Yaanenu beYom Korenu!! Leah Wolf lives in Metar, Israel. Contact her by email at ldwolf@netvision.net.il |
|
WHOSOEVER BLESSES THEM: The intifada and its defenders
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, June 28, 2004. |
|
This is a humorous satire on the Arab-Israeli conflict by Larry Miller
and appeared in the Weekly Standard of Los Angeles
(ttp://www.weeklystandard.com/weekly/weekly.asp). Larry Miller is a
contributing humorist to The Daily Standard and a writer, actor, and
comedian living in Los Angeles.
I WAS WATCHING Greta Van Facelift on Fox the other night, and she and her guests made me talk back to the TV. Shout back, actually. Nothing witty or trenchant, you understand, just something like, "Oh, come on!" Now, to be honest, it was late, and I was downstairs alone, and I was a little, what's the word ... loaded, yes, that's the word. I was a little shined up. A little spiffed and a little miffed, and I shouted something and angrily turned off the remote. I don't know exactly how angrily a remote can be turned off, but as angrily as you can push a pfennig-sized piece of round plastic, that's how angrily I did it. Then I walked back to the bar, made myself one-for-the-stairs (as opposed to one-for-the-road) and read some P.G. Wodehouse to restore my cheery nature. But back to the freshly-tightened Greta. Her guests were (INSERT INDISTINGUISHABLE ARAB NAME), from Hamas, and their attorney, Stanley Cohen. No, that's not a joke. Would that it were. Stanley Cohen, the attorney for Hamas. Check that handle again: Stanley Cohen. I mean, if you tried to make up a better name than that, you couldn't do it. Let's give it a shot, though, shall we? Irving Lefkowitz. Nah, too obvious. Lew Fishman. No, no, sounds like a carpet salesman. Isaac Bashevis Singer? Now I'm reaching. Nope, you just can't beat good ol' Stan Cohen. Yes, Stanley Cohen, folks, a hard-left, righteously indignant true-believer, an honors graduate from the William Kunstler School of Just-Not-Getting-It-And-Never-Will, who had flown all the way from New York to sit next to his wonderful client over there in not the land of milk and honey. Stanley Cohen. A man who, if he listened very carefully, would no doubt hear voices in the next room planning to blow the eyes out of more of his nieces and nephews. Stanley Cohen, and even typing that name right now and remembering this horrible man damning his own people again and again and again, I crack a nervous smile, because they're my people, too, and, God help me, if I didn't laugh, I think I might cry. Oddly enough, out of the three of them, the homunculus from Hamas didn't bother me at all. I mean, if you think about it, why should he bother any American? We know exactly who he is and, in a way, we should be grateful for that. Because if we're only willing to absorb their own words--nevermind their demonic deeds--he and his brethren have a perfectly uncomplicated point of view and agenda, and their clarity should give us our own clarity, and wouldn't that be refreshing? You want us dead? Well, now, isn't that a funny coincidence. Guess what we want? My point is, if American TV calls up and wants to put these philanthropists on, who could blame them for saying, "Sure!" I can just see them bursting out laughing and slapping each other on the back. ("They're going to put us on Fox TV! I told you terror works! And I'll bet their Green Room beats the snot out of Al Jazeera. I mean, please, how many olives can you eat?") If we're stupid enough to do that, I don't blame them for taking us up on it. All they have to do is take a few minutes away from packing rusty nails around the C4, pick one of their guys who looks, relatively, the least like a vicious scumbag, borrow a suit, and send him forth to smile for the cameras. With Stanley Cohen. But let's leave the newly-stretched Greta for a moment, as well as our friends Stanley and Ishmael (no joke, his real name). A brief overview of the situation is always valuable, so as a service to all Americans who still don't get it, I now offer you the story of the Middle East in just a few paragraphs, which is all you really need. Don't thank me. I'm a giver. Here we go: The Palestinians want their own country. There's just one thing about that: There are no Palestinians. It's a made up word. Israel was called Palestine for two thousand years. Like "Wiccan," "Palestinian" sounds ancient but is really a modern invention. Before the Israelis won the land in war, Gaza was owned by Egypt, and there were no "Palestinians" then, and the West Bank was owned by Jordan, and there were no "Palestinians" then. As soon as the Jews took over and started growing oranges as big as basketballs, what do you know, say hello to the "Palestinians," weeping for their deep bond with their lost "land" and "nation." So for the sake of honesty, let's not use the word "Palestinian" any more to describe these delightful folks, who dance for joy at our deaths until someone points out they're being taped. Instead, let's call them what they are: "Other Arabs From The Same General Area Who Are In Deep Denial About Never Being Able To Accomplish Anything In Life And Would Rather Wrap Themselves In The Seductive Melodrama Of Eternal Struggle And Death." I know that's a bit unwieldy to expect to see on CNN. How about this, then: "Adjacent Jew-Haters." Okay, so the Adjacent Jew-Haters want their own country. Oops, just one more thing. No, they don't. They could've had their own country any time in the last thirty years, especially two years ago at Camp David. But if you have your own country, you have to have traffic lights and garbage trucks and Chambers of Commerce, and, worse, you actually have to figure out some way to make a living. That's no fun. No, they want what all the other Jew-Haters in the region want: Israel. They also want a big pile of dead Jews, of course--that's where the real fun is--but mostly they want Israel. Why? For one thing, trying to destroy Israel--or "The Zionist Entity" as their textbooks call it--for the last fifty years has allowed the rulers of Arab countries to divert the attention of their own people away from the fact that they're the blue-ribbon most illiterate, poorest, and tribally backward on God's Earth, and if you've ever been around God's Earth, you know that's really saying something. It makes me roll my eyes every time one of our pundits waxes poetic about the great history and culture of the Muslim Mideast. Unless I'm missing something, the Arabs haven't given anything to the world since Algebra, and, by the way, thanks a hell of a lot for that one. Chew this around and spit it out: Five hundred million Arabs; five million Jews. Think of all the Arab countries as a football field, and Israel as a pack of matches sitting in the middle of it. And now these same folks swear that if Israel gives them half of that pack of matches, everyone will be pals. Really? Wow, what neat news. Hey, but what about the string of wars to obliterate the tiny country and the constant din of rabid blood oaths to drive every Jew into the sea? Oh, that? We were just kidding. My friend Kevin Rooney made a gorgeous point the other day: Just reverse the numbers. Imagine five hundred million Jews and five million Arabs. I was stunned at the simple brilliance of it. Can anyone picture the Jews strapping belts of razor blades and dynamite to themselves? Of course not. Or marshalling every fiber and force at their disposal for generations to drive a tiny Arab state into the sea? Nonsense. Or dancing for joy at the murder of innocents? Impossible. Or spreading and believing horrible lies about the Arabs baking their bread with the blood of children? Disgusting. No, as you know, left to themselves in a world of peace, the worst Jews would ever do to people is debate them to death. Mr. Bush, God bless him, is walking a tightrope. I understand that with vital operations coming up against Iraq and others, it's in our interest, as Americans, to try to stabilize our Arab allies as much as possible, and, after all, that can't be much harder than stabilizing a roomful of supermodels who've just had their drugs taken away. However, in any big-picture strategy, there's always a danger of losing moral weight. We've already lost some. After September 11 our president told us and the world he was going to root out all terrorists and the countries that supported them. Beautiful. Then the Israelis, after months and months of having the equivalent of an Oklahoma City every week (and then every day) start to do the same thing we did, and we tell them to show restraint. If America were being attacked with an Oklahoma City every day, we would all very shortly be screaming for the administration to just be done with it and kill everything south of the Mediterranean and east of the Jordan. (Hey, wait a minute, that's actually not such a bad id ... uh, that is, what a horrible thought, yeah, horrible.) There's bad news on the losing moral weight front, and the signs are out there. Last week, the day after Secretary Powell left on his mission (whatever that was), the Los Angeles Times ran its lead editorial in one hundred percent support of the trip and the pressure he and President Bush were putting on Israel. Here's a good rule of thumb: If the Los Angeles Times thinks you're doing a great job, everything you're doing is wrong, stupid and mortally dangerous. If they think everything you're doing is wrong, stupid and mortally dangerous, you're doing a great job, and, in fact, your chances are probably very good for getting on the fast track for sainthood. So, now, back to Greta. You know what made me mad enough to shout? You might not even think it was that big a thing. After the show she said to these guys, "Thank you, gentlemen, for being my guests." "Gentlemen." "Guests." "My guests." That's what it's come to with these non-judgmental hosts and hostesses. Nice, huh? "Thank you, Mr. Stalin, sir, for being so gracious in giving us your valuable time." "My eternal gratitude, Chairman Mao, for taking precious moments away from your splendid Five-Year Plan and visiting with us in this most convivial way." And I winced, and grunted, and shouted. Oh, yeah, and made that drink. I mean, please, folks. In 1941, did reporters feel it was their duty to give equal time to Hitler and Hirohito? Would Stanley Cohen have represented them? Ok, Stanley probably would have, but would any American have stood still while he told us about it? The National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" |
|
THE JEWISH GIRL GOES TO CHURCH IN CHINA
Posted by Marion D.S. Dreyfus, June 28, 2004. |
|
There are 16 cheerful people here for the month from Iowa City. I will try to be as uninflected and lacking in irony as I see these people, mixed sexes, about 22 to 30 years old, are. Though practicing Christianity is somewhat dicey here, and is largely forbidden, there are two types of church attendance. There are the legal churches, of which the one I attended this past Sunday was one example, and the illegal underground churches. These are the ones likely to fall under government disapproval and not infrequent official displeasure. I asked to attend church with the Iowans, for several reasons. Not least was that I was quite curious about church here, as I know many Christians have come under severe restrictions for their beliefs, or rather, for their evangelical zeal, I believe. I tried hard not to have any religion, and thought I was just one of the many people "trying out" the day, as it were. But as I walked to the third floor meeting room in the nondescript pre-War grey building that seemed to be the church - one of eight in Wuhan, I am told - one of the kind and friendly group, Jane, asked if my father was still a rabbi. Busted! I thought. Who told you my father was a rabbi? I asked, unabashedly embarrassed that I was obviously now a non-Christian as far as these sincere people were concerned. You did, replied Jane with just the slightest surprise. Inside the building, in long rooms filled with people assembled for prayer and song, were at least five such old-style (Communist) lecture halls saved from boredom, at least in our case on the third floor, by Christmas tree ornaments spaced out on wreaths of evergreen sprigging looped along the top of the wall, and several gold characters that seemed unfamiliar to me, but always centred with a clear but ornamental cross, also in gold. Though we arrived before 9 am, the room was filled side to side and back to front with Chinese. The room was about 25-people wide and about 50-people deep. We were privileged to have the front row of seats saved for us. Even so, after we sat down in a long sideways stitchery of people, the stools in front of us filled up, and the room kept saturating and supersaturating with more late entries, who sat on the sides, and filled any of the aisles that had been there before. If this were New Jersey or Maine, the fire laws would have mandated a second or third room for the overflow. When I sat down, a severe woman in traditional high-necked frog-closing silk blouse in grey was intoning in one long high-pitched tone something from the prayer book or whatever was in front of her on the lectern. Our entry made no dent in her hard and penetrating recitation in a monotonous pitch. She was soon replaced by a pleasant looking younger man - perhaps 45 or so - who led the assembled sonorously in hymns, although they were entirely composed of the notes of the scale, sol-fa-mi mi re, do re sol fa, etc. I was surprised the songs seemed to be a phonology or sounds that were makeshift alternatives to the expected Chinese opera singsong. I was an observer, so I sat quietly and tried not to become involved in the melodies - which was my inclination. When the Chinese next to me took out a small camera and snapped the stage, I mentally gave her shoulder a clap and took out my small and inexpensive modern throwaway. I thought it might be rude, but if others are doing it, at least I am not the only one being so. A three-tier robed choir sang pleasantly, and then they left the small stage, with someone coming up to move the benches they had stood on. Andy, tall, quite animated, with long and rangy arms, sandy short hair and a blue-eyed guilelessness and demeanor, was introduced, along with his diminutive and excellent translator (from a local medical college; she had translated for him the previous time they had visited Wuhan at the invitation of the university's president). I was interested to hear that his sermon was the real thing: No shilly-shallying with contemporary notions of pandering to the public, or presumed chit chatty introductory remarks. After thanking all of us for coming, and his translator, he thanked the pastor of this church, Pastor Gao, a determined-looking woman in her middle years whose recitation of prayers was clear and earnest, even something of`a model for serious Mandarin students, as each word was carefully phrased and intoned, and the emotion was clear and unmistakable. The next 25 minutes or so were interesting to me, as I am of course the scion of generations of rabbis, and thus the genetic template for speeches and sermons from the cradle up. The term might be assayed: Fire and brimstone. If one is not of Jesus, one had to become so. One could not sit on being just a good person. One had to be "fruitful." One had to alert the millions of unfamiliar Chinese that Jesus was the answer. When he raised his arms, long and tapered and considerably longer than most arms I have lately seen, one could see there was not the slightest affectation here. He was uninflected with irony or sarcasm or that cynicism that informs so much of all conversation in the metropolitan area. He was utterly, humourlessly sincere. We all had to so our part for bringing Jesus to the masses who know him not. We must be "fruitful." The prayer part following featured lit page neon signs. I could not give up my usual habit of turning them left to right, and was perplexed with myself as the page numbers grew smaller rather than larger. Each time I recalled that this was Chinese, not Hebrew, and the woman next to me whispered "It is 359, see?" And then I was reverse course and find the page, but as it was all-Chinese, and in some sort of formal order, I looked at it like an anthropologist rather than like a reader. After a half-hour of prayers in strong Chinese, with the throng behind me melodious and familiar with the prayer routine, three of the Iowans got up to sing and play guitar with the old standards, of which I recognized one, "Amazing Grace." Matt played a creditable guitar, Katey sang in clear free soprano, and Wes accompanied her. There was a short piano to our far left, and though I could se only a crescent cap of black hair, the pianist was good - not too loud or assertive, but lively and always ahead of the game just a tiny beat. My last time in church like this was in Istanbul, Turkey, where the assembly was underground, and the congregation was taut with anxiety, and the room stultified with a lack of fresh air. I almost fainted from the stale air, in fact. Here, there was lots of light and eight ceiling fans as well as the large refrigerator-type A/C they favor here in classrooms and businesses. So the air moved and it was not unpleasant. When Andy began to speak in earnest, behind me one row, a women began to wheeze uncontrollably, her head rolled back and she lost control of her posture and limbs. I did not know if it was epilepsy or something else - possession? Southern Baptist 'revelation'? - but she was led away downstairs by concerned people. Hardly a soul beyond the third row knew there had been a disturbance. Andy did not waver once from his impassioned words on the stage. Ahead of me, on the stool a hand's reach from my right hand, a new arrival. It was Brandi, one of my best English students, who seems since their advent three weeks ago to be a satellite to these Iowa evangelicals. She stayed after the end and went to a second service after eating lunch with the group. As soon as I tapped her on the shoulder to say hi, she whispered, "What are you doing here: You?re Jewish!" To which I smiled and said, "I was interested. But what about you, have you forgotten, you're not Christian, either!?" She laughed as she realized the irony in her asking me such a question. I left as soon as the service concluded, as I had work to do. There were many smiles and the idea of "love-bombing" came briefly to mind. I was treated with warmth and sweetness, without anyone inquiring as to my reason for being there. I can see why there is a swell of joiners: Andy cited the figure of "Ten thousand new souls finding their way to Jesus every day" in China. The only Jew in the Chinese Christian throng, I caught a taxi back to my little rural laird the heavy skies were leaden and began to let big discretionary drops down on us, a soft suggestion to encourage the leaving to open their everpresent umbrellas. Marion D. S. Dreyfus is a journalist, a film critic and an intrepid traveler. She is currently in Wuchan, China, where she teaches at the University and does a radio talk show. Her address is: Marion D. S. Dreyfus, Reception centre 8301, Huazhong University of Science & Technology, English Department, Wuchang Branch, Nanhu, Wuchan, Wuhan 430064, P R China. |
|
JEWS ADMIT TO HIDING HEADS IN SAND
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 28, 2004. |
|
Witnesses in Yesha saw a bullet change course and strike a Jew in Yesha. That was during the time when Israel announced development of a guided bullet. A high proportion of Jewish Yesha leaders, especially rabbis, have been killed by snipers, rather than the more pedestrian type of terrorists. Some families are attacked twice. This does not seem random. Barry Chamish's book exhibits gets a lot of reaction. Lately, he found a common reluctance by Israelis to read about how their government is getting some Yesha Jews killed, in order to demoralize the rest into leaving. There is no documentary evidence for this. However, the nature of some attacks, follow-up attacks on relatives, leftist statements of hatred against Yesha Jewry, official policy to oust it, official persecution of Yesha Jewry, and past use of devious and brutal means against dissenters, and collaboration with enemies make a strong case. Some relatives of the slain prefer feeling that their love ones were martyred by the enemy than betrayed by their government. Others worry that if they read the book and become convinced of its validity, they would feel ashamed. Chamish replies that it is the government that should be ashamed, since it is the guilty party (Chamish, e-mail, about 6/12). I recently lost my dearest relative to illness. Since mistreatment may have been a factor, I tried to get to the bottom of it, regardless of what the truth would lie. I didn't succeed, but I sympathize with Chamish, who tries to uncover the truth. These relatives don't. Their preference for illusion may be allowing a terrible scandal to go on until it engulfs the whole country. How comforting would that be? My ordeal has brought me to identify more with other people's problems. I can't save my wife, but I can help others. Otherwise, why save myself? Same for grieving and embattled Israelis. S. ARABIA EXPLAINS NATIVE TERRORISM A Saudi leader denied the responsibility for religious education in S. Arabia for warping the terrorists now striking the desert kingdom from within. "Islam is a religion of love and tolerance." (But the government is restricting mosque preaching, as if recognizing that indoctrination and agitation do cause terrorism.) He averred that the government is reforming (in recognition that its corruption or undemocratic nature, etc. also aroused antagonism). What does he say prompts indigenous terrorism? The war in Afghanistan, the Palestine problem, and the "presence of extremism." (IMRA, 6/12.) The connection is unclear to me. Mentioning the "presence of extremism" begs the question. How did extremism become present among younger Saudis? Indoctrination? EGYPT SETS UP CLERICAL POLICE Egypt approved of Islamic clerics inspecting book sales for matter they deem anti-Sunni. They can report violations but not make arrests (IMRA, 6/13). Are sex police, a la S. Arabia, next? EGYPT MAY SUPERVISE THE GAZA AIRPORT (IMRA, 6/11 from Jer. Times.) What is Sharon thinking! Does he want Egypt involved in order to expedite arms smuggling? WHY TURKEY SOURING ON ISRAEL Believing that Iraq will become unstable, Israel has sent military and intelligence operatives to Kurdish parts of Iraq. The Kurdish militia would be bolstered sufficiently to block Shiite militias from moving through. Israel denies the report. Turkey, Iran, and Syria also have large Kurdish minorities. Those countries do not want the Kurds to become independent anywhere, lest the independent Kurdistan engender Kudish demands for secession in neighboring states. The report includes a Lebanese claim that Israel is training the Kurds to fight in other countries and to monitor Iranian nuclear facilities (David Hafetz, NY Sun, 6/21, p.6). That is just what Turkey, Iran, and Syria would most fear. This story, as much as the Islamist ideology of Turkey's ruling Party, could explain Turkey's recent tilt towards the Arabs. Is the story true? Wrong question. I think the right question is how much of the story is true. We do not know. Mr. Hirsh has been unreliable in the past; he is anti-Israel. I suspect that he grafted onto the stem a more sinister interpretation and implications of extra-territorial operations. The Kurds must be worried about being left in the lurch, as they have been by Iran, Israel, and the US. WHAT P.A. SECURITY FORCES WOULD EGYPT & QUARTET REGROUP? Arafat's Fatah complains of intenational pressure to reduce terrorism and a shortage of funds to increase it. Fatah's Aksa Brigades asserts that Arafat no longer gives it money, so it may forego his patronage. Arafat has invited the Brigades into the salaried P.A. security forces (IMRA, 6/13 from Khaled Abu Toameh, Jer Post, 6/12 from Seymour Hirsh). Such are the forces that the Quartet and Egypt would be training and arming to take over from Israel in Gaza and parts (or all) of Judea-Samaria. The official line is that the training would be to prevent terrorism. Only a half-wit would believe that. Apparently most people are half-wits, for most accept the Western rationale. It would be like merging the SS into the invading German Army and commissioning that army to protect civilians from persecution. Not likely! Poor Brigades! So much diverted to graft and other terrorism, that there isn't enough for all the evil it can devise. Satan could not top the concerted effort by governments to donate funds to the murderous P.A., as if that were a solemn duty rather than to smash the P.A.. EVACUATION PLAN ACCELERATING The evacuation plan has begun, although the Cabinet was supposed to have approved only in principle. A timetable for expulsion of Jews was released. The final day Jews may be in Gaza is the anniversary of the destruction of both Holy Temples. Government-funded building has ceased. Soldiers are being withdrawn from roadblocks and main roads (Arutz-7, 6/13). If this were a sincere plan for the protection of Israelis, the civilians would be removed before the soldiers. The removal first of the soldiers and roadblocks confirms the conspiracy theorists Barry Chamish and Emanuel Winston. They posit that not only is the entire scheme a suicidal appeasement of the US and of the Arabs, but the means being used facilitate terrorism so as to weaken Jewish resistance. Certainly removal of the troops lets terrorists get at the "settlers," just as Chamish and Winston predicted. To better understand Sharon, heed Chamish and Winston. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
A DIALOGUE ON REVOLUTION
Posted by Prof. Paul Eidelberg, June 28, 2004. |
|
This was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg and is archived on the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Professor Eidelberg teaches at Bar Illan University in Israel and is the director of the Foundation for Constitutional Democracy. American: You Israelis never cease to amaze me. Since Oslo you have suffered more than 10,000 casualties - Jewish men, women, and children killed, wounded and maimed for life. Yet you do nothing. If this were not bad enough, your government plans to uproot countless Jews from their homes in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza and turn this land over to your enemies! Why haven't you people rebelled and thrown the rascals out? Israeli: Just a minute. We like to believe that Israel is a democracy; so if the public is not happy with the government's policies, we need only wait for the next election and change the prime minister or party in power. American: But don't you see it makes no difference which party or party leader is in power: you are still retreating toward your indefensible 1949 borders. Americans would never tolerate this state of affairs. Certain Mexican nationalists are now making territorial claims on Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California - once Mexican territory. If the American government yielded any part of this land to Mexico, rest assured there'd be a revolution. Israeli: But you forget that we are Jews, and for a Jew to shed the life of another Jew - inevitable in a revolution - is simply out of the question. Look at what happened after Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated. This was a national trauma from which we are still suffering. American: Well, let me tell you there are still Americans in the South who have not gotten over the Civil War, which saw families divided and involved in fratricidal conflict. But let me pursue my Mexican example. Suppose year after year a few hundred square kilometers of the increasingly Hispanic southwest were returned to Mexico, and that thousands of Anglo-Saxon Americans were expelled from their homes each month. We Americans would be up in arms, animated by the revolutionary zeal of those who signed our Declaration of Independence. Let me quote a few passages from that document: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. - That whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shown, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and provide new Guards for their future security. American (continued): Perhaps some will say that these immortal words do not justify a revolution in Israel. It seems to me, however, that your government's almost four-year failure to put an end to the murder of Jews by Arab terrorists may well be deemed a "long train of abuses." And the same may be said if your government uproots hundreds and perhaps thousands of Jews from their homes every month in pursuance of the Sharon disengagement plan. Besides, your prime minister's firing of cabinet ministers who oppose withdrawal from Judea, Samaria, and Gaza, and his ordering all cabinet ministers to be present in Israel to vote in support of his plan smacks of dictatorship. All his talk about democracy and peaceful coexistence with the Palestinians deceives only children. What do you say to this? Israeli: Look, all that you say about revolution may be true when applied to America and perhaps other countries. As concerns Israel, however, you have to bear one obvious and one less obvious thing in mind. Since the government obviously controls the army, the police, and of course the intelligence services, your proposed revolution would be nipped in the bud. Less obvious is this: even if ten thousand or more Jews were to march on the Knesset and had the wherewithal to withstand water-canons and tear gas, this would only lead to a civil war. So all your talk about revolution is futile. We Jews are a long-suffering people. Indeed, to endure suffering is part of our nature. We have had inept and wicked rulers before. Nevertheless, we have survived, and we shall survive those who now betray us in the deceitful names of "peace" and "democracy." American: But how many Jews must perish before you cease being long-suffering and take your future into your own hands instead of behaving like sheep led to the slaughter? Don't you realize that, sooner or later, the Palestinians will obtain biological or chemical weapons of mass destruction? Don't you see that your government's policy of self-restraint vis-a-vis Arab terrorists means that your political leaders are willing to tolerate the loss of considerable number of Jews, and that this cheapening of Jewish life can only make the Arabs more determined to annihilate you? Israeli: You speak as if we are threatened by another holocaust! American: That's right, but this time you will have no one but yourselves to blame for such a catastrophe. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
THE INGRATES
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, June 28, 2004. |
|
This appeared today on FrontPageMagazine.com
(http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13977).
Before his downfall, Saddam Hussein delivered on a pledge to donate $25,000 to 100 Arab families from the Jenin refugee camp whose homes had been destroyed during Israel's campaign to roust out terrorists there in 2002. The United Arab Emirates Red Crescent Authority contributed another $29 million to the rebuilding effort in a fit of generosity. Some 435 apartments were being rebuilt under the auspices of the British Government Department for International Development, but the project ground to a screeching halt last week after the British team fled Jenin when Arab gunmen armed with M-16 rifles fired on their headquarters. The gunmen were apparently voicing their protest at the small size of the new quarters in the "refugee camp." According to The Times of London, the three-man team of technical experts called it quits after months of threats and intimidation culminated in the madcap shooting spree. Paul Wolstenholme, project manager, Neil Johnston, construction manager and Mike Luffingham, design manager, expressed dismay at the violent response from the refugees. The men had been overseeing an unprecedented building effort, in which some of the replacement multi-storey homes featured Italian marble kitchen counters, Spanish tiles, Belgian windows and Japanese refrigerators, courtesy of the Iraqi dictator. "You wouldn't believe how good the properties are, the finishing is fantastic," said Johnston. Several houses are built on two levels, with three rooms and a kitchen on each level, to accommodate the clan-style living arrangements of most refugee camp residents. Many of those who had received Saddam Hussein's payments added balconies and fancy outside lighting. The whole thing was beginning to make a mockery out of the appellation "refugee camp." Where else in the world do refugees live in digs costing $135 per meter? Indeed, several camp residents (among the only people in the world who claim 3rd or 4th generation refugee status) had begun to mumble about how difficult it would be to continue to attract world sympathy for their plight under the new conditions. "We've lost the right of return," a member of the camp's governing committee told a reporter from the Israeli Haaretz newspaper. But the fuse was lit when one powerful clan allegedly bullied contractors into expanding their building at the expense of the neighbors. In a microcosm of wider Arab negotiating techniques, the aggrieved party decided to shoot it out rather than talk it out. The Brits had enough when the bullets started to fly. "I have come to help these innocent individuals who lost their houses through no fault of their own - and what do I get but harassment, threats, and not one word of thanks," said one unidentified British worker. Just one week before, a Jordanian security team ran for their lives after Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade gunmen in the camp threatened its members. According to The Jerusalem Post, the ugly little incident started when Al Aksa thugs objected to the Jordanians arriving without prior coordination with Yasser Arafat. The goings-on in Jenin's refugee camp provide a window into the havoc that passes for international policy on Arab refugees. UNRWA, the UN agency charged with carrying out humanitarian efforts for the Arabs displaced by wars more than half a century ago, has fallen into serious disrepute for perpetuating the misery of its charges. [See UNRWA, A Report by Pearl Herman. www.israelbehindthenews.com] The international community pays little attention to the ridiculousness of the claims of many so-called Arab refugees who find themselves living just a few miles from the villages they inhabited in 1948. Men like Jamal Nashrati, who maintains his two wives and 11 children in one of the new apartments in the Jenin camp. Poor Jamal is still pining for "his" village of Zarin, located exactly 12.5 miles from Jenin. Nashrati wasn't even born there - his parents are from Zarin. No other people displaced a few miles by wars that occurred decades ago, and now re-housed for free in dwellings that would be the envy of many a citizen of the Arab world, would have the chutzpa to lay claim to the "refugee" title, nor to the millions in foreign aid being poured into their part of the world. Almost a million Jews who fled or were forced out of Arab countries in the 1940s and 50s gratefully lived for years in tents and tenements with no foreign subvention whatsoever. They went on to become productive citizens, the backbone of Israeli society, with scarcely a look back at the towns and villages they left behind so long ago. Ask an Israeli Jew of Libyan or Moroccan origin if he considers himself a refugee and he'll refer you to the closest psychiatrist. Like almost every Arab leader, the gunmen of Jenin have succeeded in perpetuating the misery of their brethren. But perhaps they have also accomplished a service by exposing the hypocrisy of a community of self-defined refugees living a little uncomfortably with their Italian marble. Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com |
|
A TIME TO SPEAK: June edition
Posted by Patricia Berlyn, June 28, 2004. |
|
A Time To Speak (Ecclesiastes 3:7) - is a message that appears once a
month. Each message is on a theme that relates to Israel and the
Middle East past and present. Readers of these messages may circulate
issues or post them on websites, or use quotes from the material If
so, please cite the source and do not make changes in the wording.
This is Vol. IV:6 (No. 42) June 2004 - Sivan-Tammuz 5764 Complimentary subscriptions to the -email edition are available by request to speak@actcom.co.il DRAMATIS PERSONNAE: Webster: "Dramatis Personnae --the characters or actors in a drama" In the drama of Israel there are many players and would-be players. Too many of those have cast themselves in the wrong roles. For example, the Quartet wants to be Playwright with its Roadmap. Director of Israel's fate, and Scene-mover to rearrange the map of the Land of Israel. [Issues 23, 28, 29] One instrument in the Quartet is the United Nations, personified in Secretary-General Kofi Annan. He asks, in his ever-dulcet tones, "Can the whole world be wrong and only Israel right?" He responds to himself, "I don't think so." Among other things that Kofi Annan does not think: 1] that there is anything untoward, much less illegal, when a bloc of UN member states pursues the destruction of another member state, to the applause of most of the audience 2] that there is anything amiss when UN troops in Lebanon abet terrorists who infiltrate Israel, abduct and murder Israeli soldiers, and Mr. Annan himself suppresses the evidence 3] that UNRWA errs when it permits its "refugee camps" to be bases for recruiting and training terrorists, and allows terrorists use of its facilities and even its ambulances [Issue 17, 31] 4] that UNRWA Director Peter Hansen and Special Middle East Envoy Terje Roed-Larsen misuse their office when they spread lies and slanders about Israel in order to promote their own particular aversions 5] that the UN squanders funds when it spends millions of dollars to print and disseminate anti-Israel propaganda and hold "Palestine" festivals 6] that notice should be taken of UN personnel's peculation with billions of dollars entrusted to it for the Iraq Oil-for-Food Program. 7] that the Security Council is remiss in its duty when it formally declares that it will ignore the genocidal horrors that the government of the Sudan inflicts on its own subjects. 8] that it is incongruous for the government of the Sudan to be elected as a member of the UN's body for the protection of Human Rights 9} that he himself ought to respond when the Pygmy people of Africa appeal for his protection from cannibal neighbors who are slaughtering them as livestock 9] that it is bizarre for him to preside over a conference on anti-Semitism held at the global epicenter of anti-Semitism, and opine that "Jews everywhere must feel that the UN is their home". * * * * * * * The ICRC [International Committee of the Red Cross], based in Switzerland, is a principal player among Professional Humanitarians. It bestows official recognition and membership status on organizations comparable to the Red Cross that use other emblems, such as the Muslim Red Crescent, Persian Red Lion, and Russian Red Star. Since 1949, it has denied this recognition to Israel's Magen David Adom [Red Shield of David]. This denial is more than a refusal of status and equality. It is a refusal of protection. Hospitals, ambulances and medical workers identified with a Red Cross, Red Crescent, Red Lion or Red Star are under the safeguard of "international humanitarian law" and attacks on them are deemed criminal. Hospitals, ambulances, and medical workers identified with a Red Shield of David have no safeguard. Thus the ICRC shelters PLO ambulances, that are often used to transport terrorists, but not Magen David Adom ambulances that rush to help the victims of terrorism. Senior officials of the ICRC bring forth one excuse after another for this anomaly. The season's reasons for rejecting Israel were set forth by Francois Bugnion, Director for International Law. 1] There might not be "a consensus in favor" of the Magen David Adom among the almost 200 members of the ICRC. [Comment: The membership includes states dedicated to or complaisant about the destruction of Israel and the murder of Jews.] 2] The PLO would have to give its approval, though it is not a member. [Comment: Why should emergency medical care for the victims of PLO terrorism require the approval of the perpetrator?] 3] The ICRC was addressing the subject in 2000, but dropped it because violence broke out in the region. M. Bugnion reports that "some number" of member governments feel that because of that violence "the time was not right to discuss this issue". [Comment: The violence is caused by the Oslo War, waged by the PLO against Israelis. Of course, "some number" of governments would oppose anything that facilitates medical care for the casualties.] * * * * * * * "If the reputation builds that the Saudis take care of their friends when they leave office, you'd be surprised how much better friends you have who are just coming into office." -- Prince Bandar bin-Sultan, Saudi Ambassador to the United States Some bit players still strutting and fretting are three score former U.S. State Department diplomats, especially those who served in Arab capitals, many of them now on Arab payrolls. In June 2004 they published an open letter to President George W. Bush, admonishing him for his "unqualified support" of Israel. In their view, this blunder is "costing our country its credibility, prestige and friends ..." But they offer a chance of salvation: "Our hope is that both political parties will take heed and listen to the voices of experienced diplomats." At almost the same time, a similar letter was addressed to the Prime Minister of Great Britain by alumni of his always Judeophobic Foreign Office. The signer of this epistle also draw a good part of their incomes from petrodollars. The former Foggy Bottomfeeders interpret as "unqualified support" for Israel a current policy that: 1] excludes Israel from a place the international War on Terror 2] insists on carving a PLO state out of the heart of the Land of Israel 3] endorses a plot by Israel's own prime minister to abandon strategically vital areas to PLO rule, after rendering them judenrein 4] refuses to honor a pledge to place the U.S. embassy to Israel in Jerusalem, as repeatedly mandated by the U.S. Congress 5] subjects Israelis and American Jews alike to the snappish commands of Condoleeza Rice 6] takes Yasser Arafat under its protection To the signatories and their British counterparts, the sinful folly of their governments is not openly accommodating Arab demands for the Death of Israel. In their former careers they achieved policy failures costly to their own countries and to the Middle East. But they achieved success in providing for themselves by way of Arab petro-dollars. [Issue 12, 25] The experience of these diplomats is examined in "The Arabists and the Anti-Zionists," by Joel Mowbray, who regularly reports on the U.S. Department of State. From FrontPageMagazine, 5 May 2004:
* * * * * * * A person who finances a theatrical production is known as an "angel". The European Union has been an angel for Israelis undermining their own countries. [Issue 12, 26, 35] It subsidizes Yossi Beilin to funnel their funding of the PLO, and Switzerland financed the show put on for his pernicious "Geneva Accords". (Perhaps the Swiss deemed this an appropriate use for the money they confiscated from the bank accounts of Jews who died in the Holocaust.) The EU also provided funds for The Four Mothers, the women who purloined the affectionate title for Israel's biblical Matriarchs. Their agitation against Israel holding a terror-barrier security zone at the Lebanese border did much to precipitate the ignominious flight that endangers Israel's population and encourages its enemies. A chief of Hezbollah expects more of the same kind of help: "We have great patience in our war with the Jews. For just as their "Four Mothers" [movement] came and got them out of Lebanon, soon a few thousand of them will come to their public squares and demand that they leave the occupied territories [sic]. In the end, we will win." Other Israeli circles of similar ilk also enjoy foreign subsidies. >From "Jewish Spies Against Israel," by David Bedein, Israel Resource Review, 16 May 2004: "This week, the Israeli 'Peace Now' organization revealed that it has been conducting aerial surveillance of Israeli Jewish communities in Judea, Jerusalem and Samaria in order to determine the extent of settlement expansion. At the same time, the Israeli Knesset Parliamentary Interior Committee held a special session to discuss foreign government funding of Israeli leftwing movements. * * * * * * * There is a saying that "Nations get the governments they deserve". This is not true for Israel. For too many years past, the civilians and the soldiers of Israel have lived and died under governments not worthy of its citizens. At the moment, the heads of the three major parties are: 1] Prime Minister Ariel Sharon of theLikud Party In office, Sharon has betrayed virtually every principle he declared and every promise he made when out of office and/or campaigning for office. [Issue 37, 39, 40]. He has sown contention and distrust, and imposed senseless new stresses on a nation and people already burdened with massive stress. When his own party opposed his ill-considered plan for Disengagement [that is, Unilaterial Surrender] he concocted a divisive and costly referendum meant to prove support for him. The vote came out 60-40 percent against him. In response, he ignores the results of his own referendum and goes on with the plan so resoundingly rejected. He could not rally the required majority approval from the cabinet, whose members are not appointed by him but elected leaders of their various parties with the right to decide their own votes. So he fired cabinet ministers for the sole offense of planning to vote against his plan -- a tactic abhorrent by any standard of political decency. 2] Leader of the Opposition Shimon Peres of the Labor Party In the early days of Peres's political career, Moshe Sharett expressed his distress at the thought that Peres might ever reach real power. Golda Meir despised him. Yitzhak Rabin described him a perpetual schemer. Peres managed to become Prime Minister several times without ever winning an election. He has also held various other portfolios, among them the Foreign Ministry. It was as Foreign Minister that he was the arch-perpetrator of the accursed Oslo Accords, that he managed to foist on a nation that did not want them. The most dire predictions of the disasters to come in the wake of those Accords proved all too prescient, but Peres still insists that "Oslo" was the right thing to do and will yet prevail. He does not at the moment hold any ministry, but wanders around the United States and other countries to tell the world that Israel has no moral rights in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and the Golan. Sharon does not dispute him on this. 3] Minister of Justice Yosef "Tommy" Lapid, head of the Shinui [Change] Party. Lapid is a former journalist and television personality who got public attention as a raucous vulgarian. He launched his political career on a campaign of contempt for and ridicule of all who clings to any shred of Judaism, in observance, tradition, or culture. His expressed aspiration for Israeli society is that everyone should eat pork on Shabbat. Wynken, Blynken and Nod Among senior cabinet members are Mr. Foreign Minister Sylvan Shalom, Mr. Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and Madam Education Minister Limor Livnat. Netanyahu and Livnat did not like the Quartet's Roadmap. They would not vote to approve it. They would not vote to reject it. They courageously abstained on this fateful decision, and so helped it to pass. Netanyahu did make his abstention conditional on attaching 14 Points of his own devising. It is not clear what the 14 Points were, but they were in any case pointless since Condoleeza Rice had ruled the terms of the Roadmap to be "non-negotiable". The 14 Points, whatever they were, have not been heard of since. On Sharon's Disengagement plot, Shalom as well as Netanyahu and Livnat first said "No". Then they said "Maybe". Then they said "Yes, But ... " Then they said they would Vote For It But Not Campaign For It. First they declared that The Referendum Vote is Binding. Then they backed Sharon in overturning it. The sad irony is that those abroad who sincerely believe themselves friends of Israel -- as indeed they are -- suppose that supporting the plots of its incumbent officeholders is the same as supporting Israel and its best interests. It is not. * * * * * * * And The Lord spoke to Moses saying "Send men to scout the land of Canaan, which I am giving to the Israelite people. ... At the end of forty days they returned from scouting the land ... and they made their report ... They spread calumnies among the Israelites about the land they had scouted, saying "The country that we traversed and scouted is one that devours its settlers... and we looked like grasshoppers to ourselves." -- Numbers 13:1, 25, 32-33 Of the Twelve Scouts, only Joshua and Caleb dissented from this majority report. Only they lived to enter the Promised Land. And today, too, not all scouts -- not even all politicians -- are grasshoppers. There are still some who have not given way to moral and intellectual collapse. There are still some who will stand against what they know is wrong, even if it means losing their posts and perquisites. Natan Sharansky stood by his conscience at the cost of nine years in a cell in the Soviet Gulag. He is now a minister in the government of Israel. His explanation of his vote on Sharon's plan is set forth in Sharansky Equates Withdrawal With the Sin of the Spies," Israel National News (Arutz Sheva), 31 May 2004: "The Government of Israel is poised to make a historic and unprecedented decision, ... to dismantle and destroy flowering Jewish communities, not as the result of a comprehensive peace agreement, but rather out of despair and fear. "This is possibly the first time this has happened in our history since the Sin of the Spies ... So it doesn't matter if it's made a week later or a week earlier; it must not be made at all! ... "[Because] there is no one to talk to on the other side, and because some of the ministers feel that the nation can't just keep on going like this from terror attack to terror attack, they therefore seek a 'wonder solution' with these so dangerous ramifications." "[It is] very strange, that after this referendum -- a festival of democracy, many called it, in which the voters were allowed to make their own decision and weren't forced to follow their leader -- and then the leader ignores the results! He [Sharon] says that he is responsible not just for one party, but for the entire nation -- but if that's so, then he must first of all be responsible that the democratic character of the Jewish state be maintained. Instead, this is a blow both to the Jewish nature and the democratic character at once. "It's important that we, those who object to this plan, talk all the time about the ideology -- our history, the large picture, the running away from terrorism, etc. I tried today to do this, I even quoted the first Rashi [Arutz Sheva comment: 11th-century biblical commentator, whose explanation to the first verse in the Torah emphasizes the Divine bonds between the Land of Israel and the People of Israel] -- I felt that this was important, for one thing, because since the departure of Elyakim Rubenstein [the former Attorney-General who generally participated in Cabinet meetings], we haven't had people reading from the [religious] sources, so I tried to do this [...]" * * * * * * * The Ninth Day of the Month of Av in the Hebrew calendar has from ancient times been a day of mourning and fasting. On that date in 587 BCE, the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem, burnt the First Temple, and took the Jews into exile. On that date in 70 CE, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem, burnt the Second Temple, and drove the Jews into exile. On that date in 1492 CE, the Jews were expelled from Spain where they had dwelt for 1000 years. Sharon's plan to bestow Gaza on terrorists and Egyptians dates the completion of forcible removal of Jews form their homes to 25 August 2005, that will fall on the Ninth of Av. |
|
FIGURING OUT U.S. POLICY ON ISRAEL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 28, 2004. |
|
Friends of Israel are supposed to be reassured about the US attitude towards Israel when the US President meets cordially with Israel's Prime Minister and refers to the historical ties between the two countries. That boilerplate diplomatic language does not reassure me. All the more so it does not, for it reminds me of the historical injuries the State Dept. inflicted on Israel, such as insistence upon ceasefires when Israel was defeating the Arab aggressors, calls for Israeli pullbacks, arming the Arabs, condoning terrorism against Israel, and double standards towards the Jewish state. Other people are reassured each time Congress authorizes financial aid to Israel. People ought to notice that the Arabs get as much aid, primarily used to prepare for war on Israel. The US threatens to withhold aid unless Israel offers the Arabs concessions that would have the effect of facilitating that war. The US is superficially friendly towards Israel and devastatingly demanding upon it. Commentators react to individual US press releases about the Arabs and about Israel. I compare US statements made to the Arabs and to Israel. Their pattern contradicts the commentators' conclusions from the individual releases. Analyzing the treatment of the two sides together provides a more reliable context. Basically, the US makes firm demands upon Israel and vague ones upon the Arabs. Of the two sides, one side breaks its agreements, incites its people to violence against the other, organizes terrorism, and lacks constructive purpose. The other side keeps its agreements until it concludes the other side is not cooperating at all, urges its people to tolerance, sometimes fights back against terrorism, and has positive purposes. As you can guess, the first side is the Arab's, the second is Israel's. If the US were either objective in its alleged anti-terrorism or sincere in its professions of alliance with Israel, it would condemn the Arabs and sympathize with Israel. Generally, the US does the opposite. It condemns Israeli policy and action, but includes some face-saving expression about understanding Israel's need for security. The US never quite understands Israel's need for security enough to endorse its anti-terrorism measures for long. These measures are much like those the US institutes in Iraq. In response to Israeli security measures, the US lectures Israel that its security fence would prejudge borders, its checkpoints make life hard on the Arabs, etc.. All the US concern is about the Arabs, and none about the innocent Israelis' hardships. The US may suggest that the Arabs "try harder" to repress terrorism, but that is pro forma, too soft to be meaningful. Since the P.A. incites, finances, and manages most terrorism, such US statements may be seen as phony. Therefore, the import of the US pressure on Israel, its micro-managing of Israeli settlements, and its threats to review its supposedly solid relationship with Israel unless Israel does what it wants, shows not mere hostility, but a plan to force Israel out of the Territories, to be replaced there by a terrorist state. (Even a non-terrorist Arab state would become a confrontation state, and Israel would be deprived of its core historical homeland and strategic borders. Israel should prejudge its borders, to make sure they are secure! Certainly the Arabs do not deserve still another state.) Oh, not really a terrorist state, the US would reply -- the Road Map calls for an end to Arab terrorism. That call is a mere formality. It is not backed up by a plan for implementation. All the planning for implementation is for the real US goal: Israeli withdrawal and appeasement of the Arabs. The call does not state that ending terrorism is a prerequisite for Israeli withdrawal, nor how long the Arab steps should take, nor what would measure their success. Neither do they allow for any Israeli control to ensure that the anti-terrorism ever is done. The Map stacks the deck against Israel. Do not be deceived by Bush's original speech and plan, no longer in effect. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
A LETTER TO MY SONS ON THE WORLD SITUATION
Posted by IsrAlert, June 28, 2004. |
|
This was written by a retired attorney, to his sons, on May 19, 2004.
Isralert@aol.com source: Subscriber Posey McMillan, Fort Worth, TX Dear Tom, Kevin, Kirby and Ted, As your father, I believe I owe it to you to share some thoughts on the present world situation. We have over the years discussed a lot of important things, like going to college, jobs and so forth. But this really takes precedence over any of those discussions. I hope this might give you a longer term perspective that fewer and fewer of my generation are left to speak to. To be sure you understand that this is not politically flavored, I will tell you that since Franklin Roosevelt, who led us through pre and WWII (1933 - 1945) up to and including our present President, I have, without exception, supported our presidents on all matters of international conflict. This would include just naming a few in addition to President Roosevelt - WWII: President Truman - Korean War 1950; President Kennedy - Bay of Pigs (1961); President Kennedy - Vietnam (1961) [1]; Eight presidents (five Republicans & four Democrats) during the cold war (1945 - 1991); President Clinton's strikes on Bosnia (1995) and on Iraq (1998). So be sure you read this as completely non-political or otherwise you will miss the point. [2] Our country is now facing the most serious threat to its existence, as we know it, that we have faced in your lifetime and mine (which includes WWII). The deadly seriousness is greatly compounded by the fact that there are very few of us who think we can possibly lose this war and even fewer who realize what losing really means. First, let's examine a few basics: 1. When did the threat to us start? Many will say September 11th, 2001. The answer as far as the US is concerned is 1979, 22 years prior to September 2001, with the following attacks on us: Iran Embassy Hostages, 1979; Beirut, Lebanon Embassy 1983; Beirut, Lebanon Marine Barracks 1983; Lockerbie, Scotland Pan-Am flight to New York 1988; First New York World Trade Center attack 1993; Dhahran, Saudi Arabia Khobar Towers Military complex 1996; Nairobi, Kenya US Embassy 1998; Dar es Salaam, Tanzania US Embassy 1998; Aden, Yemen USS Cole 2000; New York World Trade Center 2001; Pentagon 2001. (during the period from 1981 to 2001 there were 7,581attacks worldwide). [3] 2. Why were we attacked? Envy of our position, our success, and our freedoms. The attacks happened during the administrations of Presidents Carter, Reagan, Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2. We cannot fault either the Republicans or Democrats as there were no provocations by any of the presidents or their immediate predecessors, Presidents Ford or Carter. 4. Who were the attackers? In each case, the attacks on the US were carried out by Muslims. 5. What is the Muslim population of the World? 25% 6. Isn't the Muslim Religion peaceful? Hopefully, but that is really not material. There is no doubt that the predominately Christian population of Germany was peaceful, but under the dictatorial leadership of Hitler that made no difference. You either went along with the administration or you were eliminated. There were 5 to 6 million Christians killed by the Nazis for political reasons (including 7,000 Polish priests). (see http://www.nazis.testimony.co.uk/7-a.htm). Thus, almost the same number of Christians were killed by the Nazis, as the 6 million holocaust Jews who were killed by them, and we seldom heard of anything other than the Jewish atrocities. Although Hitler kept the world focused on the Jews, he had no hesitancy about killing anyone who got in his way of exterminating the Jews or of taking over the world - German, Christian or any others. Same with the Muslim terrorists. They focus the world on the US, but kill all in the way - their own people or the Spanish, French or anyone else. ... The point here is that just like the peaceful Germans were of no protection to anyone from the Nazis, no matter how many peaceful Muslims there may be, they are no protection for us from the terrorist Muslim leaders and what they are fanatically bent on doing - by their own pronouncements - killing all of us infidels. I don't blame the peaceful Muslims. What would you do if the choice was shut up or die? 7. So who are we at war with? There is no way we can honestly respond that it is anyone other than the Muslim terrorists. Trying to be politically correct and avoid verbalizing this conclusion can well be fatal. There is no way to win if you don't clearly recognize and articulate who you are fighting. So with that background, now to the two major questions: a. Can we lose this war? b. What does losing really mean? If we are to win, we must clearly answer these two pivotal questions. We can definitely lose this war, and as anomalous as it may sound, the major reason we can lose is that so many of us simply do not fathom the answer to the second question - What does losing mean? It would appear that a great many of us think that losing the war means hanging our heads, bringing the troops home and going on about our business, like post Vietnam. This is as far from the truth as one can get. What losing really means is: We would no longer be the premier country in the world. The attacks will not subside, but rather will steadily increase. Remember, they want us dead, not just quiet. If they had just wanted us quiet, they would not have produced an increasing series of attacks against us over the past 18 years. The plan was clearly to terrorist attack us until we were neutered and submissive to them. We would of course have no future support from other nations for fear of reprisals and for the reason that they would see we are impotent and cannot help them. They will pick off the other non-Muslim nations, one at a time. It will be increasingly easier for them. They already hold Spain hostage. It doesn't matter whether it was right or wrong for Spain to withdraw its troops from Iraq. Spain did it because the Muslimists bombed their train and told them to withdraw the troops. Anything else they want Spain to do, will be done. Spain is finished. The next will probably be France. Our one hope on France is that they might see the light and realize that if we don't win, they are finished too, in that they can't resist the Muslimists without us. However, it may already be too late for France. France is already 20% Muslim and fading fast. See the attached article on the French condition by Tom Segel. [4] If we lose the war, our production, income, exports and way of life will all vanish as we know it. After losing, who would trade or deal with us if they were threatened by the Muslims. If we can't stop the Muslims, how could anyone else? The Muslims fully know what is riding on this war and therefore are completely committed to winning at any cost. We better know it too and be likewise committed to winning at any cost. Why do I go on at such lengths about the results of losing? Simple. Until we recognize the costs of losing, we cannot unite and really put 100% of our thoughts and efforts into winning. And it is going to take that 100% effort to win. So, how can we lose the war? Again, the answer is simple. We can lose the war by imploding. That is, defeating ourselves by refusing to recognize the enemy and their purpose and really digging in and lending full support to the war effort. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. If we continue to be divided, there is no way that we can win. Let me give you a few examples of how we simply don't comprehend the life and death seriousness of this situation. - President Bush selects Norman Mineta as Secretary of Transportation. Although all of the terrorist attacks were committed by Muslim men between 17 and 40 years of age, Secretary Mineta refuses to allow profiling. Does that sound like we are taking this thing seriously? This is war. For the duration we are going to have to give up some of the civil rights we have become accustomed to. We had better be prepared to lose some of our civil rights temporarily or we will most certainly lose all of them permanently. And don't worry that it is a slippery slope. We gave up plenty of civil rights during WWII and immediately restored them after the victory and in fact added many more since then. Do I blame President Bush or President Clinton before him? No, I blame us for blithely assuming we can maintain all of our Political Correctness and all of our civil rights during this conflict and have a clean, lawful, honorable war. None of those words apply to war. Get them out of your head. - Some have gone so far in their criticism of the war and/or the Administration that it almost seems they would literally like to see us lose. I hasten to add that this isn't because they are disloyal. It is because they just don't recognize what losing means. Nevertheless, that conduct gives the impression to the enemy that we are divided and weakening, it concerns our friends, and it does great damage to our cause. - Of more recent vintage, the uproar fueled by the politicians and media regarding the treatment of some prisoners of war perhaps exemplifies best what I am saying. We have recently had an issue involving the treatment of a few Muslim prisoners of war by a small group of our military police. These are the type prisoners who just a few months ago were throwing their own people off buildings, cutting off their hands, cutting out their tongues and otherwise murdering their own people just for disagreeing with Saddam Hussein. And just a few years ago these same type prisoners chemically killed 400,000 of their own people for the same reason. They are also the same type enemy fighters who recently were burning Americans and dragging their charred corpses through the streets of Iraq. And still more recently the same type enemy that was and is providing videos to all news sources internationally, of the beheading of an American prisoner they held. Compare this with some of our press and politicians who for several days have thought and talked about nothing else but the "humiliating" of some Muslim prisoners - not burning them, not dragging their charred corpses through the streets, not beheading them, but "humiliating" them. Can this be for real? The politicians and pundits have even talked of impeachment of the Secretary of Defense. If this doesn't show the complete lack of comprehension and understanding of the seriousness of the enemy we are fighting, the life and death struggle we are in and the disastrous results of losing this war, nothing can. To bring our country to a virtual political standstill over this prisoner issue makes us look like Nero playing his fiddle as Rome burned - totally oblivious to what is going on in the real world. Neither we, nor any other country, can survive this internal strife. Again I say, this does not mean that some of our politicians or media people are disloyal. It simply means that they absolutely oblivious to the magnitude of the situation we are in and into which the Muslim ists have been pushing us for many years. Remember, the Muslimists stated goal is to kill all infidels. That translates into all non-Muslims - not just in the United States, but throughout the world. We are the last bastion of defense. - We have been criticized for many years as being 'arrogant'. That charge is valid in at least one respect. We are arrogant in that we believe that we are so good, powerful and smart, that we can win the hearts and minds of all those who attack us, and that with both hands tied behind our back, we can defeat anything bad in the world. We can't. If we don't recognize this, our nation as we know it will not survive, and no other free country in the World will survive if we are defeated. And finally, name any Muslim countries throughout the world that allow freedom of speech, freedom of thought, freedom of religion, freedom of the Press, equal rights for anyone - let alone everyone, equal status or any status for women, or that have been productive in one single way that contributes to the good of the World. This has been a long way of saying that we must be united on this war or we will be equated in the history books to the self-inflicted fall of the Roman Empire. If, that is, the Muslim leaders will allow history books to be written or read. If we don't win this war right now, keep a close eye on how the Muslims take over France in the next 5 years or less. They will continue to increase the Muslim population of France and continue to encroach little by little on the established French traditions. The French will be fighting among themselves over what should or should not be done, which will continue to weaken them and keep them from any united resolve. Doesn't that sound eerily familiar? Democracies don't have their freedoms taken away from them by some external military force. Instead, they give their freedoms away, politically correct piece by politically correct piece. And they are giving those freedoms away to those who have shown, worldwide, that they abhor freedom and will not apply it to you or even to themselves, once they are in power. They have universally shown that when they have taken over, they then start brutally killing each other over who will be the few who control the masses. Will we ever stop hearing from the politically correct, about the "peaceful Muslims"? I close on a hopeful note, by repeating what I said above. If we are united, there is no way that we can lose. I believe that after the election, the factions in our country will begin to focus on the critical situation we are in and will unite to save our country. It is your future we are talking about. Do whatever you can to preserve it. Love,
[1] By the way on Vietnam, the emotions are still so high that it is really not possible to discuss it. However, I think President Kennedy was correct. He felt there was a communist threat from China, Russia and North Vietnam to take over that whole area. Also remember that we were in a 'cold war' with Russia. I frankly think Kennedy's plan worked and kept that total communist control out, but try telling that to anyone now. It just isn't politically correct to say so. Historians will answer this after cool headed research, when the people closest to it are all gone. [2] As you know, I support President Bush and will vote for him. However, if Senator Kerry is elected, I will fully support him on all matters of international conflict, just as I have supported all presidents in the past. [3] Source for statistics in Par. 1 is http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0001454.html [4] "The French-Muslim Connection", By Thomas D. Segel, May 4, 2004 There are more than one billion Muslims in the world. The largest Muslim population, totaling 180 million, is in Indonesia. It is followed by 125 million in Pakistan, Bangladesh with 109 million and India with 84 million. The remainder is spread through 100 countries, including an estimated 5 million Muslims in France. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
PRAYING FOR FREEDOM OF RELIGION IN THE HOLY LAND!
Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, June 28, 2004. |
|
The rebuilding of the Third Temple on Mount Moriah seems to be a long way off. First we must prevent the Arabs from controlling the Temple Mount, which is no easy feat. At present they are not permitting Jews or Christians to pray at this Holy Site. In the present atmosphere of dependence on Arab Oil, there are few who would dare bring about a change in the present status. Certainly, not the present Jewish Government, which is extremely wary of being criticized by the UN and the other nations who are pushing the Saudi Road Map. Still, the Almighty is a potent force on our side, and miracles in Israel can happen, and usually do. Prayer is therefore our most important recourse. On Tisha B'Av we mourn the loss of the First and Second Temples which occurred on this tragic day. For the Walk around the Walls of the Old City of Holy Jerusalem, we expect, as usual, a huge turnout for this major spiritual event. You are reminded that you can be present in spirit by sponsoring someone to walk in your behalf at $25. for each Walker. Such donation will help pay for the large costs involved in holding this spiritual event. These costs include ambulances which are to be available because of the security situation. These ambulance are required by the police before they issue a Permit. There are, of course, the usual huge expenditures for the advertising of this Event - by putting up color posters throughout the Country, and advertising the Event on radio, television and in the newspapers. Women in Green shall be observing, for the tenth consecutive year, this ancient custom of Walking around the Walled City of Holy Jerusalem. However, we shall be insisting on our right, and the right of everyone, to pray on the Temple Mount. After all, Mount Moriah where the First and Second Temples were located, is where the Third Temple will eventually be built. It is the holiest site of the Jewish People, the very people who have been miraculously restored to their ancient homeland by the Will of the Almighty. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
ISRAEL IS MOURNING THE PASSING OF ITS MOST LOVED SONGWRITER, NAOMI SHEMER
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, June 28, 2004. |
|
This essay was written by Leiah Elbaum, who lives in Modi'in
She can be reached at leiah@elbaum.org
Naomi Shemer - the author of anthems such as "Jerusalem of Gold", "Tomorrow", "Lu Yehi" and "Al Kol Eleh" - seemed a legendary figure, the unofficial chronicler of a nation's moods, fears and hopes. Her music, her words have accompanied me my entire life, from the children's songs my mother taught me, to the patriotic and memorial songs I sang in my school choir, to the jaunty hit playing on the radio when my future husband first talked about marriage. On hearing the news of her death, her songs flooded my mind. Over twenty years ago, "Emtza HaTammuz" foresaw her own death: It's sad to die in the middle of Tammuz Just as she predicted, Naomi Shemer died a few days ago on the seventh day of the Hebrew month of Tammuz, just as the orchards and markets are overflowing with the juiciest summer produce - peaches, plums and nectarines smiling invitingly from their baskets. For me the bittersweet heartbreak in that song typifies Shemer. Throughout her work, her passion for life, her desire to grab it with both hands, is clearly apparent. Yet throughout, she seemed unafraid of death, even her own death, only rueful that she would miss life. She wrote the most optimistic, uplifting, sad songs I know of. Even her most mournful lyrics usually contain a kernel of hope, of consolation, of continuation, even after the worst tragedy of all. Looking back it is striking how many of her most well known songs touch on her own mortality. In the early days of her career, back in the 1950s, she had a hit with the semi-autobiographical song "Noa": Noa was born in a field between stones and grass To me it seemed that she was simply someone who was comfortable with the natural cycle of the world. Just as she was inspired by the landscape and by nature, so she could accept that each life had its end, part of that simple, eternal way of the world, and this is where her optimism came from. Perhaps encapsulting her view of life and her understanding of her legacy, is "To sing is like to be the Jordan": To sing Shemer was born and grew up in Kibbutz Kvutzat Kinneret, on the shore of the Sea of Galilee. From the kibbutz you look over the lake and see the towering Golan Heights and snow capped Mount Hermon, and nearby the River Jordan flows south from the lake, down through the Jordan Rift Valley. The region features in many of her songs, most famously in 1963's "The Eucalyptus Grove". It was a landscape she felt at one with, one which shaped her love of the Land of Israel, her closeness to nature, but also her view of the world, her feeling that life was stronger than everything, that just as the seasons constantly renewed, so even after we are gone, our legacy, our mark on the world, will continually renew itself and feed new life. This closeness to the natural cycles of the Land of Israel, coupled with her deep knowledge of the bible, its text also steeped in natural imagery, is part of what made her work so Israeli, so uniquely part of this country and so closely tied both to ancient Israel and to the modern state. In part this is why she touched such a chord among Israelis, becoming our unofficial "national songwriter". In her prolific career she wrote just about every type of song: bright nonsense songs for army entertainment troupes and musicals, simple children's songs, patriotic epics, translations of French chansons and Yiddish ballads and acres of whimsical love songs. But the lyrics which most touched the nation were usually these bittersweet, optimistic songs about living in this often unpredictable part of the world. The refrain of "Emtza Tammuz", "And upon your summer and your harvest, hoorays have fallen", comes from Isaiah 16. Yet it blends seamlessly with the modern Hebrew imagery, just as she herself, a secular Tel Avivian from a kibbutz, was nevertheless equally at home with the bible and the teachings of Rabbi Nahman of Breslav or Reb Menahem-Mendl of Kotsk. For me her crowning glory was the way in which she used Hebrew language. The most able poetic translator, let alone my poor attempts, cannot do justice in trying to convey her work to the English reader. A member of the Academy of the Hebrew Language, she was one of our nation's most capable wordsmiths, her words strong enough, deep enough, to stand as poetry in their own right, even devoid of the beautifully stirring melodies she composed for them. I saw her live in concert many times. As a child my mother took me to several of her one woman performances. Just she and her piano looked very small on a huge stage, yet filled the entire auditorium with the most vibrant energy. A few years ago, despite her ill health, she went on tour again, accompanied by three other performers. This time she was clearly weaker, remaining seated, letting her companions sing many of the numbers. Yet still, when she spoke, when she sang, you felt invigorated by her bright enthusiasm, her passion for life, her frank straightforwardness, that humorous twinkle with which she faced illness and death. I cannot but help thinking of her with joy, of her tremendous joie de vivre, someone who knew how to live. In 1988 the State of Israel celebrated its fortieth anniversary, but the first intifada was at its height. A mood of national depression cast a damper over the festivities. Shemer responded with the following song: My celebration went out May her memory be blessed. Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com |
|
3-YEAR OLD CHILD AND A GRANDFATHER MURDERED AT KINDERGARTEN THIS MORNING
Posted by Wendy Sutherland, June 27, 2004. |
|
(1) is an update today from Israel Government Press Office.
(2.) is a commentary on this morning's terror attack by Jack Golbert, Lawyer, Jerusalem, Israel. (1.) UPDATE: "2 Dead In Sderot Kassam Rocket Attack" (GPO 2) UPDATE: ISRAEL TV CH2 REPORTING THAT SECOND PERSON, A 3-YEAR-OLD CHILD (PREVIOUSLY REPORTED TO BE IN SERIOUS CONDITION), HAS BEEN MURDERED BY KASSAM ROCKET THAT FELL ON NEVEH ESHKOL NEIGHBORHOOD IN SDEROT (ADJACENT TO KINDERGARTEN), EARLIER THIS MORNING. CURRENT FIGURES: 2 DEAD, AT LEAST 7 WOUNDED. (COMM BY GPO) (2) "Commentary On This Morning's Terror Attack" by Jack Golbert, Lawyer, Jerusalem, Israel During that long-ago episode which Israelis agreed to call by the nice name of "intifadah," back in 1988 and the years following, when Arabs called "Palestinians" were pelting our cars with grapefruit-sized stones as we passed on the highway, the government gave us plastic film for our car windows and then when that didn't work, plastic windows that would certainly repel at least the first stone. The infantry put similar protection on its own vehicles. We thought that if they ever used live fire, it would become an ordinary infantry problem and Israel would deal with it in an ordinary infantry way. That is to say, the infantry would go into the civilian areas where the live fire originated and search from house to house, room to room, looking for guns and gunmen and hit each stone floor tile, every block in every wall looking for hollow places where ammunition, explosives and other contraband might be hidden. The infantry would flush out the terrorists and their accomplices and disband their organization. Instead, the government built by-pass roads and put up concrete barriers to the bullets to keep civilians farther from trouble, then better barriers to hide behind. When the terrorists (whom the media call "militants") started to fire mortars and rockets at us, the government bombed empty workshops, as if those are irreplaceable and noted that, in any case, they fell harmlessly far from their targets or near their targets but no one was injured. Nothing to worry about. They are just home-made rockets. Lo and behold, the Arabs who call themselves "Palestinians" have a learning curve and both their rockets and their aim are getting better. Today, a home-made Kassem rocket hit its chosen target; a nursery school full of dangerous 3-year-old Zionists. It killed one of them and the grandfather of another. The government is already pursuing a solution, however. It is preparing to retreat from the Gaza Strip from whence this rocket and many others were fired. But this nursery school was not in one of the hated Zionist "settlements." It was in Sederot, on the respectable side of the "Green Line." What do the terrorists, whom the media call "militants", have to do to prove that such distinctions mean nothing? For the Arabs who call themselves "Palestinians," all Jews are Zionists and all of Israel is occupied territory and all Israelis are "settlers." Even the 3-year-olds. Does Ariel Sharon believe we can run away from the problem? He assuredly does not. Do the members of his cabinet believe that, if Israel does indeed leave the Gaza Strip, the terrorists will abandon terrorism and stop firing rockets at Israelis? If they do, then either they suffer from insane delusions or else they are terminally stupid. They certainly know that Israel cannot run away from the problem. Running away only allows the terrorists to set up bases deeper inside our territory, closer to our cities in a larger area, more difficult to control. They are preparing to dismantle the homes, farms, businesses and lives of Jews in Gush Katif for personal reasons of their own: either they are bribed or blackmailed or both. Or they are evil and intend evil to the Jewish nation. There is no other possibility. "They offer healing offhand for the wounds of My poor people, saying, 'All is well, all is well,' when nothing is well. They have acted shamefully; they have done abhorrent things - yet they do not feel shame, they cannot be made to blush. Assuredly, they shall fall among the falling, they shall stumble at the time of their doom - said HASHEM." (Yirmeyahu 8:11-12) < |
|
DEMOCRATIC BECAUSE IT'S JEWISH
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, June 27, 2004. |
|
The motto, "a Jewish and democratic State", has become meaningless. Aharon Barak, with an abundance of tortuous explanations, has drained its Jewish aspect of significance and has in fact declared that what (in his opinion) is democratic is Jewish. The Haredim and the national religious Jews who are trying to face the issue are going wrong in the opposite direction. They are giving up democracy (as it were) in favor of Judaism. In other words, they are accepting the interpretation of the head of the Supreme Court and are in fact saying that if democracy means the end of Judaism, they want no part of it. Give us a king, who will enforce the wishes of the Almighty. Belief-based people who adopt this approach are falling into the trap twice. The first time, because they are abandoning the most basic principle in Judaism - freedom. The second time, because they are giving up the sole brake that can halt Israel's current slide into violent totalitarianism, a process that we are now witnessing. To be a Jew is to be a free man. The Jewish people brought the message of liberty to the entire world. All human progress from slavery to a flesh and body king, towards human liberty, starting with the English Magna Charta, continuing with the American constitution, and ending with the French Revolution - Judaism formed the source of inspiration for them all, as they publicly declared. The division of authority, the recognition that the king is not the source of authority but the representative of the sovereignty, and that he is subject to constant criticism by the parallel institutions of clarifications and direction (Sanhedrin, kehuna), and that all of them - the king, the institutions, and the people, are equally subject to the same rules, are the fundamental elements of the modern free regime, or in other words, the foundations of democracy. However, the term democracy has been made meaningless by the extremist Left that has compared the democratic method to its values. Aharon Barak's test of a "civilized person" is an outstanding example of the way in which the concept of democracy is distorted. It is not surprising that many people currently tend to throw out the baby with the bathwater. The term democracy may well have become so distorted that it can it can no longer be used, just as happened to the term "Israeli" in its original meaning. It may well be preferable to return to the term "liberty", but it would be a grave error to abandon the real values forming the basis of the term. It is not easy to understand the meaning of democracy. Hundreds of definitions have been given, and all kinds of people (including mass murderers) have drawn legitimacy from the term for their own needs. (examples are the People's Democracy of China, or the democratic elections held by Arafat's murder gangs.) However, before trying to understand why the belief-based public is the sole chance for democracy in Israel, or, if you wish, why Israel can be democratic only as a Jewish State, and why, if it abandons its Jewish character, it inevitably acquires totalitarian characteristics, let us examine Israeli reality. It is difficult to call the first days of the State of Israel democracy. Ben-Gurion's regime after the establishment of the state was very centralized, the opposition was persecuted with the aid of close cooperation between the defense establishment and the ruling party, and great courage and an independent income were required to oppose the regime. Let us therefore focus on the four decades that have elapsed since the Six Day War (in which the Herut party first entered Eshkol's unity government). It can be said that during this period Israel began really progressing towards a regime based on the fundamentals of democracy. Since 1967 we have been relatively democratic. However, it is easy to point to two occasions during this period in which Israeli democracy retreated towards dictatorship in the guise of democracy. The separation fence between a free state and a totalitarian one has no color, nor can it be felt. It can only be discovered using the sense of smell. And just like any stench, those lying inside it don't feel it. There have been numerous examples in the 20th Century of free societies that crossed the fence without noticing it, and continued to believe that they were free and advanced, even when the atmosphere of freedom was replaced by the stench of dictatorship. As we have said, this fence has been crossed twice since the Six Day War. The first person to lie on it was Yitzhak Rabin, and the second, Ariel Sharon, is doing so now. These leaders were not the first to wish to hand over parts of the country to the enemy, to destroy entire settlements and drive out their residents. The first to do so was Menahem Begin, to his everlasting ignominy. But Begin didn't do this terrible deed while crossing the fence. He possessed public legitimacy for his action. The majority of the nation, hypnotized by Sadat's visit to Jerusalem, supported him. Begin didn't change the rules of the game and fit them to his needs, but acted in accordance with them. His opponents were opposed to the retreat, but not to Begin. They could not contest Begin's legitimacy as the elected democratic prime minister. Rabin and Sharon crossed the fence quite blatantly. The hypnotizing spell of the first Camp David Conference had faded away, and the public had already developed the intellectual antibodies needed to understand what it was really getting. In order to overcome the basic Jewish values, the fundamental loyalty to Eretz Israel, and Jewish identity, that again played a key role in the public consciousness, Rabin at that time, and Sharon now, had to cross the fence separating democracy and dictatorship, between those people whom Rabin discounted, and his voters, whom he had promised there would be no talks with the PLO. His government was a minority one, and he achieved the majority necessary for these fateful steps by bribing people such as Segev and Goldfarb. In this way, with a fragile coalition, a leader of a free state initiated a major national decision that split the nation over fundamental issues. Broad popular protest was suppressed with great violence, and the media, as in every dictatorship, supported the regime. Only in this way could the Oslo Process, whose results are well known, be sold to Israeli society. The current situation is far more serious. The intensity of the controversy is unchanged, but the hopes planted at the time of the Oslo process no longer exist. But the fence crossed by Sharon has exactly the same smell. There is no argument about the nature of the majority achieved by Sharon. He lost in the referendum and doesn't deny this. As long as he has the support of the Left, he is not obligated to observe any rules, not even those he himself fixed. He no longer attempts to bribe his ministers, but fires them. The human rights of those planned to be evicted no longer exist. Now, just as then, the media have been recruited to support the regime. "We shall not only evict you and destroy your homes" (in the name of the new democracy), "we shall also fix the rules governing how you will be permitted to resist, what language you may use, and perhaps even the thoughts you will be permitted to think? If you don't obey, you will be responsible for a civil war?" Not only the media but the courts and the Public Prosecutor's department have been recruited. The idea of trying to halt this madness through an appeal to the High Court of Justice, based on the law, "The dignity and freedom of man", is just ridiculous. Israeli totalitarianism is now advancing, and all the media are in a count-down to the day when thousands of citizens will be called on to pack up their belongings and move to a new place, and every morning on the State radio Arieh Golan comes up with a new idea for implementing the new democracy, such as a unit of sharpshooters deployed on the roofs and equipped with live ammunition. In such a state of affairs it will not be surprising if at some stage they start hanging people from the lamp posts, naturally in the name of the law for dignity and freedom of man, and in order to protect the values of civilized persons. This sounds far-fetched? How many Arab collaborators were hanged on the lamp posts as a sacrifice for the Oslo process? Not only the Left looked aside, but also the Right. The High Court of Justice did not intervene, but accepted Rabin's declaration that "this is a political issue and not a judicial one". During the Rabin era the emperor thought he was dressed and attempted to persuade the nation of this. At least there was some kind of plan, and an attempt was made to create the impression of democracy. However, Sharon now knows that he is naked, but doesn't care. "The referendum was morally but not legally binding." All this in the name of the "rule of law". And I am the law. This is a time to keep one's distance from the lamp posts. Without noticing it, we have fallen into a situation of dictatorship whose stench is already making itself felt. Let us now try and understand what democracy is, and why only a Jewish State can be democratic. The most important feature of democracy is the subservience of both the ruler and the ruled to the same set of rules. This has been clearly violated by both Rabin and Sharon. There are several viewpoints of democracy and I shall only address two of them: the liberal and the community approaches. The liberal tradition supports a single fundamental criterion, a universal standpoint that does not recognize a different culture, tradition, or values. It believes in the values of equality and freedom of the individual, where the state is intended to serve the individual only. The state has no purpose and does not represent the values of its society. The second viewpoint is the community one, according to which a person needs recognition by society in order to achieve self awareness, and in this way express his opinion regarding the issues of morality and values. Consequently the community plays a decisive role, and through it the individual identifies with his country. The community and the state are assigned an important role in the realization of the values and identities of the citizens. According to this interpretation, democracy is a method of government permitting the expression of the basic values of the society. Every society whose basic values are those of freedom can and must be democratic, but it must fit the lid to the pot, and adopt its form of democracy to its nature and its unique values. Those who understand democracy using this approach can also understand that the first democratic approach described, as adopted in Israel, must inevitably lead to dictatorship. The dispute regarding Eretz Israel is not about territory or security. The issue of national identity currently finds expression through Eretz Israel. Those who wish to abandon parts of the country in fact want to sever the links with their Jewish identity. "The Jews defeated the Israelis", explained Shimon Peres in an interview for Ha'aretz after he lost to Netanyahu. The argument is between those holding on to their Jewish identity and those who wish to disengage from it and replace it with a new Israeli one. The process of disengagement is one of enforcing the new identity on the vast majority of the nation. Consequently it must inevitably lead to a dictatorship, as is actually happening. Only if Israel lives in harmony with its Jewish identity, and tries to serve this identity instead of fighting it, will it also be really democratic. 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. |
|
PLANNING TO DIVIDE THE SPOILS AMD CONTINUE THE WAR
Posted by Bryna Berch, June 27, 2004. |
|
This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com)
Even as the Hamas terrorist organization last week vowed to continue attacks against Israel after the Gaza withdrawal is completed, other Arabs in the Palestinian Authority are discussing how best to divide the spoils of Israeli retreat. Hamas spokesman Sa'id Siam said in an interview over the weekend that his organization "would agree to any solution in stages, but without recognizing the Zionist presence on Palestinian soil." On the practical level, former PA official and terrorist leader Muhammad Dahlan called on the "the Authority and the Palestinian forces" to "make the Gaza experience an example that will repeat itself in the West Bank." In a conference entitled "After the Withdrawal from Gaza", sponsored last week by the PA-based Women's Affairs Group, PA economics expert Omar Sha'aban presented his conclusions as to what steps the PA should take to maximize the economic potential inherent in the communities to be evacuated of Jews. In Sha'aban's view, the homes in the Jewish communities should be demolished, but the public buildings and agricultural lands should be preserved, in order to encourage Gazan development. In addition, the economist recommended maintaining the tourist sites developed by the Jews, but against letting them fall into private hands in the PA. Sha'aban expressed his opinion that the Jewish communities could serve as an engine of employment for local PA Arabs. Also speaking at the conference, Muhammad Dahlan expressed his objection to Sha'aban's suggestion regarding the demolishing of the Jews' homes in Gush Katif. He feels that the homes should also be used for Arab needs. Dahlan criticized the PA for not seriously debating the issue. Meanwhile, Nigel Roberts, who represents the World Bank in the Palestinian Authority, said on Friday of the Jews' houses in Gaza, "We do not think it makes sense to see these assets transferred to a third party, they should go to the PA." |
|
HONEST REPORTING MISSION ROUNDUP
Posted by Honest Reporting, June 27, 2004. |
|
The first-ever HonestReporting Leadership Mission to Israel ended yesterday. It was a fantastic and inspiring week of interactive learning, with participants spanning the globe from Australia to Brazil and throughout the U.S. Some highlights: * At the opening dinner in a scenic courtyard in the Old City of Jerusalem, former cabinet minister Avigdor Lieberman gave a briefing to mission participants. Lieberman brought a newsworthy perspective, having been dismissed from his cabinet post just two weeks earlier for opposing the Gaza disengagement plan. * At the new and impressive building of the Israeli Foreign Ministry, the HR Mission had a unique opportunity to query a panel of three top journalists - Greg Myre of the NY Times, David Gilbert of CBS News, and Jamil Hamad of Time magazine - regarding their coverage of the Mideast conflict. Regarding the (non-)use of the term 'terrorist', Myre said that in principle the Times is open to using the term, but with no official policy, there are alot of 'grey areas' that crop up. Gilbert emphasized the distinction between journalism and the news business: 'I would like to be practicing more pure journalism, but we're in the news business, and that means advertisers come into play.' Gilbert indicated that his reports must be compelling to keep viewers tuned in, and that this necessarily affects coverage of the Mideast conflict. * Caroline Glick, columnist and Deputy Managing Editor of the Jerusalem Post, and the only Israeli reporter embedded with U.S. troops in Iraq, delivered a powerful talk on Israel and the West's confrontation with radical Islam. 'We have to make it clear,' said Glick, 'through HonestReporting and continual letter-writing, who the enemy is and what is really happening with the Islamist threat against Israel, the U.S. and the West. Just as they used jetliners to destroy the twin towers, they will use the media to destroy our will. We cannot let that happen.' * The HR Mission chartered a small plane and enjoyed a breathtaking aerial view of Israel's sights - Tel Aviv, the security fence, and the Sea of Gallilee. In northern Israel, the group visited an army base and toured the Syrian border. IDF officer Elliot Chodoff brought the group to key sites of the 1967 and 1973 wars, and illustrated Israel's diligent intelligence atop the Golan Heights: 'When the Syrian army so much as sneezes in Damascus, the IDF goes on alert.' * The HR Mission visited Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem, and met with Sherri Mandel, whose 13-year-old son Kobi was murdered by Palestinian terrorists in 2001. While in Gush Etzion, the group delivered cakes to over 150 hungry and appreciative IDF soldiers! * In a riveting expose to the HR Mission, one Arab journalist (who requested anonymity) explained how Palestinian 'fixers' typically accompany foreign journalists to the West Bank and Gaza, but since the 'fixers' are themselves loyal to the anti-Israel cause, the information they convey is badly skewed. He gave the example of a foreign journalist interviewing an Arab source in Ramallah: When the source was critical of Israel, the Palestinian 'fixer' translated word-for-word for the benefit of the journalist, but when the source was critical of the PA, the Palestinian 'fixer' said, 'Oh, he's now talking about the weather.' * Israeli Cabinet Minister Natan Sharansky addressed the growing problem of antisemitism in western democracies, which is often disguised as anti-Israel opinion in media sources. Daniel Pipes, who accompanied The HR Mission throughout the week, explained that while Israel is scapegoated for terror, the radical Islamic groups that actually perpetrate the attacks grow in numbers and influence - without appropriate media attention. In all, the HR Mission was a fantastic success, combining first-class accomodations with brainstorming sessions on how to increase the impact of HonestReporting worldwide. Mission participants undertook to launch local and regional activism projects, and as one Los Angeles resident said, 'With all this first-hand information about what's happening in Israel, I now have the confidence to combat the disinformation so prevalent in my community.' We've already begun planning next years' HonestReporting Leadership Mission - if you'd like to receive updates as that date appr Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167. |
|
DEAR PRESIDENT BUSH: YOU HAVE LOST YOUR WAY!
Posted by David Ben-Ariel, June 27, 2004. |
|
Dear President Bush:
You have lost your way! It's such a tragedy because you could've become a hero in our British-Israelite history, judged as a great leader with character and conviction, yet you've chosen to ignore your conscience (to the peril of all) and have become drunk with delusions of a peace without biblical foundation! Now you shamefully follow the March of Folly with such comrades as Neville Chamberlain instead of Winston Churchill! Your misguided roadmap hurls the Middle East down the Highway to Hell and invites EU road rage (to ditch America and drive their stake into the heart of Israel and occupy Jerusalem!) Fasten your seatbelt! EU turbulence is just ahead! (Isa. 28:18). President Bush, Commander-in-Chief of Manasseh, leader of the "Lost Tribes" and head of Joseph: May you wholeheartedly repent of your accursed involvement with lying peace treaties (signed with blood) that will soon be littered (with many lives) along the way and encourage Israel to know President Ronald Reagan's "peace through strength" and Rabbi Meir Kahane's biblical solution to liberate the Arab-occupied territories, annex them and expel all who refuse to live in peace within the Promised Land of Israel (not Ishmael). After all is said and done, and you kneel before our common Creator and face our Jewish Lord and Savior - as a professing Christian, you know the Holy Land is given to the Jews (as custodians for all 12 Tribes) and that the God of Israel cannot be mocked and doesn't renege on His promises. Why would you reward ungodly terrorists by erasing our forefather Israel's name off the map to supplant it with "Palestine" (Ps. 83)? Why would you dare to dismantle the Temple (Jerusalem) and dismember our Mother (Jewish homeland) to divide Israel's inheritance among bastards, whose illegitimate claims don't hold water? (Joel 3:2, Jer. 2:13). Who are you to tempt the Lord your God? Don't you know that the nations are soon to be judged for defiling the Holy Land with their unholy presence as "peacekeepers" and unnecessary meddling as mediators? Does God need the bloody UN to impose their will on His City or the German-Jesuits to stamp the Middle East with their Merovingian mark? May the God of your fathers bless you to make a U-turn and burn with His zeal (untouchable to hostile men or nations) and shine with the light of His Word, filled with His Spirit of joy (knowing God's anointing is upon you and that the faithful are praying for you!). David Ben-Ariel is author of "Beyond Babylon: Europe's Rise and Fall." His website address is http://www.benariel.com |
|
IF NOT TOTALLY JUSTIFIED, AT LEAST UNDERSTOOD
Posted by David Wilder, June 27, 2004. |
|
Shalom. "Stamp Out Islam!" - There, bet that got your attention. If I were to leave it at that, I would more than likely be arrested, indicted, and probably convicted of racism, incitement and other such palatable crimes. But the phrase that begins this commentary is not mine. I'm quoting someone else. OK, you say to yourselves, he's only repeating what his next door neighbor screamed, last night, or what one of the kids down the road chants five times daily. Right? Wrong. I'm not citing either one of them. I'm only quoting a graffiti sign in a rural New Jersey, USA neighborhood. According to a CNN-Associated Press internet report (http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/06/26/beheading.backlash.ap/archives/oldindex.html): In Lutz, Florida, "Kill the Arabs" was written on the walls of a mosque at the Islamic Community Center, whose windows were smashed. In Union City, New Jersey, liquor and beer bottles were hurled at a mosque. In Ballwin, Missouri a swastika with the word "Die" was painted on the wall of a mosque. Near Houston, Texas, dead fish were dumped at the entrance to a mosque. In Orland Park, near Chicago, community residents opposed a mosque's building application. Let's take a look at some other figures. According to an AFP article, several weeks ago United States F.B.I. director Robert Mueller told a Congressional committee that there have been 532 attacks against Muslims, Sikhs, and Arabs in the US since the 9/11 attacks in 2001. Some 200 people have been criminally charged. In the Hutchinson Report dated October, 2001, the author writes, "The see-no-evil approach of many police agencies to hate violence is also glaringly evident in the wildly erratic way that state and federal officials respond to hate violence," referring to hate crimes against Muslims following the World Trade Center attacks. The Muslim American Society, in an article called, "Hate Crimes Linger Long After September 11", it is written, "The largest number of complaints came from Maryland, Virginia, New York, Ohio, Michigan, Florida, Texas and California; home to some of the largest Muslim communities." Other articles easily accessible via internet searches quickly reveal deep suspicions about Islam and Arabs throughout the world: Australia, South Korea, and Africa, just to name a few. On Sunday morning a South Korean journalist contacted me, asking permission to film a feature about Hebron's Jewish community, saying to me, "We too have been hit with terrorism," relating, of course, to the barbaric beheading of a South Korean citizen by Islamic fanatics only a few days ago. In other words, there are other places in the world besides Israel where anti-Arab, anti-Islam feelings run high. What am I getting at? Over the past few weeks, world media has been flooded with newspaper and internet articles dealing with a photo exhibition, showing in Tel Aviv. In the words of Ha'Aretz newspaper, from June 27, 2004, "During 14 months of service in Hebron, Yehuda Shaul could not bear the moral erosion he saw in himself and his comrades. Now the ultra-Orthodox 21 year-old has organized an exhibit of soldier's photographs to bring the reality of the territories home." The CNN headline cries, "Soldiers' photo exhibit strikes nerve," and describes "Captured in the photos is a young Palestinian boy who was blindfolded and handcuffed for eight hours after he was caught throwing stones. Also pictured are Palestinian men left by the side of the road for hours at a time. And displayed on the wall are car keys confiscated from Palestinian drivers caught breaking curfew." Prominently mentioned in other articles, are graffiti comments, scrawled on Hebron shops and walls, "Arabs to the gas chambers" and "Arabs are sand niggers." Every once in a while a reporter remembers to call us and ask for a reaction. A point should be made clear. The Hebron community, both the leadership and the residents, neither condone acts that should not be executed, nor words that should not be said or written. However, if examined closely, there is most always a reason behind the actions. First, concerning alleged wrongdoings by Hebron children. I am frequently asked about graffiti appearing on Hebron shops and walls. Most of the drawings are Jewish stars, and remembrances of Shalhavet and others who have been murdered. So what? If you were a child who lived in a neighborhood where your next door neighbor had been shot, or stabbed, or your best friend's father or another family member had been killed or wounded in a terrorist attack, what would you do? And how would you react when the terror continued and continued and continued, and the government did literally nothing to stop it. So it was in Hebron, where we were shot at day and night, for two years. Occasionally someone writes expressions that are uncalled for. My friend and colleague, Noam Arnon, was once arrested because he was spray-painting over such graffiti. He was suspected of writing it himself. On the other hand, we know for a fact that certain provocative graffiti was written by outsiders, native English-speakers, whose goal was not to express their real feelings about Arabs, rather to muddy Hebron's name. We have gone so far as to bring official complaints to the Israeli police about certain individuals whose identities were known to us. The police, to the best of my knowledge, ignored these complaints. None of the kids in Hebron know what a "sand nigger" is, and I, who grew up in the United States, had never heard the phrase before. Concerning the charges made by these soldiers against their friends: Such deeds should be considered as almost treasonous. Anyone with knowledge of illegal activities should turn to the proper authorities. To publicly advertise such actions calls the purposes of the photographers into question. Please note that the force behind this exhibit, Yehuda Shaul, says in the Ha'Aretz article, "I was right-wing, even far right... Something inside me started to crack... I discovered [Yeshayahu] Leibowitz and [Aviezer] Ravitzky." Leibowitz is considered by many orthodox Jews to be an apostate. Ravitzky is a leader of an Israeli left wing organization. Concerning the pictures and actions themselves: remember, terrorists look just like everyone else - they have two eyes, two ears, a nose and a mouth. Usually they don't wear a sign around their necks declaring: I am a terrorist. The soldiers in Hebron, most of who are not yet 21 years old, have a very difficult task: protecting Hebron's Jews, watching out for their own safety and weeding out terrorists who plan attacks in such places as Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. These soldiers also know that some of their comrades are no longer among the living because they were not suspicious enough. They know that 12, 14 and 15 year-old Arabs participate in terror attacks. Only two weeks ago a fourteen year-old was discovered attempting to talk a 12 year old into becoming a suicide bomber. Such a terrible reality sometimes demands drastic measures. And there is a very fine line between permissible drastic measures and unacceptable such actions. I wonder, for instance, what the people in Lutz, Florida, would say about Yehuda Shaul and his friends. One other point of interest. I have, in my possession, a framed certificate of gratitude from Yehuda Shaul's company which says, "To Anat Cohen and her family, we thank you for making our stay in Hebron more pleasurable, and we wish continuing living in Hebron, with delight and security." I have no doubt that the photo exhibition in Tel Aviv is nothing more that a left-wing ploy, aimed at convincing the general public that Israel has no place in Yesha. The soldiers who put it together don't care about morals or ethics. If they did, they would not have publicly betrayed their friends in uniform. They are politicizing their army service, in order to further their own political beliefs. There is no excuse for such a betrayal. Not to be misunderstood. There are acts which are not totally justifiable. However, most of them, under the circumstances, can and should, be understood. With blessings from Hebron. David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com |
|
ACCOUNTABILITY ACTS IGNORE RESULTS
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, June 27, 2004. |
|
Accords, Handshakes and Accountability Acts ignore results and the
world is getting worse because they are all worse than the "Medina
Handshake" that attempted a peace accord of the Jewish King of Properous
Jewish Medina with Mohammed who had the pacifists beheaded.
As peaceful, comfortable democracies face world jihad to reverse the crusades and murder all infidels, they sign accords with the weaker terrorists and let them get stronger, going from accord to fraud to the frightful. Oslo was based on the premise that the intifada of stones was a major problem so it gave the terrorist infrastructure credibility and weapons to police themselves. From stones, Israel suffered snipers, suicide bombers, katyushkas as well as more enemies. From acknowledging Arafat the Egyptian as statesman of the PA the PM of the State of Israel is fighting increased anti-semitism, planning to bulldoze his re-settlers and make them refugees again. From negotiatimg itself, Israel suffers world discrimination. From negotiating victory, Israel has lost world approval and the world is also suffering suicide war, slavery and beheading. The results of accountability acts are that unaccountabilty is the message no matter the signature because it's logically too much for the outlaws to obey the laws so how can they be held to signatures? Losing one's lead by losing one's head is starting a new world disorder - beheading those who are heedless of the magnitude of crimes brewed by leaving rot in a paper wrapping. 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." |
|
RABBIS VERSUS PROFESSORS OF PHILOSOPHY
Posted by IsrAlert, June 27, 2004. |
|
This was written by Professor Paul Eidelberg and is archived on the
Maccabean Online of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies
(http://www.freeman.org/online.htm).
The Rabbinical Council of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza was slammed for its recent statement that the uprooting of Jewish settlements is against Jewish law and that no one, including soldiers, should be involved in such an action. As reported in The Jerusalem Post on June 25, council secretary Rabbi Mordechai Rabinowitz declared "that the policy of destroying Jewish settlements in the Land of Israel has no basis in democracy and is in conflict with basic and essential human rights." The Rabbinical Council was denounced by Assa Kasher, a Tel-Aviv University professor of philosophy. Kasher accused the rabbis of having failed to "learn the lessons of their similar behavior leading up to [the assassination of Yitzhak Rabin]." This remark is tantamount to accusing the rabbis of responsibility for the Rabin assassination. Ever since that event, the Left has repeatedly employed such slander to intimidate the religious community. One would expect higher standards from a professor of philosophy. But then, it is was none other than Assa Kasher who, having been commissioned by the late prime minister Rabin to revise the IDF Code of Ethics, deleted the words "Judaism," "Zionism," and "Eretz Yisrael" from that document! The Rabbinical Council was also assaulted by former professor of philosophy Yuval Steinitz, now chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee. Mr. Steinitz is reported as having said that the Rabbinical Council has come perilously close to calling on people to break the law. "Israel," he explained, "is a democratic country. There is a great deal of room for protest, demonstrations, and articles expressing opinions. There is no room for insurrection or violating legal orders of the government, even if they are contrary to your principles ..." But since the rabbis contend that it is contrary to democracy and basic human rights to uproot Jews from their homes, surely Mr. Steinitz should address himself to this contention. He does not. Notice that in mentioning various aspects of dissent permissible in a democracy, he omits civil disobedience. Perhaps he regards civil disobedience a form of insurrection. This is far from the American conception of democracy. At issue here is the power of the state versus the rights of citizens. American democracy involves limitations on the power of the state. This is clearly evident in the American Constitution, especially its Bill of Rights. No such limitations will be found in fascist regimes. In such regimes the state is the highest authority. Strange as it may seem, this is the case of Israel, where the law reads: "No act of legislation shall diminish the rights of the State, or impose upon it any obligation, unless explicitly stated." The State of Israel, contrary to Judaism, does not recognize a Higher Law. Although an order of the government may be legal, having been sanctioned by a majority of the Knesset, this does not make it just. Majorities can be as tyrannical as minorities. This is why the American founding fathers established a constitutional system of checks and balances to prevent majority tyranny. No such system exists in Israel, and this is why Knesset Speaker Rueben Rivlin recently declared that Israel is governed not by the rule of law but by a "gang of law." But wait! Uprooting Jews from their homes actually constitutes a clear violation of Israel's Basic Law: Freedom and Human Dignity. The Sharon disengagement plan therefore tramples on a Basic Law of the State! The rabbis are right, and Steinitz is wrong! He is wrong on philosophical grounds as well. As a secularist, Steinitz identifies Israel as a democracy. This word does not appear in Israel's Declaration of Independence. To the contrary, that document repeatedly refers to Israel as a Jewish State. This is Israel's raison d'etre - its sole justification. The term "democracy" did not enter into the language of Israeli law until the 1980s, and then only because "Zionism" had ceased to provide Israel's anemic elites with respectability and legitimacy. In any event, since Israel today is defined as a Jewish and democratic state, any candid observer will admit that there are basic contradictions between these two appellations. (For example, given the burgeoning Arab birthrate, the democratic principle of one adult/one vote promises to transform Israel eventually into an Islamic state.) Accordingly, as concerns the issue of evicting Jews from their homes, Mr. Steinitz has no logical or philosophical grounds for choosing to consider this issue solely in democratic terms - which is not to admit that he has an adequate understanding of democracy. And so the rabbis have a much stronger case than our two professors of philosophy. Although the rabbis gloss over the contradictions between democracy and Judaism, they quite rightly see that both forbid the violation of human rights projected by the Sharon government's decision to uproot Jewish communities. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
LESS SUPPORT FOR WITHDRAWAL AND ARABS THAN THOUGHT: ANALYZING THE NUMBERS
Posted by Eliezar Edwards, June 27, 2004. |
|
This was an Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com) news item on June 23, 2004.
A study carried out by the University of Haifa's National Security Research Center is sending shockwaves through Israel, as political views traditionally relegated to the margins of the political spectrum appear to be nearing a level of public consensus. For one thing, the study shows that Israeli Jews are not very pleased with the presence of a hostile or potentially-hostile Arab minority in its midst: A full 63.7% believe in what is known as transfer, and said that the government should encourage the emigration of Israeli-Arabs from Israel. 55.3% believe the Israeli-Arab population constitutes a threat to Israel's security, while 45.3% even favor eliminating Israeli-Arab rights to be elected to the Knesset and to participate in elections. A fairly clear consensus was also found among Israeli Jews on two other issues: foreign workers and targeted assassinations. 72.1% want to see restrictions on the entry of foreign workers into Israel, with 54.2% saying that the country's economy is suffering because of the jobs taken by foreign workers. Widespread support of Israel's counter-terror methods was recorded. Nearly 80% of Jews support Israel's policy of killing terrorist leaders; even 11.6% of Israeli-Arabs support this policy. Contrary to popular perception that the overwhelming majority is in favor of ceding territory, 44.1% of Jews - and 21% of Arabs, including Druze - are against handing over any part of Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) even in the theoretical framework of a comprehensive peace agreement. A bit less, 39.8%, are against the dismantling of even one Jewish community under a peace arrangement. Surprisingly, 22.4% of Arabs agree with them. Almost half - 47.7% - say that Israel must object to the establishment of a Palestinian state as a pre-condition for a peace arrangement. One out of seven Israeli-Arabs feels the same. In what is possibly the most surprising finding of all, Dr. Daphna Kanati, who co-directed the study, said that if national elections were held today, close to 30% of the public would support a Kach-like party - outlawed for its extreme right-wing views. She said that this figure had not yet been publicly released. She herself, however, told Israel National Radios Eli Stutz and Yishai Fleisher that the most surprising statistic for her was the high percentage of Jews - over two-thirds - who support transfer. Dr. Kanati said that the purpose of the study was to study right-wing extremism, at which a point a discussion evolved as to what defined extremism: "Its funny," Fleisher said, "you keep using the word 'extremism,' yet your figures show that 60% of Israeli Jews are interested in the Arabs leaving the country." Dr. Kanati: "Are you basically saying that if the majority supports something that we would have defined as extremism, then it becomes normal!?" Stutz: "Yes!" Dr. Kanati did not agree, saying that extremism is defined according to international standards of democracy. Stutz commented that this would not be accurate, as calls for transferring a population must be judged according to varying conditions in a country: "For instance, it could well be that the majority of Germans would not have called for the transfer of Nazis, while those who would have wanted to transfer them would have been called, by your definition, extremists." The study, carried out last month, surveyed 1,016 Israelis through telephone interviews, and "as opposed to other surveys, this one shows the 'real Israel,'" Dr. Kanati said. "Researchers went to great lengths to sample segments of the population usually glossed over by pollsters due to the difficulty in eliciting responses from them. These include the proportionate numbers from the hareidi-religious community who are usually wary of unsolicited telephone pollsters; new immigrants from Russia who are hard-pressed to answer lengthy telephone questions in Hebrew - we had Russian speakers speak with them; and residents of Yesha, who have a general distrust of the press and academia following unpleasant experiences involving the use of statistics to manipulate public opinion." The simple fact that we released results differentiating between Jewish and Arab responses is a step that many fail to take," said Dr. Kanati, "but it is crucial when trying to examine the true consensus within a segment of society. Some of the statistics seemed to contradict each other. For instance, half of the Jews polled expressed "support for a withdrawal from Yesha." Yet, another question found that 40% feel that "not even one settlement must be dismantled" - meaning that 60% would agree to demolishing at least one. Dr. Kanati admitted that the phrasing of the question affects the answer - and also added that, "In general, poll questions about withdrawals cannot be relied upon too much, because they are, by their nature, inexact. The question cannot specify how much of a withdrawal, for instance, or from which areas and under which conditions. In addition, the answers can change based upon whether there was recently a terror attack, and the like." |
|
MORE AMERICAN THAN ZIONIST
Posted by Bryna Berch, June 27, 2004. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick, deputy managing editor of the
Jerusalem Post. It appeared June 13, 2004 in the Jerusalem Post. It
is archived at http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/
JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1087536228093&p=1006953079897.
Boy, that lady can write! And she is always right on the mark. This week was the first time that the Palestinian Authority publicly acknowledged its responsibility for the Aksa Martyr Brigades terrorist group which is designated as a foreign terrorist organization by the US State Department. In an attempt to solve an employment dispute between the PA and the Aksa Brigades, the central committee of Fatah, which is to the PA what the Politburo was to the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, met to discuss the difficulties of terrorists who have recently been laid off by the PA. PA Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei, who is touted as the great white hope for Palestinian reform by the Bush Administration, announced at the meeting that the needs of the terror group were receiving the full attention of the Palestinian leadership. In his view, the most important thing was to protect terrorists wanted by Israel for attacks against Israeli citizens from the long arm of the IDF. That is, in Qurei's view, the most urgent goal is to provide a safe haven for terrorists. In the coming weeks, US envoys David Satterfield and William Burns are scheduled to arrive in the area in yet another attempt to jump start negotiations between Israel and the PA based on the so-called Road Map. The idea now being touted is to reduce the existing twelve Palestinian militias into three and to have them come under the control of Qurei or PA security boss Muhammed Dahlan. But who will be in these newly "reformed" militias? On Sunday night, Qurei and his colleagues agreed that the terrorists from the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades would be asked to join. Also this week, Qurei met in Gaza with Hamas terror chiefs Mahmoud Zahar and Ismail Haniyeh. Their talks, aimed at reaching a rapprochement between the PA and Hamas, centered on Hamas's conditions for joining Qurei's cabinet. Hamas demands the health and education ministries and, if it receives them, it will allow its terrorists to also join the "reformed" PA militias. In an interview with The Jerusalem Post, Dahlan said that Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists were welcome to join the PA security forces. Mahmoud Abbas, the much heralded former prime minister said that if it were up to him, he would have brought Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists into the PA security forces. Hamas and Islamic Jihad are also designated as foreign terror organizations by the US State Department. This week also, outgoing CIA director George Tenet met in Cairo with Egyptian dictator Hosni Mubarak to discuss Egypt's involvement in the Gaza Strip in the event that Israel follows through with its planned unilateral withdrawal from the area. Egypt, which is receiving plaudits from Washington for its willingness to lend a hand in ensuring order in Gaza in the aftermath of the proposed withdrawal, has made clear through word and deed that it views putting Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists on the payroll of the "reformed" PA militias as is its central goal. In sharp contrast, this week, Egyptian security forces rounded up members of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. The men were accused of having undergone terror training in the PA areas which, Egyptian officials allege, they were planning to use in order to carry out terror attacks in Egypt, Iraq and Chechnya. That is, today, even as the IDF is deployed in Gaza, and as the PA is in charge of all the militias, the area is being used as a training ground for global terrorism. For their part, Egyptian officials have made clear time and again that in the event of an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, Egypt will have no interest in curbing Palestinian terror groups operating in the area against Israel. According to Ha'aretz, a senior Egyptian official has stated bluntly, "We will not be the policemen for the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip." This is not surprising given that moderate Egypt is in actuality one of the prime state sponsors of Palestinian terrorist groups. Not only has it enabled weapons smuggling from Egypt to Gaza, according to MK Yuval Steinitz, Chairman of the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Security Committee, "Egypt is the logistical support base for Hamas." In the event of an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza, Egypt can be counted on not to curb the power of Palestinian terrorists but to enhance it. It will demand that Israel end the naval blockade of the Gaza coastline and it will further insist that the Gaza airport, closed since the start of the war, be reopened. According to military analyst Ze'ev Schiff, the reason for this is that Egypt has an interest in Palestinian terrorism against Israel because Egypt has an interest in a weak Israel. Speaking to the issue of what will likely occur in Gaza as a result of an IDF pullout, no less an authority than the architect of the pullout plan himself, National Security Advisor Giora Eiland, inferred to a Washington audience recently that if the Lebanon model holds, Gaza will become a haven for terrorists and a strategic threat to Israel as a result of the accumulation of sophisticated arsenals that can be used to take out vital infrastructures and conduct mass murder. Eiland also explained that if the Lebanon model were to hold, the introduction of foreign forces to the area would not ease the violence but would more likely act as cover for terrorists as they take action against Israel. One can reasonably ask if all of this is the case, what is Israel's problem? Why is the Israeli government acting so irrationally? But in truth, given the actions of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, running roughshod over his government ministers, MKs, party members, and political support base, the fact that the Israeli government under Sharon has ceased to base its policies on the national interest of Israel must, sadly, be taken as a given for now. In the meantime, there remains one government that seems to still recognize the need to stop terror funding and to prevent the provision of safe haven for terrorist organizations. This government sits in Washington, DC. Since the Sept. 11 attacks, the Bush administration has gone on the offensive from Karachi to Kansas City in stemming funding to terrorist organizations. It has invaded two countries and sent its military to spots around the globe to prevent the entrenchment of terror groups and to disrupt their activities. Yet the Bush administration is still funding groups that support, abet, produce and finance Palestinian terrorist organizations. The US government supports Sharon's half-baked plan that will render the Gaza Strip a terror training base to which jihadis from all over the world will gravitate for training and from which they will emerge, ready to kill on demand. It has been argued that the Bush administration cannot be more Zionist than the Israeli government. But this is a false argument. In curbing its support for the PA and in ending its support for the transfer of Gaza to the control of Egyptian supported terrorists, the US will not be acting in Israel's interest. It will be advancing its own national security interests. The sad and terrible thing about Sharon's policy spasms is that by continuing to allow the PA to operate and by calling for an Israeli retreat when the war is still ongoing and the enemy mutates by the day, Sharon is not merely harming the interests of his own country, he is harming the interests of the US in winning the war on global terror. Palestinian Media Watch this week submitted a report to members of the US Congress and the Senate in which it stated example after example of how US financial assistance to the PA is being used to advance terrorism. The US provides financial assistance to Palestinian municipalities whose leaders instruct their citizens in jihad and inculcate them to hate and work towards the destruction of Israel and America. USAID funds Palestinian universities even as these universities allow Hamas and Islamic Jihad to operate openly on their campuses espousing their genocidal ideologies and recruiting students into active involvement in terror attacks. According to the PMW report, seven students studying at USAID funded universities have carried out suicide bombings that have murdered hundreds of Israelis. USAID assists the Palestinians in spite of the fact that Palestinian NGOs have refused to sign a form committing themselves not to aid terrorist organizations and in spite of the fact that the PA's legislative council issued a condemnation of the US for requiring aid recipients to prevent the transfer of US taxpayer dollars to terrorist organizations. Aside from reconsidering its refusal to see the PA as it sees every other terrorist organization and regime in the world, the US has to ask the question how its support for Palestinian statehood squares with its commitment to overthrow regimes that support terrorism. The Palestinians themselves say every single day that their "reformed" security forces will simply be more overtly steeped in terror after their reconstitution than they have been to date. This week the PA admitted what the international community has been denying in the face of overwhelming proof for the past three years. It admitted that the Aksa Martyr Brigades is not "loosely affiliated with Fatah." The Aksa Martyr Brigades are Fatah and a branch in the PA itself. And it wasn't Arafat who made the announcement. It was Qurei, the "reform" prime minister and it was Dahlan the "reform" security boss who made it clear that Hamas and Islamic Jihad are also welcome to join the PA. So given this, how can the US possibly have a policy of support for Palestinian statehood when it is abundantly clear that such a state would be a terror stronghold no better than Afghanistan under the Taliban? Before the Sept. 11 attacks, Washington could be excused for following Jerusalem's lead when Israel's government insisted that transferring territory to terrorists would enhance security. But in the post-Sept. 11 world, it should be clear to Washington that continuing to cultivate terrorists will not only not advance US interests, it will cost innocent human lives. |
|
THOSE PEACEFUL LOVE BIRDS: THE FAR LEFT AND ARAFAT. HAARETZ SINGS THEIR PRAISES
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 27, 2004. |
|
According to a news story in Haaretz today - but, interestingly, NOT on their English web site - it is revealed that the "solidarity international protesters" and the rest of the Far-Leftist demonstrators trying to sabotage Israel's security fence to make it easier for the PLO to murder Jewish children, are taking their orders and directions directly from Yassir Arafat. Yes, they met with Arafat yesterday to hear his orders regarding how they should run their "peace" protests against Israel's security fence. Arafat is dictating tactics and timing. Yesterday he told them to escalate the sabotage and violence of their protests. What this means is that the "ISM" International Solidarity Movement to which arch-bimbo Rachel Corrie belonged before becoming pancaked, (its name should really be "I Support Murderers") is nothing more than an appendage of the PLO, and the same is true of the Israeli local home-grown "peace groups" attacking the wall. Meanwhile, yesterday saw one of the most successful anti-terror actions by Israel to date, and it was one that will have a greater impact on the terror and on the pro-terror leftists than the construction of the wall itself. Yesterday Israel carried out a sort of St. Valentine's Day hit on the number one leaders of all three major terrorist organizations in Nablus. Not only were the three terrorist dons all killed in a single day, but so were seven other terrorists with them, several of these also being terrorist leaders (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename= JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1088143074422). The peace-loving and Caring Left of course will be outraged and will escalate its violent protests against Israeli self-defense. After all, how DARE Israel assassinate the mass murdering Palestinian nazis instead of capitulating to them? A squeaky clean Arafat emerges from a Ha'Aretz rehab. This is an article entitled "Haaretz Sanitizes His Ugliness" and written by Efraim Inbar, who is a professor of political studies at Bar-Ilan University and director of its Begin-Sadat (BESA) Center for Strategic Studies. It appeared in the Jerusalem Post, Jun. 26, 2004 (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1088231179041). Haaretz has adopted an uncharacteristic dose of "religiosity" by becoming the vehicle for a pathetic attempt by the Israeli radical Left to politically resurrect Yasser Arafat. As for the peaceful Palestinians, Amira Hass writes in Ha'aretz (June 24, 2004) that in two polls, the Palestinians support fighting Israel until it is destroyed.
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
SEE WHAT THEY DO, NOT WHAT THEY SAY!
Posted by AmericanChinHigh, June 27, 2004. |
|
Just like the Egyptian born mass murderer, the Butcher Arafat (http://www.geocities.com/arabracismplusjihad/ButcherArafat), uses the "Palestinians" as a "homeland" myth-card, so do the foreigners in Iraq such as Jordanian Arab Muslim: Zarquaui or Saudi Arabian Muslim: Bin Laden in Afghanistan. Of course they are not for 'love' for their "brothers" they kill their own too, just Palestinian Arab Muslims do. See Palestinians killing Palestinians at http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/crime.html. Conclusion, they're in it for the "love" & "joy" (the same "joy" and dance to 9/11 crime) of cold blood murder, cutting humans into pieces (especially the civilians') Period. Still having it both ways, denying 9-11 crime and celebrating it. Much like "moderate" S. Arabian blaming the British and "zionists" for the bombing, just before they killed ... the Arab Terrorists responsible... |
|
A QUIET SABBATH
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, June 27, 2004. |
|
This was written by Naomi Ragen. She can be contacted at
her website http://www.NaomiRagen.com
"Can I come over for Shabbat?" my daughter asked. Her husband had been called up for reserve duty. Again. " Of course. But didn't he just do reserve duty?" I asked her. "Yes, and they promised they wouldn't call him back this year. But they did anyway. This is something special..." I was happy to say yes. What could be better than having my three grandkids and my daughter spend the weekend? I was just sorry my dear son-in-law couldn't join us too. My five year-old granddaughter missed her father terribly. She even kissed the chair around the Sabbath table he usually sits in. The two boys, ten and eight, were busy with their latest dungeons and dragons game, regaling their eighteen year-old favorite uncle, who will be going into the army at the end of the summer, with their plans for including him in their magic wars. The phone rang right before we lit Sabbath candles. My daughter spoke to her husband briefly, then let my granddaughter speak to her daddy. "Where is he? It's not dangerous, is it?" I asked her. My daughter shrugged. "He never tells me. But I hope not..." I thought of my son-in-law, modest, quiet, studious, a financial consultant with a large bank. He had a wife and three kids, but he was still being called up every time the army needed him. And he never complained. He just went. The day passed peacefully, a cool wind blowing through Jerusalem, making it pleasant to walk to synagogue and play in the parks. We ate ice-cream, and the kids chased each other around. We took long naps, and short walks, until the sun sank over the hills, and the street lamps came on. My husband took out the candle and wine and spices for the ceremony marking the end of the Sabbath and the beginning of the new week. And when the Sabbath had ended my daughter picked up the phone to call her husband. It was a short call. "He said he can't talk right now." "Did he say where he is? She paused. "He's in Nablus." I held my breath. All week long, the army had targeted Nablus, the center of training and deployment of suicide bombers in the last few months. Soldiers were going house to house searching for terrorists. "Put on the news!" We learned that as we were sitting around the Sabbath table, the Israeli army had found the secret weapons slick beneath the houses in the Casbah in Nablus. They had blown it up. And in so doing, they had found the hideout of all the leaders of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, and the Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade ( who were- it turns out- all hiding out together, so much for propaganda about rivalries, etc.) All the bomb belts, all the enormous weapons they had stored up to kill our children blew up in their faces. Ten terrorists. One of the dead was responsible for the death of 23 Israelis in Neve Shaanan in Tel Aviv; another for the death of two Israelis in Kfar Saba. Just last week they had sent a suicide bomber to Jerusalem on orders from Hizbollah, a bomber who was intercepted. They had even terrorized fellow Palestinians in Nablus as well. Over our quiet Shabbat, fathers and brothers and sons had risked their lives to deliver what Palestinians themselves are calling a "fatal blow" to the terrorist infrastructure that has cost so many innocent lives. When my daughter arrived home, she called me. Her husband had called her back. He was out of Nablus. He'd be coming home in a few days. And if I know him, he won't tell us a thing about how he spent his reserve duty. But this time, unlike all the other times, we'll know, and hopefully, so will you when you open your newspapers and television sets and hear the inevitable ugly spin that will be put on this heroic achievement of the modest, quiet, wonderful men and women of the IDF. God bless them all. Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com |
|
THE HOLY LAND BOOK REVIEW
Posted by Beth Goodtree, June 25, 2004. |
|
Although I rarely write book reviews, this book is too good not to review and recommend. The Holy Land is a fast and humorous read with a much deeper message. It clearly delineates the truths surrounding the entire Israeli-Arab conflict. It also shows the convoluted dealings and propaganda surrounding this issue in the bright light of reality. Hopefully this book, if given enough publicity, will be adopted by the college youth who have been so brainwashed to be anti-Israel. The Holy Land, by Robert Zubrin, is geopolitical satire at its best and most instructive. On the surface a light, humorous fictional read, The Holy Land nevertheless presents current global situations in such a clear light that one wonders why our current world crises are so difficult to understand. In a parody of real world events, the main premise of The Holy Land pits a vast evil, aggressive and corrupt religious regime against a minority group of people who are the only survivors of a different and peaceful religion. These survivors are called the Minervans and originated on Earth 20,000 years ago. They ended up being hunted almost to extinction by the evil Central Galactic Empire. However, the liberal Western Galactic Empire defeated the Centrals in a war, and in the process saved what was left of the Minervans and resettled them on Earth, specifically their aboriginal home of Kennewick, Washington. The Minervans are an enlightened and peaceful people, who want nothing more than to live their lives quietly and rationally. They purchase property from the Kennewickians and establish their own enclave. They offer the government of America advanced methods of agriculture, medicine and the like and are turned down flatly. The American government, which is controlled by religious fanatics, suddenly declares that Kennewick, Washington is one of the holiest sites in all of 'Christendom' and demands the Minervans' extermination because they are 'pagans.' The American government also rounds up all former Kennewickians who sold their properties to the Minervans and started productive lives elsewhere. These they put into refugee camps on the outskirts of New Minervapolis, deny them any basic necessities and bring in the galactic media to witness the misery ostensibly caused by the Minervans. The US rulers then decide to make as many children as possible holy martyrs in the war against the Minervans. They follow this up by launching a campaign of terrorism and destruction across the galaxy. Meanwhile, the various Galactic Empires have ignored the situation until they realized that America is a vast reservoir of an important resource called 'helicity,' used to power starships. Although they are fully aware of the American role in sponsoring galactic terrorism and want to stop it, the Western Galactic Empire is prevented from doing so by their own political correctness, their feckless allies (including the de-fanged but still violently anti-Minervan Central Galactics), and their dependence upon US helicity. Although The Holy Land makes the evil religious regime sponsoring the terrorist attacks on civilization 'Christians' from America, it is very obvious that this is not the group being referred to and why the author chose to do it. In this case, the term 'Christian' is really a pseudonym for a Middle East religious faction with which sadly, we all too familiar. But by placing these people in the familiar garb of small town Americans, author Zubrin strips them of their exotic foreign costumes and reveals their true nature. The plot is carried by a relationship between a beautiful Minervan priestess named Aurora and her study subject, a captured Earthling soldier named Hamilton. It is through their adventures that we see the events in The Holy Land unfold. The situations arising from this book closely mimic those we are witnessing now in the Middle East. However, The Holy Land takes the convoluted actions and dealings of the Arab-Israeli conflict, presents them in a non-threatening and humorous light and makes it easy to understand the machinations and irrationalities surrounding these events. The Holy Land gives an entertaining look at the truths surrounding a heart-wrenching situation. This book is a must-read for all college students and others who think they understand the facts surrounding the Middle East. It is sure to become a cult classic and the definitive easy-read of the Israeli-Arab and American-Arab conflicts. The Holy Land is published by Polaris Books (ISBN 0974144304), and is available on Amazon.com for US $14.95. Beth Goodtree is an award-winning writer, with a background in advertising. She writes political commentary and the occasional humor and science articles. |
|
BUSH AND ARAFAT: Compromised by Terrorism
Posted by Kitty Carr, June 25, 2004. |
|
During one of the Presidential debates on Oct. 11, 2000, Bush answered this question: Q: What is the U.S. role in the Mideast conflict? BUSH: [I] call on Chairman Arafat to have his people pull back to make the peace...I want everybody to know, Israel's going to be our friend. I'm going to stand by Israel. Credibility is formed by being strong with your friends and resolute in your determination. [To] be able to say to the Saddam Husseins of the world or the Iranians, don't dare threaten our friends. It's also important to keep strong ties in the Middle East because of the energy crisis we're in. (Source: Presidential Debate at Wake Forest University Oct 11, 2000) It is clear now that he meant everybody but "Chairman" Arafat. The fact that he is protecting and funding Liver Lips Arafat, the World's Most Monstrous Terrorist is astonishing. The fact that he treats Arafat as if he's a Normal Human Being is insane. Over 978 Jews have been killed by Palestinian violence and terrorism in over 20,000 attacks since September 2000, but that's not enough proof that Arafat is a terrorist! According to Bush he's simply "compromised by terrorism." That's what he said after Israel seized the Karine-A on January 3, 2002. The seizure of the Karine-A appeared to be a clear indication that Arafat not only was unwilling to end the violence, he was importing arms to escalate the war against Israel to everyone but the Bush Administration. Soon after the Karine-A affair, on April 1, 2002, a reporter asked Bush a question - Mr. President, under your doctrine, a terrorist or someone who aids a terrorist is the equivalent of a terrorist. So what's keeping Chairman Arafat -- what's keeping you from labeling Chairman Arafat a terrorist? THE PRESIDENT: Chairman Arafat has agreed to a peace process. He's agreed to the Tenet plan. He's agreed to the Mitchell plan. He has negotiated with parties as to how to achieve peace. And, of course, our hope is that he accepts the Tenet plan. That's what General Zinni is in the Middle East doing, working to get this Tenet agreement in place, which is a series of concrete steps to reduce the violence in the Middle East. Yet on June 24, 2002, Bush announced that "Today Palestinian authorities [Arafat] are encouraging, not opposing, terrorism," and encouraged the Palestinians to elect new leaders, blah, blah, blah. On April 29, 2003, Abu Mazen, aka Moumoud Abbas (also a terrorist) was overwhelmingly elected by Arafat to succeed him. The next suicide attempt occurred the next day, and before July 25, 2003, thirty-four Israelis were murdered. What's so special about July 25? Check Bush's to-do list of that day: (1) caution Israel to excercize restraint. (2) transfer $20 million to the Palestinian Authority. The cash transfer (which is against the law) ensured that Terror Summer could continue unabated. From the capture of the Karine-A on April 1, 2002 to Bush's cash transfer to the PA on July 25, 2003, there were 158 Israelis murdered in palestinian terrorist attacks. The next terrorist attack occurred THE NEXT DAY, July 26, 2003. From then until May 29, 2004 389 Israelis have been murdered. The Arabist State Department, when it wasn't "threatening" to withhold loans to Israel, gave $120 million to the PA through the USAID/WBG in 2003 for "in-kind assistance" and another $129 million went to the U.N. Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East. (Palestinian terror activists in the PA areas, who were arrested and interrogated by Israeli security forces during 2002, admitted that UNRWA facilities, equipment and vehicles were used for assisting in carrying out terror attacks and here's the video to prove it.) Now let me find the list of US assistance to the Palestinians that is 'offset' because of terrorism - oh, that's right! There isn't one! Speaking of UNRWA: If you go to the UNRWA website, you will see how proud they are of having fed, clothed, sheltered, educated and cared for the Palestinian refugees of 1948... and their children... and their grandchildren. The number of people UNRWA cares for has gone from 600,000 in 1948 to nearly four million today. Now, I understand that the prime impulse of bureaucracies, especially welfare bureaucracies, is the consolidation and expansion of their turf, and a steady increase in the number of their "clients"; but this is ridiculous. The good people of Hong Kong should go down on their knees every night and thank God that there was no UNRWA in the colony in 1949. So, come to think of it, should the German and East European refugees who flooded into Western Europe after WWII. (I have seen the number 14 million somewhere - the Sudeten Germans alone numbered three million. Where are the festering camps? Where are the suicide bombers?) The Bush Administration and Kofi Annan insanely bleat about land-for-peace, as though the Palestinians, aka generic Arabs, want only the end of "occupation" and their beloved homeland back. Bzzzt! Wrong again. Kofi Annan says "everybody knows" the answer is land-for-peace. This is a lie! According to Ruth Matar of IsraelNationalNews.com - May 19, 2004: Proof positive that the Palestinian Jihad against Israel is not about territory: In 1964, the year the PLO was founded, article 24 of its Charter stated, "This organization does not exercise any territorial sovereignty over the West Bank in the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan and the Gaza Strip..." The 1964 version of the PLO charter. Most people are only aware of the 1968 version, which was changed following the Six Day War to reflect the Palestinians' sudden eternal attachment to these areas. The "Road Map" is essentially a Saudi Arabian plan to drive the Jews out of Israel. Before 1967, when Jordan occupied Judea and Samaria and Egypt occupied Gaza, the PLO was not interested in sovereignty over these areas. Their present passionate attachment to this land is so that the infidel Jews should not live thereon. This attitude, of course, is encouraged and financed by all the Arab states as part of the general Jihad against the Judeo-Christian world. If the Palestinians used suicide bombings and other forms of terror just because the land of Israel and especially Jerusalem is so sacred to them, what about the 82 Israelis murdered in 56 terrorist attacks before the palestininans suffered their humiliating defeat during the Six Day War? |
|
YESHIVA STUDENTS TARGETED BY ARAB KIDNAPPERS
Posted by IsrAlert, June 25, 2004. |
|
This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com).
Several yeshiva students, learning at the Mir Yeshiva in Jerusalem, found themselves targeted in what apparently was an attempted kidnapping by Arabs from the Galilee. Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu, the chief rabbi of Tzfat (Safed), told Arutz-7 that the incident proves the danger from local hostile Arabs to be greater than originally thought. The incident, as reported in the weekly B'sha'ah Tovah magazine, took place several days ago, when a group of yeshiva (seminary) students from America studying in Jerusalem made their way to the Galilee to visit the holy sites in the region. Upon returning very late at night to their car, which they had parked in Tzfat, they discovered that two of their tires had been slashed. Due to the late hour, there was nowhere nearby for the students to obtain replacement tires, so they began making their way on foot to a gas station at the exit to the city. An Arab worker at the station told the young Americans, "I have a friend who can replace the tire for you for 50 shekels." But the "friend" was in Carmiel, the students were told, so they would have to wait. After returning to their car, within half-an-hour a truck pulled up and three Arabs - who appeared to be drunk, according to one of the yeshiva students - got out, saying they were the "flat-tire experts". They claimed that their garage was located in the nearby village of Akrabeh and they insisted that only one of the yeshiva students accompany them there. According to the complaint later filed with Tzfat police, the Arabs agreed that two of the students would accompany them and Yisrael Weiss and Shimon Rotter got into the bed of the truck, along with one of the Arabs. When they arrived in Akrabeh, the Arabs tried to convince one of the students to come into an apartment building while the other waited in the truck. "They began trying to convince us that nothing will happen to us," reported one of the students, "but on the other hand, threatening us that if we didn't listen to them, we wouldn't get out of there alive." When the students refused to be separated and tried to exit the vehicle, the driver took off at high speed, while his accomplice tried to prevent their escape. The two yeshiva students were able to overpower the single would-be kidnapper who was with them in the back of the truck and jumped into the darkness. The students ran from Akrabeh until they reached the edge of Tzfat, where an Arab well-known for his friendly relations with the Jews of Tzfat stopped for them, went to Akrabeh and returned with a replacement tire. He requested that the students not file a complaint with the police, as it would negatively impact relations with Akrabeh, generally known to be peaceful in its relations with the Jews. However, on the advice of rabbis in Tzfat, the students did file a complaint. One of the concerns motivating the students and rabbis to publicize the incident is that many of the yeshiva students from overseas are unaware of the dangers in visiting holy sites in hostile Arab villages such as Kafr Kana or Mashhad. Local Tzfat activists and leaders have also expressed their concern over Arab terrorists taking advantage of the ignorance and innocence of foreign tourists for purposes of kidnapping, as apparently almost occurred in the case reported in B'Sha'ah Tovah. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
WHY DO GOVERNMENTS PERSIST IN FAILED POLICIES?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 25, 2004. |
|
Certain policies fail throughout history, but are repeated and continued. Why? To know that a policy has failed before, one has to know history. Not enough people do. It strikes me that educated people are not as versed in important branches of learning as in former times. History, in particular, is neglected. Some politicians not only do not know much history, but brag that they don't need to. At least that is Shimon Peres' rationale for some of the statements he makes that are shocking in their criminal negligence. What do politicians do when their current policies are failing? They persist. They keep on until the next election stops them. They are afraid to admit an error. When a politician admits an error, he is not forgiven. If he changes his mind, he is accused of inconstancy or of violating his campaign pledges. Many politicians break their campaign promises, but when they do so for cause, they are mocked. That was the charitable explanation. People such as Peres and Beilin persist apparently because they are beholden to foreign blackmailers or paymasters. Some of their supporters don't even realize the failure, they are so wedded to warped ideology. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
DETACHED FROM REALITY
Posted by Women in Green, June 25, 2004. |
|
This was written by Gerald M. Steinberg, who is the director of the Program on Conflict Management at Bar-Ilan University. It appeared in the Jerusalem Post, June 13, 2004. The disastrous outcome of the Oslo process - seven years of false peace negotiations that Yasser Arafat exploited to prepare a terror campaign - can be blamed on many factors. It was driven by the personal ambitions and naive optimism of Yossi Beilin, Shimon Peres and the Labor Party, aided and abetted by eager European mediators and officials in the Clinton administration. Journalists who forgot that their job was to report the news, and not to become cheerleaders for political programs, also deserve some of the dubious credit. But let's not forget some of my fellow academics who gave the process legitimacy, maintained the facade of peace long after the failure of Oslo became clear, and, even worse, continue today as if nothing has changed. This week, Tel Aviv University is hosting a conference on "track-two diplomacy," but instead of offering a much-needed re-examination of this approach, packed the program with its architects. The meetings in Oslo began under the cover of a track-two academic dialogue, such as had been conducted for many years by Prof. Herbert Kelman, a well-meaning social psychologist who runs Harvard University's Middle East Seminar. These meetings included generally like-minded Israeli and Arab academics who exchanged pleasantries and negotiated the agreements that professors of peace studies eagerly sought. These seminars, and the illusion of "ripeness," helped create the foundations for the Oslo process. Underpinning it all was the notion that Israelis and Palestinians understood each other's desires, perspectives, fears and vulnerabilities. But over a decade after the establishment of the Palestinian Authority, and four years after the process imploded into bitter warfare, we know that these assumptions were incorrect. The expectation that most Palestinians, like most Israelis, were prepared to make pragmatic compromises to end the conflict on the basis of a two-state solution was disastrously wrong. Indeed, the evidence clearly shows that when such dialogues go from the carefully controlled environment of the psychology lab to the world of politics and interests, the results are very different. This is true not only for Palestinian-Israeli hostilities, but also other bitter ethnic conflicts - the former Yugoslavia, Rwanda, Northern Ireland, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Sri Lanka, Indonesia, etc. Time after time, handshakes and personal rapport did not translate into grand agreements. Instead, high hopes not grounded in the reality of interests, in an environment of opposing concepts of historic justice, generally ended in disaster. WHEN CONFRONTED with stark evidence of suicide bombing and Palestinian incitement, academics should be the first to rethink the theoretical starting points. However, like everyone else, we suffer from cognitive dissonance; when presented with evidence contrary to our beliefs even academics will try to rationalize disturbing data to reinforce their existing worldview. As a result, academics like Kelman and Joseph Montville, and their Israeli partners, such as Ron Pundak, who heads the Peres Center for Peace, cling to the old Oslo mythology. Despite four years of unimaginable terror, their simplistic ideology based on viewing the Palestinians as victims confronting an all-powerful Israel remains dominant. Their peace dialogues succeeded because they were limited to a small group of Israeli participants from the self-declared peace camp, partnered with Palestinians who tended to be aligned with Arafat's Fatah organization. These Palestinian leaders met relatively few Israelis who opposed giving up on Jewish historic links to Jerusalem or accepting Palestinian refugees claims. When these views turned out to reflect those of the majority of Israelis - who reported to their military units to fight terror, voted twice for Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, and now demand unilateral separation - Palestinians appeared to be taken by surprise. And at the same time, the Israelis involved in the one-sided dialogues were unprepared for the depth of Palestinian rejectionism and the degree to which historic positions on the legitimacy of Jewish sovereignty, Jerusalem, and refugee claims remained dominant. Four year after these myths violently exploded, influential academics continue to write articles and run meetings extolling the virtues of dialogue and heart-to-heart discussions. In a recent op-ed published in The Boston Globe, Kelman promoted the Geneva Accords and declared that "unilateral steps would have disastrous consequences." In addition to their refusal to recognize the failures of Oslo, the idea that the same Palestinian and Israeli leaders can be trusted to try again is absurd and detached from reality. After decades of narrow Arab-Israeli dialogues, summer coexistence camps, and summit meetings, it is time for the teachers and researchers in the field of peace studies to confront reality: The quasi-religious belief in "mutually enhancing cooperation" and "reconciliation" is not only wrong; it is also dangerous. It prevents recognition of the situation on the ground and is readily exploited for war and terror, as we have seen. It is clear that the techniques developed by social psychologists for family therapy cannot cope with deep political and religious hatreds, irreconcilable interests and the strategy of terrorism. But this does not mean that there is no hope for stability and conflict management. Indeed, a political (rather than psychological) framework based on limiting friction while enhancing deterrence can greatly reduce levels of violence while creating an environment for stability. Although far from the idyllic peace that diplomats and social psychologists imagine, the conflict management approach has the benefit of being realistic, while not contributing to increased terrorism and violence. The time for the academics from Harvard, as well as from Israeli universities, to face this reality is long overdue. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
ARMY TOLD NOT TO USE ISRAELI BULLETS IN IRAQ
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 25, 2004. |
|
This is a Reuter's news item, June 24, 2004, and appeared on
http://news.myway.com/top/article/id/411289%7Ctop%7C06-24-2004::18:06%7Creuters.html
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Israeli-made bullets bought by the U.S. Army to plug a shortfall should be used for training only, not to fight Muslim guerrillas in Iraq and Afghanistan, U.S. lawmakers told Army generals on Thursday. Since the Army has other stockpiled ammunition, "by no means, under any circumstances should a round (from Israel) be utilized," said Rep. Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, the top Democrat on a House of Representatives Armed Services subcommittee with jurisdiction over land forces. The Army contracted with Israel Military Industries Ltd. in December for $70 million in small-caliber ammunition. The Israeli firm was one of only two worldwide that could meet U.S. technical specifications and delivery needs, said the Army's program executive officer for ammunition. The other was East Alton, Illinois-based Winchester Ammunition, which also received a $70 million contract. Although the Army should not have to worry about "political correctness," Abercrombie was making a valid point about the propaganda pitfalls of using Israeli rounds in the U.S.-declared war on terror, said Rep. Curt Weldon, the Pennsylvania Republican who chairs the subcommittee on tactical air and land forces. "There's a sensitivity that I think all of us recognize," Weldon told the Army witnesses, including Maj. Gen. Buford Blount, who led the U.S. Third Infantry Division that captured Baghdad in April 2003. als, now the Army's assistant deputy chief of staff, said the Army had sufficient small caliber ammunition -- 5.56mm, 7.62mm and .50 caliber -- to conduct current operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere. But taken together with training needs, the United States had strained its production facilities, he testified. "To fight a major combat operation in another theater will require the Army to impose restrictions on training expenditures and to focus current inventory and new production on combat operations," Blount said. As a result, he said the Army hoped to stretch U.S. supplies to supplement the capacity of the government-owned Lake City plant in Independence, Missouri, that currently makes more than 90 percent of U.S. small caliber ammunition. The Lake City factory, operated by Alliant Techsystems Inc., has nearly quadrupled its production in the past four years. This year, it will produce more than 1.2 billion rounds, Karen Davies, president of the ATK arm that runs it, told the panel. Lake City provided more than 2 billion rounds a year during World War II and Vietnam, she said. The Army's needs will grow to about 1.5 billion to 1.7 billion rounds a year in coming years, Blount said. "In the near-term, balancing training requirements with current operational needs is a manageable risk-mitigation strategy," he said. The Army does not want to repeat its history of building capacity during wartime "only to dismantle it in peacetime," Blount added. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
SAUDI ARABIA - BEHEADING CAPITAL OF THE WORLD
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 25, 2004. |
|
This was written by Mike Evans and appeared on the World Net Daily
website
(http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=39130).
Michael D. Evans is the author of "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move," an
Amazon No. 2 and a New York Times best-seller, and founder of
America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of
Jerusalem, Jerusalem Prayer Team.org. Evans' "The American Prophecies"
will be released by Time Warner in early August.
The execution-style murder of Paul Johnson has been condemned by the Organization of the Islamic Conference. The OIC chief, Abd al-Wahid Bilqaziz, labeled Mr. Johnson's death as a "barbaric act," and went on to reassure the world in general and the American public in particular that "Islam recommends the protection of foreigners - and prohibits the killing of innocent people." How magnanimous of Mr. Bilqaziz! Apparently in an attempt to assuage world outrage, Saudi security launched a search for the body of the beheaded American. Why has that outrage not extended to the hundreds, perhaps thousands, who have been beheaded and tossed into unmarked graves over the past 30 years? According to Amnesty International, more than half of those beheaded between 1990 and 1999 were foreign nationals, and some were Christian missionaries. Why has the Saudi government not returned those bodies to their loved ones for proper burial? In Saudi Arabia, heads roll for sodomy, armed robbery, murder, and for being a Christian. Some Christians were beheaded after having been falsely accused of drugs or other crimes reportedly as benign as leading a Bible study or offering prayers. Saudis that convert to Christianity, or "desert Islam," are subject to the death penalty, as well. Those condemned to death are taken to a public square blindfolded after midday prayers, hands tied behind their backs and forced to kneel facing Mecca. The police clear the square of all traffic and lay a blue plastic sheet 16-feet square on the ground. The executioner swings the sword two or three times before jabbing the poor soul in the back to force him to raise his head. More than 100 people have been beheaded in Saudi since 9-11, and the vast majority were not members of al-Qaida! We are told that the militants and extremists who committed the horrendous murder of Paul Johnson have been killed. Why are murderers, who have no regard for the sanctity of human life, called "militants"? Why not label them exactly as what they are: terrorists? And, if these so-called militants and extremists are going to be hunted down and killed or arrested, what awaits the entire House of Saud? I, too, am outraged, not only by the beheading of Paul Johnson, but by the Saudi PR-machine that has hypocritically expressed its disgust over this barbarism. It is, indeed, the theater of the absurd and a festival of hypocrisy. In 1991 during the Persian Gulf War, I preached the gospel in the center of Dhahran. U.S. military police grabbed me and screamed, "Are you nuts? They will cut your head off, you fool!" Days later, I shared Christ with Gen. Khalid. He looked at me and asked, "Are you trying to convert me? We cut off heads for that." Any thinking person knows that the House of Saud is the principal financier of the terrorists on whom President Bush has declared war. They export more than oil. About 25 percent of all those in the prison camp at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, are Saudi nationals. No country in the world has spent more to export bigotry and hatred than Saudi Arabia. Islam is portrayed as a religion of tolerance. How ignorant can we be? Women cannot drive cars in Saudi Arabia, girls are still circumcised, political parties and trade unions are outlawed, the church and state are one in Saudi Arabia. Do not hold your breath while searching for a Christian church or Jewish synagogue in that country; you will suffocate. Television is censored to the degree that if Mickey Mouse gives Minnie Mouse a peck on the cheek, poor Mickey will be banished from the kingdom! Several years ago, I interviewed a U.S. Aramco employee. He told me he was tortured for having a video of "The Love Boat" in his suitcase. He was accused of possessing pornography. While in jail, he feared he might be beheaded. The Holy Grail of understanding is that there is nothing tolerant about Saudi Arabia. Shariah (Islamic law) shows no tolerance. No, it is no coincidence that 15 of the 19 terrorists who attacked America on 9-11 were Saudi Arabian. All were Wahhabists, as is the Taliban, and the majority of the population of Saudi. If democracy were to come to tolerant Saudi Arabia, Osama bin Laden would be elected in a landslide. We have been assured that Saddam Hussein was not involved in 9-11; on the other hand, we know with certainty that Saudi nationals were. For the House of Saud to try to distance itself from Islamic fundamentalism would be tantamount to Osama trying to distance himself from terrorism. The same can be said of al-Qaida. The general Muslim population thinks the evil empire of communism was not defeated by Ronald Reagan and the crusaders, but rather, it was Osama bin Laden and Islam that caused the Soviet house of cards to crumble in Afghanistan. They also believe there is just one "evil empire" in the world, and that Iraq will be to America what Afghanistan was to the Soviets.
|
|
THE JEWISH AGENCY MUST NOT CONTRIBUTE TO P.M. SHARON'S REWARD-FOR-TERRORISM EXPULSION PLAN
Posted by AFSI, June 24, 2004. |
|
"Prime Minister Ariel Sharon cannot get money from the Knesset where he has no majority, so he has turned to the Jewish Agency to fund his reward- for -terrorism expulsion plan from Gaza," declares Herbert Zweibon, Chairman of Americans For a Safe Israel. At a meeting June 23 of the Jewish Agency and World Zionist Organization leaders, the question was raised as to the legality of the plan for the Jewish Agency to finance the re-settling of Jews. A blatant attempt was made to avoid the appearance of support for expulsion by removing language relating to Gaza. Zweibon tells us, "The facts are obvious. The Jewish Agency is making a foolish attempt to remove itself from an immoral act, but the end result is the same." AFSI's Chairman concludes, "When world Jewry began contributing to the Jewish Agency, they believed they were helping to settle Jews throughout Israel. For the Agency to use these funds to facilitate the forcible expulsion of 8,000 Jews from their homes, schools, synagogues, farms and businesses in Gush Katif/Gaza, and move them into relocation settlements in the Negev and Galilee, is totally contrary to the intentions of the majority of contributors to the Agency, and is thoroughly reprehensible. Americans For a Safe Israel calls for a halt to all contributions to the Jewish Agency, until there is a clear statement from Sallai Meridor, Chairman in Jerusalem, and Carol Salomon, UJC head in New York, that the Agency has refused to be party to Sharon's defiance of the will of the majority of the Jewish people both in Israel and in America." CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE JEWISH AGENCY : The Jewish Agency: elibir@jazo.org.il Sallie Meridor: sallaim@jazo.org.il; Tel: 972-2-620-2080; Fax: 972-2-625-2352 Carol Salomon, UJC head: casuja@aol.com; Tel: 212-339-6001; Fax: 212-318-6155 NY main Jewish Agency office: Tel: 212-339-6063/68/72; Fax: 212-832-1597; 212-318-6145 Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI is a pro-active pro-Israel advocacy group. AFSI may be contacted by mail at 1623 Third Ave., Suite 205, New York, N.Y. 10128, Tel: 212-828-2424; Fax: 212-828-1717; by email at afsi@rcn.com; or by accessing its website: www. afsi.org. Helen Freedman is Executive Director. |
|
USUAL RULES DON'T APPLY TO TERRORIST
Posted by Bruce S. Ticker, June 24, 2004. |
|
This was written by Edward Prather and appeared in
http://www.crisisisrael.com
All societies who accept the rule of law and a democratic or republican form of government (lower case letters in both of those) also accept what seem to many who do not have this form of government to be contradictions. These manifest themselves in many forms - most of them being small and usually resulting in some comedian pointing out the irony and the audience getting a laugh out of it. Contradictions such as freedom of speech, but obviously not freedom to libel, and freedom to assemble, but obviously not to block access to a hospital, are two examples of some of the more serious potential abuses and how the rule of law has come in and tried to patch up that which is not in the interest of society as a whole. Protecting the rights of the individual while weighing the effects that those rights might have on society is what makes for good public policy debate. When the smoke finally clears though, it is obvious that both sides of the debate still want to move society in a positive direction - they might just not agree on what method would be the best to get them there. A major idea behind the rule of law is equal protection and application, and while we can shake our heads at many individual examples of this idea failing to be practiced at one time or another, it is still an idea very much worth striving to achieve. What happens when a group of people enter the picture who do not have any desire to be part of that society, and in fact wish to destroy it in one form or another - including by employing criminal and probably violent means? Some "enlightened" types wish to grant them the same protections and applications as any ordinary person would have, and while this might seem noble and wonderful it helps undermine the very institutions that they wish to destroy and because of this fact these noble people do the work for those who wish to see that society eradicated. Most common criminals are still willful members of society who simply find no use for certain behavior or laws and as such ignore them in order to gain what they want. While this is destructive to society, in most cases, simply removing them from the population also removes the threat they pose to the harmony in that society since they will no longer have the ability to rob, rape, or murder members of the society as a whole. The modern terrorist who is determined to destroy a culture, nation or an idea (such as the rules of law or equal application) will not be deterred by the threat of, nor rehabilitated from a stay in, prison. This person tends not to care for their own life and is quite willing and sometimes eager to die in an attempt to advance their cause. This eliminates a show of force (i.e. threats of imprisonment, armed guards and police) from being as effective as it might be against people who are willful members of a society and simply do not agree with policy - certainly not to the extent they'd die for it. When these terrorists are caught there are members of society who still wish to grant all the rights and privileges to them as if they were simply accused of car theft. We all know that laws can have loopholes and most of us get tired of hearing about people getting off due to technicalities or obscure laws and precedents, yet it seems that we fail to realize that those forms of manipulation against the rule of law's equal protection and application are trivial compared to the rights many wish to extend to terrorists. It is important for any society to hold equal application as a high standard for everyone who, even despite a criminal past, wishes to integrate into the community. It is even more important to give adequate care for the preservation of that society from those forces who wish to destroy it. Terrorists have no care for freedom of speech, and this can be seen in their own nations, so to grant them such a right and to protect it while they find ways to destroy the very society granting them such rights is a suicide pact against the rule of law. As Steven Plaut points out in his June 17th piece "Win One for the Yasser," the idea that laws are being manipulated to make it appear that Israel is a caring nation only make it a careless nation when it comes to protecting the rights of citizens who wish that society no harm. Caring for those who wish you harm is no more logical than giving the keys to someone who wishes to break into your home. Imagine the fun a comedian would have with that. Societies must protect themselves, whether is be the United States, Israel, or anywhere else, and while both of our societies respect the rule of law and hold equal application in high regard, we must also not put our own people at risk for the sake of attempting to attain something that is not within reach as long as the bombs are exploding. |
|
MUSLIM KIDS PLAY DECAPITATION GAMES
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 24, 2004. |
|
As your neighborhood anthropologist about the significance of the
games children play. Enjoy the movie.
This is from Jihad Watch (http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/002331.php ) Little Green Footballs -LGF (http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog) - has posted a horrifying link to a Scandinavian Muslim bulletin board (http://www.sindbad.se/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=1301) on which someone has posted ("Look how cute!") a video (http://homepage.mac.com/cfj/.Movies/muslim-kids-play-beheading.avi) of Muslim kids reenacting the Nick Berg decapitation video. If anyone has any doubts about what we are up against in the war on terror, see this video. It isn't bloody. It's just sickening. What will become of these children who are being brought up to glorify murder and violence? |
|
AFSI QUESTIONS TOM DELAY
Posted by Herbert Zweibon, June 24, 2004. |
|
Dear Mr. Majority Leader DeLay, As Chairman of Americans for a Safe Israel/AFSI, I am writing to you to register my surprise and distress at your apparent about-face in regard to Israel's well being and security. You have sponsored House Congressional Resolution 460, "Regarding the security of Israel and the principles of peace in the Middle East." You, along with Mr. Hoyer, Mr. Hyde, and Mr. Lantos, have submitted the concurrent resolution which was referred to the Committee on International Relations. Excerpts from the Resolution speak about a "final status agreement [that] will only be achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these realities" of major Israeli population centers that make it unrealistic to return to the armistice lines of 1949, but definitely include the President's "vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side-by-side in peace and security." It is envisioned that it is in this state of "Palestine" there will be a "settling of Palestinian refugees." All of this is based on another vision of the peaceable kingdom when all Arab states will "oppose terrorism, support the emergence of a peaceful and democratic Palestine, and state clearly that they will live in peace with Israel." None of these peaceful "visions" address the issue that there has been no let-up in terrorist actions against Israel, and yet the United States continues to pressure Israel to make concessions that simply reward the terrorists and punish Israel's Jewish citizens. Congressman DeLay, how does your support for HR 460 fit in with your positions of the past few years? May 3, 2002 - AFSI applauded you when you declared, "There is no moral equivalence between a democratic government defending its citizens and a calculated strategy of death waged by terrorist organizations... The attacks directed against them [Israel] are attacks against liberty and all free people must recognize that ISRAEL'S FIGHT IS OUR FIGHT? Every man and woman in Israel should know that America is with them." October 11, 12, 2002 - In Washington, at the Christian Coalition Rally, you joined AFSI in declaring, "NO PALESTINIAN STATE." August 16, 2000 - During the Camp David talks you wrote, "If the Palestinians are truly committed to the peace process, they must unequivocally respect the autonomy and security that Israel has struggled to maintain over the years." I'm sure you are well aware that the PA Covenant has never been changed, and continues to refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist. In light of the above, we hope you will take another look at the plan for a PA state wrenched from Israel's biblical inheritance and return to your former stance in opposition to the creation of another Arab terrorist state in the Middle East. Herbert Zweibon is Chairman, Americans For a Safe Israel (AFSI). |
|
SUBTLE ANTI-SEMITISM AND SUBTLE SELF-EFFACEMENT
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, June 24, 2004. |
|
From invasion to Inquisition to expulsion to Holocaust to Durban, it is a majority against one.
And the Jews welcome the freedom to be dependent on being like every other nation
Samson like all other men, powerless and blind
Joining those who don't see eye to eye, going blind, still alone,
Subtle effacement dries bones, but our bones are all the bones that keep Jews awake
Disengaging from good to appease evil is a false premise for peace; is the biggest lie, a tool
Sharon's Disengagement Plan has astonished the enemy; has put the wool into all eyes,
Watch out world; Israel's defeat will give pan-jihad recognition to cause more dhimmi people
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." |
|
MADONNA: OR WINNING FOR THE GIPPER
Posted by Marion D.S. Dreyfus, June 24, 2004. |
|
Wuhan series Something I have mulled upon of late, as soon as I heard of Madonna's reincarnation as Hadassah. She remakes herself every prezzy cycle or so. Now it is 'our' turn. For those around me in China, 'Kabbalah' means nothing. Torah means nothing. And most attachments to Judaism's divinity and spirituality are all, likewise, cheerfully unplumbed and untrendoid. It is not as Lenny Bruce once opined, "If you live in Manhattan, you're Jewish, even if you're not. If you live in Butte, you're gentile, even if you're Jewish." How much is that the case here: In Wuhan, China, where you're not even gentile if you're Jewish there. Atheists all, you're also not Buddhist, not Shinto, not Baha'i --so you have a nice haimische spectrum of spectacule what-you're-nots. The diff is that here, we Yidd'n are admired and respected without saying a word beyond the fact that we are, simply, vestigial people of the Book. (Former Jewish glories in Harbin, Kai'phong and elsewhere here don't count, as the memory about such things is localized and, after 100 years, misty, with the velocity of everything else the past century has wrought on the long-suffering Chinese.) Take me, for instance. As the only self-identified Jew for miles, I enjoy the fruits of people's curiosity, their admiration, and their expectation. I taught at a second college for the past semester, in addition to the branch of Huazhong University in which my mainstay courses were presented. Although I asked for a document or something written to acknowledge that I was also a 'professor' at Wen Hua, I was merely given the benison of a sleek Mercedes and a driver every week to pick me up, drive me the 40 minutes to the other university, and then the same car, alternate driver back at night, often accompanied by one, two or three others who hitch on my dime. Try as I might, I could not get any administrator to document my sojourn at the second place. Nor, though I was being paid at a 'high rate,' compared to all those around in the immediate vicinity --and indeed Wuhan proper, about four times the going rate-- I was sent back and forth between colleges for who in fact would be the dispenser of funds for my hired lectures at School Two. After retail ado, I was repeatedly assured I'd be paid but, and there lies the worm of passive-aggression, at the end of term. Came the last class, and payment was to have been forked or chopsticked over, but it was delayed. No reason proffered. "Next week," I was told. Twice. My grades were already in, and there was no more driver, no sleek black air conditioned Mercedes. No way to get easily to the school. Two weeks later, though, at the Huazhong business office of the Foreign Affairs Office, I was handed a deracinated chubby-snug brown paper bag a few ml larger than the bills lodged inside. Ta-Daahh!: Your pay. Like a Mafia hit-moll, there was just cash, in the form of Y100 notes. Fresh and red. As are all payment monies, all nice and crisp. Carmella Soprano I ain't, so I looked in vain for a piece of paper, a receipt, a little writ of issue or tissue to say what the money was. Niente. (I'm not sure of the word in Mandarin.) I counted up the total, and was perplexed at the two weeks' shortfall from what I had expected. Why, I asked, am I missing so much? Oh, heh heh, the administratrix replied with a typical and infuriating, mirthless condescension giggle, that's taxes! But, I rejoindered, if I work there only one day a week, and the sum of four days' work per month is necessarily smaller than that needed to be taxed at the usual 5% rate, why am I being given this advanced pre-chomped wad of insufficient funds? Oh... that Cruella de Ville half-smothered snarkle again... that? Is more taxes. Instead of the normal rate, I was being taxed at an advanced 20% on my total --as if they were the money earned for only one month. I listened, mentally drumming my fingers on the medulla oblongata of the person explaining that he 'had fought furiously' on my behalf, knowing, he said, that I would have 'a complaint' once I saw two weeks' earnings pfft! from the brown baggie pay packet. The result was that his ire was inadequate to the envelope thereof. The money stayed gone from my pocket, no doubt cunningly attached to the inside fabric or the appurtenances of someone else, perhaps. We tell no tales, we 100 yuan notes without accompanying receipts or documentation. I graciously thanked el Furioso, and repaired to the multitasking headaches of moving, changing jobs, getting visas and returning computers and other equipment whence it came a year ago. Nevertheless, I did not leave it at that. Despite my hectic schedule, and my upbringing as a (relatively) nice Jewish etcetera, given the name and number of the key big to approach in these circumstances by a good friend, I called the commissioner of education in this province. First shock was: He answered his phone. Second was that he speaks a fairly terrific English, really supple smooth, expressive, easy to understand and fluent. Everything I wish for my best students. Could I jot down the core issues and send it in an email? I carefully wrote down and repeated, several times his email address. I sent a letter with all the details. I waited for one, two, three days. Finally, I called up the excellent gentleman and asked if he had done anything on 'my issues.' In fact, as a short-termer now, I wondered whether it might not be smarter to have Shiwei roil the waters after I hit Hong Kong en route to my next job, at the first school of the nation, in bucolic but legendarily distant Hangzhou, Zhejiang province. Well, no. He had not gotten my first, explicatory email. He had transposed the "re" in Jeffrey to "er," even though we repeated it a few times, thus I apparently sent a puzzled stranger my assessment of issues to be investigated. With the right e-ddress, I sent him a double. In New York, the bureaucracy would have clanked into s-l-o-ow gear, I think. In a month, voila, not much would transpire, but a mailing would arrive in my postbox telling me Apologies, not our jurisdiction, sorry, la di dah please change and write to so-and-so, instead. But here, good Mr. Shiwei had already written a note alerting me to his investigation, and had called the FAO admin. I'd get a bulletin as soon as he knew anything. I worked all night on grading papers and putting all grades into percentages of people making 90 to 100, 80 to 89, and so on. I was going to rest an hour or two, my ritual of 'sleep.' Comes a call from the FAO translator and all-around do-it-it woman. Can I come in right now to discuss An Important Subject? (Undressed, yawning, and a mess? Noo-o, not really.) What's it about? Mr. Shiwei was on their case. As Shiwei's bailiwick is to license schools for their foreign expat teachers, a call from such a person is not a bureaucrat's idyll. The FAO head was quite upset. He was being held up as responsible for our not obtaining visas to stay in the country - though it was not his fault, really, that the officious Security apparatchik Ratchit of the Police Security Bureau felt she was above saying OK to any such trivial volk as myself and colleagues all due to expire soon in visa-extension terms. He explained (correctly) that they had ferried us downtown to get the visa with all we needed. Not their fault we were denied a tourist visa: Who woulda thunk they'd say no to a bunch of educated people seeking to spend money and stay in hotels and eat food for the pleasure of touring around this big GDP-obsessed country? Gey veis. I merely responded cordially now. Would I be kind enough to accept more money of the original? (Y'think?) Well, I would definitely consider it. They would return 10% of my 'taxed' total to me. No-- that's the image I was projecting. What I actually said: Of course. Of course I would be delighted. To accept more of MY OWN money back. And the myth of the invincible Jew, Hadassah or Madonna or Marion, triumphs. For a fleet moment or two. Amid all the global calumny and unpleasantness. On the wire. In the local office for expat profs at the mercy of Laocoon local legalities and arcana. How sweeter than nectar is the sensation of being vindicated, paid in almost-full (they are still keeping double the usual rate), and having them dance attendance on us, for a change. We have been shocked and unnerved by the unknowable arcade twists and turns of so many events and circumstances since arriving last year. How thrillingly... Shakespearian?... to take center stage and mould activity and justice to my will for a change, for a long-delayed change. Because, should I lift voice a wee whack more to Mr. Shiwei, the school here might be censured. That censure might take the form of forbidding further expats from being licensed to teach here. As schools have already laid out gobs of yuan for the importation of spanking new college grads, dewy with post-exam relief and getting on a plane away from the 'rents, that would mean the forfeiture of not only the monies needed for documenting these newbies, but also a debilitating fall from grace of the college, should there be a sudden cessation of Native speakers that all the student body dotes on and becomes starry-eyed over. No more rangy, lanky blue-eyed Midwesterners to set those cardiac pumps a-flutterin' for the 20-year-olds set on their own Leo DiCaprio in the big APO over the Pacific. I won one, let's just say, for the Gipper. Not I alone, but all expats who have been fiddled or Clem-Kadiddled can now hold up their heads if initially hoodwinked. The embarrassment, the 'lose-face factor,' will keep future administration implacables on the straight and narrow for at least the time remaining before the '08 Olympics. Around my name, an aureole of subdued voice and hushed attention: That Jew didn't take No for an answer, even though outnumbered 1.3 billion to one. She got her shekels, her manna, her yuan all right. Stuck to her guns. Won her case. And in 15 years, when the reputed 40 million Chinese males wake up and find they have no mates in their age cohort, because of short-sighted preference for males, routine infanticide and adoptions to the West, they'll rue the day they let us go. They won't have us to kick around any longer. Actually, that won't be true. We wander the earth, and are to be found unexpectedly expected anywhere the doors are open for business, pleasure or midground. I can't wait, she said, rubbing her palms together with relish or at least pickle, to ask the next school for a day off to fly to the Beijing Kehillah or Chabad to celebrate Tisha B'Av or Shushan Purim with her excellent co-religionists. So yeah, Madonna, go for it. Britmey, be our guest. Demi, assume the Semi or Hemi, (or double Whemmi). Adopt holy names. Vest yourself in Scripture. I don't even have to wear a red thread around my wrist to get what's coming. I got the stuff it takes. And here, I don't require alternate-side-of-the-street parking to strut our calendaria. A bicycle will do handily. Re: Esther (f/k/a Madonna) 23 june 2004 Department of Not so fast. Today, the Professor called me. Would I do him a favor and accompany him downtown to the Police Security Bureau? He was being questioned about my issue on the taxes from the school. He had never been called before the police before, not for a possible infraction. Why do you need me, I asked. They don't believe me, he said. Being a gracious sort, I complied. Despite the huge time take. I asked that because of the waste of hours going to and from Hasnkou, could I deliver the grades on Saturday instead of Friday? Yes, yes, he agreed instantaneously. When I got into the van a few hours later, the fact that Allan, our translator, was with Professor Chen alerted me tat something was up that had not been overtly stated, let alone delineated. I found out why he was along for the hour's ride. When I arrived at the too-well-known PSB, I was directed to a certain chair. Ornery as usual, and aware of NLP (neuro-linguistic programming) elements in location of seats vis-a-vis one's interlocutors, I selected another one. Twice. Professor Chen was led into another room. I was left alone with Allan and an officer in severe pewter grayand black uniform. She wore no makeup. She was all business. I could tell she knew English quite well, but couldn't imagine her having fun while learning it. She had a 3"x3" white plaster on her left elbow. I saw that though they had told me I would just sit there, that was not the case. The woman said, twice, We hope you will tell us the truth. Then followed an hour or two of redundant questioning. The upshot of which was that I was guilty of teaching. Oh my. Teaching at a non-credentialed-for-foreigners school. She read me the relevant sections of the law. I could be fined Y1000. I could be expelled from the country, have my visa rescinded. Be forbidden to work anywhere in the country. Lose my job privileges. (What exactly are those, pray?) Did I know I was illegally teaching? (No, I answered truthfully: I did as I was directed to do. My school sent me to teach somewhere as part of my job - and I went there.) Everything I said in answer to her vanilla questioning was converted into Chinese characters. Four pages of single-spaced remarks and answers. Then Allan was given the sheets, to translate them back to me. Then I signed each sheet on the rule at the bottom, wrote "Everything here is the truth," on the end of the four pages of interrogation, and they placed my index finger in red sealing ink and I placed the fingerprint on top of every one of my five signatures. One page had two signatures. She gave me a tissue to wipe off the ink. Professor Chen stayed in his chamber about half an hour longer than my questioning. I asked Allan if they were beating him. Allan raised his eyebrows in mirth andlaughed shortly. No, he replied. While she questioned me, the officer went over and over my passport, scrutinizin g every page. I wanted to snatch it away from her. Don't do that! I wanted to yell. Of course, I realized a dozen times:This is a legal document. Of course she will not give it to me. It is a legal entity on its own. As we were departing, she said they will consider my case and let me know the results, according to Chinese law. The results. According to Chinese law! I shook her cold,clammy hand, a fish shake, as I left. No reason not to be civil, though actually the proceedings were more Kafkaesque than I'd had any reason to expect. I am the fall guy for others doing the wrong thing! I should have no part in this. Although ignorance of the law is no excuse in the US, how can I be held liable for the grand crime of teaching young children English at an educational institute that my school has told me to attend and work at? I had not given anyone the finger - I had forgotten who told me about the job. I had not know who paid me - this school or that. So I implicated no one. Though I fancy myself a tough cookie, the several hours in the wooden straight-backed chair had done its non-subtle job on me. I was unnerved and slightly angry. Dope dealers. Prostitutes. Shake-down artists. Delinquents with knives. Knowing perverts. Men who transmit illness via unclean needles. SARS vectors. And me, the teacher of young adults Who Should Know Better Than to Tgeach at a Non-Credentialed School. Hiss. Boo. Get 'er, everyone! But in the knowledge that I leave here next Tuesday, perhaps I shall escape the peculiar justice here in Wuhan, which deprives honoured guests of their visas to spend money, and jumps on people for having the temerity to spend a few hours instructing 20-year-olds in the arcane of grammar, literature, poetry and comprehension.
Marion D. S. Dreyfus is a journalist, a film critic and an intrepid
traveler. She is currently in Wuchan, China, where she teaches at the
University and does a radio talk show. Her address is: Marion D. S.
Dreyfus, Reception centre 8301, Huazhong University of Science &
Technology, English Department, Wuchang Branch, Nanhu, Wuchan, Wuhan
430064, P R China.
|
|
THE JEWISH AGENCY: YES TO TRANSFER; NO TO DISENGAGEMENT
Posted by Mikimia and Herb Sunshine, June 24, 2004. |
|
Gentlemen: Congratulations, or is it Consolations? In the middle of the road, one gets hit by cars from both directions. The Left doesn't love you because you don't support transfer of Jews, but the Right has problems with you because you will build homes for the evacuees. Remember a compromise is a decision in which both sides give up what they want in exchange for what they don't. Who's content? When you insufficiently understand something, why not stay out of it? With love of Israel,
This letter was occasioned by the following news item. Jewish Agency Executive Decision Concerning Settlement Following the Government's decision concerning the disengagement plan and the request by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon to the Jewish Agency to assist in developing the Negev and the periphery, with Government funding, the Jewish Agency Executive today held extensive deliberations on this matter. The Jewish Agency Executive decided to involve itself in planning, at this stage, and if the need arises in the future, also in building new communities and expanding existing communities in the Negev, Galilee and Gilboa funded by the Government of Israel. It was decided that the Director General of the Jewish Agency Major General (Res.) Giora Romm, will coordinate the establishment of the needed apparatus and its operation. Similarly it was decided that the Jewish Agency will not be involved in any other activities related to the Government's decision on the issue of disengagement. During the deliberations the participants highlighted the Jewish Agency's contribution to settlement in Israel over the 75 years since its establishment during which more than 1,000 communities have been established throughout the country. Furthermore the Jewish Agency's role in the area of settlement after the Peace Treaty with Egypt was noted. The Jewish Agency Executive comprises representatives of the Zionist Political Parties in Israel and the Diaspora, Jewish Communities in the Diaspora within the framework of the United Jewish Communities (UJC) - The Federations of North America and Keren Hayesod - United Israel Appeal and Israeli public figures. Sallai Meridor serves as Chairman of the Jewish Agency Executive and Carole Solomon as Chairperson of the Jewish Agency Board of Governors. For further information contact:
Herbert B. Sunshine is a retired Professor of Law (U.S.), now living with his wife, Mikimia, in Jerusalem. |
|
ISRAELI GOVERNMENT ACTS PRO-ARAB
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 24, 2004. |
|
HOBBLING THE ARMY, ENCOURAGING RIOTERS The Israeli Army promulgated a new regulation, permitting its soldiers to open fire at stone-throwers without having to consult distant, higher-level commanders. (The Army usually also issues strictures against abuse of a new rule. The news brief did not mention any.) State Prosecutor Edna Arbel overturned the regulation. She claimed that the rule would allow soldiers to open fire without just cause, and was inhumane. She is aware that stone-throwing has injured and killed people (MEPF, 2/6 from Miriam Gardner of American Yated Neeman.) Investigative journalist Yoav Yitzchak has revealed instances of apparent corruption by Arbel (Op. Cit. except 2/13). Her tenure was marked by undeserved prosecutions of right-wingers and failure to prosecute left-wingers. Does she ever see the humanity of unprotected Israeli soldiers? ISRAELI ARMY SELF-DEFEATISM At an IDF ethics committee meeting with civilian experts, it was the Israeli general who said that Israeli soldiers must die to save the lives of enemy civilians. That was the behind sending foot soldiers into Jenin. There, 23 soldiers were killed. They would have been spared if the terrorist concentration were bombed from the air. It took four years of P.A. arms smuggling before the Army responded with tougher measures (Op. Cit.). What is the point in having military advantage? The government cares less about its soldiers' lives than about what foreign critics might say. The US is in the same fix. The Arabs fight to win; the Jews fight to look good to unappeasable critics. Whatever Israel does is an excuse for critics to vent spleen. The IDF should contest and reject unfair criticism. It needs psycho-therapy rather than masochistic ethicists. ISRAEL ASKS EU SUBSIDY Israel will ask European countries to subsidize its Gaza withdrawal (Ibid.). Israel should not withdraw but offer to help defend Europe from its coming Islamist uprising. FENCE FACTS After the security fence was erected in northern Israel, terrorist incidents there fell from 600 per year to zero. Theft of vehicles and farm equipment is sharply down, too. The Arabs cannot smuggle stolen goods back to the P.A. through the fence. Illegal residency is less now, too. Israeli citizens feel more secure. Their real estate values reflect it. It isn't just the fence. Most Tkulkarm terrorists have been killed, captured, or are in hiding (Ibid.). Northern Israelis shouldn't feel too secure. Hizbullah has rockets trained on them. ISRAELI POLICE WORK WITH ARAB THIEVES Police cars converged on Yitzhar, in Yesha, bringing an Arab. The Arab pointed to sheep that Jewish residents say were bought by them or born there. Without court order or evidence, the police encouraged the Arab to lead the sheep away. Police did not let the Jews explain their side. The Jews protested forcibly, and the Arab abandoned the sheep. Led by a particular trouble-making officer, the police arrested five Jews and beat anyone who came near (Ibid.), even if no violence were offered. Many Jews are angry at the "settlers," but they should sympathize with these fellow Jews trying to earn an honest living while the Arabs try to steal it and get the anti-Zionist Israeli police to facilitate the theft and commit brutality. HOW "DEMOCRATIC" ISRAEL DEALS WITH DISSENT ON THE RIGHT The government dropped its charges against Noam Federman in a case of terrorism. He also has been let out of prison after more than half a year under administrative detention on secret charges for something else. On the basis of secret evidence, however, the judge ruled that he may continue to be held under house arrest (Arutz-7, 6/11). Since the evidence is secret, Federman cannot present an informed defense. How do the judges know that the evidence is valid? After all, the government has arrested Federman dozens of times, but has been overturned those dozens of times, with a very few exceptions for minor nuisance charges of the kind that are not levied against someone except for spite. The prosecution may be seen as a persecution. The police, prosecution, and most of the judges belong to a mutually reinforcing and self-appointed system sharing the Far Left views that Federman agitates against. The government has engaged in many false arrests of other people for political reasons. It fabricates or hides evidence. Special and formerly secret rules encourage harassing prosecution of Yesha Jews. That means using the system of justice for political purposes. The prosecution has been keeping Federman under arrest, unable to
work but forced to spend on legal matters, for half his adult life, on
charges that do not stand up.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based
forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He
distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at
ricshulman@aol.com.
|
|
APPETITE VERSUS STARVATION...SOME ETERNAL TRUTHS
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, June 24, 2004. |
|
Arabs have spent decades trying to convince the world that they are both the old and the new Jews. Arafat & Co. have claimed that Jesus, Peter, and their comrades were actually Arabs--"Palestinians" to be exact--not Jews. It seems that planes were not the only things that Arafat's crew decided to hijack. Too bad that besides the Jews themselves, their Roman conquerors also left a clear record of the land belonging to the Jews and also made a distinction between Jews and Arabs as well. Tacitus and Dio Cassius were Roman historians who wrote extensively about Judaea's attempt to remain free. They wrote during, or not long after, the two major revolts of the Jews for independence in 66-73 C.E. and 133-135 C.E. and make no mention of this land being Arab, of it being called "Palestine," or its people "Palestinians." On the contrary, they detailed the difference between native Jews and Arabs from surrounding lands who joined the massive Roman assault on their Jewish neighbors. Listen to this quote from Vol. II, Book V, The Works of Tacitus: "...Titus was appointed by his father to complete the subjugation of Judaea... he commanded three legions in Judaea itself... To these he added the twelfth from Syria and the third and twenty-second from Alexandria... amongst his allies were a band of Arabs, formidable in themselves and harboring towards the Jews the bitter animosity usually subsisting between neighboring nations..." After the 1st Revolt, Rome issued thousands of Judaea Capta coins which can be seen in museums all over the world today. Notice, please...Judaea Capta...not " Palaestina Capta." Additionally, to celebrate this victory, the Arch of Titus was erected illustrating legionnaires carrying away the spoils of the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. It stands tall in Rome to this very day. Arafat, of course, denies that such a Temple ever existed. When, some sixty years later, Hadrian decided to further desecrate the site of the Temple, it was the grandchildren's turn to take on their mighty conquerors. The result of the struggle of this tiny nation for its freedom was, perhaps, as predictable as that which would have occurred had Lithuania taken on the Soviet Union during its heyday of power. Listen next to this next quote from Dio Cassius: "...580,000 men were slain, nearly the whole of Judaea made desolate. Many Romans, moreover, perished in this war (the Bar Kochba Revolt). Therefore Hadrian, in writing to the senate, did not employ the opening phrase commonly affected by the emperors, ' I and the legions are in health.' " The Emperor was so enraged at the Jews' determination that, in the words of the esteemed modern historian, Bernard Lewis, "Hadrian made a determined attempt to stamp out the embers not only of the revolt but also of Jewish nationhood and statehood... obliterating its Jewish identity." Wishing to end, once and for all, Jewish hopes, Hadrian renamed the land itself from Judaea to "Syria Palaestina" -- Palestine -- after the Jews' historic enemies, the Philistines, a non-Semitic sea people from the eastern Mediterranean or Aegean area. Sorry Yasser...trying to hijack the latter's identity, as you have tried to do with that of the Jews, won't work either. The reality, of course, is that the vast majority of Arabs did not enter the land of Israel/Judaea/Palestine until almost seven centuries after the fall of Jewish Jerusalem--during the beginning of the Arabs' own imperial conquest, forced Arabization, and settlement of much of the region. Imperialism is evidently only nasty when non-Arabs so indulge. Ditto for settlement and such. Most so-called "native Palestinians" came into the land only recently themselves, beginning with tens of thousands of Egyptian troops who stayed after the invasion of Muhammad Ali's army in the 19th century, and ballooning after Jewish capital began to develop the land soon afterwards. The records of the Permanent Mandates Commission of the League of Nations and other evidence document Arabs flooding into Palestine after 1920. It is believed that many others entered under cover of darkness and were simply never recorded. While the story of the Arabs' attempt at establishing themselves as the "aboriginals" of the land could be developed further, I'll let it rest for now. So much for their attempt at becoming the old Jews. Let's next turn to the Arab attempt to become the new Jews... After Judaea's fight for freedom against Rome and the conversion of the latter to Christianity, forced conversions, being branded the deicide people, inquisitions, demonization, dehumanization, ghettos, blood libels, massacres, expulsions, and existence as perpetual stranger in someone else's land became the plight of the stateless, "Wandering Jew." Estimates have placed the number of Jews murdered as a result of these experiences, prior to the Holocaust, in both the Christian West and in the Muslim East, in the millions. Arabs have tried to convince the world that the plight of their refugees is somehow the equivalent of that of the millennial experience of the Jews as referred to above. It has worked to a great extent with a world largely--and willingly-- deaf, dumb, and blind to the obvious differences. Let's turn the clock back some seventy years to hear how one great Jewish leader explained these differences in his Evidence Submitted To The Palestine Royal Commission in London in 1937: "Three generations of Jewish thinkers...have come to the conclusion that the cause of our suffering is the very fact of the Diaspora, the bedrock fact that we are everywhere a minority...Whenever I hear a Zionist...accused of asking too much...I really cannot understand it...Yes we do want a State; every nation on earth...they all have States of their own...the normal condition of a people. Yet, when we, the most abnormal of peoples, and therefore the most unfortunate, ask for only the same...then it is called too much...We have got to save millions, many millions. I do not know whether it is a question of one third...half...or a quarter." The presenter of this evidence was Ze'ev Vladimir Jabotinsky, patron saint of Israel's modern Likud Party. And, as can be seen above, unlike too many other Zionist thinkers, he was a realist regarding what could and what could not be expected in the Jews' relationships with Arabs. As Jabotinsky correctly forecasted, Arabs made out quite well after the break up of the Turks' Empire at the end of World War I. To date, they have almost two dozen states. And most of those were conquered and forcibly Arabized from non-Arab peoples. Appetite, indeed, Mr. Jabotinsky...and at everyone else's expense. Arabs declared the region to be purely Arab patrimony, frequently outlawed others' languages and cultures, and killed anyone who stood in their way...millions to date. In failing repeated attempts to destroy militarily the sole, miniscule state the Jews managed to get as a refuge, Arabs next set out to defeat Israel on the battlefield of ideas. Arabs transformed themselves into the new Jews. Along these lines, Israel's very attempts to survive amid repeated Arab assaults on its life were then twisted to be equated with the Nazis' treatment of the Jews. Arabs became David to Israel's Goliath, despite the fact that there are some 300 million of them on over six million square miles of territory compared to five million Jews in a state that one needs a magnifying glass to locate on a map of the world. And then there are those who make the argument, "if Jews can have a state, why not Palestinians?" While I won't get into argument over whether a distinct Palestinian Arab nationalism exists today, it certainly did not exist before the rise of modern political Zionism a little over a century ago. In fact, the former arose to negate the latter. Virtually all the writings of politically conscious Arabs on the eve of the collapse of the Ottoman Turkish Empire spoke of a greater Syrian Arab or Pan Arab identity. And there never was an Arab country, state, or nation of "Palestine." The "Palestinians" were the Jews. As in Jabotinsky's day, this conflict has never been about Jews wanting to deny Arabs their just rights. But it has been about Arabs not allowing any one else--Kurds, Jews, Berbers, Black African Sudanese, or others--even a tiny sliver of the very same rights so fervently demanded for themselves. In the war of ideas, the Arabs realized that the very identity of the conflict would have to also undergo a change. In the attempt to create their 22nd or 23rd state, Arabs came to realize that it would make for better public relations to speak in terms of creating a state for "stateless Palestinians" rather than calling for yet an additional Arab state at the expense of the one of the Jews. Hocus pocus: Conquering Arabs, with some two dozen states, were next transformed into the likes of previously starving, stateless Jews. Here's how Zuheir Mohsein, official with the PLO's military wing and Executive Council, explained this strategy in his interview with the Dutch newspaper, Trouw, on 3/31/77: "There are no differences between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians, etc...It is only for political reasons that we now carefully underline Palestinian identity....this serves only a tactical purpose...a new tool in the continuing battle against Israel." Despite the passage of time, these basic truths do not change. The Arab-Jewish (Arab-Kurdish, Arab-Berber, Arab-Black African Sudanese, and so forth) conflict is still all about Jabotinsky's appetite versus starvation...a conquering, subjugating Arab appetite which denies any one else their own share of justice in the region. By rejecting repeated compromises over the 20% of the Mandate of Palestine left after they had already received the lion's share of it in 1922 with the creation of purely Arab Transjordan (some 80% of the whole), the Arabs created the impasse we are still living with today. They invaded a reborn Israel in 1948, creating two refugee crises in the process: Arabs who fled Israel and a like number of Jews who fled "Arab "/ Muslim lands. But, unlike Arabs, Jews didn't have other multiple states of their own to potentially choose from. What's even more depressing is that, in many crucial ways, nothing has really changed for well over a half century, as a look at Arab websites, textbooks, maps, television programs, and such illustrates. Israel simply does not (or should not) exist. And the most that will be offered to it will be a temporary respite, a hudna, like that the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad, allowed his enemies until he could muster the strength to deal them the final blow...Arafat's so-called "Peace of the Quraysh." Even the Arabs' own moderates have admitted to this, calling all such moves for "peace" a Trojan Horse. So, once again...the basic truths of this struggle do not change. They are eternal. And the Arab-Jewish conflict is still all about appetite versus starvation. Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites around the world. |
|
RABBIS WON'T COOPERATE WITH SHARON'S PLAN TO EXPEL GAZA JEWS
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 24, 2004. |
|
The most effective way for this group to show their sincerity and set an example for resistance to these and other evil decrees of the Sharon dictatorship would be to resign their government jobs. Every one of them is an employee of the Government of Israel. I find it difficult to take seriously people who question the legitimacy of a system but take money from it. How can you in fact label the Government as in rebellion against the Torah and even in violation of the laws of the State of Israel and be employed by them? Even worse is the fact that all these Rabbis are employed directly by either Sharon or Lapid. If anyone is looking for a powerful, effective and totally legal way to rapidly bring down this dictatorship and prevent a horrible tragedy then there is no better way than massive resignation from all sectors of the Government. I do not mean a "warning strike" or civil disobedience or, especially not, protest rallies. I mean a clear statement that you will no longer have anything to do with this evil. Resign, quit, go home. Show that Jewish lives and the honor of the Jewish people means more to you than your nice, safe pay check! This was a news item in Arutz-7 and is archived at http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=64563 The Yesha Rabbis Council convened last night to discuss the impending withdrawal and expulsion from the Jewish communities of Gush Katif. The Council represents the rabbis of Judea, Samaria and Gaza (Yesha). The rabbis raised various ideas, including prayer and fasting, protest vigils, hunger strikes, civil disobedience, and more. They plan to turn to the hareidi sector and ask for its cooperation, continue the house-to-house efforts that were so successful prior to the Likud referendum, and possibly to recommend prayers that the government should be toppled before it can carry out its plans. The rabbis ruled that no one is permitted to take part or aid in the uprooting of Jewish towns - but did not say straight out that soldiers must refuse orders to do so. The question of refusal appears to be moot in any event, as the government has ordered the formation of a special unit of 2,000 soldiers to carry out the expulsion - and that will comprise soldiers whose political opinions will not stand in the way of carrying out this mission. The rabbis further called upon residents of the towns slated for demolition - 21 communities in Gaza and four in northern Shomron - not to enter into negotiations regarding "pitzui tmurat pinui" - compensation in exchange for evacuation. The rabbis who convened last night in Maaleh Adumim were: Council Chairman Rabbi Dov Lior of Kiryat Arba; Beit El's Rabbi Zalman Melamed; Rabbi Elyakim Levanon of Elon Moreh; Maaleh Adumim Yeshiva Hesder head Rabbi Mordechai Rabinowitz; Council Secretary Rabbi Daniel Shilo of Kedumim; and Rabbi David Dudkevitz of Yitzhar. MK Uri Ariel (National Union) briefed the rabbis on the situation at present. Rabbi Shilo said, "The very idea of uprooting towns and giving away land is deeply shocking, and we call upon the residents not to cooperate with any enticement that might be offered them. We must disengage from the disengagement and from the idea of making peace with enemies who do not want peace with us. We must rather concentrate on peace amongst ourselves, and to let the army deal with terrorism." 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. |
|
MACHSOM WATCH OR WITCH?
Posted by Women in Green, June 24, 2004. |
|
This was written by Hodayah Karish-Hazoni and appeared in Mekor
Rishon, A Hebrew Weekly (Features Section), June 18, 2004, pp. 14-15.
(The women of "MachsomWatch" present themselves as advocates of human rights of the Arabs who undergo a [security] check at IDF checkpoints. Lately, Women in Green have been visiting these checkpoints claiming that the soldiers at these outposts are subject to abuse by the women of MachsomWatch. The Mekor Rishon reporter visited these checkpoints to find out what was going on there. Below is found an English Translation of the article originally written in Hebrew.) What is most striking is the look in the soldiers' eyes. When they see the group of women leaving the car and approaching them, their look is very apprehensive, their eyes are alarmed. When they identify the intent of the women civilians, the look changes, and a small smile peeks out from their eyes. This is the picture reflected in the faces of dozens of soldiers whom I met one morning last week at different checkpoints around Jerusalem. The Palestinians, by the way, respond in the opposite manner: when the group of women approaches the checkpoint, a broad smile spreads over their faces, but when they understand who it is that's approaching - it vanishes. The group of women are Women in Green, under the leadership of Nadia Matar, on a "routine" tour of checkpoints to encourage and support the soldiers. Seven In the Morning, the Bethlehem Checkpoint The southern entrance to Jerusalem. Six women gather - Nadia, Anita, Gemma, Tsippi, Leah, and Zahavah, carrying bottles of cold drinks and cakes, Israeli flags, and large signs with the message: "IDF Soldiers, Thank You." They also have another, and important, item: a small "Zekhuton," a list of rights that was drawn up by Nadia Matar and Adv. Yoram Sheftel, that specifies for soldiers stationed at checkpoints their rights as regards the women of MachsomWatch. MachsomWatch, for anyone who missed its extensive exposure in the media, is an all-women organization, whose goal is the stationing of volunteer "supervisors" at IDF behavior in order to protect the human rights of the Palestinians who pass through the checkpoints. And here, seven in the morning at the Bethlehem checkpoint, and the "leftists," as Nadia Matar calls them, are still nowhere to be seen. The young Border Patrol soldiers stand and check those entering. One of them is skilled at locating those who attempt to bypass the checkpoint and sneak past on side paths. A., the first woman Bedouin serving in the IDF, also is at the screening post. "It's hard work," she says, "we're standing here from 5 in the morning, an eight-hour watch." Do the women of MachsomWatch come here? A. doesn't answer. A Border Patrol policeman standing nearby smiles sadly: "They come every day. My name stars with them. "What does that mean? Silence. He already folds, too alarmed to explain. Another soldier volunteers an explanation: "They ask why the Palestinians are standing for so long, they threaten to file complaints, they don't talk nicely. We try to ignore them, but it's difficult when they push themselves into the middle. Obviously, when they are around, the examination of those passing through is less thorough." Nine a.m., The Kalandia checkpoint, northern Jerusalem. It's a madhouse. Dozens of Arab vehicles and hundreds of people. The composition of the Women in Green group changes a bit. Zahavah left to teach English. Leah went to babysit her grandchildren. They are joined by Bernice, the mother of Dinah Horowitz, who was murdered together with her husband Eli in their home in Kiryat Arba. Nadia Matar marches first, resolute. "Shalom, dear soldiers," she says, and once again their eyes light up, they take a soft drink bottle, a cookie, and the Zekhuton. There's no need to explain to the soldiers here who is MachsomWatch. They glance at the Zekhuton, and their frustration bursts forth, by itself. "They drive us crazy," one of them relates. "A few days ago, the Arabs started throwing at us rocks, objects, whatever you want. I raise my weapon, and she stands in front of me, between me and the throwers, and she says: 'Shoot me if you want.' Go on to that checkpoint," he adds, "the soldiers there will be happy to see you." At the forward checkpoint stands a soldier with the innocent face of a child. "They come every day," he says. "I saw that they give the Arabs money, but mainly - they encourage them to complain against us, and the Arabs lie to them freely. One Arab pushed me, so I pushed back. He ran to one of them and complained that I beat him. You're lying, I said to him, but he only smiled and went away. She took down my personal details. I don't know what she'll do with this." Nadia Matar asks him why he didn't take the personal details of that woman, and when he replies that he asked but she refused to identify herself, Nadia quickly makes a telephone call to Adv. Yoram Sheftel, but she doesn't succeed in getting him. "Come a lot," he asks. Ten in the morning, the a-Ram Checkpoint, the sun has already begun to blaze away, and everyone's sweating. "You missed the leftists," the Border Patrol soldiers say, "they were here at 7:30." O. has been stationed at the checkpoint since January. He tells that two days after the broadcast of the Pegishat Laylah [Night Encounter] [television] program in which Koby Meidan interviewed Lia Nirgad, a MachsomWatch activist who recently published a book on her checkpoint experiences, "she came here to the checkpoint. I asked her: Do you really believe that the outposts aren't effective, like you said on television? She said that she is aware of the fact that the checkpoints prevent some of the terror attacks. I go crazy from this: What? preventing some of the attacks is unnecessary? On television she said they [the machsomwatch women] intervene only if they are asked, but this is incorrect. They come and start talking with detainees and with prisoners - asking why this is this way and not that. A few weeks ago we discovered an illegal. We brought him up to the watchtower, so that he and the other detainees would not match their stories. He sat there in the watchtower on a chair, and waited like a king, while I stand here like a dog. But she came with her demands: 'Why did you bring him up there?'" Nadia asks why the soldiers don't file complaints against these nitpickers, for disturbing them in the fulfillment of their duties. "It's bureaucracy," O. answers, "that would cause us to lose manpower. Who will stand here at the checkpoint while someone goes to file a complaint? We protect them [the MachsomWatch women], and they hate us." Nirgad's book lists occasions when she fluently curses soldiers. According to her, one has to fight with them, for they can be compared with soldiers in Nazi Germany of the 1930s. Ten-thirty a.m., on the way to the Shuafat checkpoint. We stop on the way at a small store that we come across, "Yossi's Minimarket," to buy more refreshments. There were more soldiers at the Kalandia checkpoint than we had anticipated, and the refreshments ran out. Yossi, the owner of the grocery store, beams at Nadia, "I saw you last night on television. I wanted to kiss you." At the Shuafat checkpoint one of the Women in Green asks a Border Patrol soldier if there is any stone throwing here. Instinctively, he looks at his watch. "Every day, at one o'clock, when the Arab children leave school, we get hit," he says. According to the testimony of the soldiers, [the women of] MachsomWatch come every Saturday with cold drinks for the Arabs waiting at the outpost. It's eleven o'clock. Today's round of the checkpoints has ended, without our seeing the women "checkpointers" in action, but we couldn't miss the feelings of the soldiers towards them. "It all began during Operation Defensive Shield," Nadia Matar relates. "We began going to the checkpoints to support the soldiers, to give out cookies and drinks. In the last year and a half we began seeing those women of the extreme left. We thought about ignoring them, just as we ignore the leftist demonstrations of Women in Black. But then we began hearing more and more stories from soldiers about their distress, and we reached the conclusion that they need additional assistance, and not just cold cola. I drew up a list of rights entitled 'Dear Soldier - Know Your Rights,' in which these women are exposed for masquerading as objective observers who are primarily interested in the civil rights of the Arabs, while they actually are veteran extreme left activists who are hostile to the State of Israel. "Thanks to us, we spell out the soldiers' rights to them, including the right to lodge a complaint against anyone who bothers, curses, insults, or threatens them, based on the laws against insulting a public servant and disturbing a public servant in the fulfillment of his duties. It is important for us to show the soldiers that the majority of the people is with them, that these troublesome women who harass them are a small minority that does not reflect the view of the majority, and that the great majority of us appreciate and applaud the hard work that they do. Our goal is not only to improve how the soldiers feel, but to help them to immediately remove these women. Since the official bodies are totally unaware of the severity of the problem, we sent a letter detailing how greatly these women harass the soldiers and interfere with the work of security checks. We attached to the letter a transcript of an interview on IDF Radio with Avi Ohayon, the father of Corporal Kfir Ohayon, who was killed at the Erez checkpoint in April this year." In the interview, Avi Ohayon tells that, a few days before he was killed, the late Kfir demanded that one of the Arabs passing through the checkpoint raise his shirt for the check, and he refused. After Kfir aimed his weapon at him and took him for a security check, the father recalls, "some woman, some Israeli woman who saw this, went and complained to his commanding officer. She said that she would make a commotion about this, that she would complain to the police investigators. Then his officers came to Kfir, his commanding officers, and they told him that he shouldn't have done that. My son lost his self-confidence. He called me at twelve-thirty at night. He told me, 'Father, I don't know what to do any longer. I can't sleep any longer, I have fears. Fears that I'll be put up on a complaint, and that they'll put me in jail.'" According to the bereaved father, he is certain that this complaint influenced his son's conduct at the Erez checkpoint on the day that he was killed. "We will take care of ourselves with the terrorists," he said in the interview, "but in the end we ourselves kill our soldiers." Nadia Matar sent the letter to some 300 public figures and bodies involved in security more than two months ago, but she received only a single response - from the Samaria and Judea District of the police - that stated that the material had been sent along to the district's legal advisor. Every official body that we address," she says, "including the IDF Spokesman, states that this is supervision of a humanitarian nature that does not pose a problem. In fact, however, this activity isn't so innocent. Women such as Ronni Yager, Adi Kuntsman (who is also active in lesbian organizations), and Yehudit Keshet are veteran leftist activists, with well-defined political goals, and not merciful do-gooders who are mainly concerned with human rights. It seems that the official bodies are unaware of the suffering that this organization causes soldiers, and the severe interference with their work, interference that could cost lives. "We thought of perhaps appealing to the High Court of Justice on this matter, but we fear that the court, as well, will be deceived by this seeming humane activity; accordingly, we decided to write orderly reports of the misdeeds of the troublesome checkpoint women. Perhaps if we collect all of these stories, someone in the security establishment will understand what a problem they cause, and will forbid them from approaching the checkpoints. Someone already suggested to us that we get into physical encounters with them, thereby forcing the army to get fed up with the entire mess and remove both us and them from the checkpoints. But it is not our way to physically attack, and we would be sorry for the soldiers who would lose our encouragement and the good word from us because of them." Where does the money for your activity come from - the gasoline,the telephones, the refreshments? "This really comes to a lot of money. We drive to the checkpoints at least once a week in a large group, and many women also go during the course of the week, either by themselves or with a friend, and the expenses are heavy. We receive some contributions from good Jews abroad, ten dollars here, twenty there, but not on the order of magnitude of MachsomWatch, that apparently is supported by the European Union." The spokeswoman of MachsomWatch, Adi Dagan, confirms that the organization received funds from the New Israel Fund, and also from "peace organizations" abroad. In response to the question, to whom do they give over the personal details of the soldiers that they take, she answers: "Soldiers are not obligated to give their personal details, and so we almost never possess such details. Border Patrol policemen, on the other hand, are required to give over personal details. They also wear tags with their names. If we want to file a complaint against a soldier, we turn to his commanding officers, to the battalion commander or to whoever is in charge in that sector. If we don't have the personal details of the soldier, we supply details such as day and hour and the details of the incident, and the IDF locates him." Dagan denies that any women in the organization use harsh language, curse soldiers,and call them "Nazis." She claims that all its members treat soldiers "with full respect." And what about the testimony by soldiers that MachsomWatch women give money to Arabs? This is not policy, we aren't an organization that distributes money. If a woman decides on her own, this is a personal decision, and this happens. It also happened that I gave money to a Palestinian who did not have the means to return home, but this was the personal money of a private person." The impression is received that Ronni Yager, Yehudit Keshet, and Adi Kuntsman are political women, whose political goals are not necessarily humane. "The names that you mentioned are those of the organization's founders, who at present are no longer active in it. The organization is definitely political, and the common factor shared by all its members is opposition to the occupation, opposition to the policy of the checkpoints, the closures, and limitations on movement. Our goal is totally political." Noon, the Checkpoints of Samaria In the Samaria area, at the various checkpoints around Shechem, the soldiers' stories already sound familiar. "They [Machsomwatch women] talk to us in very sharp language," attests Y., an officer who serves in the region, "and they curse 'you Nazis.' They intervene in a conversation between a soldier and someone being checked, they give the Arabs cold drinks, and they ask them if they have any complaints. They photograph us, and write down the names of the soldiers, and I say explicitly that there are checkpoints in which the soldiers conducted the examinations in an insufficiently thorough manner because these women stood there and badgered them." Hannah Gofer, a resident of Kedumim, tells that MachsomWatch women come to the Samaria area in a bulletproof vehicle, with an Arab driver. Gofer is more assertive than the Women in Green [in the Jerusalem area], and she does not have a problem with confronting them, in order "to toss them out." By chance, she recently saw an automobile with two of their activists at a checkpoint close to Avnei Hafetz. "I called out through a loudspeaker for them to get out," she attests. "A Border Patrol policeman who stood there made a sign with his finger on his neck, and told me: 'They drink our blood.' Just imagine that in some way we were inconveniencing soldiers in the performance of their work. The entire country would cry out against us. But as regards these humanists, who aid the enemy during time of war, not only does nobody interfere; to the contrary: they are awarded prizes for guarding human rights." Y., a senior officer who serves in Samaria, says that "in the large picture, their goals are good, although a small core of the organization's women act in an improper fashion to the soldiers." He admits that due to his standing he isn't stationed at the checkpoints himself, and therefore he was surprised to hear that MachsomWatch women customarily write down the personal details of soldiers. As far as he is concerned, "the soldiers are not supposed to talk to them at all, and if they take down personal details, the soldiers' company commander has to stop this. They are supposed to speak only with army people from the rank of company commander and up, and not with the simple soldier." The statement by Y. appears to concur with the claim by Nadia Matar that the command level has no idea of the interference caused in the field by the women of MachsomWatch. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
THE WORLD SEES RETREAT FROM GAZA AS THE BEGINNING OF THE END
Posted by Yoram Shifftn, June 24, 2004. |
|
Some 3 days ago, on the English edition of Maariv
(http://www.maarivintl.com), the journalist Uri Dan who has been for
years Sharon's right-hand man, appealed to Sharon to explain to the
nation why it is necessary to sacrifice this part, Gaza, for the sake of the
rest.
But already 3 weeks ago the acting Israeli ambassador in London was told by the interviewer in a BBC radio program that now, since Israel has agreed to retreat from Gaza and the North Shomron, Israel should also retreat from the rest of the territories since by retreating from this part you are admitting the illegality of the whole settlements enterprise. The Guardian for its part hopes that this retreat will initiate the "momentum" for uprooting the other settlements, and of course even Colin Powell, Tony Blair and others emphasize that this is only a good beginning. So it is in reality the inverse of sacrificing a part for the sake of the rest. Ehud Olmert twice on the prestigious bbc TV Hardtalk program said that the intention is to continue later with a further major retreat from the West Bank, but on Israel radio he says the opposite: that the idea is to save the other settlements by this retreat. It seems as this is their version of the Arab "victory by phases" doctrine. Dr. Yoram Shifftan has published articles on Israeli hasbara, in publications such as Ha'aretz, Ma'ariv, Hatzofeh, Hamodia, Ha'Uma and and Think-Israel. |
|
MISTRIAL, ISRAELI STYLE
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, June 24, 2004. |
|
A poor Bedouin Israeli Army soldier is standing trial for manslaughter in the death of an upper middle class British International Solidarity Movement volunteer. Who should really be in the dock? A 20-year-old Israeli Army private in handcuffs is led into a military court on a base near Ashkelon. Some eighty supporters are there to greet him, waving Israeli flags and carrying signs reading: Save Our Soldiers; Free the Soldier, Prosecute the ISM and No Human Shields in War Zones. The soldier, son of a poor Bedouin family from the north of Israel, is accused of manslaughter in the death last year of British International Solidarity Movement (ISM) agitator, Tom Hurndall. Hurndall, privileged product of a British public school, was shot in Rafah in April 2003 as he was making his way to the front lines of the area where the Israeli army was operating to uncover and destroy tunnels used to convey arms and ammunition from Egypt into Israel. Israeli Army officials told the Associated Press that an initial investigation, based on soldiers' accounts, indicated a Palestinian fired on a watchtower and the soldiers returned fire, hitting someone believed to be the gunman. Hurndall deliberately put himself in the area of known military operations, and took a bullet intended for a terrorist. The IDF noted: "It is important to keep in mind the danger posed by the illegal, irresponsible, and dangerous behavior of the ISM group that led to the tragic death and sad results." Hurndall was well aware of the risks inherent in his activity in Rafah. In one diary entry he wrote: "A few hundred meters away there are army snipers, and each one of us can appear in a sniper's telescopic sight. It is possible to say with certainty that they are watching us, and my life is in the hands of an Israeli marksman or settler. I know that I will probably never know what hit me, but that is part of my role - to be as exposed as possible.? We'll never know why Hurndall viewed his exposure as a crucial factor in bringing about peace in the Middle East, but this upper middle class lad from north London first tried his hand at being a human shield in Iraq, before arriving in Israel. Hurndall had joined a group of international volunteers who wanted to put themselves in front of Iraqi schools and hospitals, but when they arrived, it soon became apparent that sites would be selected by Iraqi government officials. After two weeks of heated discussion, the shields were given a list of seven sites and an ultimatum to "start shielding or start leaving." Hurndall left, passed through Jordan where he heard about the activities of the ISM, and entered Israel on a tourist visa. It's worth noting here that a number of ISMers seem to be the well-educated offspring of well-to-do parents. Hurndall attended Winchester College, one of England's most venerable and prestigious boarding schools. Tuition at the 600-year-old school is around 19,000 bp per year. Tom's father, Anthony Hurndall is a well-known London property lawyer. Mother Jocelyn, who says she is proud of her son, is head of a learning support unit. Fellow ISM volunteer, Radhika Sainath, a US citizen arrested three times for her violation of Israeli law during her repeated entries into Israel between 2002-2003, is the daughter of two Orange County, CA physicians who plans on attending graduate school at the Ivy League Columbia University in New York. In Hurndall's case, the resources and prominence of his family enabled them to hire a high profile British attorney to realize their efforts to prosecute an Israeli soldier for the death of their son. They chose Imran Khan, a controversial high-powered lawyer who tried to prevent then Israeli Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz from entering Britain for an official visit in 2002 because of "war crimes." Khan and the Hurndalls ran an effective public campaign that led to British pressure on Israel to finger an Israeli soldier for the unfortunate death of young Tom. Hurndall had control over his fate and went with full awareness into a battle zone. Tragically, he paid the price. The young Bedouin soldier arrested in January 2004 after Hurndall's demise in a London hospital was serving his country and tried to do his part to smash terrorism. Now he too is paying the price of the ISM's unconscionable efforts to put themselves in the way and encourage their volunteers to violate closed military zones. The accused has spent the last six months in jail. His family is so poverty stricken that they have been able to afford the bus fare to visit him only once during his incarceration. So far, his legal representation has been court-assigned, although Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of the Shurat HaDin Law Center has offered to assist the family. In court the other day, the accused, a stocky, dark young man dressed in a plain military green uniform, sat silently as his defense attorney addressed the court. His eyes didn't engage anyone in the room--neither the witness nor the dozens who had come to support him seemed to be of interest. The three-judge panel in the small, wood-paneled courtroom listened intently as an Israeli military interrogator answered questions about the interrogation and confession extracted from the accused. How could the court take this written six page confession seriously, asked the attorney, when the defendant neither reads nor writes Hebrew? Why did interrogators have the defendant sign the confession at night, at the end of more than nine hours of interrogation when he was tired and hungry, after he had allegedly stated: Give me a cup of coffee and a cigarette and I'll sign anything. Neil Wiggan, political office for the British Embassy was present in court with a Hebrew-English interpreter. He took a few notes, but spent most of the time catching up on his reading. "The soldier is being scapegoated by the prosecution to appease the British Foreign Office," charged Shurat HaDin attorney Leitner. Worse than that, noted Shimon, one of the supporters who had bussed down from Jerusalem. "It's the wrong entity on trial here. It's the ISM who should be sitting there accused, not this soldier who was doing his best to defend us from terrorist evil." Anyone wishing to help support the family of the accused may send tax deductible contributions to: Please make your tax- deductible check payable in the US to: PEF - Israel Endowment Fund and mail to: Shurat HaDin, Soldier Defense Fund
To donate outside the United States or in Israel, please make your check payable to:
and mail to: Shurat HaDin, Soldier Defense Fund,
"Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com |
|
WILL THE WEST SURVIVE?
Posted by IsrAlert, June 23, 2004. |
|
This was written by Walter Williams, June 23, 2004 / 4 Tamuz, 5764
and appeared in the Jewish World Review
(http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0604/williams_2004_06_23.php3)
The Muslim world is at war with Western civilization. We have the military might to thwart them. The question is: Do we have the intelligence to recognize the attack and the will to defend ourselves from annihilation? Their intent is clear, but let's refresh our memories with a bit of history. At the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich, several athletes were massacred. In 1979, the U.S. embassy in Tehran was taken over and 52 hostages held for more than a year. In 1983, U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut were blown up, killing 241 U.S. soldiers. In 1988, Pan Am flight 103 was bombed, killing 270 people. In 1993, there was the first bombing of the World Trade Center, and in 2001, it was reduced to rubble, killing more than 3,000 Americans. In 1998, U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed, resulting in more than 200 dead and 4,000 injured. Who are the people responsible for these and other wanton murders of innocents, including the recent barbaric beheading of two innocent men? They were all Muslims. You say, "Williams, you can't make an indictment of a whole people and their religion!" I'm not, and let me clearly state: By no means are all Muslims murderers. But on the other hand, I've never heard broad Muslim condemnation of their fellow Muslims' murderous acts committed in the name of their god. If anything, there has been jubilation and dancing in the streets in the wake of Muslim attacks on Westerners. Contrast their response to the widespread Western condemnation of the, mild by comparison, behavior of a few coalition forces in Iraq's Abu Ghraib prison. Muslim atrocities, and the collective Muslim response to those atrocities, might be better understood knowing their belief system as spelled out by a few, among many, passages from the Quran: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah" (Surat At-Taubah 9:29). "I will instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, Smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger tips of them" (Quran 8:12). "The unbelievers among the People of the Book and the pagans shall burn forever in the fire of Hell. They are the vilest of all creatures" (Quran 98:1-8). "Fight against those who believe not in Allah, and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (Islam), until they are subdued" (Surat At-Taubah 9:29). Phil Lucas, editor of the Panama City, Fla., News Herald, in his April 4, 2004, editorial "Up Against Fanaticism," asks, "Can anybody name three ongoing world conflicts in which Muslims are not involved?" Lucas says, "They can't get along with their neighbors on much of the planet: France, Chechnya, Bosnia, Indonesia, Spain, Morocco, India, Tunisia, Somalia, etc., etc., etc." My colleague Dr. Thomas Sowell observes, "Those in the Islamic world have for centuries been taught to regard themselves as far superior to the 'infidels' of the West, while everything they see with their own eyes now tells them otherwise." He adds, "Nowhere have whole peoples seen their situation reversed more visibly or more painfully than the peoples of the Islamic world." Sowell adds that few people, once at the top of civilization, accept their reversals of fortune gracefully. Moreover, they don't blame themselves for their plight. For the Muslim world, it's the West who's to blame. History never repeats itself exactly, but we might benefit from the knowledge of factors leading to the decline of past great civilizations. Rome was one of those advanced civilizations. Rome was so caught up in "bread and circuses" and moral decline that it couldn't manage to defend itself from invading barbaric hordes who ultimately plunged Europe into the Dark Ages. The sooner we recognize the West is in a war for survival, the more likely we'll be able to escape the fate that befell the Roman Empire. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
SHARON LOOKS TO HIS LEFT TO SALVAGE GOVERNMENT
Posted by Sergio Tezza (Hadar), June 23, 2004. |
|
No surprise for those with memory. Sharon promised CLEARLY AND REPEATEDLY, BEFORE AND AFTER THE ELECTIONS (he was even booed for it by his own party after the elections!) that HIS GOAL WAS A NATIONAL UNITY GOVERNMENT TO MAKE IT POSSIBLE TO EXILE JEWS FROM THEIR HOMES. Those who did not want to hear did not hear. The responsibility of ALL those who made Sharon's rule possible, and Shinui's presence in the government acceptable (that includes NRP and National Union, that allowed the sale of Chamets on Pesach, the mass desecration of Shabbath with unrestricted business opening on Shabbath, the legalised sale of pork, the continuous introduction of goyim and even missionaries in Israel, etc. just to serve their own partisan interests - from US contacts (Benny Elon) to money for NRP Yeshivas) is a permanent badge of dishonour and a stain in Jewish history for which we'll cry for more generations. Meantime, Sharon and his goons (including his family) will keep on drinking tea and making millions of $$$ on Jewish blood with their old friend Peres, with the help of Beilin's friend and Attorney General of choice Mazuz and their judicial dictators in the Supreme Court (who play the old "good cop - bad cop" game) and their armed wings of the police special units and Shabbak. OYLEM GOYLEM. The masses are asses. This was written June 16 by Avraham Shmuel Lewin, JP Israel Correspondent (http://www.thejewishpress.com/news_article.asp?article=3817) TEL AVIV - Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Monday that he might have no choice but to form a national unity government with the Left. "It doesn't seem that I will get far with the present coalition," Sharon said Monday night following a no-confidence motion that was narrowly defeated thanks to the Labor Party's safety net. The Knesset defeated the motion in a 37-22 vote, with 31 members refraining from voting. The Labor, Yahad and One Nation parties abstained. Following the vote, Sharon lambasted Minister Uzi Landau and Deputy Minister Michael Ratzon for defying his instructions by leaving the Knesset plenum during the vote over the disengagement plan. Likud ministers and Knesset members convinced Sharon that firing the two, as he was inclined to do, would likely increase the split in the already divided party. Likud Minister Tzipi Livni and MK Michael Eitan were among those urging restraint. Landau and Ratzon preferred to risk Sharon's wrath by skipping the vote rather than support the government's position on evacuating Jews from the Gaza Strip and parts of Judea and Samaria. Sharon had told the cabinet members Sunday to attend all Knesset votes. "I expect you to be present at Knesset votes, no-confidence votes and other votes on any issue," Sharon said. "I will not accept a situation where members of the cabinet are absent, or deputy ministers express themselves or work against the decision." Speaking before the vote, Ratzon said, "I'm not frightened by threats and scare tactics." At the meeting before the vote several MKs proposed voting against the government on the issue of the withdrawal, but it was decided that relations with Sharon should not be worsened and that the rebels within Likud would therefore abstain. Several MKs expressed dismay with ministers Tzachi Hanegbi, Dan Naveh and Yisrael Katz, who had opposed the disengagement plan but were now remaining mum. Meanwhile, half the National Religious Party faction - party chairman Effi Eitam and MKs Yitzhak Levy and Nissan Slomiansky - voted against the government on the anti-disengagement motion. The other three NRP faction members - Minister Zevulun Orlev and MKs Shaul Yahalom and Gila Finkelstein - refrained from voting. After the vote the prime minister said the 12 dissenters were forcing him to invite Labor to join the coalition which, he said, could not continue to function with so few supporters. Had Sharon dismissed the dissenters, he would have found himself with only 43 coalition MKs supporting him - 28 from Likud and 15 from Shinui. Faced with few options, Sharon will apparently merely try to keep his collapsing coalition in place until the summer session concludes on August 4. During the debate, MK Benny Elon (National Union), who was fired as housing minister before the cabinet vote on disengagement, blamed Sharon for betraying the Likud movement, its constitution and its members - who voted to defeat the pullout plan in a May 2 party referendum. Elon quoted from a section of the Likud constitution, saying that the Jewish people have an eternal right to the Land of Israel. He said Sharon was threatening his ministers to keep them from opposing his evacuation plan. "We have no confidence in the prime minister's nationalist motivations; we have no confidence in the government's responsibility and courage," Elon said. This was the first time the National Union party, which resigned from the government last week, has filed a no-confidence motion. Yahad leader Yossi Beilin stirred dissent in his leftist party by urging Labor to pull the safety net out from under the government and let it fall. Beilin has advocated toppling the Sharon government despite its stated intention of evacuating the Gaza Strip and four settlements in Samaria. MK Ran Cohen, also of Yahad, argued that the government should be supported as long as it makes a serious effort at carrying out the disengagement plan. -- Be`ahavath Israel Mr Tezzo lives in Qiryath Arba-Hebron |
|
NOT MUCH TIME LEFT TO DECIDE
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, June 23, 2004. |
|
This was written by Elyakim Haetzni and appeared in
Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com) June 16, 2004.
Today is the 16th of June. The government decision that left the people of Israel nine months to temper the evil decree was on the sixth of June. That means that the period of grace has already been shortened by ten days. What have we done in that time to save ourselves from catastrophe? The catastrophe of which I speak will not only affect the settlements. The dictator is preparing a national disaster that may well endanger the continued existence of the entire state. For a year and a half, Ariel Sharon refrained from reacting to Yasser Arafat's terror war. Even after the massacre at the Dolphinarium, even after the assassination of Minister Rehavam ("Gandhi") Ze'evi, he continued to argue that "restraint is strength", in order to avoid inciting the world powers to send international observers here. That was because he justifiably saw the involvement of such observers as foreign interference, as a constraint on freedom of action, as delimiting national sovereignty - and also as an excuse for worsening relations with the world, as always happened every time international observers set foot here. And yet, all of a sudden, there appear British spies from MI6 in the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria, to "observe" the settlements and to train the new Palestinian army. Wanted terrorists in Jenin kicked them out, but Sharon invited them in. In Samaria, Jordanian officers are also operating, in parallel with the Egyptian military intervention in Gaza. The government decision was on the sixth of June, the anniversary of the start of the Six Day War. Precisely on that day, Sharon forced through the decision that will reverse all of the gains made in that war by, among other things, returning the Egyptians to Gaza, the Jordanians to Samaria and the erasure of Jewish settlement. With Egyptian units in Gaza, the hands of the IDF will be tied. Every targeted killing could spark a war. The explosion of the APC on the Philadelphi Route was the writing on the wall, written in the blood of five soldiers: an improved "Cobra" RPG, made in Egypt, did the deadly deed. Itai Asher wrote in Maariv, on June 11, that the IDF is not currently destroying smuggling tunnels because there is no alternate armored vehicle for transporting explosives. That report is so fantastical, it is almost incomprehensible. For years, Egypt has been responsible for providing arms and equipment for the terror war, more so than Syria is guilty of arming the Hizbullah. Would anyone consider it possible that the prime minister would invite the Syrian army to the Golan Heights... in order to cease the arming of the Hizbullah? It would be thought the act of a madman. Sharon's decision to insinuate into Gaza the Egyptian army is crazier still, because the Egyptian army is several times more dangerous than the Syrian. After the withdrawal-retreat, all manner of missile and Katyusha will flow across the border controlled, on both sides, by Egypt. The missiles will turn life throughout the Negev and the south into a living hell. What the Oslo criminals brought upon the people of Israel by bringing the Palestinian terrorist groups from Tunis will pale in comparison with the results of bringing the Egyptian army and the missiles from Egypt deep into our land. In the near range of the missiles will be the Ashkelon power plant and the Dimona nuclear reactor, according to experts quoted in the media. And all of the foregoing is being done unilaterally. That is, the Egyptians and Palestinians owe us nothing, not even on paper. What do the Minister of Defense, the IDF Chief of Staff, members of the General Staff and government ministers have to say about this? Some of them are simply silent and some are running along with the rest of the herd. The Defense Minister even reported to the government with great satisfaction that Egypt is being very helpful with the disengagement, even agreeing to convene a joint committee to ease our exit. Thus the death row convict thanks his executioner: "He is very helpful." The dictatorship of Sharon not only forebodes the end of the settlements, God forbid, but also poses a threat to the security of Israel. Like the Golem of Prague when it got out of control, he tramples everything underfoot. Everything has been overturned: suddenly, he is a friend to Kofi Annan, is enthralled by the Arabs, and praises Javier Solana, the European whose hatred for us drips from him. As in the case of Shabtai Zvi, suddenly what was forbidden is permitted, the fast of Tisha B'Av becomes a feast. At the cabinet meeting, Sharon ordered the ministers and deputy ministers opposed to the Gaza retreat, as a dictator would, not to absent themselves from the Knesset and to vote only in favor of the policy. He also forbade them from opening their mouths in public against what he calls the "disengagement". And whosoever rebels will be removed. In the meantime, the compensation-for-evacuation committees are already meeting, and the jangle of money is already being sounded in the direction of the settlers, in an effort to seduce them. According to the press, down-payments will already be made as early as August. Facts on the ground are being finalized: Europe, the UN and America are declaring their commitment; the Egyptians, Jordanians and British are already on the ground; Finance Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will soon distribute cash; and still, Zevulun Orlev, Nissan Slomiansky and Sha'ul Yahalom (National Religious Party) do not see, do not hear and do not know. They don't even ask the question, "And if the government decides not to uproot the settlements, how will it get the down payments back?" They know that we know that it is all, as the kids say, "BS." In such a situation, it is forbidden that a single day pass without demonstrations and vigils across from the homes and offices of our leaders. And not a single day should pass without us also turning to the soldiers, who are already undergoing psychological conditioning and brainwashing to prepare them for the atrocity they intend to send them to carry out. Yet we have not decided to address them, verbally and in writing, to ask them not to obey. And we have not yet gone to the clerks - in the Ministries of Finance, Security, Justice - who are already working on the preparations for the atrocity of expulsion and uprooting, devastation, pushing, pulling, beating and aggression against men, women and children, along with the destruction of their places of residence. We have not yet turned to them at their homes and offices to say, "Don't do it. Don't obey. Delay, obstruct, disrupt - have a heart and a conscience. Don't take part in this national crime, which is also a crime against humanity, and about which Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, Rishon Lezion and former Chief Rabbi, said, '...it is the Torah opinion that no man has the right, not the prime minister, and not the government itself, to uproot a Jewish community in the Land of Israel; all the more so can it be obviously inferred that no part of the Land of Israel can be transferred to a foreign entity.'" The people of Gush Katif and northern Samaria, the Judea, Samaria and Gaza Council, the settlers and all Land of Israel loyalists have arrived at a fork in the road, and it is time to decide which way they are headed. It is one thing to say that Sharon's actions are mistaken, dangerous, irresponsible and even lawless. A government decision within those parameters, if it was passed through proper legal channels, must still be accepted and obeyed, even by the affected citizen and most certainly by the people in uniform. However, it is another matter entirely to say that Sharon's actions are forbidden and patently illegal, because he is violating the most basic human rights according to morality as accepted in the West, and because they are forbidden according to the Torah in the view of rabbis such as Rabbis Eliyahu, Avraham Shapira, Shlomo Aviner, Tau, Melamed, Lior and many, many others. To make it more tangible for ourselves, let's imagine that Sharon would pass through a government decision to do to 22 Arab villages what he is plotting to do to Jewish villages. In such a case, he would be accused of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and if he would dare set foot outside the country, he'd be seated in the dock alongside the Yugoslavian Slobodan Milosevic. Can it be imagined that we, Jews in Israel, would decide that exactly such an act, if done to us, is legal, permissible and kosher? All the organization of the opposition to transfer - the statements, messages and methods - change the minute the government is accused of a patently illegal act, which it is forbidden to obey orders to carry out. Even less than that will be enough. Even an act that is legal, but patently immoral, is recognized in Western democracies as falling under the rubric of "polite refusal": non-violent resistance, disobedience and the willingness to suffer the consequences. Thus the blacks in America achieved their equal rights. We have yet to hear the settler leaders declaring openly and fearlessly that they thusly relate to the dictates of Sharon, and calling on the public to act accordingly. As long as our leadership refuses to call the thing what it is - patently illegal and immoral, which should not be obeyed, all the protests will be just in order to fulfill a perceived obligation, round two of the evacuation of Yamit in the Sinai. There is not much time left to decide and to determine a course of action accordingly - just nine months less ten days. I propose to readers to demand a clear answer from our leaders: against the conspiracy of destruction - which not by coincidence is meant to begin exactly on the day of Tisha B'Av - what do you plan, a demonstration or a real struggle? The National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" |
|
RETURN ME TO AN ISLAND
Posted by Arlene Peck, June 23, 2004. |
|
I have recently returned from a 'speaking tour' to Portland, Maine. While there I had a chance to spend a few days visiting cousins on a little island that is only accessible by ferryboat. The people on Peaks Island were totally different from those here on the west coast. The children look like children instead of baby bimbett Britney Speers clones. Their world was innocent. These people don't even watch television and that is wonderful. They talk, take walks, ride bikes, read, play games, and life was utopia. For the better part of two weeks I didn't know what was happening in the world, and folks, I think I much prefer it. I returned to Marina del Rey, Ca. turned on the television and life was back to usual. Every station, every page in the L.A. Times were about the latest horrorific attack by Muslims. I wanted to go back to the old days when all we had to worry about was whether Britney wore implants or who Ja'lo was going to marry next. Who would have thought that we would become desensitized by sub-humans who routinely chop off heads of hostages? I "get it", and I think a lot of you readers do as well. We are fighting an enemy that is not only violent, but one which is part of a seventh century mentality. Land has nothing to do with the issue. Never has. The enemy hate us because ... just because. Yet, after my visit to the nice people of Maine and speaking with many, I see how lovely people like those just can't comprehend the vicious, barbarism of Islamic fundamentalism. Our culture is so different that we are a different species. The people with whom I spoke truly believe that people should 'be nice' and everything can be solved by negotiation. Maybe give them a hug or two. Many told me, "Surely you don't believe all Muslims to be like that?" No, not all, but I wonder! Out of two billion of them, can anyone out there name me one million man/woman marches protesting the idea of 'suicide' bombs, or cutting off heads? No? Well then, how about giving me the names of fifty of these nice Muslims who are protesting the evil of their culture? Have any of you seen protests by that many? Maybe you know of a mosque or two that have come out publicly stating that their Muslim brothers are dysfunctional and what is happening is just wrong? You don't, because they just don't exist. Walid Shoebat, who was once a terrorist and now speaks out for Israel, and journalist and speaker Joseph Farah are few and far between. Out of two billion Muslims where is the outcry from their own culture that what they are doing is savage and they have a Stone Age mentality? Normal people do not consider their women with less consideration than their farm animals. Chopping off heads and various body parts is beyond dysfunctional. Hell, I've been to Gaza a few times and these morons have designated "days of rage." They probably have special holidays of "blowing up" when they are not sitting around smoking "happy water" and burning tires. I've had it with politically correct people; even those in Maine, who try to see a situation with "fairness", only opt for disappointment. Dealing with this kind of enemy is as simple as them vs. us. I can't hear one more time there can be a peaceful co-existence and mutual cooperation and tolerance when this is a culture that teach their children to hate and glorify death. It's very simple. You do not negotiate with an alligator. Nor do you legitimize them by inviting them to diplomatic conferences and promising them anything that's in our State Dept's mind at that moment. Our government would let Israel be the sacrificial lamb in a heartbeat, and what's scares me is how Israel's leaders don't seem to have a problem with that. Arafat could have been taken care of long ago but it didn't happen because Bush demanded that Sharon not touch or harm him. Israel should have walked away the same as Arafat when President Bush pushed his Roadmap to Hell on the Jewish state. We should also be questioning why Israel is the only party which is expected to produce specific hard results for some fictitious peace. It is O.K. to single out Israel for 'ethnic cleansing' and Sharon seems to be going along with dividing and carving up the land of Israel. No matter how much they or we as Americans give up for that matter, it will never be enough. I understand the political reasons for Bush. He's been in bed with the Saudi family the better part of his life. But Sharon? Why are we so hesitant to acknowledge that the last seven times we Americans went into war it was in defense of the Muslims? We have forgotten, along with the Arabs, how we saved their butts in Bosnia, Kosovo, Gulf Wars 1 & 2, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia. They now want apologies for our humiliating them? Fine. But where have the marches and vocal apologies been for 9/11 when all the murderers on that fateful day were Islamic Arabs? We even flew the Saudi family out when no other planes were flying out the day after. But, hey, they've got their own problems now that their own homegrown terrorists are turning inward on them. Couldn't happen to a nicer group. For years Israel tried to tell the world about the Saudi's culpability in promoting and funding terrorism. Nobody cared. Now, however, since United States soldiers are being murdered and mutilated on a daily basis, also by the hands of our 'good friends' the Saudis, the tone of the State Dept. and talking heads has changed. I think I began to lose my compassion the first time after seeing our own people being killed, mutilated, and having their burnt bodies being dragged through the streets amongst the joyous crowd dancing and passing out candy. I know for sure I lost my patience while watching my tax dollars continue to be sent into the bottomless pit of 'aid' to countries and organizations like the PA that are never going to reach their intended goal anyway. I've never thought President Bush to be the sharpest knife in the drawer. But he knows that the Saudis and Pakistan have been behind the terrorism and they have been funding it for decades. They fund, breed, and raise these global Islamic jihadists and have been getting away with it for decades. Bush gets away with pressuring Israel at every turn to "show restraint." I lost my patience watching television and seeing Bush riding the Saudi Prince around his ranch in a golf cart while giving photo-ops and calling this terrorist culture peaceful and great. Hey, I once had compassion and I still do. I'm sorry for those masses to whom we support financially and wonder why it's acceptable for the obscenely wealthy Arabs to accept our aid, and force their people to live in squalor and 'refugee camps' for their own public relations. And I'm truly sorry that they feel they have to blame the USA for anything that angers them. I wish I was a virgin again like those good people in Maine and bury my head in the sand and no longer face the reality of what I see. Life is ever so much nicer that way Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com |
|
THE SACRED MUSLIM PRACTICE OF BEHEADING
Posted by IsrAlert, June 23, 2004. |
|
This was written by Andrew G. Bostom, May 13, 2004, and appeared on
the Front Page Magazine website
(authors.asp?ID=1056FrontPageMagazine.com)
Reactions to the grotesque jihadist decapitation of yet another "infidel Jew," Mr. Berg, (http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?strwebhead =Was+Berg+targeted+as+a+Jew%3F&intcategoryid=5) make clear that our intelligentsia are either dangerously uninformed, or simply unwilling to come to terms with this ugly reality: such murders are consistent with sacred jihad practices, as well as Islamic attitudes towards all non-Muslim infidels, in particular, Jews, which date back to the 7th century, and the Prophet Muhammad's own example. According to Muhammad's sacralized biography by Ibn Ishaq, Muhammad himself sanctioned the massacre of the Qurayza, a vanquished Jewish tribe. He appointed an "arbiter" who soon rendered this concise verdict: the men were to be put to death, the women and children sold into slavery, the spoils to be divided among the Muslims. Muhammad ratified this judgment stating that it was a decree of God pronounced from above the Seven Heavens. Thus some 600 to 900 men from the Qurayza were lead on Muhammad's order to the Market of Medina. Trenches were dug and the men were beheaded, and their decapitated corpses buried in the trenches while Muhammad watched in attendance. Women and children were sold into slavery, a number of them being distributed as gifts among Muhammad's companions, and Muhammad chose one of the Qurayza women (Rayhana) for himself. The Qurayza's property and other possessions (including weapons) were also divided up as additional "booty" among the Muslims, to support further jihad campaigns. The classical Muslim jurist al-Mawardi (a Shafi'ite jurist, d. 1058) from Baghdad was a seminal, prolific scholar who lived during the so-called Islamic "Golden Age" of the Abbasid-Baghdadian Caliphate. He wrote the following, based on widely accepted interpretations of the Qur'an and Sunna (i.e., the recorded words and deeds of Muhammad), regarding infidel prisoners of jihad campaigns: "As for the captives, the amir [ruler] has the choice of taking the most beneficial action of four possibilities: the first to put them to death by cutting their necks; the second, to enslave them and apply the laws of slavery regarding their sale and manumission; the third, to ransom them in exchange for goods or prisoners; and fourth, to show favor to them and pardon them. Allah, may he be exalted, says, 'When you encounter those [infidels] who deny [the Truth=Islam] then strike [their] necks' (Qur'an sura 47, verse 4)"....Abu'l-Hasan al-Mawardi, al-Ahkam as-Sultaniyyah." [The Laws of Islamic Governance, trans. by Dr. Asadullah Yate, (London), Ta-Ha Publishers Ltd., 1996, p. 192. Emphasis added.] Indeed such odious "rules" were iterated by all four classical schools of Islamic jurisprudence, across the vast Muslim empire. For centuries, from the Iberian peninsula to the Indian subcontinent, jihad campaigns waged by Muslim armies against infidel Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Buddhists and Hindus, were punctuated by massacres, including mass throat slittings and beheadings. During the period of "enlightened" Muslim rule, the Christians of Iberian Toledo, who had first submitted to their Arab Muslim invaders in 711 or 712, revolted in 713. In the harsh Muslim reprisal that ensued, Toledo was pillaged, and all the Christian notables had their throats cut. On the Indian subcontinent, Babur (1483-1530), the founder of the Mughal Empire, who is revered as a paragon of Muslim tolerance by modern revisionist historians, recorded the following in his autobiographical "Baburnama," about infidel prisoners of a jihad campaign: "Those who were brought in alive [having surrendered] were ordered beheaded, after which a tower of skulls was erected in the camp." [The Baburnama -Memoirs of Babur, Prince and Emperor, translated and edited by Wheeler M. Thacktson, Oxford University Press,1996, p. 188. Emphasis added.] Recent jihad-inspired decapitations of infidels by Muslims have occurred across the globe- Christians in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Nigeria; Hindu priests and "unveiled" Hindu women in Kashmir; Wall Street Journal reporter, and Jew, Daniel Pearl. We should not be surprised that these contemporary paroxysms of jihad violence are accompanied by ritualized beheadings. Such gruesome acts are in fact sanctioned by core Islamic sacred texts, and classical Muslim jurisprudence. Empty claims that jihad decapitations are somehow "alien to true Islam," (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13350) however well-intentioned, undermine serious efforts to reform and desacralize Islamic doctrine. This process will only begin with frank discussion, both between non-Muslims and Muslims, and within the Muslim community. Please Also See:
IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
BAD LAWS
Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, June 23, 2004. |
|
Bad laws are meant to be violated. No decent driver observes the speed limit if it is unreasonably low. Every normal American kid starts drinking years before reaching the legal drinking age, because it is unreasonably high. When you need a weapon for protection from an imminent danger, an unlicensed gun may be your safest option, since by the time you can obtain one legally it may be too late. And if you are a terrorist, you must consider the Geneva Conventions proof that Allah loves you, because, without them, you would've been hunted down like a rabid dog long before you had a chance to inflict so much suffering on your victims. The media nowadays is full of pictures of Iraqis running around with AK-47's or RPG launchers. When such a warrior comes home, he sticks his weapon under the bed or hides it in the hole next to the outhouse and instantly becomes an innocent civilian. How? Simple. He is a civilian because he is unarmed and not wearing a uniform; he is innocent, because, by definition, any civilian is presumed innocent until proven guilty. Convenient, isn't it? How many times has a presumably innocent civilian walked into a crowd of Jews and proven himself guilty beyond a reasonable doubt by blowing himself up, along with everyone around him? We always suspected he was a terrorist, but could do nothing until we knew for sure. Now we know for sure. But how can we punish him now that he is forever beyond our reach? Eternally virile and carefree as a regularly fed rabbit, he has taken permanent residence in the Big Muslim Brothel in the Sky, his delicate needs attended by 72 heavenly virgins. Talk about dying to get laid. Meanwhile, down below, it's business as usual: we bury our dead; Arabs shamelessly celebrate the murder. The IDF will raze the house where the terrorist's family lives. HAMAS, using humanitarian assistance funds collected from all over the world, including the United States, will promptly and generously reimburse them for the loss. What can we do to stop it? During the 1980's, when kidnapping Westerners was the favorite national pastime in Lebanon, Soviets were conspicuously absent from the list of targets. It might be, conceivably, because so many Arab terrorists had been brainwashed, trained, armed, and financed by the Soviet Union. On the other hand, jihad is jihad, and one infidel is as bad as the next one. So, why the immunity? I heard a story that might or might not be true. A rogue group had made the mistake of kidnapping a Soviet. Soon, an old man related to one of the kidnappers came to see them. He was carrying a small package. He told them that a few members of their families, including himself and a little boy, had been taken by the Soviets. They killed them all, except for the boy, in front of the old man, and then let him go so he could deliver the package, which contained the boy's little finger. After that, Soviets could walk around Beirut with as little fear as if it were adjacent to Red Square. As I said, I don't know if the story is true, but some versions of it mention Arabs shining the shoes of their hostage before driving him back to the Soviet embassy. Here's a true story that also involves Russians. Nine years ago, on June 14, 1995, a gang of 162 Chechens on three trucks raided the Southern Russian town of Budyonnovsk located not far from the border with Chechnya. For several hours, the trucks kept roaming the streets mowing down everyone who happened to be in the way. After that, the Chechens crowded 1,800 people inside the local hospital designed to accommodate 250 and kept them hostage for 6 days. The Russian authorities reacted with their usual murderous incompetence. At the end, the terrorists, without a single casualty on their side, negotiated a safe passage to Chechnya and departed, leaving behind 143 people killed and more than 400 wounded. Some of them were later captured and sentenced to various prison terms. The leader of the raid is still at large. Imagine a slightly modified scenario. Imagine that the Russians had established an air-tight cordon around the hospital precluding any possibility of even a single terrorist escaping, and informed the hostage takers that (a) every single one of them was going to be executed immediately upon surrender, (b) for every harmed hostage, the Russian army would execute several terrorist accomplices, and (c) whenever the terrorists had anything to communicate, they were to send out a hostage with the message. If the Russians made good on their promise, chances are, that would have been the very last time Chechens would have ever contemplated taking hostages. But where would the Russians have gotten so many terrorist accomplices on such a short notice? The hint comes from a rather unexpected source. Thomas L. Friedman, the staff anti-Semite at the New York Times, attempted to convince his readers that surrender to terrorists would earn Israel a moral advantage over them; I wonder what he would recommend to a rape victim. He wrote in his column that appeared in the June 13 issue of the newspaper: "There is no total victory to be had by Israel over Hezbollah or the Palestinians, without total genocide." This short statement contains so many layers of falsehood that it's hard to decide where to start. First of all, Hezbollah is a terrorist organization. Its eradication would not qualify as genocide. Second, there are no "Palestinians". The libelous, anti-Semitic misnomer "Palestinian people" refers to another terrorist organization. Its eradication would qualify as genocide no more than the eradication of Hezbollah or, let's say, Al Qaeda. Third, I strongly object to the assumption that, upon hearing the word genocide, I am supposed to cry, "Oh, anything but that!" and willingly allow my enemies to slaughter me, my family, and the rest of my people, even if, from Mr. Friedman's perspective, it would earn me a tremendous moral advantage over those who, just in modern times, have been trying to commit genocide against us ever since Hitler had nearly succeeded. Has it occurred to him that, even before almost half of my people died in the Holocaust, the 2,000 years of relentless persecution at the hands of everyone had earned us an inexhaustible supply of moral advantage over the rest of the world, from Mohandas Gandhi to the Pope? When attacked, we must defend ourselves, and there is no reason why we should feel guilty about winning. After all, we are the only people on earth who have never committed an act of aggression against anyone in the last two millennia. Most importantly, under all those libelous layers, Mr. Friedman's statement unintentionally contains a scintilla of truth. His words literally mean that every single Shiite in Lebanon and every single Arab in Israel are ready to sacrifice their lives for the cause of the extermination of Jews. Golda Meir expressed it more succinctly when she said that there would be no peace as long as Arabs hate us more than they love their own children. But what happened to the mythical moderate Muslims? Where is the peaceful majority of Arabs whose dreams and aspirations are no different from yours, mine, or Mr. Friedman's? Poor Mr. Friedman has accidentally almost told the truth; will he be forgiven his terrible slip of the tongue? The truth is that terrorists do not live in a vacuum. They do not attack from outer space. They do not act alone. In Chechnya, in Israel, in Saudi Arabia they operate from within a tight network of tribes, clans, extended families, and complicated alliances. Weapon-smuggling tunnels, bomb factories, and even Arafat's Mukata are not the most important parts of the terrorist infrastructure in Israel. The infrastructure of terror begins at the local mosque with its five daily calls for jihad; at school where Muslim children receive their first lessons in murderous hatred of the "infidel"; at the local grocery store, whose walls are decorated with posters of murderers glorified as heroic martyrs; at home where mom and dad are dreaming of "martyrdom" for their children. The mullahs, the teachers, the grocers, the parents are all terrorist accomplices. Villagers, who do not report that a terrorist is spending a night in the area, are his accomplices. Children surrounding an Arab sniper to protect him with their bodies while he is unhurriedly selecting his target are his accomplices. They all have blood on their hands; they are all guilty of mass murder. If you drop a bomb on a place that the Big International Brothel on the East River qualifies as a "refugee camp" in Gaza, Judea, or Samaria, every single casualty will be either a terrorist or an accomplice. (Am I suggesting carpet-bombing terror-infested areas of Israel? Not if there is another way for Israel to achieve peace for its people with less losses on their side.) The Geneva Conventions leave a country forced to defend itself against terrorism only one option: individual criminal prosecution of those personally responsible for the atrocities. In many cases, however, the murderers kill themselves along with the victims. When the murder does not involve suicide, as was the case with the three Americans blown up in Gaza, apprehending them is usually impossible. In rare cases when they do get prosecuted, even the heaviest possible punishment does not serve as a deterrent for those who follow in their footsteps. Paul Johnson was beheaded by Saudi terrorists on June 18. What will the US government do in response? It has already done everything that was in its power: it promised to punish those responsible. We all know that it is nothing but an empty threat. The Saudis killed a few people and announced those were the culprits. Go check. But terrorism is not a crime; it's warfare that, by its very definition, constitutes a violation of Geneva Conventions. Thus, these conventions act like gun control laws in many states, where they prevent law-abiding citizens from obtaining firearms but can do nothing, even in theory, to prevent the spread of illegal guns. It's time we start treating terrorists and their accomplices the way we treat enemy soldiers. You don't punish the enemy soldier for doing whatever soldiers do. Instead, you kill him at the very first opportunity, hopefully, before he has a chance to harm anyone on your side. Immediately, a tricky question comes up: They kill civilians; if we begin killing civilians, how are we different from them? But our enemies are not civilians; they are terrorists disguised as civilians. Civilians do not kill anyone, do not rip apart dead bodies, do not blow themselves up in discotheques and restaurants. If this is not convincing enough, let me use a parable to show you the answer. Imagine that you are witnessing a gun fight between two strangers. Both are dark-haired white males in their late twenties or early thirties. Both are wearing jeans, T-shirts, and sneakers. They use identical weapons. They display comparable combat skills. You don't know which of them started the fight. As far as you can tell, any one of them could claim self-defense. What is the difference between the two? You won't know until I tell you that one of them is an undercover cop trying to apprehend the other, who had escaped from custody after being arrested for the murder of an octogenarian lady who had tried to prevent him from sodomizing her quadriplegic husband. Only then can you choose sides according to your own ideas of right and wrong. You see, it's not what you do or how you do it, it's what you're trying to achieve by doing it. I've left the most obvious question for the very end. Only two countries in the entire world are trying to fight terrorism today: Israel and the United States. It's perfectly clear that neither of them is going to do it right in the foreseeable future. Then why I even talk about it? Because even if no one is going to do the right thing today, someone should nevertheless spell it out, so we will know that we do not have to be defenseless against evil. Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com This article was written for the Forwerts. |
|
SLAVERY OF CHILDREN AND WOMEN IN PERSIAN GULF COUNTRIES
Posted by Freedom News, June 23, 2004. |
|
This was written by Morteza Aminmansour of Seattle, Washington. It
appeared in the "Persian Journal" June 20, 2004
(http://www.iranian.ws/iran_news/publish/article_2675.shtml).
The UAE was one of the 19 countries in the world that the United States blacklisted for human trafficking. The trafficking as a modern form of Slavery leaves no land untouched.. With camel racing heavily patronized by the oil rich rulers, who have least respect in the legislature, thousands of small children from Indian sun continent face a black and future. Women migrated from Azerbaijan, Iran, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, India and Eastern Europe have reported being lured with fraudulent promises of lucrative opportunities, legitimate jobs and then forced into sexual exploitation. Women who dared resist encountered harsh punishment from their employers, including physical assault. Their status as illegal migrants made the women particularly vulnerable to attacks by customers and traffickers alike. UAE has joined the growing global criminal activity of sex trafficking. Exact number of victims is impossible to obtain, but according to an official source in UAE, there has been increase in the number of teen-age girls in prostitution (forced to work from Iran and other countries). The magnitude of the statistic conveys how rapidly this form of abuse has grown. The popular destinations for victims of the sex slave trade are the Arab countries in the Persian Gulf (UAE, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar). Traffickers target girls between 13 and 17 to send to Arab countries. The number of Iranian women and girls who are deported from Persian Gulf countries indicates the Magnitude of the trade. A measure of Islamic fundamentalists success in controlling the society is the depth and totality with which they suppress the freedom and rights of women. The Islamic fundamentalists in Iran have for example expended tremendous amounts of time and efforts controlling, harassing, and punishing women and girls in the name of Islam. In Tehran, there are an estimated 84,000 women and girls in prostitution, many of them are on the Streets, others are in the 250 brothels that reportedly operate in the City. The trade is also international. Thousands of Iranian women and girls have been sold into sexual slavery abroad. The Sex Slave Trade is one of the most Profitable activities in Iran today. Iranian governments officials are involved in buying, selling and sexually abusing women and girls. One factor contributing to the increase in prostitution and the sex slave trade is the number of female teens who are running away from home. In Tehran alone there are an estimated 25,000 Street Children, most of them girls. Many of the girls come from impoverished Rural areas. Some addicted parents sell their Children to support their habits...A number of prostitution and slavery rings operating from Tehran that has sold girls and women to Britain, France, and Germany. In Iranian Province of Khorasan, local police report that girls are being sold to Pakistani men as They have passed and enforced humiliating and sadistic rules and punishments of women and girls, enslaving them in a system of segregation. Many Mullahs and officials are involved in the sexual exploitation and trade of women and girls. Women who are arrested for prostitution say they must have sex with the arresting officer. There are reports of police locating young women for sex for the wealthy and powerful mullahs. Some may think a thriving sex trade in a theocracy with clerics possibly acting as pimps is a contradiction in a country founded and ruled by Islamic fundamentalists. I would like to define the slavery as work done without any compensation under the threat Of violence. The modern-day of slavery are forced labor, forced prostitution. Slavery is technically illegal everywhere but they are estimated 27 million enslaved worldwide than ever before, while the moral argument against slavery has been won, the practical struggle to end slavery is by no means over. Camel racing in the Persian Gulf(UAE), for example is known to be slave work only by human rights experts or locals. Until poverty is overcome, some forms of slavery will always exist. Some argue that slave labor built up western capitalist development. One of the fastest growing means by which children are enslaved today is trafficking. Girls as young as six are trafficked to work as maids in UAE and Saudi Arabia. Men and women and children live and work as slaves or in slave-like conditions. The sexual enslavement of children is part of the generation exploitation of children in impoverished parts of the world. Literatures :
|
|
THE 9/11 COMMISSION UNDER ASSAULT
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 23, 2004. |
|
One would think that the Warren Commission, investigating President John F. Kennedy's assassination had been re-commissioned. In government there are things that must be kept hidden lest the people lose faith in the ability of the government to govern - or so they tell us! I will not go into what William Safire has already spoken about in the NEW YORK TIMES, on June 21st. Nor will I cover the repressed film of Michael Moore who speaks about some of the Saudi/Bin Laden Family being spirited out of America just after 9/11 by our American Government and the State Department. Let us instead speculate why the 9/11 Commission artfully avoided questioning the role of the U.S. State Department in the 9/11 attack. The big question being asked by the Commission about the culpability the CIA and FBI is important but, the questioning of Secretary of State Colin Powell was very superficial. There was no probing of the actual role of the U.S. State Department in the events that led up to 9/11. Clearly, the State Department has been denied full recognition for their role in 9/11 and before. While they, no doubt, were involved in transferring the Saudis out of America immediately after 9/11, there was much more. The State Department has been acting as a "Shadow Government" for many years. Linked with the oil companies and other related industries, the State Department was the internal representative of the Arabs, particularly the Saudi Royal Family. It seems that the U.S. State Department should have registered as "foreign agents" who lobby for Saudi interests - as required by law. The State Department was always the gatekeeper of Arab Muslims allowed to enter America. Their Ambassadors in 22 Arab and Muslim States acted as enablers and the conduits for passports, visas, travel permits allowing any Arab Muslim entry into America. It really never mattered whether the Arab nations had demonstrated its hostility to U.S. interests, they had a friend in the State Department. Many of these Ambassadors and mid-level administrators immediately went to work for these same Arab/Muslim governments after they left the State Department. They may have been called 'advisors' but they were actually lobbyists in Washington for foreign governments. While the CIA and FBI have been attacked for dereliction, there is the small matter of interference by the State Department. Investigations by our American Intelligence Agencies of Arabs and Muslims was not a good career move because agents undertaking such missions would be slapped down - courtesy of State Department influence. Years of political restraint of our American Intelligence Agencies by the State Department has produced a doctrine that closed the door on aggressive investigation of any Arab, Muslim individual, group, organization, etc. Known Arab and Muslim Terrorists were squired about Washington as if they were welcome, high ranking official members of the Arab/Muslim nations. I once tried to get the A.E.I. (American Enterprise Institute) through a symposium of Middle East experts which I funded, to conclude with a book about the perfidy of the State Department. Needless to say, the book was never produced - despite promises to do so. That International Conference in 1998 even proved that there was not oil shortage but actually an oil glut and that the Arab/Muslim nations could not use the oil weapon ever again. But, that too was overlooked, overrun, overcome, in the interests of the State Department pumping for the Arab oil nations. Few organizations were willing to undertake the task of facing down the very powerful State Department. After all, Washington is a small nation unto itself and one doesn't want to get into trouble with the power brokers. The 9/11 Commission limited itself to questioning the Sec. Of State Colin Powell, who was a safe witness - given his very slick ability to deflect probing questions. For example: The U.S. State Department issued a misleading report for 2003 telling Americans that there were approximately half the number of Terror attacks that actually occurred. State reported 307 killed - which has now been revised to 625 killed. According to the first State report: 1,593 people were wounded while the actual number now revealed is 3,646. The number of attacks (according to State) was 190 - while the actual number was 208. Powell describes this report as an 'honest' mistake although, given that most of these attacks were initiated by Muslim extremists, the impression is that State continues in its role of the Arabist and Protector. In another glaring manipulation of the facts, State was to issue a yearly report on the Palestinian Authority's compliance ordered by Oslo and President Bush's 'Road Map'. Item #One in Oslo and the 'Road Map' was that the Arab Muslim Palestinians cease terror attack. State's annual report whitewashed the P.A.'s lack of compliance in the cessation and promotion of Terror attacks in order facilitate the release of Congressional funds to Yassir Arafat. Each year since 1994, the U.S. State Department compiled a fictitious report, indicating that Arafat had complied with the requirement for the Arab Muslim Palestinians to reduce Terror. The State Department report was always a total fabrication, given that Arafat's Arab Muslim Palestinians had exponentially increased Terror since Oslo and since the 'Road Map'. The U.S. Congress knowingly accepted this fabricated report and gave more and more millions of American tax-payers' dollars to Arafat (who kept almost all of it for himself and his cronies). The Question is: Exactly how close is the U.S. State Department to the Arab Muslim Terrorists wherein State acts as a willing and complicit co-conspirator to suppress the facts of Muslim-enacted Terror? This collaboration by State has definitely contributed to Global Terrorism, including 9/11 and 3/11 by giving the Arab Muslim Terrorists a 'carte blanche' to enter America and Europe, to conspire without observation, to Terrorize without punishment. The 9/11 Commission really never probed the State Department staff and their multiple roles in allowing into America all those Arab Muslim sleeper cells or the loading up of American universities with Muslim 'Islamists' who just happens to sign up for courses in Nuclear Physics, Chemistry and Biology - as well as ersatz flying lessons. It will take some courageous maverick reporters or movie makers to expose the deep State Department roles, pre-9/11 and after. The 9/11 Commission, while uncovering some of the facts of 9/11, are artfully avoiding other facts. Perhaps they have all been told that exposing the State Department would undermine American confidence in State or disturb our European 'sometimes' friends. When the CIA blacked out virtually 50% of the yet-to-be released 9/11 Report, be assured that the U.S. State Department held one of the indelible black markers. What might happen if the 'onion' of State is peeled back, layer by layer. Will we find that the State Department is a nation unto itself. That they are closer to the Saudis and the Multi-nationals than to Americans. After 9/11 they were still handing out visas to Saudis - despite the fact that 15 out 19 of the 9/11 hijacking bombers were Saudis (the other 4 were Egyptians). Would we discover through a Grand Jury that the State Department allowed in not only the 9/11 murderers but also "Sleeper" Muslim Terrorists who will strike the next 9/11? There are lots of questions that were never asked by the 9/11 Commission. The biggest one is "Why is the Commission protecting and shielding the State Department?" "So, Ladies and Gentlemen of the 9/11 Commission, the Congress and all those investigative reporters...Isn't it time you started doing your job...All of it?" 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). |
|
THROWING STONES: WE'RE DEALING WITH OUR PRISON ABUSES. IS THE ARAB WORLD?
Posted by Freedom News, June 23, 2004. |
|
This was written by Steven Stalinsky and appeared
today in National Review Online (http://www.nationalreview.com).
Steven Stalinsky is executive director of the Middle East Media
Research Institute.
The original article contains dynamic links to additional material. Responding to the Abu Ghraib controversy, several Arab journalists have noted that the actions of a handful of Americans pale in comparison to what occurs daily inside Arab prisons. This has led to articles in the Arab media calling on Arab leaders to end human-rights violations within their own prisons. Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak described Abu Ghraib as "abhorrent and sickening, and against all human values and human rights." But as Yusri Fatyan wrote in the Egyptian paper Al Arabi on May 23: "Frankly, what happens in Egypt doesn't differ much from what happens in Iraq's prisons... So that we don't get a surprise when foreign organizations start talking about some of our police stations, like Helwan, Al Sahel, Bilqas, and others." Another Egyptian journalist, Muhamad Ali Al Farra, wrote in the Islamist paper Al Shab: "Some Arab rulers have practiced torture on people which no one would believe, and even finishing with tortured bodies by burning them in acid, so how could such rulers condemn torture of Iraqi prisoners? Who is going to throw stones at others when his own house is made of glass?" Saleh Bin Humaid, chairman of the Saudi Shoura Council, called the Abu Ghraib abuses "hideous scenes of human-rights violations." This, despite the fact that Saudi prisoners have almost no legal rights, and that their punishments are based on Islamic law - including the severing of fingers and hands for stealing, and beheadings for drug-dealing. Syrian Minister for Expatriate Affairs Buthayna Shaban, who recently returned from a trip to the U.S., wrote in Al-Sharq Al-Awsat on February 18, 2004: "The pictures that one lone soldier managed to smuggle out of the Abu Ghraib prison aroused revulsion and condemnation in the world, because of the extent of the contempt for human dignity and fundamental human rights - particularly on the part of the forces that claimed [they had crossed] the oceans to rescue the Iraqi people from the inhumane actions [by the Saddam regime] and to bring freedom and democracy... It is the American administration's supercilious view of the Arabs and Muslims, particularly after the events of September 11, and the racist campaign against Islam and the Muslims in Europe... that leads to crimes of this kind." Ahmad Jarallah, editor-in-chief of the Kuwaiti daily Al-Siyassa and noted critic of the Syrian regime, responded in an editorial: "Dr. Buthayna Shaban, who is 'revolted'... should be the last to express her revulsion - because the kinds of torture carried out in the prisons of the regime of which she is a part and in whose services she acts are too numerous to count. No atrocity surpasses the kinds of torment and torture [in the Syrian regime]... We have gone overboard in our talk of the Abu Ghraib torture scandal... None has dared acknowledge that the U.S. behaved properly in uncovering [this] scandal, for having sufficient courage to apologize. It could have remained silent, or denied it - as is the custom of some Arab regimes that torture, assassinate, bury alive, rip out fingernails, and dissolve [people] in pits of acid, and appear before the world like innocent children with angels' wings." Other Arab journalists have recognized that U.S. actions in Iraq are not based on any sinister plans and that, while the U.S. has made mistakes, it has done more for Iraqis than any Arab state. On the liberal Arabic website Elaph.com, Syrian columnist Hayan Nayouf wrote: "After the scandal of the torture of Iraqi prisoners by American and British soldiers, the Arab media handled this affair in a way arousing ridicule, proving that the Arab media and intellectuals possess everything but objectivity, transparency, and disclosure of the truth and the facts... The American president, the president of the most powerful country in the world... apologized for the deeds of the American soldiers, and all the Americans also apologized for this shameful deed. And then the Arab intellectuals came, with their mocking, idiotic, and illogical media, and ridiculed this apology. The question arises whether Saddam or any other Arab leader [ever] apologized. Did Saddam apologize to the Iraqi people for burying a million Iraqis in the ground, for expelling millions of Iraqis, for murdering innocents in his prisons, for his crimes in neighboring countries, for invading Kuwait, and for murdering the Kuwaiti prisoners?" Since the fall of Saddam's regime, much has been revealed about what transpired within his prisons. The treatment of prisoners went far beyond the terrible incidents of humiliation and the beatings that occurred at the hands of Americans in Abu Ghraib. Iraqi human-rights activist Ibrahim Al Idrissi, the president of the Association for Free Prisoners, an Iraqi NGO, has documented the execution of 147,000 political prisoners under Saddam's regime. Idrissi recounted one incident in which a woman was raped by twelve men, and then had her unborn child cut from her stomach. He told Lebanon's The Daily Star on May 24 that U.S. abuse in Iraqi prisons was a "joke" compared to what was endured under Saddam's regime. |
|
A TIME FOR PEACE, AND A TIME FOR WAR
Posted by Bernard J. Shapiro, June 23, 2004. |
|
Unfortunately, I am forced to revise and reissue this article. It was
written originally during the early days of the Oslo Appeasement and
was the cover editorial in the August 1995 issue of The Maccabean.]
We find all the expressions of horror at the recent Rabbi's ruling concerning a soldier's obligation to avoid abandoning army bases and settlements to terrorists, to be hypocritical, self-serving, and unfortunate. The Israeli government is in rebellion against everything that Israel, Zionism, and Judaism are all about. They are the ones causing the rift in the body politic and they will be totally responsible for any resulting violence. We must pray that this does not happen. When will the Nationalist Camp realize that we are "at war already" with the PLO supported tyranny that rules Israel? At what point will Israelis realize that the CIVIL WAR they fear, IS ALREADY TAKING PLACE AND THEY ARE LOSING? Why don't members of the Nationalist Camp understand that FORCE is being used by only ONE side and that is the government. The monopoly on power must be broken or there is no hope. Under the Nazis, the Jews of Warsaw numbered over 500,000. They were depleted with regular deportations aided by Judenrats (Jewish leaders). The Revolt in Warsaw began when the Jewish population was down to 50,000 (or 90% murdered). At what point is it OK to rebel? When is civil disobedience OK? When is civil war a better course than suicide? All throughout history there have been rebels and loyalists. History is usually written by the victors but truly there is seldom a universally accepted moral standard as to what is a proper rebellion and what is not. We can say with absolute certainty, however, that the Jewish return to Zion and our struggle today for Eretz Yisrael are more righteous than any other struggle for national liberation in the history of the world. Conditions in Israel have passed the period where civil disobedience would be effective. A massive outpouring of Israelis prepared to get arrested in civil disobedience would have stopped the Oslo Suicide Pact years ago. Now, it appears that only force of arms may save the country. The government plan to begin the ethnic cleansing of Jews from Gaza and Northern Samaria is in full swing. Plans are being drawn up in great detail. Soldiers are being recruited for this evil task from volunteers with no Jewish, moral or Zionist sensibilities. Jews will have a choice: being massacred or abandoning their homes of three decades for some compensation. Their ability to defend themselves will have been thwarted by the government in collusion with the terrorists. The terrorists and their supporters, the Egyptians, will take over their homes and set up a safe haven for the training and dispatch of terror the world over. Israel will be subject to increasing attack, but will not be able to respond as per Israeli PM Ariel Sharon's agreement with Egypt and the US. The Jews of Gaza and the rest of Yesha must not be passive pawns in the political surrender of their homes. They must fight the Arabs, where necessary, to maintain their travel, water, and land rights. When the Israeli government retreats, leaving them behind PLO battle lines, they must be prepared to go on the offensive militarily to secure safe contiguous areas of Jewish control. The defeatist Israeli leaders, who have surrendered our Jewish rights to Eretz Yisrael, should be told that there are still proud Jews in Yesha who will give up neither their inheritance from Abraham nor their right of self-defense. Exercising one's right to self-defense is a moral imperative. There is a lot of hypocritical talk coming from the government about the danger of Jew fighting Jew. These warnings are coming from the likes of the left who delighted in shooting Zionist (Betar) teenagers swimming to shore after they forces sank the Altalena in 1948. These same hypocrites are putting the Jews of Israel in life threatening peril. They care nothing about Jewish lives! Should the Jews of Yesha be forced into military combat -- most likely against Arabs, but, G-d forbid, perhaps also against Jews and we must pray that this does not happen -- they would be fully justified. They will be fighting for the security of Israel and the future destiny of the Jewish people. These brave Jews would be continuing the long tradition of Hebrew Warriors, including Joshua, David, the Maccabees and Bar Kochba, who fought against all odds to save their people and their country. The glorious Hebrew Warriors who defeated five Arab armies in 1948, three in 1967, two in 1973 and the PLO and Syria in 1982 must not surrender their Jewish homeland to an evil terrorist, who delights in killing Jewish babies. The Brave Heroes of Zion must not limit themselves to passive civil disobedience. Freedom sometimes needs to be secured through the barrel of a gun. If it is considered patriotic to die fighting Arabs for Israel's survival, then it is just as patriotic to fight against Jews who would lead Israel to destruction. While such internal Jewish fighting would be dreadful, it is a consequence of the government's disregard for the security and well being of its citizens. At this great time of trial and apocalyptic threat, the safeguarding of the future of the Jewish people's right to Eretz Yisrael must take precedence. MAY THE ALMIGHTY WATCHMAN OF ISRAEL PROTECT HIS PEOPLE FROM THE DANGEROUS POLICIES OF SHARON. MAY HE LIBERATE HIS PEOPLE FROM CRUEL TYRANNY AND RESTORE ZIONIST RULE TO JERUSALEM. Bernard J. Shapiro is the executive director of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org) and editor of its monthly Internet magazine, The Maccabean Online (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm) and its daily email broadcast, The Freemanlist. |
|
THE SHAKY BASIS OF ZIONIST DISCUSSION
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 23, 2004. |
|
A good friend and fellow Jew grew passionate against Israeli retention of the Administered Territories. He based his points upon logic, and his logic is sharp, that follows from the kind of misinformation that the "New York Times" disseminates. That is to say, half the facts and most of the legal and historical underpinning of the issue were missing from his repertoire. He was left with a mistaken notion of strategic considerations bearing on the survival of his own people. As a decent and sincerely intellectual person, he had the maturity to acknowledge that his sense of justice might be swayed by unawareness of the provisions and background of the Palestine Mandate and the strategic elements of the Territories and the impossibility of coming to terms with the jihadists. He did not express awareness, if I recall correctly, that the news and views spun out of the "Times," and advocacy journalism in general, pursue an anti-Zionist agenda. He does realize that he has an average access to news on this issue, whereas I have studied this and follow it daily. Not many people would say, as did he, that he would think over the strategic elements I posed and would review the Mandate if I sent him a copy. As boyhood friends, we each trust the other's integrity. Neither is concerned with proving himself right but with reaching the most sensible conclusion for both. Like most people, my friend thought that the UNO established the State of Israel and its boundaries. The General Assembly Partition Plan had no force of law. It merely proposed what I will show was unfair to the Jewish people. Israel, like the US, established itself. Israel defended that independence from genocidal insurgency and invasion, no thanks to the UNO or to the US, both of which were complaisant about letting a second Holocaust happen. The legal basis for the Jewish state's establishment was the Mandate, which the League of Nations' successor, the United Nations Organization, incorporated into its Charter. The Mandate did not confer any rights upon the Jews -- it recognized the Jewish people's pre-existing rights to its homeland. But it had the force of international law. The UNO Partition Plan carved the proposed Jewish portion into three, tiny, non-viable economically, and indefensible militarily "Bantustans." Intentional or witless, it was a prescription for the war that followed and the annihilation of the Jews that Sec. of State Marshall anticipated. Instead, Israel came intp possession of more of its homeland. International law allows victorious victims of aggression to retain captured enemy territory if needed to prevent renewed aggression. This law was fulfilled after WWII. Only in the case of Israel is it ignored. He is indignant about Israel controlling land outside the UNO plan. I take umbrage over the UNO attempt to curtail Jewish rights and over the great powers leaving the Jewish people such a small part of its homeland as to tempt repeated Arab aggression. (More on that, later.) When Israel declared independence while besieged by the Arabs, it knew better than to bother declaring boundaries that war and subsequent negotiation would set. Deeming proper now the borders proposed by the General Assembly then, would mean dispossessing millions of Israelis and enabling the Arabs finally to exterminate them in those Bantustans. Would he prefer that the Palestinians of 1947 (what the Jews then were called), whose declaration of independence he resents, although such a declaration was precisely what the UNO had proposed, not have defended themselves and been wiped out then? Why does he suppose the Arabs have a right to a state based on a UNO suggestion that the Arabs forfeited by rejecting it? Surely it is not fair that the Arabs may make repeated war to see if they can conquer the whole, and when they lose their wars of aggression, claim statehood and territory on the basis of the very plan they rejected. Early on, the UNO became the font of evil and corruption that we know it as, today. It defers action, or defers to ruthless dictators, while innocent people are murdered by the million. Then it may intervene, often venally and ineffectively. One should not put credence in it or accept judgments by it. It is thoroughly political and biased. It is not a United Nations, which is why I resumed calling it an Organization, UNO. My friend thought the "settlers" have no rights to the area because the Partition Plan did not include it in the area to which it would restrict the Jews. Therefore, settlers were engendering casualties for the Israeli Army. When he reads the Mandate, he will see that it calls for "close settlement on the land by the Jews, including State land and waste land?" (What are called "settlements" only when Jews build communities but not when Arabs come in and build houses are entirely on State land, waste land, and purchased land, with some of the roads connecting them resulting from the normal exercise of eminent domain.) He also will see that the area for the Jewish homeland, defined from Biblical maps, included the Territories, Jordan, and Israel. (There isn't room here for the full historical background, absent from our contemporaries' memories and vocabulary, that give the Jewish people the primary legal, historical, and religious claim to the area.) After the Mandate was offered to Britain, Britain started reneging. First, what the published Mandate doesn't show is that Britain deleted the Golan Heights from the area to be included. The Golan's ancient city of Gamla played a role like that of Massada under Roman siege. Soon Britain also excluded what eventually became Jordan not from the Mandate but "temporarily" from Jewish national development. The Arabs consider themselves one nation. For public relations, however, they fabricated the notion of Palestinian nationality. Since the Palestinian Arabs already have a state, Jordan, why set up another for their terrorists? So much for the argument that Jews are living in Judea, Samaria, and Gaza (a.k.a. Yesha) illegally. If one is concerned with illegality, one should refer to the wholesale theft of land in Yesha and in Israel. Then there is the extensive Arab illegal building, non-payment of taxes, rioting, and illegal immigration. When there are actual and massive Arab illegalities, people nevertheless are indoctrinated to focus on the non-existent illegality of Jews dwelling in their own homeland in a territory set aside for just such territorial development. It is not politically correct to hold the Arabs to civilized norms. Neither is it popular to deem the Arabs, however intolerant and violent, as other than victims, nor to deem their actual victims, the Jewish state and the "settles" as other than intolerant and violent. Political correctness contradicts its humane pretension. If one knows the brief history of the Territories, one would realize how over-emphasized the Green Line is and that Jewish residents there are not "occupiers." When the Arabs rejected the UNO Partition Plan in favor of forcibly dispossessing all the Jews from the whole Mandate, they nullified the plan. The Arabs made it clear that the war would determine Israel's boundaries and whether there would be an Israel to have boundaries. The Green Line is the 1949 armistice line. It has no legal status as a border! Jordan attacked Israel gratuitously in 1967. It and Egypt lost in that war and the Territories outside the Green Line. Since the Territories previously had been seized by Egypt and Jordan in illegal aggression in 1948, they were not Arab territory then; their legal status remained that of the unallocated portion of the Mandate. Under the Mandate, Israel has the best claim. Israel incorporated some of that area into the expanding precincts of Jerusalem, as do many cities in the US with their unincorporated hinterland. Since the Territories were not part of a state, they cannot be "occupied." Neither does the Geneva Convention apply. Besides, the provisions of the Geneva Convention about population movement were intended to prevent an occupying power from displacing a native population. Not only are most of the Arabs there are of relatively recent immigrant families, Jewish settlement has not displaced the Arabs. Concerned with the defense of Israel, my friend resents the presence of Jewish communities in Yesha diverts troops needed for the defense of Israel. Good intent, but false premise. Why so? A. The Israeli Army has cut down on the draft. It doesn't want more troops. If Israel wanted to spare troops in Yesha, let it smash the P.A. aggressors and win the war, disarm the Arabs, and save more money by not subsidizing the Arabs and by recovering in court compensation for their theft and terrorism. B. Defense must be mounted against internal and external attack. It may be waged offensively and defensively. "Internal" defense is against the western Palestinian Arabs in Yesha and Israel. External defense is against invasion from the countries around. External defense requires Israeli retention of the bulk of Yesha, according to the definitive study by the US Joint Chiefs of Staff. To sum it up and then some, the Territories furnish Israel with: (1) Straight borders only half as long as without them and much easier to defend; (2) Natural tank traps due to mountain passes and the African Rift depression; (3) Observation points enabling greater warning and some time to mobilize, mobilization of Israeli reserves being Israel's chief defense tool against the Arabs who maintain almost full peacetime armies; (4) A third of Israel's water supply, without which it could not survive; and (5) The historical and religious core of the Jewish homeland, indispensable to Israeli morale and the basis for settling in Israel, itself, even in this secularist age. One may add that relinquishing the territories as a result of terrorism, even if the surrender is called the result of negotiation, would encourage the jihadists and Islamists to redouble their efforts. That would reduce security for Israelis. One simply cannot let go of the tiger's tail. A relief map and knowledge of the terrain would make these points clear. Think of point (1), that without Yesha, Israel's external boundaries would double. Proponents of abandonment of Yesha have tried to justify their position as one of retreating to a more compact area to defend. Their position stands the strategic situation on its head. Internal defense also requires control over Yesha. The presence of the Jewish communities enables the Israeli Army to be present and to have places to more around under cover. When the Israeli Army is present in Yesha, it intercepts most terrorists. When it withdraws, the Arabs resume their build-up of terrorism, and Israeli casualties mount. Right now, the Jewish communities and inspection of Arab traffic keep the Arabs from moving up to the Green Line cities of Israel. Without the Israeli presence in the Territories, the Arabs would move up and threaten all those cities along the whole length of the Green line! In that sense, the Jewish communities, against which many terrorist attacks are mounted, anyway, act as a breakwater. We Jews should thank the brave Jewish settlers who, in risking their lives, preserve those of residents of official Israel. (Many of them serve in the Army, too.) True, casualties have been reduced where the fence was built. Naturally, terrorists would prefer to attack where they don't face the difficulties of the fence. When the fence is completed, however, they would continue climbing over, digging under, and firing rockets over it. Israeli abandonment of its legal and historic claims would lead to Arab sovereignty. Sovereignty, whatever word games Israeli leaders might play with its definition, confers the legal right to import heavy weapons and foreign armies. The cannon waiting in the Sinai would be moved opposite the cities of Israel and would be fired at them. Since the Arab goal is to destroy Israel, if Israel withdrew from the Territories, the Arabs would attack Israel more directly and from a stronger position. There can be no defense against cannon emplaced all along the Green Line. Israel would suffer tremendous casualties, and would have to go to war. Withdrawal would multiply, not reduce, Israeli casualties. Isn't there a solution? My friend starts with the concept that the Arab-Israel conflict should be resolved by compromise. That premise makes him a good chap in the context of American society. We compromise and we resolve. The Arabs don't resolve, they conquer. They don't compromise, they accept concessions made by the other side as if engaged in a mutual compromise. They proceed to demand new concessions on pain of more violence. This is the nature of the jihadist enemy that it behooves American discussants to understand. By not understanding the nature of jihad, an American approves of policies that harm not only Israel but civilization, itself. Jihad is a war on civilization. The Arab fanatics want to take over the world. That should not be difficult to understand for those of us who lived through the Axis and Communist efforts to take over the world. Understanding it becomes difficult when the President, who vows to defeat terrorism, denies the religious motivation for it. Back to the matter of compromise. There already have been compromises. They solved nothing. The first compromise was that the WWI victors and the peace treaties divided the Turkish Empire into Turkey; about 99% of the Middle East outside of Iran into Arab countries and Mandates; and the 1% that represented the Jewish homeland into the Palestine Mandate. Between British incompetence and its sabotaging of world order in favor of imperial interests, the Arabs were not moved out of Palestine, although millions of people elsewhere were moved. These population exchanges, some of which also occurred after WWII, were done both humanely and inhumanely. On the whole, they prevented much more serious wars of ethnic strife. Leaving the Arabs in among the Jews in meant bellicose claims could arise. They did occur. Britain soon imposed a second "compromise," although the Arab representatives at the main peace conference had agreed to the Palestine Mandate for a "Jewish national home," known to be a euphemism for eventual statehood. Read the Mandate and see that the provisions for developing that statehood were embedded. Britain weaned away the Transjordanian provinces, eventually to become independent as Jordan. That area was more than three-fourths of the Mandate! The Jews got less than one-fourth! To the Arabs, "compromise" seems to mean that each time the Jewish portion is shrunk in behalf of the Arabs, but many Arabs, such as the million now in Israel, remain among the Jews to (multiply and) demand another partition. As I imply, that second compromise was not enough for the Arabs. Britain had given away to the Arabs the Transjordanian provinces with hardly any Arabs, but left for the Jews an area with more Arabs than Jews. Although the Mandate called for Jewish immigration, the British illegally curbed Jewish immigration, especially during the Holocaust when such immigration would have saved lives. The British let Arabs immigrate, to prosper from the industry that Jews developed and the Arabs did not. Talk about fairness! My friend finds that Israel has two alternatives to the status quo: (1) Relinquish the Territories and maintain the Jewish nature of Israel; or (2) Annex the Territories, but the Jews would become a minority. If only life were that simple! Choice (1), relinquishing the Territories, would buy only a few years, because of the growing Arab minority in Israel. It is no solution to leave that fifth column inside Israel. Choice (2), annexing Yesha in one fell swoop, would indeed be self-defeating. But there are other alternatives. In earlier articles, I listed graduated steps to discourage the Arab presence. Each step which makes the next ones seem more acceptable to people who otherwise would object. Among these steps are enforcement of the law against the Arabs' illegal immigration, wholesale theft of land and illegal building, non-payment of taxes; barring Arabs from the Territories from working in Israel and Jewish communities in Yesha; annexing vacant portions of Yesha, which most of it is; ending college and job admissions and tuition that discriminate in favor of the Arabs; banning Arab parties that promote terrorism and not just Jewish parties that want to transfer the Arabs non-violently; de-commissioning Arabic as a national language; and not releasing terrorists. The Arabs mostly would leave for want of economic opportunity. Some could be helped financially to leave. This would take time but would solve the problem with the Palestinian Arabs. As for the other Arabs, Israel has to await their becoming civilized or at least tolerant. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
NO JOKE!
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, June 23, 2004. |
|
This comes from Batya Medad, who lives in Shilo. She can be contacted at
Shilohmuse@yahoo.com or at
http://shilohmusings.blogspot.com/
There's a well-known joke that you've most probably heard
about the Jewish tourist from New York, who, when in China, found a
synagogue to pray in. Imagine his surprise when he looked around, and
noticed that it was filled with Chinese men. Just before he was about
to ask if he was in the right place one of the Chinese came up to him
and asked:
I thought of that joke when I was at a wedding last week. It was a regular religious wedding in Jerusalem. The men wore kippot, mostly crocheted; the women were in dresses with sleeves, and the married ones wore hats. The difference was that the chattan, kallah (bride, groom) and most of the guests looked like Peruvian Indians. Half a millenium after their ancestors fled the Spanish Inquisition, their "pinteleh yid," the spark of Judaism is burning brightly in Peru. Clans of Peruvians are discovering the source of "secret family customs." They are no longer afraid to be Jewish. Hundreds of years after fleeing Spain and hiding their true religion, entire families of three and even four generations are rejoining the Jewish religion and then making aliya to Israel. Over ten years ago, when the chattan's family made Shiloh its home, I asked his father, in a combination of Hebrew and my remnant of high school Spanish, why they wanted to live in Shiloh. Binyamin explained that for many years he had taught his community Bible and felt that in Shiloh he needed to live. They bought a home and added rooms. Binyamin's wife's parents moved in with them, and then four generations lived here in Shiloh until the eldest couple passed away were buried in our cemetery. Binyamin and Ruth's eldest child, a daughter, met a young moshavnik, the younger brother of a neighbor, married him and now have children. They also bought a home in Shiloh. The youngest generation has their mother's coloring and features with their fair-skinned and light-eyed father's curly hair. The wedding music was Jewish-Israeli with a Latin beat, as only our neighbor, Yehuda Glantz, can play. As we all danced, celebrating with the young couple, I looked around and saw such wonderful people. There was the warm-hearted, welcoming family from Alon Shvut that had adopted the kallah, whose family is still in Peru. A dvar Torah (Torah lesson/speech) was given in Spanish by my Bible teacher, who is from Majorca and discovered his Jewish roots when still a child. I can only admire all of those who have the courage to publicly embrace the religion their ancestors hid. And to think that despite their fears, they had passed on just enough knowledge that they were "different" for their descendents to be able to discover their secret five centuries later. This is so different from the voluntary assimilation in recent centuries. At the wedding, I felt that I was dancing as part of a miraculous performance in praise of G-d. Our hands of different colors symbolized the chain of Judaism that connects us all to those exiled after the destruction of the Holy Temple, that connects us to Bnei Yisrael that entered the Holy Land with Joshua, that connects us to those who fled Egypt with Moshe and those who entered Egypt with Yaakov and those who were born from Yitzchak, Avraham and Sarah's only child. We are one People, and we will not be destroyed. We survived the nazi holocaust, the pogroms, the Inquisition, Haman, the Greeks, the Philistines, Amalek. And with the Help of G-d, we will survive our new enemies, even those among us. "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com |
|
STALINIST INDOCTRINATION AT TEL AVIV UNIVERSITY
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 23, 2004. |
|
1. It is conservatively estimated that communism directly caused about 100 million deaths in the twentieth century. These of course include the millions starved to death by communist forced collectivization of agriculture, by the intentional famines in the Ukraine and in China, and by the massive shortages and upheavals and repressions, not to mention the Gulags and mass murders. In China, massive cannibalism was produced by communist food shortages, where families swapped children so parents would not be forced to eat their own children. A disproportionate number of those killed by communism were Jews. Jews were always subjected to special venom and animosity by communists, and the fact that some of the communist leaders and "thinkers" were Jews or ex-Jews does not change anything, in fact it probably explains the anti-Semitism that has always characterized both communism and some forms of anti-communism. Communists today lead the movement for a Second Holocaust of Jews. They seek the annihilation of Israel and its population. The communist countries have always been allied with Arab fascism and aggression and today support Islamist terror. All of which might have been regarded by most people as more than a sufficient reason why a College of Communist Indoctrination should not operate within the auspices of Tel Aviv University. But they would be wrong. Today is the inauguration ceremony of the opening of the College of Communist Indoctrination at Tel Aviv University. Really. The official name of the "college" is the "Socioeconomic College", and it operates on the Tel Aviv University campus, although evidently not with direct funding by the Israeli taxpayer, at least not yet. The comrades will, however, be using the university facilities paid for by Israeli taxpayers. The initiator of the College of Communist Indoctrination is Madame Gulag, Tamar Gozansky, who was until recently the Stalinist Rent-a-Jew sitting in the Knesset as representative for the Hadash Stalinist Party in the Israeli parliament. Hadash is an Old-Left anti-Israel Arab-national communist party, one that never quite got around to renouncing Stalinism. Mademe Gulag has been unemployed, as are most people under communism, ever since her own party got tired of her hogging one of its parliament seats. So she and her fellow commissar, a lawyer named Aviv Wasserman, came up with the idea. They decided they were sick and tired of the "capitalist hegemony in Israeli academia" (in their words see Haaretz July 23, 04), and you can see right away how someone who had spent the last few decades in some other galaxy might not be aware of the Far-Leftist hegemony that actually operates in Israeli academia. Students in this new re-education Gulag center to open at Tel Aviv University will be indoctrinated in the "theories" of Marxism that were totally debunked more than 160 years ago. They will learn the communist party's principles and its correct thinking about class struggle and other "social issues". The "college" will be administered by a newspaper journalist named Efraim Davidi. Its "degree" will not be recognized at first as a bona fide academic degree, although it might be enough to get you a job in a Cuban torture facility. The "faculty" at the "college" will consist of the usual Israeli Far-Leftist tenured radicals, including a Marxist economist from Ben-Gurion University, the extremist "Post Zionist" Moshe Zuckerman from Tel Aviv University, the Stalinist Dov Hanin who was supposed to replace Madame Gulag as the Hadash Party Rent-a-Jew but the party decided to do without further Jewish reps, some Arab non-academics whose academic credentials are that they are anti-Israel, and others. They do not get paid, I guess as there way of showing what happens to employees under communist regimes. If you think that Israeli taxpayer money should not be spent on
providing infrastructure for Stalinist indoctrination, please write to
If you want to tell the heads of Tel Aviv University what you think of this new "college" on their campus, contact: President of Tel Aviv U: Prof. Itamar Rabinovich His fax and email are FAX 03-6422379 itamarr@tauex.tau.ac.il Here is a list of other university officers (you will need to look up their addresses if you want to contact): http://www.tau.ac.il/officers-eng.html You may want to let any donors to TAU know about what is going on! 2. It has been a while since we told you about the Haifa Municipal Museum. Under Comrade-Mayor Amram Mitzna's junta, the Museum took off in a far-Left direction. It had an exhibit in which a work of "art" was a portrait showing a yeshiva student being hanged from a gallows. Had the portrait been of, say, a leftist politician being hanged, the artist in question would be rotting in jail for incitement to murder as we speak. Other manifestations of the Mapplethorpianism of Israeli art were also on display. But Mitzna is off warming a back bench in the Knesset. We got Mitzna out of City Hall but did not get Mitznaism out of the Haifa Municipal Museum. You may recall how a few months back a fanatic ex-Israeli anti-Semitic leftist living in Sweden produced a work of "art" showing the woman mass murder who blew up the Haifa Maxim restaurant as a pure Snow White? Celebrating her act of barbarism, which murdered 23 people, including many children and three generations of two families? The Israeli Ambassador vandalized the "art" to the horrors of the artsy-phartsy crowd. Well, now the Haifa Municipal Museum ran its own analogue to Snow White the Pure Murderer of Jewish Children. A Bimbo "artist" named Deganit Brest produced a work of "art" centered around a fine handsome smiling face of the peace partner suicide bomber who murdered all the children a few years back waiting to enter the Tel Aviv Dolphinarium for a dance party. Twenty one people were murdered, most high school kids, many recent immigrants from the ex-Soviet Workers Paradise that Tel Aviv University is now trying to recreate. The Museum saw nothing at all wrong with the "art" celebrating the nazi murderer of children. The public however was nonplussed and now the Museum is thinking of taking down the atrocity. Brest is outraged of course, as are the usual Far Leftists. Maybe a new portrait of The Suffering of My Hero Adolf Hitler, or maybe Eichmann the Misunderstood, will replace it. If you would like to tell the Haifa Muni reps what you think of this, go to http://www.haifa.muni.il/Hebrew/ContactusHome.htm (you will see Hebrew fonts or gibberish, but hit the first two "envelope icons" to set up a page to contact them, and then hit send. Also, try http://www.haifa.muni.il/English/Default.htm Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
ONE SMALL STEP: Is the U.N. finally ready to get serious about anti-Semitism?
Posted by Anne Bayefsky, June 23, 2004. |
|
This was a speech given yesterday at the U.N. at a conference on
Confronting Anti-Semitism: Education for Tolerance and Understanding,
sponsored by the United Nations Department of Information.
I appreciate the opportunity to speak to you at this first U.N. conference on anti-Semitism, which is being convened six decades after the organization's creation. My thanks to the U.N. organizers and in particular Shashi Tharoor [the undersecretary-general for communications and public information] for their initiative and to the secretary-general for his willingness to engage. This meeting occurs at a point when the relationship between Jews and the United Nations is at an all-time low. The U.N. took root in the ashes of the Jewish people, and according to its charter was to flower on the strength of a commitment to tolerance and equality for all men and women and of nations large and small. Today, however, the U.N. provides a platform for those who cast the victims of the Nazis as the Nazi counterparts of the 21st century. The U.N. has become the leading global purveyor of anti-Semitism--intolerance and inequality against the Jewish people and its state. Not only have many of the U.N. members most responsible for this state of affairs rendered their own countries Judenrein, they have succeeded in almost entirely expunging concern about Jew-hatred from the U.N. docket. From 1965, when anti-Semitism was deliberately excluded from a treaty on racial discrimination, to last fall, when a proposal for a General Assembly resolution on anti-Semitism was withdrawn after Ireland capitulated to Arab and Muslim opposition, mention of anti-Semitism has continually ground the wheels of U.N.-led multilateralism to a halt. There has never been a U.N. resolution specifically on anti-Semitism or a single report to a U.N. body dedicated to discrimination against Jews, in contrast to annual resolutions and reports focusing on the defamation of Islam and discrimination against Muslims and Arabs. Instead there was Durban--the 2001 U.N. World Conference "Against Racism," which was a breeding ground and global soapbox for anti-Semites. When it was over U.N. officials and member states turned the Durban Declaration into the centerpiece of the U.N.'s antiracism agenda--allowing Durban follow-up resolutions to become a continuing battlefield over U.N. concern with anti-Semitism. Not atypical is the public dialogue in the U.N.'s top human rights body--the Commission on Human Rights--where this past April the Pakistani ambassador, speaking on behalf of the 56 members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, unashamedly disputed that anti-Semitism was about Jews. For Jews, however, ignorance is not an option. Anti-Semitism is about intolerance and discrimination directed at Jews--both individually and collectively. It concerns both individual human rights and the group right to self-determination--realized in the state of Israel. What does discrimination against the Jewish state mean? It means refusing to admit only Israel to the vital negotiating sessions of regional groups held daily during U.N. Commission on Human Rights meetings. It means devoting six of the 10 emergency sessions ever held by the General Assembly to Israel. It means transforming the 10th emergency session into a permanent tribunal--which has now been reconvened 12 times since 1997. By contrast, no emergency session was ever held on the Rwandan genocide, estimated to have killed a million people, or the ethnic cleansing of tens of thousands in the former Yugoslavia, or the death of millions over the past two decades of atrocities in Sudan. That's discrimination. The record of the Secretariat is more of the same. In November 2003, Secretary-General Kofi Annan issued a report on Israel's security fence, detailing the purported harm to Palestinians without describing one terrorist act against Israelis which preceded the fence's construction. Recently, the secretary-general strongly condemned Israel for destroying homes in southern Gaza without mentioning the arms-smuggling tunnels operating beneath them. When Israel successfully targeted Hamas terrorist Abdel Aziz Rantissi with no civilian casualties, the secretary-general denounced Israel for an "extrajudicial" killing. But when faced with the 2004 report of the U.N. special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions detailing the murder of more than 3,000 Brazilian civilians shot at close range by police, Mr. Annan chose silence. That's discrimination At the U.N., the language of human rights is hijacked not only to discriminate but to demonize the Jewish target. More than one quarter of the resolutions condemning a state's human rights violations adopted by the commission over 40 years have been directed at Israel. But there has never been a single resolution about the decades-long repression of the civil and political rights of 1.3 billion people in China, or the million female migrant workers in Saudi Arabia kept as virtual slaves, or the virulent racism which has brought 600,000 people to the brink of starvation in Zimbabwe. Every year, U.N. bodies are required to produce at least 25 reports on alleged human rights violations by Israel, but not one on an Iranian criminal justice system which mandates punishments like crucifixion, stoning and cross-amputation of right hand and left foot. This is not legitimate critique of states with equal or worse human rights records. It is demonization of the Jewish state. As Israelis are demonized at the U.N., so Palestinians and their cause are deified. Every year the U.N. marks Nov. 29 as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People--the day the U.N. partitioned the British Palestine mandate and which Arabs often style as the onset of al nakba or the "catastrophe" of the creation of the state of Israel. In 2002, the anniversary of the vote that survivors of the concentration camps celebrated, was described by Secretary-General Annan as "a day of mourning and a day of grief." In 2003 the representatives of over 100 member states stood along with the secretary-general, before a map predating the state of Israel, for a moment of silence "for all those who had given their lives for the Palestinian people"--which would include suicide bombers. Similarly, U.N. rapporteur John Dugard has described Palestinian terrorists as "tough" and their efforts as characterized by "determination, daring, and success." A commission resolution for the past three years has legitimized the Palestinian use of "all available means including armed struggle"--an absolution for terrorist methods which would never be applied to the self-determination claims of Chechens or Basques. Although Palestinian self-determination is equally justified, the connection between demonizing Israelis and sanctifying Palestinians makes it clear that the core issue is not the stated cause of Palestinian suffering. For there are no U.N. resolutions deploring the practice of encouraging Palestinian children to glorify and emulate suicide bombers, or the use of the Palestinian population as human shields, or the refusal by the vast majority of Arab states to integrate Palestinian refugees into their societies and to offer them the benefits of citizenship. Palestinians are lionized at the U.N. because they are the perceived antidote to what U.N. envoy Lakhdar Brahimi called the great poison of the Middle East--the existence and resilience of the Jewish state. Of course, anti-Semitism takes other forms at the U.N. Over the past decade at the commission, Syria announced that yeshivas train rabbis to instill racist hatred in their pupils. Palestinian representatives claimed that Israelis can happily celebrate religious holidays like Yom Kippur only by shedding Palestinian blood, and accused Israel of injecting 300 Palestinian children with HIV-positive blood. U.N.-led anti-Semitism moves from the demonization of Jews to the disqualification of Jewish victimhood: refusing to recognize Jewish suffering by virtue of their ethnic and national identity. In 2003 a General Assembly resolution concerned with the welfare of Israeli children failed (though one on Palestinian children passed handily) because it proved impossible to gain enough support for the word Israeli appearing before the word children. The mandate of the U.N. special rapporteur on the "Palestinian territories", set over a decade ago, is to investigate only "Israel's violations of ... international law" and not to consider human-rights violations by Palestinians in Israel. It follows in U.N. logic that nonvictims aren't really supposed to fight back. One after another concrete Israeli response to terrorism is denounced by the secretary-general and member states as illegal. But killing members of the command-and-control structure of a terrorist organization, when there is no disproportionate use of force, and arrest is impossible, is not illegal. Homes used by terrorists in the midst of combat are legitimate military targets. A nonviolent, temporary separation of parties to a conflict on disputed territory by a security fence, which is sensitive to minimizing hardships, is a legitimate response to Israel's international legal obligations to protect its citizens from crimes against humanity. In effect, the U.N. moves to pin the arms of Jewish targets behind their backs while the terrorists take aim. The U.N.'s preferred imagery for this phenomenon is of a cycle of violence. It is claimed that the cycle must be broken--every time Israelis raises a hand. But just as the symbol of the cycle is chosen because it has no beginning, it is devastating to the cause of peace because it denies the possibility of an end. The Nuremberg Tribunal taught us that crimes are not committed by abstract entities. The perpetrators of anti-Semitism today are the preachers in mosques who exhort their followers to blow up Jews. They are the authors of Palestinian Authority textbooks that teach a new generation to hate Jews and admire their killers. They are the television producers and official benefactors in authoritarian regimes like Syria or Egypt who manufacture and distribute programming that depicts Jews as bloodthirsty world conspirators. Listen, however, to the words of the secretary-general in response to two suicide bombings which took place in Jerusalem this year, killing 19 and wounding 110: "Once again, violence and terror have claimed innocent lives in the Middle East. Once again, I condemn those who resort to such methods." "The Secretary General condemns the suicide bombing Sunday in Jerusalem. The deliberate targeting of civilians is a heinous crime and cannot be justified by any cause." Refusing to name the perpetrators, Mr. Secretary-General, Teflon terrorism, is a green light to strike again. Perhaps more than any other, the big lie that fuels anti-Semitism today is the U.N.-promoted claim that the root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict is the occupation of Palestinian land. According to U.N. revisionism, the occupation materialized in a vacuum. In reality, Israel occupies land taken in a war which was forced upon it by neighbors who sought to destroy it. It is a state of occupation which Israelis themselves have repeatedly sought to end through negotiations over permanent borders. It is a state in which any abuses are closely monitored by Israel's independent judiciary. But ultimately, it is a situation which is the responsibility of the rejectionists of Jewish self-determination among Palestinians and their Arab and Muslim brethren--who have rendered the Palestinian civilian population hostage to their violent and anti-Semitic ambitions. There are those who would still deny the existence of anti-Semitism at the U.N. by pointing to a range of motivations in U.N. corridors including commercial interests, regional politics, preventing scrutiny of human rights violations closer to home, or enhancement of individual careers. U.N. actors and supporters remain almost uniformly in denial of the nature of the pathogen coursing through these halls. They ignore the infection and applaud the host, forgetting that the cancer which kills the organism will take with it both the good and the bad. The relative distribution of naivete, cowardice, opportunism, and anti-Semitism, however, matters little to Noam and Matan Ohayon, ages 4 and 5, shot to death through their mother's body in their home in northern Israel while she tried to shield them from a gunman of Yasser Arafat's al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. The terrible consequences of these combined motivations mobilized and empowered within U.N. chambers are the same. The inability of the U.N. to confront the corruption of its agenda dooms this organization's success as an essential agent of equality or dignity or democratization. This conference may serve as a turning point. We will only know if concrete changes occur hereafter: a General Assembly resolution on anti-Semitism adopted, an annual report on anti-Semitism forthcoming, a focal point on anti-Semitism created, a rapporteur on anti-Semitism appointed. But I challenge the secretary-general and his organization to go further--if they are serious about eradicating anti-Semitism: ** Start putting a name to the terrorists that kill Jews because they are Jews. ** Start condemning human-rights violators wherever they dwell--even if they live in Riyadh or Damascus. ** Stop condemning the Jewish people for fighting back against their killers. ** And the next time someone asks you or your colleagues to stand for a moment of silence to honor those who would destroy the state of Israel, say no. Only then will the message be heard from these chambers that the U.N. will not tolerate anti-Semitism or its consequences against Jews and the Jewish people, whether its victims live in Tehran, Paris or Jerusalem. Ms. Bayefsky is a senior fellow at the Hudson Institute and an adjunct professor at Columbia University Law School. |
|
UNDECLARED WW3
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 22, 2004. |
|
This speech by the former President of Weizmann Institute of Science, Haim Harari, is a lesson that the politicians and the Media would do well to learn. I doubt that they will either read or absorb the lessons in this insiteful analysis of Terror and what it means to what we call civilization. This is not a trite 'sound byte' for the Media to toss of with a a one liner. Harari is not the average person speaking his mind but, it's rather like listening to the thoughts of an Einstein. Most journalists and politicians do not have time for deep thinkers who have matured over the years into wise men with vision. In fact, they simply do not want to know and pursue ignorance as the safest course. Well, perhaps a few will take the time to read and absorb. It was given to the International Advisory Board of a large multi-national corporation, April, 2004. It's very well worth reading. "As you know, I usually provide the scientific and technological "entertainment" in our meetings, but, on this occasion, our Chairman suggested that I present my own personal view on events in the part of the world from which I come. I have never been and I will never be a Government official and I have no privileged information. My perspective is entirely based on what I see, on what I read and on the fact that my family has lived in this region for almost 200 years. You may regard my views as those of the proverbial taxi driver, which you are supposed to question, when you visit a country. I could have shared with you some fascinating facts and some personal thoughts about the Israeli-Arab conflict. However, I will touch upon it only in passing. I prefer to devote most of my remarks to the broader picture of the region and its place in world events. I refer to the entire area between Pakistan and Morocco, which is predominantly Arab, predominantly Moslem, but includes many non-Arab and also significant non-Moslem minorities. Why do I put aside Israel and its own immediate neighborhood? Because Israel and any problems related to it, in spite of what you might read or hear in the world media, is not the central issue, and has never been the central issue in the upheaval in the region. Yes, there is a 100 year-old Israeli-Arab conflict, but it is not where the main show is. The millions who died in the Iran-Iraq war had nothing to do with Israel. The mass murder happening right now in Sudan, where the Arab Moslem regime is massacring its black Christian citizens, has nothing to do with Israel. The frequent reports from Algeria about the murders of hundreds of civilian in one village or another by other Algerians have nothing to do with Israel. Saddam Hussein did not invade Kuwait, endangered Saudi Arabia and butchered his own people because of Israel. Egypt did not use poison gas against Yemen in the 60's because of Israel. Assad the Father did not kill tens of thousands of his own citizens in one week in El Hamma in Syria because of Israel. The Taliban control of Afghanistan and the civil war there had nothing to do with Israel. The Libyan blowing up of the Pan-Am flight had nothing to do with Israel, and I could go on and on and on. The root of the trouble is that this entire Moslem region is totally dysfunctional, by any standard of the word, and would have been so even if Israel would have joined the Arab league and an independent Palestine would have existed for 100 years. The 22 member countries of the Arab league, from Mauritania to the Gulf States, have a total population of 300 millions, larger than the US and almost as large as the EU before its expansion. They have a land area larger than either the US or all of Europe. These 22 countries, with all their oil and natural resources, have a combined GDP smaller than that of Netherlands plus Belgium and equal to half of the GDP of California alone. Within this meager GDP, the gaps between rich and poor are beyond belief and too many of the rich made their money not by succeeding in business, but by being corrupt rulers. The social status of women is far below what it was in the Western World 150 years ago. Human rights are below any reasonable standard, in spite of the grotesque fact that Libya was elected Chair of the UN Human Rights commission. According to a report prepared by a committee of Arab intellectuals and published under the auspices of the U.N., the number of books translated by the entire Arab world is much smaller than what little Greece alone translates. The total number of scientific publications of 300 million Arabs is less than that of 6 million Israelis. Birth rates in the region are very high, increasing the poverty, the social gaps and the cultural decline. And all of this is happening in a region, which only 30 years ago, was believed to be the next wealthy part of the world, and in a Moslem area, which developed, at some point in history, one of the most advanced cultures in the world. It is fair to say that this creates an unprecedented breeding ground for cruel dictators, terror networks, fanaticism, incitement, suicide murders and general decline. It is also a fact that almost everybody in the region blames this situation on the United States, on Israel, on Western Civilization, on Judaism and Christianity, on anyone and anything, except themselves. Do I say all of this with the satisfaction of someone discussing the failings of his enemies? On the contrary, I firmly believe that the world would have been a much better place and my own neighborhood would have been much more pleasant and peaceful, if things were different. I should also say a word about the millions of decent, honest, good people who are either devout Moslems or are not very religious but grew up in Moslem families. They are double victims of an outside world, which now develops Islamophobia and of their own environment, which breaks their heart by being totally dysfunctional. The problem is that the vast silent majority of these Moslems are not part of the terror and of the incitement but they also do not stand up against it. They become accomplices, by omission, and this applies to political leaders, intellectuals, business people and many others. Many of them can certainly tell right from wrong, but are afraid to express their views. The events of the last few years have amplified four issues, which have always existed, but have never been as rampant as in the present upheaval in the region. These are the four main pillars of the current World Conflict, or perhaps we should already refer to it as "the undeclared World War III". I have no better name for the present situation. A few more years may pass before everybody acknowledges that it is a World War, but we are already well into it. The first element is the suicide murder. Suicide murders are not new invention but they have been made popular, if I may use this expression, only lately. Even after September 11, it seems that most of the Western World does not yet understand this weapon. It is a very potent psychological weapon. Its real direct impact is relatively minor. The total number of casualties from hundreds of suicide murders within Israel in the last three years is much smaller than those due to car accidents. September 11 was quantitatively much less lethal than many earthquakes. More people die from AIDS in one day in Africa than all the Russians who died in the hands of Chechnya-based Moslem suicide murderers since that conflict started. Saddam killed every month more people than all those who died from suicide murders since the Coalition occupation of Iraq. So what is all the fuss about suicide killings? It creates headlines. It is spectacular. It is frightening. It is a very cruel death with bodies dismembered and horrible severe lifelong injuries to many of the wounded. It is always shown on television in great detail. One such murder, with the help of hysterical media coverage, can destroy the tourism industry of a country for quite a while, as it did in Bali and in Turkey. But the real fear comes from the undisputed fact that no defense and no preventive measures can succeed against a determined suicide murderer. This has not yet penetrated the thinking of the Western World. The U.S. and Europe are constantly improving their defense against the last murder, not the next one. We may arrange for the best airport security in the world. But if you want to murder by suicide, you do not have to board a plane in order to explode yourself and kill many people. Who could stop a suicide murder in the midst of the crowded line waiting to be checked by the airport metal detector? How about the lines to the check-in counters in a busy travel period? Put a metal detector in front of every train station in Spain and the terrorists will get the buses. Protect the buses and they will explode in movie theaters, concert halls, supermarkets, shopping malls, schools and hospitals. Put guards in front of every concert hall and there will always be a line of people to be checked by the guards and this line will be the target, not to speak of killing the guards themselves. You can somewhat reduce your vulnerability by preventive and defensive measures and by strict border controls but not eliminate it and definitely not in the war in a defensive way. And it is a war! What is behind the suicide murders? Money, power and cold-blooded murderous incitement, nothing else. It has nothing to do with true fanatic religious beliefs. No Moslem preacher has ever blown himself up. No son of an Arab politician or religious leader has ever blown himself. No relative of anyone influential has done it. Wouldn't you expect some of the religious leaders to do it themselves, or to talk their sons into doing it, if this is truly a supreme act of religious fervor? Aren't they interested in the benefits of going to Heaven? Instead, they send outcast women, naVve children, retarded people and young incited hotheads. They promise them the delights, mostly sexual, of the next world, and pay their amilies handsomely after the supreme act is performed and enough innocent people are dead. Suicide murders also have nothing to do with poverty and despair. The poorest region in the world, by far, is Africa. It never happens there. There are numerous desperate people in the world, in different cultures, countries and continents. Desperation does not provide anyone with explosives, reconnaissance and transportation. There was certainly more despair in Saddam's Iraq then in Paul Bremmer's Iraq, and no one exploded himself. A suicide murder is simply a horrible, vicious weapon of cruel, inhuman, cynical, well-funded terrorists, with no regard to human life, including the life of their fellow countrymen, but with very high regard to their own affluent well-being and their hunger for power. The only way to fight this new "popular" weapon is identical to the only way in which you fight organized crime or pirates on the high seas: the offensive way. Like in the case of organized crime, it is crucial that the forces on the offensive be united and it is crucial to reach the top of the crime pyramid. You cannot eliminate organized crime by arresting the little drug dealer in the street corner. You must go after the head of the "Family". If part of the public supports it, others tolerate it, many are afraid of it and some try to explain it away by poverty or by a miserable childhood, organized crime will thrive and so will terrorism. The United States understands this now, after September 11. Russia is beginning to understand it. Turkey nderstands it well. I am very much afraid that most of Europe still does not understand it. Unfortunately, it seems that Europe will understand it only after suicide murders will arrive in Europe in a big way. In my humble opinion, this will definitely happen. The Spanish trains and the Istanbul bombings are only the beginning. The unity of the Civilized World in fighting this horror is absolutely indispensable. Until Europe wakes up, this unity will not be achieved. The second ingredient is words, more precisely lies. Words can be lethal. They kill people. It is often said that politicians, diplomats and perhaps also lawyers and business people must sometimes lie, as part of their professional life. But the norms of politics and diplomacy are childish, in comparison with the level of incitement and total absolute deliberate fabrications, which have reached new heights in the region we are talking about. An incredible number of people in the Arab world believe that September 11 never happened, or was an American provocation or, even better, a Jewish plot. You all remember the Iraqi Minister of Information, Mr. Mouhamad Said al-Sahaf and his press conferences when the US forces were already inside Baghdad. Disinformation at time of war is an accepted tactic. But to stand, day after day, and to make such preposterous statements, known to everybody to be lies, without even being ridiculed in your newspapers from giving him equal time. It also does not prevent the Western press from giving credence, every day, even now, to similar liars. After all, if you want to be an anti-Semite, there are subtle ways of doing it. You do not have to claim that the holocaust never happened and that the Jewish temple in Jerusalem never existed. But millions of Moslems are told by their leaders that this is the case. When these same leaders make other statements, the Western media report them as if they could be true. It is a daily occurrence that the same people, who finance, arm and dispatch suicide murderers, condemn the act in English in front of western TV cameras, talking to a world audience, which even partly believes them. It is a daily routine to hear the same leader making opposite statements in Arabic to his people and in English to the rest of the world. Incitement by Arab TV, accompanied by horror pictures of mutilated bodies, has become a powerful weapon of those who lie, distort and want to destroy. World does not notice it because its own TV sets are mostly tuned to soap operas and game shows. I recommend to you, even though most of you do not understand Arabic, to watch Al Jazeera, from time to time. You will not believe your own eyes. But words also work in other ways, more subtle. A demonstration in Berlin, carrying banners supporting Saddam's regime and featuring three-year old babies dressed as suicide murderers, is defined by the press and by political leaders as a "peace demonstration". You may support or oppose the Iraq war, but to refer to fans of Saddam, Arafat or Bin Laden as peace activists is a bit too much. A woman walks into an Israeli restaurant in mid-day, eats, observes families with old people and children eating their lunch in the adjacent tables and pays the bill. She then blows herself up, killing 20 people, including many children, with heads and arms rolling around in the restaurant. She is called "martyr" by several Arab leaders and "activist" by the European press. Dignitaries condemn the act but visit her bereaved family and the money flows. There is a new game in town: The actual murderer is called "the military wing", the one who pays him, equips him and sends him is now called "the political wing" and the head of the operation is called the "spiritual leader". There are numerous other examples of such Orwellian nomenclature, used every day not only by terror chiefs but also by Western media. These words are much more dangerous than many people realize. They provide an emotional infrastructure for atrocities. It was Joseph Goebbels who said that if you repeat a lie often enough, people will believe it. He is now being outperformed by his successors. The third aspect is money. Huge amounts of money, which could have solved many social problems in this dysfunctional part of the world, are channeled into three concentric spheres supporting death and murder. In the inner circle are the terrorists themselves. The money funds their travel, explosives, ideouts and permanent search for soft vulnerable targets. They are surrounded by a second wider circle of direct supporters, planners, commanders, preachers, all of whom make a living, usually a very comfortable living, by serving as terror infrastructure. Finally, we find the third circle of so-called religious, educational and welfare organizations, which actually do some good, feed the hungry and provide some schooling, but brainwash a new generation with hatred, lies and ignorance. This circle operates mostly through mosques, madrassas and other religious establishments but also through inciting electronic and printed media. It is this circle that makes sure that women remain inferior, that democracy is unthinkable and that exposure to the outside world is minimal. It is also that circle that leads the way in blaming everybody outside the Moslem world, for the miseries of the region. Figuratively speaking, this outer circle is the guardian, which makes sure that the people look and listen inwards to the inner circle of terror and incitement, rather than to the world outside. Some parts of this same outer circle actually operate as a result of fear from, or blackmail by, the inner circles. The horrifying added factor is the high birth rate. Half of the population of the Arab world is under the age of 20, the most receptive age to incitement, guaranteeing two more generations of blind hatred. Of the three circles described above, the inner circles are primarily financed by terrorist states like Iran and Syria, until recently also by Iraq and Libya and earlier also by some of the Communist regimes. These states, as well as the Palestinian Authority, are the safe havens of the wholesale murder vendors. The outer circle is largely financed by Saudi Arabia, but also by donations from certain Moslem communities in the United States and Europe and, to a smaller extent, by donations of European Governments to various NGO's and by certain United Nations organizations, whose goals may be noble, but they are infested and exploited by agents of the outer circle. The Saudi regime, of course, will be the next victim of major terror, when the inner circle will explode into the outer circle. The Saudis are beginning to understand it, but they fight the inner circles, while still financing the infrastructure at the outer circle. Some of the leaders of these various circles live very comfortably on their loot. You meet their children in the best private schools in Europe, not in the training camps of suicide murderers. The Jihad "soldiers" join packaged death tours to Iraq and other hot spots, while some of their leaders ski in Switzerland. Mrs. Arafat, who lives in Paris with her daughter, receives tens of thousands Dollars per month from the allegedly bankrupt Palestinian Authority while a typical local ringleader of the Al-Aksa brigade, reporting to Arafat, receives only a cash payment of a couple of hundred dollars, for performing murders at the retail level. The fourth element of the current world conflict is the total breaking of all laws. The civilized world believes in democracy, the rule of law, including international law, human rights, free speech and free press, among other liberties. There are naVve old-fashioned habits such as respecting religious sites and symbols, not using ambulances and hospitals for acts of war, avoiding the mutilation of dead bodies and not using children as human shields or human bombs. Never in history, not even in the Nazi period, was there such total disregard of all of the above as we observe now. Every student of political science debates how you prevent an anti-democratic force from winning a democratic election and abolishing democracy. Other aspects of a civilized society must also have limitations. Can a policeman open fire on someone trying to kill him? Can a government listen to phone conversations of terrorists and drug dealers? Does free speech protects you when you shout "fire" in a crowded theater? Should there be death penalty, for deliberate multiple murders? These are the old-fashioned dilemmas. But now we have an entire new set. Do you raid a mosque, which serves as a terrorist ammunition storage? Do you return fire, if you are attacked from a hospital? Do you storm a church taken over by terrorists who took the priests hostages? Do you search every ambulance after a few suicide murderers use ambulances to reach their targets? Do you strip every woman because one pretended to be pregnant and carried a suicide bomb on her belly? Do you shoot back at someone trying to kill you, standing deliberately behind a group of children? Do you raid terrorist headquarters, hidden in a mental hospital? Do you shoot an arch-murderer who deliberately moves from one location to another, always surrounded by children? All of these happen daily in Iraq and in the Palestinian areas. What do you do? Well, you do not want to face the dilemma. But it cannot be avoided. Suppose, for the sake of discussion, that someone would openly stay in a well-known address in Teheran, hosted by the Iranian Government and financed by it, executing one atrocity after another in Spain or in France, killing hundreds of innocent people, accepting responsibility for the crimes, promising in public TV interviews to do more of the same, while the Government of Iran issues public condemnations of his acts but continues to host him, invite him to official functions and treat him as a great dignitary. I leave it to you as homework to figure out what Spain or France would have done, in such a situation. The problem is that the civilized world is still having illusions about the rule of law in a totally lawless environment. It is trying to play ice hockey by sending a ballerina ice-skater into the rink or to knock out a heavyweight boxer by a chess player. In the same way that no country has a law against cannibals eating its prime minister, because such an act is unthinkable, international law does not address killers shooting from hospitals, mosques and ambulances, while being protected by their Government or society. International law does not know how to handle someone who sends children to throw stones, stands behind them and shoots with immunity and cannot be arrested because he is sheltered by a Government. International law does not know how to deal with a leader of murderers who is royally and comfortably hosted by a country, which pretends to condemn his acts or just claims to be too weak to arrest him. The amazing thing is that all of these crooks demand protection under international law and define all those who attack them as war criminals, with some Western media repeating the allegations. The good news is that all of this is temporary, because the evolution of international law has always adapted itself to reality. The punishment for suicide murder should be death or arrest before the murder, not during and not after. After every world war, the rules of international law have changed and the same will happen after the present one. But during the twilight zone, a lot of harm can be done. The picture I described here is not pretty. What can we do about it? In the short run, only fight and win. In the long run - only educate the next generation and open it to the world. The inner circles can and must be destroyed by force. The outer circle cannot be eliminated by force. Here we need financial starvation of the organizing elite, more power to women, more education, counter propaganda, boycott whenever feasible and access to Western media, internet and the international scene. Above all, we need a total absolute unity and determination of the civilized world against all three circles of evil. Allow me, for a moment, to depart from my alleged role as a taxi driver and return to science. When you have a malignant tumor, you may remove the tumor itself surgically. You may also starve it by preventing new blood from reaching it from other parts of the body, thereby preventing new "supplies" from expanding the tumor. If you want to be sure, it is best to do both. But before you fight and win, by force or otherwise, you have to realize that you are in a war, and this may take Europe a few more years. In order to win, it is necessary to first eliminate the terrorist regimes, so that no Government in the world will serve as a safe haven for these people. I do not want to comment here on whether the American-led attack on Iraq was justified from the point of view of weapons of mass destruction or any other pre-war argument, but I can look at the post-war map of Western Asia. Now that Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya are out, two and a half terrorist states remain: Iran, Syria and Lebanon, the latter being a Syrian colony. Perhaps Sudan should be added to the list. As a result of the conquest of Afghanistan and Iraq, both Iran and Syria are now totally surrounded by territories unfriendly to them. Iran is encircled by Afghanistan, by the Gulf States, Iraq and the Moslem republics of the former Soviet Union. Syria is surrounded by Turkey, Iraq, Jordan and Israel. This is a significant strategic change and it applies strong pressure on the terrorist countries. It is not surprising that Iran is so active in trying to incite a Shiite uprising in Iraq. I do not know if the American plan was actually to encircle both Iran and Syria, but that is the resulting situation. In my humble opinion, the number one danger to the world today is Iran and its regime. It definitely has ambitions to rule vast areas and to expand in all directions. It has an ideology, which claims supremacy over Western culture. It is ruthless. It has proven that it can execute elaborate terrorist acts without leaving too many traces, using Iranian Embassies. It is clearly trying to develop Nuclear Weapons. Its so-called moderates and conservatives play their own virtuoso version of the "good-cop versus bad-cop" game. Iran sponsors Syrian terrorism, it is certainly behind much of the action in Iraq, it is fully funding the Hezb'Allah and, through it, the Palestinian Hamas and Islamic Jihad, it performed acts of terror at least in Europe and in South America and probably also in Uzbekhistan and Saudi Arabia and it truly leads a multi-national terror consortium, which includes, as minor players, Syria, Lebanon and certain Shiite elements in Iraq. Nevertheless, most European countries still trade with Iran, try to appease it and refuse to read the clear signals. In order to win the war it is also necessary to dry the financial resources of the terror conglomerate. It is pointless to try to understand the subtle differences between the Sunni terror of Al Qaeda and Hamas and the Shiite terror of Hezb'Allah, Sadr and other Iranian inspired enterprises. When it serves their business needs, all of them collaborate beautifully. It is crucial to stop Saudi and other financial support of the outer circle, which is the fertile breeding ground of terror. It is important to monitor all donations from the Western World to Islamic organizations, to monitor the finances of international relief organizations and to react with forceful economic measures to any small sign of financial aid to any of the three circles of terrorism. It is also important to act decisively against the campaign of lies and fabrications and to monitor those Western media who collaborate with it out of naivety, financial interests or ignorance. Above all, never surrender to terror. No one will ever know whether the recent elections in Spain would have yielded a different result, if not for the train bombings a few days earlier. But it really does not matter. What matters is that the terrorists believe that they caused the result and that they won by driving Spain out of Iraq. The Spanish story will surely end up being extremely costly to other European countries, including France, who is now expelling inciting preachers and forbidding veils and including others who sent troops to Iraq. In the long run, Spain itself will pay even more. Is the solution a democratic Arab world? If by democracy we mean free elections but also free press, free speech, a functioning judicial system, civil liberties, equality to women, free international travel, exposure to international media and ideas, laws against racial incitement and against defamation, and avoidance of lawless behavior regarding hospitals, places of worship and children, then yes, democracy is the solution. If democracy is just free elections, it is likely that the most fanatic regime will be elected, the one whose incitement and fabrications are the most inflammatory. We have seen it already in Algeria and, to a certain extent, in Turkey. It will happen again, if the ground is not prepared very carefully. On the other hand, a certain transition democracy, as in Jordan, may be a better temporary solution, paving the way for the real thing, perhaps in the same way that an immediate sudden democracy did not work in Russia and would not have worked in China. I have no doubt that the civilized world will prevail. But the longer it takes us to understand the new landscape of this war, the more costly and painful the victory will be. Europe, more than any other region, is the key. Its understandable recoil from wars, following the horrors of World War II, may cost thousands of additional innocent lives, before the tide will turn." 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). |
|
WHY THE CALM IN ISRAEL?
Posted by JINSA, June 22, 2004. |
|
This is JINSA Report #419. It is archived at
www.jinsa.org/articles/view.html?documentid=2578
Stories from the major press plus a note from an Israeli source provide food for thought. It has been just over three months since Palestinian suicide bombers last struck inside Israel - the longest such lull in more than three years. Almost everyone has a theory... the barrier Israel is erecting in the West Bank, Israel's effort to smash the infrastructure of militant groups such as Hamas, or the eddying currents of Palestinian internal politics. Senior Israeli security officials cite the juxtaposition of good intelligence and good luck. The letup in attacks, they say, is not for any lack of trying on the militants' part. "All it takes is for one to get through," a senior security official said last week. (LA Times) IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Moshe Ya'alon has defended the destruction of terrorists' houses, saying that neighbors and family members of would-be Palestinian suicide bombers often come forward with information to prevent pending attacks, in an effort to spare their homes... Ya'alon also reported on over 70 terror attacks in the last week: seven shootings on the highways; 32 shootings attacks on security forces; 12 mortar attacks in the Gaza Strip; five rocket attacks; and 19 mine and anti-tank attacks on forces in the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt. (Jerusalem Post) According to a report to a Knesset committee, "There has been a drop of 75 percent in the number of suicide attacks (actual and thwarted) compared to the first half of 2003 (which itself was considerably better than 2002). Between January and today there have been 4 successful suicide attacks, the last one on March 14. During the same period, 58 attempts have been thwarted, so it's not as if the terrorists have completely stopped trying... In recent weeks, in light of the dramatically reduced level of terrorist attacks, the IDF has dismantled more than 60 of the roadblocks scattered throughout the West Bank." So, Israel has no additions for now to the grim terror statistics. Terrorists are still trying (including a double father/daughter suicide bombing group caught before they could detonate themselves), but less often and with greater risk that their own people will turn them in. The Palestinian public receives the benefit of fewer roadblocks and a somewhat more normal life despite their lousy civil and religious leadership. Punditry says Palestinian grievances have to be resolved for terrorism against Israel to end. The JINSA Flag and General Officers Trip heard a different view: Palestinians, not just terrorists, have to see that terrorism will not accomplish illegitimate goals (the destruction Israel) and there comes a point where Israel will judge its own safety to be more important than even legitimate Palestinian concerns (removing roadblocks). So Israel has engaged in a combination of aggressive attacks on terrorists and the terrorist infrastructure in the territories, even at the cost of dislocating parts of the civilian population that harbored (willingly or unwillingly) the terrorists. And as the IDF is successful in doing what the PA won?t do, Israel provides benefits to the Palestinian civilian population. So far, so good. But as long as the good guys have to succeed every time and the bad guys only a few times, no one should be complacent. The JINSA Reports are published by the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (http://www.jinsa.org). To subscribe, email jinsareports-www@lists.jinsa.org |
|
A DESIRE TO BE FOOLED
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 22, 2004. |
|
Israel's Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon, like Shimon Peres, is a master of deceit. However, his mental slaves in his Cabinet are willing partners in his deceptions because they want to be fooled. To face the pain of reality is simply too much for these exceptionally weak personalities. They want to worship, even to be beaten so they can demonstrate their obedience and awe of a dictatorial master. Dictators are natural bullies who rule through fear. We all have watched those "Yes" men who surround a fierce dictator with a certain degree of self-deprecating pleasure. Dictators all have their simpering worshipers. Saddam had dozens who hung on his every word and none dared to challenge. We saw the genuflectors to Hitler's madness. Industrialists, the Judiciary, Generals all worshiped this savage. The more he killed, the greater this awe. All dictators gather around them their "Yes" men, the toadies who rollover in whining delight, when their master deigns to give them a look of approval or scratch their bellies like a submissive rolled-over dog. But, these second-in-command compensate by themselves become bullies and pass their frustration sense of inferiority down the chain of command. This is common phenomenon in government, business, the military all the way down to the school-yard bully who, because of size, terrorizes the younger and smaller around him. This is also a syndrome in industry because when the boss is a tyrant, everybody below acts the same way. A good example is to observe Sharon then Tommy Lapid and Ehud Olmert. Each has become a small dictator, with little dictators under them. The lowest victim on this descending ladder of victimization is the people. Someone has to become the final receptacle of the tyranny and victimizations raining down and it is always the people. Sharon has his underlings who desperately craved being under the umbrella of a dictator they fear and whose approval they need. Those in Sharon's Cabinet who fell into line already knew that the military had recommended that withdrawal from Gaza/Gush Katif would surely increase Terrorism and provide a full scale base for International Terrorists. But, they discarded that counsel because it didn't match the Great Dictator's plan. So, they sniveled and whined and offered their excuses for their embarrassing weaknesses. They hated those of the Cabinet who voted against Sharon because it raised a comparison between their weaknesses and the strength of the others. Risk avoidance has been brought to the highest possible State-of-the-Art among Israeli politicians given that, if they are wrong, their very own family may be slaughtered. The Israeli public at large also practice denial believing in leaders who have time and again failed them. Those who surround dictators are equally to blame for the catastrophes, certain that they will not be dragged from office and made to pay the ultimate price. They just bury their mistakes as if nothing ever happened. Perhaps you have noticed that high level crooks in government never (or rarely) go to trial or to jail. Politicians may leave a trail of lies and dead bodies but, they never see the inside of a courtroom - let alone bars to their freedom. They are able to practice "plausible deniability" or excuse and pardon their cohorts - or they have enough inside information on those who might 'squeal' to prevent the truth from emerging. As for the public at large - they carry their share of the blame but they have an excuse. The Israeli public gets a steady diet of biased news and disinformation from their three Hebrew newspapers, each of whom are considered Left Liberal to Radical Left Liberal. We cannot expect Israelis to be an informed electorate when their three main newspapers and two TV stations have one line which is Left Liberal and reflects a Leftist doctrine established by Labor since before the State was born in 1948. The only one nationalistic competing radio News Station, Arutz Sheva (7), was driven out of business by Sharon shortly before he began his dictatorial campaign to eliminate the Jewish presence in Gaza/Gush Katif and very likely the areas of Judea and Samaria, with the Golan Heights and half of Jerusalem to follow. Then when Israel is reduced from a mini-state to a minnow state, the sharks of the Arab Muslims in the Middle East will gobble up the rest of her - just as they promise. We should believe what they say, or else we are merely racists. Israel suffers from the same news blackout one finds in Egypt through Al Ahram or in Russia, when Pravda was the only news the dictatorial government let through. In every nation ruled by Dictators, the media reflects the opinion of the boss. In Israel, the great dictator does not need to threaten the Media to stay in line because Israel's Media is an eager volunteer to spin the news without urging. The Media, like Sharon's Cabinet, wants to be fooled. They do not want the facts because then they would be required to make a real decision. They do not want to know that a Prime Minister is twisted or crooked. They do not want to know that their Prime Minister, who is following the Labor Left's planning is cutting deals with foreign governments to the detriment of the Jewish State of Israel. They just don't want to know and, if you start to tell them, they take the posture of the Three Monkeys" "See no evil; Hear no evil; Speak no evil" ... except they do speak evil. Israel, except for the Pioneering Settlers, has put herself on an automatic pilot of denial and destruction. Instead of dragging the government (all) out of office, closing down a runaway Supreme Court - most await Sharon's next lie and argue its merits as if it had merit. If the people do not rise up to rid themselves of a growing, dangerously self-destructive dictatorial regime, Israel will end up either disappearing or merely being assimilated as another Middle East nation under the thumb of a corrupt dictator. THIS JUST IN [June 22, 2pm CDT]: The South Korean Kim Sun IL, who was kidnaped by Terrorists in Iraq has been beheaded. The video from Al Jezeera TV confirms this grizzly act, along with the message that South Korean troops supporting the American coalition are to get out of Iraq. The same message was given for Paul Johnson, Jr.'s beheading. This was also the message for the beheadings of Daniel Pearl, the Jewish journalist from the Wall St. Journal and Nicholas Berg, the Jew from Philadelphia who had gone to Iraq to help reconstruct their cell-phone towers. The message for Israel's Cabinet, voters and Sharon should be as follows: When you abandon Gaza/Gush Katif, removing 8,000 men, women and children and the Israeli Defense Forces, the same 'Jihadists' in Iraq, from around the Muslim world, will move into this vacuum. Kidnapings and beheadings will soon follow, with the same message that: Israel must be vacated to the sea. This is what Sharon and his Cabinet will be bringing to Israel as he draws Israel's borders closer and closer to Israel's heartland.
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).
|
|
KEYS TO DESTRUCTION
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, June 22, 2004. |
|
This was a Jerusalem Post editorial on Jun 17, 2004.
What Palestinians and their fellow-travelers call the "right of return" - a term in which the media tend lazily to acquiesce - is broadly understood by Israelis for what it is: the destruction of the State of Israel. There is no need to add the words, "as a Jewish state": No state named Israel can ever be anything other than a Jewish state. Or would the binational state of Yasser Arafat's and Meron Benvenisti's fantasy - with an Arab majority in the Knesset and an Arab prime minister - continue to call itself "Israel"? This is the key thing, because the choice for Israel is not between "Israel as a Jewish state" and "Israel as a state of all its citizens." The choice is between Israel as a Jewish state and Palestine. Or rather, it is between Israel as a Jewish state that respects minority rights and Palestine as an Islamic state that suppresses Christians and murders Jews. A "state of all its citizens" may seem like a more perfect democracy than what we have now. In fact, it is a more vulnerable one. Such a state may remain a de facto Jewish state for as long as a Jewish majority endures, but that majority is unlikely to long endure in a state that formally abandons the one thing that makes it uniquely attractive to Jews. In this issue of Up Front, Arieh O'Sullivan looks at the story of Palestinian refugees from three angles: What remains of the villages they left behind in the Lachish district in 1948; where they are now, and what Israel is (or is not) to do about them. What makes the story of Lachish uniquely intriguing is that the Jewish settlements were generally built alongside abandoned Arab villages, and not, as is usually the case in history, atop them. So why forbid Palestinians from returning, if that return need not displace anyone? There's room enough. What is so wrong with a state of all its citizens? Most Israelis, of course, know exactly what's wrong with it. Yet it is very difficult actually to say it. To Rodney King's great question, why can't we all get along? we answer: because we never have, because we never will. To the follow-up, well, why is that? we say: because we're different, because they're different, because because. All this smacks of something ugly: xenophobia, paranoia, racism. Certainly, it seems unbecoming of Israel's liberal democratic aspirations. One of the ironies of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is that it is the Palestinians who, in their rhetoric, speak the language of liberal idealism, of why can't we all get along? It is left to Israeli to strike the doleful notes of tragic realism, which perhaps is why we fare so poorly in the international perceptions of the conflict. Yet both in practice and intent, the opposite is true: Palestinian nationalism has always been monstrously illiberal while Jewish nationalism has generally been quite liberal. There is no question that Israelis need to come up with some better rhetoric to explain just why those refugees should not come back. We need it for international consumption, for hasbara. Even more, however, we need it for ourselves. We need to know that Israeli liberalism exists as a function of Jewish nationalism, not in tension with it, and that without the Jewish nationalism that brings us together in a common language, a common experience, a common set of core beliefs, there could be no possibility of participatory democracy or individual liberty. There is nothing to be ashamed of in this view. With it, we should be able to look our liberal critics abroad squarely in the eye, as well as the elderly Arab gentleman tapping softly on the front door. The National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" |
|
A DANGEROUS ENEMY: FEDERMAN'S WIFE INDICTED
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 22, 2004. |
|
This is a news item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com)
Noam Federman of Hevron is still under house arrest - permitted outside his home for only an hour each day to participate in morning prayers - and now his family has been "blessed" with another trouble: His wife Elisheva has been indicted on three charges related to her refusal to leave an evacuated outpost last year. "This story, of which my role is only a very tiny part, is truly one of the cruelest I have heard," Elisheva told Arutz-7 today. The story began 17 months ago when Nati Ozeri, father of five, was brutally murdered by Palestinian terrorists who infiltrated the area of Hilltop 26, where the family lived alone, outside Kiryat Arba. As soon as the weeklong "shiva" mourning period ended, the widow Livnat Ozeri and her children returned to live on the hilltop. Two months later, without prior warning, IDF forces surprised the family in the middle of the night and forcibly evicted them from the area. Army bulldozers then destroyed the three small buildings on the strategic hill, thus erasing all signs of Jewish presence there. Livnat said the next morning, "My children will now forever remember the traumatic murder of their father during Shabbat dinner, and the second attack on our home by our own government. They have 'murdered us and inherited us.'" Livnat's father Sha'ul Nir said, "To wake up five orphans in the middle of the night, and put them into police wagons as they're rubbing their eyes, with giant bulldozers around their home, only two months after they lost their father - and then to destroy their home with [much of] the contents inside - there are no words to describe this other than pre-meditated evil." Livnat Ozeri later said that the soldiers broke down the door, did not speak or produce a warrant, and began searching: "[The police] told me that I had to enter the car immediately. I told them that I could not leave the children alone in the house. They forcibly pushed me into the police car. And then the soldiers went to bring the children from their beds.... 11 years old and younger - and there is no need to explain the trauma that a child experiences when his father has recently been murdered, and strangers take him out of his bed to a police car in the middle of the night.... [A]lmost midnight, in the freezing Hebron cold, with my five children - dressed in pajamas, without socks, without shoes, without a coat, and without a sweater. They forbade me to bring warm clothing or blankets for my children. We began to drive. I asked them where they were taking us. 'You will know later on, we have a long drive,' they replied...." They were dropped off in the middle of a Jerusalem street at 3 AM near her parents' home. Later that day, many Hevron residents arrived at the site and were shocked at what they saw. "The State of Israel came, in the middle of a cold night, and took out from their home the widow and orphans of a murdered terrorist victim," Mrs. Federman said. "We simply could not stand by and do nothing in the face of this terrible crime. We came to the site, and were very shaken by the destruction on the hilltop. We - three other women from Hevron and I - found an old car that for some reason the army had not taken, and while people were standing around, with the army trying to evict them, we went into the car, with our babies, for protection from the freezing rain. When the police came and told us to leave, we told them that we were not leaving in protest of this terrible crime; we demanded that the widow and orphans be allowed to return and rebuild their home and their lives." Finally, several hours later, the police forcefully removed them from the car and into a police wagon. "Suddenly we found ourselves accused of a crime, as if we had done something wrong - when in truth, the real criminal was the State of Israel... This was a year ago, and now we have actually been served with indictment papers, charging us of three crimes: refusal to adhere to a lawful order, interfering with a policeman in the line of duty, and negligence in caring for minors (in that we kept our babies in a cold car for several hours). Ironically, these are precisely the crimes with which we think that the State should be charged: They unlawfully destroyed three buildings on Hilltop 26, when in fact the demolition orders only referred to one roof of one building; they were the ones who showed 'negligence in caring for minors' by throwing them out into the cold in the middle of the night; and third - they were the ones who used force while we were exercising our lawful right to protest. Is it reasonable that anyone who carries out a protest might, from now on, find himself behind bars?" Asked if she plans to defend herself in court with the above reasoning, Elisheva said, "I don't know what will work in court and what won't; I know the truth. I know that the State carried out a crime, and that we did the minimum required of us to protest this terrible crime." The first court hearing is scheduled for Sunday, July 4. 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. |
|
SO WE'RE HATED
Posted by Menachem Kovacs, June 22, 2004. |
|
This was written by Dennis Prager and appeared today in
Jewish World Review (http://www.jewishworldreview.com).
There are many ways to philosophically divide Americans. Liberal-conservative and religious-secular are two obvious ways. But there is another, no less significant, division: Those who are ashamed of America for being hated and those who wear this hatred as a badge of honor. I am in the latter group. I understand such hatred. I am a Jew, a member of the most consistently and deeply hated people in world history. As such, and as coauthor of "Why the Jews? The Reason for Antisemitism" (Click HERE to purchase. Sales help fund JWR.), I have devoted decades to thinking about Jew-hatred. There are basically two possible ways to look at anti-Semitism. One is that anti-Semites are essentially decent folks and Jews have usually been so bad that they have merited anti-Semitic hatred. The second is that the Jews have generally been a decent people who antagonized many of the morally worst people of their time and place. Anti-Semites would, of course, choose the first explanation. Others would acknowledge that those who have hated the Jews have usually been the vilest of their generation. Whether Roman torturers, Crusaders who massacred Jewish communities on their way to the Holy Land, Nazis or Communists - they all hated Jews. The monsters of the 20th century, the Nazis, made Jew-hatred the centerpiece of their ideology. And the monsters of our young century, militant Muslims, have done the same. Why have the Jews, always among the weakest and smallest of peoples, attracted the hatred of the most evil people? Because of what the Jews represented. The civility of the Jews' lives and the values the Jews brought into the world - especially ethical monotheism, i.e., a standard of right and wrong based on a moral and judging G-d - made them loathsome in the eyes of those who led particularly uncivil lives and who celebrated moral chaos and cruelty. Turning to hatred of America, the same questions and answers apply. Either America is evil and hatred of it is merited, or America is a decent country and the haters are evil. The correct explanation is so obvious that only one who already hates America or who is simply morally confused would choose the first. To assess the veracity of this, all one need do is compare America - a country that has liberated more people from tyranny than any other, and which has been a place of refuge, tolerance and opportunity for more people from more backgrounds than any other in history - with those who hate America. Militant Muslims hate America. These people include the Taliban of Afghanistan, Al Qaeda and other Muslim terrorists, the Islamic regimes of Iran and Sudan, members of Hamas and the many Palestinians and other Muslims who support it. Now, what types of people are these, and what societies have they made or seek to make? To call the Taliban primitive is to insult the many primitive peoples who were light years more civilized than these totalitarians who forbade girls to get an education and prohibited women from such innocent activities as going to the zoo. They murdered anyone who loved liberty, beheaded any Muslim who converted to another religion, and blew up some of the most priceless sculptures of the ancient world because those works of art were of a different religion. Is it a good or bad reflection on America that the Taliban hated this country? Al Qaeda and other Muslim terrorists seek to impose Taliban-like regimes on everyone in the world, beginning with the Muslim world. They routinely slaughter innocent people - literally slaughter, as cutting off the heads of their human sacrifices is their preferred method of murder. They are monsters in human form. Is it a good or bad reflection on America that Al Qaeda and other Muslim terrorists hate this country? The Islamic regime of Iran has taken one of the brightest nations on earth back into the darkest past of human civilization. Their great ally is the genocidal regime of North Korea. Is it a good or bad reflection on America that the Islamists in Iran hate this country? The Arab Islamic regime in Sudan has killed about one million non-Arab, non-Muslim blacks in the south of its country. Rape and enslavement of these blacks is routine. Is it a good or bad reflection on America that the Sudanese regime hates this country? Hamas and its many supporters among Palestinians have developed a new theology of cruelty and death - that a Muslim boy who blows himself up while maiming and murdering as many innocent Jews as possible goes to heaven where he is then sexually serviced by dozens of virgins. In the annals of the history of religion, no analogous theology of cruelty and vulgarity has ever been devised. Is it a good or bad reflection on America that Hamas and its Palestinian supporters hate this country? One more point. When you look at the roster of the America-haters and realize that none of them hates France or Sweden, this assessment of America-hatred is rendered even more obvious. America, largely alone, calls these groups and regimes what they are - evil. America, largely alone, wages war against them. America, largely alone (with Israel), prevents them from assuming far more power. As I said to my synagogue on the Sabbath after 9-11, "I stand before you as a proud member of the world's two most hated peoples - Americans and Jews." |
|
ITEMS: SHARON'S PLAN; TURKEY; POLLARD
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 22, 2004. |
|
THE LEGALITY OF CABINET VOTING An Israeli law professor explained that Sharon was not elected Prime Minister. Rather, he formed a government coalition, of which he is part. He has no right to dismiss Ministers except for cause. He violated their right to tenure. The Professor's assertion was kept out of the news (IMRA, 6/6). ISRAELI LEADERS BLUSTER WHILE RETREATING PM Sharon secured a Cabinet vote to abandon parts of Yesha, and then warned the P.A., "We will never break." IMRA noted the contradiction (IMRA, 6/5). Sharon has broken ranks with his people. He has deceived them so well that many do not realize it. The media supports his policy by focusing not on its disastrous potential but on polls, usually misleading, and based on the media blackout, that purport to show the people agree with Sharon. Whether the people agree or not, he is betraying them. He knows the answers to the disturbing questions he and the media do not ask about the strategic disadvantages of his plan. WHAT THE CABINET VOTED FOR The vote did not restrict decisions to Sharon's committee that he selected to rubberstamp his decisions. Neither did the Cabinet fix a target date for abandonment, it just proposed one. Decisions on which communities to evacuate would be made individually, not in blocs (IMRA, 6/6). Those minor reservations would not impede an authoritarian Prime Minister such as Sharon. WHAT PRES. BUSH SUPPORTS Pres. Bush's recent remarks about ending the (non-existent) "occupation" indicates reneging on prior policy, as written into the Security Council Resolution, that Israeli withdrawal need not be complete. How can Jews "occupy" the land promised to them (by the League and UN Mandate, if not by God)? How can a Bible-believing Christian President suppose the Jews can occupy a fictional country, "Palestine," inhabited by a fictional people, the "Palestinians?" Pres. Bush keeps touting democracy in the Middle East, although PM Sharon acts dictatorial (IMRA, 6/9). So does Arafat, whom Bush subsidizes. Sharon acts dictatorial at the State Dept behest. It does not care about democracy. With George Bush, religion gives way to politics, and politics gives way to economics. His economics outlook is short-term. Look beyond the short term, and shudder. TURKEY'S ADVICE ON HOW TO FIGHT TERRORISM The Foreign Minister of Turkey suggests that the "international community" should combat terrorism but Israel should not assassinate terrorists (IMRA, 6/7). That's a good one! A direct victim of terrorism should not defend itself by seeking out terrorists. Instead, it should depend on countries that prefer the terrorists to it. That is a prescription for terrorism. Turkey's Islamist government leans more towards terrorism than it shrinks from its sad experience with it. As for "international community," that is a euphemism for self-serving prejudice against the Jewish state and inaction about other international problems. SHARON'S REAL ABANDONMENT PLAN Israel has a plan to cut off services to the Jews of Gaza, jam their communications equipment, and forcibly expel and jail those whom they can't buy out. The details are hair-raising. Thus Sharon, who has refrained from an all-out assault against the terrorists, plans one against the Jews of Yesha. He is either demented or a traitor without conscience or ethics. Likud Ministers Netanyahu, Livnat, and Shalom endorsed the plan. They rationalized that it only is a plan. However, as a result of their approval, all the details of an expulsion are being worked out and this summer money will be offered to buy out the settlers, with a cut-off date for their acceptance (Winston Mid East Analysis, 6/10, e-mail). The three Ministers are being dangerously egotistical in supposing that with everything set except the signal to proceed, they can outmaneuver that clever and unscrupulous steamroller named Sharon at the last minute and then express indignation against the plan that they failed to express sufficiently and convincingly up to now. In Israel, those who belong in jail maneuver into jail those who don't belong in it. ARMS AWAITING SMUGGLING "A very large quantity of arms, including anti-aircraft missiles and Katyusha rockets are in the Sinai Desert for eventual introduction to the Gaza Strip." (IMRA, 6/9.) One may suppose that Israel would inform Egypt where the depot is, if Egypt would prevent their use against Israelis. But Israel generally applauds Egypt for helping curb P.A. violence. Actually, Egypt promotes that violence, and the violence helps Sharon achieve his policy of expelling Jews. WILL THE LEFT ADMIT ITS ERROR? The Left had argued that Israel should not bother with the arms smuggling tunnels, for they don't matter. Then the ship carrying heavy artillery and missiles to be smuggled into the P.A. was captured en route to Egypt (Prof. Steven Plaut, e-mail) and was claimed as Egypt's by its President. That ship proves that the tunnels do matter, that Egypt is the enemy of Israel, and that Israel would be foolish both to let Egypt get involved in security for Gaza and to leave Gaza. Will the Left admit that? If not, the incident also proves that the Left is reckless. WHY DO THE P.A. MILITIAS OPPOSE SHARON'S PLAN? Although PM Sharon wants to abandon much (or all) of Yesha to the Arabs, the private P.A. militias oppose it. They complain that it calls for a suspension of their armed struggle. Interestingly, the Fatah militia, which Arafat runs and arms, rejected the plan, while the P.A., which Arafat runs and arms, approved the plan (IMRA, 6/19). None of my sources noted the contradiction in that. Do the militias really oppose the plan? It is difficult to know what the Arabs really think. What they think may not be what they say. They usually complain, so as to seem entitled to something. Surely the militias know that although the plan calls for suspension of armed struggle, it provides no means to end the armed struggle. They must know that the Road Map, which calls for ending the armed struggle has no practical steps for ending it. A CASE PARALLEL TO POLLARD'S Pollard was a US citizen and Naval intelligence analyst. So was Mr. Kim. Pollard spied for a US ally, Israel. Kim spied for US ally S. Korea, where he was born. The documents Pollard copied were about the Arab threat to Israel. The documents Kim copied were about the N. Korean threat to S. Korea. Neither set of documents was about the US. So far, the cases were parallel. Now they diverge. Pollard has expressed remorse. Kim and the government of S. Korea thought he did nothing wrong, since S. Korea is an ally. Pollard was sentenced for life without the possibility of parole (and was given cruel and unusual treatment). Kim was sentenced for nine years and was released after seven. Photographed in the act, Kim pled guilty. He claimed his sentence was harsh because he was foreign-born. (No justification for the claim was offered in the news brief.) The S. Korean ambassador visited its agent, Kim, every month. The Israeli ambassadors never visited Pollard during his 19 years of captivity to date. Although the S. Korean government showed its solidarity with Kim, Koreans think their government did not try to help him. Although Israel expressed by neglect its lack of solidarity with Pollard, Koreans think the government of Israel helped Pollard. (But Kim is out and Pollard is in.) Antisemites also think the government of Israel -- which did not protest the lack of medical treatment for the ailing Pollard, did not visit him, gave no support for his wife, and lied that it was pursuing the case -- over-aggressively strives for his release (IMRA). Legitimate criticism of Israel over this would be for its lack of solidarity with its agent who is punished by the US in inverse proportion to the crime and as cruelly as the Iraqi prisoners about whom a legitimate fuss is being made. UNRWA COMPLAINS ABOUT P.A. EDUCATION DECLINING The war has increased Palestinian Arab resort to UNRWA facilities, of which the US pays 25% and the Arabs pay almost nothing. UNRWA complains of insufficient funds for education and health in its camps for Arab refugees. It warns that most of the residents are youths, liable to become terrorists if not educated. IMRA questions the sincerity of that warning, since UNRWA textbooks encourage hatred and it allows its housing for them to be used for terrorist activities. So many youths? Not mentioned is the high birth rate that the P.A. encourages, whereas Egypt and Jordan publicly strive to reduce birth rates. Of all the refugee programs, only UNRWA tries to maximize the number of refugees in its care and its program excludes their resettlement outside of Israel (IMRA, 6/9 from Jordan Times). That is a political or religious, not a humanitarian goal. RESULTS OF ISRAELI CLOSURE OF EREZ INDUSTRIAL ZONE Although the Erez industrial zone has come under frequent terrorist attack, Min. Olmert claims or admits he has closed it in coordination with PM Sharon's supposedly suspended plan to remove Jews from Yesha. One result will be to end the jobs of thousands of P.A. Arabs and hundreds of Israelis. The government wants the companies in the zone to relocate to Israel. Their factories, however, would have to pay higher wages in Israel than they can afford against competition (Arutz-7, 6/9). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
IS THE JEWISH AGENCY ENTITLED TO USE ITS FUNDS TO HELP PM SHARON ETHNICALLY CLEANSE JEWS?
Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, June 22, 2004. |
|
According to the Jerusalem Post of Monday June 21st 2004, PM Ariel Sharon has asked the Jewish Agency to support his unilateral Disengagement Plan and use its funds to help "relocate" settlers from Biblical Gaza and Samaria to the Negev and the Galilee. According to that same article, the Agency has agreed. The Jewish Agency has let itself be convinced by Sharon that this plan will "provide security, give a boost to the economy and improve Israel's diplomatic standing." This of course is the same pie-in-the-sky reasoning which brought us the Oslo disaster with more than a thousand Jews murdered and thousands more maimed for life. The Jewish Agency writes in its website that it is "committed to assuring the future of the Jewish People with a strong Israel at its center: through immigration to Israel, Jewish Zionistic Education and partnership with and for Israel". These by-laws certainly do not empower the Jewish Agency to assist a temporary Israeli minority government to destroy Jewish Communities, to transfer Jews from their homes and to hand over our Land to the Arab enemy as a reward for terror - especially when Sharon's plan is not supported either by Sharon's own Likud party, or by a majority in the Knesset or by the majority of Israelis. Women in Green call upon all to join in a DEMONSTRATION asking the Jewish Agency to refuse to assist in the unlawful transfer and ethnic cleansing of Jews. When: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 at 10:30 am
In addition, we call upon all, to bombard the Jewish Agency offices in Israel and in the States with faxes, phone calls and e-mails protesting this outrage. The Jewish Agency main email: elibir@jazo.org.il Sallai Meridor, Chairman sallaim@jazo.org.il tel: 972-2-620-20-80 fax: 972-2-625-23-52 Carol Salomon, UJC head casuja@aol.com tel: 212 339 6001 fax: 212 318 6155 New York Main Jewish Agency office tel: 212-339-6063/6068/6072 fax: 212 832 1597, 212 318 6145 Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
JUDAS SHEEP
Posted by Ya'akov Golbert, June 22, 2004. |
|
Here's an image I picked up growing up in rural America: Predators are attracted by the smell of blood. Herbivores are repelled by it and instinctively flee from it. How do slaughterhouses get the livestock out of the boxcars and into the slaughterhouse redolent with the smell of blood? In the case of sheep, they have what is called a "Judas sheep": a ram; a young, strong, dominant one, which has lived in the slaughterhouse long enough to have grown comfortable with the smell. They bring him down the ramp into the boxcar and then back up the ramp into the slaughterhouse. And the sheep, being sheep, follow. In the end, of course, the Judas sheep is also slaughtered. The 30,000 university-educated, assimilated Jewish intellectuals, who were recruited by the Nazis as the Judenrat, were clearly the Judas sheep in the ghettos and the concentration camps. But one of the most troubling motifs of the Shoah is the Jewish leadership of Hungary. They knew everything by early 1944. Until late Summer when the Nazis overthrew the government of Horthy and installed the Salasi government, Jews could still have gotten out and gone to Shanghai or made preparations to hide or resist. Many of them could have saved themselves. People had heard the rumors of the death camps and the mass extermination of Jews but they trusted their leaders. "Surely they would know," they thought. "And surely, if it were true, they would warn us so that we could flee or make preparations to save ourselves." But they did nothing. They said nothing. The Jewish leaders of Hungary served as a sort of advance Judas sheep, convincing the people that what was in store for them was somehow normal or at least endurable. And the leaders went to their deaths with the rest of the Jews of Hungary. Isn't that what our leaders have done to us until now? All the politicians, all the journalists, including the Jewish media (especially including the Jewish media), all of President Clinton's court Jews and court ex-Jews and non-Jews with "Jewish heritage," and now all of President Bush's and all the other people who keep mumbling about advancing the "peace process" which clearly has something quite the opposite of peace as its objective, have mesmerized the Jews. They have mesmerized us to the point that not even Benny Begin and his "right wing" party dared to be the messengers bearing the evil truth. Now, something new has happened. The sheep did not follow the Judas sheep. They talked it out among themselves and they voted 60% to 40% to remain in the car and not go into the slaughter house. I do not know what slaughterhouse workers in America do in such a case. I suppose they go into the car armed with electric cattle prods, whips, sticks and perhaps dogs and they drive the sheep out and up the ramp into the slaughterhouse. I suppose that because the Judenrat did not operate in the death camps, redolent with the smell of blood. There, it was the domain of the capo, whip in hand, who achieved compliance with the will of his Nazi masters in order to gain a brief reprieve on his own death sentence. I suppose it also because that is essentially what the Israeli government is about to do. Having gotten cabinet approval by crude, dictatorial measures, the government is recruiting "special forces" for the job, joining the Turkish and Ukrainian mercenaries who have already been brought in by the Ministry of "Defense" plus the multi-Arab forces called "Egyptian" and "Jordanian" who also have already been brought into the territories. Can we assume they will be anything other than psychopath squads? If the evacuation of the "outpost" at Yitzhar is the prototype, then it will conform to this description. Sharon and his cohorts are obviously desperate to deliver the results their masters demand. They act as if their lives depend on it. There is no benefit in sitting around waiting for the axe to fall. It has always been true that only God can save us, but now it's obvious. Still, God has a way of saving us only when we act ourselves. I do not hear a prophet saying "Hashem will fight for you". We, the Jewish people, have to do it ourselves and we have to act to save ourselves. And we have to act such as to deserve Hashem's help. Professor Ya'akov Golbert is cofounder of the netzahyisroel organization (http://www.netzahyisrael.org/index.htm). |
|
POLITICS: ARAB LEAGUE, IRAN AND PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
Posted by Barry Rubin, June 22, 2004. |
|
A foreign colleague just told me that he intends to switch his focus away from studying the Middle East because that subject is "too depressing." Another expresses dismay that nothing every changes. But even as the champion of what another colleague has called "pessimistic realism," I don't mean to suggest that everything stays static. It is just that the changes are less dramatic, not so inevitably upbeat, or inevitably based on Western expectations as is expected Let's take three brief case studies of changes happening now. 1. Democratization: The Arab regime and U.S. strategies on this issue
have become apparent recently. Many Arab governments are trying to fool
the West by pretending that they, too, are eager for reform. Egypt, for
example, sponsored the Alexandria Declaration in March (text,
In May, the Arab League meeting in Tunis produced a communique more
vaguely worded and clearly intended as a response to U.S.-sponsored
efforts to press for change (text,
( Arab officials hailed the statement; reformist forces criticized it.
Again, though, it at least puts reform on the agenda, legitimizing
discussion of such issues.
Meanwhile, European officials stated that they were already doing
exactly what was needed to promote reform in the Arab world, which meant
talking about it occasionally while conducting some training programs but
without any political or military pressure. Yet the gap in the Western
alliance was closed as the United States watered down its position on the
issue to one of verbal urging and small-scale assistance programs.
The Arab reformers themselves seem to be lowering their own
expectations. In Saudi Arabia, they are closing ranks behind the regime
there. While urging reform as the best way to fight Islamist extremism,
they have no doubt that they prefer the kingdom of the Saudis to the rule
of Usama bin Ladin.
In short, reform and democratization are at the center of debate but
any action on this front is going to be extremely limited. This is very
much a long-term battle whose outcome is far from certain.
2. Iran's nuclear weapons. Recently, I spoke to some of the most
sophisticated experts on weapons of mass destruction in the world. They
told me that after a recent trip to Tehran, they were convinced that Iran
would not push ahead trying to obtain nuclear weapons. My response was
that of course they were going to do so and nobody was going to stop them.
Within hours, an International Atomic Energy Agency report seemed to
indicate that going nuclear was Iran's goal. (text,
3. Palestinian politics. We seem to be witnessing the
unraveling of the Palestinian movement. While there are no end of
suckers--or outright liars--who want us to forget all experience and
observation in order to pretend that Yasir Arafat is going to make a
compromise peace with Israel, the Palestinian leader is changing
nothing. But his strategy of extreme militancy combined with passive
leadership is leading toward a crack-up.
The most amusing aspect of recent developments is that after years of
denying responsibility for the al-Aqsa brigades, Fatah's terrorist front
group (very similar to the Black September organization of the 1970s in
this respect), Arafat has now gotten into a public dispute with its
leaders on whether he can continue to afford paying their salaries.
(Key question that journalists never ask: If Arafat is so opposed to
terrorism can he give any examples of Fatah members who have been punished
or expelled for carrying out such attacks? Answer: No)
There are currently four major challenges that Palestinian leaders
are trying to pretend out of existence:
1. Since Arafat is not providing leadership, the most militant
elements of Fatah are moving toward a strategic alliance with Hamas which
would further reinforce the Palestinian leadership's refusal (or
"inability" if you prefer) to make peace.
2. The Intifada is at least temporarily defeated. Palestinian groups
still try to stage attacks but are increasingly being blocked, especially
from succeeding, especially inside Israel. Rather than reconsider this
strategy, however, the leaders intend to continue the violence because it
yields international and local public relations' benefits and is seen as
forcing Israel to withdraw from the Gaza Strip.
3. An Israeli withdrawal from Gaza would create the need for a real
and functioning Palestinian administration there. But despite Egyptian
efforts, it seems doubtful whether Arafat can or will create such an
entity. This is partly due to his view that anarchy favors him alongside a
determination to continue the war against Israel. Naturally, the
Palestinians themselves will suffer the most and, equally naturally, most
of the world will blame Israel for this situation.
4. Arafat's coming demise, for which no preparations are being made
or successors being prepared.
Meanwhile, real massacres and ethnic cleansing are being carried out
by Arab Muslims in the Sudan with no international interest or UN
intervention. (see, for example,
The United States is fighting terrorists in Iraq with unfortunate
inevitable side-effects (attack on al-Qaeda's purported headquarters led
to civilian casualties and destruction of homes) showing that Israeli
efforts are far more limited and careful than credited. A poll taken by
the U.S. authorities in Baghdad shows that 78 percent believe the cause of
terror attacks in Iraq are U.S. efforts to steal the country's oil, while
54 percent claim that all Americans are just like those who abused
prisoners at Abu Ghraib.
And the BBC has now made triple the number of documentaries on
Israel--virtually all hostile--than on any other country in the world.
(see, for example, Oh, yes, there is plenty of change but often not in the direction one
might prefer.
*If you want to know about European policy and coverage of Israel in
the Middle East, you should definitely subscribe to Tom Gross' list.
Write to him at: Professor Barry Rubin is Director of The Global Research in International Affairs Center (GLORIA) and Editor of Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA). |
|
HE IS NO LONGER MY PRIME MINISTER
Posted by Moshe Feiglin, June 22, 2004. |
|
In the final analysis, what is democracy if not the subservience of the government and the citizens to the same rules of the game? It is true that it is customary for leaders to bend the rules, and this is even acceptable up to a certain limit. But when a leader makes a fundamental change to the game, and has no intention of subjecting himself to the same rules that he demands from his nation, he is no longer playing in the democratic arena. He is still a leader, but not one who can continue to enjoy the legitimacy of a democratic prime minister. He is forcing himself upon me by violence, and consequently I do not accept his leadership, but merely fear the enforcement agencies obeying his orders. The Likud must rapidly dismiss Sharon, and replace him by a member of the party obligated to accept its decisions and institutions, and to honor Israeli democracy. This must be done inside the party institutions, and in the Knesset, in cooperation with all the nationalist and religious MKs. This is essential not merely to save the Likud that Sharon is trampling underfoot. It must be done in order to prevent the State of Israel from sliding into total chaos. Sharon has already created a culture of totalitarian government that can only be changed by his dismissal. The debate no longer centers around security, territorial, or even ideological issues. We are actually talking about our ability to run this country on a basis of agreement and not of violence. When Arieh Golan (a member of Uri Avneri's Gush Shalom) declares on Kol Israel, without a trace of hesitation, that citizens who refuse to accept compensation will be evicted from their homes within a few months, and all because of such a gangster-type political hi-jacking, this means that we have been enslaved by a dangerous and violent gang. This is the same type of government culture that was created here in order to hasten the country on the slippery path of death of Oslo. At that time Rabin passed a decision in the Knesset by bribing MKs Goldfarb and Segev. Sharon is now using a far simpler method - he fires ministers instead of bribing them. What is the real difference between this approach and that of the Mafia, that forces owners of businesses to sell them to the don, according to the rules they make? The Mafia wants to create the impression of legitimacy. Why bother to pass a decision in the Likud Central Committee, in a referendum, in the government? So that Arieh Golan can make this horrifying broadcast. I now realize that Sharon is no longer my prime minister. Everything now depends on the Likud. If the Likud members, the Central Committee members, and above all, the Likud MKs, won't get up and throw out this dangerous person, there will not longer be any meaning to this party. The Likud will cease to exist, and a terrible danger will threaten the very existence of the State of Israel. 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. |
|
THE LUSTICK FILES: A Guide to Intellectual Fools
Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, June 22, 2004. |
|
"We must understand that even the views of the most intelligent people cannot be trusted when their personal desires block the truth. Not only does their intelligence not keep them from erring, but they use their intelligence to mislead others into accepting their foolish conclusions as if they were based on the most rigorous logic." (Rabbi Eliyahu E. Dessler, Strive for Truth, Parashat Korach) ----- He is no nutty professor nor an absentminded one - Dr. Strangelove is more like it. Professor of Political Science, Ian Lustick, is a US intelligence strategist and Director of the University of Pennsylvania's Solomon Asch Center. And he possesses that rare kind of genius that could get us all killed. I'll spare you excessive background info., but suffice to say that he's a product of Brandeis and Berkeley Universities and he's done those institutions proud. His field of expertise is Israel-bashing, which is nothing unusual in and of itself (especially for a liberal Jew who sits on the board of Tikkun), but Lustick's opinions are lauded by the academic world, politicians and the intelligence community. He advises Presidents and consults and lectures for the Department of State, NSC (National Security Counsel), NSA (National Security Agency), CIA and PLO. He's received and continues to receive significant grants for research from dozens of Institutions and Foundations including, the United States Institute for Peace, The Ford Foundation, the Charles Revson Foundation, the National Science Foundation, the Carnegie Corporation, and National Endowment for the Humanities He's written several books and scores of published articles. Some of them have offbeat, irreverent titles like Yerushalayim, al-Quds, and the Wizard of Oz Guru that he is, Lustick comes up with some novel little ideas and about big world problems like, "I supported the war [in Afghanistan] but I warned that we needed a Goldilocks outcome and we didn't get it." (1) "I think about terrorism in terms of popcorn," he says. "You can't tell which kernels are popcorn and which are not, but you assume you'll always have some kernels that are going to pop." (2) The above statements may be indicative of the problem. Lustick is so removed from reality that he reduces the concept of terrorism and war to something as innocuous as popcorn and fairy tales, yet the powers-that-be eat it up. They watch the show from their ivory towers and from behind computer simulators, while the rest of us bleed. He's currently developing computerized Terror Games based on the popular Sims model. Popular Science ran a large spread on the project and asked the question: Can computer games be devised to model the thinking and predict the actions of allies, enemies and even terrorists? Some in the U.S. government think so. Are they playing God? (3) Ok., the professor can play with words and maneuver pixels, but he can also manipulate photographic images for his purposes. For a visual overview on his Worldview go to his personal online photo album from Israel at http://globetrotter.berkeley.edu/people2/Lustick/photos/ This is where his truly ominous personality and plans becomes apparent. Lustick's photos are hardly Pulizer Prize winning material and they are a bit dull, but the below captions which appear under the photos reveal a disturbed man with and definite agenda: Redemption Movement poster on lavatory pipe in Jerusalem So, if you're wondering how we got to this recent low point in Jewish history, take a look at the opinions of the venerated professor. When Ian speaks, people listen (but I still can't figure out why)... On Arafat: When asked in a Tikkun magazine interview if he trusted Arafat, this was Lustick's response: "Do I trust Yasser Arafat? Of course not. Why should I? Why should anyone trust a politician - whether Shimon Peres, Ariel Sharon, Bill Clinton, Richard Nixon, Lyndon Johnson, Benjamin Netanyahu, George W. Bush, or Yasser Arafat? Whether we agree with them or not, politicians aren't for trusting. They are for getting done what can be done to make really horrible problems into plain old lousy problems." (4) Notice how Lustick completely disregards Arafat's history as a terrorist and neatly transforms him into not just another politician, but into a full-fledged head of state. On Terrorism: The following is taken from a book review by Joshua Sinai, Ph.D which appear in homelanddefense.org: Lustick dismisses the concept of terrorism as a valid conceptual term. Instead, he embraces what he terms an "extensive," as opposed to an "intensive," definition of terrorism that is not bound by any limiting "conditions." This, he claims, enables one to classify activities as "terrorist" if they encompass any violent "actions and threats" by governmental militaries and even "tax collectors" as well as insurgents. (5) The reviewer goes on to fault Lustick with "intellectual obfuscation." Lustick's obscuring of the term terrorism back in 1995 may shed some light on the international media's reluctance to use the "T" word and their opting for terms like militants, gunmen, insurgents, etc. According to the Professor's logic, Hamas is to terrorism as the Internal Revenue Service is to Hamas. On Moral Equivalency: Lustick's brand of moral equivalency has spread like the plague. In a 1995 interview he said, '....There must be elections including Hamas if Hamas will participate, just as Tsomet and Likud are allowed to participate in Israeli elections, although they do not endorse the peace process." (6) One wonders if the late Prime Minister Yitzchak Rabin was influenced by the professor's logic when he lumped right-wing protesters opposing Oslo together with Hamas and referred to them as "enemies of peace." Lustick manages to blur the lines in a fairly recent interview when he addressed the issue of the Iraq War: "This is not a war on fanatics. This is a war of fanatics - our fanatics." (7) Ever wonder where those accusations about Jews, like Wolfowitz, Abrams and Perle, being the cause of America's involvement in Iraq come from? On the Peace Process: In 1995 Lustick said, "Rabin has got to do things that will create the kind of political capital Arafat needs...The most obvious thing that Rabin could do is to say that there will be a Palestinian state ... There must be an end to closure of Jerusalem and an end to the thickening as well as the expansion of settlements. There must be an end to subsidization of settlements ..." (8) On Settlers: "Only if they [Israeli governments] are ready for a showdown with the settlers can real progress toward peace with the Palestinians be made." (9) The liberal prophet of peace clearly relishes, encourages and perhaps even incites civil strife (war?) between Jews in Israel. On Jerusalem: The idea of "united Jerusalem" is in fact a "carefully cultivated fetish." (10) (You don't think Olmert's been reading this stuff, do you?) On Daniel Pipes: "[Pipes] takes views that no responsible academic would ever articulate. He's so far outside the pale of mainstream scholarship, yet the networks need people to give this view because it's a popular view. A reasonable position they can get anywhere. What they're looking for is an unreasonable position." (11) Very few representing a "right-wing point of view are willing to debate someone as knowledgeable as I am." (12) (Please note that Daniel Pipes sits on the Board of the U.S. Institute for Peace, which funds and promotes a good portion of Lustick's work) On Oslo: "And in 1989, I was called by the first President Bush to the White House for a closed discussion, 'What should we do about this?' And for an hour and a half I got to talk to the president and his top advisors, and helped, I think, to convince them to give the kind of speech that James Baker gave to AIPAC [the American Israel Public Affairs Committee], which led to the loan guarantees suspension, which led to the victory of the Rabin government, I believe -- Rabin over Shamir in the 1992 elections, and then led to Oslo." (13) Lustick credits himself with having had a part in the downfall of the Shamir government which led to the creation of Oslo. At this dire hour any individual with audacity to pat himself on the back for promoting an American intrusion into an allied sovereign country's democratic process and for initiating the Oslo catastrophe is either out-of-touch with reality or a bit "touched." And what about Academic integrity and ethical research? Lustick recently remarked that, "you cannot make a contribution to policy and to a moral commitment without systematic, scientific, organized investigation of history and politics." (14) Impressive comment, but Professor Lustick has been promoting the same loaded agenda since 1969. He's so bent on proving himself the prophet that he's incapable of conducting research with integrity. Which leaves is with the question: Can a world renowned expert and professor of an outstanding American University represent history or the institutions he's affiliated with when he is so obsessed and narrow focused? He has by-passed a cardinal rule of academic research. After exhaustive investigation into an issue, if one proves themselves wrong it is commendable. Professor Gil-White (a former colleague of Lustick's) and Joan Peters (bestselling author, From Time Immemorial) are two examples of academics who had the honesty and integrity to correct their positions -the mark of true scholarship. How dangerous is Ian Lustick? Well, this is purely speculative but ... A well documented article which appeared on Arutz 7 by Lori Lowenthal Marcus, a lawyer and the President of the Zionist Organization of America, Greater Philadelphia District, reported the following: The Jewish Telegraphic Agency exposed the Ford Foundation as the source of multi-millions of dollars provided to non-governmental organizations that launched the foulest attacks on Israel and Jewry in recent history. Those NGOs relentlessly excoriated Israel as an apartheid, genocidal, colonialist monster during the 2001 United Nations World Conference Against Racism in Durban, South Africa. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=3510 Between 1996 -1998 Ian Lustick was the Director of Ford Foundation Workshops on the Problematics of States and Identities. One has to wonder... References:
Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, columnist for Israelnationalnews,com and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com |
|
LINKAGE IS KEY
Posted by D. Haimson, June 21, 2004. |
|
This was an editorial today in the
Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/).
The fact that the United Nations held its first-ever conference on anti-Semitism yesterday is receiving some attention as a man-bites-dog story. That it is considered noteworthy for the UN to oppose anti-Semitism is itself a fair measure of the problem. We welcome this conference as, perhaps, a small step toward the giant leaps necessary for the UN to address the problem and its own contribution to it. Less than three years ago, in Durban, South Africa, the UN held a conference on "Racism, Xenophobia, and Related Intolerance" that propagated exactly these crimes against Jews and Israel. Explaining why the US felt compelled to walk out of the conference, Secretary of State Colin Powell said, "I know that you do not combat racism by conferences that produce declarations containing hateful language, some of which is a throwback to the days of 'Zionism equals racism'; or supports the idea that we have made too much of the Holocaust; or suggests that apartheid exists in Israel; or that singles out only one country in the world - Israel - for censure and abuse." The Durban conference was a vivid example of how hatred and delegitimization of Israel, unacceptable in its own right, naturally spills over into anti-Semitism itself. Not surprisingly, the campaign to deligitimize Israel is accompanied by attempts to deny not only acts of anti-Semitism, but the entire category. The Arab world, at Durban and since, has tried both to quash condemnations of anti-Semitism and to claim that this euphemism for Jew-hatred actually includes Arabs as victims as well. The United Nations, if it is serious about combating anti-Semitism, must take a number of steps. It must pass a resolution condemning anti-Semitism, despite Arab opposition. It must define anti-Semitism, like other forms of hatred, bigotry, and intolerance, as a violation of human rights, rather than as a derivative of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It must stop applying a gross double standard against Israel, such as when the UN Human Rights Commission spends more time and resolutions attacking Israel than any other nation. Finally, it must stop turning a blind eye to the open, government-propagated anti-Semitism that is prevalent in the Arab world. On Saturday, in a televised statement taped by NBC News, Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah said, speaking of the wave of terrorism that has hit his country, "Zionism is behind it. It has become clear now It is not 100 percent, but 95 percent that the Zionist hands are behind what happened." Blood libels against Jews and Israel are routinely spread in the tightly-controlled media and education systems of the Arab world, including in ostensibly "moderate, pro-Western" countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Not only was a dramatization of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion broadcast on Egyptian television, but a government-owned publisher has issued a new edition of the Protocols. The same publisher issued The Jews' Crimes against the Monotheistic Religions in 2002, which includes this introduction: "There are tens of books published in Arabic and foreign languages that described broadly the history of the Jews, the sons of Israel or Zionism. It is worth mentioning that most of them ignored, or omitted on purpose, any reference to the severe crimes that this race of people did, whether against themselves, against their prophets or against other nations and people " It is obviously not realistic to expect that the UN, having been transformed by the Arab bloc into an anti-Semitic tool, would turn around and censure the Arabs on precisely these grounds. What is to be hoped is that recent explorations of this subject in Berlin and Washington will result in the imposing of concrete consequences on nations that foment anti-Semitism. In April, the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe issued the Berlin Declaration, calling for a series of measures to combat anti-Semitism and disassociating it from the Arab-Israeli conflict. This month, Minister Natan Sharansky testified before the US Congress on the need to link US relations with Arab states to their treatment of dissidents and to whether they combat anti-Semitism - similar to the linkage successfully imposed by the Helsinki process and the Jackson-Vanik amendment on the Soviet bloc. Linkage is the key. Jew-hatred, like any crime, can only be fought by imposing consequences against the individuals and states that commit it. Mr. Haimson sends out links to some excellent articles about Israel and its neighbors. To sign up, send an email to dhaimson@w3-4u.net |
|
FICTION DISPLACES FACTS IN PALESTINE
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, June 21, 2004. |
|
This was written by Ahron Bregman, author of "Israel's Wars: A History
Since 1947" and "A History of Israel" and co-author of "The Fifty
Years' War: Israel and the Arabs."
I am an Israeli but I also regard myself as a Palestinian - a Jewish Palestinian. My father was born and raised in Palestine as was his father, grandfather, great grandfather and so on for many generations. In fact the Bregmans have lived on this land - first Palestine then Israel - since around 1754. But then, there is nothing unique about this because other Jewish families as well have lived in Palestine for decades, mainly in Jerusalem, Tiberias, Safed and Hebron among other places. But Arab and Palestinian propaganda would not accept that. "The Jews never lived in ancient Israel," claimed the respected Arab historian Jarid al-Kidwa in a television program broadcast on Palestinian Authority Television in June 1997. He went even further to say that "all the events surrounding Kings Saul, David and Rehoboam occurred in Yemen, and no Hebrew remnants were found in Israel, for a very simple reason - because they were never here." Not lagging much behind, the Mufti of Jerusalem, Sheikh Ikrama Sabri, said, "The Western Wall is not a Jewish holy site... The Al-Buraq Wall (the Western Wall) and its plaza are a Muslim religious property and...the Wall is part of the Al Aqsa Mosque. The Jews have no relation to it." As regards the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, Yasser Arafat claimed that Jews have no rights there either, for Abraham, who is buried there, was not, according to Arafat, a Jew. As the Palestinian leader put it in a 1996 interview in the Jerusalem Report, "Abraham was neither Jewish nor a Hebrew, but was simply an Iraqi. The Jews have no right to claim part of the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron, Abraham's resting place, as a synagogue. Rather, the whole building should be a mosque." And the Tomb of Rachel? Well, according to Palestinian Authority officials, "Rachel's Tomb in Bethlehem is the traditional tomb of the Cushite servant of Mohammed." Mixing facts and fiction and rewriting the history of the Holy Land is part of the Palestinians' struggle against Israel and part of their negotiating tactics. In fact, quite recently, during the July 2000 Camp David summit, Arafat, who during the summit failed to put on the table a single constructive plan for peace, did come up with an interesting suggestion. U.S. envoy Dennis Ross, who was present when Arafat spoke, explained that Arafat "did offer one new idea, which was that the Temple didn't stand in Jerusalem but in Nablus." But Arab and Palestinian propaganda does not stop there, for it goes on to challenge not only Jewish and Israeli rights to the ancient parts of Palestine but also to the more modern parts of it. Thus, in school textbooks and other publications it is often claimed that the land of modern Israel was in fact "stolen" from the Arabs and that the Palestinians were effectively "robbed" by the Jews. This, of course, is nonsense. In my book "Israel's War: A History Since 1947," I put it this way: "The Jews did not...'rob' the Arabs or 'steal' their land, but rather they bought it from them. As for the Arab aristocracy of landowners who had sold the land to the Jews, they did so voluntarily and with open eyes." Although Palestinians have legitimate grievances, there is absolutely no historical basis to their claims - some of which are utterly ridiculous - that Palestine is exclusively theirs and that the Jews "stole" their land. For the truth is that Jews have always lived in Palestine - as indeed did my family - and Jewish settlers did not, as it is often claimed by Arabs, seize land, but rather they bought it. Critics and foes of Israel should recollect that the state of Israel was established by the Jews on Jewish and legitimately purchased land. And it was blessed by the United Nations and recognized by nations of the world, most notably the United States. The National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" |
|
HOW WEN-JING BECAME 'SHALVA': CHINESE JEWISH DESCENDANT RETURNS TO JUDAISM
Posted by Michael Freund, June 21, 2004. |
|
For the first time, a descendant of the once-vibrant Jewish community of Kaifeng, China, has undergone conversion in Israel and formally returned to Judaism. This past Sunday, Jin Wen-Jing, an 18-year-old student at the Yemin Orde youth village, went before a Haifa conversion court under the auspices of the Chief Rabbinate. After administering an oral examination aimed at assessing her commitment to Judaism as well as her knowledge of Jewish law and tradition, the three rabbis comprising the Beit Din informed Wen-Jing that they had decided to accept her as a Jew. Speaking in fluent Hebrew, Wen-Jing was quick to express her joy, and relief, at the court's decision. "I was very nervous, but now I am very happy," she said. "This has always been my family's dream - to return to our roots." Wen-Jing arrived in Israel four years ago with her parents. Her father, Jin Guang-Yuan, who now goes by the name Shlomo, is a direct descendant of the Jewish community that existed for nearly a thousand years in the city of Kaifeng, which lies north of Beijing, on the south bank of the Yellow River. At its peak, during the Ming Dynasty, Kaifeng Jewry numbered about 5,000 people. But widespread intermarriage and assimilation, as well as the death of the community's last rabbi, brought about its demise by the middle of the 19th century. Scholars say there are still hundreds of people in Kaifeng who cling to their identity as descendants of the town's Jewish community. Wen-Jing's father still carries with him a copy of his internal Chinese identification card, which lists his nationality as "Youtai," or Jew. He and his wife hope to follow in their daughter's footsteps and undergo conversion soon. Since her arrival in Israel, Wen-Jing has been studying at Yemin Orde under the guidance of the youth village's director, Dr. Chaim Peri, as well Rabbi Zev Rubens, an educator who oversees the school's conversion program, both of whom accompanied her to the beit din. She has decided to adopt the name Shalva (serenity), which is the Hebrew translation of her Chinese given name. Currently in the midst of her matriculation exams, Wen-Jing will shortly enter the National Service (Sherut Leumi) program for religious girls, and will perform her national service at Shaarei Zedek Hospital in Jerusalem. Why did she decide to convert? "G-d chose the Jewish people to be His nation, and I wanted to be a part of it," said Wen-Jing, smiling. "G-d has performed many miracles for Israel," she said, adding, "The fact that I have come here from China, and made it all the way here, back to my people - that too is a miracle." The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning under former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. |
|
THE NY TIMES AND HA'ARETZ SHOULD REALIZE AMERICA AND ISRAEL HAVE ENEMIES THAT WANT US DEAD
Posted by Morris J. Amitay, June 21, 2004. |
|
When it comes to Iraq you can count on the New York Times - and media fellow travelers - to always find a cloud in the silver lining. Having editorially and reporting-wise campaigned against deposing Saddam in the first place, the Times and the Washington Post only grudgingly - if at all - report on any positive developments in Iraq. So it came as a shock to see a positive Times story on page one no less (admittedly it was on a Saturday - the least read day of the week) about a successful sewage treatment project in Baghdad. This literal example of muckraking was definitely an exception to their usual doom and gloom stories. I don't, however, recall seeing a word about the growing value of the Iraqi dinar, or the fact that instead of an outflow of refugees, there has been an influx of Iraqis returning to their homeland. Yet every insurgent attack is meticulously described, and every American casualty is reported on in detail. What particularly galls is that every statement by a disaffected or unhappy Iraqi is given tear jerk treatment, and dubious reports by "eye-witnesses" are treated uncritically as gospel. But it is not only the media's peace at any price crowd in our own country which manages to get the story wrong. Self-imposed blinders are also worn by some misguided journalists in Israel - particularly those writing for Ha'aretz. Touted as Israel's "leading daily", its actual circulation is only a fraction of that of Yediot Aharonot and also much smaller than Ma'ariv's. But it is a principal source of political wisdom for Israel's leftist elite who rely on the skewed analyses of the likes of columnist Akiva Eldar. Eldar's observations about the Washington scene in particular, are often laughable. So when Eldar and a colleague recently sat down for dinner with Yasir Arafat it is not surprising that they gave new meaning to a "softball" interview. But their own display of good intentions only elicited the same double talk and outrageous statements by the object of their supplications. The point here is that both the New York Times and Ha'aretz in their commentaries still refuse to acknowledge the reality of their own nation's enemies and the nature of the threats both countries face. The United States is in an ideological war against radical Islam which seeks no less than world domination. Israel faces both the forces of radical Islam and closer to home a wily terrorist whose ultimate goal is the destruction of the Jewish state, in stages, only because it is necessary. In both cases negotiation and engagement are a fruitless exercise. The al-Qaeda barbarians who behead American hostages and Arafat who encourages suicide bombers are really on the same moral plane. Only Arafat has learned that he can convince the gullible he is more reasonable by making promises which he does not keep, but still permit him to pocket Israel's concessions. P.T. Barnum's dictum that there are suckers born every day surely applies here. Whether they are greedy Frenchmen seeking lucrative deals in Iran, or Peace Now adherents in Israel still faithful to Oslo, they are simply too self-absorbed in their own fantasy worlds to admit that they are still courting those who want them to disappear. In Israel, those belonging to the so-called "peace camp" keep blaming themselves for being hated so fiercely by the Palestinians. They look for the "root causes" behind the enmity. They solemnly state that the use of military force never solves anything. And they desperately seek "engagement" with sworn enemies in the hope that their own displays of goodwill and magnanimity can overcome hatred and hostility. Fat chance. But hope springs eternal whether it be in the breast of 80-year old Shimon Peres, or in the hearts and minds of faculty members at our leading universities who blame "the occupation" in Iraq and in "Palestine" for Islamic hatred and terrorism. Fortunately, in both Israel and the United States there are still majorities who despite the media's mangled messages have the good sense to realize that there are those in this world who want them dead simply because of who they are. Should such realization, however, fail to lead to resolute and effective action to defeat our enemies, it is no exaggeration to predict a bleak future for our civilization. It is too bad that the incentive that might be needed for more resolute action is another attack more deadly than 9/11. Then, even our head in the sand media might be unable to rationalize or ignore it. Morrie Amitay is a former Executive Director of AIPAC and founder of the pro-Israel Washington PAC (www.washingtonpac.com). |
|
MUBARAK'S EGYPT - UNDERMINING U.S. INTERESTS
Posted by IsrAlert, June 21, 2004. |
|
According to Israel's military intelligence, a large quantity of
anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles is awaiting in Sinai -
compliments of Egypt - to be smuggled into Gaza-based Palestinian
terrorists. However, rather than punish Egypt for its destructive
role, the proposed Disengagement Plan would boost Egypt's stature,
ignoring Egypt's anti-US track record, as detailed in the enclosed
162nd issue of "Straight From The JERUSALEM CLOAKROOM"
(www.acpr.org.il).
This was written by Yoram Ettinger. He write the "Straight from the Jerusalem Cloakroom" issues. Israel's DISENGAGEMENT PLAN PROMOTES EGYPTIAN, AND UNDERMINES U.S. INTERESTS. It rewards the largest terrorist base in the world (PA/PLO-controlled Gaza and 40% of Judea & Samaria), with its operatives in Iraq and Afghanistan. It promotes Egypt's role, in defiance of Egypt's systematic anti-US record: 1. OFFICIAL EGYPTIAN ANTI-U.S. INCITEMENT has characterized Egypt's controlled-media: "Baghdad is raped [by the US] in daylight and no one intervenes...We thought that the walls of Baghdad would resemble swords, chopping the neck of the [US] invader... [According the US], occupation is liberation, cluster bombs are a remedy, unprecedented bloodbath are building a new Iraq... This is a confirmation of the theory: killing for the sake of killing, occupation for the sake of occupation" (government-owned daily, Al Jumhuriyah's editor in chief, whose appointment was approved by Mubarak, April, 9, 2003). 2. OFFICIAL EGYPTIAN ANTI-SEMITISM reinforced by a recent edition of the classic Soviet "Elders Of Zion", published by the official weekly, Akhbar Al Yom (Ha'aretz, January 4, 2004), consistent with Egypt's anti-Semitic and anti-Israel school curriculum. Equally-alarming have been Egypt's systematic PERSECUTION OF ITS 9 MILLION COPTIC MINORITY, and the shameful human rights record of the MILITARY CLIQUE ruling Egypt since 1952. 3. THE ISLAMIZATION OF EGYPT has been accelerated by Mubarak, in contrast with Sadat's attempts to Westernize Egypt. Since 1981, he has concluded a "protection" pact with radical Muslim elements (in Egypt and later on WITH HAMAS IN GAZA!), accelerating their penetration into Egypt's civil service, clergy, education and military, in order to secure his regime. Mubarak has created a fertile recruiting ground for Bin-Laden and other Chief anti-US Islamic terrorists, producing Bin-Laden's chief lieutenant, Ayman al-Zawahiri, Sheikh Rakhman of the 1993 Twin Tower terrorism and majority of the 9/11 terrorists. Mubarak facilitated series of understandings between the PA and Hamas. 4. ISLAMIC PENETRATION HAS BEEN FACILITATED BY MUBARAK'S FAILED ECONOMIC POLICY, which has sacrificed "butter" at the expense of "guns" (compliment of US military aid). Israel has been marked as the leading target for Egypt's unprecedented military procurement. 5. EGYPT's SUPPORT OF PALESTINIAN TERRORISM: Anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles await in Sinai - compliments of Egypt - to be smuggled into Gaza-based Palestinian terrorists (Col. Zoaretz, Israel's commander of the Gaza front, Kol Israel, June 9, 2004). "Egyptian manufactured anti-tank RPG missiles are employed by Palestinian terrorists" (Israel's Deputy Chief of Military Intelligence, Knesset testimony, June 7, 2004). While supposedly aiming to reduce terrorism, once in Gaza, EGYPT WOULD FULFILL FOR THE PA/HAMAS THE ROLE PLAYED BY SYRIA FOR HIZBALLAH. It would protract Palestinian terrorism and bolster its infrastructure (to be activated according to Egypt's timing), while bleeding Israelis and Palestinians on the altar of Egyptian interests. A note: the Karin-A ship, carrying military hardware for Palestinian terrorists, was apprehended on its way from Iran to Egypt. 6. ACHILLE LAURO's ABUL ABBAS escaped US extradition, when flown (2003) from his Cairo's safe haven to Baghdad. In December 1985, Mubarak allowed Abul Abbas to escape US justice, flying from Cairo to Rome. 7. EGYPT IS A LARGER MILITARY THREAT THAN SYRIA. It obstructs Israel's ties with Arab and African countries and in the UN (General Eiland, the very dovish national security advisor to PM Sharon, Forward, June 11, 2004). 8. Egypt - a traditional contender for Arab leadership - will not act as a policeman against anti-Israel or anti-US Islamic/Palestinian terrorists. Egypt has not tolerated anti-Egyptian terrorism, and has therefore, always, subordinated its ties with the US to its internal security considerations (such as placating radical Islamic elements). Egypt has, also, subordinated its ties with the US to its strategic ties with North Korea (long-range ballistic missiles!), Iran (close strategic ties), Saddam (intimate contacts until the 1991 War and until the 2003 War) and Libya (violating US embargo). 9. WISHFUL-THINKING WAS COSTLY, producing unprecedented terrorism, when Israel and the US believed (Oslo 1993) that combating terrorism could be subcontracted (to the PLO/PA). It would be costlier if both were to repeat - rather than learn from - the mistake, ignoring Egypt's track record, and subcontracting war on Gaza-based PA-harbored terrorism to Cairo. It would constrain Israel's war on terrorism, would exacerbate Israel-Egypt relations, would inflame regional instability, and COULD DRAG THE U.S. - UNNECESSARILY - INTO THE ENSUING QUAGMIRE. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
SANZ REBBE TO DAVID HATUEL: THERE WILL BE EXPANSION IN KATIF
Posted by Gush Katif, June 21, 2004. |
|
This is a news item from Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNN.com) on Jun 17, 2004.
(IsraelNN.com) The "Sanzer Rebbe", leader of the large Sanz Hassidic sect, Rabbi Tzvi Elimelech Halberstam, told David Hatuel today that, with God's help, there will be no withdrawal from Gush Katif, rather there will be expansion. The Rebbe made the comments when he was asked by Hatuel whether a community in Gaza should construct a permanent or temporary ark in the synagogue for the Torah scrolls. The Rebbe replied that they should build a temporary ark, but not to prepare for withdrawal, but because they will have to move it to a bigger synagogue when the community expands. In April, the Sanzer Rebbe told a delegation from the Judea, Samaria and Gaza Council that the Prime Minister's "disengagement" plan is part of efforts to uproot Judaism. David Hatuel, whose wife, their unborn son and all their four daughters were murdered by Arab terrorists, requested the meeting with the Sanzer Rebbe. The Rebbe's late father, the Klausenberger-Sanz Rebbe, Rabbi Yekutiel Halberstam, lost his entire family as well, his wife and 11 children, in the Holocaust. After World War II, he made aliyah and rebuilt both his own family and Sanz Hassidism anew, as well as founding Laniado Hospital in Netanya. |
|
ISRAEL'S INTIFADA VICTORY
Posted by Israela Goldstein, June 21, 2004. |
|
This was written by Charles Krauthammer, who is always interesting.
It appeared in the Washington Post, June 18. It is archived at
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A50910-2004Jun17.html
While no one was looking, something historic happened in the Middle East. The Palestinian intifada is over, and the Palestinians have lost. For Israel, the victory is bitter. The past four years of terrorism have killed almost 1,000 Israelis and maimed thousands of others. But Israel has won strategically. The intent of the intifada was to demoralize Israel, destroy its economy, bring it to its knees, and thus force it to withdraw and surrender to Palestinian demands, just as Israel withdrew in defeat from southern Lebanon in May 2000. That did not happen. Israel's economy was certainly wounded, but it is growing again. Tourism had dwindled to almost nothing at the height of the intifada, but tourists are returning. And the Israelis were never demoralized. They kept living their lives, the young people in particular returning to cafes and discos and buses just hours after a horrific bombing. Israelis turned out to be a lot tougher and braver than the Palestinians had imagined. The end of the intifada does not mean the end of terrorism. There was terrorism before the intifada and there will be terrorism to come. What has happened, however, is an end to systematic, regular, debilitating, unstoppable terror -- terror as a reliable weapon. At the height of the intifada, there were nine suicide attacks in Israel killing 85 Israelis in just one month (March 2002). In the past three months there have been none. The overall level of violence has been reduced by more than 70 percent. How did Israel do it? By ignoring its critics and launching a two-pronged campaign of self-defense. First, Israel targeted terrorist leaders -- attacks so hypocritically denounced by Westerners who, at the same time, cheer the hunt for, and demand the head of, Osama bin Laden. The top echelon of Hamas and other terrorist groups has been either arrested, killed or driven underground. The others are now so afraid of Israeli precision and intelligence -- the last Hamas operative to be killed by missile was riding a motorcycle -- that they are forced to devote much of their time and energy to self-protection and concealment. Second, the fence. Only about a quarter of the separation fence has been built, but its effect is unmistakable. The northern part is already complete, and attacks in northern Israel have dwindled to almost nothing. This success does not just save innocent lives; it changes the strategic equation of the whole conflict. Yasser Arafat started the intifada in September 2000, just weeks after he had rejected, at Camp David, Israel's offer of withdrawal, settlement evacuation, sharing of Jerusalem and establishment of a Palestinian state. Arafat wanted all that, of course, but without having to make peace and recognize a Jewish state. Hence the terror campaign -- to force Israel to give it all up unilaterally. Arafat failed, spectacularly. The violence did not bring Israel to its knees. Instead, it created chaos, lawlessness and economic disaster in the Palestinian areas. The Palestinians know the ruin that Arafat has brought, and they are beginning to protest it. He promised them blood and victory; he delivered on the blood. Even more important, they have lost their place at the table. Israel is now defining a new equilibrium that will reign for years to come -- the separation fence is unilaterally drawing the line that separates Israelis and Palestinians. The Palestinians were offered the chance to negotiate that frontier at Camp David and chose war instead. Now they are paying the price. It stands to reason. It is the height of absurdity to launch a terrorist war against Israel, then demand the right to determine the nature and route of the barrier built to prevent that very terrorism. These new strategic realities are not just creating a new equilibrium, they are creating the first hope for peace since Arafat officially tore up the Oslo accords four years ago. Once Israel has withdrawn from Gaza and has completed the fence, terrorism as a strategic option will be effectively dead. The only way for the Palestinians to achieve statehood and dignity, and to determine the contours of their own state, will be to negotiate a final peace based on genuine coexistence with a Jewish state. It could be a year, five years or a generation until the Palestinians come to that realization. The pity is that so many, Arab and Israeli, will have had to die before then. |
|
THE BEST AND WORST OF PEOPLE
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 20, 2004. |
|
It's interesting to watch the Left Liberal Jews treat the Pioneering Nationalistic Jews much the same as the anti-Semitic world has treated Jews for centuries. The pioneering settlers are surely a cut above the average city dweller and their detractors. There is something about idealistic pioneers that makes them clean, even noble which, of course, they would deny with some embarrassment. That same image irritates their enemies including Jewish Leftists who suffer in comparison. The pioneering Jews are very much like America's early settlers who tamed the land at great risk to themselves. They crossed difficult terrain, fought off Indians and built a nation. They have always been must admired for their courage and perseverance. For a time, Israeli pioneers were similarly admired for facing howling Arab Muslim mobs. Tilling the land and sacrificing the comforts enjoyed by those living in cities like Tel Aviv. The Settlers were always front-line soldiers with many of Israel's best officers coming from these idealistic strong people. They really believed in the land and most believe in a Higher Power than the politicians who scrambled for power, cars and other perks. When the motley Arabs, having attacked and lost in 6 wars - decided on Terror - both the Terrorists and the Left Liberal Jews blamed the once admired Pioneering Settlers. Yassir Arafat was excellent in his propaganda, telling all he would cease his Terror attacks if 'only' those Pioneering Settlers would move out of his way. The Jewish Leftists soon became his greatest press agents, echoing Arafat's propaganda. Years later, they found out that the Left's plan of Oslo only produced at least 1500 dead Israelis since it was signed - with hundreds of thousands wounded, many maimed for life. After the abject failure of Oslo - as judged by its horrific body count", finally, the Left Liberals paused for a moment and, in fear, they drifted politically Right and elected by a landslide what was to be their great hope: Arik Sharon. But, Sharon turned out to be the Sharon of Yamit and caved in to the demands of Arafat, President George Bush, the U.S. State Department and the Europeans. He became a put together creature, composed of parts from Peres, Beilin like the fictional Golem or Frankenstein. Like these monsters, Sharon also went out of control and betrayed the Pioneering Settlers. This was Mr. Settler himself who pushed for expanding settlements and new areas to be civilized. Then he was our Jewish junk yard dog, fiercely loyal to the Settlers and they were loyal to him. They worked fiercely to accomplish all he set out for them to do. Too bad. Then Sharon's real quisling character emerged, first at Yamit and now, as he prepares his conscience-less police squad called Yatom. They act like thugs when they they have to evacuate their Jewish brothers and sisters from their homes. As Sharon betrays the Settlers, he also betrays himself - demonstrating that he has a price for a traitor and the nation. The Pioneering Settlers are the best of the of our breed and they are hated for their obvious superiority. They have principles which many Israelis simply no longer understand. With the exception of a handful in Sharon's Cabinet and the Knesset, most are greedy and self-serving which is why they hate the Pioneers. They see the comparison and cannot stand it. They must tear it all down under the rubric of chasing a peace that will never come, at least not from the Arabs. Like the Leftist Jews, the Arab Muslims also hate the Pioneers as they see the fields that the Jews can bring to life while they remain backward with only hate as their life's product. The Europeans have joined the Arabs because they too hate to see a thriving Jewish State and Pioneering Jews outperforming both Arabs and Europeans. One can understand the age old Jew-hatred taught by Islam and Christianity because they believe the Jews stand in the way of their claims to be G-d's rightful heirs. The Jews infuriate both because they do not contest these claims, they simply ignore them. Jews quietly say, we are glad you found G-d and, if you wish to take over the responsibility of the Covenant, go find G-d and present your claim. Speak to him as did Abraham and Moses. Climb the mountain and get a new Commandment or Torah for we will not object or stand in your way. G-d makes these choices - not us. But, it's not only the Arabs and European Christians (except for those many Christian friends of Israel) who hate the Jews but, it's also the non-Jewish Jews who wish to overcome the attachment of real Jews for both their ancient homeland and their G-d. These non-Jewish Jews hate the observant Jews, particularly those Pioneers who make non-Jewish Jews look small and weak. These healthy people (psychologically and mentally) embarrass the Jews of Tel Aviv who find trivial pleasure in smoky cafes and pursuing a pleasurable life, believing in nothing spiritual but themselves and perhaps not even that. We Jews have layers of people who hate us not only because we continue to exist - but we are productive. 'Tanach' (the Bible) tells us that our worst enemies shall come from within and this is coming true. Israel's Prime Minister is prepared to savage the Jewish Pioneering Settlers, fulfilling that prophecy. He has even pushed up the 'deadline' of Jewish expulsion from Gaza to December 2004 (last week it was said to be September 2005). Sharon is the present enemy from within, whom G-d knew would arise to betray the Jewish people. I pray that HaShem deals with him as He did with Korach who challenged Moses? leadership of the Jews just rescued from Egypt. Korach and those who stood with him against Moshe were swallowed up in the earth. Gaza has always been the Egyptian entry point of attack into Israel. The more things change - the more they stay the same. 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). |
|
During a system update, email files were lost. If you
send in a blog between June 15-21, and it isn't posted, we apologize.
|
|
REDEFINING COUNTERTERRORISM: THE TERRORIST LEADER AS CEO
Posted by IsrAlert, June 16, 2004. |
|
This was written by Buce Hoffman, director of RAND's Washington office
and acting director of the RAND Center for Middle East Public Policy.
He is among the world's foremost authorities on terrorism.
The article is archived at
_http://rand.org/publications/randreview/issues/spring2004/ceo.html
Killing Osama bin Laden will not quash the terrorist threat from al Qaeda, because the group sees the war it started as an epic struggle lasting years if not decades. The group has shown itself to have a deeper"bench" than was previously thought and to have some form of"corporate succession" plan. In fact, the closest organizational relative to al Qaeda is perhaps a private multinational corporation. And bin Laden himself is perhaps best viewed as a terrorist CEO. He has applied business administration and modern management techniques learned both at the university and in the family's construction business to the running of a transnational terrorist organization. He obtained a degree in economics and public administration in 1981 from Saudi Arabia's prestigious King Abdul Aziz University. He then cut his teeth in the family business, honing the management and organizational skills that later enabled him to transform al Qaeda into the world's preeminent terrorist movement. He has implemented for al Qaeda the same type of effective organizational framework adopted by many corporate executives throughout much of the industrialized world over the past decade. Just as large, multinational business conglomerates moved during the 1990s to flatter, networked structures, bin Laden did the same with al Qaeda. He defined a flexible strategy for the group that functions at multiple levels, using both top-down and bottom-up approaches. On the one hand, he has functioned like the president or CEO of a large multinational corporation by defining specific goals, issuing orders, and ensuring their implementation. This function applies mostly to the al Qaeda"spectaculars"-those high-visibility, usually high-value, and high-casualty operations like 9/11, the attack on the USS Cole, and the 1998 east Africa embassy bombings. On the other hand, he has operated as a venture capitalist by soliciting ideas from below, by encouraging creative approaches and out-of-the-box thinking, and by providing funding to those proposals he finds promising. Several attacks by groups affiliated with al Qaeda attest to this approach. The attacks include those staged by Jemaah Islamiyah in Bali in October 2002 and Jakarta in August 2003; by al-Assiriyat al-Moustaqim in Morocco in May 2003; and by the Islamic Great Eastern Raiders Front in Turkey in November 2003. Al Qaeda deliberately has no single, set modus operandi-which makes the group all the more resilient and formidable. Instead, bin Laden built a movement that actively encourages subsidiary groups fighting under the corporate banner to mix and match approaches, employing different tactics and varying means of attack and operational styles in a number of locales. Even in the post 9/11 era, when al Qaeda has been relentlessly tracked, harassed, and weakened, the corporate succession plan seems to have functioned. The group appears to retain at least some depth in numbers as evidenced by its replenishment abilities to produce successor echelons for the mid-level operational commanders who have been killed or captured. The U.S. Congress has put the number of persons trained at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan, Sudan, and Yemen at some 70,000-120,000 worldwide. Even if this figure is grossly exaggerated, the potential pool of even a few thousand well-trained and battle-hardened fighters ensures a sufficiently deep well of expertise from which to continue to draw. In terms of al Qaeda's finances, sufficient monetary reserves likely still exist. According to one estimate, some $130 million of identifiable al Qaeda assets have been seized or frozen to date. Given that bin Laden amassed a war chest of as yet undetermined dimensions, ample funds may still be at the disposal of his minions. At one point, bin Laden was reputed to own or control some 80 companies around the world. In Sudan alone, he owned the country's most profitable businesses, including construction, manufacturing, currency trading, import-export, and agricultural enterprises. Not only did many of these regularly turn a profit, but the profit was then funneled to al Qaeda cells that operated largely as self-sufficient, self-reliant terrorist entities in the countries within which they operated. Al Qaeda's resiliency and longevity are predicated not on the total number of jihadists that it might have trained in the past but on its continued ability to recruit, to mobilize, and to animate both actual and would-be fighters, supporters, and sympathizers. It is significant that, despite the punishment meted out to al Qaeda over the past 30 months, it remains a potent terrorist threat and destabilizing force in world affairs. Underpinning al Qaeda's worldwide operations is bin Laden's vision, self-perpetuating mythology, and skilled acumen at effective communications. His message is simple. According to his propaganda, the United States is a hegemonic, status quo power that opposes change and props up corrupt and reprobate regimes that would not exist but for American backing. There is no doubt that the United States and other governments have made significant progress in the war against global terrorism in recent months. Airports and planes are far better protected. Likely targets are surrounded by new barriers and other security measures. Many terrorists are in prison or in graves as a result of counterterrorism work by the United States and its allies. But all that al Qaeda needs is one new successful attack. Governments appear to be only as good as their last failure. No matter how many attacks are prevented, no matter how many people are not killed daily by terrorists, what is remembered is the small number of attacks that succeed. The epic battle launched by bin Laden is not over. If anything, because of what al Qaeda sees as America's global war on Islam (in Afghanistan and Iraq) and as America's commitment to ensuring the longevity of morally bankrupt regimes (in Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Persian Gulf, Pakistan, Uzbekistan, and elsewhere), al Qaeda's commitment and sense of purpose today are arguably greater than ever. The group's stock has evidently not plummeted among its investors. These factors point to a long struggle ahead in the war against al Qaeda's brand of corporate terrorism. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
SAUDI PRINCE: 'ZIONISM IS BEHIND EVERYTHING'
Posted by Bob Martin, June 16, 2004. |
|
Saudi Arabia's crown prince has blamed 'Zionists' for a weekend terror attack. While his comments seemed designed for a domestic audience, they could damage relations with Washington. This was written by Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball; and it appeared in http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4901881/ Only days after the State Department praised Saudi Arabia for its "aggressive" and "unprecedented" campaign to hunt down terrorists, Crown Prince Abdullah - the country's de facto ruler - has startled Bush administration officials by blaming "Zionists" and "followers of Satan" for recent terrorist acts in the kingdom. "We can be certain that Zionism is behind everything," Abdullah told a gathering of leading government officials and academics in Jeddah as he talked about the weekend attack on oil workers, which killed six people, including two Americans. "I don't say 100 percent, but 95 percent." The comments were cited by stunned Bush administration officials and other Mideast watchers today as an ominous sign of possible new tensions in the U.S.-Saudi alliance. Although some top Saudi officials, notably Interior Minister Prince Nayef, have in the past made similar remarks, Crown Prince Abdullah has never before appeared to blame his country's internal troubles on the Israelis - a position that is anathema to Washington. The U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia, James C. Oberwetter, plans to meet Wednesday with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal to seek "clarification" of Abdullah's comments, a State Department official told Newsweek late Tuesday. "We've seen these remarks and, if the crown prince in fact made them, we would strongly disagree with such an assertion and consider it unhelpful," the official said, adding that the State Department planned to withhold further comment until after the meeting. Yet the normally smooth and pro-Western Saud may not prove the most receptive audience for Oberwetter's visit. The Saudi foreign minister seemed to echo his brother's remarks in his comments today, telling reporters in Jeddah that last Saturday's attack on oil workers in the industrial city of Yanbu - which have jolted the oil industry - had fed into "a Zionist campaign" to shake the Saudi monarchy, according to a Reuters report. In an apparent attempt to provide some evidence for his comments, Saud claimed that one of two Saudis who had been linked to the attack were believed to be followers of two well-known London-based Saudi dissidents, Saad al-Fagih and Mohammed al-Masari, who, according to the Saudi foreign minister, are being financed by Israel. No evidence of such links has ever been made public. "This shows how desperate and hopeless they are," Fagih told Newsweek in a telephone interview from London. "This is like saying George Bush is sponsoring bin Laden." Some former Mideast diplomats today seemed flabbergasted by the remarks by the two Saudi leaders and at a loss to explain them. "It doesn"t make sense to me," said Chas Freeman, a former U.S. ambassador to Saudi Arabia during the first Bush administration. "I just can't understand it." But others suggested the remarks may be part of a calculated effort to placate a domestic Saudi constituency up in arms over recent developments in the region, including President George W. Bush's endorsement of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's announced, unilateral withdrawal from some Palestinian territories and even the new disclosures over the humiliating treatment of Iraqi prisoners by U.S. interrogators - a story that is dominating news coverage throughout the Mideast. "It's terribly disappointing that they [the Saudi rulers] resort to this kind of stuff," says Edward Walker, a former veteran U.S. diplomat and now president of the Middle East Institute, a Washington-based group that has received funding from Saudi Arabia. "They know damn well what"s happening." But Walker added that the Saudi rulers "don't feel they owe this country or this administration much of anything these days. They were terribly disappointed in the 100 percent support of Sharon... Maybe this is their way of making their disappointment clear. It's also a way to blunt the edge of public opinion which is very much opposed to what we are doing... We have a horrible situation in the region." This is hardly the first time that Saudi leaders have upset U.S. officials with controversial remarks in the war on terrorism. It took Saudi officials months to publicly acknowledge that 15 of the 19 hijackers involved in the September 11 terror attacks in the United States were Saudi citizens and, when they finally did so, in February 2002, they still appeared to blame others. Prince Nayef, the Saudi interior minister, who is in charge of internal security, insisted that the hijackers were a small minority who had been "taken advantage of" and that there was no Al Qaeda presence in the kingdom. As recently as December 2002, Nayef claimed that "Jews" were behind the September 11 attacks - a comment that drew strong protests from the U.S. State Department. For Crown Prince Abdullah to now engage in the same rhetoric creates awkward new dilemmas. The U.S.-Saudi relationship has been under persistent political attack in the United States, especially from leading members of Congress who blame the Saudis for failing to crack down on terrorist financing in their country and promoting religious extremism. One such member, Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York, today suggested that Abdullah's comments were evidence that the Saudi regime may be disconnected from reality. "If the Saudis are going to continue to deny reality and live in a dream world, then their regime will be short-lived," Schumer told Newsweek. Ironically, the Bush administration attempted to quell such criticism by issuing a new report last week that lavishly praised the Saudis for a renewed effort to crackdown on terrorism in the wake of last May's deadly bombing at a housing compound in Riyadh. "I would cite Saudi Arabia as an excellent example of a nation increasingly focusing its political will to fight terrorism," U.S. Amb. Cofer Black, the State Department's coordinator for counterterrorism, said in a statement accompanying the department's release of its annual "Patterns of Global Terrorism" report. Stating that Riyadh bombings and other attacks had "served to strengthen Saudi resolve," Black praised the Saudis for a number of initiatives that included arresting more than 600 suspects and working more closely with U.S. officials on antiterror financing and money-laundering initiatives. Black also complimented the Saudis for initiating an ideological campaign against Islamic terrorist organizations that included statements by senior Saudi officials espousing "a consistent message of moderation and toleration." * A Legal Defeat for Bush" Justice Department lawyers, said to be pessimistic about winning upcoming Supreme Court cases on enemy combatants and Guantanamo prisoners, are now scrambling to bring a case against alleged 'dirty bomber' Jose Padilla. * Are Latest Warnings Justified? Not everyone thought John Ashcroft's warning was justified. As is often the case with controversial comments by Saudi rulers, U.S. officials were a bit at a loss as to how to respond to them. One official noted that there were different translations of the crown prince's comments and that some Saudi newspapers had deleted Abdullah's references to "Zionists," using instead the less inflammatory word "foreigners." The country's leading English-language newspaper, Arab News, which is widely read in the West, did not carry any account of Abdullah's remarks. An account in the Arab language Al-Riyadh newspaper, translated for Newsweek and running on Sunday under the headline: "Our Country Is Targeted, Zionist Hands Behind What's Happening," states that Abdullah expressed anger to a group of visitors over the Saturday attack in Yanbu. In the attack, a group of Saudi militants sprayed gunfire in the offices of a Houston-based oil contractor, killing two Americans and four others and injuring 25 people. "Our country is targeted," the story quotes Abdullah as saying. "You know who is behind all of this. It is Zionism. This is clear now." The Saudi ruler went on to say that the real perpetrators "have tricked some of our sons and they deceived them." The Saudi militants who committed the attacks on the oil workers had been "misguided by foreigners... They allied themselves with Satan and the followers of Satan and the followers of colonialism." The attack - the latest in a spate of terrorist incidents in the kingdom - was particularly alarming because it threatens to cause further disruptions in world oil markets. The U.S. Embassy has redoubled its efforts to warn American workers in the country to leave and that exodus alone could threaten Saudi oil production. Oil industry expert Philip Verleger, a fellow at the Institute for International Economics, said that the incident in Yanbu was especially worrisome because the Saudis have repeatedly assured American contacts that security in that oilfield complex is very tight. What is troubling, Verleger said, is not that incidents in the Saudi oil fields will stop the production of Saudi crude, but rather that such incidents will cause both foreign and Saudi engineers and skilled workers to leave the region or the kingdom. Even more potentially damaging, Verleger says, would be for terrorists to somehow shut down, either through a direct attack or by intimidating operating personnel, a number of oil refineries in Saudi Arabia which produce special gasoline blends formulated for the American market. Although those refineries have not been attacked and are still believed to be operating normally, they are fragile, heavily automated plants which could be hobbled by a loss of a relatively small number of personnel, or, alternatively, by a serious terror attack. If terrorists succeed by one stratagem or another in taking down some of the Saudi-based refineries, Verleger said, "it is really, really frightening." A shutdown or big attack on one of the refineries could produce a quick rise in U.S. retail gasoline prices of 50 cents to $1 per gallon, Verleger told Newsweek. If crude production is ultimately curbed by the flight of personnel or a direct attack, Verleger says, the world price of crude could soar to $60 to $70 per barrel unless the United States and other oil-consuming countries dipped into their strategic petroleum reserves to help stabilize the market. Editor's Note: A U.S. official said Wednesday, after U.S. Ambassador Oberwetter's meeting with Prince Saud, "it wasn't a particularly productive exchange." The official said that Saud referred to the evidence tying one of the Yanbu attackers to Saudi dissident Fagih. The Saudi foreign minister claimed that Fagih, whose radio broadcasts from London have become a major irritant to the monarchy, was receving "funding from people in contact with extremist Zionist elements." The U.S. official said: "We don't have any evidence that would confirm these charges." |
|
QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS
Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, June 16, 2004. |
|
In the beginning, there were only truth and lies. Such bucolic simplicity lasted for thousands of years, until the Industrial Revolution gave birth to statistics. Soon afterwards, Karl Marx, in his Das Kapital, brilliantly demonstrated how heavy volumes of meticulously collected figures can lead oppressed masses to perfectly absurd conclusions. Thanks to the unstoppable progress, we now have yet another category of untruth, the opinion polls. In order to better to understand why poll results must be interpreted with utmost caution, let us consider a purely imaginary poll that, in theory, could be conducted in the Soviet Union in 1937: "Whom would you prefer as the supreme leader of the Soviet Union and its Communist Party: (a) I. V. Stalin?
Observe how clearly the question is worded. If a citizen attempted to avoid a direct answer citing the lack of understanding on his or her part, the officer conducting the poll would have no doubt that the suspect was feigning stupidity. Fortunately, Soviet sociologists of that era were well equipped to deal with this kind of dirty trick, effectively guaranteeing that the interrogation would never fail to produce results suitable to the investigators. Approximately one year ago, soon after President Bush declared, somewhat prematurely, our victory in Iraq, Nicholas D. Kristof, one of the most far left columnists for one of the most far left newspapers, the New York Times, tried to conduct his own improvised opinion poll in Baghdad. He was seeking proof that Iraqis hated Bush and considered the Americans "invaders" rather than "liberators". When he asked a random passerby what he thought of the United States, the answer was, I would say, astonishing. The passerby suggested molding a larger-than-life likeness of Barbara Bush out of pure gold and erecting it at the crossroads in the center of the Iraqi capital. "Why?" a stunned Mr. Kristof asked. "Because she gave life to our precious, heroic liberator, may Allah forever bless her ancestors and descendants," explained the suspect. Let's pay our due respect to Mr. Kristof who had counted on a very different response, but nevertheless honestly reported the bizarre incident in his column. Furthermore, he publicly expressed doubts in his understanding of the situation. As we know today, his initial understanding was more or less correct. At that time, no one, at least on our side, knew that the war in Iraq hadn't really started yet. Iraqis hate us today even more than they did when Saddam was in power. Then, they were burning flags and effigies; today, they burn American soldiers and their armed vehicles. Mr. Kristof's mishap reminded me of a Russian wedding I attended not long before that. A beautifully organized celebration was supervised by a distant relative of the bride, the tamada (tah-mah-DAH). I was told later that tamada was not a relation, but rather an honorary title, something like the emcee. Every now and then, he would tactfully but firmly intervene in the accelerating chaos of the gathering before it had a chance to spin out of control, delivering witty toasts that assured that every person present would, even if for a brief moment, become the center of everyone's flattering attention. By the time it was my turn, my rudimentary Russian vocabulary had deteriorated, which was unimportant since people around me kept asking me the same simple question: "Do you respect us?" According to a Russian drinking custom, the affirmative response to it is both mandatory and non-verbal; I was expected to raise my glass and down its contents. So it was no surprise that when the tamada addressed me with his toast, it sounded to me as if he was speaking some unknown dialect. As I learned the next day, he was actually speaking with an exaggerated Georgian (as in Tbilisi, Georgia, not Atlanta, GA) accent. They repeated his talking points in English; everything he said was highly flattering, but ranged from shameless exaggeration to outright misrepresentation. That's why, while reading about Mr. Kristof's experiment in Baghdad, I couldn't shake off an impression that his subject was speaking with a Georgian accent, like the tamada at the Russian wedding. In recent years, numerous opinion polls were conducted among members of the Arab terrorist organization known as the "Palestinian people". Sometimes these polls produce truly bizarre results. Thus, one recent poll favored Israeli-style democracy as the preferred form of government for the future "Palestinian state". Unfortunately, the Taliban was not listed among the available options, so we will never know if, given a choice, they would've opted for that, most natural for Muslims, form of government. Nevertheless, Arab terrorists explicitly preferred Israeli democracy to its French and even American varieties. Optimists among us happily announced that the results of that poll debunked the myth of Israeli "apartheid". Ever a pessimist, I think we should ask whether the question was even understood; after all, democracy is as idiosyncratic to Arabs as female circumcision is to us. Results of another, practically simultaneous, poll conducted within the same group confirmed my suspicions. This time, terrorists were asked, who they would like to have for a leader; Arafat won in a landslide. The idea of an Israeli-style democracy led by Arafat reminded me of the fundamental law of organic chemistry: if you mix one pound of strawberry jam with one pound of feces, the result will be two pounds of feces. Although the outcome does not depend on the quality of the strawberry jam used in the experiment, in this particular case it may have played a role. I suspect that, along with virginal Arab ignorance of anything related to democracy, recent actions of the Israeli government and, especially, Prime Minister Sharon played a role in their choice. Even considering the ever tightening pressure on Israel from every government, including the US, from every international organization, and from assorted, but well organized anti-Semites around the globe, also including the US, future historians will be unable to explain certain actions by Israeli leaders without using the term treason. Both the dead, but still unburied Oslo Accords and the Israeli decision not to use the historic precedent of Chechoslovakia, which transferred the Sudeten Germans back to Germany, but to emulate Stalin's eviction of the Crimean Tartars from Crimea belong to that category. After Sharon facilitated the free discussion of surrender by shamelessly firing two of the cabinet members who were opposed to the withdrawal, the expression Israeli democracy sounds to me as if it is being pronounced with a heavy accent, not even Georgian, but Arab. I am afraid that this time, rather than blaming poor Arabs for the obvious confusion regarding the form of government they are never going to have, we should blame rich Jews instead. It's often difficult for a dilettante like me to avoid getting lost in the political intricacies not only of Israel but even of my own country. The New York Times helps a lot. For instance, whenever they praise George W. Bush, which, thank goodness, doesn't happen too often, it invariably means that our president has committed some monstrous turpitude. The UN reaction can be similarly used as a litmus test vis-a-vis actions of the Israeli government. Several days ago, for example, Kofi Annan announced the UN support for Israel's withdrawal from Gaza. As an advance payment, Israel was rewarded with the vice-chairmanship of some UN subcommittee. I won't be surprised to learn that governments of various countries, following the example of newspapers preparing obituaries for still alive celebrities, are already secretly contracting the services of leading architects to build tasteful, elegant memorials of the next Holocaust in their respective capitals. Life goes on. In anticipation of the apparently inevitable surrender of Gaza, it's interesting to know that its non-terrorist population constitutes just 8,000 people. This handful of Jews, however, produces 70% of all Israeli organic vegetables and generates $60 million in annual exports. They have 20 various schools, not including childcare centers. If Jews do not themselves destroy everything they have built there, Arabs will do it as soon as the rightful owners of the land are forced to leave. After that, nothing will grow in Gaza but terrorism. Interestingly, no one has so far managed to explain how those 8,000 Jews threaten peace more than the six decades of pan-Arab war against Israel. If you are hoping that, in the eyes of the world, this may serve as an argument in defense of the Jews, take a careful look at South Africa. Under apartheid, it was one of the most prosperous countries in the world, where "colored" people enjoyed much higher standards of living than anywhere else on that continent. Apartheid was bad, no question about it, but what replaced it is simply ruining a formerly thriving country. Crime and AIDS are rampant, but the main concern of the government is the remnants of control the whites still exercise over the rapidly deteriorating economy. It remains to be seen if white South Africans are going to be hunted down like white Zimbabwean farmers. It is perfectly clear however that, under the pressure of the world, one evil was replaced with another, probably, a much worse one, but since victims of the latter do not belong to a protected subcategory of the human race, the world rests happily. Jews most certainly do not constitute a protected subspecies, so the destruction of Israel and the demise of its population will be inevitably, and mistakenly, perceived by the world as the triumph of good over evil. But what will replace the unprecedented cruelty of Israeli occupation of Israel's own land? What the United States is trying to achieve there is as simple as a nursery rhyme and as impractical as perpetual motion. Having come to the conclusion that Arafat will not cooperate, Bush and Powell are looking for a replacement who will. So far, their labors have produced no fruit, which is good, because history teaches us that such an approach inevitably ends in one of the two possible ways: in the Iranian version, the well-behaved puppet gets thrown out by the locals; in the Iraqi version, the puppet goes out of control and has to be removed by means of military intervention. Either way, it is a disaster of our own making. Eventually, however, Arabs will follow Ancient Egyptians, Europe will follow Ancient Greece, and the United States will follow Ancient Rome. New superpowers will rise and fall, and only two things will remain unchanged: Jews, as always, will remain a light unto nations, and the nations, as always, will hate them for that. Therefore, no major changes can be anticipated for the foreseeable future, and we can continue to happily play "questions and answers". Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com |
|
MORE "NEW JOURNALISM" AT THE NEWSPAPER FOR THINKING ISRAELIS
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 16, 2004. |
|
Haaretz, the main Palestinian newspaper published in Hebrew, all
this week has been promoting it phony media hot air balloon about how
supposedly intelligence officers manipulated Sharon and his people
into thinking that Arafat and his stormtroopers were not interested in
peace. According to the New Journalism prevalent at Haaretz these
days, 1400 murdered Israelis are not a sign of anything, anti-Semitic
nazi propaganda roadcast daily by the PLO does not tell you anything.
Haaretz insists, galaxies of evidence notwithstanding, that Arafat is
still as devoted to peace as Peres and Rabin convinced themselves he
was back in 1993, and the only reason things have gone haywire is that
a senior intelligence officer dared to state the truth. And how does
Haaretz know? Because two other senior intelligence officers from the
Left gave interviews to al-Ard, er I mean to Haaretz, and they said
so.
Today the Haaretz Spin Doctors for Palestinian Liberation have a follow up "scoop". They interview yet another Lefty, this time one Mati Steinberg. Steinberg is a purported "expert" on Palestinians, at least that is what Haaretz columnist Danny Rubenstein thinks. Rubenstein also considers himself an expert on Palestinians. I do not know anyone else who agrees. Steinberg might once have served as consultant for the intelligence service head during the mind-numbingly stupid administration of Haj Amin Ehud Barak, the gent who once said that if he had been born a Palestinian he would have become a terrorist. The fact that Steinberg could have been such a consultant may go far in explaining the singular inability of the intelligence services to tell summer from winter and day from night in those days (and these today). The fact of the matter is that the intelligence services found out about the PLO what every Israeli barber and gardener knew, only years after the former knew. Haaretz scratches up Steinberg as someone giving artillery support to the Haaretz fable that "inaccurate" intelligence assessments by officers dissenting from the holy canon of Far Leftist evaluation of Arafat were the ones responsible for the inability to strike a deal with Arafat. The whole interview is at http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/439571.html He is also a source for the previous pseudo-scoop at Haaretz (http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=437895&contrassID=1 ) If Steinberg is such an expert, how come a web search did not turn up a single reference to anything he ever published about anything? Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
FROM THE DESK OF THE SECRETARY-GENERAL
Posted by David Frankfurter, June 16, 2004. |
|
From the desk of the Secretary General To: Mr S. Tharoor - Under-Secretary-General for Communications and Public Information From: K. Annan Dear Shashi, Congratulations on your press release last month, entitled "Arab journalists urged to give full picture of UN's work in region." (http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=10727&Cr=middle&Cr1=east) You are so right. The UN can't do anything right in the eyes of those ungrateful Arab journalists. It's about time that you set the record straight. We really shouldn't have to after we were so careful during the last Iraqi regime to do everything we could to stall the American push. I know that those journalists claim that it is the least we could do. You have to make them understand that there is only so much that those food stamps and oil vouchers can buy, you know! We delayed the Bush invasion by at least 10 minutes out of the goodness of our own hearts. Why can't they at least say thank you? It's not just Iraq. We've done pretty well in Sudan, too. I know that we have slapped the Arab militias over the wrist in public. But, look we had to say something - and we have been very careful not to interfere in their murders, rapes, slave trading in men, women and children, burning whole villages down with the people inside. Look ethnic cleansing is a sensitive business, and we are pretty busy helping Yasser create a Judenrein Palestine. It's unfair of them to expect us to actively help get rid of those Animists and Christians. All we can do is get out of the way and let them get on with the job. With Libya in charge of Human Rights at the UN, we should be able to let the Arabs complete their ethnic cleansing for at least another few years. Speaking about Palestine - be fair. We haven't once criticised Egypt for breaking its peace treaty and allowing its border to be used for smuggling arms from Iran and the Hizbullah to Gaza. It is true that we condemned the gangland-style shooting of that pregnant Jew-woman and four children caught in their seat belts. But we had no choice. Using a video camera to document the kill made sense at the time. They needed to have something to show the kids on TV. It really is understandable. After all, those politicians, imams, games and MTV shows encouraging the kids to go and become martyrs become pretty boring with out some real snuff movies to brighten the afternoon. But when those terrorists were silly enough to leave the video camera behind, it became a bit hard to make excuses in public. We had to say something. While we are talking about the kids - don't forget that it's our Ramallah Teachers' Academy that trains the teachers in the best methods of indoctrinating the kids that Tel Aviv is really Palestinian and that shaheeda is the way to go. And its the summer camps and soccer teams funded by our UNESCO that are named after suicide bombers so that the kids really get the message. Look I know that we took down the incitement posters in the Lebanese UNRWA schools - but you've gotta understand. The donors were going to switch the money tap off. Don't worry - we're not changing the books that deny any Jewish history or rights in the Middle East. The teachers can say what they like - no-one will hear or know except just us. We've worked really hard to keep Syria's WMD and support for terror off the agenda - we even put Syria on the Security Council. I know we couldn't talk America out of helping its Jew-friend Israel. But we helped convince Europe to overlook Syria's support for the Hizbullah, Fatah and Hamas. And that what matters - after all 80% of Syria's foreign trade is with Europe, and with the new trade agreements and the economic support we helped broker, Bashir should have plenty of time to finish his WMD program - especially with all those bits he borrowed from Sadaam. Let me know if you need any more help convincing those journalists. If there are any really tough nuts to crack, just let me know. Most of the country leaders will take care of them for us next time they visit their homes. Keep up the good work. Sincerely, Kofi
To subscribe to Frankfurter's 'letter from Israel', email him at
david.frankfurter@iname.com.
|
|
THE SAUDI INVOICE
Posted by Irwin N. Graulich, June 16, 2004. |
|
They produced Osama bin Laden and gave birth to al Qaeda. Fifteen of the nineteen 9/11 hijackers came from there. They have invested tens of billions of dollars trying to spread radical Islam worldwide. Their flag is the only one on earth with a sword on it. They banned Pokeman from their country because one of the cards had a symbol that appeared to look like a star of David. Guess who? Our friends, the Saudis! Their history is not a good one. Since the mid-eighteenth century, when tribal leader Muhammad Al Saud joined forces with religious fanatic Muhammad Abin Abd al-Wahhab, their combined military and religious aggression proved quite loathsome. In 1932, when Saudi Arabia became a duly recognized state, their battles and mini-civil wars continued in true middle ages fashion. And then came those big American oil companies with all their promises. The Americans delivered on their contracts and brought the country riches beyond belief. Unfortunately, the Saudis did not deliver on their own promises. No gratitude for bringing them into modernity and changing their lifestyle from desert nomads into 21st century technological marvels, with all the blessings that follow. It seems that the Saudi culture does not permit appreciation for non-Muslims, since that would be a form of self-humiliation. Eventually, they nationalized the oil industry and threw out their American partners, proving once again that Islam and honesty are not related. Yet there was no retaliation by the American government on behalf of this outright thievery. Big mistake, because the ultimate result can be traced almost directly to 9/11! The Saudi flag says it all. Besides the weapon illustration, it has a family name on it and a motto that reads, "There is no God other than Allah." Perhaps that is why they do not permit a one inch cross to be seen around the neck of any visitor. Heaven forbid a Christian Bible. During the first Gulf War, they did not allow American soldiers, who were there to protect them, to have Christmas trees visible. Imagine, Santa Claus being a big threat. When George Bush Sr. did not even question this ridiculous regulation placed on our brave military force, he lost the election. American people are quite savvy. It was not the economy stupid. It was the Christmas trees and the principles they represented. Saudi Arabian evil has continued unchecked for decades. They were one of only two countries to recognize The Taliban and give them legitimacy. They continue to blame Israel, Zionism and Jews for almost every problem and terrorist incident, from 9/11 to the recent killings in Yanbu port. Saudi Arabia is simply a terrorist network with a seat at the UN. According to Crown Prince Abdullah, the Islamic terrorism is "all a Zionist conspiracy." Go figure that one out. Perhaps it is because throughout the Kingdom they do not ever think in terms of right and wrong; only in terms of Arab and non-Arab; Muslim and non-Muslim. How sad and pathetic a people. Since America had stopped Israel from retaliating severely with the Palestinians, bin Laden believed that this continuous negotiation strategy would endure with The Taliban and al Qaeda. Based on the world's response to Palestinian terrorism against Israel, never allowing the IDF to fight back with significant force or kill Arafat, bin Laden assumed a similar response to 9/11. There was virtual certainty that an Oslo-type peace process would play out with the Americans, ultimately resulting in a US military exodus from Saudi "occupation," similar to the Soviet departure from Afghanistan. This towering event would then place the 6' 4" figure into a leadership position in his birthplace. Saudi polling today shows that Osama is a recognized hero to over 50% of the population, who also believe that the Mossad was responsible for bringing down the WTC Towers. The Saudis do not even realize it, but they actually have a secondary religion besides Islam. It is an amazingly strong faith in anti-Israel, anti-Jewish, anti-Zionist hatred, which has now manifested itself into a similar anti-Americanism. This blind belief system of extreme abhorrence for Judeo-Christian values only proves that we are better, more decent, stronger and successful, while they are crude, backwards and weak. The reason for their animosity is simple. They realize quite clearly that we are superior morally, as well as in virtually every other desirable human trait. Saudi Arabia and the entire Islamic world finally understand that they can never defeat us with military force and their influence is a non-issue in the world, as long as America is around. They know we have created an amazingly moral and wonderful society, and that God has truly blessed us. The facts are right there in front of them; every time they turn on the tv, go on the Internet, read a magazine or go to a movie, our superiority is in their face. How humiliating! It is time for the Bush Administration to stop issuing warnings to Americans and start issuing warnings to Saudi Arabia. Diplomacy can go only so far, as Neville Chamberlain ultimately found out. Destroying al Qaeda is not enough. We must demolish the factories of hatred which are the Saudi sponsored mosques in the West about which Dr. Khaleel Mohammed, professor of Islamic Studies at the University of San Diego keeps warning us. Over 100 Saudi Arabian intellectuals recently wrote, "We consider the US and the current American Administration the nurturer of international terrorism with distinction, and it, along with Israel, form the axis of evil and terrorism in the world." So how does one respond to such a despicable nation? First send them a "serious bill" for what they owe us, latest estimates being $24 trillion, net 30 days. If we are not paid in full for all our troubles and the problems they have caused, we should simply listen to the words of Laurent Murawiec, the noted scholar at the Hudson Institute who testified before the Defense Policy Board in Washington DC--"After Iraq, let's do Saudi Arabia." However, we must learn the lessons of Iraq and allow the military to fight both the battles and the war, with full force at all times. In Iraq, the soldiers won every battle hands down, yet the politicians seem to be losing the war. We cannot let that happen again. Let the politicians get the American companies their oil fields back. That alone is their expertise. And if that invoice is not paid in the allotted time, well then, "Open wide and say ahhh, Crown Prince. We have a tongue depressor coming your way!" Irwin N. Graulich is a motivational speaker on morality, ethics, religion 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@verizon.net. This article appeared in Michigan News (http://michnews.com). |
|
THE "PALESTINIAN REFUGEES" ALREADY GOT THEIR "RIGHT OF RETURN"
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 16, 2004. |
|
Try to imagine what the world would be like if Israel had granted the "Palestinian refugees" who fled from Israel in 1948-49 the right to return to Israel. Not to the West Bank. Not to the Gaza Strip. But to Israel within its pre-1967 borders. Imagine a situation in which Israel agreed to allow tens of thousands of Arabs who fled from the battle zones of the Israeli War of Independence the possibility of returning to Israel, in many cases to the very homes they had abandoned during the fighting. Imagine how the same world, currently obsessed upon achieving a "right of return" for "Palestinian refugees" were forced to acknowledge that Israel had already granted the possibility for tens of thousands of these refugees to return to Israel, in many cases decades ago. What would the world then have left to bash Israel about? What would the anti-Semites have left to scream about, or the crowd claiming to be "anti-Zionists but not anti-Semites", who only enjoy seeing "Zionist" children mass murdered, or the self-hating leftist Jewish anti-Semites? Well, hold on to your streimel. Cause I have a whopper of a revelation to make to you. Israel DID grant the "Palestinian refugees" the right to return to Israel! Let us back up a bit. In 1947-48, the UN proposed partitioning "Palestine" into a Jewish and an Arab state of approximately equal sizes. The Jews accepted the plan, and the Arabs rejected it. When the British Mandate over "Palestine" was ended under the UN decision, the Arab states attacked the newborn state of Israel, tried to annihilate it and its population, and at the same time gobbled up most of the territory that the UN had allotted to become a Palestinian Arab state. The territory that became Israel had NEVER been a Palestinian Arab state, ever. Most of the Arabs in "Palestine" had migrated in from neighboring Arab countries after the 19th century start of the Zionist Jewish immigration, taking advantage of the influx of capital, the availability of jobs and of services, like hospitals. In other words, the Arabs of "Palestine" in 1948, exactly like the Jews, were by and large people from families who had been in the country for three generations or less. During the fighting in the 1948-49 war, thousands of Arabs living in the territory that became Israel fled. The main reason they fled was that they understandably wanted to put some distance between their families and the battle zones. At the same time, they were ordered by the Arab political leadership to leave the territory of Israel. Why take my word on this? Listen to Arab sources: "The Arab States encouraged the Palestine Arabs to leave their homes temporarily in order to be out of the way of the Arab invasion armies." - Falastin (Jordanian newspaper), February 19, 1949 "The Arab governments told us: Get out so that we can get in. So we got out, but they did not get in." - from the Jordan daily Ad Difaa, September 6, 1954 ""The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but, instead, THEY ABANDONED THEM, FORCED THEM TO EMIGRATE AND TO LEAVE THEIR HOMELAND" (emphasis added), Abu Mazen, erstwhile "Prime Minister" of the Palestinian Authority, in "What We Have Learned and What We Should Do", published in Falastin el Thawra, the official journal of the PLO, of Beirut, in March 1976. (there are scores of other Arab sources confirming this) So how many Arabs fled? The number has become enormously distorted over time by the Bash-Israel lobby and by Arab propagandists and their apologists, who usually claim between 500,000 and a million. A more realistic estimate is between 300,000 and 450,000, based in part on Arab and UNRWA sources themselves (http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~samuel/refugees.html ). Most of these refugees ended up in some of the twenty-two sovereign Arab states, including those Arab countries from which they had migrated into "Palestine" in the late 19th and early 20th centuries in the first place. In other words, the "refugees" went back to their earlier homelands in Lebanon, Syria, and Jordan. It was a sort of "right of return." At the same time, the Arab states carried out a near-total ethnic cleansing of around a million Jews, who had been living there since Biblical days and in many cases before these states had Arab populations (http://www.ajds.org.au/mendes_refugees.htm ). The Jews from Arab countries left behind far more property than did the Palestinian Arab refugees (http://jewishrefugees.org/JusticeForJews.htm). Most of these Jewish refugees were resettled in Israel In the years immediately after World War II, there were more than 50 million refugees: Poles, Germans, Indians, Pakistanis, Hungarians, Chinese, Japanese, Koreans, etc. etc. They were all long ago resettled and forgotten, all except for the "Palestinian refugees". How come? Because for decades, the Arab aggressor states found it convenient to utilize the "refugees" as a political and military weapon against Israel, not only of propaganda and spin, but of terrorism (http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~peters/resettlement.html ). "Palestinians" inside Arab states were trained as terrorists and sent out to murder. At the same time, there was enormous incentive for the Arab locals in the countries into which the refugees had entered to pretend also to be "Palestinian refugees" (http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=8650 ). After all, the UN and other agencies were handing out free food and perqs to anyone pretending to be a refugee from "Palestine". (For further information and documentation, see http://arabterrorism.tripod.com/FAQ/refugees.html ) Unlike all those many millions of other people considered refugees in the late 1940s, the "Palestinians" were the only ones for whom the "right of return" to their previous homes was considered an entitlement. The reason was not a selective affection for Palestinians, but a selective hostility towards Israel and Jews. Those demanding the wholesale "return" to Israel of Palestinian "refugees", including the countless thousands of non-Palestinians pretending to be Palestinian refugees, had one goal in mind, the eradication of Israel. Israel would have been insane to allow itself to be inundated with real and make-pretend Palestinian "refugees", this in a tiny sliver of land the size of Maryland, at the same time that the 22 Arab states have territory-galore stretching from the Atlantic Ocean all the way to Central Asia! The Palestinian Arabs and their sponsors had tried to annihilate Israel and failed. Just like the infant United States, which refused to allow any of the tens of thousands of Tory Loyalists expelled by the patriots to "return" to the United States after the War of Independence, Israel was entirely in its rights to refuse to allow the "return" of masses of "Palestinians", whose migration was being demanded by those seeking to liquidate Israel via a demographic flooding. There is just one little caveat though. Israel DID let the Palestinian refugees return!! Tens of thousands of them were quietly allowed to return to Israel, in many cases to their original homes, once the fighting in 1949 subsided. Many continue to be admitted today within the framework of "family reunification" agreements. From 1948 until 2001, Israel allowed about 184,000 "Palestinian refugees" or their families to "return" to Israel proper (Jerusalem Post, January 2, 2001; see also Ha'aretz 28 December 2000). These are in addition to about 57,000 Palestinians from Jordan illegally in Israel, towards whom the authorities are turning a blind eye (Ha'aretz, 4 April 2001 ). Not the West Bank, not Gaza, but Israel inside its pre-1967 "Green Line" borders! In the Camp David II meetings in 2000, Israeli leftist Prime Minister Ehud Barak rather insanely offered to allow another 150,000 "refugees" to enter Israel as part of a peace accord. The PLO's response was to launch pogroms and four years of atrocities, because the number was finite. (See also http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~jkatz/immigration-oslo.html ) The demand for a "right of return" by Palestinians to Israel is no doubt the most absurd political demand floating anywhere around the planet. There is already an Arab state in two thirds of Mandatory Palestine, named Jordan, and most of its population is Palestinian Arab. The Oslo Accords and Israel's Camp David II offer would have created a second Arab state in Palestine, in the West Bank and Gaza, as part of a comprehensive peace settlement. Any "Palestinian" from anywhere could have moved to "Palestine" or to Jordan, within the framework of such a peace, the same way any Jew who wishes to may immigrate to Israel, or any Armenian may immigrate to Armenia, and Greeks from the Greek Diaspora are automatically welcomed in Greece. The PLO and the Islamofascist states backing it demand that in ADDITION to establishing a second Arab state in Palestine within the framework of any peace settlement, Israel itself must ALSO be converted into a third Arab Palestinian state, via unlimited massive immigration of people claiming to be Palestinians. Benjamin Franklin, who opposed granting even a dime in compensation to the Tory refugees expelled from the United States during the War of Independence, would be splitting his sides laughing. But the most Orwellistic absurdity of all is that Israel long ago DID grant the right to "return" to Israel itself to tens of thousands of "Palestinian refugees". Did this earn Israel the world's gratitude for its uniquely generous gesture? Did the world denounce the Arab fascist states who ignored this generosity and continued to seek Israel's destruction militarily and the genocide of its population? Do today's bleeding hearts and recreational compassion posturers, pretending to feel uncontrollable pain and caring for Palestinian refugees, even know about the limited "right of return" granted by Israel over the past decades? Hindus have never been returned to Pakistan, Moslems from Pakistan have not been returned to India, ethnic Germans were not returned to their pre-war homes in Czechoslovakia, Poland, Russia or Romania, Japanese have not been returned to Manchuria, Greeks have not been returned to Anatolia, Jews have not been compensated for the billions they left behind when ethnic cleansing of Jews in Moslem countries took place, and Tory Loyalists were never returned to New England. But tens of thousands of "Palestinian refugees" were granted by Israel what none of these others received. It is time to say enough is enough. The only remaining reasonable plan regarding those still claiming to be "Palestinian refugees" is simply - Foggedaboutit. Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
NPR'S NEAL CONAN'S TERRIBLE 'SUBJECT'
Posted by American Chin High, June 16, 2004. |
|
On June 13 Neal Conan had the "palestinian" Arab Propagandists "activist" Whining about the "poor" Palestinians. Basically he didn't say anything but repeated 12 times the word "occupation,'" "Palestinian-land," again and again. He blamed "Palestinian" shortcomings not on their guilty vicious leaders, parents or hate-teachers, but, well of course that old boring song, you know. When a caller by the name of Veronica tried to talk some sense about Arab leaders' guilt he -- of course -- turned the incriminating ball gain on the good will gestures initiators -- the always good-guy: the Israelis, When she finally nailed the REAL PROBLEM in the MIDDLE EAST, which is VIOLENCE and TERRORISM, The NOT-AT-ALL -'gentle-man' moderator Neal Conan interrupted her by saying 'Oh the question is for another program'... How is the real issue of "palestinian'-initated bloodshed and bloodshed-education and all resources to it 'not" THE SUBJECT? Unless BASHING suffering victim Israel IS REALLY YOUR 'SUBJECT'? Of course the other day you'll have the Israeli side answer in your "even handed" blah. Don't you dare use the word "nation" for your ugly lying machine. Don't you dare, Neal! |
|
MUSLIM GOODWILL
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 15, 2004. |
|
WHO WOULD OWN THE SECOND P.A. GAZA CASINO?
The owners of the proposed new casino would be the same as those who own the Jericho one. They are clients of Dov Weisglass' law firm. Weisglass was until recently an aide to PM Sharon (Barry Chamish, e-mail, 6/7). How patriotically did he advise against his client's interests? FALSE REPORTING IN BEHALF OF ABANDONMENT Shortly before the Cabinet voted on the abandonment plan, public relations experts connected with some leftist MKs reported that reservists as a whole favor the plan. The study rejected testimony offered by reservists opposed to the plan (IMRA, 6/2). FAKE ISRAELI PRISONER SWAP There is a second phase to the recently concluded first part of a prisoner exchange of one live and three dead Israelis for hundreds of mostly live Arabs. The second phase was to furnish information about Ron Arad, whom the Arabs assured Israel was still alive. For a second time, Hizbullah sent a tissue sample, purporting to be that of Arad. The first time, it turned out not to be. Nevertheless, PM Sharon went ahead, this time. When the second sample was tested, it, too, was found not to be Arad's. Sharon withheld that news until after he won the Cabinet vote on the abandonment plan. As you may recall, he had misinformed his Cabinet that the one live Israeli was in such failing health, that he had to be rescued. The plan depends entirely upon trust. Had the Cabinet known the truth beforehand, it might have voted differently, finding neither Sharon nor the Arabs trustworthy (IMRA, 6/7). P.A. ARABS ON DEMOCRACY A survey of P.A. residents found that most want democracy. They specified democracy like Israel's (Prof. Steven Plaut, 6/8, e-mail). The result surprises me, but I wonder how valid it is. True, these Arabs may be fed up with police state tactics and corruption. But then, so are some Israelis. IRAN RECRUITING "MARTYRS" Iran is recruiting thousands for martyr-murder, according to Islamists. They plan to attack whomever they deem an enemy, including civilians. Meanwhile, their chief recruiter accused Israel of using its children as human shields (Matthew Gutman, NY Sun, 6/9, p.7). Note the crippled logic that accompanies the sick ethics! First, Arab gunmen are the ones who hide behind their children, not Israeli troops. Second, it would not make sense for Israel to do it, because most Arabs lack humane feelings towards Jewish children, whom they consider sub-human and evil. Hence Arab terrorists have singled out Israeli children. Those poor children cannot shield themselves. The Islamists make ridiculous charges, but the media fails to ridicule them. Many of these accusations against Israel are of crimes that the Islamists perpetrate. If you want to know what immoral deeds are done by the Islamists, read what they accuse Israel of doing. ARAB REFORMERS The Arab League Summit declared itself in favor of reform. The declaration was condemned by 34 Arab NGOs as intended to deceive the world into anticipating reform. They proved their point by noting that the League proposed no action. The League endorsed a Revised Arab Charter on Human Rights that recommends worse conditions for Arabs than the West suggests. The Charter curbs women's rights, the right to strike, and does not protect other human rights or democracy. The League attempted to link reform to resolution of the occupation of Iraq and the P.A. war. That is obfuscation. These wars are irrelevant to the real problems of the Arab world -- corruption, dictatorship, and lack of rule of law (and intolerance). The reformers then called Israeli actions human rights violations and denounced the US for "blatant bias towards Israel." (IMRA, 6/2 from MEMRI.) The US demands total Israeli withdrawal from Yesha, and P.A. statehood with a trained military. Is that blatant bias towards Israel? The Arabs express a twisted mentality whether in favor of reform or merely pretending to. Those who proposed reform without means of implementing it are the dictators against whom reforms are needed. They propose certain reform within Islamic law. Right or wrong, Islamic law does not match Western standards of human rights. Islamic law denies more Western-style rights than it upholds. (Its clerics deliberately mis-define "terrorism" so as to support it and to oppose counter-terrorism. They war by semantic casuistry.) Sometimes when Islamic law coincides with Western law, Arab society disregards it. All that is an irreconcilable clash of civilization! The actual reformers want to institute reforms only for Muslims. From their statements, they would seem to retain the same distorted perspective and hatred of the infidels, as do the Islamists. The reformers would deny other groups human rights. One cheer for Arab reform! ARAB BOYCOTT STILL IN EXISTENCE Syria has barred ships from Greece, Denmark, Malta, Liberia, and Spain for having stopped previously in Israel (IMRA, 6/2). Just as the US has sanctions on Syria, Syria has sanctions against third parties over Israel. The US sanctions are based on crime. Syrian sanctions are based on religious identity. They foster jihad. They should be opposed. SMUGGLING IS RAFAH'S INDUSTRY The main source of income in Rafah is from smuggler's tunnels. Clans contend over control of it. Egyptian Arabs bring contraband to the tunnel opening in a house in the Egyptian zone of Rafah. P.A. Arabs take it through to the tunnel exit in a house in the P.A. zone. When the IDF demolishes a house concealing a tunnel, UNRWA appeals for humanitarian aid for the household, although the P.A. builds the family a better one. The world condemns the IDF for imposing hardships on the "poor Arabs" who actually profited first from the actual smuggling and second from new housing. What misguided sympathy for mercenary murderers! P.A. warfare depends mostly on shipments through tunnels. As the IDF destroys tunnels, the Arabs build new ones. The government of Israel more or less allows this, by letting the IDF only detect existing tunnels, not relocate the whole town so there can be no concealed tunneling, or at least imprison or execute families harboring tunnels (MEPF, 6/3 from Miriam Gardner, American Yated Neeman, 6/3). FUTILE U.S. STRIVING FOR MUSLIM GOODWILL Among the action taken by the US in favor of Muslims: 1. Sent troops to Somalia, to end starvation. 2. Denied help to endangered Christians in Sudan and Lebanon (and Kosovo), but stopped ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosovo. 3. Helped the P.A. against Israel. 4. Rebuilding Iraq. 5. Until 9/11, ignored fundraising for Islamists, who attacked US facilities several times before. After terrorists attacked on 9/11, the Arab world exhibited its hatred of the US. It does not weigh on the scale our help for it, only our failure to completely side with it or to be part of it. Appeasement by France has not stopped Islamist plotting there. The so-called moderates failed to condemn mutilation. Arab lack of remorse, disrespect for human life, centuries of tyranny and brutality, politics based on violence rather than mutual respect, monopolistic economies, and minimal introspection show Arab society too sick to reform. The burden of proof is on the Arabs. We should not blame ourselves or solicit their acceptance. Instead of treating them as equals, challenge them to join the civilized world (Op. Cit.). INSINCERE ABOUT HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES The Palestinian Human Rights Monitoring Group (PHRMG), originally just anti-Israel, found the P.A. responsible for most gangland violence, the torture of Arabs, and for many bystanders' deaths. When PHRMG started to expose these abuses, its international support dwindled. Apparently the normally generous EU and UNO really do not care about the suffering of the Palestinian Arabs. They raise issues of human rights violations by Israel not out of sympathy for the Arabs, but as a club against Israel. They raise false issues while ignoring real P.A. violations. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
THE GREAT DICTATOR
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 15, 2004. |
|
So, how will the 'Great Dictator' with advise from the Arabist U.S. State Department insure that democracy is absolutely crushed along with the pioneer settlers. First, immediately after the coerced Cabinet vote using the false start date of August 9, 2005 (Tisha B'Av next year), Israel's Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon began to implement his re-partition plans the very next day. This corruption of the agreement was clearly planned before the vote. We are informed by the Israeli Government Press Office that Sharon has issued a proclamation wherein now that the Cabinet has adopted the disengagement plan, all members of the government, including Deputy Ministers, and are obligated to support it. So that the reader sees through this sham and coercion, note that what Sharon is saying is that no one may disagree with his decisions no matter how wrong. In essence, the government officials may not change their minds, investigate wrong doings, challenge Sharon's decisions, methods or even Sharon's breaking any understandings he has pledged to keep. Now, add to that another dictum: that in the coming months until the end of the current Knesset session, ministers should refrain from traveling abroad. They must be present whenever the Knesset is in session and must vote with the (his) Coalition. In essence, he has physically captured his own ministers and controls the Government. Add to that the pre-planned restraint lest they go abroad and speak against his decision. Clearly, the Government has fallen - except for the 'illusion' created by their showing up to cling to their seats and perks. Presumably, his main target would be Bibi Netanyahu lest he speak to the American people and/or Congress about the fraud perpetrated on the Israeli people. Sharon would also not want MK Uzi Landau, who voted against his disengagement plan to speak to American Jews or to the American Congress. Be assured that this pre-planned isolation of Ministers would have come through Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Yossi Lapid, Shimon Peres and the Arabist State Department. This has all the earmarks of a coup d'etat well planned and thought out to deprive the Israeli people of a democratic government answerable to the Knesset (Parliament) or the people. While claiming democratic process, this Government has all the coloring of any typical dictatorships in Africa and the Middle East. This bending of Justice comes straight from the Oval Office. Slice by slice, the tyrants have cut away justice, freedom of-and-by speech, freedom from wrongful imprisonment, elimination of any media who defies this Government's policy. Jews have been imprisoned - without trial in a lock-down prison even when a separate court ruling exonerates them. This is implementing the same archaic laws the British Mandate used 'Administrative Detention' against Jews. If this sounds like the Palestinian system under Yassir Arafat or any Arab Muslim dictatorial system it is because it is. The corruption runs deep and is aided and enabled by the U.S. State Department. Israel no longer even ranks as a banana republic but is actually a captive nation with the collaboration of her Government. In addition to putting the Government Ministers in chains, watch for Sharon to create a scenario of danger for himself and the office of Prime Minister. This will keep demonstrators from marching to his offices to protest his decisions. He is a brilliant scoundrel and is using his military tactics which should be reserved for Arab Muslim Terrorists but instead exercises them against Jews. Let us wait for "The Great Dictator" to issue a self-serving proclamation to keep the people from protesting anywhere that he can see or hear. This would be martial law - only with a benign title. Clearly, he fears a huge number of Israelis showing up and shouting "Dictator, Go Home!" until the ground shook. Now for the coup d'grace: I, among others, have in the past written about planning first by Rabin, Peres and now Sharon using the Israeli government to deliberately put the pioneering settlers in mortal danger by withdrawing IDF troops from patrols, eliminating checkpoints of entry for Arab Muslims, - or, in essence, inviting in Arab Muslims Terrorists who hide among innocent civilians in order to use the open access to the settlers, knowing full well that they will kill them. This is now happening. The Israel Government Press Office has just issued the following report ** (see at end). The spin being put on this 'collaboration' to murder is that Sharon's government in coordination with what they elusively call "the Civil Administration of Government Activities". (Which Civil Administration? Israel's or the Palestinian Authority's which is controlled by Yassir Arafat and nominally represented by Queria.) We are being told in this Sharon 'spin' that, by removing barriers and checkpoints he can make clear distinction between Terrorists and civilians. (Note! There is no clarity in this transparent propagandized bit of disinformation - except to fog over the fact that checkpoints will no longer be in place to inspect and catch cars and trucks with explosives, Arab women carrying explosives under their large dresses or teens with backpacks loaded with explosives. This is all part of Sharon's and the U.S. State Department's effort to ramp up the Terror level and force the pioneering settlers to leave or risk being killed. This was the same Labor Left plan in the early 1980s to force the settlers out through Arab Muslim Terror. ### ISRAEL GOVERNMENT PRESS OFFICE **"IDF SPOKESPERSON ANNOUNCEMENT: IDF EASES TRAVEL RESTRICTION IN THE WEST BANK "As part of IDF efforts to differentiate between Palestinian terrorists and the civilian Palestinian population, in joint cooperation with the Civil Administration of Government Activities in the territories, is implementing various measures in order to ease daily life of the civilian population. Recent steps include the removal of dozens of barriers in the West Bank, facilitating open vehicle passage along the main routes between West Bank towns and villages, as well as easing the encirclement around Nablus and facilitating more bus lines through the West Bank. These measures are part and parcel of the ongoing measures taken by the IDF throughout the year in an attempt to make a clear distinction between the terrorists who hide among civilians and those not involved in terror. The IDF efforts to improve the daily life of the Palestinian population will continue in accordance with security assessments providing they do not harbor terrorism and are not involved in attacking Israeli citizens. The removal of these barriers enable open movement for both vehicles and pedestrians, thus creating easier condition for many villages around the West Bank, including: *Opening of the Eiyn Bidan barrir which prevented movement of vehicles on the Nablus-Jordan Valley road. *Amtin, Atzira A-Qabliya, Orif, Beita A - Tachta, Majdel Bani Fadel, Juirsh and Kablan in the Nablus area. *The village of Ramin in the Tulkarem area. *The villages of Laqef, Azun and Dir Balut in the Qalquilya area. *The adjoining of the villages of Turmus-Iya and Sajil in the Ramallah area, creating a single entity. *The movement of vehicles from Bethlehem to Route 60 (the "X" junction). *The villages of Beit Umar, Idna and Yata in the area of Hebron. In addition, starting this morning June 14, 2004, easements regarding the encirclement imposed on Nablus will be implemented, preventing the only the passage of men between the ages of 61 and 30, compared to 16-35 until today. In addition, the traffic between Nablus and Ein Bidan will be opened for vehicle and pedestrian passage. Additional easements along the encirclement imposed on Nablus are considered, in conjunction with the security status in the city. [Do we get back Joseph's Tomb that they desecrated???! Ed. Note] The number of buses used for the benefit of the Palestinian population transporting between different cities in the West Bank was expanded over the past 2 weeks. Permanent bus lines operated int his framework, with 2 additional lines to begin operating in the coming days, compared with 26 permanent lines last month. Approximately 800,000 Palestinians have used these bus lines since the beginning of this year. These easements are a part of an ongoing process during which the imposition of curfews on Palestinian cities has stopped, most of the permanent encirclements around Palestinian cities were removed and checkpoints were removed as well. Dear Reader: As you can see from the Israel Government Press Office statement, Sharon must have been instructed to win the hearts and minds of the Arab Muslim Palestinians as Bush is doing now with the Muslims in Iraq. If, however, Sharon is doing all of this out of his own mind, then that mind must have stopped operating or simply shut down. Either way, he must be forced to leave office before he and/or Olmert succeed in virtually eliminating Israel - to include diving Jerusalem - which was proposed a few days ago by former Mayor of Jerusalem speaking for Sharon. THIS JUST IN: SHARON TOLD LIKUD MEMBERS THAT HE WILL BE FORCED TO INCLUDE THE LABOR LEFT DUE TO THE LIKUD REBELS. 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). |
|
A PIG-HEADED VERDICT
Posted by Michael Freund, June 15, 2004. |
|
It was a decision as predictable as it was disheartening. Monday's ruling by the High Court of Justice in favor of allowing the sale of pork in Israel is nothing less than a slap in the face to Jewish history, tradition and culture. It marks yet another milestone in the campaign by certain sectors of society to de-Judaize the Jewish State and to strip away any remaining vestiges of our collective heritage. Only a jurist with the most tenuous of attachments to our past could possibly countenance such a decree. Indeed, there is something distasteful, even distressing, about the sight of nine Jewish justices sitting in Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jewish people, and issuing such a ruling. Sure, at first glance the court's decision might appear to be eminently reasonable. After all, from a purely free-market perspective, why should the state interfere in the marketplace? Proponents will argue that those opposed to the sale of pork can use all the tools available to them in a free society to persuade consumers of pig flesh to change their ways. And yet, deep down, we know that while this approach may suit your average Western democracy, it just doesn't cut it when it comes to Israel. For goodness' sake, this is supposed to be a Jewish state! If we eliminate all of our unique national customs and beliefs, then we run the risk of diluting, and possibly even undermining, our collective sense of identity as a people. Every society has its norms, its conventions and its habits, and the Jewish people are no different in this respect. Strictly speaking, there is no difference as far as Jewish law is concerned between eating a ham sandwich, dining on steamed lobster or downing a plate of shrimp, all of which are prohibited. But, as we all know, refraining from pork has become a symbol, not just of fidelity to Jewish law, but of maintaining an attachment, however fragile or precarious, with the Jewish people. Over 2000 years ago, when the wicked Syrian-Greek emperor Antiochus Epiphanes of the Chanukah story ruled over the Land of Israel, it was decreed that eating pig would serve as a test of the Jews' loyalty. Indeed, according to the Second Book of Maccabees (6:18-31), there were Jews who chose death rather than be forced to eat "the food which it is unlawful to taste even for love of life." In the Middle Ages, Spanish inquisitorial courts would often find people guilty of being "secret Jews" on the grounds that they refused to eat pork, thus suggesting that they covertly remained faithful to the ways of their forefathers. In the eyes of the Inquisition, declining to eat pig was considered sufficient reason to condemn a person to be burnt at the stake. And so, by overturning regulations in three Israeli municipalities against the sale of pork, the High Court is essentially assaulting one of the most emotive symbols of Jewish faith and martyrdom. Don't be fooled by assertions that this is all about "individual rights" or "personal freedoms". That is just a convenient cover for what is really at work here, which is nothing less than an all-out assault on the Jewish character of the state. Across the board, a concerted effort has been made in recent years to tear away the Jewish symbols of Israel's public life. Whether it is proposals to change the national anthem, or to abolish the Chief Rabbinate, the goal is the same: to transform Israel into "just another country", cut off from its distinctive past, oblivious to its eternal heritage. The High Court's pig-headed ruling, whether by intent or not, will help to bring this dubious goal one step closer to fruition. Needless to say, the Court sees little problem with the fact that restrictions are commonly imposed on the sale of various products for a variety of reasons, ranging from firearms to alcohol to prescription drugs to certain kinds of pets. Nor does it seem troubled that the Communications Ministry limits the sale of particular models of fax machines in Israel which it deems unacceptable. But when it comes to outlawing pig, and showing a modicum of respect for Jewish tradition, the justices suddenly insist on invoking the principle of individual autonomy. How convenient. Ironically enough, on the very same day that Israel's High Court was declaring war on the Divine, the US Supreme Court was reaffirming respect for it. In a unanimous ruling, eight US justices overturned a lower court's decision, thereby preserving the phrase "one nation, under G-d" in the Pledge of Allegiance. The case involved a California atheist who had sued the government, seeking to ban the recitation of the pledge in his daughter's school because it made reference to G-d. While the US Supreme Court's decision was based on a technicality, and did not address the underlying constitutional issues at stake, the result nonetheless was the same: America decided not to turn its back on its religious and cultural heritage, which it proudly and unabashedly embraces. If only our esteemed judges in Jerusalem would learn from their example, and no longer be ashamed to assert a little Jewish pride. Pork has no place in Israel's supermarkets or on its shelves, nor on the High Court's agenda. This is, after all, a Jewish country, and that is what it must remain. The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. |
|
THE POWER OF WORDS DOES NOT STAND ALONE
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, June 15, 2004. |
|
The power of words does not stand alone. It has belief and conviction
behind it. That's why the state of Israel was re-created.
When Sharon dotes on another's words, convictions and Big Lies, he is lying to himself, his people and is losing not the battle of words, but the battle of belief. The battle of words of President Ronald Reagan had the belief that the Berlin Wall and the Iron Curtain were evil and that good men should take them down to create good. Reagan's words were a war on evil without weapons. Sharon's words are a war for evil with their weapons and his self-sacrifice and shame. Sharon was not guilty in Lebanon. He quit before finishing, and the Christians suffered and Israel and the world still suffer from Hizb'allah and pan-jihad. Sharon is not guilty for walking on the Temple Mount; he is guilty for not stating the facts of the third tier's misrepresentations and the magnitude of their underground chambers of destruction. Would that Solomon were around to say love builds and doesn't destroy, love embraces and doesn't kill. Solomon's wisdom kept the peace. Sharon's politics lets war linger. Sharon is compromising his country against their will and without due compensation, keeping a grip on the media and the mind, limiting knowledge and shaming the proud and patriotic. How much is the Jewish Riviera of Gaza on the Mediteranean Sea worth historically, economically and as a resort not for terrorist Arab imported mercenaries who have 22 countries of their own and still stepping on others, but for perhaps China? Maybe if the land which has become a combat zone with imported arsenals is leased to the China which respected their elders, Jews would not have to leave, it would reap more than thirty billion dollars and there would be that Hong Kong in the Middle East with the casinoes, the resorts, the greenhouses and Jews allowed. Perhaps all the kosher Chinese Restaurants will be filled with international tourists and there would be a gold mine of the industrious, not Arafat and the Egyptians in the business of corruption by destruction. There are other solutions than giving warlords their victim's rights. Leaving for hate, let's hate keep chasing. Building that Hong Kong in the Middle East is a lesser evil and should be done by those outside the prejudiced Quartet who pilfer the poor and empower the warlord. Leave Jews their inheritance and put a buffer zone of a new Hong Kong, an uninterested industrious people, with an interesting investment for Jews, too, that might be an incentive for the Arabs in Gaza to lease to Hong Kong, too, and expel their warlords who pilfer them, too. Jews belong. Jews deserve. Arabs might get more from working in the New Hong Kong than in the British brutality. Keep believing. The Jewish Way has survived all the misguided no matter the words. With a little outside industry, the false words of false prophets may be replaced by a real deal and all may profit. /i> |
|
ITEMS: WHY SHARON WON'T BE PROSECUTED; ARAFAT'S TIME HAS PASSED
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 15, 2004. |
|
Israel has a long tradition of having a dual judicial system. There
is one system that is a set of rules for courts, police and
prosecution and that operates for leftists, and another for everyone
else. That, for example, is the reason why Bibi Netanyahu and his wife
were investigated aggressively and persecuted on suspicion of taking
some ashtrays and trinkets from the Prime Minister's residence in
Jerusalem when Netanyahu had to crate things away in a hurry after
losing the election. The sleaze of Ehud Barak's campaign finance would
be an embarrassment even in a Third World country, but the prosecutors
just never got around to investigating any of that. And then there is
the deafening silence by the prosecution regarding the even worse set
of slime that characterized Amram Mitzna's ties with his building
contractor friends. When it comes to Mitzna sleaze, not a creature has
ever been moving in the prosecutorial house, not even a mouse.
But, as I said, the reason is very simple. It's the dual justice system, again. That is why a Jewish fellow who made a T-shirt with a slogan the Left thought was insensitive got prosecuted, but the worst Leftists, openly endorsing destruction of Israel and supporting terrorist atrocities, or Arab nationalists making little effort to hide their support for genocide, just never seem to get investigated or prosecuted. Actually they get tenured and promoted. Free speech absolutism holds for leftist incitement and anti-Semitism, but denunciation of the Left is a form of libel. Now all of this is well known, but the sudden decision by the Attorney General NOT to prosecute Ariel Sharon for his own election finance sleaze just does not seem to fit into the pattern of the dual justice system. It comes just hours after the same dual system passed a court ruling that Israelis must not vote in favor of local municipal laws outlawing sale of pork. The same court never ruled that it is a free constitutional right to import KOSHER food! Do not imagine the decision NOT to prosecute Sharon has anything to do with the fact that the current Attorney General is himself a Sharon appointment. That would show your unfamiliarity with Israeli politics. In Israel the Likud always appoints leftists to public positions and spends its time in office doing its best to help the Labor Party get elected. The current Attorney General is a leftist. No exception. SO how come the dual justice apparatchiks and nomenklatura are not prosecuting Sharon and his kin? Was it because Sharon's sleaze was nickel and dime stuff compared with the filth of the Barak and Mitzna campaigns? Is it because the Attorney General thinks Sharon's penny ante improprieties can wait till he finishes his term of office before being investigated? No, grasshopper. The explanation is quite simple. The Left made Sharon an offer he could not refuse. Sharon will implement the Left's political agenda, including implementing the Mitzna Plan for the Gaza Strip, the same plan rejected in a landslide by the Israeli voter. And in exchange the Left will lay off Sharon and his family, the Left's pocket Attorney General will dismiss the charges, the Left's Supreme Court justices will sit by the sidelines in uncharacteristic humility, and the Labor Party and maybe Meretz will back Sharon in the parliament when the handful of men and women of principle and conscience in the Likud and in its coalition partners abandon Sharon and vote against his appeasing the PLO, er I meant the Israeli Left. "The End of 'Arafat': Even if he lives, the idea of him must die." Reflecting the views of Israel's Cabinet, Vice Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said publicly over the weekend that "killing" Yasser Arafat was "one of the options." Secretary of State Colin Powell of course had to say that exiling or executing Arafat would incite Arab rage, that it would be most unhelpful to the peace process, etc., etc. The truth is that Yasser Arafat's moment in history has ended. The world would do well to think hard about how it came to pass, after so many years and so much talk and blood, that the era of Arafat arrived at this endpoint--with Israel saying that it may be worth the trouble simply to kill him. How far we've come from the Rose Garden in 1993. It is a fine irony that Mr. Powell spoke of the need to soldier on with Yasser Arafat while the Secretary himself was standing in Baghdad for the first time. Mr. Powell is in Baghdad because President Bush concluded after September 11, and after the political failure of the first Gulf War, that the years of Western self-delusion about the nature of global terror must be brought to an end. Similarly, the delusions about Arafat also must now end. "Arafat" should enter history not merely as the name of one autocratic man, but as the name we assign to an entire Western phenomenon of false thinking. "Arafat," we now see, has come to represent the act of self-delusion on a massive, international scale. "Arafat" is about refusing to believe that an adversary is simply irredeemable. Most importantly at this particular moment, "Arafat" is about allowing barbarism, or its techniques, to challenge the political tenets of civilized life. For years the Western nations that emerged from World War II and the Cold War have been playing with fire by pretending that their world and the alternative world of "Arafat" could somehow coexist. More than anything, this impossible notion reflected political and moral fatigue. Thus in the 1990s, the world came very close to letting "Arafat," this time in the person of Slobodan Milosevic, achieve its logical end on European soil, again. But the United States intervened and Milosevic is on trial for crimes against civilized humanity. George W. Bush's decision to go to war against the regime of Saddam Hussein was the opposite of "Arafat" thinking; it was a decision to refute "Arafat." If you look at the Nobel Prizes' own biography of Yasser Arafat, you find this remarkable sentence toward the end: "Like other Arab regimes in the area, however, Arafat's governing style tended to be more dictatorial than democratic." That is to say, Arafat by his own choice of governance--dictatorship over democracy--bears individual responsibility for the legacy he leaves. That legacy includes: the contemporary crime of hijacking and blowing up civilian-filled airliners; the attempted destabilization of Jordan and Israel and the successful destruction of Lebanon as a formerly sovereign nation; and decades of violated international agreements, culminating in the collapse of Oslo. Last year, in a perfect storm of bad faith, Arafat was caught paying for the shipment of arms from Iran to the Palestinian territories aboard the Karine A. Across these years, the West, mainly the European nations, accomplished the post-World War II feat of pretending that crime is not crime, so long as the motives and politics for the crimes are moralized. The U.S. and Israel participated as well in the pretense, bringing Arafat out of exile in Tunis. The world has learned since that this apologetics (and much direct funding) has made possible any crime, culminating in the anti-moral act known as suicide bombers. Arafat most recently threw over Mahmoud Abbas, and the fatigued West barely sighed in complaint. This past September 3, in an article published in the Palestinian daily newspaper Al-Ayyam, the Palestinian writer Tawfiq Abu Bakr wrote: "It is difficult to find a greater and more deeply rooted culture of self-deception than that in our Arab and Palestinian arena." But we in the West fomented that culture of self-deception, by perpetuating the conceit that Yasser Arafat--"Arafat"--was the singular vessel of peace for the Palestinians. He manifestly is not. The Israelis are in the best position to know what to do at this point, though no option--seclusion, exile, trial or killing him--is particularly attractive. But Israel has to live (or die) with Arafat. The U.S. for its part, rather than sustain the Arafat conceit as it is doing now, should say it is no longer going to be associated with Arafat and what he stands for. As for the Palestinians and Arabs, the President of the United States has said many times that he supports a Palestinian state. Now they too have to decide whether the moment has arrived to get past "Arafat." For those who will scream that this is more "unilateralism," we would say that for some 30 years there were crucial breakpoints, most recently the Oslo concessions and the Abbas opening, where credible pressure on Arafat from important players in the West and Middle East might have avoided arriving at where we are now. It never came. Not once. Where Yasser Arafat spends the rest of his life is not important. What
matters is for the world to recognize that it is time to get rid of
"Arafat."
Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of
business administration at Haifa University and author of "The
Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically -
on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website
address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com.
|
|
GOV'T PLANNING TO MOVE ENTIRE SETTLEMENTS TO NEGEV
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 15, 2004. |
|
This is a total snow job. Even IF Sharon and his gang ever intended to pay full compensation, there is no money in Israel to pay that sort of a bill and NO ONE ELSE will pay it. What they intend to do is set up Gulag style transit camps in the Negev. There will be only the most minimal of facilities and those living there will be give some sort of limit stipend for a few months. Housing will be recycled caravans and there will be a few slop down asphalt roads. And that is all. The hope is that since a high percentage of the Gush Katif Jews are not native born Israelis that they "will go back to where they came from" and maybe take some of the Sabras with them. The "Israelis" want the Jews out of all of Israel and are simply starting with what they see as the easiest group to attack. This article is by Herb Keinon and it appeared Jun3 13, 2004 in the Jerusalem Post. Settlers evacuated from the Gaza Strip will obviously have the right to choose where to live, senior government officials said Sunday - but if they decide to relocate as complete communities, the goal is to build these new settlements in the western Negev near the Gaza Strip. According to the officials, who are closely involved with the steering committee drawing up plans for implementation of the disengagement plan, there is as yet no final decision on how many new communities will be built; it will depend on the number of people who want to relocate as a group. In the meantime, the officials said, planning is going ahead on "more than one" such settlement relocation. The decision to build the new communities in the western Negev is new, since up to this time there was talk - in addition to building the settlements in the Negev - to also building them in the Galilee or within consensus areas in the West Bank. The officials said it is important for the steering committee to have some kind of an idea, relatively early, of how many people want to relocate as integral communities, so that construction can begin in order to absorb them by the end of 2005. Paradoxically, the officials said the committee is not interested in a flood of people wanting to move out of the settlements to be evacuated immediately, since the government has not yet voted on the actual evacuation of settlements, and is not interested in "putting the horse before the cart." The officials said the goal is to ensure that all the planning for evacuation at this stage is "reversible," in case the government does not approve the actual evacuation. The idea of offering advances on compensation to people who indicate they will voluntarily leave their homes is important for those involved in agriculture, the officials said. For instance, those with hot houses in Gush Katif may already want to start constructing them elsewhere in order not to miss a growing season next year. The officials said the criteria for compensation payments, and for advances on compensation, has not yet been worked out. The first meeting of the committee dealing with evacuation, compensation, and alternative settlements is to take place Tuesday. According to the officials, the committee will draw up criteria for compensation, which will then need to be approved by the security cabinet, be formulated into legislation, brought to the interministerial committee on legislation, and then brought to the Knesset. This process, the officials said, will take months, with the goal being that legislation will be ready by October. The officials said the committee, in drawing up details of the implementation of the plan, is looking both at the evacuation of Yamit and northern Sinai settlements in 1982, and the withdrawal from Lebanon in 2000, for precedents. Neither are perfect models, however, since the IDF did not have to deal with Palestinian terrorists trying to disrupt matters while pulling the settlers from Yamit in 1982, and the IDF did not have to deal with the evacuation of Israeli civilians while pulling out of Lebanon in 2000. One of the main lessons learned from Yamit, the senior officials said, is the need to set up one centralized administration to handle the compensation negotiations - based on clear-cut criteria - with the settlers. During the Yamit period, the settlers conducted separate negotiations with different ministries - the Agriculture Ministry, the Industry and Trade Ministry, and the Interior Ministry - with each ministry often not knowing what the other was offering. The administration, which is to be set up in July, is to solve this problem. The officials said negotiations with international organizations, such as the World Bank and UNRWA, are to begin in a couple of weeks regarding the final dispensation of infrastructure in the areas to be evacuated. The international community will be called upon to help rebuild the Gaza Strip, the officials said, and the money raised will go to rehabilitating the area, not for the resettlement of the evacuated Jews. http://65.54.184.250/cgi-bin/linkrd?_lang= EN&lah=cbd85b372be1fa6f46c8e5c2d57286c9&lat= 1087236993&hm___action= http%3a%2f%2fwww%2ejpost%2ecom%2fservlet%2fSatellite% 3fpagename%3dJPost%2fJPArticle%2fPrinter%26cid% 3d1087025357360%26p%3d1078027574097 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. |
|
ANALYSIS OF THE POLITICAL EVENTS AND THE FUTURE OF THE LIKUD
Posted by Manhigut Yehudit, June 15, 2004. |
|
The approval in principle by the government of the disengagement plan, the firing of the Ichud Leumi ministers, and the developments in the Mafdal (NRP), have created a new reality in the Israeli political scene. It seems that the old structure is crumbling, but a new one has not yet been created. There is great confusion in the Likud and the Mafdal. We are witnessing an important process of clarification in both the nationalist and belief-based publics. In which direction will this public go? Will it retain its values, or adopt the pragmatic approach tending inevitably to the Left? The support for the disengagement plan by Netanyahu and Shalom leaves the Likud without leadership. The Likud ministers who did not vote in a way corresponding to the opinions of the rank-and-file party members, as expressed in the referendum, have in fact detached themselves from the party. This doesn't worry Sharon, since he has already taken a strategic decision to trample the Likud underfoot on the way to achieving his objectives. He no longer needs this party, he understands that he won't be a candidate again, and he knows that the Left writes both the criminal charges in Israel and the history books. However, for the other ministers and MKs in the Likud, the stance adopted contrary to the wishes of the party members means gradual detachment from the Likud. This won't happen all at once. Small politicians tend to rely on the short memory of the public, and it sometimes seems that they are right. But we have here an accumulated awareness that is making the Likudniks reject those who aspire to being the coming party leadership. In fact the members of the ruling party have been left without proper leadership to represent them. Against the background of the widening gap between the leadership of the Likud and its members, Manhigut Yehudit is increasing its strength. Our strength is far less than that recently described in the media, but is far greater than we expected to reach at this stage. We are still far from being regarded by most Likudniks as a real alternative to the existing leadership, but reality is advancing at an amazing speed. The stronger we become while standing for our principles, and the more the old reality collapses inside and outside the party, the closer becomes the day in which Manhigut Yehudit will not only be able to propose itself as an alternative, but will also receive the support of a large majority. When we regard recent events we can feel satisfaction from one simple fact: Everything is advancing according to plan, and even faster than we expected. Recruitment and the delaying tactics of the Likud party machine: A belief-based body that does not withdraw into the world of the Yeshivot and the settlements, but wishes to lead and influence affairs, is something totally new on the Israeli scene. As long as Manhigut Yehudit developed its ideology on the pages of Lechatchila, no-one was frightened by it and its public exposure was also limited. Even when the movement entered politics through the Likud, it encountered mainly an attitude of scorn and contempt. However, from the moment Manhigut Yehudit began to register successes, it aroused great fear amongst the leadership of the Likud and the Israeli Left. The fear was caused by the fact that Manhigut Yehudit has ideological motivation and does not receive support from the leadership of the party but from its rank-and-file members. Generally the political machine uses bribery in such cases. It was clear to the politicians that the price of 130 Center members would be very high. We were offered many jobs in the hope that we could be bought in this way (with the taxpayer's money, of course). When they failed to do so, or, in other words, to neutralize us, Ariel Sharon adopted a diametrically opposed method. As described by Ben Caspit in Ma'ariv, Sharon ordered the Director-General of the party to stop accepting membership forms for Manhigut Yehudit. This tactic was accompanied by a media spin intended to legitimize the step, that was in contravention of the law. The Likud party machine is incapable of halting the recruiting process, but it can and will employ bureaucratic delaying tactics. Sharon's outburst regarding the subject of recruiting emphasizes the importance of this recruiting. We are continuing to recruit new members, but it will take longer for the forms to be entered into the Likud computer. Whatever happens, even if the membership forms are delayed for some time, great importance should be attached to the subject of recruiting. In the end everyone will enter and join the ranks of the Likud. The attitude to the media: The fear in the Likud is natural, but it exists only amongst those who regard us as political enemies. On the eve of the elections for the Center, Limor Livnat invited us to her office with great warmth. Only when she failed to receive our support did she suddenly become an "ideological" opponent. Most people in the party welcomed the new, refreshing, ideological body in the party. The more a Likud member is loyal to the basic values of the national camp, the greater is his support for Manhigut Yehudit. It is easy to see, based on the results of the referendum and on the ideological votes in the Likud Center, where the Likud really stands in its attitude to the Manhigut Yehudit faction. However, the party machine is controlled by the Sharon family, and this is the source of the obstacles placed in our path. Not only does the administration take steps to delay the entry of the forms, but we have a growing suspicion that the Likud Court is also controlled by the Sharon family. In the session in which it was decided to expel Ohad Kamin from the party, none of the judges bothered to ask Ohad the basic question: "What did you mean in your article?" It was clear that the result was pre-determined. In order to see how ludicrous the whole affair was, we are publicizing a demand to expel Moshe Feiglin from the party. The demand has been submitted by a former employee of the party machine, and it only remains to guess who persuaded her to do so. This demand is ludicrous, to say the least, but the Court (that isn't usually in a hurry to deal with really serious issues) demands a rapid response. In contrast to the natural fear by Sharon and his supporters, that of the media is ideological. The media has been forced to give increasing exposure to Manhigut Yehudit because it is a "hot" issue. However, the media are doing their best to slander the movement, to deny its legitimacy, and to make the public fear it. For many years we have tried to circulate our message to the broad public but, apart from the readers of Lechatchila, we have not been very successful. Suddenly great curiosity has arisen about us, and we are exploiting the opportunity to the best of our ability. However, there is a problem the media do not wish to propagate our message but to distort it, and make people afraid of us. An excellent example of this is Rino Tzror's film on Channel 10, as well as numerous press interviews. Because of the new situation we are considering giving live interviews only. Our accumulated experience indicates that despite the hostile surroundings, in this type of media we generally succeed in leading the debate and presenting our message. Our aim: To perfect the world in the kingdom of the Almighty. Manhigut Yehudit 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 STRENGTHEN THE SOLDIERS AT THE IDF CHECKPOINTS
Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, June 15, 2004. |
|
Our campaign to protect the soldiers against the harassment of the women of the extreme leftist group Machsomwatch, is growing. Different crews go to the roadblocks at different times, sometimes actually encountering the women of the left, sometimes hearing from the soldiers about the harm those leftist women do in exciting the Arab populace against the work of our soldiers. Our purpose is to type a report of the soldier's testimonies and hand it out to the army, with the hope that this will convince the army to stop those Machsomwatch radical ladies from interfering with the important work of our soldier's in protecting the Jewish People from Arab terror. Just a few examples of what those leftist women do at the checkpoints: last week, at the Kalandya checkpoint, the soldiers told us that Arabs had started throwing rocks at the soldiers, threatening their safety. The soldiers were getting ready to shoot teargas canisters at the rioters- the leftist women of machsomwatch put themselves in front of the soldiers and said: "you will have to shoot us first" and thus protected, with their bodies, the Arabs who were trying to harm our soldiers. Another soldier told us how the machsomwatch women incite the Arabs to complain against the soldiers- After such instigation, an Arab woman pointed her finger at a soldier and said "that soldier hit me in the face"- when it was an absolute lie. A complaint was filed against the soldier and now he will have to prove his innocence. If the court will believe the Arab liar, the soldier will have a stain against him even in his civilian life. Unfortunately, Army courts bend over backwards to believe Arab lies and distortions. At A-ram, a Druze soldier told us that those leftist women, when they come, see his badge and his name and tell him: oh - you are a Druze! We will not talk to you. You are worse than Jewish soldiers. You collaborate with the Jews against your own brothers." We could give you many such reports of the soldiers. Join us and hear and see for yourself. For those abroad - contribute to this campaign - by sending a donation to Women in Green to help do more for our IDF soldiers, and protect them from unjustified abuse. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
YOU MUST LISTEN TO THIS
Posted by Ellen Horowitz, June 15, 2004. |
|
"Is there still a need for the State of Israel".
Richard Ben Cramer, who has written a new hit book highly critical of Israel called 'How Israel Lost: the four questions' (book prominently displayed on book shelf displays) was on NPR yesterday. I HAVE NO WORDS (which is unusual for me)!! But at the same time, I don't believe anybody can be silent now. The full interview can and MUST be heard by all thinking, feeling Jews at: http://www.npr.org/features/feature.php?wfId=1956117 [Editor's note: A review of Cramer's book posted by Paul Comstock is presented in the next blog.] To read more about the fifth column (Jeffrey Goldberg, Richard Ben Kramer, Ian Lustick and others, you can go to the following recent articles) Jack Engelhard - "Anti-Semites, We Don't Need You Anymore" Jun 14, 2004 http://israelnn.com/article.php3?id=3801 Bret Stephens - "the Smug American" June 11, 2004 http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/ JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1086934148827 Andrea Levin - "The Goldberg Manipulations" June 7, 2004
http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_article=714&x_context=2
I also wrote on the issue?:
"The Good, The Bad and the Ugly" June 13, 2004
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=3794
"The Price of Arrogance" February 23, 2004
http://www.israelnn.com/article.php3?id=3374
Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband
and six children. She is a painter, columnist for
Israelnationalnews,com and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be
contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com
|
|
A REVIEW OF CRAMER'S "HOW ISRAEL LOST
Posted by Paul Comstock |
|
This is a California Literary Review (CLR) review of "How Israel Lost:
The Four Questions" by Richard Ben Cramer, Simon and Schuster, 307 pp.
The review is archived at
http://calitreview.com/Reviews/how_israel_lost.htm
It was written by Kelly Hartog is a writer based in Los Angeles who
was a journalist for The Jerusalem Post in Israel from 1993-2004. She
survived a suicide bombing in 2002.
CLR Rating: 2 Stars Losing The Plot There's an old saying among the Jews that goes something along the lines of: we don't need others to destroy us, because we're pretty good destroying ourselves. In other words, the red flags were already up when Richard Ben Cramer a "self-confessed proud Jew and pro-Israel supporter" came along and wrote How Israel Lost - the Four Questions. This statement is Cramer's way of warning his reading public that he's going to upset his fellow Jews but that he has every right to, because he IS a Jew. Now, that's not to say that no Jew has the right to criticize his people's policies - particularly when it comes to Israel and the Middle East conflict. Let's face it the "give me two Jews and I'll show you three opinions" is nowhere more prevalent than in Israel. Still, to quote a Yiddish idiom, it takes an enormous amount of chutzpah (loosely translated - arrogance), to title a book How Israel Lost. Lost what exactly? The Plot? Richard Cramer's respect? According to Cramer it's how Israel lost control of "the narrative that is her lifeline," only it doesn't mention that in the title. The subheading is "The Four Questions" a clear reference to the four questions asked at the Jewish Passover Seder. Of course, if you're not Jewish, you're not going to understand this reference. And therein lies the rub. This book is clearly aimed at Jews and in particular Israeli Jews - who despite Cramer's Middle East reporting credentials (he won the Pulitzer Prize for work in the region for The Philadelphia Inquirer between 1977 and 1984) - know a little more about the situation than he does. Cramer was in the Middle East during the 1978 historic peace accord between Israel and Egypt when Israel handed over the Sinai desert. And despite Cramer's quick jaunts to the region following the outbreak of the latest intifada beginning September 28, 2000, he seems to be still stuck in the late 70s mindset, making assumptions that peace with the Palestinians is as simple as peace with the Egyptians. This is the core premise of Cramer's book. That ultimately, the problem lies with Israel - that if the country would just end its occupation and withdraw to the 1967 borders, all would be well. Now why write such a book? It's hardly a new argument. And it's still a na've one. Cramer appears to be trying to cash in on his Jewish street cred to put forward this well-worn argument. But he fails, and he fails miserably. There's no doubt that many will find Cramer's conversational, irreverent writing style accessible. But the Middle East problems are not easy ones to solve. Cramer stops short of putting a black and yellow cover on the book and calling it "The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict for Dummies", but by encapsulating his ideas in flippant off the cuff throwaway sentences he attempts to bury highly-charged controversial statements and make the whole problem appear "solvable." In one instance he talks about the Israeli government policy of "targeted killings" - the assassination of terrorists. He speaks of the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) saying: "It wasn't killing at all. The new idea was these guys weren't actually people, but ?ticking bombs? about to blow up and kill more Jews. They must be defused!" Such flippant quips undermine the seriousness of the entire terrorist infrastructure. Cramer says there is "no public proof" that these men are terrorists. But he should know, Israel has plenty of public proof and routinely lists the names of these men who have masterminded scores of suicide bombings within Israel - right down to the date, and time of the attack, the number of people they have killed and the names of the victims. This, too is something that is sorely lacking in Cramer's book. He goes to great pains to list the numbers of Palestinians killed in the current conflict - but nowhere are Israeli numbers mentioned. He cites one specific incident - the killing in 2002 Salah Shehadeh, the head of the terrorist organization Hamas's military wing. A bomb was dropped on Shehadeh's house killing him and 15 members of his family and extended family. Cramer carefully lists the names and ages of those killed but chooses not to point out Hamas's clear cut policy of hiding out its terrorists in family homes - risking the lives of their own loved ones and using them as shields. But perhaps the most damning example of Cramer's bias is in his statements about the battle at the Jenin refugee camp in March 2002. He writes: "half-a-camp was mowed under by the Israelis in retaliation for the Passover suicide bomb of 2002." Well, that double suicide bombing was certainly a turning point in Israel's retaliation policy (which until that point had been NOT to retaliate). But in March of 2002, nearly 100 Israelis were killed in suicide bombings around the country, and hundreds more wounded. Israel finally said: "enough". In addition, "half a camp" was certainly not "mowed under". While Israel could easily have dropped a bomb on the entire Jenin camp, it did not. Instead, the army sent in soldiers on a house to house search, hand to hand combat, in homes that had been booby trapped by Palestinian terrorists. As a result 23 Israeli soldiers were killed by Palestinian snipers, and 56 armed Palestinians were killed. Cramer's statements merely add fuel to the myth that has been perpetuated that a "massacre" occurred in Jenin - something that even the United Nations (hardly a supporter of Israel) admits never occurred. In another example, right at the beginning of the book, Cramer talks about the properties of "absentee Arabs who ran away or were chased away in Israel's birth-war of 1948." What he fails to mention is that "birth war" was started by the Arabs who refused to accept the United Nations partition plan. Cramer also claims that Israel embarked on a program of "settlements, expropriation, assassinations," thereby forcing the Arabs to retaliate, and that this is where Arab violence against Israel stems from. He fails to mention the massacres inflicted on Jews by the Arabs that began over 20 years before the modern State of Israel was established. To his credit, though, Cramer attempts to write this book by interviewing men and women on the street; Palestinians and Israelis. And it's good that he's talking to the "little people" and not the political players. However, his choice of people is odd. Quoting members of Gush Shalom - the left-wing Israel peace organization is not quoting the voice of the Israeli people today. Once upon a time Gush Shalom had a strong following. Until the Camp David peace talks in 2000 with then left-wing Prime Minister Ehud Barak - the majority of Israelis were behind the initiative. But once Arafat rejected the 2000 peace plan, the tide quickly changed. Today, the majority of Israelis who were in favor of the Oslo Accords, are no longer supporters of Gush Shalom. In addition, the majority of Palestinians who once supported the Oslo Accords now support suicide bombings. Cramer also pays a visit to Smadar Haran, a woman whose husband and four-year-old daughter were killed in horrific circumstances in 1979 when terrorists came from Lebanon and grabbed Smadar's husband and shot him in front of his daughter. They then smashed her daughter Einat's head against a rock and killed her. Smadar ended up smothering her other baby to death to keep the baby quiet so the terrorists wouldn't find her. Almost thirty years later, Smadar tells Cramer she is not a victim and doesn't want to be a victim. But why seek out Smadar Haran to comment on today's conflict? Why does he not interview Frimet and Arnold Roth (whose 15-year-old daughter was killed in 2001 by a suicide bomber in a pizza parlor). Why not interview Sherri Mandel, whose 14-year-old son, Kobi, along with his best friend Yosi-Ish-Ran were killed when their heads were smashed in a cave by Palestinian terrorists? Why not Shalhevet Pass's parents. Shalhevet - 10 months old, was assassinated by a Palestinian sniper who blew a hole in her head from a rooftop while her mother was sitting with her in a park. Surely these are the people to talk to about the current conflict? I could go on. There are endless examples. Cramer talks about "stone throwing" by Palestinians - presumably harmless, until you see those stones up close. They're rocks. Big, heavy, rocks. They're weapons. Two years ago, a seven month old baby was killed when a Palestinian threw a "stone" through a car window. Perhaps though, Cramer's greatest disservice is not in what he writes, but in what he leaves out. That unlike peace with Egypt, or even Jordan, there can be no peace with the Palestinians while there is no negotiating partner. Palestinians continue to be ruled by Hamas - a terror organization - that puts food in their bellies, clothes on their backs, and provides medical treatment. Why? Because their leader - Yasser Arafat - has siphoned off the money meant for his people. Hamas approaches families offering them food, shelter, clothing, in exchange for their children's education, whom they then teach to hate and kill Jews - and to blow themselves up to achieve it. There is not a single Palestinian school textbook that shows that the State of Israel exists. Until Palestinian children are taught that the State of Israel has a right to exist alongside a Palestinian State, they will grow up indoctrinated with the belief that the aims of the Palestinian people is to wipe Israelis off the face of the earth. Or as Golda Meir (Israel's former Prime Minister) once stated, "Peace will come when the Arabs will love their children more than they hate us." As a Jew, Cramer is clearly upset. Upset with Israel for "losing face" in the eyes of the rest of the world. A petulant child who has lost faith in his own people. He wants Israel to return to its halcyon days when everyone loved the country in 1967. But what Israelis have learned that Cramer hasn't - is that the defense of its people in the midst of a bloody war is far more important than being seen as popular or likeable in the eyes of the rest of the world or a self confessed pro-Israeli Jew who lives safely in the Diaspora. Paul Comstock is editor of CLR. Its website address is http://calitreview.com. |
|
REPORT ON CHRISTIAN AID AND AMNESTY INTERNATION, June, 2004
Posted by NGO Monitor Organization, June 15, 2004. |
|
This is a report on Christian Aid and Amnesty International.
Information on other aid groups can be found on our website:
www.ngo-monitor.org. Or contact distribution@ngo-monitor.org.
Organizational Data * Founded in the 1950s and based in London. Findings * Christian Aid's extensive involvement in anti-Israel propaganda campaigns undermine its claims to be a charitable and humanitarian organization; Examples: Christian Aid's Propaganda Film "Peace Under Siege" * In October 2003, Christian Aid released a fundraising film entitled 'Peace Under Siege' claiming to depict the "roots of Palestinian poverty." In practice, the 20-minute documentary consisted of a vehement and highly inaccurate attack on Israel. Although Christian Aid has undertaken important projects in the West Bank, it is clear from the footage in the film that Christian Aid also, and perhaps primarily, maintains the political objective of delegitimizing the State of Israel. (Christian Aid's Political Campaign Continues: "Peace Under Siege" - NGO Monitor Oct. 2003) "Fact-Finding Missions" * Christian Aid takes British politicians on "fact-finding missions" to the Palestinian territories presenting a one-sided view of the situation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip without any adequate chance for an official Israeli response. The results were highlighted by the virulently anti-Israel comments in the media of MPs Oona King and Jenny Tonge upon their return from a Christian Aid mission. Tonge said of suicide bombers: "If I had to live in that situation - and I say that advisedly - I might just consider becoming one myself." Amoral equivalence between victims and perpetrators * The press release of 30 January stated: "Ten Israelis were killed and more than 50 injured yesterday when a suicide bomber struck close to Ariel Sharon's residence in Jerusalem. Hours before, eight Palestinians were killed during an Israeli incursion into a suburb of Gaza City." While the Israeli civilians were killed in a deliberate act of terrorism, Christian Aid fails to provide any context to the Israeli military operation that led to the deaths of the Palestinians. Similarly, Christian Aid continues to draw an amoral equivalence between Palestinian terrorism and Israel countermeasures, terming them a "constant cycle of violence." Christian Aid's Partner Organizations * Examples of Christian Aid's partner organizations include the Palestinian NGOs LAW, and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights (PCHR) and the East Jerusalem YMCA. LAW and PCHR played prominent roles in the infamous demonization of Israel that took place at Durban in September 2001. In December 2003, the Ford Foundation pledged to immediately halt funding for LAW. In addition, LAW has been under investigation for financial irregularities leading to a freeze in foreign donations after $3.63 million was found to have been misused. According to reports, the EU investigated on suspicions that LAW, amongst others, passed money received from the EU, to terrorist organizations such as Fatah and Hamas. (LAW is listed as a Christian Aid partner organization in a letter to EU foreign ministers) Political Opposition to Israeli policy (Gaza disengagement) * Christian Aid's emphasis on political activity, rather than humanitarian assistance, is also illustrated in its opposition to the Israeli government's policies ("'Disengagement plan' is another blow to Middle East peace"). As previously analyzed by NGO Monitor, a press release of 16 April 2004 expressed opposition to Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's Gaza disengagement initiative, describing US President Bush's endorsement of the plan as "another blow... dealt to the people of the Middle East". (Israel's Disengagement Plan - NGOs Rush to Reject Gaza Withdrawal - NGO Monitor May 2004) Christian Aid campaigns against the Security Fence * In a feature on its website (Why the Israeli 'barrier' is wrong), Christian Aid briefly acknowledged that "It is important to recognize Israel's legitimate fears about terrorism, and its need to take steps to protect its citizens." However, this piece continues "our experience on the ground tells us that the barrier is not the way to achieve security and peace for either people." The security fence is condemned on humanitarian grounds while failing to address the Palestinian terrorism that led to the need for the barrier, which is described as "the latest in a series of policies introduced by the Israeli government since it began its occupation of Palestinian land in 1967," and claiming "these measures have impoverished the Palestinian population". Such demonization of Israel reflects blatant bias that is grossly inconsistent with claims to be a charitable organization. Related Articles: Israel's Disengagement Plan NGOs Rush to Reject Gaza Withdrawal - NGO Monitor May 2004 Christian Aid's Political Campaign Continues: "Peace Under Siege" - NGO Monitor Oct. 2003 Christian Aid's (UK) Principles Compromised by Anti-Israel Ideology - NGO Monitor May 2003 Amnesty International has released its 2004 Annual Report, including a section covering events from January - December 2003 in Israel and the Palestinian territories. As in the past, this report is extremely simplistic, reflecting a strong political and ideological framework which undermines the credibility of this organization's claims to be focused on human rights. The Israeli/Palestinian section is very similar to previous versions, including a heavy emphasis on comparative death counts, and the stark assertion that mostly unarmed Palestinians were "killed by the Israeli army in random and reckless shooting, shelling and bombings or as a result of excessive use of force." Following its standard pattern, Amnesty fails to present the evidence or methodology used in this analysis, or to define "excessive use of force" in the context of defending against mass terrorism. The authors quote the figure of 600 Palestinian dead as a result of the aforementioned, and another 90 as a result of "extrajudicial executions", an emotionally laden phrase that erases the prevention of mass terror attacks through such targeted attacks. While laconically noting that "Others were killed in armed clashes with Israeli soldiers", Amnesty's report fails to address the extent of armed Palestinians and terrorists that were killed. As a result, the responsibility of Palestinian terrorism for the conflict situation is strongly understated and hidden, as is the defensive context to the IDF's activities. Likewise, Amnesty mentions the cases of three members of the International Solidarity Movement killed as a result of IDF activities. The report, however, places the responsibility solely on the IDF while failing to provide any context regarding this blatantly pro-Palestinian extremist organization, whose members engaged in actions which directly or indirectly contributed to their deaths in high-risk combat zones. The report also included a very brief section dealing with Palestinian terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians. While citing the death statistics on both sides (another example of amoral equivalence), no such clear data appears in a section devoted to "Attacks by Israeli settlers on Palestinians in the Occupied Territories", which states, without offering concrete evidence, that "Israeli settlers... repeatedly attacked Palestinians and their property." The report cites two examples - the same number used to illustrate the far higher number of Israelis murdered in Palestinian terror attacks. Thus, the basis for Amnesty's emphasis and details in the coverage and condemnation of Israeli defensive actions, in comparison to the coverage of the impact of Palestinian terror, appears to be entirely political and ideological. Furthermore, on the topic of "Destruction of Palestinian property", Amnesty states that incidents of destruction were carried out by the Israeli military as "a form of collective punishment... in the wake of attacks carried out by Palestinian groups." Despite examples of incidents occurring in the midst of operations against Palestinian terrorists and smuggling tunnels, the report fails to consider the wider context of Israeli activities to defend civilians against the terrorist campaign. Similarly, Amnesty repeats the unsupported claim that restrictions on the movement of Palestinians, including the construction of Israel's security barrier, are the primary reason for the increase in poverty and unemployment in the territories. The report fails to address widespread Palestinian corruption, or the link between these restrictions and the need to prevent terrorism. The claim that "Closures and restrictions on movement were routinely increased in reprisal for attacks by Palestinian armed groups" fails to note the clear evidence that the Israeli security policy has saved many lives. In summary, Amnesty's 2004 Annual Report presents a very distorted
image of Israel's army as a vengeful entity, failing to recognize the
context behind anti-terror activities designed to prevent the
deliberate targeting of Israeli civilians by Palestinian terrorists.
Unintentional civilian deaths as a result of IDF operations are
treated in the same manner as the Palestinian terror attacks
responsible for the deliberate and brutal murder of Israelis, thus
repeated the all too common amoral equivalence between victim and
perpetrator. Once again, Amnesty's report dealing with this region is
more of a political and ideological document, which is couched in the
rhetoric of human rights and international law, but without the
substance.
The NGO Monitor organization (www.ngo-monitor.org) promotes
critical debate and accountability of human rights NGOs in the Arab
Israeli Conflict.
The Monitor is produced by The Jerusalem Center for Public
Affairs/Institute of Contemporary Affairs founded jointly with the
Wechsler Family Foundation.
|
|
ISRAELI GOVERNMENT, KOSHER ONLY ON THE OUTSIDE
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, June 14, 2004. |
|
The Israeli Supreme Court today, in contradiction to thousands of years of Jewish tradition, and Israeli Law, overturned the 1956 Law of Authority, which granted city governments special authority to enact regulations banning the sale of pork products within their municipality. Many cities in Israel have such a ban, and at issue was a petition to the court, to remove the banning power from municipalities. The nine-judge panel voted unanimously to allow the sale of pork and instructed municipalities to enact new regulations conforming to guidelines set down by the court. The guidelines include, taking the character of individual neighborhoods into account when enacting restrictions on sales of non-kosher meat. The guidelines allow pork to be sold in neighborhoods where the overwhelming majority of the population wants to buy pork, or are indifferent to its sale, i.e. where there are few religious or traditional Jews. In mixed neighborhoods, the city will be allowed to decide for itself. "The Supreme Court has driven a nail into the coffin of Jewish identity in the State of Israel," Haredi (ultra-orthodox) opposition Shas Party leader Eli Yishai said in reaction to the court's decision. United Torah Judaism MK Rabbi Meir Porush also Haredi and in the opposition, decried the Supreme Court’s decision. Porush questioned the motives of the justices, who give the appearance of working to destroy the Jewish character of the nation, he stated. But from the National Religious Party (a more modern orthodox party in the government), MK Shaul Yahalom said the decision was "reasonable," given the "well-known views of the judges." He said his party would have preferred to ban the sale of pork entirely. He also welcomed the decision of the judges not to cancel the jurisdiction of cities to implement local ordinances. In contrast, Shinui Party leader and Justice Minister Yosef Lapid said the decision is "good news," he said Shinui is not "pro-pork" but wants citizens to have the freedom to buy "what they want, wherever they want." Throughout Jewish history, Kashrut observance, i.e. Jewish dietary laws (as seen in Leviticus ch. 11 and elsewhere), has been a hallmark of Jewish life. Historically, if you asked most non-Jews about Jews and Judaism, the things they would know most about were the Sabbath, Passover and Matzot (those funny dry crackers), Yom Kippur - the Day of Atonement, and that Jews keep kosher, they don't eat pork. After their conquest and occupation of Judea, the Syrian Greek Hellenists (c. 168 BCE) attempted to "break" the Jews. They set up an idol and began offering pigs to their pagan deity, in the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. When they began to spread their heresy among the Jews, they started in a small town called Modiin. They set up an alter in the town square and instigated some weak Jew to offer a pig up as a sacrifice in plain public view. Public acceptance was meant to imply that the Jews were repudiating the Torah and their covenant with the G-D of their fathers. But in a clear example of the "Law of Unintended Consequences," it sparked a national revolt instead, when a priest by the name of Matityahu took a sword, stabbed the turncoat Jew and Syrian Greek officials, and declared, "Whoever is zealous for the Torah and is steadfast in the Covenant, let him follow me." The revolt spread, and ultimately was successful, leading to a liberation of the Judean homeland from occupation. The Jews cleaned-up the Holy Temple in Jerusalem and re-lit the menorah. The oil burned miraculously eight days (the Hanukah story), and Hanukah is celebrated till this day, throughout the Jewish world, as a holiday celebrating the liberation of the Jews and Judaism from pagan culture. Why is the pig so detested in Jewish tradition? If you look closely at chapter 11 of Leviticus, in the Torah, dealing with dietary laws, you'll find the defining characteristics of kosher land animals - mammals - they must "chew their cud" and they must have "split hoofs". Several animals are given as examples that chew their cud but don't have split hoofs. The pig is given as the example of that which has spit hoofs, but does not chew its cud. The Torah clearly says just following the pig example, "Don't eat their meat..." and in temple times "don't touch their carcasses..." because you will become ritually impure (and unable to attend services at the Holy Temple in Jerusalem). So, it's very clear that Jewish law forbids eating pig... The pig has even entered the popular culture of Jews as the symbol of hypocrisy. Because, it looks kosher on the outside - you can see it has split hoofs - yet it is "Treif" i.e. not kosher on the inside, because it doesn't chew its cud. In Yiddish (one of the thirty-some Judeo-vernacular languages that Jews created in their 1,900-year-exile from their homeland), a "Chazzer Fissel" or pig's foot was what one called a hypocrite. And so, the most beautiful thing just happened, the G-D of Israel made His manifest Will clear for all to see. Usually one fumbles around, good intensions, good behaviors, but you're never really sure if you're doing the right thing. Then once in a while, comes a blessed moment, G-D's message is as clear as day. This court decision comes at a time when the Israeli government is attempting to carry out an ethnic cleansing campaign against part of its own Jewish population. Ariel Sharon, current prime minister and the "father of the settlement movement," who for years encouraged Jews to "take to the hilltops" and set up "outposts," has agreed in the Roadmap to "painful concessions," which includes dismantling those very same outposts. Those so-called outposts are actually new neighborhoods - only extensions of existing towns - within the legal boundaries of the town limits. And now, with his "Gaza Disengagement Plan," Sharon is determined to evacuate, expel, ethnically cleanse, Jews from their legally lived in homes, from their legally lived in towns, from historically Jewish Gaza, a part of the biblically promised "Land of Israel". Sharon looked kosher all these years to many on the right in Israel; retired general and war hero, supporter of settlement activity, tough on terror, his opposition to Oslo. Yet, in the end, he's willing to give away a part of the Land of Israel, without any quid-pro-quo from the "Palestinians". He's willing to allow Gaza to become a Terror State launching pad to wipe out the rest of Israel (the security fences won't stop Hamas missiles). And he's going far further than any Left-wing politician who supported Oslo. "Chazzer Fissel" indeed... The man who so epitomized security concerns, is now in negotiations with the Labor Party, to bring them into the government. Those are the same people who brought the tragedy of the Oslo Agreement - about a thousand Israelis killed in the last three years of warfare alone - to the Jewish State. Sitting with Sharon's Likud Party, in the Israeli coalition government is the Shinui Party, a party ostensibly middle-class and secular, who wrap themselves in the flag of Israeli democracy. But, of course, that didn't stop them from running the most overtly racist campaign in Israel's political history, against the Haredim, i.e. ultra-orthodox Jews, during the last elections. They even called them "parasites," something worthy of the Nazis, and something that should not be tolerated in a Jewish State. With Sharon's recent firing of the two National Union ministers over the disengagement plan, and the National Religious Party also on the verge of leaving the coalition, Sharon's men have been scrounging around for additional coalition partners, to join the now minority government. Teetering on the verge of collapse, Sharon's government has even contemplated reaching out to the ultra-orthodox parties. But the Shinui Party, according to MK Yigal Yasinov, would never sit with Haredim in the coalition, not today and not ever. Asked if he didn't feel his position was racist, Yasinov claimed that Haredim "just worry about money for Yeshivot [rabbinical seminaries] and their institutions, and are involved in graft and illegal activities," therefore his position was justified, he said. In fact, it's Shinui's partner in the coalition, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon who for over a year has been implicated in a bribery scandal along with his son. More "Chazzer Fissel"... I just want to mention in passing, that the National Union Party - supposedly "ultra-nationalist" - waited until Sharon fired it's two ministers from the government, rather than resign over the disengagement plan earlier. To their credit NRP leaders, former minister Effie Eitam and deputy minister Rabbi Yitzhak Levi resigned their positions in the coalition when it became clear that Sharon was no longer the "patron of the settlements," but their intended destroyer. But, the National Religious Party still hangs on, and the leader of the party's left-wing, Minister Zevulun Orlev, wants to continue being part of the government. He was just appointed by Sharon, to the Security-Political Cabinet, replacing Eitam. Then there is Moshe Feiglin and his Manhigut Yehudit (Jewish Leadership) faction within Sharon's ruling Likud Party itself. He has been encouraging the national-religious public to join Likud and "take over" from within, "Trojan Horse" style. Although they only make up 5-10% of Likud members - by his own admittance on a radio interview recently - they have been successful till now, of exerting disproportionate power within the Likud. Feiglin didn't create the "disengagement plan crisis" in Likud - that fell into his lap - but it gave him and Manhigut a platform to flex its muscles in the ensuing referendum, in which they "defeated" the Sharon forces. But, bottom line, Sharon is still carrying through with his ethnic cleansing plan, and all the Likud ministers voted for it in the cabinet. How long will the Feiglinites attempt to kosher the Likud? Interestingly, the Supreme Court's "pig decision" came in response to a three-year-old suit filed by Likud MK Marina Solodkin (originally part of the Russian-immigrant Yisrael B'Aliyah Party before they merged with Likud), challenging the laws against public sale of pork. It wasn't someone from the ultra-secularist Shinui Party, or the secular Labor Party, or the ultra-leftist Yahad Party, but from within the Likud itself. In many ways, this is a sort of replay of the 1986 "Pork Bill" scandal within the leading "ultra-nationalist" party of the time, Tehiya - a mixed party of religious and secular elements - when retired general and ultra-nationalist - but avowedly secular - Raphael Eitan voted with the sponsors of the bill to allow the raising of pigs in Israel (for medical purposes, so they said). That led to his eventual withdrawal from Tehiya, and the transformation of his Tzomet Movement into an ultra-nationalist and anti-religious party. Tehiya itself later fell apart, but Tzomet was elected to the 1992 Knesset on an ultra-nationalist and anti-peace process platform. Yet, it was Tzomet's Gonen Segev and Alex Goldfarb who abandoned the party platform and joined Rabin and Labor in 1995. Segev, "sold his seat" for a Volvo - the car perk for government ministers - a seat in the cabinet, and was the 61st vote that allowed Rabin to pass the Oslo II Agreement in the Knesset. Today Segev is on trial for trying to import 30,00 Ecstasy tablets into Israel. Why do I remind you of all this? Because, I believe Manhigut Yehudit will hit a glass ceiling. Likud is a secular, centrist party on the Israeli political landscape, not the pro-settler, religiously oriented one Feiglin wants to turn it into. Already there have been many criticisms of Feiglin and the Manhigut faction from within the Likud, calling it an "alien implant". The mostly secular members and politicos in Likud will do all they can to block Feiglin and Manhigut from rising to power within the party. There have already been attempts to kick him out. We already see the lack of adherence to "Jewish values" and the lack of faith toward the Land of Israel on the part of many "old-time Likud" members. If the Feiglinites get too close to a take-over, and they can't be stopped, then I think the "Likudniks," i.e. the secularists and moderates, will bolt the party to join some other grouping. There are already rumors that Sharon has been negotiating with Labor's Shimon Peres to form a Centrist "National Unity" party, out of Labor and Likud elements. If that happened, then Feiglin and Manhigut would be left holding a whittled down settler party called "Likud". That's not much of a change on the political landscape. That's why I say; the Israeli government is kosher only on the outside... P.S. With everything I've said, I don't want my words misconstrued to imply that I'm against the State of Israel. Jewish political independence in the Land of Israel, i.e. the State of Israel, is an important mitzvah from the Torah. In fact, all of Judaism presumes that Jews live in their own homeland as an independent polity. But, governments, administrations, and their policies come and go. The State of Israel is Holy. It is supposed to be used to further the cause of G-D in this world. But, those in power can misuse its institutions, and this must be stopped. Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko |
|
A ONE TERM PRESIDENT
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 14, 2004. |
|
President George W. Bush, like his father, George Herbert Walker Bush who, during his Presidency cursed the Jewish nation and thus sentenced himself to became a one term President. I've heard many pro-Israel Jews claim that this President Bush is "one of the best friends Israel has". I agree, he smiles pleasantly when he delivers his orders for Israel to dismantle and follow his Road Map to perdition. Somewhere near the start of this George Bush presidency, I saw similar traits as his father exhibited and I forecast then that he would likely be a one term President. Recent polls indicate that Bush ranges between neck-and-neck with John Kerry while other polls show him several points behind. I do not look forward to a Kerry presidency and I had hoped that the younger Bush would continue on - insofar as he pledges to fight Global Terrorism. Regrettably, Bush fell back into the old mode of his father by attempting to appease Saudi Arabia and the other Arab Muslim oil nations by initiating the dismemberment of the Jewish State of Israel. But, Bush introduced his Road Map in his June 2002 speech - which was dangerously revised by the Arabist U.S. State Department, together with the anti-Israel U.N., the anti-Semitic European Union and Russia (whose history is red with Jewish pogroms). Since the Quartet re-invented the Road Map, with no object from Bush, the pressure from the White House and the State Department has increased exponentially. The need for a political win in the Middle East to offset the losses in Iraq become more important than preserving the Jewish State of Israel. The weak leadership in Israel started to bend and finally broke under the unending threats from the Bush Administration to re-partition the tiny Jewish State of Israel on its way to extinction. The pro-Arab U.S. State Department has been working toward this goal ever since the Land of Israel was partitioned by the U.N. in 1947 (against the strenuous objections by the State Department). The day Israel falls (G-d forbid), be assured that champagne will literally flow down the halls of the State Department. Bush, following his father's lead in practice, allowed State to unleash its anti-Israel dogs to attack the Jewish State with every tool and propaganda mechanism in its large inventory. Washington has long known that neither Israel nor the U.S. could pacify the Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorists or the supporting Arab Muslim nations. If they did not really know before 9/11, followed by the American and allies attack against the Taliban in Afghanistan and then in Iraq against the monster, Saddam Hussein - they must certain know it now. There is no pacification of Islamist/Jihadists - no matter what you offer them by way of appeasement, including the deaths and wounding of Americans fighting to save them from tyranny and even the sacrifice of Israel. America learned that the 56+ years the Muslim terrorists have been fighting Israel was not just a single aberration of Islam's hostility to Jews. Now they've learned that also includes the Christian West. They experience it daily in Iraq as Muslims from all over the Arab world came through Syria to join Iraqis in killing American soldiers - daily. They are also killing, bombing, ambushing the civilian construction workers who are trying to restore electricity, water, security and other civil services to the Iraqi people. The headlines today (June 14th) read: "In Race to Give Power to Iraqis, Electricity Lags: U.S. Falls Short of Goal for Reviving Output." This outrageous story appears the same day 13 civilian construction workers (including one American, one Brit, 2 French) were car-bombed to death. (1) This was the day after 13 Iraqis, including 4 Iraqi police officers were blown up in separate car bombs in Bagdad. American good-will attempts to appease them through winning their hearts and minds by providing these services simply do not work to prevent their Muslim Terror attacks against "The Great Satan" (their name for America). Now the Bush Administration is desperately trying to find a way out and, like his father, is perfectly willing to offer up Israel as a sacrifice. The Muslims call Israel "The Little Satan." Knowing all this about Arabs, Muslims, radical Muslims, Islamists, Jihadists - Bush has turned on Israel as his own political solution - using force against her weak leadership to create a false win of the Bush Plan to democratize the Middle East. So, he took the only democracy and advanced civilization in the Middle East - the only country in world who votes with America consistently in the U.N. and begins to force her dissolution. He was determined to create what he knows will inevitably be an International Terror State for the Arab Muslim Palestinians which would show the hostile Arab nations that he was their friend and collaborator. He was going to not only shrink Israel beyond her present vulnerable, minuscule size but, would insure that the only productive people in the Middle East (the Jews) were forced from their ancient homeland. Thus began a landslide of threats to the weak government of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon. The threats were credible since Israel relies upon her "friend and ally" for spare parts, trade and hopefully a vote against the corrupt United Nations as a voice of reason against the always hostile Europeans so closely allied with the oil-bearing Arab/Muslim nations. With all that in mind, I repeat the oft-stated injunction of HaShem (G-d): "I will Bless those who bless you; and Curse those who curse you." The Bush Dynasty has cursed the Jewish nation and allied themselves with Israel's most dedicated Arab and Muslim enemies. I ignore the self-serving gestures, smiles and nice speeches used for political cover to persuade his Christian Right Coalition and Jews that Bush is a friend of the Jewish people and nation. It's not what they say (or how nicely they say it) but, it's what they do! I do recall the reported phone conversation between the elder Bush and King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia wherein Bush assured the Saudi King, "...not to worry. My son will take care of you." And so he has.) Presently, Bush and Sharon are ethnically cleansing the land that G-d promised to the Jewish people. May they and theirs be cursed to wander homeless as they have cursed the Jews. Let no man raise their hand against these consummately dangerous people, for they are 'tamei' (unclean). We do not know how they and the nations who are gathering against Israel (as predicted) will be punished. They are now in before the Universal Court and will be judged. I only regret that the punishment must be shared by good people who stand near them. We read now in the Torah about the traitor, Korach, who challenged Moses and G-d, Himself in the desert - only to have the earth open its mouth and swallow Korach and all who stood near him. A Universal ruling is long over-due for the nations and the peoples who have cursed the Jews and the Jewish nation. At the end of 'Shacharit' (Jewish morning prayers) there is a closing line of thought: "Do not fear the sudden terror, nor the destruction of the wicked. Contrive a scheme but, it will be foiled. Conspire a plot but it will not materialize, for G-d is with us." In righteous anger, I have often reminded HaShem of the nations and the leaders who have savaged the Jewish people and His Promise of just retribution. I've spoken to Him about the capitols of Germany, France, Iran, Egypt, Libya, Iraq.... I've spoken to Him about the Kings, Prime Ministers, Dictators and Presidents - ALL of whom deserve to be eliminated in a plague or, at least, to suffer great pain on this earth. I even included the non-Jewish Jews who are betraying the Jewish people. Perhaps G-d is listening and will keep His Promise of cursing all those who curse His anointed people. ### 1. "In Race to Give Power to Iraqis, Electricity Lags: U.S. Falls Short of Goal for Reviving Output" by James Glanz, New York Times, June 14, 2004 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). |
|
P.A. ARABS, UNHAPPY WITH APARTMENT SIZE, FIRE AT BUILDERS
Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, June 14, 2004. |
|
This was a news item in today's Arutz-7.
Terrorists in the Palestinian Authority-controlled town of Jenin, in northern Shomron (Samaria), opened fire at and inside the local United Nations office, in protest of the small size of the apartments being built for them. The UN Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA) is in the process of building the new houses to replace the slums damaged during the IDF's anti-terror Operation Defensive Shield in 2002. The operation is being funded by a $27 million contribution from the Persian Gulf Emirates, Although the houses are much fancier and sturdier than the old houses, they are 15% smaller, in order to make room for wider streets. At least nine new streets, each about seven meters wide, have replaced the narrow alleyways of the camp. Much of the original damage to homes in the Jenin slums was caused by IDF tanks forced to squeeze through small alleyways, and by booby-trap bombs planted by terrorists. UNRWA's spokesman in Judea and Samaria said that five Arab gunmen approached UNWRA offices and fired at the building last week before entering the offices and firing shots into the rooms. This was the third such attack on UN offices and crew in Jenin camp in the past half year. Complaints dealt not only with the size of the housing, but also with the slow speed and accusations that senior Palestinian Authority officials had stolen some of the financial donations to the camp. One of the gunmen complained that the 180-square-meter (1,900 square feet) apartment he had been given - much larger than the typical Israeli apartment - was too small for his wife and him. "When we have children, this apartment will be too small," he reportedly told the UN staff. The UNRWA clerks, contractors and planners have halted all construction until their security can be guaranteed. NOTE: I live in a 73 metre apartment [mbm] Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@computer.org |
|
TAKING STOCK IN STOCKHOLM
Posted by Barry Rubin, June 14, 2004. |
|
Stockholm, Sweden: There are few better places to contemplate current European antagonism toward Israel than in Sweden. Let's start with a brief recital of factors shaping Swedish attitudes: --On one hand is an explicit double standard. Israel is expected to act better than the Palestinians or Arabs, an attitude benefiting the latter groups but rooted in an implicit racism toward them. --On the other hand, Israel's enemies are romanticized as revolutionaries, creating a second double standard in which their deeds are justified as being in the service of a higher cause. --Enjoying high living standards and believing themselves to be highly humanitarian people, Swedes salve their consciences by expressing sympathy for a distant underdog even as it mistreats Third World immigrants at home. --After many centuries of peace, Swedish political culture assumes there can only be a conflict if both sides provoke one. In this sense, Israel is equally at fault. But being stronger it is held to be the main guilty party. --Swedish anti-Americanism means Israel's being a U.S. ally counts strongly against it. --With Sweden perennially dominated by the Social Democratic party, hegemonic leftism creates sympathy for the side considered radical and rebels. --The intellectual, cultural, media-dominating class (as elsewhere) is especially predisposed to the above characteristics. Thus, anti-Israel factors are highest in the sector shaping the rest of society's views.. --About five percent of the population are Muslim immigrants. This new sector's direct influence, alongside Swedish attempts to appease or sympathize with them, furthers anti-Israel sentiments. There are just two points, which should not be underestimated, that counter these diverse factors. First, a feeling of guilt toward the Jewish people. Sweden was neutral during World War Two, protecting itself from invasion by selling Nazi Germany the iron ore it needed for weapons. While Sweden shielded its own small Jewish population, it turned over some Jewish refugees to the Third Reich. Swedes, like other Europeans, insist their attitude toward Israel is not antisemitic. This may be true if one only means direct, conscious hatred of Jews. But antisemitism is central in terms of misunderstanding Jews in a way that makes them easily demonized as inscrutable people whose fears and motives are incomprehensible. Thus, the most extraordinary things may be said and believed about them. Again, though, Sweden understands it is possible to go too far and that is a restraining factor. It is careful to say that Israel has the right to exist and defend itself. The second factor is a collection of countervailing influences. Sweden remembers past sympathy with an Israel seen as socialist and as a fellow small country. There is some awareness that its enemies are reactionary, authoritarian, and use terrorism. Non-leftist forces like Christian Democrats and Liberals are also less hostile. Even the current government has become somewhat milder in its antagonism, partly due to the new foreign minister Laila Freivalds who just visited Israel, where she nonetheless claimed that Israel's response to terrorism violated international law. At home, she may have expressed herself more bluntly. During a recent high school lecture, a Muslim immigrant student asked Freivalds whether Israel treated the Palestinians as Nazis did the Jews. At best, Freivalds equivocated; at worst, a Jewish student in the audience claims her reply and remarks made to him afterward made it clear her answer was "yes." The foreign minister denies his account. How she obtained her job is both ironic and revealing. Freivalds' predecessor, Anna Lind, was a 1960s'-style leftist who, for example, blasted the United States for daring to suggest that Yasir Arafat might be a terrorist. Lind was murdered last September by a Muslim immigrant bitter about his family's mistreatment in Sweden. While Sweden was at one time generous in admitting refugees and still gives them large welfare payments, it also keeps them at arms' length. Immigrants are not readily admitted into Swedish society, suffer numerous indignities, and have trouble finding jobs. Anger is building and while the small proportions of Muslims will shield Sweden from the troubles facing France, Islamist sentiments and even terrorist cells are becoming evident. Also troubling is the extent to which Sweden is ready to compromise its high-minded principles for the sake of siding against Israel. This includes suppression of an official report concluding aid should stop to the Palestinian movement because it was misusing the funds. The situation is also worsening for the small Jewish community, supposedly under the government's vigorous protection. One young man has been assaulted four times by Muslim immigrants who saw his Star of David necklace. When my colleague remarked to a Jewish student about hers, she quickly hid it under her collar. This is where Sweden's policy and media reporting is leading on Middle East issues: distortions of reality, breaking democratic principles, and siding with extremist, anti-democratic forces. Knowing this to be true gives rise to a small voice of conscience which may be the only hope for changing the situation. Professor Barry Rubin is Director of The Global Research in International Affairs Center (GLORIA) and Editor of Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA). |
|
ARAB STRUGGLE TO DOMINATE; JEWS DON'T FIGHT BACK
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 14, 2004. |
|
Jews no longer can afford to acquire property in Jerusalem unaided. Ultra-Orthodox Jerusalemites who marry and set up new households would prefer to remain. Instead must settle outside. Secular Israelis are streaming out of the city, tilting it towards an Arab majority. How can the Arabs afford to stay? They build illegally, unhindered by the authorities. The Arabs evade license fees (and probably taxes) and cut corners (and may usurp other people's land). (They also get outside subsidy for the purpose of getting them a majority with which to take over.) Why does the government, whether dominated by Labor or Likud, condone the Arab illegality? The ultra-Orthodox suspect that the government won't build public housing for Jews, because they don't want the ultra-Orthodox to get it. They would rather let the Arabs take over Jerusalem, (MEPF, 6/7 from Miriam Gardner of American Yated Neeman, 6/3) which would mean severing it from Israel. To these secularists, Jerusalem means little. Labor has offered to give away parts of Jerusalem, as if only their views count. This selfish thinking overlooks the impetus that an Arab acquisition of Jerusalem would give to jihad to kill them! As Israel shrinks, so do its defenses. There may be other factors. Law enforcement against the Arabs, in these cowardly societies called democracies, is not politically correct. The Left, the outside media, democracies, and purportedly humanitarian organizations would protest. Ironically, illegal Arab building violates building codes meant to protect the inhabitants from dangerous conditions. I would let Israel's vicious critics, but uphold the law or make a new one barring Arabs. ARAB DEFENDANT'S CLAIMS In order not to be deported, an Arab in Dallas denied being a fundraiser for the Holy Land Foundation, which was declared a terrorist organization. He claimed to be a mere technician, unaware of those larger issues. He still made that claim after the prosecution presented checks made out to him and his name on fundraising literature. His lawyer said that any low-level functionary would do the same. He is just picked on for being an Arab and a Muslim (MEPF 5/23 from Miriam Gardner of American Yated Neeman, 5/21). Every Arab terrorist claims he is being picked on for being an Arab, as if no Arabs commit terrorism, but the evidence is against the accused. Sometimes the evidence that the government can present without jeopardizing other cases is insufficient to convict, but rarely are they found innocent. Discrimination against them is minimal. Claiming it is like liberal and black claims when of non-existent discrimination, made to cow opposition. The immediate cry of discrimination against Arabs, without any evidence offered to sustain it, not only is demagoguery, but is a terrorist tactic. We should disregard such claims and examine the facts of the case. Low-level functionaries and technicians are not named on fundraising literature. Names that draw donations are mentioned. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS COME UNDER....MI-6 SURVEILLANCE
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 14, 2004. |
|
PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING REPORT SLOWLY & CAREFULLY. NOTE BRITAIN'S MI-6 (MILITARY INTELLIGENCE - 6) INVOLVED IN SURVEILLANCE OF ISRAELI SETTLEMENTS & EARLIER INVOLVEMENT IN PROVOKING THE FIRST ARAB MUSLIM 'INTIFADA' (ARAB RIOTS) IN DEC. 1987. THERE ARE MANY NATIONS & FOREIGN INTERESTS CONSPIRING AGAINST ISRAEL - INCLUDING HER OWN GOVERNMENT WORKING IN TANDEM WITH OUR "BEST" FRIENDS! This is a DEBKAfile Special Report. DEBKAfile - "We start where the media stop" at http://www.debka.com/article_print.php?aid=862 June 13, 2004, The Israeli government is getting ready to offer down payments to voluntary evacuees from 21 Gaza settlements and four West Bank locations that Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon plans to remove by the end of 2005. This move is designed to stimulate departures and jump the gun on two major delaying factors: the cabinet only approved the Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement outline; voting on settlement removals is not due until March 2005 and then it will be piecemeal. Secondly, compensation to departing settlers entails long and tiresome legislation, whereas down payments do not. Broad hints that the first comers will get the best deal have been thrown out already. The bargaining is clearly about to begin. A second Middle East party has also hit on the notion of financially rewarding people willing to change address. DEBKAfile's Palestinian and Jordanian sources reveal that Jordan's King Abdullah is offering non-returnable "mortgages" - cash on the nail - to high Palestinian officials willing to purchase and move to luxury villas in Amman. The king is hoping to shut the West Bank door to the Egyptians, whose arrival is described as imminent under a putative proposal agreed by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Sharon and British prime minister Tony Blair (about which more later). The Amman villas come with a proviso: purchasers must list their new addresses on their calling cards. Their dual residency is intended to provide Jordan with a foothold at Palestinian Authority headquarters in Ramallah and represent the king's interests on the West Bank. According to our sources, several Palestinians have taken Abdullah up on his offer; two are prominent: Yasser Abd Rabo, Palestinian co-signatory of the Geneva Accords and Jibril Rajoub, Yasser Arafat's own national security adviser, evoking a nasty letter from Arafat to the palace in Amman announcing that he would not stand for Jordanian officers and agents running around Palestinian territory. The West Bank is not the Gaza Strip! He declared. Both are anxious to stall momentum on the Mubarak-Blair-Sharon project, on which White House national security adviser Condoleezza Rice has been briefed, for Egypt to send 150 instructors to Jericho to set up a new training academy for intelligence and special operations officers. These instructors are to double as the nucleus of the projected Egyptian military intelligence presence which will work in harness with British Secret Service MI-6 agents to supervise the reorganization (called "reforms" in the Middle East road map) and operation of Palestinian security and intelligence bodies. Abdullah and Arafat share in interest in sabotaging this Jericho project, but are too far apart on everything else to collaborate. The prime minister's office in Jerusalem has not shared the ins and outs of this proposal with outsiders including cabinet ministers. In important respects it is an offshoot of President George W. Bush's limited gains from the Europeans and the United Nations on Iraq; jocular encounters and amiable speeches have so far yielded no offers of troops or authority to fly NATO or UN flags over the US-led multinational force. Even the president's resuscitation of the virtually moribund Middle East Quartet elicited a tepid response. Britain, which already has troops in Iraq, was the only European power prepared to jump back into the Palestinian-Israel conflict, in its own inimitable fashion and for its own reasons. Tony Blair believes fervently that restoring Britain to Arab favors as a lead player in the Middle East is the key to Britain's revival as a political and economic power. However, he suffers from five handicaps: 1. Gone are the glory days of formidable British fighting strength. 2. Investment capital is in short supply. 3. The British public has no taste for foreign adventure. Blair's military involvement in Iraq is unpopular and eroding his own and his Labor party's electoral standing. Labor came third and last in local council elections last week, trailing the opposition Conservatives and Lib Dems. 4. Behind the grandiloquent rhetoric lauding the close US-UK pact, Washington is clearly delimiting British expansionist aspirations - especially in Iraq. British military presence and influence are carefully winnowed down to a narrow - albeit strategically important - strip of the south between the Iraqi-Iranian border cities of Basra and al Amara, outside the southern oil fields and with scarcely a toehold in most other cities including Baghdad. 5. Parts of the Blair government cling fondly to Britain's former pretensions as the great friend of the Muslim Arab world, forgetting they were unceremoniously pushed out of the Middle East half a century ago and not always remembered with affection. 6. MI-6, the operational arm of British expansion, historically opted for the Middle East camp opposed to Israel and cultivated a special relationship with Yasser Arafat going back decades. Strictly speaking, Egyptian intelligence invented the Palestinian national leader and used his services between the 1960s and well into the 1990s. Even today, the Egyptian official assigned to keeping tabs on him is intelligence minister General Omar Suleiman. It is less well known that during those decades, British intelligence ran a covert operation to build him up as a world figure. London saw in him a vehicle for planting British influence deep inside the Arab-Muslim orbit (which is why he was never received in Islamic revolutionary Tehran) and an instrument for keeping Israeli intelligence in check and limiting its influence in Washington. These ties were somewhat loosened after the 1993 Oslo peace accord, when he relocated from Tunis to Gaza and Ramallah. But they were never abandoned. The British have performed two key services for the Palestinian cause: A. They sponsored the concept of Palestinian statehood as a means of reducing the Jewish state to what London considered its natural dimensions, sitting behind Arafat's shoulder and lobbying the international case for a Palestinian state year after year until it was taken up by President Bush. Few Israelis are aware of the pivotal role parts of MI-6 through the British Foreign Office played over the years in developing and shaping Palestinian diplomatic and PR strategy, helping to make the Palestinian cause far more resonant internationally than the Israeli case - even when Arafat openly espoused and practiced terrorism. B. They instigated the first Palestinian uprising against Israel in 1987; it was not provoked by Arafat then still in Tunis or even the PLO leadership, but MI-6 agents operating in the Rafah refugee camp of the southern Gaza Strip. The trigger was a road accident in which an Israeli army truck ran over a group of Palestinian children. The local protest raised spread quickly and was presented opportunistically to the media as a "popular uprising." Again in 2004, British "activists" are working hard to win Arab "hearts and minds." Now "volunteers" are sent over to shield Rafah residents against Israeli military operations and support Palestinian protests against Israel's anti-terror barrier. But, despite these five obstacles, Blair's chances of making progress towards his goal are a lot better now than they were in 1987. For one thing, President Bush owes him a big favor for standing alongside the United States in Iraq. MI-6 agents may therefore swarm over the West Bank under fairly lax control from Washington. For another, the British path is paradoxically eased by the Israeli prime minister's office's spin campaign around Sharon's disengagement plan and the Israeli media's readiness to buy uncorroborated reports presenting Egypt and European governments as eager to accept a role in the plan's execution and lavishly fund its costs. The UK is thus granted an opportunity to depict its agents' presence in the West Bank as laying the groundwork for the Egyptian military and intelligence personnel supposedly coming to supervise the reorganization and operation of "reformed" Palestinian security bodies. This is far from the truth. Egypt has not yet decided finally to get involved in Sharon's disengagement scheme. The coordination between London and Cairo is flimsy at best, resting only on the initiative of Muhammed Rashid, a private Palestinian Kurdish individual, who commutes regularly between the two capitals, the while pushing hard for his London-based business partner, former Gaza strongman Muhammed Dahlan, to make a comeback. Furthermore, Arafat's promises to streamline his security apparatus are trumpeted far and wide without awkward questions on implementation. Last Thursday, June 10, Israelis were afforded a rare glimpse in the sky of Venus passing the sun; on the ground, they saw the MI-6 in action. Israeli radio announced dryly that a group of British intelligence officers had visited Jenin and carried out surveillance of Israeli settlements. No one asked whether the group was on a cowboy spying mission or had received authorization. And if authorized, by whom? The Israeli government is after all the competent security jurisdiction in the territory. That was not the end of the matter. DEBKAfile's Washington sources report that shortly after the incident was discovered, the British premier handed the US president at the Georgia G-8 summit a secret intelligence report that was a clear signpost to where the Blair government is heading. The report claims the Palestinians have made a good start on cracking down on terrorists - except that they are severely hindered by - the IDF. Israel's Shin Beit and its troops - and their unremitting efforts day and night, year after year, to keep Palestinian suicidal terrorists at bay - rate no mention in the MI-6 report except as an obstacle to Palestinian good intentions. The London report, our sources learn, was handed to other leaders attending the summit. A copy was even addressed to Ariel Sharon and another to Yasser Arafat. This development raises some interesting questions about the game developing around the Israeli prime minister's disengagement plan - to be the subject of the second part of this DEBKAfile Special Report. 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). |
|
THEORY & REALITY: TESTED IN YESHA
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 14, 2004. |
|
By gesture and by glare, the Arabs express their opinion that Jews don't belong in Kalandia. These same Arabs roam freely in Israeli malls or Jewish Yesha towns such as Maale Adumim. A resident of a Jewish town tried to shoo away Arab children (who had no reason for being in it), but found them unafraid. They know that if touched by one Jew, another would report it. Having raised their own children to be tolerant and humane, they assume that Arab children are similar. Actually, Arabs are raised to hate Jews as sub-human and to kill them. Terrorists use children for suicide bombing. Older Arab children or Arab workers might kidnap Jewish children playing in the streets. It would be prudent to prevent this result of the Arabs' collective war mentality. The Jews of ostentatious humane impulses think that evil is an individual matter rather than the predominant ideology in Arab society. These seemingly decent Jews are obsessed with appearing to critics as decent. These critics have mercenary motives or an evil ideology. They deem the Jews irredeemably bad, and simultaneously are indulgent about the demonstrably bad Arabs. Some would sacrifice Israel for the sake of arms sales and appeasing the Arabs over their use of the arms. Does bending over backward to appear decent impress Israel's critics? No. The criticism remains unfriendly, unfair, and unceasing. Credit for the self-sacrificing appearance of decency is infrequent, fickle, and false. Experience would disabuse emotionally normal people of this craving for gentile approval. Unfortunately, those Jews are "other-directed." Is bending-over backwards decent? Ironically, no! It is not ethical to risk lives merely for approval from people whose own views are not ethical. Nor is it ethical to soften one's blows against the evil Arabs. Evil is not something to compromise with. Unless fully uprooted, it grows back like the mold in my bathroom tile grouting, and is more noxious. Back in Kalandia, a terrorist was caught trying to get through the checkpoint. Later, Arabs started a riot nearby, disrupting work at the Atarot airstrip. Israeli soldiers fired a warning shot. This shot, said to have killed an Arab in a wheelchair, is being investigated. The IDF is likely to conclude that the soldiers should restrain their firing, rather than to aim better. The IDF too often risks its soldiers' lives and therefore fails to protect Israeli civilians rather than that of Arab rioters whose unwarranted confrontation of armed troops absolves Israel of responsibility. The government might feel less restrained if it called this a war. Then more people would understand the need for forceful defense. The usual critics still would denounce Israel. Israel ought to retort that its critics find the same forcefulness appropriate when defending their own troops, and that Israel resents a double standard used against the Jewish state. The Checkpoint Watch Women had come earlier. A five-year-old Arab claimed that a certain soldier hit him. The soldiers later told Women In Green that he never even had seen that boy, much less struck him. The Checkpoint Women ask the troops military questions. Spying? They serve inadvertently to divert the troops attention from looking out for terrorists. Women in Green found that the soldiers still were not informed about their rights against disrupters. Its lawyer advised the troops to identify and photograph the Checkpoint Women. Some women refuse to identify themselves. Perhaps those are the foreigners among them, who come to disrupt. A normal country would deport them (a former associate, 6/8, e-mail). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
THE SHEIKH'S PRESS PASS
Posted by Honest Reportng, June 14, 2004. |
|
When a large new Islamic center opened its doors in London on June 11, Sheikh Abdur-Rahman al-Sudais, imam and preacher of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, flew in to deliver an inaugural speech. Under the headline, 'Saudi Imam Urges British Muslims To Promote Peace,' Associated Press reports this al-Sudais statement from the event: The history of Islam is the best testament to how different communities can live together in peace and harmony... Muslims should exemplify the true image of Islam in their interaction with other communities and dispel any misconceptions in some parts of the media. BBC also spoke glowingly of al-Sudais as the 'world's most celebrated imam' who delivered a kindly talk promoting 'community cohesion' between Muslims and their neighbors (text, video). While al-Sudais' London call for peaceful co-existence is certainly laudable, BBC and AP failed to inform readers of the 'second face' that al-Sudais presents to non-Western audiences. For example, MEMRI documents al-Sudais' talks in November 2002, when he beseeched Allah to annihilate the Jews. He also urged the Arabs to give up peace initiatives with [Jews] because they are "the scum of the human race, the rats of the world, the violators of pacts and agreements, the murderers of the prophets, and the offspring of apes and pigs... These are the Jews, an ongoing continuum of deceit, obstinacy, licentiousness, evil, and corruption..." Due to such statements, Canadian authorities reportedly denied al-Sudais' request to enter Canada just last month. Arab media expert Steven Stalinsky documents that al-Sudais' hateful talks are not limited to Jew-baiting. Al-Sudais believes that [Christian] "worshippers of the cross" and "idol-worshipping Hindus" ... should be fought. Al-Sudayyis has been consistent in calling for jihad in Kashmir and Chechnya, for Jerusalem to be liberated, and for the "occupiers in Iraq" to also be fought. He often claims that Islam is superior to Western culture. Given the Saudi imam's well-documented history of jihadist incitement, news reports welcoming his call for 'peace and harmony' in London should have at least made reference to the vitriolic anti-Semitic and anti-western ideology that he regularly promotes from Mecca - the very heart of world Islam. Imagine if David Duke were to speak in London on 'peace and harmony' - would AP and BBC even consider omitting Duke's white supremacist views from their coverage of his speech? Comments to Associated Press: feedback@ap.org
Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167. |
|
CLARIFICATION
Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, June 14, 2004. |
|
Women in Green wants to clarify that Nadia's article re the disengagement of Jews from Europe was a SATIRE based on what Ariel Sharon plans to do to the Jews in Gush Katif and northern Samaria. Ariel Sharon has announced that "at the end of 2005 there will no longer be any Jews in the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria". In fact, August 14, 2005 has been set as the last day of the existence of Jews in Gush Katif. It also happens to be the Ninth of Av, the day of the destruction of the First and Second Temples and the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492. Sharon also announced that from now till August 14, 2005, those Jews can leave voluntarily, but after 2005 they will be removed by force. The entire area will be given over to the Arab enemy. Disgracefully, the world has welcomed Sharon's remarks concerning the ethnic cleansing of Jews, and their deportation from Gush Katif and Samaria and the destruction of thousands of Jewish homes, synagogues, Jewish businesses, etc., with calm and indifference instead of with shock and horror. In her article, Nadia used the same exact terminology that Sharon used against the Jews of Gush Katif but attributed it, satirically, to EU leaders re the Jews of Europe. As expected, this was felt to be shocking ... some readers even believing the article was true and asking to receive some more info re the imminent expulsion of Jews from Europe. Even though Nadia's article was a satire, Women in Green would like to warn that if, G-d forbid Sharon's plan for the deportation of the Jews from Gaza and Samaria will be implemented, the scenario of Nadia's article will become more and more likely. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to fight Sharon's plan and prevent it from being implemented. The best way to do so is to bring down Sharon and send him back home to his farm where he will be able to continue to raise his sheep. The People of Israel will not accept being Sharon's sheep to be slaughtered by him or anyone else. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
REMOVING SHAME FROM MY HOUSE
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 13, 2004. |
|
Over the years I had a modest personal and warm relationship with Arik Sharon, Ehud Olmert, Bibi Netanyahu - among others. I first met Sharon in the Sinai during the 1973 Yom Kippur War after he had driven the Egyptians out of the Sinai and across the Suez Canal after the Yom Kippur sneak attack. I valued that friendship and had his photo that I had taken at the Suez Canal on a wall in my house. I admired him like no other and waited for the day when he would become Prime Minister. That day came and the Arik I knew and respected vanished - to be replaced by an arrogant dictator. Similarly, I had a good personal relationship with Ehud Olmert and Bibi Netanyahu. With regret, I must remove these personal photos from my walls because I know it's like having something unholy and evil looking back at you. "Evil", in this context, means anyone who would willingly and actively endanger the Jewish people and Israel by dismembering the Jewish State. inclinaton. Most of Israel's rabbis and military/intelligence experts agree that giving the Arab Muslims control over the Gaza and and part of Judea and Samaria will only invite in more Arab Muslim terrorists from all over the world, creating a site for an International Terrorist State. The dangers to the rest of Israel (and by extension, world Jewry) are patently obvious to all who are NOT captivated by foreign interests. Sharon and Olmert have shown themselves to be in the grip of such evil that just having their faces in one's home is like having an idol in your house. As for Bibi, he is merely a weak disappointment. A brilliant voice without integrity is not a whole person. All the Israeli officials need to do is "Just Say NO!" Photos of Menahem Begin, Yitzhak Shamir and Moshe Arens remain because any mistakes they may have made did not include turning on the Jewish people as have Sharon and Olmert. An Israeli withdrawal from Gaza will NOT stop terrorism - at least according to Mahmoud A-Zaher of Hamas, the likely secret leader of Hamas after the assassination of Abdel Rantisi who has stated forthrightly that Hamas will continue to launch terror attacks, irrespective of any withdrawal from Gaza: "We will not stop our attacks until the "occupation" [sic] is ended." The occupation he refers to is ALL of Israel - which Sharon understands but ignores. David Ben Gurion was a far more effective thinker and leader of the Jewish people in their creation of Jewish State. He said: "NO Jew has the right to yield the rights of the Jewish People in Israel. No Jew has the authority to do so. No Jewish body has the authority to do so. Not even the entire Jewish people alive today has the right to yield any part of Israel. It is the right of the Jewish People over the generations, a right that under no conditions, can be cancelled. Even if Jews during specific period proclaim they are relinquishing that right, they have neither the power nor the authority to deny it to future generations. No concession of this type is binding or obligates the Jewish People. Our right to the country - the entire country - exists as an eternal right and we shall not yield this historic right until its full and complete redemption is realized." By David Ben Gurion at the Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland in 1937 Sharon and Olmert, along with a gaggle of 'yes' men and women have made their place in history. It is a place generally reserved for the most dedicated enemies of the Jewish people. Since I would not consider having the faces of Shimon Peres, Yassir Arafat, Adolph Hitler, Pope Pius or those of the Jewish Judenrat in my home, with regret, I cannot have Sharon or Olmert reminding me of what they have become. They are to me as the walking dead. Whatever they once were is no longer relevant. Whatever dybbuk (evil spirit) has entered their minds now has full control of what they are and what they do. When Faust sold his soul to the devil, it was for riches. Gifting your soul to the devil merely to garner approval from a thankless world indicates an emptiness of spirit. I wonder how long before we learn the price of Sharon's Faustian bargain that he asked for - or was offered. Arik Sharon has pledged to drive the last Jew from Gaza by September 15, 2005. Most Israelis are too smart for this. I think that Sharon and his Gang will be gone before then! As I remove any signs of the old Sharon from my walls, may the Israeli people remove this new and evil Sharon from the office of Israel's Prime Minister. I cannot help but think that, with the callous disregard Arik Sharon and/or Shimon Peres have shown for those pioneer settlers, there will be civil unrest. People of spirit cannot long live under a tyrannical rule. Sharon and his 'yes' men and women are no longer welcome in many homes of former friends. While pictures of these people come off the wall, no doubt, they will start going up in the home of Shalom Achshav (Peace Now). Even Kofi Annan called to congratulate Sharon personally. That should say it all! 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). |
|
THE NEW YORK TIMES COVERS (AND COVERS UP FOR) CHILD BOMBERS
Posted by Alex Safian, June 13, 2004. |
|
Why do Palestinian children become human bombs, willingly strapping on suicide belts and slipping into Israel to kill as many Jews as possible? That's the key question which the New York Times has once again failed to answer, this time in an otherwise informative story by Greg Myre ("Israel Says Children Enlist Children as Suicide Bombers", June 13, 2004). While Myre pulls no punches when it comes to telling readers how Palestinian children are now recruiting their classmates and cousins to become suicide bombers, he shies away from telling readers why Palestinian kids have taken up this grisly task. In Myre's rendition the child recruitment is a mystery -- he reports only that "some Palestinian leaders have condemned the use of teenagers, and opposition to the practice is widespread among ordinary Palestinians ..." Could the Palestinian kids have been indoctrinated in their schools? Myre casts doubt on this, reporting at face value the claims of one Palestinian school official that he tries to keep politics out of the classroom, "This place is for education and we don't want to talk about politics." Unfortunately, nothing could be further from the truth. Far from being opposed to child suicide bombers, Palestinian society and Palestinian leaders revel in child "martyrdom," and the Palestinian media does all it can to encourage a cult of death among children. The paramount Palestinian leader, Yasir Arafat, for example, stated in an interview on Palestinian TV that: ... this child who is grasping the stone, facing the tank, is it not the greatest message to the world when that hero becomes a shahid [martyr]? We are proud of them ... (PATV, Jan. 15, 2002 cited in Ask for Death, Palestinian Media Watch.) While Arafat's words certainly carry weight among Palestinian children, perhaps the most effective recruitment tool has been music videos which are broadcast for hours on end by official Palestinian television (there is no independent television under Arafat's rule). The videos are a call to call to death and martyrdom for Palestinian children, promising the glories and pleasures of heaven to the young "warriors for Allah": How sweet is the fragrance of the shahids, how sweet is the scent of the earth, its thirst quenched by the gush of blood flowing from the youthful body. (Itamar Marcus in the Jerusalem Post, January 29, 2004) Another music video also aimed at children and broadcast repeatedly told young viewers that: Oh, young ones: Shake the earth, raise the stones. You will not be saved, O Zionist, from the volcano of my country's stones. You are the target of my eyes, I will even willingly fall as a shahid [martyr for Allah]. Allahu akbar [god is great]! Oh, young ones! (Itimar Marcus in the Jerusalem Post, June 2, 2004) Yet another music video shown repeatedly on Palestinian TV centered on a Palestinian child who had been killed at the start of the present violence in October 2000. A young actor portrays the child in paradise, flying a kite and running on the beach, and encouraging other Palestinian children to follow him in martyrdom, "I am waving to you not in parting, but to say, 'Follow me.' " (Itimar Marcus in the National Post, April 8, 2004) As for the claim that Palestinian parents oppose such suicide bombings, news reports, including in the Times, indicate the opposite. For example, a few months ago Myre's colleague James Bennet reported that "Many Palestinian parents have praised their sons and daughters for carrying out suicide attacks, hailing them as heroes and martyrs." (New York Times, March 25, 2004) Avoiding this ugly reality will only help to perpetuate it. Write a letter for publication so that other Times readers will not be misled by Mrye's critical omissions. To send a letter for publication write to : letters@nytimes.com This is the article by Greg Myre. It is called "Israel Says Children Enlist Children as Suicide Bombers." NABLUS, West Bank - When teenage suicide bombers began emerging from Nablus last fall, Israeli and Palestinian leaders expressed concern that Palestinian factions were cynically exploiting the youths. In November, a 16-year-old from Nablus blew himself up near Israeli soldiers in the West Bank, killing no one else. Another 16-year-old carried out a nearly identical action in January, with the same result. In March, Hussam Abdo, 16, was captured on videotape when he was confronted and arrested by Israeli troops at a checkpoint with a bomb belt cinched under his red sweater. In early May, Israel arrested two Nablus residents, ages 18 and 19, who are accused of planning a bombing. Not all the cases are directly linked, but Israel says that it also has arrested a teenager it accuses of recruiting several youths in Nablus to become bombers. He is Nasser Awartani. Nasser, 15, a good student with no previous record of trouble, is one of four youths from the same 10th-grade class who are in Israeli custody, suspected of links to attacks emanating from Nablus. "In his interrogation, Nasser admitted recruiting and attempting to recruit suicide bombers," says a report of his questioning, conducted by Israel's Shin Bet security service. The report was made available in response to a request from the New York Times. Nasser's family members say they do not believe the accusations. "In this atmosphere, all mothers are worried that something could happen to their sons," said Nasser's mother, Iklas Abu Saud, who is divorced and uses her maiden name. "I tried to keep an eye on him at all times, and didn't want him mixing with armed people. I can't believe he would do something like this." As the Israeli-Palestinian conflict grinds on, with many Palestinian militants now arrested or dead, the ranks are increasingly filled by eager youths, some in their middle to late teens. Some Palestinian leaders have condemned the use of teenagers, and opposition to the practice is widespread among ordinary Palestinians, but it is not clear that the practice has stopped. Palestinian factions say that women and youths are more able than men to slip past Israeli security checks. The number of young bombers coming out of Nablus has raised questions about their recruitment. Israel says Nasser's case shows that the factions have used teenagers to lure other teenagers. "A 16-year-old can be very effective using peer pressure on another 16-year-old," said an Israeli lieutenant colonel stationed in the Nablus area who has been involved in investigating several of the incidents. "These kids believe they are going to become heroes by becoming bombers," said the colonel, who declined to speak for attribution because of army regulations. "I see them as scared children who don't grasp what they are doing." According to the Shin Bet report, Nasser joined Al Aksa Martyrs Brigades last year. He also had links to the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the report said. Initially, Nasser's role was limited to such activities as putting up the "martyr posters" that are produced when Palestinians are killed. But last October, two students in Nasser's class at the Abdel Hamid Assayeh school asked him if he wanted to be a suicide bomber, the report said. Nasser refused, but he agreed to recruit potential bombers, the report said, adding that his first choice was his friend and relative Sabih Abu Saud, a 16-year-old who lived nearby. The mothers of Nasser and Sabih are cousins, and the two boys had known each other and played together all their lives. Shortly before Sabih's attack, the boys went to a photo studio and posed together, arms around each other's shoulder. According to the Shin Bet report, Nasser introduced Sabih to Al Aksa leaders, and Sabih left to carry out his bombing on Nov. 3. The teenage bombers generally have been ineffective, and Sabih never made it out of the West Bank, blowing himself up as soldiers were closing in on him. The parents said the boys' friendship was evidence that Nasser would not have led Sabih toward becoming a bomber. In addition, they said, Sabih was a year older and was the big brother in the relationship. It was unrealistic that the younger boy could have exerted so much influence on the older one, the parents said. The Israelis tore down the Abu Saud family home in retaliation for Sabih's bombing. Still, the two Palestinian families remain on good terms. "I don't believe that Nasser recruited Sabih," said Sabih's mother, Nawal Abu Saud, who wears a gold locket with her son's picture inside around her neck. "Sabih didn't need to be recruited by anyone. He did this based on the suffering he saw." Nasser's mother married and divorced as a teenager. Nasser is the elder of her two sons, and together they have lived with her parents in a middle-class Nablus neighborhood. She said her son was a good student, though he began to withdraw and his grades slipped after the Palestinian uprising began in September 2000. When Nasser asked her permission to take karate lessons, she refused because it would have required him to go to downtown Nablus, where she feared he might find trouble. "I didn't want him to stray from the neighborhood," she said. Still, one of the city's main hospitals was near Nasser's school, and when there was violence, Nasser and other students would often visit to see the Palestinians who had been killed or wounded. "Nasser would come home and say, 'Today I saw someone who lost his hand,' " his mother said. "And then he would cry." To keep tabs on him, she made him carry a cellphone. But Shin Bet said Nasser used the phone to contact Al Aksa leaders in Nablus and update them on his recruiting efforts. Nasser approached several additional teenagers, and in at least three more instances, introduced youths to Al Aksa leaders for talks about potential bombings, the report said. One case involved Hussam Abdo, the 16-year-old captured on videotape and in photographs on March 24 as he reached an Israeli checkpoint on the edge of Nablus. After Hussam was stopped and removed his bomb belt, he was seized by Israeli soldiers and interrogated. The next morning, at 3 a.m., Israeli troops arrived at the second floor apartment where Nasser lived, handcuffed and blindfolded him and took him away. He has been in a juvenile prison since, his mother said. Three of Nasser's classmates also have been arrested in the last six months. The military, which has detained thousands of Palestinians in recent years, did not reply to an inquiry seeking information of the status of those youths. "None of the four had any problems here," said an official at the Abdel Hamid Assayeh school, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "We were quite surprised to hear about the charges." The school official said he tried to keep politics out of the classroom, but that often proved impossible. "This place is for education, and we don't want to talk about politics," he said. "But these kids live politics every day." Alex Safian is associate director, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA). Its website address is http://www.cameral.org. |
|
THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN, ANTI-SEMITE
Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, June 13, 2004. |
|
Imagine the outrage if the New York Times published an op-ed article that would contain the following paragraph: Yes, the race relations in the United States are still tense, but very few African-Americans have been lynched here in four years. That's my idea of racial harmony. There is no total victory to be had by the American Blacks over racism in the United States, without total eradication of the KKK. There is, though, the possibility of long periods without cross burnings and lynchings, with the African American community holding the moral and strategic high ground, so it can lead its life. I didn't write the paragraph above. Thomas L. Friedman did. I only replaced a few nouns in what he wrote in his column in the New York Times on Sunday, June 13, 2004. Here it is, the way it was printed: Yes, the Israel-Lebanon border is still tense, but very few Israelis have been killed there in four years. That's my idea of peace. There is no total victory to be had by Israel over Hezbollah or the Palestinians, without total genocide. There is, though, the possibility of long cease-fires, with Israel holding the moral and strategic high ground, so it can lead its life. It's not difficult to figure out why the New York Times decided to hire a Jew to promote its consistently anti-Semitic views. It's hard to imagine though how Mr. Friedman manages to look at his reflection in the mirror without vomiting. Lots of practice, I guess. Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com |
|
GAZA'S UNDERGROUND ECONOMY
Posted by David Frankfurter, June 13, 2004. |
|
"Operation Rainbow", the Israeli army's recent incursion into the Gaza town of Rafah, was accorded intensive coverage by the world media. The actions of both sides were exposed - and judged in the courts of world opinion. For example, in flagrant breach of the Geneva Conventions, Palestinian combatants were transported in UNRWA ambulances. In another incident, an Israeli tank missile overshot its target, killing both Palestinian combatants and civilians. Gaza's extensive underground tunnels, used by the Palestinians for gunrunning, were also exposed. The BBC among others published a full pictorial exposure on its website. Evidently, since the Palestinians declared war on Israel in September 2000, they have constructed dozens of these subterranean networks. Romantic legends surround resistance movements. Such tunnels are pictured as being hand-dug by idealistic freedom fighters - in this case to supply arms to the heroic Palestinian resistance. In fact, the real picture is far from romantic. There are even ramifications concerning EU and British government aid for the Palestinians. These tunnels originate on the Egyptian side of the border and exit in the back streets and congested civilian neighborhoods of Gaza. Guns, anti-tank and sagger missiles are not the only items transported. Drugs, precious metals and electrical goods are also brought under the border. Women, destined to be victimised by a lucrative sex trade, are also smuggled via Egypt. The operators, traders and middlemen all make significant profits - a profit margin that is apparently significant enough to distract the Egyptian border police. How are these tunnels dug? With professional earth-moving equipment. The tunnels are extensively engineered - installed with electricity, telephone communication, airshafts, and recently even with proper lifts. They average about 500 metres in length. How many are there? The number is difficult to confirm, as the tunnels often connect to each other. Israel has exposed around 100 of them to date. What are the costs of such complex, extensive engineering? Sources put the cost at up to $1,000 per metre - or up to $500,000 per tunnel. Part of the economic overhead includes hiding the tunnel's exit. Every Gaza family knows that allowing their home to hide a tunnel is a high-risk business. And so, the owners receive "rent" of $1,000 per month for the use of their home. Should the tunnel be discovered and the house destroyed, the family is promised compensation by the Palestinian Authority. This includes a brand new home in the up-market neighbourhood of Tel Sultan. The economics of the whole enterprise extends beyond the "host family" holding the tunnel franchise. As more tunnels are uncovered, the value of the smuggled goods has risen. Bullets, which used to cost $1, now cost five times that price. One might suppose that the prices of other smuggled wares have risen according to the same scale. A more sinister role is played by the Palestinian Authority (PA), headed by Chairman Arafat. This is the only body in the region with the logistical might to manage such a comprehensive enterprise. And it has been repeatedly caught in arms smuggling, a clear contravention of the Oslo Accords and other agreements. The PA also has the financial resources to devote to these schemes. From the EU alone, it has received 4 billion euro ($4.9b) over the past decade, in addition to donations from individual countries - including the British government. And here is the catch. UK charities operating in the area repeatedly claim that the average Palestinian is forced to live on $2 a day. The UK Government is about to announce a full package of financial support for "Palestine", including a further £26m ($47m) in 2004. The abject poverty of the average Palestinian contrasts sharply with the vast quantity of monies donated to the Palestinian cause. The contrast may be explained by an independent IMF report on financial mismanagement in the PA. Also, the EU reported in March 2004 of clear evidence of the diversion of aid money to fund terror. Even former Palestinian ministers and bankers are complaining of corruption amongst the top leadership. The diversion of funds to terror is a compound crime. It is an abuse of trust. Taxpayers across Britain and Europe are seeing their hard-earned money go not to the Palestinian people, but to pay for - among other things - complex underground smuggling operations. The efforts of Britain and the EU should be channeled towards aiding the Palestinian people, and guiding the region to peace, rather than escalating warfare. David Frankfurter is a writer on economic affairs in the Middle East and a regular contributor. He sends "Letters from Israel" emails to subscribers. Email him at David.Frankfurter@iname.com or go to www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/ |
|
GUSH KATIF NEEDS YOUR HELP
Posted by Ken Heller, June 13, 2004. |
|
Ladies And Gentlemen: "disengagement".."uprooting"..."resettlement"..."transfer"..."deportation"..."expulsion" Whatever you call it, Mr. Sharon's plan to make Gaza and, for the time being, parts of Shomron "Judenrein" (Jew free) are abominable, horrifying displays of perfidy. He is acting as a traitor to Am Yisrael because he IS a traitor to his people! He is eliminating democracy and human rights....of his own people to appease foreign governments and terror organizations. Did it matter that his own party rejected his plan? Not a bit. He will simply continue to do the bidding of George Bush, Colin Powell, Condeleeza Rice, the UN, the EU, Russia as well as the terror organizations, one of which just yesterday, Hamas, said that they will continue its terror activity against Israel regardless of whether Sharon's plan is implemented. If you would have told me four years ago that Mr. Sharon would indeed become Mr. Mitzna (the man he ran against for Prime Minister) and implement Miztna's plan of disengagement of the Jews in Gaza, I would have said, in my apparent naivete, that you were nuts. But indeed that is what happened. It is incredible that this has been allowed to happen. It is terribly sad. It indeed is a crisis! A friend of mine, Anita Tucker, living in Netzer Hazani within Gush Katif has said that "too many people in Israel and the United States have apparently become anesthetized by the situation in which democracy has been totally trampled and Sharon's Mafia has taken charge". She added in her letter, "the people of Gush Katif have decided to stand tall and proud against Sharon and his power mania effort to murder our souls and spirits by the method of divide and rule". We Must Stand "Tall and Proud" with the people of Gush Katif and help stop Sharon's madness. A good way to put pressure on the powers to be is by phoning, faxing and emailing them telling them that Sharon's insanity must stop now before he adds irreparable harm and disaster to the people of Yesha and all of Israel....because that is what his plan would do. Of course, try to focus on the Ministers and their assistants. You can't possibly call them all but do the best you can. I understand that faxes work better than emails. Please click here to retrieve the numbers for Israeli Government Ministers and thank you very much for your genuine care and concern for the people of Gush Katif. If you would also want to help by sending a financial assistance, please make your check out to: "Friends of Gush Katif", in care of Ken Heller, 11213 Jeanes Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 19116 Your help is desperately needed. Thank you! Ken Heller Ken Heller is a pro-Israel activist and heads the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For A Safe Israel (AFSI). He can be reached at kjhnha@aol.com. |
|
THE PUNDITRY OF AMNESIACS
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, June 13, 2004. |
|
In light of repeated acts of megabarbarism deliberately directed against Israeli innocents (many proudly claimed by Arafat's own al-Aqsa affiliate), it's time to take a closer look at some of the underlying issues which have frequently been ignored. Consider the following, for starters... Pick your paper...as diverse as the Washington Post or the Daytona Beach (Florida) News-Journal. Chances are pretty good that editors and columnists are ready to give advice or offer condemnation on the matter. And this just reflects the American press. It is often far worse elsewhere. The Post's Richard Cohen, The New York Times' Nicholas Kristof, and many of their colleagues elsewhere don't like Prime Minister Ariel Sharon very much, especially those settlements he has frequently insisted upon. The News-Journal's editorialist Pierre Tristam--one of the point men for the paper's own slant--writes such objective essays as "Barbarism Under Israel's Boot." Kristof compares Sharon to Arafat. In a piece which appeared in the News-Journal on May 27, 2004, he blamed Sharon for "knocking the legs out from under the Palestinian moderates." The fact that the Arabs responded to Camp David and Taba 2000, in which they were offered everything but the kitchen sink and responded by starting the bloody intifada instead, "of course" had nothing to do with hurting the so-called peace camps on both sides of the conflict for those of Kristof's persuasion. Having their own bully pulpits, more often than not, attempts by the public at meaningful response to such "truths" are then suppressed. And those few snippets that are permitted usually appear in the paper long after the original extensive editorial and op-ed attacks, skewed news reporting, and the like have had a chance to be digested and absorbed as "fact" by readers. While living in the safety and comfort of their own homes and having to travel farther to work than the width of Israel by its pre-'67, 1949 U.N.-imposed armistice lines, such folks as these in the media, academia, and--alas--too often in our own State Department seem to prefer a breed of Jew that bares his neck much easier. But, then again, most of them complained about former Prime Minister Ehud Barak as well, even though, had Arabs agreed to have a state alongside Israel instead of in place of it under his watch, virtually all of those settlements would have been history by now. Not to mention the fact that when Sharon himself earlier believed that Israel had a true partner for peace, he dismantled settlements in Sinai for Menachem Begin in order to achieve "peace" with Egypt...something totally ignored by the Richard Cohens, Thomas Friedmans, Nicholas Kristofs, and Molly Moores of the media world. It's also worth noting that it is from "peaceful" Egypt, recipient of over sixty billion dollars in American top of the line armaments and aid, that those tunnels originate from which supply Hamas, Islamic Jihad, & Co. with explosives and such to carry out a terror campaign against Jews... So much for what kind of faith Israel can place in alleged "peace" agreements with dictatorial Arab regimes. As of April 2004, Sharon had gotten into political trouble in Israel for declaring, in the absence of another Arab partner for peace, that he would dismantle settlements in the strategically important Gaza Strip and West Bank anyway. Many saw this as simply a unilateral reward for terrorism...thereby only encouraging more of it. True to form, there was no gratitude shown by Arabs for these concessions...just more one-sided demands. Their post-'67 destruction in phases scenario was playing out nicely. Nevertheless, the media largely kept up its attacks upon Sharon anyway. So, all of this begs the question: Why is there seldom an attempt, in the name of fair journalism, to determine why those Jews are so adamant on the issues of territory and settlements? As a concession to the so-called "roadmap," it had earlier been reported that Arafat and his former Holocaust-denying Prime Minister, Mahmoud Abbas were seeking to limit Arab disembowelment and incineration of Jews to "just" the West Bank and Gaza. They would thus supposedly be able to show the world that they were only against "occupation and settlers," not Israel itself.. A mere look, however, at the material in their own websites, textbooks, etc. soon explains what "occupied" territory really means...Tel Aviv as well as Hebron. And this is even more so for the Hamas crew. After its war to oust Saddam from Iraq, the United States banned the Baath Party in Iraq. Regardless of one's thoughts about this, Hamas openly declares that no Israel, regardless of size, has a right to even exist...So what should a much more vulnerable Israel insist upon? For those without a grasp of history, both recent and a bit farther back, this ploy focusing on occupation and settlements will work. And it will do so for those who simply like to believe that Israel is the devil incarnate as well. Unfortunately, it also seems to work with a media afflicted too often with a severe case of amnesia when it comes to such issues. The reality is that this proposed gesture by Arafat was just another staged fiction for, at best, a naive West. Just who is a settler in the Middle East, and how is that word defined? Of course, Arabs, Cohen, Kristof, & Co. point to Jews. So, unless the "West Bank" is ethnically cleansed of the Jewish presence, as the fiction goes, there will be no chance for peace. Much, if not most, of the press constantly supports this position. Countless editorials and columns have appeared spouting such wisdom. Consider the November 16, 2002 AP report by Nasser Shiyoukhi. Listen to his description of the situation in Hebron: "The Muslims here are among the most devout and the Jewish settlers among the most radical." Notice the adjectives. Unlike the Arabs, the Jews -- who know that they are risking their lives living among hostile Arabs but do so anyway for deep religious conviction and faith --were not described as "devout," a positive concept, but were labeled, instead, as being "radical," with negative connotations. Yet the Tomb of the Patriarchs was sacred to Jews for over two thousand years before the Prophet of Islam ever lived and before the vast majority of Arabs ever knew that the Hebrew Patriarch, Abraham, even existed. The same folks who claim that there was no Temple of Solomon in Jerusalem (Arafat calls it Buraq's Mount in honor of Muhammad's winged horse who supposedly took him on a flight to the holy site) deny any Jewish connections to Hebron as well. Now for a dose of reality... There's very good evidence that Arafat was born in Cairo, Egypt. Scores of thousands of other Arabs came from Egypt earlier in the 19th century with Muhammad Ali's armies and, like Arafat a bit later, settled in Palestine. During the mandatory period after World War I, the League of Nations Permanent Mandates Commission recorded additional scores of thousands of Egyptian, Syrian, and other Arabs entering into Palestine and settling there. Hamas' patron saint, Sheikh Izzedin al-Qassam, for whom its militant wing (the folks who blow up the teen clubs, pizzerias, buses, etc.) was named, was from Aleppo, Syria. He too settled in Palestine. It is estimated that for each one of these people who were recorded, many others crossed the border under cover of darkness to enter into one of the few areas in the region where any economic development was going on because of the influx of Jewish capital. These folks later became known as "native Palestinians." While this is not to say that there were not native Arabs also living in Palestine, it is to say that many, if not most, of these folks were also newcomers-- settlers--themselves. Many of the villages set up in the West Bank and elsewhere were settlements established by Arab settlers. And there were Jews whose families never left Israel / Judaea / Palestine as well over the centuries, despite the tragedies of the Roman Wars, forced conversions of the Byzantines, the Diaspora, Crusades, etc. So, why is it acceptable to Cohen, Kristof, Friedman, Tristam, and--at best--their fellow amnesiacs for Arabs from the surrounding lands to settle in Palestine, but not for Israel's Jews, half of whom were refugees themselves from Arab/Muslim lands? They're the other side of the refugee coin nobody talks about. Jews owned land and lived in Judea / Samaria until they were massacred by Arabs in the 1920s. Those lands weren't known as the "West Bank" until British imperialism made its presence there in the 20th century and purely Arab Transjordan -- created itself in 1922 from 80% of the Mandate for Palestine Britain received on April 25, 1920 -- annexed the "west bank" of the Jordan River after the 1948 fighting. Saying Jews have no rights in places like Hebron is like claiming that if China conquers the Vatican, then Catholics will no longer have rights there. Again, the world would not know of the significance of places like Hebron if not for the Holy Scriptures of the Jews. If one million Arabs can live as citizens without fear in Israel, then why is it that Arabs insist that lands where both peoples have historical ties must be made Judenrein? UN Resolution #242 emerged in the aftermath of the Six Day War. It did not call for Israel to return to those suicidal, pre-'67 armistice lines. Among other things, those lines had made Israel a mere 9-miles wide, a constant temptation to its enemies.. Notice, please, that the vast majority of the settlements are built on strategic high ground areas designed to provide precisely what Israel is entitled to under Resolution #242... a slightly increased buffer from those who would destroy it. Furthermore, any eventual Israeli withdrawal was to be linked to the establishment of "secure and recognized borders" to replace those fragile lines. Many of those now demanding Israel to forsake this have conquered nations and acquired territories hundreds or thousands of miles away from home in the name of their own national security interests. Legal experts such as William O'Brien, Eugene Rostow, and others have repeatedly stated that the non-apportioned areas (the West Bank in particular) of the Palestinian Mandate were open to settlement by all residents of the Mandate, not just Arabs. That Arabs disagree is not a shock. They don't believe Jews have rights in any part of Israel. Keep in mind that most of the almost two dozen so-called "Arab" states were themselves conquered and forcibly Arabized from non-Arab peoples like Berbers, Copts, Kurds, Jews, Black Africans, and others as well. Lastly, at Camp David 2000 and Taba, Barak's Israel offered to end the occupation. 97% of the territories, half of Jerusalem, a $33 billion fund, and other concessions. were offered to Arafat in a contiguous state, not disconnected cantons, as Arab spin doctors now claim. Ambassador Dennis Ross was there as U.S. chief negotiator and confirmed all of this. I'll take his word over Arafat's. So much for occupation being the cause of the problem. Unfortunately, the predominant Arab "vision of peace" still has no room for a permanent Israel. Some have made a tactical decision to play the game to win as much concessions diplomatically from Israel as possible...making their end goal that much easier to achieve. Arafat and others speak of the "peace of the Quraysh." The Quraysh were a pagan tribe with whom the Muslim Prophet, Muhammad, made a temporary peace with until he gained enough strength to deal the final blow. Even the PLO's late model moderate, Faisal al-Husseini, called for a purely Arab Palestine "from the River to the Sea." If one is really interested in seeing what Arab thinking is in these regards, all that is required is an online visit to the Palestinian Authority websites, or a look at its textbooks, maps, insignias and such. There is no Israel present. And these are the "good cops." Go to the Hamas site and then understand why the sole, miniscule state of the Jews cannot be expected to commit national suicide so that Arabs can obtain their 22nd or 23rd state - and second one in Palestine. Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites around the world. |
|
ARBEL'S LEGACY: ISRAEL'S POLITICIZED JUSTICE SYSTEM
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 13, 2004. |
|
This was written by Ben Chorin.
Israel's state prosecutor's office consistently decides whether to pursue charges against politicians based on their political views. This is not conjecture; it is backed by overwhelming evidence. The most far-reaching consequence of this policy is its deterrent effect. Politicians know that if they behave according to the political preferences of the prosecutor's office, they have a better chance of not being charged with a crime. Every politician knows that there is an open file waiting for a misstep and that such files can be kept open for many years. They also know that if they pursue the "right" (that is, the left's) policies, any file can be made to disappear. (I'll even go out on a limb and make a prediction here. Attorney General Mazuz will find a way to keep Sharon on the hook as long as possible. He will neither indict him nor close the cases against him. Just watch.) I could list two dozen examples of the above phenomenon with little effort. But I'll mention here only five of the most egregious ones, each of which has had significant political consequences: 1. For the first example, I'll simply quote my friend Jonathan Rosenblum: "Arbel was accused, together with former attorney-general Michael Ben Yair, of bringing an indictment against then-justice minister Yaakov Neeman which they knew could not hold up in court. Their goal: to force the resignation of Neeman, an outspoken critic of the government legal system. (See "Bad Faith and Shoddy Goods," http://www.jewishmediaresources.com/article/709/ "The police were not allowed to enter a written recommendation concerning Neeman's prosecution into his file because prosecutors knew that the recommendation would be negative. Worse, the police were not allowed to interrogate the only relevant witness in the case, despite his pleas that they do so, because that testimony would have fully cleared Neeman. "Though Neeman was fully exonerated by the court, which had harsh words of criticism of the prosecution, he was never reinstated as justice minister. Thus those who "fabricated a case against an innocent person and obstructed justice in order to pursue a purely political and ideological agenda," in the words of Ma'ariv editor Amnon Dankner, succeeded in their goal of removing Neeman. "If there is an answer to the charges concerning the Neeman prosecution, we have yet to hear it." 2. The second example is the failure to prosecute anyone in the Yossi Ginosar affair, a tale of corruption so deep it could have kept an army of journalists busy for years. Instead it died inside of a week. In short, Ginosar was a secret agent and friend of all the Labor party makhers, who made millions in partnerships with Muhammad Rashid, a major PLO makher. Rashid and Ginosar were partners in Palestinian cement and casino businesses. They were also involved in laundering hundreds of millions of dollars for the Palestinian Authority -- money which remains unaccounted for to this day and has very likely been used to finance terror operations. (Steve Cohen, now an advisor to Colin Powell, was also reportedly involved in this scheme.) Ginosar also served as a senior advisor to Rabin, Peres and Barak before and during Camp David. These negotiations concerned sensitive security and financial issues and Ginosar's conflict of interest could not be more blatant. Consequently, then Attorney General Elyakim Rubenstein ruled that Ginosar could not serve in Israel's delegation to Camp David. As part of massive efforts by Barak to include Ginosar, affidavits were presented denying any conflict of interests. These blatantly false affidavits were reportedly signed by Danny Yatom. Despite solid testimony by Ginosar's assistant, Ozrad Lev, no charges were ever brought against Ginosar (now deceased) for corruption, nor against Yatom for perjury. Incredibly, the case was closed due to "lack of public interest". (An important sidebar to this story: Two other people deeply involved in the Palestinian casino business are Dov Weissglas (http://israelbehindthenews.com/Archives/May-16-04.htm#conflictofinterest), Sharon's right-hand man in the hitnatkut fiasco, and Martin Schlaff ("Weisglass pushed Sharon to reopen Jericho casino", http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=20734) the man reportedly behind the Cyril Kern affair.) 3. Ehud Barak's cronies, Tal Zilberstein and Buzhy Herzog, set up a network of fake charitable organizations to funnel money illegally to the Barak/Labor campaign. The state comptroller, Eliezer Goldberg, who investigated the matter, called it a "trampling of the law" and fined the party an unprecedented 3.2 million dollars. Among other violations, the "charitable" organizations were used to launder illegal foreign contributions and to funnel to the campaign estate money, under Herzog's control, intended for charity. Under questioning both Herzog and Zilberstein "pleaded the Fifth". The investigation was allowed to fizzle and no charges were ever brought against any of the major players. 4. By contrast, after his defeat against Barak, Bibi Netanyahu was hounded by the police and press for moving gifts he received as PM from one warehouse to another, supposedly some sort of technical violation. (His Labor predecessors reportedly took hundreds of gifts home and in at least one case such gifts were auctioned off; none of them were even investigated.) When Attorney general, Elyakim Rubenstein declined to bring charges, Arbel let it be known far and wide that she dissented from his view and wanted charges brought. A few days ago, the supreme court, of which both Arbel and Rubenstein are now members, decided on the murkiest of grounds that the justice department is obligated to publicize Arbel's decision, despite it's being an internal Justice Department document. [JP note: This was just before Netanyahu hid behind the proffered fig leaf and changed his position to support Sharon's abandonment of Gaza. Surprise: The Arbel report has not been published, as "required".] 5. Arbel authorized Moshe Mizrachi, head of the Israel Police international investigations division, to wiretap the phones of Avigdor Lieberman and other right-wing politicians as part of an alleged criminal investigation. As it turns out, Mizrachi taped conversations clearly unrelated to the investigation, including intimate conversations between family members and friends, and conversations between public personalities (including past and present state presidents) not suspected of any crimes. In addition, Mizrachi transcribed these conversations and placed them in a safe, presumably for use as the need and opportunity would arise. These charges were confirmed and documented in detailed reports by both Rubenstein and state comptroller Eliezer Goldberg (http://wwwhttp://www.nfc.co.il/archive/001-D-45337-00.html ?tag=1-22-28&au=True.nfc.co.il). Arbel used her office to hamper these investigations from their inception. Finally, when Rubenstein recommended removing Mizrachi from his post, Arbel, in violation of all protocol, publicized a dissenting view, sharply critical of Rubenstein. The case against Mizrachi could not be more compelling, Arbel is herself implicated in these crimes and hence suffers from clear conflict of interest, and, in any case, had no authority to publicly dissent from the attorney general's ruling. That she did so without any fear of public criticism (indeed, the press dutifully supported her) is sorry testimony to the state of Israel's justice system. To make matters worse, it is now reported that the Chief of Police has decided to reject Rubenstein's recommendation and will not remove Mizrachi from his post. Arbel's second victory over Rubenstein (and over common sense and decency) this week. 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. |
|
LOOK HOW HAPPY THEY LOOK!
Posted by Anita Tucker, June 13, 2004. |
|
Arik Sharon and Ehud Olmert look HAPPY as they plan the eviction of thousands of wonderful, honest, hard-working Jews from their homes, many of whom have lived in and build from sand dunes over 3 generations!! They're happy that they've removed Arutz 7 from our radios. They're happy that Jonathan Pollard still languishes in a US prison. (Remember what a good buddy President Bush is to Sharon!) What else are they happy about? May HaShem save us from their evil intentions. Be'Ezrat HaShem... Anita Tucker lives in Netzer Hazani in Gush Katif. She is one of the many who are slated to be driven from their homes in Sharon's expulsion of the Jews from Gaza. |
|
AT THE END OF 2005 THERE WILL NO LONGER BE ANY JEWS IN EUROPE
Posted by Nadia Matar, June 13, 2004. |
|
This is a satire - I want to make clear what Sharon want to do in Gaza.
In June 2004 the European Union convened all its members to discuss the question of anti-Semitism in Europe. Violent incidents against European Jews had greatly increased during recent months - firebombs thrown at Jewish schools, the desecration of graves, Jews wearing kippot being attacked on the streets, and the like - mainly by Muslims. The European Union resolved to put an end to the phenomenon. After lengthy deliberations, a press conference was held in which the Chairman of the European Union announced a dramatic program that would constitute a final solution to the problem of anti-Semitism. The name of the program: "Disengagement from Europe." "We have resolved to defend the Jews," the Chairman of the European Union proclaimed, "and to immediately stop the violence against them. To this end, we have formed a program that will disengage the Jews from Europe. The Jews will be evacuated to other locations. So as not to interfere with the demographic balance in the Middle East between Israel and the Palestinians, we will do everything so that European Jews will not immigrate to Israel. We shall rather promote the transfer of Jews to desolate regions in the world, such as the Sahara Desert." "Details concerning the exact location where the Jews will be relocated will shortly be specified, but one thing is certain," the Chairman continued: "At the end of 2005 there will no longer be any Jews in Europe." And thus there will no longer be any anti-Semitism in Europe, and the Jews will no longer be attacked." "The Interior Ministries of each European state will prepare the lists of Jews, the number of people in each family, and their addresses. Beginning now until the end of 2005 the Jews will be able to leave of their own free will and receive set compensation for their businesses and homes. The Jewish property will be transferred to the Muslim community in Europe, in the hope that this growing community will assimilate in its surroundings and aspire to peaceful coexistence with its neighbors, the indigenous Europeans." "The forceful deportation of those Jews who refuse to leave of their own free will shall begin in September 2005. For this sensitive mission we have chosen elite units of the German army, because of the considerable experience they have amassed in previous years." The "Disengagement from Europe" plan was approvingly accepted by the UN, that announced that it would do all in its power to facilitate the plan and its implementation. The United States announced that it officially opposed the expulsion of Jews from Europe, but would remain a member of the United Nations in order to try and change the resolution. "Who knows," the American President opined, "perhaps by the end of 2005 we will be able to ensure that only the Jews of France and Belgium will be expelled, and not all the Jews of Europe. This compromise would constitute proof of the importance in remaining a member of the United Nations in order to exert influence "from within." The Israeli government issued a strong condemnation of the "Disengagement from Europe" program, and charged the European Union with hypocrisy and deception. The Israeli announcement stated: "The European Union is masquerading as the initiator of programs for the defense of Europe's Jews, but the truth is that this is an anti-Semitic plan for the forced deportation and ethnic cleansing of European Jewry - a plan that is meant to appease the Muslim community in Europe, that is growing by terrifying dimensions and threatens to take control of all Europe. We call upon the Western world to immediately abandon this plan, so as not to give a victory to violence." The Chairman of the European Union responded to the Israeli announcement with surprise, and stated: "It is actually the Israeli announcement that is hypocritical. We in Europe are merely applying the exact program that Ariel Sharon is about to carry out in Israel, in order to provide an answer to Arab terror. If a Jewish Prime Minister in Israel can evacuate Jews from the Holy Land, then we certainly can do so in Europe." Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
STATE OF JUDEA - FOUNDATION COUNCIL
Posted by Judah Tzoref, June 12, 2004. |
|
Israel is the only country in the world where Jews are deprived of their basic human rights on the grounds of being Jews. The very fact that Israel has become an arena for a public debate on uprooting of Jewish communities, just for the blame of being Jewish, is a living proof of her moral bankruptcy. In such dismal days, it is imperative to remember that uprooting and expulsion of Jews are appalling symbols of persecution during ages of tragic Jewish exile. The "disengagement" plan, which contradicts the very ideal underlying the establishment of Israel, started out as a sole whim of the Prime Minister and eventually gathered a sweeping public momentum energized by the powerful outlets of the leading media. Every normal nation would ardently defy such plan as the "disengagement", that amounts to nothing but a pointless concession of national assets and vital resources. Against the collapse of the state leadership, civil powers are rising around the country with a view to healing the nation of ongoing maladies that undermine its survivability. The present political fix demands the consolidation of the national powers around the urgent mission of saving Yesha (Judea, Samaria and Gaza Strip), that is the most vulnerable organ in the body of Israel. The establishment of the State of Judea, that will embrace Yesha autonomies, is the most effective move to foil the creation of an Arab terrorist state on the ruins of Yesha communities. The Foundation Council of the State of Judea is currently being appointed from among the wide public. The State of Judea is destined to apply her sovereignty on those Yesha settlements where Israeli security forces are withdrawn (if and when). At the outset, the Foundation Council will design the practical outline for the establishment of the Jewish state in Yesha, that will require operational coordination with Israel from the preparatory stage of Israeli pullout. The Foundation Council will demand an ordered delivery of all IDF facilities, slated for evacuation, to the authorities of the new Jewish state, as well as the proper delivery of water, electricity and communication systems in all territories of Israeli withdrawal. It will be additionally required that arms be provided to the State of Judea in sufficient quantity for her defense against terrorism, that originated and evolved to ominous scale as a result of the heavy armament provided by Israel to the Palestinian Authority according to commitments of the Oslo Agreement. |
|
DAVID HA'IVRI'S LEGAL DEFENSE FUND
Posted by Ken Heller, June 12, 2004. |
|
Dear Friends:
I just received this email urging help with the solicitation of funds
for David Ha'ivri. Please read both the note from my friend, Herb from
Jerusalem and Ha'ivri's piece.
These are the addresses both in the States and in Israel to where
donations can be sent.
Donations to the legal fund for David Ha'ivri can be sent to:
HaMeir L'David, P.O. Box 960121, 143 Doughty Blvd., Inwood NY 11096, USA
or HaMeir L'David, P.O. Box 4005, Ariel, 44837, Israel or via PAYPAL Also please be kind enough to send this to your friends and family
members for the purpose of having them help out also.
Thank you very much!
Ken Heller
This is worth publicizing. David Ha'ivri needs financial help as
part of the police plan is to break him. I was supposed to testify at
the trial along with Paul Eidelberg as experts on "free speech". No
English testimony was permitted. Israel plays hardball. Sharon means
every word he says against Jews; his opinion of Arabs is variable. You
can get a list of Knesset e-mails from Women in Green. Don't let your
place of residence obstruct your feedom to criticize - the Quartet
doesn't live here either. Spoke to your friend from Philly, referred
him to Feige Kahane for a tour, but had no time to meet him.
With love of Eretz and with fear for its future.
Herb
Beware of Policemen Bearing Gifts - Conclusion of Ha'ivri Trial
On Wednesday, June 9th, David Ha'ivri's trial for printing T shirts
with the slogan "No Arabs - No Terror" came to an end. While he was
acquitted of the principal charge - incitement to racism - he was
convicted of obstructing justice. After admitting on record that
obstruction of justice rarely merits a serious sentence, Judge Amnon
Cohen said that Ha'ivri is an exception and sentenced him to four
months imprisonment which could be converted to community service -
eight hours a day for four months - as well as a 5,000 shekel fine or
thirty additional days of jail, and a six-month suspended jail
sentence.
But just how did Ha'ivri obstruct justice?
At a demonstration two years ago police confiscated a number of the
"No Arabs - No Terror" shirts. They received a faxed request, with
Ha'ivri signature, to return the shirts, and they complied. Ha'ivri
told interrogators that his signature was forged, and the court
agrees. So what did Ha'ivri do to warrant four months of a full-time
job with no pay, as well as a large fine? He accepted the shirts that
the police gave him even though he wasn't the one who faxed the
request. In other words, Ha'ivri was punished for a mistake made by
the police.
Ha'ivri's harsh sentence should serve as a warning to all of us not
to accept a gift from a policeman. If you do, be prepared to work a
full-time job for free for several months. Interestingly enough, three
months ago the police raided Ha'ivri's home and offices in an
operation they coined the "Trojan horse".
David Ha'ivri commented: "I'm proud to be chosen by the authorities
as the 'enemy', because it proves that they consider us the obstacle
to their national suicide policies. All this only encourages me more
to continue spreading the Torah truth as Rabbi Kahane taught it."
We turn to our readers and supporters to help us defray the legal
costs and harsh fine that has been imposed. In addition, David
Ha'ivri's four month public service severely hinders his ability to
operate. Help us continue spreading the truth without losing a beat.
To sign the petition to stop the harassment of Jewish patriots in
Israel, please click here;
http://www.petitiononline.com/haivri/petition.html
Ken Heller is a pro-Israel activist and heads the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For A Safe Israel (AFSI). He can be reached at kjhnha@aol.com. |
|
ON THE EVOLUTION OF THE SUICIDE/HOMICIDE BOMBER
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, June 12, 2004. |
|
While the year 2004 has brought other issues back to the front burner that also demanded immediate attention (the future of the Gaza Strip and the rest of the disputed territories as just a few examples), it's worth rethinking another all-too-real fact of life that had driven events over recent past years, especially since the onset of the era of the so-called Oslo "peace, " and still very much with us. I'm speaking, of course, about the Arab suicide/homicide bomber. Unfortunately, we have heard too much about suicide/homicide bombers in the Middle East, and when Israel pursues the deliberate murderers of its innocents, this then becomes the next excuse for Arabs to kill more innocents. Of course, the way many --if not most--Arabs see all of this, there are really no Israeli "innocents." They're all simply Jews who have stolen "purely Arab" land. That's the way it's taught in their textbooks, preached in their mosques, and inbred elsewhere as well. After the September 11, 2001 tragedy, when nineteen Arabs (mostly Saudis) hijacked civilian aircraft and flew them as guided missiles into the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, killing some three thousand Americans and others as well, the situation has become even more of a concern. Officials believe that it's just a matter of time before the United States, itself, once again becomes victimized this way. The Arab suicide / homicide bomber has also since made his (or her) debut in other places as well--notably in the fight for the future of Iraq. Young children have also been utilized as living bombs. There is no doubt that this is a horrendous human tragedy. But while Arabs and their supporters place the blame for this on Israel, the truth is actually far more depressing. Like in many other places, there are conflicting historical and political claims over the land contested between Arabs and Jews. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of scholarly books written about the connection of the Jews to the land of Israel. The very name Jew, itself, comes from the later name of the land, Judaea, which in turn was named for the Hebrew tribe of Judah--one of Jacob's sons. Judaean equals Jew. Early Muslim Arab historians recorded this in their works, as does the Qur'an itself, the Holy Book of Islam. Similarly, there are many books which deal with the imperial Arab conquest, settlement, and incorporation of the land of Israel / Judaea / Palestine--and much of the rest of entire region as well--into the two earlier Arab Caliphates based in Damascus and Baghdad. Imperialism is evidently only a nasty word when non-Arabs so indulge in it. Suffice it to state, therefore, that a quest for relative justice demanded some sort of compromise over the land in question. Unfortunately, that was too much to ask... Arabs saw themselves as the only legitimate heirs to a defeated Ottoman Turkish Empire which had replaced the Arabs (and others) as imperial rulers and had ruled most of the region for some four centuries prior to the end of World War I. After the Allied defeat of the Turks, Arabs subsequently treated the region as "purely Arab patrimony" and acted accordingly. Despite the presence of scores of millions of non-Arab Berbers, Kurds, Jews, Black Africans, Copts, Semitic but non-Arab Lebanese, and others as well, Arabs saw these as purely Arab lands. As just a few of many other examples of what next transpired, both Berber and Kurdish languages and cultures were periodically "outlawed," churches of the Copts were burned down, Black Africans in the Sudan and Kurds in Syria and Iraq were massacred, and more Jews fled "Arab" lands than Arabs who fled Israel...the other side of that famous refugee problem that few folks ever talk about. Those who resisted this forced Arabization process were simply killed, turned into refugees, and the like...millions over the decades, and continuing to this very day. Returning to our main topic, the Arab rejectionist response to the question of a compromise with the Jews over the question of Israel / Palestine falls into this same pattern. Arabs rejected any solution which would grant Jews any rights at all. They attacked a miniscule, reborn Israel in 1948...and thus the continuing problem regarding Arab refugees. But it didn't have to be this way... Hundreds of millions of people became refugees in the course of the last violent century (not to mention the millions before then). Many were displaced between the two world wars. Scores of millions were uprooted in the 1947 partition of the Indian subcontinent into Hindu India and Muslim Pakistan. Many more examples exist, like that involving Turks and Greeks; but, as is already hinted to above, one truly stands out in light of the current turmoil in the Middle East: The one half of Israel's five million Jews whose families fled Arab/Muslim lands around the same time Arabs fled in the opposite direction because of the invasion of Israel by five Arab states upon its rebirth in 1948. This does not include another million of these Sephardim who fled to other lands in the Diaspora, notably France and the Americas. Greater New York City alone now has tens of thousands of Syrian Jews. They were known as kelbi yahudi --"Jew Dogs"--in those "Arab" lands...So much for what Arabs like to claim was their alleged tolerance of "their Jews" before the rise of modern political Zionism. Again, how dare anyone else but Arabs demand a sliver of national dignity in the region! At virtually the same time that the partition of the Indian subcontinent was taking place, the Arabs rejected a similar plan that would have created a second state for themselves in historic Palestine. Jordan had already emerged on some 80% of the original territory of the Mandate issued to Great Britain in the wake of the Paris Peace Conference on April 25, 1920. Colonial Secretary Churchill had separated all of Palestine east of the Jordan River and handed it over to Britain's Hashemite Arab allies in the creation of Transjordan in 1922. Listen to what Sabri Jiryis, a prominent Palestinian Arab researcher at the Institute for Palestinian Studies in Beirut, had to say about all of this in the Lebanese newspaper, Al-Nahar, on May 15, 1975: "While it is estimated that 700,000 Arabs fled the 1948 war...against this...Arabs caused the expulsion of just as many Jews from Arab states...whose properties were taken over...a population and property exchange occurred and each side must bear the consequences.? Much more evidence for this exists in books written by Arab kings, officials, and others as well. So, why is it that over a half century later, Arabs-- who have received billions of dollars in aid from the United Nations, the European Union, America, oil revenues, other international funds, and elsewhere as well--still have not relieved the plight of their own refugees...a problem which, by their own rejectionist attitudes, they largely created themselves? They have, after all, almost two dozen states on some six million square miles of territory--lands that belonged mostly, as we have already discussed, to other non-Arab peoples before they were conquered in the name of the Arab nation. Jews absorbed their own refugees into a sole, tiny state roughly the size of New Jersey. The answer to the above question can perhaps best be illustrated by Arab actions. Some years back, with the status of the disputed territories Israel found itself in control of in the aftermath of the 1967 War still unresolved, Israel offered to knock down the dilapidated refugee camps and replace them with new housing and better living conditions. It's worth remembering that Egypt and Jordan occupied these territories from 1948 to 1967 and not only did nothing about this problem but never discussed the creation of that additional Palestinian Arab state here either. So, how did the Arabs respond to that Israeli offer? They demanded that Israel do nothing to remedy life in the camps. Again, why? It's really not hard to understand... Quite simply, and as it has been known for decades, Arabs have used their own refugees as pawns in their perpetual war to delegitimize Israel. For them, there is no justice nor suffering besides their own. Arabs don't want the refugee problem solved--not as long as it means that a viable Israel will still exist on the morrow. That's why they tacked on the "right of return" of millions of real or alleged Arab refugees to the so-called Saudi peace plan a few years back and Arafat walked away from an offer to get some 97% of the disputed territories, half of Jerusalem, and other major Israeli concessions as well at Camp David 2000 and Taba. The result of both Arafat's and the "moderate" Saudis' so-called "peace plans" still envisions Israel's Jews being overwhelmed so that a second Arab state will replace Israel, not live side by side with it. This should come as no surprise since all Palestinian (and many other) Arab maps, school books, web sites, and the like omit Israel as well. This is also why talk about creating a "provisional Palestinian Arab State" under these circumstances is scary. Faisal al-Husseini, the late showcase moderate of the PLO, said that while he'd accept any land diplomacy would yield, a purely Arab Palestine from the River to the Sea was the real goal...the same old "destruction of Israel in stages" strategy dominant since after the "one fell swoop" alternative collapsed as a result of its failure in the 1967 Six Day War. Thus, tragically, this conflict still really has no end in sight. And the horrendous human costs specifically associated with suicide/homicide bombings for both sides has been created and sustained by the Arabs themselves. Reasonable compromises have been repeatedly offered--and rejected--to end the Arab-Israeli conflict...certainly more than anything Arabs have ever offered to the numerous native, non-Arab peoples they have conquered and forcibly Arabized in carving out most of the almost two dozen states they now call their own. Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites around the world. |
|
URGENT ATTENTION FROM YASSIR
Posted by IsrAlert, June 11, 2004. |
|
This is a spoof by Jonathan Kaye, a writer who lives in San Jose,
California. He can be reached at info@kaye.org
FROM; ABU AMR
ATTN: Sir, Greetings, With due respect, trust and humility, I use this medium to write this letter to you irrespective of the fact that you do not know me but please do consider this letter as a request from an old and confused man in dire need of assistance. Let me formerly introduce myself, I am Abu Amr aka Yasser da man, president and leader of the peaceful and loving people of palestine. I got your contact courtesy of a business publication in my earnest search for a reliable and trustworthy individual who can render me assistance. During the war waged against my oppressed people by the supporters and cohorts of the jews to claim all the Arab owned farms in our country, I found myself leading these farmers as they burn our homes and olive trees and drive us from this land. In the course of the nakba in my beloved country, the zionist invader attacked and destroyed my splendid towns and cities, my fields and vineyards. He remove my language and song and all my history and make lies about the jews who claim palestine belongs to them, but the world and even the United Nations say that this land is palestine and that it was promised by the almighty god to Ibrahimi and Ishmel as a home forever for the great palestinian people. After the death of of my many warriors martyred at the brutal hands of the isreali in his cafes and shopping malls, I manage to escape to my secret hideout in Ramallah, palestine where I fear that any time the isreali tank or plane will come and kill me. Prior to this untimely predicament, I managed to bury two big trunk boxes containing nine-hundred-and-forty-eight million dollars (US$948,000,000.00) cash, bonds, important documents of property title and other valuables, which is now deposited in a security and brokerage firm in paris France where my poor destitute wife Suha must beg for a crumbs of bread and live on the streets at the mercy of the zionist thugs who rule France and show her no mercy. At the moment, I am in a dilemma on how to move this money to your country for proper investments. I then spoke to my friend Osama who put me in touch with his banker Mohammed Jamal Khalifa and he assured me that the safest way to move this money is for you to come to my secret hideout in Ramallah and open an investment account in your name where the money will be deposited for onward transfer to your account in your country. In recognition of your personal executive powers and investment opportunities that abound in your country, I decide to solicit for your assistance in moving this money to your country pending my future arrival for investments. I have resolved to compensate you adequately if you can assist me by coming or the purpose of this transaction. I have in mind to establish a good business and friendly relationship with you in the near future if you are able to help us. Please let me receive your approval or reply through my poor wife Suha and my starving daughter Zahwa Email: { suha.arafat@creditswissbank.com.} feel free to ask questions you may consider relevant.If you will not be able to assist us, be kind and notify me so that I can look for a suitable alternative. Accept my warm compliments, as I earnestly await your urgent response. Best Regards:ABU AMR (Abd al-Rahman abd al-Bauf Arafat al-Qud al-Husseini) IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
THE ABSENCE OF STRATEGY IN ISRAEL'S DISENGAGEMENT
Posted by IsrAlert, June 11, 2004. |
|
This is a special Soref Symposium Report on Security, Peace, And
Israel's Strategy Of Disengagement by Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Giora Eiland.
It is archived as Peacewatch, Number 456, The Washington Institute for
Near East Policy
(www.washingtoninstitute.org/Peacewatch/peacewatch2004/456.htm), May
13, 2004.
What Do the Palestinians (sic) Want? The natural answer to this question is "a Palestinian state." Indeed, during the Oslo process, Israel operated under this very premise. Over the past three and a half years, however, considerable doubts have arisen about whether this is what the Palestinians really want. Of course, the leaders of Hamas explicitly state that the only solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the complete destruction of Israel. From their point of view, the Palestinians need not make any hasty decisions. After all, Hamas argues, a careful reading of historical, political, religious, and demographic developments indicates that the state of Israel will collapse by the year 2027. Israelis believe that Yasir Arafat shares these same views, although his method of fulfilling them may be more sophisticated. Basically, Arafat's policy is to avoid reaching a peace agreement with Israel. This policy is based on four pillars: first, promoting a diplomatic "peace process" because the process itself is something that most everyone supports; second, retaining the terrorism option; third, sustaining the notion that Palestinian victimhood is so terrible that it requires the attention of the entire international community; and fourth, biding time until Palestinians constitute a large majority in the historic land of Palestine. If all of these efforts are pursued simultaneously, then -- in Arafat's view -- the state of Israel will not survive. For Arafat and Hamas, the end result will be the same: the collapse of Israel. Is the Occupation the Main Cause of the Arab-Israeli Conflict? The general assumption, of course, is that when occupation ends, all problems between the Arab states and Israel will vanish. In fact, the Lebanon precedent suggests that Arab animosity toward Israel will not be resolved by ending the occupation. In May 2000, Israel withdrew all its forces from Lebanon and deployed them to Israeli territory, behind the precise line demarcated by UN experts. Moreover, the UN Security Council (UNSC) -- not normally known as a pro-Israel institution -- officially certified that Israel had fulfilled the requirements in UNSC Resolution 425. According to that resolution, the Lebanese government was supposed to assume responsibility for security along the international border. Instead, it permitted Hizballah to take up positions along that border. The result today is that Israelis can open their windows and see Hizballah military positions just a few dozen meters from their homes. This is not a hypothetical problem; at least seventeen Israelis, half of them civilians, have been killed by Hizballah since the Israeli evacuation of Lebanon. And Hizballah has succeeded in transforming itself into an organization with substantial military capacity, including around 12,000 rockets of various sorts in reach of approximately half of Israel. This situation -- developed by a Lebanese organization after Israel was certified to have ended its occupation of Lebanese territory -- poses a real military threat to the existence of the state. Is there any reason to believe that the situation will differ in the West Bank and Gaza after an Israeli withdrawal? Will Hamas not follow in Hizballah's path? Will the Palestinian Authority behave differently than the government of Lebanon? Evidently, Israel's "occupation" is not the only root of the Middle East conflict. What Role for 'International Forces'? Israel recognizes that international involvement in support of a possible disengagement plan is not only possible, but also desirable. In many areas, especially economic and humanitarian affairs, Israel welcomes the involvement of the European Union and others. But in some quarters, there is an assumption that the best way to resolve a conflict or build trust between the two sides is to deploy an international military force as a buffer. Again, the Lebanon precedent questions the wisdom of this approach. A UN force -- the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) -- has been deployed along the international border for more than twenty years. At no point -- either before or since Israel's withdrawal -- has that force declared any intention to fight Hizballah or take steps to prevent Hizballah from attacking Israel. Although UNIFIL's official mandate is to restore security and peace along the border, it has done nothing in support of this mandate; in some circumstances, whether wittingly or unwittingly, the force has even given certain cover to activities against Israel. Based on this experience, why should Israel be confident that an international force deployed between Israelis and Palestinians would be any more effective? What Does the Arab World Want? A common refrain from Arab leaders and thinkers is, "We Arabs look forward to profound political, social, and cultural reforms taking hold in our societies but, unfortunately, this process cannot take place as long as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict persists. So, this problem needs to be resolved before we can tackle our internal problems." Can one seriously conclude that the extreme poverty in Egypt, the utter lack of human rights in Saudi Arabia, or the many other fundamental problems holding back development in Arab societies are the result of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict? Much more likely, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict provides an easy excuse not to address these problems and to divert pressure from within those societies onto an outside problem. To What Extent Is a 'Two-State Solution' the Proper Formula for Resolving the Arab-Israeli Conflict? This is a sensitive question, especially since the idea of a "two-state solution" has now become widely accepted as the pathway for resolving the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. But given demographic trends, is it actually realistic to believe that there is adequate space between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea for two, independent, viable states? For example, the area of the Gaza Strip is 365 square kilometers; it contains today a population of about 1.3 million Palestinians. That figure will double in one generation. Is it possible to imagine that, when 2.5 million Palestinians live in Gaza in the year 2025, they will be able and willing to focus their national energies -- economically, culturally, and so on -- within this limited space? Perhaps it is neither wise nor just to premise the solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict on this assumption. Are Peace Agreements Always the Best Solution? The legacy of the quarter-century-old peace agreement with Egypt is instructive. On the positive side, Israel has no claims against Egypt and vice versa, which is important and very positive; both sides sought to maximize their interests, which is what negotiations are all about. But there have been some problems, too. 1) Israel had an expectation that Egypt would serve as a bridge between Israel and the rest of the Arab world. Clearly, this expectation has not been fulfilled. 2) A key goal of peace agreements is to reduce military threats. Over the past twenty-five years -- and thanks to massive U.S. military support -- Egypt has managed to develop armed forces that are, in many respects, of more concern to Israel than are the forces of Syria, a country that has not signed a peace treaty with Israel. 3) For the treaty with Egypt, Israel withdrew from 100 percent of the Sinai Peninsula. As a precedent to other possible agreements, this creates difficulties. Theoretically, Israel may be forced to move to the pre-1967 lines in the West Bank, but no one should consider those boundaries to be "secure borders." 4) In retrospect, perhaps the most damaging aspect of the Israeli-Egyptian peace treaty is what that agreement did not resolve: the Palestinian issue. In considering future peace agreements, Israel must keep these lessons in mind. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
SHEIKH PALAZZI AT UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA/SANTA BARBARA
Posted by Root and Branch Association, June 11, 2004. |
|
This was written by Mrs. Nonie Darwish, March 8, 2004. Her website
address is www.noniedarwish.com
Sheikh Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi, Director, Cultural Institute of the Italian Islamic Community, was a guest speaker at the University of California in Santa Barbara [Thursday, March 4, 2004]. The event was open to the public. I attended the event and had the pleasure of discussing with the Professor many topics concerning Islam today. In his speech, the Professor opposed terrorism and the suicide/homicide murder of civilians, which he considers as an aberration of Islam. One would think that Moslems, who believe in Islam as a religion of peace, would be appreciative of this kind of message. However, a group of Moslem students from the U.C.S.B. campus were trying to disrupt the event during the question and answer period. They criticized him for not starting his speech by saying "In the name of Allah and his Prophet Mohamed". They obviously do not differentiate between speaking to Moslems in a mosque and speaking in other non-religious venues. Two men who identified themselves as Afghani used the opportunity of being given a microphone for questions to give their own speech against the Sheikh whose only message was standing against terrorism. When they were asked to only ask questions they refused claiming freedom of speech and would not leave the microphone. A female Moslem student expressed her support to terrorism by questioning; If not terrorism, what would Palestinians then do against the oppression? Some of the students came in with Moslem rosaries in their hands and clothing that usually is worn when attending a mosque. They were loud, rude, "in your face" and obviously did not want to ask questions, but just be disrespectful of the professor. They yelled "we cannot live with Zionism" and told the professor "You are finished, man!" Their leader ended up the heated argument by calling on the Moslem students to leave the hall and as they did they were yelling insults against the Sheikh. On the other hand, the other students who were in shock, many of whom were Jewish, were extremely respectful and were going out of their way to be polite to the Moslem students. I could not help but ask myself a few questions. Why did these kids choose the U.S. for their education? They obviously have no respect for our system and the way our culture channels dissent. Foreign students who come here for an education especially after 9/11 should know better than to use oppressive tactics of dissent familiar to many in the West Bank and Gaza against Israel. They should not equate themselves to the sixties student grassroots movement by American students against the American war in Vietnam. Much of the unruly behavior by Moslem students on U.S. campuses is done by foreign students who are here on student visas. The Vietnam student uprising against the U.S. government's war in Vietnam was done by American Students on American soil and not by foreign students. The ones who spoke on foreign soils did not criticize the foreign governments that provided them with a forum to speak. The foreign students are guests of this nation to get an education. They are addressing an old Moslem/Palestinian cultural problem which has caused unprecedented terror in America, the nation they are getting an education in. If these students are naturalized citizens, I think they should show more loyalty to the U.S.A., the country they chose over the Arab world to call home. The bottom line is that the students who attacked Sheikh Palazzi did not impress me as being in the U.S. for the purpose of higher education. Expectations in the Moslem world are often contradictory and hypocritical. Moslems, especially in the Arab world, do not reciprocate much of their demands from the West, simply because in their eyes we are the infidels. They demand with passion tolerance for Moslems in the West while their religious leaders in mosques call on the murder of infidels and placing FATWA on Arabs who disagree. They demand freedoms to build mosques in Europe and America, but prohibit building churches and synagogues in Moslem countries even by native Middle Eastern Christians and Jews. They jail and kill missionaries and anyone who dares to hold a Bible in front of a Moslem in the Arab world, while they freely preach Islam and extremism to our citizens, even to our most vulnerable and angry prison population. They demand bending our rules to cover their face for a driver license photo, while prohibiting women from driving at all in countries such as Saudi Arabia. They fight discrimination against Islam in Western Christian countries while they sympathies with terrorists who want to destroy the non-Moslems, America and Israel. They showed no outrage at their Moslem brothers who destroyed the Buddha statues in Afghanistan and who desecrated Jewish monuments in Israel but are outraged by ethnic profiling after 9/11. They prohibit Christians and Jews from desecrating Moslem land by simply existing on it, while Moslems are living, respected and protected in non-Moslem countries. Moslems were demonstrating all over the Arab world against France's decision to prohibit wearing any religious symbols, including Islamic Hijab while the same demonstrators prohibit Jews and Christians from wearing a cross or the Star of David. These are the same Moslems who say that the West is interfering in Moslem internal affairs and freedoms within their own Moslem countries. They are also the same people who allow only Islam to be taught in Arab public schools that gives no respect to Christian Arab children. They fight for civil rights only in the West and accept oppression, injustice, corruption and brutality from their leaders. Only America is fair game and it is not because they are brave, to the contrary it is because they are cowards. They are too scared to face the Arab internal causes of oppression, violence and instability and instead they find it easier to attack American and Israeli democracies. When Moslem Palestinians rise against the Jordanian King or Chechnians rise against the Soviet Union they are crushed and killed by the thousands without hardly any criticism of these oppressive regimes. However, the simple humiliation of a checkpoint to a Palestinian suspected of terror would make International news. There is something very wrong in this picture and many Arabs don't see it. Many of these Moslem student come here with an agenda and instead of using the U.S. freedoms to learn about the American system and befriend and get to know a Jewish student, they end up bringing the West Bank and Arab culture of intolerance and hate right here to our campuses. The equal opportunity, civil rights and non-profiling they demand from the West and is given to them by our democracy, has to be reciprocated. The arrogance of having two sets of rules has to end. They can't have it both ways. The naive American has to wake up. Moslem students who demonstrated against Sheikh Palazzi's presentation could have learned a lot from his message of tolerance and anti-terrorism and instead they shut their eyes and ears and acted like they were entitled to unruly behavior. Many U.S. politicians keep saying that Islam is a religion of peace and instead of trying to confirm this view, they rejected the courageous message of peace and tolerance by the Moslem sheikh. The world is hungry to see the humane and tolerant side of Islam and Moslems never miss an opportunity to prove otherwise. It is up to Moslems who love Islam and the Koran to elevate it from being associated with terror and hate. .Sheikh Professor Abdul Hadi Palazzi is with the Italian Muslim Association, and is Muslim Co-Chair of Islam-Israel Fellowship of the Root & Branch Association, Ltd. The Root and Branch Association is based in Jerusalem. "It is an all-volunteer, non-member organization founded by Torah-observant Jews, promotes cooperation between the State of Israel and other nations, and between B'nai Israel (Children of Israel) and B'nai Noach (Children of Noah) in Israel and abroad, to build a better world based on the universal Noahide Covenant and Laws as commanded by the G-d of Israel in the Bible and Jewish tradition." Its website address is http://www.rb.org.il. |
|
CONVERSATIONS WITH A TERRORIST
Posted by Joe Kaufman, June 10, 2004. |
|
Little did I know when Muslim convert Randall "Ismail" Royer started
e-mailing me that he would soon be sentenced to 20 years in prison for
waging jihad against America.
As a columnist for FrontPage Magazine who gravitates toward controversial subjects, I get my share of responses, sometimes from unexpected quarters. In April of 2003, I received an e-mail from someone calling himself "Ismail Royer." At the time, I didn't realize the importance of this correspondence: I had just been contacted by a terrorist. Background Randall Todd "Ismail" Royer, a native of St. Louis, converted to Islam at the age of 19, at the impetus of an acquaintance and a "singing bird." He began attending mosque and, in 1994, took a position with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), a self-proclaimed Islamic civil rights group. CAIR, at the time, was an upstart created by three leaders from the extremist Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP). It was in this same year (1994) that Royer quit college to enlist with the Bosnian army, which was actively recruiting foreign Muslim fighters from around the globe to help battle the Serbs. He says, about the members of his unit, that they were "the most beautiful people I've ever met in my life." These "beautiful people" included leaders from the Lashka-e-Taiba, a violent terrorist group headquartered in Pakistan, with operations in numerous other countries, particularly India. It was his actions relating to this organization that led Ismail Royer to receive 20 years behind bars. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, in January 2004 Royer pleaded guilty to charges of a violent nature, including "aiding and abetting the carrying of an explosive during the commission of a felony." In his plea agreement, Royer admitted to helping co-defendants Masaud Khan, Yong Ki Kwon, Muhammed Aatique and Khwaja Mahmoud Hasan in gaining entry to a terrorist camp in Pakistan operated by Lashkar-e-Taiba, where they received weapons training. Royer also admitted to helping co-defendant Ibrahim Ahmed Al-Hamdi gain entrance to the Lashkar-e-Taiba camp, where Al-Hamdi received training in the use of a rocket-propelled grenade, training he would use to carry out the Islamist assault on India. Royer's actions took place on Sept. 16, 2001, just days after 9/11. "Three other individuals attending that meeting -- Yong Kwon, Muhammed Aatique, and Khwaja Hasan (all of whom pled guilty) -- stated that they went to the Lashkar-e-Taiba camp to obtain combat training for the purpose engaging in violent jihad in Afghanistan against the American troops that they expected would soon invade that country," Justice Department officials said. For his role in the worldwide Islamist jihad, Royer received 20 years in prison. But before all this, he read my articles and wanted my attention.... Revelation While I didn't know exactly with whom I was conversing with - his name meant nothing to me - I did know about the organization he belonged to. The e-mail address Royer was using to write to me was "communications@masnet.org." I had found myself on the site masnet.org before. It was (and is) the homepage of the Muslim American Society (MAS). It turns out Royer was then the Communications Director of MAS. Considering the find (or rather him finding me), I couldn't pass up the journalistic and "counter-terrorist" opportunity to ask a few questions. E-mail Subject #1 - Muslim American Society (MAS) I began by asking his background with radical Islam. Kaufman: "How did you get involved in MAS?" Royer: "I applied for the job!" Kaufman: "Are you concerned at all with groups it affiliates with?" Royer: "Such as...?" Royer was either ignorant of the fact that the organization he was working for had major radical connections or he was just playing stupid. Being that he would soon be convicted of acting as the ringleader of an al-Qaeda affiliated group, one would presume that he knew precisely what the Muslim American Society represented. The MAS holds its annual conventions in conjunction with the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA). As reported in the January 30, 2004, edition of the New York Daily News, the ICNA "is under FBI investigation for terror ties." Also, according to the report, both the MAS and ICNA "have held conferences featuring speakers accused of terror ties and have published material supporting suicide bombings against Israel." One of these published works, a series of fatawa (religious edicts) found in the March 2002 edition of the MAS's The American Muslim, calls suicide bombing against Israelis "justifiable." The piece, entitled "Questions About Palestine," states, "Martyr operations are not suicide and should not be deemed as unjustifiable means of endangering one's life... In martyr operations, the Muslim sacrifices his own life for the Sake of performing a religious duty, which is Jihad against the enemy... martyr operations are totally different from the forbidden suicide." And an article in the July 4, 2003, edition of The American Muslim, entitled "Reaching the Roots of Terrorism," justified terrorist attacks, including suicide bombings, as "a reaction to injustice." The MAS, which has been named as being part of the DALLAS/FORT WORTH TERRORIST NETWORK, was founded via individuals associated with the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA). In a news report put out by Indianapolis's WTHR 13, counter-terrorism expert, Steven Emerson, is quoted as saying, "ISNA has sponsored extremists, racists, people who call for Jihad against the United States." And the report itself stated, "We found about a dozen charities, organizations or individuals under federal scrutiny for possible ties to terrorism that are linked in some way to ISNA - ties sources tell us have also placed ISNA under the federal microscope. ISNA has provided convention booth space and helped raise money for a number of Islamic charities later linked to terrorism by the federal government..." E-mail Subject #2 - Muslim Brotherhood (MB) The topic of conversation between Kaufman and Royer shifted to the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood after Sheikh Mustafa Mashour was assassinated. Royer either was truly naive as to the nature of the Brotherhood or was a gifted manipulator of the truth. Kaufman: "Do you condemn the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, which your organization says it mourns the death of its leader?" The press release on the MAS website read, "MAS Mourns Loss of Sheikh Mustafa Mashhour: Supreme Guide of Muslim Brotherhood pioneered balanced Islamic activism." Royer: "I'm not sure why I would condemn the Muslim Brotherhood. They're not on any list of terrorists, and the group is so broad and decentralized that to object to the actions or ideas of what one loosely-related individual or group does is not neccessarily [sic.] to object to what another group or individual does." Kaufman: "The fact that you don't condemn the Muslim Brotherhood, a group that has been responsible for the murders of leaders in the Egyptian government, is a very telling sign. And of course it would account for you not being aware of groups in your organization (MAS) that you should be concerned about." Royer: "I think you're confusing the MB with Gamaat Al-Islamiyya." The Muslim Brotherhood, may have been thought of by Royer to be a kindhearted, peace-loving organization, but the reality was something totally different. And my so-called "confusion" of the Brotherhood with Gamaat Al-Islamiyya (a.k.a. Egyptian Islamic Jihad) was no confusion at all. With this in mind, I presented Ismail Royer with the following from the United States Council on Foreign Relations, TERRORISM: QUESTIONS & ANSWERS: The basic sentiment of today's Muslim extremists has flourished in the Islamic world for decades. It can be traced at least to the founding of the Muslim Brotherhood, a political force that began in Egypt in 1928 with the goal of restoring Islamic laws and values in the face of growing Western influence... The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and the Wahhabi radicals in Saudi Arabia both arose out of an Islamic religious movement called the Salafiyya, which believes that the practice of Islam has become corrupted and must be reformed to reflect the seventh-century form of Islam practiced at the time of the Prophet Muhammad. This brash interpretation of Islam would eventually influence a new generation of violent, radical Muslim groups, including the Taliban, al-Qaeda, and Egyptian Islamic Jihad - the last of which assassinated Egyptian President Anwar al-Sadat in 1981. Kaufman: "Did you read what I sent you about Muslim Brotherhood? What do you think about that? Do you shrug that off as nothing?" Royer: "I did read it. The fact is that there are many views on the Muslim Brotherhood. And it's misleading to present that as "the" view of CFR, which comprises scholars of many different stripes and opinions... The group (Muslim Brotherhood) isn't perfect; you'll find extremist Republicans as well. The fact that they've retained their moderation under an oppressive middle eastern regime like that of Mubarak strikes me as quite impressive." If this were not the view of the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR), then why would the group include the content of the passage I quoted to Royer so prominently on its website? In addition, saying that the Muslim Brotherhood "isn't perfect" -- when considering all of the terrorist organizations the Brotherhood has spawned, including all the ones previously mentioned in addition to HAMAS and Palestinian Islamic Jihad -- is a reckless understatement. And lastly, Royer's compliment of the Muslim Brotherhood ("quite impressive") -- in association with his denouncement of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, who has had his life threatened on numerous occassions, including a failed assassination attempt in 1995 by those associated with the Brotherhood -- is appalling and shows a total lack of respect for human life and well-being. E-mail Subject #3 - Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) In the course of our contact, Ismail Royer, apparently having knowledge of my past criticisms of the organization, voluntarily brought up the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR). Royer: "Your complaints about CAIR are disenguous." [sic.] Kaufman: "My complaints about CAIR are genuine, because I am using fact. Do you support CAIR? Are you a member of CAIR?" Royer: "I worked at CAIR in 1994, and then from 1997 to 2001." Kaufman: "While you worked there, did you know of CAIR's affiliation with the Islamic Association for Palestine? And for that matter, Hamas? Do you support those groups?" Royer: "IAP isn't a 'terrorist group,' regardless of the claims of Steven Emerson. CAIR has no affiliation with HAMAS, unless one wants to use Emerson's tenuous claims. No, I don't 'support' HAMAS, whatever that means. As for IAP, if they're trying to get out a Palestinian point of view, then more power to them, but I find find [sic.] them rather nationalist for my taste." The so-called "tenuous claims" that Royer has accused Steven Emerson of making have been confirmed by numerous other credible sources. That said, CAIR's ties to Hamas are many. Previously mentioned, CAIR was formed by three individuals from the Islamic Association for Palestine or IAP. As stated in Congressional testimony: "The first manifestation of Hamas' presence in the United States was the creation of the Islamic Association for Palestine for North America in 1981. Founded by Hamas leader Mousa Abu Marzook, IAP has served as a Hamas support organization in the United States by publishing Hamas communiques, distributing Hamas recruitment videos and hosting conferences raising monetary and popular support for Hamas." At CAIR's inception, in June of 1994, the group received $5,000 from the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF) to open up a headquarters in Washington, D.C., CAIR Executive Director Nihad Awad, who has professed his support for Hamas, called the $5,000 a "modest donation." The HLF, whose Chairman, Ghassan Elashi, was also a founding board member of CAIR's Texas chapter, was shut down by the United States for financing Hamas. The FBI called HLF "Hamas" largest fundraising entity in the U.S." Indictment Just short of two months following the e-mails, Royer and ten of his colleagues were indicted, charged with "conspiring with a foreign terrorist group to engage in jihadist combat in foreign nations friendly to the United States." That foreign group was Lashkar-e-Taiba (LET), a team of Kashmiri separatists that regularly commit acts of terror against Indians. And the indictment read that the conspirators had "an intent to serve in armed hostility against the United States." The eleven became known as the "Virginia Jihad Network," and a number of convictions (including Royer's) resulted. Of course, Ismail Royer's e-mails to me didn't let on to anything as sinister as this. However, they did say something about the man. They painted a picture of a man who was in severe denial about the true nature of radical Islamist organizations. He was, in other words, the perfect recruit for Islamist terrorism; Royer's resume, which included a job as a researcher for the extremist American Muslim Council (AMC), made him a ideal candidate to take the next step from radical Islam to the world of terror. Conclusion In a May 12, 2003, piece he had written in defense of Sami al-Arian (entitled "Al Arian case: Misplaced priorities"), Royer stated, "law enforcement should at least keep tabs on people suspected of being responsible for violence overseas." The irony of this statement is apparent, since at the time of its publication, Royer was in fact being watched by law enforcement for the exact same reason. But just as in the e-mails he had sent to me, Randall Todd "Ismail" Royer was creating an illusion. On one side was his "perfect" life as a well-doer in the cause of Allah, while on the other was a twisted terrorist reality. Unfortunately for him, even he can't deny cold prison walls. Because of his work, many more credulous American Muslims may one day follow him to prison...or an early grave. Joe Kaufman, "The CAIR-Terror Connection" http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13175, April 29, 2004. "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists." This was the line from President George W. Bush's September 20, 2001 Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People that set the "Bush Doctrine" in motion. In the speech, this line made reference to foreign nations that harbored and/or supported terrorists. However, within the "war on terrorism," the line actually had a much broader meaning -- specifically towards those individuals and groups that supported the enemy right from our own shores. According to Justice Department U.S. Code Title 18, Part 1, Chapter 113B, Section 2339A: "Whoever provides material support or resources or conceals or disguises the nature, location, source, or ownership of material support or resources, knowing or intending that they are to be used in preparation for, or in carrying out [terrorist acts], or in preparation for, or in carrying out, the concealment or an escape from the commission of any such violation, or attempts or conspires to do such an act, shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 15 years, or both, and, if the death of any person results, shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life." One group in particular, CAIR or the Council on American-Islamic Relations, an entity masquerading as a "civil rights" organization, has called into question its own support for nefarious causes. The following will prove that, in late 2001, CAIR appeared to be in violation of United States law, as in regards to the providing of material support to terrorists. In September of 2001, just following the worst terrorist attack ever suffered in modern history, CAIR placed on its website, under a picture of the World Trade Center in flames, a plea for donations. It read, "Donate to the NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund." Yet, when people clicked on the link, it did not take them to any NY/DC Emergency Relief Fund. No, it took them straight to the website of the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development, an Islamic "charity" that was soon to be shut down by the United States for "raising millions of dollars annually for HAMAS." The fact that CAIR was toying with the emotions of persons wanting to give money to a fund that CAIR disguised as one related to the 9/11 attacks is despicable... The fact that CAIR was asking people to donate to an organization that was raising millions for a terrorist organization that regularly sends suicide squads to murder innocent people is criminal. Later that month, on September 25, 2001, CAIR changed the link to explicitly ask persons to "Donate through the Holy Land Foundation." And in addition, CAIR added a new link to its site, soliciting persons to "Donate through the Global Relief Foundation." The Global Relief Foundation, like the Holy Land Foundation, was soon to be shut down by the U.S. government on terrorism related charges. As stated by the Treasury Department, "The Global Relief Foundation has connections to, has provided support for, and has provided assistance to Usama Bin Ladin, the al-Qaeda Network, and other known terrorist groups." At the time of the Holy Land Foundation's closure, on December 4, 2001, CAIR immediately took the Holy Land Foundation link off of its site. And less than a week after the Global Relief Foundation's December 14, 2001 closure, CAIR removed that group's link as well. The question we now have to ask is, "Did CAIR know that these organizations existed as terrorist related entities, prior to CAIR removing the links?" Or, considering CAIR's connection to both offending organizations, the more appropriate question would be, "How did they not know?" Mousa Abu Marzook - Grandfather of CAIR The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development was founded by HAMAS leader Mousa Abu Marzook, a man who was deported by the United States to Jordan in 1997. Marzook, who may very well be, today, second in command of HAMAS, also founded, in 1981, CAIR's parent organization, the Islamic Association for Palestine. This is important, when considering the previous questions asked, but - but - there is a much bigger connection to CAIR, with respect to the Holy Land Foundation. Ghassan Elashi - CAIR Board Member The Chairman of the Holy Land Foundation, before the group's closure, was Ghassan Elashi. Elashi, in December of 2002, was charged with "selling computers and computer parts to Libya and Syria, both designated state sponsors of terrorism." Besides the Holy Land Foundation, Ghassan Elashi was also involved with CAIR. In fact, Elashi was one of the founding board members of CAIR's Texas chapter. What this means is that CAIR didn't just stick a link to the Holy Land Foundation on its website, but instead, CAIR was directly linked to the Holy Land Foundation itself! Rabih Haddad - CAIR Fundraiser Rabih Haddad was a co-founder of the Global Relief Foundation. Before being deported by the United States to Lebanon in July of 2003, Haddad had held various positions with Global Relief, including that of Executive Director and Public Relations Director. And like Ghassan Elashi, Haddad was also active in CAIR. According to the Quaker organization, the group that runs the large charitable foundation, the American Friends Service Committee, Haddad had served as a fundraiser for CAIR. Just as in the previous case, this shows that the Global Relief Foundation was not only a link on the CAIR website, but that CAIR was directly involved in the organization. Considering this evidence, it would be somewhat difficult for CAIR to deny any knowledge of the two pseudo-charities' nefarious involvements -- involvements that directly led to the murders of innocents abroad. This includes the December 2, 2001 suicide bombing of a bus in Haifa, Israel, murdering 15 and wounding 40 others... and the suicide bombing in an entertainment area in Jerusalem, which took the lives of 11 young people, just a day earlier. Both incidents occurred, while CAIR was soliciting funds for the terrorist charities on its site. If CAIR was indeed involved, under the Justice Department code stated earlier, it could result in life imprisonment for all implicated. But while it's hard for CAIR to run away from its connections to the Holy Land Foundation and the Global Relief Foundation, because of the connections, it's easy to understand why CAIR tried vigorously to defend and protect the groups. CAIR called the closure of the Holy Land Foundation "unjust" and "disturbing." And CAIR described the closure of the Global Relief Foundation as the racial profiling of an organization that "had established a track record of effective relief work." If CAIR wasn't involved in the conspiracy, why would it go out of its way to defend terror related organizations? Any group that claims to value human rights would run as far away from these organizations as possible. But CAIR did not. The reason seems clear. Now, it's time for the United States government to investigate this matter.
Joe Kaufman is the Chairman of Americans Against Hate. You can visit
the group's website, at www.americansagainsthate.com. And you can view
all of Joe's archived articles, at www.joe4rep.com.
This article appeared in Front Page Magazine June 8 and is archived at
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=13684. The
original article has links to additional material.
|
|
GUSH KATIF PLANS TO STAND STRONG
Posted by Ken Heller, June 10, 2004. |
|
Anita Tucker is a friend of mine living in Netzer Hazani in Gush
Katif. You can see by her letter that the frustration among those
living there is growing.
Please jot her a line of support. Her email address is: atucker@isdn.net.il
If you would also want to help by sending a financial assistance, please make your check out to: "Friends of Gush Katif", in care of Ken Heller, 11213 Jeanes Street, Philadelphia, Pa. 19116 Thank you and shabbat shalom!
Dear Ken Thanks for writing. There are very few people that are still communicating with us. Too many people in Israel and U.S. have apparently become anesthetized by the situation in which democracy has been totally trampled and Sharon's Mafia has taken charge! Sharon's Mafia is trying to spread fear and confusion among the people in Gush Katif. The last few nights we have had meeting after meeting and the people in Gush Katif have decided to stand tall and proud against Sharon and his power mania effort to murder our souls and spirits by the methods of"divide and rule". We have lots of experience with the Arabs who tried to murder our bodies and even after they succeeded in a few cases we then showed our best spirits of unity and stood up tall and continued giving support to the families of the fallen and to each other. We will make every effort to continue now as they attempt to murder our honor and spirit by trying to sell our souls for money. This is not the only tactic the Sharon Mafia is using. They are beginning to put security pressure on us as well and are now partially removing soldiers from roadblocks and from the main roads. The last few evenings the Al Batar missile attacks on Netzer Hazani by Arabs from nearby school buildings in Khan Hunis have been allowed to be renewed (these are a new more dangerous and exact anti-tank missile). The army apparently requested to clean out these schools that are serving as bases for missile launchers--but Sharon has denied the IDF approval for this death preventing action. Miraculously God is with us and no one has been hurt. Sharon's actions on using security as a tool for coercing Gush Katif to fold to his demands will, unfortunately, shortly boomerang into all of Israel. The IDF officers here are warning us that weapons smuggling from egypt this week is on a huge uprise and there are, as well, enormous store slicks of arms waiting along the Egyptian border to flow into the area via the tunnels in Rafah -- some will be used against Israel and some will reach Europe for the Islamic terrorists there. Sharon has given the green light to Islamic terror via his determination to break the inhabitants of Gush Katif, even if it means endangering our lives and of the lives of the people of Israel. We continue to pray for Gods help and will do our utmost to watchover and keep this privilege we have been given of turning a barren desert in Eretz Israel into a blooming oasis. Our strength is coming also from the youth and children of Gush Katif whose love of their home and their homeland is invincible. We pray that the anesthesia that Sharon has injected into to the people of Israel will wear off in time to save Eretz Yisrael and save themselves and the future of world Jewry. In those weeks that we went out to the cities to speak to the people in order to win the Likud referendum we discovered that the huge majority of the people we spoke to do not agree with Sharon -they simply have been numbed into inaction by Sharon's coercion tactics. May God have mercy on us all. We will, God willing, do our best! We hope that Am Yisrael will help by yelling loudly and clearly --SHARON STOP THIS DESTRUCTION OF ERETZ YISRAEL AND AM YISRAEL! We will not allow you to go on with this power crazy insanity! Besorot Tovot,
This was a news item in today's Arutz-7: Yet another emergency meeting will be held in Gush Katif on Sunday, in light of the apparent onset of the withdrawal/expulsion process. On the agenda will be the reports of the beginning of negotiations for financial compensation and other indications that the withdrawal is being implemented. Ken Heller is a pro-Israel activist and heads the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For A Safe Israel (AFSI). He can be reached at kjhnha@aol.com. |
|
ITEMS: A DEADLY CEASEFIRE COMING? QUESTIONS FOR SHARON AND BUSH/
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 10, 2004. |
|
MEDIA COVERAGE NOT FOR NEWS BUT FOR VIEWS Some Israeli journalists admitted the imbalance in their profession's extraordinary full attendance at a rally to abandon Yesha. They covered it during prime time television and extensively. By contrast, they aired no speeches made at a year 2000 rally against abandoning the Golan. The Israeli recipient of a Cannes Film Festival award holds Israel "responsible for the slavery of a million 'Palestinians.'" She got friendly coverage. (Her meaning is not clear from this snippet. Israel did bring Arafat into power in most of Yesha, where he did oppress his people. Israel thought it was promoting peace but got war.) By contrast, only one journalist reported at that time that the P.A. opened its armories in Gaza to Hamas (IMRA, 5/30), a crucial fact. IMRA shows that the Israeli (and other) media emphasizes news or anti-Israel slander, and de-emphasizes news favorable to Israel. What does that tell you about Israeli journalism's state of health and the journalists' emotional state? IF P.A. ARABS GO HUNGRY, WHY? The P.A. claims that Arabs in Gaza do not have enough food supplies. Why might that be? Arab terrorists use the same Karmi crossing as do food trucks. The terrorists have attacked Arab workers at the crossing, so as to discourage their employment with Israeli companies. The P.A. police do not stop these attacks. Therefore, Israel has to inspect everything and everyone passing through. This takes time and delays food trucks (IMRA, 6/1). The more unemployed the Arabs are, the less food they can afford. The nerve of the Arabs to complain about Israeli counter-measures to Arab criminality! They mix up cause and effect. EGYPT OFFERS SPACE TO THE WEST The government offered to allow NATO and US equipment to be pre-positioned in case of emergency or for regional exercises (IMRA, 6/1). What is missing from the report? Statement of the price! That valuable offer has drawbacks. Since Egypt sympathizes with Arab regimes that the US may have to fight, leaving US equipment under Egyptian supervision might delay its availability. Another possibility is that Egypt, especially if its regime is overthrown, may itself have to be fought. It would seize the stores, to be wielded by its huge, US-trained Army. Israel should have kept the Sinai, and made the offer, without extending any risk to the West. People assume that a brake on runaway Arab hostility would be the old need for replacement parts from the US. That assumption gets less tenable as Egypt, Jordan, and Iran develop their own military industries. A DEADLY CEASEFIRE COMING PM Sharon may be agreeing to a ceasefire with the P.A.. His purpose would be to claim that the conflict has calmed down and he can proceed with his abandonment plan (Op. Cit.). Being temporary, a ceasefire would not facilitate peace, which jihadists do not make. Arab military doctrine is to seek ceasefires when on the run, so they could rearm, regroup, and terminate the ceasefires. The abandonment plan, itself, would put those jihadists into a stronger position for resuming combat. Any student of strategy knows that. Ariel Sharon was a master of strategy. Why is he putting his mastery at the service of the Arabs and of the US? His appeasement amounts to collaboration. QUESTIONS OF SHARON & BUSH Miles of undeveloped sand dunes are available to the Gazan Arabs. Instead, they are waiting for their terrorism to bring them the houses, farms, factories, and other businesses that the Jews built. Their terrorism is armed by smuggling from Egypt into Gaza. Although Israel knew that Egypt assisted the smuggling into Gaza, it kept that information from the public until now. (Israel thus conspired to maintain the illusion that it made peace with Egypt and therefore could make peace with other Arabs, such as Arafat's). Egyptian police would have sufficed to block the smuggling. Now, despite knowing of Egypt's complicity in it, PM Sharon is asking Egypt to move heavier forces up to the border, praising Egypt for its stated readiness to use those troops to block smuggling. More likely, in the absence of IDF patrols in Gaza, Egypt would build tunnels for rapid invasion through Gaza! (There is no excuse for Sharon's enabling Egypt to invade, as its army has been training to do for years, with free US equipment and advisors.) Sharon's anti-Israel policy raises these questions: 1. How long has Sharon been conspiring with Egypt and the State Dept. to break the Camp David Accords and allow Egypt to re-militarize the Sinai? 2. Is he responding to threats from the US Ambassador? If so, what are they? Why don't we Americans know whether the State Dept. acts ethically and in our national interest. 3. Is he sacrificing Gaza (etc.) so Pres. Bush can call that progress, to balance against problems with Iraq? What does Sharon plan to do with the billions worth of Israeli investment there? 4. Does he accept Bush's promise of financial aid, the way Pres. Clinton's promise was accepted by Israel but not by Congressional appropriators? 5. Isn't Bush worried that Gaza will become a base for super-terrorists? How large an army will Sharon let Egypt make for the P.A.? The bigger the P.A. army, the worse the next war. 6. Has Sharon made secret pipeline deals with Egypt, as bribes for his unpatriotic invitation to it? 7. Who will profit from the casino to be built on land vacated in Gaza? (Since there is vacant enough land on the part the P.A. already controls, this new casino must be the price of a bribe.) 8. Or is this appeasement of Egypt and the P.A. the price of the leftist Attorney General, whom Sharon recently appointed, for dropping the investigation into the Greek Island affair? 9. Did Sharon make a deal with Russia to ship oil across Israel, rather than around Africa? 10. Is Sharon planning to withdraw military support from Jewish communities in Yesha, so the people there must flee (without compensation) from the terrorists, who are better armed? 11. Sharon wants Jordanian troops in, reportedly to harass the Jews out. 12. Or is Sharon planning a pre-emptive withdrawal to circumvent ordinary democratic opposition? Sharon forbids commanders to tell the Cabinet what is wrong with the abandonment plan and fired Ministers who disagree with it. 13. Why did Pres. Bush levy minor sanctions against Syria for letting terrorists at US troops in Iraq? What has Bush not told the American people? Is the silence by Bush and Sharon a form of lying? (Winston Mid East Analysis, 5/30 & 6/2, e-mail). Why don't mass-media journalists raise the critical issues that Mr. Winston does? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
MISTRIAL, ISRAELI STYLE
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, June 10, 2004. |
|
A poor Bedouin Israeli Army soldier is standing trial for manslaughter
in the death of an upper middle class British International Solidarity
Movement volunteer. Who should really be in the dock?
A 20-year-old Israeli Army private in handcuffs is led into a military court on a base near Ashkelon. Some eighty supporters are there to greet him, waving Israeli flags and carrying signs reading: Save Our Soldiers; Free the Soldier, Prosecute the ISM and No Human Shields in War Zones. The soldier, son of a poor Bedouin family from the north of Israel, is accused of manslaughter in the death last year of British International Solidarity Movement (ISM) agitator, Tom Hurndall. Hurndall, privileged product of a British public school, was shot in Rafah in April 2003 as he was making his way to the front lines of the area where the Israeli army was operating to uncover and destroy tunnels used to convey arms and ammunition from Egypt into Israel. Israeli Army officials told the Associated Press that an initial investigation, based on soldiers' accounts, indicated a Palestinian fired on a watchtower and the soldiers returned fire, hitting someone believed to be the gunman. Hurndall deliberately put himself in the area of known military operations, and took a bullet intended for a terrorist. The IDFnoted, "It is important to keep in mind the danger posed by the illegal, irresponsible, and dangerous behavior of the ISM group that led to the tragic death and sad results." Hurndall was well aware of the risks inherent in his activity in Rafah. In one diary entry he wrote: "A few hundred meters away there are army snipers, and each one of us can appear in a sniper's telescopic sight. It is possible to say with certainty that they are watching us, and my life is in the hands of an Israeli marksman or settler. I know that I will probably never know what hit me, but that is part of my role - to be as exposed as possible." We'll never know why Hurndall viewed his exposure as a crucial factor in bringing about peace in the Middle East, but this upper middle class lad from north London first tried his hand at being a human shield in Iraq, before arriving in Israel. Hurndall had joined a group of international volunteers who wanted to put themselves in front of Iraqi schools and hospitals, but when they arrived, it soon became apparent that sites would be selected by Iraqi government officials. After two weeks of heated discussion, the shields were given a list of seven sites and an ultimatum to "start shielding or start leaving." Hurndall left, passed through Jordan where he heard about the activities of the ISM, and entered Israel on a tourist visa. It's worth noting here that a number of ISMers seem to be the well-educated offspring of well-to-do parents. Hurndall attended Winchester College, one of England's most venerable and prestigious boarding schools. Tuition at the 600-year-old school is around $30,000 per year. Tom's father, Anthony Hurndall is a well-known London property lawyer. Mother Jocelyn, who says she is proud of her son, is head of a learning support unit. Fellow ISM volunteer, Radhika Sainath, a US citizen arrested three times for her violation of Israeli law during her repeated entries into Israel between 2002-2003, now plans on attending Columbia University graduate school, and is the daughter of two Orange County, CA physicians. In Hurndall's case, the resources and prominence of his family enabled them to hire a high profile British attorney to realize their efforts to prosecute an Israeli soldier for the death of their son. They chose Imran Khan, a controversial high-powered lawyer who tried to prevent then Israeli Chief of Staff Shaul Mofaz from entering Britain for an official visit in 2002 because of "war crimes." Khan and the Hurndalls ran an effective public campaign that led to British pressure on Israel to finger an Israeli soldier for the unfortunate death of young Tom. Hurndall had control over his fate and went with full awareness into a battle zone. Tragically, he paid the price. The young Bedouin soldier arrested in January 2004 after Hurndall's demise in a London hospital was serving his country and tried to do his part to smash terrorism. Now he too is paying the price of the ISM's unconscionable efforts to put themselves in the way and encourage their volunteers to violate closed military zones. The accused has spent the last six months in jail. His family is so poverty stricken that they have been able to afford the bus fare to visit him only once during his incarceration. So far, his legal representation has been court-assigned, although Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of the Shurat HaDin Law Center has offered to assist the family. In court the other day, the accused, a stocky, dark young man dressed in a plain military green uniform, sat silently as his defense attorney addressed the court. His eyes didn't engage anyone in the room--neither the witness nor the dozens who had come to support him seemed to be of interest. The three-judge panel in the small, wood-paneled courtroom listened intently as a military interrogator answered questions about the interrogation and confession extracted from the accused. How could the court take this written six page confession seriously, asked the attorney, when the defendant neither reads nor writes Hebrew? Why did interrogators have the defendant sign the confession at night, at the end of more than 9 hours of interrogation when he was tired and hungry, after he had allegedly stated: Give me a cup of coffee and a cigarette and I'll sign anything. Neil Wiggan, political office for the British Embassy was present in court with a Hebrew-English interpreter. He took a few notes, but spent most of the time catching up on his reading. "The soldier is being scapegoated by the prosecution to appease the British Foreign Office," charged Shurat HaDin attorney Leitner. Worse than that, noted Shimon, one of the supporters who had bussed down from Jerusalem. "It's the wrong entity on trial here. It's the ISM who should be sitting there accused, not this soldier who was doing his best to defend us from terrorist evil." "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com |
|
RULES OF WAR ENABLE TERROR
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, June 10, 2004. |
|
It has been clear since Arafat and his terrorist gangs started to employ their murderous tactics against civilians back in the 1970s, that most rules of law devised by the civilized world to alleviate the horrors of war, lost their relevance. Israel has since been at the forefront of the most despicable warfare ever invented, a war deliberately aimed at non combatants. As long as Jews were the victims, most of the world preferred to shut eyes and remain silent. It took 9/11 to wake it up from its deep slumber. Israel has been fighting with one, if not two, hands tied behind its back. Terror which break all civilized rules cannot be fought with civility. Had the world allowed Israel to fight correctly, the Intifadah would not have lasted more than a few weeks and many lives would have been saved on both sides. America, correctly, decided to fight terror with all her might, until the discovery of the "abuses" at Abu Ghreib. Let me tell you one thing, friends: After Saddam, if you were a law abiding citizen, going on your daily routines, you would not end up in Abu Ghreib prison. 36 million Iraqis were NOT "abused" in Abu Ghreib! Liberal-left people say they protect human rights. We, normal people, prefer to protect humans. The innocent kind. Alan Dershowitz, the famous Harvard law professor, is suggesting to modify the Rules of Law. Here is how. THE GENEVA Conventions are so outdated and are written so broadly that they have become a sword used by terrorists to kill civilians, rather than a shield to protect civilians from terrorists. These international laws have become part of the problem, rather than part of the solution. Following World War II, in which millions of civilians were killed by armed forces, the international community strengthened the laws designed to distinguish between legitimate military targets and off-limit noncombatants. The line in those days was clear: The military wore uniforms, were part of a nation's organized armed forces, and generally lived in military bases outside of population centers. Noncombatants, on the other hand, wore civilian clothing and lived mostly in areas distant from the battlefields. The war by terrorists against democracies has changed all this. Terrorists who do not care about the laws of warfare target innocent noncombatants. Indeed, their goal is to maximize the number of deaths and injuries among the most vulnerable civilians, such as children, women and the elderly. They employ suicide bombers who cannot be deterred by the threat of death or imprisonment because they are brainwashed to believe that their reward awaits them in another world. They have no "return address." The terrorist leaders - who do not wear military uniforms - deliberately hide among noncombatants. They have also used ambulances, women pretending to be sick or pregnant, and even children as carriers of lethal explosives. By employing these tactics, terrorists put the democracies to difficult choices: Either allow those who plan and coordinate terrorist attacks to escape justice and continue their victimization of civilians, or attack them in their enclaves, thereby risking death or injury to the civilians they are using as human shields. Whenever a civilian is accidentally killed or an ambulance is held up at a checkpoint, the terrorist leaders, and those who support them, have exploited the post-World War II laws of warfare to condemn the democracies for violating the letter of the law. Some human rights groups, international organizations and churches have joined this chorus of condemnation, equating the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians by terrorists with the unintended consequences of trying to combat terrorism - unintended by the democracies, but quite specifically intended, indeed provoked by, the terrorists. This only encourages more terrorism, since the terrorists receive a double benefit from their actions. First they benefit from killing "enemy" civilians. Second, they benefit from the condemnation heaped on their enemies. Human rights are thus being used to promote human wrongs. The time has come to revisit the laws of war and to make them relevant to new realities. If their ultimate purpose was to serve as a shield to protect innocent civilians, they are failing miserably, since they are being used as a sword by terrorists who target such innocent civilians. Several changes should be considered: First, democracies must be legally empowered to attack terrorists who hide among civilians, so long as proportional force is employed. Civilians who are killed while being used as human shields by terrorists must be deemed the victims of the terrorists who have chosen to hide among them, rather than those of the democracies who may have fired the fatal shot. Second, a new category of prisoner should be recognized for captured terrorists and those who support them. They are not "prisoners of war," neither are they "ordinary criminals." They are suspected terrorists who operate outside the laws of war, and a new status should be designated for them - a status that affords them certain humanitarian rights, but does not treat them as traditional combatants. Third, the law must come to realize that the traditional sharp line between combatants and civilians has been replaced by a continuum of civilian-ness. At the innocent end are those who do not support terrorism in any way. In the middle are those who applaud the terrorism, encourage it, but do not actively facilitate it. At the guilty end are those who help finance it, who make martyrs of the suicide bombers, who help the terrorists hide among them, and who fail to report imminent attacks of which they are aware. The law should recognize this continuum in dealing with those who are complicit, to some degree, in terrorism. Fourth, the treaties against all forms of torture must begin to recognize differences in degree among varying forms of rough interrogation, ranging from trickery and humiliation, on the one hand, to lethal torture on the other. They must also recognize that any country faced with a ticking-time-bomb terrorist would resort to some forms of interrogation that are today prohibited by the treaty. International law must recognize that democracies have been forced by the tactics of terrorists to make difficult decisions regarding life and death. The old black-and-white distinctions must be replaced by new categories, rules and approaches that strike the proper balance between preserving human rights and preventing human wrongs. For the law to work, it must be realistic and it must adapt to changing needs. Yuval Zaliouk write the Truth Provider essays. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
WHEN AND HOW TO END TERRORISM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 10, 2004. |
|
Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich warned that it may take more than half a century to defeat terrorism. He knows the task is difficult, but he does not understand terrorism. We don't have much time to defeat terrorism. Any month now, terrorists may develop or acquire weapons of mass-destruction. Perhaps they already have them, and are planning when and where to launch them. Then they will strike. When they do, the damage to us may be enormous. It may reduce our resistance. We cannot afford to wait for that to happen. We have to muster the resources now to overthrow all the terrorist regimes. We also must pursue all the terrorist organizations and rogue state scientists. Whereas Mr. Gingrich treats the current struggle like a long-term Cold War, it really should be a briefer one, like WWII. The USSR restrained itself; terrorists do not. We need a President who recognizes the threat, leads the country against it, and demands the resources to conduct it. The incumbent's speeches allude to the threat, but he does not lead the country to the full realization or call for sufficient resources. His opponent suggests diplomacy with fanatics and pooling of resources with our foes. That cannot work. The GOP campaign should challenge Sen. Kerry, who boasts of approval by foreign leaders, to get those leaders to pool their resources with the US. He thus would help his country and accrue electoral credit for his success. I think he would fail. Foreign leaders probably like his policies for their inability to change the status quo. Pres. Bush actually is mounting a long-term effort against terrorism. He therefore embraces Gingrich's fallacious sense of timing. The Bush initiative would try to spread democracy and literacy among the Arabs. He, too, seeks financial help from our stingy former allies turned adversaries, to subsidize 100,000 teachers to reduce illiteracy among the Muslims. Half the Arabs already reject the program. The Muslim states wouldn't need our money for such a program, if they didn't spend theirs preparing for war on each other, on Israel, and on us. Since so many Arabs would not be reached by a program their governments, such as Egypt, reject, the program would not prevent some terrorists from attacking us fairly soon with weapons of mass-destruction. A proper education would undercut the terrorism-promoting madrassas in some countries. It would not do so in S. Arabia, which has sufficient funds but whose curriculum is Islamist. S. Arabia is not the only Muslim country whose government schools indoctrinate in intolerance and violence. UNRWA schools in the P.A., run by the UNO, a quarter of whose expenses are paid by the US, is another extreme example. The US arms both the P.A. and Egypt. Rather than promoting literacy in the Muslim world, the West would be better advised to bar Muslims from science classes in the West, where they learn the basis for developing weapons of mass-destruction. On the other hand, universities could argue that what the Arabs don't make, France, N. Korea, Russia, or China would sell them. The notion that democracy would eliminate terrorism, if indeed democracy could be grafted into the Muslim states, is unproved. There is no reason to anticipate that indoctrinated people free to choose their leadership would select for tolerance. Nor is the supposed democracies' record that exemplary. The US and EU support Palestinian Arab terrorism. The government of Israel accedes to some P.A. terrorist demands. To those ends, these governments work in secret and even silence some critics. Who will purify the democracy that the US, EU, and Israel are supposed to have? The Arabs, who ordinarily pounce on Western self-contradictions, ignore that one. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
UN ADDRESSES PALESTINIAN REFUGEES AND DOESN'T LET ISRAEL ATTEND
Posted by Elias Yrachmiel, June 10, 2004. |
|
In view of the recent unbelievable acts of deceit, submission,
dessertion and treason against Am Yisrael by Prime Minister Sharon and
the Haverai Knesset, we at Netzah Yisrael Lo Yeshaqer ask you to
consider and act on the information provided by David Bedein, bureau
chief, Israel Resource behind the News. Please forward this and then
go immediately to the following hyperlink to add your name to the
growing list of those that know the only way to cure the disease is to
cut it out!
This article was written by David Bedein, Bureau Chief, Israel Resource
News Agency.
This week, with funding from the Swiss government, UNRWA, the UN agency that is charged with handling refugee camps from the 1948 war, launched an international conference on what should have been a clear, innocuous and professional agenda: Addressing the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian Arab refugees. 67 nations, 34 relief organizations, the Palestinian Authority and the PLO were invited to attend the conference, held at the UN's plush international conference center in Geneva Yet Israel was not invited to attend. Nor was any Israeli reporter invited to cover the event. UNRWA spokespeople said that they would only recognize reporters with credentials from either the UN or from Switzerland. I covered the conference anyway, since it would have been difficult for the UN to turn down press credentials which had been certified by a dues-paying UN member nation. A young Egyptian clerk looked at the Jerusalem credentials and looked up at me and stamped my press pass, quietly saying that "You know that we are at peace with you". According to the UNRWA spokesman: Israel was not invited to this conference because Israel is not a contributing nation to UNRWA. Yet until a few years ago, Israel provided more than $750,000 dollars per annum to UNRWA and exceeded the contribution of many of the Arab countries. So why not invite Israel to attend as an observer or a discussant? To that. UNRWA and the Swiss government had no answer. After all, the PLO, which sent a senior delegation to the conference, can hardly considered to be a donor to UNRWA, even though it would have been logical for UNRWA to ask that the PLO dip into assets which are worth anywhere from two to nine billion dollars, depending on which financial expert you ask. Yet UNRWA never asks for any contribution from the PLO Even though Israel was not invited to attend the UNRWA conference, the spokesman of the Israel Foreign Ministry reported that the Swiss government had assured Israel that the atmosphere of the conference would be devoid of any message against Israel, Indeed, the UNRWA web site had proclaimed that the conference would be devoid of politics and not discuss the "right of return". However, the UNRWA conference, from its opening moment, was held in an atmosphere of invective against Israel. As conference participants entered the hall, they were greeted by more than a hundred life size pictures of Palestinian Arab refugees who have suffered at the hands of Israel. Pictures in the exhibit were interwoven of Arabs fleeing their homes in 1948, Arabs dwelling in tents and shacks, and portraits of Arab women and children facing Israeli police and the Israeli army, which would lead any participant at the conference to come to the visceral conclusion the total picture Palestinian refugee reality is oppression at the hands of Israel. And from the pictures in the hall, you would think that these refugees still live in tents. In the central open conference room as the participants walked in, UNRWA screened short movies, all funded by the Swiss government, and played them consecutively throughout the conference, designed to show different aspects of UNRWA's services. You could not miss the invective against Israel in some of the films. "Hoda's Story" showed the medical treatment that UNRWA provides for an eleven year old girl who had been shot in the head, by the IDF while she was sitting in her classroom in Khan Yunis. Hoda is blinded as a result, and shown going through medical treatment at UNRWA health facilities. The film focuses on the children in Hoda's school mates who discuss their fear that the IDF will kill more children and that Hoda's fate may be their fate at the hands of the IDF. The film clearly hints that the IDF intentionally shoots children. No mention of the fact that her school was caught in cross fire between the IDF and the Palestinian armed forces. Had Israel been invited to attend the conference, Israel could have shared its publicly available intelligence reports on how the Palestinian armed forces use UNRWA offices, UNRWA medical clinics and even UNRWA schools as a base of operations. A discussion would have ensued between UNRWA spokespeople and Israeli spokespeople as to the extent to which the Palestinian armed forces use UNRWA facilities as their base of operation. Yet Israel was not afforded the right to respond to baseless allegations that it has a policy of killing children. For its part, Israel could have been afforded the chance to distribute the recent publications on the Palestinian Authority's incitement of school children, and the recent booklets that tell the story of 113 Israeli school children who were murdered in cold blood by Palestinian terrorists. Another movie screened by UNRWA showed the massive $27 million UNRWA project to repair demolished homes in Jenin.a noble undertaking in itself, as the film shows careful and diligent coordination with the rival camp committees to accomplish the goal. Yet laced throughout the film is blame and hatred of Israel, with films showing the tanks that knocked down houses in Jenin in April 2002. The film shows a crying woman complains how the Israelis had simply destroyed the home that she had built, brick by brick, over a period of 20 years. The visceral reaction that any conference participant who saw this film would be deep anger and resentment of Israel for what it did in Jenin. The film does not mention how Fateh spokesman had referred to the UNWRA camp in Jenin as "the suicide capital". No mention of how some of these homes had been used by snipers to kill 23 IDF troops. No mention of how the Palestinian armed forces had taken refuge in these homes. Had Israel been invited to attend the conference, Israelis would have shown their footage of the UNRWA camp in Jenin. Instead, conference participants were left with the impression that Israel destroys homes with no reason given. Indeed, the commissioner general of UNRWA, Peter Hansen, held a press conference at the conference in which he complained that Israel had increased home demolitions from 65 a month in 2002 to more than 140 a month during this calendar year. Hansen could provide no explanation for the demolitions, and no one was there from Israel to say why. Hansen could only say that he wonders if Israel will now demolish the new houses that UNRWA has built. Meanwhile, Hansen has never recanted his statement from April 2002 that Israel had conducted a massacre of "hundreds" of people in Jenin at the time. The Arab death toll at the time was 56, most of whom were armed. Since the Swiss government paid for the movies, the spokesman of the Swiss government present at the showing was asked for comment on the one-sided nature of these films. His response was to shrug his shoulders and take no responsibility for their content. Meanwhile, one of the films screened by UNRWA would have been appreciated by Israel, had an Israeli representative been present to comment. That was the film of the rehabilitation of the UNRWA camp in Nesirat. Located in northern Syria. The film showed how the Syrian government had cooperated with UNRWA to relocate people who had been in the stench of an overcrowded camp since 1950 into a much healthier facility in northern Syria, in a program financed with the help of the US and Canada. This would have been Israel's opportunity to share the approved policy of the government of Israel which calls for the rehabilitation of UNRWA camps and their transformation into decent and humanitarian living conditions. That policy had been adopted by the Israeli government in 1983 and rejected by the UN in 1985, because of the UN commitment to not interfere with the "inalienable right of return" for Palestinian Arab refugees to go back to their homes from 1948. Although UNRWA declared that the conference would not deal with the "right of return", UNRWA allowed the PLO Refugee Affairs Department to put up a table in which it distributed its materials to promote the "right of return". The PLO distributed precise maps of where and how the UNRWA camp residents could take back their homes from 1948. Asked about the fact that the HAMAS terrorist organization had taken over the teacher's union and workers council of UNRWA, Hansen did not deny it, but went on to say that only one UNRWA employee had ever been arrested for terror activity. Hansen went on to say that UNRWA could not discriminate against the religious affiliation of his staffers. invoking a new understanding of civil rights and religious liberty, with Hamas recognized as a religious denomination. It is therefore not hard to imagine what message HAMAS teachers are conveying in an UNRWA classroom. Perhaps that it is for that reason that the UNRWA schools, as a matter of course, hold celebrations and marches in honor of HAMAS suicide bombers. Had Israel been invited, Israel could have provided films of rallies for HAMAS inside the UNRWA schools. The Conference on the humanitarian needs of the Palestinian refugees concluded with a unanimous resolution which called on all nations to protect Arab refugees and to protect UNRWA personnel, and to ensure the safe passage of UNRWA personnel to and from the UNRWA camps. The conclusions of the conference appear on the web site of UNRWA. As conference was indeed concluding, a news report blipped on the computers of the reporters that residents of an UNRWA camp in Gaza had fired mortar shells into the Israeli city of Shderot, located in the Negev. The UNRWA shells had hit a factory and injured five people. No resolution dealt with the question of who is supposed to protect the people of Shderot from the armed personnel who fire mortars from the UNRWA camps. At the end of the conference, U.S. State Dep't personnel emerged from the briefings. Perhaps this would provide a breath of fresh air for Israel, since the US often stands by Israel at the UN. U.S. State Department people were asked about the fact that Israel was excluded from this crucial UN conference. However, U.S. officials indicated that they had concurred in the decision to exclude Israel, a member in good standing in the UN since 1949, from these discussions. |
|
A PERSONAL APPEAL FOR THE UNITED JERUSALEM FOUNDATION
Posted by Richard Haar, June 10, 2004. |
|
I Richard Haar as a devoted Israel advocate, Zionist activist and founder of The United Jerusalem Foundation appeal to you for your help. Our data storage costs, administrative/maintenance, licensing and transaction fees continue to grow. Please help us maintain the Internet's largest and most valuable Israel-News permanent archive and letters/comments boards. Please take out your credit card and give what you can by clicking the secure link directly below or mail a check. We truly hope you are able to show United Jerusalem your appreciation for all that we do and have done over the past 4 years. presents a multitude of news reports while examining and responding to anti-Israel media bias and inaccuracy which permeates the 'Free Press.' Each day brings up to 100 headlines from dozens of daily publications and wire services. If you are an Israel news buff, writer or educator, United Jerusalem has something major for you! More importantly our searchable |Israel-News Today| archival data base is equipped to compose and send |Letters to the Editor| *In truth United Jerusalem calls all those of good will to battle bias. |Sign-Up| now in order to utilize our proprietary letters platform and view our 'Watchmen' letter's on the comments board. 'On your walls, O Jerusalem, I have appointed Watchmen'. (Isaiah 62:6) Israel's reality as presented by the so called 'free press' is deeply flawed, routinely misleading and must be dealt with seriously, diligently and continuously. UnitedJerusalem.org allows us to do just that. Today the largest and most prolific news services continuously embed bias and falsehood in their reporting on Israel and it's having a cumulative negative effect on the publics perception and attitudes about Israel and the Jewish people. Become a Watchman help us battle anti-Israel media bias and inaccuracy. Shalom Richard Haar. INTERNET: https://www.unitedjerusalem.org/donation.asp? CharityID=2#Charity MAIL: The United Jerusalem Foundation
Richard Haar is Executive Director The United Jerusalem Foundation. |
|
THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY
Posted by Ellen W. Horowitz, June 10, 2004. |
|
Last Thursday morning, I was sitting at breakfast with my husband at a certain 5 star Hotel in Jerusalem (I'm entitled to this rare occasion, OK!). We had the dining room all to ourselves, and in walks MK and then-Cabinet minister Benny Elon -he was alone. So, I whispered to my husband, "tell him in that great Tel Aviv accent of yours to quit the government now!" My husband rolled his eyes and replied, "I refuse to invade the privacy or disrupt the meal of a public figure - you taught me that!" And so I ate my scambled eggs in silence, but every once in a while I threw a cold stare in the minister's direction. 24 hours later, Benny was on the lam and doing all he could to avoid being served a dismissal notice from PM Sharon. It was both somewhat amusing and so very embarrassing. But all in all, I'm glad I voted for the National Union. Thank you, Avigdor Lieberman, for taking the lead. It seems that it took a former resident of the Soviet Union to see what a farce Israeli Democracy really is. But what can you expect from a state built by and primarily populated with a people who were either indoctrinated by Eastern European Bolshevism or victims of Arab tyrannies? It should also be taken into consideration that Western-style Democracy is not an inherently Jewish concept. I was thinking about how America and much of Diaspora Jewry has always justified Israel's existence because "it's the only Democratic presence in the Middle East." Well, what will be the justification now - that we make the best felalfel? So, it seems the fledgling state has lost its political and national direction. But we are going to get it back. Don't fret, as recent developments are ultimately for the good. It seems that seeds of truth - as opposed to "seeds of peace" - are starting to sprout. (Real peace can only be built on a foundation of truth, but the peace camp is ever-so anxious to skip-over that basic premise). Sharon's plans to evacuate Gaza were overwhelmingly defeated in a very democratic referendum. This was no small minority vote, as the Israeli Left and international commentators will have you believe. The largest and most popular political party in Israel overwhelmingly defeated the plans of the country's leadership (who just happen to be a members of that same party). These are the facts and the will of the people cannot be taken lightly. It's Hebrew Book Week and the new release, "The Covenant", by religious, right wing author Noami Ragen just unseated A.B. Yehoshua's book as number one on the national best seller list. Another indication that the people of this nation are thirsty for the truth. Aside from little deviations here and there, for the last 27 years the people of Israel have consistently voted to the Right. Even those few Labor victories have been ensured only by placing purported hawkish generals at the top of the ticket. Had the media and pollsters been correct in their reading of public opinion, people like Peres, Beilin and Burg would have been leading this country long ago. The assassination of the legendary Labor Prime Minister should have, theoretically, shifted public opinion to the far Left. Instead, we elected Benjamin Netanyahu. So much for pollsters and media pundits. They are perpetually off the mark and yet, like idiots, we still tune in. Now, listen and learn - this is an essential point that must be understood. We didn't elect Bibi back in 1996 to bring about national reconciliation or to continue the peace process, or even to integrate Israel into the new global economy. The simple truth is that we, the public, desperately wanted to rid ourselves of Oslo. We elected the seemingly potent figure with the golden tongue to stand up in front of the world and to verbally and physically rip the Oslo accords to shreds. At the time, that's all we required of him. Instead, the media sliced through Bibi and the wounded hero handed us Wye. So much for form and style. For a brief time we watched the ludicrous, boyish antics of Clinton, Arafat and our little General (Barak) at Camp David. When the mischievous game got out of hand and the blood started gushing, Israel ran into the arms of a big, grown-up man. Ariel Sharon was not brought to power for his charm, diplomatic skills or talent as a tactician. We simply wanted the old bulldozer to push through all political roadblocks and to uproot and bury terrorism. Instead, we got the roadmap, free passes for bus bombers and a disgraceful dictator who unabashedly proclaims his intentions to rip Jews from their land. We Israelis have neither the time nor luxury to ponder our position on today's demented geopolitical chessboard. We're not so "sophisticated" or "intellectually" astute. The New World Order is Chaos and that doesn't interest most of us. We just want to live on the land that G-d gave to us, pure and simple. How very primitive and elementary of us - but then again, the truth is rather unpretentious. And if the very basic truth be known, our current political system, leaders and local media are corrupt and bad. The rot runs so deep, that I doubt if unassisted human endeavors can rectify the damage. The foundations that the Modern State of Israel were built on appear to be corroded beyond repair. The good news is that the spirit of Israel is alive and well and the people are strong and healthy. So, I believe we are in for a great change. I said great change, not another shift. The political pingponging between the right and left of this country has gone beyond overtime and somebody needs to call the game, and turn the table over. It won't be easy, changes never are. There will have to be something of an earthquake to set things on the right path. Israel as a nation needs to simultaneously separate and consolidate herself. There are elements in and among us and Diaspora Jewry which we need to disconnect from. I am not referring to people with differing political and religious opinions and views - as that's what makes the world go round. I am suggesting that we expose and isolate those Jews who have clearly betrayed their own people and are actively working to bring about the destruction of the Land, People, Torah and State of Israel. Which brings me to the ugly... Jeffrey Goldberg of the very posh New Yorker wrote a self-hating, self-defeating, obsessive compulsive piece of trash entitled, Among the Settlers: Will they Destroy Israel? Through much of the article, Goldberg relies on erroneous polls, deceptive interviews and the demographic scare tactics of the Left-wing, but what's particularly sickening is that a disproportionate share of the piece is spent on describing the physical attributes of rabbis, settler leaders and right-wing activists. A sampling follows: "her fingernails were chewed and dirty." "He is a heavyset man who smokes bad cigars and has perhaps the most profane mouth in Orthodox Judaism." "For many years, he has been the face of the settlement movement, which is no favor; his head is small, but his eyes are bulbous and his teeth outsized. His voice is deep, and his beard seems constructed of iron shavings. I said hello. He grunted a reply." (By the way, when I read a portion of the last quote to my daughter, she was sure it was in reference to Arafat). It's funny that while the piece is peppered with other numerous personalities, including Prime Ministers, members of Knesset, generals and Arab terrorist leaders, degrading descriptions do not preface nor follow their names. I've seen your picture on the Internet, Jeffrey, and it's nothing to write home about either. For the record, I bite my nails, am more than overweight and have a stutter. But I am a proud Jew. Another far more sinister member of our tribe who appears to be oh-so-suave and debonair is Ian Lustick. The pride of the Left and professor from The University of Pennsylvania likes to play dangerous games, literally. Popular Science has a five page spread on the professor's new virtual terror game. He's a man who loves to pin the label of false messianism on the Israeli settlers. But in truth, it's Lustick, the control freak, who likes to play G-d. Israel and those who support her are mere pawns on Lustick's political chessboard. I wrote about the prominent professor last February in, "The Price of Arrogance," http://www.israelnn.com/article.php3?id=3374 At that time, thanks to Lustick, the academic fate of pro-Israel professor and columnist Francesco Gil-White was hanging by a thread. Lustick was also actively encouraging the FBI and IRS to investigate the philanthropic, albeit Zionist activities of Dr. Irving Moskowitz. A few months later, it appears that Gil-White has lost his job and Moskowitz is under investigation. But Lustick should be the object for investigation, as he spends a lot of United States public and private sector funds on promoting Palestinian Arab endeavors to destroy Zionism and Israel. Passia, the propaganda mouthpiece for the PLO has invited Lustick to speak in Jerusalem/Al Quds (sic) on June 16th. The topic: The Future of the Settlements in a Two-State or One-State Solution. Passia receives over 1 million dollars annually in U.S government aid and is registered as a legitimate charity with the Ministry of Interior of the State of Israel Now that's ugly, (and confusing) isn't it? Two exceptional investigative reports about Passia's activities were written by David Bedein of the Israel Resource News Agency and columnist Judy Lash Balint, and can be seen at http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=10535 http://www.emunah.org/magazine_comments.php?id=P32_0_4_0_C In an oh-so civilized email exchange, Ian Lustick invited me to meet with him, but I'm afraid that I'll have to decline. Welcome to Israel, Professor. I don't have the time nor desire to engage in any dialogue with you (I'm too busy trying to pick up the pieces from the mess that people like you have created), but I will find the time to write about you. I intend to make your stay here as uncomfortable as possible. Once Israel rids herself of the murky influence of the ugly among us, we will then be able to clearly decipher the good from the bad. When that happens, we will all see a lot clearer and, G-d willing, make the right choices. Ellen Horowitz lives in the Golan Heights, Israel with her husband and six children. She is a painter, columnist for Israelnationalnews,com and co-founder of helpingisrael.com. She can be contacted through her website http://www.artfromzion.com |
|
"SHREI GEVALT"
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 10, 2004. |
|
"SHREI GEVALT": A loose interpretation is to "Cry Out With Force!" **
Before WW2 some Jews were more attuned to their Gentile neighbors and ramped up days of inspired rage. They seemed more aware of the varying levels of hostility and they acted accordingly. In Germany, some Jews were alarmed at the popularity of Adolph Hitler, his anti-Semitic speeches, the declaration of his Nuremberg regulations restricting all civil rights of Jews and the attacks of his Brown Shirt thugs. They knew that this was the incarnation of extreme danger. These Jews tried to warn the Jewish community to leave. Most ignored the warnings, even to the point where those who "Shrei-ed Gevalt" were castigated as alarmists. Those Jews, in deep denial, proclaimed that they merely wished to Iive in peace and the threat was exaggerated. Those who ignored the warnings of the more prescient Jews whose antennae picked up the signals of hatred and imminent hostile action more clearly than others, were slaughtered. Germany was the catalyst but the European nations that were invaded by Hitler soon and energetically joined Hitler's killing machine. Attacking Jews was not new to any of the European Christian nations but Germany's concerted planning and the thrust of the Genocide to "ethnically cleanse" the world of all Jews gave new impetus to what can only be called 'church-taught' hatred. That sickness was not limited to the Axis but, even the Allies displayed an astonishing bias when it came to even considering the rescue of the Jews from the Nazi Holocaust. Clearly, many nations stand condemned for their participation of attempting to wipe out the whole race/religion of Jews and there is a price yet to be paid. Perhaps the angels wept but, not a tear from the 'civilized' race of men! It is now 2004 - a new millennium and a new century. For quite a while those Jews who have sensitive antennae to coming danger have been "Shrei-ing Gevalt". As in the 1930s and 40s the smell of pogroms in the air is so strong you can taste it. Again the Jews sometimes called Leftists, socialists, pacifists not only ignore the shouted warnings but have joined with friends of our enemies and even with our enemies themselves hoping it is all a passing phase. Most of those who follow the leading 'deniers' of danger are merely unaware Jews in denial who want to live in peace and are willing to ignore the daily killings and pledges by Arab Muslims to utterly destroy the Jewish nation of Israel and the Jews around the world. Burbling about 'peace' usually never bought 'Peace' but it did encourage our enemies to accelerate their pace of cruelty and plans of attack. Then there are the non-Jewish Jews, our so-called leaders, the appeasers who indicate that they do not want a nation that is Jewish and are perfectly willing to risk the elimination of the Jewish people and the Jewish State to impose their defeatist ideology on all the Jewish people. Like the Judenraat who collaborated with Hitler. Today's Judenrat still believe the the Arabs will let them live after the Jewish 'Nakba' (Catastrophe). They have themselves rushed to the gates of the city and country to open them to the hordes of screaming Arab Muslims who shout for their blood. You might ask, How can any thinking Jew ignore all prior pledges of Arab Muslims to kill Jews which have been carried out in a daily ritual slaughter? How can they so willingly open the gates to the barbarians who dance with the body parts of Jews even using a blown off Jewish head as a soccer ball. With specificity, I name Shimon Peres, Yossi Beilin, Yossi Sarid, Ehud Barak and now Arik Sharon as Jews who are blind and willing to sacrifice their own people to the knives of the Arab Muslims in order to achieve popularity (or at least acceptance) in the world. All, of course, had their court sycophants - all the way down to the uneducated fools who pour into the streets with the slogans of "Peace Now" - even as the Arabs clamor for lives. There are a small host of us who critically observed each of the Wars, tabulating the constant Terror, the Arab Muslim and European nations who knowingly fund the Terrorist organizations globally. The nations of the West ignore Arab Muslim aggression because of their need and greed for oil. We watch such Global organizations at the United Nations, the European Union as they adopt the cause of radical Islam - insofar as the security and sovereignty of the Jewish State of Israel is concerned. We watch all these things ramp up and we "Shrei Gevalt". Others, now dead, tried to warn their Jews when Hitler's Brown Shirts were first attacking Jews on the streets of Berlin and breaking the windows of Jewish shops on 'Kristallnacht' (Night of the Broken Glass) November 9-10, 1938. The Nuremberg laws restricting Jewish civil rights were already enacted by 1935 stripping all Jews of their basic civil rights but, still the Jews dithered and milled around like confused cattle. We tried to warn the Jews of France as the French turned in their own Jewish citizens over to the Gestapo and Vichy French government collaborators who were aiding the incoming German Nazis. A few escaped but, most remained confident that Hitler's killing machine was merely a 'temporary aberration'. The Jews of Germany, France and elsewhere could not bring themselves to believe that civilized nations would simply murder them because they were Jews. Now we clearly see the intentions of the Arab Muslim killing machine. They write, they broadcast, they proclaim their intentions in plain language to eliminate the Jewish people and the Jewish State. Their map of another Arab Muslim State called "Palestine" covers the entire map of Israel. Since the signing of the Oslo Accords on the White House lawn September 13, 1993, more than 1500 Jews have been murdered (and more than 45 Americans), tens of thousands have been wounded - crippled until they die. When they can, they deliberately mutilate the dead Jewish bodies - just as they are doing in Iraq. The mutilation is their expression of rage and demonstrate what they eventually hope to do to all Jews. The nations, including our friends, have stood by, virtually mute, except for the money they supply to the Terrorist organizations of the Arab Muslims. How can anyone be blind to their intentions? You, as a Jew, may not want to know, to see, to believe. You may wish to believe that your dream to live in peace with the Arab Muslims in the Jewish State of Israel is possible, is coming soon - if only we give them a little more land. Oh, really! How short-sighted! It's much better to know, to see and therefore, to strengthen yourselves against the coming and continuing onslaught. Then, we might just survive - barely. But, psychiatrists and students of aberrant behavior view the Jews as a society in deep denial in spite of the frequency when the Arabs try to kill them. Do you think that we like to write these horrible prognoses for our future? NO! We'd much rather not. So, wake up already and prepare to protect your families! Let's get on with the business of girding our loins for the battles that the Muslim Arabs promise us. Us - those Jews in Israel and around the world and the rest of the non-Muslims in the Free West. We "Shrei Gevalt" and it is past time for Jews to perk up your ears now! There will be no mercy, no pity and, as before,, don't expect any nation to come to our rescue. The Arab Muslim killing machine is backed by, funded and protected by the same nations who assisted Hitler's Genocide. The Jews of Europe were decimated! That means that only 1 in 10 of the Jews who lived in Europe before Hitler survived. The survivors fled the anti-Semitism of the Europeans that remained AFTER WW2. Many came to Israel. Now, the survivors must face this cruelty again. But, this time it should be different. The Jews have their own State, a fantastic Army. This time they can meet that virulent midnight 'knock on their door' with a gun in hand. Too bad that the same weak leaders, the 'Judenrat' of Israel and America tell the Jewish people: "We must pacify the Arab Muslim Palestinians and the Arab Muslim States' killing machine". Foreign government leaders press Israel to give up defensible land in the vain hope that the Arab Muslims will cease their Terror attacks globally. Why should they? It's working! These leaders of the West already know that there will be no pacification of the Arab Muslims now attacking Jews - just as there is no pacifying the Arab Muslims attacking American soldiers in Iraq. Have you not wondered why the so-called Arab Muslim Palestinians and other Arab Muslims dance with joy when there is a successful murderous attack against Israelis or Americans in Iraq? 9/11 was a joy for the Arab Muslims in Tehran, Bagdad, Damascus, the Palestinian Authority and even in Cairo, Egypt. But, sacrificing Israel for the brief extra time it may give the West to plug the holes in their defenses is a necessary cost for the majority. Jewish victims or victims-to-be may not see it that way, although Israel's weak leadership seems to find the price acceptable. So, let me, among others, try once more to "Shrei Gevalt". The Arabs are closing in on all of us. The leaders of Israel, including the Left, have shown a special incompetence in protecting the Jewish nation. Both must be removed from power because they ignore the future, erase the past as if inconsequential and continue to believe in appeasement - just as when Neville Chamberlain agreed to appeasing Hitler by giving him the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia. Later Chamberlain said on his deathbed: "It would have been OK if only Hitler hadn't lied to me." Foreign nations have only oil interests to consider and, therefore, Israel is expendable in their doctrine where the few can be sacrificed for the many. The nations are, indeed, gathering and Israel must be ready to push over the pillars of an uncivilized world as did Samson. Jews, you have no place to escape to except Israel - because none of the nations will take you in. Each for their own reasons - be it oil, religious hatred - they all want Israel gone from this planet. It is past time to say "NO!" And, when that knock-on-the-door comes at midnight, open it and shoot the marauder. We are instructed by G-d to take a life when a killer comes to take ours. We are NOT instructed to give up our homes or our lives in a vain effort to de-program Arab killers cheered on by anti-Semitism. It's way past time to "Shrei Gevalt!" to all Jews because the alternatives is to wake up dead. ### ** In Yiddush the correct spelling is Gewalt, but it is pronounced with the 'V'. 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). |
|
WHAT'S FLYING UP NORTH
Posted by Honest Reporting, June 10, 2004. |
|
As Israel's northern region was targeted in the past few days, media coverage failed to present essential context to inform readers of ongoing Arab aggression against Israel. Here's a review of what occurred: 1) On June 7, a Lebanon-based Palestinian group (Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine) fired a number of rockets toward Israel. One nearly hit an Israeli naval vessel patrolling in Israeli territorial waters. 2) In retaliation hours later, the Israeli Air Force struck a PFLP base just south of Beirut. 3) The following day (June 8), in a new provocation, Hezbollah fired 20 rockets and mortars at IDF positions on Har Dov. 4) In retaliation that day, the IDF returned fire against Hezbollah. Yet here's how the June 8 Associated Press report began: Hezbollah guerrillas and Israeli troops fired rockets and shells at each other across the south Lebanon border Tuesday, a day after the deepest Israeli airstrike into Lebanon in four years. Note that the Israeli airstrike raises readers' concern ('deepest in four years') and is mentioned in a long-term historical context, but the PFLP rocket attack that immediately preceded the Israeli airstrike and instigated this entire round of violence is omitted. AP only gets around to mentioning the instigating attack - the PFLP rocket strike - in the 10th paragraph of this report. AP thereby misleads the typical reader by skirting past what is perhaps the dominant narrative of the entire Mideast conflict - Arab rejection of, and aggression against, Israel. Indeed, this week's provocations from Lebanon were in blatant violation of the Lebanese-Israeli border (the 'Blue Line') that the United Nations defined following Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon in May 2000. Since then, despite Israeli commitment to the Blue Line, Hezbollah and Palestinian groups in Lebanon have killed six Israeli civilians and eleven IDF soldiers through an ongoing barrage of unprovoked attacks: - 105 anti-aircraft attacks
By failing to put this week's violence in proper context, Associated Press extends an all-too-familiar pattern of 'tit-for-tat, cycle of violence' coverage - emphasizing the latest Israeli strike, while downplaying the fact that Israel was merely responding to unprovoked violence. Comments to AP: feedback@ap.org THE NORTHERN THREAT Immediate and forceful IDF response to these Hezbollah and PFLP attacks are absolutely essential for Israeli security. Here's a map that explains why - the relevant item is the range of Katyusha missiles: Over a million Israeli civilians live within range of Ketusha rockets fired from southern Lebanon. If the IDF would not respond to the terrorist fire, the entire northern Israeli populace would become regular targets. News stories don't convey the Israeli vulnerability illustrated by this map. Yet you have no idea what's really flying in this story if you don't understand this map's implications for Israeli security. So as the Lebanese-based terrorists threaten to heat up the northern region once again, HonestReporting encourages subscribers to use these background points to respond to misrepresentations in your local media. Or better yet, take the initiative to draft an op-ed for publication in your local paper. Honest Reporting monitors the media for inaccuracy and unfairness in how they report the news about Israel. Ther website address is http://www.honestreporting.com. You can help support their research online or by sending contributions to: HonestReporting, 400 South Lake Drive, Lakewood, NJ 08701-3167. |
|
THE SADDAMIZATION OF ISRAEL
Posted by David Wilder, June 10, 2004. |
|
Well, Noam's back home. Finally, at last, after almost nine months of lockup, originally in the same wing with Shech Obaid and Mustepha Dirani. After a prolonged hunger strike that has left him underweight. After legal battles which climaxed when the State dropped all charges against him in the "Bat Ayin" case. Noam was suspected and indicted for masterminding a "Jewish terrorist gang," accusations backed up by zilch evidence, as proven by the fact that the indictment was voided. Municipal court judge David Heshin had little choice but to release Federman following a Supreme Court ruling paving the way for Noam's release. Yet the Shabak - the "Jewish section" of the Israeli intelligence organization, is still not convinced. Judge Heshin annulled the 2nd six month administrative detention order which was to have kept Noam in prison until, at least Rosh HaShana - over three months from now. However, as Noam walked out the Ashkelon penitentiary early this morning, he was handed another administrative order, this too signed by Central Command General Moshe Kaplinsky, with the blessings of Defense Minister Shaul Mufaz. This time Noam won't have to serve his time behind bars - at least he's home. But free he's not. He must now comply with the rules and regulations of his freshly bestowed administrative house arrest orders. He is restricted to the four walls of his apartment, in the Avraham Avinu Neighborhood in Hebron. He may leave to pray, once a day, every morning, at Ma'arat HaMachpela, with a police escort. He is also being allowed a one-week vacation in northern Israel, with daily visits to the nearest police station in the area. Not good. One administrative order replacing another. But, at least he's home, with his wife, family and friends. The simcha - the joy at his homecoming earlier today in Hebron, was tangible. Everyone joined in welcoming Noam back home, including singing, dancing, and, or course, media interviews. The reporters were ready and waiting, with microphones bared like swords, or perhaps better described as fish hooks, waiting to see what they might catch. Nine months of incarceration have not dulled Noam Federman's tongue or senses. In a radio interview he granted last night, he said, "prison hasn't broken me. Not a day passed by when I stopped smiling." This morning Federman expressed himself clearly. "My release isn't the end of our struggle. There are others still in jail who we want to see back home, here in Hebron." He was referring to Itzik Pass, father of slain infant Shalhevet, and his brother-in-law Matti Shvu, who were convicted of illegally acquiring and possessing explosives - 8 "explosive bricks," discovered in their car. They are presently serving a two year jail sentence in the Ramla prison. Federman verbally attacked Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, calling him a dictator and comparing him to Saddam Hussein, saying that Sharon's place, like Saddam's is behind bars. He vowed to continue fighting the planned expulsion of Jews from Gaza. When asked whether he didn't fear being returned to his now-empty jail cell, Federman laughed, saying, "jail doesn't scare me - you see me here today, after being in jail, if they put me back then again, they will have to release me. I will not stop the struggle to keep Eretz Yisrael in our hands." Noam Federman is described by almost all media outlets as a "leader of the extreme Jewish right." In the past he was a compatriot of murdered Rabbi Meir Kahane, and spokesman of the now-outlawed Kach movement. Many times his views and expressions are minimized, as his, and his alone. I can agree with the first half of that statement, but not the second. Because today, Noam's views are not his alone. The foundation of his opinion rests upon the pillars of Am Yisrael, Eretz Yisrael and Torat Yisrael - the people, land and Torah of Israel. There may be disagreements concerning the "how," how to accomplish our mission and reach our goal. But today, there are tens and hundreds of thousands of Israelis who too, must be maligned as belonging to the "extreme right," because we are all worried about the same thing - and we really do have what to be worried about. Let's play true and false:
What do you say? If you answer true, you're mistaken, on both counts. This morning our beloved media reported, (truthfully it seems), that negotiators have already begun speaking with Gush Katif residents, promising them substantial compensation if they leave their homes of their own free will. According to reports prepared by the Israeli version of the National Security Council, the first exorcizing will commence, not next March, rather in two months, in August. At that time families will be able to "voluntarily" leave Gush Katif, with promises of a big bank account, at some time in the future. According Arutz 7, the 2nd stage of expulsion will continue from November 2004 thru July 2005. All the suckers convinced to abandon their houses and land "of their own free will" will get paid on the spot. That's what's called instant gratification. The final stage, when Jews are to be literally dragged from their homes, is due to start in September, 2005. Already by the middle of August all Gush Katif will be declared off-limits to anyone and everyone not living there. By the end of September Gush Katif is scheduled to be Judenrein. G-d forbid. To reiterate, because I've said it before, and so have many others, wiser than me, we must realize, this is only the beginning. Many other communities throughout Judea and Samaria are on the chopping block. Gush Katif is only the appetizer. Earlier this week it was revealed that former Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert, once THE champion of a united Jerusalem (now Sharon's trumpet), announced intentions to transfer a number of "Arab cities" in east Jerusalem to the PA. It's really so simple: you begin with Kfar Darom and finish with Jerusalem. It's a straightforward equation. Ariel Sharon and his gang have plans, that if implemented, will result in a cataclysm impossible to conjure up, even in our wildest nightmares. Others, like Noam Federman, fearless, facing up to truth and acting accordingly, are needed, to try and stop this madness. I think that all the latter know the rules, are aware of the "red lines." The problem is that the former know no "red lines" - everything is permissible. This week the Israeli press gave notification that snipers, with "live ammunition" were stationed at the expulsion and destruction of Mitzpe Yitzhar. Their targets were not Arabs. Such snipers, we are promised, will continue to be activated at future evictions. Add that on to administrative detention, and other Sharon-planned goodies, and we really do begin to look like a watered-down version of Saddam's kingdom. With blessings from Hebron. David Wilder is spokesman for the Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com |
|
THE JEWS MUST GET RID OF SHARON BEFORE SHARON GETS RID OF THE JEWS
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 10, 2004. |
|
The great tragedy of Sharon is that at a certain level he still
believes all of this. To understand what happened to him one needs to
know that after selling Billions of Dollars of weapons captured in
Lebanon (and receiving a hefty commission for the sales) Sharon fell
deeply in love with money. When the Americans or anyone else wiggle a
multi-billion dollar deal in front of him he reacts exactly as we
would expect an hormone driven teenaged boy to react to a scantily
clad women. His rational facilities are short circuited and all he
sees is the money. Nothing will help him and nothing will change his
mind. Sharon and his crime syndicate must be removed from power. If
they are not, the result will be enormous bloodshed in Israel.
One of the most dangerous men for the survival of Israel as a democratic Jewish State is one of its erstwhile Jewish heroes, Ariel Sharon. After many attacks by the Arab terrorists against the Jews in Gaza during the current Oslo War, Sharon decided on a brutal assault of his own -- but against his own people, the Jews: "I have given an order to plan for the evacuation of 17 settlements in the Gaza Strip," Sharon said in an interview with the Israeli Ha'Aretz newspaper. "It is my intention to carry out an evacuation - sorry, a relocation - of settlements," he said. "I am working on the assumption that in the future there will be no Jews in Gaza." If this happened anywhere else in the world, were any government to declare its intention to expel Jews, and only Jews, from their homes, this will be denounced as rampant anti-Semitism and racism. And all this is to take place not in a country like Nazi Germany, but in the Land promised by G-d as an everlasting inheritance to the Jews. Ariel Sharon is caving in to Arab terror and joining forces to realize the fondest dreams of the Arabs, namely to drive the Jewish People out of their Promised Land, so miraculously regained by a miracle of Biblical proportions. Ironically, Sharon's initial focus is on Gaza, which the Bible tells us was apportioned to the Tribe of Judah, (Joshua 15:47 and Judges 1:18) as part of its eternal patrimony. Make no mistake about this! Sharon's planned transfer of Gaza's Jews is just the beginning of the dismantling of Israel. In today's Jerusalem Post, we read that Olmert, Sharon's Vice Premier, is announcing a plan for the division of Jerusalem as well. By the way, four Jewish Communities in Biblical Samaria are also already on the chopping block as part of Sharon's "Unilateral Disengagement Plan". Simply put, what does Sharon's Unilateral Disengagement Plan entail? To abandon 7,500 Jews, who have built their communities in Gaza, with the encouragement of all Israeli governments, and specifically with the encouragement of then General Ariel Sharon. Ariel Sharon was the head of the Southern Front Command, which included Gaza, between December 1969 and February 1972. Sharon had called for a referendum of all Likud members on his Unilateral Disengagement Plan. The vote went heavily against him - 39.7% for and 59.5 against (a 19.8% difference). However, Sharon continued pushing his plan in the cabinet, declaring that insignificant cosmetic changes - such as altering the plan's title - were sufficient to comply with the referendum results. In so doing, he made a mockery of the referendum, his prior public pledge to honor the results, and, most importantly, the democratic process. Sharon managed to pass his Unilateral Disengagement Plan in the Cabinet by firing those of his ministers who had pledged to vote against his plan, and by letting other ministers know that they were expendable if they disagreed with him. In order to understand Sharon's 180 degree turn with regard to the Jews reestablishing their communities in Biblical Gaza, Samaria, and Judea, it is essential to read Chapter 18 of his autobiography "Warrior". In this book, Ariel Sharon describes his anti-terrorist effort: "I recommended the establishment of several Jewish settlements, Jewish 'fingers', as I call them, to divide the Gaza district. I wanted one between Gaza and Deir el Balah, one between Deir el Balah and Khan Yunis, one between Khan Yunis and Rafah, and another west of Rafah - all of them built, like the Judean and Samarian settlements, on state-owned land. ... In addition, it was essential to create a Jewish buffer zone between Gaza and the Sinai to cut off the flow of smuggled weapons and - looking forward to a future settlement with Egypt - to divide the two regions." (Page 258, "Warrior") "At the same time we succeeded in maintaining the calm that we had worked so hard to achieve. The settlements we built cut off the flow of weapons from Sinai, and we also devised a way of preventing the infiltration of arms into Gaza by sea." (Page 261) "Until the Yom Kippur war I used to think that the Gaza anti-terror campaign was one of the most significant Chapters in my military experience. Certainly it was the most interesting. ... Above all, it proved, to me at least, that terrorism was neither inevitable nor unresolvable, that a population upon whom the worst horrors were being visited could be freed from the hold of PLO Organizations that look on terror as their standard tool of policy." (Page 262) Important Background Material on Sharon's Attitude Toward the United States Also in Chapter 18, Sharon speaks about how the United States asked Israel to mobilize its forces to prevent a Syrian attack on Jordan. King Hussein of Jordan was fighting for his life against the PLO that had established itself in the very heart of his country (as it was to do in Lebanon later) and was progressively undermining his ability to govern. Arafat's people made several attempts to assassinate the King. On the morning of September 20th Syrian tank columns invaded Jordan. These events did not take place in a vacuum. Hussein's attack on the Palestinians and the growing tension between Jordan and Syria had already triggered a series of moves and countermoves by the American government - which maintained close ties with Hussein - and the Soviets - whose clients included the Syrians and the threatened PLO. The Israeli Army and Air Force now became crucial to American policy. Hussein's survival was at stake and only Israeli forces were positioned to meaningfully threaten the Syrian tank army that had quickly overrun much of northern Jordan. On September 21 the United States asked Israel to mobilize her forces. This we did... aware that their bluff has been called and unwilling to risk direct confrontation, the Syrians began to pull back. By the 23rd the last Syrian tank was gone from Jordan. Two days later Henry Kissinger sent a note of thanks to the Israeli government: "According to the latest available information, the forces which invaded Jordan has withdrawn to Syria. We believe that the steps Israel took have contributed measurably to that withdrawal. We appreciate the prompt and positive Israeli response to our approach." Now, I quote Sharon's own words: "The resolution of this crisis was considered a success by the Americans and the Jordanians. Most Israelis were also pleased with the outcome. But I was not one of them. Prior to our decision to mobilize, Israel's options had been closely analyzed by General Headquarters. While most of the senior officers favored complying with the American request, a minority, including myself, believed that Israel should not interfere with events in Jordan. This was the Sharon we all loved and admired, and most of all trusted. Today's Sharon asks approval for Israel's policies, first of all with the American President, and even with some European leaders, before he bothers to enlighten his own Cabinet, his own Knesset, and his own Jewish People. He has truly become a lackey of foreign powers, instead of fighting for the interests of his own People. This new Sharon has nothing to offer us but despair, anguish and retreat, unilaterally and under fire. The Jewish People desperately need someone like American President Ronald Reagan, of blessed memory, who just passed away. We need someone who will stand up to the world, who will stand up to our enemies, someone with love for his People, with pride in his country, and faith in Israel's G-d given right to the Holy Land. I do not want to speculate on the reasons why Sharon has changed in such a drastic manner. Many Israelis feel that he is a desperate man resorting to desperate measures, one who is putting his own personal interest ahead of the country in a transparent attempt to deflect attention away from his entanglements with the law. The Jews must get rid of Sharon, before he gets rid of the Jews. It is urgent to send Sharon back to his sheep farm and to topple his government forthwith. We will not be led like sheep to the slaughter again. Whatever Sharon's past accomplishments, he is no longer fit to serve as leader of the Jewish State and the Jewish People. With Blessing and Love for Israel, Ruth Matar P.S. Please send this article to President George W. Bush and other Government officials, and in general, distribute it as widely as you can. This is very urgent! 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. |
|
SHARON'S FINAL SOLUTION
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, June 10, 2004. |
|
This is Sharon's final solution to the Jewish problem in Gaza and no
doubt eventually the rest of Israel as well. If this Eichmann style
plan should, G-D forbid, ever be executed, those who will enforce it
will afterwards justify their actions by saying that they were just
following orders. These are two items from Arutz-7. The first is archived at
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=63823; the second at
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=63839
(1.) SHARON MOVING AHEAD WITH GAZA EXPULSION SCHEDULE (IsraelNN.com) While the cabinet earlier this week approved the Gaza separation plan, aides to the prime minister are organizing plans for residents of Gaza and northern Shomron communities who agree to leave their homes voluntarily. National Security Advisor Giora Eiland is overseeing the logistics involved, a chief architect of the Gaza plan. Residents of areas agreeing to leave voluntarily will be offered compensatory payments as early as August 2004. In actuality, Eiland and his team have already drawn up plans to prepare the political and military communities for the elimination of Gaza's Jewish community. Residents of the areas involved may leave voluntarily until August 15, 2005. At that time, Gaza will be closed to outsiders, preventing opponents of the plan from making their way to Gaza communities to assist residents. The army will declare all of Gaza a "closed military zone", thereby barring entry. The government at that time will permit area residents to leave on their own, a last chance to prevent being forced out by soldiers. This grace period will end on September 1, 2005. The master plan already drawn up and distributed to high-ranking IDF officers calls for taking radical measures to expedite the removal of area residents, including cutting off of water, electricity and telephones. The plan even details activating jamming devices that will render cellular telephones useless. The residents refusing to leave will be isolated and left without supplies or any means of communications with the outside world. It is believed that most of the residents will leave during this period, but contingency plans also address the "hardcore" residents who will result to force to defend their homes. The comprehensive plan makes provisions for every eventuality. Security forces will be authorized to use force when necessary and the plan drawn up by Eiland, a retired major-general, even estimates the number of killed and wounded, soldiers and civilians. The operation also takes into account the likelihood that soldiers will be fired upon by terrorists who will undoubtedly maximize the opportunity to attack both military personnel and Jewish residents, busy confronting one another. Detention facilities will be set up in southern pre-1967 Green Line Israel and social workers and psychologists will be deployed to deal with the "refugees" after being thrown out of their homes. Gaza residents who do not comply with instructions and are taken out forcibly will be placed in jail facilities. Community centers will be prepared in southern Israel as well, providing basic crude accommodations for the women and children who will suddenly find themselves homeless. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is has been ready for some time. Armed with cabinet approval, he now hopes to take his plan to the next step, Knesset approval, hoping to move ahead towards the elimination of the Jewish communities of Gaza and four communities in the northern Shomron. (2.) GOVERNMENT BEGINS APPLYING THE PRESSURE ON GAZA RESIDENTS (IsraelNN.com) Persons in the government involved in advancing the Gaza separation plan are looking into the possibility of paying less compensatory payments to Gaza residents who do not leave their homes voluntarily. Government officials have already announced that residents of one of Gaza's Jewish community willing to accept government compensatory payment for leaving a home voluntarily may already do so this summer. A cut off date has also been announced, August 15, 2005, after which time security forces will move in and begin remaining residents forcibly. The government officials are interested in an arrangement that those persons, the ones being ousted by force will receive a lower payment from the government, a move intended to apply increasing pressure on Gaza residents to "sell out" or face the financial and other consequences. Interestingly, Likud Ministers Binyamin Netanyahu, Silvan Shalom and Limor Livnat announced their support for the plan, justifying their action by explaining at this stage, the government was only continuing logistical preparations for the Gaza plan and no one was being evicted from their homes. Nevertheless, the government is planning to arrange for paying persons who wish to leave beginning in about two months, from August 2004. This does comply with the letter of the agreement since those leaving now are doing so "voluntarily" but only because the compensatory payment is being offered. Aryeh Zelasko lives in Beitar Illit, south of Jerusalem. He is Director of Sales and Marketing of Israel Visit (www.israelvisit.co.il) which provides information and an internet buying facility for American visitors to Israel. |
|
THE FRUITS OF WAR - THE EREZ INDUSTRIAL ZONE IS TO BE CLOSED
Posted by David Frankfurter, June 10, 2004. |
|
It is with sadness that I read of the Sharon Government's decision to close the joint Palestinian-Israeli industrial zone in Erez, at the entrance to Gaza. This group of businesses was the symbol of the promise of the Oslo agreements. Joint Palestinian-Israeli businesses that would bring prosperity and peace to all. A place which provides an employment opportunity for thousands of Palestinians. Their closure represents an admission that terrorism has won and that real peace is a long way off. The Erez checkpoint has been used as a path for terror - sending women and children to transfer weaponry and blow themselves up, using the industrial zone as cover for the murder of innocent civilians and of the soldiers who defend them. The Israeli decision is rational and fair. One cannot have a business partner that wants to kill you and take the spoils. The Arabs want us to leave the land. They want as much of the Middle East as possible to be Juedenrein. They practice a murderous form of apartheid. I guess that they are getting what they want in Gaza. When Christian Aid, UNRWA, ISM the EU and others come crying about another several thousand Palestinian families being added to the poverty cycle, tell them to stop blaming Israel! Ask these self-righteous organisations what THEY have done to promote real peace and mutual understanding. Ask them what they have done to create real economic opportunity for the Palestinian Arabs. Ask them what they have done to resettle refugees in permanent housing in a viable economic environment. Ask them what they have done to eradicate the hate education and incitement to terrorism at least from their own institutions. Ask them what they have done to make sure that there is zero tolerance for the diversion of their 'aid' money to terrorism and corruption. Ask them what they have done to ensure that their activities reduce confrontation and increase cooperation. Ask them what they have done to make sure that each and every one of their actions, programs and donations has actually helped the people that they claim to assist. Then remind them that the Jewish people went about resettling refugees driven out of Arab countries - about the same number that fled Palestine in 1948 - and created a vibrant, democratic society where all have prospered - Jew, Muslim, Christian and Druze alike. Remind them that Arabs who want to live in peace in Israel do so. Arabs take part in every aspect of Israeli society. They run businesses, work in government, study at university, are members of parliament, have rights to full medical care, are policemen, lawyers, doctors, teachers....living in peace and prosperity. Then remind them that the Israelis, having succeeded in creating a truly free, democratic society, as part of the Oslo accords attempted to share the wealth with their Palestinian neighbours - and have been rejected. Point out that there has been a sharp and progressive decrease in every economic and social measure for Palestinian Arabs since Arafat and his cronies flew in from Tunis. The blame for Palestinian poverty should be laid squarely at the feet of the Palestinian Authority - and at the feet of the charities, solidarity movements, governments, welfare and other international bodies that have supported and encouraged them in their corruption and warmongering. The real losers in this intifada war are the Palestinian people. David Frankfurter is a writer on economic affairs in the Middle East and a regular contributor. He sends "Letters from Israel" emails to subscribers. Email him at David.Frankfurter@iname.com or go to www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/ |
|
JOY IN JERUSALEM'S YEMENITE VILLAGE
Posted by Bryna Berch, June 9, 2004. |
|
While everyone is focused on Gaza, Israel's "leaders" are starting to
cave in to the State Dept's plans to give a big chunk of Jerusalem to
the "Palestinians." Illegal Arab building is ignored; legal Jewish
building is discourged. We have to be grateful to those hero Jews of
Jerusalem who are starting to take back Jewish land.
Another moving ceremony marking yet the latest stage in reclaiming Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem was held yesterday in the area known as the Yemenite Village. Located near the City of David, below and just to the southeast of the Temple Mount, the area was home to many Jewish families, mostly from Yemen, from the 1880's until 1938. On Aug. 11, 1938, the British evacuated the last 30 families from the neighborhood, following a long period of Arab riots, pogroms and looting. "The British gave assurances that the 'Jewish refugees' would shortly return," according to Daniel Lurie, "but of course, this never happened - until this year." Just two months ago, seven families and several singles moved into the newly reclaimed homes in the village, which over the years was illegally populated by Arab squatters. Many of the original homes, and three of the four synagogues, were destroyed over the years, but some of the buildings are still standing. Yesterday, well over 100 people, including many descendants of the original residents, took part in a festive synagogue dedication ceremony. "We were dancing through the narrow streets, singing and blowing the shofar in traditional Yemenite Jewish style," Lurie recounted. "One man who grew up there as a child remembered some of the buildings." The synagogue is located, for now, on the top floor of one of the newly acquired buildings - a structure in which seven Jewish families now live. A member of the Yemenite community in Rehovot, which has "adopted" the neighborhood, has donated a new Holy Ark. "The only remaining synagogue of the original four is now being used by Arab squatters," Lurie said, "but we hope to purchase it as well. It's just a matter of resources." The Yemenite Village is just one of several initiatives to rebuild old Jewish neighborhoods in Israel's capital. Organizations such as Yeshivat Ateret Cohanim, Yeshivat Beit Orot and Uvneh Yerushalayim have re-created facts on the ground in the following Jerusalem neighborhoods: * Shimon HaTzaddik (just to the east of Route 1 connecting the Old City with northern Jerusalem); |
|
THE ROLE OF IDEOLOGY
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 9, 2004. |
|
What is an ideology? An organized system of major beliefs and values. Different people have different belief systems. Therefore, having an ideology is not in itself good or bad; the term, "ideology," is neutral. Nevertheless the Left is using it pejoratively against the Right. The Left describes MK Uzi Landau's opposition to PM Sharon's abandonment plan as purely ideological, makes his opposition blind, illogical, and deleterious. Actually, the Left's support for the abandonment plan is theoretical and contrary to experience and fact. It is illogical and harms the country. The Left resorts to hypocrisy, in order to uphold its defective theses. MK Landau has a Zionist ideology. Zionism has carried the Jewish people far. The Left has an ideology of appeasement. Appeasement has carried the enemies of the Jewish people far. Appeasement of the Arabs is based on: (1) Distaste for one's own people, which is neurotic; and (2) Suppositions contrary to Arab belief and practice, that the Arabs are willing to make peace and keep agreements about it. The Arabs believe in breaking agreements. They have added to their age-old imperialism and sense of superiority a racial hatred of the Jewish people. In pursuing appeasement blindly, i.e., despite mounting evidence of its counter-productivity, the Left is following its ideology blindly. Many leftists admit that their views failed. Many professional far leftists, however, are too driven by ideology to re-examine it. How ironical that the Left, captive of an unhealthy and undemocratic ideology, complains that the Right is too ideological! A further irony is that what is called the Right, in Israel, is led by people so thoroughly secularist, as to have no ideology. They lack a core of ethical beliefs, usually but not necessarily religious, and an appreciation of their history, which they feign so as not to alienate voters. As a result, supposed right-wingers such as Benjamin Netanyahu and Ariel Sharon, have no basis for taking a needed firm stand against US and Arab demands. Jewish history and territory don't mean much to them so they yield under pressure. Their surrenders, they consider "pragmatic." They are as pragmatic as a fish's seizing bait as prey. Who is the real prey? Human being are supposed to be cognitive creatures that can recognize the sharp hook in the bait. Some of us are myopic. MK Landau has more vision and integrity than most. His ideology, however, is too moderate and incomplete. He, too, would make a deal with the Arabs, if the deal states more favorable conditions. He is not ready to admit that regardless of what conditions are stated, the Arabs will abuse whatever concessions are made to them. A more complete ideology was implied by Pres. Bush and Pres. Reagan. They realized that certain foes are irredeemable and fanatical. They are evil. Evil cannot be negotiated with. It must be defeated. Whether Pres. Bush lives up to his ideology is another matter. He does not. He is a politician influenced by the media, even segments inherently hostile to him because of his Party affiliation. He tries to placate public opinion. He made some great speeches, but did not follow p. That is his pattern. One doesn't know how much he means what he says. (Same for Sen. Kerry.) He does not live up to what he says. Thus he declares a war against terrorism, but restricts it to some terrorism and fosters other terrorism, as by financial and diplomatic subsidy of the P.A.. His war suffers from his having reduced government revenues and distributed too much of what is left to the rich. Now the US lacks sufficient resources for the grand world war that Bush briefly got the people to comprehend and is waged against us. Let us not be cowed by being called ideological. Instead, let us re-examine our ideology. Is it based on absolute values or transitory ones? Is it healthy or self-destructive? Is it supported by experience or contrary to fact and common sense? Have we organized our beliefs into a working hypothesis? How else can we understand what our enemies are up to and what we should do? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
THE GREAT DISCONNECT BETWEEN PM SHARON AND THE LAND AND THE PEOPLE
Posted by Helen Freedman, June 9, 2004. |
|
The overwhelming feeling one has when traveling through the beautiful springtime mountains and valleys of Israel, visiting the residents of Gush Katif/Gaza, Judea and Samaria, is that those who are governing Israel have a great disconnect from the land and the people. Prime Minister Sharon doesn't understand that his proclamations about making areas of Israel Judenrein, must fail. The people and the land will prevail. Our semi-annual AFSI Chizuk mission to Israel took place May 16-24, with a group of twenty-five participants from all over the United States, including Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Oregon, Maryland, New Mexico, Texas and Hawaii. We arrived on a beautifully sunny Monday morning at Ben Gurion airport and took off immediately for our first stop at Yad Mordecai, where DROR VANUNU, the Public Relations chief for Gush Katif, and our very special friend, met us to take us into the northern Gaza strip. Our first meeting was with AVI FARCHAN in Alei Sinai. Avi told us of his fight to hold onto his home in Yamit in the Sinai in 1982. After expulsion, he made his new home in the Gaza strip, less than two miles from Ashkelon's electrical plant that supplies Israel with most of its electricity. He believes that removing the Jews from Alei Sinai will simply move the front line closer to Israel's sensitive areas, making them even easier targets for terrorists. Avi reminded us that in 1994 PM Sharon admitted making a mistake in evacuating Yamit. The same mistake today could be disastrous to Israel. We continued south to Dugit, a community which boasts 25 families, two restaurants, and a very popular beach. A little further east we stopped at Nisanit, home to 300 families. From there we could look across Beit Hanun and see S'derot, a community outside the strip, which we have visited in the past. This community of 2500 people is the constant target of rockets and missiles. Miraculously, there have been no fatalities to date. Unable to travel straight down the 24 mile Strip, we drove out and south and then through the Kissufim Junction in order to enter Gush Katif, the block of 21 communities that exist close together. Morag is one that is on the outskirts and somewhat isolated. CHAIM GROSS, a young man whose brother was tragically killed in Hebron, served as our guide. We enjoyed Chaim's good humor as he escorted us around the community of 36 families which borders on the Arab refugee camp of Khan Younis, and is therefore constantly on guard against terror attacks. Our next stop was at Katif, the home of David Hatuel, whose pregnant wife and four daughters were brutally murdered on the road by Arab terrorists on May 2, 2004. We drove around the lovely community of 61 families, noting the playground equipment which is omnipresent in every neighborhood, and saw the land that had already been cleared for a new cluster of 40 homes in memory of Tali and her children. This is the Israeli answer to terrorism, not the expulsion that Prime Minister Sharon has planned. There is no doubt in the minds of the travelers that the people, the Torah, and the land will win out. They are indestructible, whereas PM Sharon is only a politician who can be replaced. He cannot succeed in the face of G-d's plan for the chosen people: "I will bless those who bless you [the Jews] and curse those who curse you. And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." (Genesis 12:3) ANITA TUCKER was our next guide through Netzer Hazani. She is a good friend whom we visit each time we're in Gush Katif. Anita boarded our bus carrying a huge basket of home grown cherry tomatoes which were quickly devoured by the group. We all commented on how very delicious they were, benefiting from growing in the special sand soil of Gush Katif. Anita took us into her pepper hothouse where we were treated to the beautiful sight of peppers of different colors growing on their stalks. They were being harvested and shipped out to ports throughout the world. Eating peppers off the stalk was a special treat. We were staying overnight at Midreshet HaDarom, a lovely grouping of thatch- roofed bungalows where we have stayed in the past. The accommodations are modest, but comfortable, the food is superb, and usually, we have the place to ourselves since Gush Katif is no longer a popular tourist stop. This time, however, since the Rafah incursion was scheduled to begin that night, Monday, May 17, the area was filled with soldiers. Dror was invited to join one of the embedded journalists in the military entrance to Rafah, but he declined. RACHEL & MOSHE SAPERSTEIN greeted us at dinner, with Moshe telling us stories about the miracles that have occurred in the Gush where over 3000 mortars have fallen without causing any fatalities. Rachel sold us beautiful stationery created by her students at the Ulpana of Nevei Dekalim, and read to us a very moving letter written by a student who had worked so hard campaigning against the expulsion of the Jews from Gaza. We were all touched by the awareness of the enormous group effort that resulted in the huge victory of the people over the Sharon plan. Our group felt that we were present at an historic moment in history. Tuesday, May 18, we left our friends in Gush Katif and drove through the Kissufim junction. We saw that many Arab homes along the road, used for staging terror attacks against the Jews, had been cleared, but many homes still remained within close range, posing an ongoing threat to Jewish travelers. We drove northeast on our way to the southwestern Hebron hill community of Negohot. Driving along we saw again the large, palatial Arab homes that sprawled within the valleys. NA'AMA LEIBNER served as our guide in Negohot, a community of thirty hilltop families threatened with evacuation. A few homes that make up what the government calls an "outpost" were ordered to be evacuated by May 17. In response, the community planned a well advertised dedication of a Torah scroll for May 27, and hundreds of supporters from all over the country came to show solidarity. Among them were two of our AFSI travelers, CHARLOTTE WAHLE and PHIL BEACHEY. Na'ama took us to another neighborhood, Mitzpei Negohot, an outpost overlooking an affluent Arab village. It was established with a sense of urgency about the need to create Jewish facts on the ground as to Jewish rights to the land. AMIT HALEVY, who has lived in Mitzpei Negohot for two and one-half years, with his wife, IRIT and children HADAR and YEHUDA, in a house they built themselves, spoke to us while we shared the magnificent view of the Hebron hills in the spring. He was passionate about the need for Arabs to know that Jews own the land and that Arabs have human rights, not national rights in the Jewish state. Irit thanked us for visiting them. She said that the media is constantly trying to create the impression that the "settlers" are alone, and isolated. Our being there gave her encouragement. Traveling north, we passed Adora, a community that had suffered a terrible terror attack when two terrorists, dressed in IDF uniforms, murdered four people, including five year old Danielle Shefi, and wounded seven others, including Danielle's mother and brothers. Following that attack, people left, so that the community of 80 families was reduced to 25. We were told, however, that religious families are returning, establishing a program of Yeshiva training before army service. We stopped in Telem, a community of 30 families, southwest of Hebron. ORIN TAIRI, our guide there told us that the regional council of Har Hebron helped them settle there in 1981. Orin took us to his home in a lovely neighborhood, with magnificent views overlooking the Hebron hills. He, his family, and his neighbors, are there to stay. We continued north into Jerusalem, the holy city, which always feels so special as one climbs the hills to enter it. After settling into our home base at the Kings hotel, we prepared for our festive Jerusalem Day dinner celebration at Beit Orot Yeshiva on Har HaZaytim, the Mount of Olives. The night was brilliantly clear, the mood was one of celebration, and we were thrilled to once again meet our friends from Beit Orot, SHLOMO ZWICKLER, CHAIM SILBERSTEIN, and TOURISM MINISTER RAV BENNY ELON. Shlomo now runs the Yeshiva as Executive Director, Chaim is the head of Uvnai Yerushalayim, an organization dedicated to reclaiming Jewish land and homes in east Jerusalem, and Rav Benny Elon is a hero who has stood by Israel's right to all the land of Israel. His refusal to accept PM Sharon's Gaza expulsion plan has caused him to be fired by Sharon from the cabinet, in a demonstration of undemocratic, totalitarian behavior on the part of the Prime Minister. We have faith that Rav Benny's commitment to the people and the land of Israel will prove victorious, and Sharon will be the one to suffer defeat. Wednesday, Yom Yerushalayim, began for some members of the group with an ascent to the Temple Mount under the guidance of RABBI RICHMAN, who helped them in fulfilling all the halachic requirements. They then joined the rest of the group, led by CHAIM SILBERSTEIN, in a tour of new Jewish neighborhoods being created in Jewish east Jerusalem through the efforts of Uvnai Yerushalayim. We stopped to admire the wonderful apartment complex, Ma'aleh HaZaytim, whose creation is due to the vision of DR. IRVING MOSKOWITZ. We had seen it first when it was a small house in an area called Ras El Amud, inhabited by a few Yeshiva students led by ARYEH KING. It has grown to 52 apartments with another section scheduled which will have 68 units. Chaim stressed that this is now a permanent Jewish neighborhood which cannot be moved. There is a need for so many more such neighborhoods, since tragically, in the 200 acres which make up the Old City of Jerusalem there are 40,000 people, with less than 3,000 Jews. The Arab population continues to build illegally in the city, with the number of such buildings reaching over 10,000. The government seems unwilling or unable to control the situation. Other Jewish communities created at painstaking effort and great cost are in Kidmat Zion, where four families have moved into the Abu Dis neighborhood, Musrawah, with three families, and the Shimon HaTzadik neighborhood which entails four acres of Jewish land which must be reclaimed. We visited MARIA GOTTLIEB and her family living happily in one of the apartments there. She is proud to be part of the re-Jewvenation of Jewish land. Our last stop on our tour with Chaim was at Rachel's Tomb, Kever Rachel, in Bethlehem. Jews may enter the fortressed area only in a bullet proof bus, although the roadblock into Bethlehem is within the Jerusalem Municipal borders. The Arab program to take over the Jewish holy sites is evident at Kever Rachel which is surrounded on three sides by a Moslem cemetery. (This is the same strategy being used by the Arabs adjacent to the Temple Mount, where Arab burials have been taking place illegally under the Waqf's control.) Uvnai Yerushalayim is determined to create apartments, a Bat Mitzvah area, and a Visitor's Center at Kever Rachel. We pray they will be successful. In the meantime, the huge cement 25 ft. high security fence that cuts through Jerusalem will be built to surround Bethlehem, threatening to isolate Kever Rachel. It is a race against time to preserve as much of the area surrounding Kever Rachel as possible, for Jewish building. We thanked Chaim for his great dedication to his work, and pledged our support wherever possible. We then continued on to Yad Vashem to view the new Historical Museum designed by MOSHE SAFDIE, the architect of the Children's Memorial, with SHLOMO ARONSON as the landscape architect. The museum is partially underground, cutting through the Mount of Remembrance and symbolizes the return to life as its huge concrete wings swing out over Jerusalem. Walking around the walls of the Old City on our way to IR DAVID, the City of David, we passed the southeast corner of the Temple Mount and noticed that the wall seems to be severely damaged by the enormous amount of digging done by the Arabs in building the huge mosque, Solomon's Stables, which lies beneath the Mount. In Ir David we learned that King David had bought the land for the Temple Mount, so that ownership could never be disputed, just as Abraham bought the burial place for Sarah in Hebron. Twenty-five Jewish homes have been redeemed in Ir David, which looks across at the Arab community of Silwan. Standing on a rooftop we had a 360 degree view of Jerusalem. It was breathtaking. The formal ceremonies for Yom Yerushalayim were held at Ammunition Hill. Just as had happened the year before, the weather changed in the afternoon, and there was light rain. In 2003 the rain had been mixed with mud. This year it was just water. But as the dignitaries spoke about the great sacrifices that took place in 1967 to bring about the reunification of Jerusalem, it seemed as though HaShem was crying for his holy city. The Arab determination to wrest this city away from the Jews is evident wherever one looks. Only the government looks away. On Thursday we began traveling south from Jerusalem through the hills of Judea, enjoying the terraced farming and the abundant fields of olive and almond trees. We passed camels and goats maneuvering amongst the rocks and sand. Our first stop was in Susya, where we were met by YISRAEL MARGOLIN, a transplanted American from Highland Park, New Jersey. He told us about their ambitious Yeshiva leadership training program and then took us to visit DALIA HAR-SINAI, the widow of YAIR who was murdered by Arab terrorists while he was grazing his sheep. Dalia has kept their farm going and proudly led us around the area. We then went on to ancient Susya where our guide, DAVID, gave us a fascinating tour of the ancient city. In the potter's cave he gave us a demonstration on an old potter's wheel of just how the vessels were made in ancient times. He reminded us that as clay is in the hands of the potter, so man is in the hands of HaShem. We were thrilled to see the ancient mosaic floor of the synagogue in which seven generations were represented. It reminded many of us of the beautiful mosaic floor that had existed in the ancient synagogue in Jericho, which has since been destroyed by the Arabs. That was one of the stops that we treasured in past visits to Israel, just as we always included visits to the grave of Joseph in Shechem, before Kever Yosef was turned over to the Arabs for protection and they promptly burned it down and turned it into a mosque. We concluded our Susya visit with a ride up to Mitzpe Yair, a community of six caravans built in memory of Yair Har-Sinai. The omnipresent playground, a feature of every community, no matter how small, testified to the new life in the area. We marveled at the magnificent view of the Judean desert which stretched out to the Dead Sea. One doesn't have to be a millionaire to have a treasured lookout point in the Jewish state. One simply has to be willing to live on HaShem's hilltops in the promised land. At Karmel, just northeast of Susya, we stopped to buy therapeutic products made from the Dead Sea and the Hebron hills. The herbs grown by the community are good for countless ailments and our group bought these promised cures with great enthusiasm. We arrived in Hebron in time to meet our guide, SIMCHA HOCHBAUM, who led us up to Tel Rumeida where we visited the caravans, went to the Jewish cemetery and heard the story of Sarah Nachson who was responsible for the re-opening of the cemetery to Jewish burials when she insisted on burying her infant son there. Once again we reviewed the terrible deed of then Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he turned over 80% of Hebron to the Arabs in 1997. In the 20% left for the Jews, 15,000 Arabs still live, making life in Hebron a constant battle for survival for the Jewish population. Despite that, the community continues to grow. We visited the neighborhoods of Abraham Avinu and Beit Hadassah, witnessing children playing happily in the sunshine and people going about their business purposefully. In one of the former Arab vegetable stalls, there is now a synagogue dedicated to the murdered Shelhevet Pass. Other former stalls have been transformed into large, beautiful, desirable apartments which are much in demand. We completed our visit to Hebron by saying our afternoon prayers in the Ma'arat HaMachpela, the Cave of the Patriarchs, and then enjoying the early preparations for a wedding which would be taking place outside the Ma'arat. The entire community was there for the celebration. The bride was beautiful, the sunshine in the late afternoon was warm and glowing, and the entire atmosphere was one of joy and continuity. As we drove out of the community we passed the destroyed synagogue which lies between Kiryat Arba and Hebron. Although the government has ordered its destruction countless times, the people are determined to keep it alive. We saw young men guarding the site and spreading a tarpaulin to protect the area. Since the day had been proclaimed Hebron Day, in honor of the restoration of Hebron in 1967, a special ceremony had taken place at the synagogue earlier in the day attesting to the endurance of the Jewish presence in Hebron, as symbolized by the synagogue which would not be destroyed. Friday morning began with a visit to the extraordinary community of Beitar Illit, just fifteen minutes south of Jerusalem. The former first mayor, MOSHE LEBOWITZ, served as our guide, informing us about this city of 25-30,000 people where each family has five to seven children. The residents come from the U.S., Russia, and Israel to this hareidi community, discovering an immaculately clean and well equipped environment. We were very impressed with their security center which houses ten video centers that chart all the activities in the city. Often, their equipment allows them to work with the army in alerting them about potential dangers. Mr. Lebowitz declared, "We live by nissim (miracles.)" We proceeded south into Gush Etzion, the bloc of communities that protect the southern entrance into Jerusalem. We always include an eat and shop stop at the Gush Etzion gift shop which has beautiful items for sale, as well as good food. Driving past the Herodian, a famous flat-topped hill where DAVID ROSENFELD was killed twenty-two years earlier, we arrived in Nokdim where we met our good friend and local guide, SHANI SIMKOWITZ. Shani showed us the community of 120 families, living in the area where they feel a strong connection to the prophet Amos. The Gush - the bloc of communities that are part of the whole, number twenty in all. We drove on into Tekoa, viewing Nokdim on the left, the Arabs on the right, and the magnificent Judean desert spread out in front of us. I was surprised to learn that it was Shimon Peres, in his former life no doubt, who started Tekoah, which now has four distinct sections, aleph, bet, gimel and dalet which is at the furthest point. Three hundred and fifty families comprise the population. Just below Tekoah is a nature reserve and the famous Khartun caves. Tragically, it was in one of those caves that Koby Mandell and Yosef Ish-Ran were brutally stoned to death by Arab terrorists, May 9, 2001, as the boys were scouting the area in preparation for the school Lag B'Omer outing. It was time to head back to Jerusalem to prepare for Shabbat. There is an almost tangible atmosphere in Jerusalem as the city settles in to await the Shabbat bride. The traffic slows down, buses disappear, people appear in their Shabbat clothing, and the warm, sunny afternoon melts into a beautiful evening. Candles are lit and choices are available for attendance at services to receive the Shabbat. Some people went to the Kotel, or the Western Wall. A group of us went to the Great Synagogue where we enjoyed a beautiful service, and then returned to the hotel for a lovely Shabbat meal. The next morning arrived with the true spirit of Shabbat - rest, prayers, food, friends, and family. We were on our own in the morning, and gathered after noon to walk to the Old City. On our way, we stopped at the City Hall where one of our group, GLENN RICHTER, had scouted out for us the parking area for the fabulous floats which had been created for the Yom Yerushalayim parade. The theme of most of them was agriculture, and they were all very colorful and creative. We arrived for lunch in the Old City at the home of a remarkable family, AUDREY and DR. JEFF KASHUK, and their three lovely daughters. I had befriended them at an earlier time, and had enjoyed a beautiful Shabbat with them in the past. When they heard that I was bringing a group in May, they insisted on hosting all 25 of us for Shabbat lunch. As we flowed into their lovely home, and seated ourselves around the beautifully set table, it was clear that we would be experiencing a unique Jerusalem Shabbat. Amidst much talk, and delicious food prepared by Audrey, including the home baked challah, we celebrated the joy of Shabbat in the holy city, in the holy land, and felt ourselves to be so fortunate to have the opportunity to do so. We are grateful to the Israelis who are preserving the Jewish homeland so that we in the galut have a home to go to whenever we choose, and to which we may return permanently some day. Sunday was the last day in Israel for those on the Chizuk mission who had not extended their stay. It was designed to visit as many of the Shomron communities as possible in one day. We began with Karnei Shomron, delivering the special toys we had brought with us from America at the request of SONDRA OSTER BARAS, Director of the Christian Friends of Israeli Communities. We were told that these toys would help in the therapy for traumatized children who have been victims of terror. We were then fortunate enough to find MOSHE FEIGLIN, head of Manhigut Yehudit, in his office in Karnei Shomron. He invited us into a nearby park where we heard him speak about changing Israel from a secular shtetl of the Jews into a proud Jewish state. Moshe believes that new Jewish leadership is the only aim that can succeed. He told us that PM Sharon is fighting the reality of HaShem. We agreed that Sharon cannot succeed, no matter what tactics he employs. Our next stop was at Emanuel, a beleaguered community of 400 families dedicated to their children. We were greeted by RABBI RICE and Mayor AVNER MATUFF. We were pleased to deliver to the children a duffel bag filled with toys which we had brought with us from America. Unfortunately, Emanuel was battered by two devastating terror attacks in a short period of time which caused people to leave. After the second attack an army presence was sent to defend the community. It is presently suffering from budget cuts introduced by the government. We felt saddened by their struggle, and many in the group felt determined to help them. At Kfar Tapuach, one of our favorite communities, we were met by LENNY GOLDBERG and DEBBIE FRIEDMAN. They took us to see the synagogue on the hilltop which had been destroyed by the Israeli army in the most thorough way. Even the cement floor had been hacked to pieces to prevent the residents from rebuilding the synagogue dedicated to Binyamin Kahane and his wife, Talia, who had been viciously gunned down in their car on Dec. 31, 2000, leaving six children orphaned. Lenny explained that thousands of people had come to the reception for the Torah scroll, dedicated to the memory of Binyamin and Talia. Word spread that it was a Kahane synagogue and Tommy Lapid called for its destruction. Military rabbis stood by to oversee the debacle. I was deeply moved when Lenny told me that his fifteen year old son, whose birth I remember, does not dream of growing up to enlist in an elite unit of the IDF. Instead, he sees the army as his enemy, since they are the ones with whom he has fought to preserve his home. Pieces of the synagogue were placed in plastic jars which we took home with us. I have this jar sitting on my desk at the moment, a grim reminder of the cruelty and insanity reigning in Israel today, when Jewish synagogues are destroyed by order of a Jewish government, by a Jewish army, under the supervision of Jewish rabbis. Who could believe that such a perfidy could occur in the land promised to the Jews by HaShem? There is no doubt that the destroyers may win an occasional battle, but they cannot win the war. MIKE GUZOFSKY then showed us the remarkable work they are accomplishing in training Belgian Shepherd dogs to find would-be Arab terrorists and attack them. Right now they have thirty dogs and puppies. Volunteers, aged 16-30, are trained with the dogs for guard duty. DAVID HA'IVRI then led us in a wonderful tree planting experience, where each member of our group planted a tree. We were pleased to plant ours in memory of our former AFSI New York Chairman, Morris Berkower, of blessed memory. David Ha'Ivri had just been found innocent of racist incitement for selling T shirts that said, "No Arabs, No Terror." There was no proof that he had sold the shirts; however, he is in danger of being sentenced to three years in jail for obstructing justice. Such is the Israeli court system that concentrates on harassing its finest citizens. As of this writing we're happy to report that another Jewish victim of the Jewish courts, NOAM FEDERMAN, has been released from his administrative detention prison term which lasted nine months. At no time did he ever learn of any charges against him. We drove on to Yitzhar and spoke with NIRA METUKI whose husband had studied in the Od Yosef Chai yeshiva at the Grave of Joseph - Kever Yosef - in Shechem, until the Kever was turned over to the PA for safekeeping. The Arabs quickly burned it down and turned the grave into a mosque. All the students of the Yeshiva moved to Yitzhar. There are five hills around the community in which 100 families live. One of the hilltops was recently evacuated by the IDF. Mitzpe Yitzhar is another hilltop community, along with L'ahavat Yitzhar. Harel Ben Nun, a yeshiva student who encouraged the rebuilding of destroyed communities, was killed by Arabs, as was Hillel Lieberman, trying to rescue the Torah scrolls from Kever Yosef, and Shlomo Liberman. They are all buried together on a hillside. MINA BERENSTOCK, the spokeswoman for the community, is originally from Memphis, TN and is married to one of the Yeshiva students. She explained that they employ NO Arab workers, not even Israeli Arabs, to work in the community. They don't want any Arabs to have first-hand knowledge of the community and its inhabitants. An army post sits on another hilltop, Shalhevet, named after Shlomo and Harel. From that point we were able to see as far as Ashkelon on the south and Haifa in the north, along the Mediterranean. Continuing along, we arrived in Itamar, where DR. ELIEZER HIRSCHBERG, a math professor at the College of Judea and Samaria, guided us around. The community is marred by the vacant home of the Shabo family, who were victims of Arab terror in June, 2002 when Mrs. Shabo and her three children were murdered. We drove up to the hilltop farm of AVRI RAN, which is 851 meters above sea level. We saw mountain goats scampering around, chicken coops containing 4000 chickens, which produce organic eggs, geese, horses and cows, all spread out over a vast area that basked in the sunlight. The magnificent heights and hilltops of the Shomron mountains, including Har Bracha, Har Greezim, and Mt. Ebal, showed off their beauty for us. We were smitten. We arrived at our last stop of the day in time to view the sunset at Elon Moreh. PINCHAS FUCHS, the tireless public relations director of the community, introduced us to a delightful resident, MENACHEM BRODY. Menachem told us that he had been an organic farmer who lived in Maine, he came to Israel 26 years ago, and now has a beautiful home and farm in Elon Moreh. Although there are 160,000 unfriendly Arabs living in Shechem, right next door to them, he feels very privileged to be living in the modern day link to the biblical home of our patriarch Abraham. After a delicious dinner at Elon Moreh, we said our farewells to our hosts, boarded our bus, and drove to Ben Gurion airport for the flight back to the United States. During the bus ride, participants in the AFSI Chizuk tour took turns speaking to the group through our open microphone. Each one spoke about the extraordinary strength we had received from the remarkable Israelis with whom we met on our travels. There is no question that visiting Gush Katif/Gaza, the Hebron hills and Hebron itself, Gush Etzion, the Shomron and exploring the reclaimed areas of east Jerusalem gives one an appreciation of the people and the land that cannot be derived in any other way. While pundits proclaim "solutions" to the Arab/Israeli conflict that defy logic, and belong in the theater of the absurd, we, who have walked on the hilltops and on the desert sand, have enjoyed the beauty of the sparkling Mediterranean Sea on the Gaza coast, and have prayed in many of Israel's holiest places, understand the strength of the people and the land. It has no connection with the talk going on in the halls of government meeting places, whether they are in Israel, the U.S., the U.N., the EU, Egypt, Jordan or anywhere in the Arab world. Israel's right to exist is a biblical, historical, moral imperative. The brave Israelis who have fought the many wars, suffer the intolerable losses of the Arab reign of terror, suffer the indecencies of the Israeli court system, and are trampled upon by the undemocratic policies of the Sharon government, are the ones who deserve our great appreciation and love. The very "settlers" who are castigated by the ignorant are those who are preserving the Holy Land for all Christians and Jews who treasure its existence. We, at Americans for a Safe Israel/AFSI feel incredibly indebted to them. We will continue our semi-annual AFSI Chizuk missions to Israel, concentrating on those areas which are the most threatened by their own Israeli government. This is our answer to the disconnect that exists in Israel today. We will remain closely connected. YOU ARE INVITED TO JOIN AFSI ON ITS NEXT CHIZUK MISSION - THE EVENING OF NOV. 2 - RETURNING ON THE MORNING OF NOV. 10. WE WILL CELEBRATE THE EXTRAORDINARY JOY OF SHABBAT CHAYE SARAH IN HEBRON ON NOV. 6, ALONG WITH VISITS TO OUR FRIENDS IN GUSH KATIF/GAZA AND OTHER ENDANGERED COMMUNITIES. RESERVATIONS MAY BE MADE IMMEDIATELY WITH A NON-REFUNDABLE CHECK FOR $100. CALL THE AFSI OFFICE FOR SPECIFIC DETAILS -212-828-2424 OR EMAIL: afsi@rcn.com Helen Freedman is Executive Director, Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, 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. |
|
HUNTING QUAIL AND SITTING DUCKS...TAKE TWO
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, June 9, 2004. |
|
This is a revision of an earlier article available on the January 2004 bloged page.
With the November 2004 American Presidential election already starting to heat up the approaching summer more than usual, those of us who care about what happens to Israel have some very important decisions to make. The choices and solutions are not as cut and dry as partisans on both sides claim. Mr. Bush and Mr. Kerry have said the right stuff at times...only to retract it later when audiences changed, new "circumstances" arose, or whatever. An American President--the first since Harry Truman in 1948--finally took a political stance in April 2004 that might, in the long run, actually further the peace process in the Middle East between Arab and Jew... if given half a chance. Regardless of some serious potential drawbacks, President George W. Bush's public announcement that Israel should not be expected to slit its own throat by absorbing millions of real or fudged descendants of Arab refugees nor have to return to the U.N. imposed Auschwitz/armistice lines of the post 1948 fighting was a positive development. While the precise wording and such of U.N. Resolution 242 has been known for quite some time, the State Department had spent decades trying to distort the interpretation of it to require Israel to return to its 9-mile wide armistice line existence. The main problem that immediately followed in the wake of the President's announcement has been all the derriere-kissing and pandering to the predictable Arab "rage" by the media, anti-Israel academia, etc. The Arabist Foggy Folks quickly began to muddy the waters with its doublespeak and the like. No surprise here. They opposed Truman's recognition of Israel in the first place, and not a few multinational oil and other big business folks, with lucrative ties to the Arab oil sheikhs, have made it into the highest ranks of the State Department as well as other government agencies. Faced, at long last, with the reality that America's policy will not reincarnate that of Allied Europe, when Czechoslovakia was sacrificed by its "friends" at Munich in 1938 over a heavily German-populated Czech Sudetenland, the Arabs--when the dust finally settles--would likely have to fish or cut bait if they expect to ever gain anything beyond simply killing Jews from all of this mess. Again, that is if the Foggy Folks don't emasculate the potential here. And that's very much a real possibility. Things have gotten worse since the Iraqi prison abuse scandal erupted. Before long, it appeared that Mr. Bush had totally backtracked on his public, but non-binding, words of April, and Mr. Sharon appeared as Dubya's April fool. The "assurances" Sharon thought he'd get in return for a Gaza withdrawal didn't last out the month as crucial positions and decisions regarding Israel's future were once again offered up as potential sacrificial lambs to recoup America's standing with angry Arabs. Since this has been a source of severe heartburn for at least some of us, let's delve into what's going on a bit further. Some time ago, President Bush spent the New Year holiday hunting quail with George Sr. and James Baker, a close family friend. Chances are pretty good that they traveled farther to do this than the State of Israel is in width. Now I have nothing against hunting per se, as long as it's done in a sustainable way to put food on the table. Only vegetarians have a right to protest this, and I'm not quite there yet. Furthermore, while I voted for the other guy the last time around, I'm no Bush-basher either...although I have problems with the family's oil ties and related worrisome environmental record. But there's a good possibility that I'll wind up voting for Dubya anyway this November. So what bothers me here isn't the quail that are being hunted nor the hunters. My problem lies with the influence James " _ _ _ _ the Jews, they don't vote for us anyway" Baker continues to have on the Presidential family, and an even more bothersome worry that the family shares many of these same ideas with or without his influence. I have a feeling that Daddy and James are peas of the same pod, but I was hoping, despite the odds, for something better from the son. Dubya quotes, after all, from Joshua in the Hebrew Bible...but then (up until his recent public announcement) apparently espouses Judea becoming mostly Judenrein in the next breath. To anyone concerned about Israel not being shortchanged in terms of justice, it is indeed worrisome to see the reemergence of James Baker III on the political scene. He has evidently been appointed as Dubya's personal envoy to the Middle East, and if Mr. Bush gets reelected in November, anything goes... Bush will have nothing to lose in terms of angering a large segment of his supporters if he follows Baker's and Foggy Bottom's lead since this will be his last term in office. On this same issue, the Democrats are even worse...Mr. Peanut is likely their future main man in the Middle East. Carter has never met an Arab disemboweler of Jewish babes and grandmas that he didn't blame the Jews themselves for. And Mrs. Kerry appears to be a big financial supporter of some blatantly anti-Israel organizations such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR)...Headaches. Baker has been in the background for decades, especially since his close friends, the Bushes, gained ascendancy in American politics. His law firm represents Saudi Arab interests in this country and typifies how people move through the revolving doors of businesses tied to Arab interests back and forth into government positions--especially those in Foggy Bottom. Baker's law partner, Robert Jordan, was appointed ambassador to Saudi Arabia by President Bush in 2001. Casper Weinberger and many others have been through these lucrative doors as well. Most often, their influence has spelled trouble for an Israel trying to get a fair hearing. While Bush the First was at the helm, widespread published reports circulated that Secretary of State Baker promised Hafez al-Assad the same deal on the Golan Heights as Egypt's Sadat received in the Sinai Peninsula...a complete withdrawal of Israeli forces. And this was prior to negotiations between the parties themselves...a promise Baker evidently made to Saddam's twin butcher, author of the "Hama Solution," etc. Hama was the town that dared oppose Assad and suffered tens of thousands of casualties within a few months as a result...far more than Arabs have suffered after several years of intifada and suicide bombings launched against Israel. And with no United Nations' inquiries or trial in Geneva either. And I won't even get into Syria's past and renewed atrocities against its own non-Arab Kurds a la Saddam in Iraq. In a Time magazine article on February 13, 1989, Baker spoke of Israel as being a turkey to be hunted and carefully stalked. He has referred to Jews working for him and doing his bidding (including the current American Ambassador to Israel) as his "Jew boys." I know a few Jew boys who'd like to have an up close and personal chat with him about all of this. But I'm getting sidetracked...so back to Baker's comments about the Golan. What most folks don't know is that the Golan was a hotly contested region ruled by many different peoples--including Jews--over the millennia. Furthermore, it was part of the original Mandate of Palestine Britain received after World War I until imperial politics prompted a trade off with France in 1924. Presidents Bush and Baker know full well how Syria used its acquisition and position on the Golan prior to '67 to rain death on Israeli kibbutzim and fishermen in the Sea of Galilee below. And they also know the losses Israel took to end that state of affairs when war was forced upon it--largely via Syria's instigations and game playing with Nasser's Egypt--in 1967. A bit later, had it not been for Israeli forward positions on the Golan, it was an easy downhill assault into Israel proper when Syria attacked in the Yom Kippur War in 1973. And if you believe that Israel was attacked to simply retrieve "occupied lands," I have two bridges to sell you. The passes Israel now controls greatly prevent a renewed Syrian assault. Additionally, much of Israel's water supply originates in this area...a vulnerability Syria is well aware of and has tried to cash in on in the past. Indeed, when Israel later offered almost an entire retreat from the Heights, negotiations broke down because of Syria's insistence that it be allowed to hold Israel virtually captive this way. What's particularly even more worrisome is that if Syria had not blundered into supporting Saddam against America in Iraq, the Administration--with Baker's and Foggy Bottom's active prodding-- would be all set to turn the screws on Israel vis-a-vis the Golan. So what gives? Up until now, it looked like our President was able to distance himself from the troublesome record of the past. His Dad's venomous attack against Israel when the latter launched its surgical strike against Saddam's Osirik nuclear reactor in Iraq in 1981 still haunts my memory. It angered too many of his Arab oil buddies and their State Department allies. But as the months progressed after the toppling of Saddam in Iraq, the President's line in the Middle East sounded more and more like the same one constantly pushed by Daddy, Baker, and Foggy Bottom: "Justice for Arabs and _ _ _ _ everyone else." Has anyone heard of a roadmap, for instance, for some thirty million stateless Kurds yet...America's best friends in Iraq, and the folks whom the Arabs are likely to slaughter yet again when America finally withdraws? Arabs must have some two dozen states, but Kurds are forbidden even one. What's wrong with this picture? Nauseating...but "justice," Foggy Bottom style. While Mr. Bush's remarks regarding the Sharon Gaza plan were promising, as we have seen, there already appears to be major backsliding regarding them. Nothing he said, after all, was legally binding. The Foggy Folks were quick to point that out. Israel had received promises before from American Presidents in return for important concessions it was coerced into making, only to see them evaporate when they were needed in the crunch. America can acquire, conquer, or whatever land and manipulate, topple, or whatever governments in the name of its own national security interests, but how dare Israel build a fence to keep Arab bombers from blowing up its kids that does not precisely cling to its pre-'67, 9-mile wide armistice line existence or insist that a compromise is in order to assure that Baby Assad doesn't follow in Papa's footsteps. Right now he has an incentive not to do so: Israeli long range artillery on the Golan are in a position to potentially do unto Damascus what Damascus actually did unto Jews for two decades prior to '67. Think of all the shameful flak Israel has caught over these issues. Every military expert who has visited the Golan from abroad has given the same advice: Israel would have to be suicidal to return to the status quo ante here. Israel doesn't have the wriggle room on the Golan or in Judea and Samaria / West Bank that it had in the Sinai. Yet reports have recently been coming out that Washington is concerned that Israel is solidifying its position on the Golan and will eventually put the squeeze on here as it has done vis-a-vis the West Bank. Of course, one could hope that if Mr. Bush stands by and solidifies his words regarding Israel being entitled to territorial compromise on the West Bank, he'll also take the same position regarding the Golan. Only time will tell here. But, meanwhile, there's plenty to be concerned about. He's already backtracked on those earlier comments, and Gaza, after all, since the days of the Pharaohs, has been historically used as an invasion route into Israel proper and is currently a rejectionist terrorist stronghold. And it still remains to be seen just how much (if any) of the strategically important West Bank America might actually support Israel retaining. All of this has the potential of another Baker/State "done deal" scheme in the making, with G_d knows what kind of behind the scenes' pressure that has been exerted on Ariel Sharon. Again, think about what might very likely be going on right now if the Syrians weren't acting as they are. And think about what might happen if things go even more sour for America in Iraq. One more time...The Iraqi prison abuse news broke right after the President made his earlier, welcome April comments. It didn't take long for the Administration, with State's prodding, to then try to retrieve some good standing with Arabs at the Jews' expense. So what else is new? And what does that say about such "assurances?" Israel will continue to be the likely sacrificial offering of the Foggy Folks to improve Arab relations. The good news is that it looked, for a fleeting moment at least, like we finally had a President who would firmly reject this pathetic treatment of a tried-and-true ally. Unfortunately, the waters have once again become muddied on this. So, the problem really has nothing to do with quail. But it is about demanding that Israelis remain forever as sitting ducks, for that is what the absorption of real or alleged Arab refugees and a return to the pre-'67 armistice lines amounts to, whether in Judea, Samaria, on the Golan, or wherever. It is a matter about justice for somebody else besides Arabs in the region for a change. Hopefully, despite apparent setbacks, this message has finally started to sink in to Mr. Bush, and he'll deal appropriately with those who still haven't received it yet. Gerald A. Honigman is a Florida educator who has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated many Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in newspapers, magazines, academic journals and websites around the world. |
|
A SECOND-HAND EMOTION
Posted by Yashiko Sagamori, June 9, 2004. |
|
Today, we will talk about love and its ceaseless mysteries: how easily it is misdiagnosed, how simple it is to abuse it to lure the lovelorn into a trap, how precious and yet how superfluous it is. Not so long ago, someone asked me a question about love. He said: "What's it like to live as a Jew?" "I suppose, it's pretty much like living as a Seventh Day Adventist or, let's say, a Zoroastrian," I responded. "If you prick us, do we not bleed, and so on? You've probably heard of such experiments." "That's not what I mean," he said. "I wonder what it feels like to be eternally hated by everyone around." I was tempted to say, "It feels good, because as long as you hate us, we must be doing something right," but the man's curiosity was friendly, and I decided to remain as polite as I could possibly manage. "I wonder what it feels like to live without being eternally hated by everyone around," I said, sounding like a Lubavicher asking his gentile friend to describe the taste of pork chops. "We've never had a chance to experience it. Must be a terribly interesting sensation; do you find it enjoyable?" My interlocutor began explaining to me that life was full of hardship even for the goyim, but I wasn't listening too closely, because, believe it or not, their tzores are not too different from ours. Instead, I was thinking how surprisingly well we've done for ourselves despite the eternal hatred of our friends and neighbors. Without exception, in every country of the Diaspora where pogroms have not yet started, we get ahead of other ethnicities and religions in business, sciences, literature, music, visual arts, performance arts, and, most importantly, development of social theories that are intended to improve everyone's life but only inspire pogroms instead. I was thinking about the inexplicable correlation between the well-being of any given society and the prosperity of its Jewish community. Countries where we flourish, flourish with us, while countries afflicted with anti-Semitism ebb. In light of that amazing societal law, tell me please, how can a reasonably intelligent gentile possibly avoid the conclusion that Jews do control Wall Street and Hollywood, media and politics, the Congress and the Senate, the White House and the Kremlin, the floods and the droughts, the hurricanes and the earthquakes, HIV and the Ebola virus, the sunspots and the rings of Saturn? God promised to bless those who bless us and curse those who curse us, and He's delivered. However, He never said it would make us popular, and so it didn't. We may very well be a light upon nations, but chances are the nations would like to have easy access to the switch. Without it, they probably feel like those poor innocent Iraqis at Abu Ghraib, locked in cells where electricity shines brightly day and night and only feral American she-soldiers have the power to turn it off. Poor goyim! Let's not forget how cruel God's sense of humor is. He promised Abraham that his descendants would be as numerous as grains of sand in a desert, but neglected to warn him that 98% of them would come from Hagar's bastard and, with the senseless maliciousness of matinee villains, would devote their entire history to the eradication of the legitimate 2%. Those of us who have personally felt the not-so-gentle touch of real anti-Semitism upon their tender skin, are probably lamenting countless lost opportunities, an unending stream of daily humiliations, the terrible memory of the last Holocaust, and the ever present, ever growing fear of the next one. But look at the bright side: where would we have been today if the gentiles had loved us? Like a pinch of salt that slowly falls through the scum on the surface of a pond and quietly dissolves in its murky water, we would have long ago disappeared without a trace in the enormous human mass surrounding us everywhere. Anti-Semitism is a painful thing, and the very worst may very well be still ahead of us, but it has been one of the two most important factors that have kept us alive throughout the ages. Anti-Semitism and the Torah, not necessarily in that order. Let me ask you then, why do you still crave their love? President Bush, whose boundless tact can only be compared to his bottomless sense of history, announced in his speech to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee last May: "Our nation, and the nation of Israel, have much in common. We're both relatively young nations." I voted for Dubya in 2000, am going to vote for him again in 2004, and hope you will follow my example, because, frankly, this time we simply don't have a choice. But let's be honest: when it comes to relativity, he is no Einstein. The United States has recently begun its third century, which may seem a very long time to our president, but Israel has been around almost 20 times that long. George W. Bush apparently does not consider what has happened to the Jews since the beginning of time up to 1948 a part of Israel's history. So let me correct our president: while the United States really is a relatively young country, Israel remains the oldest living nation on this planet. Nevertheless, the United States and Israel do have something fundamentally important in common. Since September 11, 2001, the United States has become almost as universally hated as Israel. The fact that not a single country in the whole world, except for the United States and Israel, is even attempting to resist jihad, is not just a coincidence. Manifestations of that hatred would be funny to watch if they were happening on another planet. When a bunch of fools in American military uniform stupidly, but harmlessly, made fun of a few prisoners at Abu Ghraib, the world responded with outrage, both public and official. The United States Human Rights Commissioner contemplates pursuing the matter as a war crime. Why were they not protesting while thousands of people were systematically tortured to death in that prison when it still belonged to its original owner? Why was it that the UN never attempted to interfere or even simply objected? Well, the UN was too busy skimming billions of American dollars off the oil for food program. But why was there no public outcry? Why were there no protests when a bunch of Arabs sawed off Nick Berg's head in front of the entire world? Why was there no popular outrage around the world in the aftermath of September 11, either against the mass murder, or against the open celebration of it by the Arabs? Why was there no outcry against the March 11 atrocity in Madrid? Why is nobody protesting the systematic hostage taking by the Arabs? Or their systematic murder of Westerners and mutilation of their bodies? Why is nobody planning to prosecute those whose very way of life constitutes one ongoing crime against humanity? Why is it that the world's anger is always directed only at those who are trying to defend themselves? I'll tell you why. We are witnessing the fulfillment of another old promise: the meek have finally inherited the earth, and now the earth is going to hell in a handbasket. During the last hajj, a leading Saudi cleric preached to millions of pilgrims that the murder of a Westerner constitutes jihad, while the murder of a Muslim constitutes terrorism. The cleric explicitly endorsed the murder of Westerners, but cautioned against killing Muslims. There was no public outcry, no official or unofficial protests, and no accusations of racism. Instead, his sermon made headlines that read "Leading Saudi cleric condemns terrorism." Nobody protested that outrageous lie either. Those who committed the recent mass murder in Khobar, Saudi Arabia, followed their religious dogma to the letter. They separated Christians from Muslims and killed only the Christians. No one called it religious cleansing, although that was precisely what it was. This is not a conjecture; this is what those people said they were doing: cleansing the "sacred" Saudi soil of the vile presence of the infidel. The world took it in stride, as if this was how the majority of humans of all persuasions had envisioned our most desirable future. Here is an excerpt from an article published in the New York Times on June 6, 2004: A recent fatwa posted on a popular Islamic Web site in Saudi Arabia explains when a Muslim may mutilate the corpse of an infidel. The ruling, written by a Saudi religious sheik [are there atheist sheiks in Saudi Arabia? - YS] named Omar Abdullah Hassan al-Shehabi, decrees that the dead can be mutilated as a reciprocal act when the enemy is disfiguring Muslim corpses, or when it otherwise serves the Islamic nation. In the second category, the reasons include "to terrorize the enemy" or to gladden the heart of a Muslim warrior. In other words, Islamic authorities are encouraging Muslims to mutilate enemy bodies whenever the opportunity presents itself. It comes from a country that is advertised by our Administration as one of our most reliable allies in the Middle East. Not a single government, not a single organization came to the conclusion that a religion that can be served by the mutilation of enemies' corpses does not deserve to be called a religion. Nobody commented that the fatwa constituted an open call to terrorism. Nobody remarked that a warrior whose heart is gladdened not by peace he wins but by atrocities he commits is, by definition, a war criminal. Nobody protested. There is logic behind these apparent inconsistencies, this selective blindness. It is the logic of blind hatred. The same logic existed behind the Roman rumor that Jews worshipped a jackass' skull in the Holy of Holies of their temple. The same logic was behind every variety and every incidence of blood libel. The same hateful logic forged the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion. The same logic accuses Jews of occupying the neverland of Palestine, whose borders miraculously coincide with the borders of Israel. This is the logic of anti-Semitism, and it is now directed against the United States as well. In a way, the United States finds itself in a worse bind than even Israel. Unlike Israel, it is a young country, and when you are young, your craving for love can be unbearable. That's why the United States is losing its war on terror: it is trying to win not the war but the love of its sworn enemies, which is a hopeless task. This problem should go away with age, provided the United States manages to reach the required age. And while it is maturing, the hatred of the entire world directed against the United States means that today this country stands with the forces of Good against the forces of Evil. May God bless it. Yashiko Sagamori is a New York-based Information Technology consultant. To read other articles by the author, go to http://www.middleeastfacts.com/yashiko/ or email ysagamori@hotmail.com |
|
IS SHARON SANE - ABANDONING GAZA TO TERRORISTS AND THEIR EGYPTIAN ALLIES?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 9, 2004. |
|
ISRAEL WARS WITH TIED HANDS Israel still does not depict its enemies frankly. In averring necessity for sweeps through Arab cities in Gaza, it puts it merely that the P.A. security forces "do not do enough" to prevent terrorism. This implies that the P.A. makes an attempt to prevent terrorism. The P.A. does not, except when such acts would harm its diplomacy or public relations. Those occasions are few, because most of the media do not expose or disparage the P.A. for its terrorism, even though terrorism is the bane of the 21st century. The media practically is an accomplice of terrorism. Why Israeli government reticence in its rhetoric? To a certain extent, Israelis talk in cliches, ones not set by Zionists. Mostly, the officials' instinctively hew to appeasement. Their appeasement stems from weak character and from naive faith in the malleability of immovable enemies. THE SITUATION IN YESHA The Arabs are building 12-story apartment houses, often illegally, on all the hilltops in Judea-Samaria from Maale Adumim to Jerusalem's French Hill. Many beautiful villas are among them. The "poor Arabs," indeed! When children from the high-rises return from school, they throw rocks at the Israeli soldiers stationed at the Shuafat checkpoint. What should the soldiers do? Stand, and be injured if not killed? Arrest the children, only to see them released almost immediately? Hide, and encourage Arab aggression? Shoot some and end the harassment, but incur feigned world indignation against the Jews? Sic dogs on their tormentors, something the Arabs would fear? Israel doesn't take strong measures, for it is not a normal country. It gives priority either to rioters or to the media and foreign organizations solicitous of rioters and not of their Israeli victims. Those who don't understand Zionism or military tactics think that more Jewish settlement means just more exposure. But the settlements are like umbrellas. They may get wet but the bodies beneath do not. Breaking the continuous chain of Arab hilltop settlements, the Jewish community of Negahot affords views of the surrounding mountains and the distant sea. But also like an umbrella, Negahot's presence has thwarted many terrorist attacks on Kiryat Arba. More Jews, more eyes, more troops, fewer terrorists. That is what Zionist "settling the land" means, aside from its non-defense aspects. (When the Arabs settle there, they, too, are staking a claim with facts on the ground and rocks or guns in their hands. Were Israel normal, it would not allow it.) Buses that travel through areas to which the Arabs have access are "bullet-proofed." They are not, however, bulletproof. Just their windows are. Bullets can pierce the bus frames; road mines can explode through the floor. The P.A. was given the territory around certain roads. When Israeli civilians want to pass along those roads, they require an armored jeep escort. The jeep's windows are covered up with only small slats to see out of. What would have been a 15-minute drive becomes 1 1/2 hours. There would be none of these hardships all around, if Islam were a religion of peace or if the Arabs honored their peace accords. Then why give land over to Arab rule, if that imposes constraints on Israelis such as reliance upon military escort? One soldier advised his mother that he did not expect to survive his assignment. Rather than safely blowing up buildings in Gaza, at considerable loss to Arabs, the IDF ordered him on a door-to-door search. The Arabs were waiting for him behind a false wall. They shot him dead. His mother lamented that the government protects the Arabs rather than its sons. As for blowing up buildings owned by some Arabs but used by others, few are the innocent Arabs in Gaza -- in the P.A., war is a collective enterprise (former associate, 5/29 and 6/3). CORRUPTION INVOLVED IN GAZA ABANDONMENT? PM Sharon's aide, Dov Weisglas, would be a partner in a casino to be built on evacuated Gaza territory (Barry Chamish, 5/30, e-mail). Withdrawal benefits him - in the short run. SHARON WELCOMES EGYPT'S "BACKING" PM Sharon expressed gratitude for Egypt's help in seeking approval for his Gaza abandonment. He hopes this help will bring the two countries into further cooperation. Egyptian involvement in guarding the Sinai, "if it really is carried out seriously," is important. After all, he explained, the two countries have mutual interests: peacefulness in Gaza and repressing the terrorist organizations (Mark Lavie, NY Sun, 6/2, p.7). Israeli abandonment of part of Yesha would be a great victory for the Arabs and their terrorism. It also would set precedent that Israeli governments, led by appeasement-minded people such as Rabin, Peres, Netanyahu, Barak, and Sharon, would find hard to stop from continuing. Why else does Egypt "help" Sharon? No constructive cooperation intended! If Egypt wanted non-violence in Gaza, would it have smuggled arms into Gaza? If Egypt wanted to fight terrorism, would it have advised the P.A. to hold out for bigger Israeli concessions? Judge the sanity of Sharon's inviting Egyptian military units to the outskirts of Gaza and EU forces inside, by Egyptian military doctrine that posits Israel as the enemy and the corresponding Egyptian military buildup. If Egypt wanted peace, it could have used tens of billions in US aid to build its economy instead of to tear down Israel's. Can Sharon and other Israeli leaders be as stupid as they appear? They must be blackmailed. PROBLEMS FALSELY DESCRIBED The P.A. describes Egyptian diplomacy as an "effort to revive the peace process and end the Israeli aggression." It attributes the difficulty in Arafat's supervising Gaza to Israel not letting him go there. IMRA says the obstacle is that he wants Israel to promise not to arrest the terrorists now with him or who would go with him (IMRA, 5/28 or 5/29). He would supervise terrorism. There never was a peace process. It always was a sham. Its thrust was to get Israel to concede to the Arab aggressors. The aggression now is in P.A. terrorism, wrong in itself but also in violation of Accords signed by the P.A.. It is not aggression for Israel to pursue the terrorists. That is its duty under international law. It also is the duty of the rest of the world, much of which instead subsidizes the terrorist autonomy. THE PROBLEM WITH ISRAELIS Israelis rarely read documents and proposals, such as the Oslo Accords and plans by Sharon and Beilin (IMRA, 5/29). They rely on biased summaries of them. Some of the agreements, such as
the one with Egypt, are not published in full. The non-published or
non-publicized portions can be hair-raising. For example, in the
treaty with Egypt, Israel has a side-letter with the US asserting that
this treaty takes priority over Egypt's earlier treaties with Arab
states, and is a peace treaty. Egypt has a secret side letter
asserting that Egypt's earlier treaties take priority. Therefore, for
Egypt, this is not a peace treaty. All it means is that Egypt pledges
not to attack Israel by itself. If, however, Egypt's Arab allies are
at war with Israel, Egypt may help its Arab allies, even though Israel
would not have attacked Egypt. To this day, the people of Israel and
the US imagine that Israel has made peace with Egypt. Actually, the
treaty served to get Israel out of the Sinai, rearm Egypt, lull
Israeli defenses, and promote diplomacy and terrorism against Israel.
Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based
forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He
distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at
ricshulman@aol.com.
|
|
FRAILTY, NOT LEADERSHIP
Posted by Michael Freund, June 9, 2004. |
|
As America mourns the passing of a great man this week, Israelis continue to chafe under the rule of a weak one. The death of Ronald Reagan, who served as 40th president of the United States from 1980 to 1988, has brought back a flood of memories. Here was a leader with courage and vision, a man who saw the threat posed by Communism and set about to take it down. He inherited a nation whose spirit was shattered, and which had lost its sense of purpose and mission, and he realized that the first and most urgent of tasks was to restore the American people's confidence in themselves and their cause. With gripping oratory, Ronald Reagan reminded Americans not to lose faith. His earnest optimism and profound conviction in the triumph of freedom lifted his nation's spirits and gave hope to those imprisoned behind the walls of totalitarianism everywhere. Reagan did not shy away from confronting the Soviet dictatorship, never hesitating to point out the immorality of its ideology and the evil of its ways. His stance was consistent and unswerving, and that is why it ultimately triumphed. Contrast this with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who has nothing to offer us but despair, anguish and retreat. For the past several years, Israel has found itself on the front lines of a global war against terror, confronting a ruthless enemy bent on its destruction and unwilling to compromise or make peace. Instead of standing firm in the face of this ominous threat, instead of marshalling the resources and willpower of this great nation to rise up and defend itself, Sharon has chosen the path of capitulation and surrender. He has taken the pulse of the nation and defined it to be weak. Rather than acting to revive the patient, he prefers to discourage him further by telling him just how ill he thinks him to be. Sharon says that Israel cannot hold on to Gaza or northern Samaria any longer, that the country does not have the staying power to do so. And so he proposes that we run away, unilaterally and under fire. This is not leadership, it is frailty, it is weakness and it is destined to fail. In this part of the world especially, once you open the door to vulnerability and helplessness, it has a tendency to snowball out of control. Indeed, it didn't take long for that to happen. On Monday, deputy premier Ehud Olmert was already telling the Maariv newspaper that Israel would eventually have to divide Jerusalem and hand over parts of it to Palestinian control. The former mayor of Israel's capital had this to say about his plan to remake the city: "I will not view it as fundamentally undermining our sovereignty in Jerusalem", he said. "Jerusalem is dear to me but we shouldn't lose a sense of proportion.? The only people who have lost their "sense of proportion" are those such as Olmert and Sharon, whose lack of principles and faith undermine their right to call themselves leaders of this nation. They are Israel's Jimmy Carters, and their mindset of malaise is downright destructive. Now more than ever, the Jewish people need a Ronald Reagan of their own, someone who will stand up to the world, and especially to our enemies, with pride in his heart, power in his voice and principles in his view. Someone who will remind us that the Jewish people are unlike any other, that we are here by right, by Divine mandate, and that we shall never, ever yield this Land of ours. We have survived the worst that the world had to throw at us. We fought our way out of the Exile, and have built one of the best darn countries around, despite all the obstacles that stood in our way. The time for retreat is over. The difficulties of the past can be put behind us, but we need a leader to put things back into perspective, to remind us that if we return to ourselves, and to our G-d, we can and will find the inner strength to stave off our foes and fulfill our mission as a nation and a people. Faith, optimism, pride and hope. As Ronald Reagan showed America, that is truly what a great leader has to offer. Israel, I dare say, deserves no less. The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning under former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. |
|
d from this list, please send your Email address.
FRIENDS & ENEMIES BETRAY THE JEWS: EGYPT & JORDAN - FOXES GUARDING THE HEN HOUSE?
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 8, 2004. |
|
THIS JUST IN: "Mohammed, the Egyptian", key bombing suspect of the 3/11 Madrid bombing was arrested in Milan, Italy today. His real name is Rabai Osman Ahmed, an explosives expert from the Egyptian Army - with close ties to the suspected ringleader of the 3/11 Terror Attacks. Now we know about 15 Saudis and 4 Egyptians who were the hijack bombers of America's 9/11 and an another Egyptian who may have been the explosives mastermind of Spain's 3/11. He had organized 10 bombs in the Madrid commuter train system, killing 191 men, women and children, wounding more than 1,800. Friends or Enemies - Betraying the Jews is not news, at least it's not news to the Jews. Let's cover the latest betrayal and who are the likely participants. Last week Turkey, on a tip, inspected a Ukrainian ship leaving the port of Istanbul bound for Egypt. It was loaded with serious armaments which, as a practical matter, Egypt did not need. They already have American weapons in huge quantities generously gifted by the State Department and several presidents in the name of the American people who (unknowingly) paid for this 'gift'. Egypt is called the military colossus of the Middle East. But, for reasons just beginning to emerge, Egypt (President Hosni Mubarak) lied and took responsibility for this shipment, in essence, to keep its actual recipients secret from the Israeli Cabinet, Knesset and people. As the truth is revealed, this ship was bound for the Arab Muslim Palestinians - just as the Karin-A which was caught by Israel January 3, 2002 (1). The first Karin-A was bound for the Arab Muslims Palestinians under the watchful eye of Mubarak. It was to be unloaded in Alexandria, Egypt with RPGs (Rocket-Propelled Grenades), AK-47s, explosives, Sagger and LAW anti-tank missiles, 120 mm mortars, mines, advanced explosive equipment, weapons and sniper rifles, ammunition and much more - 50 tons worth. While both shipments were to be delivered to the Arab Muslim Palestinians, it was Hosni Mubarak who had to give his approval to receive this shipment on Egyptian soil. This second ship was similarly loaded down with RPGs, AK-47s, explosives - all destined to be used by the Arab Muslim Palestinians to kill Israelis. Who knew at the time when that shipment of arms was discovered that the ship was destined for the Palestinians and why did so many lie? First, the liars lied because Sharon was in negotiations with his Cabinet over the Gaza withdrawal/retreat. Clearly, the negotiations would have stopped and rightfully so! Who was knowledgeable about this? Obviously, Sharon and those close to him, like Ehud Olmert, Joseph (Tomy) Lapid, and Dov Weisglass would have known and suppressed the facts. Plainly, Hosni Mubarak knew and lied to protect his back channel agreement with Sharon who would abandon Gaza of which Mubarak was a conspiring partner (more on this later). President Bush, the Arabist U.S. State Department and the CIA had to know but they, too, decided to conceal the truth from the Israeli and American people because they had a prejudiced interest in insuring that the Sharon's Cabinet voted for the re'partition of Gaza. Fellow travelers and the Leftist Media have yet to publish what is easily known all over Washington, the Israeli media and the Internet. In brief, they all knew; they all lied and thus betrayed the Jewish citizens of Israel (and the world) who had a right to know that this ship of armaments was destined for the Arab Muslim Palestinians. The Jews were betrayed by their friends and by their own government an act which should be considered nothing less than treason of the highest order. I have written extensively about the perfidy of the Sharon government which is no less guilty of lying to the Israeli people than Shimon Peres and the Rabin government who condemned Israel to Oslo. All of these people collaborated in a conspiracy to betray the citizens of Israel and keep them ignorant of a ship loaded with death to be used by the Arab Muslim Palestinians against the Jews of Israel. There is little doubt that this shipment had to be destined for Gaza because it is somewhat easier to hid smuggled-in arms than Nablus, Hebron or Ramallah. Many words can describe these liars and collaborators: Betrayal, Treason, Corruption, Perfidy, Conspiracy to commit murder, Planning for War, etc. Perhaps you have a few words of your own! In brief, the vote taken by the Israeli Cabinet was deliberately rushed through before these truths could be revealed and succeeded by Sharon peremptorily firing 2 Cabinet Ministers. The rushed vote was based upon lies and withheld information. Having submitted his case to the Cabinet with 'unclean hands', this vote would and should be considered null and void in any honest Court. Let's move on to other lies by the same conspirators: While Israel Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon was supposed to be negotiating in good faith with his Cabinet and the Israeli people, he deliberately overlooked or overruled the vote of his own Likud Party who voted 60% to 40% against the Gaza Retreat. While firing Cabinet Ministers and arm-twisting his other Cabinet Ministers, he was also planning with Egypt and Jordan. Those plans with the Egyptians included training and arming the Arab Muslim Palestinians in Gaza, becoming the 'guards' against Terror to Jews in the Jewish State on Israel's southern border. Not yet noticed is the fact that Jordanians are also in YESHA (Yehuda, Shomron, and Gaza), training Arab Muslim Palestinians in Judea and Samaria. Sharon's plans included moving Egyptian troops into Gaza before the vote which made Sharon into a deliberate conspirator with Egypt. [Today, June 8th Kassem Rockets built in and shot from Gaza, hit the road between Sderot and Yad Mordecai near Ashkelon, putting at least 3 people in hospital.] In essence and no doubt, America's President George W. Bush had made the decision that the Cabinet discussions were irrelevant. Sharon seemed in a panic to get the Cabinet to approve his decision - given that he had already illegally implemented that decision. Had the Cabinet voted against retreat and uprooting of 8,000 Jewish men, women and children from Israel's historic homeland - with Egyptians already present in Gaza, Sharon would have had to admit his dictatorial blunder and resign immediately. Perhaps you will agree that this ranks with other swindles of the Jews where Jewish lives were traded for the interests of others. I recall such lies and promises, as the German Nazis put up on the entrance to the death camps Arbeit Macht Frei (Work Makes you Free). Or Roosevelt's promise to rescue the Jews "after he won WW2." The promises (lies) of Arafat, Rabin and Peres through the Oslo Accords which effectively sentenced 1500 Jews (and 45 Americans) to be murdered, with hundreds of thousands wounded, many maimed for life. Now we have the promise of Sharon for Retreat/Withdrawal/Uprooting/Evacuation [pick your own word] all of which equals ethnic cleansing of Jews from our ancient Jewish homeland in Gaza, Judea and Samaria - Israel's heartland. The lying promise of Sharon, Mubarak and Bush is that they are telling the Jews that such evictions will bring peace. As oft said: "There are liars, damned liars and statisticians." The statisticians claim that IF Israel doesn't withdraw, the baby-producing Arab Muslims will soon outnumber the Jews and Israel will lose her majority in the Knesset because Israel democratically allows all Arab Israel citizens to vote. Of course, these dire predictions have been heard since - at least - the British Peel Commission in 1937 and they have never come true! The balance of voters in Israel is still 80% Jewish and less than 20% Arab Muslims. The Arabs often vote for the Jewish Labor Party because they recognize that their economic well-being improves when the Jews are in control. While it may be democratic, it is still very foolish to allow the current 10 Arabs Muslims in the Knesset to vote on significant issues regarding Israeli Jewish sovereignty in the Jewish State of Israel. I am deeply shamed by President Bush joining such a coverup of the arms shipment so the pretense of Arab Muslim Palestinian murderous intents would not be exposed. (This does not mean I would favor voting for John Kerry in November. He might be worse than Bush.) But, it is (and always has been) the U.S. State Department and CIA who organize and run America's foreign policy - always against the Jewish interests of the Israel. If Sharon, Egypt's Mubarak, President Bush were willing to blatantly lie (suppress the facts of the arms shipments and the Egyptians and Jordanians already present within Israel), think how much more they will have to lie when the Arab Muslim Palestinians in Gaza begin to launch their improved missiles at Israel's southern cities of Ashkelon, Ashdod, Beer-Sheva, Sderot and even as far as Tel Aviv and Bet Shemesh, with assistance from Egypt and the new missiles they can import without Israeli control. I am similarly ashamed for Prime Minister Sharon who has given up any honor due him for prior gallant service. He and his Cabinet who voted for this insidious plan can mark this as a Day of Infamy. P.S. Don't expect Israel's corrupt Leftist Media to reveal the expose of how the vote was manipulated with lies and suppression of the truth. ### 1. "Arafat's Arms-for War Ship Caught (Part 1)" Feb. 7, 2002 & "How Was It Reported Part 2)" by Emanuel A. Winston Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). |
|
NAFA TO PROTEST THE ATROCITIES IN SHILLUK KINGDOM, SUDAN
Posted by Kwathi Ajawin, June 8, 2004. |
|
The wide scale and tragic military operations carried out by the combined forces of the Government of Sudan and six allied militia groups in the Shilluk Kingdom since January 2004 have claimed hundreds of civilian deaths. Other cases of death and wounded have still to be confirmed. Despite the progress in Peace process in Nivasha, Kenya, the Pro-government Militia burned down the entire Southern region of the Shilluk Kingdom of the oil rich Upper Nile region in southern Sudan; hundred of civilians have been killed, 23 villages entirely burned, and thousands of civilians have been displaced. Many of these people are concentrated on an island between the Bahr el Jebel River and the Lol Stream, surviving on water lilies. Some are living under trees in Papwojo with no shelter and are exposed to heavy rains and to sun stroke. Others have decided to make the long and tedious walk from Papwojo to the border with the Nuba mountains. Many of the displaced are still hiding in open swamps between the rivers under insecure condition and are exposed to Malaria and malnutrition. We ask Mr. Kofi Annan, the international community and Rights activist to expose and condemn this evil doing of Sudan's government and to join us in these demands:
Mr. Kofi Annan, your complacency and silence over the situation in the Shilluk Kingdom enables the Government of Sudan to operate with impunity and allows it to deny desperately needed relief assistance to the civilians in the Shilluk Kingdom, as we have seen in the so-called three day window which expired before the NGO's could start their work. Mr. Kofi Annan, we ask you to speak up now to wash your hands from the blood of the innocent, children, women, and the elderly brutally murdered by the Government of Sudan in the Shilluk Kingdom. Your action will not undermine the peace process for it is the peace which is for the people and not the people for the peace. The North America Fashoda Association is a Washington DC based non-profit organization working to educate the larger community about the plight of southern Sudanese in the Shilluk Kingdom in southern Sudan, as well as to augment local, national and international efforts to provide assistance to southern Sudanese living in above-mentioned region. NAFA aids the acculturation of southern Sudanese refugees and immigrants from the Sudan, by providing appropriate activities, including, but not limited to, orientation to American life and culture, educational tours, and referrals to community and other sources of assistance. NAFA promotes southern Sudanese, especially the Shilluk culture, through a variety of activities, including cultural performances, public presentations, and participation in local and other affairs. Kwathi Ajawin is with North America Fashoda Association (NAFA). Contact him at kaja2win@aol.com or 703 503 0490. |
|
"HOW LONG WILL THIS NATION PROVOKE ME AFTER ALL THESE MIRACLES?"
Posted Women in Green by June 8, 2004. |
|
This essay was written by Rabbi Eliezer Waldman.
In this week's Torah portion, the Almighty says: "How long will this nation provoke me ... how long with they not have faith in me despite all the miracles that I have performed." (Numbers 13:11) It certainly is no coincidence that the "disengagement" plans of Prime Minister Ariel Sharon reached the agenda of the Israeli government precisely the same week we read the Torah portion "Shlach Lecha". Here, the Torah distinguishes between those Jews who shamefully declared "We cannot ascend to Eretz Israel because the enemy is stronger than us" (Numbers 13:31) and the faithful Jews who declared "Let us ascend and possess the land for we can succeed in overcoming all the hardships". (Numbers 13:30) These Jews of faith continued to explain: "If G-d favors us, He will bring us into this land and give it to us". (Numbers 14:8) The determining factor creating the difference between the two camps is the recognition of the Divine leadership determining the flow of events. Those not imbued with the faith in the leadership of the Almighty allowed themselves to be frightened by the appearance of the giants, and as a result came to the conclusion "When looking upon them we felt like grasshoppers and we are sure that that is the way they looked upon us". (Numbers 13:33) This breach of faith in the G-d of Israel who miraculously delivered them from Egyptian slavery, brought them victory when Amalek attacked, and on the desert trek provided them daily with heavenly nutrition; this weakness in faith caused the fierce Divine response of the Almighty "How much longer will this nation provoke me". how long with they not have faith in me after all these miracles?. I can almost hear these Divine words reverberating in our ears in Hebron today in response to the "disengagement" plan being accepted as official policy by the Israeli government. Is it happening again? Jewish leaders declaring we cannot hold on to our G-d given land, we cannot withstand the pains and difficulties, we must "disengage" - uproot Jews from their homes while destroying the towns we have built. We must flee from Palestinian terror, hide behind fences and walls, and close our eyes to the rockets that explode in our faces. These rockets have reached Sderot, Nahal Oz, and Sa'ad, towns not even part of Yesha. How absurd that this scenario is presented as a solution for our problems leading towards a "peace process". Our leaders guarantee us that this is the right direction by the fact that this plan ensures us the support of Mr. Bush, Kofi Annan, Mr. Chirac and even Mr. Mubarak, the President of Egypt. I want to comfort our dear readers, that there is another path that we in Yesha have chosen - the path of faith, the path of life, the path that recognizes the Divine dimension leading us in this Zionist process of redemption. This is the path of Yehoshua and Calev, who against all odds continued to express their faith in the Almighty, and therefore were privileged to lead the Children of Israel to their destination in Eretz Israel. We are actually continuing the path of classical Zionism. The only realistic explanation for the astonishing success of the Zionist process of settling and building the Jewish State, is the recognition of the Divine spirit that has been a pillar of inspiration and strength. This Divine spirit has created the boundless devotion and self sacrifice of pioneers and idealists from Hanita, Rosh Pina, Rishon L'zion, Petach Tikva, and Jerusalem, Hebron, Bet El, Eli and Shilo. All these pioneering efforts succeeded in the face of Arab terror striking against us in the last hundred years; generation after generation of Jewish settlers and builders projected the unique character of the pioneers of Eretz Israel. Their infinite faith in the power and reality of creating facts on the ground became the determining factor in securing the boundaries of our holy land. Thirty seven years ago, the Six Day War elevated us to a higher level of perceiving the spirit of the Almighty leading us on the path of redemption. This Divine spirit helped create the great reality of Jewish life in Judea, Samaria, the Golan and Gush Katif. Close to three hundred thousand Jews in villages, towns and cities are living a complete Jewish life of faith, joy and appreciation of our blessed lot. Only those who are disengaged from the historical reality of Zionism and its Divine spirit can have such terrible ideas of uprooting Jews from their homes and destroying Jewish life, while thinking that they are bringing peace and security to our people. We, the descendants of Calev and Yehoshua, feel blessed and privileged to be able to continue in their path of faith. Thank G-d there are already three generations motivated by this faith living in Yesha, along with thousands of Jews in all of Israel who support us. I must admit that we have no choice but to continue on this path, because we know what the other alternative is, it all appears in this week's portion, "Shlach". I tremble when I read these verses again. I turn to my government and Prime Minister: A responsible Jewish leadership, especially in these difficult times, must put its mind and heart to the Divine words describing the crisis in the desert and the Divine solution expressed by the words of two great Jewish leaders Calev and Yehoshua. Mr. Sharon, with all due respect, it is not Mr. Bush or Mr. Powell or European leaders, and certainly not the terrorists, nor the ancient biblical giants, who determine the course of Jewish history but the G-d of Israel, whose spirit and inspiration have created the vitality and beauty flowing in the stream of Jewish life in all of Israel, He is the One who guides and determines the direction of Jewish destiny. Always remember the words of Calev and Yehoshua: "Tova Ha'aretz Me'od Me'od" ("The Land is exceedingly good") - (Numbers 14:7) Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
GAZA IS ONLY 6 KM FROM THE MAJOR ELECTRICAL POWER STATIONS SUPPLYING ASHKELON
Posted by Dror Vanunu, June 8, 2004. |
|
An awful thing happened in Israel this Sunday. Exactly thirty-seven years after our historic victory in the Six Day War, returning us to Gaza, Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, a Likud government headed by Ariel Sharon passed a "Revised Disengagement Plan". This plan calls for the formation of committees who will work out the procedure for evacuating all the Katif Bloc settlements as well as some in northern Samaria. We residents of the Katif Bloc believe, work for and pray that this illegitimate and grotesque "pregnancy" will be quickly aborted. The opposition to surrendering the Katif Bloc successfully passed three democratic tests: 1. A year and a half ago Ariel Sharon defeated his Labor Party opponent, Amram Mitzna, by rejecting and ridiculing Mitzna's disengagement plan. 2. When Sharon abandoned his Likud principles and endorsed disengagement he called for a referendum of Likud members and promised to abide by the results. Our successful campaign resulted in 61% of Likud members voting against the expulsion of Jews from their homes. 3. Three weeks after the referendum Sharon brought the plan before his cabinet, which rejected it by 12-11. Sharon, undeterred by repeated defeats, decided to create a majority by using tactics reminiscent of totalitarian regimes and firing several ministers who had voted against him. We stand before a complex and difficult struggle to preserve the integrity of the State of Israel. The ultimate purpose of the disengagement plan is clearly to create a terrorist state supported by Egypt in Gaza and Jordan in Judea and Samaria including the dismemberment of Jerusalem and the supply of tens of thousands of weapons - for "peaceful purposes", of course - to the Palestinians. We "Oslo Process graduates" who have seen for a decade how that led to an increase in terror and the spilling of rivers of Jewish blood cannot stand by silently as this new plan leads to an unprecedented catastrophe. In the coming days we residents of the Katif Bloc, together with colleagues in Judea and Samaria, Likud members and members of other nationalist parties will determine a course of action to defeat the disengagement plan. We believe that logic, reason and common sense will triumph and the plan will be swept in to the dustbin of history. The Katif Bloc will remain intact, as was said by the prophet Amos: "And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the LORD thy G-d" Dror Vanunu lives in Gush Katif, Gaza. |
|
KOFI ANNAN PROTESTED AT HARVARD COMMENCEMENT FOR INACTION ON SUDAN GENOCIDE
Posted by Jeffrey Hipp, June 8, 2004. |
|
BOSTON - Kofi Annan is coming to Harvard on Thursday to receive an honorary degree, but will be met with a human rights protest over his inaction on genocide in Sudan. "Mr. Annan's inaction is anything but honorable," said Rev. Dr. Gloria White Hammond, co-founder of relief organization My Sister's Keeper, and a director of the American Anti-Slavery Group. "The Secretary-General has failed to stand up to the Arab-dominated Government of Sudan in its murderous campaign of ethnic cleansing." The rally, which will begin at 6 p.m. on Wednesday at the Cambridge Common outside Harvard Yard, will feature an array of activists, including Rev. Walter Fauntroy, founder of the Congressional Black Caucus and a former aide to Martin Luther King, Jr.; escaped slave Francis Bok; Suliman Giddo of the Darfur Peace and Development Organization; and Kwathi Ajawin of the North America Fashoda Association. The Sudanese government has for years been leading a campaign of genocide against Sudan's minority African population. Despite participating in a peace process to end Sudan's civil/religious war, the Khartoum regime is currently destroying the Shilluk Kingdom in Southern Sudan, holding thousands of South Sudanese Christians and animists in slavery, and launching devastating raids against African Muslims in the Western Sudanese region of Darfur. 30,000 have been murdered in Darfur in the past few months alone, and over one million made refugees. As many as 1 million people may die by the end of 2004 as a result of Khartoum's policy of forced starvation. "Annan stood by in Rwanda in 1994, he stood by in Sebrenica in 1995, but we will not let him stand by today in Sudan," noted Dr. Charles Jacobs, President of the Anti-Slavery Group. "It's 'Kofi's choice" - be a bystander to genocide or take action to save lives." "This pattern of ineptitude and practice of inaction is a disgrace for the UN," Hammond stated. "The UN is an organization born from the ashes of the Holocaust to ensure that 'never again' would the international community tolerate genocide." For more information, please visit www.iabolish.com/darfur |
|
RECLAIMING JEWISH PROPERTY IN JERUSALEM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 7, 2004. |
|
Just outside the Old City of Jerusalem, is the neighborhood of Silwan, from which the British escorted the Jews out, last century, instead of protecting them from Arab mobs. (That was ethnic cleansing. Pity the "plight of the Palestinians?" The facts incline otherwise.) An Arab sold a Jewish organization a house in Silwan four years ago. One year ago, he sold it again, to another Arab. (Arab cheating in real estate and land deals is notorious, and filled the court schedules in British Mandatory Palestine, but we are supposed to accept every Arab's claim that Zionists took his land.) The P.A. (itself a usurper of Church property) paid for legal counsel to sue the Jewish organization. The Arab "purchaser" claimed to have had a previous draft of purchase for the property, but "couldn't find it." The P.A. planned to forge its date, so it would seem to have preceded the Jewish purchase, but it was waiting to find out the exact date of that purchase, so it could do so. The P.A. has been found to engage in much forgery (sorry, lost citation). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
REAGAN, BEGIN, AND ISRAEL
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, June 7, 2004. |
|
With the passing of former American President Ronald W. Reagan, another element from a bygone era gains closure. The "Cold War" is just a distant memory, the "Evil Empire" he worked so hard to bring down is no more. That legacy, no one will be able to take away from him. Many in America and Israel have written about his close relations with American Jews, and his fond feelings for Israel, all true. But truth demands, that we look at a man in his completeness, warts and all. I remember clearly, that September 1st, in 1982. I was at the home, of my now long deceased Jewish history professor. I had been working with him as a research assistant on the first three volumes of his planned magna opus five-volume complete history of the Jewish people. He never lived to complete the fifth volume. We had been working several hours that day, but at 8:00 pm, we needed to finish up because President Reagan was going to speak to the nation. The PLO and arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat had been expelled from Lebanon, under the watchful eye of then Defense Minister Ariel Sharon. In those days, it was acceptable to call Arafat a terrorist and people didn't look at you funny, wondering why you're being so extreme. It would take another 12 years for Arafat to "win" his Nobel Peace Prize, and a few more, for most people to realize it was a farce. President Reagan and then Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin had an ongoing up and down relationship. They were very different people. Reagan was a mid-western self-made man of simple roots, an actor and later a politician. Begin was a prim and proper European-trained lawyer and a Jew who survived the Holocaust era. Begin was also a fervent nationalist, proud of his country Israel, and its achievements, who believed in the rightness of his cause, the survival of the Jewish People, at all cost. In this, there actually was some similarity between them, Reagan also believed in the greatness of his country and tried to revive its spirit. Both were fighters for their causes, and they often clashed. I recall the previous fall-winter of 1981. After a long drawn out political battle over US plans to sell advanced radar planes - AWACS - to Saudi Arabia in October - planes Israel felt compromised it's security - ended in victory for President Reagan, he tried to balance the American-Israel association by proposing a "strategic relationship" with Israel in November. Reagan, during the heated debate over the AWACS sale had said, "It is not the business of other nations to make American foreign policy," in reference to Israel. In December of 1981, the Israeli Knesset led by Prime Minister Menachem Begin, passed the "Golan Heights Law" officially annexing the territory captured by Israel from Syria in the 1973 Yom Kippur War. Syria had previously used the territory to repeatedly shell Israeli civilian areas down below the Heights, and with massive public support, the Israeli government decided to solidify - in law - its determination never to return to such a situation. Till this day, there is a consensus in Israel, not to return the Golan Height to Syrian control. Reagan, angry, withdrew the "strategic relationship" offer. As a response to Reagan's previous statement about foreign countries making American policy, and his withdrawal of the "offer," Begin gave a rousing speech, reminding all who would listen that Israel is not a "Banana Republic". Israel would also not let foreign powers interfere with its pursuit of its vital security needs, such as securing the Golan Heights. On June 6th, 1982 - seventeen years, to the day, from the beginning of 1967 Six-Day-War - Israel entered Lebanon to put an end to PLO rocket attacks on Israeli cities in the north. Within three days, Israel swept north to Beirut, driving the PLO northward. There was little bloodshed in those three days, because most PLO terrorists chose to run instead of holding their ground and fight. The mostly Shiites and Christians in South Lebanon, hailed Israelis as liberators, so horrendous was the PLO atrocities against them. Israel was poised to enter Beirut, and route the PLO once and for all. But Ronald Reagan didn't want that. The Arabist State Department pulled out their old myth that Israel couldn't enter an Arab capital because the Arabs would "lose face" and then they wouldn't be able to make peace with Israel later. The same stale argument was made to keep Israel from fully routing the Syrian Army in 1973, and penetrating into Damascus. Under tremendous pressure, Begin hesita ted for three weeks, during which time, the PLO dug in, increasing the likelihood of fierce house-to-house combat in civilian neighborhoods. The PLO had for years terrorized the civilians in Lebanon, creating a state-within-a-state, and had no compunction in using civilians as shields against the invading Israeli forces. Begin backed off, and the famed "siege of Beirut" began. If Reagan hadn't pressured Begin, or if Begin hadn't backed down, the PLO instead of digging in, would have continued fleeing northward, and the Israeli Army could have crossed through Beirut as it had the South of Lebanon, with nary a shot fired. Once, north of Beirut in open territory, Israel could have finished off the PLO for good. That is the greatest tragedy of the war. During this period, Reagan secretly formulated a plan not only to get Israel to pull its troops out of Lebanon, but to force Israel into withdrawing from Judea and Samaria - the West Bank - and Gaza. Reagan envisioned Palestinian autonomy in a federal system with Jordan. And that brings us back to my professor's house that September evening. We sat there, in front of the TV, glued to our seats... On September 1st, 1982, Ronald Reagan - in a nationwide televised speech - unveiled his plan. Reagan began, "My fellow Americans, today has been a day that should make us proud. It marked the end of the successful evacuation of the PLO from Beirut, Lebanon...But the situation in Lebanon is only part of the overall problem of conflict in the Middle East. So, over the past 2 weeks, while events in Beirut dominated the front page, America was engaged in a quiet, behind-the-scenes effort to lay the groundwork for a broader peace in the region...The evacuation of the PLO from Beirut is now complete, and we can now help the Lebanese to rebuild their war-torn country..." And so, on September 17, 1982, with American help, the UN Security Council passed Resolution 520, demanding that "all non-Lebanese forces" leave Lebanon, which was understood to include Syria. But, almost twenty-two years later, Syria, in one of the most vicious occupations in recent memory, still occupies Lebanon. Recently, the US has moved one step closer to realizing Reagan's vision. Last year the US Congress passed the "The Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act of 2003," which President Bush signed into law. It calls on Syria to halt support for terrorism, end the occupation of Lebanon, stop production of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and holds Syria accountable for the illegal Syrian-Iraqi trade, which provided Iraq with the weapons that killed American troops, and stop the flow of weapons and fighters into Iraq. Only time will tell if it changes Syria's behavior or the nature of its regime. Reagan spoke that September evening of the Camp David Accords and the American brokered peace treaty with Egypt. He referred to "the tragic assassination of President Sadat" and the breakdown of the "autonomy" talks. Then Reagan continued, "But the opportunities for peace in the Middle East do not begin and end in Lebanon. As we help Lebanon rebuild, we must also move to resolve the root causes of conflict between Arabs and Israelis...The war in Lebanon has demonstrated many things, but two consequences are key to the peace process. First, the military losses of the PLO have not diminished the yearning of the Palestinian people for a just solution of their claims; and, second, while Israel's military successes in Lebanon have demonstrated that its armed forces are second to none in the region, they alone cannot bring just and lasting peace to Israel and her neighbors." As we watched, I reminded my professor that Ariel Sharon was against the peace treaty Begin signed with Egypt. Reagan continued, "The question now is how to reconcile Israel's legitimate security concerns with the legitimate rights of the Palestinians. And that answer can only come at the negotiating table. Each party must recognize that the outcome must be acceptable to all and that true peace will require compromises by all. So, tonight I'm calling for a fresh start...I call on Israel to make clear that the security for which she yearns can only be achieved through genuine peace, a peace requiring magnanimity, vision, and courage. I call on the Palestinian people to recognize that their own political aspirations are inextricably bound to recognition of Israel's right to a secure future. And I call on the Arab States to accept the reality of Israel -- and the reality that peace and justice are to be gained only through hard, fair, direct negotiation." Reagan declared, "The time has come for a new realism on the part of all the peoples of the Middle East. The State of Israel is an accomplished fact; it deserves unchallenged legitimacy within the community of nations. But Israel's legitimacy has thus far been recognized by too few countries and has been denied by every Arab State except Egypt. Israel exists; it has a right to exist in peace behind secure and defensible borders; and it has a right to demand of its neighbors that they recognize those facts." It would be another twelve years till the second Arab state, Jordan, would sign a peace treaty with Israel, the greater Arab world for the most part still hasn't fully accepted Israel's existence. Ariel Sharon was against that treaty too. The Arab League Economic Boycott against Israel, which the League promised to be bring to a close in the heady "peace-making days" of the early 1990's - much touted in the media - hasn't completely ended, in fact Syria in recent months has been trying to fully revive it. Then Reagan said, "I have personally followed and supported Israel's heroic struggle for survival, ever since the founding of the State of Israel 34 years ago. In the pre-1967 borders Israel was barely 10 miles wide at its narrowest point. The bulk of Israel's population lived within artillery range of hostile Arab armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again." When my professor heard this, he smiled, referring to Reagan's friendship with Israel. About the situation of the Palestinians, Reagan said, "Only through broader participation in the peace process, most immediately by Jordan and by the Palestinians, will Israel be able to rest confident in the knowledge that its security and integrity will be respected by its neighbors. Only through the process of negotiation can all the nations of the Middle East achieve a secure peace." Here President Reagan began to spell out his plan, which included Jordanian involvement, a Palestinian-Jordanian Confederation. "First, as outlined in the Camp David accords, there must be a period of time during which the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza will have full autonomy over their own affairs. Due consideration must be given to the principle of self-government by the inhabitants of the territories and to the legitimate security concerns of the parties involved. The purpose of the 5-year period of transition which would begin after free elections for a self-governing Palestinian authority is to prove to the Palestinians that they can run their own affairs and that such Palestinian autonomy poses no threat to Israel's security," Reagan said. He continued, "The United States will not support the use of any additional land for the purpose of settlements during the transitional period. Indeed, the immediate adoption of a settlement freeze by Israel, more than any other action, could create the confidence needed for wider participation in these talks. Further settlement activity is in no way necessary for the security of Israel and only diminishes the confidence of the Arabs that a final outcome can be freely and fairly negotiated. I want to make the American position well understood. The purpose of this transitional period is the peaceful and orderly transfer of authority from Israel to the Palestinian inhabitants of the West Bank and Gaza. At the same time, such a transfer must not interfere with Israel's security requirements." Reagan called for a settlement freeze, but not settlement evacuation. He also said, "Beyond the transition period, as we look to the future of the West Bank and Gaza, it is clear to me that peace cannot be achieved by the formation of an independent Palestinian state in those territories, nor is it achievable on the basis of Israeli sovereignty or permanent control over the West Bank and Gaza. So, the United States will not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and we will not support annexation or permanent control by Israel." Let me repeat that, "...the United States will not support the establishment of an independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza..." Reagan pointed out that, "The final status of these lands must, of course, be reached through the give and take of negotiations. But it is the firm view of the United States that self-government by the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza in association with Jordan offers the best chance for a durable, just, and lasting peace. We base our approach squarely on the principle that the Arab-Israeli conflict should be resolved through negotiations involving an exchange of territory for peace." Reagan referred to United Nations Security Council Resolution 242 and continued, "When the border is negotiated between Jordan and Israel, our view on the extent to which Israel should be asked to give up territory will be heavily affected by the extent of true peace and normalization, and the security arrangements offered in return." Again, there is no reference to dismantling "settlements," i.e. Jewish communities. About Jerusalem, Reagan said, "Finally, we remain convinced that Jerusalem must remain undivided, but its final status should be decided through negotiation." My professor smiled again, "Jerusalem won't be divided, he said." But I pointed out to him that it didn't mean the US recognized Israel's right to its "eternal capital," Reagan said, "its final status should be decided through negotiation." "And, make no mistake, the United States will oppose any proposal from any party and at any point in the negotiating process that threatens the security of Israel. America's commitment to the security of Israel is ironclad, and, I might add, so is mine," Reagan assured. He ended with, "And I fervently hope that the Palestinians and Jordan, with the support of their Arab colleagues, will accept this opportunity." So one can summarize, President Reagan said, no Palestinian State, no return to the 1967 borders, and an undivided Jerusalem... At the time, I wasn't that impressed by the speech, I wasn't as enthralled as other pro-Israel activists were about Reagan's plan. Many stressed that he said no Palestinian State, no return to the 1967 borders, and an undivided Jerusalem, but I would point out he doesn't recognize the Jewish people's historic and spiritual claims to Judea and Samaria - the West Bank, or Israel's rights in its capital city, Jerusalem. About Reagan's other legacy, he referred to it in his speech, "When our administration assumed office in January of 1981...There were two basic issues we had to address. First, there was the strategic threat to the region posed by the Soviet Union and its surrogates, best demonstrated by the brutal war in Afghanistan...With regard to the Soviet threat, we have strengthened our efforts to develop with our friends and allies a joint policy to deter the Soviets and their surrogates from further expansion in the region and, if necessary, to defend against it." Reagan will always be remembered for helping cause the collapse of the Soviet Union. Ronald Reagan fought the "Cold War" for over thirty years. But during this time, the US and USSR maintained diplomatic relations throughout their rivalry, and they recognized each other's existence. That situation is not so with between Israel and much of the Arab/Islamic world, till today. Even with Egypt, a state that Israel has signed a formal peace treaty with, relations are described as a "Cold Peace". That's a lie, it's misinformation, it's "spin". Israel is in a situation of "Cold War" with Egypt - who for over three years has withdrawn its ambassador from Israel - in just one of many treaty violations. Egypt does nothing to prevent the Palestinians from smuggling arms into Gaza. Egypt does nothing to outlaw - as the treaty stipulates - anti-Semitic propaganda in Egyptian media and society. The hatred of Israel, that continues to be propagated in Egypt, is worthy of the Nazis, and far more virulent, than that which the former Soviet Union heaped on America. To get a clearer picture about Israel's precarious relationship with Egypt, read my articles, "Jimmy Carter's Selective Memory" and "Egyptian Tunnels to Heaven". Given the Islamic Barbarism overcoming the region and the world; given the clear lack of interest on the part of the Palestinian leadership - from Arafat on down - to end terror and work something out with Israel; given Israel's steadfast refusal to just "curl up and die;" Israel awaits a leader, who like Reagan fought the "Evil Empire" and won. George W. has that in common with Reagan (the W. for his middle name). Does he have what it takes to achieve victory over the "Axis of Evil" in his "War on Terror"? Better yet, maybe Israel truly awaits a leader like Begin, willing to "clash" with an American president and stay the course, for the sake of Jewish rights and Israeli security, or, even better, someone who won't back down in the crucial moment. For the last ten years, Israeli leaders, Rabin, Netanyahu, Barak and now Sharon have kept good relations with Washington, but that's led to a "peace process," almost 1,500 murdered, and thousands injured from Palestinian terror. With hindsight, I must say, Reagan's ideas regarding the "peace process" were down right benign, in comparison to what's been bandied about since, such as Oslo and the Roadmap. During the early Clinton years, "the heady days of peace-making," Israel under Rabin, nearly "gave the whole store away." And, now with the "bulldozer" as prime minister - even though Sharon was opposed to both peace treaties - he's suggested bringing Egypt and Jordan back into Gaza and the West Bank as part of his "disengagement" plan. Recently, the Israeli cabinet bullied by Sharon, even voted to consider uprooting Jews from Gaza. I don't think Ronald Reagan would have accepted the ethnic cleansing of Jews from their homeland. I miss those "squabbles" between Reagan and Begin... Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko |
|
ISRAEL'S FUTURE GOVERNMENT - IN EXILE
Posted by Paul Eidelberg, June 7, 2004. |
|
Dear Friends:
When Prime Minister Sharon blatantly declared that "By the end of 2005, not one Jew will remain in Gaza." he should be taken seriously. The uprooting of 8,000 Jews from Gaza will be followed by the uprooting of countless more in Judea and Samaria. Many Jews will leave Israel and fewer will make aliya - or even have room to settle in Eretz Yisrael. Increased terrorism aside, the shrinkage of Israel, the loss of its heartland, will demoralize the country. The Jewish majority will further decline. Israel's future will be bleak indeed. To prevent what now appears as Israel's ultimate demise, I have formulated a PLAN OF ACTION that requires your help. Please go to http://netzahyisrael.org/govt_in_exile.htm to access the PLAN (which has a registration form). We would indeed be grateful if you add the link below to your website, and that will refer viewers to our PLAN. The first few paragraphs of the plan are presented below. Yours, with Love of Israel,
A dreadful feeling is sweeping through Israel - that the Jewish State is heading toward catastrophe. A Bar-Ilan University study of 6,196 Israelis between the ages of 11 and 15 from a variety of religious and ethnic groups indicates that 40% worry that the State faces the threat of destruction. Meanwhile, eminent Israelis believe that the government itself has been contributing to this precarious state of affairs. All is not bleak, however. In a referendum of his own Likud Party, not only did an overwhelming majority oppose Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to withdraw unilaterally from Gaza - a preliminary to withdrawing from Judea and Samaria - but by so doing they all opposed the President of the United States who had publicly supported Sharon's plan! Nevertheless, in violation of his pledge to abide by the Likud referendum, indeed, in an act described as that of a dictator, Mr. Sharon fired two of his opposing cabinet ministers to obtain a cabinet majority for his illegal as well as immoral plan to remove every Jew from Gaza, that is, to remove them from their homes and synagogues, their schools and yeshivas, their farms and factories, and to turn over this treasure of three generations to Arab terrorists! Contrary to his once heroic reputation, Mr. Sharon's plan of retreating under fire and uprooting countless Jews from Judea, Samaria, and Gaza means defeatism, which can only lead to the demise of Israel which so many fear. Unfortunately, there is no person or party or organization in Israel that has the wherewithal to rally the people around a constructive plan, one that can not only reverse Israel's withdrawal to its indefensible 1949 borders, but can also reform Israel's government so as to make it truly representative of the abiding beliefs and values of the Jewish people. We therefore request your help. We urge you to study the plan outlined below and get involved in our effort to prevent Israel's demise. We are compiling a mailing list of people who endorse our plan. Please see the end of this e-mail for instructions on how you can get on this mailing list and receive future releases concerning our plan to save Israel. [The rest of the article is to be found at http://netzahyisrael.org/govt_in_exile.htm] |
|
THE GOLDBERG MANIPULATIONS
Posted by Andrea Levin, June 7, 2004. |
|
The New Yorker's Jeffrey Goldberg is not known for dishonesty; he's recently won awards for daring stories on Hezbollah and Iraq. But a May 31 piece entitled "Among the Settlers: Will They Destroy Israel?" is so distorted, included being sloppy with facts, as to raise questions about his other writing. The title signals the thrust of the piece and rightly indicates there will be little interest in balanced or thorough consideration of the genesis, purpose and legality of the settlement enterprise. Instead readers find a 24-page spread, rich in stereotypes and heavily devoted to lurid portraiture of Jewish residents of the West Bank and Gaza. A number appear emotionally unstable and many are physically repellent -- one has "fingernails [that] were chewed and dirty," others are "sallow" and "sour-faced." The opening "Zealots" section has one after another spewing vile language and fierce anti-Arab sentiment. Moshe Levinger, with "bulbous eyes" and "outsized teeth," is said to be the unfortunate "face" of the settler movement, a man who calls for expelling any Arab "who hurts Jews." Yet Goldberg contradicts himself, writing, for example, that "three-quarters of the Jews in the West Bank and Gaza could be considered economic settlers" - that is, not motivated by religious fervor - and the remaining 25% of the "national religious camp can be divided into two main groups." One part will "respect the authority of the elected government in Jerusalem" as compared to what he terms the "more unremitting settlers" of Hebron. So, then, Levinger the Hebron firebrand is a fraction of a small minority. Another indicator of his tangential role can be seen in a Nexis search of major world publications for the last three years. Goldberg's "face" of the settler movement was mentioned in fewer than a score of media stories and these mainly in passing references to his activity in the late sixties in Hebron. In contrast, Ron Nachman, mayor of Ariel, turns up in four times as many news citations. But perhaps the writer preferred readers not to see this "face" or to know that in Ariel at the College of Judea and Samaria hundreds of Arab men and women earn degrees along with Jews. Goldberg sticks to his dominant message that religious fanatics disconnected from Israel's daunting, real-life political challenges embody and define the entire settlement question. Thus too he skates over or ignores completely essential information about the history of settlements. In the entire piece, there is not a mention of the Labor party's embrace of the Allon Plan, first enunciated in July 1967. That peace proposal defined Israel's defensive territorial needs in the wake of the Six Day War, consistent with UN Security Council resolution 242, whose framers believed that it would not be in the interests of peace for Israel to return to its pre-1967 armistice lines. The Allon Plan projected ambitious settlement construction to secure strategically critical areas, including in the Jordan Valley, areas in general sparsely populated by Palestinians. In the next decade, under Labor prime ministers seventy-six settlements were built. Goldberg alludes to Labor's founding role only in a brief, misleading observation that "such men as Shimon Peres and Yitzhak Rabin"..."discerned a strategic value to settlement; these kipa-wearing pioneers would keep watch over the newly-conquered Arabs..." In fact, Israelis who established the twenty-one Jordan Valley settlements, for example, were primarily not "kipa-wearing" religious settlers, but secular men and women who founded kibbutzim and moshavim for security motives. There were no residents of Jordan Valley or Gush Etzion or other, similar, Allon Plan communities interviewed for the piece. Goldberg is equally deceptive in his single, dismissive reference to the legal status of settlements. He declares simply: "Most international legal authorities believe that all settlements, including those built with the permission of the Israeli government, are illegal." That's it. Case closed. None of the "international legal authorities" are named and none of the contentious issues involved are described. The writer fails to mention that the United States does not characterize the settlements as "illegal." And many experts on international law have disputed their illegality on multiple grounds. Professor Julius Stone, a leading scholar on the subject, has maintained that the effort to designate Israeli settlements as illegal is a "subversion... of basic international law principles." Likewise, suggestive of both the casual incendiary tone of the piece and Goldberg's shoddy approach to accuracy is his repeated charge that Israel is practicing "apartheid" in areas "across the Green Line." He explains the system is "apartheid, because two different ethnic groups living in the same territory are judged by two separate sets of laws." One wonders whatever happened to the touted fact-checkers at the New Yorker. In the West Bank, there are different laws not on the basis of ethnicity but of nationality. The Palestinian Autonomous areas have their own legal system, mainly inherited Jordanian law and new law introduced by the Palestinians themselves. Moreover, if Israel moved to extend its own legal system to the territories, that would constitute annexation, which both Palestinians and Israelis oppose, and would be universally condemned. The areas under emergency Israeli military control are, as Goldberg notes, "temporary." To bring the charge of "apartheid" in circumstances involving the Israeli military's recent counter-attack against a terrorist onslaught unprecedented in the nation's history is, yet again, highly distorted. "Among the Settlers" is one of those accounts that says much more about its author than its subject. It is a gaudy display of twisted Jewish assault on caricatured "other" Jews and intellectually dishonest generalizations about the representative significance of those "others." In occasional moments of professional integrity, Goldberg introduces facts - such as the very small percentage of settlers represented by his featured "representatives" - and those facts demonstrate less the strength of a zealot threat to Israel than the weakness of Goldberg's zealot journalism. Andrea Levin is Executive Director of CAMERA, Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America. CAMERA's website address is http://www.camera.org |
|
IDF STRIKES TERRORIST TARGET IN LEBANON
Posted by IMRA, June 7, 2004. |
|
These are two announcements issued by the IDF today.
I. IDF targets a terrorist base in Lebanon following morning attack. This evening the IDF targeted a terrorist base located near Beirut, which is used as a platform for the terrorist activity in Lebanon. The strike follows rocket fire from Lebanon at an Israeli Naval vessel, patrolling in Israeli territorial water this morning. The State of Israel is determined stop terror acts emanating from Lebanon and places the responsibility for these terror activities on the governments of Lebanon and Syria. II. Background Info: Terrorist Attacks From Lebanon Since May 2000 Terrorist attacks from Lebanon against Israeli targets since the Israeli pullout in May 2000, and attacks within the last year Since the IDF pullout from Southern Lebanon in May 2000, 6 Israeli civilians and 11 IDF soldiers were killed, in addition to 14 Israeli civilians and 53 soldiers that were injured. Since May 2000 the following attacks against Israeli targets have taken place: * 105 anti aircraft attacks
In the last year (since June 2003) an Israeli civilian and three IDF soldiers were killed in terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians and military targets along the Israeli- Lebanese border. In addition, six Israeli civilians were injured as a result of shell fire under the guise of anti-aircraft fire in the last year. The following is a summary of the main incidents in the last year since June 2003: * 8.8.03- An IDF soldier was lightly injured as a result of mortar shells and anti-tank missiles fired at IDF posts in the Mount Dov area, the Hermon and the northern Golan Heights. The IDF returned artillery and aircraft fire. Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis), which is a "current digest of media, polls and significant interviews and events." Its website address is http://www.imra.org.il |
|
US EXTENDS THE WAR ON ISLAMIC TERROR TO THE SAHARA DESERT
Posted by IsrAlert, June 7, 2004. |
|
This was written by Damien McElroy, Foreign Correspondent, for the
Sunday Telegraph and appeared on http://www.mideastweb.org.
America has launched a secret war against Islamic terrorists across the southern Sahara after it discovered that a group linked to al-Qaeda bought heavy weapons using the proceeds of a ransom deal with the German government. The realisation that a new Islamic fundamentalist force was building what officials call "garrisons in the sand" on the border of Algeria and Mali has led America to launch a new anti-terror campaign across a swathe of Africa's harshest and most sparsely populated terrain. The Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat has spent about £4 million, which it received in return for releasing 17 European tourists kidnapped last year, on surface-to-air missiles, heavy machine-guns and mortars. It also bought satellite positioning equipment to enable it to conceal and later return to weapons caches buried in the sands of the Sahara. Major Sarah Kerwin of the US Army's European Command, which is responsible for north and west Africa, said: "There are clear indications that Muslim extremists from the Middle East and Afghanistan have moved into these massive open spaces, where they are as elusive as if they were out at sea. "They bring a new threat where they can bury weapons in the sand, mark the exact position with their satellite equipment, and then move off along the camel trails with other tools and equipment." As well as the Salafists, other targets include the Morrocan Combat Group, which is held responsible for the bombings in Madrid and Casablanca. The US Army plans to spend $125 million (£72 million) over the next five years on its Trans-sahara Counter Terrorism initiative, aimed at preventing groups allied to al-Qaeda from establishing a foothold in the region. American special forces are being deployed discreetly in the region - which covers eight countries and thousands of miles of desert - to train, advise and equip pro-US government troops. In a significant breakthrough in March, the US military helped orchestrate the ambush and capture in western Chad of Amari Saifi, the Salafist group's leader. Brahim Tchouma, for the Movement of Democracy and Justice, the pro-US rebel group that is holding Saifi, told The Telegraph that they were prepared to hand the former Algerian paratrooper to America or its allies. "They were only lightly armed and travelling in two groups in areas controlled by our movement after a fight with the Chad army. We have them and will hand them over. We want nothing in return." Plans for a handover have been stymied delayed after objections from the military government in Chad, which opposes official contacts with its rebel opposition, but US military officials expect the problem to be resolved in the coming weeks. The group is also believed to have a terrorist presence in Europe. Its members have been arrested in Italy, Spain and Germany for suspected terrorist activity. Governments in the Sahara region were furious when Germany approved payment of a $6 million (£4 million) for the hostages, who included Germans, Austrians and Swedish tourists. Berlin has never officially acknowledged the deal, but it is widely believed that the government of Mali paid the ransom in return for a promise of additional aid from Berlin. A Western diplomat said: "This sum was equivalent to 25 per cent of the defence budget of Niger last year. That gives the extremists a huge boost, an advantage which they can exploit to destabilise these governments. "Once al-Qaeda-linked groups can cause instability, or preferably chaos in a country, they have the ability to operate freely within it." IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
LET'S PLAY "IT'S THE JEWS!"
Posted by D. Haimson, June 7, 2004. |
|
This was written by Joel Katzman, Ph.D. and it appeared in Arutz-7 today. It is archived at www.israelnationalnews.com/print.php3?what=article&id=3766 Ex-general Anthony Zinni joined the growing contestants seeking fame and fortune on the new "game show" called "It's the Jews!" Zinni hopes to be a star and the winning contestant by blaming the Jews or Israel for whatever mess he and others perceive in Iraq and the Arab world. No doubt, Zinni's new "fish bait" will catch a few more book offers and speaking engagements. One too many Israelis, and some of their leaders, refuse to respond to their alarm clocks. They just continue to snooze comfortably while dreaming securely about the promises made by their "dear friends", if only Israel would sheepishly implement "recommended" peace risks/plans; plans that have repeatedly proven to be childish dreams designed to promote the interests of their creators. It is a truly strange phenomenon, if not a hideous "Catch 22" at best, that as Israel strives to appease its "friends", and even its enemies, at its own peril (more than any nation in history), Israel receives more blame and bashing than it would if it gave up the hope of positive results coming from the weight of foolish appeasement. And, of course, suckers that we are, we will sway in awe as these "friendly" bashers vehemently deny any anti-Semitic or anti-Israel motivations while they pontificate disingenuously. We can all rest assured that the likes of Zinni, and the rising song-and-dance politicians and opportunists bellowing like bulls in heat about Israel and the Jews' responsibility for Iraq, are merely responsible politicians, citizens and critics. Yeah, and I am Elijah the prophet, "God is Dead", and the Nazi propagandist Joseph Goebbles was an honorable, forthright and respectable man just bringing the truth to mindless Germans. What do you think might be motivating Zinni, Hollings, et al, who are trying to sell the notion that the Iraqi war was motivated by Jews for the purpose of securing Israel? Could it be Arab propaganda and Arab appeasement, propaganda from the Left, or economic interests and political opportunism, or all the above? Could there even be the slightest possibility that blaming Jews/Israel for the problems with the Iraqi war and the Arab world is not too different from Hitler's blaming the Jews for the economic troubles of Germany, and then some. Hitler's dump on the Jews became part of a sure ticket to fame and fortune for Hitler, didn't it? Time to wake up, slumbering and well-assimilated Jews, because it looks like there are some powerful people in this morally decaying world that want to get some personal mileage out returning the Jews to the stake, and it is starting to look like Israel might just be the convenient vehicle by which to accomplish this task. As for who is to blame for the Iraqi War, the finger can only point in one direction, if one refrains from trying to blame the Jews -- the Islamofacists the world over, a dictator in Iraq trying to keep power by outdoing Hitler, US Democrats (intoxicated on Leftist lunacy), and those who were asleep at the wheel when terrorist chieftains and their bands of satanic cultists plotted, planned and carried out destruction against the US, Israel and the rest of the civilized world. Of course, let us not forget to give blame awards to Yasser Arafat and his depraved horde of barbarians, Hizbollah, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and last but not least, the media, who has made it nearly impossible to succeed against Islamofacism in Iraq or anywhere else that might cause the Islamic world justifiable discomfort. More simply put, there is a rising tide of US politicians, has-been power elites, and up-and-coming power mongers joining the ranks of the corrupted UN and the decaying EU, dedicated to the task of laying blame, while achieving personal fame and fortune, for the difficulties with Arab world and Iraq (including personal failures and appeasement of Islamofacism) at the door step of the Jew. Once again, history proves that it can repeat itself, albeit with somewhat different "colors" and creative "designs". Grow Up Zinni! Whatever mess there is in Iraq is not because of George Bush, most of his administration (less the US State Department), but because of people like you, Zinni, the media and the most of the Left and its Democrat captives, who are salivating at the possibility that garbage cans full of lies and distortions might put them back on throne. Zinni you can only fool the fools. Unfortunately, there seems to be a growing number of fools. OK, enough about Zinni; I have already devoted more than enough time to him and his cohorts. Now what? It is way past the time when many Jews and Israelis (especially those on the Left and Israeli leadership) have to struggle out of their comfortable slumber and shake off the textbook dreams that appeasing most world leaders, and especially many in the Arab world, will bring them security and peace. The first step in self-preservation is to identify your threats or the problem by becoming more capable of discriminating (oops, not so politically correct) between those who are really on your side and those who are not, despite the abundant sweet talk and the smoke and mirror promises. Certainly, you do not want to allow yourself to once again get painted into a corner by sweet-talking diplomats selling peace proposals that favor the enemy and leave your security in doubt (unless you are the vanquished). These fantasy driven, fame and fortune, peace plans have already cost to many Israeli lives to make them worth more than a moment's consideration (just long enough to toss them in the trash). You will also want to be very cautious about unilateral withdrawals from disputed lands that promise, once again, to be "steps" towards peace in the region; these steps are more like an escalator that switches direction at the whim of the enemy's needs and the self-interest of various world leaders and organizations. No sooner had the US made some withdrawal/peace gestures to the Islamofacists in Iraq (Faluja, Najaf), it became evident that deals with these Islamic thugs were less reliable than striking a bargain with the devil. Of course, we all know too well where Israel's repeated peace efforts led. If it is war that your enemy wants, then give them a war that will make them think twice. If not, they will learn that terror and war are workable means to address their frequent sleight-of-hand grievances, and the means by which they might achieve their lofty goals (the Islamicization of the Middle East and the world). Most of all, remember that peacemaking with the Islamofacists of the world is not like a marital conflict that can be addressed simply by applying typical theories and practices of conflict resolution found in the offices of the psychotherapist, or in the auditoriums that sport positive and egalitarian oriented seminars. Mr. Haimson sends out links to some excellent articles about Israel and its neighbors. To sign up, send an email to dhaimson@w3-4u.net |
|
UNITED NATIONS FINALLY ISSUES PRESS CREDENTIALS TO ISRAELI REPORTER
Posted by IsrAlert, June 7, 2004. |
|
David Bedein of Israel Resource News Agency called IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis) from Geneva to advise that he was issued press credentials today to attend the conference. Yesterday, Isralert@aol.com released Bedein's story to our worldwide network indicating the UN's denial of his press credentials to cover the special conference on Palestinian refugees that the UN has scheduled in Geneva, June 7th and June 8th. A UN spokesman in Geneva said that the UN would only allow reporters to attend this conference if they are credentialed by the government of Switzerland or by the United Nations itself. The special conference on Palestinian refugees is being administered by UNRWA, the United Nations agency that handles assistance to Arab refugees who have been residents of temporary United Nations transit camps since 1948 which are located in Israel, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon. 67 nations will be attending the conference, which is being run on an invitation-only basis. Israel is not invited to attend. An Israeli government spokesperson indicated that if the UN did not recognize Israeli press credentials to cover the UN conference in Geneva, the Israeli government would consider withholding press credentials from UN personnel who currently hold Israeli government press credentials. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
HUMAN RIGHTS WATCH NEEDS TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY IN HIRING
Posted by NGO Monitor Organization, June 7, 2004. |
|
In May 2004, Human Rights Watch (HRW) issued employment announcements for a Researcher on Israel/Palestine (http://www.hrw.org/jobs/Res_Israel_Palestine0504.htm) and in Middle East/North Africa Advocacy (http://www.hrw.org/jobs/advocate-mena-0504.htm). Given HRW's intense emphasis on this region, and on issues related to the Israeli-Arab conflict and responses to terrorism in particular, this process and the outcome will receive careful examination. Past evidence of political basis and deviation from its mission statement, as seen in HRW's active participation in the demonization of Israel, particularly in the infamous Durban "Conference on Racism" (2001) highlights the questions of transparency in employment policies. As documented and analyzed by NGO Monitor (http://www.ngo-monitor.org/issues/hrw.htm) these political and ideological excesses have severely damaged the credibility of rhetoric invoking universal human rights norms. HRW's entrenched structural bias is reflected by the background of Joe Stork, acting executive director of the Middle East and North Africa Division. Before joining HRW, Stork was a highly visible and radical anti-Israel political activist and ex-editor of Middle East Report. After the 1972 Munich Olympic massacre, this organization urged socialists to "comprehend the achievements" of the atrocity. ("Who Are the Terrorists," MERIP Reports, No. 12, September-October, 1972, pp12-13) Similarly, after a Palestinian terror attack on an Israeli school, Stork's organization declared that "all Israeli settlers are potential targets of the Palestinian resistance" ("Ma'alot: an Account and an Evaluation," MERIP Reports, No. 29, (June 1974), pp21-3. Since coming to HRW, Stork's biases have shaped this organization's activities and its credibility. The criteria and process used by HRW's leadership in Stork's case remain hidden, highlighting the salience of the NGO "democratic deficit" and facade of exploiting the rhetoric of human rights and international norms to pursue extremist political objectives (http://www.ngo-monitor.org/editions/v2n09/v2n09-6.htm). To avoid a repetition of the Stork example, it is critical that HRW open its decision making process to transparent public examination and involvement. Having published clear criteria, including the need to be "scrupulously objective" and the ability to investigate "without prejudice or favor", the question is who will be responsible for assessing the candidates accordingly? Given HRW's history of political bias, how will this organization avoid inbreeding and reinforcement of unacceptable activities? The criteria for the Israeli/Palestinian researcher require a knowledge of Arabic, whereas Hebrew fluency is only "desirable". This suggests a preference for someone who is Arabic speaking and therefore also likely to be familiar with and sympathetic to the pro-Palestinian orientation that is already dominant at HRW. As a result, the details of the process by which applicants are screened must to part of the public record, to insure accountability. The NGO Monitor organization (www.ngo-monitor.org) promotes critical debate and accountability of human rights NGOs in the Arab Israeli Conflict. The Monitor is produced by The Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs/Institute of Contemporary Affairs founded jointly with the Wechsler Family Foundation. |
|
THE CASE OF CHOUDHURY, THE BANGLADESHI JOURNALIST WHO SUPPORTED ISRAEL
Posted by David Frankfurter, June 7, 2004. |
|
Salah Uddin Shoaib Choudhury never set out to be a cause, or a martyr. Reared in a Muslim society, he received a worldview that demonized both the Jewish state and the Jewish people, and even worked for a time at Islamist-backed Daily Inquilab newspaper. Eventually, he became convinced that the people of Bangladesh were being deceived by the one-sided media portrayals of Israel and the Jewish people. He wrote and helped publish articles urging his country to recognize Israel, condemning terrorism and the biased press portrait of Israel and Jews. His views sparked debate in the nation's press and even the halls of government. On November 29 2003, Choudry was arrested whil we boarding a plane, on his way to make an historic address in Tel Aviv on the role of the media in creating peace. Police raided his press offices and home, seizing computers, disks, and files. On their heels, a mob sacked the premises with impunity. A public vilification campaign followed, accusing Choudhury of being a Mossad agent and a Muslim fundamentalist, a homosexual and a womanizer, a committed Zionist and an opportunist. His family continues to receive threats and pressure to denounce him. His brother and principal spokesman, Sohail, has been attacked and twice had to flee the capital. The police refused to record the attacks, and blamed the Choudhurys for their "alliance with the Jews." Choudhury was repeatedly hauled into court, each time returned to prison for "interrogation" with no formal charges until charged with sedition - a capital offense - in January. There is no substance to the charge, and the government has admitted as much. The problem is that Bangladesh's lower courts are notoriously corrupt and subject to the political forces of the moment. Choudhury's lawyer pins his hopes on Bangladesh's High Court, but as Sohail Choudhury said last week, "It is very difficult to get a date with the High Court," and there is no indication when his case might be heard. Choudhury's situation becomes more precarious with every passing day. His health has deteriorated markedly in prison, where the temperatures soar above 45 deg. C and he is forbidden to use even an electric fan. Despite successive court orders to the Prisons Service, he has not been given the treatment for advanced glaucoma that he needs. Outside, the Choudhurys are deprived of a living: their businesses closed and looted. Banks have refused them credit to re-open, and Sohail can't find work due to his public stance. The families have been living on their savings, but ongoing legal bills and the cost of daily life in the capital are steadily depleting family assets. Even more ominous is Bangladesh's deteriorating social and political situation. Several prominent journalists, politicians, and writers have been arrested. On May 6, a prominent opposition MP was gunned down in Dhaka. Rioting followed, and the government imposed what amounts to martial law. Armed militia recently raided the prison where Choudhury is confined, "searched and checked all prisoners" and "badly harassed" several. Choudhury's supporters fear that he might turn up 'shot while trying to escape' or simply disappear. The government gains in several ways by harassing Choudhury. It stops his activities, sends a clear message to others who might dare speak the heresy of peace with the Jews, asserts the government's power, and curries favor with the discontented populace. Simply, appearing even more anti-Zionist than your opponent is a sure way of winning support in any Muslim country. Most importantly, it does it because it can. Despite protests by Reporters without Borders, Committee to Protect Journalists, and a few others, Bangladeshi officials have heard little outrage over this human rights violation. Dr. Richard Benkin, a Chicago based author and speaker, published pro-Israeli pieces in Bangladesh through Choudhury, before his arrest. Benkin was shocked when his friend was arrested, and today spearheads a campaign to free Choudhury. His website at http://www.freechoudhury.com includes an online petition for Choudhury's freedom and a 'visitors book' through which supporters send messages of hope to the family. Benkin is also looking for possible leads on work opportunities for Sohail. "A foreign company operating in Bangladesh and not subject to local passions, or something through the Internet might be ideal," he says. Benkin says that people also use his website to email the Bangladesh authorities, letting them know that their treatment of Shoaib Choudhury is being watched around the world. He summarises: "The only things Choudhury preached were peace and interfaith understanding. And for that the Bangladesh government persecutes him. Shoaib Choudhury took a personal risk in standing with us and is paying for it. We must not sit by idly." David Frankfurter is a writer on economic affairs in the Middle East and a regular contributor. He sends "Letters from Israel" emails to subscribers. Email him at David.Frankfurter@iname.com or go to www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/ This article apeared on Israel Insider and is archived at http://web.israelinsider.com/bin/en.jsp?enPage=ViewsPage&enDisplay= view&enDispWhat=object&enDispWho=Article%5El3715&enZone= Views&enVersion=0 |
|
BLACK DAY FOR THE JEWISH PEOPLE
Posted by Ruth and Nadia Matar, June 7, 2004. |
|
It is interesting to note that the Sharon Government's fourteen to seven vote to eventually exit from Biblical Gaza, and Northern Shomron was taken during the week when a significant Biblical portion will be read in the Synagogues throughout the world. In that Bible portion, Moses sent out leaders of each Tribe to view the Promised Land. They came back with an unfavorable report. While the seven dissidents to the Government vote was an improvement over the sparse two that then dissented, the present Government's vote was nevertheless a black day indeed for the Jewish People. It is unlikely that the punishment that befell the Jewish People when they rejected G-d's Promised Land, will reoccur once again. The generation that lacked the faith in G-d's Promise, was not allowed to enter into the Land of Israel. Only the two who had the necessary faith, Caleb Ben Yefune and Yehoshua Ben Nun, were permitted to come to Israel. In contrast, those in the Government who did not have that faith and voted for the exit from Gaza, already live here. Therefore, they are not subject to the Biblical punishment. The Sharon Government, in effect, adopted the Mitzna plan of unilateral withdrawal and the uprooting of Jewish Communities, and the deportation of Jews from their Homeland. Sharon, in a dictatorial fashion, pushed through this plan of abandonment of Gaza and Northern Shomron. Sharon, unfortunately, is no Moses. He lacks the faith that distinguishes a great Jewish leader. Faith in the L-rd has been typical of the Jewish People throughout its ancient history. It has been a main and basic attribute of the Jewish Religion. When all is said and done, the vote in question was a victory for Arafat, and those Arabs holding the Hamas orientation. It was a reward for Arab terror. Moreover, it is quite ludicrous for Israel to rely on its arch enemy Egypt, to supervise the Gaza area. Egypt has a long history of antagonism towards the Jewish People. Its present dictator and enemy Mubarak, is hardly a person to rely on for the safety and welfare of the Jewish People. The question is: WHAT NOW? We do not know what punishment, if any, lies in store for those who have been unfaithful to G-d's Promise. However, we must make it clear that such a Government decision must be reversed. It will never be respected by the People of Israel. Jewish communities in all the Land of Israel must be allowed to grow and develop. We Jews must have the faith in G-d's Promise, and in our Jewish destiny. Israel is the Promised Land. No one is permitted to act in defiance of G-d's Promise to the Jewish People. That Promise is to be found over and over again throughout the Bible. The Bible is our Mandate. The Torah of Israel must be once again our guiding light. We, who follow in its path, are like a tree of life which will forever blossom and bear fruit. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
ARAB CHUTZPAH
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 7, 2004. |
|
First the Soviets discriminated against Jews. Then the Nazis accused Jewry of every fault and of causing every social problem (except Nazism). The Arabs go further. The Arab code of ethics permits them to perpetrate the numerous and hideous crimes of which -- not with evidence but with a show of righteousness -- they accuse the Jewish people. The Arab double standard reflects a unique and extreme chutzpah. Most of the media generally reports Arab accusations as if legitimate opinions. This is dereliction of duty. The media fails to report facts rather than what the falsifiers allege. In this Arab-Israel conflict, which is one of the many jihads now sweeping through the world, the media leaves Western audiences unalarmed. We therefore are unprepared for what amounts to World War III. This is a war of combat, but most Westerners are calmed down by assertions that Islam is a religion of peace. They need to be roused up by reminders that Islam is a religion of war. The Islamists are carrying that war to wherever they can. They can spread it to our shores, and from there spread jihad to other shores, thanks to our permissive and politically correct immigration, open universities, and law enforcement. Media bias is most obvious in its reporting of Israeli military reactions to Arab attacks, without first reporting much about the initiating Arab assaults. The Arabs attack but complain as if Israel were not entitled to retaliate or intercept arms smuggling by the P.A.. Note: the Arabs sign peace agreements but make war; they assassinate Israeli civilians but cry out against targeted assassination of Arab terrorists. They adopt Nazi racism, but accuse Isrelis of being like the Nazis. The media fails to make Arab hypocrisy clear. Result is, audiences wax indignant against the extraordinarily humane Israelis for being "disproportionate" or inhumane, and overlook the Arabs' extraordinarily brutal deeds and the significant threat to civilization by the rise of that kind of Islamic power. While the Arabs strive to poison Israelis, they accuse Israelis of having poisoning them. P.A. propaganda has for years been depicting Israel as committing genocide against it, while it preaches genocide against the Jews. The Palestinian Arab population explosion remains one of the world's highest, partly thanks to health measures by Israel! Earnest and courageous journalism would find much to ridicule in P.A. claims. Our journalism fails to make the point if it even perceives it. The Arab double standard is exemplified by an Iraqi and Palestinian Arab tactic. They use human shields, sometimes volunteers and sometimes people forcibly drafted for the purpose. If the adversary, the US or Israel, is deterred by humane impulses that the Arabs lack, then the Arabs are preserved from Western guns and have opportunities to shoot their more decent but less practical adversaries. If, on the other hand, the adversary is not deterred, some of the human shields fall. Then the Arabs feign victimhood, one of the chief avocations of those victimizers. The Arabs accuse the adversary of attacking civilians. When Israel is the adversary, media quotations of Arab accusations are followed by UN condemnations. As in the Middle Ages, investigations of accusations against the Jews are not deemed necessary. After all, what is a scapegoat for? A prime example of the Arabs accusing Israel of doing what the Arabs do involves ambulances. Westerners at war have sufficient honor to keep ambulances out of combat and therefore entitled to free passage. The Arabs do not. Counting on Israeli decency, they use ambulances to transport terrorists and arms. That, of course, violates the Geneva Convention, that the Arabs and the UN accuse Israel of committing. When the IDF realized the deception, it inspected ambulances. Some of these ambulances did hold terrorists. With feigned shock, the Arabs accused Israel of denying Arabs, many of whom are allowed into Israeli hospitals, and free if charge medical services. That Arab accusation is special chutzpah! Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER BUS RIDE
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, June 7, 2004. |
|
This was written by Joseph Yudin, who can be contacted at joe_yudin@hotmail.com.
I wake at zero-five hundred, make myself a cup of powerful coffee (that we in Israel simply call "mud") and read a few headlines off the Jerusalem Post website. This morning an article entitled "Israeli Arab Planned Attacks" caught my eye. Apparently a certain Basel Mahajneh, a 19-year-old from the Israeli-Arab village of Umm el-Fahm in Wadi Ara, admitted to plotting a suicide bombing for Hamas before his arrest last month. It seems he was going to blow up bus #842 running from Afula to Tel Aviv. My stomach turns and I discard the rest of my coffee before setting out for the day. I walk about a half mile before hitching a ride to the main highway that runs through the heart of the Jezreel Valley. I set my bag down and watch the sun come up over Mount Tabor, which looms over the city of Afula. The prophetess Deborah and her general Barak gathered the combined Israelite forces there 3,200 years ago to do battle with the Philistines based in the city of Haroshet HaGoiim, which is near today's village of Um el-Fahm in Wadi Ara. The battle took place "by the waters of Megiddo" and to make a long story short, we won. The number 842 bus comes barreling down the highway and I flag it down. The armed security guard gets off first, gives me a quick once-over look and says, "Good morning" with a smile. I get on the bus heading towards Megiddo Junction. I take out some tests to grade, as a group of American high school students have (finally) come to study at a prestigious Israel program. I see the ancient city of Megiddo rising at the point where the valley blends in with the rolling green hills. The ancient tel towers over the earliest highways that converge at the junction. For 5000 years at least, this was the crossroad between Egyptian empires and Mesopotamia running north-south, and the spice routes of the far east to the Mediterranean ports, running east-west. We pass a makeshift memorial to the victims of the number 842 suicide-bombing that took place here two years ago, and then the bus arrives at the mountain pass between the Maneshe hills and Samarian Mountains and into a gorge on the ancient road that runs along the seasonal riverbed called Wadi Ara. As we approach the first Arab village the five or six people on the bus, all Jews, suddenly awake from their morning slumber and we begin to stare at the door. The security guard gets off the bus with a changed demeanor. His face is cold and professional, he looks at everyone sitting at the stop sharply as if to accuse, hand on his side near his weapon, speaking into the microphone attached to a stealthy earpiece. The Arabs do not get immediately on the bus. They first must answer questions and if these are not answered sufficiently their belongings and bodies are searched. Then they are allowed on the bus. I am disgusted. I see the angst in their faces. They mumble under their breath. I know what they are saying as they look down avoiding eye contact and sitting in the very front of the bus huddled together away from the Jews who are spread out. I am disgusted not by them but with myself. I hate myself for allowing this racial profiling, but at the same time I am thankful that I may finally take the bus with some sort of security apparatus in place. I ask myself why Jews and Arabs are not both subjugated to the same scrutiny. I strain my brain to think of the last time a Jew blew himself or herself up on a bus filled with civilians and I know immediately what the answer is: never. I still cringe at the sight of it though. I cringe for the people being searched because of their ethnicity and I cringe because their brethren have made me accept these horrible circumstances. Most of all I cringe because I know that many of the residents here in Wadi Ara aid and support the intentional murder of Jewish civilians at the hands of murderous savages. Terror is not the way to peace. Civil disobedience maybe. Strikes and protests maybe. International protests maybe. Negotiation maybe. But the intentional targeting and killing of babies, women and children going along their daily business is definitely not the way. And for a person to even suggest that another human being has the right to kill unarmed civilians makes me cringe even more. So I accept this violation and I will continue to accept it until my right to live as a Jew in a Jewish nation is accepted, not just temporarily tolerated. As we leave Wadi Ara and emerge in the Sharon plain along the Mediterranean Sea, we pass many Jewish towns and villages, picking up passengers along the way. People doze again as we make our way towards Tel Aviv. We stop in Netanya and four soldiers get on the bus, four close friends it seems. They are smiling and laughing, talking about their weekend, their boyfriends, chewing gum and blowing bubbles just like any other teenage girl would do. They speak fluent Hebrew although their accents are different. Two of them are tall and thin, blond-haired, blue-eyed, obviously Russian immigrants. Another is either an Ethiopian immigrant or her parents are immigrants from Ethiopia. The fourth is a sabra (native Israeli), with long black hair tied back, fair in complexion with dark brown eyes. Four Hebrew-speaking soldiers from the four corners of the earth with different cultures, backgrounds and characteristics. I look at them and smile as I come to the realization that we Jews of Israel are not the racist monsters that I read about in the New York Times. Those people do not exist. We Israelis are striving for a balance between ideas, peoples and forces beyond our control, and when we find that right balance we will continue to strive to create a utopian society that will surely be a light unto the nations. I then turn my attention to my students' papers on Theodore Herzl and Zionism to see if they have any new ideas on how to achieve this noble goal. The Jerusalem Diarists group is a group of people who are recording their experiences living in Israel today. "Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times" by Judy Lash Balint (Gefen) is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com |
|
FACING GENOCIDAL ENEMIES
Posted by Louis Rene Beres, June 6, 2004. |
|
Israel's survival problem is basically this: A small state, indeed a microstate that is less than half the size of Lake Michigan, is surrounded by several openly genocidal enemy states - some of which still seek biological and/or nuclear weapons of mass destruction. It is also beset by relentless terrorist groups and insurgent forces sustained by these states, many of which are comprised of "Holy Warriors" seeking "martyrdom" via mega-terror, and by the prospect that even an entire enemy country could soon act as a suicide bomber in macrosom, that is - without regard for rational behavior. Faced with conditions wherein ordinary threats of international deterrence could be immobilized, Israel must prepare increasingly for various forms of preemption. But defensive first-strikes by Israel would be fraught with operational difficulties and political risks. Of course, if realistic hopes could somehow be placed on the "Road Map" to a Middle East Peace Process, the bleakness of Israel's survival options could be greatly improved. But this is clearly a vain hope, as the world's general idea of a Middle East "peace" would require Israel's immediate territorial dismemberment and codified indefensibility. Israel remains the openly-declared national and religious object of Arab/Islamic genocide. No other country on this persistently bleeding planet is in a remotely similar predicament. What is Israel to do? How would Israel's possible actions or inaction affect the likelihood of a regional nuclear war in the Middle East? Looking at the current situation systematically, what can we now expect to happen in this very bad neighborhood? Israel's nuclear weapons, unacknowledged and unthreatening, exist only to prevent certain forms of aggression. It is inconceivable that this deterrent force would ever be used except in defensive reprisal for certain massive enemy first-strikes, especially for Arab and/or Iranian attacks involving nuclear and/or biological weapons. For the time being, at least, Israel's enemies are not nuclear, but this could change in the foreseeable future. Even if it should change, Israel's nuclear weapons could continue to reduce the risks of unconventional war as long as the pertinent enemy states were (1) to remain rational; and (2) to remain convinced that Israel would retaliate massively if attacked with nuclear and/or biological weapons of mass destruction. But there are many complex problems to identify if a bellicose enemy state were allowed to acquire nuclear weapons, problems that belie the agreeable notion of stable nuclear deterrence. Whether for reasons of miscalculation, accident, unauthorized capacity to fire, outright irrationality or the presumed imperatives of "Jihad," such a state could opt to launch a nuclear first-strike against Israel in spite of that country's nuclear posture. Here, Israel would certainly respond, to the extent possible, with a nuclear retaliatory strike. Although nothing is publicly known about Israel's precise targeting doctrine, such a reprisal might surely be launched against the aggressor's capital city or against a similarly high-value urban target. There would be no assurances, in response to this sort of aggression, that Israel would limit itself to striking back against exclusively military targets. Of this, I am quite certain. What if enemy first-strikes were to involve "only" chemical and/or biological weapons? Here, Israel might still launch a reasonably proportionate nuclear reprisal, but this would depend largely upon Israel's calculated expectations of follow-on aggression and on its associated determinations of comparative damage limitation. Should Israel absorb a massive conventional first-strike, a nuclear retaliation could still not be ruled out altogether. This is especially the case if: (1) the aggressor were perceived to hold nuclear or other weapons of mass destruction in reserve; and/or (2) Israel's leaders were to believe that non-nuclear retaliations could not prevent national annihilation. In this connection, recognizing Israel's uniquely small size, the threshold of existential harms would understandably be far lower than wholesale physical devastation. Faced with imminent and existential attacks, Israel - properly taking its cue from the national security strategy of the United States of America - could decide to preempt enemy aggression with conventional forces. Announced on September 20, 2002, this new American strategy affirms the growing reasonableness of anticipatory self-defense under international law. If Israel were to draw upon such authoritative expressions of current US policy, the targeted state's response would determine Israel's subsequent moves. If this response were in any way nuclear, Israel would assuredly undertake nuclear counter-retaliation. If this enemy retaliation were to involve chemical and/or biological weapons, Israel might also determine to take a quantum escalatory initiative. This sort of initiative is known in military parlance as "escalation dominance," and could be essential, for Israel, to favorable intra-war deterrence. If the enemy state's response to an Israeli preemption were limited to hard-target conventional strikes, it is highly improbable that Israel would resort to nuclear counter-retaliation. On the other hand, if the enemy state's conventional retaliation were an all-out strike directed toward Israel's civilian populations as well as to Israeli military targets - an existential strike, for all intents and purposes - an Israeli nuclear counter-retaliation could not be ruled out. Such a counter-retaliation could be ruled out only if the enemy state's conventional retaliations were entirely proportionate to Israel's preemption; confined entirely to Israeli military targets, circumscribed by the legal limits of "military necessity", and accompanied by explicit and verifiable assurances of no further escalation. It is exceedingly unlikely, but not entirely inconceivable, that Israel would ever decide to preempt enemy state aggression with a nuclear defensive strike. While circumstances could surely arise where such a defensive strike would be completely rational and also completely acceptable under international law, it is improbable that Israel would ever permit itself to reach such dire circumstances. An Israeli nuclear preemption could be expected only if: (1) Israel's state enemies had unexpectedly acquired nuclear or other unconventional weapons presumed capable of destroying the tiny Jewish State; (2) these enemy states had made explicit that their intentions paralleled their capabilities; (3) these states were authoritatively believed ready to begin a countdown-to-launch; and (4) Israel believed that non-nuclear preemption could not possibly achieve the minimum needed levels of damage-limitation - that is, levels consistent with its national survival. Should nuclear weapons ever be introduced into a conflict between Israel and the many countries that wish to destroy it, some form of nuclear warfighting could ensue. This would be the case so long as: (a) enemy state first-strikes against Israel would not destroy the Jewish State's second-strike nuclear capability; (b) enemy state retaliations for Israeli conventional preemption would not destroy Israel's nuclear counter-retaliatory capability; (c) Israeli preemptive strikes involving nuclear weapons would not destroy enemy state second-strike nuclear capabilities; and (d) Israeli retaliation for enemy state conventional first-strikes would not destroy enemy state nuclear counter-retaliatory capability. From the standpoint of protecting its security and survival, this means that Israel must now take proper steps to ensure the likelihood of (a) and (b) above, and the unlikelihood of (c) and (d). Both Israeli nuclear and non-nuclear preemption of enemy unconventional aggressions could lead to nuclear exchanges. This would depend, in part, upon the effectiveness and breadth of Israeli targeting, the surviving number of enemy nuclear weapons and the willingness of enemy leaders to risk Israeli nuclear counter-retaliations. In any event, the likelihood of nuclear exchanges would obviously be greatest where potential Arab and/or Iranian aggressors were allowed to deploy ever-larger numbers of unconventional weapons without eliciting appropriate Israeli and/or American preemption. Should such deployment be allowed to take place, Israel might effectively forfeit the non-nuclear preemption option. Here, its only alternatives to nuclear preemption could be a no-longer viable conventional preemption or simply waiting to be attacked itself. It follows that the risks of an Israeli nuclear preemption, of nuclear exchanges with an enemy state, and of enemy nuclear first-strikes could all be reduced by timely Israeli and/or American non-nuclear preemption. Such preemption would be directed at critical military targets and/or at pertinent regimes. The latter option could include dedicated elimination of enemy leadership elites. Nuclear war is like any other incurable disease. The only remedies lie in prevention. Looking at the Islamic Middle East, where several Arab states and Iran are still sworn to "root out the Zionist cancer," the only promising remedy is to ensure that Israel remain the only regional nuclear power. To this end, Israel must now be encouraged, with or without American support, to do what is needed to preempt enemy nuclearization and to deter enemy aggression. Louis Rene Beres is Professor of International Law in the Department of Political Science at Purdue University. He is the author of many books and articles on terrorism and international law. This article appeared in Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com), June 01, 2004. |
|
PRES. REAGAN: NO PALESTINIAN STATE, NO RETUREN TO '67 BORDERS, UNDIVIDED BORDERS
Posted by IMRA, June 6, 2004. |
|
President Ronald Reagan, "Address to the Nation on United States
Policy for Peace in the Middle East," September 1, 1982,
www.reagan.utexas.edu/resource/speeches/1982/90182d.htm
Note: The President spoke at 6 p.m. from the studios of KNBC - TV in
Burbank, Calif. The address was broadcast live on nationwide radio and
television.
My fellow Americans:
Today has been a day that should make us proud. It marked the end of the
successful evacuation of PLO from Beirut, Lebanon. This peaceful step could
never have been taken without the good offices of the United States and
especially the truly heroic work of a great American diplomat, Ambassador
Philip Habib.
....
When our administration assumed office in January of 1981, I decided that
the general framework for our Middle East policy should follow the broad
guidelines laid down by my predecessors.
....
The time has come for a new realism on the part of all the peoples of the
Middle East. The State of Israel is an accomplished fact; it deserves
unchallenged legitimacy within the community of nations. But Israel's
legitimacy has thus far been recognized by too few countries and has been
denied by every Arab State except Egypt. Israel exists; it has a right to
exist in peace behind secure and defensible borders; and it has a right to
demand of its neighbors that they recognize those facts.
I have personally followed and supported Israel's heroic struggle for
survival, ever since the founding of the State of Israel 34 years ago. In
the pre-1967 borders Israel was barely 10 miles wide at its narrowest point.
The bulk of Israel's population lived within artillery range of hostile Arab
armies. I am not about to ask Israel to live that way again.
....
Beyond the transition period, as we look to the future of the West Bank and
Gaza, it is clear to me that peace cannot be achieved by the formation of an
independent Palestinian state in those territories, nor is it achievable on
the basis of Israeli sovereignty or permanent control over the West Bank and
Gaza. So, the United States will not support the establishment of an
independent Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza, and we will not
support annexation or permanent control by Israel.
...
Finally, we remain convinced that Jerusalem must remain undivided, but its
final status should be decided through negotiation.
...
Tonight, on the eve of what can be a dawning of new hope for the
people of the troubled Middle East -- and for all the world's people
who dream of a just and peaceful future -- I ask you, my fellow
Americans, for your support and your prayers in this great
undertaking.
Thank you, and God bless you.
Dr. Aaron Lerner is Director of IMRA
(Independent Media Review & Analysis), which is a "current digest of
media, polls and significant interviews and events." Its website
address is http://www.imra.org.il
|
|
THE REALLY HOT ISSUE OF THE SHARON PLAN - NOT THE SETTLEMENTS
Posted by David Bedein, June 6, 2004. |
|
The issue of dismantling Israeli settlements contiguous to Gaza provided a distraction for the even hotter issues that are inherent in the Sharon Plan that was approved by the Israeli cabinet on Sunday, June 6th, 2004. What promises to be the most hotly debated issue when the Knesset parliament considers the Sharon Plan is the almost unnoticed Clause Five of the Sharon Plan, which mandates that Israel provide military training for Palestinian armed forces, in conjunction with the US, the UK, Jordan and Egypt, while Clause One of the same Sharon Plan continues to declare that there is no Palestinian partner to peace". In other words, the Sharon Plan, ratified by a sovereign Israeli government, offers to provide military assistance to an entity seen by the State of Israel as hostile to the State of Israel. Has this happened before? Well, yes. Back in 1993, with the genesis of the Olso Process, Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres offered to provide military training for Arafat's Palestinian Liberation Army. At the time, Rabin and Peres had come to the conclusion that the Palestinian armed forces would use their weapons in the context of a peace process. Yet in September. 2000, Rabin and Peres were proven to be wrong, when the arms and military training that they had provided for the Palestinian armed forces then turned against the people of Israel, in a terror campaign has resulted in the premeditated cold murder of more than 1,000 men, women and children, and the maiming of more than 10,000 people It is that same Palestinian armed force at war with Israel that the Sharon Plan proposes to arm once again. In that context, Sharon's government has bestowed security responsibilities on Muhammad Dahlan as the warlord of Gaza, while Israeli intelligence warns that Dahlan is directly responsible for the current terror campaign against the Israeli population. Indeed, it was Ehud Olmert, now Israel's deputy defence minister, who exposed Dahalan's security file, when Olmert authored an impassioned essay in the Wall Street Journal on June 2, 2002, when Olmert in which he called for Dahlan to be "eradicated". Two years later, senior officials who serve in Israeli intelligence say that there has been no change in Dahlan's "modus vivendi", and that Dahlan continues his direct involvement with the planning of lethal terror acts. Indeed, Dahlan is the head of the Palestinian organization known as the Popular Resistance Committees which took credit for the May 2nd 2004 killing of Tali Chantual, murdered in her 8th month of pregnancy, and the point blank shooting deaths of her four little girls. Yet Olmert is now the prime proponent of the Sharon Plan, and he will not comment on why he suddenly places his trust in a terrorist whom he had called on Israel to get rid of - exactly two years ago. Meanwhile, in what promises to develop into yet another hot security issue, the Sharon Plan calls for the Egyptians to move their armed forces into Gaza, while officials in Israeli intelligence gather daily documentation which shows that Egypt knowingly facilitates weapons tunnels to supply arms into Gaza from Egyptian territory. In conclusion, the Sharon Plan, which many had scrutinized in terms of how it would affect the lives of 7,500 Israeli farmers near Gaza, should be examined in terms of the security threat that is may pose to people who live anywhere in Israel. David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency, Beit Agron; and Jerusalem Fellow, Center for Near East Policy Research, Wellesley, Mass. |
|
YA THINK WE'RE FINALLY GETTING IT?
Posted by Arlene Peck, June 6, 2004. |
|
You know, I think we just might be 'getting it.' For more years than I care to remember, I've been writing and speaking about how the cancer within the country must be cut out. Transfer was a dirty word and I have been chastised plenty for my very political stance. Of course, I get plenty of mail also when I write that I am so appalled with the leadership of my country at the moment (both parties) that for the first time in my life I have no idea who to vote against the most. Yet, I know, deep in my heart that it has never been about land. The Arabs don't care about land in Israel nor do they want land in America. It's all about democracy and religion. The savages that we see on the nightly news beheading people, or blowing up civilians or anyone in their path just for the fun of it, just don't want the Saturday or Sunday people around much longer. They truly believe that 'their' Allah is the only G-d and whoever isn't one of them has to die. Or, in their seventh century mentality, 'smitten.' Truly, it makes me sad when I see that we, as a nation, are losing our innocence because of the nightly horror that we have faced since 9/11. We've never known disgust or even the budding hatred that we, as a nation are beginning to feel. Israel is used to living in the midst of a snake-pit. However, we are first becoming attuned to the fact that there are those around whom no matter how nice and understanding we are to them, just aren't going to like us. Our leaders regularly go on television and report that we are working to win the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people. Yet, the evening news and the newspapers are filled from cover to cover with vicious and violent attacks and scenes of depravity from these very same Arabs who should be grateful because we've saved them from Saddam. Yet, they aren't and will never be. Our President still talks about "winning the hearts and minds of the Iraqi people" and doesn't realize it's a lost cause. Not so long ago, these same media outlets were never too busy to trash Israel. Lately thought, they haven't been doing that. Mainly, I believe, because page after page in our newspapers are filled with the latest atrocity in Iraq, Afghanistan, or most anywhere in the world where the Arabs are making life miserable for their neighbors. Not to mention the daily carnage on our soldiers. It's not the ho-hum attitude that I've come to expect when the Israeli soldiers are being slaughtered by some terror bomb set off by being hidden under a woman's skirt or bed of a kid in an ambulance. Wow, it's 'our guys' that are being murdered daily by these Arabs and it's beginning to sink in that "Wow! Israel has the same enemies that we do!" In fact, there are those enlightened ones who now are beginning to realize that the "Political correctness" that we have been living under is coming to an and. The talk shows are less complacent and I'm hearing more of "Let Israel go in and kick their asses!" For being a backward and primitive culture, they have been clever in using our laws, civil liberty and good nature to defend and protect them. We, as Americans have been gullible and compassionate for too long. And, for all the wrong causes. I shudder to think how much of our tax dollars and Social Security money has gone into the coffers of the very ones who are attacking us under the guise of charity,. President Mubarak has recently come out attacking the United States for their 'mistreatment of the Arabs." I wonder if that would cause them to refuse the billions and billions of dollars that we send them yearly in aid. Not hardly. Until recently, we just didn't 'get it." We are a country that protects our children. Our naive minds couldn't comprehend that there were actually people in the world that taught their children that being 'homicide murderers' was something to strive for and more important to them than living. We, along with Israel, are taught to value life. Now, we are beginning to learn what Israel has known for decades. We had been lulled into the propaganda that Islam is peaceful and that they love America. But, when the cameras are gone, the translation goes back to the basics. That being, they have a plan. It isn't and never has been about land. The Arabs don't give a diddly-squat about having the land of Israel or America. It's about culture and democracy. The powers that be in the Muslim clerics can't have either. But, they do want Israel as their appetizer and the United States has been saved for the main course. We are finally getting the realization that the danger from the land of Islam is real and very close. The Catholic Church recently put out a warning that Catholic women should be wary of marrying Muslim men. I wonder, has anyone told the pope when he made that edict that they also treat their farm animals better than their women? Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com |
|
ISRAEL SHOULD PUT ARAFAT ON TRIAL LIKE BARGHOUTI
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, June 6, 2004. |
|
"It is likely that Israel will consider bringing Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat to trial, too." That's right, you read it right, and the Israeli Justice Minister Yosef Lapid said it recently. For about two years now, I've been calling on the Israeli government to try Yasser Arafat like Nazi leader Adolph Eichmann for war crimes and crimes against humanity. I've written nine articles about it, such as, "Put Arafat on Trial Like Eichmann," "Don't Expel Arafat," "Poor Marwan," and "Hang Saddam, Then Arafat." With the exception of single articles by Alan Dershowitz, Uri Dan, and J. Grant Swank, Jr., I've been a lone voice. Sure there's been Israeli politicians calling for Arafat to be expelled from Israel, or "taken out and shot," but no one has called for a proper judicial process to educate the world about Arafat's horrendous crimes like Lapid recently did. Then a week later, the recently evicted, former Transportation Minister Avigdor Lieberman, speaking on the popular Israeli television news show, "Politika," said, "There's no difference between Barghouti and Arafat, they're exactly the same, with one difference, Arafat is responsible for many more Israelis murdered in terror attacks, since after the Oslo Agreements..." So both Lapid and Lieberman agree that Arafat should be tried... Israel's court system recently found Marwan Barghouti, founder of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade (later outlawed as a terrorist organization by the US) and a member of the Palestinian Legislative Council, guilty of direct involvement in the murder of five Israelis. The Tel Aviv District Court acquitted him of 33 other attacks. As leader of the Fatah-Tanzim terrorist organization, Barghouti was on trial for overseeing dozens of terror attacks. The judges explained their decision to acquit Barghouti of most of the cases on the basis of Israel's legal system, which they said, prevents the conviction of a leader of a terrorist organization for acts carried out by members of the group, if he himself is not directly involved, even though it may be known that the leader encouraged them to carry out the attacks and provided his associates with the finances to carry out the attacks. They said the law was far from satisfactory, but they were bound by the law as is. Since when is an accomplice to serial murder ignored? Such antiquated laws in Israel must be changed. How is Israel going to contribute to the "War on Terror," if it can't even prosecute terrorist leaders? "The accused [Barghouti] generally did not have direct contact with the people on the ground who perpetrated the attacks," the court verdict read. "The contact was made with people close to him, among them [his nephew] Ahmed Barghouti...who, with the support of the accused, planned and carried out the murderous attacks, using the money and arms that the accused made sure to supply to them for that purpose." Israeli forces captured Barghouti in April 2002. He was arrested, together with his nephew, in a building only 500 meters from Arafat's Mukatah compound. His nephew, Ahmed Barghouti, received thirteen life sentences last year by the Ofer Military Court, for his part in the terrorist murder of 12 Israelis and the wounding of dozens of others. In addition to his terrorist exploits, Marwan Barghouti has made statements such as, "After we attain a Palestinian state [in Judea and Samaria], there will be greater things for which to strive...There is no room for more than one state between the Jordan and the Mediterranean." Nothing particularly radical in comparison to what Yasser Arafat has said or done for years. Yet Arafat - as head of Fatah - who personally ordered the terror attacks - as the judges concluded - and authorized the funds later used by Barghouti for the attacks, hasn't yet been tried. Why not? Till now, Israel hasn't brought Arafat to trial because it didn't want to prosecute public figures, Lapid said. But now, they've successfully prosecuted Barghouti, who in his sentencing was given five consecutive life sentences plus forty years. Unrepentant, Barghouti throughout his trial insisted he didn't recognize the court's right to try him. At his sentencing, Barghouti accused the judges of cooperating with the "occupation" and compared them to Israeli Air force pilots "who drop bombs on children". The Tel Aviv District Court judges said that, "Barghouti's declarations that he is a 'man of peace' do not stand the test of reality...it has been proven that Barghouti was personally involved 'up to his neck' in acts of terror." The judges said Barghouti's orders for terror attacks were sometimes "based on instructions" from Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat. "Arafat would never give explicit instructions for attacks but he let it be known when the timing was right," the judges said. "He made sure his subordinates understood very well when he was interested in a cease-fire and when he was interested in terror attacks against Israel," the verdict said. So, I understand that the Israeli court has verified that Arafat has had a direct hand in much of the terror perpetrated on Israelis. Add to that, the documentation Israel has found earlier linking Arafat to arms purchases and the funding of terror activities. How is it possible that about 1,500 Israelis have been killed since Arafat established the Palestinian Authority for Terror in 1993, and yet he's not held responsible? Do his fairly regular calls of "Jihad, Jihad, Jihad" mean nothing? Although I don';t feel the Fourth Geneva Convention applies to Judea, Samaria (the West Bank), and Gaza. There is an interesting point to think about for those who prefer expelling Arafat. While Part 3, Section 3, Article 49 forbids individual or mass transfers from occupied territories - and is likely to raise many cries worldwide that we are violating International Law - Articles 64, 66, 67, and 68 (of Section 3), allow the Occupying Power to bring to trial and impose the death penalty on a person guilty of espionage, serious acts of sabotage against the military installations of the Occupying Power, or of intentional offences which have caused the death of one or more persons. Israel would be on firmer legal ground - according to the world - trying Arafat for his involvement in murdering Israelis, and executing him, than expelling him. Put Arafat on trial for crimes against humanity, i.e., the Jewish people, his war crimes in Lebanon, the American diplomats he's already admitted years ago to having ordered killed in Sudan, and all the other victims of his decades old serial murder spree in the name of Palestinian independence, and get it over with already. Israel should put Arafat on trial like Barghouti, with one exception, Barghouti got life sentences, Arafat should be hanged like Eichmann. Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst and consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko |
|
IT'S ALL HAPPENING AGAIN (BLAME THE JEWS)
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 6, 2004. |
|
Recall during WW2 the Jewish leadership became incontinent at the possibility that the Roosevelt Administration would become anti-Semitic if they complained about the slaughter of the Jews in Europe. Now, once again, the Jewish leadership in Israel and America are tied in knots with fear that the Bush Administration will get furious with them unless they cross the threshold of suicide by building a Terrorist Arab Muslim State - in Gaza first. Washington has mounted an add-on propaganda campaign to further frighten the Jews into coming before the Great Wizard behind the curtain in Washington. The lead theme is called "Blame the Jews for the Bush decision of invade Iraq". To shift the blame is a high state of art in the Arabist U.S. State Department which tasks the CIA with such missions. The first step is "memory erasure". Americans must be made to forget why we went to war in the first place. 9/11 must be fogged over so our first strike on the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden is to appear incidental. We must also forget and erase the fact that we knew Saddam had WMD (Weapons of Mass Destruction) because he used them on the Iranians and his own Kurds. There is also the 'delicate' matter that, under Bush and Baker, the U.S. - along with the Europeans - acted as Saddam's suppliers by enabling him to acquire arms and certain precursors for chemical warfare. Did we know for sure that Saddam had WMD, including NBC (Nuclear, Biological and Chemical)? You bet? Where are they then? He could have hidden them anywhere in the Iraqi desert but, most probably they are buried in Syria. A great effort must be made to insure that the Arabist State Department is not investigated before the public with respect to their years of permitting Arab Muslim 'sleeper' Terror cells to migrate into America. Nothing must connect them to appeasing Saudi Arabia, Saddam in Iraq, Hafez al Assad in Syria (followed by Bashar Assad). There is a lot more to fudge over before the campaign to "Blame Israel" is launched in earnest. Nothing must reach the media about the prior scheme by former President George H.W. Bush (when he was Vice President) to blame Israel should the scheme to arm the Nicaragua Contras be exposed. Recall that Oliver North gave testimony to Congress that the plan to illegally arm the Contras had the escape element to shift the blame to Israel, if exposed. VP George H.W. Bush denied knowledge, although in that job, plus his prior job as DCIA (Director of the CIA), it would be impossible not to know. (1) Israel was ordered by Washington to assist in transferring weapons to the Contras, not knowing that they were scheduled to become the "Fall Guys" to shield the real culprits. Then came the reluctant decision by Bush and Baker to challenge Saddam's attack and occupation of Kuwait in August 1990. After six months of mobilization with well designed foot dragging by then Chief of Staff, Colin Powell, President Bush used the American Armed Forces to push Saddam out of Kuwait. Then, after only four days of ground war, he quit and never ousted the tyrant Saddam from power. Did he fumble deliberately in order to appease the Arab Muslim oil world? Saddam, his Ba'ath Party and Republican Guard Army escaped unscathed to fight another day (after torturing and murdering unknown hundreds of thousands of his own people). Now, President George W. Bush, the son, has to finish the job his father botched. The American soldiers being killed daily in Iraq are being attacked by the very same Republican Guard Army that faded into the civilian population. Add to that Syria who is culpable as the gateway for Muslim Terrorists, long protected by the State Department and the Bush Dynasty. In 1991 Bush, Sr., then Sec. of State James Baker and then Head of the Joint Chiefs Colin Powell allowed Saddam's Army to escape with their armaments. (With U.S. approval) Saddam had shipped his Soviet-built planes to Iran for safekeeping which was a sham deal cut by Bush-Baker-Powell. Once in Iran (who had no maintenance infrastructure for Soviet aircraft) they were stripped down, crated and transferred to Syria. The Saudis put up several billion dollars which went to Saddam to cover his debt from his 8 year war with Iran. Saddam was to be saved on the philosophy that he would be a firewall against Iran's Muslim expansion. But, all that must also be covered over IF the current anti-Israel propaganda is to succeed and frighten the wits out of American Jewish leaders and the Israelis. The stated threat is: Vote to establish a Muslim Terror State in Gaza or the Bush Administration will abandon you as a friend, ally, financial and equipment supplier. Did I forget to mention that Israel has always been an invaluable ally? For example, when the elder Bush was forced against his will to rescue Kuwait, it was Israel who provided the ground intelligence (called Humint in the trade - Human Intelligence). And Israel provided the air umbrella for the incoming aircraft during the 6 months of mobilization by keeping Saddam's Air Force pinned down. But, that too must be forgotten. In the second attack on Iraq, March 2003, Israel provided the intelligence and training so American soldiers who had not fought urban war might not be so vulnerable. Israel, of course, did have 55+ years of experience in fighting terrorists in cities. So now, George Bush needs the hint of even a Pyrrhic victory in the Middle East, given the fact that, in fighting a 'humane' war to win the hearts and minds of Muslims in Iraq, he has been losing Americans daily. I think the number is somewhere near 800 dead, plus thousands wounded, some maimed for life. Bush and the State Department needed anything that looks like a Middle East success. So, like Bill Clinton in his last days as President, Bush decided that Israel must pay an even greater price than they have been paying to daily terror attacks on her civilians by Arab Muslim Palestinians. Since Oslo was signed in 1993, more than 1500 Jews have been murdered, including some 44 Americans, with tens of thousands wounded - many maimed for life. But, the Arabs must be appeased in these days of high oil prices for Bush to win in November. Now, Bush insisted, with accompanying threats delivered by senior State Department official, David Satterfield and Ambassador Daniel Kurtzer that Israel give up all 21 of her Gaza farming communities with 8,000 Jewish men, women and children to be transferred out of their homes, synagogues, farms, factories, schools and businesses - all to be given over to the same Terrorists who have been killing them with impunity. Then, the Arab Muslim Palestinians could have an unmonitored Terrorist State and staging ground for more successful attacks against Israel and, shortly thereafter, with Al Qaeda and other Islamic Jihadists for International Terror operations. This transfer/evacuation of Jews from their homes would make Bush look like he won a Middle East victory and NOT the Godfather of what would become the most dangerous conglomeration of Terrorists on this planet. In the meantime, the propagandists at State and in the various Intel Agencies began to float the rumor that: "The only reason we are stuck in Iraq 'cum' Vietnam was that Bush, in his concern for Israel, went to war with Saddam". It's a great lie but it meets the Hitler/Goebbels criteria of: "Tell a big enough lie often enough and it will be believed". The real truth is that Bush stumbled into two necessary wars because of 9/11 and the discovery that Global Terrorists had become operationally effective. Global Terrorists had linked up, particularly among the Muslim. They got their initial training in terrorist tactics from the CIA and impetus in the war in Afghanistan against the Soviets. The American CIA trained and armed the Mujahadin (Muslims dedicated to Jihad - Holy War against all infidels). This included Osama Bin Laden. Because neither the CIA nor the State Department ever understood how must the Muslims hated the West, they trained and unleashed a plague of now rampant World Terror. But, the State Department, CIA and other American and European Intelligence Agencies knew that this threat was growing, arming, training and integrating all over the world - long before 9/11. They knew Saudi Arabia funded and taught terror (even in Islamic schools called Madrassas in America). They knew Iran did the same. In addition, the West knew many of the Muslim countries had a nuclear arms development program, as well as probable biological and chemical programs. They knew Syria was arming, training and housing 10 major Terrorist organizations but, did absolutely nothing about it. (These were the real sins of George Tenet whose resignation may protect him from investigation and prosecution for knowing about the import into America of Muslims until they reached a critical mass, thus endangering Americans). I maintain that the State Department was the main culprit but they always had the protection of various Presidents like George Herbert Walker Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush. You think the CIA is a secret underground operation? Well, they can't hold a candle to the State Department regarding Black Operations. Back to the Jews: With things going so badly in Iraq, the State Department was allowed to unleash its anti-Semitic dogs. Even Presidential contender John Kerry is slip-sliding around like a cat trying to cover its doodoo on a hot tin roof when he is speaking about Israel. They even enlisted Sen. Fritz Ernest Hollings, D-S.C. and Rep. Jim Moran D-Va., to unleash a diatribe about how we went to war in Iraq to protect Israel. For centuries, whenever leaders failed in a war and wanted to shift blame away from themselves, they blamed the Jews for a secret agenda. Recall how Hitler prodded the German people by blaming the Jews for the Depression and the Versailles Treaty after WW1 and prior to WW2,? According to Hitler, the Jews caused Germany to collapse - or so Hitler claimed. When was the first or last time any nation, including America, went to war to assist Israel by attacking her enemies? Israel has repulsed the Arab Muslims armies in 7 wars and never asked for foreign troops assistance. Israel is eternally grateful, no doubt, for the shipment of munitions when she started to run short after Egypt and Syria hit Israel in a coordinated surprise attack on Yom Kippur 1973. Days before, when Israel saw the mounting threat and could have pre-emptively hit the gathering enemy forces, then President Nixon and Secretary of State Henry Kissinger told Golda Meir that, if she attacked the Arab armies, Israel could expect no assistance in the form of ammunition or spare parts. Going back even further, I don't recall Franklin D. Roosevelt, the British or the Soviets lifting a single finger to assist the Jews being murdered by the Nazis. They refused to even bomb the rail lines bringing the Jews to the death camps or to blow up the crematoria. Regarding the Jewish leadership in Israel and the Diaspora: Perhaps the psychological impact of being hunted and murdered for a few thousand years has caused a genetic impact. Our people have a knee-jerk cowering response to the threats of enemies and even a fear of so-called friends. They fear the continuing rise of anti-Semitism and will do foolish, life-threatening things to avoid it. They still can't believe that their efforts to be the 'Good Guys' and invent life-saving medical procedures and drugs will not overcome the taught Jew hatred. Enter here the familiar graveyard humor of Jews: Two Jews abut to get shot by a firing squad. The commander asks if they want a blindfold. One of the Jews says: "Go to hell!" The other Jew turns to him in a fury: "Shut up! Do you want to make them mad?" We have already seen Israel's current Prime Minister panic. There is little doubt that the State Department has been lobbying the Conference of Presidents of American Jewish Organizations. (They're usually easy to massage or frighten.) AIPAC (American-Israel Public Affairs Committee) has been given its marching orders. So, all in all the "Scare the Jews" campaign is off to a flying start. As for trusting Bush or Kerry, well - you get the idea. Presidents come and go, but the State Department runs the show - forever! Right now the Administration's game plan is to lower the heat on Bush for the blundering in Iraq. State will encourage various anti-Semites to start beating the drums with the mantra: "Blame the Jews". It always works. Or at least it has in the past. Can't we change that vicious paradigm? The result will be Israel evacuates the Gaza District; the Arab Muslim Terrorists will create an International Terror State and Israel will hopefully bomb them to smithereens. "Ain Breira" (No choice). Then it will be too late. The 250,000 Jewish men, women and children who invested their life's savings and their toil to create blooming farms, villages, towns and cities will have all been 'transferred' out of their ancient homeland. Those beautiful homes and gardens will be given to the Arab Muslim Palestinians and, when they continue their Terror, these beautiful gardens will be the next battlefield for Jewish rights and sovereignty in our own Land that G-d promised to the Jewish people forever. Strangely, it would or could have been Israel's presence that would have brought these backward people up to a higher standard of living for their families as it did when Israel controlled Judea, Samaria and Gaza. But, the product of the next Arab Muslim State of Palestine will not be food for the world but more murders. ### 1. "The Secret War Against the Jews: How Western Intelligence Betrayed the Jewish People: 1922-1992" by John Loftus & Mark Aarons St. Martin's Press NY 1994 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). |
|
FEDERMAN ADMINISTRATIVE DETENTION ORDER VOIDED
Posted by Hebron Jewish Community, June 6, 2004. |
|
Finally, good news!!! A Jerusalem municipal court has voided Noam Federman's administrative detention order. Federman, an administrative detainee for the past eight months, was acquitted several weeks ago from all guilt in the 'Bay Ayin' case. He had been accused of masterminding terror attacks against Arabs. The prosecution dropped all charges for lack of evidence. Federman then appealed his administrative detention to the Supreme Court, which sent the case back to the Jerusalem municipal court. A short time ago Judge Heshin invalidated the administrative order. The judge has allowed Defense Minister Mufaz to implement limits on Federman's movements. Mufaz must decide upon limitation by the middle of the week and Noam is due to be released on Friday. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com |
|
CHILD SOLDIERS OF THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, June 6, 2004. |
|
Palestinian Mother: I would have preferred a different son had died
The Palestinian Authority continues to promote the use of children as soldiers and to present their deaths as valuable and heroic. During a long interview today, PA TV displayed the pictures of two 15-year-old combatants holding an assault rifle and a pistol. [See above] These children were killed while attacking an Israeli town in 2003, and have been honored by PA society for their deed as heroic Shahids (Martyrs). The text on picture of the dead children reads: "The Popular Resistance Committee proudly announce the falling of three Shahids of the Great Islam." This picture, shown throughout the interview with the dead children's parents, presents a strong message to viewers -- and especially to children -- that the dead combatants are role models for children. The interviewer praised 15 year-old Mohammed who "always aspired Shahada (Martyrdom) despite his young age... He said the 2 dead combatants "became outstanding for all Palestinians, outstanding in their medals of honor -- Shahada." The mother of 15 year-old Tareq said: "It was sad and joyous about him, meaning, he always liked the Shahada. All children at his age do... He was my first son, he always cared for me... I would have preferred that one of his other brothers would have attained Shahada instead of him, because he was the joy of my life." It is striking that the mother who clearly mourned her son, could not bring herself to break the PA taboo by expressing regret at the loss of her child as a Shahid. Instead, she expressed a preference "that one of his other brothers" would have died as a Shahid. This would be acceptable in PA society, as she did not reject what is expected of her as an Palestinian mother - to offer her sons to Allah as a Shahid. Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
TRANSPARENT FRAUD AGAINST THE ISRAELI PEOPLE
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 6, 2004. |
|
Adding insult to injury, as the saying goes, comes with what should have been expected, namely a 'cover you a--' decision by the Leftist Supreme Court at the orders of Israel's Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon. Supreme Court head Aharon Barak favors Sharon's high handed actions. Conflicting reports state that the Supreme Court seeks to intervene in Sharon's peremptory firing of 2 Ministers of Knesset in his Cabinet. Sharon fired Rabbi Beni Elon, Minister of Tourism and Avigdor Lieberman, Minister of Transport in order to insure his Retreat from Gaza vote goes the way he and President George W. Bush demand. The hue and cry of his being a dictator and destroying any vestige of Israel's democratic government stings our erstwhile Prime Minister. He needs political cover badly and fast. But, he may forego Supreme Court cover in the short term for the vote he has in his pocket today, Sunday June 6th. He and/or Shimon Peres goes to Aharon Barak, Chief of the Supreme Court to request a ruling. This may be the most Leftist, pro-Arab, anti-settler, anti-religious activist Court on record in Israel. Even the American Judge Bork, well-known as a conservative Judge who believes judges should rule on law has cited the Israeli Supreme Court as ultra-activist. This is not a compliment to Israel's judiciary! Now we hear that the vote is to be postponed a second time so the Leftist Court of Aharon Barak can rule on the firing of Mks Elon and Lieberman. However, it is very likely that Sharon will push ahead with his vote today as long as he has even the slimmest majority in his pocket - and later accept a Supreme Court ruling that his machinations (to fire the two Mks) were legal. Even if by some miracle the Court rules against Sharon, he can ignore the ruling and move ahead with the evacuation of 8,000 men, women and children covering 3 generations - uprooting them from their homes, synagogues, schools, farms, factories and businesses. The objective in seeking Supreme Court cover would likely be that firing of Cabinet Members to manipulate a vote is perfectly legal. Then Sharon can slide out from under his new title of Supreme Dictator and claim vindication. Keep in mind that, if you review the Supreme Court rulings of even the last 20 years, it has invariably reflected the doctrine of the Labor/Meretz Parties. Aharon Barak is well known for his Leftist views and his desire to make law above the rights of the Knesset to make laws. Thus the derogatory appellation: "an Activist Court". (Courts should be neutral and NOT activists for any political cause or party in order to be fair and just.) The withdrawal/retreat from Gaza to be followed by the evacuation of 220,000 men, women and children from Judea and Samaria (the Golan and Jerusalem are next in line) has been the political doctrine of the Labor Left since well before the early 1980s. The Labor Party leaders met with the Master Terrorist and PLO Head Yassir Arafat when it was absolutely illegal to meet with any declared enemy of the Jewish State. The Supreme Court was silent then, in effect, becoming a silent and 'de facto' co-conspirator in Labor's plans to forcibly evacuate Jews from Judea, Samaria, Gaza, the Golan and half of Jerusalem. I would be very surprised if this Leftist Court voted that Sharon's firing of Elon and Lieberman was illegal. Sharon, no doubt in deep discussion with the slippery Shimon Peres who is well known for under-the-table maneuvers, would likely call Judge Barak to provide some legal cover for Sharon. What Sharon is planning fits the Left's Doctrine of Labor so why not assist Sharon for the moment? The objective is not only to make Sharon's orchestrated firing seem Kosher but, to insure that the retreat has the look of a legal and binding premise. Should Sharon be thrown out of office (very likely), the Left, including the Supreme Court, wants insurance that the next Prime Minister cannot merely cancel Sharon's ordered withdrawal, declaring it null and void. Sharon's purpose now is to wrap a bad decision of retreat and transfer of Jews from their homes in enough legalisms so, if the question arises, the case goes before the very same Supreme Court who finessed or at least acted as its enabler in the first place. Since the three Hebrew newspapers, the television channels and most of the radio stations are Israel's only source of timely news and are themselves Ultra-Left, be assured that what I have delineated herein will never reach the people. After all, that's why Sharon, with advise from the U.S. State Department, shut down Israel's only radio station representing a nationalistic viewpoint, Arutz Sheva (7) - another patently illegal, illegitimate and unjust action. As for the Israeli Supreme Court, it can only remind one of Germany's respected High Court who, once it fell under the control of Hitler's regime, changed radically to reflect the Hitlerian Doctrine. When a Court system goes bad as well as ethically corrupt, there is only one answer. Close it down by rule of the Knesset (Parliament) and choose judges with no know political biases. But, who knows, miracles do happen and, for a moment in time, Judge Barak may issue an honest decision - although it is likely to be too late for it to be meaningful. 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). |
|
RONALD REAGAN AND DIPLOMACY; ARIEL SHARON AND DIPLUNACY
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, June 6, 2004. |
|
They say President Ronald Reagan did not stick his hand in the wind to see the way the winds were blowing. Ronald Reagan exposited the American values of life, liberty, truth and justice. He was a diplomat par excellence who with conviction broke the iron wall of despotism. He demanded the wall come down and evil stop. Upon his death all the world agrees that this man of convictions merits. As we watch PM Ariel Sharon force those who disagree out of the government and we see the political expediency of Benjamin Netanyahu and Limor Livnat, history will tell an ugly story of the walling in of the Jews who are stronger, moral and innocent. The walling in of the Jews and their elthnic cleansing are crimes against humanity, letting evil linger and grow, disallowing Jews the rights due all mankind even as they are still compensated for such evils against them in the Holocaust. Remember the incineration of Jews by suicide pre-meditated murderers. Remember the assasination of Tali, her four daughters and unborn son. Remember, the eleven hour trafic jam representing the largest in the history of maybe the world against disengagement and ethnic cleansing of Jews from their land. Remember the recent major referendum against disengagement with those as has been proven will continue to engage in jihad. Remember the mandate that elected Sharon for the words he spoke. As he speaks against his words, his people, his party and they follow his misguided road trap of the Geneva Coup by losers, history will note their major unilateral diplunacy and they will demerit. President Ronald Regan and his diplomacy made a righteous country proud. Prime Minister Ariel Sharon not only shames his country but unilaterally snubs the only democracy in the Middle East, his own. As the Jewish people survived all the imperialism of their enemies, it will survive the diplunacy of those off the derech. History was witness and will witness the survival of the Jews and the end of jihad and the defeat of Jews for jihad. Truth is durable; lies have no roots and reality and will be gone with the wind. Jews have survived the Romans in Gaza, the Mohammedans, Napoleon, the British, the mufti Haj al Husseini, the Egyptians and they will survive Arafascism al Husseini, world jihad as well as the Geneva Coup who lost their bids for office and still try to maneuver for jihad against the Jews. Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, us, because their hearts were softened for more." and just released sequel, "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." |
|
AIRING OUR DIRTY LAUNDRY
Posted by Arlene Peck, June 6, 2004. |
|
I wonder, do the Jewish liberal politicians who, most times I find to be self-serving and self-haters, have any idea of the damage that they do to Israel or the Jewish people when they utter their garbage? Our enemies take a simple uttering from a Tommy Limpid about how the behavior of the Israel Army reminded him of what his poor old Holocaust survivor mother endured at the hands of the Gestapo in Nazi Germany. That stupid comment made headlines around the world. Did the man mean the damage that he did? I don't know, but, it was done. The same way a few renegade soldiers were remiss in their sick treatment of enemy soldiers in the prison, the damage to the vast United States Armed forces has been done. Did they mean it? Or, were they just guys and gals who wanted to have fun and photo-ops with the prisoners of War under their duty? Who knows? Who cares? The damage has been done and the liberal and enemy press took those pictures and it's going to cost us dearly. Why do I mention this? Well, for starters, it has come to my attention that Prime Minister Sharon in his apparently senile years has proposed the idea of compensation to hundreds of Palestinians whose homes were demolished during the widening of the death road, the Philadelphia Corridor. Who, in heavens name does he plan on paying for the 'reimbursement' of damages done? As far as I'm concerned, these same displaced homeowners/terrorists have cost enough for making it necessary to erect a wall to keep them out of Israel. I'm writing columns about how there are children in Israel going hungry and the economy is in difficult times, and the powers that be want to pick up the tab for the buildings that were demolished in Rafah to keep the missiles from being smuggled through the tunnels underneath those same houses? Yet, the Los Angeles Times incredibly wrote an editorial that the reins of the turnover, (that apparently is a done deal) should be turned over to Egypt. Excuse me? Was one of the primary reasons for the incursion into Gaza to seek and destroy the tunnels that were coming in from Egypt and bringing weapons to be used against Israel? I interviewed a mother who was one of the victims of Arab terrorism, specifically Gaza terrorism. She decried how she didn't have money to pay her babysitters to watch her other three children while she stayed at the hospital to take care of her bombed daughter. Yet, the Prime Minister wants to pick up the tab? Who, incidentally, is going to compensate for all the damages these savages have caused? Have all the bills for the thousands and thousands of wounded and maimed they've caused been settled? Is Arafat and Company, the EU or UN going to send their checks to repay Israel for the continued operations, the medical supplies and disability checks to those who will never function normally again? I suppose the expenses of all those hotels, discotheques, bus companies, malls and military vehicles that have continuously been destroyed by these savage Arabs have been covered. Surely the bills for all of those have all been taken care of by the EU and United Nations. Generous donations from the Red Cross took care of the Victims of Arab terrorism, just like Israelis were after 9/11. No? Then why are Sharon and company making comments to the biased press who hate them, about his plans for compensation? Do the Israelis have any idea how detrimental it is when prominent leaders or members of the IDF make stupid public statements like the Tommy Lapid comparisons of any behavior of Israel to the Gestapo who harmed his poor old grandmother in Germany? The LA Times is one of the more rabid anti-Israel papers in the nation. Have you any idea how delighted they were to print a huge column written by Uri Dromi who is now the director of the International outreach at the Israel Democracy Institute in Jerusalem? I knew him when he was the Director of the Press Office in Israel and thought him a terrific guy. I believe he even made it possible once for me to enter Gaza as press to report on what I found then. This was before the 'intafada' but, it was getting dangerous at that time. I saw first hand what a cesspool it was of bored and violent people. Even then. I remember thinking I had never seen such hate filled and old eyes on children. And, they didn't even know that I was Jewish! Mr. Dromi, I am sure, is well aware of the situation and the mentality of these crazed savages who roam the streets of Gaza. So, I was a little surprised and dismayed to read how he thinks, like our President Bush, that we must win the hearts and minds of the enemy. Folks, these people who thrive on death and destruction, don't have hearts or rational minds to be won. They are out to kill us... both the Saturday and the Sunday people. Yet, according to Mr. Dromi, "Israel should do its utmost to heal the wounds of this recent, bitter episode. Compensating those people whose homes were demolished is a good first step toward that goal." Outrageous comment, and more so because he should be talking about the compensation of the carnage from these animals and worry about the victims of the Arab terrorism. He continued speaking about the love they will feel for Israel for withdrawing from Gaza and what Israel should do to heal their wounds by "Instead of deepening their animosity toward Israel, and instead of demolishing the settlements once they are evacuated, Israel should generously hand them over to Palestinians who desperately need better housing." As though it were already a 'done deal' he continues that, "This move would neither diminish the strength of Israel nor harm its security. On the contrary, it would prove that Israel is not only mighty but also magnanimous: not running away but pulling out in a thoughtful, positive way." Maybe I'm old fashioned, but I truly believe that for issues as important as what Sharon, Dromi, and the LA Times have decided, I believe that there should be a referendum of the entire people as to how they feel on issues such as this. It is not up to one man, or outside countries that don't have the Jewish homeland in their minds or hearts. However, while all this is going on, it might be wise to put a muzzle on the usual suspects Tommy, Peres and now Uri Dromi before giving their press conferences to Israel's enemies and not write extensive columns to any newspapers who gleefully use their words against them, they want to show their sensitivity and do something 'feelie'..tell them to go hug a tree! My momma, Queen Mollie, used to tell me to keep my skirts clean and don't ever wash my dirty laundry in public. Now, I understand what she meant! Arlene Peck is an internationally syndicated columnist and television talk show hostess. She can be reached at: bestredhead@earthlink.net and www.arlenepeck.com |
|
JUNE 5, 1968 - A TRAGIC ANNIVERSARY, ROBERT KENNEDY'S ASSASSINATION
Posted by Michael D. Evans, June 6, 2004. |
|
Below is an important reminder. Why? Because it's true, and if enough
people read it, it's possible that the American government could try
Yasser Arafat for murder. There is no statute of limitations on
murder.
June 5, 1968 - The Anniversary of the Day a Terrorist Killed a Presidential Candidate In 1968, Robert Kennedy ran for President on the Democratic ticket. In June 1968, he took his campaign to California. In fact, he won the Californian primary on June 5, 1968, the anniversary of the outbreak of the Six-Day War. Kennedy's staff requested a photo opportunity with Yitzhak Rabin, the Chief of Staff in Israel during that war and was then Israel's. Ambassador to the U.S., to commemorate the day. However, that photo opportunity never took place. On that evening, Kennedy was shot to death by a young Jerusalem-born Muslim named Sirhan Bishara Sirhan. As Rabin wrote in his memoirs: "The American people were so dazed by what they perceived as the senseless act of a madman that they could not begin to fathom its political significance." What was its political significance? According to a report made by a special counsel to the L.A. County District Attorney's office, Sirhan shot Kennedy for his support of Israel, and had been planning the assassination for months. In an outburst during his trial, he confessed, "I killed Robert Kennedy willfully, premeditatedly, and with twenty years of malice aforethought." [Twenty years, of course, date back to Israel's declaration of nationhood in 1948.] In a notebook found in Sirhan's apartment, investigators found a passage written on May 18, 1968 at 9:45 AM: "Robert F. Kennedy must be assassinated before 5 June 68."- the first anniversary of the beginning of the Six-Day War. It is well known that Robert Kennedy, John's Attorney General and younger brother, was also one of the President's most trusted advisors. What isn't so well known is that it was a younger Robert Kennedy, fresh out of Harvard and reporting for the Boston Post, who was in Israel when she declared herself a nation, and through the early days of her War for Independence. The Kennedy brothers also went to Israel in 1951 on a seven-week congressional tour of the Middle East. They left with a further respect for the young country's willingness to "bear any burden" in pursuit of their dreams. It seems likely that President Kennedy saw in the young country the friend in the Middle East he had really been looking for-a friend worthy of the dreams of Camelot. When Robert first met with Shimon Peres during the negotiations over the Hawk Missile purchase, the memory of Robert's 1948 visit was the first thing they talked about. The second was Israel's desire to break America's "elegant arms embargo." [3] It seems unlikely that Robert didn't exert at least some influence on Peres' behalf to allow Israel to acquire the Hawk. Others saw Robert's influence in this decision as something that Arabs of the world could do without-especially after the U.S. arms purchased by Israel helped it win the Six-Day War of 1967. If the young Kennedy was to be despised for helping to end the arms embargo as the Attorney General, how much more would he be a problem as the President? When Yasser Arafat's Black September terrorist stormed the Saudi Embassy in Khartoum in March of 1973 and took US Ambassador Cleo Noel, Charge d'Affaires George Curtis Moore, and others hostage, Sirhan's release was one of their main demands. On March 2, 1973, after Nixon rejected that demand, Arafat was overheard and recorded by Israeli intelligence and the U.S. National Security Agency giving the code words for the execution of Noel, Moore, and Belgian diplomat Guy Eid, who were shot to death. James Welsh, a Palestinian analyst for the N.S.A., went public with charges of a cover-up of Arafat's key role in the planning and execution of these kidnappings and murders. (There is no statute of limitations on murder.) If Sirhan had acted independently of the P.L.O., why were they willing to kill Americans to try to gain his freedom? Please forward this to everyone on your list. Michael D. Evans is the founder of America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of Jerusalem, the www.JerusalemPrayerTeam.org. He is the author of the New York Times bestseller "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move." |
|
HENDEL, LAW PROFESSOR AND HATZOFEH ALL SLAM SHARON
Posted by Bryna Berch, June 6, 2004. |
|
Sharon is - out of control? off his lithium? suffering from senile
dementia? Or maybe he really has been taken over by aliens from outer
space - or the US State Dep't.
This is a news item from today's Arutz-7. Deputy Minister of Education Tzvi Hendel, the third National Union member of the government, resigned this morning. In a sharply-worded letter to Prime Minister Sharon, Hendel wrote, "This letter is submitted with pain and pity for a Hero of Israel who has deteriorated from a 'high roof to a deep pit,' and who has thrown off all Zionist, settlement and democratic values." Hendel, a resident of Ganei Tal in Gush Katif and a former Mayor of the Gaza Coast Regional Council, will hold a press conference this afternoon before the National Union Knesset faction session. Law Prof. Mordechai Kremnitzer of the Hebrew University said today that an Israeli prime minister may fire ministers only for a substantial reason, such as their failure to perform their ministerial functions. He noted that the entire government of Israel is the executive body, unlike in the US, where the President is the Chief Executive. Voice of Israel's legal commentator Moshe Negbi, whose opinions are generally pleasing to the left-wing of the political spectrum, expressed his opinion that even if the dismissals are legal, the 48 hours that must pass before they take effect should not include the Sabbath. According to both legal experts, then, both Lieberman and Elon should be able to vote in today's Cabinet vote. The editorial in HaTzofeh newspaper today stated: "Nowhere in the coalition agreement is it stated that the ministers may [not] think differently than His Eminence the Ruler. But apparently, for Sharon it was self-evident: In a dictatorship, it's inconceivable to think differently than his Eminence. |
|
SONG OF PEACE REDUX AND PEACE FOR GALILEE REVISIONISM
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 6, 2004. |
|
1. The "Song of Peace" Redux In the late 60s, well after the Six Day War, a whiney "peace song" named Shir Hashalom (http://www.radiohazak.com/Shir.html ) became popular among Israel's teeny-boppers. At the time it was not played on the state-run radio because Golda Meir disapproved of its message, which included the following stanza: "Nobody will return us
It was basically a song insisting that peace was there on the shelf for Israel to pull out, and if there were no peace yet it was basically because Israel did not want it enough. Back in those days the Israeli Labor Party under Golda was still a Zionist party, although not particularly democratic. Israel was still a one-party state under the near-totalitarian rule of the Labor Party-MAPAI. Anyway, the song quickly became a cliche and largely forgotten by most people. But then in the early 1990s the Labor Party made a sharp turn to the extreme Left, abandoning all pretense of being a Zionist party, while the distinction between the Meretz (nee MAPAM) party and the anti-Israel HADASH Arab communist party all but disappeared. And the Shir Hashalom underwent a rebirth. When Rabin started implementing the Beilin-Peres ideas about Israel appeasing its way to peace with the PLO, the song became almost a second national anthem, especially because Labor Leftists were increasingly uncomfortable with the words of the actual national anthem Hatikva, with its mentioning the yearnings of the Jewish soul and all. Anyway, at that last "Peace" rally where Rabin spoke before he was assassinated by Yigal Amir, it was sung and played. Right after the murder, the song became associated in people's minds with Rabin himself and became a sort of semi-official musical representation of the Oslo zeitgeist. There is one interesting twist about the song. Namely, its writer. Shir Hashalom was written by one Yaakov Rotblit. I am not sure what his political ideas were back 35 years ago when the song was written and while I was studying sociology (wince, grunt, gulp), but it turns out that the very same Rotblit is today decidedly un-Left. Indeed, he is one of the important figures fighting against the plan to cleanse the Gaza Strip ethnically of Jews and expel the "settlers". And as part of his current ideology, the very same Yaakov Rotblit has now composed and released a NEW song. It is a song that mercilessly attacks the Israeli Left, so you will not be surprised to hear that the same state-run radio stations do not play it. It is called a Song of the Land of Israel. Rotblit released it just before the Likud referendum a few weeks back, in which 60% of the Likud members rejected Sharon's plan for new appeasements. Right after the referendum, Sharon morphed into the Israeli Mugabe, and insisted that Likud voters can go to hell and what the heck do the voters know about anything anyway. So if you read Hebrew and your computer has the fonts, you can see the words at http://www.fresh.co.il/dcforum/Politics/8278.html. Here is a translation of parts of the song (it is considerably longer): "My life have I given for you, Eretz Yisael Land of Israel,
"Every single kibbutznik,
"Don't call it 'transfer' or expulsion,
"So when Jews hate other Jews,
Gosh, you think Aviv Gefen will sing it in the next Rabin Square super-rally? 2. "Peace for Galilee" Historic Revisionism Israel's Left underwent a process of radicalization, de-Zionization, and growing extremism, beginning with Israel's 1982 "Peace for Galilee" invasion of Lebanon. It was a radicalization compared by many to that of the American Left and its self-conversion into a movement of rabid anti-Americanism and even pro-Saddam extremism. Few remember today how popular the invasion of Lebanon had been in Israel in its early stages. The PLO and its affiliates had been using Lebanon as a base for years, to shoot rockets and mortars into Israel and from which to launch numerous terrorist atrocities, including the Maalot and Avivim massacres of Israeli children, and attacks on Nahariya and Kiryat Shmona. Menahem Begin and his cabinet decided to end the situation. The attempted assassination of Israel's Ambassador in London in 1982 was the last straw. When Prime Minister Menahem Begin and Defense Minister Ariel Sharon ordered the Israeli army to cross into Lebanon, they stated at first that the army would only go as far as 40 kilometers, the range of Katyusha missiles at the time (for a history, see http://www.eretzyisroel.org/~samuel/lebanonwar.html and http://www.adl.org/ISRAEL/Record/lebanon.asp ). Public opinions polls at the time were showing a 92% support rate for the invasion, in polls that included Israeli Arabs. But Israeli journalism was already under the near-totalitarian hegemony of the Far Left, so Israeli Op-Eds were running at about the same 92% AGAINST the invasion. These were the same media that would shortly invent that 400,000 datum for the number of anti-Sharon protesters turning out to oppose the war, for the now-famous and largely mythical rally in the public square in Tel Aviv that at most holds 60,000 people. What had begun as a military operation of near-universal popularity among Israelis, however, deteriorated within a few months into a fairly unpopular one, with Israelis about evenly split between supporters and opponents. The military had gone well beyond the 40 kilometer line, and indeed conquered all of Beirut. Inside Beirut, Arafat himself was lined up in the sites of an Israeli sniper, but the foolish orders came down from above not to finish him off. Arafat was expelled to Tunia, where he would sit and rot until rescued from his oblivion by Shimon Peres. Meanwhile, the Israeli Left started screaming that Sharon had told a fib. How dare Sharon not let Arafat know the true extent of his plans up front! The Left also claimed Sharon had lied to Begin himself, which Begin denied. The main reason for the conversion of the operation from popular to unpopular, with maybe half the Israeli public opposed in its later stages, was the unexpectedly large number of Israeli military casualties. The total number of dead soldiers was over 700 and roughly the same magnitude as those from the entire Six-Day War. The Left, in its usual revisionism, has by now rewritten history so that the source of the opposition was supposed Israeli shame over the Sabra and Shatilla massacres, in which about 600 or so Palestinians were killed by the Lebanese Christian Phalange militiamen. But at the time, few in Israel felt responsible for those massacres, which were murders of Arabs by other Arabs, not exactly a rare event in Lebanon. No Israelis had killed anyone in Sabra and Shatilla. When Time magazine claimed Sharon had encouraged the Christian militia to carry out he revenge, he sued it for libel and won. The Christian militias had simply gone on a revenge killing spree after their own leader was assassinated, probably by the PLO. Nevertheless, the Israeli Left went on the war path against the Begin government. How dare Sharon and Begin not prevent the Sabra and Shatilla killings!, they bellowed. Those atrocities had been entirely predictable and anticipated, insisted the Left and the Israeli media, and never mind that not a single Leftist nor a single journalist had predicted them! (For a fuller analysis of the operation, see "Peace for Galilee": Success or Failure?," by Eliot A. Cohen, Commentary, November 1984 http://www.commentarymagazine.com/Summaries/V78I5P26-1.htm.) The very same Israeli Left, which a few years later would be screaming that irresponsible rhetoric caused the Rabin assassination ("Rabin was killed by words"), felt not a smidgen of shame nor embarrassment in marching down the boulevards with signs denouncing Begin and Sharon as "war criminals" and "fascists." Seconds after the Israeli Left revealed its rhetorical extremism, it was picked up by every anti-Semitic hooligan in Europe and North America, who marched on campus with similar signs about Israeli "war crimes." It did not take long for the Israeli Left to make the full transition from hatred of the Begin-Sharon government to full anti-Zionism, loathing of their own country, and Jewish self-hatred. It would be difficult to explain the later Oslo debacle had not the Israeli Left, including the Labor Party, made the metamorphosis into becoming parties of Jewish self-loathing and self-embarrassment. The demonization of Ariel Sharon by the Left has continued down to today. The Left and much of the general Israeli public has never forgiven Ariel Sharon for those 700 of so dead Israeli soldiers in the Peace for Galilee Campaign. The Left has also tried to argue that Sharon is personally responsible for all subsequent Israeli losses in the Southern Lebanon Security Zone, which Israel maintained until the cowardly abandonment by Ehud Barak in 2000. There a low-level guerilla war of attrition operated, which I have dubbed "Controlled Carnage", with a few hundred additional Israeli casualties. By mid-1985, the total number had risen to 1215. Others were killed in clashes in the 1990s, during most of which the Labor Party held power. The losses in Lebanon were an excessive price for Israel to pay, believed many Israelis, having grown accustomed to relatively low casualty levels in Israeli wars (low at least compared with wars in other places), and they were totally unforgivable in the minds of the radicalized Left, convinced the entire campaign had been unjustified and that Israel should have responded to the PLO's katyusha rockets by turning the other cheek. Never mind that the losses were far lower than those in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, whose casualties were so high as a direct result of the sheer stupidity and irresponsible naivety of the Labor Party leadership at that time. But the absurdity of the "historic revisionism" of the Leftist Ascendancy and its captive media in Israel is best seen in comparing its righteous outrage over those losses in the "Peace for Galilee" campaign with the carnage produced directly by the Left's own policies starting in 1993. The Oslo "peace process" has by now produced about 1400 murders of Israelis, and tens of thousands of maimed people, broken lives and families. Those 1400 are about twice the losses in the initial Peace for Galilee Campaign itself, and they are considerably higher than the entire set of Israeli losses from 1982-85. No less important, the losses in the Peace for Galilee Campaign were entirely soldiers. Most of those murdered by the Oslo policies of the Left were civilians, and a great many were children. If the high number of Israeli losses in the Peace for Galilee campaign are unforgivable in the eyes of many Israelis, and downright criminal in the view of the radicalized Israeli Left, then what is the Oslo Carnage? Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
SUSPICIOUS UKRAINE ARMS SEIZED BY TURKS ARE EGYPT'S
Posted by IsrAlert, June 6, 2004. |
|
Below are two separate articles.
(1.) "Gul: Egypt claims to own containers [seized with rockets]" This is from Independent Media Review and Analysis (IMRA), whose website address is www.imra.org.il. This news item comes from Turkish Daily News, 5 June 2004 and is archived at www.turkishdailynews.com/FrTDN/latest/for.htm#f8 [IMRA: There is an interesting inconsistency - according to the AP report "Valery Shmarov, director of Ukrspetsexport, the country's arms export monopoly, said that the two containers had "radio-electronic spare parts and equipment for anti-aircraft defense complexes" which were being transported to Egypt under a 1994 long-term contract." - but this is not consistent with the reports that there were rockets in the shipment.] Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said on Friday that the Egyptian government claimed to own the seized weapons in two containers destined for Egypt from the Ukraine. "Egypt owns the weapons. We have started initiatives with the Egyptian government on the issue," said Gul speaking to reporters. Istanbul Customs authorities on Thursday seized a radio-controlled missile and launcher as well as other weapons in two containers destined for Egypt from the Ukraine. The weapons, including a number of rockets and warheads, were discovered when customs officials searched two containers at the port of Ambarli, some 35 kilometers from the city. Tuzmen had noted on Thursday that the first ship's captain had declared it was carrying spare parts. Officials became suspicious after noticing damage to numbers inscribed on the container, he said. "According to international rules, full reports of what is inside the containers should be given. Although these ships are only trans-passing us, they pass through the Straits and we should take the necessary measures. Since there are no reports on the weapons inside the containers, our teams will open all packages in the containers," Tuzmen said. Meanwhile, CNN-Turk reported yesterday that the missile's range was some 35 kilometers. Turkey has boosted security ahead of a NATO summit in Istanbul later this month, which U.S. President George W. Bush and other leaders are scheduled to attend. (2.) This article, "Shipment Seized in Turkey Said Legitimate", is from yahoo news June 5, 2004, and is archived at story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540& ncid=736&e=1&u=/ap/20040605/ap_ on_re_mi_ea/turkey_weapons_shipment ANKARA, Turkey - Two suspicious containers seized in Turkey appear to be a legitimate shipment of spare parts and equipment for Egypt's anti-aircraft defense systems, officials said. Turkey's Foreign Minister Abdullah Gul said Friday that Egyptian officials confirmed ownership of the containers, which originated in Ukraine. The container were en route to Egypt when officials at an Istanbul port noticed discrepancies on the cargo's manifest and changes to their labels, said Kursad Tuzmen, minister for trade and customs. He said the seized shipment contained sophisticated weapons, including a radio-controlled missile and launcher. A senior Turkish government official, who declined to be named, said Friday that the shipment appeared to be legitimate. In Ukraine, Valery Shmarov, director of Ukrspetsexport, the country's arms export monopoly, said that the two containers had "radio-electronic spare parts and equipment for anti-aircraft defense complexes" which were being transported to Egypt under a 1994 long-term contract. He said the load did not contain "any explosives or elements of weapons or equipment that could cause anxiety." A number of people had been detained on suspicion of possible weapons smuggling, the official said, and authorities leading the investigation were trying to determine why the changes to the manifests and labels were made. Gul told reporters Friday that Egypt confirmed that the shipment belonged to it. He said Turkey was in contact with the two countries. On Friday, the daily Sabah claimed that the shipment was traced to Istanbul by NATO through satellites that detected a suspicious shipment from a Ukrainian military depot. That report could not be verified independently. Turkey has boosted security ahead of a NATO summit in Istanbul later this month. President Bush and other leaders are scheduled to attend. Last month, police in the northwestern city of Bursa announced that they had foiled a plan to attack the summit. Courts have charged nine people in that alleged plot. Four truck bombings blamed on a Turkish al-Qaida cell killed more than 60 people in Istanbul in November. A court has charged 69 suspects in connection with those bombings. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
THE DE-JUDAIZING OF ISRAEL
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 6, 2004. |
|
For centuries there has been an effort to de-Judaize Eretz Yisrael and take away the mystique of one G-d in Covenant with the Jewish people. If one goes back in history, you will find many nations, along with the keepers of their respective religions, dedicated to dismissing the fact that the Jews are G-d's chosen servants. Christians, Muslims and, yes, even Jews wishing to escape their obligations under G-d and the hostility this responsibility brought to them. There is not enough paper to detail the numerous gods, demons, underworld deities that man has conjured up to overwhelm the One G-d of the Jews. Generally, the method of choice was invading what was believed to be the power center and earthly dwelling of this elusive, invisible G-d. With that goal, the various invading forces always tried to enlist the Jews to accept or join their own god-head or heads, thereby attaching their lineage from Abraham or going back even further to Adam and Eve or Noah. This would seal their claim to be the rightful heirs to G-d's Covenant, plus 'koshering' the various god/s they worshiped. When the Jews (inevitably) did not accept their other gods, they were killed in staggering numbers. Yet, they continued to exist, rebuild their lives and worship One G-d. However, from time immemorial, there were always some Jews who wished to abandon this One demanding G-d. Many just assimilated and either joined a prevailing religion to escape the threat of death and/or torture - or simply made themselves invisible with non religion. Then there were those quasi-Jews who dedicated themselves to "normalizing" observant Jews. In this context, "normalization" meant abandoning Torah law, customs of praying, customs of dress and even intermarrying with the other. They accepted their Jewishness, but in name only. They did not believe in or honor this One G-d and they despised those who did and worked diligently to disenfranchise the observant Jews. They wanted to be or to be in a nation which belonged to no specific religion although in practice, they honored other religions - just not their own. Other religions were deferred to and their practices given a high place of honor or acceptance. But, Jewishness was looked down upon and even hated. For them Torah Judaism was a primitive and unacceptable way to live. In order to advance their doctrine of 'no religion', they made every effort to destroy or denigrate the national memory of the Jewish people. All places of worship were to be disposed of by any means possible. Giving up what observant Jews considered Holy was a prime objective. When then Defense Minister Moshe Dayan gave up the keys to the Temple Mount of King Solomon's Temple to the Arab Muslim Waqf after Jerusalem was liberated and reunited in 1967, most observant Jews thought this must be merely bad judgement. Indeed, it was very bad judgement that was planned long before Jerusalem was re-taken. This most Holy center of world Judaism was not to be allowed to fall into the hands of observant Jews. Nothing so singularly vital to Jewry must be permitted as a rallying point where Torah Judaism would re-invigorate the Jewish people's belief in One G-d. This would be a disaster for the non-believers who would concurrently lose their political power to the priests of Solomon's Temple. Be assured, if the Ark of the Covenant was first discovered by these non-Jewish Jews, they would smash it to pieces and then burn the pieces. There is a cult of non-believers and they make no effort to hide themselves. Presently, a short list would include Shimon Peres, Yossi Beilin, Tommy Lapid, Yossi Sarid, Ehud Olmert, Bibi Netanyahu, Ehud Barak, Arik Sharon and a host of appointed military and/or intelligence directors who are non-Jewish Jews and who have established their own anti-Jewish cult. Giving away the Temple Mount in 1967, the Jericho synagogue and Joseph's Tomb in 1993, 80% of Hebron including 'sharing' religious worship at the Cave of the Machpelah (Cave of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs), endangering Kever Rahel, the Mount of Olives ancient Jewish cemetery... is all no accident or case of bad judgement. This all is deliberate and discussed at length by those who would de-Judaize Israel. Giving away the Land of YESHA (Judea, Samaria and Gaza) is similarly not an accident. It is a doctrine which links up to a cabal who has for centuries made every attempt to dispose of the Jewishness of their own people, the Jews. These non-Jewish Jews try to give away anything remotely connected to what is known as Jewish history and antiquity. Other religions are willing to take whatever is abandoned and incorporate it within their religions because they feel the power of these ancient Jewish historical treasures more than the non-Jewish Jews do. Both are frustrated because there are Jews who continue to remain observant, maintain their national memory and honor such places as the Temple of Solomon, the Torah Laws, the Tombs of Abraham, Sara, Isaac, Leah, Yaakov and Rivka, the city of Jerusalem, the other Holy cities like Safed, and holy places like Joseph's Tomb in the captured city of Schehem (Nablus). And, Thank G-d, many, many Jews are returning to their traditions and discovering what a rich history and brilliant treasures are waiting for them in the Torah and the Holy Places. But, all the non-Jewish Jews hate them for it. It invalidates their zeal for the secular, hedonistic life on the non-Jew. This includes those mentioned above plus many other anti-Jewish Jewish organizations such as Peace Now, B'tselem, Women-in-Black, Gush Shalom, International Solidarity Movement and countless others. At the moment Israel's Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon has come fully out of his tight fitting closet to make his lack of observance and his aberrant anti-Jewish behavior known to all. He desperately wants to divest Israel of all the remaining symbols of Torah Judaism which rests in the Land and her Holy Places. Much of it has already been abandoned to Islam. The Holy Jewish Temple Mount, Joseph's Tomb, the Cave of the Machpelah in Hebron, the Jericho ancient synagogue.... Soon Sharon will be joined by the rest of the hostile anti-Jewish Jewish cult in giving up Land east of Jerusalem up to the Jordan River. Sharon is returning to Egypt as was the desire of the Jewish slaves and what came to be known as the "Erev Rav" (non-Jewish trash of Egypt who Moses allowed to accompany the Jews in their Exodus out of Egypt). Sharon has foolishly invited the Egyptian Army to Israel's borders and has similarly invited the Jordanians to bring their troops into what is called YESHA (Yehuda, Shomron and Gaza). None of this is accidental as this black non-Jewish cult tries to ingratiate themselves with another anti-Jewish dynasty in America. The European Union has in the past and will now play a leading part in this black priest cult to destroy Judaism and the Jewish people. When they were unsuccessful in eliminating their Jewish citizens, they followed them across the Mediterranean Sea to continue their genocide in Israel, the ancient and modern Jewish homeland. We now see the Bush family dynasty join these non-believers in undermining the Jewish nation in deference to the Arab oil nations. Both the Arabs and the Europeans were willing partners in the obliteration of the last remnant who escaped their hands in the last century. Now, they have new and enthusiastic partners among the non-Jewish Jews in Israel and around the world. While each professed a different reason in eliminating either the Jewish State - or, at least - its Jewishness, in the end, they were of the same mind. It is always possible for the observant Jews to awaken from their stupor and cast out those non-Jewish Jews from power. I fear that first they must suffer a great deal more before their mind-set of denial is cleansed. 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). |
|
WHO DOES POWELL THINK HE'S KIDDING?
Posted by Michael Freund, June 5, 2004. |
|
Colin Powell has got some nerve. After a week in which 13 young Israeli soldiers had been killed by Palestinian terrorists, who then paraded the body parts of their victims through the streets of Gaza, the US secretary of state could find nothing better to do than to cozy up to the Palestinians and criticize Israel. Shortly after arriving in Jordan this past Saturday, Powell met with the Palestinian leadership. Afterwards, he told reporters that he was pleased to have had a "constructive talk" with Palestinian premier Ahmed Qurei, along with "my colleague Nabil Shaath and so many other of my good friends from the Palestinian Authority." His "good friends"? This is the same Palestinian Authority that has been waging a terrorist war against Israel since September 2000 and which is directly responsible for the deaths of hundreds of innocent men, women, and children. It is the same entity that Powell's own State Department, in its recently released report on Patterns of Global Terrorism, has linked to acts of terror against the Jewish state. And this is whom Powell considers to be his "good friends"? Not only that, but in his remarks to the press, with a smiling Qurei standing at his side, Powell did not even bother to mention the horrific events of the preceding week. He did not see fit to condemn the Palestinians' vile desecration of Israel's dead, nor did he denounce their ongoing efforts to carry out attacks against the Jewish state. Indeed, not once did Powell even mention the word "terrorism." As if that weren't bad enough, Powell followed up this appalling performance with an even more shameful one the next day. Speaking Sunday at a news conference at the World Economic Forum on Jordan's Dead Sea coast, Powell slammed Israel for demolishing Palestinian structures in Gaza that have been used to stage attacks on Israel's soldiers. "We know that Israel has a right for self-defense," Powell said, "but the kind of action they are taking in Rafah with the destruction of Palestinian homes, we oppose. We don't think that that is productive," he added. That Palestinian terrorists use these very same houses to attack and kill Jews doesn't seem to move Powell one whit, nor does he seem troubled by the fact that his "good friends" in the Palestinian Authority utilize the area to smuggle in weapons from Egypt. On those issues, he is strangely silent. And yet when Israel seeks to thwart such efforts by expanding the Philadelphi Route, as the area between Rafah and the Egyptian border is known, Powell suddenly finds his voice and lambasts the Jewish state for daring to defend itself. NEEDLESS TO say, this is hardly the first time that Powell has chosen to denigrate Israel. Two years ago, while testifying before Congress, he outrageously accused Israel of trying to solve the Mideast conflict by killing as many Palestinians as possible. "Prime Minister Sharon has to take a hard look at his policies to see whether they will work," Powell said. "If you declare war against the Palestinians thinking that you can solve the problem by seeing how many Palestinians can be killed, I don't think that leads us anywhere" (New York Times, March 7, 2002). In April 2001, after IDF troops entered Gaza to stop Palestinian mortar attacks against Sderot, Powell responded by rebuking Israel, saying that its actions were "excessive and disproportionate" as if there was something wrong in Israel's attempting to protect itself. But what is truly remarkable about Powell's latest broadside over Israel's destruction of Palestinian homes in Gaza is its sheer unvarnished hypocrisy. After all, it was just 15 short years ago that a certain American general named Colin Powell oversaw the US invasion of Panama in late December 1989. In the initial days of the war, US forces bombarded the El Chorrillo neighborhood of Panama City, where the headquarters of the Panamanian Defense Forces were located alongside the homes of thousands of innocent civilians. According to a report prepared by the UN Economic and Social Council, the result of the US attack on El Chorrillo was that "several blocks of apartments were totally destroyed, as a result of which their inhabitants were forced to seek alternative accommodation, often at a great distance from their former dwelling. Other buildings suffered severe damage." By the UN's estimate, the homes of at least 2,723 Panamanian families, totaling approximately 13,500 people, were affected. An April 7, 1991, the Human Rights Watch report was even more blunt, referring to "the devastation" of El Chorrillo and asserting that Powell's forces had "violated the rule of proportionality, which mandates that the risk of harm to impermissible targets be weighed against the military necessity of the objective pursued." Now, isn't that ironic. The same Colin Powell who blasted Panamanians out of their homes 15 years ago to protect American troops now chooses to criticize Israel for doing the very same thing. Who does he think he's kidding? But let Powell complain all he wants. Israel has no choice but to safeguard its citizens, regardless of what the secretary of state and his "good friends" the Palestinians might think. The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu. |
|
SHARON IS A DICTATOR - ALL DOUBT DISPELLED
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 4, 2004. |
|
Even the most Left of the Left will now see that Israel's Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon has cast aside all disguise and shows himself as equal to any dictator in the region. Today, June 4th, Sharon dismissed two Cabinet members, Rabbi Beni Elon and Avigdor Lieberman of the National Union Party who had declared they would vote against Sharon's plan of national suicide to ethnically cleanse Jews from their own homes. The Arab Muslim Palestinians and countries will view Sharon's planned "Disengagement" as weakness - not as a rational compromise - and theywill act accordingly. Israel will be vulnerable in the South, East, North and heartland of Israel to incursions by homicidal Muslim Arab Terrorists and even a coalition of Arab States' Armed Forces. Will we again see more of those of the Right meeting with road accidents, drive-by shootings, homicide bombings (courtesy of well-informed Arab Muslim Palestinian Terrorists)? Clearly, Sharon has exposed his dictatorial nature and has also shown himself to be owned by the Bush family dynasty. Never again will Sharon have to go through the pretense of consulting with either his Cabinet, the Knesset or the Israeli people. Anyone who runs afoul of Sharon can expect the worst sort of treatment from him. We have all watched with no surprise when Arab dictators dismiss their Parliament if they exhibit only a hint of defiance. Sharon has adopted the regional nature of dictators which seems to have always been his nature. His rogue nature won wars when he was fighting the Arab nations and their proxy Arab Muslim Terrorists. Now, that same rogue nature has turned him against the Jewish people and what once was his democratic nation. We all thought winning wars would also make him a good and wise political leader. We were wrong, as Sharon shames himself, his family and his ancestors, leaving a legacy of perfidy. Sharon cannot be trusted as his aberrant nature deteriorates further. He is twisty and clever. Having fired two of the objectors: Elon and Lieberman (so far), he knows that it is likely others will simply resign, leaving a hole to be filled with his fellow co-conspirators Peres and Beilin. Sharon, his shadow Leftist Party partners and the Bush Administration have set in motion a pre-planned 'coup d'etat'. His crude method of rule is only marginally slicker than what occurs regularly among Arab and/or African tribal leaders. The Left may temporarily cheer Sharon's swing to the Left - until they also come under Sharon's dictatorial hammer. If the Israeli people, both Right and Left, do not rid themselves of this self-styled dictator, they will find themselves enslaved on all other points of legislation. Sharon is no longer a leader representing his people but a man strictly for himself and those lackeys who obey his every wish. Let us see who remains firmly connected to this power-monger after his arrogant grasp of power. So, Arik, what is your next treacherous move? Who will you eject from the country and who will be denied entry - based upon their politics? You shot down the only radio station, Arutz Sheva (7), who spoke in favor of nationalistic policies and thus had to be silenced. Now, faithful listeners world-wide can still get Arutz 7 in Email or audio on their computers We observed that Tom Rose, the publisher of the Jerusalem Post was dismissed, perhaps because of his conservative Right Nationalistic editorial views which, like Arutz 7, wouldn't have helped you push forward your plans for ethnic cleansing of Jews. How many leaders of the Right will be imprisoned under Administrative Detention with no court hearings before you assault the settlers in their homes? When you assign the Yatom (special squad of the IDF) soldier to attack and uproot the settlers, will they be allowed to stay anonymous as before under Rabin and Peres (no name tags, no photos, no videos allowed)? The Yatom brigade are men (and women) who were first selected by Rabin and Peres for their lack of Jewishness, no relatives in YESHA (Yehuda, Shomron and Gaza) and their absence of conscience when mistreating Jews (too much like Hitler's Gestapo SS). Generalissimo Sharon, will you cut off the water, electricity and security protection from the 250,000 men, women and children who live in YESHA before your assault to uproot them - while keeping your commitment to President George Bush to provide water, electricity - even homes, schools, synagogues (to be converted into Muslim mosques), farms, factories and businesses to the incoming Arab Muslim Paletinian Terrorists? Arik, you are the personification of evil today. Hopefully, HaShem, will deal with you and your co-conspirators in His wisdom. May no Jew lift his hand against you, for to do so would contaminate their souls. President Bush, if you continue to work against G-d's promise of the Land of Israel to the Jewish people, you will inevitably be a one-term President - as was your father for the same reasons of betraying Israel. For what you are doing, you will carry the mark of Cain for the rest of your life - may you live long! Dear Christian friends of Israel, know that PM Sharon is on the Bush family dynasty leash in this treachery. Ignore the Bush facade of finding G-d and push him out of office as he is pushing the Jews out of their homes and G-d's promise of their Homeland, Israel. Hopefully, the people - Right and Left - will show up in the Rose Garden, Jerusalem, outside the Prime Minister's office Sunday June 6th during the Cabinet meeting at 9:30 AM with horns and shofars. There is a permit for a protest demonstration. Stamp the ground so that the Cabinet members inside can hear and the walls of their short-sighted planning will fall - just as they did in Jericho. Protest Sharon's rule by force, rather than reason. Run this dictator out of office. 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). |
|
BECOME A PRESS AMBASSADOR FOR ISRAEL
Posted by Shoshana S. Cardin, June 4, 2004. |
|
We are very excited to announce that already 129 terrific pro-Israel
leaders, professionals and activists have signed up to serve as Press
Ambassadors. The folks will go through an intense "media boot camp"
June 27-29th in Washington, DC sponsored by The Israel Project,
Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations,
Jewish Council for Public Affairs, and United Jewish Communities.
Following the training, Press Ambassadors will work with local teams
to meet with journalists back home in order to improve how Israel is
seen in the media. However, more help is needed!
71 more volunteers are needed BEFORE the training in order to give this program the strength it needs. Would you consider volunteering? Are their people in your community who would be the right folks to do this who you can encourage to get involved? CRC directors and leaders? Hillel leaders and staff? Synagogue Israel advocacy chairs? Passionate and articulate supporters of Israel? Federation leaders, Wexner or Birthright graduates and more? To find out more about the program and how you/your community can get involved, we invite you to join us for one of the two conference calls below and to read a note from the National Chair of Press Ambassadors for Israel, Shoshana S. Cardin. The first call is Wednesday, June 9, 2004, at 2:00 p.m. EDST with:
Shoshana Cardin, Chair, TIP's Press Ambassadors for Israel, Past
Chairman, Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish
Organizations; Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, Founder & President, The Israel
Project.
The second call is Friday, June 18, 2004, at 11:00 a.m. EDST. On
the call will be: Shoshana Cardin, Chair, TIP's Press Ambassadors for
Israel, Past Chairman, Conference of Presidents of Major American
Jewish Organizations; Jennifer Laszlo Mizrahi, Founder & President, The
Israel Project; Gail Hyman, Senior Vice President, Communications, UJC;
Hannah Rosenthal, Executive Director of JCPA.
On the Call You Will Find Out How to Get:
Learn how you or members of your community can become a PRESS AMBASSADOR and why this is so important for your community, as well as protecting Israel and the Jewish people. Please call in approximately ten minutes early so that the operator can get everyone into the calls on time. RSVP REQUIRED! There is a presentation you will need to get for the call. Please email meaganw@theisraelproject.org with your name and where you are from so we can get you the presentation before the call. Thanks! Open Letter from Shoshana S. Cardin Dear Friend of Israel, |
|
SLA SOLDIERS DENIED GUN PERMITS
Posted by IsrAlert, June 4, 2004. |
|
Former South Lebanon Army soldiers fought alongside IDF but cannot
work as security guards because they've been denied gun permits.
Gil Horev wrote this article for Maariv and it's archived at
www.maarivintl.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=printArticle&articleID=8159
Former South Lebanon Army (SLA) soldiers, who fought alongside the IDF in Lebanon, are complaining that they cannot get jobs as security guards in Israel because they are denied a gun permit. According to Israeli law, only citizens or permanent residents are eligible for the permits. As a result, SLA soldiers, who were only granted temporary residency, are unable to secure a permit. Last year, following a wave of terror attacks on buses, SLA soldiers were interested in joining the public transportation security service. Transportation Minister Avigdor Lieberman agreed and offered his assistance in resolving the gun permit issue. However, when the former soldiers submitted an application for the job they were told they are ineligible for the job because they do not have gun permits. Saliman, a 40 year-old SLA soldier currently residing in Kiryat Shmona says that he attempted to find a job in agriculture but is too old. "What are we asking for?", he says, "only that we get a gun permit so we can find a job" Meanwhile, 36 year-old Milad says: "I wanted to work in what I do best - security. In Lebanon I was good enough to protect the State of Israel and now I'm not?" The Interior Ministry says that by law gun permits are given only to Israeli citizens or permanent residents, but noted that in October 2001 the government decided that the restrictions on SLA soldiers be eased due to the complexity of the issue. IN addition, it was decided that the former soldiers be employed as security guards at government offices. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
IF EGYPT WERE JORDAN
Posted by IsrAlert, June 4, 2004. |
|
This article was written by Amir Oren and appeared in Haaretz today.
It is archived at www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/435191.html
It's not only in the Eurovision Song Contest and the basketball and soccer leagues - in the eyes of the U.S. army, too, Israel is situated in Europe. Up until March, Syria and Lebanon were also on that continent, until President George W. Bush discreetly uprooted them in a decision that produced no reverberations. The decision means that the two countries were moved from the army's European Command (EUCOM) to the central command (CENTCOM), which is responsible for countries such as Egypt, Jordan, Iran, Iraq and Saudi Arabia. "Politically, culturally and militarily," a senior official explained to the Pentagon press service, "Syria and Lebanon are more oriented to the countries of CENTCOM," while Israel is more aligned with Europe. Bush's decision effectively put an end - at least for the next two years during which the U.S. Unified Command plan will not be updated - to the disagreement over placing Israel and the Arab states. Israel was seen as part of Europe in scenarios for a third world war, where it would serve as the Middle Eastern wing of the Sixth Fleet's battle against the Soviets. In the 1980s, the same U.S. fleet operated against targets in Syria and Lebanon. In American eyes, Israel is included in the list of 13 "Major Non-NATO Allies" outside the European continent. Since the Americans have been encouraging security cooperation between two of EUCOM's Middle Eastern members (Israel and Turkey) and one CENTCOM country (Jordan), the true meaning of leaving Israel in the army's European command has nothing to with relations between Israel and Jordan, nor with the possibility of an outbreak of violence on the northern Syria-Lebanon-Hezbollah front, which the Americans see as part of the ongoing campaign in Iraq and the one that could open in Iran. The meaning is that Egypt is not to be trusted - not in Rafah, not in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and not in any political initiatives in the region. Sharon's public relations efforts for his Gaza disengagement plan create the false impression that the Egyptians are close to being convinced that they had better accept a certain amount of responsibility for the Palestinian wild west along the coastline Strip. The accumulated experience with Egypt proves that Israel's salvation will not come from Cairo. If Jordan were in control of Gaza, with a port that would allow it access to the Mediterranean Sea and with the legacy of Black September in the background, the Israel Defense Forces could forgo its control of the Philadelphi route. If Egypt were Jordan, and security forces loyal to Hosni Mubarak were securing the border like the Jordanian army does, preventing infiltration attempts, Israel could afford to get rid of Gaza. The danger to Israelis serving in official positions in Cairo and Amman is similar, and so is Mubarak and King Abdullah's fear of extremist Islamic forces, local and Palestinian, which threaten their regimes. However, what the Jordanians are doing with meticulous care, the Egyptians refuse to do; and since they can, the conclusion is that they don't want to. Egypt does not want to go to war with Israel, but it finds continuous Israeli bleeding convenient; otherwise, Mubarak would have pressured Yasser Arafat four years ago at Camp David to reach a settlement with Ehud Barak. Egypt, whose internal problems are threatening to topple its regime, is contending with Israel for leadership of the region, and it knows that a stable, lasting peace will position Israel and Palestine's combined, thriving economy at the forefront of the Middle East. The demand that Israel dismantle the weapons that Egypt does not possess - namely, the nuclear ones - receives American support in principle, but only on condition that a "political agreement providing safe and secure borders for the parties" be achieved first, as John Wolf, U.S. assistant secretary at the State Department's Bureau for Nonproliferation said a month ago in New York. The frequent contacts between Sharon, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, Mossad chief Meir Dagan, Shin Bet security service head Avi Dichter and others with Egyptian intelligence chief Omar Suleiman give a positive wrapping to a problematic content. So do the talks by Mubarak, Foreign Minister Ahmed Maher and others with senior Israeli officials other than Sharon, as well as with Arafat, Muhammad Dahlan and other Palestinians. These talks are meant to portray Egypt in Washington as striving for progress in the Israeli-Palestine conflict. It is indeed a spectacle of handshakes and reclining on sofas, because in Cairo they know that real negotiations are held only with the prime minister. The schedule for the contacts is set according to the Egyptians' whims, signaling which side is calling the shots. War with Egypt? Ahead of this week's government discussion, Sharon intimidated the heads of the army and the Shin Bet with the veiled threat that they may be blamed for the failure of his plan if they dare come out against it. The security officials understood the hint and tried to change the format and tone without appearing spineless. They sounded like salespeople who market their goods a little differently to various potential buyers: "Cheap, yet of high quality," to one, "high quality, but cheap," to another. In contradiction to exaggerated reports by ministers loyal to Sharon, the security chiefs didn't join forces to help the prime minister, but it was enough for him that they didn't all stand up against him. It is no coincidence that GOC Southern Command Dan Harel, who consistently objected to the plan, was absent from the list of those invited to give their military point of view on the future of the region under his direct command. The IDF believes that Egypt wants to position itself as a pro-American regional superpower that shies away from war with Israel but competes with it for leadership of the region. The army also believes that the Egyptian army is preparing itself for the possibility of moving into Sinai, in contradiction to the peace agreement. The Suez Canal will be the major obstacle in the Egyptian army's movement into the peninsula as part of an all-out Arab campaign, with the aim of fighting in the desert toward the Negev, or at least forcing a substantial number of the IDF's southern divisions to remain in the region rather then fight on other fronts. A violation of the peace agreement without actually using the military will force Israel, unless it manages to achieve a military victory within a week on the other fronts (Palestinian or northern) to choose between ignoring Egypt and focusing on the other fronts, or taking up the Egyptian challenge. The second alternative is known as the "rendezvous scenario" - while the Egyptian army moves east from Sinai's demilitarized zone A, the IDF will move west. The Egyptians have been positioning low-level regional policing forces in zones A and B. Their aim is to gather intelligence on IDF patrol activity in peacetime, and on major military offensive efforts during a war. In recent years these forces have been storing fuel, but not water or ammunition, for fighting along the main routes along which they believe the IDF armored forces will move. Stopping this movement has been practiced with the use of Special Forces highly equipped with antitank and night vision equipment. The hope is for an American intervention that will stop both sides, prevent a deterioration of the situation, restore things to their former position and prevent a violent breakout. But there is no certainty that this will actually happen. The IDF fears that a war with Egypt, perhaps in a post-Mubarak period, is not a wild hallucination. The Israeli objective that will be presented to the government in the event that such a war breaks out, will be inflicting severe damage on Egyptian military hardware (mostly air force) but not troops, as well as a temporary takeover of the Ras Muhammad / El Arish line, in order to gain the option of returning the western part of Sinai in exchange for reinstating the agreement. Agents of the sides In the Philadelphi tunnels, there is no need for observing, there is a need for fighting, a senior IDF officer who has reservations about the security-related aspects of Sharon's plan said this week. He added that the Egyptians, or anyone else for that matter, would at the most send inspectors who would write reports, not soldiers that would kill and be killed. The only Israeli border that does not host international observers belonging to the United Nations or other multinational organizations is the Jordanian border. Israel and Syria are separated by the UNDOF observers, while Lebanon is home to UNIFIL. On both sides of the Israeli-Egyptian border, the Multinational Force and Observers (MFO) carries out its patrols under joint American-Israeli-Egyptian funding ($50 million a year), headed by an American director general - a former diplomat who sits in Rome - and commanded by an officer from another country - currently Italy's General Roberto Martinelli - whose headquarters is located at the El-Gorah base near Rafah. The multinational force has shrunk over the years from 2,700 soldiers to some 1,700. It has three infantry battalions from the U.S., Colombia and Fiji, a maintenance-support battalion, American helicopters and Italian patrol boats at the Tiran Straits. When the force was first set up, Sharm al-Sheikh was considered the most sensitive spot, which had brought about two wars. The American battalion was therefore positioned in the south, enjoying a private beach of its own for swimming, scuba diving and tanning. The Colombian battalion patrols the central Sinai region, while the soldiers from Fiji are responsible for the north, including the outskirts of Egyptian Rafah. The force's position in Rafah, opposite the Dahaniya airport to the north of the Kerem Shalom checkpoint, has been manned regularly since October 2000. A Pentagon delegation offered improvements in the position as well as the rest of the force's defenses against Palestinian attacks. A company of Fijians is stationed at the Rafah base, on alert. So far they have not been called to protect the multinational patrols. A senior official with the multinational force was asked this week whether the force would be able to expand its activities to the Philadelphi route, which is an integral part of the security Appendix D of the Israeli-Egyptian peace agreement. IDF forces in this area were meant to be restricted to a mechanized brigade on the other side of the Egyptian border. According to the appendix - signed on Israel's side by Major General Avraham Tamir - the width of area D was to be three kilometers, meaning deep into Palestinian Rafah. In the Oslo Accords, Israel waived this width and agreed to limit itself to the few dozen meters of the Philadelphi route. Since the beginning of the October 2000 confrontations, Israel no longer strictly abides by the understandings concerning the width and the restriction of military presence in the area. But Tamir and others warn against the temptation to reopen the peace agreement with Egypt in order to beef up the Egyptian military presence, in exchange for Cairo's keeping an eye on the Rafah free-trade tunnel zone. "We, as is well known, are the agents of the sides," said a multinational force member. "If they want us to operate there, and agree between themselves, we can discuss it. Until now we have not been asked to do so." The main obstacle: The Palestinians are not a party to the multinational force, and it's hard to believe that Fijian soldiers who came to make a living by watching the dunes of Sinai, will risk their lives in battles against Hamas and Islamic Jihad. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
ROOTS AND WINGS
Posted by Israel National News, June 4, 2004. |
|
In Jerusalem, the Ingeborg Rennert Center for Jerusalem Studies of
Bar-Ilan University awarded this year the prestigious Guardian of Zion
Award to film producer Arthur Cohn. Previous recipients of this award
include Dr. Elie Wiesel, Herman Wouk, Charles Krauthammer and Sir
Martin Gilbert. Arthur Cohn, the only producer to have won six Academy
Awards, is the only foreign producer ever honored with a star on
Hollywood's "Walk of Fame". His Academy Award winning films include
"The Garden of the Finzi-Contini" and "One Day in September." Below
are some excerpts of the distinguished Rennert Lecture, this year
delivered by Arthur Cohn. The full address is posted on the website at
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=3763.
The earliest memories of every Jew are tied to Jerusalem. Jerusalem is mentioned repeatedly in our daily prayers and in the Grace after Meals. In our most supreme moment of happiness, at a wedding, we break a glass, because no joy can be complete while the Temple remains unbuilt, and the bridegroom vows festively, "If I forget thee, O Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its cunning". Each year, three entire weeks - culminating in the fast of Tisha B'Av - are devoted to mourning the destruction of Jerusalem. Jerusalem is mentioned no fewer than 667 times in the Bible - and not even once in the Koran. Both Yom Kippur and the Passover night seder, which are celebrated almost universally, even by assimilated Jews, close with the fervent hope: "Next Year in Jerusalem." This "Jerusalem-orientation" of the Jewish people even finds expression in the fact that no matter where they are, Jews face Jerusalem to pray. In contrast, when Egypt's President Sadat visited the Temple Mount, he turned his face in prayer to Mecca - and his back to Jerusalem. The roots of every Jew are embedded in this city. The Israeli writer S. I. Agnon, a native of Buczacz, in Galicia, was indeed correct when he announced, upon receiving the Nobel Prize, that he was born in Jerusalem. I never created a professional work about Jerusalem. I didn't write about Jerusalem in the days I worked as a journalist; nor, did I, as a producer, make any films about the city. Nevertheless, Jerusalem is an integral part of all of my creations. Such is the power of Jerusalem that it gives every Jew an energizing flow of Jewish spirituality that inspires all his creative works, consciously and subconsciously. Jerusalem, it seems to me, symbolizes three basic elements in our collective consciousness: identification with the Jewish tradition, yearning for the Land of Israel, and a desire for a divinely inspired, just society. In recent generations, Jews have been able to give concrete expression to their loyalty to Jerusalem. Zionism deals with the renewal of the bond between the people of Israel and their land and language. But, as far back as close to a century ago, the Arab residents of the region initiated savage terror attacks against Jews wishing to settle in the Land of Israel. Contrary to often repeated claims, terror did not begin after the Six-Day War. The PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization), which later was to metamorphose into the Palestinian Authority, was established three years earlier, in 1964, when there were no so-called "occupied" territories to liberate. My film One Day in September about the Israeli athletes who were murdered in Munich in 1972, deals with terror, a topic that began to attract world attention only in recent years, notably after September 11, 2001. It was with great emotional difficulty that I decided prior to the release of the film to include at its end an authentic interview with the last surviving terrorist of the terror team in Munich, whom we located in a hiding place in Africa. His words, however, proved tragically correct. He stated: "I do not regret our attack at the Olympic Games. We succeeded brilliantly in bringing the political aims of the Palestinians to the knowledge of untold millions all over the world." Terror, which sabotages our lives in every possible way, unfortunately is succeeding in winning the sympathy of public opinion in its war against Israel. The film One Day in September warns against the destruction of the Zionist dream as a result of physical terror. But it doesn't mention a terror that is possibly even worse: ideological terror. Recent years have witnessed an alarming explosion of insidious, sophisticated Arab propaganda that has been delegitimizing the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel. This attitude can be summarized by the phrase in a Palestinian schoolbook for the sixth grade which says explicitly: "The argument that Jews have historic rights in Palestine is the greatest lie in human history." According to a study by Dr. Yitzhak Reiter, conducted for the Jerusalem Institute for Israel Studies, even the history of Jerusalem has gradually been rewritten. The claim that Jews have no real connection to Jerusalem and its holy sites has been adopted by the Palestinian leadership and has become entrenched in Arab and Muslim communities. At the heart of this new version is the argument that Arabs ruled Jerusalem thousands of years before the Children of Israel. The most amazing element of the new history is the claim that the First and Second Temples are lies fabricated by the Jews. This view was even adopted by the website of the Egyptian Embassy in Washington, which declared that there has never been any archaeological evidence of Jewish life in the Jerusalem of ancient times. No wonder, then, that the Palestinians seize every opportunity to destroy in the most uncivilized way all the precious archaeological artifacts beneath the surface of the Temple Mount. What an irony: No other people except the Jews has ever made Jerusalem its capital, despite its conquest by many imperial powers, but now clear facts are denied and history is rewritten. While history is being rewritten, old myths and libels against Israel and the Jews are being revived - and new ones created. Examples of modern "blood libels" are the poisoning of Arab women and children, the use of the blood of Arab children to bake matza, the dissemination of The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and the denial of the Holocaust. By denying the historic/religious bond between the Jewish people and its land, the Arabs portray the Jewish settlement enterprise in the entire State of Israel as theft of their lands. This includes even those lands on which Jews have lived for generations and those acquired at great cost and sacrifice. Let me stress: Just as the blood libels encouraged the murder of Jews, the contemporary libel that speaks about the theft of the Holy Land by the Zionists and Israel legitimizes acts of terror against the Jews, as "thieves" and "murderers." The most problematic word, "occupation", with all its negative connotations is added to the accusation of "theft" when referring to the lands that came into Israeli hands as a result of the Six-Day War, including even the old City of Jerusalem. Although the so-called "occupied territories" were not taken from legal owners, but from Egypt and Jordan - whose claims to the West Bank were never recognized internationally (and who themselves later relinquished their claims to these areas); despite the fact that they were taken in a defensive war; even though these territories were given in a League of Nations decision (1922) to the Jewish people for habitation and residence; and notwithstanding the fact that the Palestinians, who are demanding these lands, only in recent years discovered their existence as a national entity, they are trying, by the use of the term "occupation", to further delegitimize our right to the Land of Israel. However, the accusation of "theft" in the Arab textbooks and communications media - or, as the Palestinians call it, "The Rape of Palestine" - is applied to the entire State of Israel, with no distinction made between Nablus (Shechem) and Tel Aviv, between Jericho and Haifa. The influence of this historic revisionism, together with the vilification of Israel and Jews, on Arab youth - particularly Palestinian youth - must be of major concern to us. The media, the textbooks, and the sermons in the mosques are fraught with perverse libels and lies that distort both the historic past and the present. They prevent any possibility of coexistence and peace in the foreseeable future and poison the minds of future generations. It is crucial that all those who are faithful to Jerusalem join in the struggle against the anti-Semitic slander that denies the Jewish people's rights to its spiritual heart. Although Israeli society and the Jewish world are divided on many issues, there is a broad consensus on basic matters that must be stressed in every forum and discussion. It is the duty of every responsible Jew to stress emphasizing the basic Jewish and Zionist beliefs that we all share. Jerusalem is a city that unites all of us, the city that must join together the various fractions of the Jewish people and unite them in defending it. Avital Sharansky, in her admirable speech at the mass rally for Jerusalem organized by her husband and the Mayor of Jerusalem, declared forcefully: "Jerusalem is the heart of the Jewish people. The heart is not only the seat of our feelings and emotions, but also pumps vital life-giving blood to the entire organism. Just as dreams of Jerusalem sustained the Jewish people throughout the generations in their darkest moments, today, too, Jerusalem nourishes the Jewish people wherever they may be." If we have no historic-national rights over Jerusalem, if "for thousands of generations, we have dreamt of you" in vain, if Jerusalem does not belong to us, our entire connection with this land is in question. Every person needs both roots and wings. Only he who is nourished by the firm ground of his past can give creative expression to his personal dreams. Nations, too, can only soar to new horizons if they are established on sound foundations. The roots that have bound us to this land for thousands of years are strong and deep and allow us to survive the strongest tempests and to persist in our unique way of life. Thanks to these roots, the Jewish people was able, even after the horrors of the Holocaust, to renew itself and flourish in all paths of life. The winds of time cannot undermine us so long as stability of the foundations of our existence, our Jewish and Zionist roots, remain firm. Therefore, we must protect, with vigor and devotion; the deep roots of our tradition in Zion and Jerusalem. We all must be defenders of Jerusalem. We all are Guardians of Zion. The website address of Arutz-7 - Israel National News - is http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com |
|
REALITY CHECK
Posted by Daily Alert, COP/JCPA, June 4, 2004. |
|
This was written by Mark Steyn and appeared in the Spectator
(http://www.spectator.co.uk).
Here's a headline from Tuesday's Glasgow Herald: 'Saudi Security Forces "Allowed the Killers to Escape".' Hold that thought for a moment. For two-and-three-quarter years now, there's been a continuing debate between, loosely, the 'neoconservatives' and the 'realists'. The old realpolitik crowd dispute that the war on terror is a war at all, except in the debased sense of the 'war on drugs'. That's to say, terror, like drugs, will always be with us, and the best thing to do is manage and contain the situation through the usual long-established mechanisms - a quiet word with Crown Prince Abdullah here, a modest initiative with M. Chirac there. Insofar as I can remember anything Sir Crispin Tickell or Lord Hurd said in these pages a few issues back, that seems to be the gist of it. The problem, as some of us saw it, is that the realists aren't very realistic. Arguably, it's 40 years of Washington realpolitik in the Middle East that gave us 9/11. I said as much here a couple of weeks afterwards, advocating the dismantling of Saudi Arabia, and I've said it on many occasions since. Used to get appreciative notes from chaps at the Pentagon, and even on occasion from the State Department. But not any more. The current thinking is that the neocons have overplayed their hand, with their insane plans to make the world safe for truth, justice and the American way. The US is said to be suffering from 'pre-emption fatigue'. No one's in any mood to liberate Syria or destabilise Iran. According to the Washington Post, 'Kerry Says Global Democracy Is Not His Top Issue'. If Bush wants to play Woodrow Wilson, Kerry's happy to run as Henry Kissinger. Indeed, even Bush seems to be moving to a post-pre-emptive strategy. You get the feeling that if they got wind that North Korea was going to nuke Tokyo on Wednesday, the Administration would wait to see what ideas Jacques and Vlad wanted to kick around at the emergency Security Council meeting on Thursday. The reason for this pre-emption fatigue is, of course, Iraq. The little local difficulties confirm the realists in their belief that restraint, stability, a steady hand on the tiller, etc., are better bets than radical transformation. Sorry, but no sale, effendi. One thing you notice from a casual glance around the world is that just as many people seem to be dying in those places where we're pursuing containment as in those where we're toppling dictators and holding loya jirgas. For example, some 30 people died in various attacks in Iraq on Monday. Bad news, but then what do you expect' It's a notorious quagmire, on the TV round the clock. But then the same day in Karachi 16 people died in one bombing of a Shia mosque, apparently in retaliation for the assassination of a Sunni cleric on Sunday. Last week there were two car bombings in Karachi. Earlier in May, a suicide bomber killed 24 people and injured 125 at another Shia mosque in the city. The Sunni-Shia civil war that the media keep insisting is about to break out in Iraq is already breaking out - in Pakistan, a nuclear state filled with crazy graduates of Saudi madrasahs. Speaking of our friends the Saudis, when the latest group of 'militants' stormed that compound in Khobar the other day they grabbed an Iraqi-American and asked him, 'Are you Muslim or Christian' We don't want to kill Muslims. Show us where the Americans and Westerners live?' Their final tally suggested a somewhat broad definition of 'Americans and Westerners': one American, one Italian, one South African, one Swede, one Egyptian, two Britons, two Sri Lankans, three Filipinos, three Saudis and eight Indians. The British oil executive Michael Hamilton was killed in front of his colleagues from Apicorp (Arab Petroleum Investments) and then dragged through the streets from the back of a car for over a mile. Say what you like about these wacky Islamofascists but they've got it pretty well thought out: desecrate and flaunt the corpses of the big-time infidels; murder the Asian janitors and maids to collapse the support structure of the expat communities; kill the Saudis as a warning to the locals not to collaborate with the foreign devils; and put a big announcement on the Internet declaring that 'our heroic fighters were able, by the grace of God, to raid the locations of the occupying American oil companies... which are plundering the Muslims' resources'. Not a bad day's work. And how did the Saudi authorities react? Well, as is now traditional, the perpetrators got away. Just as the perpetrators of last November's terror attack in Mecca got away, and the terrorists in last August's firefight with police mysteriously disappeared, and the al-Qa'eda members surrounded by the security forces last May managed to shoot their way out. The authorities are ruthlessly efficient when it comes to chasing Saudi schoolgirls who've made the mistake of fleeing without first putting on their head coverings and shooing them back into their burning schoolhouse to perish in the flames. But every time they have some al-Qa'eda-affiliated terrorists surrounded, the bad guys mysteriously fly the coop. What's going on? Either the Saudi police agencies are totally incompetent, as suggested by their high level of casualties on these occasions. Or a significant proportion are hopelessly corrupt and on the take from the terrorists. Or they're under the sway of some of the murkier members of the 'royal' family. Or they're following orders from higher up the chain of command, maybe even from the long-time (three decades) interior minister Prince Nayef himself. It doesn't really matter which one you pick because they all boil down to the same thing - that the urbane Westernised princes in the Savile Row suits who get put up on CNN to assure America that the situation's totally under control cannot deliver. And although Prince Bandar, the oleaginous Washington ambassador, is careful not to say anything too goofy in the US media, back home his dad, Prince Sultan, and his uncles sound nuttier by the day. In November 2002, Prince Nayef insisted that no Saudis were involved in 9/11 and that, in fact, the Jews 'are behind these events'. Nayef sides with the anti-American Wahabi clerics and this was his way of explaining why he wasn't going to crack down on Islamist terrorists, as they clearly have nothing to do with Islamist terrorism. Prince Nayef's half-brother and rival, Crown Prince Abdullah, on the other hand, is the famously pro-American liberal reformer. So last month, when terrorists killed various American, British and Australian expats in the Red Sea town of Yanbu, Abdullah went on state television and said, 'I am 95 per cent sure that Zionism is behind the attacks, for I believe that [the Zionists] play in the minds of those who are committing the attacks.' Hmm. With pro-American liberal reformers like that, who needs anti-American clerical reactionaries? The polite thing among the ex-US ambassadors now shilling for Abdullah on various Saudi-funded think tanks is to ignore any statement that any senior prince tells his own people. We're supposed to agree to overlook what the House of Saud says in Arabic rather than CNN English. My distinguished colleague Bruce Anderson was doing a bit of this the other day, describing Crown Prince Abdullah as 'able'. Several adjectives spring to mind for a man who claims that Zionism has the youth of Saudi Arabia in its grip - 'bonkers' or 'desperate', depending on whether you think he believes it. But 'able' would come pretty low down on my list. This week Magdi Allam of Corriere della Sera advanced an interesting thesis on Abdullah's I-blame-the-Zionists speech. It's explained, say Allam's sources, by a new deal between the House of Saud and al-Qa'eda designed to save their throne. Again, it doesn't especially matter if that's true or not. When a hitherto relatively sane man (by the standards of the region's rulers) starts pandering to the most delusional conspiracy theories of his people, he's not a good long-term proposition. Right now, which would you bet on? That Crown Prince Abdullah, Prince Sultan, Prince Nayef and co's brilliant strategy of denying that there's a problem, buying off the terrorists, letting them escape and saying they're all Zionists will be able to reform their failing state or at least hold the lid on? Or that the current spate of attacks will increase and intensify, driving out Westerners, destabilising the oil markets, undermining the economy and gradually, remorselessly conscripting more and more of the population into al-Qa'eda's ranks? King Fahd is in poor health with short-term memory loss. Fahd's successor, Abdullah, and Abdullah's successor, Sultan, are both pushing 80. Nayef is a whippersnapper in his early seventies and covets the throne himself. What would a death out of sequence do to the balance of power in the House of Saud? And who, honestly, has a clue about how deep al-Qa'eda's tentacles go into the royal family? And, given that it's the Saudi government that funds all the madrasahs that form the ideological backbone of Islamist terrorism, is there any point in pretending that the House of Saud and al-Qa'eda are on opposite sides rather than twin manifestations of the same problem? The West backs the Saudi regime as a bulwark against local destabilisation, in return for which they underwrite destabilisation of the West across the entire planet. Here's another question for the 'realists'. Patrick Bishop (in the Telegraph) says we must keep the House of Saud in power at all costs. But what is the 'House of Saud'' It's 30,000 strong, and half of them are playing both sides. Supporting the House of Saud is like saying you support the Premier League: it's insufficient as a choice. Is it worth keeping a House of Saud led by a reformist Abdullah in power at all costs? Maybe. Is it worth keeping Abdullah when he's abandoned reforms and done a deal with the terrorists? Doubtful. Is it worth keeping the House of Saud in power when they give the throne to Prince Nayef? It's a mistake to think Saudi Arabia can only be lost when President bin Jihad takes over in a revolution. There are all kinds of intermediate stages at which you can lose the country, and the House of Saud is still nominally in charge. Indeed, you can make the case that we've already crossed most of them. In the end, a containment policy plays on your enemy's terms: you're trying to stand still, he makes all the running. That was the lesson of the Nineties: you try to fight a war defensively, you lose. You send the FBI in to look over Khobar Towers as a crime scene, and Prince Nayef obstructs your investigators. You try to lob a couple of cruise missiles at Osama in Afghanistan, and Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence picks them up on the radar and tips him off. That's the world John Kerry wants to return to. There's no reason for Bush to join him there. It's not possible to manage Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Iran, Pakistan, Syria and a myriad of smaller problems indefinitely. So manage the smaller problems and, when it comes to the biggest ones, confront them and fix them. What exactly is 'realist' about continuing to back the Frankensaud monster? The present policy is all but certain to wind up delivering the peninsula and its oil into the hands of Osama's buddies. In one sense, the war on terror is a Saudi civil war which the Saudis cunningly exported to the rest of the world. The trick now is to gift-wrap it and send it back home marked for the attention of Prince Nayef. Given the inevitability of disaster if we stick to a failed containment strategy, how could things be any worse if we went in for some creative disruption? At the very minimum, Washington needs to have solid, detailed contingency plans for securing the oil fields, and making sure the Hashemites are on stand-by to return to Mecca and Medina. Saudi Arabia can't be saved, and the more we postpone reaching that conclusion and acting on it, the messier it's going to be. Whoever you're backing in November, the quiet life isn't on the ballot. The Daily Alert is prepared for the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations (COP) by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). To subscribe, send a blank email to daily-subscribe@dailyalert.org |
|
MEDIA COMPLICITY IN SLANDER
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 4, 2004. |
|
The journalistic standard is to verify allegations from usually reliable sources through two or three other, independent sources. Being totalitarian, jihadist, and imbued with the Arab ethic of deceit, the P.A. is not a reliable source. Nevertheless, most journalists accept its claims without verification. Neither are Israel's verified - the media disregards them, disdains to examine their proof or simply denies it. The media prefers the word of the terrorists. Why the double standard? Because the media is biased, intimidated, or hires Arabs who toe the PLO line. The most recently expose of the media's complicity with P.A. propagandists was over the demolition of houses in Rafah, Gaza. The media and the UN multiplied the incidents twenty-fold, lied about international law, and ignored Israel's justification for the limited demolition it did do. If thousands of Israeli houses in Yesha were to be demolished, the media would thrill over it. Exaggeration of Israeli actions to the point of falsehood, and without reference to Arab causation, is a pattern. Not that long ago, the media and the UN went into paroxysms of outrage over what they called a great massacre that destroyed most of Jenin. Thousands were said to be killed in the battle. The thousands turned out to be about 50. None of Jenin outside of the refugee camp was struck. Within the refugee camp, only a small percentage of buildings were destroyed. Some of that destruction was from Arab booby-trapping of their own people's buildings and cars. The media and the UN let themselves be used to libel Israel. Nor was that the first time. The classical earlier case of exaggeration was during the War in Lebanon. The media then took the word of Arafat's brother, head of the PLO Red Crescent, that Israel had destroyed much of certain ancient cities and sent a couple of hundred thousand refugees onto the roads. These false accusations solidified world public opinion against Israel. Too late, as usual, Israel investigated. It found that the estimate of refugees exceeded the entire population of that area, not all of whom were on the road. In fact, the Lebanese on the road were not fleeing from the Israelis but following them into the areas that the IDF was liberating from the PLO! Most of the cities said to be largely destroyed were almost entirely intact. Much of the destruction there, which fomented revulsion against Israel, had been wreaked during the Lebanese civil war set off by the PLO before Israel invaded. When Israeli forces approached Sidon and Tyre, they gave the population time to assemble in safety on the beaches, away from the anticipated combat. Meanwhile, of course, the PLO had time to dig in or run out. Thus Israel risked its troops' lives and mission to spare civilians, but got accused of slaughtering civilians. The first such story was the one of the War of Independence. Well after the war, Arab propagandists fabricated tales of the refugees all having been expelled by Israel, not that there would have been anything wrong with expelling a nationality vying for control of the country by means of genocide. Just a few were expelled, those threatening key road junctions or border areas. Shortly after the war, the Arabs complained about one of the real reasons for the Arab flight - the Arab generals ordered them to. The other reason is that that is what Arabs do. They expected the victorious Jews to exterminate them. It is what their broadcasts had threatened they would do to the Jews. Part of the Arabs' fear arose from another false tale, that of a massacre at Deir Yassin. Witnesses later denied the story. The story originated from unscrupulous leftist factions seeking to marginalize rightist factions that participated in the battle. The fact that the rightists let all villagers who wished to evacuate from the danger zone leave first was inconvenient to the propaganda, so it was downplayed. Our media is too unreliable to help guide us through these perilous times. The media and our leaders would rather be politically correct than adopt correct policies. Are we in trouble! MISCONCEIVED "BALANCE" & FEAR OF STATING FACTS Complaints ballooned about Columbia University's establishment of a secretly Arab subsidized chair for pro-Arab, anti-Zionist propaganda. In apparent reaction, the University is contemplating a chair for Israel studies and is investigating political intimidation in classrooms. The newspaper report does not assert that the existing chair is totally anti-academic and biased against Israel and the US. Instead, it cites allegations. "One of the most frequent complaints concerning anti-Israel sentiment at Columbia is that professors use their courses to advocate a certain political view, often one that is openly hostile to America and Israel." Again, "Many pro-Israeli people involved with Columbia viewed the recruitment of Mr. Khalidi - who has endorsed the killing of Israeli soldiers in occupied (sic) territories - as further proof of a pro-Palestinian (sic) bias at the school." Joseph Massad taught "Palestinian-Israeli politics and societies. Mr. Massad has compared Israel to Nazi Germany and has said the country does not have the right to exist as a Jewish state." (Jacob Gershman, NY Sun, 6/1, p.3). Is the program biased as charged? The newspaper report is neutral. One can surmise from the criticisms and the quotations of extremist statements that it is. But a newspaper should report facts rather than opinions. Since these facts call for judgment, standards should be presented, so that readers can verify that the judgment is factual. Editors may have their reasons for reticence, but they impoverish journalism. Declining to make forthright statements about the totalitarian Arab enemy of our country and of academic standards, an enemy now engaged more or less in a jihad against us, elevates it to legitimacy. Going further, Columbia U. elevated them to primacy. Columbia and other universities lend themselves to subversion of our country, of Western civilization, and of freedom. Nor would a chair of Israel studies be the answer. First, do not assume that the University would appoint an upholder of Zionism. Many Israeli academics in the social sciences prefer the Arab view and hate the nationalists among their own people. A disloyal or appeasement-minded Israeli would magnify the bias on campus. Second, even if the Israel studies program would pursue Western academic integrity, the answer is not to "balance" the pro-Arab chair with a pro-Israel one. The pro-Arab professors lie, distort, intimidate and may work with terrorists. Fanatical totalitarians sponsored by S. Arabia do not belong on US campuses. Imagine if during the Cold War, Columbia accepted Soviet subsidy! Instead of adding another chair to balance the first one, these Arabs, who are propagandists and agitators rather than fair-minded teachers, should be dismissed. It is one thing to be open-minded between liberals and conservatives. It is another to be open-minded towards totalitarians - they are beyond the Pale. Let there be one program for Middle Eastern studies, and let it be a truly academic one! Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
THE LAST ISRAELI
Posted by IsrAlert, June 3, 2004. |
|
This poem was written by Marge Segal
Gone - knowledge, the wealth of all mankind
A senseless tragedy triggered by a mind so warped
He came upon another and asked,
Descendant of Abraham and Hagar my mother
Just shoot me!" "Oh no" said the soldier, "that's not our teaching
We should make peace." With that the soldier extended his arm to
All body parts were in smithereens
We're mourning! IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
SULLYING THE IVORY TOWER
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, June 3, 2004. |
|
This was written by Glen Feder and appeared as an "Investigative
Project" piece yesterday.
http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/html/article.html?id=3734
Glen Feder works for the Investigative Project as a terrorism analyst.
He is an advanced PhD. candidate in Political Science at Boston
College and L'Ecole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales in Paris,
France.
At the world famous Massachusetts Institute of Technology (M.I.T), a group called The New England Committee to Defend Palestine has been given rooms and auditorium halls to organize its protests and hold conferences for several years. An advertisement on their web site for their most recent protest on April 8th of this year states: "The Iraqi uprising against the Anglo-American Colonialist forces and their mercenary death squads (so called civilian contractors) is a natural reaction to the brutality and unjust nature of the occupation." At an anti-Zionist conference that the NECDP held last year at M.I.T, the revisionist "historian" Lenni Brenner called Judaism "the mother of all segregationist ideologies." Examples like these point to an alarming trend towards preaching hate in our nation's college campuses, and a few professors and administrators at some of the most respected universities in the world, based in Boston, are turning a blind eye. In many cases, this is not out of an endorsement for a particular position. Quite the contrary- it is out of their faith in a theory which has been dominant in American Universities since the 1960's: cultural relativism. Nine months after 9/11, a Harvard graduate student wrote an article in protest of a controversial Harvard University graduation speech originally entitled "American Jihad" given by Zayed Yasin, former president of Harvard Islamic Society. This graduate student articulated well the source of blind willingness that leads some respected university professors and administrators to open their prestigious doors to extremist groups: "The most consistent message that I have heard from professors and students is that everything is relative--reality is a personal, cultural construct, and therefore there is no way to distinguish between right and wrong, moral and immoral. I believed that following the attack on America students and professors would recognize that some wrongs are absolutely wrong, that, at least in some cases, there is no moral ambiguity. As is evident by the choice of graduation speech, however, the reality of thousands dying in the hallways of the World Trade Center and the Pentagon has not penetrated the fortified, detached hallways of the ivory towers." The promising ebb in the tide of cultural relativism directly after 9/11 seems to already be giving way to a sea of moral confusion. The clear difference between moderates and extremists disappears in its wake, as is evident in some of the elite universities in the Boston area. While these diversity peddlers who allow such speakers to be invited claim to be open to every single viewpoint in our academic forums, terrorist supporters and hate mongers often win the stage over those fighting for the integrity of the university. Last year, Stanley Cohen, a notorious lawyer for terrorist groups around the world, was invited to speak at the annual Harvard Divinity School Conference entitled "Islam in America." He told the attendees, "The U.S. should be very sensitive and familiar with terrorism because we support it all over the world. We are probably the largest terrorist nation or network in the history of the world." At the end of his speech Cohen, referencing himself, said to the crowded auditorium "Fight back. Stanley Cohen said it at the Divinity school at Harvard. What day is it? Jihad! Not the Jihad of George Bush, the Jihad to do good things for your people. The struggle to work as a community. That is what must be done - do not to make the mistake which my people have made for hundreds and hundreds of years in Europe, do not go silently into the night." One wonders what "doing good for one's community" means to a man who has defended groups like the IRA, advocates for the Peruvian terrorist group Shining Path, and claims he is friends with members of Hamas. Most of the audience and panelists reacted with loud applause after his speech. William Graham, Dean of the Harvard Divinity School, gave the opening remarks at this conference and was the facilitator. Graham said in an address last year that he is "uncomfortable" with the term "fundamentalism" when referring to Islamic fundamentalism. He prefers "Islamism" and claims "They do want to reform the world; they do want to make things better and different." He disagrees with definitions of Islamism that attach extremist elements to it. However, those who know about some of the extremist groups that have had an important influence on Islamism's history might be "uncomfortable" with this Graham's view. This statement might not be surprising given previous controversies surrounding him. In May 2002, Graham signed a Harvard/MIT petition calling for divestment against Israel, even though he later retracted it. He has also shown continued reluctance to reject a grant from the Zayed International Center for Coordination and Follow up based in Abu Dhabi, which is a think tank known for its links with anti-Semites, holocaust deniers and racist conspiracy theorists. Diana L. Eck, a professor at the Harvard Divinity School and director of Harvard's "Pluralism Project" also spoke at the "Islam in America" conference. She is the author of "A New Religious America," which includes a chapter entitled "American Muslims" that opens with an account of the first Muslim prayer invocation in the U.S. House of Representatives, given by imam Siraj Wahaj. She writes of Wahaj: "The African-American imam of the Masjid Al-Taqwa in Brooklyn, New York, has built his reputation on a hard-hitting and warmhearted ethical message... His genial, winning smile can open the heart of even his most piercing critiques." However, Siraj Wahaj, un-indicted co-conspirator in the first World Trade Center bombing, is well known for his virulent and hate filled attacks on America. He was not smiling when he said at his mosque in Brooklyn, "You know what this country is? It's a garbage can. It's filthy, filthy, and sick. This country is taking our children. We're trying to raise them up righteous. And you with your sick, low morals grabbing them, trying to teach a man how to be respectful towards that... Why you wanna try now to destroy us? Because we're against that sickness of this society, that's why.." Eck's CD "On Common Ground, World Religions in America," which may be found in University libraries and other institutions across the country, also features Wahaj and has web links to several organizations- some of which are moderate and some which have historically extremist ties, like the American Muslim Council. It might be difficult for Eck to feature a few past AMC members, like former long time executive director and self avowed supporter of Hamas and Hezbolla Abdurahman Alamoudi - he is in jail for receiving money from a Libyan terrorist fund. A few miles away from Harvard Divinity School at M.I.T., the co-founder of the New England Committee to Defend Palestine, Amer Jubran, has organized many rallies in the streets of Boston calling for support for the "intifada" (when he is not in jail, as he has been quite often this year). NECDP just held its annual conference at M.I.T., this year entitled "Confronting Zionism; Resistance and the Struggle for a Free Palestine." Last year, while the NECDP publicly stated it takes "no position" on the question of suicide bombing, Jubran organized a workshop entitled "Palestinian Resistance: Strategy for Liberation" where he encouraged both armed and other forms of "resistance." Other featured speakers included Lenni Brenner, who spoke about his book "Zionism and Nazism," which argues that Zionists and Nazis collaborated in many ways, including establishing the state of Israel. His book was sold out to audience members at the end of his speech. While the American constitution allows many forms of hate speech under the first amendment, the university occupies a special place in the U.S. which seeks to educate. Promoting the goal of education presupposes we can offer some guidance to our students, and is thus antithetical to the moral anarchy which cultural relativism leads to. Universities such as Harvard and M.I.T. are some of the most prestigious in the world, and they deserve to be. However, these model universities, among many others, have a growing minority of professors and administrators who are failing in their responsibilities as educators to distinguish between constructive criticism and preaching pure hate because they are blinded by their faith in cultural relativism. As naive first year students wander into these lectures that their parents pay fortunes for, and our troops abroad sacrifice their lives for freedom against fanaticism, perhaps it is time that we question our own fanatic faith in a theory which believes in an egalitarianism so radical that it gives priority to hate mongers over true educators inside our cherished ivory towers. The National Unity Coalition is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "Israel is not just a Jewish issue. Millions of Christians resolutely endorse the principle of peace with security for the state of Israel. Because we work closely together and speak with a united voice, our message is being heard!" |
|
TO BE 'PRO-PALESTINIAN' IS TO LIVE IN A WORLD OF DELUSIONS
Posted by IsrAlert, June 3, 2004. |
|
This was written by Clifford D. May, and appeared May 3, 2004 in the
"Union Leader" of Manchester, N.H. as a guest commentary. It is
archived at www.theunionleader.com/articles_showa.html?article=37026
Clifford D. May is the president of the Foundation for the Defense of
Democracies, a policy institute focusing on terrorism.
CONSIDER WHAT'S required to wear the label "Pro-Palestinian." To start, you have to appear non-judgmental about innocent Palestinian children being raised to become human bombs. You must refer to those who send such children on suicide/mass murder missions as "political leaders" or, even better, as "spiritual leaders." Call them militants if you must, but never terrorists. To be thought of as pro-Palestinian, you must cite the plight of the Palestinian refugees as a key motivation for violence, ignoring the fact that there would have been no refugees had Israel's Arab neighbors not launched a war to destroy the tiny Jewish state immediately upon its birth. Indeed, Arabs who chose to stay in Israel are today Israeli citizens, as are their children, enjoying more freedoms than do the citizens of neighboring Egypt, Syria, Saudi Arabia or even Jordan. Supporters of Palestinians must point to the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank as another root cause of violence. Avoid mentioning that it was a second Arab war against Israel that led to the seizure of those territories, which, at that time, were not called Palestinian territories. Gaza was administered by Egypt and the West Bank by Jordan and no one demanded that they be turned them over to Palestinian sovereignty. The Israelis captured the Sinai as well. That territory, several times larger than all of Israel, was returned to Egypt in exchange for a piece of paper promising peace. Forget these awkward details. To burnish your pro-Palestinian credentials, even as you rail against the Israeli occupation, say nothing positive about Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's plan to end that occupation entirely in Gaza and to withdraw Israeli troops and settlements from 85 percent of the West Bank. While it is true that at Camp David in 2000, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered about 95 percent of the West Bank and Gaza, Yassir Arafat turned that offer down and initiated several years of terrorist attacks. Even so, Mr. Sharon has said he's willing to consider further withdrawal, to discuss permanent borders, though he won't negotiate with those dispatching terrorists. Dismiss all that as irrelevant - if you want to be described as someone who sympathizes with the Palestinians. Also, continue to insist that Israelis eventually must agree to a "right to return" - that they must let millions of Palestinians settle not just in an independent Palestinian state next to Israel but in Israel itself. Promote this idea even if you're savvy enough to know it can never happen - just as Hindus can never re-settle in what is today Muslim Pakistan, just as Greek Christians can never re-settle in what is today Muslim Turkey. In fact, Israelis with roots in Arab countries today comprise about half of Israel's population. They might understand better than anyone else that a Palestinian "right to return" would mean the end of Israel as a homeland for the Jewish people, that Jews would become a minority in what would no longer be the world's only predominately Jewish state. And that's a frightening thought because, sadly, few minorities living in the 22 Arab countries and the more than 50 predominately Muslim nations enjoy anything approaching freedom and equality. Such freedom and equality may be achieved in Iraq in the years ahead - though not if the dictators of Syria, Iran and Saudi Arabia can help it, and not if the Palestinian "political and spiritual leaders" who supported Saddam Hussein and who now oppose the American "occupation" have anything to do with it. Nor should Friends of Palestine plan for the opportunities that the Israeli withdrawals will present. Don't even think about the Israeli homes that will be turned over to Palestinian families, the hotels that could be built along the Mediterranean. Forget about foreign investors, new hospitals and schools. And certainly don't talk about cooperation with Israel. On the contrary, shrug when Hamas terrorists bomb the checkpoints through which Gazans pass on their way to work in Israeli factories. But should the Israelis respond by closing those checkpoints, complain vehemently that the Israelis are cutting off the livelihood of Palestinian workers. The United Nations is very pro-Palestinian. That's why U.N. experts are not hard at work drafting a plan to give Palestinians more say over who governs them. Arafat was elected Palestinian leader - he ran exactly one time in 35 years and in that election he was opposed by a woman whose name few can recall and who hadn't a ghost of a chance. Surely, that's as much democracy as any reasonable person could desire for Palestinians. Perhaps someday people will look back in astonishment on all this. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
ALLEGATIONS OF MISUSE OF U.S. AID
Posted by Kitty Carr, June 3, 2004. |
Clyde R. Mark wrote this about USA Aid to Israel in
October 31, 1996. It's called "Foreign Affairs and National Defense
Division Allegations of Misuse of U.S. Aid"
(http://www.fas.org/man/crs/85-066.htm).
The United States stipulates that U.S. aid funds cannot be used in the occupied territories. Over the years, some [who?] have suggested that Israel may be using U.S. assistance to establish Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. Israel denies that it uses U.S. aid funds for settlements in the occupied territories. Because U.S. economic aid is given to Israel as direct government-to-government budgetary support without any specific project accounting, and money is fungible, there is no way to tell how Israel uses U.S. aid. Israel provides an annual letter to the U.S. Agency for International Development stating that the economic funds are used to service Israel's debt to the United States (approximately $1 billion per year). Isn't it odd that when it comes to Israel, money is fungible, so part of their loan guarantees are "offset" because "someone" suggested they may be using US assistance to establish settlements. It isn't suggested that they are murdering anyone, only that they may be using money to establish settlements. Israel denies this, but that doesn't matter. Now let me find the list of US assistance to the Palestinians that is "offset" because of terrorism - oh, I forgot! There is no such list! The Palestinians are kept to a higher standard to make sure that the millions given to them for their infrastructure, indoor-toilets and other amenities doesn't go to terrorism? This comes from a FAQ by USAID (http://www.usaid.gov/wbg/faq.htm): What precautions does USAID/WBG take to ensure that it does not provide assistance to terrorists? Let's pretend this is true: before USAD/WBG disburses millions to the Palestinians, it checks with the State Dept. Terror list (which doesn't include Arafat or the PLO, but does include Fatah, al-aqsa Martyrs Brigade and Islamic Jihad, and according to the State Dept. none of these groups have anything to do with Arafat or the PLO). Then let's pretend the US government reviews the organization for possible associations with terror groups. And finally, every contract and grant awarded by USAID includes a clause "reminding" the recipient of its legal obligation to comply with the prohibitions stated above. Israel, our ally, lies, but terrorists are trusted when they sign a piece of paper. All of this money goes to terrorism, of course, but only Israel is punished, because, apparently, only the money to Israel is fungible. Palestinian terrorism isn't mentioned at all, because it's not considered a crime, but when Israel takes measures to protect themselves, well, there's your crime. |
|
WORLD OPINION BE DAMNED: AMERICA'S ATTEMPTS TO APPEASE "WORLD OPINION" ARE DEPRAVED AND SUICIDAL
Posted by Alex Epstein, June 3, 2004. |
|
It is a testament to the perverse priorities of our politicians and journalists that the biggest American outcry over Abu Ghraib has been not about the gruesome decapitation of American Nicholas Berg by terrorists, but about the fact that many Arabs and Europeans are mad at us. "We are the most hated nation in the world," laments Ted Kennedy, "as a result of this disastrous policy in the prisons." The alleged solution to this alleged crisis of "world opinion" is to show more deference toward the rest of the world. Otherwise, we are told, the world's anger will bring more terrorist attacks and less "international cooperation" against terrorism. All of this evades one blatant truth: the hatred being heaped on America over Abu Ghraib is undeserved. Throughout the Middle East, torture--real torture, with electric drills and vats of acid--is official policy and daily practice. Yet there are no worldwide condemnations of the dictatorships that practice such atrocities--let alone the Arab-Islamic culture that produces so many torturers. But when, during a war, a handful of American prison guards subject a handful of Iraqi POWs to comparatively mild humiliation--which the U.S. government denounces and promptly investigates--"world opinion" proclaims itself offended and condemns America. Abu Ghraib is just the latest example of the injustice of "world opinion." Since September 11, the United States--the freest nation on Earth--has been ceaselessly denounced for any step in the direction of self-defense against terrorism, while terrorist regimes Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinian Authority get a moral free pass. So-called "world opinion" is not the unanimous and just consensus that its seekers pretend. (Observe that the phrase never includes the many pro-American foreigners, such as freedom-fighters in Iran.) It is the irrational and unjust opinion of the world's worst people: the Islamists who seek to subjugate the world to Islamic rule, the socialists and pacifists who seek to subjugate U.S. sovereignty to U.N. rule, and the legions of "moderate" followers who support or sympathize with these goals. These people oppose us not because of any legitimate grievances against America, but because they are steeped in irrational doctrines like Islamic fundamentalism, collectivism, and pacifism--which lead them to oppose and resent American freedom and individualism, and our resulting wealth and power. The proper response to the anti-American voicers of "world opinion" is to identify them as our ideological and political enemies--and dispense justice accordingly. In the case of our militant enemies, we must kill and demoralize them--especially the Arab and Islamic regimes that support terrorism and fuel the Islamist movement; as for the rest, we must politically ignore them and intellectually discredit them, while proudly arguing for the superiority of Americanism. Such a policy would make us safe, expose anti-Americanism as irrational and immoral, and embolden the world's best elements to support our ideals and emulate our ways. President Bush, like most politicians and intellectuals, has taken the opposite approach to "world opinion": he has tried to appease it. Instead of identifying anti-American Muslims as ideological enemies to be discredited, he has appealed to their sensibilities and met their demands--e.g., sacrificing American soldiers to save Iraqi civilians and mosques, and striving to make the Iraqi occupation not look "too American." Instead of seeking to crush the Islamists by defeating the causes they fight for--such as Islamic world domination and the destruction of Israel--he has appeased those causes, declaring Islam a "great religion" and rewarding the Palestinian terrorist Jihad with a promised Palestinian state. Instead of destroying the terrorist regimes that wage war against the West--including Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the Palestinian Authority--he has sought their "cooperation" and even cast some as "coalition partners." Such measures have taught the enemies they appease a deadly lesson: anti-Americanism pays. "Denounce and oppose America," they have learned, "no matter how irrationally and hypocritically, and American leaders will praise your ideals and meet your demands." "Attack America via terrorist proxy," terrorist states and movements have been taught, "and America will neither blame you nor destroy you, but redouble its efforts to buy your love." Is it any wonder that anti-Americanism is gaining prominence, and that the "War on Terrorism" has no end in sight? Every attempt to appease "world opinion" preserves, promotes, and emboldens our enemies. Every concession to angry Muslim mobs, every denunciation of Israel, every consultation with Prince Bandar or dictator Assad gives hope to the Islamist cause. Every day we allow terrorist regimes to exist gives their minions time to execute the next September 11. America needs honest leadership with the courage to identify and defeat our enemies--world opinion be damned. Alex Epstein is a writer for the Ayn Rand Institute (www.aynrand.org) in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. Send reactions to reaction@aynrand.org |
|
PREYING ON CHALABI
Posted by D Haimson, June 3, 2004. |
|
This was written by Joel Mowbray, who writes
occasionally for "The Washington Times". It was published June 1,
2004 and is archived at
www.washingtontimes.com/functions/print.php?StoryID=20040531-094323-7204r
Inside the halls of the State Department, career members of the Foreign Service have been buzzing about a prospect that excites them very much: President John Kerry. Never mind that their current boss is President George W. Bush. To what extent this impacts day-to-day job performance or leaks to the press is unclear, but it is clear that Mr. Bush presides not over an administration divided on philosophy, but over an administration whose foreign policy team is dominated by those who desperately want him to lose come November. And if Mr. Bush doesn't act soon, their wish might be granted. For proof, look at the "scandal" surrounding Iraqi Governing Council member and longtime U.S. ally Ahmed Chalabi. His Baghdad home was raided recently, and the media coverage has been clogged with quotes from anonymous "intelligence officials" claiming that there is "rock solid" evidence that Mr. Chalabi gave the Iranian mullahs "highly classified" intelligence. It didn't take a particularly astute observer to notice an awful lot of hostility being vented. For Mr. Chalabi, it was a comeuppance of sorts. He has been hated by State and the CIA, for different reasons, for years. State Department diplomats dislike the Iraqi democrat because he is committed to a secular, pluralistic society. The Foreign Service doesn't necessarily oppose such values, but it does -- fiercely -- when it comes to lands where they have never existed. Why? Because it would threaten the most important of all State Department objectives: stability. Mr. Chalabi is seen as a threat to the Arab world order. State has long supported whichever tyrant can bring "stability" to a given Arab nation, as the diplomats believe that that region of the world is incapable of fostering or supporting democracy or even anything resembling a free society. Even if State now grudgingly has to support Iraqi democracy -- and even that's an open question -- its bureaucrats long ago developed an unshakable hatred of Mr. Chalabi, and they will do anything in their power to undermine him. Although the CIA largely shares State's worldview, its contempt for Mr. Chalabi is much more visceral. In the mid-1990s, the CIA organized a ham-handed coup attempt against Saddam. Mr. Chalabi warned them it wouldn't work. He was right -- and said so publicly. The CIA fumed. Bad blood has existed ever since. Given the history of acrimony, the smear campaign against Mr. Chalabi was almost inevitable. His enemies at State and CIA are still bitter not just that Mr. Chalabi won the support of the White House -- he was seated behind Laura Bush at the State of the Union -- but that his decades-long push to oust Saddam finally succeeded. In striking Mr. Chalabi, State and CIA are not simply attacking him, but his allies inside the administration and the decision to go to war in the first place. And that's not unintentional. State Department diplomats and "intelligence officials" from State and CIA hate the hawks inside the Pentagon -- the so-called "neocons" -- almost as much as they do Mr. Chalabi. Luckily for them, they can kill two birds with one smear campaign. After all, it was the administration hawks -- primarily based in the Pentagon, though there are others, such as Vice President Dick Cheney and a handful at the State Department -- that championed Mr. Chalabi from the very beginning of this administration. "Intelligence officials" leaked to the New York Times last week that there was an investigation centered on "a handful" of officials, most of whom "are at the Pentagon." The dividing line is very clear: On one side are the president's political appointees; and on the other are careerists who have no loyalty to the commander-in-chief. To fully appreciate the mutinous sentiment at State, consider that it is a place where its employees feel free to display on desks and doors political cartoons lampooning President Bush. Anecdotally, several State Department officials know of many Foreign Service colleagues who joined antiwar rallies last spring. The undermining is not merely symbolic, either. Last spring, State Department officials learned from Pyongyang representatives in New York that North Korea was admitting, for the first time, that it was reprocessing plutonium. And it kept that bombshell a secret, even from the White House, because it didn't want to give administration hawks a reason to cancel upcoming talks -- something for which State had lobbied very hard. The insubordination continues to this day. Bureaucrats at State and CIA -- despite CIA Director George Tenet being the one claiming the case for WMD was a "slam dunk" -- largely did not support the war. They can no longer win the fight on the decision to go to war, but taking out Mr. Chalabi is the next best thing. It calls into question the motives and justification for the war, and in the process, defends the institutional integrity of both State and CIA. So far, the White House has not refereed the open revolt in its ranks. This has only emboldened the president's enemies at State and CIA. If there is evidence against Mr. Chalabi, it should be put on the table. But if not, if this smear campaign is merely a bluff to carry out character assassination, then Mr. Chalabi might not be the only one who unfairly falls from grace. Mr. Haimson sends out links to some excellent articles about Israel and its neighbors. To sign up, send an email to dhaimson@w3-4u.net |
|
DAMASCUS PLAYS PUPPET MASTER: HOW SYRIA LOOKS INDISPENSABLE THANKS TO HEZBOLLAH
Posted by IsrAlert, June 3, 2004. |
|
This essay was written by Michael Young, who is is opinion editor at
the "Daily Star" newspaper in Beirut and a contributing editor at "Reason"
magazine. It appeared yesterday and is archived at
http://slate.msn.com/id/2101603/
BEIRUT - It's an odd day indeed when officials in Washington trouble themselves with municipal elections in Lebanon. However, the country's most recent elections, which ended on Sunday, may be different. Why? Because the militant Islamist group Hezbollah came out of the contest considerably strengthened, in part because Syria wanted to send a message to the Bush administration. In three localities - Beirut's predominantly Shiite southern suburbs, in the Bekaa Valley, and in the South - Hezbollah did remarkably well, winning (either alone or in alliance with others) control over a large number of local councils. Among its more notable triumphs was a victory in the Bekaa Valley town of Baalbek, known for its spectacular Roman ruins and international summer cultural festival but also as a place where Western hostages were held during the 1980s. In South Lebanon, Hezbollah also did well, winning an estimated 61 percent of local councils. A principal cause of Hezbollah's success was that Syria created the political conditions that made it possible: In the Bekaa Valley it put pressure on potential rivals to make sure they would either support Hezbollah or not stand against it. In the South, the Syrians, for the first time, consented to let the party stand alone in the elections, not in a Syrian-imposed alliance with the rival Amal Movement - a Shiite party that Damascus also favors. This meant that Hezbollah was not obliged to compromise with Amal on candidates, allowing it to mobilize its base of supporters for a knockdown contest with the movement, which many Hezbollah supporters dislike and consider corrupt. Because Hezbollah's base of support in the South is larger than Amal's, the Syrian concession virtually guaranteed that Hezbollah would come out of the elections ahead. Damascus saw an opportunity to raise the ante on the United States, which recently imposed sanctions on Syria under congressional legislation known as the Syria Accountability and Lebanese Sovereignty Restoration Act. One of the act's stipulations is that Syria give up support for Hezbollah, which U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage referred to last year as "the A-team of terrorists." So Syria, by allowing the party to score well in the elections, effectively told the Bush administration, "Don't ask us to suppress Hezbollah; the party has strong support and legitimacy in Lebanon." Hezbollah is indeed popular, particularly among those benefiting from its expansive social welfare network. It is also led by a charismatic leader, Hassan Nasrallah, who could be forgiven for considering Hezbollah's latest performance as another defining moment in his own illustrious career (two others being his controversial, and winning, decision to participate in Lebanon's 1992 parliamentary election, integrating Hezbollah into the country's post-civil war political system, and the loss of his son in an anti-Israeli military operation in 1997). However, Syria, by playing up Hezbollah's popularity, has done itself and Lebanon little good. The election results will not convince the Bush administration and the U.S. Congress of the party's "acceptability," but it will make Lebanon a more likely American target, while also persuading U.S. officials that Hezbollah is flourishing under Syria's tender eye. So why is Syria doing it, other than to emphasize that attacking Hezbollah may prove a chore? The Syrians have long believed that a strong Hezbollah makes them appear indispensable in Lebanon, because it allows them to convince the United States that if Syrian forces were required to withdraw from the country (another demand of the Syria Accountability Act), Hezbollah would fill the vacuum. This rationale goes to the heart of Syria's dilemma with respect to the United States: Hezbollah is only of use to Damascus for as long as the party remains active and alarms the Americans and their allies. If the Syrians get rid of Hezbollah, Washington will have far less incentive to regard the Syrians as useful. Conversely, if Syria fails to subdue Hezbollah, American hostility will only increase. What is frustrating Syria is that it wants to use Hezbollah as one means of leverage to improve its relationship with Washington. However, the Bush administration has no inclination to bargain. Indeed, if Iraq becomes more of a problem, a vulnerable Syria may emerge as an increasingly tempting U.S. target to prove the war on terrorism is alive and well. The Lebanese, meanwhile, are hoping they won't be caught in the crossfire. But given the way the Syrians have promoted Hezbollah, they may soon find themselves in the direct line of fire. IsrAlert, a Jewish advocacy network, is hosted by Harv Weiner. To subscribe to IsrAlert, send an email to isralert@aol.com |
|
SHARON'S 'POCKET' CABINET
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 3, 2004. |
|
Israel's current Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has
virtually told the world that 'His' Cabinet is in his pocket and will
vote the way he tells them to vote this Sunday.
If I were an Israeli Cabinet member, I wouldn't want to be tarred with the reputation that they will always be known as Sharon's "Pocket Cabinet". (Note! I do not include those members who have had the courage, the honesty and the principles to stand up to Sharon's threats of dismissal.) I wonder how those who discarded their principles (if they ever had any) feel to be labeled merely Sharon's pocket playthings? But, there are pockets within larger pockets. Sharon is in the very large pocket of the Bush family dynasty and the Arabist U.S. State Department. Like Yitzhak Rabin, Sharon was promised a role in playing a role with the Super Powers plans for the Middle East if he was 'compliant'. Israel's role in the great but unworkable Middle East Plan was to give up land - south, east, north and center - to placate the terrorists who were the advance guard for Saudi Arabia, Syria, Egypt and Iran. Israel is also supposed to keep her mouth shut when Egypt at the behest of the State Department occupies Saudi Arabia when the Royal Family falls from power. Egypt, already the U.S. replacement for Iran under the Shah, has been equipped with a vast army, paid for with $60 Billion in free American Taxpayers' dollars. Egypt is supposed to represent U.S. interests by occupying the oil fields of Saudi Arabia at such a time when it seems probable that radical Islamists are on the verge of dumping the Royal Family and taking over.] The only 'small' problem with that scenario is that Egypt itself is vulnerable to fall at any time into the hands of the same radical Islamists (in Egypt called The Muslim Brotherhood), making Egypt as hostile and dangerous to U.S. interests as is Iran now (with probable nuclear capability). Should Egypt, indeed, occupy Saudi Arabia, it can then add its $60 Billion of American equipment to Saudis even bigger armory - inflating Egypt into the biggest military colossus of the Middle East and beyond. When, not if, Egypt reverts to an Islamist doctrine, the U.S., Israel and the rest of the Free World will face an even stronger, implacable enemy - armed beyond any hostile Dictator's wildest dreams. I will add that it is more than probable that Egypt has also been building a nuclear capability - with the assistance of Pakistan, China and North Korea (like Libya and Iran). Moreover, Egypt is scheduled to activate 5 (five) nuclear power plants between 2007 and 2011. Did the U.S. know about Egypt's nuclear capability? Probably. Have they suppressed this information? No doubt. Will Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak and/or his heir apparent (son) be assassinated by the Muslim Brotherhood? Very likely. They will try numerous times and one day succeed, which will be the turning point for Egypt to adopt a radical Muslim Islamists doctrine (appropriately called Islamo-Facism) toward the West. How can two farm-raised boys like Rabin and Sharon grasp this reality? I don't think so. Their world experience was limited to military action, understand that they were always considered disposable, expendable playthings - to be used, abused and discarded by their friends in favor of their enemies. Sharon has stated plainly that this Sunday his Pocket Cabinet playthings will do as he says. In effect, Sharon has told the Israeli people that there is no government of the people because only he is the government. Only his decisions and Plans count. He will move his ponderous buld to center stage like any Caesar or Nero - telling all that only he can decide the fate of the Jewish nation and her people. That includes all the Jews still in the Diaspora because the fate of Israel greatly affects their lives and well-being in their countries of residence. They will again be considered hostile, resident aliens when Israel loses her power. If Israel is chopped up, re-partitioned, truncated, she will no longer be an invaluable ally to America (and the Free World) but instead, she will become a vulnerable liability and will soon be discarded in honor of 'real politics'. As Herod was commanded by Rome, so too is Sharon commanded by the Bush Dynasty and the Arabist State Department. As for Sharon's Cabinet, with the exclusion those honorable handful who defy his coup d'etat, the rest can go to the children's playroom to build block castles and scribble pictures, pretending they are grown-ups doing a day's work. How do we know that Sharon's re-partition plans are a mistake? Beyond common sense and knowing the Arab Muslims for their actions ***, read the liberal Media. When such as the NEW YORK TIMES, CHICAGO TRIBUNE, BBC, Israel's Hebrew media and the Labor Party of Shimon Peres or Yossi Beilin all congratulate Sharon for his great wisdom, be assured that they know he is about to walk off a cliff and pull the Jewish State of Israel with him. It is revealing that President Bush today praised Sharon for his Plan to remove Jewish settlements from Gush Katif and Israel's heartland. This is too much like Neville Chamberlain's abandonment of the Sudetenland of Czechoslovakia to Hitler in the hope for "Peace in our Time". We know where that led, don't we? How many Americans and Allies did we just commemorate on Memorial Day? ### IT'S TIME TO GO 'EN MASSE' TO THE PRIME MINISTER'S OFFICE ON SUNDAY & MAKE A NOISE THAT WILL BE HEARD AROUND THE WORLD! FAX & CALL THE CABINET MEMBERS! 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). |
|
WAQF EXPANDING PAST THE TEMPLE MOUNT
Posted by Bryna Berch, June 3, 2004. |
|
It's interesting that in 1967 when Israel gained control of all
of Jerusalem, the Arabs would have been content with being allowed to
worship on the Temple Mount. But they were given control. And little
by litte, they expanded the territory they rule and, with no fear of
punishment, destroy Israeli archeological treasures. So why does
Sharon think they'll be content with just Gaza? Or Gaza and Samaria and
Judea? Or Gaza and Samaria and Judea and Jerusalem?
With Israel's economy so lousy, it could save some money by having the Palestinian Authority pay Sharon's salary - he works for their benefit, not for Israel. And he doesn't give a damn about the Temple Mount. If he did, he'd have taken back control of the Mount, when the Arabs started destroying archeological evidence that the Temple Mount is Jewish and was Jewish long before the Arabs came into Jerusalem. This is a news item from today's Arutz-7. The Moslem Waqf is now beginning to take control not only over the Temple Mount, but also over areas adjacent to it. So says Nadav Shragai, author of a book on the topic of the struggle over the Mount. Shragai told Arutz-7 yesterday that the Muslims are expanding the cemetery outside the eastern wall of the Temple Mount, and are now using area near the southeastern corner for burial. "The Nature and Parks Authority is trying to fight the Waqf on this," Shragai said, "and has enlisted the help of the Jerusalem Municipality, but they are having trouble. For one thing, the Prime Minister has ordered that everything having to do with the Temple Mount must go through his office, and also because in general the Waqf does whatever it wants..." Shragai estimates that the Waqf's consent to allow Jews to visit the Temple Mount came at the price of being allowed a relatively free hand regarding matters such as digging and construction on the Mount - "and possibly adjacent to it, as well." Shragai said that the media take interest in the Temple Mount only when a catastrophe occurs: "If there is a violent clash on the Mount or near it, all the press would rush to the site, and then there would be news about whatever it was that sparked the clash: the Moslem cemetery that is being expanded, or the digging on the Mount, etc. But when everything is quiet, the press takes no interest." |
|
ARABS AND AZTECS
Posted by Martin, Communaude-Juive-France, June 3, 2004. |
|
This was written by Dr. Jack Wheeler and appeared April 30, 2004. It
is archived at
www.network54.com/Forum/message?forumid=135069&messageid=1083375062
Thanks to Bruce Tefft at OSINT for this article. http://www.intellnet.org/ Researchers neeeding more information on the Arab/Aztec connection: see http://aztlan.net/ Cortez and his Spanish soldiers who conquered the Aztecs are known to history as "Conquistadors." That label of "Conquerors" was applied to them by their contemporaries -- but it originated a generation earlier. It was first used to describe the Spaniards who liberated their own country from Islam. Arab invaders had swept across Spain in the early 700s, and it took centuries for the Spanish to kick them out. Cortez was not yet 10 years old when they were finally ejected from their last stronghold in Grenada in 1492. When Cortez first looked upon the pyramid temples of the Aztec gods, he called them mezquitas -- mosques. Cortez saw himself as a liberator -- just as his fathers had liberated Spain from the Islamic yoke, so he would liberate "New Spain" from the Aztec yoke. Yet he had little idea of how deep were the political-religious parallels between the Arabs and the Aztecs. The parallels go beyond the death worship of Aztec warriors and Arab suicide-bombers. One of the latter responsible for the train bombings in Madrid declared in a letter: "You (Christians) love life -- we (Moslems) love death." Compare this Aztec poem: "There is nothing like death in war Nothing like the flowery death So precious to the gods who give us life Far off I see it! My heart yearns for it!" The deeper parallel is this: both the Arabs and the Aztecs invented a Religion of Jihad as a rationale to justify their imperialist empires. For the Aztecs, war was their purpose for existence, the sacred manifestation of their religion. War for the Aztecs was always Holy War. The Aztecs were a tribe of primitive nomads when they first entered the Valley of Mexico in the early 14th century. They were shunned as barbarians by the inhabitants, descendants of the disintegrated Toltec Empire, and were forced to live on swampy islands in the valley's huge lake. The one thing the Aztecs knew was how to fight. So they hired themselves out as mercenaries to the warring Toltec-remnant principalities. Before long, they had an army big enough to take over the principalities -- which they proceeded to do. No empire can be held together with simple brute force, however. It requires a rationale, and the Aztecs soon invented one: a religion with gods who need them, the Aztecs, to wage continual war to keep the universe together. The Aztec god of the hunt was Huitzilopotchtli (The Hummingbird on the Left). Once the Aztecs began conquering other kingdoms in the 1430s, he was transformed into a universal power controlling the earth, the heavens, and the rising of the sun. For reasons the Aztec Witch-Doctors could never explain, Huitzilopotchtli, although a god, required food to sustain his labors in keeping the cosmos in one piece. The food the Aztec god must have so the sun would rise tomorrow was a daily -- daily -- supply of dozens -- dozens -- of live, beating human hearts, physically ripped out of a living human being's chest and placed in the chacmool, the sacred receptacle, fresh, hot, and still palpitating. In 1487, to celebrate the completion of the Great Temple of Huitzilopotchtli in the Aztec capital of Tenochtitlan, 20,000 prisoners were sacrificed in fourteen days, with long lines of victims stretching from the temple in four directions as far as the eye could see. It was decreed that other gods were perpetually hungry. Tlaloc, the rain god, needed the hearts of children and babies so that it would rain. Xipe, the plant god, needed human skins acquired by skinning a victim alive, so that plants would grow. Naturally, the tens of thousands of victims needed annually for these cosmic sacrifices could not come from the Aztec people, or else they would quickly kill themselves off. The only way to get them was to capture them as prisoners of war. Thus war -- Holy War -- became the purpose of the Aztec State. All soldiers in the Aztec Army were Holy Warriors, Warriors of the Gods. Peace was dangerous. No war meant no prisoners to sacrifice, no food for the gods, which risked the destruction of mankind and the universe itself. The only way to avoid cosmic disaster was for the Aztecs to accept the burden fate had given them and wage perpetual war for the salvation of humanity. All in all, a pretty clever rationalization for a monstrous imperialist tyranny, wouldn't you say? Sounds like they were taking religion-inventing lessons from the Arabs. For just as the worship of Huitzilopotchtli was an invention to provide a religious justification for Aztec imperialism, so Islam was an invention for the purpose of providing a religious justification for Arab imperialism. It is commonly taught that the purpose of the Arab Conquest -- Arab hordes exploding out of Arabia in the middle of the 7th century to conquer all of the Christian Middle East, Zoroastrian Persia and Central Asia, Hindu Northern India, and Christian North Africa and Spain in 100 years -- was to spread Islam. It turns out this is the opposite of what actually happened. That is, just like other nomad hordes that swarmed out of a desert and infested civilizations through history -- like Attila the Huns or Genghiz Khan's Mongols -- so did the Arabs. Finding themselves in sudden possession of a vast empire of vastly different peoples and all of them non-Arab, the Arabs invented a religion to justify their ruling it, and aptly named it Islam, which in Arabic means Submission. They claimed it meant submission to the Will of God, but what it really meant was submission to them. This is detailed in The Myth of Mecca, written shortly after the September 11 Moslem attack on America. It is posted in the Classics section of To The Point News, and I could not encourage you more strongly to read it. [ed., article is open to non-subscribers] At long last, serious scholars have begun researching the history of Islam's origins. Their conclusion, in the words of one, I.M. Al-Rawandi, is that the life of Mohammed chronicled in the Sira (the official Islamic hagiography) is a "baseless fiction." It was made up. He never lived in Mecca, and if he lived at all, he was a bandit chieftain named Ubu'l Kassim ("Mohammed" is not a name, it's a title meaning "The Praised One") who lived in what is now southern Jordan. An additional conclusion is that the Koran is made up as well -- stories and quotations from scores of varying sources and authors stitched together over a century or two after the Conquest. This is why the Call to Jihad is hard-wired into the Koran. Jihad is why Islam exists. The Moslem religion was invented by Arabs in order to claim their conquering of other peoples and religions was ordained and approved by God. After the tide of Arab imperialism was turned back in 15th century Spain, the Ottoman Turks took up the call of Jihad, plundering southeastern Europe for slaves and booty. The Islamic threat to Europe was stopped at Vienna, where the German-Austrian-Polish forces led by Polish King Jan Sobieski defeated the Ottoman invaders on September 12, 1683. Now the threat of Jihad has arisen once again from the deserts of Arabia. The threat is much closer than in Iraq. Earlier this week (April 26), the New York Times featured an article entitled Militants in Europe Openly Call for Jihad and the Rule of Islam. It focused on a group of Moslem radicals in England called Al-Muhajiroun (The Immigrants) and one of its leaders, a young man calling himself Sayful Islam (Sword of Islam). The Times' story was based on interviews reporter David Cohen of the London Evening Standard had with Sayful and his followers. Mr. Cohen's article, "Terror on the Dole," is in this issue of the TTP Weekly Report under Guest Authors. Here is an excerpt: It was the events of 11 September that crystallized Sayful's worldview. "When I watched those planes go into the Twin Towers, I felt elated," he says. "That magnificent action split the world into two camps: you were either with Islam and al Qaeda, or with the enemy. I decided to quit my job and commit myself full-time to al-Muhajiroun." Now he does not consider himself British. "I am a Muslim living in Britain, and I give my allegiance only to Allah." According to Sayful, the aim of al-Muhajiroun (The Immigrants) is nothing less than Khilafah - "the worldwide domination of Islam". The way to achieve this, he says, is by Jihad, led by Bin Laden. "I support him 100 per cent." Does that support extend to violent acts of terrorism in the UK? "Yes," he replies, unequivocally. "When a bomb attack happens here, I won't be against it, even if it kills my own children. Islam is clear: Muslims living in lands that are occupied have the right to attack their invaders." I suggest you re-read that quote and let it sink in. And lest you think this is just an _expression of "radical" Islam to which all "moderate" Moslems are opposed, here are the words of Sayful's followers: "The mosques say one thing to the public, and something else to us. Let's just say that the face you see and the face we see are two different faces," says Abdul Haq. "Believe me," adds Abu Musa, "behind closed doors, there are no moderate Muslims." Centuries ago, Western Civilization had the ability to produce heroes like Cortez and Sobieski who had no qualms over fighting murderously evil empires. Today, even the most courageous leader on earth, George W. Bush, proclaims Islam to be a "religion of peace" -- when the terrifying reality is that it is a religion of war. Without perpetual war against the infidels, without Jihad, Islam has no driving purpose. It is therefore incumbent on all those who wish not to someday submit to an Islamic yoke to demand of Moslems that they publicly renounce the Koran's Call to Jihad. Civilization's only path to peace is for Arabs and their Islamic converts to stop behaving like Aztecs. |
|
ISRAEL MUST NOT PLAY THE PART OF CZECHOSLOVAKIA IN THE GLOBAL WAR AGAINST TERRORISM
Posted by Ruth Matar, June 3, 2004. |
|
Dear Friends, This morning, Thursday, June 3, 2004 I woke up to a most disturbing news article in the Jerusalem Post, headlined "Bush backs Gaza Withdrawal." The day before, President Bush had again thrown his support behind Ariel Sharon's plan for a unilateral withdrawal from the Biblical Gaza Strip and parts of the Biblical Judea and Samaria. According to the Jerusalem Post Senior U.S. officials said that the administration is trying to help Sharon win approval for the plan in the cabinet on Sunday. What happened to President Bush's desire for democracy in the Middle East, one of the reasons for which he went to war in Iraq? As far as democracy in Israel is concerned, Prime Minister Sharon has made himself a virtual dictator. He is the head of Israel's largest party, the Likud, with forty Knesset Members out of a total of 120 Knesset Members. Sharon's own party voted overwhelmingly against his withdrawal plan: 59.5% against and 39.7% for (a 19.8% difference) Before the referendum vote Sharon stated the he would definitely abide by the results. As soon as it became apparent that the results were hugely unfavorable to him, he changed his mind in his dictatorial fashion. One is reminded of what Prime Minister Golda Meir once said about Sharon, whom she did not want to become IDF Chief of Staff. She said that if he were appointed and the Knesset did not do what he wanted, he would surround the Knesset building with tanks until it did his bidding. Is Sharon insisting on his unilateral retreat plan simply because he wants to have his own way? Even Sharon's late wife, Lilly, of blessed memory, cautioned against Ariel Sharon being elected Prime Minister. Lilly Sharon said this to an unimpeachable source in the Golan many years ago. Lilly Sharon gave her reason as the parable of Jotham (ninth chapter of the book of Judges), but refused to elaborate further. What motivates President Bush to call Sharon's undemocratic behavior "a courageous step toward peace", during a speech devoted mostly to the war on terrorism and Iraq at an Air Force Academy Commencement Ceremony? Doesn't President Bush consider Sharon's behavior in disregarding a referendum vote which he himself initiated, clearly undemocratic? The most upsetting of President Bush's remarks at the Air Force Commencement Ceremony was the following: "His [Sharon] decision provides an historic moment of opportunity to begin building a future Palestinian state. This initiative can stimulate progress toward peace by setting the parties on the 'Road Map', the most reliable guide to ending the OCCUPATION THAT BEGAN IN 1967. [Emphasis is mine -R.M.]" How can Jews "occupy" their own Land Promised to them by the L-rd? How can a supposedly Bible believing Christian President speak in such terms? Doesn't President Bush realize that the Jews cannot possibly occupy a fictional country "Palestine" inhabited by a fictional people "the Palestinians"? At this point, some historical background is critically valuable. The following was sent to me by Gilbert Simons from his as yet unpublished book on this subject. "How did this artificial Arab country of Palestine come into being? Ahmed Shuqairy, a lawyer, created it out of thin air, at the bequest of Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser. From his pen came the Palestine National Covenant, a historical revisionist document creating a mythical state, concurrently eliminating Israel from the history books. He then created an organization, The Palestine Liberation Organization (the PLO), to destroy the reborn state of Israel, while 'liberating' his fictitious Arab Palestinian state, a circular tour de force. Nasser appointed him the PLO's first Chairman. No 'Palestinians' were involved. "In his memoirs, Shuqairy reminisces: 'Firstly, I started by laying down the Palestinian entity on paper, like the engineer who traces the plan of a building with all of its foundations, details and measurements. I wrote, altered, erased and changed the order of the articles until I formulated the 'National Covenant' and the 'Fundamental Law' of the Palestine Liberation Organization.' (From the Summit to Defeat, with the Kings and the Presidents). Ahmed Shuqairy himself acknowledged before the Security Council: 'It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria' [which itself was not a nation, but a province of the Ottoman Empire for about 700 years until the Empire was carved up by the victorious Allies in 1918]. "PLO Claim: Ahmed Shuqairy, the author of The PLO Covenant or Charter, set down in Article 4: 'The Palestinian personality is an innate, persistent characteristic that does not disappear, and it is transferred from father to son....,' Article 7 reads: 'The Palestinian affiliation and the material, spiritual and historical tie with Palestine are permanent realities.' But then, Shuqairy ran into a problem. Creating a Palestinian identity on paper was one thing, but getting Arabs to behave as if it was real was another. Arabs had to be taught these 'innate characteristics,' an oxymoron. Blithely ignoring the contradiction, in the same Article 7, quoted above, Shuqairy added: 'The upbringing of the Palestinian individual in an Arab and revolutionary fashion, the undertaking of all means of forging consciousness and training the Palestinian, in order to acquaint him profoundly with his homeland, spiritually and materially, and preparing him for the conflict and armed struggle, as well as for the sacrifice of his property and life to restore his homeland, until the liberation - all this is a national duty.' "Another contradiction which did not bother Shuqairy was to claim that the Arabs of the area were uniquely 'Palestinians,' while simultaneously asserting that 'The Palestinian people are a part of the Arab Nation,' (Article 1), thus no different from the Arabs of the Middle East and North Africa, which of course is a fact." There has never been a distinct-Arab Palestinian culture, literature, dialect or national consciousness. Zuhayer Muhsin, head of Sa'iqa [sub-group of the PLO], in an interview with James Dorsey for Trouw, 31 March 1977 put the whole matter in perspective, admitting: "It is only for political reasons that we carefully underline our Palestinian identity, because it is in the interest of the Arabs to encourage a separate Palestinian identity in contrast to Zionism. Yes, the existence of a separate Palestinian identity is there only for tactical reasons. The establishment of a Palestinian state is a new expedient to continue the fight against Zionism and for Arab unity." *** In last week's Letter of May 27, 2004, I promised to discuss the Palestinian National Charter of 1968 in this week's Letter. [Editor note: You can read Matar's email of the Charter at /http://www.think-israel.org/may04bloged.html#may04.239] In 1968, after the Arabs were defeated in the 1967 Arab-Israel War, the Palestinian National Charter was supposedly revised. In the 1968 Palestinian National Charter the clauses are virtually the same as in the 1964 Charter. The only major difference is that Article 24 of the 1964 Palestinian National Charter was eliminated. No wonder it was eliminated! I want to remind you what Article 24 was all about: "ARTICLE 24: THIS ORGANIZATION DOES NOT EXERCISE ANY TERRITORIAL SOVEREIGNTY OVER THE WEST BANK IN THE HASHEMITE KINGDOM OF JORDAN, ON THE GAZA STRIP OR IN THE HIMMAH AREA. ITS ACTIVITIES WILL BE ON THE NATIONAL POPULAR LEVEL IN THE LIBERATIONAL, ORGANIZATIONAL, POLITICAL AND FINANCIAL FIELDS." Dear Friends, the Arabs living in the Holy Land are the only group of people in this whole world whose openly declared national objective is to destroy the country of Israel, and to slaughter its people, the Jews. It is of utmost importance that the American people, who live in the greatest democracy in the world, influence their Government to abandon the idea that a fictional "Palestinian people" is entitled to regain a fictional homeland called "Palestine". The Jewish People "occupy" only their own Land (and not even all of that land) promised to them in the Judeo-Christian Bible. No support of an American President for an Israeli Prime Minister, who has abandoned all pretence of democratic government, will change this everlasting Word of G-d. The Arabs are not only trying to occupy the Holy Land, but attempting to transfer the Jews from the communities which they have so passionately built in their regained Homeland. The Jewish "Settlers" are not, and never were, an obstacle to peace! In fact, the Hebrew word "Mitnachlim" has been mistranslated as "settlers". The true meaning of the word "Mitnachlim" is not "Settlers" but "Inheritors". The "Inheritors" are not going to allow themselves to be evicted from their homes, schools, factories, hothouses and Synagogues in Biblical Gaza, Judea and Samaria. At this critical juncture in history, it is incumbent on each and every one of us to make it clear to Israel's Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, U.S. President George W. Bush, and the rest of the leaders of the Western world, that it is counterproductive in the war against the Global Jihad of the Muslims to offer G-d's Promised Land as a gift to pacify the Muslim wolves. This would only intensify the Muslim war against Judeo-Christian Western Civilization. The Muslim extremists would rightly understand that terror pays, and that worldwide terror would bring even greater dividends. With Blessings and Love for Israel, Ruth Matar Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
ARABS AND MEDIA LIE AND EXAGGERATE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 2, 2004. |
|
HAVING TO THOROUGHLY DETEST A thinking person may take sides but sees both sides. He acknowledges some merit to the other side. The forces of conformity don't tolerate such open-mindedness. They want to see the other side as totally wrong, the more evil the better to cast aspersions upon them if not cast them out. In mentioning positive elements of otherwise mostly negative movements, we sometimes forget to place the positives in perspective. When the explanation is too brief, on is misunderstood as favoring the movements. Consider discussions of Saddam Hussein. Evil he is. Great harm he did. As a potential menace, he ranked among the worst. He repressed dissent, supported terrorism, invaded other countries, poison gassed and otherwise mass-murdered, and violated agreements. Nevertheless, not everything about his regime was bad. Saddam's regime allowed women education and jobs denied them in most other Arab countries. Being secular, it avoided most Islamist oppression. Those are positives. However valuable those positives are, the negatives far outweigh them. When someone cited the positive features as showing that the regime was not deleterious for Iraqis in every way, he was chided for defending Saddam. The mockery of him made it clear that it is not politically correct in certain conservative circles to find any good in that regime. Truth is evaded. We must be totally condemnatory. This attitude is authoritarian and conformist. A similar attitude seems to pervade liberal journalistic circles, in discussing the US reconstruction of Iraq. Actually, it does not discuss reconstruction. It discusses occupation and resistance to it. Despite that resistance, which includes self-destructive sabotage, the US has restored electricity, water supply, and oil extraction to pre-war levels. Despite the danger, Iraqis who fled from the war have returned to Iraq. So, also, have Iraqis who went into exile before the war. These are positive and hopeful signs. They are not much reported in the liberal organs of the media. Why not? If they were, people would not reject Pres. Bush's policies as much. To admit that would be inconvenient for the liberal goal of defeating Pres. Bush. I do not like the Bush Administration, but will not deny its several successes. Truth is truth. I rejoice when my country does something humane and successful. I won't sully my country's reputation to smear Bush's. Liberals are pathetic and even unpatriotic in their total hostility to Pres. Bush. Were they confident of their case against him, they would not have to pretend that he is wrong 100% of the time. LOGIC IN DECLINE Rationalization is familiar. New about it is how extensively it has displaced logic. We see this when PM Sharon alleges unfounded benefits from his proposed plan to abandon territory and the French Ambassador denies in the current "Commentary" that his government ignores Muslim persecution of Jews and denies the frequency of incidents. He called the accusation against the Muslims racism, while a French author defended his country by insisting that the antisemitism is limited almost entirely to Muslims. Does that make the author a racist or a reporter of racism? After pretending that the hundreds of acts of violence did not occur, France now speaks up, but not against the Muslim community that fosters them. It acts against persecutors, but allows more bigots to immigrate. While French culture is drowning, the Ambassador accuses his critic of venting her imagination. His tendentious denial may be France's last gasp. MEDIA PATTERN OF EXAGGERATION The media complained that the IDF destroyed thousands of Arabs' houses in Rafah, putting their families on the streets. Those shocking figures led to moralizing against Israel and accusing Israel of violating international law and of being inhumane. Those figures were shocking but false, and that should be shocking! Only 56 houses were demolished in the offensive described. Those houses had been used as vantage points for assaulting Israeli patrols seeking to detect tunnels used to smuggle arms for murdering Israeli civilians. The IDF had every right to destroy those ambush-houses. The Arabs had no right to commit terrorism, smuggle arms, or fire upon the duly constituted Israeli security forces. The minor destruction was not disproportionate and not in violation of international law. Defense is permitted by international law; terrorism violates it. As for the pitied Arabs, many of them dashed out of such houses to steal body parts of slain Israeli soldiers and desecrate them or hold them for ransom (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/25, e-mail). Couldn't the media figure out who the barbarians are? Many Arab householders in Rafah earn attractive fees for lending their houses to arms and drug smugglers. They deserve no pity when they are made to pay for their deeds. ISRAEL WOULD ACCEPT ARAB PLEDGE PM Sharon said Israel is ready to negotiate a withdrawal if the P.A. and Egypt pledge to maintain security after an Israeli withdrawal (IMRA, 5/25). By the time the P.A. signed the Oslo accords, it had broken every one of its 200 agreements, including those involving security. Egypt has violated ceasefires with Israel and its treaty with Israel. Egypt's most notable violation is to allow the P.A. to smuggle in arms through Egypt, though Egypt easily could stop it. Arab culture approves of using deceit. Israel cannot rely upon an Arab pledge, especially one about security by those unrepentant enemies. Do you suppose that in suggesting reliance upon Arab pledges, PM Sharon is totally naive about the Arabs? Why does he make this fundamental blunder? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
MOSSAWA: OUTLAW TALK OF 'TRANSFER' - EXPULSION OF JEWS FINE, THOUGH
Posted by Steven Plaut, June 2, 2004. |
|
This was a news item from today's Arutz-7 (http://www.IsraelNationalNews.com).
An organization working on behalf of Israel's Arab citizens is calling for legislation making the mere discussion of "transfer" illegal. INN spoke with one of its representatives about the "transfer" of Jews from Yesha. The release of a new report today by the Mossawa Advocacy Center for Arab Citizens in Israel regarding the treatment of Israeli Arabs was covered extensively in the Israeli press. The report's authors accuse Israeli authorities, the police and the judicial system of creating a climate of violence and racism against Arab citizens of Israel. Mossawa's report comes days after Transportation Minister Avigdor Lieberman (National Union) announced his plan for a "separation of nations," which would "transfer" Israeli Arabs deemed disloyal to the State of Israel. Mossawa called for new legislation making public discussion of such steps illegal. The report also condemns Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's contention that Israel's Arab citizens constitute a "demographic problem" - citing it as an example of discourse it wishes to make illegal. The organization, finding that 22% of Israeli Jews would vote for the outlawed Kach party - whose platform was the transfer of Arabs hostile to the Jewish State - is promoting legislation that would make it illegal to discuss the "transfer" or expulsion of Israel's Arabs. However, the organization told Israel National News that it sees no problem with the transfer of Jews and does not wish to outlaw discussion of that. Arutz-7's Ezra HaLevi talked to Mossawa spokesperson Abir Kopty, asking her what the legislative goals of her organization are. "In an environment that is increasingly perceiving Arabs as a threat to the state of Israel, we are calling on the Israeli government to make it illegal to discuss transfer," said Kopty. "So you are against the transfer of any Israeli citizen?" asked HaLevi. "That is correct," replied Kopty. "So you would agree that the forced transfer of Jewish citizens from Judea, Samaria and Gaza is reprehensible as well," HaLevi asked. "That is different - we don't call that transfer, that is dismantling of settlements - we are speaking about the forced removal of people who were born here," said Kopty, audibly flustered. "So basically, Jews born in Judea, Samaria and Gaza can be thrown out of their homes, but the mere discussion of relocating Arabs involved with terrorism from within Israel's pre-1967 borders should be made into a crime," asked HaLevi. "Look, we deal with ensuring the equal rights of Arab citizens in Israel - it is not comparable to people living in illegally occupied territories [sic]," Kopty replied. The report also claims that Israeli Arabs do not receive protection from the police and are in fact targeted for violence, citing numerous cases of "illegal and unjustified police shootings of Arab citizens." They also claim that there is a leniency for the police and the courts to be soft on "displays of racism against Arabs by private citizens and public figures." An investigation by Ha'aretz, however, revealed that at least one of the "16 Arab citizens killed by gunfire from police and security forces since October 2000 was not killed 'by security forces' gunfire," as was written in the report, [but] actually killed in a motorcycle accident while being chased by police." Steven Plaut is an American-trained economist, a professor of business administration at Haifa University and author of "The Scout." He frequently comments - both seriously and satirically - on Israeli politics and the left wing academic community. His website address is http://www.stevenplaut.blogspot.com. |
|
WOULD YOU ALLOW ME TO AFFIX YOUR NAME TO THIS LETTER?
Posted by Ken Heller, June 2, 2004. |
|
Please take a moment or two to read Nadia Matar's article which you
will see below and then please be so kind as to read my brief remarks
following the article. Would you allow me to affix your name to this
letter
I wrote Dr Harris? Email me at KJHNHA@aol.com. Thank you.
Ken Dr. James T. Harris III
Dear Dr. Harris: Last September, a friend of mine from Israel named Nadia Matar, Co-Chairwoman of the organization called, WOMEN IN GREEN, wrote an article about one of your upcoming guest speakers, Shimon Peres. He is, as you know, due to speak on January 25th. Please take a moment or two to read the article which you will see below and then please be so kind as to read my brief remarks following the article. <>Yes, Indeed - Peres and His Friends are the Criminals of Oslo Dr. Harris, I want you to know that I share the sentiments expressed by Mrs. Matar completely and it is with deep sorrow, disgust and regret that I learned of Widener's plans to have Mr. Peres speak. Mr. Peres is a loathesome, self-hating, ultra-left wing, post-Zionist who thankfully only speaks for a minority of Jews living in Israel. The OSLO Accords which was designed by Mr. Peres has done nothing to secure peace with the Arabs but it certainly has served to reward terrorism which again has taken over 1200 innocent Jewish lives since its inception. His policies have done nothing but cause death and destruction among the Jewish people and his hands are soaked with their blood. I urge that you quickly dis-invite Mr. Peres because he is not the esteemed celebrity that you think. He is rather an accomplice to mass murder....and certainly not worthy of being a participant in your highly acclaimed program. Thank you for your time and attention in this matter. Kenneth J. Heller
Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org Ken Heller is a pro-Israel activist and heads the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For A Safe Israel. He can be reached at kjhnha@aol.com. |
|
SERVING THE ENEMY
Posted by David Ha'ivri, June 2, 2004. |
|
The pictures of the Arab masses waving body parts of IDF soldiers in front of the television cameras is not something which can easily be erased from our national memory. The internet and foreign stations broadcasted scenes even more atrocious - that of Arabs eating the flesh of our soldiers. Israeli T.V. claimed that they refrained from showing this cannibalism, out of consideration for the families of the victims. I don't believe them. Israeli television was ever one to make such considerations. The cannibalism of the Arabs is their way of demonstrating their intention to humiliate and degrade us, to eat us alive. The Israeli media, whose credo is "the right of the public to know" - and will usually broadcast anything and everything, intentionally did not broadcast to the Israeli viewer these pictures because they have another consideration which is more important than "the right of the public to know" - to brainwash the nation that there is still a chance for "peace", meaning we should withdraw from the land and put an end to the Jewish State. This is why the Israeli media is interested that the picture of Arabs eating the flesh of Jews not be etched in our national memory. They prefer to show us the bandaged Arab boy and his mother standing amidst the ruins of their destroyed home. This is what they want instilled in our national memory, and not that of the Arab barbarian. Murder, abuse of corpses, rape and cannibalism are nothing new to the Arab. The Hebron slaughter in 1929, the abuse of Israeli prisoners by Egypt and Syria in the Yom Kippur War in the 70's, the cruel torture and murder of Moshe Tamam and Dani Katz in the 80's, and more recently, the savage murder by Arab shepherds of Yaakov Oshran and Koby Mendel from Takoa, so beaten, that the morgue was barely able to identify whose body was whose. In short, the Arabs always acted this way. The only difference now, is that these atrocities are now being broadcasted for all eyes to see. As if it wasn't enough to view the bodies of our soldiers being abused, we were later shown IDF commanders crawling in the sand searching for pieces of flesh of their comrades. What a national disgrace! And why should our soldiers be degrading themselves in front of the Arabs and the world? After all, we know where the body parts are. They aren't in the sand, but in the hands of the cannibals of Gaza. Only when Gaza, the Hamas City, is blown off the face of this earth - only then will the souls of our heroes find rest!! The outpost "Tal Binyamin" was voluntary evacuated by the Yesha Council. As a rule, we were always against the idea of building a settlement in the place where a Jew was killed, or as a reaction to the Arab murder of Jews. This so-called "Zionist answer" actually negates the Jewish halacha, where it is stated that in a place where a Jew is murdered, that area must remain abandoned. The real Jewish answer to the murder of Jews, is the killing of those murderers. Whoever decided to establish the outpost Tal Binyamin in memory of Binyamin and Talyia Kahane, H'yd, should have thought good and hard about what should be done if pressure was put on them demanding its evacuation. The voluntary evacuation under government pressure of the outpost Tal Binyamin only desecrated the memory of Binyamin and Talya Kahane. Speaking of voluntary evacuation, we suggest that the Yesha leadership try it. Those who chose to evacuate Tal Binyamin in order to avoid a confrontation with the IDF, are part of the old school which failed in preventing the evacuation of Yamit. Mired in ancient concepts and uncreative in their thinking, they are incapable of preventing the eventual dismantlements of Bet El and Ofra, God forbid. Settlements and outposts are not trump cards that are used for negotiation purposes. The declaration of Jewish sovereignty over all parts of Eretz Yisrael, which these outposts represent, are a Kiddush Hashem, and the forfeit of even one outpost is a Chillul Hashem. If a referendum were taken amongst the Yesha settlers, it would be seen that just as the policies of Sharon do not reflect the views of Likud constituents, so, too, the Yesha Concil does not represent the settlers. What Sharon and the Yesha Council both possess is firm control over key power sources, as well as public funding. These are people who are ideologically bought off by Omri Sharon's money. And on this the Torah says "bribery will blind the eyes of the wise man". The Yesha Council has no alternative for Sharon and the left. They refuse to adopt the truth which Rabbi Kahane proclaimed over thirty years ago: there can be no co-existence between Arabs and Jews; that the mitzvah of settling the land means expelling the Arab trespasser. The land of Israel is a divine gift to the Jewish People, and all the "realistic" and "practical" security arguments are absolutely worthless. We must stand up, straight and strong and declare that the land is ours. He who is unwilling to lead should let go of the reigns.
Let the Yesha Council leaders vacate their posts for true Jewish
leadership.
David Ha'ivri is founder and director of "Revava" a national
grassroots movement for Jewish land rights in Eretz Yisrael. He
publishes the Darka Shel Torah and Ideas in Action newsletters. He
recently was cleared of the charge of "incitement to racism" for
producing and distributing T-shirts with a picture of Rabbi Meir
Kahane, with the saying, "No Arabs, No Terror", but was found guilty
of a technicality in the same case.
|
|
US EMBASSY SWAMPED WITH PHONE CALLS TO RELEASE POLLARD
Posted by Lee Caplan, June 2, 2004. |
|
This was written by Tal Yamin-Wolfowitz and appeared in Maariv yesterday.
"Release Pollard now"- that's the message the members of the Committee for Pollard have been using since this morning when swamping the directory of the US embassy in Tel-Aviv. Committee members have spread brochures across Israel which contains the phone number of the embassy. According to the members, "We will continue to disrupt the US diplomatic activity in Israel in any way possible as long as Jonathan Pollard is still in prison". J4JP Adds: The Phone-In Rally for Jonathan Pollard which began 1 June 2004, is the intitiative of the Jerusalem-based Committee To Bring Jonathan Pollard Home. On Day One of the Phone-In Rally thousands of phone calls were received, effectively overwhelming the Embassy's phone lines. The campaign was so successful that the Committee asks the general public to keep those call coming, to continue calling the US Embassy in Tel Aviv every day for as long as it takes, until Jonathan Pollard is home. The telephone number in Israel is: 03-519-7575.
|
|
EAST AND WEST PALESTINE
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, June 2, 2004. |
|
Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is now proposing to bring Egypt back into Gaza, and Jordan back into Judea and Samaria, i.e. the West Bank. They are "supposed" to help the "Palestinians" reform their security services, "democratize," and stabilize society so that the Palestinian Authority can govern. This plan it is promised, will bring the Roadmap back "online" and lead to Palestinian independence. Was that East and West Pakistan? If a Palestinian state is born, East and West Palestine will suffer a similar end. Or, do they intend to carve up Israel to gain territorial contiguity? Will we be reduced to a Northern and Southern Kingdom? Will Tel-Aviv and the Galilee - formerly the coastal and northern parts of Israel - become disconnected from the Negev, the newly formed Southern State? Whatever they tell you, know this, states collapse, countries or areas of a country merge with other states, and some ethic groups go extinct in time. East and West Palestine is just such a creature. It will be still born at best, on long-term international life-support. But that won't save it from the fait of East and West Pakistan! So, even if an illegitimate child-state is born, expect it's early demise. Why you might ask? For starters, because they're never was an independent Palestinian Arab State or identity. The closest thing they have to an independent identity is hatred of Jews and Israel, and the desire for statehood. If they achieved statehood and actually lived peaceably with Israel, their whole purpose to existence would end. History abhors a vacuum and the so-called "Palestinian identity" will probably be subsumed in a greater Arab or Muslim identity. Beyond this, Jewish identity is stronger. Simply put, Israeliness not withstanding, Jewish identity, the connection to our ancient and modern homeland, will prevail over a sick child-state and it's international doctor-backers. You know, I feel that the Quartet - the United States, EU, UN and Russia - is about to play the role of Dr. Kevorkian (the suicide doctor). They're about to help the "Palestinians" commit national suicide. Why is this child-state doomed? Because it won't be a democracy. My proof, ask yourself, will Jews living in towns in Yesha - the West Bank and Gaza - be allowed to stay and be equal Palestinian citizens - including voting rights and electability to parliament - as Israeli Arabs can be in Israel? No, they're talking about ethnic cleansing, making "Palestine" Judenrein, free of Jews. And a state born in such sin will never redeem itself. Who dreams otherwise? Shimon Peres? Yossi Beilin? The others who brought you the Oslo War? East and West Palestine will be a Terror State and its eventual end will gladden the hearts of millions around the world. If born, this moral-AIDS ridden Terror State won't be a democracy. Lacking democracy, freedom, and real control over their own lives, Arabs will continue to suffer deprivations at the hands of their 'leaders' and be used to attack Israel. Because it won't integrate the different elements of Arab society into an organic whole, they will never overcome their deeper inner contradictions. As long as they have an external enemy, the Jews, they might hold off the internal feud, but for how long? East and West Palestine won't last because they aren't the same societies. Gaza is medieval, insular, Islamic, poverty stricken, overcrowded and in just plain language, "a hell hole". It has no culture beyond terrorism, and no chance of commerce or serious relations with Egypt its neighbor to the west, they'll be under Egyptian "occupation," remember. Cut-off from Israel who got tired of being attacked by them, with whom will they interact, the Bedouin of the Sinai? The "West Bank" by contrast is more cosmopolitan. Although overwhelmingly Muslim, there are a significant minority of Christians. It has the potential to be more secular, more democratic, and more tolerant. Trade and cultural relations with Jordan exist and will continue to flourish. East and West Palestine will suffer from uneven development. If the child-state is born, and democracy does "rear its ugly head," with its tolerance, pluralism, and western movies, music, and bars, you can count on the Ayatollahs and Sheikhs of Gaza to rant and rave against "the infidels" in East Palestine, the West Bank. For those of you who don't remember, East and West Pakistan fought a bloody civil war in 1971, and the outcome was Bangladesh, an independent state. Although both parts of Pakistan were Muslim - the only reason for its separation from India in 1947 in the first place - cultural and ethnic differences led to serious animosity between the two sides. But developmental inequality is what pushed the final button. East Pakistan was an economic basket case (as it continues to be today). "Blessed" by being at the convergence point of several natural phenomena; the southern third of East Pakistan/Bangladesh sits on the mouth of the Ganges River, where it empties into the Bay of Bengal. Never short of water, they regularly suffer from floods from the Ganges overflow and yearly Monsoons (hurricanes). A former International Relations professor of mine - originally from Thailand - once commented, that Bangladesh is situated in one of the harshest inhabited areas of the world. "Why would people want to live there?" He asked. "It would do the international community good, to simply move the entire population out of there. It would save a lot of lives, money, and time in disaster relief efforts." East Pakistan - the more populous area - for years complained that they weren't getting their fair share of central government budgets. After a period of military rule, in December 1970, the East Pakistani Awami League won absolute control over the newly formed parliament. With the Awami League set to control the government and demanding autonomy for East Pakistan in a federated state, General Yahya - junta leader from West Pakistan - chose to disband the assembly and invaded the East. Civil war broke out and after a half a million Bengalis (East Pakistanis) were massacred, India invaded to establish order. Ultimately India recognized Bangladeshi independence, and so did the international community. But India continues to suffer till today from the Muslim fanatics of Pakistan. Is that the prognosis for East and West Palestine? Is a civil war or societal degeneration in the offing for the unborn child-state? Will there be continuous warfare between Israel and Palestine? Or would a partial birth abortion better serve the international community? East and West Palestine is an experiment doomed to failure from the start. Like my former professor's advice about Bangladesh, I suggest about East and West Palestine, that "It would do the international community good, to simply move the entire population out of there. It would save a lot of lives, money, and time..." Few things in life are certain, but these two are worth betting on; first, that East and West Palestine won't survive if born, and second, that the territorial integrity of the Land of Israel will. The Jewish people didn't survive 2,000 years of dispersal and persecution, just to return to their homeland and then give it away to 7th century Arab imperialists and early 20th century Arab squatters. Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst & consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko |
|
NEWS JUNKIE
Posted by Michael Freund, June 2, 2004. |
|
This is an article of mine from The Jerusalem Post about the daily
dose of poison in Israel's mainstream Hebrew press.
It has been over a year now since I took a fateful step, one that has not only served to boost my morale, but has also reinforced my bond with the Land and people of Israel. And just what is it that has invigorated me so much and restored my faith in the splendor of this country? The answer is really quite simple: canceling my subscriptions to the three main Hebrew-language newspapers. Like most news junkies, I used to wake up each morning hungry to get my hands around the latest information. Hurtling down the steps, I would thrust open the front door, caring less about my attire and more about what I might find in the latest batch of headlines. Like a creature of prey, I would pounce on Yediot, Maariv and Haaretz, consuming the news stories, devouring the opinion pieces and topping off the feast with a glance at the analysis and commentary. But as much as this steady diet of news kept me up to date on what was happening, it also had the cumulative effect of dampening my spirits and souring my mood. I could not help but notice just how downbeat and negative the general tone of Israel's news media would generally prove to be, and how intent they seemed on tearing down just about everything of value in this country. With their decidedly left-wing agenda, anti-religious bias, and outright demonization of certain sectors of the population, the Israeli media long ago ceased to be a unifying or even enlightening factor in the country's civic discourse. Even now, during a time of war, when the Palestinians are waging a bitter campaign of terror against us, the media continues to do its utmost to dishearten, discourage and depress the public. Take, for example, some of the stories that appeared last week on the eve of the holiday of Shavuot, when Jews around the world celebrate the giving of the Torah. I should have known better, but like any addict, I just couldn't help myself, so I went out and bought the papers. Not surprisingly, despite the lofty nature of the festival, Israel's Hebrew newspapers seemed determined to undermine the spirit of the day. Perhaps the most egregious offender was Yediot Aharonot, the mass-circulation daily with the largest readership in the country. Its holiday supplement for Shavuot featured a cover story about how hundreds of Israelis have at last discovered the 'Israeli dream' - in Australia, of course. Entitled 'The Garden of Eden is in our hands', the piece was a virtual invitation to leave the country, describing the idyllic life which so many former Israelis have now found in Byron Bay, Australia, far away from the conflict back home. They play soccer, speak Hebrew, and ostensibly enjoy all the benefits of Israel without actually living here. Call it Zionism without Zion a la the media. And if that was not enough to convince the average Israeli to consider relocating elsewhere, Yediot also ran a two-page spread in the same issue singing the praises of life in Finland, where the streets are clean, the education is excellent, and the welfare state is alive and well. Sure, Helsinki is not exactly what Theodor Herzl or the ancient prophets of Israel had in mind, but why should that stop Yediot from making Israelis feel foolish for choosing to live in the land of their forefathers? But it didn't stop there. Another article in the paper, entitled 'Brotherhood of Minorities' described in glowing terms the rising incidence of intermarriage between Russian immigrants to Israel and Israeli Arabs. With all the political correctness and sappy 'love triumphs over all' cliches they could muster, Yediot was happy to tell us about a young Jewish woman from the former Soviet Union who found joy and happiness when she married an Israeli Arab and converted to Islam. You will surely be pleased to hear that she is now raising her two young Jewish children in the Muslim religion. Aghast at this motley selection of articles, I reached for the newspaper's magazine, but that hardly proved any better. The lead story was a six-page color spread highlighting an interview with Victor Ostrovsky, the rogue former Mossad employee who sold out his country by writing a couple of books full of what even he now admits were dubious allegations. Among other things, Ostrovsky accused Israel of plotting to assassinate US President George Bush. Astonishingly enough, the article attempts to generate sympathy for Ostrovsky, even though he betrayed the country and did great damage to Israel's image abroad. Is this really the type of person that the media should be celebrating? The other two Hebrew dailies, Maariv and Haaretz, were no more comforting, with the former profiling a beautiful young Israeli actress who has decided to go abroad for an extended leave, while the latter devoted its magazine section to Israel's alleged mistreatment of its Arab Muslim minority. Truly the perfect Shavuot afternoon reading. To be fair, the job of the media is not necessarily to serve as a cheerleader for society. But it most certainly shouldn't be trying to demoralize the country at every possible turn, either. By feeding the public a daily dose of poison, Israel's news media is doing the country a great disservice. Harping on the negative, while ignoring the positive, only undermines our collective sense of hope about the future. It sows despair, and plays straight into the hands of our foes, who want nothing more than to see us give up and call it a day. And so, while I may continue to check their websites periodically for late-breaking news, and may even one day resume delivery, I am quite glad that for now I stopped bringing the three main Hebrew papers, with all the noxious news they contained, into my home. On occasion, it seems, ignorance truly can be a form of bliss. The writer served as Deputy Director of Communications & Policy Planning under former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. |
|
TELL US THE TRUTH, ARIK: TELLING 'NOTHING' IS MERELY LYING WITH SILENCE
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, June 2, 2004. |
|
Clearly. Have you been cutting questionable under-the-table deals with other countries and are you now in a panic to complete these deals before they are exposed and questions asked? Tell us about the threats from the U.S. State Department, delivered perhaps by Ambassador. David Satterfield, a senior U.S. State Department official - in the name of President George W. Bush? Share with us your need to sacrifice Gaza so President Bush can balance his failure in Iraq with a 'win' in Gaza before his November elections? Tell us about the 'pipeline' deals you are cutting with Egypt's President Hosni Mubarak which you have kept so carefully hidden? Tell us about the gambling Casino to be built by the Arab Muslim Palestinians on Land you wish to vacate in Gaza/Gush Katif? Tell us if this is another 'Greek Island' affair - possibly involving your attorney/chief-of-staff Dov Weissglass, whose firm has represented Arab Muslim Palestinian interests in the Jericho Casino - owned by Yassir Arafat with some Israeli 'silent partners'? Tell us about the quashing of the investigation of the 'Greek Island' affair by Attorney General Mazuz, whom 'you' appointed? Tell us about the investigations which have simply evaporated over illegal foreign donor money for your last election? Tell us about the deal(s) you have cut with the Russians to have their oil docked at an Israeli port and then transferred by pipeline to the Gulf of Aqaba to be re-loaded onto Russian tankers, saving them 23 days of sea transport? What's the financial cut? Tell us what is being promised by President George W. Bush, although it is the American Congress who really holds your purse strings? We recall then President Clinton's $850 million promise to then PM Ehud Barak if he would retreat from Lebanon - which was never paid. Tell us why Bush is suddenly worried about your withdrawal/retreat strategy which he encouraged/threatened and the probability of Gaza filling up with Super Terrorists for whose Global Terrorism Bush will be blamed? (and rightly so). Tell us why you switched from being an elected Democratic Prime Minister to a 'benevolent[?]' Dictator, threatening to fire all those in your Cabinet who would dare to vote their consciences against your re-partition plans for the Jewish lands in YESHA? Tell us, Mr. Prime Minister, Mr. Security, about the issuance of your gag order on Israel's military commanders from testifying against your withdrawal/retreat plans? Why would you insist that your Cabinet be shielded from testimony by field commanders and Israel's Intelligence services about the influx of Terrorists? Why were they/we not to hear about the extended range missiles, shipped from Egypt (by sea and/or tunnel) that can hit cities or towns in Israel's South? Some already have. Gush Katif has been hit with more than 4,000 missiles/bombs/armed ambush - as has the city of Sderot just yesterday (June 1). Tell us, Arik, of your back room discussions with Shimon Peres to dump your Likud Party and replace it with a Labor Party government majority - should your Cabinet refuse to give in to your panicky withdrawal from Gaza/Gush Katif with their stamps of approval? Tell us, "General" Sharon, about your plan for a quick, overnight, Barak-style pull-out from Gush Katif/Gaza before the 8,000 men, women and children who lived there for three generations, your Cabinet, your Knesset and/or the rest of Israel protest such a dastardly move? Tell us, Housing Minister Sharon, what you plan to do with the homes, factories, schools, synagogues, businesses that the 8,000 men, women and children have built over three generations - often with their own money, certainly with their own investment of blood, sweat and tears? Tell us, "General" (ret.) Sharon about your secret negotiations with President Hosni Mubarak and the U.S. State Department to cancel that part of the Camp David Accords that calls for a permanent demilitarization of the Sinai Desert and, at your request, put Egyptian troops into the Sinai and on Israel's Southern Border? Tell us, "Generalissmo" Sharon, about your follow-on withdrawal/retreat discussions of troops, patrols, checkpoints from Judea and Samaria to force total evacuations of Jews from Israel's heartland - in lock-step with the Arabist U.S. State Department? Tell us, Arik, why the early reports now speak of the under-the-table deals you have been cooking with King Abdullah of Jordan which call for bringing Jordanian troops into the Jewish communities you will abandon in Judea and Samaria? To guard them? Really, we're not that gullible. Tell us about your statement to the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee to wit" "By the end of 2005, there will be no Jews in Gaza or the Northern Shomron." ?? Tell us, Mr. Former Defense Minister, do you plan on allowing the training and arming of a 350,00 man (or larger) Para-Military Force in Gaza that will threaten all of Israel and Jordan - as well as planning Global Terrorist operations from a secure base you plan to make sovereign? So, you will have Egyptian troops in the South and Jordanian troops to the east and in the heartland. What do you propose for the Golan Heights? Syria? Tell us about your discussions with Bush, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell about evacuating the Golan to the Syrians while, under the Syrian Accountability Act, President Bush uses a slap-on-the-wrist penalty against Syria for aiding Islamists to hit American soldiers in Iraq? (The U.S. Congress should have started impeachment hearings on this bit of political trickery.) Tell us, Arik, to whom will you gift Jerusalem? Arafat, Abdullah or the Saudis? Tell us, how you will avoid the permanent title of 'Quisling' because you negotiated in secret with other nations to re-partition Israel and how you still manage to avoid indictment for Treason? I must admit, you are a clever scoundrel - perhaps even more twisty and dangerous to the Jewish people than Shimon Peres who orchestrated Oslo, causing at least 1500 Israelis to be murdered by Arab Muslim Terrorists since Oslo was signed in 1993. There is a lot you have NOT told the Israeli people - which matches what the Bush Administration and U.S. State Department have NOT told the American people and/or Congress. When one goes into court on a serious matter and it is proven that they knowingly lied, their crime is labeled "with unclean hands". Are either you or Bush ready to testify to your constituents that you come to them with clean hands? The absence of truth is merely a lie by other means. If you win the vote in the Cabinet on June 13th to retreat from Gush Katif/Gaza, the Israeli people and Jews all over the world will lose. Clearly, you represent other interests (not Jewish or Israeli) and cannot be relied upon as a leader or protector of the Jewish nation's interests. You must be forced to resign because you have lost all control of your office and yourself. Strangely, we know that, if you were not now Prime Minister, you would condemn and fight like hell any attempt to evacuate the settlements you helped to build and the re-partition of Israel. Arik, you have really overstayed your welcome. Let me remind you that you were elected as a Prime Minister and temporary custodian for the Land of Israel. It is not within your job description to embezzle the Land from the Jewish people and future generations because you are merely a 'Trustee', not King or Dictator - unless you have, indeed, overthrown the government in a technical 'coup d'etat'. Remember, Israel was established in a Land Trust by HaShem (G-d) for all time and cannot be broken by temporary political custodians whose names are erased in time. 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). |
|
ENGINEERING CIVILIAN CASUALTIES
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, June 2, 2004. |
|
This OpEd in today's Jerusalem Post documents the way in which the
Palestinian Authority (PA) systematically encourages its civilians to
put themselves on the front lines in military zones for its own
political purposes.
It could have been an invitation to a social event, calling for "all citizens - women, children and the elderly" to participate. But the venue was anything but hospitable. The event was dangerous and the consequences deadly. Two days before four Palestinian civilians were killed and others injured during the recent fighting in Rafah, the Palestinian Authority called on women, children and the elderly to stand in front of the IDF bulldozers that were searching for weapons tunnels between Gaza and Egypt. The area was infested with terrorists, and was the location of heavy fighting between the IDF and armed Palestinians. Instead of urging civilians to stay out of harm's way, the PA intentionally sent them to the front lines of an active war zone. In the words of the official Palestinian Authority daily, the call was to create "an impassable barrier for the occupation bulldozers" and to "prevent their progress to the Rafah neighborhoods." The principal of a school in Rafah "called for all the citizens, women, children and elderly to participate" according to the May 17, Al Ayyam newspaper. The call was answered. Thousands of civilians marched into the heart of the battle zone. Tragically, this is not the first time the PA has urged civilians into combat zones. It is part of a consistent and disturbing pattern. Since the outbreak of violence in October 2000, the PA has been pushing civilians, especially children, to leave the safety of their homes and join the fighting. Children have been enticed into battle through manipulative music videos, broadcast for hours every day on official PA television, depicting youngsters in combat as heroes. One such video, broadcast repeatedly by the PA, shows young boys and girls in army uniform taking part in a frenzied war dance, along with other scenes of children participating in the violence at the battlefront. The song accompanying the visuals is a musical call to arms for the children: "Oh, young ones: Shake the earth, raise the stones. "You will not be saved, O Zionist, From the volcano of my county's stones. "You are the target of my eyes, I will even willingly fall as a shahid [martyr for Allah]. "Allahu akbar! Oh, young ones!" Children are directed by Palestinian television to go to the front and "willingly fall" as martyrs. In this glorification of war for children, even a toddler who can barely sit up is filmed breaking stones for the older children. ANOTHER VIDEO, aired repeatedly from 2000 through 2002, instructs very young children to attack soldiers with stones and tells them about their supposed strength and invincibility. "Don't be afraid," a 10-year-old sings to a five-year-old. "The stone in their hand turns into a rifle." Every adult knows that stones can't be a match for rifles. But the Palestinian leadership mesmerizes its children through music and dance, while inculcating the fanciful notion that "the stone in their hand turns into a rifle," and that they should therefore be out fighting IDF rifles with their stones. As they have done repeatedly in the past, the United Nations and world media have rushed to condemn Israel for the deaths of civilians during Operation Rainbow. But very few observers have looked beyond these lamentable deaths to ask the crucial questions: Why are PA leaders sending civilians, especially children, to the front lines and encouraging them to seek death? What kind of political leaders send their five-year-olds, their "women, children and elderly," to the front lines of a war zone? Yasser Arafat supplied the answer on Palestinian television several years back. Asked what message he would like to send to Palestinian children, Arafat answered: "This child, who is grasping the stone, facing the tank, is it not the greatest message to the world when that hero becomes a shahid? We are proud of them" (PATV January 15, 2002). The PA chairman's explanation that dead children are the greatest message to the world finally puts PA policy into perspective. Palestinian leaders know that civilian corpses make powerful images and increase global anti-Israel sentiments. Dead Palestinian children make the Palestinians look like victims and create a smoke screen for the PA's terrorism war against Israeli civilians. Photos of dead Palestinian children are manipulated to balance photos of dead Israeli civilians killed in pizza shops and on buses, murdered by Palestinian terrorists. Simply put, dead Palestinian children create the illusion of moral symmetry. The saddest part of this twisted value system is how well it is succeeding. Palestinian civilians continue to flock to the front lines. And, tragically, the media have fallen for the Arafat trap, enabling the PA to continue its terror war while the world laments the "cycle of violence." Arafat's propaganda campaign, built on the corpses of these civilian pawns, continues to fool even the best-intentioned observers who focus only on who inadvertently hit the wrong target, not on who deliberately put the target there in the first place. Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -Palestinian Media Watch - (http://www.pmw.org.il). Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
BANDYING INTERNATIONAL LAW ABOUT
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 2, 2004. |
|
Amnesty Intl. (A.I.) and Human Rights Watch (HRW) call Israeli demolition of Arab buildings in Gaza discriminatory and against international law. Actually, international law holds that structures used by armed combatants in a war zone lose their neutrality. (During WWII, when the Germans emplaced a machine gun in a farmhouse, were the advancing GIs not supposed to blow it up? Ask HRW if they, but not the Germans, were supposed to respect its neutrality!) HRW relies upon unnamed 'eyewitnesses" in criticizing IDF killing of Arabs. It calls the civilians "peaceful marchers," but self-contradictorily admits that some might have been armed. For hours, those NGOs relayed P.A. false claims as their own, of a big massacre in Gaza. They did not investigate. They did not check that the march was a cover for attacks on Israeli soldiers. ACRI, Physicians for Human Rights, and B'tselem claimed that the IDF barred Arabs from medical treatment. They ignored the fact that P.A. gunmen exploited ambulances militarily (which is the war crime known as treachery), as usual. They are contradicted by the IDF offer to get the Arabs treated in Israeli hospitals (IMRA, 5/24 from NGO Monitor). Since the Arabs are engaged in a collective war, and their culture encourages deceit, their "eyewitnesses" usually offer propaganda. The bias of these NGOs is proved by their accepting one side's press releases unquestioningly. That side's press releases eventually become questioned and disproved. If these NGOs had any fairness and decency, they would stop accepting from a demonstrably foul source. As for international law, how could they not know by now that it authorizes what Israel does and forbids what the P.A. does? These groups hurl accusations of "violating international law" as tendentiously as racists hurl accusations of racism. They are like devils with fake halos glued on. Let us not be manipulated into cowering. Their bias on the side of terrorists, they amount to accomplices of terrorists. People with humane impulses should stop donating to such organizations. One doesn't "do good" by donating to evil. TOLERANCE IN THE ISLAMIC CONFERENCE" Although that was the topic of the Intl. Islamic Conference, they didn't allow the non-Muslim observer to comment. He concluded that they don't want an honest dialogue. They allow their people to clash with Western civilization. The conference presented pointless research, demagogic speeches, and predictable cliches. It presented no practical example of tolerance; it just glorified past eras of Islam, reputedly (but not really) tolerant. It ignored the Koran's later verses that advocate intolerance, as fulfilled by Egypt's current persecution of the Couppts and by the death penalty for converts out of Islam. It rejected violence but did not criticize violence against infidels. It was against terrorism, but didn't mention terrorism against Israel and Jews or in Sudan. Its only concern about Sudan was for the country's unity (under Arab repression). It called on Muslims to uphold women's rights under Islam, but mentioned no such rights, as not to be forced to have a painful circumcision. The call went out for democracy, but without recommending the means (IMRA, 5/24 from MEMRI). This is typical of Muslim conferences and Arab press releases. They tend to be generalized, bland endorsements of safely vague, fine-sounding principles. These offend no one but accomplish nothing. Why hold them? Apparently for propaganda. These conferences maintain a facade of civility. They reinforce the misconception of Islam being a religion of peace. It is militant, military, and not ashamed of it, but it doesn't want to disclose its hand and arouse the lethargic West to a powerful defense. JIHADIST SELF-JUSTIFICATION Besides denying the bombings are terrorism, Islamists justify them as defensive. They claim to be resisting occupation, as if such means were legitimate. Their bombing of Spanish trains was called resistance to occupation of Iraq by Spanish troops (IMRA, 5/24). Spain is not Iraq. The Spanish troops embarked because of Iraqi aggression against Kuwait, among other violations of international law and armistice agreements. Resistance to that is improper. NEW FIENDISHNESS FABRICATED BY ARABS & ATTRIBUTED TO ISRAEL Citing P.A. medical "sources," the official P.A. news agency accused Israel of having shot an Arab with a chemical-bearing bullet and keeping him from medical attention until he succumbed. The poison had the ghastly effect of causing his body to disintegrate where touched (Op. Cit.). Although the Arabs are striving to find means of poisoning Israelis en masse, and although the Arabs in the P.A. and Egypt have barred medics from treating wounded Jews, they project that fiendish mentality onto the Israelis. They falsely accuse the Israelis of poisoning the Arabs in numerous, horrible ways, and of barring medics from treating wounded Arabs. Actually, Israel has high standards of humaneness in treating the enemy, whereas the Arabs murder prisoners. I think Israel is too benign. Numerous Arabs from the P.A. get treated in Hadassah Hospital, Jerusalem, probably without charge. Why assist the enemy population, when one's own is becoming impoverished from enemy aggression? Let Arafat steal less humanitarian aid! ARABS CHANGE THE RULES & CRY "INJUSTICE" In 1947, the Arabs tried to annihilate the Jews of Israel. The Arab aggressors lost and fled. Now they claim a moral right to return, though their hostility is unabated. Let them return to try again? The Arabs wail about some of their villages having been leveled after the war, they destroyed all the Jewish communities they conquered and massacred some of the captured Jews. The Arabs believe in ethnic cleansing when they can perpetrate it. Their notion of equity is one-sided. The Arabs want to change the rules of warfare, when it suits them. That is not fair; they are unjust (Prof. Steven Plaut, 5/25). ARAB INDIGNATION AGAINST THE IRAQI WAR A Saudi ambassador calls the US war on Iraq colonial, intended to get Iraqi oil (IMRA, 5/29). The US did not take Iraqi oil or the proceeds from it. It used funds captured from the regime and tens of billions of dollars of its own money on reconstruction of the country. That generous country of mine lavished more money on Iraq than on any other country. The US is in process of turning power back over to Iraq. What other conqueror was so generous? The Ambassador's claim is totally and obviously false. The Ambassador forgot that the US saved S. Arabia from impending invasion by Iraq! Since even the Ambassador of S. Arabia maligns the US, it is unsurprising that S. Arabia comes in for some criticism in the US media. His government reacts hysterically to that criticism, accusing the US of conducting a "systematic" propaganda campaign against the desert kingdom. If only the US did recognize that S. Arabia is its enemy! Going further, the Saudis attributed this systematic propaganda campaign to manipulation by the Jews. Always the Jews! Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
MAJOR ANTI-SEMITIC MOTIFS IN ARAB CARTOONS
Posted by Jerusalem Center of Public Affairs (JCPA), June 2, 2004. |
This was an interview with Joel Kotek, conducted by Manfred
Gerstenfeld. (The original article includes some of the cartoons
mentioned. To view these cartoons, see:
http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-21.htm.)
* The main recurrent motif in Arab cartoons concerning Israel is "the devilish Jew." This image conveys the idea that Jews behave like Nazis, kill children and love blood. The similarity with themes promulgated by the Nazis is evident. Many Arab cartoons praise suicide bombing or call for murder. The collective image of the Jews thus projected lays the groundwork for a possible genocide. "The collective image of the Jews created by Arab cartoons lays the groundwork for a possibility of genocide. My collection of Arab caricatures demonstrates this. One can argue about whether these genocidal ideas are conscious or subconscious. My view is that they are still at the subconscious stage." Dr. Joel Kotek, a political scientist at the Free University of Brussels, searched the Internet daily for anti-Semitic cartoons in the Arab media for over two and a half years and found about 2,000. Even an initial superficial analysis revealed that the cartoons not only targeted Israel, but were aimed at all Jews. His subsequent research resulted in a book co-authored with his brother Dan Kotek. Published in French, its title translates as In the name of anti-Semitism: The image of the Jews and Israel in the caricature since the second Intifada. 1 In a world where image plays a central role, the cartoon, Kotek stresses, has become a popular and efficient means of communication. A caricature may have as much influence on public opinion as an editorial. The visual impact of these drawings is further strengthened by the fact that many Arab cartoonists are quite gifted illustrators. Kotek says: "The main recurrent theme in these cartoons is 'the devilish Jew.' By extension, this image suggests that the Jewish religion must be diabolic, and the entire Jewish people evil. I even found a Greek Orthodox cartoonist of Lebanese origin, who conveys the message that the Jewish religion has caused the State of Israel to be so 'evil.' The cartoons convey the idea that Jews behave like Nazis, leading readers to conclude that the only logical solution is their elimination. As the Arab world is becoming increasingly convinced of these ideas, they have no inhibitions showing them on a multitude of websites." Several hundred Arab cartoons from Kotek's collection are categorized according to ten anti-Semitic themes in his book: "The first theme is based on the oldest anti-Semitic motif, demonization of the Jew. In the Islamic world the Jew's status - like that of Christians - is that of a dhimmi, a second-class citizen. "Israel, an entire state of these 'inferior creatures,' has won military victories against the Arab world. By their logic, this was only possible, they believe, because Jews are 'satanic beings.' In the cartoons I collected, the Jew is depicted as inhuman and an enemy of humanity. This dehumanization is necessary to justify the hoped for elimination. "On 28 December 1999 - well before the second Palestinian uprising - Al-Hayat al-Jadida, the official Palestinian Authority journal, published a cartoon expressing this core idea. It depicted an old man in a djellaba, symbolizing the twentieth century, taking leave of a young man wearing a tee-shirt symbolizing the twenty-first century. In between them stood a small Jew with a Star of David on his breast, above which an arrow pointed to him saying, 'the illness of the century.' 2 "A few months later on 22 March 2000, the same journal ran another cartoon showing a large Pope talking to a small Jew with the skin, feet, and tail of an animal, and a big hooked nose, wearing a kippa. The Pope exclaimed 'Peace on Earth' while the Satanic-looking Jew calls out 'Colonies on Earth.'"3 A second central theme in the cartoons Kotek has collected is the Jew as a murderer of God. "This is originally a Christian motif. Bernard Lewis has shown how this theme had been appropriated by the Islamic world. This representation serves in efforts to obtain the sympathy of some Christians by adapting one of their central myths. "Lewis said that the first manifestations of anti-Semitism in the Middle East originated among Christian minorities there who were inspired by Europeans. These ideas initially had only a limited impact. The poison spread after 1933, when Nazi Germany promoted hatred of the Jews in the Arab world. Thereafter, the Palestinian conflict enabled the diffusion of an anti-Semitic interpretation of history.4 "In the Muslim worldview one cannot kill God, but can wound Him. Their discourse says that not only did the Jews betray Mohammed, but before that, they had turned Jesus - a prophet, according to Islam - into a martyr. In a dangerous mutation, Islamic anti-Semitism says, as if it were to the Christians, that the Jews treat Palestine as they treated Christ. In this way they transform the story's main characters: the Israelis have become the Romans and Jesus has become a Palestinian. "Whenever there is a report from Bethlehem, the Israeli soldiers are depicted by Arab cartoonists as Romans, while Bethlehem is described as Christ's birthplace. In the Islamic world the motif of the Jews wounding the prophet is not ancient. Its inventors are Christian Arabs in the 1980s." "The third motif in these cartoons is Israel as a Nazi state. This is based on two contradictory allegations, which the Islamists try to reconcile. Their first claim is that the Shoah never happened. Their second contention is that if it did, it has caused more damage to the Palestinians because they believe they are being treated worse than the Nazis treated the Jews. "Long before Sharon came to power, the theme of the Israeli as a Nazi was well-represented in the Arab caricature. According to it, all Zionists from Peres and Barak to Sharon are inspired by Nazi methods. The paradox is quite evident if one remembers the Arab sympathies for the Nazis during the Second World War. After the war many Arab intellectuals denied the crimes the Nazis committed during the Holocaust. These were rarely denounced. "A cartoon in the Egyptian Al-Akhbar shows Barak dressed as a Nazi with a Hitler moustache, blood dripping from his hands.5 In another caricature in the Egyptian daily Al Goumhouriya from 1996, Hitler is shown wearing a swastika band on his arm, while telling Shimon Peres, wearing a Star of David band on his arm: 'I made a mistake by not understanding the importance of American support.'6 "A 1993 cartoon in the Syrian daily Teshreen shows one soldier with a Star of David on his helmet and another with a swastika on his helmet. The caption reads: 'The Security Council has studied the case of genocide of the Palestinians.' The long list is of Israeli crimes; the small list of Nazi crimes.7 In the Lebanese Daily Star in 2000, four consecutive drawings show how Sharon, with a Star of David on his lapel, becomes Hitler with a moustache, and on his lapel, a swastika. The cartoonist Jabra Stavro, born in Beirut, has won many prizes."8 Kotek says: "The fourth motif - zoomorphism - is a very common theme throughout the world. To abuse one's adversaries, one dehumanizes them by turning them into animals. In Nazi, Soviet and Romanian caricatures, the Jew is often depicted as a spider, perceived as an evil animal. Stavro in the Daily Star portrays Barak, with a Star of David on his breast, as a spider interrupting the peace process.9 "The two other predominant anti-Semitic zoomorphic motifs are the blood-thirsty vampire and the octopus. The vampire image is a classic theme used by anti-Semites. I have not found any other people besides the Jews represented as such. This genocide-preparing design originates in Christian imagination. "Another caricature by Stavro in the Daily Star of 23 October 2000, depicted a spider with a Star of David on its body and the head of Ehud Barak in a web on which the word 'war' is written many times. A cartoon in the weekly La Revue du Liban shows an octopus with the Star of David on its body, its tentacles strangling Fatah, Jihad and Hamas. This is another cartoon by Stavro.10 "The Arab cartoonists often follow the Nazis as far as the bestial representation of the Jews is concerned. The messages transmitted are that the Jews are destructive, inhuman and evil. In 1934 a Nazi cartoonist drew an octopus with a Star of David whose tentacles covered the globe.11 A 2002 cartoon from Russia shows a Star of David with America throwing coins on it. The star then mutates into an octopus with rockets and planes in its tentacles.12 "Occasionally, other animals are used to dehumanize the Jews. Emad Hajjaj, a well-known Ramallah-born cartoonist living in Jordan, designed a two-headed snake with Stars of David on its body, depicting the heads of Sharon and Barak.13 The cartoon's message is simple: these persons are two faces of the same monstrosity. It was published in the Jordanian daily Al Dustour. "Sometimes one also finds pigs representing the Jew in contemporary Arab cartoons. This classic dehumanizing motif has its origins in the Middle Ages, though everybody knew that the pig was a forbidden animal to the Jews. "This approach of zoomorphism exists in every culture and has cultural specifics. The snake is used by almost everybody. It appeared very often in French caricatures about the Germans before the Second World War and vice versa. The Hutus in Africa consider the Tutsis cockroaches. "In the Israeli press one rarely finds cartoons depicting Arabs as animals. In such instances, they do not appear in mainstream papers but originate from extremist bodies such as the forbidden Kach movement or the Women in Green. These occasionally present Arafat as a pig or snake."14 "The fifth anti-Semitic motif in Arab cartoons echoes the classic conspiracy theme, that 'the Jews control the world.' This explains Arab thought as to why they have not been able to win against these people. Before 1967, the classic theme - also in the Soviet world - was that the Israelis were the aircraft carrier of the United States in the Middle East. "Today the opposite idea is depicted. Israel's opponents allege that the Jews dominate the United States. By implication, they also claim that the Jews are the 'masters of the world' - a classic conspiracy theme exploited by the Nazis. For the communists, the Jews were the bourgeoisie and the capitalists; for the Nazis they represented the essence of capitalism. "Many Arabs wonder why the United States supports Israel rather than their own cause. They find this mysterious and have developed a simple response: The Jews dominate the world. As the Arab world is in a rather poor state, they claim that its masters, i.e., the Jews, are the cause of their problems. This motif is identical to that exemplified in the Russian Czarist falsification of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Thus, subconsciously, they want to get rid of these 'evil conspirators.' In the caricatures Israelis are rarely shown. When they are, they are often represented as ultra-orthodox Jews, which is another absurdity. "The gifted American caricaturist of Algerian origin, Bendib, designed a monkey with a Star of David on its breast sitting on top of the globe on which small figures of the Pope and an Arab are drawn. The monkey says: 'Jerusalem: from New York City to Kuala Lumpur, undivided, eternal capital of Israel; everything else is negotiable.'15 In this cartoon the domination motif is thus combined with that of zoomorphism." "The sixth recurring anti-Semitic motif is that of the Jew as a corrupting force. This is a derivative of the theme that Jews dominate the world with their money. Arab anti-Semites allege U.S. presidents are linked to Jewish banks and other Jewish money. What the Arabs forget in the caricatures is that George W. Bush was their candidate in the last American elections. Most Jews, who are liberals and thus Democrats, voted for Al Gore. Jews also supported Clinton. In the perception of the cartoonist, however, everything becomes possible. "Bendib draws God holding a fat bag of dollars. On it the names of major Jewish organizations are written: 'ADL, AIPAC, ZOA.' God outstretches his hand to Bush, who slaughters a child on the altar of the Holyland Foundation for needy Muslim children. The caption reads: 'And the Almighty dollar [represented by God] said: "Sacrifice me, a Muslim son, or else." And George the W. said "You've got it Lord, if this improves my chances for a second term."'16 "A caricature in Teshreen shows bearded Jews with sidelocks and a bag stepping on Hitler to access an open safe filled with money on which is written: 'U.S.' The Holocaust is thus introduced as a motif of blackmail in order to extract money."17 "Yet another major theme in Arab cartoons is the bloodloving or blood-thirsty Jew. This originates in Christian anti-Semitism. The Christian anti-Semitic libel alleged the Jews needed Christian blood for their Passover service. Its claim is that the Jew is evil, as his religion forces him to drink blood. In today's Arab world this image of unbridled hatred has mutated into the alleged quest for Palestinian blood. "There are so many of these cartoons that I could select only a few for my book. Blood-drinking Jews are frequently shown by Al Ahram, one of Egypt's leading dailies. On 21 April 2001, it printed a cartoon showing an Arab being put into a flatting mill by two soldiers wearing helmets with Stars of David. The Arab's blood pours out and two Jews with kippot and Stars of David on their shirts drink the blood laughingly.18 "Another well-known Egyptian cartoon portrays Sharon with horns and blood dripping from his mouth.19 A Jordanian cartoonist Rasmy shows a plumber repairing a number of taps. From the American tap comes oil, from the Turkish, water and from the Israeli blood."20 Kotek says that to the best of his knowledge, the blood theme is anti-Semitic, and not a general racist theme. No other people has been accused of drinking blood. The origins of this myth are in twelfth century Christian England, where the blood libel was invented. "The eighth recurring anti-Semitic theme in Arab cartoons is the most extreme. The concept that the Jews not only murder, but preferably target children, is what the cartoonists try to convey through their imagery. This depicts the Palestinians primarily as children or babies. Thus, Arab and Muslim propagandists turn Palestinian children into the paradigm of the victim, despite the fact that most of their dead are adults." Kotek observes: "The Palestinians do live a tragedy on a daily basis and have had over the last decade about 5,000 dead. Many Israelis have also been killed. During the same period of time, two million Sudanese have died; three million Africans around the big lakes; 200,000 Bosnians; 150,000 Algerians and 100,000 Chechenians. The media, however, concentrate on the Palestinians. "A Palestinian caricature shows the Statue of Liberty lifting with her right arm a Palestinian child dripping blood. In her left hand, she protectively holds Barak.21 A Kuwaiti cartoon shows an old Jew wearing a kippa and carrying a gun, shafting a child into a burning oven to bake matzot. The reference is both to the Shoah - which now the Palestinian child is portrayed as undergoing - and ritual crime.22 "The official website of the Palestinian Authority's press service carries a caricature of Sharon with a blood-covered axe slaughtering a baby, or fetus, against a background of a butcher's hooks with children hanging from them, next to a sign saying 'Palestinian blood.' A large sign on the counter says 'Sale.'23 "In the Qatari journal Al Watan, Sharon is shown drinking from a cup on which is written 'blood from Palestinian children.' On the bottom of the cup it says 'Made in the U.S.A.'24 In Al Hayat al-Jadida, Sharon offers the bleeding head of a young Palestinian on a plate to George Bush.25 The earlier-mentioned cartoons of the Jew as a blood-thirsty vampire thus combine two anti-Semitic themes in one design." "The ninth anti-Semitic motif used is that Israel is a 'perfidious' country which does not want peace. The theme of 'the perfidious Jew' is an ancient one in Islamic anti-Semitism. Mohammed is said to have tried to make peace with the Jews at times, but, they allege, he was systematically betrayed, and he murdered them. "Rasmy shows a Palestinian throwing his weapons on the floor saying: 'I give up my weapon to convince you.' An Israeli soldier from behind the wall kills him saying, 'That's how I believe you.'26 In a Syrian cartoon, an Israeli offers a ball to Arafat holding a dove. On the top is written 'The Oslo Accords.' The ball explodes, killing the Arab. The Israeli walks away strangling the dove."27 "The tenth motif concerns apologies for suicide bombers. I collected many cartoons calling for outright murder. In the hundreds of designs I analyzed on this theme I did not find a single one depicting the Israeli as a civilian. He is always a soldier or an ultra-orthodox Jew. He has no father, mother or child. "A Jordanian cartoon by Rasmy shows a Palestinian with his face covered and dynamite on his body, saying to a Russian Jewish immigrant shown as an ultra-orthodox Jew: 'Come into my arms.'28 Another one by Emad Hajjaj shows a Palestinian mother raising her arms, holding up her children who are depicted as suicide bombers."29 Kotek concludes that these caricatures often express a new type of anti-Semitism. "They are frequently 'calls for murder.' To the cartoonists, death seems the only worthy punishment that 'the Zionist enemy' merits. As Pierre-Andre Taguieff notes in his book on the new Judeophobia,30 this Islamic-Jihadic version is explicitly genocidal. It defines its battle as a total elimination of the absolute enemy." When asked how he became so interested in cartoons, Kotek says that when he was nine years old - shortly before the Six Day War - a book published by an Israeli scholar on anti-Semitic caricatures already fascinated him. "Some books you read when you are young, can influence your entire life. "Belgium has always focused a great deal on cartoonists and their iconography. Living there, one's mind is more open to this art form. I even wrote an article on Herge, Belgium's most important cartoonist, who was an anti-Semite. "I was thus predisposed toward the caricature. It is a simple and convincing tool to demonstrate quickly the extremely serious developments taking place in the Arab world. Their themes are used in the Western world as well. The similarity of these cartoons with those of the Nazis is evident, which has already been demonstrated in an earlier book by Arieh Stav."31 In order to obtain the copyright for the caricatures, Kotek wrote to many cartoonists in the Arab world. As Belgium has an anti-Israeli image, especially in view of the law suit brought against Sharon, many of those queried automatically assumed that he was anti-Israeli. Quite a few gave him permission to use their cartoons without payment. "In Europe, being an anti-racist makes one automatically a leftist. When you fight anti-Semitism however, you are seen as a right-winger - a supporter of the Likud and of Sharon. This is untrue, as I am a conscious Jew who belongs to the peace camp. I see myself as a friend of Israel, yet critical of some of its policies. But once you become aware of the enormous Arab hate and demonization of Israel you have to defend Israel. I am horrified by the impact of anti-Zionism combined with the great ignorance I often find among people about Israel. "The cartoons in my book - representative of a much larger collection - show how old Christian myths of the diabolic Jew are resuscitated in the Arab world. Palestinian cartoonists often lay the emphasis on ritual murder of children. They then try to give this tenability by claiming that Israelis target Palestinian children." Kotek says that these allegations have also permeated Western society as they resonate with the long-standing prejudices of the Christian world. He follows the French and Belgian media closely. "It occurs regularly that when French or Belgian radio reports a Palestinian being killed, they also tell his age. This is the only conflict in the world in which the age of the victim is mentioned. "In the collective sub-conscious of many Christians, and now Arabs, anti-Semitic myths cannot be eradicated. They present the Jews as 'the Eternal Jew,' a warmonger and a danger for the world. This is no longer just an Arab concept. Many recent polls in the European Union confirm how strong these prejudices have permeated this continent." 1. Joel et Dan Kotek, Au nom de l'antisionisme: L'image des Juifs
et d'Israel dans la caricature depuis la seconde Intifada (Brussels:
Editions Complexe, 2003). [French]
31. Arieh Stav, Peace: The Arabian Caricature; A study of Anti- Semitic Imagery (Jerusalem: Gefen, 1999).
Dr. Joel Kotek was born in Gent in 1958. He studied history at the
Free University of Brussels and has a doctorate in Political Science
from the Institute for Political Studies (Sciences Po) in Paris. He
teaches Political Science at the Free University of Brussels,
specializing in the subject of European Integration. He is also
director of Training at the Center for Contemporary Jewish
Documentation in Paris.
The cartoons in this interview have been taken from Dr. Kotek's
book. Other cartoons with English explanations from this book can be
found in the booklet, "Fighting Anti-Semitism," published jointly by
the JCPA and the office of the Minister for Diaspora and Jerusalem
Affairs, Natan Sharansky. A Hebrew version of this booklet can be seen
at: http://www.antisemitism.org.il/antisemheb.pdf.
(The original article includes some of the cartoons mentioned.
To view these cartoons, see: http://www.jcpa.org/phas/phas-21.htm.)
|
|
WHY JERUSALEM IS NOT HOLY TO MUSLIMS
Posted by Women in Green, June 2, 2004. |
|
This was written by Leah Bat-Chaim and it appeared in Arutz-7
We often hear the Muslim claim that Jerusalem is their "third holiest city", after Mecca and Medina; and specifically, that this is because our Temple Mount is mentioned in the Koran. As a result, Muslims are allowed sole control over our Temple Mount - to visit it whenever they choose, to destroy priceless archaeological relics while building additional mosques, etc. - while Jews are only occasionally allowed to visit, and never allowed to utter a prayer there. (Like in the old joke that ends "...but don't let me catch you praying." Except this isn't a joke.) This situation has always amazed me. Even if Jerusalem and the Temple Mount were truly the "third holiest place" for Muslims, why should that give them more rights than Jews, for whom the Temple Mount is our first holiest place? But in fact, even the claim of being the "third holiest place" is not true. It cannot possibly be true, for several very logical reasons. First, the claim of being "the third holiest place" is based on a dream described in the Koran. That's right, not an actual event, just a dream. In the dream, Mohammed "visited" a place referred to as masjid el-aksa, which means "the farthest mosque". The Arabs claim that this refers to their mosque of that name, located on the Temple Mount. But the El Aksa Mosque was built about a hundred years after Mohammed. In Mohammed's time, Jerusalem was ruled by the Byzantine Christians, and there were no mosques at all in Jerusalem, not on the Temple Mount or anywhere else. So obviously, Mohammed couldn't have dreamed about a mosque that didn't exist. Moreover, the very name "El-Aksa" for the imaginary place mentioned in Mohammed's dream proves that the reference could not possibly be to Jerusalem. Because Jerusalem would never be referred to as "the farthest place". Jerusalem is centrally located. Within the Land of Israel, it is located on the mountain ridge between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. On a larger scale, it is located at the junction point of three continents: Asia, Europe and Africa. We see this shown in ancient maps, such as the Medeba map. In Mohammed's time (or earlier), "the farthest place" would never refer to Jerusalem. It would refer either to a coastal city, such as Jaffa, Acre or Haifa, or it would refer to the end of the Mediterranean Sea - Spain, Gibraltar or Morocco. We see this in the book of Jonah, where the prophet attempts to flee to the end of the earth by going to Jaffa and catching a boat headed for "Tarshish" (usually considered to be Spain). So, how did the tradition arise of Jerusalem's "holiness" to Muslims? It's very simple. It has always been a Muslim policy, when conquering any area, to take over the holy places of the local people and to turn them into mosques. It is a way of putting down the conquered people - to show them that Islam will take away the most important thing to them, and there's nothing they can do about it. They have done this not only in the Land of Israel, regarding both Jewish and Christian holy places, but also in India (regarding Hindu holy places), in Afghanistan (regarding Buddhist holy places), etc. So, when the Muslims conquered the Land of Israel in the 7th century, they looked for the holiest place around, and found a Byzantine church that was built on the Jewish Temple Mount. So here we have a no-brainer - an opportunity to take away a holy place from both Jews and Christians at the same time! In addition, the Muslim ruler of the Land of Israel wasn't happy with the fact that he was stuck with a backwater province. So, to make it more attractive to tourists, he named the new mosque "El-Aksa", and told all the tourists that it was the very same one mentioned in the Koran. Voila! The birth of a "tradition". It would be the equivalent of Christians believing that the founder of their religion was born in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, or that he grew up in Nazareth, Texas. Obviously, these places are simply named after the original Bethlehem and Nazareth; just as El-Aksa Mosque was named after the imaginary place described in Mohammed's dream. It's time that more people were aware of the simple facts and logic involved. Jerusalem and the Temple Mount are not holy to Muslims, and never have been, except as an attempt to take them away from the Jews. Ruth and Nadia Matar established Women For Israel's Tomorrow (Women in Green), an activist group of women based in Jerusalem. Their website address is http://www.womeningreen.org |
|
DUPING FORBIDDEN HERE
Posted by David Wilder, June 2, 2004. |
|
Shalom. Today there are two issues filling our agenda. First of all, an update dealing with the only Jewish administrative detainee in Israel, Noam Federman. As you may recall, a few weeks ago the Israeli prosecutor's office dropped all charges against Noam, dealing with the so-called "Bat Ayin terrorist gang." It was almost two years ago that Noam was arrested, placed under house arrest, and later under administrative detention, suspected of masterminding a "massive terrorist plot" against the Arabs. Three men were convicted. Many others, arrested, were released without charges being filed. Yet others were tried and acquitted. Now, less than a month ago, the prosecution announced that they had no evidence incriminating Noam and that the indictment against him was dropped. However, in answer to the judge's inquiry, "Now he can go home?" the prosecutor exclaimed, "Of course not, he's an administrative detainee." Several days later the case again reached the Israeli Supreme Court. Justice Ayala Prokatchia, not known to be a "full-blooded extremist settler," or even a close friend of theirs, asked the State why Noam Federman was still incarcerated, following the "Bat Ayin" acquittal. The State's reply, based upon "secret intelligence information" was not enough. The judge ordered the case back to the Jerusalem Municipal Court, demanding that the State show cause why Federman hasn't yet been released. That court hearing has been continuing now for several days, partly behind closed doors. Municipal court judge Heshin has already hinted that the State has no case, and following on Justice Prokatchia's ruling, should be released. Noam Federman has, himself, testified for hours, explaining why he should be freed. Again, the "Jewish unit" of the Shabak, the Israeli intelligence organization, testified behind closed doors, presenting hush-hush data, supposedly incriminating Noam. Of course, these facts are so secret that not even Noam nor his attorney can be in attendance while they are presented to the judge. They are also not substantial enough to be the basis of a new indictment. But, so what - why should that make any difference? However, according to Noam's wife Elisheva, there is, for the first time in over eight months, a reason for subdued optimism. Noam might just be coming home in the near future. The extended hearing, which has now stretched over three days, is expected to conclude today, following Noam's final testimony. The judge has announced that a decision will be rendered on Friday afternoon at three o'clock. Just in time for Noam Federman to spend his first Shabbat at home in Hebron, with his family and friends, for the first time in eight months. Let's hope and pray. Earlier today Ariel Sharon testified at the Knesset Committee for Foreign Affairs and Security. He pulled a few new rabbits out of his bottomless hat. First, he promised that his revised "disengagement plan" would receive a cabinet majority at the next government meeting on Sunday. He dismissed any compromise, which would include annihilation of 'only a few communities' in Gaza. Rather, he proclaimed that 'no more settlers will live in Gaza by the end of 2005.' Ditto four communities in the northern Shomron. However, if that's not enough, Sharon is planning to allow Egyptian security forces to assist Muhammad Dahlan's attempts to prevent further terror in Gaza AND, (now get this), he's involving JORDANIAN security forces, as some kind of a security force in the Shomron. The Jordanians? Where did they come from? Who asked for them? Totally absurd. Following Sharon's appearance, MK Shaul Yahalom (NRP) declared, "Sharon's mad, he fell on his head." But much more importantly, MK Yechiel Hazan of the Likud responded by saying that if Sharon continues this way, he will no longer be Prime Minister by the end of 2005. "He will have to disengage himself from his chair." Someone else was quoted as saying, "Sharon's grandchildren will live in Netzarim." Knesset speaker Rubi Rivlin said, "When I heard Sharon my heart skipped a beat." There are all sorts of rumors predicting Sharon's next moves. Some say he'll fire some of his ministers in order to ensure a majority. Others explain that he won't fire anyone, rather he'll just add two more ministers to the government, a process some of you might recall as 'court-packing,' but in this case, 'cabinet-packing.' The latest gem is a plan to pass a new law dissolving the Knesset and bringing about new elections. The latter because: should Sharon resign, any other Likud Knesset member with 61 Knesset supporters would become Prime Minister. Netanyahu has the 61 votes. And even if Sharon were to create a cabinet victory, it is almost certain that the program would not receive the necessary majority in the Knesset. That, because well over half of the Likud's 40 MKs reject Sharon's plans to eradicate the Jewish communities in Gaza and in the northern Shomron. All of them, together with the religious parties, the NRP and that National Union, ensure Sharon's failure. We are facing an all-out war: Sharon, and ironically enough, the Israeli left, against Eretz Yisrael. They will stop at nothing - I repeat - N O T H I N G - to achieve success. Just a few days ago a group of reserve soldiers released a letter opposing continued Jewish presence in Netzarim in Gaza. They smeared the righteous, courageous people living there, attempting to prove why they must be evicted from their homes. The letter received major media coverage. Only later was it discovered that the letter was instigated by an aid to former MK Avrum Burg, one of the initiators of the Geneva Accords. It was then reported that the letter caused a major squabble within that particular IDF unit, being that many of its members vehemently disagree with their comrades, who were, it seems, very much a minority. I have no doubt that Sharon has some more tricks up his sleeve. But there are some things that cannot be fantasized and there are those who cannot be duped. The great fairy tale that Eretz Yisrael must be chopped up and divided amongst our enemies is just that, a fairy tale, having nothing to do with reality. And Am Yisrael, as we saw a few short weeks ago, when 200,000 people rejected Sharon's 'disengagement' from Gaza, will no longer be hoodwinked. Oslo was enough. The lesson has been learned. All of us, in Hebron, Kfar Darom, Shilo and Beit El, Homesh and Kedumim, we are here to stay. And don't let anyone else tell you otherwise. With blessings from Hebron.
David Wilder is spokesman for the Jewish Community
of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of
Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il,
972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn,
NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com
|
|
MAKING STRATEGIC SENSE OF THE SITUATION IN ISRAEL
Posted by Gilbert Simons, June 2, 2004. |
|
Here is a simple and implentable solution to the terrible plight Israel is in, which will be extremely worsened by making Gaza judenfrei and making Jews refugees in their own land: The Knesset could within hours (if Israel's leader had the courage): 1. Declare Israel's borders from river to sea (an absolute requirement of a sovereign state). 2. Declare that this state shall be a Jewish Democratic state, not a Democratic Jewish one. 3. Declare that only those who swear allegiance to this Jewish Democratic state shall qualify as Jewish citizens. Every sovereign state has the right to decide who shall and who shall not be citizens. All but a very limited number of Arabs will not qualify (including Arab M.K.'s). "Fiercely Israel-loyal Circassians, Druze and Bedouin" will qualify. 4. All peaceful Arabs (and there are many) will qualify to be permanent Arab residents of Israel. They will have economic, social, religious, educational, and all other rights equal to Jewish citizens, except for national political rights. Before Arafat, all Arabs in Israel, and the millions who came to Israel from Arab countries came for these benefits, not to overthrow the Jewish state.No more need for a barrier between Jews and Arabs! They can live anywhere, work anywhere, within what is now and forever a permanent, Jewish state. No need for international alyia, financial incentives for Jews to have large families, national service for all Arabs, etc. None of these concepts assures Israel of such an outcome. This is the humanitarian, benign, righteous way to resolve the demographic time-bomb problem. In my unpublished book, "The P.S.P. Plan: Key to Israel's Survival," I offer a way for Peaceful Arabs desiring their own state to obtain one without tearing Israel in half. Gilbert Simons is a social scientist, with a Phi Beta Kappa from the U. of Pittsburg, and a graduate degree from U.C.L.A. He is a reetired psychotherapist. |
|
"DIPLUNACY" WHEN THE LAMPS OF ISRAEL ARE CAST IN SHADOW
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, June 1, 2004. |
|
In the history of diplomacy, tactfully dealing with one's challengers,
As we speak of the sin of the spies, remember, it was before their punishment.
As we speak of the foolery of those seduced by the Trojan Horse, remember,
As we speak of the silence of the Holocaust, remember,
Not sounding the trumpets for victory, survival and gladness, PM Sharon is scrolling Israel into a snail,
The banner of the flag of the tribe of Judah awarded Ashdod and Gaza was journeyed first
Law, legitimacy, land, legacy, livelihood, love and life itself are at stake. As Sharon demands not security, not history, but diplomacy,
It is unjust to destroy all the diplomacy that created Israel,
gave Jews a safe harbor, the right to buy land, Diplunacy accepts lies, terrorism and destruction. Diplunacy would disengage from Gaza and move Israel into a worse hell than redeployment.
Mr. Sharon, fighting suicide with diplunacy is double suicide.
Evelyn Hayes is author of "The Eleventh Plague, TWINS, because their hearts are softened to accept the unacceptable" and "The Twelfth Plague, GENERATIONS, because the lion wears stripes." She is working on another book, "Thirteen! Redemption!" |
|
TIME TO REOPEN CASE ON GEYER'S HOAXES
Posted by Lee Green, June 1, 2004. |
|
Since the revelations of massive plagiarizing and fabrication by New York Times reporter Jayson Blair, editors at other publications have often been more willing to investigate the public's concerns about their own journalists. This increased editorial rigor has resulted in the discovery of fabricated reports, some of them years old, by USA Today reporter Jack Kelley and Chicago Tribune reporter Uli Schmetzer. ["Journalists Behaving Badly" http://tinyurl.com/3f67v] In light of these recent developments, it is time to reopen the case of syndicated columnist Georgie Anne Geyer. (http://tinyurl.com/3yfvc) In a May 10, 2002, syndicated column that was published in numerous papers, including the Chicago Tribune, Geyer falsely claimed that Prime Minister Sharon had told his Cabinet, "I control America." (http://tinyurl.com/2tugh) Geyer's second bogus claim was: "Look at U.S. television: One minute, you see pro-Israeli ads saying the Arabs are all dogs..." CAMERA viewed the ads in question and none portrayed Arabs as dogs. The bogus Sharon quotation is a variation on a hoax disseminated by the Islamic Association for Palestine. And the IAP hoax is yet another variation on the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" fabrication. When CAMERA requested substantiation for Geyer's inflammatory statements, Editorial Page Editor Bruce Dold of the Chicago Tribune wrote in June 2002, "Ms. Geyer does indeed cite the same sources you note [the Islamic Association for Palestine press release, which falsely claimed Kol Yisrael radio reported the bogus Sharon statement ] on the Sharon quote. If you have a statement or confirmation from Kol Yisrael, I'd like to see it. As for the second point, that is not a direct quote from an ad, but Geyer's own interpretation of the nature of the content." CAMERA informed Dold that Yoni Ben Menachem, the Kol Yisrael reporter assigned to cover the Israeli Cabinet [where the Sharon statement was alleged to have been made], said Sharon had made no such statement and that Kol Yisrael had never broadcast any such report. Dold responded that Geyer now claimed to have two anonymous Israeli sources for the quotation. Surprisingly, Dold did not find it implausible that two Israelis, presumably cabinet members, would have both bypassed all Israeli and other American journalists and gone only to Georgie Anne Geyer to reveal this bombshell of a quotation from Sharon. Dold also appeared unconcerned that Geyer gave him two different versions of who her source was, and his trust in Geyer remained firm even when CAMERA informed him that Geyer gave an editor at the Sarasota Herald Tribune yet a third version of who her source was. Geyer told an editor there her source was the Israeli daily Ha'aretz, though she never supplied the alleged article. No such article appeared in Ha'aretz. In response to CAMERA's questions, Geyer's syndicate, United Press Syndicate, disseminated the following inadequate Editor's Note. It was published June 14, 2002 in the Chicago Tribune and Sarasota Herald Tribune. "Editor's note: Georgie Anne Geyer's May 10 column included a quote from Ariel Sharon, 'I control America.' This quote was widely reported in the Palestinian press but cannot be confirmed in independent sources. Geyer and Universal Press Syndicate regret not having attributed the quote more specifically." The syndicate editor admits that "This quote...cannot be confirmed in independent sources," but refused to state that Sharon never uttered the words and that the alleged quotation first appeared in a press release from the pro-Hamas IAP (Islamic Association for Palestine). Since IAP said that Kol Yisrael was their source and Kol Yisrael denies broadcasting any such report, there should be no question that IAP was attempting to perpetrate a hoax. (see note of denial from Kol Yisrael below) Furthermore, the Editor's Note implies that the problem was one merely of mistaken attribution -- that it would have been acceptable for Geyer to use the bogus quotation in her column if she had only stated that it came from "Palestinian sources." However, since these sources have been proven false, by what conceivable logic is it appropriate to publish it at all? And what about Geyer's later claim to Chicago Tribune editor Bruce Dold that two Israeli sources who wanted to remain anonymous gave her the quotation? Or her contradictory claim to the Sarasota Herald Tribune that her source was Ha'aretz? It's time for her editors to verify these so-called Israeli sources or to admit publicly that Geyer lied to them and that the quotation is bogus. Additionally, the Editor's Note failed entirely to address the other major hoax in Geyer's May 10 column: "Look at U.S. television: One minute, you see pro-Israeli ads saying the Arabs are all dogs..." Chicago Tribune's Bruce Dold wrote CAMERA that "Arabs are all dogs" was Geyer's "interpretation" of such ads. However, there was no way that her readers could have understood that she was badly interpreting the ads rather than paraphrasing or quoting from them. Furthermore, it is extremely unlikely that any "U.S. television" station would have broadcast an ad proclaiming or implying that "the Arabs are all dogs." After much prodding, Geyer did identify which ads she was "interpreting." They were from the Foundation for the Defense of Democracy. CAMERA viewed the ads, and none even remotely portrayed Arabs as dogs. Geyer, Geyer's syndicate and the papers that published her column owe the public an apology. CAMERA - Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America - monitors the news and TV media for how fair they are in reporting on Israel. Their website address is www.camera.org |
|
LAST CHANCE: STAND WITH JERUSALEM NOW
Posted by Michael D. Evans, June 1, 2004. |
|
On April 1, 1979, when Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini established what he called "the government of God" in Iran, the decision was made to export the revolution to Palestinian children. Hamas, Khomeini's political party, set up kindergarten camps to teach Islamic fundamentalism, and the glories of becoming a martyr. The fruit of that Islamic revolution birthed through religion, has produced over 5000 suicide attacks in Israel, and the September 11th catastrophe in America. Every U.S. President has waived the Jerusalem Embassy Relocation Act since its passage in 1995. It is time to take a stand! America's national security cannot depend on continued negotiations with terrorists. Be part of prophecy. Urge President Bush to allow the Jerusalem Embassy Act to pass into law. Over 17,000 people have signed electronically, and many, many more have faxed in petition copies with signatures of friends. Please forward this to your email list. Then, please print a copy of the petition for multiple signatures, have your friends sign it, and fax it to the Jerusalem Prayer Team at 817-285-0962. Following President Bush's address to the nation Monday, May 24, I wrote the following article: President Bush, Say the "R" Word In his address to the nation on May 24, President George Bush said, "Our terrorist enemies have a vision that guides and explains all of their varied acts of murder. They seek to impose Taliban-like rule, country by country, across the greater Middle East. They seek the total control of every person, and mind, and soul; a harsh society in which women are voiceless and brutalized. They seek bases of operation to train more killers and export more violence. They commit dramatic acts of murder to shock, frighten and demoralize civilized nations, hoping we will retreat from the world and give them free reign. They seek weapons of mass destruction, to impose their will through blackmail and catastrophic attacks. None of this is the expression of a religion." It is this mindset that caused Americans to be caught so off-guard on September 11th. All of this is the expression of religion; President Bush is absolutely wrong! Isser Harel (founder of Mossad, Israeli intelligence) knew this very pertinent fact in 1979. He and I talked about the religion of the Islamic fundamentalists birthed on April Fools Day. A Shi'ite ayatollah, Ruhollah Khomeini, called it the "first day of the government of God." Harel said that America was developing a tolerance for terrorism. He was convinced that the target would be the tallest building in New York City. (Harel understood the religious implication of the phallic symbol in most cultures, and why the Islamic fundamentalists would interpret New York's tallest spire as a symbol of America's strength and dominance.) I was so positive Harel was correct that I spoke of this worldwide, and even wrote a novel in 1999 based on the concept that Osama bin Laden and Islamic Jihad purchased a nuclear device to blow up New York. Why were American politicians and the American public so blindsided by the September 11th attack? Why were the FBI, the CIA, Congress, the Pentagon, the mayor of New York and the President of the United States caught so unaware? They were busy studying the politics of the Middle East, and not the religion of Islamic fundamentalism. As long as President Bush refuses to admit that Ground Zero for the war on terrorism is a religion called Islamic fundamentalism, we will not be able to win the war. It has been said that he who defines the terms, wins the debate. Yigal Carmon (expert on terrorism and former adviser to Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir and Yitzhak Rabin) spoke at the Pentagon on February 26, 1993. In his speech, he warned: "Radical Islam is an imminent threat to America". Following his briefing, smirking critics retorted: "We don't consider a religion to be a threat to our national security." How wrong they were! Those who have tried to point out the danger have been jeered and ridiculed - much as Yigal Carmon was mocked during his visit to the Pentagon in 1993. (By the way, Carmon flew from the Pentagon to New York City where at 12:18 PM, Islamic terrorists attempted to blow up the World Trade Center. One thousand were injured and six killed, but still, no one connected the dots to religion.) During the Persian Gulf War in 1991, I had lunch one afternoon with the governor of Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, Prince Mohammed Khalid (Commander-in-Chief of the Saudi Royal Air Force and the Arab multinational forces). Khalid and I talked about Islamic fundamentalists and the threat they and their fanatical religion could be to the West. My words antagonized Khalid, who said, "Your country is a lot more dangerous than ours. You can walk our streets at two in the morning and nobody will bother you. You can't do that in L.A., New York, Chicago or most of the big U.S. cities." "Are you telling me Islamic fundamentalists are peaceful?" I asked. If the concept of Islamic fundamentalism as a "peaceful religion" is a true assessment of the 100,000 million Muslims who adhere to the teachings of the Quran - how can we account for such inciting passages as: "...kill the disbelievers wherever we find them." (2:191) Abraham Lincoln was fond of asking "If you called a dog's tail a leg, how many legs would he have?" The person would inevitably respond by saying "He would have 5 legs". "Nope" Lincoln would then reply with a smile, "Just because you call a dog's tail a leg doesn't make it one..." When will someone have the courage to stand up and say, "Islamic fundamentalism is NOT a religion of peace; it is a religion of terrorism! It is being bolstered by a demonic doctrine - Wahabism - exported from Saudi Arabia, and practiced, most notably, by Osama bin Laden." Islamic fundamentalism has produced glassy-eyed suicide bombers who creep into cities and towns in Israel, in Europe, in the Middle East with only one purpose in mind - kill the infidels (anyone who does not embrace Islam.) The latest figures according to the International Institute of Strategic Studies recently revealed that 18,000 young Muslim men willing to strap on vests laden with explosives, or drive vehicles loaded with dynamite to bring about death and destruction, are scattered around the world. Apparently no one has taken the time to connect the dots. Most of the violence perpetrated by these radical fundamentalists follows a hate-filled diatribe by a mullah or ayatollah in the local mosque. This seems especially true in Israel and in Iraq. America has been in Osama bin Laden's murderous crosshairs since 1998 when he issued a fatwa calling on Muslims everywhere to kill Americans. No one in this country took him seriously when he wrote: "The ruling to kill the Americans and their allies-civilians and military-is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque and the holy mosque [Mecca] from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty God, "and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together," and "fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in God." Yes, Islamic fundamentalism is a religion...and it kills. The enemy is among us, and we can no longer define who that enemy is. Like the frog in the vat of water, we are perfectly happy to take our ease - not realizing until it is too late that the pot reached the boiling point while we were lulled into a false sense of security. Michael D. Evans is the founder of America's largest Christian coalition praying for the peace of Jerusalem, the www.JerusalemPrayerTeam.org. He is the author of the New York Times bestseller "Beyond Iraq: The Next Move." |
|
ON ISRAEL, NEO-CONSERVATISM, AND ITS DISCONTENTS
Posted by Ariel Natan Pasko, June 1, 2004. |
|
With America seemingly bogged down in Iraq, there are those looking for scapegoats to blame. Neo-conservatives, Likudniks, and Israel have become frequent targets, besides the standard fare of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Rice. Attacks from the left and the Democrats, can be seen as purely partisan, but attacks from the right, need further clarification. I want to start by saying I don't claim any special expertise in the minutia of the history of conservative thought. But the areas I do claim some knowledge in, I feel, are sufficient to give an educated opinion on what's really going on, in this Neo vs. Paleo thing in American Conservatism today, what it has to do with Jews, Israel, international affairs, and the evolving "Clash of Civilizations" taking place in the 21st century. But first, a brief look at the history of religious - i.e. cultural - and political thought, as I see it. I hope after reading this you will better understand what I'm going to say about the above. As we all know, early Christianity broke away from Judaism. It was a protest movement. Although the Christian or New Testament criticizes the Jewish civilization of the time - especially the priests and Temple cult, some of which was already being voiced by the Rabbis - many historians view these as veiled critiques of the excesses of Roman pagan culture, not really Judaism itself, so much as Greco-Roman culture's inroads into Roman-occupied Judea, and its people. Under severe persecution by the Roman authorities for a couple hundred years - long after any semblance of Jewish autonomy ended - Christianity stressed the imperfectability of "This World" - an idea that helped to move it further away from Judaism - promising its adherents a great life in the next world, heaven. Simply put, Judaism with its legal system - Torah and Halacha - for the Jewish nation, living in its own homeland, believed in ultimate perfectibility of the world under G-D's Laws. Christianity, first having rejected "The Law", later rejected this understanding of the nature of social life. Without getting any deeper into the differences between Christian and Jewish theology, one can summarize thus: Judaism's ultimate fulfillment is achieved by the group, in one's lifetime, in this world. Christianity's ultimate fulfillment is for individual believers to gain "eternal life" after death in the next world. Judaism desires the establishment of a "Messianic Nation-State" in the Land of Israel - run according to the Torah, Jewish Law - to lead the Jewish people onto individual and group, spiritual and social perfection. Judaism's goal is to establish a "Model State" and society, whose purpose is to influence mankind, in proper individual practice and social organization to worship G-D, i.e. national and universal redemption. Christianity having rejected the group concept of a "Chosen Nation," substituted individual salvation for national and universal redemption. Christianity sees the world as ultimately imperfectable, which led to a separation of religion and politics best expressed by the Christian Testament statement, "Give unto Caesar what is Caesar's and unto G-D what is G-D's," a clear call for the separation of religion and state. Judaism sees state power as a necessary requirement - not evil - along the way to messianic redemption. One further point, Judaism's primary goals are meant first and foremost for the Jewish people - nation of Israel - and then as a byproduct of completion, to influence the whole world toward Godliness without any thought of converting people. Christianity is individualistic and otherworldly, but missionary - i.e. it tries to gain as many followers as possible. Now to complete the triangle, to better understand the "Clash of Civilizations" taking place in the 21st century, one needs to know where Islam fits in. Islam can be summarized as more group-oriented than individualistic, law-based (they have Sharia Law), universalistic, missionary, and this world oriented. Therefore, whereas Judaism is for the Jews - i.e. nation of Israel - Islam like Christianity aspires to convert all mankind. Whereas Judaism aspires to political control over only one territory on earth, the Land of Israel - i.e. the Promised Land - Christianity's kingdom is of the spirit, and Islam aspires to control the whole world under Allah's rule. Both Judaism and Islam have legal traditions capable of governance, Christianity does not. And finally, whereas Christianity puts an inordinate emphasis on the individual, and Islam makes him subservient to the group and state, Judaism holds the two values in balance. Although its true that after Roman Emperor Constantine's conversion to Christianity in 335C.E.; the Roman empire's adoption of Christianity as "State Religion"; Christianity had a thousand year fling with state power in parts of Europe, but that's just it, it was a fling. The revolt of princes and kings against the Catholic Church, the renaissance and reformation that led to the rise of secular state power and modern life in the West, returned European culture and society to the pristine vision of earlier Christian thought, separation of society and politics from religion. With that separation, and the later attack on the "divine rights" of kings, modern democracy arose with its emphasis on individual rights and liberties, the pragmatic - as opposed to ideological - and consent of the governed. One can now begin to understand how pluralist democracy developed in the Christian western world and has not developed in the Islamic east. Terminology has been evolving over the centuries... And to complicate matters, there are several spheres of discourse, economic organization, social-political policy, and inter-state relations - i.e. foreign policy. Classical Liberalism is not the same as the term Liberal today. Classical Liberalism, a term most related to the economic organization of society - i.e. the belief in the efficacy of free-markets and free trade - found expression in the 17th to 19th century revolt against mercantilism - or state-supported trade. Today liberalism stands for big government and its involvement in the economy - i.e. the welfare state - social leniency and the PC or politically correct movement - which includes government involvement to enforce social leniency, and as the war in Iraq taught us, a non-interventionist foreign policy. Quite a distance from Classical Liberalism, isn't it? So too, the meaning of conservatism has also changed over time. Originally, supporters of the monarchist order in Europe, conservatives have adapted to democracy, and incorporated free-markets just as liberalism metamorphosized to New Deal policies of big government and big spending. But, whereas conservatives believe in free-markets and free trade and small government in the economic realm, they tend to stand for "traditional family values" in the social realm and are not adverse to big government in social policy. Those truly "Classically Liberal" (i.e. small government or no involvement) in all three spheres, economic, social-political, and foreign relations, are the libertarians - not the party per se, but the movement. Which brings us back to the discussion I alluded to in the first paragraph. What is all this talk about Neos & Paleos? Paleo-conservatives, or traditional conservatives, or old-style conservatives claim that they represent "true" conservatism. They say that the Neo-conservatives are for the most part, escapees from the New-Old Left of the New Deal or 1960's. Paleos say that Neos are interventionist in foreign affairs, whereas traditional conservatism is more isolationist. Paleos claim that Neos are not adverse to big government to achieve their goals, of extending American power and influence overseas. Paleos accuse Neos of lack of interest in domestic economic issues and are more socially lenient that traditional conservatives. In that regard, for the most part, Pat Buchanan and the other Paleos are somewhat correct. On the other hand... So what? As I said earlier, terminology is evolving. 21st century terminology - what's a conservative - might not be the same as 20th century terminology, just as the term Liberal has changed its meaning in time. In America today, there are economic interventionists and those who are for freedom from control; there are social-political interventionists and those who are for freedom from control; and there are foreign policy interventionists and isolationists. The only relevant issue is where a person, group, party, or policy stands on this triad. The current terminology blurs distinctions and labels help to muddle thinking. Pat Buchanan, Rep. Jim Moran, Louis Farrakhan, David Duke and others, all blamed the Neo-Cons - read Jews - and Israel for the war in Iraq. More recently, Senator Ernest "Fritz" Hollings and retired general Anthony Zinni have also. So did elements on the far-left in America, the PC people, and the Islamists. It's true that many Neo-conservative thinkers are Jewish, and the war - in theory - benefited Israel (who doesn't like to see their sworn enemy defanged?), but many other Neo-conservatives aren't Jewish, and the war also benefited the entire western democratic world. Pointing out that many Neo-Cons are Jewish is the equivalent of pointing out that many Nazis or Ku Klux Klan members are white Christians. So what? Blaming all Christians for the Klan or Nazis, just as blaming "the Jews", well I think you get the point... The war in Iraq simply was America's attempt to suppress rogue state behavior, the spread of weapons of mass destruction, terror-supporting regimes, and reshape the Middle East, whether others understood it, agreed with them or not. Whether America should act multi-laterally, uni-laterally, or be isolationist is an issue worth discussion. But, blaming one group, "the Jews" is simply anti-Semitic. All the accusations that it's "Likudniks" - the ruling party of Ariel Sharon in Israel - in the White House directing policy, bemoans the fact that the Bush Administration policy toward Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking - the roadmap process - might in fact be on a collision course with Israel, but, more of that later. The biggest area of disagreement between Paleos and Neos is on interventionism overseas. Neo-conservatives, like Reagan before them have been willing to fight the "Evil Empire" and "Axis of Evil". Interventionism, couched in religious imagery, rights and wrongs, is a hallmark of Neo-conservative thought. So too, it dovetails with the Christian fundamentalist element in the Republican Party and elsewhere. But I thought you told me earlier that Christianity withdrew from the political sphere, you might now be asking yourself? Yes, that's true I did. But that was primarily in Europe. The early Puritans who helped found America believed in government involvement in society. The early settlers of America were profoundly influenced by the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament). Hebrew was one of the languages considered for use in early America as the "national language". Benjamin Franklin, Samuel Adams, and Thomas Jefferson's original design for the Great Seal of the United States showed Pharaoh and his Egyptian charioteers pursuing the Israelites across the parted Red Sea, while Moses stood on the opposite shore, bathed in a light from a blazing pillar, extending his arms upwards and beseeching the L-RD to close the waters over Pharaoh and his army. The motto they selected was "Rebellion against tyranny is obedience to G-D". Although America was founded on the principle of opposing state support for religion, and believing in separation of church and state, a strong element of American culture has included moral involvement in politics. American exceptionalism and idealism have always been the counterbalance to American pragmatism. Protestantism in America has always had two wings, those who wanted government involvement and those who didn't, so, you get the call for economic liberty, and yet, the call for banning alcohol, the temperance movement. Which leads to the Moral Majority, Christian Coalition, and Christian Conservatives of today. Since the fight against Nazism and Fascism in World War II, and the Cold War through the 1980's, America understood the necessity of engaging the world. After "winning" the Cold War, even if America thought it could go to sleep - as evidenced by Buchanan-type isolationism reminiscent of the 19th century and the 1920's - September 11th woke it up. American's now understood the world could become a very dangerous place, if they ignored it. The only question is whether the US wanted to barricade itself inside and pray, or confront the dangers that lurk outside. Neo-Con thinkers only saw the dangers a little earlier than most. Neo-Conservative thinkers want to use American power and prestige globally - while the US is the sole superpower - to make the world "safe for democracy" and free-markets, i.e. for America. There are those Neo-Cons who are part of the American idealist tradition. As escapees from the Left - repentant true believers - they have all the zest of the "born-again". But there are other Neo-Cons, who are tempered by the pragmatic side of American political tradition. They also see global intervention as in America's long-term interest. Both believe in the use of state power overseas. Liberal pluralist democracy as in America and the West, evolved from an underpinning of Christian culture, secularization, and the separation of religion and state. Although there are those willing to use state power to implement "moral values" in society, in general, there is an aversion across American society to excessive government intervention. But, use of state power overseas, for the purpose of guaranteeing those freedoms at home, does seem to be a legitimate aim to most. I believe the Jewish Neo-Cons have another element, not yet fully addressed by any other commentator. I've spoken about American idealism, now I want to address the Jewish element in Neo-Conservative thinking. As I described earlier, Judaism as opposed to Christianity, believes in the ultimate perfectibility of the world. This Jewish messianic belief is really the ultimate "idealism". Christian messianism as I earlier said, really gave up all hope for the world's improvement and transferred that hope to the next life, Jewish messianism never did. Jewish messianism - although perverted - can be found in the thought of the son of recent Jewish converts to Christianity, Karl Marx. Many Jews were communists and socialists because they saw improvement in the workingman's lot - a Jewish moral value - and once secularized, felt close to Communism's desire to "fix the world". Jewish idealism can be seen in Jewish involvement in the trade union movement in America. Jewish idealism can be seen in many of the liberal social causes that Jews flock to in America. Remember, I didn't say they were properly applying that messianic drive, only explaining where it comes from. Many Jews, fairly assimilated into the US and bereft of real involvement in Judaism - and its laws - buy into the democracy, individual liberties, and free enterprise system of America. I believe a residue of Jewish idealism "to fix the world" is what truly drives many Jewish Neo-Cons. American political culture has many elements, but one has to look at how very profoundly it was influenced by the Hebrew Bible. America has seen itself as the new Promised Land. America like the Israelites of old, is an ideological nation, seeing itself as more moral than "Old Europe". America has seen itself as having a mission. Most countries in the world are ethnically based. Before the rise of colonialism, and the modern nation state, which redrew borders, most people lived in homogeneous population groups. Nations came about by biological proximity and linguistic similarity. It's true that empires sometimes mixed things up, but for the most part, countries, people, and nations coincided. America was different; it was born out of ideological fervor, law in hand - the constitution - with a purpose. So too, were the ancient Jews. This similarity, between America and Israel is probably the greatest reason for the strong support America has had for the Jewish state. This I believe is why the Neo-Cons have been successful in capturing the imagination of America. It's not that Ariel Sharon and the "Likudniks" have brainwashed Bush, or that the Jewish Neo-Cons have "cabaled" the Washington policy establishment, but that America and Israel have an underlying cultural connection and similar policy objectives in the short run. The State of Israel, as a modern democratic state - not yet that Messianic State - is part of the American vision for the world. Today you have Christian conservative elements and secularized assimilated Jewish Neo-conservative elements driving American policy. As Fundamentalist Christians, Christian Zionists support Israel because of an overlapping of mutual values and because it plays out their own "End-of-Days" theology. As secularized, assimilated Jews, these Neo-Cons are a hodge-podge of Jewish idealism and America first ideology. What Pat Buchanan and the other anti-Semites don't understand about the Neo-Cons is that they don't work for Israel's interests, or Jewish interests, but for America's interests. Back to the third part of the triangle and the "Clash"... Islam as explained briefly above is more collectivist than Christianity. Thus one can now understand why when secularized elements in the Arab world took charge in the 1950's, they aligned themselves with their natural cultural cousins, the Communist Bloc. Combined with the desire of Islam to conquer the world and put it under Allah's dominion; one can see why Arab socialism held sway. Previous to their love affair with the Soviets, the secularized Arab thinkers had been enamored with fascism and the Nazis. But the underlying point is their, totalitarianism - whether religious or secular - and their missionary fervor. Arab socialism is at bay, but Jihadist Islam is on the march. A "Clash of Civilizations" as Huntington called it, between the West - led by America - and the Islamic world is in the offing. Isolationists like Buchanan, really don't have America's best interests at heart. Sure America can close its borders, but to stop the kind of terror that 9-11 symbolizes, it would have to become the type of police state, that it abhors. In the process, becoming just like all that is wrong with the Arab-Islamic world. Pro-active intervention overseas, driven by "End-of-Days" theology, Jewish or American idealism, or just plain old American pragmatism, is the best and probably only way to prevent many more 9-11's. Islam desires to create the "ideal" social order globally, so does the United States. America sees its model - democracy, individual liberty, and free enterprise - as universally applicable, so does Islam. That's a sure prescription for conflict. But whereas Islam has never had a reformation, is authentic to its Arab imperialist roots, whether in the Wahabbiist version being exported by Saudi Arabia, or the Khomeini variety from Iran - and maybe soon Shiite Iraq? - America and Christian Western culture is conflicted. Will it follow the Christian Conservatives and Neo-Cons in their "Crusade for democracy and free-markets" or will leftist-liberal elements in America, allied with Islamists - homegrown and imported -and their backers in Europe, gain sway? Jewish Neo-Cons I believe, will ultimately fail. Christianity at its roots is ultimately other world oriented and Western civilization has little interest in "fixing this world". I don't believe they have the lasting power. Islam in contrast does, and you can count on them to continue their charge toward victory throughout the 21st century. The modern State of Israel and most Jews in it; like most Jews throughout the world and in America; have become secularized in the last 200 years. They're weak in Jewish tradition and observance. Watered down Judaism combined with democracy, and free-markets, isn't far away from American culture. That's why Israeli leaders today and American leaders see eye-to-eye on most issues. Judeo-Christian culture, a phrase used by some people in America, really is Christian culture wedded to some Jewish elements. Although used by some Jews also, the term really stands for "traditional values" more than any overarching cultural symbiosis. Authentic Judaism, including the sense of peoplehood, and desire for life as an independent nation, is only taking place in Israel. Torah - that G-D given Law - not democracy and free enterprise is supposed to be implemented there. Its values are meant for the Biblical Promised Land, where messianic fulfillment is supposed to take place, not in the "pr omised land" of America. The transference of Jewish idealism in a secularized and Americanized form, by Jewish Neo-conservatives, is doomed to failure. Messianic redemption, the setting up of a Model Nation-State - i.e. polity - and society in the Land of Israel, as prophesized by the Jewish prophets in the Hebrew Bible, is meant primarily as stated earlier, for the Jewish people, though it will have universal meaning. If America led by Neo-Cons and Christian fundamentalist try to usurp that role from the Jewish people's state, they will either, at worst come into direct conflict with G-D's unfolding redemptive process, or at best end in utter failure. America's current Middle East peace-making policy, the "roadmap" that envisions a Palestinian state is just such an example. It's the beginning of conflict between Israel and America. How can America be "helping" Israel and the Jewish people, when it threatens to take part of the Promised Land away? America, will never "fix the world" with democracy and free-markets, because that isn't a holistic world-view that encompasses both spiritual and worldly realms - as Judaism has. America will not perfect the world, because it doesn't have the cultural underpinnings to do it, and because it is not America's role in history. It will never bring democracy to the Arab-Islamic world, unless some form of "Islamic Reformation" takes place first. The best that America can hope for is to play a supporting role in helping Israel in it's messianic mission, combating the spread of Jihadist Islam, while holding out a torch of freedom to the rest of mankind. The sooner the Neo-Con's see that and the limits to America's power, just as they initially saw the value in attacking Saddam Hussein's regime, the faster they can avert another tragedy for America! Ariel Natan Pasko is an independent analyst & consultant. He has a Master's Degree in International Relations & Policy Analysis. His articles appear regularly on numerous news/views and think-tank websites, in newspapers, and can be read at: www.geocities.com/ariel_natan_pasko |
|
A VOICE FOR KILLING
Posted by David Bedein, June 1, 2004. |
|
This appeared on Front Page Magazine (www.frontpagemag.com) May 10,
2004.
Palestine Authority radio, known as the PBC "VOICE OF PALESTINE", remains the most influential media tool in the hands of the Palestinian government. It has been in business ten years as the official voice of the Palestinian people and since the genesis of Palestinian Authority self-rule. You hear the VOICE OF PALESTINE everywhere in the Arab street. It sets the public tone. VOICE OF PALESTINE was founded by Yassir Arafat and is overseen by the highest echelons of the nascent Palestinian Authority, providing radio feeds that are played in every Arab marketplace and every home in areas ruled by the PA. The radio airwaves for the VOICE OF PALESTINE were provided for the PA from Israel's Ministry of Communications with the idea that the Palestinians would be able to broadcast messages of "peace" on their own radio and in their own language. Despite this, during the past ten years, The VOICE OF PALESTINE has consistently praised Arab terror attacks. May 2nd, 2004 was no exception, when all of Israel stood in shock at the Arab terror drive-by murder of a pregnant woman and her four little girls. Two Arab terrorists executed each little girl at point blank range with a shot to each one's head, the youngest child being only a two-year-old, after they first blew their mother to bits. The murders were witnessed by a CNN crew who watched with horror only 30 meters away. Mike Swartz, the CNN producer, had the good sense to use his vehicle to block any further traffic from driving into the terror trap on the highway. Israeli soldiers who arrived on the scene were able to kill the Arab terrorists, but not before the four little girls in the van had been finished off by their murderers, one at a time. Dr. Michael Widlanski, an Arabic media expert at the Hebrew University, formerly a reporter for the New York Times and the Cox Syndicate in Jerusalem, who is also an academic who recently completed his PhD on the subject of Palestinian Authority media, listened carefully to The Voice of Palestine during the hours that followed the attack. The VOICE OF PALESTINE described the men who carried out the attack that left a pregnant mother and her four children dead as "an act of heroic martyrdom." The VOICE OF PALESTINE radio station repeatedly used the term "is tish-had" (heroic martyrdom in Arabic) and "mustash-hidin" (heroic martyrs) to describe the act committed by "two youths". After reporting the attackers names, the radio repeated again that they were heroic martyrs. Widlanski recorded the VOP constantly referring to the victims of the shooting attack only as "five settlers" without mentioning that the attack claimed that they were a pregnant women and her four children. The next morning's broadcast of the Voice of Palestine added that that the five "settlers" who were killed, were "mukharibun" - terrorists. The reference to the settlers as "terrorists" was in a VOICE OF PALESTINE report that the settlers were preparing to build a new neighborhood in a settlement near Gaza. Once again, VOICE OF PALESTINE did not condemn the attack that killed a pregnant mother and her four children, but did vigorously condemn the "cowardly act" by Israel of attacking a Hamas radio station which had exhorted Palestinians to carry out further attacks against Israelis. There were no reported Arab casualties in that Israeli attack. Meanwhile, Palestinian Media Watch reported that the Palestinian Authority's official daily newspaper glorified yet another murderer - a man who was responsible for a cold-blooded murder of an Israeli father and his 2 daughters, labeling him "a beacon of light for generations to come." Palestine Media Watch, an agency that translates Arab broadcasts, noted that "According to the daily newspaper, 'Al-Hayat Al-Jadida', Samir Quntar, the murderer of Dani Haran and his two daughters in Nahariya in 1979, is a Palestinian hero and 'authentic role model'..."(sic). Palestine Media Watch further quoted the following statement which appeared in the PA official daily newspaper: "Samir Quntar, a name of pride in the history of the prisoners of the [Palestinian] national movement. A name that he created, during the resistance in Lebanon and the hours of heroism in Nahariya [the terrrorist attack in which Dani Haran and his daughters were murdered]. A name that is written in the blood that dripped in the interrogation dungeons. [Quntar] wrote the noble history of this name in letters of fire and light during the battles of the struggle! [Quntar] was and will continue to be a beacon of light for us and for the generations to come and an authentic role model. Every day that passes Samir's pride grows, and our pride in him grows greater and greater." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, May, 6, 2004] So there you have it. The official media outlet of the Palestinian Authority, an entity with diplomatic relations with 138 nations around the world, endorses the cold-blooded murder of parents and their children. That is the same Palestinian Authority which receives direct aid from all of the western democracies, including the USA to the tune of more than 10 billion dollars in its ten years of existence. The United States taxpayer used to fund Palestinian Television also until word got out about children's shows teaching small children to become martyrs. For the past week, The U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT was asked if it would condemn the PA's official media outlet, THE VOICE OF PALESTINE for endorsing the cold-blooded murder of a pregnant mother and her four children and no answer was received. The question remains: Will the U.S. at a bare minimum condemn the Palestine Authority for inciting its own people in its own language to conduct such heinous acts of murder? David Bedein is Bureau Chief, Israel Resource News Agency, Beit Agron; and Jerusalem Fellow, Center for Near East Policy Research, Wellesley, Mass. |
|
LEFT-WING AND INTERNATIONAL ELEMENTS: WITHDRAWAL FROM GAZA IS NOT ENOUGH
Posted by Bryna Berch, June 1, 2004. |
|
Why are people acting as if the issue is: to leave Gaza or to stay?
It's obvious that once Israel agrees to leave Gaza, the pirahnas will
gather and she will bitten from all sides - including her internal
traitors - until she gives away Samaria and Judea and then chunks of
Jerusalem and then the Golan ... This is a news item from today's
Arutz-7 (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).
As Israel wrestles with the question of how much, if any, of Gaza to withdraw from, the Jordanian government said this week that Israel must withdraw from all of Gaza - and then from Judea and Samaria. Prime Minister Sharon has often explained that the purpose of his withdrawal plan is to head off international pressure for even more Israeli concessions. Jordan's position appears to put the lie to his position. There have been other indications, as well, that Sharon's plan - not only the "reduced" version involving the removal of only three towns, but also the "full" version calling for a full withdrawal from Gaza and northern Shomron - is not acceptable to those who feel that Israel must make concessions. Former Foreign Ministry director-general Eitan Bentsur said just two weeks ago that though "Sharon's intentions are good," his strategy simply did not work. "He thought that he could go through with his disengagement from Gaza, and then be allowed to keep large chunks of Judea and Samaria," Bentsur said. "But we see that Europe responded right away by saying that Gaza was only the first step, and that they expected Judea and Samaria to be next. So his plan has just not worked." Meron Benvenisti, an extreme left-wing Jerusalem politician, wrote an article last month entitled, "Ariel Sharon's Bantustan Plan Doomed to Fail." In the article, published on http://www.aljazeerah.info/, Benvenisti has strong criticism of his left-wing colleagues for their acceptance of the withdrawal plan, and says that the plan is based on the "illusion" that "'separation' is a means to end the conflict." Excerpts: "... As the Israeli left sees it, the confinement of one and a half million people in a huge holding pen fulfills the ideal of putting an end to the occupation, and furnishes some relief about how 'we are not responsible'. Similarly, when in South Africa a failed attempt was made to solve demographic problems by creating 'homelands for the blacks,' liberals originally supported the idea, and even a portion of the international community viewed the measure as a step toward 'decolonization.' But, after a short time, it became clear that the ploy was designed to confer legitimacy on the expulsion of black people, and their uprooting. The bantustans collapsed, demands for civil equality intensified, and the world mobilized for the defeat of apartheid... More recently, Andres Martinez wrote in the New York Times, "The two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, once the idealistic aspiration of peace-minded people on both sides, is now seen as the lesser-evil option by mayhem-weary realists. The prevailing Israeli sentiment runs something like this: 'Take your territories and let us wall them off so we never have to deal with each other again.' Though understandable, that sentiment could prove a dangerous fantasy for Israelis. Despite the seeming tidiness of a two-state solution, Palestinians and Israelis will continue to live in a shared economy. Israel will only undermine its own security if it ignores this fact. Gaza offers a cautionary tale of what a hopeless Palestinian state would be. Sealed off, the Gaza Strip has become an increasingly radicalized prison of 1.5 million inmates; it is run by Hamas and other terrorist groups. The percentage of Gazans in poverty - defined as a daily household income ! of les s than $2.10 - has exploded to 80 percent from 20 percent in less than four years... [Israel] will need to accept greater Palestinian sovereignty over such important matters as water rights unless it wants to have a homicidal, desperate neighbor forever. That is what Gaza is becoming." |
|
EUROPE GOING UNDER
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, June 1, 2004. |
|
In the south of France, Muslims attack French school children, vandalize cars, make teachers afraid to cover WWII, the French Resistance, and the Holocaust, and render their neighborhoods inhospitable to infidels. Public schools not only are dangerous for non-Muslims, but they also are less educational, as resources are diverted to discipline. Native French are switching to private schools. These events motivate them to have smaller families, thereby hastening their demographic overthrow. Meanwhile, they have to pay for detectives in mosques, monitoring of public transportation, and guards everywhere (for the Arabs are violent and criminal). In the north of France, native French hear about the Muslims and about Israel only from pro-Muslim newspapers. Ashamed of past colonialism, the higher classes step aside for untruth. The press does report dozens of Islamist attacks, attempted bombings, and uncovered terrorist cells, every week! In response, Europe attempts appeasement of the Muslims. The result is to open Europe up even more to be attacked. Terrorism is not just to kill. It also is done to intimidate. Europe is too pacifistic to fight back. Nor do Europeans get excited in defense of Christianity, for religion is not important to most of them. They see no divine purpose in life. They offer Israel as a scapegoat, hoping to buy time before they come "under the gun." This Islamist onslaught may be why the EU did not admit Turkey, whose government is Islamist. Once admitted, Turks by the million could pour freely into other EU states. Meanwhile, Russia's population declined, too, and is subject to disease. It may yet be overrun by Muslims. (Its economy, however, has been growing by 5% a year for the past several years). For reporting the Islamic religious war's threat to precious Western civilization, Ms. Fallaci was accused of inciting it. Lawsuits were brought against her. The publicity increased her book sales, but intimidated other social critics. Turnabout is fair play, but nobody sues a Muslim who touts the alleged superiority of Islamic civilization. (Why is "racism" a one-way charge? Because those who raise it are phony and the other people are either too refined or too intimidated.) The Muslims publicly boast that they will use their higher birth rates and immigration to take over Europe. They want to destroy European freedom and its way of life. Imagine how they would trash its artistic treasures! European countries started pandering to Muslim demands after the 1973 oil crisis. That is when it gave in to OPEC and abandoned support for Israel. It lets the Arabs finance efforts to influence European politics (while it finances efforts to undermine the Israeli polity in behalf of the Arabs, who menace both). Muslim population growth in Scandinavia spreads crime. Natives are fleeing to the US. In Cordoba, Muslims strive to reconvert the Cathedral, functioning as such since 1236, back into a mosque. This effort shows the deliberateness of the Islamic conquest of Europe. The Right and the Church gave in. Churches lobby for Muslim immigrants! They shelter immigrants, who then turn (under-utilized) churches into mosques. The Christian clergy apologizes for the Crusades, but doesn't ask Islam to apologize for oppression of Christians now. (Why apologize for what ancestors did and not condemn what one's current enemies do?) Fifty-two former diplomats condemned Britain's participation in the coalition in Iraq. Most of them have business links with Arab governments. They boast of it (MEPF, 5/23 from Miriam Gardner). Their conflict of interest turns their loyalty. It is scandalous. The same process is at work in the US, though less advanced. Nevertheless, political correctness paralyzes most resistance, and the government is an unwitting accomplice. France's excuse for allowing Arab immigration is a need for workers. With 25% unemployment? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at ricshulman@aol.com. |
|
IS FRANCE ON THE WAY TO BECOMING AN ISLAMIC STATE?
Posted by Communaute-Juive-France, June 1, 2004. |
|
This was written by Barbara Amiel and appeared in the Daily
Telegraph, January 26, 2004.
France, wrote Luigi Barzini, wouldn't be the great and endearing country that it is, la lumiere du monde, if its quarrelsome people had not been "moulded down the centuries by antagonisms and tensions between tribes, clans, cliques, classes, coteries, guilds, camarillas, sects, parties, factions, regions..." The French are ever at the barricades. Last week the barricades were at the prime minister's office, the Matignon, where the government was discussing the awkward business of France's proposed new law designed to ban the Muslim headscarf from schools. The Bill, portentously named "Application of the Principle of Secularity", will go to the National Assembly on Wednesday, with a peppy addition to ban beards from schools as well. Dominique de Villepin, the foreign minister, gravely explained that the law is not aimed at any particular minority, community or religion, though there is, he said, some difficulty in making the essential tolerance of it clear to Arab countries. Domenica Perben, the justice minister, felt the whole thrust of the issue revolved around the equality of men and women - which clears up why the French may be forcibly shaving prematurely mature Sikh schoolboys: they are a gender offset for de-scarfed female Muslims. France is facing the problem that dare not speak its name. Though French law prohibits the census from any reference to ethnic background or religion, many demographers estimate that as much as 20-30 per cent of the population under 25 is now Muslim. The streets, the traditional haunt of younger people, now belong to Muslim youths. In France, the phrase "les jeunes" is a politically correct way of referring to young Muslims. Given current birth rates, it is not impossible that in 25 years France will have a Muslim majority. The consequences are dynamic: is it possible that secular France might become an Islamic state? The situation is not dissimilar elsewhere in the EU. Europeans may at some young point in the 21st century have to decide whether they wish to retain the diluted but traditional Judaeo-Christian culture of their minority or have it replaced by the Islamic culture of the majority. In theory, the cultural and legal assimilation of Europe's Muslims would be the ideal. This was supposed to be the notion behind the vision of the French interior minister, Nicolas Sarkozy, of a "French church of Islam" with homegrown imams. But knowledgeable observers say his "moderate" Council of Muslims has made radical Islam the government-sanctioned norm for all Muslims. For Islamists, assimilation is contamination since, in Professor Bernard Lewis's words, "Muslims must not sojourn in the land of the infidel". Intermarriage should be another route to assimilation, though in France this usually involves an Islamic male and often the wife converts to Islam. Meanwhile, the state of Christendom in France is perilous. Catholics may not have reached the secular nirvana of the Church of England's working party that declared the Sunday Sabbath redundant, but French Catholicism, except for little pools of the faithful, is taken with the notion that their Church will be borne forward only if the next Pope is ready to "dialogue" with Islam - a code word that augurs dilution of the faith. Currently, Islamists are only a fraction of France's Muslim population. In last week's demonstrations against the headscarf law, only 20,000 people turned out. But as in all radical movements, the young are the driving force. As their numbers increase, the militancy of Islam is likely to increase as well. Europe's chickens are coming home to roost. The Great Powers used the Commonwealth or La Francophonie to continue the fiction of Empire. Large numbers of people were admitted mainly from North Africa. The borders of mainland France seemed extended to include Algeria. Guest workers arrived to satisfy needs for cheap labour. Unloved by their host country, they were marginalised in shabby living conditions, with no attempt made to assimilate them. Political refugees and asylum seekers moved in. Early arrivals, such as the White Russians or the Ayatollah Khomeini and his supporters, never intended to assimilate. They were sitting out bad weather before returning home. More recent ones, who arrived because of Nato policies in the Balkans, have been greeted with hostility and distrust. European countries are not organically immigrant societies. The groups that went to America in the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries did so specifically to become Americans. They wanted to shed their past and, within a generation, they did. America's emphasis today on faith and God is just an echo of the founding Pilgrims for whom Christianity was central. Their beliefs were reinforced by many Christian groups, from Baptists to Mennonites, all in search of religious freedom. These founding fathers decreed separation of church and state, not to make sure the nation was secular, as in France, but to make sure no state religion could interfere with religious freedom. European countries have none of this melting-pot principle. You cannot become German or Italian with the same ease with which you become American. Also, into this very different European environment came a very different sort of immigrant - people who had no interest in assimilation at all. They came as settlers, wanting to establish their own communities; at best they favoured a merger - at worst, a takeover. Their approach was nurtured by notions of multiculturalism, a creed appealing to intellectuals, administrators and enforcers, but having almost zero appeal to the home population. The cultural abrasions that developed, especially between the rapidly growing Muslim community and the French, became the problem that could not be talked about. All respectable political parties, journalists and academics felt it too volatile and far too politically incorrect. The field was abandoned to extreme Right-wingers and nativists who, by default, established the unpleasant tone of the debate and became exclusive owners of a subject affecting the whole nation. In the absence of openness, the government's response was a cover-up - or, rather, an uncovering: to outlaw Muslim headscarves, shave beards worn for reasons of faith, or ban crucifixes if too large. In Britain, some school Nativity plays were forbidden. There seemed to be a genuine belief among governments that they could solve this problem by violating Western traditions of religious freedom and by outlawing their own cultural traditions. Far from alleviating the situation, this only aggravated it. Worse, it gave fodder to the extreme Right. Tribal friction has only two solutions: groups will either unite in the manner of Normans and Saxons, melding into a society that may have different religious practices but subscribes to the same laws and values - in which case headscarves, beards and demographics don't matter a fig. Or they will follow the pattern of warring tribes throughout history. The question is not whether French and Muslims can co-exist with each other so long as Muslim schoolgirls are bareheaded. Rather, it is the fundamental question of whether Muslim groups will become part of the French nation. This is not one of those old "querelles gauloises" that Barzini so loved. It is the fundamental dilemma of the new century. This is the netsite for the French Jewish Community. They can be reached at Communaute-Juive-France-owner@yahoogroups.fr at |
| Home | Featured Stories | June 2004 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On The Web |