| HOME | Featured Stories | March 2007 Blog-Eds List | Background Information | News On the Web |
Opinions And Editorials By Our Readers
|
SPRING COMES -- A NEW BEGINNING
Posted by Bernice Lipkin, March 31, 2007. |
|
The first two photos are by Fred Reifenberg. The one on the left is
called Cracking and the one on the right is New Beginning. See other
of his imaginative photos at |
|
|
|
FORGET ABOUT DARKNESS, FROGS, LICE...WE ARE BESET WITH THE PLAGUE OF THE TEFLON LIARS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 31, 2007. |
|
Pesah reminds us of the ten plagues. James Taranto (see below) introduces us to one great current example of the eleventh: the plague of the teflon liars. We seem this year (and last) to be beset with a plague of liars who hold high public office and/or are high-profile public figures. They lie through their teeth, with palpable transparent lies...but they either get rewarded or ignored. No one of substance or authority takes them to task. Nothing sticks. They are teflon. Coincidentally, their lies seem to always involve Israel, or Jews, or Muslims, or Muslim states, or Muslim terrorists. Walt and Mearscheimer lied about AIPAC throughout their 68-page article last year, and got a 3/4-of-a-milliom-dollar book contract to do more of the same in 268 pags. Jimmy Carter lied about Israel on every page of his latest book...and gets an endless stream of TV interviews where he gets to re-assert his lies and no one challenges him (of course, he has a good trick: he refuses to meet with anyone who would challenge him, and then claims that his Jewish enemies are stifling the debate). Baker-Hamilton lied about American priorities in Iran and in Iraq, and about the role of the Arab-Israel conflict in the resolution of broader Middle East war (re-asserting the 'road to Baghdad is through Jerusalem' horse kakka)...to the accolades of the hate-America and hate-Bush crowds. Geroge Soros lied through his teeth last week in 'On Israel, America, and AIPAC' in the New York Review of Books, creating page after page of pure screed and self-contradictory arguments to demonize AIPAC and lionize the genocidal intentions of much of the Arab world against Israel. Robert Leiken and Steven Brooke of the Nixon Center lie about the Muslim Brotherhood, asserting in the most recent Foreign Affairs (March/April 2007, 'The Moderate Muslim Brotherhood') that this Muslim terrorist parent organization to Hamas is really democratic and moderate and peace-loving. A Saudi enterprize near Taos, New Mexico, creates fabricated history and false narratives about the scourge of Islamic invasions and conversions at the point of the sword -- claiming that this never happened; claiming that as they stood upon the piles of corpses of their own dead and dismembered, survivors of the Muslim onslaughts of the 7th-17th centuries agreed to convert because they saw how beautiful and peaceful Islam is. And this Saudi enterprize is getting its lies published in textbooks for our kids in High Schools and colleges. And, of course, perhaps most disconcerting of all, Muslim spokespersons lie to us in the West daily (well, almost daily somewhere or another in the West) about the 'true meaning of Jihad' ... and no one of substance bothers to point out to them that their own Arab historians, contemporaneous to the massive slaughter perpetrated by Arab invadors, wrote proudly of the huge piles of infidel skulls, gloried in the myriads beheaded; and from the mobs scurrying to convert lest they share the fate of the dead victims, these contemporaneous historians concluded that indeed Allah had chosen the Arabs to be the standard-bearers of the one true religion...via jihad. But the obvious does not stop the teflon liars from lying, nor does it impel the audience to speak out against their egregious falsehoods. Except for the one that James Taranto noted yesterday in his weblog Opinion Journal (OpinionJournal@wsj.com), citing Ray Gronberg's article in the Herald Sun (http://www.heraldsun.com/durham/4-834412.cfm).
However, at least in this instance, the newspaper covering Brzezinski's talk pointed out that in fact millions had been slaughtered after the American retreat ...just as was expected. These teflon liars may be victims of some sort of 'sudden intellectual jihad syndrome' (the uncontrollable desire to lie in order to make Muslim terrorism look good), or they may be the hired guns or agents provocateurs for pro-terrorist groups (the Saudis, Iran), or they may be just good old fashioned Jew-haters who deeply hate the Jewish state because it is Jewish, and use it as the whipping boy for all of their anti-Jewish angst...... ...But whatever the case, their lies may bring down western civilization, even though they themselves may be gunning only for the Jews. PS. For more on this plague of teflon liars against Israel, see:
'The War in America Against Israel,' By Richard Baehr, in American
Thinker
For more on the threat of teflon liars to western civilizaiton, see: The road to serfdom', by Caroline Glick, Jerusalem Post, 3.31.07. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
MAKING A DIFFERENCE: CHAYA HAMMER, PASTOR JOHN HAGEE
Posted by Janet Lehr, March 31, 2007. |
|
Passover. Giving is a special mitzvah -- Migdal Ohr, Israel's largest orphanage is preparing 18,000 special meals for Passover, over 4 times its normal load. To help them offset the enormous costs you can donate thru www.migdalohrusa.org HOW CAN YOU MAKE A DIFFERENCE? SUPPORTING MAJOR JEWISH CHARITIES IS A GOOD THING -- HOWEVER FINDING YOUR OWN PERSONAL 'NICHE' FOR GIVING JEWISHLY, GIVING ON A ONE TO ONE BASIS; UNDERTAKING A SPECIAL PROJECT FOR SOME ONE OR A GROUP WHO IS NEEDY, IS ESPECIALLY REWARDING. 'A MITVOT A DAY...' For over two decades a now ninety-six-year-old powerhouse is responsible for providing 490 families throughout Israel with their weekly chicken and meat. Local recipients "buy" what they need at Hacker and "charge" it. For needy families who live a great distance from Hacker, Hammer sends over one hundred checks in attractive cards that wish the recipients "chodesh tov," a good month. Even the stamps she chooses are decorative. By dressing up the donation, Hammer believes that the recipient will feel that he is receiving a present rather than a handout. Hammer's average weekly butcher bill amounts to $1,000. Before the Jewish holidays, it's usually $1,500. "I always work with the Hacker brothers," says Hammer, who is affectionately known as "Mrs. Chicken Lady." "I never question the bill; I trust them implicitly." Nor has she ever requested a discount from the butcher shop. "They're entitled to make a living too. If I can help them in that way while helping others at the same time, I feel twice as good!" To help, send donations to Chaya Hammer at 4 Mishmar Hagavul, Apt. 2, Jerusalem 97752 ISRAEL. Chaya Hammer's story Something about the young girl in front of her on line at Hacker, a butcher shop in Jerusalem, seemed familiar, although Chaya Hammer had never seen her before. Perhaps it was the empty basket slung over an arm covered by a threadbare sweater sleeve or the lank braids hanging alongside a too-thin face? "She reminds me of myself," realized the older woman in surprise, as her mind whirled back to the distant memories of herself as a young new immigrant in the Promised Land. "Next!" The booming voice of the butcher interrupted Hammer's reverie. Seeing who was next, the butcher reached under the counter, extracted a bag filled with chicken fat and skins and handed it to the girl. Thanking him, she turned and left. "Goodness! " Hammer recalls exclaiming to the butcher as he filled her weekly order. "That family must have a lot of dogs or cats to feed!" "Actually, they have no pets at all," he replied. "The father is on dialysis, unable to work, and the mother has her hands full trying to care for a large family on her own. We have been giving them meat on credit for a long time already, but their bill now exceeds 10, 000 lirot, and we simply cannot afford to keep it up. Now we save all the chicken parts that no one wants; at least this way they can have soup and cholent for their Shabbat meal." This was too much for Hammer to hear. "From now on, give that family chicken and ground meat every week -- and put it on my bill!" she said. Some time later, the butcher asked her if she was interested in taking on another needy family. It never occurred to Hammer to refuse. Over two decades later, this ninety-six-year-old powerhouse is responsible for providing 490 families throughout Israel with their weekly chicken and meat. Local recipients "buy" what they need at Hacker and "charge" it. For needy families who live a great distance from Hacker, Hammer sends over one hundred checks in attractive cards that wish the recipients "chodesh tov," a good month. Even the stamps she chooses are decorative. By dressing up the donation, Hammer believes that the recipient will feel that he is receiving a present rather than a handout. Hammer's average weekly butcher bill amounts to $1,000. Before the Jewish holidays, it's usually $1,500. "I always work with the Hacker brothers," says Hammer, who is affectionately known as "Mrs. Chicken Lady." "I never question the bill; I trust them implicitly." Nor has she ever requested a discount from the butcher shop. "They'reentitled to make a living too. If I can help them in that way while helping others at the same time, I feel twice as good!" Generally, Hammer sends her "clients" directly to Hacker, although there are times when the brothers bring her attention to specific cases. The local families have no idea of the role she plays in their lives. "I prefer it that way," says Hammer. "I like the fact that I can go to the butcher, stand behind someone I know I' helping, yet she has no clue who I am." For those outside the local area, she has no choice but to reveal her identity. Hammer's cheerful mood dissipates as she shares some of the stories of those she helps. Pulling out an old newspaper, she points to a photograph of a young woman staring forlornly at the camera. Life is a daily struggle for this woman, who was born without arms or legs. After tracking her down, Hammer began sending her a monthly check, and calls her occasionally, just to say hello. She has no plans to meet the woman though. "I think it might embarrass her. [The money is] easier to take when you are anonymous." In 2000, when terrorists murdered a young couple, Hammer took over some of the financial responsibility for caring for their eight orphans. When "Shlomo," a father of fifteen, died after falling down four flights of stairs, the widow and her children were "adopted" by the "chicken lady." People have been known to ring her doorbell, hand her an envelope with money and escape before she can even say thank you. "Miriam" and her father have been receiving a monthly stipend since Hammer learned of their hardship. The crippled man would sit on street corners in Tel Aviv, playing the accordion in order to feed himself and his daughter. Not only did Hammer take care of them financially, but upon learning of Miriam's dream to be a professional violinist, she got hold of a secondhand violin, had it fixed and then personally traveled to the city where Miriam lived to deliver it. Donors to Hammer's "chicken fund" come from all walks of life "Jews and non-Jews, religious and unaffiliated. Most of the donors hear about Hammer's efforts via word of mouth, or through articles. People have been known to ring her doorbell, hand her an envelope with money and escape before she can even say thank you. No one has ever requested a receipt; donors know that every penny goes directly to those who need it. Hammer personally pays for the hundreds of stamps needed monthly. "I, too, want to donate to this worthwhile cause," she explains. Each donor receives a thank-you letter. As a concession to Hammer's arthritis, first-time donors now receive a form letter, which is constantly updated. Even so, Hammer always tries to add a few personal words at the bottom, and always signs the letters herself. Repeat donors get handwritten letters. No stranger to poverty herself, Hammer knows what it feels like to go to bed hungry. It is this memory that gives her the strength to persist in her mission. "I picture the children's faces, remember the hunger and can't rest until I've done something to help," she says. "Hashem sends me the strength because He knows I'm trying to care for His children." The oldest of three children, Hammer was born in Vinograd, Ukraine. "We were rich back then," she reminisces. "My grandfather and father would buy eggs from the local farmers, and send them to a brother near Kiev to resell them in town. After we miraculously survived three pogroms, my family managed to escape, crossing the frozen Dnestr River into Romania. There were forty-two in the group, eleven of whom were children. I was only ten years old." At this point in her story, tears well up in her eyes. "My Ima fell in the deep snow, and my father turned back to help her up. The smuggler guide would not let him go to her! He forced us on, leaving my Ima in the deep, cold snow, all alone in a harsh foreign land " she without us, us without our Ima. It was many, many months before we learned what had become of her. "Soon after, we were caught by the Romanian authorities and thrown into prison, adults and children alike. For five long months, we received nothing more than a small ration of bread and water daily. Eventually, word of our imprisonment trickled out, and the local Jewish community managed to arrange our release. We finally found our Ima in a hospital, alive but ill. "After arduous travels, we made it to Israel, where we lived in a tent. Between the ages of ten and fourteen, I knew hunger firsthand, going to bed hungry almost every night." Hammer's mother never fully regained her strength; she contracted tuberculosis. Hoping to find a cure for their mother's illness, the family moved to the United States. Nevertheless, at the age of thirty-four, Hammer's mother died. "An eventual return to Israel remained my priority; so much so, that it was one of three conditions I set before agreeing to Ephraim Hammer's marriage proposal," says Hammer, who lived in Los Angeles. ("The other two conditions? He had to agree that we would speak only Hebrew between ourselves, and [that he] would teach me how to drive his Ford!) "Ephraim and I took numerous teaching jobs, working mornings, afternoons and evenings in order to save money as quickly as possible, yet it was not until our three daughters had established their own families that we were able to return to Israel. Ephraim always encouraged me with all my projects, and although he passed away twenty years ago, before the 'chicken business' really grew, he took it to heart as much as I did." Eventually, Hammer's daughters also made it to Israel, and now, says Hammer, five generations of her family live in the country. Winding down her story, she gets up and fondly straightens an award that hangs on her wall. It's the coveted Yakir Yerushalayim award given to those who have made a significant contribution to the good of Jerusalem's citizens. In 1999, Hammer received the award from then-Jerusalem Mayor Ehud Olmert "Despite all those I've helped, I still can't rest," she sighs. "I [have] hundreds' still calling for food." It's this thought that keeps Chaya Hammer going. To help, send donations to Chaya Hammer at 4 Mishmar Hagavul, Apt. 2, Jerusalem 97752 ISRAEL. "I stand up tonight for the millions of Evangelical Christians to deliver this message ISRAEL, YOU ARE NOT ALONE." Pastor John Hagee AIPAC 2007, Washington DC ISRAEL, YOU ARE NOT ALONE
"Good evening dear friends of Israel. You are the finest and most efficient advocacy organization in Washington DC. We meet at a difficult time in world history. When it seems that the whole world is against Israel, you search for friends. Dore Gold says, the US is a Tower of Babel; and Middle East Chairs are sponsored by the Saudis; go to book stores and see a slanderous title by a past president of the United States and they feel very much alone." "I stand up tonight for the millions of Evangelical Christians to deliver this message ISRAEL, YOU ARE NOT ALONE." "It's a new day in America," he cried. "The sleeping giant of Christian Zionism has awakened. There are 50 million Christian Zionists across America consider the Jewish people the apple of God's eye; the chosen people; a cherished people." "The root of Christianity is Jewish. What we have in common is far greater than what has separated us over the years." Hagee said CUFI was spreading quickly across the United States, its goal being to ensure "that Congress knows that the matter of Israel is no longer just a Jewish issue." "It is a Christian-Jewish issue from this day forward." Speaking to the megalomanic rantings and actions of Iranian leader Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Hagee said it was imperative that "we must stop Iran's nuclear threat and stop it now." "I have been saying, it is 1938. We must stop Iran's threat. The only way to win a war is to make sure it never starts." "My answer: Do not threaten America; do not threaten Israel. When Pharoah threatened Israel he became fish food in the Red Sea. You may be talking about your demise when you speak about 'passing away in a sudden storm', not Israel's." "There will never be another Holocaust, not on our watch and never again."
"The only way to win a nuclear war," he stressed, "is to make certain it never starts." As far as Israel and the nations were concerned, the only real truth pertaining to them was to be found in the pages of the Bible, in which God warned that He would bless those who bless Israel and curse him who curses Israel. Those threatened judgments, Hagee said, are "very real." "Where are the nations that have persecuted the Jewish people," he asked, listing Pharaoh and his army, the Babylonians, the Greeks, the Romans, the Ottoman Empire and "that goose-stepping lunatic Adolf Hitler and his Nazi hordes?" All were "historic footnotes in the bone yard of human history." As for Israel and the Jewish people, "they are alive and well. They are thriving. They are prospering. They are growing. Even in the day of adversity they are still going forward." Beyond the threat from Iran, something else concerns me. I believe there is another threat, to parcel out part of Israel, in the EU, in the UN, and in parts of the US. The Nazi beast smelled the appeaser and ate Chezkoslavakia and swallowed most of Europe.
We are told, if we want Syria to stop, if we want women in Saudia Arabia to drive, we must give up land. If we want the sun to rise in the East and set in the West we must give up land. The problem is Israel has no partner for peace. The problem is the failure of moderates in Islam and the Arab world. If moderate Arabs feel murdering Christians and Jews is wrong, stand up and speak. We welcome you, Stand up and Speak. America should not pressure Israel to give up land. They must not pressure Israel to divide Jerusalem. Jerusalem is the capital of the Jewish people, now and forever. It must remain united under Jewish control now and forever. It is not what Christians say or what Jews say, truth is what the Torah says. Even in these days of adversity where is Israel? The Jewish people are prospering and going forward. Israel was miraculously created on May 15, 1948.
"Israel lives," Hagee proclaimed, his voice rising and his hand stabbing the air in front of him. "Shout it from the housetop: Israel lives! Let every Islamic terrorist group hear it: Israel lives!
"Jews have outlasted pogroms -- Long after the
crises of Iran the flag of Israel will be flying over Jerusalem.
Christians believe we gave them the word of G-d. If you take away the
Jewish existence from Christianity there is no Christianity. But,
Judaism doesn't need Christianity to explain their existence. "
Answering the often-asked question of why Christians support Israel, Hagee said it was because Christians believe that they owe "a debt of gratitude" to the Jewish people. "You gave us the Word of God. You gave us the Patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. You gave us the prophets. [You gave us ] the first family of Christianity Mary, Joseph, and Jesus; the Apostle... " Hagee "humbly ask[ed] forgiveness of the Jewish people... for the deafening silence of Christianity in your greatest hour of need, during the Holocaust. "We were not there. We cannot change the past. But together we can shape the future," he said. Ending his message, the Texan declared: "Let the word go forth from Washington DC tonight: There is a new beginning in America between Christians and Jews. "We pledge to God and to the Jewish people to fulfill the words of the prophet Isaiah: 'For Zion's sake I will not hold my peace and for Jerusalem's sake I will not rest. You who make mention of the Lord do not keep silent and give the LORD no rest until He makes Jerusalem the praise of all the earth.'" "I believe 2007 is a year of destiny, a war of good and evil." "I close with Winston Churchill's words," "In the dark days of WWII, you ask what is our aim, Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at janetlehr@veredart.com |
|
TERRORIST CELLS IN AMERICA
Posted by Milton Fried, March 31, 2007. |
|
This is from the USA Wake UP organization
|
|
The threat of a nuclear holocaust within our borders has never been more imminent than it is today. No longer is the threat of a long range missile reaching our shores our single most major concern. In today's world, a single individual, or small group, could bring this country to its knees with the detonation of a small nuclear device, or through the release of a biological weapon. Our porous borders, and free society, make it easy for these type(s) of terrorists to enter the country and carry out their destruction. Whether it be smuggling in a nuclear/biological weapon, or simply launching one from a fishing trawler, or freighter, via a short range missile, our defenses may be too weak, or inept, to prevent such an attack. Or, worse yet, prevent multiple attacks.
http://standeyo.com/Our_Books/PPusa/next.htm. Deyo notes, "Terrorists are a very real and growing threat in America and to American interests around the world. It should be assumed these are not the only cell locations within the US and that they are subject to change." Contact Dr. Milton Fried at docmiltfried@mindspring.com |
|
THE ARAB LEAGUE, APPLE PIE AND INDIGESTION
Posted by David Singer, March 31, 2007. |
|
Jordan's King Abdullah is at it again repeating the mantra of the Arab League of which Jordan is a foundation member: "The principal problem in the region is the Palestinian issue and, if it is not solved, it will be impossible to solve other problems." [Jerusalem Post 2 March 2007] Palestine comprised an area of about 120000 square kilometres, which has now been divided into two sovereign States -- Israel (22000 square kilometres) and Jordan (92000 square kilometres) -- plus an area of 6000 square kilometres called the West Bank and Gaza in which statehood still remains undeclared. The Arab League has called for full Israeli withdrawal from Gaza and the West Bank and Israel's acceptance of an independent Arab State there with East Jerusalem as its capitol. This means (i) the expulsion of some 400000 Jews presently living in the West Bank who have lived there for all or part of the last 40 years. The Arab League has shown no indication of any readiness to abandon this "all or nothing approach" by agreeing to the Jews retaining and living in a portion of this disputed territory whilst the remainder and its Arab residents becomes part of Jordan as it was between 1948 and 1967. A second Arab State in Palestine, which has been propounded for the last 20 years, is as ridiculous as suggesting a second Jewish State in Palestine. Two peoples -- the Jews and the Arabs -- need two States in former Palestine not three. Whilst the Arab League persists with this intransigent attitude there is indeed a problem, but one solely of the Arab League's choosing. The Arab League presently is made up of 22 member States covering almost 14 million square kilometres in which almost 320 million Arabs reside. It is incredulous and completely false to continually advocate that a dispute over 6000 square kilometres housing 3 million Arabs must first be settled before all the other problems in the region can be resolved. Yet this is precisely what the Arab League has sold to the Quartet - America, Russia, the United Nations and the European Union. -- and they have swallowed it hook line and sinker. Besotted by this tale that could have come from the Arabian Nights, the Quartet has thrown billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of hours in aid and diplomatic manoeuvring in trying to solve this problem. They have not got the disputants to even move off the starting blocks. Meanwhile the Arab League has allowed far more serious bushfires to rage out of control in some of its' own member States, that threaten to eventually consume the Arab League itself. In fact some League members such as Syria are actively helping to fan the fires by providing arms, money and safe transit for terrorists to bring down the Governments of other member States where life is anything but pleasant. The League's biggest problem involves a non Arab state -- Iran -- as it seeks leadership of the Islamic world through the supremacy of Shia Islam as the dominant Islamic religion over Sunni Islam , the religion of the majority of the Arabs. This is the clash of ideologies that must first take place before militant Islam can hope to achieve its aim of making Islam the world's dominant religion. Islam can only have one leader not two to achieve this objective. Will that leader be Shia or Sunni? The Arab League's failure to prevent Iran interfering in the affairs of Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority and Iraq has given Iran and the Shiites easy entrée into the Arab World and put the Arab League's very future existence under serious threat. The white ants are on the march and the Arab edifice is in danger of total collapse. Perhaps it is time for the Quartet to tell the Arab League to start solving the problems affecting their own member States such as Lebanon, Iraq, Algeria, Somalia and Sudan where the lives of 100 million people are at risk every day and where the sight of Moslem blowing up Moslem and mosque after mosque being bombed is unbelievable The Quartet should also put the Palestinian question on the backburner and focus their attention, effort and political clout (if any is left) on the real and pressing issues outlined above. Creating another Arab State on 6000 square kilometres of land when you already have 22 Arab States on 14 million square kilometres of land reminds me of the glutton who was given 99.5% of the apple pie but still was not satisfied and demanded the rest. He ended up with severe indigestion. [The writer acknowledges Wikipedia as the source for the statistics appearing in this article] David Singer is an Australian lawyer and convenor of Jordan is Palestine International, an organisation calling for sovereignty of the West Bank and Gaza to be allocated between Israel and Jordan as the two successor states to the Mandate for Palestine. |
|
HOW MY EYES WERE OPENED TO THE BARBARITY OF ISLAM
Posted by Phyllis Chesler, March 31, 2007. |
|
Is it racist to condemn fanaticism? Once I was held captive in Kabul. I was the bride of a charming, seductive and Westernised Afghan Muslim whom I met at an American college. The purdah I experienced was relatively posh but the sequestered all-female life was not my cup of chai -- nor was the male hostility to veiled, partly veiled and unveiled women in public. When we landed in Kabul, an airport official smoothly confiscated my US passport. "Don't worry, it's just a formality," my husband assured me. I never saw that passport again. I later learnt that this was routinely done to foreign wives -- perhaps to make it impossible for them to leave. Overnight, my husband became a stranger. The man with whom I had discussed Camus, Dostoevsky, Tennessee Williams and the Italian cinema became a stranger. He treated me the same way his father and elder brother treated their wives: distantly, with a hint of disdain and embarrassment. In our two years together, my future husband had never once mentioned that his father had three wives and 21 children. Nor did he tell me that I would be expected to live as if I had been reared as an Afghan woman. I was supposed to lead a largely indoor life among women, to go out only with a male escort and to spend my days waiting for my husband to return or visiting female relatives, or having new (and very fashionable) clothes made. In America, my husband was proud that I was a natural-born rebel and free thinker. In Afghanistan, my criticism of the treatment of women and of the poor rendered him suspect, vulnerable. He mocked my horrified reactions. But I knew what my eyes and ears told me. I saw how poor women in chadaris were forced to sit at the back of the bus and had to keep yielding their place on line in the bazaar to any man. I saw how polygamous, arranged marriages and child brides led to chronic female suffering and to rivalry between co-wives and half-brothers; how the subordination and sequestration of women led to a profound estrangement between the sexes -- one that led to wife-beating, marital rape and to a rampant but hotly denied male "prison"-like homosexuality and pederasty; how frustrated, neglected and uneducated women tormented their daughter-in-laws and female servants; how women were not allowed to pray in mosques or visit male doctors (their husbands described the symptoms in their absence). Individual Afghans were enchantingly courteous -- but the Afghanistan I knew was a bastion of illiteracy, poverty, treachery and preventable diseases. It was also a police state, a feudal monarchy and a theocracy, rank with fear and paranoia. Afghanistan had never been colonised. My relatives said: "Not even the British could occupy us." Thus I was forced to conclude that Afghan barbarism was of their own making and could not be attributed to Western imperialism. Long before the rise of the Taleban, I learnt not to romanticise Third World countries or to confuse their hideous tyrants with liberators. I also learnt that sexual and religious apartheid in Muslim countries is indigenous and not the result of Western crimes -- and that such "colourful tribal customs" are absolutely, not relatively, evil. Long before al-Qaeda beheaded Daniel Pearl in Pakistan and Nicholas Berg in Iraq, I understood that it was dangerous for a Westerner, especially a woman, to live in a Muslim country. In retrospect, I believe my so-called Western feminism was forged in that most beautiful and treacherous of Eastern countries. Nevertheless, Western intellectual-ideologues, including feminists, have demonised me as a reactionary and racist "Islamophobe" for arguing that Islam, not Israel, is the largest practitioner of both sexual and religious apartheid in the world and that if Westerners do not stand up to this apartheid, morally, economically and militarily, we will not only have the blood of innocents on our hands; we will also be overrun by Sharia in the West. I have been heckled, menaced, never-invited, or disinvited for such heretical ideas -- and for denouncing the epidemic of Muslim-on-Muslim violence for which tiny Israel is routinely, unbelievably scapegoated. However, my views have found favour with the bravest and most enlightened people alive. Leading secular Muslim and ex-Muslim dissidents -- from Egypt, Bangladesh, Iran, Iraq, Jordan, Pakistan, Syria and exiles from Europe and North America -- assembled for the landmark Islamic Summit Conference in Florida and invited me to chair the opening panel on Monday. According to the chair of the meeting, Ibn Warraq: "What we need now is an age of enlightenment in the Islamic world. Without critical examination of Islam, it will remain dogmatic, fanatical and intolerant and will continue to stifle thought, human rights, individuality, originality and truth." The conference issued a declaration calling for such a new "Enlightenment". The declaration views "Islamophobia" as a false allegation, sees a "noble future for Islam as a personal faith, not a political doctrine" and "demands the release of Islam from its captivity to the ambitions of power-hungry men". Now is the time for Western intellectuals who claim to be antiracists and committed to human rights to stand with these dissidents. To do so requires that we adopt a universal standard of human rights and abandon our loyalty to multicultural relativism, which justifies, even romanticises, indigenous Islamist barbarism, totalitarian terrorism and the persecution of women, religious minorities, homosexuals and intellectuals. Our abject refusal to judge between civilisation and barbarism, and between enlightened rationalism and theocratic fundamentalism, endangers and condemns the victims of Islamic tyranny. Ibn Warraq has written a devastating work that will be out by the summer. It is entitled Defending the West: A Critique of Edward Said' s Orientalism. Will Western intellectuals also dare to defend the West? Phyllis Chesler is an Emerita Professor of Psychology and Women's Studies at the City University of New York. This article appeared March 7, 2007 on The Times Online. For more on Chesler's life in Afghanistan, see "How Afghan Captivity Shaped My Feminism," http://www.think-israel.org/chesler.afghan.html, Nov-Dec, 2005. |
|
NELSON WEEPS OR, BRITANNIA RUES ITS FORMER WAYS
Posted by Daniel Mandel, March 31, 2007. |
|
Britain led the world in abolishing slavery in 1833, a generation before Americans fought a civil war to end the practice and well ahead of most other societies. Thirty years earlier, in 1807, the British parliament had already made it unlawful for any British subject to capture and transport slaves. The bicentenary of this watershed was observed this week. In short, Britain should yield to none in its pride in having led the way on slavery and having served as a moral force in world affairs. Instead, as Melanie Phillips recounts in London's Daily Mail, Britain has made the 1807 declaration of slavery's abolition an exercise in self-abasement, a commemoration of British guilt for its practice rather than a celebration of its abolition. But this is scarcely new to 21st century Britain. 2005 was the bicentenary of Lord Nelson's victory over the Franco-Spanish fleet at the battle of Trafalgar, No-one can deny Trafalgar's finality and significance, coming at the end of a two-year invasion threat to England posed by Napoleonic France, which was then busily subduing the European continent, with England soon to be facing the peril bereft of allies -- an early echo of Churchill's Britain standing alone in 1940. Yet to judge by the sometimes curiously anemic celebration of this peerless victory, Britain was similarly embarrassed. The Franco-Spanish defeat, which was its only object, was assiduously played down in deference to the sensitivities of both countries. Instead, a reenactment in May 2005 was produced of "an early 19th century sea battle" between a "blue fleet" and a "red fleet," leaving one to wonder what historical distinction inspired the effort. Britain's psychological insecurity has practical ramifications. As Phillips rightly laments, the Britain that as recently as 1982 dispatched half the Royal Navy to reverse Argentina's invasion of the Falklands has this week responded with tepidity and indecision to the Iranian seizure of 15 Royal Marines in international waters. Three years ago, six Royal Marines and two sailors were seized in the same locality and held for three days before being released. This time, Britain can expect any release to come with a hijacker's extortionate demand -- the release of five Iranian Revolutionary Guards who were captured in Iraq by American troops earlier this year. As Phillips says, Nelson may well be "revolving in his grave -- the more so now that the Royal Navy, which under his command would have dealt with such acts of war with summary audacity, is to be largely moth-balled. Contact Daniel Mandel at daniel.mandel@gmail.com |
|
ARABS CAUSED REFUGEE PROBLEM, ARABS SHOULD SOLVE REFUGEE PROBLEM
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 31, 2007. |
|
Steven Erlanger's "Olmert Rejects Right of Return for Palestinians" (New York Times, 3.30.07) omits information that is critical to understanding PM Olmert's recent comments on Arab refugees. 1.) Who caused the Refugee Problem? Erlanger should have mentioned that the UN resolution 181 of Nov. 29, 1947 called for the creation of two states on the west side of the Jordan River: a state for the Jews and a state for the Arabs. Had the Arab world accepted this partition, not only would there have been no refugee problem, but there would have been a state for the Palestinians since 1948. Moreover, an unimpeachable witness to the creation of this problem tells us, in no uncertain terms, that it was the Egyptian army which drove 300,000 Palestinians from their homes in southern Israel, herded them in to concentration camps (which we today call refugee camps) in the Gaza Strip, and kept them there under force of arms (Yasir Arafat: Terrorist or Peacemaker, Arafat's authorized biography, by Alan Hart). Some today still say that even before the Arab nations attacked Israel, many Arabs fled or were forced to flee by Jewish fighters. But there are literally dozens of articles in Arab and western newspapers dating from 1949 until the 1980's, in which Arab and western spokespersons tell us that it was not the Jews but the Arab leaders, including the Palestinian Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who told Arabs to flee (see my book, Big Lies, for a detailed list of these articles), with the expectation that once all the Jews where annihilated, the Arabs would come back and take both their land and the land that belonged to the Jews. 2.) Why could the refugees not come back after the war? Erlanger writes: "After the war, Israel barred their return." This is incorrect. After the war Israel offered a negotiated return of refugees in the context of peace talks. The Arabs refused: no recognition, no negotiations, no peace. Israel tried to negotiate directly with refugee representatives at the Rhodes Armistice conference in 1949; and Arab forces physically prevented any meeting. The inability of refugees to return to their homes is a function exclusively of Arab obduracy regarding peace with Israel.
3.) What about UN Security Council Resolution 194, December 1948? Resolution 194 does not mention Palestinians. It mentions refugees. The authors were aware of the fact that by the end of 1948, hundreds of thousands of Jews were being driven from their homes throughout the Muslim world, from Morocco to Iran. These Jews were innocent civilians, non-combatants, and citizens of their Muslim host countries. Many could date their ancestry in those countries from as early as the 6th century BC -- 1,200 years before Mohammed! They were forced to flee, some with barely the clothes on their backs, by Arab governments outraged that Jews in Israel had miraculously defeated a vastly larger Arab army, and thus brought great humiliation upon the Arab world. UN resolution 194, fairly and even-handedly, sought the resolution of both refugee problems, in the context of peace negotiations. But the Arab refusal to agree to any semblance of peace made any just and reasonable resolution of both refugee problems impossible. Meanwhile, with no help from the rest of the world, Israel took in 90% of these nearly 900,000 Jewish refugees, and integrated them in to the fledgling Jewish state. The Arab rejection of the UN partition plan (UN resolution 181), and the subsequent invasion of Israel by 7 Arab armies, is what caused the refugee problem. The Arab rejection of UN resolution 194, any possibility of peace with Israel, is the reason that today's millions of descendents of the original 725,000 Arab refugees languish in grinding poverty in refugee camps, supported by UNRWA, with an annual budget of billions of dollars (most from the USA and Europe). This being the case, the full onus of culpability for the resolution of this problem rests squarely, and solely, upon the Arab nations which caused, and maintain, the problem. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
MACMASTER UNIVERSITY SUES U.S. AUTHOR OVER TERROR ALLEGATIONS
Posted by Michael Travis, March 31, 2007. |
|
We must support Paul Williams in his battle against terror and
injustice This was written by Carmela Fragomeni (cfragomeni@thespec.com) and it appeared in The Hamilton Spectator. |
|
McMaster University, fed up with accusations of harbouring terrorists and lax security at its nuclear reactor, is suing an American author for $2 million for defamation and libel. The suit alleges Paul Williams, in his 2006 book The Dunces of Doomsday, falsely says McMaster mismanaged university security, leading to the infiltration by terrorist operatives and the theft of nuclear material for bomb-making. It also cites radio interviews where Williams said McMaster's licence was revoked for losing 180 pounds of radioactive material. The allegations have yet to be proven in court. The Canada Nuclear Safety Commission has investigated and states no nuclear material is missing, and says McMaster has never lost its reactor licence. Williams, a journalist from Scranton, Penn., has written books on Islamic terrorism and has started a legal defence fund. His statement of defence claims a moral duty to notify the public and says a Mac student and former student were among 17 suspected terrorists arrested in June. It also says his book is thoroughly researched, including interviews with authorities about Mac's security problems. The lawsuit originally included WND Books/Cumberland House Publishing and its publicist, but that part was settled out of court with a retraction of a media release about the book that was posted on the publisher's website. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
DAYENU FOR PALESTINIAN STATE SUPPORTERS (PSS)
Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 30, 2007. |
|
Repeat it long enough and it will catch on: On the eve of Passover -- the Jewish holiday representing the Jewish 'From Bondage To Freedom', transformation, let us recite: the Paradigm Of Two-State Solution Is DEAD And Has Been Removed From The Negotiations Table In Israel As Well As The International Policies. This was written by Yoram Ettinger and it was filed March 27, 2007
as Straight From The Jerusalem Cloakroom #202
|
|
Palestinian State supporters are advised to revisit the very long traditional Passover hymn of DA'YE'NOU ("It would suffice"): "How many good qualities has G-D bestowed upon us? If G-D had only delivered us from Egypt, and had not plagued the Egyptians, it would suffice", etc.). Enclosed you'll find a paraphrased edition of DA'YE'NOU, addressing the proposed Palestinian State. The Proposed Palestinian State -- a 2007 edition of Passover's DA'YE'NOU How many assumptions have the Palestinian State Supporters (PSS) bestowed upon us? 1. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that snatching the PLO (in 1993) from the jaws of oblivion in Mideast terrorist camps, installing the PLO onto hilltops overlooking the door steps of its intended victim (Israel), arming and training the Palestinians, rewarding the PLO with a Nobel Peace Prize and with frequent access to the White House, and showering upon the Palestinians a multi-billion dollar aid-package, would pave the road to A MODERATE PALESTINIAN STATE AND PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE WITH ISRAEL, DA'YE'NOU (it would suffice); 2. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that the resuscitation of the peace process required overlooking the correlation between expanded Palestinian sovereignty and exacerbated Palestinian terrorism, while sweeping under the carpet the TRACK RECORD OF THE ABU-MAZEN/ARAFAT PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY since its inception (rejoicing in 9/11, naming central sites after Iraqi and Palestinian terrorists, systematic violation of commitments, virulent hate-education, all time high conventional terrorism, becoming role-model of homicide bombing), DA'YE'NOU; 3. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that the proposed Palestinian State would be less violent than the ARAFAT/ABU-MAZEN SUBVERSIVE AND TREACHEROUS TRACK RECORD in Egypt (early 1950s), Syria (1960s), Jordan (1968-1970), Lebanon (1970-1982) and Kuwait (spearheading the 1990 Iraq's invasion), which sparked civil wars, bloodshed and massive expulsion, DA'YE'NOU; 4. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that the establishment of a Palestinian State would resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict, ignoring the fact that NONE OF THE ARAB-ISRAELI WARS HAS BEEN TRIGGERED BY THE PALESTINIAN ISSUE (e.g. the 1948/9 War was fought by the Arab countries at the expense of the Palestinians, hence the Jordanian and Egyptian occupation of Judea, Samaria and Gaza respectively), and that neither the 1982 Israel-PLO war in Lebanon, nor the 1987-92 1st Intifadah, nor the 2000-2006 2nd Intifadah ignited Arab-Israeli wars, DA'YE'NOU; 5. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that the Palestinian issue constitutes a crown jewel of Arab priorities, and that the establishment of a Palestinian State would sooth Arab leaders, thus disregarding the fact that ARABS HAVE NEVER SHED BLOOD FOR PALESTINIANS, BUT HAVE SHED MUCH PALESTINIAN BLOOD, that pro-Palestinian Arab rhetoric has been matched by anti-Palestinian Arab actions, that the meager Arab financial assistance to the Palestinians is dwarfed by Western assistance, that Arabs consider Palestinians to be a potentially subversive element, DA'YE'NOU; 6. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that the establishment of a Palestinian State would defuse Middle East turbulence, failing to realize that a one century old (Palestinian) problem cannot be a root cause for 13 century old (inter-Arab, inter-Muslim, Islamic terrorism) problems, that THE ARAB/PALESTINIAN-ISRAELI CONFLICT HAS NEVER BEEN "THE" MIDDLE EAST CONFLICT, and that Iran's and Iraq's megalomaniac aspirations, Al-Qaeda Islamic fanaticism, the Iran-Iraq conflict, Syrian regional terrorism, Islamic assaults on conservative Arab regimes and Sunni-Shite conflicts have preceded -- and have raged independent of -- the Arab/Palestinian-Israeli conflict, DA'YE'NOU; 7. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that a Palestinian State would diminish Islamic terrorism, turning a blind eye to a 13 century old tradition of Islamic terrorism and to the fact that -- IRRESPECTIVE OF ISRAEL'S EXISTENCE AND THE PALESTINIAN ISSUE -- Islamic terrorism has recently plagued Australia, the Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, India, Sri Lanka, Russia, Lebanon, Egypt, Sudan, Somalia, Mauritania, Nigeria, Turkey, Scandinavia, Holland, France, England, Spain and the US, DA'YE'NOU; 8. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that a Palestinian State would moderate anti-US Islamic terrorism, ignoring the fact that the PA has become the largest terrorist base in the Middle East and the role model of homicide bombing, that ANTI-AMERICAN ISLAMIC TERRORISM HAS PEAKED SINCE THE 1993 ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY AND WHILE WASHINGTON APPEASED THE ARABS and/or pressured Israel (1983 -- Lebanon, 1993 -- 1st Twin Tower, 1995/6 -- Saudi Arabia, 1998 -- Kenya Tanzania, 2000 -- Aden and the 2000 preparations for 9/11), DA'YE'NOU; 9. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that a Palestinian State would advance western interests in the Middle East, brushing aside its LETHAL EFFECT UPON JORDAN'S HASHEMITE REGIME, its energizing impact on rogue regimes and on terrorist organizations, its close ties with Iran and pro-Saddam and pro-Bin-Laden elements, its alliance with Russia and China, its corrupt and repressive (mostly anti-Christian) track record, DA'YE'NOU (it would suffice); 10. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that the establishment of a Palestinian State and Israel's security are mutually-inclusive, ignoring the track record of the PA/PLO/Hamas and the INDISPENSABILITY OF THE MOUNTAIN RIDGES OF JUDEA & SAMARIA (the "Golan Heights" of Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Israel's 9-15 mile wide sliver along the Mediterranean) to Israel's security, DA'YE'NOU; 11. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that the establishment of a Palestinian State would spare Israel a demographic calamity, while ignoring the FALSE 70% INFLATION OF THE ACTUAL NUMBER OF PALESTINIANS IN JUDEA & SAMARIA, the grave inconsistencies in Palestinian demographic statistics, the dramatic decline in the Arab-Jewish fertility gap from 6 children to 1 child, the 36% increase in annual Jewish births since 1995, while the number of annual Arab births has stagnated, as documented by the American-Israel Demographic Research Group (www.aidrg.com), DA'YE'NOU; 12. If the PSS had ONLY assumed that Palestinians deserve a state alongside the Jewish State, while being oblivious of the fact that geographically, historically and demographically the core of Jordan is Palestinian, hence the ESTABLISHMENT OF A SECOND PALESTINIAN STATE -- and the 23rd Arab state -- would be AT THE EXPENSE OF THE ONLY JEWISH STATE, DA'YE'NOU; How many more assumptions -- made by Palestinian State supporters (PSS)-must be crashed against the rocks of Middle East reality, before we realize that THE PROPOSED PALESTINIAN STATE WOULD EXACERBATE THE PROBLEM AND NOT ADVANCE THE SOLUTION, and that the proposed Palestinian State and regional stability, peaceful coexistence, Western interests and Israel's existence CONSTITUTE AN OXYMORON?! Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
MARSHALL'S MIDDLE EAST: IGNORANCE OR MENDACITY?
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 30, 2007. |
|
To the Editor,
Rachelle Marshall's 'Hamas and Israel' in today's Palo Alto Daily News (3.30.07) is utterly breathtaking in the depth and breadth of its ignorance. There are errors of fact in every sentence. Space limitations require our looking at only the most egregious. She asserts that all the Palestinians want is a nation of their own. This may be true. But why then did they twice elect leaders who in word and deed have made it clear for decades that their sole purpose is the total destruction of Israel and genocide of its Jews? Moreover, the UK, the UN, the USA, and Israel have made a total of 15 offers of nationhood to the Palestinian people since 1937. Every offer has been met with rejection, violence, murder, terrorism and war...and an endless relentless diatribe of hatred and genocide and destruction. If all they wanted was their state, they could have had it many times over. But the Palestinian people have chosen, and still follow, the leaders who preach the destruction of Israel. There are no leaders without followers. Contrary to Marshall's assertion, Hamas has indeed promised many times to annihilate Israel's Jews. Its foundation document, the Hamas Covenant, mentions this promise in four different places. And the goal is not just Israel's Jews, but the genocide of Jews world-wide! Contrary to Marshall's assertion, Israel has made many concessions and offers of more, in exchange for peace. Most recently, Israel unilaterally and unconditionally ceded the Gaza Strip, destroyed 17 Israeli villages, and rendered 9,000 Jews homeless in order to make a galactically generous peace offer to the Palestinians. And Hamas' response was their vociferous declaration that terrorism has wrought this miraculous victory, so let's do more terrorism in the West Bank. Contrary to Marshall's assertion, there is no reason to believe that relinquishing more territory will bring peace. The Israeli retreat from the Gaza Strip brought more Hamas terrorism and more Qassam rockets in one year than in the previous five years. The Israeli retreat from Lebanon (5.24.2000) brought 6 years of Hezbollah's Qatyusha and Shehab rockets. And the Israeli elections of 2006, in which the Kadima party won on a platform of ceding more land for peace, were met with more Hamas violence and more promises to destroy Israel and create 'Palestine from the River to the Sea'. The Palestinans do indeed need freedom, as Marshall asserts; but not from Israeli control. They need freedom from their own totalitarian, tyrannical, triumphalist, theocractic, imperialist, jihadist, supremicist, terrorist and genocidal government. In the real world, there are very bad consequences to very bad decisions. The Palestinian people's decision to follow terrorist leaders has led to some very bad consequences for the Palestinian people. There are no leaders without followers. Can Ms. Marshall be so galacticallly ignorant of the realities of the Middle East conflict, or does she merely hope that her audience is? David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
MEDIA SILENT ON ABUSE OF JEWS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 30, 2007. |
|
HOW MEDIA SPIN DISTORTS A STORY The initial story was that six Muslim clerics publicly prayed before boarding an airplane in Minneapolis, from which they were removed before the flight. They were unarmed and not part of a terrorist plot. American prejudice against Muslims. The imams are suing US Airways. Now come additional facts that put matters in a different light. One of the imams prayed uncharacteristically loudly, as if to draw attention to himself and his faith. When the six boarded, they requested different seats -- a pair at the front, another pair in the middle, and the last two in the rear, as if to control all exits. Why else would the group separate? Three of average build asked for seatbelt extenders, and slipped them under their seats, instead of using them. Seatbelt extenders have heavy metal buckles, not suitable for cushions but useful as weapons. Apparently they were performing to arouse suspicion, be expelled, and have a basis for lawsuit. One of the imams who seemed to be reenacting 9/11 duly complained he was treated as criminal. He must hope to profit from the American reflex against discrimination and to propagandize against US self-defense, (John McWhorter, NY Sun, 3/15, Op.-Ed.). ABUSE OF JEWISH RIGHTS; MEDIA SILENT The federal government indicted two Americans for talking to a newspaper reporter about publicly known information that happened also to be classified. This is an unprecedented crackdown, for no public benefit, on what hardly is a crime, but the government is treating it as espionage. The prosecutor wants to keep the evidence secret from the public. Secret trials usually outrage the ACLU and the like. Not this time. Those usually voluble groups, which devote bountiful resources to the rights of enemy combatants, are not following this case. Could that be because this case involves officials of AIPAC, the Israel lobby, not enemies of our country? (NY Sun, 3/15, Ed..) Is that why the crackdown? HOLOCAUST DENIAL During the Holocaust, denial was the mode. Although reporters witnessed Nazi "round-up of Jews, the railroad lines of cattle cars, the work camps, the death camps, the gas chambers and the crematoria," the major media, such as the NY Times and Chicago Tribune buried that news on the back pages as unconfirmed" (Winston Mid East Analysis,3/6). Calling it "unconfirmed" is unconscionable! Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
ETHIOPIAN MUSLIMS BEAT CHRISTIAN EVANGELIST TO DEATH IN MOSQUE
Posted by Michael Travis, March 30, 2007. |
|
Two items. Different tactics depending on how much Islamists are in
control. The first item come from the LittleGreenFootballs website
|
|
Our friends in the House of Saud have been spending billions to promote the Wahhabist strain of supremacist Islam in the Horn of Africa, and their efforts are bearing fruit in atrocities like this: Ethiopian Evangelist Beaten to Death by Militant Muslims. (Hat tip: Ringo.) On Monday afternoon Tedase and two female coworkers were conducting street evangelism on Merkato Street in Jimma, Southern Ethiopia. Merkato Street runs by a Wahabbi Mosque. As the team was walking by the Mosque, a group of Muslims exited the Mosque and began to run after them to confront them. Tedase's female coworkers ran away from the mob but Tedase continued on. The Muslims caught up with Tedase, pulled him into the mosque, and savagely beat him to death. Sources from Jimma reported that Tedase was beaten with a calculated intention to kill him. This was no accident or case of mob frenzy getting out of control. His body was later taken to the hospital for an autopsy and he was buried Tuesday, March 27.
A Muslim woman who was told she had to remove her veil if she wanted to testify in 31st District Court in Hamtramck filed a federal lawsuit Wednesday against the judge who made the ruling. Ginnah Muhammad filed the complaint against Judge Paul Paruk, alleging he violated her religious rights and denied her equal access to the courts. Muhammad had gone to small claims court last October in a dispute with a car rental company when Paruk said she could not testify unless she removed her veil, the lawsuit alleges. "If in fact, you do not wish to do it, then I cannot go forward with your case and I have to dismiss your case," Paruk told the woman, according to a transcript attached to the complaint filed by Dearborn Heights lawyer Nabih Ayad. Muhammad refused and Paruk dismissed the case, the lawsuit alleges. Paruk did not return a phone call. "I'm a human being and I wanted to come to court to get justice," Muhammad said at a news conference Wednesday outside the federal courthouse in Detroit. "When I walked out, I just really felt empty, like the courts didn't care about me." The Quran doesn't explicitly require women to cover their face, but many Muslim women wear a hajib or other covering as a sign of piety and modesty. The Detroit News is amazingly clueless on this issue. Forget
about the fact that they won't even consider the possibility this is a
radical Islamic agenda at work; that's not a "veil" she's wearing,
it's a niqab, a full-body disguise, one step away from the
burqa (which obscures the eyes as well). And the word for the
veil that covers the head and hair is "hijab," not "hajib." Sheesh.
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
CLINTON TRIES TO LEGITIMIZE DUBAI ANTI-SEMITES
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 30, 2007. |
|
This was written by Dick Morris and Eileen McGann and it appeared on
FrontPageMagazine.com March 26, 2007. It is archived at
http://www.frontpagemagazine.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=27550 Dick Morris is a former adviser to Bill Clinton. Eileen McGann is an attorney and CEO of www.Vote.com. Together, they collaborate on books, columns and foreign political campaigns. To receive free copies of all of their commentaries, please sign up at www.dickmorris.com. |
|
The past few years have seen a concerted international PR campaign to promote Dubai as a tolerant new Mecca of Middle East moderation and amazing economic growth. And it's working. Corporate giant Halliburton is moving its headquarters there; the famed Louvre is opening a branch in the emirate. Tourists are flocking to Dubai's luxury hotels. But don't be fooled. Dubai, which is one of the seven princedoms of the United Arab Emirates (UAE), is anything but tolerant and progressive. To put it bluntly: They don't like Jews. In fact, Dubai, like the rest of the UAE, is blatantly anti-Semitic. It bars all Israeli citizens from ever setting foot in the country. People from other nations whose passport have stamps indicating they've even visited Israel must notify Dubai immigration authorities of the stamp before entering. Dubai is also actively involved in the Arab boycott of Israel: It bans all products made in Israel and even ones with parts made in Israel. But the emir of Dubai, Sheik Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, understands the value of using prominent Americans to legitimize his country and burnish its image in the American media. That's why former Presidents George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton have been the objects of Dubai largesse. Their Dubai friends have given millions to each of their presidential libraries. And Bill Clinton has raked in more than $1 million for speeches he's given in Dubai and the UAE. Dubai's PR machine went into high gear after 9/11 -- in part to distract attention from the extensive use the terrorists made of the emirate. More than half of the hijackers traveled to the United States via Dubai. The 9/11 Commission noted that $234,500 of the $300,000 wired to the hijackers and plot leaders in America came via Dubai banks. Several months after 9/11, Dubai's newest best friend began his public association with the country. In January 2002, Bill Clinton gave his first Dubai speech (for $300,000). He's been legitimizing the country ever since. Clinton was the rainmaker who introduced the emir to his friend and employer, Ron Berkle, the owner of Yucaipa companies and a major fund-raiser for Bill and Hillary. Last year, Yucaipa and the emir formed a new company, DIGL, for their joint ventures. So Bill Clinton is now an adviser and member of the board of directors of a company that is in partnership with the anti-Israeli government of Dubai. The Clintons won't reveal how much the former president pocketed for setting up this deal, except to report on Hillary's Senate disclosure form: "more than $1,000." A lot more. According to San Francisco Examiner columnist P.J. Corkery, Clinton makes $10 million a year from Yucaipa. Bill isn't alone in legitimizing Dubai. Other Clinton pals -- including disgraced former National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, ex-Secretary of State Madeline Albright and Al and Tipper Gore -- have attended highly publicized events there. So have some Republicans -- including former Bush Sr. Chief of Staff John Sununu, presidential brother Neal Bush and Rudy Guiliani. Republican ex-Sen. Bob Dole and Democratic ex-Rep. Tom Downey lobby for Dubai; so does The Glover Park Group, home of Hillary Clinton spokesman Howard Wolfson and former President Clinton press secretary Joe Lockhart. Major U.S. business leaders populate the many conferences sponsored by Dubai and its industries. All of this helps legitimize Dubai. And no one mentions the problem with Israel. Bill Clinton even created a Dubai Scholars Program at the American University in Dubai under the sponsorship of the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation. Laura Tyson, Clinton's chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, created a similar Dubai study program at the University of London. But not everyone is blind. Last month, the University of Connecticut correctly abandoned plans to open up a campus in Dubai after serious complaints about Dubai's state-imposed discrimination of people based on their national origin and religion and its documented violations of human rights. (For example, Human Rights Watch has said Dubai abuses tens of thousands of migrant workers from India and Pakistan.) The Clinton Foundation certainly wouldn't sponsor a program in America that banned Israeli students. It shouldn't sponsor one in Dubai, either. It's time to stop legitimizing an anti-Semitic state. |
|
THE RISE OF ISLAMISTS IN THE MIDDLE EAST
Posted by Elan Journo, March 29, 2007. |
|
Washington's policy of bringing elections to the Middle East, we were assured, would lead the region's people to embrace America. But in fact many have flocked to support Islamic totalitarians--members of the ideological movement behind 9/11. In Lebanon's U.S.-backed election, Hezbollah won positions in the cabinet, and its current drive to topple the regime and take over has massive popular support. In the Palestinian territories, Hamas won in a landslide; it remains both wildly popular and adamantly committed to destroying Israel. In Egypt's parliamentary elections, the group that scored stupendous gains was the Muslim Brotherhood, whose offshoots include Hamas and parts of al Qaeda. This show of support for Islamic totalitarianism is commonly attributed to Washington's supposedly overly aggressive military action, which allegedly antagonized and "radicalized" otherwise-friendly people in the region. But in fact the opposite is true. It is Washington's failure to unleash sufficient force to defeat the Islamists that explains their growing popularity. Contrary to Bush's evasions, vast numbers of Muslims in the region have not been pining to embrace our political values. They have long been intellectually sympathetic to the Islamists. These Muslims believe that submission to Allah's laws is morally good, and that their religion was meant to apply universally. While many will not themselves attack the West, they regard the cause of Islamic world domination as a noble ideal. This is why so many condone and actively support Islamist warriors and their sponsoring regimes. Consider the (little reported) street demonstrations after 9/11 across the Islamic world celebrating Osama bin Laden as a hero; consider the everyday popular glorification of "martyrs" on posters and in videos. The region's widespread support for Islamic totalitarianism is led by the states that are that movement's chief financiers and inspirations: Iran and Saudi Arabia. These regimes are waging a proxy war against the West; they are proselytizing and recruiting untold numbers to join the fight to subjugate mankind to Islamic rule. Since the Islamist cause has state-sponsorship and widespread moral endorsement, Washington's military response to 9/11 should have been to crush the hostile Islamist regimes and demoralize the movement's many abettors. By unapologetically devastating these regimes, America would have disheartened the Islamists and their supporters. Only demoralized people will reject the ideals and leaders that inspired their belligerence and promised victory; only humiliating defeat will drive them to renounce the fight as hopeless. But instead of defending America by bringing defeat to our enemies, Bush chose to bring them elections--elections that have strengthened the Islamist cause. Were Bush and his supporters merely ignorant about the ideas popular in the region? No, anyone who reads the newspaper can tell that Islamists command mass support. Bush and his supporters pushed for elections, not because of some honest mistake about the probable results, but because they evaded--and continue to evade--the nature of the threat we face from the Middle East. Why? Because our leaders lack the moral courage to do what is necessary to destroy it. If our leaders admitted the nature of the threat, they would have to fight an assertive military campaign against a hugely popular movement--potentially killing many people. But such a response is morally inconceivable to them. They believe that America has no moral right to wage a self-interested war to protect our lives. For Washington, only a self-effacing response is legitimate. Thus, our leaders pretend that the threat is limited to a handful of "radicals," and that the region is dense with oppressed, peace-loving admirers of the West. Our leaders selflessly empowered Mideast mobs with elections and vowed to endorse whatever they chose. Encouraged to vote their conscience, the mobs demanded Islamist rule and "Death to America, Death to Israel." The U.S.-engineered political success of Islamists vindicates one of the movement's central claims: committed jihadists bearing inferior weapons but armed with moral certainty can triumph over the powerful but cowardly America. Even after 9/11, the United States cravenly refused to defeat Islamists, and instead bent over backwards to hand them political power. What could do more to galvanize Muslim support for the cause of Islamic totalitarianism? And what could do more to demoralize and disarm the better people in the region, however few, who genuinely renounce terrorism and aspire for freedom? By bringing elections, rather than defeat, to our enemies, the United States has made them stronger. To protect American lives, we must recognize the ideological nature of the threat and proudly exercise our moral right to self-defense. Elan Journo is a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute (http://www.aynrand.org/) in Irvine, Calif. The Institute promotes Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand--author of "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead." Contact the writer at media@aynrand.org. |
|
TIME TO STAND UP TO THE SAUDIS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 29, 2007. | |
The imperviousness of the Saudi plan to any changes, any negotiations, any Israeli input; along with the insistence on the 'right of return' that everyone knows is a deal-breaker for Israel; all indicate that this is not a real peace plan. But it is a PR success of the highest order for the Arab leadership intent on destroying Israel. The PR picture: The Arabs get together and offer a peace plan. They know in advance that the plan has 'deal breaker' elements in it to which Israel will never acquiesce. They also know that many details of the plan should be worked out in negotiations; but an integral part of the offer is the 'take it or leave it, as is' aspect, about which they are obdurate. So, naturally, Israel rejects it. The Arabs can now say that Israel, therefore (and not the Arabs), has chosen war. Thus one can conclude that: Israel is to blame for the current state of war. Thus, the PR war can be won in one fell swoop by this 'peace initiative.' and this PR war win is a real win-win for the Arabs because if Israel does acquiesce, then it will have made substantive, costly concessions which endanger its security and make it more vulnerable to attack, and which cannot be reversed (except by war) -- while the Arab side has made only symbolic verbal concessions which cost nothing and are easy to reverse. Thus the stage is set, if Israel acquiesces, to a later reversal of these Arab concessions (on some flimsy excuse or another) and an assault on a weakened and disadvantaged Israel from positions of much greater strength and geographic advantage. In short, the reality of the Saudi plan is Israel's 'unconditional surrender'; and then all Israel can do is hope for the Arab nations' good intentions to motivate their follow-through on paper promises. But, wait, how can one know if/when the Saudi plan is sincere? Easy. An honest attempt by the Arabs at peace making would include the following, rather obvious, and historically well precedented, characteristics: 1.) The reversal of the Khartoum 'NO's (Aug. 1967: No recognition, No negotiations, No peace) So, in light of the above, Arab states should be able (if they really want peace) to understand Israel's need to see some substantive and concrete concessions and changes on the Arab side before it can trust the sincerity of the Arab proposal. These are called 'confidence building measures'. Acknowledging this tragic reality, Arab states can demonstrate their sincerity by undertaking a time line of changes akin to those listed above, coordinated with Israeli concessions, with mile-stones, with apparatus for verification, and with Israel reserving the right to reverse concessions in the absence of Arab compliance. All of the above requires extensive negotiations and demonstration of flexibility and good will from both sides. The absence of any Arab willingness to enter in to such negotiations, and the demand by the Arabs that Israel accept 'as is' the 'peace plan' in its entirety, and the highly transparent motivation for the mis-representation of Hamas as a party to peace in order to gain monetary reward from the West, are very strong indications that the current Arab peace plan is not sincere. It will then be reasonable for Israel to interpret this new Arab peace plan as a disguised demand for unconditional surrender...a demand to which Israel is under no obligation to acquiesce. David ML ps. Debka.com notes two Arab preconditions not mentioned earlier. End Aliyah (one of the core reasons for Israel's existence; and in any case an unacceptable demand, because what state anywhere in the world allows foreign entities to control its immigration policies?) and end defensive preventative measures against terrorist attacks. Hmmm. ... Now what can the Saudis have in mind with these two preconditions that no state in the world could accept? "Arabs want halt in Jewish immigration" Another liberal Arab intellectual/author gets it right. Below, MEMRI (www.thememriblog.org) provides excerpts from Mamoun Fandy's essay. See (1.) below. (2.) below is a Washington Times editorial on the Saudi Peace Plan. | |
|
1.) "Adding of the Right of Return to the Saudi Initiative
Changed It From 'The Start of an Earnest Dialogue' to 'An Initiative
Impossible to Implement'"
In an article in the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat on March 26, 2007, the eve of the Arab League summit in Riyadh, liberal author Dr. Mamoun Fandy wrote on the Arabs' tendency to leave obstructions to development in place rather than remove them, comparing these issues to rocks left in the middle of the road. In particular, he points to the Palestinian issue as one that has drained the energies of the Arab states for more than 50 years, and calls on the conferees at the summit to remove the demand for the return of Palestinian refugees from the Arab peace initiative in order to arrive at a practical and realistic solution to the Palestinian issue. The following are excerpts:[1] 'For 50 Years the Arabs Have Been Walking Around the Palestinian Issue' 'King 'Abdallah Bin 'Abd Al-'Aziz's initiative has traveled the breadth and width of the Arab states and the world since 2002, until they [i.e. the Arabs] returned to it once more in Riyadh in 2007. 'It was inevitable that the initiative, like every Arab dossier, would tour like this... [The Arabs] have become convinced today that this tour is no solution, and have returned to the land of the 2002 initiative for the Riyadh summit... [But] the basic problem for the [summit] conferees can still be summed up in one word: 'rock.' 'I am referring to... the boulder placed in the middle of the public road, which is surrounded by the cries of those with a vested interest in its remaining in place. 'In every country in the world, when a rock obstructs a road, the municipality hurries to move it aside to facilitate the flow of traffic. However, in the Arab world, someone throws a rock in the road, and instead of moving it aside, those claiming to be of sound judgment come up with [what they consider] the ideal way to deal with the problem of the rock -- namely, placing a sign above it saying 'Careful of the Rock.' 'The worst thing is that tending to the rock requires, in the long term, entire institutions -- from the workers who man the shifts at night carrying lanterns to light up the sign above the rock, to the construction of an overpass to circumvent the rock, or the digging of an underpass. 'One of the most important responsibilities of the Riyadh summit is to get rid of the rock, instead of placing a warning sign on it and going around it. 'The rocks that stand in the path of our success and our development are many, from all our institutions... to our international relations. But I will be blunt right from the start, and say that leaving the Palestinian issue for 50 years without an ultimate solution is the largest rock blocking the road of Arab development. Either we remove this rock from the road with a fundamental and permanent solution, or else we continue building overpasses and underpasses. 'For 50 years, the Arabs have been walking around the Palestinian issue. They started newspapers and broadcasts and TV stations for this issue, and produced writers and analysts and intellectuals for this issue, and readied tremendous armies and allocated fat budgets to this issue, but none of this advanced a solution or was of any benefit. All of this just rallied under the sign 'Careful of the Rock." By Including the Right of Return, the Arabs 'Emptied the [Saudi] Initiative of its Content' 'The strange thing is that the Palestinian issue did not merely make the Arabs uphold leaving it like a rock [obstructing] development in their countries, but has even made the Israelis share these same feelings with us, since it is in their interest to leave the issue of Palestine as a rock in the region. The Americans joined in the process [as well,] and began to draw up a map to avoid the rock, instead of removing the pitfall from the road. 'It was King 'Abdullah Bin 'Abd Al-'Aziz alone who proposed [this] earnest initiative at the Beirut summit in 2002, and it was the start of an earnest dialogue to resolve the issue of Palestine. But the 'rock crowd' added to it the issue of the return of the Palestinian refugees, in order to change it from an earnest initiative suitable for a comprehensive solution, that made the most of the existing realities, into an initiative that was impossible to implement, [and] not much different than the unimplemented Security Council resolutions. In so doing, they emptied the Saudi initiative of its content, and left the Palestine issue as a rock, so that they can carry the lanterns that light up the sign hung on the rock, and so they can shout at us, 'Careful of the rock!' '[When] the initiative is proposed again now in Riyadh, it must be a courageous proposal that does not bow to the 'rock lobby.' The Palestinian issue must be solved, as a basis for the solution of all of the pending questions in the region. 'I personally consider it auspicious that representatives from Malaysia, Indonesia, and Turkey are present at this summit, since we, as Arabs, have over the last 50 years become accustomed to [seeing the Palestinian issue as] a knotty issue that only the prophets can unravel -- so that for us it has reached the level of sanctity. Perhaps those coming from afar have a courageous, outside perspective that can help us call things by their [true] names and help us see the issue of Palestine as one that can be resolved through clarity of vision, without exaggerating its sanctity.' Some Conferees Will Come 'Armed to the Teeth With Their Media Militias' and Will Say that the 'Iranian Rock Blocking Peace and Security is an 'Islamic Rock'. 'The [second] rock that the Riyadh summit must deal with is... the export of extremism, which has become the Arabs' second [largest] export after oil. The conferees need to discuss clearly and transparently the downturn in the security situation in Iraq, and the suicide terrorists who blow themselves up there, even in the houses of Allah. They didn't come out of [thin] air, nor did they come to Iraq through the air, [but rather came to Iraq from neighboring countries]. 'The responsibility for combating terrorism is weighty and is shared [by all], and it calls for an urgent collective effort that cannot stand delay. But some of the conferees in Riyadh claim that America alone is responsible for the destruction... This claim is an attempt to evade responsibility and to leap over the rock via an overpass. 'The Riyadh summit must address [the issue of a] nuclear Iran, another large rock placed in the center of the Middle East, despite its complexities. Naturally, there will be at the summit a significant group of politicians armed to the teeth with their media militias, who will say that the Iranian rock blocking peace and security in the region is 'an Islamic rock,' and that 'the intervention of America or Europe in this matter is humiliating to the feelings of the Muslims,' and that 'moving this rock is an offense to Islam and the Muslims'... 'Education in the Arab world could also be considered a large rock in the path of development, to which the coming Arab summit should pay heed. This is especially [true] since we know that not a single university in the Arab world offers an intellectual product for the world's consideration -- unless we take into account some of the universities' specialization in producing 'software' for terrorism and a [terrorist] mentality. Our education ministers claim that it is impossible to do better, and that the budgets allocated to them are insufficient, and that there is no choice but to establish private universities, on the condition that they not teach the curricula of the 'infidels.' This is an ingenious solution, much like the solution of employing workers with lanterns at night to call pedestrians' attention to the rock placed in the middle of the path. 'What the coming Arab summit in Riyadh must do is move aside the heavy rocks [obstructing] growth, development, and peace in the Arab world, and not shirk its responsibilities... and circle around them, or build bridges and tunnels above and below them. 'The Arab world expects King 'Abdullah Bin 'Abd Al-'Aziz... the author of the initiative on which the summit will focus, to restore to the Arabs their faith in the meaning of the word 'summit'...' Endnote:
(2.) "The Saudi 'peace' plan ultimatum"
During her visit to the Middle East this week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has been touting a peace plan advocated by Saudi Arabia as the basis for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations -- even though it has serious flaws that have raised well-founded concerns from a dovish Israeli government. Parts of the Saudi plan, particularly the proposal for a peace agreement in which the Arab states agree to recognize Israel, are indeed laudable and deserve support. Other parts, particularly provisions demanding that Israel yield all of the West Bank territory it captured in a defensive war and return to its precarious pre-1967 borders; requiring that it yield the Golan Heights to a Syrian Ba'athist regime that is aligned with Iran; and leaving open the possibility that Palestinian refugees from the 1948 war and their descendants might be permitted to return to their former homesteads inside what is now Israel, are unacceptable. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert quite sensibly has asked that these provisions at a minimum be significantly modified. Mr. Olmert got his answer from Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal on Tuesday in the form of an ultimatum. Prince Saud said the proposal is non-negotiable, and suggested that Israel would be to blame if war broke out as a result of its failure to swallow it whole. 'It has never been proven that reaching out to Israel achieves anything,' he told the London Telegraph. If Israel does not agree to the offer, it will be putting its future 'in the hands of the lords of war,' he added. (This apparently was the royal response to the hopes of Miss Rice and Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni that Saudi Arabia would make the plan the basis for future discussions with Israel, not a take-it-or-leave-it offer.) Yesterday Saudi King Abdullah opened an Arab summit meeting in Riyadh by calling 'illegitimate' the U.S. military presence in Iraq and denouncing as 'oppressive' the embargo on the terrorist-dominated Palestinian Authority government. The U.S. government has invested considerable political time and effort over the years in trying to advance the cause of peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors. Given the strategic importance of the Middle East to the United States, that is something this newspaper has strongly supported -- in particular, the Bush administration's work to bring about an Israeli-Palestinian settlement based on the creation of an independent Palestinian state living in peace with Israel. But in the real world, advancing any plan for Israeli-Palestinian peace today would appear to face tremendous if not insurmountable obstacles -- so much so that it is difficult to understand why Miss Rice has seen fit to spend so much political capital in wartime on a diplomatic initiative with so little likelihood of success. Ever since Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat signed their Declaration of Principles in September 1993 while a beaming President Clinton looked on, efforts to create a 'peace process' worthy of the name have been crippled by incitement and terror from Arafat, Hamas and others on the Palestinian side. Today, the Palestinian Authority that runs Gaza and aspires to run the West Bank is headed by a coalition government comprised of two organizations: 1) Fatah, which includes terrorists such as the Iranian-backed al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, as well as ineffectual 'moderates' such as Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, who make statements about nonviolence and 'two-state solutions' when meeting with Miss Rice and Mr. Olmert, but do little or nothing of substance to make them a reality; and 2) Hamas, which remains committed to Israel's destruction and reserves the right to continue 'resistance' (terrorism and other acts of violence) against Israel. Given these realities, any peace plan would face an uphill battle -- at best. The Saudi plan had its origins at a March 2002 Arab summit meeting in Beirut -- a meeting which was overshadowed by one of the most deadly terrorist campaigns in Israel's history, culminating in the March 27, 2002, bombing by Hamas of a Passover seder at a hotel in Netanya, in which 30 people were killed. In response to these attacks, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon launched Operation Defensive Shield, sending the Israeli Army into the West Bank several days later to wipe out the terror cells Arafat had allowed to flourish there. As the fighting escalated, the Saudi initiative was largely forgotten until this year when the diplomats trotted it out in desperation for something they could plausibly call 'progress.' If the Saudis want to be taken seriously as peacemakers, they need
to stop issuing ultimatums to Israel and start issuing them to the
Palestinian irredentists they continue to lavish money on.
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli,
currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern
studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director
of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org).
Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com
|
|
PURCHASING AND POPULATING A NEW BUILDING IN HEBRON
Posted by David Wilder, March 29, 2007. |
|
Last week Hebron's Jewish community received a green light from its attorneys, Eitan Geva and Nadav HaEtzni. The deal was completed to their satisfaction. We could move in. The community purchased a 4,000 sq. meter structure, overlooking the road between Hebron and Kiryat Arba. A complicated and expensive affair which took several years to conclude, the building was purchased from its previous owner for approximately $700,000 through an office in Jordan. As soon as the final legalities were finished, it was decided to take possession of the newly-owned property. A group of students from Yeshivat Shavei Hevron, together with Hebron community residents, moved in. Such a transaction, anywhere else in the world, would not even make the local papers. People buy and sell property every day, not only for hundreds of thousands of dollars, but for millions of dollars. However, Hebron is different. Purchase of a building in Hebron makes international headlines. "Isn't this a provocation?" "Is the community trying to expand?" "Why did you take over a 'palestinian' house?" Let's take one question at a time: An Arab contractor claims the building belongs to him and says he has the papers to prove it. Any Arab suspected of selling property to Jews is considered to have committed a capital crime, the punishment for which is death. A year ago Muhammad Abu al-Hawa was killed for such a crime. "Fatah gunmen in Jericho have claimed responsibility for the murder, condemning the victim as a "traitor." In a leaflet, the gunmen threatened to kill any Arab who dares to sell his house to Jews." (The Jerusalem Post, April 16, 2006). To further prove the point, a few days ago, while being interviewed by CNN correspondent Ben Weidman, an Arab woman interrupted our conversation, speaking to him in Arabic at a rapid pace. When she had concluded I queried, "what did she say." Weidman replied that she wants copies of the sales documents in order to put the seller on trial. Another Arab resident of the area told Ga'alie Tzahal radio journalist Guy Varon, "If the Jews really did buy it, all the more power to them. But we will find the seller and chop him up into tiny pieces." This being the case, any Arab who is suspected of dealing with Jews, immediately yells 'counterfeit' -- I didn't do it! In this particular instance, however, the Arab in question really did sell the property, but he didn't know it was being sold to Jews. He thought the deal was with another Arab. To prove the point, the police have been given a video of him counting the money. Is the community trying to expand? There are dozens of families on a waiting list to live in Hebron. The first generation's children are marrying and many of them wish to reside in Hebron. However, there are no available apartments. In order to build in Hebron (on empty, undisputed Jewish-owned property) permits reaching the heights of the Defense minister must be obtained. Given the current political climate, such permits are very difficult to receive. Purchasing from Arabs is dangerous (for them), expensive, and very intricate. It isn't often that a seller is found and a workable deal formulated. However, if such an occurrence presents itself, why not? Because we are Jews? Should a Jew be prevented from purchasing property in Hebron, Maryland, or any of the other 11 Hebrons in North America because he was Jewish, headlines and legal actions due to racism and anti-Semitism would be immediate. Why is it that only in the original Hebron, the first Jewish city in Israel, should Jews be forbidden from legally purchasing a building, only because we are Jewish? Why should such a purchase be considered a provocation? How does this building affect security in the region? According to high-ranking officers, this structure, which was previously used by the IDF to station guards, will only enhance the area's security due to its strategic location between Hebron and Kiryat Arba. It is important to note: There are all kinds of rumors floating around, of various sorts and sizes. According to our sources, a police investigation has determined that the sale was fully 'legal.' However, the Defense Minister, Amir Peretz isn't overly interested in legalities and wants us out. He may very well be looking for an excuse to issue an expulsion order. Clearly, any such order could only be defined as racist and anti-Semitic. The Arabs can renovate, build and purchase as much as they so desire. Only Jews, because they are Jews, are prevented from renovating, building, purchasing. This is, of course, an unacceptable exploitation of authority for political reasons, despite the validity of the purchase. Finally, this building has been named "Beit HaShalom" -- the House of Peace. It is our fervent desire to live in Hebron peacefully with our neighbors. We seek neither violence nor confrontation. But we do demand the right, our legitimate right, to continue to live in the city of the Patriarchs and Matriarchs. This year marks the fortieth anniversary of Israel's return to Hebron in the 1967 Six-day war. What better a way to commence this celebration than to purchase and populate a new building in 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 |
|
THE JEWS AND ISRAEL-THE PERENNIAL SCAPEGOATS OF THE WESTERN WORLD
Posted by Ruth Matar, March 29, 2007. |
|
The West is in trouble! In an open act of war last Friday, Iran kidnapped 15 British sailors in the Persian Gulf. Iran's act of aggression occurred just as the British voted in favor of a UN Security Council Resolution, imposing increased sanctions against Iran for its illicit nuclear weapons program. Kidnapping is something the Iranians are very good at. Last summer Iran's Lebanese proxy, Hizbullah, kidnapped two Israeli soldiers, Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev, to divert attention from Iran's nuclear program. These soldiers have not, as yet, been freed, nor has access to them been allowed. We pray that they are alive and well! One of the theories about the kidnapping of the 15 British sailors is that Iran used this as a bargaining chip to force the U.S. military to release Iranian operatives, who the U.S. has arrested in Iraq in recent months. No doubt Iran feels that the West, or at least the U.S., will be willing to pay any ransom price to solve this international crisis. And they are right! The U.S. Administration is more than willing to pay the price, as long as it is in Jewish Israeli coin! U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, certainly no friend of the Jews and Israel, has therefore hastily been dispatched to our neck of the woods. Since last Friday, she has been shuttling between Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan, and Saudi-Arabia. Has Condoleezza Rice come to our region to coordinate moves to check Iran's increasing bellicosity? Not at all! Rather, Rice is here to promote the Mecca Arab Peace Plan. This Plan was dreamed up by Saudi-Arabia, which pretends to be America's good friend. Never mind that 15 of those 19 terrorists, who blew up the World Trade Center towers, killing more than 3,000 Americans, were bona-fide citizens of Saudi-Arabia! No Sir! Condoleezza Rice is here to attempt to push the Jewish Israeli scapegoat off the cliff. She is laboring hard to force a weak, ineffective, unpopular Israeli Prime Minister to agree to dangerous and strategically catastrophic concessions to the Palestinian terrorist government. The Mecca "Peace Plan" that Rice has come to the region to advance does not even have the benefit of a peaceful façade. The Palestinians make clear every single day that they do not and will not accept Israel's right to exist in any borders, and that they will not work to combat terrorism against Israel. The Arab "Peace Plan" will, if implemented, bring about Israel's rapid destruction. In today's Jerusalem Post, (March 28), there is a verbatim report of excerpts from U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice's March 27th Jerusalem press conference. Reading this verbatim report of what Rice said, (not somebody's interpretation), makes it crystal clear that she has great animosity toward the Jewish State, and that she is unable to be impartial with regard to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Now for a few excerpts from Rice's verbatim remarks: CONDOLEEZZA RICE: "President Abbas truly desires peace!" RUTH MATAR: I beg to differ. On January 14th of this year, Abbas publicly called upon Palestinians to attack Israel. Speaking at a rally to mark the 42nd anniversary of the founding of Fatah, Abbas told a huge crowd in Ramallah: "With the will and determination of its sons, Fatah will continue. We will not give up our principles. We have said that rifles should be directed against the occupation. We have a legitimate right to direct our guns against Israeli occupation." After returning home from her meetings with Abbas, Rice said that the U.S. is working with Abbas' Fatah to create a unified Palestinian security force. Rice then announced a United States 86.4 million dollar grant for the purpose of equipping and training Abbas' Fatah forces! Mahmoud Dahlan, a Gaza War Lord, was chosen to be responsible for carrying out this plan. This is an exact quote of what Dahlan said upon being appointed by Abbas: "THE PROJECT THIS TIME IS SUPPOSED TO BE ARMING FATAH AGAINST HAMAS, BUT [ALLAH] FORBID, I WILL NEVER SHOOT AGAINST MY BROTHERS IN HAMAS. THE USA WEAPONS AND AID WILL PROTECT THE INSTITUTIONS OF FATAH AND BE USED TO FIGHT ISRAELI OCCUPATION!" Dear friends, I don't know what happened to that 86.4 million dollar grant to Abbas that Condoleezza negotiated. Could someone please enlighten me? Did Congress agree to bankroll these murderers? Now let's discuss Condoleezza's negotiating partner, Ehud Olmert: *He is currently under investigation on several cases of suspected bribery and corruption. What gives this man the right to sign away portions of our Home Land as if this were his private real estate? Dear Lord, save us from Condoleezza Rice's diplomatic efforts. Above all, save us from Ehud Olmert, the most ineffective, defeatist and inept Israeli Prime Minister since our country's rebirth. He is even disloyally willing to sell our Home Land for prime-time photo opportunities with bigwig American leaders! We must get rid of Olmert before he gets rid of us! Dear friends, we implore you to stand with us in these crucial times. Not only Israel's future is on the line, but that of the United States and of the entire Western World. We must unite now in order to defeat our common enemy! Please forward this Letter from Jerusalem to President Bush and to all your government representatives. In the words of Eric Hoffer, the famous American longshoreman/social philosopher; "I HAVE A PREMONITION THAT WILL NOT LEAVE ME; AS IT GOES WITH ISRAEL, SO WILL IT GO WITH ALL OF US. SHOULD ISRAEL PERISH, THE HOLOCAUST WILL BE UPON US. " I am pleased to be able to include the 1968 article by Eric Hoffer in its entirety. Mr. Hoffer's article was published in the Lod Angeles Times in 1968. It is as relevant today as the day it was written! With Blessings and Love for Israel, Ruth Matar |
|
ISRAEL'S PECULIAR POSITION
The Jews are a peculiar people: Things permitted to other nations are forbidden to the Jews. Other nations drive out thousands, even millions of people, and there is no refugee problem. Russia did it. Poland and Czechoslovakia did it. Turkey threw out a million Greeks and Algeria a million Frenchmen. Indonesia threw out heaven knows how many Chinese--and no one says a word about refugees. But in the case of Israel, the displaced Arabs have become eternal refugees. Everyone insists that Israel must take back every single Arab. Arnold Toynbee calls the displacement of the Arabs an atrocity greater than any committed by the Nazis. Other nations when victorious on the battlefield dictate peace terms. But when Israel is victorious it must sue for peace. Everyone expects the Jews to be the only real Christians in this world. Other nations when they are defeated survive and recover, but should Israel be defeated it would be destroyed. Had Nasser triumphed last June, he would have wiped Israel off the map, and no one would have lifted a finger to save the Jews. No commitment to the Jews by any government, including our own, is worth the paper it is written on. There is a cry of outrage all over the world when people die in Vietnam or when two Negroes are executed in Rhodesia. But when Hitler slaughtered Jews no one remonstrated with him. The Swedes, who are ready to break off diplomatic relations with America because of what we do in Vietnam, did not let out a peep when Hitler was slaughtering Jews. They sent Hitler choice iron ore and ball bearings, and serviced his troop trains to Norway. The Jews are alone in the world. If Israel survives, it will be solely because of Jewish efforts and Jewish resources. Yet at this moment Israel is our only reliable and unconditional ally. We can rely more on Israel than Israel can rely on us. And one has only to imagine what would have happened last summer had the Arabs and their Russian backers won the war to realize how vital the survival of Israel is to America and the West in general. I have a premonition that will not leave me; as it goes with Israel, so will it go with all of us. Should Israel perish, the holocaust will be upon us. 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 |
|
BEWARE OF MULLAHS BEARING GIFTS
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 29, 2007. |
|
This article was written by Amil Imani and it was published on the
Family Security Matters network. It is archived at
Amil Imani is an Iranian-born American Citizen and pro-democracy activist living in the United States of America. Imani is a columnist, literary translator, poet, and novelist, who speaks out for the struggling people of his native land, Iran. |
|
Iran's mullahs have repeatedly indicated their willingness and ability to help restore order in Iraq, on the condition that the United States packs up and leaves the region. The mullahs have also pledged on their Boy Scout's honor, although they have never been Boy Scouts, that their nuclear program is strictly for peaceful purposes. As a further gesture of goodwill, these self-appointed custodians of Allah's earth are volunteering to serve as unpaid policemen of the entire Gulf region, protecting vital U.S. interests, just like the Shah did before them. Sounds like a great gift package from the kind-hearted do-gooders of Allah. Beware of mullahs bearing gifts! The mullahs are diehard adherents of the Islamists' eleventh commandment "Thou shall not lie or dissimilate (tagyyeh), deceive or cheat (ketman) unless they serve a higher purpose." And to these devoted faithful, there is no higher purpose in the world than serving Allah's biding, as they like it and as they interpret it. Keep in mind that the very name "Islam" means "submission," unquestioning submission to the will of Allah. Qur'an 33:36, "It is not fitting for a Muslim man or woman to have any choice in their affairs when a matter has been decided for them by Allah and His Messenger. They have no option." And in the Quran itself, Allah gives these fellows their mandate: Cleanse the earth from all kuffar (infidels), and help usher in the golden rule of Islam over a corrupt world. This high-purpose strategic goal of Islamization legitimizes any and all tactics. Qur'an 8:39 "Fight them until all opposition ends and all submit to Allah." Allah, in his kindness, leaves a bit of wiggle room for the unbelievers. Those who refuse to convert or whose life is spared may live under the rule of Islam by paying poll taxes. Qur'an 9:29, "Fight those who do not believe until they all surrender, paying the protective tax in submission." These men of Allah are urged to use every "stratagem of war," to kill and take the disbelievers as captives. The ones they do not kill, mostly women and children, they take as booties of war and slaves. These devotees of Allah have been and continue to be among the most persistent practitioners of slavery. Qur'an 9:5, "Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war." "Every stratagem," means every stratagem. No heinous act is out of bounds for these savages. They place children, for instance, in the backseat of a car bomb so that it could be waved through checkpoints without inspection. Then, the adults park the car in the midst of a shopping crowd, run out of the car and detonate it with the children inside. Horrific? Shocking? Absolutely barbaric? These are the same people who used thousands of Iranian children as minesweepers during the Iran-Iraq war to clear a path for their more valued armored vehicles. And as for Iran's mullahs' unyielding drive to acquire the ultimate weapon, it is in obedience to the command of the Quran. And "terrorism," abhorrent to the civilized world, is explicitly enjoined on the faithful. Qur'an 8:59 "The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them. They are your enemy and Allah's enemy." And for those who advocate retreating to the safety of "fortress America," the following warning should dispel their vain hope. Europe is already partly invaded, and America and other infidel lands are next. Qur'an 13:41 "Do they not see us advancing from all sides into the land (of the disbelievers), reducing its borders (by giving it to believers in war victories). It is worse than appeasement to negotiate a "deal" with the Iranian theocrats because any deal struck with these mullahs is only another ruse for them to further their plans. The UN resolutions are nothing more than pieces of paper good for fire, they can pass them all they want, president Ahmadinejad proclaims belligerently. These Islamists go by their 1400-year-old charter of Allah, the Qur'an the same charter that they hold in one hand while slashing the throat of an innocent infidel and yelling joyously "Allah is the greatest" the whole time. To the misguided "Supreme Guide," mullah Ali Khamenei of Iran, a few words are in order. The civilized Iranians, descendants of Cyrus the Great, find you, mulla Ali, and your cabal of Islamists guilty of heinous crimes. A partial list of charges is given below. Domestically
Internationally
Misguided advocates of negotiation with the mullahs, beware. The mullahs are on an Allah-mandated mission. They are intoxicated with Petrodollars and aim to settle for nothing less than complete domination of the world under the Islamic ummeh. It is precisely for this reason that they consider America and the West as "Ofooli," setting-dying system, while they believe their Islamism as "Tolooi," rising-living order. They are in no mood of negotiating for anything less than the total surrender of democracy, the very anathema to Islamism. And to you, the misguided mullah Ali Khamenei, don't be fooled by the sycophants who misinform you. Don't threaten the West by either as-yet-to-come online nuclear weapons or your fantasized sleeper cells. You will be terribly disappointed when Iranian expatriates everywhere will be among the very first to help the authorities find your sleeper cells, if any actually exist, and put them into permanent sleep. Freedom may suffer retreats periodically and tyranny may advance occasionally. Yet, free people everywhere will meet any challenge and pay any price to safeguard the precious treasure of freedom for themselves and the finest bequeath they can leave for the next generation. |
|
A PASSOVER STORY AND CHAG SAMEACH
Posted by Ken Heller, March 29, 2007. |
|
This comes from Ruth and Jacker Lauber. |
|
With Pesach soon upon them, the Jewish community in Madrid found themselves in a desperate situation. There was an acute shortage of horseradish. (Now many of you may know that horseradish is the key seder ingredient, and not only that fiery condiment for gefilte fish, and which is also known as chrain). A hue and cry arose and the entire community was mobilized in an effort to prevent this shonda (shame, tragedy). All the European Union Countries gave them the same reply, "Sorry, we have none to send." In desperation, the Rabbi phoned one of his Yeshiva friends in Tel Aviv and begged him to send a crate of horseradish by air freight to Madrid. Two days before Pesach, a crate of grade Aleph, tear-jerking, Israeli horseradish was loaded at Ben Gurion Airport onto the EL Al 789 flight to Madrid, and all seemed to be well. Unfortunately, when the Rabbi went to the Madrid Airport to claim the horseradish he was informed that a wildcat strike had just broken out and no shipments would be unloaded for at least four days. As a result: Ken Heller is a pro-Israel activist and a member of the Philadelphia Chapter of Americans For A Safe Israel. He can be reached at kayjayphilly@yahoo.com |
|
ARAB PEACE PLAN IS PR STRATEGY TO RECEIVE AID AND ISOLATE ISRAEL
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, March 29, 2007. |
|
Goals of Arab peace initiative: Gain support for unity government, international blockade of Israel While the world sees the Arab Summit peace initiative as a serious proposal, for the Palestinian Authority (PA) it is a well-orchestrated PR strategy that has nothing to do with bringing about peace. By proposing conditions it knows Israel can never accept, the PA hopes to renew international political and financial support for itself while isolating Israel as intransigent. According to the new PA Foreign Minister Ziyad Abu Amr, the goals of the Arab Summit include "lifting from it [the PA] the international blockade." In exchange, he says, "Israel must be put under an international blockade." A cartoon in today's official PA daily stresses that the goal is to receive foreign money. The words "Arab Summit" are written in the shape of a key to release a Palestinian Authority imprisoned by the financial blockade. At the heart of the Arab plan are three demands that every Israeli government and the overwhelming majority of Israelis have rejected repeatedly: - Israel's moving from its current borders to the 1949-1967 ceasefire lines The Arab world is presenting these demands as a take-it-or-leave-it proposal: "[PA] Information Minister, Dr. Mustafa Al-Barghuthi... reiterated the Palestinian stance, which opposes any change in the Arab initiative." By packaging the plan as the first sincere peace offer from the Arab world, the PA hopes the plan will appeal to the international community -- even though PA leaders know full well that Israel cannot accept it. As part of the strategy to paint Israel into a diplomatic corner, PA leaders are praising this plan as the last and only chance for peace. Even though he knows the plan is a non-starter, for example, PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas called it the "only chance for peace," and said, "I think the Arab initiative is the most precious and important [plan] proposed since 1948 for a solution of the Palestinian problem and the occupation." [Palestine Times, March 28, 2007] The purpose of this public relations initiative, therefore, is to gain international economic aid and political recognition for the Palestinian Authority government. It also cleverly camouflages the fact that this government is partnered with Hamas, which still presents the destruction of Israel and the genocide of Jews as God's unchanging imperative. According to the PA plan, Europe will accept this deal and Israel will be isolated as the spoiler of peace. Below are further translations related to the Arab League proposal: Palestinian Authority Information Minister, Dr. Mustafa Al-Barghuthi: "[PA] Information Minister, Dr. Mustafa Al-Barghuthi expressed his opposition to any Israeli attempt and to any pressure for change in the Arab initiative in the Riyadh summit. Al-Barghuthi reiterated the Palestinian stance, which opposes any change in the Arab initiative, and in particular, the pressures put forth for a change in the initiative's clauses related to the Palestinian refugees' return. He confirmed the adherence to the refugees' right of return to their land and their property, which they were banished from, and to grant them their rights, as was established in the UN resolution 194." -- [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 23, 2007] Dr. Ziyad Abu Amr, PA Foreign Minister. First he speaks of it as a chance for peace, and then he talks about all the political benefits of accepting the plan. He also says he knows Israel will ruin this chance for peace, and international isolation will be result: 'For the first time, the Arabs here are united on a practical and applicable peace initiative. The Arab initiative has the benefit of a consensus, and now it has gained the world' s attention, and even the Israelis are talking about the important foundations of a peace initiative...The Arab Summit can give a great support to the national unity government, not only on the economic level, but also political support, so that it will have a significant voice in international circles and especially in Europe...and that the Palestinian issue will receive the necessary support, and that the summit will succeed in promising cooperation and recognition in the national unity government and lifting from it the international blockade...The Arab efforts to achieve just and inclusive peace in the region must continue, and Israel must be put under an international blockade, if it insists on rejecting what is being generally accepted by the Arabs and the international community...From our experience, Israel avoids and tries to destroy any effort that has a chance of succeeding.' -- [Al-Ayyam, March 28, 2007] Editorial in today's Al Quds: "The Arab capitals...have no illusions about the intentions of the Israeli government who oppose peace...When the Riyadh summit throws the ball to the Israel' s side, then this state will be exposed to the international community, following ten years of putting the blame on the Arab side, and especially the Palestinian side." -- [Al Quds, March 29, 2007] Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -- Palestinian Media Watch -- (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
ISRAEL'S OWN DOUBLE STANDARD; ISRAEL DIDN'T USE DEPLETED URANIUM
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 29, 2007. |
|
UNO FAILED IN LEBANON With UNIFIL help, Lebanon was supposed to patrol its border, prevent Hizbullah from rearming, disarm all the terrorist organizations including Hizbullah, and keep Hizbullah men and activity away from the border. It did not. Border incidents have been few, but only because Hizbullah is preoccupied with rearming. Once rearmed, it is expected to resume bold attacks (IMRA, 3/5). This is another UNO failure as well as a failure of Israeli military and diplomacy. The IDF failed to smash Hizbullah sufficiently or to punish Syria for arming it. The diplomacy relied upon the UNO, although nationalist commentators warned that the UNO would be just a cover for Hizbullah rearming. They were right, as usual. When will the government listen to the commentators? HARSHER DOUBLE STANDARD AGAINST ISRAELI JEWS The government of Israel still follows its guidelines discriminating against protestors of expulsion of Jews from the Territories. These guidelines prohibit prosecutors from closing cases for "lack of public interest" (the usual excuse for closing cases against police brutality and framing). The guidelines call for pursuing cases even of no evidence, for demanding harsh penalties for first-time, non-violent, and youthful offenders even if just civil disobedience (which is allowed when roads are blocked by unions or students). Sometimes the mere presence of patriotic and religiously observant youth caused them to be arrested. Light sentences are to be appealed, if the "crime" is ideological (but not when Arabs protest violently). Example: "It should be emphasized that these cases cannot be closed by the investigative unit because of lack of evidence or lack of public interest, but only with permission from the State Prosecutor." (IMRA, 3/3.) Israel is a police state that discriminates against patriotic and religious Jews. SAUDI PLAN NO GOOD; LET'S HAVE HALF OF IT Hillel Halkin invariably rejects an impractical, phony peace proposal, but then proposes accepting a significant part of it. First he finds the Saudi plan impractical, because it asks Israel to let itself be overrun by refugee descendants. Then he suggests that Israel accept "some" descendants, pay off the rest, and give up much of the Territories (NY Sun, 3/13, Op-Ed). Why should Israel accept any responsibility for descendants of Arabs who wantonly tried to dispossess thee Jews, failed, and fled? They should compensate Israel! Once it accepts such, the world would condemn it and demand it take in more. Slippery slope! Most of the Arabs whom UNRWA counted as refugees were not by normal definition. Why doesn't Halkin propose compensation for real Jewish refugees? BIG GAZA WAR COMING The P.A. is preparing to field many more troops. It is building massive fortifications. It may not be able to feed its people, but spends a lot arming them (and hopes that "humanitarian" organizations would pay for the food). The result would be a much more difficult IDF effort to break through, when war resumes. Israeli casualties would be higher. Israeli security officials have warned the government about this, but the government does not intervene while the Arabs are not ready. What is worse, the government wants to extend this non-intervention to Judea-Samaria. The policy is to ask the Muslims to stop using their weapons. That leaves it up to them when to resume using them, if they even stop. Sensible policy should be to insist that the Muslims give up their weapons (and to enforce that insistence). A harsh Israeli crackdown and an end to full autonomy for the P.A. is necessary, however unpopular it would be in the media and the State Dept. (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 3/8). The government of Israel doesn't run the country for its people or for its purpose but largely for the media and the State Dept.. PM OLMERT'S "CREATIVE" TESTIMONY PM Olmert testified to an investigation commission that war in Lebanon was decided upon months before Israeli forces moved in. The Knesset Defense Committee chair testified that two months before, Olmert reduced the IDF budget by half a billion shekels, and made no military preparations (IMRA, 3/8). His story keeps changing. He is trying to duck responsibility for losing the war. One way is by claiming to have won. ISRAEL DID NOT USE DEPLETED URANIUM IN LEBANON The UNO, the International Atomic Energy Agency, and others checked metals and dozens of samples of soil at various depths in Lebanon. They found radioactivity consistent with the environment there. There was no evidence that Israel used depleted uranium shells in the war, there (IMRA, 3/8). The Arabs constantly slander Israel. Then Israel and foreign agencies solemnly investigate. The investigators find no truth to the complaints, though sometimes the UNO nevertheless accuses Israel anyway. They ought to ignore Arab complaints, which just are propaganda and hysteria. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
THE GOLDEN REIGN OF PRESIDENT TIBI THE FIRST
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 29, 2007. |
|
The following is taken from Chapter 12 from the 10th grade history textbook in use in the United Federation of Palestine, copyright 2013. |
|
It was back in the glorious year of 2007, which was exactly 1429 years since the Hijra, when Ahmad Tibi became President of Israel. That auspicious development took place under some unusual arrangements in Israel regarding the role and functioning of the President of the Jewish state. Moshe Katsav had been President for some time when he was forced to step down, due to his being indicted for sexual misconduct. Under those circumstances, Israeli law declared that the Chairperson of the Knesset assumes the position of Acting President in Israel. In the case of the Katsav deposal, the Chairperson of the Knesset was Dahlia Itzik from the Israeli Labor Party, who immediately assumed the mantel of Acting President. Now under the rules governing the acting presidency, Itzik served as Acting President for only as long as she was in the country and was physically capable of fulfilling the presidential duties. Things began to unravel when Itzik decided to attend a professional conference on the educational merits of cosmetics, held in the Cayman Islands, those very same islands in which so many Israeli politicians kept their bank accounts back then. While she was basking in the Caribbean sun, Itzik turned over the reins of the presidency to the deputy chairperson of the Knesset, according to the operating rules for such an event. And that is how Ahmad Tibi, the Deputy Chair of the Knesset, became the Acting President of Israel in late 2007. Tibi, unlike Katsav and most of the previous presidents of Israel, was determined not to serve as a mere figurehead and butt of mockery heading a powerless presidency. Tibi decided to harness the powers of clemency granted to the President under Israeli law in order to promote his political agenda. That agenda of course was Israel's complete dismemberment and annihilation. But President Ahmad Tibi was willing to restrain himself and act cautiously and wisely. His first order of business was to prevent the return to Israel of Dahlia Itzik, which would have required that he turn back over to her the President's Mansion in Jerusalem and the presidential powers. To prevent that tragedy, he began a process of negotiation with all Labor Party politicians facing impending indictment or imprisonment. He offered to grant them blanket clemency in exchange for their voting to remove Itzik from her position in the party and for ordering her to resign as Knesset Chairperson. At the same time, Itzik's cooperation was assured when a number of Hollywood ex-Israelis in the entertainment business made Itzik a fabulously attractive offer to begin starring in films. Having dealt with the immediate threat of being forced out of the Presidency by Itzik, President Tibi then approached the Likud politicians facing imminent indictment and imprisonment. He promised all of these blanket clemency in exchange for stripping Katsav of his residual claims on the presidency and for conferring them formally and permanently upon Tibi himself. Hence, President Tibi was no longer merely the Acting President, but was the actual ninth president of the sovereign state of Israel. President Tibi invited representatives of the Hamas and the Islamic movement of northern Israel to the President's mansion to help him celebrate his successful appointment. The gala celebration lasted 4 days. Because the kosher cooking staff had been evicted from the mansion, the Israeli Labor Party and Meretz were the only Zionist Knesset factions to send representatives to the festivities. Once the place was cleaned up, President Tibi could get down to serious business. He approached the major political factions in the Knesset. Playing one off against the other, he threatened each party to retract his previous promise to grant clemency to party members facing imminent indictment and imprisonment, but would reconsider and restore his previous pledge as long as they assisted him in imposing his political vision and agenda on the country. Of course President Tibi was too clever to attempt all at once to bring about the dismemberment and abolition of the Jewish state. Instead, using his powers of clemency as the whip to keep the ornery politicians in line, Tibi introduced new government decisions one at a time, in a sort of salami tactic. The first step was to make sure that Israel would not re-conquer the Gaza Strip and drive out the Qassam rocket crews. So President Tibi introduced the New Gaza Policy, under which Israel would exercise self-restraint and respond to barrages of rockets or teams of suicide bombers entering from Gaza with passive restraint and turning the other cheek. After each attack, the country would simply call for more talks with the Hamas government of the Palestinian Authority. Israel would also do absolutely nothing against the operation of countless smuggling tunnels into Gaza from Egypt. Next, the government under the guidance behind the scenes of President Tibi changed its Lebanon policy. Israel announced that in the event of Katyusha attacks on northern Israel, the most that Israel would do in response would be to bomb some empty buildings inside Lebanon. Israel would decidedly NOT send in any ground troops. It would also express willingness to negotiate the disputed Shabaa Farms territory. After this, the new government, obeying its puppet-master President Tibi, agreed that it would reward all Arab terrorist groups that manage to kidnap Israelis by turning over to them hundreds of imprisoned Palestinian terrorists. All the past squeamishness about "terrorists with blood on their hands" was of course forgotten. Israel agreed to free hundreds of imprisoned terrorists even when the kidnapped Israelis in question had been murdered in cold blood during captivity. That accomplished, the Tibi government began an initiative for a repeat implementation of the ideas behind the Gaza "redeployment" in the West Bank. The government announced that it was willing to cooperate with the Saudi "Road Map" master plan, as well as with the outline for peace prepared by the "Quartet". It accepted the Mecca arrangement by which the Fat'h and the Hamas shared power in a government that refused to recognize Israel, and Israel would immediately open talks with its representatives. President Tibi was well along in his plans to abolish Israel when the most amazing development of all took place. The Kadima faction in the Knesset, led by Ehud Olmert himself, approached President Tibi with an official protest. "Everything you have done so far -- the New Gaza Policy, the new policy of restraint regarding the Hizbollah, the redeployment initiative for the West Bank, the wholesale release of imprisoned terrorists . ALL these are really OUR policies and OUR ideas. We are outraged!" President Tibi, being a modest and restrained sort of person, listened to the complaints from the Olmerites from Kadima and took them all under consideration. Rather than slapping Kadima down and dismissing its members for their impudence, threatening to revoke his pledge of clemency for all Kadima members facing imminent imprisonment and indictment, President Tibi chose the path of accommodation and compromise. "Here is what I suggest," responded President Tibi to the Kadima complaint. "Rather than quibble over who deserves credit for all these wonderful policies and strategies, let us simply combine forces and work for our joint goals together!" And that was when Kadima and the Raam-Taal party decided to merge to form one single umbrella political faction, calling itself "Raadima", although the press dubbed them the "Tiberts". The Tiberts recruited new members from among Arabs and Jews from across the political spectrum. Its platform and visions appealed to many politicians from the Likud and the Labor Party. Meretz refused to join because the Raadima party did not promise an immediate return to the 1947, one without any negotiations. The Raadima faction swept the next elections and formed a government coalition capable of implementing its peace plan at last. And that is how Israel ceased to exist and was replaced by the United Federation of Palestine, with capital in al-Quds. For the history of the ethnic cleansing of the Jews from Haifa, Tel Aviv and Beer Sheba, see the next chapter in this textbook. 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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
KEEPING THE KIDNAPPED SOLDIERS IN OUR HEARTS AND MINDS
Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 28, 2007. |
|
A rally in Nahariya last Friday, March 23, organized to bring public attention back to the kidnapped soldiers. We are all trying to keep them in our hearts and pray that Udi, Eldad and Gilad will return home soon. I thought you might want to see this picture. |
|
Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
AS US CHRISTIANS GATHER IN JERUSALEM, FATAH VOW U.S. AID USED TO 'HIT THE ZIONISTS'
Posted by Michael Travis, March 28, 2007. |
|
"Abbas unit fires rockets at Israel
JERUSALEM -- The declared "military wing" of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party today took credit for rockets fired into Israel, vowed to break a Gaza cease-fire and told WND U.S. financial aid pledged yesterday for Fatah security forces will be used to "attack the Zionists." "Even if the American money and weapons reach only members of Fatah who are not involved in the resistance, it will find its way to the Palestinian resistance and be utilized for attacks against the Zionists," said Abu Ahmed, the northern Gaza commander of Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terror group. Abu Ahmed was referring to $59 million the Bush administration announced yesterday it will send to strengthen Fatah security forces. "This money is an attempt to generate civil war between Hamas and Fatah and to buy off Fatah. But we will never leave the political line of Yasser Arafat, who would not give up even one inch of Palestine," charged Abu Ahmed. The terror leader said the infighting between Fatah and Hamas "was over." "Now there are only a few dozens who want it to continue, so maybe there will be localized infighting but we will not fall into this Zionist-American conspiracy of civil war," he said. The Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, a branch of Fatah, is responsible for scores of shootings and rocket firings, and together with the Islamic Jihad terror group has taken responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the last two years, including an attack in Tel Aviv last April that killed eight Israelis and American teenager Daniel Wultz. Earlier today, seven rockets were fired from the Gaza Strip aimed at nearby Jewish communities. Abu Ahmed told WND his group fired two of the projectiles while the other five were launched by Islamic Jihad. He said the two rockets fired today were "dedicated to Yasser Arafat." Abu Ahmed claimed his group launched the rockets in response to "Israeli threats to the Al Aqsa Mosque and criminal Israeli operations in the West Bank against our fighters." The Jewish state is not threatening the Al Aqsa Mosque. The Israel Defense Forces the past two weeks carried out a series of anti-terror operations in the northern West Bank aimed primarily at arresting Brigades members. Abu Ahmed said if the Israeli raids continue "there will be no more cease-fire, and you can count of a large string of suicide bombings and rocket attacks." In November, Israel agreed to a truce with Gaza militants in which the Jewish state vowed to suspend anti-terror operations in the Gaza Strip in exchange for quiet. Since then, more than 170 rockets have been fired from Gaza, but the IDF has been restrained from operating in the territory. Abu Ahmed's threats come as the Bush administration announced plans to ask Congress to approve $59 million for Fatah forces. The U.S. said the bulk of the new aid package -- $43.4 million -- will be used to strengthen Abbas' Force 17 presidential guard units. According to the announcement, the sum includes $14.5 million for "basic and advanced training," $23 million for equipment, $2.9 million to upgrade the guard's facilities and $3 million to provide "capacity building and technical assistance" to the office of Mahmoud Dahlan, Fatah's strongman in Gaza. The Bush administration in January pledged $86.4 million to strengthen the Fatah forces, including Force 17, Abbas' security detail, which also serves as de facto police units in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. At the time, Abu Yousuf, a Fatah militant from Abba's Force 17 security forces, told WND U.S. funds and weapons being transferred to his group would be utilized to "hit the Zionists." Many Fatah security members from Force 17 are also openly members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. All Brigades leaders are members of Fatah. WND reported Israel earlier this month arrested 18 Fatah fighters in the West Bank wanted for shootings against Israeli civilians. Seventeen of those arrested were also members of the Brigades, Israeli and Palestinian security officials said. Abbas last June appointed senior Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades leader Mahmoud Damra as commander of Force 17. Damra, who was arrested by Israel in November, was on the Jewish state's most-wanted list of terrorists. "Christians offer 'repentance'"
Hundreds of Evangelical delegates gather at Knesset to celebrate
Jerusalem's reunification, offer apology for past persecution
Evangelical Christians from around the world have presented a 'letter of repentance' to the Jewish people expressing remorse for Christian persecution throughout history, during a ceremony at the Knesset on Wednesday.
Pastor Pitts Evans of Virginia read the letter out before a Knesset hall packed with Evangelicals who arrived in Israel to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the capital's reunification, an event organized by the Knesset Christian Allies Caucus (KCAC). The event was also attended by Knesset Members Benny Elon (National Union-Mafdal), Elhanan Glazer, (Pensioners Party), and David Rotem (Israel Our Home).
"Many of us just came back from Yad Vashem," Pitts said, before
reading out the letter. "This is man's feeble attempt to take a first
step," he added.
"On behalf of the millions of Christians who love Israel and pray
for her, we would like to repent before you before crimes committed
against the Jewish people throughout history in the name of
Christianity," Pitts said. "We have sinned against God and against
you. We have not lived according to the mandate given to us by the
scriptures; to love God with all our hearts and to love our fellow man
as we love ourselves. May God grant you the ability to forgive us and
may we be brothers and sisters again," he said.
"Please know there will always be a strong number of Christians who
love Israel and will stand with her and seek the peace of Jerusalem,"
he added.
Pastor Seymour Kook, of South Carolina, read out a "love letters to the God of Israel," in which Evangelical signatories said they were "deeply grateful for the root of God's olive tree (and) for every Jewish father of the faith... we stand in faith in our branch, without arrogance, with humility toward your God and the fathers of Israel, who took us in when we could not deserve him and could not find him."
"May Jacob be blessed by us, not scattered to the nations, but brought back on eagles wings, not inheriting his land divided, but yours, returned to you to steward until the messiah comes, and then forever and ever and ever," Kook concluded, receiving a standing ovation.
Reverend David Decker, an American Evangelical leader, delivered a prayer in which he heralded Israel's "capturing of its ancient heritage, the city of David. We must celebrate the modern liberation of Jerusalem," he added, receiving warm applause. "But the redemption is not finished," Decker said. "We stand before the holy mighty God of Israel as your holy people, Jews and gentiles, one people as you would want us to be," he added, expressing thanks "in the name of the beloved messiah."
"I don't think this is tourism," Knesset Member Elon told the delegates. "This is a spiritual experience, for you, and also for us. You remind so many Israelis what we are doing here," he added.
'Keen to serve Israel'
Elon said the grandfathers of Knesset Members on the panel would
have reacted with disbelief were they told "that 60 years from now, in
the shrine of democracy in the independent Jewish state, they would
welcome Christians who came to honor the State of Israel."
"After Auschwitz, we are here, thank God. Isn't that a miracle? When we see you opening the bible and using it as a personal tour guide, it means the bible is not just a book, it is a real thing. God has fulfilled his promise to gather and return us from exile," Elon said, receiving an ovation.
During the event, a number of Evangelical pastors pronounced prayers in Hebrew and in English, and the delegates sang the Israeli national anthem, Hatikva.
Speaking to Ynetnews, Apostle Zilly Aggfey, a Christian leader from Nigeria, said millions of African Christians were keen to "serve Israel."
"African Christians would love to kiss the ground in Israel. They would love to kiss the feet of a Jew," he said. During his address to the conference, Aggfey offered an apology on behalf of Nigeria for cutting relations with Israel in 1973.
"My people did not know the implications of that," he said, adding: "Any nation that does not serve you will perish. Our economy went down after we cut ties, and we became one of the poorest nations in the world. Since we have restored relations with Israel, our economy is back up."
Josh Reinstein, Director of KCAC, told Ynetnews that the event was a defining feature of relations between Jews and Christians. "I believe this underlies the relationship in the 21st century," he said.
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
DIARY FROM CHOMESH
Posted by Nadia Matar, March 28, 2007. | ||||
|
[Editor's Note: Despite opposition from the Israeli Government, a sizable group of people made their way to Chomesh in northern Shomrom, from which many of them had been expelled during the Great Psychosis of 2005. The photos comes from Arutz-Sheva's photo essay on March 27, 2007 (www.IsraelNN.com)] | ||||
|
Dear Friends, I would like to share with you the experience a few of us had of the exciting last few days in Chomesh and hopefully pass on to those of you who could not be there, a so much needed shot of Zionism, adrenaline, renewed hope and faith.
Fearing that, like it had happened on Chanukka, the army would put up roadblocks already on Monday morning [March 26, 2007], our little group of 9 people decided to leave our homes at midnight Sunday night. In our van we packed as much as we could: a sleeping bag for each, warm clothes, helmets against police brutality, food, drinks and lots of strong will to make it to Chomesh. With me in the van were three of my children (Talya, 16 years old, Bentzie, 14 years old and Amichai, 10 years old), two other mothers and three other teenagers from Efrat. Our first goal was to reach Shavei Shomron, the community closest to Chomesh where all the people had been asked to gather. Our drive took a little less than two hours and to our amazement -- no roadblocks. The rumor was that the army was probably going to let the people get to Chomesh, but only for one day. In Shavei Shomron we met many other people who also had feared roadblocks and thus arrived that night. Everybody found somewhere to sleep. Boys in one building, girls in another. The women in our little group joined others who had found room to sleep in some side room in the main synagogue. In the morning, after morning prayers, we gathered around the synagogue plaza, we were around 300 people. The organizers told us that we would be the first group to mach up to Chomesh at 8:00 am. The masses would be coming later in the afternoon. The rumor turned out to be true: the army decided to let marchers go up, on condition that it would be by foot. No cars allowed. The army's decision to allow people to go up to Chomesh was already a first victory. After the authorities had threatened to not allow anyone back and even warned that people daring to march to Chomesh would be punished with a two year jail sentence and organizers would be fined with all the expenses -- the organizers did not cave in; did not agree to make any compromises and simply said: we are going up no matter what. We refuse to make any deals with you, we refuse to collaborate with you.
When the authorities realized the organizers were serious, they realized they were the ones who had to bend down and allowed the marchers to go up. Sadly, this made us realize how things could have been different in the summer of 2005 -- had we not been stuck with the Yesha council as our leaders but rather with a leadership with no ties to the government, a leadership of uncompromising idealists who do not collaborate with the authorities. At 8:15 we started walking. Each and one of us, even the children, carried as much as we could: sleeping bags, sweaters, backpacks with as much food as possible, tefillin for the boys and lots of brazenness. We knew it was not an easy walk. Three hours, all the time uphill. But let me tell you, those 3 hours will not be forgotten by anyone. The knowledge that we were going back to Chomesh gave all of us, even those not in such good shape, the strength to make it uphill. No word can describe the beauty of the view we witnessed. Who needs to go abroad to Thailand when we got even more beautiful views and landscapes right here in our Promised Biblical homeland? The green hills, the fields of colorful flowers, the amazing blue sky, reminded all of us how beautiful Eretz Yisrael is and how insane anyone who wants to give it up is. Here and there one sees some Arab houses and even small villages, but mostly, the area is empty, waiting for the Jewish people to come back home and resettle their G-d given homeland. During the march, army jeeps were driving by with soldiers waving hello -- happy that they were not (yet) asked to prevent us from going to Chomesh. When we neared Chomesh, we could see from far the ruins of the other community destroyed by the Sharon government: Sa-Nur. The last hill before one gets to Chomesh is the most difficult one- but by that time our excitement was so great, that no one could feel the tired legs and feet. We almost ran. At around 11:00am we entered what once was the beautiful entrance to Chomesh. Our excitement and happiness mingled with lots of sadness. Everything was gone, destroyed, ruined. The evil powers of the Sharon government made sure to clean everything away, even the sewage connections. All that we could see were some bricks left from the streets and here and there some steps that used to lead to people's homes.
The youth ran to the one and only structure left in place; the water tower. Climbing on top the tower they hung the 2 flags we had brought with us; the Israeli flag and a flag Women in Green had produced after the expulsion in 2005: an orange flag on which is printed a Magen David and the saying: The Land of Israel belongs to the people of Israel. We took a stroll around what used to be Chomesh. There had been the swimming pool, there had been the synagogue, there lived this family, there lived that family. Looking around one can easily see the Mediterranean sea, Tel Aviv, Natanya, Hadera; turning on the other side one can see Haifa and even the Hermon Mountains. One looks at this view and one asks: WHY? Why was this place destroyed? Why was this place abandoned? In Gush Katif they claimed it was because of the "many Arabs of Gaza" that make it impossible for Jews to live there -- a lie in itself as we know, but that was the official terutz...here in Chomesh, with hardly any Arabs in sight, what was their reason? And this is where you realize that there was "reasoning" behind the expulsion. Just pure hatred of the national camp by the left. What pushed them to destroy 25 Jewish communities was pure evil. A sick pleasure by the Israeli secular leftist camp to try and crush the traditional Jewish camp and all those who want this country to be a Jewish country. Looking down from Chomesh onto the road, we all of a sudden realized that the road we had just one up, was black with people. What a sight!! Thousands and thousands more Jews were now trekking up to Chomesh. Arriving, after a three hour walk, were women with children and babies, men carrying their little one on the shoulders, teenagers, and even elderly people. No, not only youngsters were making it up the hill but lots and lots of adults. Everyone that arrived found a place where he would spend the night. Girls in one area of Chomesh. Boys in another one and families in yet another area. Everyone made sure to gather wood for the bonfires that will be needed at night. Around 4:00pm it was already getting very cold and windy. Youth were building a house from leftover blocks and stones. At 5:00pm the organizers covered tents they had hidden there a few days before. Within a few minutes five large tents had been put up. The stream of people arriving did not stop till late in the night. There must have been at least 6000 people there. Among them Women in Green activists Anita and Chaim Finkelstein, Renee Margolis, Meira Zohar, Kenny and Sandy Lerner and many more. It was simply amazing. Around 7:00pm the official ceremony started with incredible fireworks that warmed everybody's hearts. Lots of singing, dancing and words of strength and Torah were spoken by different public figures and activists. The night was not easy. It was very, very cold and by that time many people had finished all the food they had brought. Evil minds in the government had decided, in order to try and break the Chomesh supporters spirit, to not allow water and food be brought up to Chomesh. When the mass murderer Yasser Arafat, may his name be blotted out, was being held in the Mukata compound, the Israeli government made sure to tell the world that -- for humanitarian reasons-Israel is allowing Arafat to get pita bread and humus and drinks -- but when Jewish lovers of the Land are concerned, the Olmert government does not allow them to get supplies of food, water, diapers and coats that were so much needed.
This did not break the people and we spent the night, close to the bonfire, warming ourselves mainly with the incredible feeling of satisfaction and success: we had come back home to Chomesh and even if the authorities will succeed in bringing us down -- we will come back and back again, till Chomesh will be rebuilt, please G-d. The next morning, after morning prayers, our little group of nine needed to get back home. Even though the army had provided buses for people to go back, we refused to give them that satisfaction and walked back the three hour walk. Arriving back in Shavei Shomron we heard that the authorities had stopped allowing people to go up. Despite that, tens and tens of youth were going up, this time not on the main road but through the field and the mountains. In the late afternoon a very exciting event took place in Chomesh. Limor Har Melech, resident of Chomesh, whose husband, Shuli HY"D, had been murdered a few years ago by Arab terrorists, had remarried and a week ago gave birth to a son. The very emotional Brit Mila (circumcision) took place on the ruins of their house.
Another night was spent on Chomesh. Our little group of nine already was not there. Other people had replaced those who had come in the beginning. This morning (Wednesday) 1000 policemen came and evacuated the 300 or so youngsters who were still in Chomesh. I am writing those words while listening to the Arutz 7 news report announcing that there still are tens of youth scattered around the hills. Even if by the end of the day the government will succeed in bringing down all Jews from Chomesh -- this return to Chomesh was an incredible success. We have passed on a clear message that like at the time of the creation of the State of Israel the Jews did not accept the decree of the British White Paper not allowing Jews to come to the land of Israel, we today do not accept the decree of uprooting us from our homeland. We have not forgotten nor forgiven. We will go back and back and back till we will be back in all places abandoned by the Sharon government. With G-d's help. Nadia 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
|
|
THINK ACADEMIA IS ACADEMIC? ISRAEL'S WAR ON THE JEWS
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 28, 2007. |
|
ISRAEL DOESN'T REACT TO BUSH APPEASEMENT The Bush Administration has stood down from confrontation with Iran and N. Korea in favor of its critics' suggested negotiation. Iran will gain nuclear arms. Iran's ideology, threats, and support for proxy wars indicate that it is not likely just to hold the weapons. Otherwise, why develop them? What is Iran likely to do? Iran would either: (1) Launch nuclear weapons, or wait until its missiles can reach the US, or distribute some to other rogue states or irresponsible terrorist organizations, so it can disclaim responsibility for the first few nuclear attacks; or (2) Support proxy wars more, with impunity because of its nuclear arsenal. A policy of mere talk is not wise for the US and is even deadlier for Israel. Israel disclaims responsibility (IMRA, 3/2 from Caroline Glick), urging the "world," i.e. somebody else, to impose sanctions upon Iran. Sanctions would have to be most severe to sway Iran from its religiously motivated course. I think we (the US) would have to take down the regime or bomb out its nuclear facilities periodically. There is a problem with Russia, which will sell Iran defensive systems against such pre-emption, as it is selling them to Syria, so Syria can defend its offensive capability against Israel. ORIENTALISM Orientalism was a demanding, rigorous branch of knowledge about the Arab and Persian cultures. Nobody admits to being an Orientalist, these days, not after Edward Said's popular book claimed that the discipline was a Western racial supremacy ideology. He claimed that its alleged bias made Islam seem inferior and helped Europeans to subjugate it. "To substantiate his indictment, Said cherry-picked evidence, ignored whatever contradicted his thesis, and filled the gaps with conspiracy theories." Robert Irwin in Dangerous Knowledge: Orientalism and Its Discontents fights back, too late. Actually, the brilliant Orientalists freed Europe from old myths about the Mideast, often sympathized with the Muslims, even too much so, championed anti-colonialism, and were as scholarly as English Prof. Said was not. Said's book was full of mistakes, misinterpretations, and misstatements. Said's smears stuck, while criticism of his errors dripped off him. Said (using the Muslim tactic we see much of now) browbeat sympathizers into making more concessions, including control over publishing decisions, grants, and Middle East centers, turning the latter from a discipline into a pro-Muslim lobby. Said's star now is waning (Commentary, 3/2007, p.63). HAMAS MAKES FURTHER USE OF EVACUATED GAZA The P.A. has been using the formerly Israeli communities in Gaza as rocket-launching platforms and terrorist bases conveniently near Israel. The latest news is of Hamas' construction of an Islamist university at the former Jewish town of Netzarim. Former Jewish residents ask what was the point of ejecting them from Netzarim, only to be replaced by a university that recruits terrorists (Arutz-7, 3/3). Good question. The governments and media of Israel and the US fail to ask it. Instead, they would compound the disaster by expelling 10 times as many Jews. P.A. ARABS IN HATE-CRIMES Israeli military courts indicted 3,523 P.A. Arabs in 2006 for attacking Israelis, from throwing rocks to shooting at them (Arutz-7, 3/3). Those are only the ones who were caught, and are in addition to thousands already under custody. At what point is the P.A. government to be judged a criminal enterprise and its people a criminal gang? CONFLICT BETWEEN REGIME & SETTLERS The fences and checkpoints that the Arabs complain about are seen by the Jewish population as a means of controlling Jews. The government can cut off or isolate their towns when it wants to demolish outposts (or towns). The new measures for traffic control, inaugurated as an anti-terrorism measure, are seen as a means of harassing Jews from Israel who want to visit ones in Yesha. After all, they point out, the Arabs are on separate inspection lines from Israeli Jews, so why must the Israeli Jews be on slow lines, too? Their leaders urge them not to cooperate with the new security rules, or they will suffer in the long run (Arutz-7, 3/3.) The settlers have experienced their government as a hostile entity discriminating against them and siding with the Arabs. They have found the government duplicitous towards them. It does not trust the government, whose policy is divide and be conquered -- split off the Territories and lose defensive borders. MUSLIM ESPIONAGE IN ISRAEL Hamas and Hizbullah run much of the terrorist operations in Judea-Samaria from Gaza. They use day laborers to gather intelligence on Israel (IMRA, 3/3). The US keeps demanding that Israel let more P.A. laborers in, as humanitarian. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
CONDI'S EMBRACE OF JIHADIST 'PEACE'
Posted by Dawn Treader, March 28, 2007. |
|
This is by Caroline Glick. It appeared in the Jerusalem Post |
|
In an open act of war, Iran Friday kidnapped 15 British soldiers in the Persian Gulf. Iran's act of aggression occurred just as the British voted in favor of a UN Security Council resolution imposing increased sanctions against Teheran for its illicit nuclear weapons program. Several theories have been raised to explain Iran's behavior. Some say that the Iranians acted against the British in the hope that Britain would respond by abandoning its alliance with the US and swiftly pulling its forces out of Iraq. Another theory is that in kidnapping the sailors the Iranians are seeking to reenact their ploy from last summer. Then, Iran ordered its Lebanese proxy Hizbullah to kidnap IDF soldiers in order to divert the international community's attention away from Iran's nuclear program. As is the case with the British servicemen, so last summer's attack on the IDF took place as the Security Council was expected to convene and discuss sanctions against Iran for its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Yet another theory has it that Iran kidnapped the sailors to use as a bargaining chip to force the US military to release Iranian operatives who the US has arrested in Iraq in recent months. Whatever the case may be, it is absolutely clear that the Iranians intentionally fomented this international crisis with the expectation that their aggression would in some way be rewarded. AGAINST THIS backdrop, and given the stakes involved, it could have been expected that the US and its allies would be concentrating their attention on how to weaken Iran and its terror proxies and curtail Iran's ability to acquire a nuclear arsenal. But, alas, the US is doing just the opposite. The Iranians acted as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was en route to the region. Since Friday, Rice has shuttled between Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Authority and Jordan, and is on her way to Saudi Arabia. She is not working to coordinate moves to check Iran's increasing bellicosity. Rather, Rice is laboring to empower Teheran's terrorist allies in Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and Fatah. This she does by promoting the so-called Arab peace plan, which demands that Israel agree to dangerous and strategically catastrophic concessions to the Palestinian terrorist government. In behaving thus, Rice is walking in the well-worn footsteps of her predecessors. Indeed, it seems almost axiomatic that when the going gets tough for US administrations, administration officials get tough on Israel. AFTER THE Republicans won control of the Congress in 1994, then president Bill Clinton was hard-pressed to advance his domestic agenda. And so Clinton -- who had almost no interest in foreign policy in his opening years of office -- turned his attention to Israel and the so-called peace process, in which Israel was expected to give land, arms and legitimacy to the PLO in exchange for terrorism. Clinton's penchant for forcing Israeli concessions to the PLO in the name of peace became more pronounced as things became more difficult for him during his impeachment hearings in 1998. As the House of Representatives poised to vote on articles of impeachment, Clinton twisted then prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu's arm until he signed the Wye Plantation memorandum, in which Israel pledged to transfer wide swathes of Judea and Samaria to Yasser Arafat's terrorist government. Clinton forced Netanyahu's hand in spite of the fact that, by 1998, it was clear that Arafat was actively enabling Hamas and Islamic Jihad to carry out terror attacks against Israel and indoctrinating Palestinian society to wage jihad for Israel's destruction. But negotiating with Netanyahu was inconvenient. Netanyahu refused to implement the Wye agreement in light of Arafat's support for terrorism and forced Clinton to acknowledge that Arafat was doing nothing to combat terror. Unhappy with this state of affairs, Clinton set out to overthrow Netanyahu's government. IN AN ACT of unmitigated contempt for Israeli democracy and electoral laws, Clinton sent his own election advisers James Carville, Stanley Greenberg and Robert Schrum to Israel to run Labor party leader Ehud Barak's campaign in the 1999 elections. The culmination of Clinton's campaign was the failed Camp David summit in July 2000. There, and in subsequent desperate discussions with Arafat at Taba, Barak agreed to hand over the Temple Mount to Arafat in addition to Gaza, Judea, Samaria and a pile of money. Israel paid dearly for Barak and Clinton's behavior. In the Palestinian jihad that followed Arafat's rejection of Barak and Clinton's plaintive offers, more than 1,000 Israelis were murdered -- more than 70 percent of whom were civilians. Israel's international standing fell to all-time lows as global anti-Semitism rose to levels unseen since the Holocaust. America too, paid dearly for Clinton's behavior. Rather than pay attention to the burgeoning terror nexus which had placed the US directly in its crosshairs -- in 1993 at the World Trade Center; in 1996 at the Khobar Towers; in 1998 at the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; and in 2000 at the USS Cole -- Clinton remained scope-locked on the so-called peace process. Rather than acknowledge the existence and threat of the global jihad to US national security, Clinton pressured the global jihad's primary victim -- Israel -- into transferring its heartland and capital to the godfather of modern terrorism. But while Israel and America bled, Clinton himself paid no price for his behavior. Rather than be blamed for the war he contributed so richly to enabling, Clinton is upheld as a hero at best, or at worst a tragic figure who devoted his presidency to the cause of peace. Today, Rice's newfound mania for peacemaking comes when local conditions negate any possibility of peace. Just last month the Saudis promised the Palestinians a billion dollars and so paved the way for the Mecca accord, where the Iranian-sponsored Fatah terror group surrendered to the Iranian-sponsored Hamas terror group. In so acting, the Saudis brought about the formation of a Palestinian government openly committed to the use of terrorism as a tool to ensure Israel's destruction. International conditions also ensure that Rice's peacemaking will fail to make peace. Regionally, Iran ups the ante daily against the US-led coalition in Iraq. Domestically, the Democratic-controlled Congress works daily to prevent the US from fighting its enemies. Globally, states as far-flung as Russia, China and Venezuela make deals with terror governments to check US power. The program that Rice has come to the region to advance does not even have the benefit of a peaceful facade. The Palestinians make clear every single day that they do not and will not accept Israel's right to exist in any borders, and that they will not work to combat terrorism against Israel. The Arab League, and its member states, for their part, have repeatedly announced that they will brook no change in their "peace" plan which, if implemented will bring about Israel's rapid destruction. In behaving as she does, Rice, like Clinton before her, is aided by a politically weak and strategically incompetent Israeli government that is willing to sacrifice Israel's long-term security for the benefit of prime-time photo opportunities with bigwig American leaders and Arab potentates. Sunday, the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government has announced that it is open to negotiating on the basis of the Arab plan. As one government official told The Jerusalem Post, Israel will "not dismiss" the plan. THIS IS Israel's position in spite of the fact that the Arab plan calls for Israel to surrender east, north and south Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and the Golan Heights to Hamas and Syria and for Israel to permit four to five million hostile, foreign-born Arabs posing as Palestinian "refugees" to immigrate to its truncated territory. As the "peace" plan makes clear, all these suicidal Israeli moves must come before the Arab states will be willing to have "regular" (whatever that means) relations with the indefensible, overrun Jewish state. Commenting on the government's position, the official explained, "We would not reject this out of hand." It is not surprising that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni are behaving in this manner. After all, these are the same leaders who brought about Israel's defeat in Lebanon in last summer's war at the hands of Iran's Hizbullah proxy army. Last summer, Olmert followed Livni's lead in rejecting military victory as an option. Heeding Livni's unwise, defeatist counsel, Olmert postponed the essential ground offensive in south Lebanon until it was too late to make a difference and instead opted for a negotiated cease-fire. As is the case with the Arab "peace" plan, the cease-fire Israel enthusiastically acceded to last summer was strategically disastrous for the country. UN Security Council Resolution 1701 placed Israel on the same plane as the illegal Hizbullah terrorist organization; prevents Israel from taking steps to defend itself; does not require the safe return of IDF hostages Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser; enables Hizbullah to rearm and reassert its control over south Lebanon; and lets Hizbullah's state sponsors Syria and Iran completely off the hook for their central role in Hizbullah's illegal war against the Jewish state. Recent history shows that the US and Israel will both pay heavily for the opportunism of our weak political leaders. It can only be hoped that the Israeli and American people have learned enough from our experiences to demand that our leaders stop their reckless behavior before the price of their cowardice and perfidy become unbearable. Contact Dawn Treader at dawntreader3@yahoo.com |
|
LIFE IN JEWISH HEBRON
Posted by David Wilder, March 28, 2007. |
|
If the Jewish people has undeniable rights anywhere on earth it is in Hebron. Hebron, numbered among the four holy cities (with Jerusalem, Tiberias and Safed) is the first Jewish city in history. It is the place where the Jewish national patriarchs lived and were buried. Their burial plot -- Ma'arat HaMachpela, the Tomb of the Patriarchs -- was the first Jewish property purchased in the Land of Israel, and one of the Jewish people's most impressive monuments was built atop it. The Jewish community in Hebron existed for thousands of years until it was brutally displaced in 1929 -- after Arab marauders murdered, raped and burned to death scores of Jews and dispossessed the community of properties that included hundreds of acres of real estate. Not surprisingly, after Israel's conquest of Judea and Samaria in the Six Day War of 1967, the restoration of Hebron loomed large as a goal for many Jews. In 1967 a group of religious Jews rented the Park Hotel in Hebron for the Passover period -- and refused to leave. Pressure grew upon a reluctant government, which then allowed the group to settle on empty land adjoining the city, which became Kiryat Arba. But the Jews of Kiryat Arba did not give up on their goal of returning to Hebron itself. A tragedy paved the way for the renewal of Jewish life in Hebron. In 1975 a baby boy named Avraham Yedidya was born to famous Hasidic artist Baruch Nachshon and his wife Sarah, who were among the first Jews to come to Kiryat Arba in 1968. Three months later Sarah found her newborn baby lifeless in his crib. The young mother was beside herself. "Everything in this world has a purpose," she thought to herself. "What was the purpose of her three- month old son?" Sarah Nachshon decided that Avraham Yedidya would be buried in the ancient Jewish cemetery in Hebron. The cemetery had been last used to inter Jews slaughtered in the 1929 riots in Hebron. It is minutes from the traditional graves of Ruth and Jesse and overlooks Ma'arat HaMachpela. Perhaps, Sarah thought, this was the purpose of Avraham Yedidya, to take part in a sad but vital part of renewing Jewish Hebron. After almost fifty years, the Jewish cemetery of Hebron would again be utilized as a Jew's last resting place. Late in the afternoon the funeral procession left Kiryat Arba for the ancient Jewish cemetery in Hebron. Then, suddenly, the mourners encountered soldiers and roadblocks. "No, you may not proceed to the cemetery," the soldiers ordered the mourners, "the cemetery is off-limits. You must bury the baby in Jerusalem." One of the car doors opened. A short woman stepped out, with a bundle in her arms. "Are you looking for me -- are you looking for my baby? My name is Sarah Nachshon. Here is my baby, in my arms. If you won't let us drive to the cemetery we will walk!" Men with shovels and flashlights, and women, Kiryat Arba residents, walked through ancient Hebron in the early evening. They passed Ma'arat HaMachpela. They passed the sheep sty atop the 450 year-old Abraham Avinu synagogue, left in ruins, destroyed by the Jordanian occupiers and Hebron Arabs. Blockades, set up to stop the crowd, were pushed aside. Senior officers gave orders over their walkie-talkies: "Stop them -- don't let them proceed -- but the soldiers, overcome by the scene, radioed back: "We can't stop them. If you want, come here and do it yourselves." The procession continued, past Beit Romano, Beit Shneerson, home of Menucha Rachel Shneerson Slonim, granddaughter of the "Ba'al HaTanya," up the steep hill to the ancient cemetery. Sarah Nachshon released the body of her tiny son and it was lowered into the freshly dug grave, only meters from the mass grave of the 1929-Tarpat riot victims. Mustering her voice, Sarah spoke: "Four thousand years ago our Patriarch Abraham purchased Hebron for the Jewish People by burying here his wife Sarah. Tonight Sarah is repurchasing Hebron for the Jewish People by burying here her son Avraham." Four years later a group of 10 Jewish women and 40 children resettled Hebron, moving into the abandoned Beit Hadassah building, just minutes from the cemetery. One of those ten women was Sarah Nachshon. One of the most common questions I receive, from journalists and tourists alike is: What's it like to live in Hebron? What's everyday life all about? There is a stereotype attached to places like Hebron, similar to the Wild West. In all honesty, it's generally not like that. So, what is it like? Usually, life is a routine, just as it is elsewhere in Israel and around the world. I can speak for myself and I think this fairly represents most people here. I get up in the morning, pray, eat breakfast, and then go to work. There are many men who arise early for prayers at Ma'arat HaMachpela and then attend a daily Talmud class. Each person has his/her own employment: there are men who study Torah in a yeshiva or kollel; a few men are sofrim (scribes); others work in some aspect of education, many here in Hebron or in Kiryat Arba. There's a doctor who lives in Hebron who has clinics around the county. We also have musicians, artists, nurses and office workers living in Hebron. Of course, during the day, the kids are in school, either in Hebron or Kiryat Arba. Those of high school age and above may study and live away from home, as is wont in Israeli religious society. After-school youth groups, clubs, library and homework assistance are all part of every day life. Shopping, a post office, doctors and dentists, a medical center with up-to-date technology can all be found in Kiryat Arba. There are several supermarkets that are less than 5-10 minutes from our homes. Orders can also be given over the phone and delivered to our door. In other words, for the most part, it's not difficult to be self-sufficient within a radius of 10 minutes from our homes. So when is life not so normal? One day last week my cell phone rang at about 4:50 in the morning. One of my colleagues was on the phone: Excitedly she said, "Get here fast, the police are here..." (In truth, not even my wife can get me out of bed so fast, especially at that time of the morning, but...) And of course, as I write ( March 20), the Hebron community's
purchase of Beit HaShalom (The House of Peace), between Kiryat Arba
and Hebron, and our moving into the building, has radically changed my
personal daily schedule and the lives of many others. This kind of event generally does not occur elsewhere. In Hebron, this is the second time in a year that this type of 'adventure' has transpired. So in some ways it could be concluded that life in Hebron is quite different from just about anywhere else in the world. And of course it's not normal for your own government to restrict your movements and ignore your most basic rights in the city where you live. Today Jews are allowed to enter only three percent of the municipal area of Hebron. Yet thousands of Arabs continue to live in the Israeli zone. The Palestinian Authority is deliberately establishing institutions in this area for the express purpose of "strangling" the Jewish community by attracting masses of Arabs. Although the 1997 "Hebron Accord" stipulated that Jews should enjoy total freedom of movement in Hebron and the right to visit and worship at shrines such as Elonei Mamre and the Tomb of Otniel ben Katz, its provisions are totally ignored. Jews find it virtually impossible to register title to land. In the past 20 years the Israeli government has issued permits for only three buildings. Offspring of the Jewish community who marry and wish to live in their community cannot do so -- due to the racist Jews-only building restrictions. Under blatantly discriminatory guidelines from the State Attorney's Office, the Israeli government uses law-enforcement as a technique to harass the Jewish community. The procedures require the police to invest unprecedented resources in personnel, funds and motor vehicles in order to monitor the Jews. As a direct result of this over-enforcement there is wholesale opening of investigation files for trifling offenses and inconsequential activities, often ending with acquittals or closure of files on technical grounds. This adds up to a grievous, ongoing blow to the personal freedoms of the Jewish residents of Hebron, coupled with cumulative damage in the form of files that besmirch the inhabitants with criminal records -- files that would not have been opened anywhere else in Israel. One last point: it is important to keep in mind that no one is being forced to live in Hebron. All the people who reside here do so because they want to be here. Anyone who wishes to leave, for any reason, can do so. However, most people stay, regardless of the difficulties and the 'abnormalities,' despite the terror attacks and murders that have claimed dozens of casualties in Hebron's Jewish community since the "second Intifada" that began in September 2000. They remain because it is a privilege to live in Israel's first Jewish city, and to walk in the footsteps of Avraham and Sarah, and King David. Despite the problems, Hebron is our home, and we are honored to be residents of such a holy city. Of course, there are those who would say that we are crazy for wanting to live here. So be it: Crazy or not, Hebron is here to stay, and so are its Jewish inhabitants. comments David Wilder is spokesman of The Jewish Community of Hebron. You can contribute directly to The Jewish Community of Hebron, POB10, Kiryat Arba-Hebron 90100, hebron@hebron.org.il, 972-2-9965333 or write to The Hebron Fund, 1760 Ocean Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11230, hebronfund@aol.com This appeared on AFSI's Mideast Outpost |
|
OUR SOLDIERS FIGHT ARAB TERRORISTS WHILE OUR ADMINISTRATION PAYS THEM OFF
Posted by Michael Travis, March 28, 2007. |
|
There are 3 stories below. Americans have been led to believe that the Administration does not fund terrorist organisations. Story 1: This week Rice revealed what the rest of the planet has known for years -- we do give money, millions of dollars to fund the campaign of terror and bloodshed against Israel. In the second story, the "moderate" Saudis, America's good friend and mentor, say to Israel -- your choice: suicide or war. The third story has more details on which terrorists gets U.S. money. |
|
"Rice reveals US intentions for 'parallel' talks with Israel, PA"
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met in Jerusalem Sunday for three hours. No details of the meeting were released but the leaders confirmed that they are scheduled to meet again on Monday. The focus of the meeting was the Palestinian issue, with Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice revealing a new approach to revive Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts, saying she would pursue "parallel" talks with the two parties on a common agenda in order to "move forward on forming a Palestinian state," Ynetnews reported. Rice's plan is a departure from Israel's policy of not conducting talks with Abbas now that he has formed a unity government with Hamas. "Now we are in a situation in which I think a bilateral approach, in which I talk in parallel to the parties ... is the best way," Rice said at a news conference with Abbas, Ynetnews reported. Rice's meeting with Abbas was the first since the terrorist group Hamas and Abbas' Fatah Party formed a new unity government last week. The US is working towards an Israeli-Arab summit, which would be mediated by the Quartet, that would be scheduled for the end of May. Rice's current tour in the Middle East will establish the groundwork for the negotiations. According to Palestinian officials, the United States did not agree to recognize the Palestinian government but Rice said the Bush administration would assess the actions of the new coalition government. The US has sent mixed messages by demanding that Palestinian government comply with the Quartet's stipulations and at the same time not denouncing the government outright. On Monday Secretary of State Rice is scheduled to meet Jordanian King Abdullah in Aman, then meet with Abbas again in Ramallah. Later Monday Rice will meet with Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni before her second meeting with Olmert. "Accept peace plan or face war, Israel told"
The "lords of war" will decide Israel's future if it rejects a blueprint for peace crafted by the entire Arab world, Saudi Arabia's veteran foreign minister warned yesterday. As leaders began gathering in the Saudi capital, Riyadh, for today's summit of the Arab League, Prince Saud al-Faisal told The Daily Telegraph that the Middle East risks perpetual conflict if the peace plan fails.
Saudi foreign minister Prince Saudi al-Faisal, right, and Amr Moussa, Secretary General of the Arab League Under this Saudi-drafted proposal, every Arab country would formally recognise Israel in return for a withdrawal from all the land captured in the war of 1967. This would entail a Palestinian state embracing the entire West Bank and Gaza with East Jerusalem as its capital. Every Arab country will almost certainly endorse this blueprint when the Riyadh summit concludes tomorrow. Prince Saud said Israel should accept or reject this final offer. "What we have the power to do in the Arab world, we think we have done," he said. "So now it is up to the other side because if you want peace, it is not enough for one side only to want it. Both sides must want it equally." Speaking inside his whitewashed palace, surrounded by luxuriant lawns and manicured flower beds resembling a green oasis in the drabness of Riyadh, Prince Saud delivered an unequivocal warning to Israel. advertisement "If Israel refuses, that means it doesn't want peace and it places everything back into the hands of fate. They will be putting their future not in the hands of the peacemakers but in the hands of the lords of war," he said. Prince Saud dismissed any further diplomatic overtures towards Israel. "It has never been proven that reaching out to Israel achieves anything," he said. "Other Arab countries have recognised Israel and what has that achieved? "The largest Arab country, Egypt, recognised Israel and what was the result? Not one iota of change happened in the attitude of Israel towards peace." Israel has numerous reservations about the Arab peace plan -- which was previously proposed at a summit in 2002. Israel fears any hint that Palestinian refugees would have the right to return to their homes in the event of a peace settlement. Prince Saud is the 66-year-old son of the late King Faisal. Relieved of the need to seek re-election, he has held office for 32 years. Flush with oil money, Saudi Arabia is playing a more assertive role in Middle Eastern diplomacy. As well as securing the Arab peace plan, the Kingdom brokered the agreement between Hamas and Fatah -- the two Palestinian factions -- to form a unity government. But western diplomats in Riyadh believe this resurgence in Saudi diplomacy stems from more than the kingdom's oil boom. The menacing spectre of Iran, the rising Shia power with nuclear-tipped ambitions for regional dominance, looms large across the waters of the Gulf. Saudi Arabia is quietly moving to contain its bellicose neighbour. Prince Saud offered conciliatory words to Iran, laced with coded criticism. "We have no inhibitions about the role of Iran," he said. "It is a large country. It wants to play a leading role in the region, and it has every right to do so. It is an historic country. But if you want to reach for leadership, you have to make sure that those you are leading are having their interests taken care of and not damaged." Saudi Arabia has privately urged Iran to stop enriching uranium, in compliance with United Nations resolutions and lay to rest any suggestion that it is seeking nuclear weapons. Prince Saud called for a "Middle East free of nuclear weapons" with "no exceptions for anybody, be it Israel or Iran". Asked whether the kingdom would consider seeking nuclear weapons of its own if Iran managed to acquire a bomb, Prince Saud replied: "We have made it very clear that we are not going down that road under any circumstances." He paused for a moment, before adding, "under any foreseeable circumstances". "U.S.-backed force 'mostly terrorists'
TEL AVIV -- A U.S.-financed and trained Fatah force in the northern Gaza Strip that surrendered to Hamas today consisted primarily of members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades terrorist group, the declared "military wing" of Fatah, WND has learned. The news comes as the Bush administration announced plans today to ask Congress to approve $59 million to strengthen Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah security forces. The Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades is responsible for scores of shootings and rocket firings, and together with the Islamic Jihad terror group has taken responsibility for every suicide bombing in Israel the last two years, including an attack in Tel Aviv last April that killed eight Israelis and American teenager Daniel Wultz. The U.S. said today the bulk of the new aid package -- $43.4 million -- will be used to strengthen Abbas' Force 17 presidential guard units. According to the announcement, the sum includes $14.5 million for "basic and advanced training," $23 million for equipment, $2.9 million to upgrade the guard's facilities and $3 million to provide "capacity building and technical assistance" to the office of Mahmoud Dahlan, Fatah's strongman in Gaza. Last week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice admitted in a hearing she cannot guarantee U.S. funding for Fatah forces would not reach "the wrong hands." Rice said she would reduce a funding request for Fatah forces following concerns last month expressed by key lawmakers that some of the money would be used for terror-related purposes. The Bush administration in January pledged $86.4 million to strengthen the Fatah forces, including Force 17, Abbas' security detail, which also serves as de facto police units in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. At the time, Abu Yousuf, a Fatah militant from Abba's Force 17 security forces, told WND U.S. funds and weapons being transferred to his group would be utilized to "hit the Zionists." Last month, Congress placed a hold on the $86 million transfer pending a clarification from Rice as to where exactly the money would end up. During a hearing before the House of Representatives Appropriations subcommittee, Rice said she would make a new request for less money. She conceded, "I will request less money, precisely because some of the money that I would have requested I did not think I could fully account for." Meanwhile, a Fatah militia in Beit Lehiya in the northern Gaza Strip surrendered today to Hamas forces after reaching an agreement in which the Fatah militants stated they will evacuate the city and altogether depart the Gaza Strip. Palestinian officials told WND the Fatah force, directed by Dahlan, was provided with U.S. weapons and training and had been charged with competing with Hamas for security control of Beit Lehiya, a large Gaza city from which rockets are regularly fired into Israel. Some of the rocket attacks are carried out by Fatah's Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. The Fatah force in Beit Lehiya consisted of about 40 senior officers from Force 17, the Palestinian Preventative Security Services and the General Security Services. The leader of the Force was Samih El- Madhun, who is also openly a senior leader of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. According to Madhun and to Fatah and Brigades sources, most of the leadership of the U.S.-backed force that surrendered in Beit Lehiya consisted of Brigades members. Many Fatah security members from Force 17 and the Preventative Security Services are also openly members of the Brigades. All Brigades leaders are members of Fatah. WND reported Israel earlier this month arrested 18 Fatah fighters in the West Bank wanted for shootings against Israeli civilians. Seventeen of those arrested were also members of the Brigades, Israeli and Palestinian security officials said. Abbas last June appointed senior Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades leader Mahmoud Damra as commander of Force 17. Damra, who was arrested by Israel in November, was on the Jewish state's most-wanted list of terrorists. While Congress has been blocking aid to Farah forces, it wasn't immediately clear if the U.S. would continue to supply Fatah with weapons. The last American arms shipment to Fatah publicly confirmed by Israel took place in May. At first, the shipment of 3,000 rifles was denied by the U.S. and Israel, but Olmert in June admitted the transfer took place, telling reporters, "I needed to approve the shipment to help bolster Abbas." At the time, Abu Yousuf, a Fatah militant from Abba's Force 17 security forces, told WND while some of the weapons may be used in confrontations against Hamas, the bulk of the American arms would be utilized to "hit the Zionists." Abu Yousuf said if there is a major conflict with Israel, U.S. weapons provided to Fatah may be shared with other "Palestinian resistance organizations." "The first place of these U.S. weapons will be to defend the Palestinian national project, which is reflected by the foundation of the Palestinian Authority. If Hamas or any other group under the influence of Iran and Syria wants to make a coup d'tat against our institution, these weapons are there to defend the PA," said Abu Yousuf. "We don't want to go to civil war with Hamas, because this is what both the U.S. and Israel want. This is our last option. We hope our brothers in Hamas won't oblige us to find ourselves in confrontation," Abu Yousuf said. But the Fatah militant said the American weapons may also be used to target Israelis. He admitted previous American arms supplied to Fatah were used in "resistance operations" against the Jewish state. "If Israel will deliver what it promised to Abu Mazen (Abbas), [meaning a] withdrawal from Palestinian lands, including east Jerusalem and the Temple Mount, remove all the checkpoints in the West Bank, release our prisoners, and find a clear solution for our refugees, we'll control our forces and the distribution of weapons," said Abu Yousuf. "But if Israel doesn't deliver, and we find ourselves manipulated by Israel, we cannot guarantee members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and Force 17 will not use these weapons against Israel. Our goal is to change the occupation," he continued. "It's unnatural to think these American weapons won't be used against the Israelis," he said. Like some other Force 17 members, Abu Yousuf also is openly a member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. Abu Yousuf said the American weapons shipments may be shared with other Palestinian terror groups. He said that during large confrontations with Israel, such as the Jewish state's 2002 anti-terror raid in Jenin, Fatah distributed weapons to Hamas and Islamic Jihad. "We don't look where this piece or that piece of weapon came from when fighting the Israelis," Abu Yousuf said.
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
ZOA: BUSH ADMINISTRATION SHOULD DROP FICTION THAT PALESTINIANS ACCEPT ISRAEL
Posted by Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), March 27, 2007. |
|
New York -- The Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) is urging the Bush Administration to drop the fiction that Palestinian Authority (PA) president Mahmoud Abbas and Palestinian Arabs in general have accepted Israel's existence as Jewish state and seek a peaceful Palestinian state alongside Israel, following Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice's comments to the media in Jerusalem on Sunday that, "I think that the desire for peace and support for a two-state solution is far broader in the two communities, among the Palestinian people and among the Israeli people, than just the two leaders [Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas]. It's, in fact, something that has shown up in all kinds of polls. It's shown up in all kinds of discussions with people on both sides that the Palestinian people and the Israeli people would like to have peace" (State Department, March 25, 2007). Rice made further comments in the same vein about Palestinian Authority (PA) president Mahmoud Abbas today, claiming that "President Abbas truly desires to be a partner for peace. ... President Abbas told his people that he could end the occupation by ending violence" (State Department, March 27, 2007). Yet, only weeks ago, Abbas and his Fatah Party joined the Hamas terrorist government after signing the Mecca Agreement. Those like Condoleezza Rice who have hung on to the mirage of Abbas' alleged moderation must now confront the naked reality of Abbas joining an openly terrorist regime under an agreement which does not call for peace but for more terrorism; demands the so-called 'right of return' of Palestinian refugees and their millions of descendants to Israel and thus Israel's dissolution; demands the release of jailed Palestinian Arab terrorists; and does not in fact even mention Israel let alone recognize it. Secretary Rice's words are completely at odds with the record of Mahmoud Abbas' words and deeds and innumerable Palestinian opinion polls. Mahmoud Abbas' own words:
Abbas' own deeds:
Palestinian Polls:
ZOA National President Morton A. Klein said, "We continue to be perplexed that Bush Administration officials like Secretary Rice persist in making flat-earth statements about Mahmoud Abbas and Palestinian Arabs in general and their alleged desire for peace with Israel in a state alongside her. It is especially worrying that Secretary Rice believes that Palestinian polls bear out her completely false evaluations -- Palestinian polls have consistently shown extremism and support for violence to be widely supported by Palestinian Arabs. The evidence we have provided (of which there is much more) shows that these claims are simply not credible or accurate. By stating the opposite of what the facts warrant, Secretary Rice is misleading the American public and pursuing a policy which lacks any factual basis and which will lead to another terrorist state while appeasing terrorists and terrorism. It is vital to realize that policies built on illusions will tragically fail and the sooner U.S. policy is revised the better. "It is crystal clear from these polls and a great deal of other data that Palestinian Arab society clearly opposes acceptance of Israel as a Jewish state and consistently supports terrorism against Israeli civilians in an attempt to undermine Israel's survival as a Jewish state. When consistent majorities of Palestinian Arabs are shown to support terrorism and non-acceptance of Israel, it is clear that there can at present be no peace process with such a society and its like-minded leadership. Under these circumstances, there should be no discussion of a Palestinian state. Rather than giving unmerited praise to Palestinian Arabs for moderation, the Bush Administration should fearlessly state the truth and make it clear that there will be no concessions, no negotiations and no American funds until the PA fights, arrests, extradites and jails terrorists and confiscates their weaponry and ends the incitement to hatred and murder in the PA-controlled media, mosques, schools and youth camps that feeds it. All of these promises were made by the Palestinian Arabs in the Oslo I, Oslo II, Hebron and Wye Agreements as well as the Roadmap, yet not a single one has been fulfilled." The Zionist Organization of America (www.zoa.org), founded in 1897, is the oldest pro-Israel organization in the United States. The ZOA works to strengthen U.S.-Israel relations, educates the American public and Congress about the dangers that Israel faces, and combats anti-Israel bias in the media and on college campuses. Its past presidents have included Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis and Rabbi Dr. Abba Hillel Silver. |
|
PALESTINIAN ARAB CAMPS INFILTRATED BY TERRORISTS
Posted by Israel Zwick, March 28, 2007. |
|
This was done by the Al-Hayat Translation Unit.
|
|
Tripoli (North Lebanon) -- The accusation imputed by Lebanese security services to "Fateh Al-Islam" group about being involved in Ain Alaq bombings in Mount Lebanon raised the issue of the presence of these groups inside the Palestinian refugee camp in Nahr Al Bared, especially that some persons who were accused are still in the northern camp. The accusation also raised some questions about the identity of these groups and what it was said about their connection to "Al Qaeda" organization, especially that they include, in "Samed" camp, activists from different nationalities: Syrian, Saudi, Yemeni, Algerian and Moroccan. This doesn't seem a sufficient proof of "Al Qaeda"-like activities related to this group. Information given to "Al Hayat" mentioned that it's a hybrid group that includes different security service members, as well as some elements upholding the "Salafi Jihadi" ideology and willing to go to Iraq. "Al Hayat" visited the camp of this group in Nahr Al Bared camp, North Lebanon, and met with their spokesman. It asked the residents of the camp, the Lebanese security services and Islamist activists about this phenomenon: below is the full story. Nahr Al Bared Camp A man is lying back on his chair next to his shop in the Palestinian refugee camp in Nahr Al Bared in North Lebanon. He hung a signboard above his shop reading: "Circumciser of Al Saffouri Sons". The man is almost sleepy, the security situation in these days negatively affected the market. Last night, the camp witnessed the death of one of "Fateh Al-Islam" members during a clash with anonymous elements. He is the "circumciser" of the camp, who scares children every time they pass by his shop in the center of the market. He's a middle-aged man, tall and thin, with grey hair. A silent man, whose silence reflects the stillness of his occupation, he does everything without saying a word, giving the impression that he wouldn't answer if you ask him any question. Thus, we sought another man to inquire about a wise subject. The Palestinian faction militants' dismays in Nahr Al Bared due to the presence of "Fateh Al-Islam" members in the camp is different from the one expressed by the residents. The militants dismay seems packed with politics and fears from the arrival of "Fateh Al-Islam" to the camp while the residents dismay stems from issues related to the inactive market and the lack of any flow of outer residents who come to the camp to shop. Some residents praise "Fateh Al-Islam" members and express their admiration to these strangers who came to the camp a year ago. They installed themselves in "Fatah-Intifada" movement camps in the northern regions and in the western north regions of the camp. "They are strangers in the camp" is the recurring expression you hear from militants in Palestinian organizations in the camp. Most of them are Syrians; some are Saudis, Yemenis and Lebanese. Palestinians maybe come at the end of the list, while Lebanese security sources add Moroccans and Algerians to these nationalities. Why did they come to the camp? How did their number reach 150 fighters? Some brought their family and rent houses next to the camp. There are no specific answers to many questions about the presence of "Fateh Al-Islam" in the Palestinian refugee camp of Nahr Al Bared. If they came all of a sudden from other camps, a great number of them joined "Samed" camp in Nahr Al Bared in the period following the disclosure of their arrival. The Lebanese army doubled its check points on the entrance of the camp that doesn't exceed 1 km² long. Some activists affirm that after the Lebanese army entered "Ain Al Helweh" camp, some members of "Jend Al Sham" group who left "Taamir" region, went to Nahr Al Bared and joined "Fateh Al-Islam". According to these activists, some Lebanese nationals from different regions joined them too. Lebanese security sources confirmed that almost five Lebanese, came from "Taamir" region, including a man called "Chehab Kaddour" alias "Abou Hourayra", from Akkar who went to "Ain Al Helweh" camp in the nineties and then came back lately to join "Fateh Al-Islam" group in Nahr Al Bared. Residents of "Al Bared" are aware of the arrival of "Fateh Al-Islam" members to their camp or at least the events that brought them. Although the members of the movement- stemming from "Fateh-Intifada", which stemmed from "Fatah", the main movement -- are strangers in the camps, there is no deviation from a social strict order that refuses members from the outside. Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon have always been a shelter for strangers of various purposes and for other refugees who were thrown into Palestinian camps by Lebanese "communities". They are Iraqis, Syrians, Kurds and others who resided and expanded in the Palestinian camps in Lebanon. In addition, "Al Bared" camp is a district market; it is linked to the Lebanese regions by the road connecting Tripoli to rural Akkar. This however, doesn't imply that the residents lack a common social fabric. Indeed, as other refugee camps residents, they come from Galilee villages; Safad, Saffouri, Saasaa, Loubieh, Khalssa, Safsaf and others. The camp is home for 35 thousand Palestinian refugees. Throughout the 55 years since its creation, it has produced an advanced architectural and civil pattern, compared to the other Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon, despite junctures and mistakes. The pictures of Saddam Hussein are widely spread everywhere in the camp: on houses and shops. It seems that the way Saddam Hussein was executed, stirred a wave of sympathy and compassion among the residents like in many Palestinian camps. This is undoubtedly linked to the mood allowing to accept a group like "Fateh Al Islam", in light of the news about the relation of some of its members with the "Jihad" in Iraq. This acceptance however, doesn't imply facilitating the establishment of the group or collaborating with them. Still, Nahr Al Bared camp, that is open to the social and security Lebanese and non Lebanese environment, wouldn't have resisted the arrival of fighters who initially came as fighters within "Fatah-Intifada", but then dissented and split in a process that is yet ambiguous. The young man who is sitting next to his shop on the main camp road says that the accent of "Fateh Al-Islam" members is not Palestinian. He explains that their accent is "Islamist" and they don't converse much with the residents of the camp. They probably don't talk much in order to hide their nationality. Most of the time they use classical Arabic but the large majority has a Syrian accent when speaking. In the vicinity of "Samed" center, their headquarter in the camp, a military car with a middle submachine gun and a veiled man is parked. A guard stands at the entrance of the camp; he doesn't seem to examine closely the few passers-by. It's the day that followed the death of a member of the group in a clash with anonymous armed elements. The anxiety was obvious on the faces of "Fateh Al-Islam" members, who are scrutinizing faces and moves. The guard said that the members are tired after they escorted the deceased in the funeral procession. We should wait until they finish their meal. The waiting room can accommodate ten guests. It seems to be located on the southern part of the camp. The door leading to the inner camp discloses a small corner of "Samed" center; the area seems meant for training: some barbed wires are used to train for crawling. The small kitchen next to the modest reception room releases the smell of food and the voice of the chef talking to his colleague with a Lebanese accent. People who pass by the reception room to the inside of the camp are not veiled, unlike the members of the guard outside. The faces are confused and always evading. Some signs indicate that are not affiliated to "Al Qaeda" organization as it was said in Lebanon lately. "Al Qaeda" members who are in jail and in the camps are usually less confused. Furthermore, their beards are not similar to those of "Al Qaeda" members. Although these supposedly "Salafi-Jihadi" fighters are bearded, the way they trimmed their beards show that they are not expert in the matter. Nothing is concluding, these are mere observations. A young man who talks with a Syrian accent draws closer followed by another cloaked man, probably Palestinian or maybe Lebanese, one of those who spent their days in the Palestinian camps. The cloaked man exerted a sizeable effort to provide the coherent language of any typical Sheikh of Salafi Daawa. He was about to succeed were it not for hesitating when trying to utter some words "Daawa" and Islamists experts are skilled at. Buildings around the camp, where some of "Fateh Al-Islam" fighters must have rent houses for their families are lifeless. They look like uninhabited houses or houses abandoned by their residents. The district, unlike the other districts in the camp, is almost motionless. The majority of those passing by "Samed" center are young people who greet quickly the guard and resume their way without looking to the inside of the camp. Armed members flock out from the main entrance on motorcycles, heading toward the neighboring streets and coming back. Anxiety is apparent on all faces. Trust is scarce between passers by and armed persons, a feeling one gets from the signs people use around "Samed" camp. Since the Lebanese security forces announced that "Fateh Al-Islam" group is involved in "Ain Alaq" bombings in Mount Lebanon, the camp is in a state of alert. The announcement held back the economic activity in the camp. The forces and the factions held daily meetings to discuss a possible attack by the Lebanese army after a noticeable increase in security control in the vicinity. Abu Jaber, an official affiliated to "the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine" said that the solution of the "Fateh Al-Islam" issue will not be military. Should it be the way, it would lead to a real blood bath. He added: "everybody knows how these people came to the camp. The solution is to send them back to where they came from. In fact, this phenomenon has a close relation with "Fatah-Intifada" movement and these members are part of it, some Lebanese groups joined them lately. This is a potential solution." It seems that announcing the emergence of "Fateh Al-Islam" by the end of September, last year and the then circumstances are at the core of a debate in the camp. Back then, the presence of Chaker Al Abssi and some of his fighters within "Fatah-Intifada" camp and other Lebanese camps, was seen as a natural aspect. Thisis was the case until a clash blew up in "Bedawi" camp. Some of "Fatah" members were killed and the Lebanese security forces arrested two members of "Fatah-Intifada" who confessed the presence of Islamists in "Fatah-Intifada" camps and a plan to hit the UNIFIL forces in South Lebanon. "Fatah-Intifada" denied any link with these elements, while Chaker Al Abssi announced that his group is autonomous and promptly occupied the premises of "Fatah-Intifada" in Nahr Al Bared" camp. Lebanese security sources confirmed the relation of "Fateh Al-Islam" with "Fatah-Intifada", explaining that the story of splitting from the mainstream group is just a cover. Sources provided "Al Hayat" with information and facts proving the connection between Chaker Al Abssi and his assistants with "Fatah-Intifada" command: the training camps affiliated to the movement in Bekaa and Bourj Al Barajne and Chatila camps in Beirut welcomed Abssi and his group when they came to Lebanon on July, last year. The same sources point out that the assistant of Abssi "Abou Medyen" is Syrian and is the leader of the group. The sources don't deny the presence of members from different Arab nationalities among "Fateh Al-Islam" fighters, as it doesn't deny the relation of this group with "Al Jihad" in Iraq, yet specifies that the insertion of these members aims at hiding their real identity. The camps of "Fatah-Intifada" in Helweh and Kussaya in Bekaa welcomed fighters from different nationalities for military training. They were then disseminated according to the roles they were supposed to assume. Thus, we are before different replicas of "Al Qaeda", or in a sector where "Al Qaeda" functions are mixed with the "intelligence" role. The same applies to the members who participate in these activities. The Yemeni or the Saudi who comes from "Jihad" in Iraq trains with the Palestinian or the Syrian that joined "Fatah-Intifada." The Lebanese security sources stress that inducing Arabs from different nationalities to join "Fateh Al-Islam" aims at claiming that the group is an Arab "Jihadi" group and that its activities aren't linked to the conflict in Lebanon. These information are based on the investigations the Lebanese services held with arrested Saudis who belong to this group. Those arrested elements revealed that they came to Lebanon immediately because it's the "Land of Rabat" and "the Land of Nassra" and they are waiting to go to the land of Jihad in Iraq but they found themselves in Nahr Al Bared camp and nobody wanted to send them to Iraq. After they stayed for so long in Lebanon, young Saudis asked to meet with Sheikh Abdallah Al Bichi to request his advisory opinion about staying in Lebanon. The sources say that he came from Iran and stayed in the camp of "Fateh Al-Islam" but he didn't advice young Saudis to stay in Lebanon and decided to leave. He was arrested by the Lebanese security services in the airport, along with four other Saudis from "Fateh Al-Islam" group who were willing to leave Lebanon. It seems that the training camps in Koussaya and Helweh were part of the network that has been producing "Moujahedin" throughout the last years. Few Sheikhs from Tripoli say that tens of young northern asked them their advice about joining the training sessions in these camps. Sheikh Bilal Baroud who is a Salafist and the Imam of "Salam" mosque in Tripoli says that before they call themselves "Fateh Al-Islam", they were "Fatah-Intifada" and they had relations with Abu Khaled Al Amla, this one used to call young people from the region to train them in Wadi Fissan next to Brital region (Bekaa). Young Lebanese went from Tebbeneh to attend these sessions. This happened one year before "Fateh Al-Islam" emerged. Lebanese security sources say that during the phase that followed their attendance in the training camps in Bekaa, they went to Beirut camps. Bourj Al Barajneh camp was the center that welcomed them. They moved after July war to the North. Northern Islamist figures underline that "Fateh Al-Islam" group didn't limit themselves to stay at the camp but sought to gain sway among the Lebanese Islamists and recruit a number of Lebanese belonging to "Daawa". They succeeded in the deprived district of Tebbeneh in Tripoli. The Lebanese army intelligence arrested a young individual, Khaled Mahmud, who belongs to the group of "Deniyeh". Mahmud was linked to "Fateh Al-Islam" group. He tried to blow up a bomb targeting the patrol of the Lebanese army that came to arrest him. It seems that Lebanese Sunni Islamists didn't appreciate the emergence of "Fateh Al-Islam" months before it was introduced. The "Independent Islamic Gathering" official spokesman Khaled Daher comments: "We knew their purpose even before they announce it themselves. They declared that they belonged to "Fatah-Intifada", while the group claimed that they were using them and never included them among their members." They repeated the same words. "The Islamic Gathering" sent during the month of Ramadan a delegation formed of its Sheikhs to explore their intentions. The delegation came back with a negative impression and revealed that the group intends to hit the UNIFIL. But Khaled Daher, the former representative of the "Islamic Jamaa'" he split from, discards any connection of this group with "Al Qaeda" organization. He points out to differences between the two patterns of action and thinking. Sheikh Bilal Baroud, a member of the delegation "the Gathering" sent to meet Shaker Al Abssi explains: "When I met Abou Hussein Al Abssi I felt that he was in a confused situation and doesn't know what to do. Maybe he thinks that "Fatah-Intifada" used him in a bad way so he expressed his anger by controlling their places and announcing "Fateh Al-Islam". When I entered their camp in Nahr Al Bared, I was surprised by the armed people and the huge size of the camp. I told him: you are a colonel but it's a military error. Your identity is disclosed and you can be targeted. I gave him the example of "Anssar Al Islam" in Kurdistan and explained how their camp was targeted, everybody was killed in one raid." The phenomenon of "Fateh Al-Islam" emerged in Nahr Al Bared after a difficult path in the training camps and in other Palestinian camps. The camp wants to resume its economic and social functions that have been hindered by the presence of this group in the different regions, in addition to the general Palestinian belief that defies disappointment and despair with a secret admiration for these groups who, according to him, does not belong to the "general pattern in the region". A quick tour in Nahr Al Bared camp gives you two impressions: trade and business prosperity along with slogans of resistance in Iraq and Palestine. Multiplying the security procedures around the camp threaten its social and economic openness to the Lebanese environment, a trend that is different from the situation in other Palestinian refugee camps in Lebanon. The camp of Ain Al Helweh in South Lebanon, besieged for more than ten years looms in the minds of Nahr Al Bared residents. The problem of the camp started with the emergence of "Ousbat Al Ansar" group and the camp became an isolated security area. Will the emergence of "Fateh Al-Islam" set off the isolation of Nahr Al Bared camp? One of the young people in the camp said that a foreign journalist made a mistake when he wrote the name of the camp: "the camp of Nahr Ain Al Bared". The youngster saw a bad omen in the confusion between these two names. He underlined: "we are expecting to live the same situation the residents of Ain Al Helweh camp endure". "Fateh Al-Islam" spokesman stressed : "We will not leave the camp."
Al Hayat: what happened yesterday and how was the member who belongs to you killed?
Al Hayat: If the residents of the camp asked you to leave will you?
Al Hayat: Are there contacts with the factions in other camp?
Al Hayat: Do you insist that you have no relation with the persons they were arrested in Ain Alaq bombings?
Al Hayat: Are you ready to reach a consensus to put an end to the problem between you and the Lebanese security forces?
Al Hayat: Some said that the consensus would ask "Fateh Al-Islam" to go back to where they came from.
Al Hayat: What's the consensus in your opinion?
Contact Israel Zwick at
israel.zwick@earthlink.net or go to his website;
|
|
PALESTINIAN ARABS SUFFER BECAUSE THEIR LEADERS MAKE WAR
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 28, 2007. |
|
This was written by Hazem Al Amin, for Al Hayat |
|
To the editor,
Dion Nissenbaum's "Palestinians, Israelis agree to talks" (SJMN 3.28.07, 3A) is so full of misrepresentations and decontextualizations that one hardly knows where to begin. The list is so long that I most respectfully request that you accept this as an op-ed piece, and a long one at that, in order to correct the misunderstandings that Nissenbaum's article will surely generate. I will proceed in the order of her paragraphs. PM Olmert did indeed reject Secretary Rice's urgings to discuss borders and refugees. But why does Nissenbaum not tell us why he did that? He did that because Qassam rockets still fall daily on Israeli cities, and because suicide bombers are launched from Gaza or the West bank on a weekly or even semi-weekly basis; but happily the IDF's amazing military intelligence and fast work results in the prevention of these suicide bombers from reaching their targets. What sense does it make to talk peace with an enemy that continues to bombard and perpetrate attempts at mass murder, with all the acts of terror accompanied by the relentless diatribe of genocide and promises of destruction? When the terrorism stops, peace talks can start. There has indeed been little improvement in Palestinian quality of life. This is tragic, and important to know. But equally important is the "why?" which Ms. Nissenbaum somehow does not think to ask, much less answer. But the facts are quite obvious. Hamas has tens of millions of dollars to spend on armaments and anti-aircraft rockets and millions of bullets and thousands of rifles and a burgeoning cadre of "police" and "security personnel" (aka, terrorists) on the PA payroll... but no money to pay teachers or maintain safe sewage repositories. Israel has paid tens of millions of dollars in employment taxes to the Palestinian Authority. Hamas officials have smuggled in tens of millions in cash (some counterfeit). And Arab countries continue to pump in millions monthly. Where did that money go? Meanwhile, Israel continues to provide electricity and water to the Gaza Strip despite the daily rocket attacks and Hamas' refusal to release the kidnapped Israeli soldier. Exports from the Gaza Strip are way down and traffic through the border crossings from Gaza is slowed to a trickle. Why? Because Israel cannot know in which vegetable truck the suicide bomber is hidden. Absent the endless relentless brutal barbaric terror war being waged against it for 13.5 years by the PLO and Hamas (despite Israel's unconditional and unilateral pull-out from the Gaza Strip almost 18 months ago), traffic could flow normally, and exports would be up. There are no shuttles from Gaza to the West Bank because too many times the IDF has caught terrorists or terrorist assistants with weapons and/or explosives on route to a target destination in Israel. Inconvenienced Palestinians is the price to be aid for continued attempts to blow up Israelis. The number of physical barriers has indeed doubled. Why? Nissenbaum's lack of explanation makes it sound as though Israel is randomly and cruelly oppressing the Palestinians with additional barriers and lock-downs and road blocks. But the reason is obvious and simple: since Israel ceded the Gaza Strip to Hamas, the number of terror attacks has quadrupled. Only by interfering with the free flow of traffic can the IDF capture terrorists before they reach their targets. As Nissenbaum correctly notes, "...virtually no aspect of the agreement has been fulfilled." But then she enumerates only those aspects that Israel has not fulfilled. For some strange reason, she neglects to note that Israel has not eased upon in its check-points and road-blocks and inspections at crossings precisely because Hamas, now operating freely in the Gaza Strip, has escalated its terror attacks. The only way that Israel can protect its citizenry, short of another war in which Israel will use its military capacity to crush Hamas and kill thousands in order to eliminate the dozen terror armies operating in the Gaza Strip, is to maintain strong defensive measures. Only on page A-4, 16 paragraphs in to her text, does Nissenbaum get around to mentioning Israel's security concerns... and even then, almost en passant. Nissenbaum fails to ask the two most obvious, and most tragic, questions that Israel must answer daily in its defensive measures against Hamas' terror war: 1.) "Where do you want the casualties?" All of the restrictive and inconvenient measures that Israel imposes on the Palestinians cause dire and harmful casualties: Palestinians delayed, inconvenienced, and perhaps even humiliated; an economy stifled; mercantile and personal movement impaired. But were Israel to abolish these restrictive defensive measures, the casualties would be the scores or hundreds, or perhaps even thousands, of Israeli citizens blown up, or burned alive, or shot, or stabbed, or kidnapped by all of the terrorists who would successfully reach their targets in Israel to perpetrate drive-by shootings, road-side bombs, truck bombs, car bombs, suicide bombers, arson attacks, and sniper attacks. Where would any civilized person want the casualties? 2.) "Why is there no peaceful solution?" Because Hamas and Fatah and the PFLP and the DFLP and the PFLP-GC and the Islamic Jihad and the el-Aqsa martyrs' Brigade and Hezbollah and el-Qaeda and the new Resistance Committees all insist in word and deed that they will destroy Israel, even if they must do it one Jew at a time. There can be no hope for a peaceful solution while the Palestinian Authority is under the direction of Hamas and its terror affiliates. Palestinians cannot be expected to think of peace while their state
controlled media teach children to emulate suicide martyrs, video
clips portray happy child martyrs in the after-world and hatred is
spewed daily in mosques and schools. See
Article 9 of the PLO Covenant declares plainly that armed struggle is not merely tactical, it is the overall strategy. Article 19 rejects the 1947 UN partition, thereby rejecting the Quartet's proposed two-state solution and advocating destruction of the entire Jewish state. Article 20 unashamedly deems the Balfour Declaration and the UN's 1947 partition both null and void. Peaceful negotiation is emphatically ruled out by the Hamas charter. The Prologue, the Introduction, Article 7, and Article 13 all state that peaceful solutions and international conferences contradict the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement and that the only solution is through Jihad...until Israel is destroyed and all of its Jews are dead. Is it reasonable for Secretary Rice to urge Israel to negotiate rationally with a terrorist leadership that generates hatred based on fantasies? The Hamas Charter states that freemasons, Rotary clubs, Lions and similar organizations stirred the French and Communist revolutions as well as World War I, that Jews formed the League of Nations in order to wage war on Islam, that Jews control the world media, and that Jews are at cause for all of the entire world's ills. The Hamas charter promises that these organizations will be obliterated when Islam takes control, as well all Jews, world-over! The hatred that drives the Hamas terror war is not rational, it is not the result of any grievances or unresolved issues. It is psychosis. It is homicidal insanity. Ms. Nissenbaum should read the PLO and Hamas constitutions before
she does any further reporting on Palestinian issues. The documents
can be viewed in English at
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
ISRAEL OFFERS ASSISTANCE IN WAKE OF GAZA SEWAGE DISASTER
Posted by Avodah, March 27, 2007. |
|
This was written by Nissan Ratzlav-Katz and it appeared in Arutz-Sheva
(http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/121976). |
|
While Umm Nasser Council Member Ziad Abu Farieh called the flood "our own tsunami," PA officials laid the blame for the disaster on Israel and the Western powers. Israel Offers Assistance in Wake of Gaza Sewage Disaster (IsraelNN.com) Israel has offered assistance to hundreds of Palestinian Authority Arabs affected by a flood of raw sewage that swept through a Bedouin village in the northern Gaza Strip Tuesday afternoon. Defense Minister Amir Peretz instructed the IDF to prepare for the possibility of evacuating the injured to Israeli hospitals. The village, Umm Nasser, is near Beit Lahiya and less than a kilometer from the Gaza Strip border with Israel. At least 25 houses in the 200-family village were immediately swamped when the local sewage system's cesspool wall collapsed and pipes burst. Between six and nine people are reported dead, dozens are injured and some 200 are unaccounted for. Hundreds fled or were evacuated by rescuers, and armed Hamas members rushed to the area to search for victims trapped in the rubble of the decimated village. The IDF is prepared to evacuate the injured to Israeli hospitals. Angry residents attacked rescue workers, drove reporters out of the area and mobbed government officials who arrived at the scene. When PA Interior Minister Hani Kawasmeh arrived to survey the damage, his bodyguards fired in the air to disperse the crowd. While Umm Nasser Council Member Ziad Abu Farieh called the flood "our own tsunami," PA officials laid the blame for the disaster on Israel and the Western powers. According to PA Environment Minister Yousef Safia, Israel threatened to bomb previously planned construction work for a modern sewage system in the area. A Gaza-based spokesman for the ruling Hamas terrorist organization, Fawzi Barhoum, blamed Western economic sanctions on the Islamist-led PA for the dilapidated infrastructure in Gaza. Foreign funding for several sewage treatment projects was frozen by the donor nations after Hamas was voted into power in PA elections last year. PA Water Authority Director Fadel Kawash said that there had been a sewage treatment project underway for two years before it was ended due to what he called "troubles." He blamed Tuesday's accident on the poor local infrastructure as well. [Editor's Note: As Nurit Greenger asks, "This is the Palestinians spin. Where are the $100,000,000 qIsrael transferred to the PA last month that could have easily fixed this cesspool? Disappeared, gone to what and where? Stolen, stashed away? In 2006 the PA received $1.2 billion in donations from Arab countries, including Iran, and the UN. Where did it go? It was certainly not spent on public health, welfare, education, or infrastructure. It went for weapons and/or disappeared through corruption. Where are the billions of dollars we have invested in the PA bottomless cesspool?"] UPDATE The collapse of a septic pool in a Gaza village, killing five people including two babies, has been blamed on residents stealing sand from an embankment. Gaza City Mayor Majid Abu Ramadan blamed the collapse on local people digging sand from an embankment around the structure and selling it to building contractors. (AP/The Age-Australia) Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
ROAD MAP PARALLELS TO MUNICH, II
Posted by Professor Eugene Narrett, March 27, 2007 , March , 2007. |
|
This comes from Professor Narrett's blogsite: "Israel End Times"
(http://israelendtimes.com/blog/2007/02/26/road-map-parallels-to-munich-ii.htm). |
| As the UN led by Russia and Islamic nations condemn Israel as apartheid and the British prepare to reduce their already puny forces near Basra; as Arabs ready an intifada over the Temple Mount again and Iran waves its rockets we must further highlight how the Oslo-Road Map process imitates the phased destruction of Czechoslovakia by British diplomacy in the 1930s. The lessons to be learned grow ever timelier. The Arabs west of the Jordan River, both Israeli Arabs and those in the Autonomous areas have many more political and economic privileges and benefits than Arabs in any other state. From medical care to virtually free electricity and water, to uncensored media that spew Nazi-style Jew hatred, their liberties reach license. Similarly, in the 1930s "the minorities of Czechoslovakia were the best-treated minorities in Europe and the [Sudeten German] agitations were noticeable precisely because they were living in a democratic liberal state that gave them the freedom to agitate."* The resemblance of that situation to today's murderously violent Arab agitation in Israel is clear. What has grown dangerously into a form of global incitement are the media that follow and sometimes stage or prompt anti-Israel spectaculars: the media has become the megaphone of the hidden hand of the diplomatic-financial interests. This is not just about market share: it is to isolate Israel as an "apartheid" state (cf. Jimmy Carter's book and the Baker Study Group's findings) and justify its destruction. Just as British diplomats and officials stirred up the Arab riots of the 1920s and '30s against Jews in the yishuv so their European colleagues enabled Hitler during the 1930s, encouraging even helping finance (via America) Germany to rearm, making statements in Parliament and sending messages in meetings on the continent that Eastern Europe was for the Reich. These same diplomats undermined or crushed all those who resisted their grand design. The victim is demonized, delegitimized and dismembered in the modern version of ancient cults of human sacrifice, -- just as Israel is demonized, delegitimized and being partitioned in our day. Remember: even the 1949 lines are not recognized borders but
armistice lines. Don't believe that the British Foreign Office or
their friends in the State Department have surrendered the goal of an
Arab Federation from Baghdad to Cairo. The situation in the Negev (as
with the contiguous Gush Katif before it) shows it is being set up to
be severed from the State, in whole or in part. A Polish-corridor
style free access from Gaza to Jericho and the West Bank would be just
the start and would lead to a similar result, Arthur Dove's Arab
Federation, "its front door on the Mediterranean."
In 1937, Czech Prime Minister Hodza offered to transfer all German
administrators serving in the Czech government to the Sudeten area so
Germans there could be entirely self-ruled. "Plan after plan for
minority rights, economic concessions, cultural and administrative
autonomy and even political federalism were produced by the Czechs...
but brushed aside as inadequate..." Under British pressure, the Czechs
even agreed for dual Czech-German nationality for the Sudetens
(similar measures have been proposed for Arabs in Yesha). But "none of
these suggestions were acceptable to Konrad Henlein, head of the
Sudeten German Party for the simple reason that he wanted no
concessions within Czechoslovakia...his real desire was to destroy the
Czechoslovak state." Here is a precise description of the position and
rejectionist behavior of all the Arab states to an Israeli state, even
the possibility of a Jewish state, no matter how small since 1920,
from Amin al Husseini to the PLO, Fatah and Hamas today. It's like
listening to a tape: they don't want concessions; their real desire is
to destroy the Jewish state while western diplomats minimize or back
page this ugly fact, the pre-selected outcome of the process. As in
1937-8, the pressure on the victim to submit is relentless, the
'guarantees' increasingly strained and absurd; the professions of
allies that they cannot do more to help are precisely the same: false
and outcome-based, the outcome being the disintegration of the victim.
But concessions continue to be offered, then and now, under pressure of the great power "friend" of the beleaguered nation in question. Months before Hitler demanded self-rule for the Germans in the Sudetenland, Neville Chamberlain, Lords Halifax and Lothian among others were privately discussing, inadvertently 'leaking' and eventually publicly stating in parliament (March 1938) that the Czechs should cede their entire mountainous region to Germany outright. This demand for compromise was clearly a recipe for dismemberment and ruin because the Czech fortifications were built into the region. The Sudeten Mountains then, the mountains of Judea and Samaria today; a historian asks: how could Czechoslovakia have its peace or even its existence guaranteed by France, as the British claimed it could, after surrendering its key defensive positions when according to the British it could not be guaranteed by France, Russia, and England with these defenses intact because Britain was overextended? As the London Times asserted February 20, even its five thousand troops remaining near Basra may be "significantly drawn down" by late 2008. At the same time, British officers are training PLO Force 17 in Gaza under the eyes of the UN. For this they have time and personnel as they did to train, equip and lead the Arab legion during the 1940s. The writing again is on the wall.
How will the United States, even with the best will in the world guarantee and maintain the existence of Israel minus Judea and Samaria when it claims that peace will never come so long as Israel retains its mountainous heartland and maintains full autonomy for its own people and armed forces? The entire process is one of terrorizing the target state to make suicidal concessions just as was done in 1938.
Another link between those times and ours is the disjunction
between the upper diplomatic echelons of western governments and their
military, parliaments and people. The purpose of the so-called
negotiations with the Czechs (as now with successive Israeli regimes)
is to exert pressure to surrender at any cost. The importance of
"consultation before partition," Chamberlain said, was that "it could
be represented as the choice of the Czechoslovak government ," as the
expulsion of Gush Katif was sold as the "choice" of a supposedly
representative and "democratic" Israel and the "rightwing nationalist"
Ariel Sharon. Blackmail in the form of negotiations "would have a more
favorable reception from the British public" then as it may from the
American public today. Above all, Chamberlain added negotiations and
eventual Czech agreement, like a handshake on the White House lawn
"would dispose of any idea that we were ourselves carving up
Czechoslovak territory." And so it is with administrations in
Washington since that of Jimmy Carter [emphasis added].
Given the orchestrated UN uproar against Israel, meant to legitimize Hamas and cover Hizbollah's activities in Lebanon, it is clear that Mr. Carter's book, its title and the timing of its release were not an isolated exercise in individual bias. The resignations from his institute at Emory University are apt but come very late in the day. And as to Russia, the major supplier of Iran's nuclear and missile program and former backer of Egypt, Syria and the PLO: why did American and England let them into the UN at all when the world body was created "to foster democracy?" Because Russia shares and serves, as they have since 1917, various global interests of the Anglo-American elite, mainly the drive toward a regionalized world system that uses constant wars of attrition or "terror" to impose security measures on their own populations.
The gap between the agenda and methods of the diplomatic top tier,
western parliaments and general electorates was strong then as now.
When six months of betrayals, pressure on the French, and green lights
to Hitler had wrung acquiescence from Paris and crippling concessions
from the Czechs, Chamberlain found that he had created a monster. At a
meeting in Godesborg on September 22, 1938, having repeatedly been
assured of and received British diplomatic help Hitler was in a fury,
demanding the whole pie immediately without impressive treaties. For
everyone but Chamberlain and his clique and the top French diplomatic
group it was a deal-breaker; the English and French Cabinets rejected
the entire partition plan; the Czechs formed a new Cabinet that
rejected it; the Russians served notice that if German forces moved
they would invade East Prussia and protect the Czechs. But Chamberlain
would not let go of his grand design. With the help of the media his
group created a war scare, a terror war in Britain based on grossly
exaggerated descriptions of German military might. Having previously
ordered the Czechs not to mobilize their forces (shades of summer
2006) they now ordered that they do so. Pronouncements of Germany's
military omnipotence filled the news. Through dominance of the media,
a small clique can impose its agenda and views on a nation, via
hysteria and manufactured despair when they feel it useful.
If Mahmoud Abbas announced tomorrow that he was going to take all of Israel from Eilat to Lebanon and Jerusalem to Tel Aviv would it create as great revulsion and stir? Would Congress, let along the EU or Russia formerly repudiate Oslo and the Road Map? No; the State Department would not even need to order Olmert to mobilize the IDF (for show) and to flood the complicit media with stories about dirty bombs exploding in American cities in order to secure Israel's unilateral surrender, termed "disengagement."
One last parallel to emphasize: just as the Czech armed forces' quantity were on par with those of Germany in fall 1938 (the British government knew this via its military attaches on the continent) and the quality of Czech forces far superior, so is the quality of Israel's armed forces today still far superior to those of its neighbors. The vulnerability of the Germans then was as evident as the weakness of Fatah and Israel's Arab neighbors now. So grave was the German position that the German Chief of Staff and other top officials were prepared to assassinate Hitler on September 28, 1938 if and when he gave the order to invade the Czechs; Arafat, too, in 1982 and afterward, and now Abbas have been and are saved by America and by Israeli regimes. Without its mountain barrier, Jewish settlements, and with EU, UN and NATO troops ready for Judea, Samaria and Gaza military advantages will be gravely compromised as happened to the Czechs without the Sudetenland. And with all governments and major media claiming that "the cycle of violence" will rise without Israeli concessions (that invite attacks by Hamas and Hizbollah on the "apartheid" state and suppress Israeli response), the military advantages of the victim, as great as those in 1938 can be neutered. Milner's words that Palestine "must never become a Jewish state" will be fulfilled.
British diplomats had no problem having Americans rebuild the continent their policies had led to ruin; Anglo-American and EU diplomats would have no problem letting Americans rebuild Israel after a similar process of "consultation before partition." It's good for business and demonstrates authority. Mesopotamia may not be the only killing field in the Middle East unless a sovereign Israel finds and rights itself.
History does repeat; but with awareness of the pattern the game need not again be played till the checkmate: holocaust and a huge spike in global terror.
Professor Eugene Narrett teaches writing and Literature at Boston University. He is the author of hundreds of articles, columns and reviews on politics, American culture and the arts. He is completing a study on Romanticism and the longterm decline of Western Culture. He writes often on subjects relating to Israel and Judaism and is a weekly columnist for the MetroWest Daily News in Framingham, Massachusetts. Contact him at culturtalk@aol.com |
|
THE SAUDIS ARE LEADING AND THE EUROPEANS, AS USUAL, ARE BEING LED BY THE NOSE
Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 27, 2007. |
|
Repeat it long enough and it will catch on: "Death Certificate was issued to the Palestinian State west of the Jordan River...the paradigm of the two-state solution is DEAD and has been removed from the negotiations table in Israel as well as the international policies. Other solutions for the Palestinian Arabs must be found, such as the "Live and Live" Solution, two State Solution In East Jordan." This article is called "Worrisome Regional Trends" and it was
written by Rufi Buchnik March 22, 2007 and it appeared in OMedia |
|
The revived Saudi Initiative is another token of Saudi Arabia's reinvigorated position. America's status in the region has declined. The Saudis are filling the void and making the most of it Like a phoenix, a Saudi peace plan that has received the Arab League stamp of approval (Beirut 2002) has returned to the center stage of Middle East diplomacy against a backdrop of regional and international activism presaging a move to corner Israel and paints it in world public opinion as a chronic opponent to peace. Related Articles Saudi Arabia -- The Quest for Seniority Saudi-Iranian Contacts to Resolve the Crisis in Lebanon Iran and Saudi Arabia: An Islamic Cold War Saudi Arabia Watching Iran Through Gunsights Saudi Arabia's new status as a regional power taking the initiative and leading processes in the Arab world continues to gather momentum. This trend is expected to peak at the end of March at an Arab summit meeting in the Saudi capital of Riyadh, where a full turnout expected. Saudi King Abdallah had good reason to leave his mark on the sensitive issues on the Arab and Islamic agenda and solidify Saudi Arabia's senior position, at least among the Sunni Arab states. The Saudis are Leading and the Europeans are Being Led by the Nose In a joint press conference held in Riyadh (March 14), Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al Faisal and his colleague Javier Solana, foreign policy coordinator of the European Union, offered a preview of Saudi Arabia's intentions regarding the Middle East's major issues. It also represented a form of European confirmation bordering on self-abasement for the shift in the balance of forces in the region. At the press conference the Saudi Minister contended Israel had rejected UN Resolution 242, the Madrid Conference and the Arab Peace Plan, saying Israel had imposed conditions on each and every one of these initiatives. He recommended Israel first embrace the proposal and then discuss it. In his opinion, imposing conditions prior to negotiations or deliberations is a ludicrous way to conduct business. Meanwhile the Saudi Minister praised the European Union's stance on the Mecca Agreement between Fatah and Hamas. Saudi Arabia hopes the European position is translated into support and assistance for the Palestinian unity government with a view towards "alleviating the humanitarian suffering of the Palestinian people and promoting peace in the region." In a reference that was clearly lip service towards the anti-American position on the nuclear issue, the Minister expressed his hope the European Union would stay on course in guaranteeing the rights of nations to obtain nuclear energy for peaceful purposes according to the yardstick set by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Saudi Arabia emphasized the importance of having all countries in the region including Israel adopt these principles (an allusion to the Arab demand to compel Israel to join the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty). Regarding the Iranian nuclear issue, the Saudi Foreign Minister said his kingdom believes in striving for normalization with the Iranians without applying pressure on the country. He maintains it is important to continue deliberations on the subject without the sense the Iranians have a gun to their head. Negotiations in a relaxed atmosphere may be hard to achieve, he explained, but negotiations in an atmosphere of conflict are almost impossible. According to the Saudis, threats to use force in Lebanon would not produce results. Meanwhile he called on the rival parties in Lebanon to exercise logic and give national interests top priority, circuitously proposing to host a meeting between the Lebanese parties provided the meeting would take place for the purposes of reconciliation, welfare and development. Solana announced the European decision to involve four Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, in the next session of the international Quartet, which will focus on the Middle Eastern peace process. The involvement of these countries in the discussions is intended to facilitate a better understanding of regional problems in an attempt to find directions that would lead to appropriate solutions. In his opinion "the Middle East also constitutes part of the European milieu and therefore the aspiration for peace and regional development is in the European Union's interest." Solana praised the stabilizing role played by the Saudi monarchy in the Middle East, saying, "Every day we are informed of initiatives and proposals." In a very illuminating comment the European minister noted, "We have never disappointed the Palestinian people; during 2005 we contributed money and in 2006 we contributed even more to the Palestinian Authority." The European Union wants to see "the right people in the right positions" in the new Palestinian government. The US' Eroding Status The above joins growing indications the weakening international dam against the Hamas Government is about to burst, which obligates Israel to engage in more dynamic strategic thinking. Regional forces are vigorously trying to fill the political vacuum the United States is creating given its weakness and reluctance to take charge of processes pertaining to the Israeli-Arab conflict as it has done in the past. The EU and Russia are disgruntled by Washington's strong reservations regarding any measure that would connote recognition for the new Palestinian government. This comes on top of a "suggestion" transmitted to the Government of Israel to refrain from any discussions with Bashar Assad's regime in Damascus. All this could reflect a tendency towards "reevaluation" in the Bush administration regarding the energies that should be invested in preserving America's status as an active broker in such a complex and tense region. The tendency towards change in the American approach reflects the erosion of Washington's influence over the Middle East as a result of the clear failure of the agenda dictated by neoconservative circles that has led to the present chaotic situation in Iraq and has America bogged deep in the mud. What has happened in practice is diametrically opposed to the vision of those who shaped the conservative policy line. Instead of a form of American hegemony we are witnessing the reinforcement of Iran's regional status, the exacerbation of conflict within the Islamic world and Hamas' bolstered status among most Palestinians. Israel's lack of success in toppling Hezbollah in South Lebanon added another level to the collapse of the forceful approach underpinning America's Middle East strategy. The fact that President Bush's Middle East Policy is encountering growing domestic opposition in recent months is reflected in the United States' diminished ability to present an effective deterrent to further challenges in the region on the order of the Iranian nuclear threat. Thus Washington is likely to confront a new regional reality of wallowing in the Iraqi muck from a military and strategic perspective on one hand, while its status as an honest broker on the Israeli-Arab issue has been greatly eroded on the other hand. With this in mind a pessimistic outlook is taking shape among intelligence analysts in the US and Israel regarding the regional repercussions of a withdrawal of American forces from Iraq (which the Democrats are pushing for). Some are describing this as a "nightmare scenario" whose primary impact would be on the stability of moderate Arab regimes. Such an extreme scenario where America is pushed aside and yields its traditional place to regional players motivated by short-term interests constitutes a warning sign. This is already spurring senior officials in Washington, such as Vice President Cheney, to examine directions that stand to produce a significant turnaround in processes inimical to American interests in the Middle East. Benefiting from the Regional Power Vacuum Given America's weakened image the Saudi monarchy senses an opportunity in the Middle East, perhaps out of duress, to assume an active role as a regional force in order to shore up the status quo and play a stabilizing role, as well as to solidify the position of the pro-Saudi states in the event of a deterioration in regional security. Riyadh's major concern, aside from the Iranian nuclear threat, is the formation of a alliance between Tehran and the Shiite government in Iraq that would deliver a fatal blow to those forces in Iraq which enjoy Saudi support. The monarchy sees a general civil war in Iraq following an American pullout as the most likely scenario and under such circumstances Iran would not stand idly by. American experts versed in the intricacies of the Saudi Court in Riyadh also point to a major bellwether in the form of a Saudi project to establish a sophisticated security fence along the border with Iraq as signaling advance preparation in the event the deterioration scenario materializes and as a concrete example of the palpable dangers Saudi Arabia anticipates in terms of chaos filtering down from the Iraqi theater into its own territory. The complexity of the problems surrounding the Arab world and the explosiveness of each of every one of them in the absence of the formerly assertive American diplomacy, creates a moment of opportunity a sort of "ball waiting to be slammed" for Saudi King Abdallah. His firm measures in the Palestinian arena, his involvement in the back alleys of the internal Lebanese process as well as the upgrading of communications channels with both the Russian and Iranian presidents and recently the talks with the European Union create the optimal background for the kingdom on the eve of the Arab League leaders summit (March 28th and 29th). The American weakness alongside the erosion of Israel's deterrent image given the impression of IDF failure in the second Lebanon war can serve as an unflagging catalyst from the Saudi perspective for reviving the Arab initiative for a general Middle East peace. In the present circumstances, understandings may have already been reached between the Saudis and international bodies that this initiative is indeed a fitting and proper framework for ending the Israeli-Arab conflict. The tidings that emerge from the Riyadh conference center at the close of the month will confer renewed sanction to the Arab peace plan, and may even include the exact wording including the demand that Israel implement the refugees' "right of return." Israel should pay careful attention to the remarks by the Saudi Foreign Minister on this issue: "Israel must first accept the initiative before discussing its contents with the Arab world." This deliberately ignores Israel's familiar reservations regarding the contours of the program. Furthermore the open intransigence on the issue of the "right of return" displayed by pragmatic Arab states, including Egypt (which signed a peace agreement with Israel), should set off a warning light in Israel. Hopes for an Arab or European initiative regarding a solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict are still contingent on Washington's say, at least as long as President Bush is in the White House. Diplomatic sources in the US are still entertaining hopes the current administration will soon sober up, both in terms of dealing with those who are generating chaos in Iraq and adopting a firmer policy on the Iranian nuclear issue. If a renewed American resolve materializes it would mark America's return to center stage in our region, with all that entails. Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
DO NOT STAND IDLY BY THY BROTHER'S BLOOD
Posted by Aleksandra Fliegler, March 27, 2007. |
|
The Almagor Terrorist Victims Association has published a report on
the results of Israel's release of imprisoned terrorists in prisoner
exchanges. The 30 attacks perpetrated in recent years by terrorists
freed in prisoner exchanges or otherwise killed no fewer than 177
innocent citizens, mostly Israeli Jews. Many were also seriously wounded.
The government of Israel is finalizing a deal to release 1400 of
terrorist murderers into the heartland of Israel in exchange for IDF
soldier Gilad Shalit.
The last prisoner deal of similar proportions was the J'ibril exchange in 1987 involving 1,005 terrorists released into Yehudah, Shomron and Aza. Within 6 months the first Intifada (uprising) began, which then led to the infamous Oslo accords. The result: over 1,600 Jews murdered and 8,000 maimed since Oslo was signed, over 8,000 Jews expelled from Gaza and the Jewish land turned over to terrorists which continue shelling Israel with Katiusha rockets to this day. Faced with this reality, the burden of a mass terrorist release will be borne by the Rapid Response Teams of these communities. The volunteer teams will need to increase their numbers and will need more protective equipment since IDF only supplies them with firearms. SAVING JEWISH LIVES FROM ARAB TERROR Since 1988, Mishmeret Yesha www.kadam.org.il, in conjunction with IDF, trains the civilian Rapid Response Teams to defend Jewish homes from Arab attacks in Israel's frontier communities. More information can be found at http://www.kadam.org.il Recently Mishmeret Yesha supplied several dozen bulletproof vests to the front line in Lebanon. A member of the Likud Central Committee, just out of his reserve IDF duty, an infantry veteran, Mr. Danziger will be visiting the Bay Area with a fresh analysis of Israel's current state of affairs. Please join us for a first-hand account from a respected and widely experienced soldier in Israel's daily battle for survival. For mid-April event information, contact Aleksandra Fliegler at thelady@bayarea.net or at 650-992-0512 Contact Aleksandra Fliegler by email at thelady@bayarea.net |
|
ON THE SYRIAN SIDE OF THE BORDER; CULTURAL WAYS OF THINKING
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 27, 2007. |
|
WHAT HAMAS DOES WITH DONATIONS Although the government of the P.A. is dependent upon foreign donations, and although it neglects its people and its employees, it has spent millions of dollars of donations from Arab countries on upgrading its broadcasting and web site, in competition with Fatah's outlets. It considers propaganda of paramount importance. Its propaganda also is anti-US and anti-Israel. It likens the US to Genghis Kahn's Golden Horde (IMRA, 2/28). Fatah is anti-US and anti-Israel, too. Donating to the P.A. is far from humanitarian. ON THE SYRIAN SIDE OF THE BORDER Syria is not allowed, under the terms of its truce with Israel, to station heavily armed forces on its portion of the Golan. However, it is building or moving infrastructure near the border to be in position for a war. It has moved fuel depots there. It has built potential weapons depots and bases there. This was not observed by the UN Disengagement Observer Force, invoked by the truce (IMRA, 3/1). The UNO sees no evil and hears no evil, but evil is all around it and within it. IRAN DOES FIGHT AGAINST YANKS IN IRAQ Pres. Bush is reluctant to accuse the government of Iran of complicity in the Iranian war on the US in Iraq. He allows that this Iranian effort may be an operation not under control of the top leadership. Dan Diker, for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, laid out a case that this effort is sponsored by Iran's top leadership. He cited Israel's experience with Iranian proxies as among the pieces of evidence. Iran's top leadership set up the Qods Force as a loyal department dedicated to warfare to advance the Islamist revolution. It enjoys resource that could come only from top government sponsorship. It controls some proxies of Iran, such as Hizbullah. The US had better wake up to the strong, concerted effort by Iran to export its revolution (IMRA, 3/1). This means that the US needs not just to destroy Iran's nuclear weapons but also to eliminate its clerical regime. The US needs a strategy for defeating jihad, not just for defending against it here and there. Otherwise, jihadists will just rise up, again. This is world war. We should not be hosting Muslim propagandists in our universities. CULTURAL WAYS OF THINKING People have universal equal rights but not sameness of cultural concepts. Westerners perceive some of the differences in self-contradictory ways. On the one hand, they attribute the different ways of thinking of Western males and females largely to upbringing, and they are aware of the extreme reluctance of Chinese and to admit having made a mistake and of the Japanese to say "no." On the other hand, they assume that excuses by the Arabs and other Muslims are genuine and not a refusal to have made mistakes. They assume that since Westerners make agreements to resolve problems, the Muslims do, too. Actually, Muslim doctrine is to make agreements with Westerners in order the better eventually to conquer the infidels. Self-deception is common but different. One type is wishful thinking. Westerners harp on making peace, deluding themselves that fanatical jihadists can be persuaded to cease their crusade just when they are gearing up and are looking forward to consolidating the Mid-East and dominating Europe and Russia. Self-contradiction is common, but it is more frequent and common among the Muslim Arabs. Their intellectuals accept all arguments in behalf of jihad, regardless of lack of evidence for them, a plethora of evidence against them, poor logic in behalf of them, and their self-contradiction. Arab polemicists may contradict themselves in the same paragraph. Most Western journalists and intellectuals, however, are reluctant or unable to point out those self-contradictions. The Muslim Arabs hold obviously self-contradictory ideas simultaneously in a way that puzzles me. An example is the P.A. curriculum about Israel. P.A. maps don't mention Israel, but show it as part of Palestine. Arab schoolchildren are not taught that Israel exists. On the other hand, Israeli cities are described as "Israeli occupied." How can they be occupied by a country that doesn't exist? A rational way to reconcile that self-contradiction, though it would be wrong factually, is to show Israel on the map and assert a claim to it. But the Arabs have no legitimate claim to it and a poor claim to Judea-Samaria and Gaza. That the West presses the Arab claim to the Territories is not based on international law, historical justice, etc., but on appeasement of the Arabs and hatred of Jews. Westerners have their ways of being devious. The State Dept. and the Left contend that if Israel conceded the Territories, the Muslims would make peace. Aside from thereby ignoring the Muslim imperative of jihad, Westerners ignore the P.A. curriculum and the other, abundant evidence that the Arabs wouldn't stop with the Territories, but that their real goal is to conquer Israel, the Territories being a key step along the way. Why don't the major media expose this? Antisemitic prejudice blinds the supposedly logical Western mind. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
KHALED ABU-TOAMEH AT SAN JOSE UNIVERSITY
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 27, 2007. |
|
Below and attached is my summary of Khaled abu-Toameh's presentation at San Jose State University. On March 21, 2007, Khaled abu-Toameh spoke at the San Jose State University on the topic of what is happening in the Palestinian territories now (now = after the Mecca Accords and the new "unity government"). The following is a brief summary of his comments. |
|
Three most important statements I'd rather be a 2nd class citizen in Israel than a first class citizen in Beirut or Ramallah. Israel is the only free democracy in the Middle East, the only state with free media. Arabs world-wide admire and want Israeli-style democratic system About Himself His father is an Israeli Arab Muslim. His mother is a Palestinian Arab Muslim. He was born in Qalqilyah (an Arab village in the Palestinian Authority part of the West Bank). He has a BA in English Lit from the Hebrew University (Jerusalem). He started his journalism career with the PLO, but left because there was no freedom of thought, freedom of speech in the PLO. So he got a job with the Israeli and later international media. He is now a producer for NBC News, BBC, and other news outlets. He also writes in Hebrew for Israeli newspapers. He has written for the Jerusalem Post (in English) for more than 5 years and has never experienced any censorship. Criticism of the Arab self-image It is an incredible irony that an Arab can express himself freely only in Israel. Thus the Arab press is merely a mouthpiece for the government. Problematic is the fact that self-criticism is almost non-existent. Any failure must be either hidden, or blamed on the Jews/Israel/Zionism/occupation. Criticism of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas: In 2006, more Palestinians were killed by Palestinians than by Israelis...but human rights groups are silent. Not just in Gaza, but in the West Bank as well, there is no rule of law, no governance, no civil institutions. Armed gangs rule. Tribes and clans rule. And the problem is not just with leaders. Palestine is a Muslim state. If Hamas were to change, and accommodate the possibility of peace with Israel, Hamas' Muslim constituency would reject it. The Palestinian people have become more and more radicalized over the past 13 years, since Oslo. Arafat took billions in western money, and then used it to educate his children into hatred of the west, terrorism against the West...and western leaders never demanded an accounting. The core issue, the real heart of the problem is that the Muslim and Arab world refuses to acknowledge that a Jewish State has the right to exist. Thus, this is at its core a religious conflict. Whatever 'peace process' there may have been after Oslo died on 9/29 2000 (the first day of the 2nd Intifada). The Problem with Journalists Journalists see the Palestinians as the good guys, because they are weak, 'occupied', 'oppressed', and Israel is strong. So Israel is de facto the oppressor, occupier, bad guy. There is not one foreign journalist that will go in to Gaza (DML: incorrect. One just got kidnapped when he went in to Gaza a few weeks ago). They get their news about Gaza and Hamas from the stringers. But the stringers are Arab/Muslim/Palestinians who get their news from the same news sources that abu-Toameh left 26 years ago because they were censoring everything and producing fake news. So the western journalists become the conduits for Hamas propaganda. Ha'aretz is in its essence a Palestinian newspaper. Some of its articles are translated, in toto, and published in Palestinian newspapers. Solution There is no solution. The conflict cannot be resolved. It can only be managed. Israel's strategy now can be only, how to manage the violence, keep it at levels that do not create an existential threat. Oslo The concept embodied in Oslo (two states) was good. But the implementation was a disaster. Israel and the USA (i.e., Clinton) simply refused to deal with the reality that the PLO was a terrorist organization and not a political party. Terrorists in police uniforms are still terrorists. Arafat set up as his job #1 the control of the media so that his corruption, embezzlement, massive abuses of Palestinian human rights...all could be hidden from the western presses. Foreign journalists in the West Bank did NOT want to go looking for problems, or things to criticize. Foreign editors did not want to hear about PA corruption etc...they only wanted to hear about "exile" and "occupation" and "oppression" and suffering of Palestinians. Arafat incited his people endlessly after Oslo, and he used billions in foreign money to do so, and to educate to incitement, and to preach from the mosques to blame all the miseries of the Palestinian people on Israel and the West and the Jews and the infidels. Despite the agreements at Oslo, there was never rule of law, and the Palestinians were more afraid of the PA police than of the IDF. Arafat wanted to divert anger from his misdeeds and redirect it to Israel. So he made up the idea that Israel wanted to destroy el-Aqsa, and launched the 2nd Intifada with the fiction that el-Aqsa was in danger. People in the PA were pressing to ask hard questions, to demand Arafat's answers, so to divert them, he blamed everything on Baraq. Abbas Abbas came to power in 2005 on the platform of ending financial corruption, bringing freedom and democracy, and dismantling the militias, and negotiating peace with Israel. Didn't work. Hamas Hamas came to power in 2006 on the same platform...didn't work. Hamas just as corrupt, no transparency, but at least honest that they do not want peace, they want to destroy Israel. The West tried to help the PLO and Abbas retain power. Didn't work. The Mecca accords put the last nails in that coffin. Abbas simply decided: if we can't beat them, then we will join them. So now Abbas and PLO are part of Hamas. They need money; so they put forth to the West the complex and intentionally vague platform of a "unity government" which permits the Muslims to interpret that there is no peace, no compromise, no recognition for Israel...but permits the West to read between the lines that "recognition is implied" and "treaties will be recognized". The message from Abdullah at Mecca was: join forces, pretend to recognize Israel...but Hamas said no: we must stay honest and loyal to our commitments...destroy Israel. He cannot understand why the international community still rushes to embrace Hamas, give legitimacy to intended genocide, lend support to international Islamofascist terrorism. Why does West accept and welcome this radical extremism? Q&A 1. How do we untangle this mess? Israel has made so many concessions (Oslo, letting the PLO become the PA, Gaza, offer to give more territory in west bank, even divide Jerusalem) that some Arab leaders will surely see the light and recognize that Israel wants peace. How can we help them see the light? Easy: withhold money, and demand change in return for aid (free media, end corruption, disarm militias) 2. What is the mood in the populace? Most want peace but too much incendiary input from el-Jazeera and from PLO/PA hate speech and hate preach and hate teach. 3. What is the relationship between the Muslim brotherhood and Hamas? Hamas is an offshoot of the MB but has now moved toward Iran and Syria. 4. Why is there no dialogue with Islamic fundamentalists? Because there can be no dialogue with fundamentalists. What will we dialogue about? We should be dialoguing with the moderates, and protecting them, and helping to develop them. 5. Are you in danger? Yes. But I just keep telling the truth. However, ironic that CNN will not come to me for any analysis of the situation. They prefer to go to Hanan Ashrawi. 6. Are the settlements a barrier to peace? No. Not at all. Just look: before there were settlements (i.e., pre' 1967) there was no peace. During the settlement period there was little or no terrorism. Now that Gaza is without settlements there is no peace. There is no causal relationship between settlements and peace. The barrier to peace is that there is no peace partner in the PA/PLO. 7. What about the rivalry between Palestinian factions? They kill each other. They are brutal and ruthless. They kill each other's children. They murder each other's children in the streets. They practice gang rape and murder in streets and in mosques. In the last 3 months, 145 people have died due to rivalry violence. But the UN is silent about this murder of children. 8. Why is Israel always to blame? It is time to stop the blaming. Both Jews and Palestinians are victims. The "wall" harms both sides; but the media is interested only in Palestinian suffering. Look at Palestinian education. It is hate education inculcating hate toward Israel, hate toward "kufar", and love for martyrdom and jihad. This comes from the schools and the mosques and government and media in the PA. 9. What happened to all the billions of $$? $1,600,000,000 went to Gaza from unknown sources in 2006. Where did it go? $$6,500,000,000 went to the PA between 1993 and 2001. Where did it go? It went to Suha Arafat, to Yassir, to terrorists, corruption, embezzlement. 10. What about the discrimination towards Israeli Arabs? There is discrimination. Lack of funding for Arab schools and communities. And Israeli Arabs are upset with Israel. The Oslo accords destroyed the relationship between the Israeli Jews and the Israeli Arabs. Israel should embrace Israeli Arabs. Only 0.8% of Arabs hold jobs in the public sector. There are no industrial zones in Arab sectors. There is need for affirmative action, for the Israeli government to say that there is a problem and do something about it. I'd rather be a 2nd class citizen in Israel than a first class citizen in Beirut or Ramallah. 11. What about the Iraq War; did it help or harm the peace process? There is no peace process. There is simply no intention on the Arab side to make peace with Israel. A very conservative estimate has it that ONLY 10% of Palestinians are radical. Sounds small. But there are 3,000,000 Palestinians in Israel. So that means that there is an army of 300,000 who are bent on violence against Israel. 12. What about Iran? Iran is the greatest threat. Then Syria. They are the mentors of Hezbollah and are intent on destabilizing Lebanon, then the PA, then Jordan. Iran poses a real danger to other Arab countries, and other Muslim countries, not just to Israel. Akhmedi-Nejjad is another modern Hitler. The problem is that if Israel attacks Iran, he will be more popular than ever in the Muslim world, therefore, Israel and the USA should let the Arabs fight him... before he destabilizes Saudi Arabia and the UAE. There is much pressure on Akhmedi-Nejjad inside his own country to bring him down and end the mullocracy. 13. Where are Saddam's WMDs? Khaled does not know. But there should not have been a war. There should have been a summit. The USA now should work toward the creation of a peace keeping force with soldiers from Egypt, Jordan, North African Arab countries, the Gulf States, and this peace force could then replace the USA and use the peace force soldiers to kill the insurgents. 14. What about the Arab refugees? The refugees are a source of the problem. The USA and Japan and the rest of the world should force the Arab countries to pay compensation and resettlement. The purpose of UNRWA is to keep the refugees as refugees...to maintain the problem. Look at the numbers. Jordan has 2,000,000 refugees. Syria has 500,000. Lebanon has 500,000. Lebanon has 72 laws prohibiting Palestinians from working, from traveling, from getting Lebanese passports, for buying land. The refugee camps in the West Bank (i.e., under Israeli control) are much better than those in Gaza (under Hamas) or Jordan or Syria or Lebanon. Much of the Arab world hates the Palestinians because of their support for Saddam. Kuwait and Qatar exiled 450,000 Palestinians due to their support for Saddam. It is the Arab states that should solve the refugee problem, not Israel. Refugee camps in Israel look like normal villages. There is no squalor, no mud huts, no tents. 15. What about the unity government? There is nothing to talk about as long as this government does not renounce terrorism, accept Israel's right to exist, stop incitement, and honor previous agreements. Abbas is now part of Hamas, and that is good for Hamas because Abbas (the Moderate) can extort money from West and especially from the USA. The PLO has still not come to terms with its defeat by Hamas. The PLO must reform, call new elections, and then bring down Hamas. Suicide bombings are attempted almost daily. The IDF stops most of them. Sharon's unilateral action looked like weakness to Palestinians, looked like retreat, helped bring Hamas to power. Qassams continue daily under the "unity government"...there is no government. There is only Hamas, hell-bent on destroying Israel. 16. Is there a secret policy for the IDF to intentionally shoot Arab children? No. Arab children and other civilians die in the fighting because the terrorists use them as human shields. 17. What about the UN? The UN does much that is very wrong toward Israel. It ignores the real problems in Darfur, the real genocides, the real violations of human rights, and focuses on Israel. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
PUTTING ORDER (SEDER) INTO MY LIFE
Posted by Rachel Saperstein, March 27, 2007. |
|
I've had to make some order (seder) in my caravilla, my Amutah [NPO] and into the enterprises that Operation Dignity has been aiding: The Orange Gallery, Bnei Menashe Motif, and Katifnik [Mr. Fix-It]. The caravilla, my plywood home, has been the easiest. We had moved into the caravilla a year ago, right before Pessach. Wonderful teenaged girls from a nearby high school had come to unpack and put our things away. For one year I have been searching for and re-buying items that are stored "somewhere". This year I organized the closets and found six packages of the same painkiller and enough band-aids for a small war. I found single socks, hoping the other one would show up. I found shirts with frayed collars and stains. Cans of vegetables bought in Neve Dekalim added to the pile that made its way to the dark green dumpster across the street. Why one cannot make order (seder) during the rest of the year is a question only a Jewish woman can answer. Why bother when you can wait for the pre-Pessach cleanup. Order has been reached until the next time. I'll probably buy another box of painkillers when the doctor writes the next prescription because I will have forgotten about the other six boxes lying neatly "somewhere". I have had to put order into my enterprises. Operation Dignity has been aiding the running of three projects and it was more than the NPO could handle. Our opening date of the Orange Gallery, March 19, came and went without an opening. We had spent so much on clearing the muddy lake and installing a brick patio that we had no funds left for the insurance needs. Thefts are common in the Nitzan refugee camp and we could hardly have opened without fire, theft and personal accident insurance. The printing needs and office equipment overwhelmed us so we decided to postpone the opening until we could find financial help. The Gallery has been successful in helping the artists and artisans make a living, but with the small percentage we take from each work sold we are unable to sustain ourselves. We clearly need patrons to keep us going. We turned to JobKatif who have agreed to back us. So once again we have an opening date, during the intermediate days of Pessach, Thursday, April 5. At 1:15pm. We will affix the mezuzah on each of our structures, invite our rabbis to say words of Torah, and greet the guests whom we hope will arrive for this wonderful opening. This is your invitation to be with us for the opening of the Orange Gallery. Order in ones personal life means celebration in its time. We held a Kiddush in the home of Moshe's brother and sister-in-law in honor of Moshe's mother's 90th birthday. Her friends, young and old, from her Har Nof Jerusalem neighborhood came with fondness for this feisty, inspiring woman, Shoshana (Rose) Saperstein. Her life has been devoted to her family and to chessed and we have tried to walk in her footsteps. A family picnic with her sons and daughters-in-law, seven grandchildren and thirty-plus great grandchildren will be held during Pessach in Har Nof. And to the Pessach seder itself... We are looking forward to Tamar and Oshri and the girls joining us. I have prepared small gifts for the girls. My sister-in-law calls it reinforcement; once we called it bribery. We hope they will participate. We've bought them children's Haggadot, Afikoman candy boxes, and hair ornaments. I haven't found the '10 plagues' gift packages that my friend Mara brought so many years ago, so will make up games as we go along. All ideas for getting grandchildren to participate in the Seder are appreciated. May I wish you all a happy and kosher Pessach. For those of you outside Israel, may you be privileged to live in the land of Israel. For those who live here, may we be privileged to live in a land of peace. Send your checks earmarked for OPERATION DIGNITY to:
Central Fund for Israel
OR
Central Fund for Israel
Rachel Saperstein and her husband, Moshe, were among the thousands of
Jews kicked out of their homes in Gush Katif, in the Gaza strip, and
forced into temporary quarters so dismal, their still-temporary
paper-based trailers in Nitzan, seemed a step up. Contact them at
ruchimo@.netvision.net.il
|
|
CONDI'S EMBRACE OF JIHADIST 'PEACE'
Posted by Michael Travis, March 27, 2007. |
|
This is by Caroline Glick and it appeared yesterday in the
Jerusalem Post
|
|
In an open act of war, Iran Friday kidnapped 15 British soldiers in the Persian Gulf. Iran's act of aggression occurred just as the British voted in favor of a UN Security Council resolution imposing increased sanctions against Teheran for its illicit nuclear weapons program. Several theories have been raised to explain Iran's behavior. Some say that the Iranians acted against the British in the hope that Britain would respond by abandoning its alliance with the US and swiftly pulling its forces out of Iraq. Another theory is that in kidnapping the sailors the Iranians are seeking to reenact their ploy from last summer. Then, Iran ordered its Lebanese proxy Hizbullah to kidnap IDF soldiers in order to divert the international community's attention away from Iran's nuclear program. As is the case with the British servicemen, so last summer's attack on the IDF took place as the Security Council was expected to convene and discuss sanctions against Iran for its pursuit of nuclear weapons. Yet another theory has it that Iran kidnapped the sailors to use as a bargaining chip to force the US military to release Iranian operatives who the US has arrested in Iraq in recent months. Whatever the case may be, it is absolutely clear that the Iranians intentionally fomented this international crisis with the expectation that their aggression would in some way be rewarded. AGAINST THIS backdrop, and given the stakes involved, it could have been expected that the US and its allies would be concentrating their attention on how to weaken Iran and its terror proxies and curtail Iran's ability to acquire a nuclear arsenal. But, alas, the US is doing just the opposite. The Iranians acted as US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was en route to the region. Since Friday, Rice has shuttled between Egypt, Israel, the Palestinian Authority and Jordan, and is on her way to Saudi Arabia. She is not working to coordinate moves to check Iran's increasing bellicosity. Rather, Rice is laboring to empower Teheran's terrorist allies in Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and Fatah. This she does by promoting the so-called Arab peace plan, which demands that Israel agree to dangerous and strategically catastrophic concessions to the Palestinian terrorist government. In behaving thus, Rice is walking in the well-worn footsteps of her predecessors. Indeed, it seems almost axiomatic that when the going gets tough for US administrations, administration officials get tough on Israel. AFTER THE Republicans won control of the Congress in 1994, then president Bill Clinton was hard-pressed to advance his domestic agenda. And so Clinton -- who had almost no interest in foreign policy in his opening years of office -- turned his attention to Israel and the so-called peace process, in which Israel was expected to give land, arms and legitimacy to the PLO in exchange for terrorism. Clinton's penchant for forcing Israeli concessions to the PLO in the name of peace became more pronounced as things became more difficult for him during his impeachment hearings in 1998. As the House of Representatives poised to vote on articles of impeachment, Clinton twisted then prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu's arm until he signed the Wye Plantation memorandum, in which Israel pledged to transfer wide swathes of Judea and Samaria to Yasser Arafat's terrorist government. Clinton forced Netanyahu's hand in spite of the fact that, by 1998, it was clear that Arafat was actively enabling Hamas and Islamic Jihad to carry out terror attacks against Israel and indoctrinating Palestinian society to wage jihad for Israel's destruction. But negotiating with Netanyahu was inconvenient. Netanyahu refused to implement the Wye agreement in light of Arafat's support for terrorism and forced Clinton to acknowledge that Arafat was doing nothing to combat terror. Unhappy with this state of affairs, Clinton set out to overthrow Netanyahu's government. IN AN ACT of unmitigated contempt for Israeli democracy and electoral laws, Clinton sent his own election advisers James Carville, Stanley Greenberg and Robert Schrum to Israel to run Labor party leader Ehud Barak's campaign in the 1999 elections. The culmination of Clinton's campaign was the failed Camp David summit in July 2000. There, and in subsequent desperate discussions with Arafat at Taba, Barak agreed to hand over the Temple Mount to Arafat in addition to Gaza, Judea, Samaria and a pile of money. Israel paid dearly for Barak and Clinton's behavior. In the Palestinian jihad that followed Arafat's rejection of Barak and Clinton's plaintive offers, more than 1,000 Israelis were murdered -- more than 70 percent of whom were civilians. Israel's international standing fell to all-time lows as global anti-Semitism rose to levels unseen since the Holocaust. America too, paid dearly for Clinton's behavior. Rather than pay attention to the burgeoning terror nexus which had placed the US directly in its crosshairs -- in 1993 at the World Trade Center; in 1996 at the Khobar Towers; in 1998 at the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania; and in 2000 at the USS Cole -- Clinton remained scope-locked on the so-called peace process. Rather than acknowledge the existence and threat of the global jihad to US national security, Clinton pressured the global jihad's primary victim -- Israel -- into transferring its heartland and capital to the godfather of modern terrorism. But while Israel and America bled, Clinton himself paid no price for his behavior. Rather than be blamed for the war he contributed so richly to enabling, Clinton is upheld as a hero at best, or at worst a tragic figure who devoted his presidency to the cause of peace. Today, Rice's newfound mania for peacemaking comes when local conditions negate any possibility of peace. Just last month the Saudis promised the Palestinians a billion dollars and so paved the way for the Mecca accord, where the Iranian-sponsored Fatah terror group surrendered to the Iranian-sponsored Hamas terror group. In so acting, the Saudis brought about the formation of a Palestinian government openly committed to the use of terrorism as a tool to ensure Israel's destruction. International conditions also ensure that Rice's peacemaking will fail to make peace. Regionally, Iran ups the ante daily against the US-led coalition in Iraq. Domestically, the Democratic-controlled Congress works daily to prevent the US from fighting its enemies. Globally, states as far-flung as Russia, China and Venezuela make deals with terror governments to check US power. The program that Rice has come to the region to advance does not even have the benefit of a peaceful facade. The Palestinians make clear every single day that they do not and will not accept Israel's right to exist in any borders, and that they will not work to combat terrorism against Israel. The Arab League, and its member states, for their part, have repeatedly announced that they will brook no change in their "peace" plan which, if implemented will bring about Israel's rapid destruction. In behaving as she does, Rice, like Clinton before her, is aided by a politically weak and strategically incompetent Israeli government that is willing to sacrifice Israel's long-term security for the benefit of prime-time photo opportunities with bigwig American leaders and Arab potentates. Sunday, the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government has announced that it is open to negotiating on the basis of the Arab plan. As one government official told The Jerusalem Post, Israel will "not dismiss" the plan. THIS IS Israel's position in spite of the fact that the Arab plan calls for Israel to surrender east, north and south Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria and the Golan Heights to Hamas and Syria and for Israel to permit four to five million hostile, foreign-born Arabs posing as Palestinian "refugees" to immigrate to its truncated territory. As the "peace" plan makes clear, all these suicidal Israeli moves must come before the Arab states will be willing to have "regular" (whatever that means) relations with the indefensible, overrun Jewish state. Commenting on the government's position, the official explained, "We would not reject this out of hand." It is not surprising that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni are behaving in this manner. After all, these are the same leaders who brought about Israel's defeat in Lebanon in last summer's war at the hands of Iran's Hizbullah proxy army. Last summer, Olmert followed Livni's lead in rejecting military victory as an option. Heeding Livni's unwise, defeatist counsel, Olmert postponed the essential ground offensive in south Lebanon until it was too late to make a difference and instead opted for a negotiated cease-fire. As is the case with the Arab "peace" plan, the cease-fire Israel enthusiastically acceded to last summer was strategically disastrous for the country. UN Security Council Resolution 1701 placed Israel on the same plane as the illegal Hizbullah terrorist organization; prevents Israel from taking steps to defend itself; does not require the safe return of IDF hostages Eldad Regev and Ehud Goldwasser; enables Hizbullah to rearm and reassert its control over south Lebanon; and lets Hizbullah's state sponsors Syria and Iran completely off the hook for their central role in Hizbullah's illegal war against the Jewish state. Recent history shows that the US and Israel will both pay heavily for the opportunism of our weak political leaders. It can only be hoped that the Israeli and American people have learned enough from our experiences to demand that our leaders stop their reckless behavior before the price of their cowardice and perfidy become unbearable. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
"ISLAM WILL ENTER EVERY HOUSE AND WILL SPREAD OVER THE ENTIRE WORLD"
Posted by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook, March 27, 2007. |
|
While the Hamas goal of destroying Israel is well known, its aspiration for Islamic subjugation of the entire world is just as basic to Hamas dogma. Both aims appear in the Hamas Charter as God's irrepressible will, and both aims were reiterated this week by senior Hamas leader and former PA Foreign Minister Mahmoud Al-Zahar. At a mass rally in memory of Hamas founder Ahmad Yassin, Al-Zahar said that the Quran promises the "liberation of all of Palestine," meaning the destruction of Israel. He went so far as to challenge the Islamic faith of those who deny this goal: "No one can deny it. One who denies it must check his faith and his Islam." Regarding the Hamas religious goal of Islamic world domination, he said: "Islam will enter every house and will spread over the entire world." Below is the translation of Al-Zahar's speech: [Mahmoud] Al-Zahhar spoke at the mass rally held on the memorial day for Sheikh Ahmad Yassin... Itamar Marcus is director of PMW -- Palestinian Media Watch -- (http://www.pmw.org.il). PMW is based in Jerusalem. Barbara Crook, a writer and university lecturer based in Ottawa, Canada, is PMW's North American representative. |
|
TIME HAS COME TO SILENCE FOREVER THE U.N COUNCIL OF HUMAN RIGHTS
Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 27, 2007. |
|
The Banned UN Speech: "Human Rights Nightmare" can be seen at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uhWgZu6tcZU The representative of UN Watch is slamming the representative of the U.N Council Of Human Rights. Six decades ago in the aftermath of the Nazi horrors, prominent world figures gathered on the banks of Lake Geneva to reaffirm the principles of human dignity that the Nazis stripped the world of. They created the Commission of Human Rights, now known as the "U.N Council Of Human Rights." What has become of this noble dream? The good-for-nothing do-nothing Council's response to any atrocity and violation of human rights around the world is silence, indifference, and it is criminal. The despots who run the U.N. Council of Human Rights could care less about human rights; they allow the criminals to go on with their crimes with impunity, but the fingers of the council are pointed at Israel at any and every opportunity: Their only job is to demonize the Israeli democracy, to delegitimized the Jewish State, and to scapegoat the Jewish people. Moreover, they seek to distort and prevent the very language and ideas of human rights. With their terrible lies and inversion, they turn the idea of human rights into a nightmare. The question is: Why do we go on validating the criminal actions of the U.N.? Why do allow our hard earned dollars to pay the criminals who run the U.N.? The time has come to dismantle the U.N., or to end the United States membership in this most disgraceful, do nothing good for nothing [in]human council and the United Nation Organization -- the U.N. Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
OLMERT'S LIES BACKFIRE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 26, 2007. |
|
DANGER OF ATTACKING IRAN If Israel attacks Iran's nuclear facilities (or perhaps even if the US does), Syria would fire rockets at Israel, some bearing chemical weapons. Iran's terrorist proxies would join the fray (Arutz-7, 2/27). They are putting Israel in the position of having to follow the attack with a threat to counter with nuclear weapons, if Syria thought to attack non-conventionally. This quandary shows the folly of letting enemy terrorist groups and countries get so far. It shows the follow of withdrawal without peace (as in Lebanon) and withdrawal from one's own patrimony (as in Gaza and northern Samaria). The withdrawal from Sinai, not integrally part of Egypt, facilitates smuggling into Gaza. OLMERT LYING TO SALVAGE REPUTATION Everybody knows that the Prime Minister, Defense Minister, and Chief of Staff fumbled the Lebanon war. Under investigation for that as well as for corruption, Olmert pretends he didn't make a snap decision to go to war, but decided months earlier. We already reported that he contradicted that claim by having reduced the military budget before the war and did not prepare for the war. The Knesset military chair also noted that before the war, Olmert reduced military training and reserve call-ups. If he secretly had planned war, those reductions would be criminal negligence, worse than a snap decision to go to war. Olmert's phony excuse provides an excuse for Hizbullah, by indicating that its kidnapping of Israeli soldiers was just a pretext for Olmert's allegedly prior decision to go to war, hence Hizbullah's precipitating action was not rash (Arutz-7, 3/?). The limited war that Olmert waged failed in Israeli war games before Olmert chose it, anyway. The public long knew that he needed to call up the reserves, but he stuck with his failing plan so long that reservists couldn't prepare. Olmert claims that he broke out into a full-scale ground assault, sustaining relatively higher casualties just hours before calling it off, in order to get a better UNO ceasefire resolution. But the Security Council already had passed its resolution unanimously. The Council would not review it in Israel's behalf. As for the terms of the resolution, it mandated no action against Iran and Syria even to barring their re-supply of Hizbullah, treated the illegal Hizbullah terrorists and aggressors on a par with UNO member Israel, treats the Hizbullah collaborator, Lebanese PM Siniora, as a positive factor, and urged more power for UNIFIL, which reported Israeli movements on its web site in time to warn Hizbullah, and which let Hizbullah rearm then and now (IMRA, 3/9 from Caroline Glick). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
DON'T DISTURB DECORUM WITH TRUTH
Posted by Alex Grobman, March 26, 2007. |
|
This comes from Democracy Project |
|
Hillel Neuer, the executive director of UN Watch, spoke truth to the U.N. Human Rights Council last Friday, for which he was admonished for speaking the truth. How dare he was the reply. How dare we ignore the reply, and what it says so clearly about the U.N.? A bit of Scottish sense, via Walter Scott, first: One hour of life, crowded to the full with glorious action, and filled with noble risks, is worth whole years of those mean observances of paltry decorum, in which men steal through existence, like sluggish waters through a marsh, without either honor or observation. Now for Mr. Neuer: Mr. President, Reply by U.N. Human Rights Council President Luis Alfonso De Alba: For the first time in this session I will not express thanks for that statement. I shall point out to the distinguished representative of the organization that just spoke, the distinguished representative of United Nations Watch, if you'd kindly listen to me. I am sorry that I'm not in a position to thank you for your statement. I should mention that I will not tolerate any similar statements in the Council. The way in which members of this Council were referred to, and indeed the way in which the council itself was referred to, all of this is inadmissible. In the memory of the persons that you referred to, founders of the Human Rights Commission, and for the good of human rights, I would urge you in any future statements to observe some minimum proper conduct and language. Otherwise, any statement you make in similar tones to those used today will be taken out of the records.Dr. Alex Grobman's most recent book is Nations United: How the UN Undermines Israel and the West. He is also co-author of "Denying History: Who Says The Holocaust Never Happened?" (University of California Press, 2000) and author of "Battling for Souls: The Vaad Hatzala Rescue Committee in Post War Europe" [KTAV]. |
|
IT'S BAD WHEN YOU START LOSING IN THE EYES OF YOUR ENEMY (AND MAYBE YOURSELF)?
Posted by Dave Nathan, March 26, 2007. |
|
DEBKAfile Exclusive: The halt of Jewish immigration to Israel is one of two key Arab pre-conditions for engaging the Jewish state in peace talks Our Arab sources reveal that the two conditions will be incorporated in the final resolutions approved by the Arab League summit in Riyadh on Thursday. 1. Israel must halt Jewish immigration so that the Israelis leaving the country or revoking their citizenship are not replaced by newcomers. 2. The international community must condemn Israel's High Court of Justice for authorizing targeted assassination of Palestinians in cases of security threats. Arab justice ministers will lobby international judicial bodies to elicit this condemnation. Contact Dave Nathan at davenathan@aol.com |
|
AMERICA'S EGYPTIAN ALLY
Posted by Daniel Mandel, March 26, 2007. |
|
America is reputed to have some moderate Arab allies of which Hosni Mubarak's Egypt is perhaps pre-eminent. It ought therefore to have concerned the Bush Administration and the State Department that Mubarak rebuffed a 24 March a request from the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon to pressure Sudanese President Omar Hassan al-Bashir into dropping his objections to United Nations peacekeepers in Darfur. In point of fact, this act has brought no rebuke from Washington, but then Egyptian failure to assist efforts to end the mass killing in Sudan is not new. As I have previously noted, Egypt has a history of continually foiling international efforts to end the genocide being perpetrated there. When one looks at the broad goals of American Middle East policy -- promoting democratic reform in the Middle East, fostering conditions to bring about an Arab-Israeli peace -- Egypt's record is no better than on Darfur. It is Egypt that that has turned a blind eye to the smuggling of weaponry and materiel to terrorists in Gaza from Egypt. It is Egypt that in May 2006 arrested hundreds of demonstrators supporting judges who had denounced the rigging of parliamentary elections. It was Mubarak who subsequently cancelled municipal elections. The Bush Administration's reaction to the Mubarak regime's repression is an index of its evaporating will to work towards the attainment of its own declared goals in the Middle East. Whereas Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice commenced her stewardship of Foggy Bottom in January 2005 by cancelling a visit to Egypt to protest the arrest of leading human rights activist Ayman Nour (which helped to secure his brief release) her December 2006 visit, in contrast, was notable for her silence on democratic reform or Mr Nour's rotting in gaol. One therefore expects that Egypt's proposed referendum to give Mubarak new powers to more easily dissolve Parliament and suspend civil liberties will not meet with more than a whimper from Washington -- although that whimper has sufficed to attract a heated Egyptian reaction. Contact Daniel Mandel at daniel.mandel@gmail.com. This article is
archived at
|
|
BANK OF THE INTIFADA TO JOIN THE U.N.
Posted by Michael Travis, March 26, 2007. |
|
This was written by Anne Bayefsky. It appeared in National Review
Online and is archived at
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Nzc2YjJlMWFiMzllODE4NjY2YzVkNTc0YjcxMjc5MjM |
|
The United Nations' nourishment of terrorism (a concept it has yet to define) reached a new low last Friday. On March 23, 2007, the United Nations General Assembly's Sixth Committee -- its lead legal body comprised of all 192 member states -- recommended that observer status be granted to the Islamic Development Bank Group (IDB), an entity that has been directly involved in paying the families of Palestinian suicide bombers. Back in August of 2001, Ahmad Muhammad Ali, president of the bank, was questioned by the publication Asharq Al-Awsat about payments to the Palestinian Authority for the sake of carrying out the intifada. Ali told the publication that "there was no delay in paying financial assistance to the families of Palestinian martyrs," assuring it, "We have started paying them soon after receiving the money." An Arab Summit in Cairo in late October of 2000 created two funds, the Al-Quds Intifadah Fund and the Al-Aqsa Fund. According to Ali, the IDB is responsible "for the smooth functioning of the two funds." The final communiqué of the summit made no attempt to conceal the purpose of the funds: "the Al-Quds Intifadah Fund will have a capital of 200 million dollars to be allocated for disbursement to the families of Palestinian martyrs fallen in the Intifadah." The creation of a fund dedicated to making suicide-bombing financially appealing was the brainchild of then Crown Prince, now King, Abdullah of Saudi Arabia. He announced the move at the Arab League Summit thus: [W]e propose the establishment of a special trust under the name of 'The Jerusalem Intifada Fund' with a capital of 200 million US dollars. This amount will be allocated, to the families and the education of the children of the Palestinian martyrs who sacrificed their lives in the struggle. (That "education" is one that will certainly include the glorification of the violent and racist goals of the children's parents.) The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) has reported on some of the details of the financial connections between the IDB and terrorism. According to a 2003 report: Saudi funds which originate in the Jeddah based Islamic Development Bank (IDB) reach the Palestinian Authority Treasury Department via Account 98 of the Saudi Development Fund (SDF). All funds for Prince Salman Ibn Abd Al-Aziz's Popular Committee for Assisting the Palestinian Mujahideen go directly to the PLO, while Prince Nayef's funds from the Support Committee for the Al-Quds Intifada and Al-Aqsa Fund go to the Palestinian Authority. In June of 2006, the foreign ministers of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), the 56-member voting bloc that drives the majority "non-aligned" movement in the U.N., praised the contribution of the Islamic Bank in forwarding the OIC's hateful agenda. It adopted a resolution explaining its goals and the IDB's role in achieving them, "Commending the just and legitimate struggle of the Palestinian people...[and] Commend[ing] the efforts of the...Administrative Committee of the Al-Aqsa and Al-Quds funds and the Islamic Development Bank...with respect to the management of the Funds." As recently as March 9, 2007, Arab foreign ministers concluded a meeting in Cairo and "decided to upgrade the ceiling of [the] Al-Aqsa fund and Al-Quds uprising by $300 million." None of this made the slightest difference at the U.N. Saudi Arabia, where the bank is headquartered, put forward the application of the IDB for observer status, announcing in accompanying documentation that the IDB works "to promote social progress in accordance with the ethos of Islam." Nowhere in the six-page Saudi "explanatory memorandum" does it mention the bank's administration of the Al-Aqsa and Al-Quds Intifadah Funds. It does make passing mention, without explanation, of a program in partnership with the U.N. Development Program "currently providing special assistance in...the Palestinian territories," but "special assistance" is most likely not a U.N. euphemism for "funding of suicide bombings." One item apparently not a priority for the Islamic Development Bank and its "ethos of Islam" is the liberation of the millions of women living under the most repressive regimes on the planet. According to the IDB's U.N. observer application: "As of October 2006, the IDB Group's cumulative commitments reached $44.7 billion covering some 5,200 operations," and, among these commitments, the bank "currently provides 0.7 million annually [for]...women advancement programs." The criterion for granting observer status to intergovernmental organizations at the U.N. is deliberately vague -- its activities must "cover matters of interest." Not surprisingly, the same U.N. General Assembly Committee that believed the work of the Islamic Development Bank was "of interest" also believes a comprehensive convention against terrorism is not. Last month, the U.N.'s Legal Committee once again failed to adopt the draft terrorism treaty due to a definitional glitch. The Organization of the Islamic Conference insists that blowing up Americans and Israelis doesn't count. The U.N. Charter says membership in the United Nations is open to "peace-loving states which accept the obligations contained in the present Charter" -- among them the commitment to "fundamental human rights and the dignity and worth of the human person." This principle, which is supposed to apply equally to any other entity formally accredited by the U.N., didn't seem to matter in this case to the U.N.'s member states. Instead, the recommendation that the IDB be granted observer status was adopted, by consensus, in the form of a draft resolution. The United States looked the other way. Only Israel registered a concern that the bank had relations to Hamas and pointed out that its "organizational chart showed that it had operated Al Aqsa and Al Quds funds, which had known ties to terror groups." Although the recommendation must now be formally ratified by the plenary of the General Assembly, it is expected to be rubber-stamped before June. The Islamic Development Bank will then join the ranks of the 64 other U.N. observers, on a par with the Holy See, the Council of Europe, and the Organization of American States. It will have a standing invitation to participate as an observer in all of the sessions and work of the General Assembly -- extraordinary global access to policymakers for an entity linked to terrorists. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
THE 7 PILLARS OF "ARAB REFUGEE" WISDOM
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 26, 2007. |
|
1.) Israel did not cause the Arab refugee problem...the Arabs did. The UN partition plan of 11.29.1948 called for TWO states: one for the Jews and one for the Arabs. Israel accepted the UN partition plan, and extended a hand of peace and friendship to the Arab state that was supposed to come in to existence at the same time as Israel. The Arab leadership rejected the UN plan and declared war. 710,000 Arabs became refugees ONLY because of the war. Had there been no war, not only would there be no Arab refugee problem, but there would have been a state for the Arabs of British Mandatory Palestine in 1948. Therefore, the full onus of culpability for the Arab refugees rests exclusively on the shoulders of the Arab states whose animus toward Jews and Israel was so great that they preferred killing Jews to helping their Palestinian brethren. 2.) Israel offered solutions to the problem ...the Arabs rejected it. At the Rhodes Armistice conference in 1949, Israel offered to negotiate the return of conquered territories and the repatriation of refugees IN THE CONTEXT OF PEACE TALKS. The Arabs refused. No peace, no negotiations, no recognition! Better that 710,000 Arab civilians should remain in squalor and exile than that the Arab world should admit that Israel exists. Israeli offers in later years, for reparations and assistance in resettlement, were all rejected by the Arab countries, which prevented the refugees themselves from working with Israel to resolve the problem. 3.) Israel has not kept Arabs in refugee camps...the Arabs have. Jordan alone permitted the Arab refugees to acquire Jordanian citizenship. Egypt kept Arab refugees in concentration camps in the Gaza Strip (into which the Egyptian army herded them at gun point during the 1948 war, according to Yassir Arafat's authorized biography). Lebanon has 72 laws keeping refugees in their camps and prohibiting them from living like normal free people in Lebanon. 4.) Israel's Arabs are not refugees. The c. 170,000 Arabs who stayed in Israel became free citizens in a free and democratic state, and today number more than 1,400,000, with representatives in the Israeli Parliament, and working in every profession in Israel's economy. Despite the fact that some animosity and discrimination exists on a personal level, Israel's Arab citizens enjoy more freedom and prosperity than any of their brethren in the Arab world, except the oil-rich sheikhs and their families. 5.) By international law, most of today's "refugees" are not refugees. International law is clear that the descendents of refugees who are resettled in host countries no longer have the status of "refugee". After almost 60 years, the only real refugees today are mostly in their dotage. Their descendents may arrogate to themselves the status of 'refugee,' but inasmuch as they were born and lived all their lives in a host country, they do not have the legal claim to that status. 6.) Stolen Jewish property off-sets demands for Israeli compensation. Between 1949 and 1956, almost 1,000,000 Jews were driven from Arab lands by murderous mobs, rioting Arab crowds, and complicitous governments happy to confiscate Jewish bank accounts, real estate, businesses, etc. The Jews of these Arab lands fled with no money, no property, and sometimes nothing more than the clothes on their backs. They fled countries in which they and their ancestors had lived for, on some cases, 2,500 years. Israel took them in, rehabilitated them, and turned them in to productive citizens. A conservative estimate of the total value of property stolen from these bona fide refugee Jews from Morocco to Iran, from Syria to Yemen, is about $2,500,000,000 in 1948 dollars. Assuming a conservative growth rate of 6% over 60 years, that property would be worth $80,000,000,000 today. Let's let that $80,000,000,000, stolen from innocent Jews who were not combatants, nor citizens of a belligerent enemy, be used today by the Arab governments that stole that property, to compensate the "Arab refugees." 7.) UNRWA perpetuates the problem Of the almost 22,000 UNRWA employees, all but a few hundred are Palestinians. The inmates are running the asylum. The USA and EU provide the bulk of the billions of dollars annually that sustain these 4,500,000 self-identified Arab refugees. Arab countries provide less than 3%...yet it was the Arab countries that caused the problem. UNRWA's mandate from the onset has been to support and maintain the Arab refugees in their refugee situation. The other UN agencies dealing with other refugee populations have as their mandates the resolution of problems; and, indeed, almost all of the tens of millions of refugees created by wars in the 20th century have been resettled...except the Arab refugees. The Arabs caused the problem, and then UNRWA and the Arab world have perpetuated the problem for its propaganda value against Israel and against the West; today keeping millions of innocent victims in a perpetual state of hopeless, hapless, helpless, homeless squalor -- so that terrorist armies can more easily gain recruits and terrorist governments can blame the west for all the failures of the Arab world. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
IRAN WANTS THE BRITISH OUT OCCUPIED ENGLAND NOW!!!
Posted by Yid With Lid, March 26, 2007. |
|
While I have sympathy for the British sailors, captured by Iran (and their families also). Tony Blair's verbal rebuke yesterday was out of line. "This is very serious"---harumph!!! What about the other side of the story --it is not being reported at all. No one talks about the fact that the Britons have been occupying the Islamic homeland of England for centuries. All the Iranians want is for Britain to get out of occupied England and return to the pre 347 CE borders. Well that and allow Iranians who were kicked out by the Anglo-Saxons along with their cousins, plumbers and other acquaintances) to return to their home and establish an Islamic Republic with London as its capital. Getting the British out of London would enable the Iranians to build a mosque on top of the disputed holy site of Westminster Abby. Iranian Imams teach that the Ayatollah Khomeini was once there and rose directly from that site to the nearest 7/11 store for some Beef Jerky, a Dr Pepper Slurpie a couple of lotto tickets and a carton of Marlboro lights. Over the past months Britain has placed undo hardship upon Iranian people, cutting off aid and erecting the apartheid clock they call Big Ben. Tony Blair should be ashamed of himself; they even force Prince Charles to wear these dopy-looking fake ears. Why don't they listen to the group Human Rights Watch which asks them to stop torturing these freedom fighters and go to a dentist for G-d's sake. Why don't they heed the words of B'tsellem, which is reports that Buckingham Palace is built on Arab land. Lord Snow sees the light he quotes the French ambassador; calling for you and your people to get out of that "Shitty little country." Tension is beginning to rise--we must work to stop this circle of violence. I even understand that the British Army is planning a disproportionate response to the captured soldiers--the UN Security counsel should act and call for a cease-fire before Britain has a chance to defend itself. We should force a solution upon them because as we all know, there will be no peace in Iraq until the Angl0-Saxons leave the occupied territories. Some people claim that this is ridiculous, that there were never any Iranians in England, London is not really that important to Islam and the clock was built to protect people from being late. But I say HOGWASH! The rest of the world knows what is right. They will respond the same way that they responded to the Israeli Soldiers being captured. Contact Yid With Lid at YidWithLid@aol.com |
|
SILENCE SURROUNDS THE 40TH ANNIVERSARY OF THE '67 ISRAELI VICTORIES
Posted by Helen Freedman, March 25, 2007. |
|
Will there be any official government celebrations planned in Israel to recognize the 40th Anniversary of the re-unification of Jerusalem, the return to Hebron, and the restoration of Judea, Samaria, Gaza and the Golan to the Jews of Israel -- and the world? If so, we haven't heard of any. The reason for the silence from Israel is that the Olmert government is planning the reversal of the amazing 1967 victory by the Israeli army over the attacking Egyptians, Lebanese, Syrians, Iraqis, Saudis, and Jordanians, betraying all those who dreamt for centuries of the return to Zion. It is also, of course, a betrayal of the many thousands who gave their lives in order to create a whole Israel. Americans -- ask your mainstream Jewish organizations, the UJA, UJC, JNF, what celebrations are planned for the 40th Anniversary in America. You'll probably elicit a stony silence, or response about "disputed territories" from those who endorse the give-away plan and refuse to recognize the existence of a whole Israel. The give-away program was actually begun with the treacherous Oslo Accords of 1993, but swung into full force in August, 2005 when Gaza was emptied of its Jews by order of then PM Ariel Sharon. Wishing to distract the public from his pending indictment for a variety of criminal activities, Sharon pushed forward the expulsion of 10,000 Jews from the 21 communities of Gush Katif and Sanur and Homesh in Samaria. The area, as predicted by the opponents of expulsion, has now become a Hamas terrorist stronghold, threatening the Negev communities. Now we hear that Israel must talk to Syria. There are "diplomats" who insist that Israel's refusal to do so is stubborn intransigence. What could these talks possibly mean? Only the giveaway of the Golan Heights, Israel's absolutely necessary security position against the Iranian and Syrian backed Hezbollah. Anyone who has been to the Golan, and seen Damascus from the Israeli heights, can appreciate how dangerous it would be for Israel to give away this natural protection. And that goes without mentioning the vineyards, farms, homes, schools, cities and lives of the Jews of the Golan. And yet, the "diplomats" urge talk and "painful concessions." The Olmert government has been building a wall through Judea and Samaria that is cutting off Jewish communities from other Jews, placing them in what would be the "Palestinian" state, if that disaster should come to pass. The "Saudi initiative", from our "good friends" the Saudi Arabians, who were well represented in the World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks, and who sponsor Wahabiism, the most virulent of the Islamic jihadist religions, requires Israel to return to its "Auschwitz" 1967 borders and requires the right of return for Arabs who fled in 1948. Although the number of Arabs was about 500,000 at the time, their descendants now claim to number in the millions, thanks to the careful protection of UNWRA, and it is these millions who are demanding the right to flood Israel with their return. All of this seems quite reasonable to Ehud Olmert, who is ready to empty out many of the 250,000 Jews of Judea and Samaria, in order to replace them with "Palestinian"/Hamas Arabs who are dedicated to Israel's destruction. And the jewel in the crown is Jerusalem -- Yerushalayim -- the holy city over which the Jews have cried for centuries. Jews continue to mourn the destruction of the First and Second Temples, and look forward to the day when the Third Temple will be rebuilt on the Temple Mount. Unfortunately, the Israeli government doesn't reflect these yearnings. In 1967, when Matti Gur ascended the Temple Mount with the victorious Israeli army, and planted the Israeli flag there, proclaiming "The Temple Mount is in our hands," he was ordered to take down the flag. Moshe Dayan gave the keys to the Temple Mount to the Arab Waqf, and since then, Israelis have been fighting to assert their rights to this holiest of places. And now, we hear that Olmert is considering re-dividing Jerusalem. The "Saudi" plan calls for the surrender of half of Jerusalem to the Arabs. Of course we know that surrendering part is in effect surrendering all. That is what the Arabs continue to tell us. They want to drive the Jews into the sea. They refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist, refuse to stop their terrorist activities, and expect to succeed in their goal to Islamize the world. Israel and Jerusalem are only the first step. Tomorrow, the world. So that is why we do not hear talk of celebrations, parades and special events to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the restoration of the state of Israel to its immediate post-1967 state of wholeness. When the government of Israel is prepared to give away everything that was achieved in the miraculous 1967 victory, how can they celebrate the gains of that six-day war? What is clear is that what the Arabs lost militarily, they understand they can gain diplomatically. They merely have to use the language of "peace" and the western world becomes hostage to them. But there are those who will not accept the delusions, deceptions and betrayals of the "diplomats" and "leaders" who are only concerned with their personal power positions and are willing to sacrifice the welfare of the country for their own good. There are many remarkably brave and heroic Israelis who will fight against the perfidious ones. We Americans, who understand the nature of the fight, must join with them. Helen Freedman is the former Executive Director of Americans for a Safe Israel (AFSI). Contact her at ghfree@aol.com |
|
COMMON ENEMY
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 25, 2007. |
|
The common enemy of all civilized people is extremism, today rearing its ugly head, most perilously, in martyr driven Islamic fundamentalism, an expanding subset of the overall Islamic culture. Credible arguments cannot, however, be made that say Western capitalists have incited this insidious phenomenon. In the cruel jungle of Darwinian capitalism, underdeveloped nations undoubtedly are exploited by powerful imperialistic nations. Any history of say the African continent will attest to that statement of fact. But the radicalization of Islam, a perversion of moderate Koranic imperatives as interpreted by moderate Muslims, much like moderates of any faith who interpret their own gospel texts, eschewing literal demands of violent passages, has nothing whatsoever to do with say non-Muslim forces such as Big Oil or other industrial leviathans interloping into the power structures of Middle Eastern regimes, or the habitation of non-Muslims on perceived Muslim soil. Furthermore, the Jewish State of Israel did not instill the concept of jihad i.e. militant martyr driven holy war within the collective mindset of Muslim extremists. Radical belief systems, especially those imbued by an overriding anti-secular paradise filled afterlife, encouraging violent behavior while inhabiting a less essential earthly domain, are outgrowths of unstable perceptions pertaining to secular existence. It is one thing to defend one's nation from a perceived aggressor, it is something much different to justify that defense, or in fact an incursion beyond one's territory, with the concept of militant martyr driven jihad based on a violent literal interpretation of the Koran. A willingness to detonate oneself, blowing body parts asunder along with proximate victims, is the sickest of acts, yet is presumably justified by a faith immersed in the glories and afterlife rewards of martyrdom, not necessarily correlated to any presumed overt acts of aggression against that suicide/homicide bomber's nation. If that were not so, there would be many fewer truly innocent victims of such attacks, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan. What is the point of blowing oneself asunder in say a crowded Iraqi food market, where virtually every collateral victim of the horrific explosion is an innocent civilian shopper, not a foreign aggressor? No doubt, fanatical Sunnis blow up fanatical Shiites and visa versa, such tribes still engaging in a religious war that has lasted over 1300 years, but has nothing directly to do with resisting any foreign aggressor, although America and its allies toppled a dictatorial tyrant who heretofore kept a lid on that sectarian war. In Afghanistan, extremist Taliban forces attempt to regain control, through violence, of turf relinquished when American forces invaded, just after the 9/11 catastrophic attacks on American soil. Such aggressive action by the religious fundamentalist fanatical Taliban is however mostly directed at ordinary Afghan citizens, especially women, unwilling to follow strict misogynistic sharia laws imposed by a literal interpretation of the Koran. Again, the perceived foreign invaders, composed of forces not only from America but many other non-Muslim nations, are the perhaps indirect but not primary focus of resurgent Taliban forces. Modern Israel, since its inception in 1948, remains in an extremely precarious situation, being perceived in agitated propagandized collective Muslim mindsets, both moderate and extreme, as a foreign invader of Islamic Palestine. Yet, the Jewish State did not radicalize collective belief systems found within those extremist subsets of its many Islamic enemies. If moderate Muslims, attuned to the secular world, had any sense, they in fact would perceive the moderate democratic State of Israel as an ally, not at all opposed to dealing with Arabs or other sects adopting a rational Islam, respectful of the many secular issues dominating the Middle East, believing that all human life on Earth is precious without regard to ethnicity. No doubt, the common enemy of all civilized people is extremism, indeed a culturally debilitating disease born from within the afflicted culture, not from without. When and if this condition is recognized for what it is, afflicted mankind will be able to combat it more efficiently and effectively. When and if this is realized, perhaps moderate Muslims will eschew the ranting of jihad junkies, more importantly incarcerate or put to sleep criminally aggressive anti-secular elements within their communities, depose propagandizing exploitative leaders that enable extremists as well as divert attention away from themselves by bashing scapegoat Israel and indeed all Jews, let the disease of religious anti-secular fanaticism virtually die a natural death or more likely become impotent over time, and finally accept the tiny State of Israel as an intrinsic part of the Middle East, not a foreign invader, with much to offer in building that region into a technologically advanced sector of the planet, befitting the new millennium. Let us hope for that epiphany of logic in the very near future. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
THAIS UNDONE -- THE HAPPY WARRIOR
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, March 24, 2007. |
|
Intimidation is more effective than war -- Jim This was written by Mark Steyn and it appeared in the National Review. |
|
If you read the paper, you'll notice that there are a handful of places that attract the attention of everybody who matters -- the UN, EU, IAEA, NGOs, the full alphabet soup. You'll further notice that, for the fellows pressing ahead with Iran's nuclear program or mopping up the few remaining opportunities for mass murder in Darfur, attracting the attention of the planet's A-listers seems to make not a jot of difference. The bigshot acronyms hold meetings, and the crises they're holding the meetings over trundle along pretty much on schedule. What then of those problems that don't even catch the jet set's eye? It was about three years ago that I began following events in southern Thailand -- the old Sultanate of Pattani, to us Mad Dogs and Englishmen. It was the numbers at first: Muslim "insurgents" were murdering over a hundred people a month, which seemed rather on the high side. Then I started looking for the bloody details behind the statistics: the two Laotian-immigrant farm workers beheaded for... well, for what? The Thai government isn't occupying Palestine or invading Iraq or stationing troops in Saudi Arabia. And for a while I took to citing the country's southern provinces as a bit of list filler to demonstrate the splendidly ecumenical nature of the jihad: Muslims vs Jews in the West Bank, Muslims vs Christians in Nigeria, Muslims vs Hindus in Kashmir, Muslims vs Buddhists in Thailand. Aside from bringing up the rear in my planetary generalizations, what's going on? The International Herald Tribune, in a brief story on the daily barrage of bombings and beheadings, decided it made no sense: The insurgency is all the more difficult to combat because it does not show its face. Unlike similar movements around the world, this one has not set out its demands or published a manifesto. It is a collection of violent groups without an identifiable central leadership. You don't say. Now why would that be? When the Herald Tribune refers to "similar movements around the world", it seems to be harking back to the good old days of 1960s nationalist movements. Your old-school insurgent got into the insurgency game against the state because he wanted to be the state: the object was to have your flag fluttering from the palace and swear yourself in as President-for-Life. A generation or so back, there were such groups running around Pattani promoting a more or less conventional Malay-Muslim secessionist movement. But, as in other parts of the globe, the disaffected have become co-opted into something bigger. Who wants to settle for being Minister of Transport when you can be part of a new caliphate that overthrows the entire global order? To modify the Palestinian peace-process cliches, these "collections of violent groups" are in favor of a no-state solution. In Thailand, they target the lowest officials of the kingdom -- schoolteachers, policemen and municipal functionaries. The object is to emphasize that not only can these people not protect you but that associating with them is likely to endanger you, too. If the state reacts with a bloody crackdown on Muslims, that's good news for the insurgents. If the state instead dithers uncertainly, that works, too. The Buddhist villages in the south are emptying out, week by week, remorselessly. There are no-state solutions popping up hither and yon these days, from Somalia to southern Lebanon to Waziristan. If you can hollow out a state from within, the husk provides useful cover for all kinds of activities, as we should have learned from Afghanistan. In fact, these non-state actors practice a more effective multilateralism than most great powers. There's a kind of United Non-Nations Insecurity Council out there that seems all but impervious to disruption. According to the South Asia Analysis Group, a thousand Pattanis are studying in Pakistani madrassahs and Wahhabi-Deobandi money and ideology from Waziristan is the principal source of radicalization of Thai Muslims. In the wake of the July 2005 London Tube bombings by British born Muslims with strong ties to Pakistan, General Musharraf officially banned any non-Pakistani students from studying in his country's toxic madrassahs. Unofficially, life went on much as before. That's another advantage of the no-state solution: in effect, the Islamists move western allies into the field of fire. The roots of many problems from the Horn of Africa to Iraq to south-east Asia to northern England lie in the Pakistani tribal lands, but Washington has no desire to add to General Musharraf's woes. Likewise, the King of Thailand's increasingly nominal sovereignty over Pattani and the "government" of "Lebanon"'s over Hezbollahstan provide similar cover. And what of the other end of the ideological pipeline? East is east and west is west and ne'er the twain shall meet, but Kipling never saw Heathrow and Manchester airports when the flights land bearing Pakistani wives from the old villages for young Muslim husbands in Bradford and Leeds and Birmingham and Bristol. There, too, is another no-state solution in the making. Do you know Thomas P M Barnett? He's a very successful author, wonderfully optimistic and full of terrific technocratic advice on how to integrate the "gap" -- the collapsed fringes of the map -- into the functioning "core". I'm a pessimist. If the fellows who run the western world took Dr Barnett's advice, things would be swell. But in practice it's very difficult to crank the State Department or the EU into action, and by the time they do it's too little, too late. And those crises that don't even make the headlines, like the Buddhist villages of southern Thailand, will bleed quietly to the dark fringes. Where's Richard Gere's Oscar night speech when you need it? Contact Fred Reifenberg at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
THE OIL TERRORISM CONNECTION
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 24, 2007. |
|
A direct correlation exists between the rise of martyr driven Islamic fundamentalism and the per barrel price of oil. As long as industrial nations worldwide are willing to pay extortionist prices for their carbon based energy fixes, as long as industrial nation worldwide will not seriously address manmade global warming, develop energy alternatives, and wean off the burning of fossil fuels, as long as big oil and puppet politicos pretty much control the short as well as perhaps long range destiny of our disrespected planet, oil producing Islamic nations and nations under their thumb need not develop technologies and social structures attuned to century twenty-one, relying on the kindness of 'infidel' strangers to shower petrodollars over their raw material based primitive economies. Modernized progressive nations will not lean on Islamic oil pushers to culturally adapt to a secular world, requiring fairness to all citizens, including gender equality, as long as such industrial dynamos rely on a continuous flow of that vicious viscous substance for their own economic engines. No civil secular oil dependent industrial national leader, alas, truly wants to ruffle the robes of say OPEC moguls, or force Sudan's sadistic president Omar al-Bashir to call off his genocidal janjaweed dogs, lest such energy providers retaliate with spindly fingers, tightening their fossil fuel faucets. Modern secular industrial oil dependent nations stupidly finance oil revenue dependent regimes with petrodollars, enabling such regimes to underwrite proxy and non-proxy anti-secular religious groups led by fanatics, advancing the socially mutated martyr driven phenomenon of fundamentalist Islamic terrorism against those same industrial nations, bolstered in impact by technologically advanced weaponry. For examples, oil rich Iran now underwrites proxy Islamic fanatics Hizbullah and Hamas, while oil rich Saudi Arabia underwrites non-proxy Islamic fanatic producing Wahhabi madrassas, a/k/a techno-human bomb factories, worldwide, especially in Pakistan. No doubt, the Saudi royal family pays such protection money lest it risks being overthrown by Islamic gangsters obsessed with delusions of grandeur, needing to recruit madrassa educated soldiers and twenty-first century, morphed to the dark side, human cannon fodder, fitted with tailor made de rigueur suicide belts, for planet wide jihad. Indeed, civilized secular mankind is his own worst enemy. No doubt, the secular civilized world enables an under-productive Islamic intellectually as well as morally bereft, in effect, welfare culture, an insidious expanding subset of overall Islam, thriving on raw material wealth, the antithesis of wealth created by industrious human beings. Furthermore, the more oil a non-thinking world burns, the more glaciers melt, the more chilling will be mankind's ultimate future. So, might it be a no-brainer for civilized industrial nations to focus their best minds on developing a cheap efficient energy alternative to fossil fuel? Will it take a catastrophic event to push such nations in that direction? Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
MK URGES MUSLIMS TO FREE JERUSALEM; EGYPT'S MUBARAK DEFENDS AGAINST MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD
Posted by Janet Lehr, March 24, 2007. |
|
1>MK Ibrahim Sarsour (UAL-TA'AL) drew the ire of right-wing Knesset members on Sunday when he called for "Muslims and Arabs" to "liberate Jerusalem. Pause a moment. Think about the implications of what was written. Only right-wing Knesset members were irate!! Israel is in the throes of a great civil upheaval. I am writing now from Israel, for the next few days. Jews are Liberal by nature, but today, they are too tolerant, in the face of an intolerant foe, as is the rest of the Western world. Meanwhile -- Egypt's Mubarak has moved to defent his nation from muslim religious take-over at the hands of The Muslim Brotherhood. See article #2 2> Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak defended on Saturday two controversial aspects of constitutional amendments which will go to referendum on Monday, saying Egypt needed to avert the dangers of sectarianism and terrorism. |
|
1>MK Sarsour calls Muslims to free Jerusalem
MK Ibrahim Sarsour (UAL-TA'AL) drew the ire of right-wing Knesset members on Sunday when he called for "Muslims and Arabs" to "liberate Jerusalem. Speaking at the "Jerusalem First" conference in Ramallah, the lawmaker emphasized the importance of Jerusalem to Islam, and called on participants to "act together to become a torrent on the road to liberation." "Just as the Muslims once liberated Jerusalem from the Crusaders, so must we today believe that we can liberate Jerusalem. It is not an impossible dream," he said. MK Muhammad Barakei (Hadash) accused Israel of trying to "empty Jerusalem of its Palestinian inhabitants." Calling Jerusalem a "national issue, not just a religious issue," he called on Palestinians to take cohesive, immediate action to "reclaim the city." MK Zvi Hendel (NU-NRP) criticized both legislators' remarks and reiterated his call for all Knesset members to take an "oath of allegiance" to the State of Israel before they could serve as lawmakers. Hendel was not the first to propose such a move. Fellow NU/NRP legislator Zevulun Orlev proposed a bill last year that would prevent anti-Israel citizens -- particularly Arabs -- from serving in the Knesset. A similar bill submitted by Israel Beiteinu MK Estherina Tartman was rejected in October. Hendel also responded to a comment made over the weekend by Minister-without-Portfolio Ghaleb Majadele (Labor), who said he would not sing the national anthem because it was clearly not inclusive of Arab citizens. "How many more times will we take the Arab MKs spitting in our faces and then insist on pretending that it's raining?" Hendel demanded. "The Arab MKs, who continue again and again to fearlessly incite against the Jewish people, its symbols and its holy places, and to cooperate with the most bitter and hateful enemy, must get out of the Knesset." He called on all Zionist lawmakers to unite and ensure that such a move was carried out. In October, Hendel introduced a bill that would require Israelis to sign a declaration of loyalty to the state before being allowed to vote, in an effort to prevent citizens who are "hostile to the State of Israel" from having a say in the government. The bill was overwhelmingly rejected, however, on grounds of racism. 2>Egypt's Mubarak defends constitutional changes
CAIRO (Reuters) -- Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak defended on Saturday two controversial aspects of constitutional amendments which will go to referendum on Monday, saying Egypt needed to avert the dangers of sectarianism and terrorism. His foreign minister, Ahmed Aboul Gheit, earlier on Saturday dismissed U.S. criticism of the amendments, which human rights organisations and the main opposition groups have called a step away from freedom and democracy. The amendments will enshrine in the constitution a ban on parties based on religion and will give the authorities wide powers of arrest, surveillance and trial in special courts. Analysts say the main target is the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist movement which emerged as the country's largest opposition force in 2005 elections and which opposes any attempt to install Mubarak's son Gamal as the next president. In a speech in the southern city of Assiut, Mubarak said the ban on religious parties was meant to prevent strife between Egyptian Muslims and the Christian minority, which accounts for about 10 percent of the population. "I was aware of the constant attempts to cause divisions between the Muslims of the country and its Copts (Christians), wary of the sectarian and secessionist strife which countries dear to us have seen," he added, apparently referring to Iraq. "I have learnt ... the dangers of mixing religion with politics and politics with religion. The constitutional amendments ... should prevent any trading in religion and attempts to strike at the unity of this country," he added. The Muslim Brotherhood has tried to reassure the country's Copts that it would not make any changes in their status. It notes that Islam is already the religion of the state. Mubarak said another aim of the constitutional changes was to stop political violence without recourse to the emergency law which has been in force since he took power in 1981. ARBITRARY DETENTION "The security and stability of Egypt and the safety of its citizens are a red line which I have not allowed and will not allow anyone to cross," he said. The rights group Amnesty International said on Friday the amendments would entrench practices of arbitrary arrest and detention, torture and unfair trials, and violate Egypt's international human rights obligations. One of the amended articles says measures against terrorism will be exempt from restrictions on arbitrary detention and on the surveillance of communications. U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, who is arriving in the south Egyptian town of Aswan later on Saturday for a meeting with Arab foreign ministers, said on Friday that she was concerned and disappointed by the changes. But Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said: "Only the Egyptian people have the right to say their views on that referendum. ... If you are not (Egyptian), then thank you very much. It's our own development, our own country." He was speaking at a news conference after U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon had talks with Mubarak. Rice said the United States had hoped that Egypt would be in the lead "as the Middle East moves towards greater openness and greater pluralism and greater democratisation". "It's disappointing that this has not happened," she added. A U.S. campaign for democracy in the Arab world peaked in about 2005 but analysts say the momentum diminished when the Bush administration realised it had serious problems in Iraq. Aboul Gheit said: "Egypt and the United States are friends and we maintain the best of good relations. However, internal Egyptian affairs are an Egyptian affair and nobody else has the right to say anything." Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at janetlehr@veredart.com |
|
BBC PAYS £200,000 TO 'COVER UP REPORT ON ANTI-ISRAEL BIAS'
Posted by Fred Reifenberg, March 24, 2007. |
|
To the Editors -- The Daily Mail
Ladies and gentlemen, After reading Paul Revoir's article below, is any reaction other than indignation and outrage possible? British citizens must waste no time contacting their local Members of Parliament and forcefully protesting the BBC's arbitrary and irresponsible waste of public funds in this shameless cover-up attempt. Although I was born and raised in the USA, for many years I was certain that the "Beeb" was always a credible and reliable source of fair, impartial and balanced journalism. Unfortunately, its horrendous Mideast coverage forced me to abandon that certainty several years ago. As a proud and veteran Israeli of almost 29 years, I must state the painful yet plain fact that the network's Mideast reporting almost never provides a true representation of what occurs in this terribly conflicted region. I hope that the British public and officials responsible for the BBC's expenditure of public funds will do all that is necessary to prevent the BBC's efforts to avoid compliance with the Freedom of Information Act. Respectfully, Dave Alpern
|
|
The BBC has been accused of "shameful hypocrisy" over its decision to spend £200,000 blocking a freedom of information request about its reporting in the Middle East. The corporation, which has itself made extensive use of FOI requests in its journalism, is refusing to release papers about an internal inquiry into whether its reporting has been biased towards Palestine. BBC chiefs have been accused of wasting thousands of pounds of licence fee payers money trying to cover-up the findings of the so called Balen Report into its journalism in the region, despite the fact that the corporation is funded by the British public. The corporation is fighting a landmark High Court action, which starts next week, in a bid to prevent the public finding out what is in the review, which is believed to be critical of the BBC's coverage in the region. BBC bosses have faced repeated claims that is coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict has been skewed by a pro-Palestianian bias. The corporation famously came under fire after middle-east correspondent Barbara Plett revealed that she had cried at the death of Yasser Arafat in 2004. The BBC's decision to carry on pursuing the case, despite the fact than the Information Tribunal said it should make the report public, has sparked fury as it flies in the face of claims by BBC chiefs that it is trying to make the corporation more open and transparent. Politicians have branded the BBC's decision to carry on spending money, hiring the one of the country's top public law barrister in the process, as "absolutely indefensible". They claim its publication is clearly in the public interest. The BBC's determination to bury the report has led to speculation that the report was damning in its assessment of the BBC's coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict that the BBC wants to keep it under wraps at all costs. Others believe that the BBC is using the case to test the law about how much protection it has got from making its editorial activities public and also because it fears that if it loses the case it will create a precedent. The BBC's action over the case have provoked inevitable charges of hypocrisy as the BBC itself makes frequent used of freedom of information requests to get stories. The BBC's own website boasts of 69 stories that it says it has broken with the help of the Freedom of Information Act. If the BBC loses the High Court case next week it could appeal again and again until the case reaches the European Court in Strasbourg. This would soak further thousands from BBC coffers, which should be spent on making TV programmes. Conservative MP David Davies said: "An organisation which is funded partly to scrutinise governments and other institutions in Britain appears to be using tax-payers money to prevent its customers from finding out how it is operating. That is absolutely indefensible." He added: "I think the BBC are guilty of shameful hypocrisy. What could possibly be in this report that could possibly be worth £200,000 to bury. What is it they feel is so awful in this report." A source close to the case said they believed that the BBC had spent in the region of £200,000 on the case so far, while another legal expert claimed the cost could be as much as £300,000. The document was put together by BBC editorial advisor Malcolm Balen in 2004 but never released. The High Court action next week is the latest episode in what has become a lengthy legal battle which has been pursued by London solicitor Steven Sugar, who made the initial FOI request. Initially Information Commissioner Richard Thomas agreed with the BBC's decision not to release details of the report. But Sugar appealed the Information Tribunal and they backed his claims in September. This then saw the BBC appeal to the High Court. The BBC claims public broadcasters do not have to disclose material that is held for the purposes of "journalism, art or literature". But the BBC is now facing accusations it is using this rule as a smoke-screen. It claims the measures are there to protect the integrity of its reporting and protects its journalists from interference from the public. The BBC believes that this includes the Balen Report. The BBC also claims that if the court finds in Sugar's favour it could lead to a sudden increase in FOI requests which would require more staff and a further burden on the licence fee. While the BBC did not reveal the findings of the Balen Report, which was compiled in 2004, the corporation did last year make public the findings of an independent panel report into the BBC's impartiality on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That report found said that there was "no deliberate or systematic bias" in the BBC's reporting, but said its approach had at times been "inconsistent" and was "not always providing a complete picture" which had been "misleading". But some claimed that the independent panel report only took a snapshot of the BBC's activities and should have looked more deeply at the reporting of the most troubled moments of the conflict. Steven Sugar, who said he was prepared to take the case all the way to European court, said: "What I would like to see is the disclosure of an important document which will give us an insight into what the BBC itself thinks of its own performance. "I would like to see the BBC facing up to its professed interest in transparency and openness." Contact Fred Reifenberg at freify@netvision.net.il |
|
THE GOOD NEWS AND THE BAD NEWS, VIGNETTES ON PERVERSION AND HOLINESS
Posted by Professor Eugene Narrett, March 24, 2007. |
|
There is a lot of good news concerning Israel, the land and people, every day: they exist by miracles of faith, efforts, devotion, applied insights, holiness and a demonstration of the divine promise. There is a lot of bad news every day about Israel because the sovereignty of the nation is tenuous, the hostility of the world powers, government and NGO's is relentless as expressed by the "world community"; a miracle of existence because there are enemies without and weak spirit within the Land, a self-hatred, projected onto other Jews that invites attack from Amalek (cf. Exodus 17; 1 Samuel 15; Esther, v. Haman the Agagite). And there is bad news because even when one of the major media unveils some of the implacable genocidal hostility and propaganda masked as education of Israel's enemies within and around it they manage to bury their minimal and belated revelations by not mentioning its most salient points. This happened throughout the shoah; the lies of omission are if anything even more pronounced in recent years. The good news for the evening of March 15, 2007 was that the Hannity & Colmes show on Fox News featured a five-minute segment with Brigitte Gabriel on the topic of female homicide-suicide bombers. In the major media they are, of course, referred to simply as "Suicide bombers" or "killers"; in the Arab world they are termed "martyrs" (shaheeds) all misleading or just plain false phrases. Since these "martyrs" purpose is to murder Jews, and that is the reason that jihadists term them "martyrs" than it is misleading and false not to term them murderers since that is their avowed purpose and what in fact they do, if they are successful. To them success means murdering Jews, destroying the state of Israel and naming it Palestine as the perverted and genocidal Roman Emperor Hadrian did after his legions defeated the third Jewish war for independence and desolated the land and the people. Jews speak truth to power... During this five-minute plus discussion, the word "Jews" as in "kill" Jews was used only by Brigitte Gabriel (several times, but not several other times when the context demanded it for clarity); Sean Hannity used the term once; Alan Colmes, of course, did not used the hateful term "Jews" at all although it is for the purpose (and often with the result) of murdering Jews that these "martyrs" are dispatched. The term "murder" went unspoken. One good thing, -- truth is a good thing, obscuring it is evil -- that was discussed was the brutality and injustice of Islamic treatment of and attitudes toward women. A Muslim women can give mortal offense to members of her extended family by talking, in person or on the cell phone to someone that some male members of her family do not wish her to talk; she can give mortal offense be being seen with someone a family member decides he does not wish her to be or be seen with. She can give mortal offense by being accused of adultery, a kind of hideous version of how the accusation of a man, husband, co-worker, friend, acquaintance -- by a woman in Anglophone nations can result, the mere accusation alone in that man being treated by the judicial system as a violent criminal. Maybe that's why feminists like Colmes and legions of others do not so much or anything about Islamic "honor killing" of women, one form of which is ordering and equipping them to gain "atonement" by murdering JEWS by exploding themselves in the midst of Jewish men, women and children, including doctors and nurses giving them free medical care. Maybe it's because of the hatred of Jews that pervades western culture since its origin, a culture which is entirely indebted to the Jewish people whose principles it pillaged and deformed in establishing itself (and that's why it's been disintegrating ever since it was cobbled together, for all its wondrous accomplishments) that western mass media, despite the pitiless and unjust feminism they have promoted for forty years or more if one includes the push for legal and limitless abortion and female-initiated divorce that has destroyed this culture from within; maybe it's because of this hatred of Jews and because of this feminism that western mass media don't mention that it is legal in several Islamic states to punish women that offend male members of their family by gang-raping them. Why don't the feminists who rule the western mass media make a big, big story about that? It's the reason that gang-rape is endemic in Eurabian-ruled portions of Europe. Maybe that's what feminists want here, too... the other side of the coin to what they are and what they have done. One last word on this selective attention that numbs and conditions consumers of news: the ironies here described are treated in the opening discussion of the sages of the Zohar (Exodus 193) on Torah portion Ki Tisa (Exodus 35-38:20). Among several salient lines of discussion the sages compare Israel, the nation that builds the sanctuary on this earth for its Creator Who designated them as His am segulah ("intimately beloved people") to its two relentless opponents, Edom and Ishmael who have been entwined genetically via forbidden marriages since the days of Esau whose behavior "was a bitterness of spirit to his parents." Esau, he is Edom it states thrice (Genesis 36) which is Europe in its imperial sense, the EU and the religions of Rome; Ishmael is Islam whose founder thence traced his descent from Kedar. Noting the insightful and timely metaphors of the sages, the big beautiful "cow" of Edom offers its rump to the per'adam, the wild ass, the human beastliness of the gangrapers of Kedar whose legal (by their law) brutality is the complement to the lawless law and engrained perversion of Edom as observed in the ideology, media, courts, academia and other institutions of the post-modern west. Together they generate Eurabia and postmodernism, monsters worthy of Ovid, and foreseeable from his fables. The sages teach that the evil impulse for forbidden sex is particularly desirous of dwelling in Israel, the desirable land as embodied in the calves set up by Yeravam, the female one being in Dan toward which Israel tended (Zohar, ibid). We see this in the past two centuries in simple terms as many Jews are attracted to western (Edom's) norms that themselves are deformations of Judaism. So Israel's institutions and categories of thought in this century is doubly removed from itself, a mockery of mockery of itself, which explains much of the bad news. The goddess worship the pagan west injected into Israel corrupts and cripples Israel and keeps it from being a Jewish state. The monstrously unjust condemnation of Israel by the UN commission thus is bitter poetic justice. It is a wake-up call, a shofar in the city. Amalek is the snake of sexual perversion and profligacy as evidenced by widespread prostitution. "They who kiss the calves" will slaughter people as is done to the settlers. This perversion will be suppressed by Yesod Ha Tiferet, "beauty in holiness" when the covenant is honored, fathers teach their sons and genuine peace follows victory and dissipates the lies of the War on Terror (Zohar 200a on portion Vayakel). Then Israel will have a sanctified covenant and state... When the UN Commission on the Status of Women issued its report, as Anne Bayefsky (www.eyeontheun.com) noted on March 20, the only nation in the world it condemned was Israel. The million female slaves in Saudi Arabia, their passports confiscated; the hundreds of thousands of raped and mutilated women of Darfur; the forced abortions in China, the Christian women and schoolteachers murdered in Nigeria all were ignored in order to demonize the Jews. At the very time that gangs of Israeli-Arab thugs were raping Jewish women to 'resist the occupation' Euro-UN mouthpiece John Dugard was condemning Israel for racism and the Germans introduced a prissy qualification. But as we have seen, Jews in Israel have no human rights and no humanitarian crises because the nations do not consider them human. Israel will live only be standing up in its own resistance and asserting its humanity, promise and mission. Secretary of State C. Rice admitted that American tax-dollars sent to Fatah wind up with Hamas, as the Arabs defiantly state. "We will have to be more careful," she told Congress asking for an amount less than the original $86 million. "I'm doing my best," she added, her words lacking a direct object which clearly is to murder Jews and destroy Israel. Abu Mazen -- Abbas stated weeks ago that "our rifles [received from the US] will be raised against the occupation," that is, used to shoot Jews. As long as it means alliance with those who want to murder Jews and call it "martyrdom" and "resistance to the occupation" Europe and the US State Department will join the jihadist enemy in every form of perversion, including those of language and thought that describe Jews living in the Israeli heartland as "occupiers" who must be expelled. That lie is called the Road Map; bad news for other days. AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. Professor Eugene Narrett teaches writing and Literature at Boston University. He is the author of hundreds of articles, columns and reviews on politics, American culture and the arts. He is completing a study on Romanticism and the longterm decline of Western Culture. He writes often on subjects relating to Israel and Judaism and is a weekly columnist for the MetroWest Daily News in Framingham, Massachusetts. Contact him at culturtalk@aol.com |
|
ON BEDIER'S "SMALL BAND OF CRITICS"
Posted by Michael Travis, March 23, 2007. |
|
The basic essay is by Ahmed Bedier, Tampa executive director of the
Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Tampa. Bedier's essay is
called "CAIR: Attacks Seek to Silence Muslims" and it was published
March 19, 2007 on the CAIR website |
|
Attacks Seek to Silence Muslims
The audacity of any claim that CAIR and Muslims in general are being silenced when CAIR and Bedier post videos of themselves on major news networks is notable absurd. ADVOCACY GROUP FOR MUSLIMS GETS QUESTIONS You'd better believe people have questions, and as a nationally known organization, CAIR has every right ot be questioned by both private citizens and the media. This is standard for all groups such as CAIR. ATTACKS SEEK TO SILENCE MUSLIMS Not mine, I attempted to question one Muslim (Bedier) and urge other Muslims to speak out, as well as defending the rights of other Muslims to speak out and not be silenced (Tawfik Hamid, Kareem Suleiman, among others). This New York Times article on the challenges facing the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) exposed the relentless efforts by "a small band of critics" made up of racist right-wing and neo-Zionist extremists who seek to silence and marginalize American Muslims and groups that represent them by exploiting anti-Muslim fears in our nation. Speaking solely for myself here, I am not "racist" nor am I even "right wing" on many issues. Even if I were a right-winger, is Bedier here insinuating that citizens of a certain political stripe have no right to their opinion? He could, arguably, be speaking about a rather sizable portion of our government, after all. Define "neo-Zionist extremist". Is anyone who believes that Israel has a right to exist a "neo-Zionist"? Or even a Zionist? And if so, why is the position that a country has a right to exist "extremist"? CAIR's purpose is very clear. It is a grass roots organization that serves as America's largest and most visible Muslim civil rights group. CAIR is to the Muslim community what the NAACP is to the African-American community or what the ADL is to the Jewish community. Define "grass roots". Much of CAIR's networking and calls for financial and other support fall under this category. It's founding could be considered (and has been) to be anything but "grass roots". For the record, CAIR unequivocally condemns terror attacks targeting people of all faiths and in all areas of the world. Selectively, and usually only when pushed to do so. CAIR operates under the strict guidelines of its core values. These values include: support for freedom of religion and freedom of expression, and a commitment to supporting policies that promote dialogue, civil rights and diversity in America and worldwide. Again, selective activism. Note no "Action Alerts" or other statements in support of many high profile Human Rights Campaigns in support of rights of Muslims worldwide (Nazanin Fatehi, Kareem Suleiman, among others). Why not? Look for yourselves, the statements in support of major campaigns of groups such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International are not listed on CAIR's website, nor on their numerous TV appearances, many of which are available at YouTube Otherwise, their main public statements and campaigns, especially lately, in support of any groups abroad and regarding policies within the U.S. have been in support of "Palestinian" issues and to further condemnation of Israel and supporters of Israel "neo-Zionist extremists" etc.). Do "policies that promote dialogue" include releases such as this one that play the victimhood card and are attempts to smear those with questions about CAIR, rather than speak with them publicly? See again Bedier's performance on CNN's Glenn Beck show as posted below. His stance was opposition to "diversity" of thought regarding Muslim opinions about Islam in the U.S. and abroad. Funding for CAIR chapters is no secret: Monies are raised here and spent here, with not a penny of it going overseas. How many lawyers helped with the wording on this one? Note the
use of present tense. Also note this It is important to note that not a single active law enforcement official has ever accused CAIR of any wrongdoing. CAIR enjoys positive relations with officials from city hall to Capitol Hill, from the police to the FBI. Again, here With this in mind, it is obvious that the attacks against America's largest and most visible Muslim civil rights group have nothing to do with national security but rather are rooted in hatred toward Muslims and Arab-Americans. Speaking again for myself, I dislike many aspects of Islam from a theological standpoint. As a Christian who has read and reread the Quran and the Sunnah, this is a natural position, as these Islamic Holy Texts are quite hostile to my own religion. Is Bedier here saying that scrutiny of Islam as a religion is unacceptable and as is scrutiny and study of other religions, and that furthermore this scrutiny and criticism equals hatred of Muslims themselves? Please clarify this Bedier, this is not true of me, and quite insulting to myself and others. Furthermore, regarding hatred of "Arab-Americans", Bedier does not note that the majority of Arab-Americans are not Muslim, but either Orthodox Christians or descendents of Christian Arab immigrants. Some of my best friends fall in this latter group, and many other friends fall into the Arab-American Muslim category. I don't hate my own friends, Bedier. Adding to this, I have even voted for an Arab-American for President of the United States (yes, other readers, smack me now). Has Bedier? I think my record of not hating Arabs based on their ethnicity is quite clear. Sorry Bedier, wrong accusation, try again. The real "scrutiny" should be directed toward the motives of the Islamophobes who are generating these baseless accusations. Their politically motivated attacks are meant to silence the voice of American Muslims and to promote the only agenda they deem acceptable -- their own. "Islamophobe" is an ill-defined and absurd term. I dislike the Salafi and Wahabi ideologies within Islam and their radical growth in this century as well as the last. I am not alone in this, and have found agreement in this position amongst many Muslims, both mainstream Sunni and Shi'a. Phobias refer to irrational fears, and my fear of the growth of Salafism and Wahabism worldwide and in the West particularly are not irrational, but well founded on statements of intent put out by terrorist and political organizations of this ideology. It's not paranoia if they're really out to get you, and these groups, from al Qaeda to the Muslim Brotherhood to splinter groups in most Western countries have released statements that are quite threatening. Baseless? Also, in the above links regarding law enforcement, note the amount of sources cited by those investigating CAIR. Can you actually prove each "baseless"? Please try, I'd love to see the results. Many of those smeared and maligned in this letter also heavily support many Muslim Americans who do not support the agenda of CAIR itself. We are not trying to silence "American Muslims" as a whole, and the agendas of those we criticize (note, not try to silence, but criticize) are rather radical. This is our right as American citizens, and is not "racist" or "Islamophobic", so please stop calling us that as well as "hate bloggers" and other names, Mr. Bedier. Ahmed Bedier has a long history in the Tampa Bay area of either maligning his opponents into silence through stigmatizing them or talking them into agreeing to cease their criticisms of him. That not everyone is amenable to this tactic is what is what bothers him, not the accusations made in his letter, in my opinion. [Editor's Comment: The host of the Always On Watch Two website commented on this essay: Excellent parsing of those statements from CAIR. This statement of CAIR's is particularly a gem: It is important to note that not a single active law enforcement official has ever accused CAIR of any wrongdoing. Never mind the CAIR CEO's who have been arrested and/or deported! From CAIR: "For the record, CAIR unequivocally condemns terror attacks targeting people of all faiths and in all areas of the world." Then let's hear individuals--OBL, for one--condemned by name. At my site, I have posted toward the top info about UAC's invite to CAIR to burn OBL in effigy. Guess what? CAIR is not interested. Hmmmm...] Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
SHALOM AKHSAW -- PEACE NOW
Posted by Sergio (HaDaR) Tezzo, March 23, 2007. |
|
BTW... for those who don't know: the law that forbids ONLY JEWS to purchase land or buildings in Judea, Samaria and Gaza without the personal permission of the Israeli Minister of Defence, was passed in 1979 by the First Begin Government, that is by LIKUD and NRP, the SO-CALLED, ALLEGED, PRETENDING TO BE "National Camp"...with ALSO the votes of the charedi parties... They are the SAME GUYS who gave away ALL THE JEWISH LAND THAT WAS EVER GIVEN AWAY BY ISRAEL DEPORTING THE JEWS LIVING IN IT, from 1979 to 2005, from Sinai to the Gaza Strip and Northern Samaria. They are the same guys who in 1981, under the authority of Prime Minister Begin and Interior Minister Yosef Burg of the NRP, SO AS NOT TO UPSET THE ARABS, had 30 tons of cement dropped in the place where Rav Getz, ZTUQ"L, and Rav Goren, z'l, had begun excavating UNDER Har HaBayith and discovered a very large HALL with a VAULT DATING FROM THE FIRST TEMPLE ERA. FOOD FOR THOUGHT FOR ALL THOSE WHO INVITE TO OR CONSIDER VOTING FOR ANY "kosher pig" like LIKUD and NRP. On 21 Mar 2007, at 09:55, HaDaR wrote "Shalom Akhshaw This Time Has Seen Well!!" Qiryat Arba, 21/3/2007 The extreme left-wing and pro-palestinian group Shalom Akhshaw (Peace Now) has always been acting to kick us Jews out of our ancestral land to give her over to the blood-thirsty Arab enemies, who, just like the nazis, dream of nothing but our destruction. End Arab occupation of the Land of Israel: Judea to the Jews, Arabia to Arabs ============================= End Arab occupation of the Land of Israel: Judea to the Jews, Arabia to Arabs Be`ahavath Israel -- from HaDaR- a Torah-wing Jew from Qiryath Arba Hebron one of those that some people call "religious fanatic, gun-toting settler":-) ============================================================== He who is merciful with the cruel, will end-up being cruel to the merciful -- Kohelet Rabba 7:16 ============================================================== On a visit to inter-war Berlin, Rabbi Yerucham Levovitz of Mirrer witnessed household pets dressed in pants and sweaters. He commented: "Where they treat animals as humans, in that place they will slaughter humans as animals" and he quoted the verse "Those who slaughter men will kiss their calves" (Hosea 13:2). ============================================================== When terrorists kill a Jew in Erets Israel , there are two responsible parties: the terrorists and the government that allows it. -- Rabbi Meir Kahana, ZTUQ"L, HI"D ============================================================== THE TORAH ON WALLS AND FENCES: "He [your enemy] shall besiege you in all your gates, until the fall of the tall and fortified walls in which you trust throughout your land..." -- Deut. 28, 52 Ezekiel Chapter 13:10 Because-, even because they have led My people astray, saying: Peace, and there is no peace; and when it buildeth up a wall, behold, they daub it with whited plaster; 11 say unto them that daub it with whited plaster, that it shall fall; ============================================================== "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" -- Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) U.S. Founding Father. Signatory of the Declaration of Independence and of the U.S. Constitution ============================================================== Every drop of Jewish blood spilled by Arab terror, is on the hands of ALL those who refuse to work for the removal of these blood-thirsty beasts from among us. They cannot say: "Our hands did not spill that blood." -- HaDaR ============================================================== Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil. (Isaiah 5,20) ============================================================== "At a time of universal deceit -- telling the truth is a revolutionary act." (George Orwell) ============================================================== "Lots of bad editorials are better than a beautiful obituary." -- an old Israeli saying from the times before "Lemmings Disease" and "Osloporosis" struck most of the country- ============================================================== "The strength of the prophets of Israel lay in the fact that they proclaimed the Truth when everything was against it." -- Andre Malraux ============================================================== Pacifism is objectively pro-Fascist. This is elementary common sense. If you hamper the war effort of one side, you automatically help out that of the other. (George Orwell, Partisan Review, 1942) ============================================================== "Patriotism is supporting your country all of the time, and your government when it deserves it." (Mark Twain) ============================================================== "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the galleys, heard in the very hall of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor -- he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and wears their face and their garment, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation -- he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city -- he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared." -Cicero, 42 B.C.E.- ============================================================== "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 a specific period proclaim they are relinquishing this 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 land -- the entire land -- exists as an eternal right, and we shall not yield this historic right until its full and complete redemption is realised." -- David Ben Gurion -- at the Zionist Congress in Basel, Switzerland, in 1937 Contact the poster at HaDar-Israel@verizon.net) |
|
"PROGRESSIVES" AGAINST THE EXODUS
Posted by Daryl Temkin, Ph.D., March 23, 2007. |
|
Why did Moses have to stop and take notice of that burning bush? Couldn't he have simply walked past it and not have engaged in conversation? In a progressive view, Moses became a radical Egyptophobe who publicly denounced the terrible conduct of the Egyptian taskmasters, slave owners and, worse, he discredited the words of Pharaoh. Moses exposed Pharaoh and embarrassingly demonstrated that he was not a "moderate". But in spite of a mountain of evidence, the progressive view insisted that Pharaoh's political leadership was just fine. Moses' view was marginalized and seen as alarmist and extremist. The "progressive" slaves hated Moses' freedom campaign because they saw it as disruptive to Egypt, and a justification for anti-Jewish protests. The progressive intellectual slaves proclaimed Moses to be a stupid stutterer who couldn't even pronounce basic words. Although all the documents of Egypt consistently pressed for the annihilation of the Jews, the progressives argued that Pharaoh was really benign and had recognized the existence and rights of the Nation of Israel -- it was only for political reasons that Pharaoh couldn't publicly state his recognition. Two professors from the prestigious Nile University published research which indicated suspicion that the Israelite nation was not politically supportive of Egyptian attitudes and was organizing to achieve its own goals. Progressive slaves quickly argued in favor of continued Jewish enslavement. The fact that Moses the radical wanted the Jews to abandon Egyptian enslavement was a terrible affront to Egyptian taskmasters and was a reason to initiate widespread anti-Semitism. The progressives claimed that if the Jews would only stay and cooperate with the Egyptian plan to kill them, then hatred of the Jews would not have to be aroused. The progressive slave position declared that Moses was an "imperialist expansionist" whose goal was to have the Jews leave Egypt and become a free people in their own land. Leaving Egypt meant that the Jews were planning to conquer the entire universe. The progressives warned that the Jews who entered the Sinai desert would be the beginning of an unbearable occupation and would create an unsightly refugee problem of Jews living in makeshift tents for decades. The world would be in constant fear regarding where the Jews would settle and which indigenous population would be displaced. In the face of trying to negotiate with an administration that doesn't recognize you, Israel embarked on a unilateral decision to leave Egypt. The progressives protested the decision claiming that it was misguided, it wouldn't lead to the betterment of the Israelites, and that the Egyptians were given virtually no choice in the matter. By leaving Egypt, the Jews robbed the Egyptians of their slaves. Robbing a nation of its slaves was a human rights violation of the Ramsee Convention's Protection of Slave Owners' Rights. At the Nile International Court of Justice, crowds of progressives joined Egyptians chanting, "Give us back our slaves so they can serve us." The prosecution's legal argument stated that the slaves couldn't leave Egypt because that would cause an enormous loss to Egyptian brutality and would basically destroy Egyptian brick production. The price of bricks would skyrocket and cause the collapse of the international brick market. Progressive slaves joined the Egyptian conspiracy theory stating that the Jews knew the opening and closing times of the Red Sea and therefore planned the entrapment and destruction of Pharaoh's army. Furthermore, they claimed that the Israeli apartheid leaders had filled Egyptian swimming pools with blood so that an entire generation of Egyptians couldn't learn how to swim. The enormous damage caused to Egypt with the loss of countless waterlogged chariots, army uniforms, drowned horses and soldiers would be the fault of the Jews. Egyptian historians conducted conferences to prove that the Jews never belonged in Egypt and that they only came to steal the Egyptian land. Yet, the Egyptian-Goshen two state solution was touted by progressives as being a safe and secure living condition that would guarantee Jewish enslavement. The security fence surrounding Goshen would comfort Egyptians that no slave would ever escape. Moses realized that no matter how hard Jews slaved away for the Egyptians, and no matter how many "Nile Prize" science awards the Jews would earn, the Egyptians would continue publishing anti-Semitic school textbooks. No matter how perfect the Jews would be, the Egyptian media would continue preaching that the Jews are the usurpers of the land, pariahs and blood sucker expansionists whose only interest was to rob Egypt and to push the Egyptians into the sea. In response to the blatant Egyptian anti-Semitism, the progressive slaves chose to be silent and just act as if nothing was wrong. Using magical thinking, the progressives claimed that eventually Egypt would recognize the Israelites and the Egyptian taskmasters would stop killing Jews for sport. The progressives claimed that everything would be fine if only Moses would stop his demands and the Israelites would behave as model cooperative slaves. But if Moses continued to demand freedom and liberty, the Egyptians and the world would be forced to hate the Jews. Although the progressive slaves would fight ferociously for other people's right to be free, when it came to themselves, it was better that they remain a no-people with no rights and no-land, and let the nations of the world decide where and what should be done with them. Then, the progressives turned the discussion of freedom up-side-down. They claimed that Moses was the real threat to the Jews, not Pharaoh, and that Moses was the enslaver. They claimed that the world hated the Jews because of Moses' plan to take the Jews beyond their borders. The progressives just wanted to be loved by those who articulated their plans to kill them. Pharaoh preached that he wasn't anti Semitic -- after all, he was a Semite; so how could he be called anti-Semitic? Pharaoh was just "anti-Israel". He just didn't want the Jews to go off and become their own people in their own land. The fact that he made it legal to kill, murder, and abuse the Israelites was just a minor detail which human rights groups would choose to ignore. It is estimated that 80% of the Egyptian Jews were against the Moses plan of seeking personal and religious freedom. If there had been a democratic vote, Moses would have been defeated by a landslide, imprisoned, and likely lynched. The 80% of the slave community who sounded so rational in their refusal to leave Egypt vanished; some say they disappeared during the biblical Plague of Darkness. Basically, they became invisible because their beliefs led to the erosion and dismantling of the Jewish mission. How different are things today? The official progressive position is that Israel must work at becoming loved. They are to accept Hamas and its non-recognition of Israel's existence Palestinian Unity Government. Israel is expected to make more high risk concessions and accept more security restrictions. As Pharaoh of old, the new "PA Unity Government pharaoh" wants the same: to make the lives of the Jews more vulnerable with very few rights to self protection, fewer rights to self-preservation, and basically a renewed enslavement. Progressive, which means "to progress", needs to be renamed, perhaps more accurately, "recessive". For all who consider what the Jews have brought to this world to be of great value, had the so-called "progressive" ideology prevailed, the whole world would have all remained in a plague of darkness. Daryl Temkin is the founder and director of the Israel Institute and can be contacted at: DT@Israel-Institute.com. |
|
ESTHER POLLARD AND LARRY DUB SPEAK OUT
Posted by Hillel Fendel, March 23, 2007. |
|
Following the awarding of the Jerusalem Conference "Lover of Zion" Award to Jonathan Pollard, IsraelNationalRadio's Yishai Fleisher and Alex Traiman spoke with his wife Esther and her husband's long-time pro-bono lawyer, Atty. Larry Dub. They first asked Esther about her husband's condition and his daily struggles of being alone. "It's now year 22," she said, "and I think that what troubles Jonathan even more than the harsh conditions, his failing health and the daily tortures, is what he sees as the failure of the People of Israel to wake up. G-d, in His kindness, has given us the Pollard case so that we might wake up and redeem ourselves by fulfilling our obligation of mutual responsibility. What G-d wants from us is unity -- absolutely nothing stands in the way of Jewish unity!" "Our goals and aspirations have been perverted," she said. "Instead of seeing and understanding how the US is acting towards us, we are an entire generation that is aspiring to be more and more like them! That's pretty shocking. Yet Hashem has chosen, in His infinite wisdom and kindness, someone as great and as strong and as whole as Jonathan to be the model and example for us... We have to wake up. This troubles Jonathan more than anything else that he is enduring -- that his beloved nation is in trouble and that we're losing the Land because of it. This conference is a great step in the right direction; the organizers have made a tikkun ( rectification) of the government's evil towards Jonathan in this regard." The First Correspondence Asked how she got to know her husband, Esther explained: "I was living in Jerusalem, at the time, working for the Ministry of Justice, and teaching English at Hebrew University. I saw an ad asking people to write to Jonathan. I knew nothing about the case. I had no idea who he was. But I had an aerogramme, and I figured that here was a Jew in trouble, so I dashed off a quick note. Jonathan later said that when he read the letter, he used two of his last three stamps from his monthly allotment- because he sensed he had to answer me. He sent me two envelopes -- one with all the information on his case, and the other was a personal letter. I read the informational one first, and couldn't believe that something that bad could have happened in the US. And when I read the second one, and I was blown away -- because I thought that someone who had experienced such injustice would be filled with hatred and bitterness- yet instead I saw someone who was filled with light and love for his people and his country. I felt that I was looking into my own soul. We both felt right from the start that we were soulmates... "Rabbi Mordechai Eliyahu, Jonathan's rabbi, had a vision of our relationship and our marriage, and when he went to visit Jonathan in 1991, he told Jonathan that he had had a dream of the woman he would marry, and he described -- me! Jonathan was delighted because this was the first time he could share his heart about our relationship. Unfortunately, there was a Mossad agent who had to accompany the Rav, and he wasn't very discreet, and the next thing we knew, it was all over the newspapers that Jonathan had a girlfriend whom he intended to marry... But it didn't matter; it was lovely to us that even the honored rabbi recognized the cosmic nature of our relationship, and how Hashem brought us together for a purpose... "Prayer is very important to us, it's our main ammunition... We have a very small team of people working for Jonathan; they are worth their weight in gold, working 24/6 for this purpose... Everything was done [by the authorities] to ensure that we wouldn't still be around at this point; their plan was that he would die in prison -- either by hopelessness, or by his own hand, or by an 'accident.' But the Shechinah [Divine Presence] is with him and that's why he survives, as Rabbi Eliyahu says. In spite of all odds, he has survived; Hashem had other plans for him -- and G-d willing, he will be home very soon. Atty. Dub: US Justice System is Cruel Larry Dub has been Jonathan Pollard's pro-bono lawyer in Israel for 21 years. Excerpts from his remarks: "Taking a careful look at the American prison system, it appears to be one of the cruelest in the world -- one that rivals Third World countries. In Israel, we have a system that allows for rehabilitation, with weekend visits, conjugal visits, and the like; but in the US, it's 24/7 -- inside for 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Jonathan's first lawyer made a terrible "mistake" in which he failed to protect Jonathan's right to appeal, and the American legal system has ridden the coattails of that injustice to punish him way beyond the median sentence for that particular crime -- passing classified information to an ally. There are others who have committed the exact same crime, and they received 2-4 years in prison, but when it came to Pollard, they felt that it was time to teach the Jews a lesson -- and they gave him life without parole... Asked if he suspects the Americans of some form of anti-Semitism, Dub said that the CIA originally came to Pollard with a list of prominent American Jews and "asked him to point out which of them were conspiring with him. When Pollard said that none of them were, they simply refused to believe it; the Americans just don't trust the Jews." Video: Jonathan Pollard at Jerusalem Conference Awards' Ceremony
Audio: Interview with Esther Pollard, 11 minutes 19 seconds:
Hillel Fendel is senior news editor at Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com). |
|
'PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY IS CAPITAL OF ANTI-SEMITISM'
Posted by Avodah, March 23, 2007. |
|
This is by Hillel Fendel and it appeared in
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/121894 |
|
(IsraelNN.com) The most ant-Semitic political entity is the Palestinian Authority, says Haifa University's Prof. David Bukai at the Fourth Annual Jerusalem Conference. Acclaimed columnist Caroline Glick and anti-Semitism researcher Prof. Robert Westreich also spoke. Middle Eastern affairs expert Dr. David Bukai of Haifa University, speaking Monday at a Conference session on anti-Semitism in Europe and the Islamic world, said that anti-Semitism in Egypt and particularly in the Palestinian Authority is much more worrisome and significant than in Europe. Bukai compared the situation today with that of the Nazi days: "The world's indifference to the Iranian threats is exactly as it was towards Hitler's threats. Academia in those days supported the Munich agreement of capitulation -- and today it's the same story, with appeasement once again leading the way... Extremist Islam wants to bring the modern world back to the 7th century. They say this openly -- not like the Nazis, who tried to hide their intentions." "However," Bukai said, "Iran is the wrong target for the war against anti-Semitism. Iran is not motivated by anti-Semitism; it wants to turn Iraq and Lebanon into Shiite countries, it wants to activate Hamas and Hizbullah, it wants to strengthen the militant line in Gaza and in southern Lebanon -- but all this has nothing to do with anti-Semitism... The main dispute in the Middle East is between the Shiites (10% of the world's Moslems) and the Sunnis and the so-called moderate nations. The Shiites are more threatening to Saudi than to Israel; Israel is their excuse." Other speakers did not agree. Palestinian Authority: Champion of Anti-Semitism "In terms of anti-Semitism," Dr. Bukai said, "Egypt is very bad; anti-Semitism in the Moslem world started there, and it is now found in all strata of the country. But the main site of anti-Semitism in the Middle East, and maybe in the whole world, is in the Palestinian Authority. It is found in government announcements, and in the media, and mainly in the schools. No other school system in the world has anti-Semitism as bad as in the Palestinian Authority, which is filled all over the place with calls for the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state and its replacement with an Arab state. MEMRI and Palestinian Media Watch bring this out very well. But I don't hear Eli Weisel [who called for a world-wide struggle against anti-Semitism] and others calling for action against the PA -- perhaps it is related to their support for the Oslo process..." Bukai explained why it is that the radical secular left and radical religious Islam have joined up with each other: "[The late Italian journalist and author] Oriana Fallacci gave three reasons: 1. They are both anti-American. 2. The left no longer has an ideology of its own. 3. There is no more proletariat, and Moslem immigrants in Europe have taken their place. But the real explanation lies elsewhere. The reason is that in truth, the left is very religious -- it believes in absolute truth, and absolute good and bad, just like Islam, and it posits that there are believers and those who are not believers; both the left-wing and Islam are churches -- they both think they're always right, and they never apologize; they both want a world based on their vision of truth, backed up by verses of Marx and Muhammed; they both want to control how we think, and punish those who do not fall in line; both are autocratic and, actually, anti-liberal." Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
CAN A GOOD MUSLIM BE A GOOD AMERICAN?
Posted by Michael Travis, March 23, 2007. |
|
This was written by Michael Fortune and it appeared yesterday on his
website
|
|
Because I've recently been posting some stuff I've learned about Islam, my friend Jim decided to forward me an email "to get a rise out of me." Which worked. The email asked the following question: Can a good Muslim be a good American? And overwhelmingly concluded "no." Since I can't read the Quran in its native Arabic, I hauled out my English translation of the Quran called The Message of the Quran translated and explained by Muhammad Asad that I received in the mail for free from The Council on American Islamic Relations [See previous post "Christ In The Quran?" for details] and added my responses in italics which Jim said he'd look forward to reading. Can a good Muslim be a good American? What do you think? Theologically -- no. Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon god of Arabia. Allah means "The God" and is the Arabic word for the monotheistic worship of the only true God in heaven that was known by the bedouin descendants of Abraham's first son Ishmael [Genesis 16] in Arabia for thousands of years before Muhammad was even born. Religiously -- no. Because no other religion is accepted by his Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256). That's not what that reference says. Sura 2:256 actually says "There shall be no coercion in matters of faith. Distinct has now become the right way from [the way of] error: hence, he who rejects the powers of evil and believes in God has indeed taken hold of a support most unfailing, which shall never give way: for God is all-hearing, all-knowing." Scripturally -- no. Because his allegiance is to the five pillars of Islam and the Quran. Common sense contradicts this conclusion. Who do historians say actually protected many of the oldest manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments? Muslims. Sura 5:68 adds, "Say: 'O followers of the Bible! You have no valid ground for your beliefs unless you [truly] observe the Torah and the Gospel, and all that has been bestowed from on high upon you by your Sustainer!" Geographically -- no. Because his allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day. This makes very little sense. American Freemasons and their buildings always face east so they can pray toward the sun. But we don't question the patriotism of the numerous Freemason Presidents of the United States do we? Socially -- no. Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make friends with Christians or Jews. Much of what Muhammad was taught came from Jewish and Christian friends. Sura 5:47 says, "Let, then, the followers of the Gospel judge in accordance with what God has revealed therein." Politically -- no. Because he must submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of Israel and Destruction of America, the great Satan. There are 1.3 billion Muslims in the world many of whom do not advocate violence. Moderate voices like Hamza Yusuf [click here to read his article "Love Even Those Who Revile You"] and Abou Fadl who wrote The Great Theft [click here or the graphic to the left for more info] could probably do a better job of getting their message out, but they often do not receive much help from the media or from Christians. Domestically -- no. Because he is instructed to marry four women and beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34). As hard as it is for us understand, Muhammad actually elevated the treatment of women in the violent 6th century. Sura 4:34 is comparing how Muslims should treat a righteous devout wife versus an unfaithful unrighteous unrepentant wife. "Men shall take full care of women with the bounties which God has bestowed more abundantly on the former than on the latter, and with what they may spend out of the possessions. And the righteous women are the truly devout ones, who guard their intimacy which God has [ordained to be] guarded. And as for those women whose ill-will you have reason to fear, admonish them [first]; then leave them alone in bed; then beat them; and if thereupon they pay you heed, do not seek to harm them." Sura 4:15-16 adds, "And as for those of your women who become guilty of immoral conduct, call upon four from among you who have witnessed their guilt; and if these bear witness thereto, confine the guilty women to their houses until death takes them away or God opens for them a way [through repentance]. And punish [thus] both of the guilty parties; but if they both repent and mend their ways, leave them alone: for, behold, God is an acceptor of repentance, a dispenser of grace." Intellectually -- no. Because he cannot accept the American Constitution since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be corrupt. Because Muslims believe the Quran is 1 book from a single revelation of God that Muhammad subsequently dictated to his scribes over 23 years instead of the numerous revelations they believe the 44 authors of the Bible received over 1500 years, Muslims believe the Quran and the Bible are totally different in nature making comparisons between the two fruitless. Muslims still highly respect the Bible though and don't understand why Christians would ever leave it on the shelf or casually place anything on top of it using it as a coffee table coaster. Sura 4:136 says, "O you who have attained faith! Hold fast unto your belief in God and His Apostle, and in the divine writ which He has bestowed from on high upon His Apostle, step by step, as well as in the revelation which He sent down aforetime [the Bible]: for he who denies God, and His angels, and His revelations, and His apostles, and the Last Day, has indeed gone astray." Philosophically -- no. Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not allow freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam cannot co-exist. Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic. We should judge an idea by its founder and its teachings not by its abuses. Muhammad and the Quran do allow for freedom of religion and expression. Democracy and Islam can co-exist. There are moderate Muslims teaching and preaching this. Christians should help them do it. Sura 5:48 says, "If God had so willed, He could surely have made you all one single community: but [He willed it otherwise] in order to test you by means of what He has vouchsafed unto you. Vie, then, with one another in doing good works! Unto God you all must return; and then He will make you truly understand all that on which you were wont to differ." Spiritually -- no. Because when we declare "one nation under God," the Christian's God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Quran's 99 excellent names. I think it's ironic that all 99 names of Allah in the Quran are also found in the Bible for God. Sura 6:59 adds, "For, with Him are the keys to the things that are beyond the reach of a created being's perception: none knows them but He. And He knows all that is on land and in sea; and not a leaf falls but He knows it." Therefore after much study and deliberation...perhaps we should be very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country. They obviously cannot be both "good" Muslims and good Americans. After a little more study and deliberation, perhaps we should be suspicious of anyone who makes blanket statements about entire groups of people that are at best misleading and at worse blatantly false. Sura 5:42 says, "But if thou dost judge, judge between them with equity: verily, God loves those who act equitably." Call it what you wish...it's still the truth. Truth can afford to be fair. Sura 3:103 says, "And hold fast, all together, unto the bond with God, and do not draw apart from one another. And remember the blessings which God has bestowed upon you: how, when you were enemies, He brought your hearts together, so that through His blessing you became brethren; and [how, when] you were on the brink of a fiery abyss, He saved you from it. In this way God makes clear His message unto you, so that you might find guidance." Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
NEWS FROM ISRAEL, NEARLY ALL OF IT MAKES ME ANGRY!
Posted by Lee Caplan, March 23, 2007. |
|
The following articles are from today's Arutz 7. There is something very much in common among all but the last article, in that they all demonstrate the complete double standard that is applied by the Israeli authorities when it comes to dealing with the Israeli people. On the one hand, all of the law enforcement institutions are pathetically weak, thereby endangering the people. When it comes with dealing with the Arabs, the criminals, and the leftists, there is a very laissez faire attitude of laxity and permissiveness, almost like anything goes. On the other hand, when it comes to good Jews who love Eretz Yisrael and Am Yisrael and would give their lives for both of them, then there is no effort spared by the law enforcement institutions to try and prevent these wonderful people from doing their avodas hakodesh. However, we can see from the last story a fulfillment of the verse that many are the thoughts of man, but the advice of Hashem is what takes the day. Despite the efforts of these law enforcement institutions and their handlers in the government to separate our People from our Land and to physically and spiritually attempt to weaken our People, Hashem prevents them from prevailing. Out of the ashes of Gush Katif and Amona, comes the upcoming marriage of Yitchak and Ayelet. May Hashem bless this young couple and enable their wedding to take place bishaah tovah umutzlachas in the ruins of Amona and enable them to build a bayis neeman biYisrael in Eretz Yisrael hashleimah, and may Hashem bless the efforts of our People to reclaim Homesh on Monday! |
|
"'Blatant Double Standards' in Police Investigations"
(IsraelNN.com) Three Border Guard policemen have been suspended, just a day after being filmed hitting a suspected Arab rock-thrower, while policemen indicted for beating Jewish protestors are still in active service. The Ynet news service prominently featured an "exclusive" film of a Border Guard policeman hitting an Arab youth near Shechem on Wednesday, after repeated rock-throwing attacks on Israeli jeeps in the area. The next day, Ynet proudly announced that as a result of its report, Border Guard Commander Hassein Fares had suspended the policeman and his two partners from active service. The three suspected Border Guard policemen were summoned to the Department for Investigating Policemen (Machash) Friday morning to explain their actions. The head of the Machash Investigative unit, Avi Peretz, said that despite the film, the policemen would be summoned to give their version of the events: "Despite all, we have to hear the suspects' version. In similar cases, policemen have even been sent to jail... We still have not found the complainant, but I hope that we will receive an official complaint [from him]." 'Blatant Double Standard' "This is a blatant example of a double standard," Orit Strook, the head of the Yesha (Judea and Samaria) Civil Rights Organization, told Arutz-7 this morning. "When there is a case of violence against Arabs, there is an immediate suspension, but we have cases of police violence against Jews -- in which criminal indictments have already been handed down! -- and the policemen are still serving and have not been suspended." Strook, a resident of Hevron, provided some examples: "Mounted policeman Dudu Edry, who has been indicted of trampling Yehuda Etzion in Amona over a year ago, has not been suspended. Policeman Yaniv Reuveni, who was photographed choking a boy from Netzer Hazani during the Disengagement protests, has not been suspended. Police officer Yechiel Amsalem kicked and broke the jaw of a protestor, yet has not been suspended from active duty..." Strook said that 100 complaints against police violence at Amona last year have been submitted, but only three indictments have been served. The Border Guard unit patrolling the Hawara area, near Shechem, is often pelted with rocks. In this Wednesday's incident, the police stopped a crowd of youths suspected of taking part in throwing rocks that day. One youth did not stop when ordered to by the police, and it was he who was filmed being hit. The first talk-back in the Ynet story, and others afterwards, commented that it would have been fair of Ynet not to suffice with the testimony of the boy who was hit, but to bring the Israeli side and evidence of frequent rock-throwings as well. Shmuel Medad, head of the Honenu organization that provides legal aid for those facing legal charges for actions they took in the framework of their duties protecting Israel and the like, said, "The suspension of the three policemen is very grave. The State has placed its policemen in an impossible situation -- expecting them to protect us under very difficult and hostile conditions, and then we judge their actions while watching TV or the internet from our living rooms. What happened to 'don't judge someone else until you are in his shoes'? ... Not to mention that this is clear discrimination, in that policemen who hit Jews are not judged as quickly or as strictly as those who hit Arabs." "Karadi: Law Enforcement Bodies are Weak"
Karadi mentioned the release of the murderers of Shaked Shalhov -- a girl mistakenly killed in a mob hit -- as an example of what was weakening the system. The murderers were released because a Supreme Court judge ruled the trial had dragged out. "It's frustrating," Karadi said. Karadi said that all of the parts of the law enforcement system needed to be strengthened: "I think," he said, "that the other systems need to be more resolute and have more deterrence, and the police too." Karadi, Ashkenazi to Discuss Homesh Operation (IsraelNN.com) The IDF and Israel Police have yet to decide which of them will get the dubious honor of preventing the repopulation of Homesh by Jews. According to one news report, the police will be in charge of evicting Jews from inside the ruins of the community, while the army and additional police forces will place roadblocks around the site. A large group of Jews is expected to try and enter Homesh Monday, in an attempt to revive the community which was razed in the Disengagement. Outgoing Police Commissioner Moshe Karadi will meet IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi and discuss plans for preventing the repopulation of Homesh early next week. "There is an argument now, if it is the police's job or the army's," Karadi told an audience in Beersheva Friday. Report: "Two Battalions Guarding Homesh from Jews" Arutz 7 / IsraelNN has been informed that two IDF battalions have been taken away from activity in the Golan Heights and stationed in the evacuated community of Homesh in northern Samaria. The battalions were apparently brought there as part of the IDF's preparations for the planned resettlement of Homesh by Jews this coming Monday. Boaz Haetzni, one of the organizers of the Homesh resettlement, says the IDF's involvement is another example of the government's folly, its disconnection from reality and its warped agenda. "The government is taking soldiers away from preparations for the next war which is about to begin, and for which it will be responsible," Haetzni said. 'Shalom House' May Be Evacuated -- IDF Radio (IsraelNN.com) IDF Radio says there is growing probability that Shalom House -- the strategically located house in Hevron in which 200 Jewish students made their home earlier in the week -- will be evacuated. According to the military station, the Ministry of Defense has looked into the matter and has determined that the Minister of Defense never gave his approval to enter the building, as is required by law. Orit Strook, a Hevron resident, is quoted as saying a decision by Defense Minister Amir Peretz to evacuate the building would be a political one: "if the Defense Minister decides not to give the final seal of approval... this would be anti-Semitic behavior," she said. "The question is political, not legal." Plowshares into Swords: Former Jewish Towns are Terrorist Camps"
(IsraelNN.com) The prediction by the Biblical prophet Isaiah that enemies will beat their swords into plowshares may have been carried out by the Jews of Gush Katif -- but Palestinian Authority Arabs in Gaza got it backwards and are now using the former Jewish agricultural communities as terrorist training camps. The towns of Elei Sinai and Dagit, former Jewish communities in the Gaza region, are now being used to teach new terrorists and upgrade the skills of those who are already experienced in attacking Israeli civilians and soldiers. Earlier this week, Israelis living in the western Negev reported hearing explosions that upon investigation turned out to be part of explosives training exercises carried out by the ruling faction in the new PA unity government. The Gaza trainees are using the formerly Jewish towns to practice producing and using explosives, ambushing soldiers, shooting rockets and more, according to a senior member of Hamas. He added that the terrorists are preparing for an Israeli operation in the area, which they believe will take place in the near future. "Closing of a Circle: Wedding Made in Amona"
Yitzchak Shlissel and Ayelet Biber, who met while working to save Gush Katif and Amona, will be married next week -- in Amona. Yeshanews reports that Yitzchak, 28, and Ayelet, 21, knew each other casually while working in the Ta Katom (Orange Cell) Students Group on behalf of Gush Katif. However, following the Gush Katif expulsion in the summer of 2005, their ties got stronger as the government's plans to destroy nine Jewish homes in Amona became more immediate. They worked together in Amona during the destruction, and their second meeting there will happen next week -- under a wedding canopy. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, in one of his first moves after taking over as Acting Prime Minister following Ariel Sharon's massive stroke early last year, sent in large police and army forces to destroy nine newly-built houses on the hilltop of Amona, east of Ofrah. The Supreme Court had ruled in accordance with a Peace Now claim that the land on which they were built belonged to Arabs -- though the said owners never showed up to demand or claim their land. The Jewish residents maintained that the homes were constructed legally and in accordance with government promises that they would be approved. In the event, on Feb. 1, 2006, the destruction of the nine Amona buildings was completed in approximately five hours. Stories and videos of brutal and unprovoked police violence -- over 200 protestors were injured -- began surfacing almost immediately, and continued for weeks thereafter. The happy bridegroom Yitzchak, a resident of Shaarei Tikvah near Petach Tikvah, recounts: "Our relationship essentially began on the backdrop of Amona, on the Sabbath before the destruction [Jan. 2006]. Ayelet helped organized a Sabbath for the Ta Katom members from all over the country. On Saturday night, I suggested that we make a short movie to call upon the public to come to Amona to protest the destruction. After we finished, we went to Amona, arriving the night before the destruction [as did hundreds of others]." During the violent destruction, Yitzchak became one of hundreds of protestors who were injured by policemen. He was atop one of the houses, filming a policeman breaking into the house next door (where dozens of protestors were 'sitting-in') by smashing its windows. "When he saw me, he sent another policeman to beat me and break my camera. I was rushed by ambulance to the hospital, and received five stitches in my head." Ayelet, a former resident of Disengagement-destroyed Netzarim in Gaza and now living in Ariel, says that she was in another house at the time, waiting to hear what Yitzchak had caught on film -- they had apparently not agreed on the correct approach -- and what was going on outside. "After a while," she recalls, "Yitzchak phoned me and said, 'Listen, my head was cracked open and I'm on the way to the hospital.' I was in shock, and couldn't believe that things had gotten that far. Then he added, 'Oh, by the way, our argument about the camera -- it's not relevant anymore.' I went to visit him in the hospital the next day -- and the rest is history." Yitzchak was pleasantly surprised that Ayelet took the loss of her camera so well, "and not only that -- she came to visit me the next day. So I began to think..." The wedding will be held in the ruins-turned-temporary-wedding-hall of Amona, overlooking Ofrah in the Binyamin region. The canopy will stand outside the ruins of House #9, where Yitzchak was beaten, and the dancing and wedding feast will be in the area of the "Tent of the Wounded." The wedding will be conducted by Rabbi Dov Lior, Chief Rabbi of Kiryat Arba-Hevron, and the couple will live in Ariel. "For us, this is a closing of a circle," say Yitzchak and Ayelet. "Yes, there was an expulsion from Gush Katif and a destruction of Amona, but precisely from amidst this loss we are continuing to build new homes and new families." Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com |
|
BORDERS OF THE PROMISED LAND
Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 22, 2007. |
|
This was written by Rev Willem Glasshouwer of Christians for
Israel, International. It appeared on their website
|
|
What, according to the Bible, are the borders of the Promised Land? The answer is more global then specific. From the river of Egypt (Wadi el Arish, the eastern branch of the Nile) to the Great River, the Euphrates (Gen. 15:18). The area from the Red Sea to the Sea of the Philistines (the Mediterranean Sea) and from the wilderness to the Euphrates, (Ex.23:31). What is striking here are the recurring references to the Euphrates. Is this river to be the northern or eastern boundary, or both? If the Euphrates is to be the eastern border, then the Lord has promised a large area east of the Jordan! If the Euphrates is to be the northern border, then Syria (Aram) also belongs to Israel, but the area to the east may be limited. Although it is reported that during the entry into the Promised Land the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and the half-tribe of Manasseh settled beyond the Jordan, this has not always been accepted without discussion (Num. 32; Joshua 13:8-33; 18:7; 22:1-4, 9, 25; Deut. 3:16-18). Various descriptions in the Bible seem to assume that the Jordan is the eastern border of the promised land of Canaan (Num. 32:29-42; 34:2-12; 35:10; Deut. 32:49; Joshua 22:9-11), meaning that the Euphrates is viewed as the northern border (thus including Syria and the Golan Heights). Mention is also made of Gilead, the northern portion of the land beyond the Jordan, which is also promised to Israel: "And I shall bring them to Gilead and Lebanon, and there will not be room enough for them," (Zech. 10:10; Jer. 50:19). "Benjamin will possess Gilead," says Obadiah 19-20. The division of the land described by the prophet Ezekiel in chapters 40 to 48 is yet another story when he speaks of the temple, and describes it in great detail. According to some, this temple seems to be situated not even in Jerusalem, but in the area where Shiloh was once located, that is, the place where the tabernacle first came to rest after the trek through the wilderness. The area of the Promised Land is also defined (Ezek. 47:15-20; 48:1, 28). A survey of these data leads some to conclude that the heart of the Promised Land and the temple will be to the west of the Jordan, and that once the final temple has been built and is in place, the Euphrates will indeed be the northern and maybe even the eastern border. If one perceives all these biblical covenants and promises Almighty God made to Israel one starts to realize that ultimately Israel does not exist by the grace of the United Nations, or Europe, Russia, China, or by the grace of Christianity or Islam, but by the Grace of God, on the basis of an everlasting covenant to which the Lord Almighty swore a solemn oath. Further, that the Lord Almighty is true to his everlasting covenant with Israel. Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
DANGEROUS DIPLOMACY: OLMERT'S POLITICAL FAILURE RE HAMAS, MECCA AND TEHERAN
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 22, 2007. |
|
It is dangerous to assume that your enemy shares your values. The USA has done this consistently in its diplomacy (or lack thereof) in the Middle East ('surely Mr.Akhmedi-Nejjad's first concern is the well-being of his people' -- while some Iranians will tell you that his first concern is full-body burqas for all Iranian women, and a close second is his WMD program so he can nuke Israel). When the USA makes mistakes such as have been made consistently in the Middle East since 1953, much of the world pays for them in money and blood. But when Israel makes such mistakes, whether driven by USA pressure or just sheer stupidity, the price may be the very existence of the state of Israel. That is really dangerous diplomacy. Note especially the DEBKA (c. 85% accurate in my opinion) evaluation below: 'Iran not only gave them (hamas and Hezbollah) arms, ordnance, cash and training, but also strategic depth. Its Revolutionary Guards have spread their wings into Gaza through Sinai up to the Suez and Mediterranean, and built up a war menace to Israel from the south, as well as the north. The realistic prospect is therefore closer to war rather than peace, the culmination of a process which the prime minister (Olmert), his foreign minister (Livni) and their advisers consistently missed or misread.' So now Israel is facing the possibility of a war on a total of seven fronts at once: 1.) North: Hezbollah out of Lebanon 2.) Northeast: Syria in league with Iran and Hezbollah 3.) South: Sinai (where Muslm Brotherhood and el-Qaeda and Iranian Pasdaran and Revolutionary Guard are active) 4.) West: Hamas from Gaza Strip in league with Iran and el-Qaeda 5.) East: the Palestinian kingdom of Jordan once the Hashemites are overthrown by a coup engineered by hamas/Hezbollah/Iran/Syria 6.) East: West Bank where Hamas and Fatah and 12 other terror gangs operate with relative impunity 7.) Internal: 25% of Israeli Arabs support Hezbollah, Hamas, deny Holocaust, support kidnappings...and some percentage of this 25% may be willing to take a stand, strike a blow, even risk 'martyrdom' for Islam. NB! I have no doubt that the majority of Israeli Arabs (Christian and Muslim) are loyal citizens who would never lift a finger to harm their country (Israel). BUT, there are 1,400,000 Israeli-Arabs. Even if only 10% harbor evil intentioins against Israel, that 140,000 potential terrorists operating with impunity in the entire country. Even if only 10% of these actually take up arms agianst israel, that is 14,000 -- an army the size of Hezbollah's. Can Israel survive such a war? Israel did survive such a war in 1948 when seven armies marched against her from the south, west, east, and north. BUT...the army suffered 10% casualties...which translated in to 1% casualties for the population as a whole. Such a casualty rate today... (assuming that Iran does NOT succeed in dropping a nuclear bomb or two on Israel -- if Iran did succeed, the casualty rate would be much higher and the country would probably succumb to massive Arab invasions and pervasive massacre and genocide)... would mean c. 60,000 dead. As comparative per-centages of population, that is equal to c. 2,940,000 dead Americans, and uncountable millions more wounded. What steps would we want our government to take, pre-emptively, to avoid such a scenario? This below is from the DEBKAfile. |
|
New Palestinian government marks collapse of Israel's Middle East positions
The Hamas-Fatah government taking office Sunday, March 18, is more than a policy failure by prime minister Ehud Olmert and foreign minister Tzipi Livni; it is another milestone on the road to the collapse of Israel's Middle East positions at large, on a scale comparable to the setback to its deterrence from the mismanaged war against Hizballah last summer. This fiasco is reflected in the horrified outcry across the board, from members of the Olmert government coalition and the opposition alike, as Israelis woke up Sunday, March 18, to face a hostile Palestinian government led by a terrorist organization, godfathered by Saudi Arabia, armed by Iran, and blessed by Western powers. Exactly a week ago, on March 11, the Israeli prime minister said he was positively reviewing sections of the Saudi Arabian 2002 "peace plan." He did not waver when Riyadh declared the hard-line text would not be modified when it is re-launched at the Arab summit in ten days' time. That afternoon, Olmert had his second interview with Mahmoud Abbas, chairman of the Palestinian Authority and leader of Fatah. He stressed the importance of "staying in touch with positive Palestinian elements." This was also Livni's mantra during her recent travels to the US and European capitals. They both fell into the Palestinian trap, effectively sanctioning the seal of moderation with which Abbas and Fatah stamped a Palestinian government dominated by the Hamas terrorists. Even more dangerously, the two Israeli leaders failed to question the covert Yalta-type understanding reached by Riyadh and Tehran. They ought to have grasped that when the Saudis and Iranians stuck their deal to preserve the Siniora government in Lebanon, as DEBKAfile revealed in late February, they must also have come to terms on the Palestinian issue. And so they did. It was a package: Tehran called off the campaign led by its patsy Hizballah against the anti-Syrian Lebanese government, gaining stronger representation -- at Syria's expense, while the rival Palestinian factions were told in Mecca to share power -- at Israel's expense. Olmert and Livni forgot a permanent Middle East axiom: Israel's neighbors can always set aside their differences for common action against the Jewish state. Therefore, Sunni princes and Shiite clerics easily agreed on a Palestinian formula that would imperil Israel's most vital interests. They figured that, just as Syrian president Bashar Assad is too isolated to challenge his dependence on Tehran, so too Israel is too dependent on Washington to complain about Saudi under-the-table transactions with Iran for the sake of a deal on Iraq. In the past year, Olmert-Livni policies have been so closely synchronized with Washington's, that many of Israel's vital interests have gone by the board. It was their vain hope that Arab governments in fear of Iran's ambitions would come to terms with Israel and move the Middle East closer to peace. This misreading was shared by opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu. What happened instead was that the so-called moderate Arab camp stood aside when Tehran focused its attention on building up the menace to Israel on the backs of the now-kosher Palestinian radicals. Iran not only gave them arms, ordnance, cash and training, but also strategic depth. Its Revolutionary Guards have spread their wings into Gaza through Sinai up to the Suez and Mediterranean, and built up a war menace to Israel from the south, as well as the north. The realistic prospect is therefore closer to war rather than peace, the culmination of a process which the prime minister, his foreign minister and their advisers consistently missed or misread. Addressing the Washington pro-Israel lobby AIPAC's annual conference last week, Olmert and Livni both came out in support of the Bush administration's military strategy in Iraq. Since that strategy hinges largely on covert Saudi-Iranian diplomacy in Washington's name, Israeli government spokesmen implicitly gave America a blank check to pay for an Iraq accommodation at Israel's expense. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
WHAT SHOULD ISRAEL DO WITH ITS ARABS? POOR DEFENSE AGAINST JIHAD
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 22, 2007. |
|
PICKING ON THE INNOCENT An Israeli settler was stabbed to death near Hebron. Islamic Jihad claimed responsibility. Its representative threatened to attack more soldiers and settlers who commit crimes against the (Muslim) people of Hebron (IMRA, 2/27). The particular settler was a religious Jew who used to pray in isolated areas and minded his own business. He committed no crimes. Islamic Jihad did. It stereotyped him and picked on him because of his religion. LENDING CREDIBILITY TO EXTREMISTS The NY Times headline of 3/6 was, "Israeli Says Iran Is Training Hamas Men." The sub-headline was, "Palestinian PM calls the Accusation 'Propaganda'" (A8). Paired, the headlines take the Muslim contention seriously and put it on a par with the Israeli one. That is neither fair nor wise. The Muslims constantly propagandize deceitfully, while Israel tries to be fair about its external enemies. It would be as ridiculous as this pair of headlines, (1) Britain Says Nazi Germany Invaded Poland; and (2) Third Reich Calls the Accusation Propaganda. Another example: (1) US Says Soviets Violate Test Ban Treaty; and (2) USSR Denies the Accusation." AMERICAN POLITICS Quotations are taken out of context, then criticized. Instead of reasoned argument, we have sound bites. Pollsters tell politicians what would be popular to say; nobody knows what most politicians believe in. They run for office for power. Elections cost so much, that the chief donors control the candidates. Those observations were by Newt Gingrich, who proposes real debates. Cal Thomas considers him a thoughtful potential candidate (NY Sun, 3/6, Op.-Ed.) Has Mr. Thomas forgotten that when Gingrich was Speaker of the House, he abused his power for partisan advantage, behaving undemocratically? Thomas made a point about the power of donations to corrupt candidates. The NY Sun usually ignores that problem -- it touts unrestrained donations as free speech. WHEN YOU QUESTION ISM The International Solidarity Movement (ISM) had speakers at a couple of US colleges. When a member of the audience asked a question that could embarrass the speakers, the speakers didn't answer. Instead, campus security officers ejected the questioners, beating them in the process (IMRA, 2/27). HOW SERIOUS IS THE SUNNI-SHIITE CLEAVAGE? Muslims think of themselves as Muslims, not as Sunnis or Shiites. Sunnis and Shiites have not fought each other seriously for centuries. They cooperate in Iraq against US troops and in the P.A. against Israeli troops. The clergy of both groups follow the orders of powerful governments. When those governments or factions within them make power plays, they may tell the clergy to stress Sunni-Shiite differences. But the underlying struggle is over power. However, there is a risk that the masses may take the propaganda seriously (Youssef Ibrahim, NY Sun, 3/5, p.7). If Mr. Ibrahim is correct, we have misunderstood the Iran-Saudi rivalry as a religious one, and suppose that we are not in the gun-sights of both Muslim sects. His controversial assertion shows the necessity of getting the facts about Islamic culture. RICE'S MIDEAST ALLIANCE ABORTS Sec. Rice tried to rally Sunni Arab states into an alliance against Shiite Iran. She calls them moderate, though they include S. Arabia. Instead, S. Arabia concluded that the regional danger is from foreign interference. On the other hand, by itself, S. Arabia has gotten other Gulf States to cooperate in mutual defense (Eli Lake, NY Sun, 3/5, p.1). S. Arabia is the font of Sunni jihad. Egypt is going Islamist. By foreign interference, they may be referring to her. POOR DEFENSE AGAINST JIHAD We try to extinguish the fiery lava of jihad, while the volcano that emits it, the totalitarian governments and movement, remains intact. Our assumptions are false, that: (1) A strong offense creates enemies, whereas it defeats and discourages them, as in WWII; (2) Poverty causes war, whereas it causes emigration; (3) Democracy guarantees freedom, but people can pick dictators; (4) The Islamic culture of slavery and suicide is as worthwhile as ours of freedom, life, and prosperity; (5) It is moral to sacrifice ourselves for aggressors; (6) It is wrong to defend ourselves, whereas since aggression is evil, it is wrong not to defeat it. Pacifism against aggression is wrong, for it would encourage aggression (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/2006, p.47 from John Lewis, The Objective Standard, Winter, 2006). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
ISRAEL-JORDAN TENSIONS--RICE ADMITS TO FUNDING TERRORISM
Posted by Michael Travis, March 22, 2007. |
|
DEBKAfile Exclusive: Israel-Jordan tensions flare over discovery of king's covert support for hard-line Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal March 22, 2007, 9:35 PM (GMT+02:00) Israeli officials and army chiefs were taken aback by an intelligence report summing up two years of research, which exposed Jordan's King Abdullah, Israel's partner in peace and the war on terror, as being secretly in league with the Damascus-based radical Khaled Meshaal. A high-placed Israeli source commented: "All these years Israel was guided by the knowledge that Meshaal was sponsored by Damascus and more recently Tehran. We now learn the entire Hamas leadership also enjoyed the patronage of the Hashemite court in Amman. It has been a real shock." It also catches Israel in a diplomatic crisis with both its Arab peace partners a week before the Arab summit in Riyadh. Cairo claims Israel's responsibility for hundreds of Egyptian troop deaths was exposed in an Israeli TV documentary. The Jordanian-Hamas connection came to light during Israel's information-gathering on the stages leading up to the formation of the Palestinian Fatah-Hamas government. The rancor spilled out into acerbic exchanges between Jerusalem and Amman. March 16, prime minister Ehud Olmert said a precipitate US withdrawal from Iraq would jeopardize or even bring down the regime in Amman. The king riposted that Olmert would do better to deal with his own shaky government than with Jordanian affairs. On March 20, parliament in Amman condemned Olmert's words, maintaining, "The Hashemite regime in Jordan, which has not been at any time a fragile country or lacked the attributes of a state, will remain a strong homeland, unaffected by skepticism of developments in the region." The dispute casts a long shadow on Israel-Jordanian collaboration in the war on Islamist terror, DEBKAfile's counter-terror reports. US president's security coordinator Lt. Gen. Keith Dayton, joined by the British and Canadians, is organizing a Jordanian-Palestinian military force to prop up Mahmoud Abbas and his Fatah in relation to Hamas. Tuesday, March 20, the American general reported to Congress in Washington that Hamas commands a well-trained army which is bigger and better equipped by Iran than Abbas' security forces. This was the first time an American military officer has made such an assessment of relative Fatah-Hamas strength. The compilers of the Israeli intelligence report question the consistency of Jordan on the one hand contributing to a military force supposed to bolster Palestinian moderates while at the same time backing Hamas. They also ask, according to DEBKAfile's sources, if Jordan can be relied on to select non-Hamas members for the Palestinian unit designed to offset Hamas' military strength. Were Hamas infiltrators weeded out? And can Jordanian officials be trusted not to leak the force's secrets to Hamas? The ties between the royal house and Hamas, according to Israeli intelligence researchers, have always been managed by Muslim Brotherhood leaders close to the throne. From Wnd's Jerusalem Bureau
JERUSALEM -- Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice today admitted she cannot guarantee U.S. funding for security forces associated with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah organization would not reach "the wrong hands." Rice said she would reduce a funding request for Fatah forces following concerns last month expressed by key lawmakers that some of the money would be used for terror-related purposes. The Bush administration in January pledged $86.4 million to strengthen the Fatah forces, including Force 17, Abbas' security detail, which also serves as de facto police units in the Gaza Strip and West Bank. At the time, Abu Yousuf, a Fatah militant from Abba's Force 17 security forces, told WND while U.S. funds and weapons being transferred to his group would be utilized to "hit the Zionists." Last month, Congress placed a hold on the $86 million transfer pending a clarification from Rice as to where exactly the money would end up. During a hearing today before the House of Representatives Appropriations subcommittee, Rice said she would make a new request for less money. She conceded, "It will request less money, precisely because some of the money that I would have requested I did not think I could fully account for." She did not say how much money would be cut from the original request. "I hope that is a sign for you that we take very seriously our responsibilities," she said. "I have no interest in having to come here one day and say, 'you know this funding did not end up in the right place.' I will do my very best," she told the committee. While the aid is being temporarily blocked, it wasn't immediately clear if U.S. weapons would continue to be transferred to Fatah. The U.S. has been regularly shipping convoys of weapons to Fatah security forces in Gaza and the West Bank. WND reported the U.S. in February transferred 7,000 assault rifles and more than 1 million rounds of ammunition to Fatah militias. According to Palestinian officials, no U.S. weapons have been transferred since last week's unity government was forged. The last confirmed American arms shipment to Fatah took place in May. At first, the shipment, consisting of 3,000 rifles, was denied by the U.S. and Israel, but Olmert in June admitted the transfer took place, telling reporters, "I needed to approve the shipment to help bolster Abbas." Fatah's Abu Yousuf told WND if there is a major conflict with Israel, U.S. weapons provided to Fatah may be shared with other "Palestinian resistance organizations." "The first place of these U.S. weapons will be to defend the Palestinian national project, which is reflected by the foundation of the Palestinian Authority. If Hamas or any other group under the influence of Iran and Syria wants to make a coup de tat against our institution, these weapons are there to defend the PA," said Abu Yousuf. "We don't want to go to civil war with Hamas, because this is what both the U.S. and Israel want. This is our last option. We hope our brothers in Hamas won't oblige us to find ourselves in confrontation," Abu Yousuf said. But the Fatah militant said the new American weapons may also be used to target Israelis. He admitted previous American arms supplied to Fatah were used in "resistance operations" against the Jewish state. "If Israel will deliver what it promised to Abu Mazen (Abbas), [meaning a] withdrawal from Palestinian lands, including east Jerusalem and the Temple Mount, remove all the checkpoints in the West Bank, release our prisoners and find a clear solution for our refugees, we'll control our forces and the distribution of weapons. "But if Israel doesn't deliver, and we find ourselves manipulated by Israel, we cannot guarantee members of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades and Force 17 will not use these weapons against Israel. Our goal is to change the occupation," said Abu Yousuf. "It's unnatural to think these American weapons won't be used against the Israelis," he said. Like some other Force 17 members, Abu Yousuf is openly also a member of the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. All Brigades leaders are also members of Fatah. Abbas last June appointed senior Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades leader Mahmoud Damra as commander of Force 17. Damra, who was arrested by Israel in November, was on the Jewish state's most-wanted list of terrorists. Abu Yousuf said the American weapons shipments may be shared with other Palestinian terror groups. He said that during large confrontations with Israel, such as the Jewish state's 2002 anti-terror raid in Jenin, Fatah distributed weapons to Hamas and Islamic Jihad. "We don't look where this piece or that piece of weapon came from when fighting the Israelis," Abu Yousuf said. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
WHEN THE MEDIA WILL NOT BE ANTI ISRAEL BIASED
Posted by The Reality Show, March 21, 2007. |
|
When the media will not be anti Israel biased 1) When there is an account of every single Arab Muslim terrorism. 2) When Israeli victims of terror will turn to human from being "tanks" in media's dehumanization. 3) When the (BBC, NPR, etc.) reporter will finally visit an Israeli hospital for a change. 4) When a rare (if/when) abuse by an Israeli soldier won't be overblown any more than any other westerner's case. 5) When those drama words, bigoted slurs (like: "apartheid", "racism") invented by Arabism, Palestinianism upon Israel's war on fascists' terror won't be used. 6) When it will remember to quote the source where it comes from, like a "Palestinian" point of view, stating it as such: "Palestinians" say, not reporting it as "facts", and use "they say" as the media is always so careful to side it only on Israel's view. 7) When the tone won't be inflating the cult of 'Palestinian' victim hood, but reporting dry facts. Or the passion should be used on Israeli victims just as much. 8) No more "Palestinians" are the bigger picture, When the headlines are the repercussion of both sides, not a headline & main news crying on 'Palestinians' and in just small little details something about Israel as well. 9) When it will finally start mentioning the sacrifice democratic Israel is making in gestures to "Palestinian" Arabs & open borders on the expense of it's vital security, asides from it's humanitarian aid. 10) When it will report the racism, treason & danger from Arabs living inside Israel & it's establishment's incitement for Jihad, murder, hatred & terrorism. 11) When it will refrain from calling fear & worry for security as "racism". 12) When it will stop dancing around the real issue of the conflict, the seeds of hate, the 'Palestinian death cult' indoctrination & it's child abuse. 13) When talk will come about on the real racism & real apartheid, such as in "Palestine" ethnic cleansing of Jews, anti Christian apartheid, oppression of own people and on minorities, as well as on the entire Arab & Muslim world that practices such heinous crimes against humanity without any 'fighting terrorism' or 'self defense'. 14) When it will stop it's double standard that any attack on non Muslim infidels at any corner of the world is any different from Arab Muslim 'Palestinian' genocide campaign on non Muslim Israelis (A.K.A as "fascism"). Contact The Reality Show at therealityshow@mail.com. Visit http://lightonthings.blogspot.com. |
|
IS JEROME M. SEGAL REPUDIATING HIS PAST INTIFADA AGAINST ISRAEL'S EXISTENCE?
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 21, 2007. |
|
Jerome Segal has long been one of the most evil Jews alive. Little
more than a Tokyo Rose in the service of the PLO. He founded the
pro-PLO "Jewish Peace Lobby", which should have better been named the
Jewish self-annihilation lobby. He supported Israel turning Jerusalem
over to the savages
Well, suddenly Segal is having second thoughts? Unfortunately only in Hebrew, the very same pogromchik fella wtites in YNET today (http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3378465,00.html) that there is no international legal basis for promoting a Palestinian "right of return". He suddenly insists that there is no legal basis for it and that it is a stupid and harmful idea, that the only way to settle past scores is through compensation for losses of property. First Benny Morris partly recants his old anti-Zionism, and now Mister Jewish Intifada? Anyone spotted the Messiah coming? 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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
U.S. WON'T HALT AID TO ABBAS' TERROR FORCES
Posted by Michael Travis, March 21, 2007. |
|
This was written by Shmuel Rosner and Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondents and AP |
|
The U.S. intends to continue funding and training Palestinian security forces loyal to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, despite the formation of a unity government with Hamas. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the Congress House subcommittee that controls foreign aid that the State Department was close to completing a revised plan regarding the PA, which would take into account the recent political developments. The formation of the unity government in the PA has complicated the U.S.'s long-term plans for the creation of a Palestinian security force under Abbas that would counterweigh forces under the control of Hamas. Rice said the administration was trying to find ways to support the development of forces loyal to those who accept the principals of the Quartet. She added the funds requested by the administration for aid for the PA would be reduced, due to concerns over how some funds would be spent. Rice said she would make a new request to Congress outlining in detail how the money would be spent and providing assurances it would not get into the "wrong hands." "It will request less money, precisely because some of the money that I would have requested I did not think I could fully account for," Rice told a House of Representatives Appropriations subcommittee. She did not say how much money would be cut from the original request. "I hope that is a sign for you that we take very seriously our responsibilities," she said. "I have no interest in having to come here one day and say, 'you know this funding did not end up in the right place.' I will do my very best," she told the committee Congress sources told Haaretz Wednesday that under the new circumstances, forces under partial control of Hamas may receive American foreign aid. This would be in violation of the American constitution, as Hamas is classified as a terrorist organization. The American lawmakers froze transfer of all aid funds to the PA several weeks ago, and it is at present unclear if and when it would be renewed. U.S. Lieutenant-General Keith Dayton, U.S. security coordinator to the PA since 2005, warned Congress last week against Hamas' growing military strength. If left unchecked, Dayton warned, it would erode Abbas' already limited ability to enforce any cease-fire in the Gaza Strip and increase the chances of Israeli military intervention. The quartet of Middle East peace negotiators, the United States, the United Nations, the European Union and Russia, said Wednesday that an international aid embargo would remain on the PA until three conditions were met: to recognize Israel, agree to past accords and renounce violence. "The quartet expressed its expectation that the unity government would
support the efforts of President Abbas to pursue a two-state solution
to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," said the statement.
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
U.S. RESTRAINT & ENEMY'S LACK OF IT; ARAB LEAGUE ON DARFUR
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 21, 2007. |
|
WHICH SIDE BEING PROTECTED IN LEBANON? Lebanese who live near the border with Israel claim that UNIFIL is aggressive against them and protects Israel from Hizbullah. The UNO claims that the Lebanese Army keeps certain border areas are off-limits to UNIFIL, to shelter Hizbullah from UNIFIL (IMRA, 2/25) and from Israel. Hizbullah is buying land just north of the Litani R., where UNIFIL jurisdiction ends. Apparently they are populating it with Shiites, who would let it build new fortifications there, in anticipation of the coming war (IMRA, 2/26). I believe the UNO. The Muslim Arabs usually get the story wrong, because they follow biased instincts rather than respect facts, and they utter propaganda more than realistic assessments. ACCORDING TO KUWAIT A Kuwaiti newspaper reported that three Gulf states offered Israel permission to fly over their countries in an attack on Iran's nuclear facilities (IMRA, 2/25). Qatar said it would deny the use of its country in such an attack (IMRA, 3/15). U.S. RESTRAINT & ENEMY LACK OF RESTRAINT The US limits military force, has lawyers make sure, apologizes when hurting civilians, prosecutes its soldiers if they humiliate prisoners, accepts journalistic escorts to monitor the troops, lets the enemy broadcast beheadings of captured Americans without closing the station, and calls countries that assist enemies to develop nuclear energy "friends." We may freeze some enemy assets used to finance the war, but do not strike their capitals. We pretend that our war is only with "extremists who have hijacked a great religion." While complaining of anti-Muslim prejudice (which hardly manifests itself in the politically correct US), totalitarian Muslims teach that Jews are sons of pigs and all civilians in Israel and Western countries may be attacked. Iranians build "bridges of understanding" here but nuclear bombs there (Mid East Forum). RUSSIAN FOREIGN POLICY LIKE USSR'S Russia supports the Palestinian Arabs, Syria, and Iran. It is recognizing the Hamas government, sending thousands of anti-tank missiles to Syria, and thwarting sanctions against Iran (Arutz-7, 2/27). Dr. Aaron Lerner warned of policies based on Syria's current weaknes. PECULIARITIES OF POLITICS & ECONOMICS The Druse farmers on the Golan are residents of Israel but citizens of Syria, with which they identify. They grow apples. Syria wants to buy their apples to show support for "Syrian farmers in the Israeli occupied Golan". Israel's Minister of Agriculture asked the Finance Ministry for a subsidy to lower the price of those apples. Request granted (IMRA, 2/3). Thus Israel subsidizes enemy propaganda and enemy farmers. Wouldn't the apples have been sold without the subsidy? ARAB LEAGUE ON DARFUR Members of the Arab League pledged $150 million to sustain the peacekeepers in Darfur. They contributed only $15, however. Meanwhile, the crisis gets worse, as more countries get dragged into it and the rebels fracture into multiple gangs, leaving no one with whom to make peace (IMRA, 2/24). Pledges are made when in the spotlight. Later, the Muslims renege. ARAB GENERAL SAVES JEWISH CHILD An Israeli three-year old was lost in the Old City of Hebron. An Arab general found him and returned him to the Israelis (IMRA, 2/24). HAARETZ' CONCLUSION ABOUT DEFENSE MIN. PERETZ Everybody knows that Defense Min. Peretz is not competent. They make fun of him, as when he was caught posing as an inspector of battlefields looking through covered binoculars. Haaretz' Gideon Levy admits the incompetence but notes that other politicians have not been ridiculed for their failures. He concludes that the ridicule really is for Levy's being Moroccan rather than Ashkenazi. Dr. Aaron Lerner worries that if Peretz was too embarrassed to admit he did not know how to work the binoculars, he have may been too embarrassed to get help with more important matters (IMRA, 2/24). When Pres. Katsav, from Likud, accused his critics of similar ethnic prejudice, Levy ridiculed him as paranoid. Why the different standard? (Arutz-7, 2/25). Levy gave no evidence for his serious charge about Peretz, known for stupidity. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
RAPING AS 'RESISTANCE'
Posted by Yisrael Medad, March 21, 2007. |
|
This appeared in the Jerusalem Post today. It is archived at
|
|
A good friend of mine, Edva Naveh of Sha'arei Tikva in Samaria, made an interesting observation recently concerning the gang of Beduin youths who, according to their indictment, committed a series of rapes in the Galilee area. She was struck by reports in the Hebrew media -- YNET, for instance -- saying that the rapes were perpetrated as a form of nationalist vengeance against IDF operations in Judea, Samaria and Gaza. The Post headlined its March 1 report: "Police make new arrests in 'terrorist rape' case." Now if it's true that these were "terrorist rapes," Edva wondered why feminist organizations in Israel which devote themselves to combating rape, harassment and trafficking in women appear to have ignored the entire matter. These organizations also deal with sexual abuse, pay-scale disparities and other economic and social issues. Many have been active in protesting President Moshe Katsav's continued tenure, despite the fact that he's not been formerly charged. Haim Ramon's kissing episode also deeply disturbed the feminists -- not to mention the rest of us. HOWEVER, Edva asked, why hasn't the feminist community addressed -- or at the very least investigated -- the matter of Jewish women allegedly being raped out of nationalist motivation? Millionaire Ofer Glazer and MK Yoram Marciano have been pilloried by them for reported sexual improprieties. Actor Rami Heuberger is being criticized. But the behavior of the young residents of Galilee has been largely ignored by the feminists. Where are the feminist voices of MKs Ruhama Avraham and Zahava Gal-On? Surely it can't be that "rape as resistance" is judged as being less of a crime than the standard criminal variety? What about humanitarian groups here and abroad which define themselves as liberal, left or progressive? They've been rightly vociferous in condemning rape used in the course of war, as in Bosnia, Rwanda, the Congo and Darfur. Why the apparent silence in this instance? Sociologists suggest that rapes carried out against the background of political violence are intended to show the affected men that they cannot even defend their women; that they are worthless. The tactic is used to fragment societies. HISTORIANS TELL us that during the American Civil War, in April 1863, Francis Lieber, a Columbia College professor, wrote instructions (promulgated by president Abraham Lincoln) in the code of military conduct. Article 44 stipulates: "All wanton violence committed... all rape... of such [civilian] inhabitants, are prohibited under the penalty of death." Both Edva Naveh and I wonder whether Gal-On, Shulamit Aloni, Avraham and Shelly Yacimovich would support a similarly severe form of punishment for these young men, were they found guilty? Meanwhile, won't they, at the very least, speak out on the issue and stop ignoring it? Why the double standard? Why ignore a behavior pattern that is surely criminal and, if the reports prove accurate -- and the defendants' words and actions shown on the news broadcasts seem to confirm police suspicions -- would be an offshoot of the terror campaign that Arabs have practiced against Jews for over 80 years in the land? LET US consider some possibilities that explain the feminists' silence: They are not convinced that the assertions are true. After all, the trial hasn't begun and the accused are innocent until proven otherwise. On the other hand, no one has seen any solid evidence against Moshe Katsav, and yet demonstrations have been conducted outside his residence and demands made for his ouster. Feminists might see protesting as inherently prejudicial given the low socioeconomic status of the Beduin accused. But since when is socioeconomic status an excuse for feminist silence? Haredim (like those who live across the Green Line) don't seem to get a feminist pass because of their lack of social and economic wherewithal. Maybe feminists do accept that the "occupation" -- as they call it -- was a contributing factor. Which gets us back to: Is sexual violence less of a crime even if, using the prevailing "progressive" feminist worldview, the rapes were impelled by an immoral, oppressive situation and carried out by a deprived population? What seems to be at work here is an aberrant form of Israeli post-feminism: a sick twist on the "she asked for it" excuse -- not because of being provocatively dressed, but because of the provocation of being a Jewess and representing the larger -- "oppressive" -- state. LEFT-WINGERS have for years been promoting the theory that violence in Israeli society, and especially violence directed at women, is somehow connected with the IDF service of their husbands and boyfriends. The theory's proponents assume that the soldiers are either frustrated, or have become numbed by the force they must use against the civilian Arab population in the disputed territories. This pent-up anger is eventually released, the argument goes, at home against children, mothers and girlfriends. This post-Zionist outlook has insinuated itself inside the feminist mindset. And when you mix radical feminism with an ultra-left view of the Arab-Israel conflict, I'm not surprised that the feminists are immobilized by reports that the Galilee rapes might have been motivated by an Arab animus toward Jews. Whatever the reason for the silence of Israel's women's movement, it is a blemish on those parts of its ideology that mainstream Israel embraces, not to mention immoral from a Zionist standpoint. It is still not too late for women's groups to raise their voices on behalf of rape victims of the Galilee. Let them do so. Yisrael Medad lives in Shiloh. Contact him at yisrael.medad@gmail.com |
|
TRIUMPH OR BLUNDER OF DEMOCRACY
Posted by Steven Shamrak, March 21, 2007. |
|
This letter was sent to the Australia Jewish News newspaper. It could be said that the fact that 128 Jews have been able to create yet another Jewish organization dedicated to criticizing Israel is a tribute to the triumph of democracy in Australia. I have been publishing an Internet editorial for over five years, covering the Arab-Israel conflict from a Jewish national prospective and promoting the ideas of the original Zionists. Throughout all of this time, not one of my many critics has been able to name even one Muslim/Arab organization which would openly and completely support Israel's right to exist. Not one, anywhere in the world! I have been trying, with little success, to form a Jewish group in support of true Zionism in Australia but anti-Israel organizations, driven predominately by Jews, are popping up like mushrooms. It is amazing how many Jews seem to be willing to provide moral support to the enemies of the State of Israel in particular and the Western world in general. Why should this democratic right of freedom of expression only be limited to the right to criticize Israel? Why is Israel blamed for the problems that were created by Arab/Muslim countries with the enthusiastic assistance of a hypocritical International community? Why are most Jews, who are living in democratic countries, still scared, and unable to proudly and openly support the Jewish national liberation movement -- Zionism? Quote of the Week: "This country exists as the fulfillment of a promise made by God Himself. It would be ridiculous to ask it to account for its legitimacy." -- Golda Meir, Le Monde, 15 October 1971. PA Platform a Declaration of War. The PA new platform claims that acts of terror against Israel are a "legitimate right," and says that violence will continue. Minister of Strategic Affairs Avigdor Lieberman said that the goal of the new PA leadership is clearly the destruction of Israel. (Our enemies still retain the same goal as 58 years ago. It is time for Israel to return to her original Zionist aspirations! Negotiation with, and appeasement of the enemy does not work, specially for Jews.) Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. For the last 3 years, he has been publishing internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict -- independently, not as a member of any organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak.e@gmail.com |
|
GETTING PAID IN SPADES
Posted by Zalmi, March 21, 2007. |
|
The failure of all Israel's peace initiatives from Oslo to Gaza -- along with all the Jewish lives lost or shattered in the wake of these concessions -- can be blamed on one central fallacy. That is the expectation that -- given the right conditions -- the Arabs can become good neighbours, civilised people just like us -- committed to peaceful coexistence in the interest of promoting education, welfare and employment as free people. It's based on this expectation that the Americans and Europeans have lavished huge grants on Arafat and Abbas. And what the world has given in cash, Israel has given in land and trust -- by withdrawing from Lebanon and Gaza, and closing checkpoints all over the country even as bomb belts were still being intercepted. Perhaps the most dangerous concession has been to give up the Philadelphi corridor by which control of arms smuggling into newly liberated Gaza has been entrusted to Egypt in what was supposed to be a demilitarised Sinai. But the undeniable truth is that the Arabs are not like us and never will be like us. The unchanged living standards of the average Gazan family prove beyond doubt that virtually all the financial aid has been siphoned off in fraud or diverted to terror organisations. The concessions of Oslo were repaid with the indiscriminate bombing of our civilians in a merciless intifada. Instead of building homes and schools in liberated South Lebanon, the Arabs built bunkers and missile silos. And in Gaza they replaced our lush farmlands with Kassam missile sites and turned our irrigation channels into new smuggling tunnels through which they captured Gilad Shalit. Wishful-thinking American Jewish philanthropists stomped-up $14,000,000 to save the Gush Katif greenhouses and keep the 3,500 Arab employees in their productive jobs. But Hamas had other plans and the greenhouses were quickly destroyed and looted. It utterly sickens me to think how quickly that money was raised -- and wasted -- by American Jews and what miracles could have been performed in the poorest suburbs of Israel with those fourteen million dollars. So what prompts me to pen these lines today? As usual, it's a news report. This time it's a statement by Avigdor Lieberman, the ultra-right winger who wants Arabs moved to the other side of the fence etc etc. It would be hard to think of a more unlikely member of Olmert's supposedly left-of-center coalition. But this was never about principles or beliefs. It had more to do with personal needs; Olmert needed to stay in power at all costs and Lieberman clearly loves the limelight and perks of office. Lieberman has been irritated since the appointment of Ghaleb Majadle as the very first Arab minister to serve in the government of Israel. He was put in charge of Science, Culture, and Sports. (However barmy this may seem, one must not forget Kadima's appointment of another Arab to the Knesset Defense and Foreign Affairs committee!). Anyway, today's news story is about Lieberman protesting that Majadle will not sing the Hatikva. Apparently he does stand up for it but doesn't sing it. Perhaps he can't pronounce the words. Perhaps he might even choke on them. Be that as it may, it just seemed to me like some sort of black comedy. Here is a nation which has paid an incredible price in death and misery on the totally bankrupt notion that Arabs can someday be like us. And someone like Lieberman -- whose right wing beliefs must have discredited that notion a thousand times over -- expects our first Arab minister to sing the Hatikva like a kibbutznik ! Whether it is in concessions, humanitarian aid or just by filling up our fuel tanks every week, the undeniable truth is that whatever we and the rest of the world have given to the Arabs they have always repaid in spades. Spades to bury our dead. In Israel, New York, Washington, Madrid, London, Bali, Buenos Aires, Nairobi, Aden ... the list goes on. Contact Zalmi by email at zalmi@zalmi.net or visit his website: www.zalmi.net |
|
ISRAEL HAS NO RIGHT TO EXIST
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 21, 2007. |
|
Saree Makdisi's "In the war of words, The Times is Israel's ally" (LA Times, 3/11/07) makes an amazing number of factual errors and lapses of logic and rational thought. But most amazing is Makdisi's mis-perception of the issue: "right to exist." The reality of world history is that no country in the world exists today by virtue of its 'right'. All countries exist today by virtue of their ability to defend themselves against those who seek their destruction. Take Tibet, for example, and Israel for the opposite example. Tibet did nothing to threaten or anger China. No aggression, no threat of aggression. But in 1950, China invaded Tibet and ended Tibet's existence as a nation. As with all nations, Tibet had no right to exist. It existed only as long as it was not attacked. When it was attacked and could not defend itself adequately, nor garner support for its continued existence from the world's family of nations, it ceased to exist. The same would be true of Israel, except that Israel has defended itself adequately. Israel's continued existence is not by right, but only by its ability to defend itself against the Arab and Moslem world that seeks her destruction. And if it were ever unable to defend itself, it would soon share Tibet's fate...or worse. Nations exist because they can defend themselves from those who want to destroy them. Therefore, the question itself, "what right does Israel have to exist?" is a bogus question, misleading in its intention. No country ever came into existence by virtue of any right, except one. All nations throughout the world and across history came into existence by virtue of their ability to conquer some other indigenous inhabitants. Violence, murder, war, rapine, conquest, massacres, burning, looting, pillaging, and sometimes even genocide: those are the costs of nation creation in the real world, throughout all of history. The only known exception to this gallery of historical horrors is the modern state of Israel. Israel came into existence by virtue of: a. its ability to buy land with the help of world-wide Jewish and Christian Zionists. In sharp contradistinction to the manner in which all other nations have been created, the ineluctable historical fact is that Israel came into existence by legal, peaceful, constructive processes. Despite this fact, Israel is the one and only country whose right to exist is challenged. Q. So why pick on Israel? A. Because the question has nothing to do with an inquiry into Israel's rights or lack thereof. The question is simply a mechanism for the launching of an anti-Israel diatribe. Its real purpose is to open an avenue of propaganda attack, to bash Israel, de-legitimize her, denigrate her; and ultimately to justify the Arab world's desire to destroy her. In the absence of any inquiry into the right of infinitely more reprehensible societies -- Russia, China, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Mauritania, Sudan, inter alia -- why condemn Israel as a rogue state with no right to exist? Why not start with the worst offenders? Why de-legitimize Israel for its victory in a defensive war that was far less destructive than the religious imperialist Jihad of the Arab states whose invasions in the 7th to 9th centuries racked up tens, if not hundreds, of millions of casualties and destroyed four ancient civilizations (Byzantine, Coptic, Sassanian, and Berber)? Why not start with the most horrific of conquerors? Because the purpose of the question is to attack Israel and justify those who attack Israel! The bottom line is that if you think Israel has no right to exist, you are right. And I'm sure that Hitler would agree with you wholeheartedly. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
SLAVERY IN ISLAM
Posted by Michael Travis, March 21, 2007. |
|
This comes from Silas's website: http://www.answering-islam.org/archives/oldindex.html. You can reach him via email at silas333@hotmail.com. This article is archived at http://www.answering-islam.org/Silas/slavery.htm |
|
ABSTRACT Islam institutionalized slavery. Muhammad began to take slaves after he moved to Medina, and had power. Slaves were usually taken in raids on nearby Arab tribes, or war, either through offensive or defensive actions. Islam allows the taking of slaves as "booty", or reward for fighting. This has led to numerous "jihads" by Muslim states and tribes to attack other non-Muslim groups and obtain slaves. Islamic jurisprudence laid down regulations for the proper treatment of slaves. However, abuses have occurred throughout history. INTRODUCTION The West is familiar with the history of slavery in the new world. It was sinful and terrible, and it lasted for several hundred years. And it was abolished mainly through the efforts of Christians in England (Wilberforce, Clarkson) and America (the Abolitionists, primarily Protestant). However, few people in the west know about Islam and slavery. Most would be surprised that Islam authorizes the taking of slaves as spoils of war. From the days that Muhammad drew his sword to rob and conquer non-Muslims to this very day, Muslims have been taking non-Muslims, and even other black Muslims, as slaves. Muslims were enslaving black Africans long before any slave ships sailed for the New World. Muslims were taking and making slaves all over the lands they had conquered. Later, when slave ships were loaded with black slaves, often, a Muslim slave broker had the human cargo all ready to go. American slavers rarely had to go into inland to capture slaves, they were already waiting there, courtesy of some Muslim ruler, and/or slave broker! In many cases, if the black slaves were not sent to the New World, they were sent to the Mideast to be enslaved by Arabs, or kept by other black Muslims as slaves. MUHAMMAD, MUSLIMS, THE QURAN, AND SLAVERY To begin with, the Quran justifies slavery, and often mentions slaves. Here are some relevant verses: 33:50 -- "Prophet, We have made lawful to you the wives to whom you have granted dowries and the slave girls whom God has given you as booty." This verse clearly shows that Muslims believe that taking slaves in war was a God-given right. These slaves were considered 'booty' or the spoils of war. As the saying goes: to the victors go the spoils. 23:5 -- "... except with their wives and slave girls, for these are lawful to them:..." The passage's context here (not quoted in full) details how Muslim males are allowed to have sexual relations with their wives and slave girls. Implicit in this is that Muslim males had slave-concubines. 70:30 is basically a repeat of 23:5. Ibn Sa'd's "Tabaqat", gives a clear description of Muhammad having "relations" with at least one of his slave girls. Muhammad had sexual relations with Mariyah, his Coptic slave. Mariyah and her sister, Sirin were slaves given as gifts to Muhammad. Muhammad gave Sirin to Hasan Thabit, the poet. Ibn Sa'd says that Muhammad "liked Mariyah, who was of white complexion, with curly hair and pretty." [Taken from Ibn Sa'd's "Kitab al-Tabaqat al-Kabir" (Book of the Major Classes), p151]. Ibn Sa'd also writes that Mariyah bore Muhammad a son named Ibrahim. He died 18 months later. Sa'd writes: "If he had lived, no maternal uncle of his would have remained in bondage", p164. This shows that there were other Coptic slaves owned by the Muslims. The Quran also instructs Muslims NOT to force their female slaves into prostitution (24:34), and even allows Muslims to marry slaves if they so desire (4:24), and to free them at times as a penalty for crime or sin (4:92, 5:89, 58:3) and even allows slaves to buy their liberty, if they meet certain of their master's conditions (24:33). [90:10 'freeing of a bondsman' refers to Muslims ransoming other Muslims who were slaves of non-Muslims.] While I think it's nice to allow a slave to obtain his freedom, (at his master's discretion) it is tragic that Islam allows them to be enslaved in the first place. That's like robbing a bank and giving some of the money back to the bank, and thinking you did the right thing! The above verses show that taking slaves was ordained by Allah, and that it was permissible for Muslim males to have sex with their female slaves. It also shows that slaves were a valuable commodity to the Muslims, otherwise, Allah would not have imposed the penalty of freeing a slave to make up for a crime. BUKHARI'S HADITH AND SLAVERY There are hundreds of Hadith that deal with slavery. Whole chapters of Hadith are dedicated to dealing with the taxation, treatment, sale, and jurisprudence of slaves. In addition to this, numerous Hadith mention slaves, and their relation to their Muslim masters. Here is a selection of Hadith on slaves: [all Hadith are from Sahih Bukhari, unless noted.] Vol. 7-#137 Narrated Abu al-Khudri: "We got female captives in the war booty and we used to do coitus interruptus with them. So we asked Allah's messenger about it and he said, "Do you really do that?" repeating the question thrice, "There is no soul that is destined to exist but will come into existence, till the Day of Resurrection." Here, Muslims had taken female slaves, and had sex with them. Muhammad approved of this. He only admonished them not to practice coitus interruptus. Vol. 5-#459 [This Hadith is similar to the above. However, additional details are added]. Narrated Ibn Muhairiz: "I entered the mosque and saw Abu Khudri and sat beside him and asked him about coitus interruptus. Abu said, "We went out with Allah's messenger for the Ghazwa (attack upon) Banu Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus. So when we intended to do coitus interruptus we said "How can we do coitus interruptus without asking Allah's messenger while he is present among us?" We asked (him) about it and he said "It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist." Here, the Muslims attacked the Banu Mustaliq, and took slaves. The female slaves were distributed as booty to the Muslim soldiers. Being away from home, the soldiers became horny, and want to have sexual relations with the newly captured female slaves. They went to Muhammad and asked about coitus interruptus. He told them not to practice that, but to complete the sexual act with the slaves. Related Hadith show that they didn't want to get the women pregnant because they wanted to be able to sell them later on. Under Islamic law they were not allowed to sell pregnant female slaves. In effect, Muhammad okayed the rape of female prisoners. Vol. 3-#765 Narrated Kuraib: the freed slave of Ibn 'Abbas, that Maimuna bint Al-Harith told him that she manumitted a slave-girl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, "Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?" He said, "Have you really?" She replied in the affirmative. He said, "You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles." Here a woman frees a slave girl, but Muhammad says that she would have gotten more (heavenly) reward if she had given the slave one of her uncles, thus keeping the slave in slavery. Vol. 7-#734 "...At the door of the [Muhammad's] room there was a slave to whom I went and said, "Ask the permission for me to enter"... This is a long Hadith, and the quote reveals that Muhammad has slaves working in his house. Vol. 7-#344 Narrated Anas: "Allah's messenger went to the house of his slave tailor, and he was offered a dish of gourd of which he started eating. I have loved to eat gourd since I saw Allah's messenger eating it." This Hadith shows that another one of Muhammad's slaves was a tailor. #346 gives additional details. Vol. 5-#541 Narrated Abu Huraira: When we conquered Khaibar, we gained neither gold nor silver as booty, but we gained cows, camels, goods and gardens. Then we departed with Allah's apostle to the valley of Al-Qira, and at that time Allah's messenger had a slave called Midam who had been presented to him by one of Banu Ad-Dibbab. While the slave was dismounting the saddle of Allah's messenger an arrow the thrower of which was unknown, came and hit him... This Hadith shows that Muhammad held a slave, who was struck with an arrow. Vol. 5-#637 Narrated Buraida: The prophet sent Ali to Khalid to bring the Khumus ([one fifth] of the booty) and I hated Ali, and Ali had taken a bath (after a sexual act with a slave girl from the Khumus). I said to Khalid, "Don't you see this (i.e. Ali)?" When we reached the prophet I mentioned that to him. He said, "O Buraida! Do you hate Ali?" I said, "Yes" He said, "Do you hate him, for he deserves more than that from the Khumus." The note for this Hadith says "Buraida hated Ali because he had taken a slave girl form the booty and considered that as something not good." Here Ali took a newly captured slave girl, and had sex with her. When Muhammad was told about it, he approved of it. Note that slaves were considered as booty, and as a man's property, they can use the female slave for sex, i.e., rape them. Vol. 5-#512 Narrated Anas: "...The prophet had their warriors killed, their offspring and woman taken as captives..." This Hadith details the attack on the Jews of Khaibar. Again, many of the women and children were taken and made into slaves. Vol. 5-Chapter 67 Narrated Ibn Ishaq: The Ghazwa (attack upon) Uyaina bin Hisn waged against Banu Al-Anbar, a branch of Banu Tamim. The prophet sent Uyaina to raid them. He raided them and killed some of them and took some others as captives. Here, Muhammad sent out his men to attack another tribe. The killed some of them and took others as captives. Once again, the Muslims attacked a neighboring tribe. Vol. 5-#182 Narrated Aisha: "Abu Bakr had a slave who used to give him some of his earnings. Vol. 5-#50 Narrated Amr Maimun: "...The slave of Al-Mughira..."
Vol. 9-#462 Narrated Aisha: "...Furthermore you may ask the slave girl who will tell you the truth". So the prophet asked Barira (my slave girl)...
Aisha had her own slave.
Also, volume 7-#s 845, 341, 352, 371, 410, 413, 654, ch. 22, ch. 23, and
All these Hadith detail that many other Muslims owned slaves.
MUHAMMAD, ABU DAWUD'S HADITH, AND SLAVERY
Abu Dawud, vol. 2, chapter 597 -- "On a Man who Beats His Slave
While he is in the Sacred State (wearing Ihram)."
#1814- "(Abu Bakr) began to beat him (Bakr's slave) while the apostle of Allah was smiling and saying: "Look at this man who is in the sacred state, what is he doing?" [The note for this Hadith says "Abu Bakr beat his slave to teach him sense of responsibility."]
Abu Dawud, vol. 2, chapter 683 -- "On the Marriage of a Slave without the Permission of His Masters"
#2074- "Ibn Umar reported the prophet as saying: "If a slave marries without the permission of his master, his marriage is null and void."
Abu Dawud, vol. 2, chapter 1317 -- "Contractual Obligation of a Slave."
#3499, 3500 -- "The contractual obligation of a slave is three
days. If he finds defect in the slave within three days, he may return
it without any evidence; if he finds a defect after three days, he
will be required to produce evidence that the slave had the defect
when he brought it."
MUHAMMAD, THE MUWATTA OF IMAM MALIK, AND SLAVERY
The chapters mentioned below show just how intrinsic slavery was
during Muhammad's life, and the lives of the Caliphs. The Muwatta is a
book of Islamic jurisprudence. It is full of regulations on dealing
with slaves. Slaves were used throughout the Islamic world. Judging
from the amount of Hadith here, it is safe to assume that many Muslims
owned slaves.
Chapter 368 -- "Who takes the Property of a Slave When He is Freed"
Chapter 371 -- "Slaves who cannot be set Free in the Obligatory Freeing of a Slave"
Chapter 383 -- "Cohabitation with a Slave Girl after Declaring Her 'Mudabbir'" (free after the master's death).
Chapter 387 -- "Who is Entitled to the Property of a Slave or Slave Girl at the time of Sale."
Chapter 388 -- "The Limit of Responsibility of the Seller in the Sale of a Slave or Slave Girl."
Chapter 390 -- "On the Conditional Sale of a Slave Girl."
There are additional chapters dealing with slaves. This list is
enough to show that dealing with slaves during and after Muhammad's
time was extensive.
OTHER ISLAMIC WRITINGS ON MUSLIMS OWNING SLAVES
There are additional Islamic writings that document how Muhammad took purchased, sold, and gave away slaves. The following quotes are from "Behind the Veil".
Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, a great scholar and Islamic historian says in his book "Zad al-Ma'ad", part 1, p160:
"Muhammad had many male and female slaves. He used to buy and sell
them, but he purchased more slaves then he sold. He once sold one
black slave for two. His purchases of slaves were more than he sold."
"Muhammad had a number of black slaves. One of them was named
'Mahran'. Muhammad forced him to do more labor than the average man.
Whenever Muhammad went on a trip and he, or his people, got tired of
carrying their stuff, he made Mahran carry it. Mahran said "Even if I
were already carrying the load of 6 or 7 donkeys while we were on a
journey, anyone who felt weak would throw his clothes or his shield or
his sword on me so I would carry that, a heavy load". Tabari and
Jawziyya both record this, so Islam accepts this as true."
Ali, who was Muhammad's son-in-law, whipped Aisha's slave in front
of Muhammad to make her talk about the adultery charges against Aisha.
Muhammad did not say a word to Ali about beating the female slave.
[From the Sirat Rasulallah, p496.]
In the Sirat Rasulallah, Muhammad massacred 800 males and took
their women and children as slaves. He kept at least one Jewish female
named Rayhana as his concubine, and gave the rest away to the Muslims.
The Sirat says (p466) "Then the apostle divided the property, wives,
and children of Banu Qurayza among the Muslims...
and
"Then the apostle sent Sa'd Zayd brother of Ashhal with some of
the captive women of Banu Qurayza to Najd and he sold them for horse
and weapons."
One thing for certain: MUHAMMAD WAS A SLAVER. The names of many of
Muhammad's slaves are detailed in Muslim writings and they can be
found in "Behind the Veil".
Some Muslims claim that slaves under Islam were always treated
fairly and kindly, and that slaves in the West were always treated
like "chattel". The fact is that the real treatment slaves in both the
west and under Islam has varied. Some slaves were treated fairly,
others were treated brutally. Both the Quran and New Testament command
masters to treat slaves fairly. Compare Ephesians 6:9 with Sura 4:36.
Both are similar. However, the New Testament condemns slave trading in
1 Tim 1:10 (menstealers is the same word for slave-traders), the Quran
allows for, even urges slave-taking.
THE RIGHTS OF SLAVES UNDER ISLAM
According to the Hughes Dictionary of Islam, slaves had few
civil or legal rights. For example:
b) Slaves are as helpless before their masters as idols are before God -- Sura 16:77
c) According to Islamic Tradition, people at the time of their capture were either to be killed, or enslaved. Shows you that they were at the bottom of the barrel to start with.
d) According to Islamic jurisprudence, slaves were merchandise. The sales of slaves was in accordance with the sale of animals.
e) Muhammad ordered that some slaves who were freed by their master be RE-ENSLAVED!
f) It is permissible under Islamic law to whip slaves.
g) According to Islam, a Muslim could not be put to death for murdering a slave. Ref. 2:178 and the Jalalayn confirm this.
h) According to Islam, the testimony of slaves is not admissible in court. Ibn Timiyya and Bukhari state this.
i) According to Islamic jurisprudence, slaves cannot choose their own marriage mate. -- Ibn Hazm, vol. 6, part 9.
j) According to Islamic jurisprudence, slaves can be forced to marry who their masters want. -- Malik ibn Anas, vol. 2, page 155.
Slavery continued in Islamic lands from about the beginning to this very day. Muslim rulers always found support in the Quran to call 'jihad', partly for booty, part for the purpose of taking slaves. As the Islamic empire disintegrated into smaller kingdoms, and each ruler was able to decide what Islam's theology really meant. Usually, he always found it in support of what he wanted to do. Their calls of jihad against their neighbor facilitated the taking of slaves for Islam. The Quran and Islamic jurisprudence support the taking of slaves, so, those petty Muslim rulers were following the Quran when they needed slaves.
WHO COULD BE MADE SLAVES UNDER ISLAM?
1) Islam allows Muslims to make slaves out of anyone who is captured during war.
2) Islam allows for the children of slaves to be raised as slaves
3) Like #1, Islam allows for Christians and Jews to be made into slaves if they are captured in war. After Muslim armies attacked and conquered Spain, they took thousands of slaves back to Damascus. The key prize was 1000 virgins as slaves. They were forced to go all the way back to Damascus.
4) Christians and Jews, who had made a treaty with the ruling Muslims could be made into slaves if they did not pay the "protection" tax. This paying for 'protection' was just like paying a Mafia racketeer! This allowed Muslim rulers to extort money from non-Muslim people.
POST MUHAMMAD SLAVERY
WHERE DID MANY OF THE MUSLIM'S SLAVES COME FROM?
Although Muslims took slaves from all over the lands they conquered, many of the Muslim slaves were black Africans. There were forced to do the harshest labor.
There was a famous black slave revolt in Iraq where thousands of black slaves revolted and killed tens of thousands of Arabs in Basrah. There slaves were forced to work in the large Muslim saltpeter mines. During their revolt, they conquered the city of Basrah, in Iraq. They conquered city after city, and they couldn't be stopped. Their uprising and drive for freedom lasted for about 11 years. ["The History of Islam", Robert Payne, p.185.]
As the Muslim armies continued to conquer land, they acquired many slaves. Bernard Lewis in "The Arabs in History" writes: "polytheists and idolaters were seen primarily as sources of slaves."
In the early years of the Arab conquests, vast numbers of slave were acquired by capture. C.E. Bosworth in "The Islamic Dynasties" writes: "the use of this labor enabled the Arabs to live on the conquered land as a rentier class and to exploit some of the economic potential of the rich Fertile Crescent."
Ibn Warraq writes: "Arabs were deeply involved in the vast network of slave trading -- they scoured the slave markets of China, India, and Southeast Asia. There were Turkish slaves from Central Asia, slaves from the Byzantine Empire, white slave from Central and East Europe, and Black slaves from West and East Africa. Every city in the Islamic world had its slave market."
ABUSES OF SLAVES IN MODERN ISLAM TODAY
Muhammad did say that slaves should be treated fairly. But they were still a Muslim's property. Just as abuses occurred under Christianity, so too, many abuses occurred, and still occur under Islam. The difference between the two is that Islam ordains the taking of slaves during war, thus perpetuating slavery. Christianity does not. In slavery's perpetual existence, Islam has seen great abuses of slaves.
Everyone knows about the abuses of slaves in the new world. What do you know about the abuses of slaves under Islam? I found two very good books on slavery and Islam.
1) "Slavery and Muslim Society in Africa", by Allan Fisher, pub in 1971, and
2) "The Slave Trade Today" by Sean O'Callaghan, pub in 1961.
Both books really opened my eyes to how terrible slavery under Islam really is. I use the present tense, because it is obvious that these abuses continue to this day.
I also have a number of other references concerning slavery in Islam. A general survey is Hughes Dictionary of Islam. It notes a few basic points:
b) Slavery is in complete harmony with the spirit of Islam. Islam did make life better for the average slave, but Muhammad intended it to be a perpetual institution.
c) Hughes also says that it is a righteous act to free a slave. I just find it hard to understand that the god who told Muhammad to take slaves later tells him it's good to free slaves?
In 'The Slave Trade Today', Sean O'Callaghan toured the Mideast and Africa and covertly visited many slave markets. Since Islam allows for slavery and slave trading, he was able to see much of the real world of Islamic slavery. Remember O'Callaghan saw this less than 40 years ago. This probably still continues today, albeit more discreetly.
In Djibouti he writes:
"Why had the girls (female slaves who had just been sold) had
accepted their fate without a murmur, the boys howled and cried?"
"Simple" said the Somali, we tell the girls from a very early age -- 7
or 8 that they are made for love, at age NINE we let them practice
with each other, and a year later with the boys".
In Aden he writes:
"Only one offense was severely punished; attempting to escape from
the harem... The wretched girl was stripped and spread eagle in the
courtyard...punishment was administer by a eunuch, a huge powerful
Negro who seemed to enjoy his task. 70 lashes were given."
"Because of this (the fact that eunuchs can perform sexually), the
eunuch often has his penis removed as well as his testicles"! This
is also legal under Islamic law, since it is preparing the slave for
service.
In Saudi Arabia he writes:
'The slave population was estimated at 450,000"!.
...Slave auctions are no longer held regularly, only in an alley in
Mecca."
'I was awakened by shouts and screams coming from the courtyard. Rushing to the window I looked down to see a dozen slaves being herded through a door at the far end of the yard. They were being driven in like cattle by three hefty guards armed with long lashed whips. Even as I watched, one of the poor wretches, a Sudanese girl with huge breasts, received a savage lash across her naked buttocks let out a shriek of agony'
'As the next slave was led in, a murmur of excitement went up
among the buyers and they crowded closer around the rostrum. He was a
slender boy of about 12 years old with beautiful classical Arab
features. Although much has been written about Arab brotherhood and
solidarity, I knew that the Arab has no compunction in enslaving his
fellows should they fall into his hands.
The boy was naked and tried to cover his privates with his little
hands and he ran up the steps of the rostrum...there is an age old
saying among the Bedouin: "A goat for use, a girl for enjoyment, but a
boy for ecstasy". He (the now purchased slave boy) was claimed by a
tall bearded Arab who led him from the rostrum with an arm around his
waist".
This is just a portion of what O'Callaghan saw. This happens because Islam has made it legal for slavery. Yes, some of this is against Islam, but because Islam has made it into an institution, abuses will occur.
Remember, this happened just 35 years ago or so, and it is probably still happening today.
In Fisher's book, other observations are recorded:
In Mecca:
"The streets are full of slaves... we see a few old slave women. They are recognized by the poverty of clothing... but we see nothing of the younger women slaves who are kept in the houses of the city."
"As we move along we see two or three very old men and women who look like black skeletons. If we go to the mosque at sunrise we shall see some of these, if we go at sunset they will be there too, and if we pass by at midnight, we shall see them there still ... Sleeping on the stones in their rags. They have no home but the mosque, and no food but what they receive in alms; (they were) turned out to seek the bounty of Allah, as their masters would say."
Speaking of how Saudi obtains so many black slaves: "they (the slave traders) pose as Muslim missionaries who guide their compatriots (black African Muslims), to the Holy Places of Islam, to make the Pilgrimage, and be instructed in the Quran in Arabic." Once transported, they are made into slaves.
Fisher also notes that white slaves are most highly prized.
Another interesting comment I've come across is that there were
regions in black Africa that Muslim missionaries wouldn't go into. The
reason is that if those blacks became Muslim, they could no longer
enslave them. So, the Muslims banned spreading the word of Islam among
certain black tribes. It was from these tribes that local Muslim
rulers would harvest slaves, and sell them throughout the Islamic
world.
Time and time again, slavery in Islam is abused. The west has finished with slavery, Islam continues it, and with that, the abuses go on.
A recent article on the slavery in Sudan is found in Newsweek,
Oct. 12, 1992. Since that time, there have been numerous articles
written by every form of press on Islamic slavery in Sudan. Basically,
southern Sudanese, who are not Muslim, are attacked, and rounded up,
and sold into slavery. Anyone willing to do a search at a library
could find these articles quite easily.
Lastly, I remember watching a Tony Brown's Journal show. It
covered the slavery existing in Muslim lands today, the torture of
slaves, the hobbling by breaking the young boys ankles, the seizure of
Negro lands by Arabs, etc. Anyone is able to call the show and order
this tape. A Negro Muslim from Mauritania was on the show. He
described what the Arabs in Mauritania were doing to the Negroes (all
Muslim) there. Recent human rights publications have also stated that
the same is happening in Mali. Arab Muslims are forcibly taking land,
and enslaving Negro Muslims there.
Just a short while ago, a group of Negro pastors in the US, formed
a group to combat Islamic slavery amongst the blacks, both Muslim and
non-Muslim in Africa. The information on this can be found in the
August 1997 issue of Charisma magazine, and in the 11-17-97 issue of
Christianity. The group is called "Harambee" and is affiliated with
the Loveland Church in Los Angeles, CA.
Islam, when compared to Christianity is a step backwards; a step
into "justification" of the enslavement of others.
The book Behind the Veil can be obtained from The Voice of the
Martyrs @ 1-918-337-8015.
slavery.htm
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
1.2 BILLION DOLLARS TO THE PALS IN 2006
Posted by Bereny, March 21, 2007. |
|
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-337944,00.html 1.2 billion dollars to the pals in 2006 that is 1200,000,000 per year that is 100,000,000 per month that is 23,076,923 per week that is 3 milion 296 thousand and 703 dollars per day to "resist by any means Israeli occupation" or with other words to kill Jews. Steven Erlanger
Despite the international embargo on aid to the PA since Hamas came to power a year ago, significantly more aid was delivered to the Palestinians in 2006 than in 2005, according to official figures from the UN, U.S., EU, and IMF. Palestinians received $1.2 billion in aid in 2006, compared with $1 billion in 2005. Washington increased its aid to $468 million in 2006, from $400 million in 2005. The EU and its member states alone are subsidizing one million people in the West Bank and Gaza, a quarter of the population. While starvation has been avoided, a culture of dependence is expanding. (New York Times) Contact the poster at bereny@tin.it |
|
A DEAD PEACE ACTIVIST -- TANYA REINHARDT
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 21, 2007. |
|
1. What is a "peace activist."
We were informed that Tanya Reinhardt died in her sleep in her apartment in New York. She was called a "linguist" expert in syntax and probably some other linguistic issues. She was called also a "peace activist." Linguistically the words "peace activist" have the positive connotation that a peace activist is not only a good person but that he/she is better than most of us because this person is active. Most of us want peace. Go to anybody in Israel or West Bank and even in Gaza and you find a majority that wants peace. To be an activist you have to show the world that you are doing something, to demonstrate your feelings. Those who are in government or institution can plan steps that promote peace, a road map, a series of agreements and alike. The plan for peace is known in advance and thus may or may not be supported by the interested parties. An agreement between two different groups of citizens should be an agreement that is local and not dictated by outside institutions or countries. Heads of state and their cabinet as rulers who have to come up with decisions and are responsible to their consequences. "Peace activists" want their voices to be heard. They do not necessarily have a comprehensive plan for peace. They quickly understand that the louder they scream, the more extreme they are, their voices are more likely to be heard. To say that you are for peace is not enough. Most of us are such. But it is the psychology of "man bites a dog" which makes news. The more extreme are the allegations the more "peace activist" you are. So you wave the flag that you are Jewish and than you say that you are Israeli too. You get some audience. But then you have to come with more statements, Israeli are racist, do ethnic cleansing, kill Arabs, occupation, Apartheid state, paria state and "worse than the Nazi" and now you have a stronger title than your professorship: You are an internationally renowned "peace activist." At this stage the renowned does not have to come with a comprehensive peace plan. You trash the Oslo peace accords and every agreements that were made between Israel and the Palestinians. You blame Israel for war crimes while developing a tunnel vision: you look only at Israel and it's deed. Every deed is inherently bad, but the Palestinians never ever do anything wrong. There is no mention of homicide bombing in Tanya Reinhardt book. It simply did not happen. If Israeli civilians are killed it must have been done by IDF itself to justify the "occupation." Indeed, many doors were opened for her in the anti Israel anti-Semitic arena. The Palestinian media and activists accepted her with open hands and probably were one of those who financed her. But where is her peace plan if she is a "peace activist"? Reinhardt claimed free speech, yet free speech is a privilege that has to follow certain rules otherwise it is not free speech but a fascist dictate. Free speech has to be fair, balanced and accurate. Otherwise free speech becomes demagoguery. Free speech which criticizes has to allow to be criticized. She published articles in Counterpunch knowing that this anti Israel journal does not accept criticism and thus you can load your articles with falsehoods, misrepresentations, exaggerations and straight forward lies. You can ignore the Palestinians, Hamas, Hizballah, Islamic Jihad and alike as if Israel exists in a vacuum. While doing so Reinhardt did not carry any responsibility, she was not fair and was far from being balanced. Her peaceful activism turned into bitter hate. Now Israel has to be boycotted at any level, commerce, academia, culture and alike. This she thought "peacefully" will force Israel to accept her theory that Israel is illegitimate. Thus it came to the fact that the University and College Lecturers' Union (NATFHE) voted for a motion to boycott Israeli academics who do not condemn Israel's "Apartheid policies." Reinhardt was, of course, accepted with open hands. Academic freedom, freedom of speech from which Tanya was nourished did not matter. She was spitting into the well from which she was drinking water. Tanya Reinhart did not leave behind any significant linguistic research material, but she left behind tones of her papers and lectures against Israel and by inference the Jews. One wonders when did she have time to teach, to fulfill her duties at the University of Tel Aviv, a duty for which she was paid. What did she really teach? Was she indoctrinating her students? Was she able to separate her political world from her academic duties? It seems that in reality she did not advocate peace and coexistence between Palestinians and Israeli. Rather she did what ever she could to widen the gap and to delegitimize Israel, to prefer Arab domination over Jewish right to exist. Tanya Reinhardt does not deserve the title "peace activist." We only hope that she will not become the Shahid of the radical left academics who are trying to follow her steps. 2. "KSM's Confession"
Last week Khalid Sheikh Mohammed (KSM) admitted to having been responsible for planning no fewer than 28 acts of terrorism, including the horrific September 11 attacks, from "A to Z." The sensational confession, made during a military hearing at Guantanamo Bay, raises a number of serious questions -- most pointedly about the decision of the 9/11 Commission to rely on the CIA for information about this terrorist leader, who was captured in 2003. Although the 9/11 Commission identified KSM as a key witness in the World Trade Center and Pentagon, it never was allowed to question him or his CIA interrogators. Instead, the staff received briefings from a CIA "project manager" -- who was himself briefed by other CIA case officers on what KSM had putatively revealed during his interrogation. As the 9/11 Commission chairmen noted, this was "third-hand" information; but it allowed the CIA to fill in critical gaps in the commission's investigation. Now KSM's claims throw this reliance on the CIA into question. Consider the Feb. 26, 1993, attack on the north tower of the World Trade Center. A 1,500 pound truck bomb was exploded by Islamist terrorists, intending to topple the building. Over 1,000 people were injured, and eventually five of the perpetrators, including the bomb-builder, Ramzi Yousef, were caught and sentenced to life imprisonment. Yousef is a relative of KSM, and was involved with him in a subsequent plot to blow up U.S. airliners. Nevertheless, the 9/11 Commission concluded that KSM had played at most a "cameo role" in the 1993 attack, limited to providing Yousef with $600 and having a few phone conversations with him. And it based this conclusion largely on the CIA briefings of what KSM had said during his interrogation. According to the CIA, for example, KSM had maintained that "Yousef never divulged to him the target of the attack." The 1993 WTC bombing, therefore, appeared unrelated to the 9/11 attack -- and so the 9/11 Commission had no need to investigate it, or the conspirators involved in it. In his confession, however, KSM says that he was responsible for the WTC bombing. If so, both it and 9/11 are the work of the same mastermind -- and the planning, financing and support network that KSM used in the 1993 attack may be relevant to the 9/11 attack. Of especial interest are the escape routes used by Abdul Rahman Yasin and Ramzi Yousef, both of whom helped prepare the bomb and then fled America. Yasin (who is not even mentioned in the 9/11 report) came to the U.S. from Iraq in 1992, at about the same time as Yousef, and then returned to Iraq via Jordan. Despite being indicted for the World Trade Center bombing, and put on the FBI's list of the most-wanted terrorist fugitives with a $5 million price on his head (increased to $25 million after 9/11), Iraqi authorities allowed Yasin to remain in Baghdad for 10 years (In 2003, after the U.S. invasion, he disappeared.) His co-conspirator Yousef, who entered the U.S. under an alias on an Iraqi passport (switching passports to his Pakistani identity), escaped after the 1993 WTC bombing to Pakistan, where, after being involved in another bombing plot with KSM, he was arrested and is currently in a U.S. prison. But if indeed KSM had been behind the 1993 bombing -- and the 9/11 Commission had not been told the opposite by the CIA -- the question of what support KSM had in recruiting the conspirators and organizing the escape routes of the bomb makers would have become a far more pressing investigative issue for the commission. Of course, KSM's credibility is a very big "if." He might have lied in his confession about his role in the 1993 WTC bombing; he might have lied to his CIA captors (which itself would say something about the effectiveness of their aggressive interrogation); or, in selecting bits and pieces out of their full context, the CIA project officer may have accidentally mis-briefed the 9/11 Commission staff. But at the root of the problem is the failure of the commission itself to question KSM. This was not for lack of trying. The commission chairmen fully recognized the need to gain access to the author of 9/11, and took note that their staff was becoming "frustrated" at their inability to get information from KSM and other detainees. On Dec. 22, 2003 -- with less than seven months remaining before they had to deliver their report -- they brought the problem up with George Tenet, then CIA director. He told them, point blank, "You are not going to get access to these detainees." The commission considered using its subpoena power, but was advised by its general counsel that since KSM was being held in a secret prison on foreign soil, it was unlikely that any court would enforce a subpoena. The commission also decided against taking the issue public, believing it could not win in a battle with the administration, at least in the time it had left. So, lacking any viable alternatives, it allowed the CIA to control the information it needed from KSM and other detainees. The result is that basic issues concerning KSM's interrogation -- and the dozens of crucial citations in the 9/11 Report -- are now in such doubt that 9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey suggested last Sunday, in his Daily News column, that KSM be put on trial in New York, where presumably he could be properly cross-examined. While that remedy may be far-fetched, some resolution of this investigative failure is necessary. 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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
PESACH PARTNERSHIP
Posted by Anita Tucker, March 21, 2007. |
|
Dear friends, You'll never guess what my husband Stuart and I dressed up as this Purim --- a Jeep with four flat tires --. Yep, last Purim and Pesach we were still full of energy ready to build anew, our spirit and values had not been destroyed in the destruction of Gush Katif. But when not much happens to enable our community to move forward to this goal it "takes the air out of your tires". So now it is almost Pesach and this year's spring renewal season is pretty depressing for too many Gush Katifers. I look out the back window of our temporary caravilla and see that, thank God, the flowers are blossoming again on every weed that just dropped a seed, even the wind and other things helped these flowers to be maintained by allowing the seed to start anew. However for us not very much is renewed. No building anew yet for the Gush Katif towns. Not one town has yet been enabled to build their homes anew. Not one synagogue or public building in a permanent new location anew and up.
We have the seeds and the energy and are just waiting to be able to DO IT. With God's help, the Pesach message will polish up this spirit and those values we brought out with us from Gush Katif. I know it and pray for it.
Yet, meanwhile the ray of hope I see is shining from those businessmen who have had the guts to begin anew. The competition for Gush Katif stores near the big cities is really rough and most of the locations that the Katifers have been allotted for beginning their renewed stores are off the main road. So investing anew and getting customers to come has caused really rough riding for these "Nachshons" with the guts to give it their best -- As a former celery farmer, it is obvious to me that these retail stores need a bit of fertilizer, watering and T.L.C. (tender loving care) so that they'll get a head start and flourish as they deserve... The same agricultural techniques will work for those Gush Katif families who are still going through really rough times, with no work and no permanence yet in site. Also those who have put huge investments into starting new farms which they already had built up and lost in Gush Katif -- yet not receiving appropriate compensation for what they had and seeking to rebuild their good name and clientele, are also going through very tough financial and emotional times. So some caring volunteers hooked up with the Gush Katif Committee to come up with a great idea to enable anyone of you who also care and feel concern to have an opportunity to be the trigger for a chain of chesed called the "Pesach Partnership". If you are the type that makes the effort to send your Maot chittim funds to where you can really make a difference with endless ripples, than I think this might be it You will in one effort help the needy, help the new stores and help those temporarily suffering through the rough times caused by the Expulsion from Gush Katif. Read the details below and if it sounds as great an idea to you as it does to me than surely you will act on it. Have a Chag Sameach! Anita Any of you interested in specifically partnering directly with my Netzer Hazani community can send help via USA-Central Fund of Israel,
mail airmail to Anita tucker
or for all of Gush Katif communities partner via details in the below link. http://www.katifund.org/pesach/pesach.htm please forward to your friends as well thanks for caring, caring gives strength,
Until August 2005, Anita Tucker was a farmer in Gush Katif, Gaza. Together with other Gaza expellees, she now lives in temporary quarters in Netzer Hazani, waiting for the government to settle the settlers so they can renew productive lives. As this article shows, she isn't holding her breathe, waiting for the government to do what they are supposed to. An activist, she has initiated action to help the expellees. She could use your help. |
|
IRAQI MUSLIMS USE CHILDREN IN CAR BOMBING
Posted by Michael Travis, March 20, 2007. |
|
This comes from
|
|
Insurgents in Iraq detonated an explosives-rigged vehicle with two children in the back seat after US soldiers let it through a Baghdad checkpoint over the weekend, a senior US military official said Tuesday. The vehicle was stopped at the checkpoint but was allowed through when soldiers saw the children in the back, said Major General Michael Barbero of the Pentagon's Joint Staff. "Children in the back seat lowered suspicion. We let it move through. They parked the vehicle, and the adults ran out and detonated it with the children in the back," Barbero said. Tools of the trade. A screwdriver. Detonator. Semtex. Child. All to struggle in the way of Allah. Blasphemy. Madness. [...] "It killed the two children inside as well as three other civilians in the vicinity. So, a total of five killed, seven injured," the official said. Officials here said they did not know who the children were or their relationship to the two adults who fled the scene. They had no information about their ages or genders. "The brutality and the ruthlessness of this enemy hasn't changed,"
said Barbero, deputy director of regional operations of the Joint
Staff. "They are just interested in slaughtering Iraqi civilians, to
be very honest."
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
THE STATE OF ISRAEL IS IN A STATE OF DENIAL
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 20, 2007. |
|
This below was a comment on an article that reported that that the Lebanon War of last summer has been declared a war (Ronny Sofer, "Ministerial committee declares Lebanon conflict a war," Ynet News, http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3378240,00.html). The next issue is what to name the war. |
|
This controversy reveals current state of denial An aggression that resulted in so many casualties, not a war? And there are other examples of this state of denial: - Palestinians want peace.
Too depressing... Tracy W (03.19.07) |
|
BROTHER OF TERROR
Posted by Joe Kaufman, March 20, 2007. |
|
This appeared in FrontPageMagazine.com today. |
|
Nabil El-Shukrijumah lives with the dubious distinction of having a family associated with terrorism. His father was the spiritual leader of one of the most dangerous mosques in America and a character witness for an explosives expert convicted for his involvement in a plot to blow up New York's Lincoln and Holland Tunnels. His brother, a jihad camp trainee, is said to be the fugitive leader of a terror cell charged with carrying out the next wave of 9/11-style attacks on U.S. soil. Is Nabil's terrorist pedigree enough to push him towards the same? If his websites are any indication, then the answer is yes. Gulshair El-Shukrijumah had been an imam at Masjid Nur Al-Islam, located in Brooklyn, New York. He was sent there as a missionary by the Saudi government, in 1986. One of his congregants, Clement Rodney Hampton-El, was a veteran of the Soviet-Afghan War, an explosives expert, and possibly the one that taught the cell how to build the bomb used in the '93 World Trade Center attack. Gulshair, as well, was a translator for Omar Abdel-Rahman (a.k.a. The Blind Sheikh), who was the local spiritual leader of the group associated with the bombing conspiracy, Maktab Al-Khidmat. Prior to Hampton-El's and Abdel-Rahman's convictions in 1996, Gulshair had taken his wife and kids out of Brooklyn and brought them to Miramar, Florida, where he was to become the imam of the Al-Hijrah Mosque. Nabil, his son, was 13, at the time. Aside from the father, the family had only been in Brooklyn for a short stay. The wife, Zuhra Abdu Ahmed, and children had previously been residing in Saudi Arabia. Adnan El-Shukrijumah was the eldest of the children. When he was born, in 1975, his mother was just 16 years old, a child herself. His father was 47. Shortly after arriving in Florida, Adnan enrolled in classes at Broward Community College, studying engineering. According to school records, he was a student there till 1999. Adnan was widely known throughout the South Florida Muslim community, having spent time in numerous area mosques and Islamic centers. He was a devout Muslim and was well versed in Quranic teachings, often imparting that knowledge to those younger than himself. In May of 2001, Adnan left Florida for Trinidad, where he had family -- according to his father, to sell Islamic garments. Nabil, his brother, was 18, at the time. He would not return, as authorities gathered intelligence that Adnan was being groomed by Al-Qaeda to become the next Mohammed Atta, with whom it is believed he (Adnan) had dealings while in the States. That intelligence came, in part, from the operational commander of the September 11th attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. Other terrorists Adnan has been associated with include: "Dirty Bomber" Jose Padilla, Hamas and Al-Qaeda fundraiser Adham Hassoun, and convicted terrorist Imran Mandhai. Padilla and Hassoun are currently awaiting trial in Miami. Today, Adnan is alleged to be part of an Al-Qaeda nuclear bomb plot. When word got out about his terror ties, his father was released from his duties as imam of Al-Hijrah, in March of 2003. Gulshair didn't have to wait long to find a new job, as he soon became a director at the Shamsuddin Islamic Center, located in North Miami Beach. The mosque had recently moved across the street from its original location, at the same address as the American Muslim Association of North America (AMANA). AMANA's director, Sofian Abdelaziz Zakkout, was previously the Vice President of the Health Resource Center for Palestine (HRCP), a "charity" that was shut down, after it had been exposed for having ties to Hamas. Besides his profession as an imam, Gulshair was also an Arabic language teacher. He even tutored Mandhai, before he (Mandhai) went to prison. Prior to his disappearance, Adnan had set his father up with a website that would be used to sell Gulshair's books and tapes on how to learn Arabic. The website was appropriately titled, " Master Arabic." On it, Adnan stated, "My father is the narrator of a system designed to take you from as basic as the alphabet to constructing words to conversation to Arabic [sic] grammer... Go ahead and click your way to mastering Arabic." The site contained a guestbook within it. The very first signatory in it was AMANA's Zakkout. Soon after him, an individual by the name of Bilal Philips signed. Years before, Philips had been placed on the U.S. Attorney's list of potential co-conspirators of the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. He wrote, "Salaam alaykum Ibn Shukri, Mabrook on the website and special salaams to your father and prayers for his good spiritual and physical health. He was one of my first teachers in Arabic and is a dear friend, though geography and world politics has separated us. Tell him that, as always, I love him for the sake of Allaah. Was salaam, Bilal." Gulshair's site also contained a picture of another "unindicted co-conspirator" of the '93 bombing, Siraj Wahhaj. Adnan's tribute to his father would end in July of 2003, when the website would be taken down. [The internet address for the site is set to expire in June of 2008.] However, recently, Adnan's brother, Nabil, would honor Gulshair with his own tribute site -- of the same title. Nabil, who runs a print company out of his parents' home, like his brother before him, has proficient web design skills. Within My Space, an online community that allows you to keep in contact with friends and family, Nabil created a new "Master Arabic" page for his father. On the page, he placed numerous pictures of Gulshair. One is of Gulshair teaching two young boys at his Brooklyn mosque. One of the lines on the blackboard reads, "The human being is under the oppression of the kuffar (unbelievers)." Gulshair's words were not the only disturbing message on this web page. In December of 2006, Nabil posted the following, with severe implications: "As Salaam Alaikum Dad, you're still living among all of us, will see you later but not that much later." In addition to his father's page, Nabil created his own personal My Space page. He uses the name "El-Shukri." [Shukrijumah is the combination of Shukri and the last name of the family, Jumah or Juman.] On the site, one finds many examples of how he has sought to follow in his father's and brother's extremist footsteps. Numerous pictures that Nabil put on his page are of a jihadist nature. One of them can easily be construed as a threat to Israel's existence. It states, "Oh Jerusalem, we are coming" and shows a terrorist [draped with a Saudi flag] with rifle on horseback, watching as the city burns in flames. Another picture depicts scenes of dead American soldiers. Under one of the scenes, it says, "These are the armaments of the enemy, who are disgraced." The picture, which contains a militant holding a rocket launcher, is from an Iraqi "resistance" group. Above the picture are large images of Saddam Hussein. Two pictures on the page are from a Muslim rap group called Soldiers of Allah. They both include the black Islamic flag of war, which has been made popular by the banned British Islamist organizations, Al-Muhajiroun and Hizb-ut-Tahrir. As well, when one opens Nabil's page, he/she is treated to Soldiers of Allah's song, '1924.' It contains the following quotes: "I am not going to give one inch of Palestine to the Jews... I would rather have my flesh be cut up than cut out Palestine from the Muslim land..." and "When the west was training Muslim scholars for hire, Jews were setting Al-Aqsa mosque on fire!" [A reference to a 1969 fire at the mosque, started by Dennis Michael Rohan, an Australian Christian] One other picture on Nabil's page is not worrisome for what it has on it, but for where it came from, www.arab3.com. The site is registered to Yousif Al-Olayyan, a former student at the University of Florida. Al-Olayyan is also the registered agent and the editor-in-chief for www.alsakher.com, a site that features in-depth discussions about Al-Qaeda, including from those that claim to be affiliated with the organization's leaders. One individual, who goes by the title 'Al-Am' or 'The Pains,' stated, " I was with Sheikh Dr. Ayman Al-Zawahiri to launch attacks in the Arab country..." Along with the many pictures, Nabil placed a video on his My Space about how America attacked itself on 9/11. This is outrageous, given the fact that his brother Adnan, who is nicknamed Jafar the Pilot, is suspected of flight training with the perpetrators of 9/11. My Space allows people to join others' My Space pages as "friends." Every "friend" needs to be approved by the owner of the site. As well, My Space allows you to place your favorite set of "friends" on your homepage, along with their pictures or logos. On Nabil's site, there are numerous suspect individuals. His favorites include: a 23-year-old resident of Hollywood, Florida named Yusuf Abdullah, who calls the El-Shukrijumah family "a blessing in my life." Abdullah's page sports a background picture of a Quran and a Kalashnikov rifle alongside one another. Additionally, on his site, one finds audio and video of the song 'Ghurabaa' by Saad al-Ghamdi. In the piece, it is repeated, "So let us make jihad, and battle, and fight from the start." Also featured in Nabil's favorites is a My Space page dedicated to the deceased Chechen terror warlord, Omar Ibn al Khattab. Khattab, who was closely aligned with Osama bin Laden and the Al-Qaeda network, was responsible for the murders of scores of Russian soldiers. The page is called "Hattab -- The Lion of Islam," and it contains an abundance of footage from Chechen terror operations, as well as the Hamas logo and a poem stating, "It is Islam, [it has] returned. In the path of Allah, we have walked and announced Jihad. We have returned with a machine gun." Another "friend" of Nabil is Vegeta (a.k.a. Saiyan). On Vegeta's site, visitors can see photographs of Hamas and Hezbollah terror fighters, including children dressed in terrorist garb. Nabil posted a comment on the site, calling Vegeta "my Muslim Brother" and approvingly stated, concerning an anti-Israel video Vegeta had posted, "Very good, Masha' Allah." Nabil enjoys posting comments on other people's sites, including numerous statements containing the highly offensive term " nigga." He has also posted religious material, such as a flyer for the Nur-Ul-Islam children's Academy. Nur-Ul-Islam was co-founded by Raed Awad, a former agent for the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a "charity" that raised millions of dollars for Hamas. In addition, it was Awad that is believed to be responsible for the conversion to Islam by Jose Padilla. Web design skills within the El-Shukrijumah family are not just limited to Adnan and Nabil. Aidah, their 22-year-old sister, has her own My Space page, as well. On it, she pays tribute to her lost brother with photographs. On one, she refers to him as "Big bro." In another, she and her siblings are sitting outdoors next to their father, holding a sketch of Adnan. The photo was taken outside the CBC Building in Toronto, one of Adnan's known stomping grounds. The picture is labeled "Memories." Long forgotten, it seems, was the time, in 1997, when "Big bro" was arrested for biting Aidah. That was then. Today, Aidah has a new life with her husband, who from the looks of one of his shirts, hails from the windy city of Chicago. Relocated, she is, awaiting her soon-to-be born baby, in Albuquerque, New Mexico, thousands of miles from the family's Miramar home. Does she know where her brother, Adnan, is? Who can say? Does any of the family know? If they do, they've been careful not to slip up. The mother has admitted to telling him not to return, for fear of him being brought to justice. One thing is for certain, though. Whether Adnan comes back or not, the family has a new adult jihadi to keep the legacy alive -- Nabil El-Shukrijumah. Given the trouble the United States has had in locating his brother, one would think that he would be watched with at least the same interest and intensity. |
|
ISLAMIST WEBSITE TEACHES MUJAHIDEEN TO USE WEBFORUMS TO FOSTER ANTI-WAR SENTIMENT AMONG AMERICANS
Posted by BE Shepp, March 20, 2007. |
|
This entry was posted on 3/19/2007 12:27 PM and is filed under Ummah News Links (http://ummahnewslinks.com/2007/03/19/islamist-website-instructs-mujahideen -in-using-popular-us-web-forums-to-foster-antiwar-sentiment- among-americans.aspx). |
|
In the past few months, Islamists engaged in "media jihad" have increased their efforts to expose as broad a Western audience as possible to their jihad films, which purport to document the growing success of the mujahideen in Iraq and Afghanistan. As part of this endeavor, they have posted jihad films on popular free video-sharing websites such as YouTube, LiveLeak, and Google Video, hoping that such films will tip public opinion in the West against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan -- thus pressuring Western governments to withdraw their troops from these countries. As part of the campaign to foster anti-war sentiment among Westerners, and more specifically among Americans, a member of the Al-Mohajroon Islamist website with the username Al-Wathiq Billah instructed mujahideen in how to infiltrate popular American forums and to use them to distribute jihad films and spread disinformation about the war. The following are excerpts: "Raiding American Forums is Among the Most Important Means of Obtaining Victory in the Fierce Media War -- and of Influencing the Views of the Weak-Minded American" "There is no doubt, my brothers, that raiding American forums is among the most important means of obtaining victory in the fierce media war... and of influencing the views of the weak-minded American who pays his taxes so they will go to the infidel American army. This American is an idiot and does not [even] know where Iraq is... [It is therefore] mandatory for every electronic mujahid [to engage in this raiding]." "It is better that you raid non-political forums such as music forums and trivia forums... which American people... favor... Define your target[ed forum]... and get to know it well... Post your contribution and do not get into... futile arguments..." Indicate You Are an American "Obviously, you have to register yourself using a purely American name... Choose an icon that indicates that you are an American, and place it next to your nickname [in the forum]." "In my experience, the areas most visited in American forums... [are titled] 'Random Thoughts' and 'What's going on in your mind?'... [The former] takes priority in the American forums, and is highly popular. You should post your contribution there... This should include films of the mujahideen in Iraq, mujahideen publications in English, and images and films of the Americans' crimes, [such as] killing unarmed civilians in Iraq... etc." "Invent Stories About American Soldiers You Have [Allegedly] Personally Known" "Obviously, you should post your contribution... as an American... You should correspond with visitors to this forum, [bringing to their attention] the frustrating situation of their troops in Iraq... You should invent stories about American soldiers you have [allegedly] personally known (as classmates... or members in a club who played baseball and tennis with you) who were drafted to Iraq and then committed suicide while in service by hanging or shooting themselves..." "Also, write using a sad tone, and tell them that you feel sorry for your [female] neighbor or co-worker who became addicted to alcohol or drugs... because her poor fiancé, a former soldier in Iraq, was paralyzed or [because] his legs were amputated... [Use any story] which will break their spirits, oh brave fighter for the sake of God..." How to Make Americans Feel Frustrated With Their Government "You should enter into debate or respond only if it is extremely necessary... Your concern should [only] be introducing topics which... will cause [them to feel] frustration and anger towards their government..., which will... render them hostile to Bush... and his Republican Party and make them feel they must vote ton bring the troops back from Iraq as soon as possible." "Do not... discuss issues pertaining to Arabs or Muslims at all, whether negatively or positively... because this could be a trap for you... In addition, do not ask people to circulate the material [you have posted] in other forums... as these types of requests will expose you..." Links in the original at MEMRI Contact BE Shep at BEShepp33@aol.com |
|
WHAT IS SO IMPORTANT ABOUT JERUSALEM?
Posted by Michael Travis, March 20, 2007. |
|
The United States breaks the boycott of the 'Palestinian Authority' The United States consulate in 'East Jerusalem' (less than a mile from my home as the crow flies) has been known for years as the unofficial US embassy to the 'Palestinians.' It has also been known as a hotbed of virulent anti-Israel and anti-Semitic positions. Ultimately, if the boycott was going to be broken, this was not a surprising source. Al-AP has reported within the last hour that the United States Consul General in Jerusalem has met with 'Palestinian' 'finance minister' Salam Fayad. Yes, that would be the same Salam Fayad (pictured in the very western-looking suit at top left) who told us last week that he had no idea where moneys that have been donated to the 'Palestinians' since Hamas took power ended up. Jacob Walles, the US consul general in Jerusalem, met with Fayaad in the West Bank town of Ramallah, said Palestinian Information Minister Mustafa Barghouti. "This is part of the ordinary meetings that Palestinian ministers are conducting with the international community," Barghouti said. Micaela Schweitzer-Bluhm, spokeswoman for the US consulate, would not confirm or deny the meeting. An Israeli official said the government was waiting for official US comment before responding. The official spoke on condition of anonymity because there was no official U.S. confirmation. Just yesterday Hamas took 'credit' for a shooting attack against an
unarmed Israeli electrical worker at the Karni crossing into the Gaza
Strip. But hey -- let's just give them a posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 6:21 PM It is Islam that is the "new-comer, the invader, the squatter, the illegal occupier... for Islam (and the first Muslim) never appeared before 622AD. The Christians had already been there for six centuries, the Jews for over FIFTY centuries! Below is Article number 44, by Lee Underwood, |
|
In 586 BCE, on 9 Av, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon destroyed the city of Jerusalem and the First Temple. Two thousand five hundred fifty-three years later, on June 7, 1967 (28 Iyar 5727), during the Six-Day War, Israel regained control of Biblical east Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount. For the first time in more than 2,000 years, was in complete control of the entire city. Within a few days, Defense Minister Moshe Dayan gave control of the Temple Mount back to the Moslems, while maintaining Israeli sovereignty over it. Thirteen years later, Israel adopted its "basic law; Jerusalem" declaring, "Jerusalem, complete and united, is the capital of Israel". If the above had happened in any other nation, it wouldn't have garnered much attention from the rest of the world. But it didn't happen in just any other nation. It happened in the nation of Israel. Because of this, the entire world is in an uproar. On November 29, 1947 -- six months before the declaration of the State of Israel -- the United Nations passed Resolution 181. One of the main points of this Resolution was the establishment of Jerusalem as a "corpus separatum" ("body of separate covenant"). This means, basically, that the UN separated the city of Jerusalem from the rest of the world and created a separate covenant for it. This has never been done before in all of history. In 1950 the UN adopted the "Statute for the City of Jerusalem"setting forth the regulations for the administration of the city of Jerusalem by the United Nations. It would be an international city; it would not be linked to, or controlled by, any nation or government except the United Nations. Why would the world be so concerned with an ancient city like Jerusalem? It is located approximately 27 miles inland from the coast. It has no natural resources. Most of it is built upon the ruins of previous structures. What makes it so important that the United Nations would set it apart from any other city or nation in the entire world? The interesting aspect is that Jerusalem has never been important to the nations unless it was important to Israel. When Israel started to return to the Land in large numbers during the late 1800's, the nations began to stir. It was just a little more than 50 years later that the UN adopted its "Statute for the City of Jerusalem". The importance of Jerusalem lies in its spiritual aspect, not its physical makeup. It is a city that lives and responds to the Holy One of Israel. God declares to Ezekiel how He had mercy on Jerusalem, how He blessed her and made a covenant with her (Ezekiel 16.6-14). Jeremiah laments of her misery and suffering after God judged her (Lamentations 1.1-22). Yet God declared that He will not forget Jerusalem; He will establish an everlasting covenant with her (Ezekiel 16.60-63). Jerusalem is the center of the earth, according to the Lord (Ezekiel 5.5). Its very existence continually proves that there is a God and that He will judge every man and hold him accountable for his deeds. God has declared that Jerusalem is the place from which He will reign: "At that time they shall call Jerusalem 'The Throne of the Lord'" (Jeremiah 3.17a). It is to Jerusalem that Jesus will return in the Glory of the Father (Acts 1.11; see also Ezekiel 43.1-4). The Lord said He was "exceedingly jealous for Jerusalem" (Zechariah 1.14). Many of the prophets spoke of the Lord's return to Jerusalem. The Lord declared through Zechariah, "'I will return to Jerusalem with compassion; My house will be built in it', declares the Lord of hosts" (Zechariah 1.16a; see also Zechariah 2.12; 8.3). More than 4,000 years ago Abraham understood the importance of the city when he declared that Mount Moriah, in the midst of Jerusalem, would be "the place where God will be seen" (Genesis 22.14). Yet God also declared that Jerusalem would be a problem for the nations of the world: "Behold, I am going to make Jerusalem a cup that causes reeling to all the peoples around; and when the siege is against Jerusalem, it will also be against Judah. And it will come about in that day that I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the peoples; all who lift it will be severely injured. And all the nations of the earth will be gathered against it" (Zechariah 12.2-3). The Lord also gave warning of His judgment against those who come against Jerusalem: "And it will come about in that day that I will set about to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem" (Zechariah 12.9); "Now this will be the plague with which the L-rd will strike all the peoples who have gone to war against Jerusalem; their flesh will rot while they stand on their feet, and their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongue will rot in their mouth" (Zechariah 14.12). Jerusalem is important to the Holy One of Israel. It is the place that He has chosen to dwell in the midst of His creation. It is also the place where He will judge the nations. Does this scenario sound familiar? It should. It is happening in our very day. Literally all of the nations of the world are gathering against Israel. The line has been drawn in the sand. It is the people of the God of Israel standing against all the nations of the world. Whose side will you be on? This is not the time to be straddling the fence. Now is the time to make a stand. Pray for the peace of Jerusalem, for through her peace will come the peace of the world. Enter into the battle, put on the full armour of God. Stand and see the salvation of the Lord. Additional Readings: http://www.knesset.gov.il/laws/special/eng/basic10_eng.htm
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/partition.html
http://domino.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/db942872b9eae454852560f6005a76fb/cfb4e24b399e8efd8525644a007972e1!OpenDocument
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
UNREALISTIC DEFENSE SECRETARY; UNDERSTANDING ARAB HONOR
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 20, 2007. |
|
LONDON'S RED MAYOR Mayor Ken Livingstone espouses multiculturalism. How does he implement it? (1) Organized a conference on Islam and the West with speakers who almost all denounced the West as the source of the conflict (jihad); and (2) Set aside separate prayer rooms for Muslim men and women, and nothing for other faiths. The media generally have ignored the anomaly of a socialist mayor allying himself with the most reactionary strain of Islam, its arguments, and its demands. Leftist British newspapers took the Muslim line on the suicide bombing of London, by blaming not jihad but British foreign policy. "Now overwhelmingly and everywhere you find people who scream their heads off about the smallest sexist or racist remark, yet refuse to confront ultra-reactionary movements that explicitly reject every principle they profess to hold." There is no logic nor principle behind this subservient alliance with Islam (Prof. Steven Plaut, 2/23 from Nick Cohen). UNREALISTIC SEC. OF DEFENSE The new Sec. of Defense, Robert Gates, is complacent about nuclear weapons getting into the hands of Iran's President, because, Gates supposes, other leaders in Iran would deal responsibly about it. Sec. Gates omitted the increase, such possession would permit, in Iran's ability and likelihood of damaging US interests. His thinking is dangerous (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/2006, p.45 from Jerusalem Post, 12/6). Such theories mired the US in Iran-Contra, which strengthened Iran against us. It is the kind of thinking that saw Iran's Pres. Khatami as a moderate, while he pursued nuclear development and built up terrorist forces. It ignores Islamist ideology and assumes, without knowing, ideological differences in opposing factions in Iran. Those are slender suppositions on which to risk national survival. Hence, Gates's thinking is dangerous. UNO VS. ISRAEL The UNO Human Rights Commission is publishing a report that condemns Israel for war crimes, occupation, and apartheid, and demands an end to the financial boycott of the Hamas regime, for humanitarian reasons. It also finds the firing of rockets at Israel a war crime, but claims Israel does much worse. The report blames Israel for impoverishing Gazans. Actually, as much economic aid flows to the P.A. as before, but to Abbas. (The Muslims waste or divert the aid to war.) UNDERSTANDING EASTERN "HONOR" You may have a strong sense of honor and an Arab may have a strong sense of honor, but it isn't the same. In eastern, traditional societies, vindication of their culture is more important than freedom and wealth. Both the Baathists and the Islamists dream of heroic resistance and of restoring "greatness." Westerners tend to dream more of earning their first million or writing a book. Muslims would rather grind into poverty than make peace with Israel, whose existence is a humiliation of Islam, which is supposed to conquer all and keep the infidels down. Fighting may not accomplish anything, but it redeems their honor. The 9/11 attack was unprovoked aggression and a war crime. It puzzles us to find the Muslims neither outraged by 9/11 nor ashamed of it. The explanation is that they consider violence justified to protect their honor, as if a form of self-defense. Having somewhere, somehow, been humiliated by the infidel US, perhaps merely being shown up by its success compared with their failure, they attacked it. That is why Muslims all over the world rejoiced over our casualties. We spare civilians, and consider the Muslims uncivilized for not doing so. Their society is primitive in its ethics. They consider civilians fair game, merely for belonging to the enemy, and as spoils of war. Remember, they still practice slavery in places; elsewhere the colonial West banned it, the Arabs didn't evolve their code of ethics beyond that barbarism. Remember laughing at Saddam's Minister of Information, who told the TV cameras that his troops were mopping up the Americans at Baghdad airport, though the cameras showed the US troops advancing? He knew he was lying. However, under his code, it would not be honorable to admit weakness. He must save face. No wonder Saddam pretended to hide weapons of mass-destruction he didn't have. (He may have hidden them in other countries or been lied to, himself.) His lie resulted in war, but he preferred being thought strong. They may not be rational by our lights, but neither are they crazy (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/2006, p.45 from Jonathan Rauch, National Journal). MISSED OPPORTUNITIES Iran represses strikes. The US fails to protest. We lose opportunities to embarrass and weaken the Iranian regime and to encourage dissidence there (Michael Rubin, MEF News, 2/23). Iranians have many grievances against their regime. They might overthrow it if they did not feel abandoned by us. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
TYRAN-A-SOROS
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 19, 2007. |
|
1. THE MADNESS OF KING GEORGE.
George Soros lunched with some reporters on Saturday at Davos. He talked about spending $600 million on civil society projects during the 1990s, then trying to cut back to $300 million, and how this year it will be between $450 and $500 million. His new projects aim, in Floyd Norris's words, to promote a "common European foreign policy" (read: an anti-American foreign policy) and also to study the integration (or so he thinks) of Muslims in eleven European cities. He included among his dicta a little slight at Bill and Melinda Gates, who "have chosen public health, which is like apple pie." And then, after saying the United States was now recognizing the errors it made in Iraq, he added this comment, as reported by Norris in The New York Times' online "Davos Diary": "To what extent it recognizes the mistake will determine its future." Soros said Turkey and Japan were still hurt by a reluctance to admit to dark parts of their history and contrasted that reluctance to Germany's rejection of its Nazi-era past. "America needs to follow the policies it has introduced in Germany. We have to go through a certain deNazification process." No, you are not seeing things. He said de-Nazification. He is not saying, in the traditional manner of liberal alarmists, that the United States is now where Weimar Germany was. He is saying that the United States is now where Germany after Weimar was. Even for Davos, this was stupid. Actually, worse than stupid. There is a historical analysis, a moral claim, in Soros's word. He believes that the United States is now a Nazi country. Why else would we have to go through a "certain de-Nazification process"? I defy anybody to interpret the remark differently. The analogy between Bush's America and Hitler's Germany is not fleshed out, and one is left wondering how far he would take it. Is Bush like Hitler? If it is "de-Nazification" that we need, then in some sense Bush must be like Hitler. Was the invasion of Iraq like the invasion of Poland? Perhaps. The more one lingers over Soros's word, the more one's eyes pop from one's head. In the old days, the Amerika view of America was propagated by angry kids on their painful way to adulthood; now, it is propagated by the Maecenas of the Democratic Party. But nobody seems to have noticed. I did not see Soros's canard reported in other places, and on the Times' website on the day I saw it there were only four comments. Imagine the outcry if a Republican moneybags--say, Richard Mellon Scaife--had declared that Hillary Clinton is a communist or that Bill Clinton's America had been in need of a certain de-Stalinization process. But I hear no outcry from Soros's congregation. People who were repelled by Bush's rather plausible notion of the "axis of evil" seem untroubled by Soros's imputation of even worse evil to Bush. Because Bush really is a fascist, isn't he? And Cheney, too; and Donald Rumsfeld, and Antonin Scalia, and even Joe Lieberman, right? Or so I fear too many liberals now believe. There seems to be a renaissance among liberals of the view that there are no enemies to the left. I hear no Democrats expressing embarrassment, or revulsion, at Soros's comment. Whether this silence is owed to their agreement or to their greed, it is outrageous. But if Soros lives in a Nazi state, what does that make him? I still recall Karl Jaspers's devastating point, in The Question of German Guilt in 1947, that every German shares in the guilt of Hitlerism. Such guilt was not, in Jaspers's mind, an abstraction or a purely political matter. But Soros does not appear to accept any responsibility for the Nazi-like crimes he ascribes to the United States. Perhaps he thinks that, having contributed $18 million to elect John Kerry in 2004, he was an American hero, a dissident, a resistance fighter, the Grill Room's representative of the White Rose. And if, in 2008, Soros's gang comes to power, how will de-Nazification work? Whom shall we send to prison? Perhaps we should prevent everybody who voted or argued for the war from running for office. At the very least, the neocons must be brought to justice. (Maybe Ramsey Clark can represent them.) What makes Soros's remark even more twisted is that he himself experienced something of Nazism. He was 14 when the Nazis entered Budapest. On December 20, 1998, there appeared this exchange between Soros and Steve Kroft on "60 Minutes": Kroft: "You're a Hungarian Jew ..."
Kroft: "... who escaped the Holocaust ..."
Kroft: "... by posing as a Christian."
Kroft: "And you watched lots of people get shipped off to the death
camps." Kroft: "In what way?"
Kroft: "My understanding is that you went ... went out, in fact, and helped in the confiscation of property from the Jews."
Kroft: "I mean, that's--that sounds like an experience that would send lots of people to the psychiatric couch for many, many years. Was it difficult?"
Kroft: "No feeling of guilt?"
Kroft: "For example, that, 'I'm Jewish, and here I am, watching these people go. I could just as easily be these, I should be there.' None of that?"
So this is the psychodrama that has been visited on American liberalism. We learn Soros never has nightmares. Had he been tried in a de-Nazification process for having been a young cog in the Hitlerite wheel, he would have felt that, since other people would have confiscated the same Jewish property and delivered the same deportation notices to the same doomed Jews, it was as if he hadn't done it himself. He sleeps well, while we sleep in Nazi America. Soros is ostentatiously indifferent to his own Jewishness. He is not a believer. He has no Jewish communal ties. He certainly isn't a Zionist. He told Connie Bruck in The New Yorker -- testily, she recounted-- that "I don't deny the Jews their right to a national existence-- but I don't want to be part of it." But he has involved himself in the founding of an anti-aipac, more dovish Israel lobby. Suddenly, he wants to influence the character of a Jewish state about which he loudly cares nothing. Once again, he bears no responsibility. Perhaps his sense of his own purity also underwrites his heartlessness in business. As a big currency player in the world markets, Soros was at least partially responsible for the decline in the British pound. Forget my differences with Soros's Jewishness. Call it shul politics. But the characterization of the United States under Bush as Nazi is much bigger, and more grave, than shul politics. It casts a shadow over U.S. politics. In the same conversation at Davos, Soros announced that he is supporting Senator Barack Obama, though he would also support Senator Hillary Clinton. So my question to both of those progressives is this: How, without any explanation or apology from him, will you take this man's money? 2. The New Blood Libel
Since at least the Middle Ages, the approach of Easter has been marked by anti-Semites who make the false allegation that Jews slaughter gentile children and use their blood to bake unleavened bread for Passover. This alleged bloodthirst among the Jews is a classic anti-Semitic myth, known as the blood libel, that has been used over the years to justify the actual killing of many actual Jews. This holiday season, a new blood libel is being bandied about, though those wielding it would be appalled to think they are dealing in the same hatreds. They are, after all, neither Cossacks nor rednecks marauding through the woods of Eastern Europe or the American South. We are not saying they are anti-Semites. They are a two-time Pulitzer-Prize winner and a billionaire philanthropist, writing in publications that appeal to an intellectual audience in America. Here's the two-time Pulitzer-winner, Nicholas Kristof, in yesterday's New York Times: "B'Tselem, a respected Israeli human rights organization, reports that last year Palestinians killed 17 Israeli civilians (including one minor) and six Israeli soldiers. In the same period, B'Tselem said, Israeli forces killed 660 Palestinians, triple the number killed in 2005. Of the Palestinians killed in 2006, half were not taking part in hostilities at the time they were killed, and 141 were minors." Here is the billionaire philanthropist, George Soros, writing in the New York Review of Books of April 12: "The current policy of not seeking a political solution but pursuing military escalation -- not just an eye for an eye but roughly speaking ten Palestinian lives for every Israeli one -- has reached a particularly dangerous point." Aside from the fact that Israel was being attacked by the Palestinians after withdrawing to the 1967 borders of the Gaza Strip, here's some context that Mr. Kristof left out. B'Tselem is funded by German church groups, the governments of Switzerland and the European Union, and the same Ford Foundation that underwrote the anti-Israel agitation that preceded the United Nations' Durban conference. Moreover, the statistics Mr. Kristof cites don't include Israelis killed by other Arab terrorists working in league with the Palestinian Arabs and funded by the same Iranian terror master. In 2006, that included 43 Israeli civilians and 117 Israeli soldiers who were killed in the war with Lebanese-based Hezbollah. The B'Tselem statistics do include -- but Mr. Kristof omits -- the 55 Palestinian Arabs killed in 2006 by other Palestinian Arabs, a figure to which can be added another 84 killed in intramural violence in January and February of 2007. For these deaths, it seems Mr. Kristof hasn't yet figured out how to blame the Israelis. Nor does Mr. Kristof's selective use of the B'Tselem statistics include the Americans and those from other countries who were killed by Palestinian Arab terrorists, such as Daniel Wultz, a 16-year-old from Florida who was slain in a 2006 suicide attack on the old central bus station in Tel Aviv. More broadly, both Messrs. Soros and Kristof ignore an essential difference. The Israelis are out to minimize both their own casualties and those of the noncombatants behind whom their enemies hide. They build bomb shelters into every building and have established a culture where civil rights groups, independent commissions, and a Supreme Court investigate allegations of misconduct beyond the collateral damage that is an inevitable consequence of any war. The Palestinian Arabs, in contrast, are out to maximize casualties, training their children as suicide bombers in hopes that they will become "martyrs," so that gullible Westerners who haven't thought the matter through will use their deaths to extract concessions from Israel. The Palestinian Arabs attack Israeli civilian targets such as pizza parlors, banquet halls, wedding parties, and buses as a matter of policy, while the Israeli army goes to great lengths to avoid targeting civilians. *** Given Mr. Soros' significance as the moneybags of the activist core of the Democratic Party, it is going to be illuminating to see how the party reacts to the billionaire's call for the party to "liberate itself from AIPAC's influence." In his New York Review of Books piece Mr. Soros comes awfully close to buying into the whole paranoia of Professors Mearsheimer and Walt. Mr. Soros, who describes himself in the New York Review of Books as neither a Zionist nor "a practicing Jew," claims to have a great deal of sympathy "for my fellow Jews" plus "a deep concern for the survival of Israel." He says he is prepared to be subjected to "a campaign of personal vilification." We don't desire to vilify either Messrs. Soros or Kristof, nor do we draw any conclusions about their motives. At a certain point, though, people stop caring about what their motives are. The fact is that they write at a time when a war against the Jews is underway. It is a war in which the American people have stood with Israel for three generations. The reason is the same that moved America to take the side it took in the war against the Nazis and communists, from whom Mr. Soros fled as a youth in Europe. The reason is that Americans are wise enough to understand which side in the war against the Jews shares our values -- and to sort out the truth from the libels. 3. "Straight Talk on Palestine"
Even before the Palestinian "unity" government was sworn in Saturday at least five European countries announced that they would resume their business with the Hamas-led coalition. The U.S. has endorsed Israel's position on the Palestinian government -- namely, that its political platform does not meet the conditions set by the so-called "Quartet" of the U.S., EU, U.N. and Russia for ending the boycott. Washington is now under heavy pressure from its Arab allies in the Middle East to deal with it. But the U.S. should stand firm. The Palestinian government is not committed to the Quartet's demands that it renounce violence, recognize Israel and abide by agreements signed with Israel in the past. The speeches delivered by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his new Hamas partner, Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh, at Saturday's parliamentary session show that the Palestinians are determined instead to continue their strategy of double-talk. Neither the president nor the prime minister openly called for an end to terrorism or for recognizing Israel's right to exist. And to add to the confusion, the two men came up with a political program that contains many contradictions and ambiguities. The wording of the program was drafted in such a way as to allow both Hamas and Fatah to argue that neither party had totally abandoned its traditional position. The equivocal tone is also designed to appease the Americans and Europeans. After all, the main goal of the new coalition is to get the international community to resume desperately needed financial aid. With regard to the three main demands of the Quartet, the program leaves the door wide open for different interpretations. On the issue of terrorism, the program states that the new government "stresses that resistance is a legitimate right of the Palestinian people ... and our people have the right to defend themselves against any Israeli aggression." But the program also says that the new government will "work toward consolidating the tahdiya [period of calm] and extending it [to the West Bank] so that it becomes a comprehensive and mutual truce." The program sets a number of conditions for halting the "resistance" -- ending the "occupation" and achieving independence and the right of return for Palestinian refugees, as well as an end to Israeli security measures in the West Bank and Gaza Strip (including the construction of the security fence). In other words, Fatah and Hamas are saying that the violence will continue as long as Israel does not meet these demands. Regarding Israel's right to exist, the program does not even mention the name Israel. Instead, it refers to Israel as "The Occupation." It also makes no mention of the two-state solution. Rather, it reiterates the Palestinians' opposition to the establishment of a Palestinian state with temporary borders. Although the document declares that the "key to peace and stability is contingent on ending the occupation of Palestinian lands and recognizing the Palestinian people's right to self-determination," it does not specify which "lands" -- those captured by Israel in 1967 or 1948. Fatah representatives, of course, argue that the program refers only to the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem. Hamas, on the other hand, will be able to argue that the phrase "Palestinian lands" applies also to all of Mandatory Palestine. Referring to the third demand of the Quartet -- abiding by agreements between the PLO and Israel -- the political program states that the new government will only "respect" agreements signed by the PLO. Hamas leaders have already explained that there is a huge difference between "respecting" an agreement and making a pledge to fulfill it. In other words, Hamas is saying that while it accepts the agreements with Israel as an established fact, it will not carry them out. Elsewhere in the program, the new government says that it will abide by unspecified U.N. and Arab summit resolutions, leaving the door open for Fatah to claim that this is tantamount to recognizing the two-state solution and all the agreements with Israel. Fatah will cite the 2002 Arab peace plan that implicitly recognizes Israel. Hamas, on the other hand, can always claim that among the Arab summit resolutions that it intends to abide by is the one taken in Khartoum, Sudan, in September 1967. The resolution contains what became known as "the three no's" of Arab-Israel relations: no peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel. Although the program makes it clear that the PLO, and not the new Hamas-led coalition, will be responsible for conducting negotiations with Israel, it also seeks to tie the hands of President Abbas by stating that any "fateful" agreement must be approved by the Palestinians in the PA-controlled areas and abroad through a referendum. The program, moreover, closes the door to any potential concessions on the problem of the refugees by emphasizing their "right of return to their lands and property [inside Israel]." The international community must demand an end to the era of ambiguity and double-talk. If the new government is opposed to terror, there is no reason why it should not state this loudly and clearly. If it recognizes Israel -- as some of its members claim -- then why not announce this in unequivocal language? The international community must insist that the messages coming out of the Palestinian leaders be the same in both English and Arabic. There is no point in pouring millions of dollars on the "unity" government as long as it's not prepared to make a clear and firm commitment to halt terror and recognize Israel's right to exist. 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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
LOOK WHO'S THREATENING TO DEPORT PALESTINIANS...
Posted by Avodah, March 19, 2007. |
|
This comes from http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Blog.aspx/2 |
|
You won't be reading much about this in the mainstream press, because it doesn't involve Israel A Middle Eastern government has announced that it is considering a plan to deport untold thousands of Palestinians from their homes, forcibly uprooting them and compelling them to leave. It won't be the first time this government has threatened such a move -- in fact, back in 1995, it carried out those threats, and sent numerous Palestinians packing. But you won't be reading much about this in the mainstream press, nor will you hear nary a peep of protest from much of the left and its sympathizers over the cruelty and brutality of such a move. And that's because the government in question -- believe it or not -- is Libya, which views this as a form of protest against the policies of the new Palestinian Authority (PA) government. In fact, the PA is so concerned about the possible Libyan move, that PA Minister for refugee affairs Dr. Atef Adouan went public on the issue, telling the London-based newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi this, "We hope that the Libyan leadership will act wisely and with patience. Deporting the Palestinians from Libya would cause greater suffering to the Palestinian refugees." Further proof, once again, of the cynical and manipulative manner in which the Arab states continue to exploit the issue of Palestinian refugees -- and of the selective morality of those who criticize Israel on a regular basis. Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
DOME OF THE ROCK -- TARGET OF MUSLIM EXTREMISTS?
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 19, 2007. |
|
Concern has been raised in Israel that Islamic terrorists such as Hamas or Al Qaeda may target the Muslim shrine of the Dome of the Rock or Al Aksa Mosque which both sit atop the site of the Jewish Temple Mount in Jerusalem. The Islamic terrorists would then blame Israel to arouse Muslim anger in order to trigger a war in the Middle East. The subsequent loss of Muslim lives is of little concern to them. On the contrary, they even think this is the best way to get their fellow Muslims into their paradise by making them "Shaheedim" (Martyrs for Islam). We have already seen Shiite and Sunni Muslims target each others' mosques for demolition and that both use their so-called "shrines" for the storage of weapons, explosives and safe houses for their Terrorists. They do, however, expect Americans and Israelis to respect the self-proclaimed sanctity of their mosques and shrines. Suspicions were raised in light of the frenzied reaction to Israel repairing a crumbling, earth-quake damaged, earthen ramp that leads up to the site of the Temple Mount. They tried to assert that the Dome of the Rock and Al Aksa Mosque were endangered by these repair measures -- a rather ridiculous claim. It was also thought that they were planning to collapse the shaky ramp on top of Jewish worshipers at the Western Wall. They also may have intended to use this excuse to permanently close the Mugrabi gate (the only gate open to non-Muslims) to the Temple Mount so no "infidels" (non-Muslims) could enter. In this light it is now clear why they always opposed any infrastructure improvements in the area. With an anarchist agenda, they want people to get hurt and are happy to help the process along if it benefits their religious war against the Jews, Christians and all other non-Muslims whom they view as "Infidels" who they must kill. In fact the Muslim Wakf has been carrying out secret excavations under the Temple Mount to make up and reinforce their own religious claims while disposing of all Jewish artifacts from the First and Second Temple periods of the Jews. Israeli engineers warned them that they were weakening the supportive walls of the Temple Mount, including the Dome of the Rock and Al Aksa Mosque. A dangerous bulge was spotted on a major retaining wall of the Temple Mount. Yet the Muslim Wakf have continued to undermine the foundations until today. A moderately small earthquake in February 11, 2004 coupled with the effects of a major snowfall, damaged the Mugrabi ramp leading up to the Temple Mount. Even a small earthquake could collapse the ancient stone walls. Many earthquakes have hit this region which lies on a major fault along the Jordan River called the Dead Sea Rift which runs the length of Israel, creating a series of active faults throughout the country. The area underlying the entire region is a series of major and minor faults under constant pressure to slip or crack, producing major and minor tremblers. [If you wish to explore this further pull up "Earthquake 2004 damage to Mugrabi ramp to Temple Mount" on Google.] This will explain why even a small trembler could collapse the wall of Solomon's Temple Mount now that the Muslim Wakf has dug out the core of the Temple Mount. It is merely an event waiting to happen. The other possibility is that the Muslim Arab Terrorists might be preparing to place high explosives on the remaining supports that hold up the Dome of the Rock and Al Aksa Mosque. Time will tell. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at winstonmedia@comcast.net |
|
RESOLVING DISPUTES WITH THE BROKEN RECORD RESPONSE
Posted by Israel Zwick, March 19, 2007. |
|
Those that are growing up in the current generation are accustomed to listening to clear, crisp digital music from their CD's, DVD's, MP3 players, and satellite radios. Those of us that were raised in the turbulent years of the Viet Nam War and Yom Kippur War can still recall the static, scratchy noises coming from vinyl LP records. Whenever the phonograph needle encountered a particle of dust or a scratch, the music would be accompanied by irritating noise. Occasionally, the scratch would be deep enough to prevent the phonograph needle from advancing. In that case, the last few words would be repeated continuously until someone picked up the phonograph arm and advanced it manually. Psychologist Manuel Smith used the analogy of the "broken record" in his bestselling book When I Say No, I Feel Guilty, published in 1975. Dr. Smith's popular book presented a variety of suggestions for using verbal techniques to resolve conflicts, disputes, and disagreements. His first lesson on assertive responses involved verbal persistence, a technique he titled, "Broken Record" which employed continuous repetition of the desired outcome. Though the book is over 30 years old, much of its advice is still pertinent, and perhaps even more important today then it was then. The current leaders of the State of Israel would be advised to incorporate some of these skills in their diplomatic dealings. The Palestinian Arabs have portrayed themselves as "poor, oppressed, suffering people who are struggling for liberation and self-determination." They condone and excuse their barbaric violence against Israeli civilians as "legitimate resistance operations against the harsh Israeli occupation and aggression." In contrast, the defensive security measures of the Israeli government are repeatedly condemned as "violations of the humanitarian rights of the Palestinian people." In response to these repeated vilifications by international non-governmental organizations, the Government of Israel should perhaps adopt a simple "broken record" response. To every condemnation of their defensive measures, they should simply respond, "First the Arabs must stop their incitement and violence." Israeli spokesmen would respond to criticism with the following simple statements: Stop the incitement and violence and there will be no security fence. Stop the incitement and violence and there will be no checkpoints. Stop the incitement and violence and there will be no travel restrictions. Stop the incitement and violence and there will be no military incursions. Stop the incitement and violence and there will be no targeted killings. Stop the incitement and violence and there will be no arrests. Stop the incitement and violence, and then there will be peace, harmony, and tranquility. Another oft repeated statement is, "The best defense is a good offense." Instead of Israel having to repeatedly defend itself from fallacious accusations, Israel should start going on the offensive and make demands from the Arabs as preconditions for peace negotiations. The following demands should be considered and repeated often: 1. Acceptance. The Arabs must accept that Jews have strong historical, religious, and cultural ties to the Holy Land. Jews have every right to live and establish communities in the environs of Jerusalem, Hebron, Bethlehem, Shechem, Shiloh, and other historical sites. Jews should even have the right to live in Arab countries where they lived for 2000 years until they were forcibly expelled. These should be the minimal starting points for negotiations between Israel and her Arab neighbors. If the Arabs cannot accept these minimal conditions of civilized society, they should not be given international support. Manuel Smith was not the only voice of that era to advocate verbal techniques for resolving disputes. The popular country singer, Kenny Rogers, also offered sound advice for avoiding conflict in his two hit songs, The Gambler, and Coward of the County. They are presented here in crisp, clear, digital sound, so it won't be necessary to pick up the phonograph needle and advance it manually. Play MP3, Kenny Rogers, The Gambler Play MP3, Kenny Rogers, Coward of the County Contact Israel Zwick at his website: http://cnpublications.net This article is archived athttp://cnpublications.net/2007/03/18/broken-record-response/#more-490 |
|
ISRAEL PLACED HER HEAD IN QUARTET'S NOOSE
Posted by Marcel Cousineau, March 19, 2007. |
|
"Since Abbas has estranged himself from the Quarter's demands and the commitment to the Road Map, Israel has nothing to discuss with him. Abbas has colluded with Hamas, and therefore Israel cannot engage in talks with such a Palestinian unity government." That statement would be true if Israel had a backbone to stand firm and not be so easily led by the ring in her nose. Israel tries to convince the world instead of acting. Israels serious error has been to let the Quartet determine the agenda for its future instead of leading strong and standing firm. Weakness always calls out to others to do what Israel should have done long ago. I don't even think Israel has the will or the sense to defeat this latest and more deadly threat to her existence. Israel on her deathbed calls upon the Quartet's Dr. Mengele for help and assisted suicide is what Israel shall receive at their hands. Israel at present under Olmert will allow itself to be pushed wherever the Quartet deems it should be pushed. The Palestinians know this and are openly moving forward towards their end goal of Israel's destruction without shame or any care. They have been open about their plan and the Quartet is aware of where the Palestinians are going. It is beyond stupid of Israel to allow this to continue, but without faith in Hashem Israel is rules by fear and continues to make extremely bad decisions. Israel, by playing this peace farce Quartet final solution game, has placed its head in the noose. What Israel's enemies could not do in war against Israel, President Bush has accomplished by peace. The trojan horse from a 'friend' has been accepted with open arms and there seems to be no awakening from this 2nd holocaust in the making. Contact Marcel Cousineau at his website:
|
|
NEO-COLONIALISM AGAINST ISRAEL?
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 19, 2007. |
|
EGYPT'S CRACKDOWN ON MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD Warning that the Muslim Brotherhood seeks to take over Egypt and impose an Islamist regime, Pres. Mubarak ordered the arrest of dozens of Brotherhood leaders. His regime's focus was on the wealthy members who finance the organization/Party (IMRA, 2/21). The crackdowns come in cycles. When Mubarak seeks more support, he releases imprisoned Brotherhood members. When they become a military or political menace, he cracks down. If he stayed on top of them, he wouldn't risk their coming down on him. He shouldn't be surprised at their current rise. The longer he monopolizes power, the greater the corruption and the more he becomes the focus of discontent. Having marginalized all other opposition, the Brotherhood remains, attracting support from opponents who have nowhere else to go. That they are making a Faustian bargain does not occur to them. He makes the danger from them seem the danger of Islamism. This may persuade the US he is in the right. However, his regime is Islamist, too. He has imposed Islamism gradually. By allowing Islamist education, he fertilizes the Islamist movement against which he now is fighting to retain power. He is no friend of the US nor of civilization. NEO-COLONIALISM? Judea and Samaria are disputed territories. The EU subsidizes organizations within Israel that agitate against the Jewish claim to them. This interference is neo-colonialism. (I don't know if it is that, but it is dangerous meddling.) European governments finance Peace Now, B'Tselem, and the Peres Center. (If Israel were democratic, the nationalists would be able to denounce those governments for interference and those groups for being foreign agents.) The EU subsidizes the Israeli Committee Against House Demolitions, which promotes anti-Israel boycotts and divestment. (It opposes demolition of houses built illegally by Arabs or used by terrorism, not houses legally owned by Jews.) Other financing opposes various Israeli self-defense measures. (None I have heard of support groups opposed to Arab aggression.) European financing of subversion in Israel is extensive and mostly hidden. It should be publicized and denounced more than the one time Israel did (Prof. Steven Plaut, 2/21 from Gerald Steinberg). Surprising. The government is just as subversive. But it wants to give up on its own time scale. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
ISRAELI INTELLIGENCE: "ISRAELI ARABS ARE A SIGNIFICANT DANGER"
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 19, 2007. |
|
Israeli Intelligence has concluded that Israeli Arabs (those who live inside Israel's territories) are a significant danger should they arise "en masse". Imagine that! While that has been predicted for years, with no surprise, Israel has another internal and even greater danger. They come in different categories and titles but, for all intents and purposes, let's call them "The Left". This is an amalgam of people who believe that Jews do not belong in Israel and that Arab Muslims do. These various Jewish groups assist the Israeli Arabs and those called Palestinians who live in adjoining areas to support claims of prior ownership, despite the fact that most worked the Land as tenant farmers for sheiks in Syria and elsewhere abroad. This would include the seven cities given over to control of the Palestinian Authority by the Oslo Accords as Nablus (ancient Schehem), Bet'Lehem (later a city inhabited by Christians, now the Christians are driven out by the Muslims), Jenin, Qalquilya, Ram'Allah and Gaza (which has been made "Judenrein" by Ariel Sharon and Ehud Olmert) and the Leftists of Israel. There are many self-styled Jewish organizations, hostile to Judaism, whose members do not believe in the rights of Jews to the Land. It would difficult to list them all and their "accomplishments" in merely a few pages. We have seen them, the Machsom Women in Black harassing soldiers at checkpoints. Many would act as an impediment to soldiers who are either breaking up riots or assembling to go to their units at the front. A few other oxymoron "titles" come to mind such as Peace Now, Gush Shalom, New Israel Fund, Rabbis for Human Rights, B'tselem and others. The Supreme Court's Leftist bias was built up under Chief Justice Aharon Barak and now under the new Chief Justice Dorit Benish. I often think that some of our people have a gene missing in their DNA which calls them to national suicide. The JNF (Jewish National Fund) is presently funding Arabs out of funds donated by Jewish donors who thought their charitable contributions were planting trees, building reservoirs in order to strengthen and green-up the Jewish State for Jewish sovereignty and right to life. One must include a host of government officials such as Yitzhak Rabin, Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak, Bibi Netanyahu, Ariel Sharon, Ehud Olmert through the Kadima Party who negotiated detrimental weakening agreements, mostly in secret, without consulting the Knesset. Each in his time worked diligently to undercut the bonds of Jewish identity, education and Jewish bonds to the Land of the Jewish State and her ideals as the world's only Jewish State as a refuge for persecuted Jews. Not surprisingly, the nations who persecuted their Jews over the centuries agreed that the Jews didn't deserve their own State and they did every thing possible to add another Arab Muslim State to the 21 Muslim Arab States already existing. We do not need to worry about an uprising of Israeli Arabs acting as a "Fifth Column" subverting the Jewish State of Israel, given that we have our own home-grown "Fifth Column" of Leftist Jews which is desperate to return (so to speak) to the safe slavery and flesh-pots of Egypt. You do recall how many of these reluctant Jewish slaves Moses led out of bondage who begged to return to Egyptian slavery because, like trained dogs used to being fed daily by their masters, they also wanted to be fed daily. Many of them were the "Erev Rav", mixed multitude trash who left with the Jews and Moses to escape from Egypt but who weren't ready to build a country and a people. Regrettably, that trash is still present in the Jewish State only now they call themselves "Leftists". Today those same Jew-hating Jews are still with us, believing in nothing let alone the right to stand up on their own two legs and be masters of their own destiny. We needn't fear the uprising of the Arab Muslim Palestinians living among us. We're prepared to defend ourselves against the hostile Arab Muslims. However, most of the time, it's the "Fifth Column" of Leftists inside of our own gut that chews on us. If the Leftists cannot return to the fleshpots of Egypt, they are perfectly willing to turn themselves over to the Muslims to be ruled if left alive. We should, however, fear the uprising of those rude beasts called "Leftists" who have already arisen to snap at the heels of Jews who believe in the Land and their return to what was always ours because G-d gave it to us. The pack of curs called "Leftists" have worked hard to subvert Observant Jews and those who work the Land, knowing it is theirs by right and by G-d's promise and through their own blood, sweat, tears and hard-earned savings. War is surely coming again -- for which the Arab Muslim nations and proxy Terrorists are arming prodigiously. Both the Israeli Arab Muslims, along with the Leftists, would surely feel more at home with their own kind. Gathering them up to be transferred to the towns and cities controlled by Fatah/Hamas or in Egypt, Syria, Jordan or Lebanon which would be a generous blessing to them. If they dislike the Jews and the Jewish State so much, perhaps they should be given the chance to join their own brethren in the countries from which they or their families emigrated. Many with the money are already doing so on their own. They know they'll feel more at home with their own people or to escape to Eurabia where they bring with them all they are escaping from, namely Islam. As for the Jewish Leftists, surely, they would be welcomed by those Arab Muslims in the neighboring States who hate the Jews and the Jewish State. Those Leftists must sincerely believe that returning to the flesh-pots of Egypt is their true destiny. ### I call your attention to a similar article following, written by David Bedein, entitled "Israel's Fifth Column" which delves further into the hostile groups within Israel. |
|
"Israel's Fifth Column"
There are more than one million Israeli Arabs -- more than 15 percent of Israel's population. These Israeli citizens have shown widespread support for Iran, causing the Israeli security establishment to worry. Israel's General Security Service (GSS), the Israeli equivalent of the FBI, has warned about an alarming increase of subversive activity on behalf of Iran by Israel's Arab minority. This past week, the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs issued a report entitled "Iran Is Building 'Hamastan' in Gaza," which documents how Iran is establishing a base in nearby Gaza, premised on "a growing strategic alliance between Iran and the radical Palestinian forces..." It has not been forgotten that the PLO, the harbinger of local Arab revolution, was the first sponsor of the successful Iranian revolution. Iran was the first and only Islamic nation ever to hand over an Israeli embassy to the PLO. And Iran now emerges as the greatest champion of Palestinian Arab Islamic nationalism. Last summer, the elected officials of the Israeli Arab members of the Israeli Knesset Parliament showed support for Hezbollah's missile attacks on Israel. Since then, Israel's security establishment has launched its own investigation of Israel's Arab minority. Recently, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert met with GSS Director Yuval Diskin and other high-ranking security officials concerning the Arab minority in Israel, where the GSS provided a report to the Prime Minister concerning the continual decline in its identification with the state, the rise of subversive elements within it and the dangers that lie therein. Some high-ranking security officials said that the turn of events within the Arab minority constituted "the real, long term strategic threat" to the very existence of Israel as a Jewish state. The GSS reports there has been a rise in the Israeli Arabs' identification with the Palestinian terrorist organizations, and a rise in their identification with Iran, Hezbollah and other groups that reject the legitimacy of Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state. All of this is done publicly and openly, and has been accompanied by incitement by the local Israeli Arab political leadership. That incitement has not been yet been dealt with by Israel's law enforcement community. The GSS assessment indicates that the separatist and subversive trends that are reflected by the Israeli Arab leadership are liable to set the agenda and sweep the masses behind them. One American organization that provides financial help to the Israeli Arab community to develop itself as a "Palestinian religious and national ethnic community" is the New Israel Fund. The GSS is now looking into the work of the NIF to determine whether this outside organization is an element that encourages subversive activity amongst the Israeli Arab population. THE FEAR FACTOR 68% of the Jewish population in Israel fears the possibility that Israeli Arabs will begin a popular rebellion, while 63% do not enter Arab communities in Israel, according to a new poll issued this week by Haifa University. Meanwhile, 64.4% of Israeli Jewish citizens fear that the Arab citizens endanger national security because of their high birth rate, while 83.1% fear Israeli Arabs support of the Palestinians' struggle and 73% believe that most of the Arab citizens will be more loyal to the state of Palestine than to the state of Israel. Clearly the Israeli Fifth Column is hard at work trying to tear the country apart -- and Iran is more than happy to help. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at winstonmedia@comcast.net |
|
TV DOCUMENTARY: EGYPTIANS KILLED CAPTURED IDF TROOPS IN 1973 WAR
Posted by Avodah, March 18, 2007. |
|
This comes from The Associated Press -- 18/03/2007 -- and was published on www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/839095.html It is archived on IMRA's -- Independent Media Review and Analysis -- website: www.imra.org.il |
|
Egyptian troops killed dozens, if not hundreds of captured Israel Defense Forces soldiers in the 1973 Yom Kippur War, according excerpts of an Israeli TV documentary screened Sunday, responding to charges that IDF forces killed captured Egyptian prisoners of war during the 1967 Six-Day War. Channel 10 TV showed parts of interviews with IDF soldiers who served in the 1973 conflict, relating specific cases in which they said Egyptian forces killed soldiers who had been captured or had surrendered. The channel said its documentary was a response to the outcry over a different program shown earlier this month on Israeli TV about the 1967 conflict. Egyptian media said that the program showed that IDF forces executed 250 captured Egyptian soldiers sparked widespread outrage in Egypt and a crisis in relations between the two countries, which signed a peace treaty in 1978. The documentary producer denied that his film made such an allegation. Participants said the 250 were armed Palestinian fighters killed in a battle, but senior Egyptian officials demanded an investigation. In the 1973 war, Israeli forces were caught by surprise in a two-front lighting attack by Egyptian and Syrian armies. Thousands of IDF soldiers on the front lines were killed, wounded or captured. The Channel 10 documentary showed film of what it said were IDF soldiers, their hands bound behind their backs, shot to death in the Golan Heights and the Sinai desert. Defense correspondent Alon Ben-David concluded, "Investigations of the Egyptian army's behavior in wars against Israel will find dozens, if not hundreds, of cases of captured Israeli soldiers murdered in cold blood by their Egyptians captors." Egyptian government officials could not immediately be reached for comment. One of the ex-soldiers, Issachar Ben-Gavriel, said he witnessed one of the incidents. He said he was one of a group of 19 IDF soldiers who surrendered at the Suez Canal, flying white flags and raising their hands. "They (Egyptians) just shot them," he said, "11 guys." Another Israeli who fought in the 1973 war, Eitan Mor-Gan, said he was in a group of captured soldiers who were lined up against a wall. Mor-Gan said before opening fire at them, an Egyptian officer told the soldiers, "I will kill whoever stays on the ground. Whoever manages to get up will be saved." In another case, an ex-soldier told of a fighter in his unit who was captured alive but beaten to death during interrogation. Ben-David said the interviews were done during a visit by the ex-soldiers to the sites of the Sinai desert battles, which have been turned into museums by the Egyptians. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
ISRAELI ARABS CAUGHT FIGHTING WITH AL QAEDA IN IRAQ
Posted by Michael Travis, March 18, 2007. |
|
These items come from the DEBKAfile. |
|
"Israeli Arabs caught fighting with al Qaeda in Iraq"
Captured in Baghdad Saturday, March 17, were two -- some sources say three -- Israeli Arabs, who told their American interrogators they came from the northern Israeli village of Majd al Krum near Carmiel, northeast of Haifa. They were taken prisoner fighting in the central Baghdad district of Bab al Moadham, near the notorious insurgent stronghold of Haifa Street, together with Abu Qetada al Falastini, deputy al Qaeda commander in Iraq. DEBKAfile's counter-terror sources report that al Falastini's real name is Mahmoud al Madi and he hails from the West Bank town of Nablus. The Israeli Arabs captured with him formed his inner personal command. Ahead of the new US-led security crackdown in Baghdad ordered by President George W. Bush, al Qaeda pulled its top local commanders out of the city and out of range. It is not clear why the Palestinian group did not join them. Western intelligence services and agencies engaged in the war on al Qaeda were taken aback by the discovery of Israel Arabs in al Qaeda's Iraqi ranks, although they had long ago spotted the veteran Abu Qetada who joined the jihadist movement in 1992. After years spent at training camps in Afghanistan and Pakistan, he came to Iraq in 2004 to fight alongside Abu Musab al Zarqawi. After he was killed by the Americans, the Palestinian was appointed his successor's deputy. The Israeli Arabs told their captors that two or three years ago they went to study at fundamentalist Muslim medressas in Pakistan and Afghanistan, where they were recruited by al Qaeda. They are believed to have reached Iraq last year with orders from Pakistan to find Abu Qetada and fight the Americans under his command. Sunday, March 18, al Qaeda in Iraq issued a communiqué denying that any of its chiefs had been detained in Baghdad, without mentioning any names. "Israel farmers stop aerial crop-spraying near Gaza because of
smuggled Palestinian anti-air missiles"
The transport ministry in Jerusalem warned the farmers Sunday, March 18, that the Palestinians had recently smuggled shoulder-borne SA-7 anti-air missiles into the Gaza strip. They ordered an immediate halt to aerial crop-spraying near the territory following an Israeli army caution. "New Palestinian government marks collapse of Israel's Middle East
positions"
The Hamas-Fatah government taking office Sunday, March 18, is more than a policy failure by prime minister Ehud Olmert and foreign minister Tzipi Livni; it is another milestone on the road to the collapse of Israel's Middle East positions at large, on a scale comparable to the setback to its deterrence from the mismanaged war against Hizballah last summer. This fiasco is reflected in the horrified outcry across the board, from members of the Olmert government coalition and the opposition alike, as Israelis woke up Sunday, March 18, to face a hostile Palestinian government led by a terrorist organization, godfathered by Saudi Arabia, armed by Iran, and blessed by Western powers. Exactly a week ago, on March 11, the Israeli prime minister said he was positively reviewing sections of the Saudi Arabian 2002 "peace plan." He did not waver when Riyadh declared the hard-line text would not be modified when it is re-launched at the Arab summit in ten days' time. That afternoon, Olmert had his second interview with Mahmoud Abbas, chairman of the Palestinian Authority and leader of Fatah. He stressed the importance of "staying in touch with positive Palestinian elements." This was also Livni's mantra during her recent travels to the US and European capitals. They both fell into the Palestinian trap, effectively sanctioning the seal of moderation with which Abbas and Fatah stamped a Palestinian government dominated by the Hamas terrorists. Even more dangerously, the two Israeli leaders failed to question the covert Yalta-type understanding reached by Riyadh and Tehran. They ought to have grasped that when the Saudis and Iranians stuck their deal to preserve the Siniora government in Lebanon, as DEBKAfile revealed in late February, they must also have come to terms on the Palestinian issue. And so they did. It was a package: Tehran called off the campaign led by its patsy Hizballah against the anti-Syrian Lebanese government, gaining stronger representation -- at Syria's expense, while the rival Palestinian factions were told in Mecca to share power -- at Israel's expense. Olmert and Livni forgot a permanent Middle East axiom: Israel's neighbors can always set aside their differences for common action against the Jewish state. Therefore, Sunni princes and Shiite clerics easily agreed on a Palestinian formula that would imperil Israel's most vital interests. They figured that, just as Syrian president Bashar Assad is too isolated to challenge his dependence on Tehran, so too Israel is too dependent on Washington to complain about Saudi under-the-table transactions with Iran for the sake of a deal on Iraq. In the past year, Olmert-Livni policies have been so closely synchronized with Washington's, that many of Israel's vital interests have gone by the board. It was their vain hope that Arab governments in fear of Iran's ambitions would come to terms with Israel and move the Middle East closer to peace. This misreading was shared by opposition leader Binyamin Netanyahu. What happened instead was that the so-called moderate Arab camp stood aside when Tehran focused its attention on building up the menace to Israel on the backs of the now-kosher Palestinian radicals. Iran not only gave them arms, ordnance, cash and training, but also strategic depth. Its Revolutionary Guards have spread their wings into Gaza through Sinai up to the Suez and Mediterranean, and built up a war menace to Israel from the south, as well as the north. The realistic prospect is therefore closer to war rather than peace, the culmination of a process which the prime minister, his foreign minister and their advisers consistently missed or misread. Addressing the Washington pro-Israel lobby AIPAC's annual conference last week, Olmert and Livni both came out in support of the Bush administration's military strategy in Iraq. Since that strategy hinges largely on covert Saudi-Iranian diplomacy in Washington's name, Israeli government spokesmen implicitly gave America a blank check to pay for an Iraq accommodation at Israel's expense. "Al Qaeda's dirty chlorine bomb warfare may well spread from Iraq's
Anbar across the Middle East"
Iraq has seen six poison gas attacks in six weeks. DEBKAfile's military and counter-terror sources warn that al Qaeda may well expand its chemical war to other parts of the Middle East. Chlorine is readily available, used widely everywhere to purify water and in industry. Saturday, March 17, three suicide bombers blew up their chlorine-filled tankers in three of al Qaeda's hotbeds in the western Iraqi Anbar province: Falluja, Amiria and Ramadi. According to US figures, two Iraqi policemen were killed and 356 victims, including 6 American servicemen, taken to hospital. Unofficially, eight people died and 500 suffered toxic symptoms. The first blast struck an American roadblock northeast of Ramadi, injuring two US soldiers. The second occurred in the early evening at Amiria, 17 km south of Falluja, killing two Iraqi policemen and causing choking symptoms in 120 local inhabitants. Half an hour later, the third suicide truck bomber detonated his toxic cargo at Albu Issa, south of Falluja, causing the largest number of casualties -- 6 dead and nearly 300 injured -- some of them seriously. This blast was the biggest of the three. It used 200 gallons of chlorine gas. DEBKAfile reports al Qaeda targeted the local Sunni Albu Issa tribe which recently agreed to work with the Baghdad government and US forces to fight al Qaeda and drive them out. Al Qaeda's first gas bomb attack took place on Jan. 28 in Ramadi. A number of small trucks carrying small quantities of chlorine gas were detonated simultaneously killing 16 people and putting an unknown number in hospital. On Feb. 20, a second chemical attack was staged in Baghdad, killing 5 and poisoning 120, The next day, Feb. 21, a chlorine truck exploded in Taji north of Baghdad, killing 9 people and injuring more than 150. That same day, coalition forces discovered and destroyed two chlorine bomb factories in Karma and Fallujah. Karma has increasingly become a hot spot in Anbar province. That raid forced al Qaeda to take a break from its poison gas campaign in Iraq between Feb. 21 and March 17. "Incoming Palestinian PM Haniyeh vows to uphold "all forms of
resistance" to Israel as he presents new Hamas-Fatah government"
Mahmoud Abbas urged an end of the world boycott against the Palestinian government although Middle East Quartet conditions are ignored in its platform. The unity government he has launched with Hamas PM Ismail Haniyeh won a vote of confidence at the Palestinian legislative council Saturday, March 17. The US and European governments have already set up contacts. Norway was the first Western goernment to re-establish political and economic ties. Washington will invite Salim Fayad in his capacity as the PLO's financial adviser -- but not as Palestinian finance minister, so long as the unity government withholds recognition from Israel and a guarantee to end violence. Israel will maintain contact with Mahmoud Abbas alone; there will be no other form of cooperation with a Palestinian government that refuses to accept these Middle East Quartet's terms. The UK will maintain working contacts with non-Hamas ministers. Later Saturday, the Palestinian legislative council votes confidence in the new 24-member government. Its signatories, Mahmoud Abbas and Ismail Haniya, Hamas, as designated prime minister, will outline its platform. Vice PM Shimon Peres said Saturday that Israel rejects absolutely as "suicidal" the Palestinian demand for the "right of return," which is also incorporated in the Saudi peace plan to be re-launched at the coming Arab summit March 28. He said the Fatah-Hamas accord binds Israel to nothing. "For peace, they must talk to us. The Europeans can't talk for Israel." He confirmed that Abbas failed to make good on his pledge to procure the release of the Israeli soldier, kidnapped by Hamas-led raiding party last June, before the new Palestinian government was set up. The issue remains as unresolved as before. DEBKAfile notes: One putative "independent," the designated foreign minister Ziyad Amar, is a known Hamas adherent. Pro-American Salam Fayed is retained as finance minister as bait to draw US recognition and international assistance. Abbas and Hamas prime minister Ismail Haniyeh (who retains the post) worked against the stopwatch to get their Saudi-brokered unity act together in time for the Riyadh Arab summit on March 28. If anything, Abbas lost points; any agreements or deals he may conclude with Israel will be subject to ratification by the Palestinian national assembly which has a Hamas majority of a national referendum. But because the unity deal is in the bag, the Palestinians will be represented at the Arab summit this month by a Hamas prime minister Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
MK SA'AR: 'FATAH HAS SURRENDERED TO HAMAS'
Posted by Avodah, March 18, 2007. |
|
From Jerusalem Post Staff, The Jerusalem Post, Mar. 18, 2007
|
|
The new Palestinian Authority government is a Hamas government in every way," MK Gidon Sa'ar (Likud) said on Sunday morning, adding, "Fatah has surrendered to Hamas." In an interview with Israel Radio, Sa'ar stressed that Hamas was still a major terror group, noting that the weapons flow to Gaza had increased six-fold in the last year. "We need to stop this arms flow," said Sa'ar. "We don't want another inquiry commission following another conflict we were unprepared for." Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
DOLLARS MATTER!
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 18, 2007. |
|
The United States will remain the world's dominant superpower as long as the U.S. dollar maintains its worldwide status as premier reserve and primary oil trading currency. Period!!! Nations likely to challenge the dollar's lofty position in the not too distant future, with their respective currencies, are China and Japan, in the farther future perhaps a one currency South America if the anti-Israel/Jew Hugo Chavez and his friends keep surging and influencing, however, today's most formidable challenger is the European Union, to be substantially fortified when and if Great Britain and Norway come on board, agreeing to adopt the euro. The United States, indeed, under the stewardship of the Bush Administration, has thrown monetary caution to the wind, directing sizable and expensive troop deployments first into Afghanistan, then compounding that initiative exponentially by possibly committing itself to a long-term military involvement and investment in Iraq, initially justified by the popularly touted weapons of mass destruction pretext. No doubt, the Afghanistan deployment was effectuated in order to smash Osama bin Laden and his Al-Quaeda forces, fresh from perpetrating their 9/11 'in your face America' carnage, ever welcome to break pita and finance their jihadist ambitions with misogynist Taliban warlord drug pushers. However, the likely primary impetus for invading Iraq, as well as setting up permanent bases within that sovereign nation, was to insure an energy future, allied to a friendly government, squatting over the second largest fossil fuel reserves on the planet. That is the sort of things superpowers do in order to maintain their status. Other factors prompting that decision were likely a need to remove U.S. forces from strategically located Saudi Arabia, its royal family threatened by jihadist forces to evict the infidel from holy ground or else, as well as Sadist Hussein's hubristic disrespect for the petrodollar, daring to trade his oil for euros, a line in the desert crossed only by impulsive tyrants with a death wish. Still, just because a superpower, no longer leashed to a gold standard, can print its currency at will to pay for aggressive foreign policies, its leaders unwilling to tax constituents heretofore coddled by the concept of a seductive free lunch, such a modus operandi is not necessarily wise or even sustainable. Indeed, foreign bankers holding mucho greenbacks and U.S. debt notes may not be at all pleased, witnessing such profligacy by the planet's premier debtor albeit superpower nation. Furthermore, euros in recent years have been kicking the butts of Uncle Sam's minted dead presidents, and foreign bankers with no collective conscience or loyalty to anything other than profit, may very well decide to jilt America's most essential psychologically valued export, its beauty ever fading, dumping it precipitously on the market for perhaps a Continental bride, bringing nothing but tsuris to Wall Street and Main Street, stalwart pillars of a consequentially stunned goliath with shaky knees. At this point, even the powerful petrodollar would begin ceding its throne worldwide to perhaps a petroeuro, while the sun rapidly sets on modern day Rome. Not so fast. Lets not prematurely declare R.I.P. to an empire, perhaps speeding towards a cliff overlooking 'catastrophe canyon', yet still able to apply the brakes with a host of solutions. Furthermore, there are more Neville Chamberlain than Winston Churchill kindred spirits in today's Europe, military budgets overall have shrunk while Islamic militants continue to metastasize through the bowels of that continent in denial, the euro could certainly take a licking if and when the ticking jihad time bomb explodes, and any imagined coronation of a century twenty-one style Continental Caesar, awash in euros, could just as easily become a coroner's inquest of a corpse drained of ancestral blood, tossed like a Caesar salad, garnished with jihadist cretins. The State of Israel, of course, would be affected by any seismic shifts in a planetary balance of power, thus should reinforce its own foundation, making it as earthquake proof as possible. Solidifying the strength of its shekel by attracting more foreign investors like Warren Buffet and Donald Trump, further advancing a state of the art technology sector, enhancing the quality of first world educational institutions, maximizing employment opportunities, insuring first rate health care for all citizens, maintaining infrastructure, and no doubt revitalizing a military/intelligence establishment that must be world class, is ever necessary, and all this must be accomplished without relying on the psychological value of its national currency, as alas its most formidable ally has so carelessly done. No one knows what the future holds, but wise nations prepare for all eventualities. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
JONATHAN POLLARD COMMENTS ON FBI'S MISPORTRAYAL: THEY SMEAR JEWS
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, March 18, 2007. |
|
Jonathan Pollard relayed the following comments from FCI Butner, North Carolina, in response to the recent FBI smear. See news item "FBI Misportrayal of Pollard Smears Jews" for details. "I have warned for the last 22 years that this organization, the FBI, is extremely anti-Semitic. Apart from being anti-Israel, they are extremely anti-Semitic. Institutionally they pose a clear and present danger to the viability of the American Jewish community. See Also:
Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard by email at justice4jp@gmail.com |
|
BEER YES? BULLETS NO?
Posted by Michael Travis, March 18, 2007. |
|
This comes from the Storm Report website and is archived at
|
|
Back in 2004, the well known dhimmicat and terrorist apologist and appeaser, Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii warned army generals in 2004 that Israeli-made bullets purchased by the U.S. Army should be used for training only, not to fight Muslim guerrillas in Iraq and Afghanistan. Since the Army has other stockpiled ammunition, "by no means, under any circumstances should a round [from Israel] be utilized," Abercrombie. Has he slithered away in embarrassment from his controversial proclamation? Nope. Like every useful idiot, proven wrong he redoubles his efforts. Atlas Shrugs reports that in a vote to suspend aid to Hamas, there was one lone NO VOTE -- Rep. Abercrombie. He also was one of 8 members who voted "No" on this summer's House resolution defending Israel's right to defend itself against Hezbollah. Alright, just another liberal nut case voted in by the clueless majority in a sate even more left than California -- both politically and geographically. So what harm can t his putz do? A lot. You see, he's the top Democrat on the House of Representatives Armed Services subcommittee with jurisdiction over land forces. He is also a member of the Readiness Subcommittee. Which makes him a very dangerous dhimmicrat. Meanwhile, under the noses of our politically correct leaders in Congress, US troops and Iraqis Share Taste for Israeli Beer.
A close inspection of photos from inside the Mosul villa where Qusay and Uday were shot dead by American troops last month reveals beer bottles and a candy wrapper with what looks suspiciously like Hebrew lettering. Ironically, Saddam Hussein's sons and grandson may have spent their last hours consuming the products of the hated Zionist state. In another odd twist, the troops of the US 101st airborne division may have cracked open beer of the same Macabbee brand while laying Saddam's heirs to siege. The free market wins again in spite of the liberal socialist useful idiots. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
ANTWERP PASSOVER PLOT
Posted by Zalmi, March 18, 2007. |
|
A family friend from Belgium stopped by over Purim and I asked him where he would be going for Pesach. For the past several years he has taken the whole family to Israel. I was therefore very surprised when he answered: "Turkey". The surprise turned to shock when he told me that a large number of Antwerp families were going to Turkey for Pesach this year. After he left, the surprise that turned to shock, then turned to little less than revulsion at the thought of Jewish kids sitting around a Seder table in the Moslem capital of Europe. It's bad enough to see Israelis travelling to Egypt for Pesach. But these are mainly secular folk for whom it's more of a holiday than a holyday. Here we are talking about strictly orthodox families who -- for what I must assume is a small saving on a hotel package -- are prepared to trade the purity of their eternal capital Jerusalem for the squalor of a Muslim Kasbah. What on earth has become of our people who, for 2,000 years have yearned for Jerusalem only to pass it up for a caterer's discount in Ankara. I often think of my father gazing out the window of his freezing barrack in Auschwitz and how he and thousands of other inmates must have dreamed and yearned for the warmth and security of Eretz Yisrael. What if someone told him that 60 years later, Eretz Yisrael would be an independent state with Jerusalem as its capital. That it would have the most powerful economy and army in the Middle East, with world-class kosher hotels to cater for all tastes on the three annual festivals. And that it would cost just a few hundred dollars a ticket to fly there any day of the week. His face would have beamed in wonderment that the struggle in Europe and the slaughter of 6 million of his people would not, after all, have been for nothing. So what do you think he would say to the Antwerp families today, many of whose grandparents were survivors of the Shoah ? I wish them a lot of luck when they open the door for Elijah. It may well be Mohammed that walks in. And it will serve them right. FOOTNOTE: It's always possible that Turkey represents a refreshing change for Antwerp's Jews when you consider what is happening in Belgium. This piece in the Washington Times is a real eye-opener. To read it, click here. Contact Zalmi at zalmi@zalmi.net or go to his website:
|
|
HOW THE UJA AND JNF IS SPENDING YOUR MONEY
Posted by Arieh King, March 18, 2007. |
|
If you will be visiting Israel in the near future, I would be happy to provide material about the post-Zionist political people who now control the UJA and JNF. I can, in addition, take you on a tour of JNF land where there are numerous Arab homes and even an Arab school; None of them are, of course paying rent to the JNF. There is even JNF property in the ancient walled city of Jerusalem occupied by Arabs. This is a crime against the Jewish people. I am adding two letters which I received from Jews in the U.S. Jews must wake up before it is too late If you are visting Israel, i will be happy to let you read with me the all information that i have about the JNF & UJA that are today are controlled by post-zionist political persons. I will be happy also to take you to a tour to see lands belong to JNF with Arabs living on. I can also take you to a land belong to JNF were there is a Arab school, Do you think one. one of them is paying a rent to JNF? Ho! And there is also houses in the Old City of Yerushalaim...and guess what? guess who is living in the house? I am telling you it's a crime against the Jewish nation!
I am sending two letters that i received from two people from US. Jews must wake up before it will be too late! |
|
First letter about the UJA: Sirs, I am shocked to hear that you favor using Jewish Agency funds, collected from Jews from all over the world for Zionist and Jewish uses, to give to Arabs. If this is true, I will no longer give money to the agency until I am assured that it is going to Jews for the purposes of building up the Jewish state. The Arab citizens of Israel should never expect to receive this aide as they used to understand that Israel is a Jewish state. If they want to live in an Arab state they have many choices. Jews don't. How many Arab states even allow Jews to live as equals there, let alone giving them money? This is just another way that Arabs will steal from Jews, with Jewish collaborators being all too willing to enable them to go about further stealing our country from us. If you no longer represent the Jewish people, you should step down from your offices. This has nothing to do with equality of treatment, but everything to do with Jewish self-hatred. I will be notifying my local Federation that all future checks from me will be cancelled until Jewish recipients can be assured. Sincerely,
Second letter about the JNF: Reading this one wonders how Olmert has not been impeached or imprisoned. The man is a menace and a fraud and a coward. Even if he is pressured 100%, he could get the story to the newspaper, the people would scream, and he could say it is "too controversial" to allow the Moslems to build on the land that was to be used for a synagogue. What a horror he is. On the road to Mecca, in Saudi Arabia, there is a sign warning "infidels" that continuing further on that road would mean death. After the Arabs gain the surrounding buildings, and the access to the Temple Mount, a similar sign might go up, this in the most revered spot for Jews in Jerusalem. Disgusting!! The Jewish National Fund should be objecting BIG TIME to such happenings. The JNF should be BUYING AND PRESERVING this land before it is in Moslem hands. The millions of trees JNF has planted in Israel will count for little if Jerusalem is lost to the Moslems. Contact Arieh King at kingshir@bezeqint.net |
|
THE "PALESTINIAN" CONTRIBUTIONS TO HUMANITY -- 'PALESTINIANISM'
Posted by American, March 18, 2007. |
|
1) Commit the crimes on your own kids (human bombs, human shields or killing their own kids in order to stage it as in 'Muhammad al Dura' & other kids) and always blame the Zionist victim. 2) How to unite the Arab world, bring about "Dead Arab kids", Hezbollah picked up on that very fast. 3) The bastion of (fake) excuse for Islamists' crimes against humanity. 4) The phenomenon of "brown" Arabs Kissing up to "white" Hitler, Hitlerists, never mind what one wishes the other. 5) Inventing big drama words, such as "apartheid", "racism" for those daring to stand up against Racist, Fascist terrorists. 6) The lucky invention of the 1960's, One of the 21 century successful lies, such as "palestinian people" (on the Arab group mostly grandkids of immigrants from surrounding countries). 7) The `creme de la creme' best "export" of "palestinian" industry, the human shields tactics of course (to Iraq's Al-Sadr, Talibans, Hezbullah, etc.). 8] The death cult that always finds somebody to kill, if not the Zionists, or their kids via tactics that the media might blame the IDF, they find each other to practice it with (civil war). 9) when simple lies don't work, edit videos to fit the propaganda,
PALLYWOOD, "palestinian" fake Images industry. The Second Draft
10) Self infliction especially on their kids in order to perpertuate `victimhood', the more miserable they can appear on international arena the more their hate hunger for demonizing Israel is satisified, that's their oxygen. Contact American at American1627@yahoo.com |
|
DOLLARS MATTER
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 18, 2007. |
|
The United States will remain the world's dominant superpower as long as the U.S. dollar maintains its worldwide status as premier reserve and primary oil trading currency. Period!!! Nations likely to challenge the dollar's lofty position in the not too distant future, with their respective currencies, are China and Japan, in the farther future perhaps a one currency South America if the anti-Israel/Jew Hugo Chavez and his friends keep surging and influencing, however, today's most formidable challenger is the European Union, to be substantially fortified when and if Great Britain and Norway come on board, agreeing to adopt the euro. The United States, indeed, under the stewardship of the Bush Administration, has thrown monetary caution to the wind, directing sizable and expensive troop deployments first into Afghanistan, then compounding that initiative exponentially by possibly committing itself to a long-term military involvement and investment in Iraq, initially justified by the popularly touted weapons of mass destruction pretext. No doubt, the Afghanistan deployment was effectuated in order to smash Osama bin Laden and his Al-Quaeda forces, fresh from perpetrating their 9/11 'in your face America' carnage, ever welcome to break pita and finance their jihadist ambitions with misogynist Taliban warlord drug pushers. However, the likely primary impetus for invading Iraq, as well as setting up permanent bases within that sovereign nation, was to insure an energy future, allied to a friendly government, squatting over the second largest fossil fuel reserves on the planet. That is the sort of things superpowers do in order to maintain their status. Other factors prompting that decision were likely a need to remove U.S. forces from strategically located Saudi Arabia, its royal family threatened by jihadist forces to evict the infidel from holy ground or else, as well as Sadist Hussein's hubristic disrespect for the petrodollar, daring to trade his oil for euros, a line in the desert crossed only by impulsive tyrants with a death wish. Still, just because a superpower, no longer leashed to a gold standard, can print its currency at will to pay for aggressive foreign policies, its leaders unwilling to tax constituents heretofore coddled by the concept of a seductive free lunch, such a modus operandi is not necessarily wise or even sustainable. Indeed, foreign bankers holding mucho greenbacks and U.S. debt notes may not be at all pleased, witnessing such profligacy by the planet's premier debtor albeit superpower nation. Furthermore, euros in recent years have been kicking the butts of Uncle Sam's minted dead presidents, and foreign bankers with no collective conscience or loyalty to anything other than profit, may very well decide to jilt America's most essential psychologically valued export, its beauty ever fading, dumping it precipitously on the market for perhaps a Continental bride, bringing nothing but tsuris to Wall Street and Main Street, stalwart pillars of a consequentially stunned goliath with shaky knees. At this point, even the powerful petrodollar would begin ceding its throne worldwide to perhaps a petroeuro, while the sun rapidly sets on modern day Rome. Not so fast. Lets not prematurely declare R.I.P. to an empire, perhaps speeding towards a cliff overlooking 'catastrophe canyon', yet still able to apply the brakes with a host of solutions. Furthermore, there are more Neville Chamberlain than Winston Churchill kindred spirits in today's Europe, military budgets overall have shrunk while Islamic militants continue to metastasize through the bowels of that continent in denial, the euro could certainly take a licking if and when the ticking jihad time bomb explodes, and any imagined coronation of a century twenty-one style Continental Caesar, awash in euros, could just as easily become a coroner's inquest of a corpse drained of ancestral blood, tossed like a Caesar salad, garnished with jihadist cretins. The State of Israel, of course, would be affected by any seismic shifts in a planetary balance of power, thus should reinforce its own foundation, making it as earthquake proof as possible. Solidifying the strength of its shekel by attracting more foreign investors like Warren Buffet and Donald Trump, further advancing a state of the art technology sector, enhancing the quality of first world educational institutions, maximizing employment opportunities, insuring first rate health care for all citizens, maintaining infrastructure, and no doubt revitalizing a military/intelligence establishment that must be world class, is ever necessary, and all this must be accomplished without relying on the psychological value of its national currency, as alas its most formidable ally has so carelessly done. No one knows what the future holds, but wise nations prepare for all eventualities. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
CLEPTOCRACY AND AUTHORITARIANISM GO HAND IN HAND -- ISRAELI JUDGE JUSTIFIES POLICE VIOLENCE
Posted by Sergio Tezza (HaDaR), March 18, 2007. |
|
This is called "Judge Terms Crackdown On Anti-Withdrawal Protest
'War'" and it appeared today in |
|
TEL AVIV -- In a defense of police brutality, a judge has termed the government crackdown against the civil disobedience campaign to block the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and West Bank a "war." Judge Hanan Efrati appeared to justify the behavior of police charged with assaulting an anti-withdrawal protester during a demonstration in 2005. Efrati suggested that police were defending an Israeli government besieged by massive protests against its decision to expel 16,000 Jews from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank. "These were not ordinary times or ordinary demonstrations," Efrati, a judge in the Tel Aviv Magistrate Court, said. "This was like in a war." On March 14, Efrati presided over a trial in which two police officers were charged with brutality. The officers allegedly beat and injured a handcuffed young demonstrator who was not resisting arrest during a June 29, 2005 protest in the Tel Aviv suburb of Ramat Gan. At the trial, a video of the protest showed police officers Eran Naim, 36, and Eliran Avraham, 33, pulling the protester to the ground. The officer handcuffed the demonstrator, Akiva Vitkin, 20, and then beat him around the face. In the video, Naim inserts his fingers in Vitkins nostrils and then yanks his head back. At the same time, an unidentified officer pokes Vitkin in the eyes. The prosecution asserted that Avraham later again beat Vitkin in the police station. Vitkin was said to have sustained facial injuries. "The [prosecution] witness testified that he [Vitkin] did not resist arrest," prosecutor Moshe Saada said. "There was the use of extreme force even when there was no life-threatening danger." The trial was one of the few cases in which authorities agreed to prosecute police officers alleged to have injured non-violent anti-withdrawal protests. Right-wing parliamentarians asserted that police were ordered to assault peaceful demonstrators to deter anti-government protests against plans to withdraw from the Gaza Strip and West Bank. During the police brutality trial, Efrati expressed support for the defendants. Efrati demanded that the prosecution respond to the argument that the demonstration in which Vitkin was attacked was meant to launch massive anti-government protests. "They called this a trial run," Efrati told prosecutor Saada. "Argue in this direction." The attorney for the police officers said his clients were permitted to use force against Vitkin regardless of whether he resisted arrest. He said the right-wing protest was seen as threatening the country. "This was an organized disturbance meant to threaten the public order in the state," Lior Epstein said. Efrati expressed agreement. The judge suggested that demonstrators must accept the risk of police violence. "There aren't any pet police and there aren't any pet demonstrators," Efrati said. Contact the poster at HaDar-Israel@verizon.net) |
|
THE INSULT AND THE RANT...
Posted by Gerald A. Honigman, March 18, 2007. |
|
You decide. Recently, as one of my favorite baseball players of all time, Yogi Berra, would say, it was like déjè vu all over again. Not long ago, yet another example of a scholar--this time, Michael Rubin, a rarity these days who should know better--took Kurds to task in the 3/19/07 Weekly Standard for pressing for independence (or as much secured autonomy as possible), distancing themselves from Arabs who have repeatedly slaughtered them to the tune of hundreds of thousands over this past century. Indeed, he labeled such endeavors "illusions." Here's a chunk of the article to check out... ...(Senator) Biden is correct that federalism cannot be avoided. However, he is incorrect to assume that federalism should be based on ethnic and sectarian division rather than on Iraq's existing geographical provinces. Ethnic division will not bring security. Rather than embrace peace with his neighbors, Barzani now mimics the strategy of the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat--seeking diplomatic legitimacy while refusing to renounce violence. Rubin's "Enabling Kurdish Illusions" mostly focused on the PKK's fight with the Turks and--as can be seen in his analogy of mainstream Kurdish leaders with Arafat (how many Arab school buses, restaurants, pizza parlors, etc. and so forth have Talabani or Barzani ordered blown up?) and other comments--holds that Kurds are asking for too much to want something beyond their perpetual, insecure existence among their various butchers and tormentors. I subsequently asked Rubin in our correspondence if he holds that Arabs should not get their proposed 22nd state (and 2nd, not 1st, one in "Palestine") because of the terror of both Hamas and Abbas's alleged "moderate" Fatah. I received no reply from him on this or my other points. Rubin labeled them all a rant and then claimed that my suggestion that too often sins of both commission and omission in what is and what is not taught in the classroom are tied to financial support--in one way or another--received by those institutions was an insult. Forget about his real insult to the plight of 30 million repeatedly massacred, subjugated, used, and abused stateless people that his Weekly Standard article represented. That was of no concern. Keep in mind that much of Rubin's analysis was on target, and I do agree that as part of a better Kurdish future, the PKK will have to be dealt with. I've written this myself. I, too, see the Turks as friends and valued allies. Here's a slice from one of my own articles on this topic, "Are You Ready? Here's The Plan": "...The one place where American military bases will probably be welcome in this strategic part of the world (where they increasingly are not) is in Iraqi Kurdistan...like the one America has at Incirlik in Turkey. This would accomplish a number of things. First, under the right circumstances, it could help calm the nerves of the Turks. The latter have their own ideas about what to do upon the breakup of Iraq...or even sooner. Ankara has long pouted over the loss of Mosul and northern Iraq's Kurdish oil wealth after the Brits manipulated the League of Nations to tie it to its Mesopotamian Mandate gift to its Arab allies in 1925...at the expense of earlier-promised Kurdish independence. American bases could help insure that the border remains stable...in both directions. Hopefully, the leftist, militant Kurdish PKK could be convinced, with an independent Kurdish state or secure and highly autonomous Kurdish region as the prize, to avoid problems with the Turks. American forces and Kurdish Peshmerga would have to show Ankara, however, what the alleged "moderate" Abbas refuses to do for Israel...that Kurds are willing to use force even against their own people for the sake of peace with their neighbors. This goes for dealing with jihadist Islamist Kurds as well, notably those associated with Ansar al-Islam. While one fifth of Turkey's population of about seventy million is Kurdish and this population is adjacent to Iraqi Kurdistan, it is obviously in the Kurds' overall best interests to assure their powerful Turkish neighbors (whose armed forces are already amassed on the border, set to pounce) that a peaceful Kurdish state will not be a major headache for them. Keep in mind that an Israel that can fit almost forty times into Turkey has a similar problem yet is expected to see yet another hostile Arab state (Arabs 22, Kurds 0) created in its very backyard. One fifth of Israel's six to seven million people are Arabs. Why is this not "destabilizing," but mere talk of the birth of an independent Kurdistan constantly gets branded this way Stating the obvious, Kurds would help insure peace with their neighbors since it would be their own best guarantee for their sustained independence or secured autonomy." Again, the above was among what Rubin simply called a rant when I answered his note to me complaining of my "insult." When "Enabling Kurdish Illusions" was first brought to my attention, it brought back bad memories. These included my never receiving a doctoral dissertation advisor for daring to bring up such inconvenient truths in a program led by a tenured chief honcho at Ohio State whose only mention of Kurds--while constantly lionizing the cause of Arab state # 22--was when he mocked their plight while speaking of his travels through Turkey. But this time, decades later, it was even worse, for I was certain that the fairly recent renewed slaughter and gassings of Kurds would finally open eyes a bit more to the hypocrisy which prevails both on the world arena at large and among academics in particular. Recall, again, that thirty million Kurds remain stateless today, their promised dream of independence in the new age of nationalism aborted on behalf of British petroleum politics and Arab nationalism. Caught between a constricted yet invigorated Turkish nationalism led by Ataturk after the breakup of the Ottoman Turkish Empire post-World War I and its eastern Iranian counterpart under Reza Shah Pahlavi, Mesopotamian Kurdistan became the focus of the Kurds' main struggle. Mustafa Kemal (Ataturk) drew his line in the sand beyond which there would be no further retreat. Turkey's large eastern Kurdish population became "Mountain Turks" from then on...language and culture outlawed, etc. and so forth. Arabs would do likewise. Ismet Cherif Vanly's The Syrian Mein Kampf Against The Kurds (Amsterdam 1968) and the Kurdish experience among Arabs in Iraq are stories that are well known to all who want to know. To this day, Kurdish kids in Syria are forced to sing songs in school praising their "Arab" identity. Unfortunately, those who you'd expect would be among the most tuned in have been, instead, among the worse offenders who have played deaf, dumb, and blind to the plight of Kurds while never allowing "Palestine" to move off of the front burner in the halls of academia. Before going any further, check out this haunting analogy and excerpt from a presentation by a leader of another victimized people in 1937: 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 (indeed, one third of world Jewry would be eliminated within just a few years of his remarks)... It is not a hardship on any race, any nation possessing so many National States now and so many more National States in the future. One fraction, one branch...and not a big one, will have to live in someone else's State: Well, that is the case with all the mightiest nations of the world...That is only normal and there is no "hardship" attached to that. So when we hear the Arab claim confronted with the Jewish claim, I fully understand that any minority would prefer to be a majority. It is quite understandable that the Arabs...would also prefer Palestine to be the Arab State No. 4, No. 5. or No. 6...but when the Arab claim is confronted with our Jewish demand to be saved, it is like the claims of appetite versus...starvation. The presenter was Ze'ev Vladimir Jabotinsky, the patron saint of Israel's modern Likud Party, testifying before The Palestine Royal Commission in London. Does this sound just a bit familiar? A rant and no analogy here, Dr. Rubin? Having seen Arabs, Turks, Iranians, Jews, Armenians, and others in the region live to see their quest for independence eventually fulfilled, it did not take Einstein to figure out how Kurds would react to repeatedly being ignored by the world community and deprived of the same thing...that same world community which today insists that that 22nd state be created for Arabs (on lands conquered and forcibly Arabized from mostly non-Arab peoples) while Kurds remain stateless. Continued Kurdish frustration, oppression, and subjugation has led to repeated revolts and conflict in Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq. And again, while those same Arabs, Turks, and Iranians saw the emergence of their own modern nation states, tens of millions of Kurds were told that they were to simply accept their perpetual victimization...including by such folks as Rubin. After receiving a favorable decision from the League of Nations tying the oil-rich Mosul region to their Mesopotamian Mandate in 1925, the Brits decided that their future depended more on Arab good will than on promises to the Kurds. An Arab Iraq was created with the oil of the Kurdish north tied to it for strategic and economic viability. The British imperial fleet had not long before switched from coal to oil... The area around oil-rich Kirkuk and Mosul was the heartland of Kurdistan for millennia--long before an Arab or Turk ever set foot in the region. In the 1960s and '70s, the competing Talabani and Barzani factions of Kurds joined forces and took on their latest Arab butchers, including Saddam. Yes, he was around for that long. A country as artificial and unstable as Yugoslavia was thus sired under similar circumstances (upon the collapse of empires and with groups often at each others' throats glued together largely for others' interests), with British military support aiding in the suppression of the Kurds' subsequent responses to this travesty. Unlike the Brits' other Mandate, Palestine, which would witness several partitions and partition plans to take into account competing nationalisms (like those which would also result in a Muslim Pakistan and a largely Hindu India), Kurds would simply be ignored in the even larger Mandate of Mesopotamia. Keep in mind that Arab nationalism was rewarded some 80% of the original April 25, 1920 Mandate of Palestine with the creation of what would later be renamed Jordan in 1922. Again, the fight today is over the birth of the Arabs' second state in "Palestine," not the first. Arabs declared the whole area to be purely Arab patrimony, and woe unto those who demanded their own slice of justice in the new nationalist age...be they Jabotinsky's Jews, Kurds, black African Sudanese, etc. and so forth. So, back to Rubin's piece... Yes, it was déjà vu yet again... Back in the '70s when I was doing masters and doctoral work in New York and Ohio and also a consultant for a major organization guest lecturing on dozens of universities across several states, I noticed those obvious acts of omission and commission mentioned earlier in the halls of academia itself. While it later became obvious to me what was going on, back then I was still too naïve and starry eyed about the positive aspects of the ivory tower to believe... But, to reiterate, I noticed that while certain topics and issues never left center stage, others rarely--if ever--were even mentioned. At least Rubin now mentions them... So, while Arab genocidal behavior towards African blacks--Muslims as well as non-Muslims, and not only in the Sudan--has been going on for decades, too many act now as if Darfur and such are new developments. Ditto for the revolts of the Kurds for freedom against their Arab and other oppressors, the plight of native Middle Eastern Jews (kilab yahud--Jew dogs--in Arabic), Copts, Assyrians, Berbers, and so forth. Most often, such subjects were/are simply ignored by the same professors who constantly scrutinize Israel under a high power lens and espouse the cause of the Arabs' 22nd state. That same tenured chief honcho I referred to earlier who liked to call Jabotinsky a fascist, all but canonized Hitler's good buddy, the Mufti of Jerusalem. And this was the same academic who taught a doctoral seminar on the Palestine Mandate and never mentioned the Cairo Conference of 1921 where Colonial Secretary, Winston Churchill, engineered the future separation of Transjordan--over 75 % of the territory--from Palestine on behalf of the Brits' Arab allies in World War I. Included, such information would put to the lie the Arab claim that the Jews wound up with the whole shebang. A mere accident from an academic expert in this field? Guess again... Worse yet, academic freedom only goes one way in such classes. Students risk their future careers (as I know all too well) by asking for such balance. Another professor, who I suspect was more reasonable, allowed me, as a doctoral Teaching Assistant, to do a one day's lesson on the Kurds. The Arabs in class were disturbed by this deviation from having the Jews frequently under the lens, so I soon "heard" about it. And note that the T.A. was chosen to do this lesson...No professor dared touch such a topic with a ten foot pole. This was all too typical in Middle Eastern Studies then, and I suspect it remains so today as well. And seeing articles such as Rubin's "Enabling Kurdish Illusions" is not promising in this regard either. Gerald A. Honigman, a Florida educator, has created and conducted counter-Arab propaganda programs for college youth, has lectured on numerous campuses and other platforms, and has publicly debated Arab spokesmen. His articles and op-eds have been published in both the print media and on websites. Contact him at honigman6@msn.com or go to his website: http://geraldahonigman.com/blog.php This essay appeared in
|
|
WHAT IS THE JEWISH BELIEF ABOUT 'THE END OF DAYS'?
Posted by Avodah, March 17, 2007. |
|
This was written by Rabbi Nissan Dovid Dubov, who is director of
Chabad Lubavitch in Wimbledon, UK. It appeared in
|
|
The term "End of Days" is taken from Numbers 24:4. This has always been taken as a reference to the messianic era and therefore we shall explore albeit briefly the Jewish belief in the coming of Mashiach. What does the word Mashiach mean? Mashiach is the Hebrew word for Messiah. The word Messiah in English means a saviour or a "hoped-for deliverer". The word Mashiach in Hebrew actually means "anointed". In Biblical Hebrew the title Mashiach was bestowed on somebody who had attained a position of nobility and greatness. For example, the High Priest is referred to as the Kohen Hamashiach. In Talmudic literature the title Mashiach, or Melech Hamashiach, (the King Messiah) is reserved for the Jewish leader who will redeem Israel in the End of Days. What is the belief in Mashiach? One of the principles of Jewish faith enumerated by Maimonides is that one day there will arise a dynamic Jewish leader, a direct descendant of the Davidic dynasty, who will rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem and gather Jews from all over the world and bring them back to the Land of Israel. All the nations of the world will recognise Mashiach to be a world leader and will accept his dominion. In the messianic era there will be world peace, no more wars nor famine and, in general, a high standard of living. All mankind will worship one G-d and live a more spiritual and moral way of life. The Jewish nation will be preoccupied with learning Torah and fathoming its secrets. The coming of Mashiach will complete G-d's purpose in creation: for man to make an abode for G-d in the lower worlds; to reveal the inherent spirituality in the material world. Is this not a utopian dream? No! Judaism fervently believes that, with the correct leadership, humankind can and will change. The leadership quality of Mashiach means that through his dynamic personality and example, coupled with manifest humility, he will inspire all people to strive for good. He will transform a seemingly utopian dream into a reality. He will be recognised as a man of G-d with greater leadership qualities than even Moshe. In today's society many people are repulsed by the breakdown of ethical and moral standards. Life is cheap, crime is rampant, drug and alcohol abuse are on the increase, children have lost respect for their elders. At the same time technology has advanced in quantum leaps. There is no doubt that today, if channelled correctly, man has all the resources necessary to create a good standard of living for all mankind. He lacks only the social and political will. Mashiach will inspire all men to fulfil that aim. Why the belief in a human Messiah? Some people believe that the world will "evolve" by itself into a messianic era without a human figurehead. Judaism rejects this belief. Human history has been dominated by empire builders greedy for power. Others believe in Armageddon -- that the world will self-destruct, either by nuclear war or by terrorism. Again Judaism rejects this view. Our prophets speak of the advent of a human leader, the magnitude of whom the world has not yet experienced. His unique example and leadership will inspire mankind to change direction. Where is Mashiach mentioned in the Scriptures? The Scriptures are replete with messianic quotes. In Deuteronomy 30:1 Moshe prophesies that, after the Jews have been scattered to the four corners of the earth, there will come a time when they will repent and return to Israel where they will fulfil all the commandments of the Torah. The gentile prophet Bilam prophesies that this return will be lead by Mashiach (see Numbers 24:17-20). Jacob refers to Mashiach by the name Shilo (Genesis 49:10). The prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Amos, Joel and Hosea all refer to the messianic era. For full references the reader is referred to the book Mashiach by Rabbi Dr.I.Schochet. It is interesting to note that on the wall of the United Nations building in New York is inscribed the quote from Isaiah (Ch.11:6), "And the wolf shall lie with the lamb". Furthermore, it is clear from the prophets, when studied in their original Hebrew, that Mashiach is a Jewish concept and will entail return to Torah law, firmly ruling out any "other" messianic belief. What sort of leader will Mashiach be? Mashiach will be a man who possesses extraordinary qualities. He will be proficient in both the written and oral Torah traditions. He will incessantly campaign for Torah observance among Jews and observance of the Seven Universal Noahide Laws by non-Jews. He will be scrupulously observant and encourage the highest standards from others. He will defend religious principles and repair breaches in their observance. Above all, Mashiach will be heralded as a true Jewish King, a person who leads the way in the service of G-d, totally humble yet enormously inspiring. When will Mashiach come? Jews anticipate the arrival of Mashiach everyday. Our prayers are full of requests to G-d to usher in the messianic era. Even at the gates of the gas chambers many Jews sang, "Ani Maamin" -- I believe in the coming of Mashiach! However, the Talmud states that there is a predestined time when Mashiach will come. If we are meritorious he may come even before that predestined time. This "end of time" remains a mystery, yet the Talmud states that it will be before the Hebrew year 6000. (The Hebrew year at the date of this publication is 5763.) This does not rule out the possibility of Mashiach coming today and now if we merit it. It should be noted that many Torah authorities are of the opinion that we are in the "epoch of the Mashiach" and the Lubavitcher Rebbe stated on numerous occasions that the messianic redemption is imminent. Could Mashiach come at any time in any generation? Yes. In every generation there is a person who potentially could be the Mashiach. When G-d decides the time has arrived, He will bestow upon that individual the necessary powers for him to precipitate that redemption. Any potential Mashiach must be a direct descendant of King David as well as erudite in Torah learning. It should be noted that many people living today can trace their lineage back to King David. The Chief Rabbi of Prague in the 16th Century, Rabbi Yehuda Loew (the Maharal), had a family tree that traced him back to the Davidic dynasty. Consequently, any direct descendant of the Maharal is of Davidic descent. Maimonides, a great Jewish philosopher and codifier of the 12th Century, rules that if we recognise a human being who possesses the superlative qualities ascribed to Mashiach we may presume that he is the potential Mashiach. If this individual actually succeeds in rebuilding the Temple and gathering in the exiles then he is the Mashiach. What exactly will happen when Mashiach comes? Maimonides states in his Mishnah Torah -- a compendium of the entire halachic tradition -- that Mashiach will first rebuild the Temple and then gather in the exiles. Jerusalem and the Temple will be the focus of Divine worship and "From Zion shall go forth Torah, and the word of the L-rd from Jerusalem." The Sanhedrin -- a supreme Jewish law court of 71 sages -- will be established and will decide on all matters of law. At this time all Jews will return to full Torah observance and practice. It should be noted that in this present age of great assimilation and emancipation an unprecedented return of Jews to true Torah values has taken place. This "Baal Teshuvah" phenomenon is on the increase and paves the way for a full return in the messianic era. Will miracles happen? The Talmud discusses this question and again arrives at the conclusion that, if we are meritorious, the messianic redemption will be accompanied by miracles. However, the realisation of the messianic dream, even if it takes place naturally, will be the greatest miracle. According to some traditions G-d Himself will rebuild the third Temple. According to others it will be rebuilt by Mashiach, while others suggest a combination of the two opinions. Some suggest that there will be two distinct periods in the messianic era: the first, a non-miraculous period, leading on to a second miraculous period. Maimonides writes, "Neither the order of the occurrence of these events nor their precise detail is among the fundamental principles of the faith ... one should wait and believe in the general conception of the matter." What will become of the world as we know it? Initially, there will be no change in the world order other than its readiness to accept messianic rule. All the nations of the world will strive to create a new world order in which there will be no more wars or conflicts. Jealousy, hatred, greed and political strife (of the negative kind) will disappear and all human beings will strive only for good, kindness and peace. In the messianic era there will be great advances in technology allowing a high standard of living. Food will be plentiful and cheap. However the focus of human aspiration will be the pursuit of the "knowledge of G-d." People will become less materialistic and more spiritual. What are the birthpangs of Mashiach's arrival? The Talmud describes the period immediately prior to the advent of Mashiach as one of great travail and turmoil. There will be a world recession and governments will be controlled by despots. It is in this troubled setting that Mashiach will arrive. There is a tradition that a great war will take place, called the war of Gog and Magog, and there is much speculation as to the precise timing of this war in relation to Mashiach's arrival. There is a tradition that Elijah the prophet will come to the world and announce the imminent arrival of Mashiach. However, according to other opinions, Mashiach may arrive unannounced. Elijah would then arrive to assist in the peace process. Some suggest that if the Mashiach arrives in his predestined time then Elijah will announce his arrival, but if Mashiach comes suddenly then Elijah will appear after Mashiach has come. As mentioned before, it is unclear as to exactly how these events will unfold. However, this uncertainty does not affect the general matter of Mashiach's arrival. When will the resurrection of the dead take place? One of the principles of Jewish faith is belief in the resurrection of the dead. According to the Zohar -- an early Kabbalistic text -- the resurrection will take place forty years after the arrival of Mashiach. However, certain righteous individuals will arise with the coming of Mashiach. All the dead will be resurrected in the Land of Israel. There is a small bone in the body called the Luz bone (some identify this bone as the coccyx) from which the body will be rebuilt at the time of resurrection. Our daily prayers are replete with requests for the resurrection and there are many customs connected with it. (See the book To Live and Live Again -- SIE Publications) What can be done to bring Mashiach? In general, mankind must strive to perform more acts of goodness and kindness. The Jew is mandated to learn and be aware of the messianic redemption, and strengthen his faith in Mashiach's ultimate and imminent arrival. Charity is a catalyst for redemption and every day in our prayers we sincerely plead many times for the rebuilding of Jerusalem, the in-gathering of the exiles and the return to Torah observance under the leadership of Mashiach. The Lubavitcher Rebbe mounted a worldwide Mashiach campaign to heighten the awareness of Mashiach's imminent arrival. The Rebbe constantly urged every Jew to prepare himself, his family and his community for the arrival of Mashiach. This can best be achieved by "living with Mashiach"; that is, by learning about Mashiach and yearning for his coming. Summary
In conclusion, the Jew always was and remains the eternal optimist.
Even in his darkest hour he hopes and prays for a brighter future -- a
world of peace and spirituality.
Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com
|
|
THE RADICALS' NOT-SO-SECRET WINNING STRATEGY
Posted by Barry Rubin, March 17, 2007. |
|
T he world's radical regimes--especially Iran, Syria, North Korea, and their associated client groups--have come up with a brilliant strategy that breaks every rule in the diplomatic book and yet works brilliantly. The West's inability to cope with this approach--indeed, failure even to comprehend it--has been one of the biggest problems in Middle Eastern and world politics for the last few decades. The basic rules of diplomacy go something like this: -- States that act aggressively or systematically subvert neighbors (using tools like terrorism) know they will be punished and so don't do it; All the above points make sense. Western politicians, diplomats, academics, and journalists all expect that other countries will follow these rules. When they don't do so, often they reinterpret the other governments' behavior--out of ignorance or disbelief--to conform to them. You might call this system, "moderation insurance" because it tends to discourage regimes from acting in an adventurous manner and knocks out of existence those who disregard these rules. In fact, the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, while so highly controversial, could be called a normal application of the rules of international affairs. Another example of the system is the balance of power, which has so often prevented war--the U.S.-Soviet, Greek-Turkish, and India-Pakistan balances usually worked to keep the peace. Starting in the 1950s, however, radical Arab nationalist, and later Islamist regimes, simply threw away this rule book. Their less extremist neighbors--like Saudi Arabia and Jordan--believed they were making a big mistake by doing so. Watch out, they warned, the West is going to crush you! Do you think it will let you get away with sponsoring terrorism, starting wars, overthrowing the shah of Iran, and disregarding their interests in every way? But surprise, surprise, the radicals have generally gotten away with their strategy and often they have prospered from it. This inspired revolutionary opposition movements to use similar tactics and even relatively moderate countries to step up their anti-Western propaganda and ignore Western demands or interests. A key element in this strategy is that it plays to the strengths of the perpetrators and the perceived weaknesses of the West. On their side, the radicals have several advantages: they like conflict; are patient; not bound by morality (that is, they don't mind murdering people in cold blood); and are willing to suffer (or, rather, let their people suffer since the dictators always eat well). Since they are dictators, they don't care about public opinion and even mobilize it for themselves through demagoguery. (As dictators, they also control the schools and media.) In contrast, the West likes peace, is impatient for solutions, and doesn't like casualties. As democracies, their people are divided and thus vulnerable to the extremists' propaganda. So what are the main elements of the radicals' regulations? 1. Ignore the balance of forces. Who cares if the other side is stronger? What are they going to do, attack us? There are some specific countries--especially India, Israel, South Korea and Turkey--whose survival requires them to make an equally tough response with popular support at home. In contrast, crippled by European weakness and its own intellectual fifth column, its priority on high living standards and low levels of bloodshed, the West has a hard time dealing with this problem. And yet, nevertheless, the West and democratic world will win, for the traditional rules ultimately will apply. For example, the extremists force the West to oppose them by their very aggressiveness; economic and strategic superiority does count. The problem is that this new radical strategic superweapon makes it harder and longer to achieve this result. Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and co-author of "Yasir Arafat: A Political Biography" and "Hating America: A History" (Oxford University Press, August 2007). Prof. Rubin's columns can now be read online at http://gloria.idc.ac.il/columns/column.html. |
|
ISLAM: AN EGREGIOUS CULTURE
Posted by Michael Devolin, March 17, 2007. |
|
Steven Stalinsky, the Executive Director of the Middle East Media Research Institute, wrote in the National Review (May 2004) that, "As the war on terror continues, the voices from the Arab and Muslim world celebrating death over life have been heard more often than those criticizing this philosophy." Judging either by the silence or the non-committal voices of the so-called "moderates" of Islam, we the inexperts-on-Islam, non-Muslims of this world can only surmise that Islam has fixed itself upon the course set out for it by the violent and bloody-minded of this religion. A course pondered and plotted not only by Mohammed himself, but also by many extremists since Islam's conception. The famous British historian Charles Allen mentions in his book God's Terrorists that present day Wahabbism began long before the Arab Al Wahhab (born in 1702), from whom the Wahabbists get their name, but earlier, in the late 13th century (1263), in what is now Syria, in the heart and mind of the Sunni jurist Sheikh Ibn Taymiyya. Bernard Lewis (whom I consider to be too much an apologist for Islam and too little an objective historian) points out that sectarian violence within this religion's bloody sphere began immediately the Prophet Mohammed died and his so-called heir apparent could not be deemed as being apparent enough. Regardless, wherever Islam takes root, violence is found there, and in effusive measure. We hear from Islam's apologists, over and over (many of whom will not answer those particular questions which profile the very off-putting and denigrating passages in the Quran about the Jews), that terrorism and bloodshed and everyday mistreatment of non-Muslims are not an integral part of Islam but rather a tangential phenomenon of their religion. We hear that those incriminating manifestations -- for example, the public beheadings of both Daniel Pearl and Nicholas Berg -- are not incriminating at all but rather a culture of the region wherein these manifestations take place and therefore outside of Islam. If this is the case, why is Islam always a contributing factor in these violent manifestations and why are Muslims always involved in these violent manifestations? Moreover, why is Islam and its millions of adherents (clerics included) more concerned with killing their critics than with listening to them. No-one has put it more succinctly than the Tunisian intellectual Al-Afif Al-Akhdar when he wrote, "Why do expressions of tolerance, moderation, rationalism, compromise, and negotiation horrify us [Muslims], but when we hear fervent cries for vengeance, we all dance the war dance?...Why do other people love life, while we love death and violence, slaughter and suicide, and even call it heroism and martyrdom?" If Islam's apologists are to be believed, we are to blame entire peoples for bad customs and not the religion of Islam. For instance, we are to blame Palestinians for suicide bombings and not those Islamic clerics who teach their congregants that to murder Jewish Israeli children warrants them a place in Paradise; we are to believe that Pakistanis are congenitally and inherently evil for beheading Daniel Pearl and Nicholas Berg and not Wahabbism's Islamic clerics who, as related by William Gifford Palgrave, teach that all Muslims should "consider everyone save themselves an infidel or a heretic," and "regard the slaughter of an infidel or a heretic as a duty, at least a merit"; we are to believe that all Chechens are born bad and not the Muslim zealots who, led by an Amir and inspired by passages from the Quran, murdered 186 Russian school children (but not before raping some of the young girls) in the small town of Beslan. I can go on, but I think the reader can see the point I'm making: Islam, and not their provincial culture, has created all this interconnecting obsession with death and destruction and hatred among these many peoples who have been inculcated with its maleficent ideology. Islam's apologists (including their "experts") are simply attempting to obfuscate this obvious peculiarity attendant wherever Islam becomes the dominant religion. Sophists like Harroon Siddiqui of the Toronto Star are sweating at the brow, especially since the advent of the internet, in their attempts to conceal the atrocious truth about Islam, which is that Islam emanates violence and bloodshed. Daniel Jonah Goldhagen appellated Islamic violence as "political Islam," which is both ridiculous and irresponsible. Anyone who delves even slightly into the history of Islam will immediately see that this insalubrious religion is culpable for all Islamic terrorism and hatred of the West. No matter how great the good our Western governments can do for the Muslim Middle East, whether militarily, financially, or otherwise, the Muslim Middle East will repay us contumeliously, vis-a-vis Islam's inexorable penchant for terrorism and their religiously taught hatred of everything Judeo-Christian. Islam is the exclusive and primary source of Wahabbist terrorism -- not Christianity and not Judaism; Islam is the exclusive and primary source of the Wahabbist terrorist--not Christianity and not Judaism. Only Islam is the source of violence between Muslim factions within the Middle East -- between Sunni and Shia, between Fatah and Hamas -- not Western governments, and especially not the United States, a country that has given billions to these Muslim groups only to see it disappear into a bureaucratic oblivion immediately it reaches the so-called "leaders" of these Islamic factions. Likewise, if there exists a provincial culture outside of the Western hemisphere wherein murder and terrorism are become most fashionable, even acceptable, then you can be assured that Islam, the same Islam practiced the world over, contributed markedly to the formation of that culture. "When the light is crooked, the shadow is crooked." --Yiddish proverb "Muslim leaders and governments are unhappy to call it Islamic terrorism. They argue Islam is a religion of peace and that Islamic faith is not the cause of terrorism." -- K.N. Pandita Contact Michael Devolin at devolin@reach.net |
|
PALESTINIAN UNITY GOV'T MAY BE THE LAST NAIL IN FATAH'S COFFIN
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 17, 2007. |
|
This was written by Avi Issacharoff, and it appeared today in
Haaretz
Aren't you thrilled Olmert presented Hamas with all those kill-a-Jew weapons a few weeks ago -- with Abbas as delivery boy. They play it for us westerners like a cop show - good cop, bad cop: Good terrorists Fatah, bad terrorists Hamas. Actually, it's more Tweedle-dee and Tweedle-dum: Fatah, Hamas and all the splinter groups are all the same and have the same desire to kill off Israel. They only disagree on who keeps the welfare money from EU. The current sham unity was mecca-factured and paid for by the Saudis, who want the Palestinians to pretend they are ready for peace with Israel -- it's part of the Saudi plan to pressure Israel into committing peace-plan-suicide. The Saudis hope that with the weakness of the lobotomized Israeli government and with pressure from the bucktoothed queen of the state dept, their "peace" plan will work before PA "unity" splinters and/or Hamas kills off all the opposition. |
|
The celebrations in Ramallah and Gaza on Saturday of the Palestinian Authority unity government could all too quickly turn into a burial ceremony for Fatah. The movement over the past year presented itself as a clear political alternative to Hamas. Now it has become Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh's closest ally. Senior Fatah officials opposed to the move worry the organization will thus be identified with failures in the economy, internal security and in creating a political horizon. The limited protests from senior Fatah figures against Hamas policy will peter out and with them the chances to constitute a real political and cultural competition to the Islamists. Both Haniyeh and PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas were all smiles on Saturday, but Haniyeh and his Hamas associates particularly had reason to be pleased. Following tough negotiations, Hamas has a majority in the cabinet after Fatah agreed to consider Foreign Minister Ziyad Abu Amar as one of the independent ministers representing it. The idea of holding elections was rejected, and a crack has appeared in the diplomatic siege of Hamas, while the organization has not changed its ideology: no recognition of Israel, no negotiations with it (Abbas will do the dirty work) and "the resistance" in other words, violence will go on. However, the option of Palestinian unity and damage to Fatah was the lesser of two evils. The other possibility for Abbas was civil war. The problem is that until the next elections for president (in less than two years) the Palestinian public will forget that Abbas overcame lesser political considerations and remember primarily that Fatah is not functioning. The movement's reforms of bringing in younger leaders was not enough. Most of the 72,0000 registered members of Fatah know today there is no alternative to Hamas, say young Tanzim leaders in the West Bank. The sixth party convention has become a stale joke; there seems little chance it will ever be held. The party is in economic crisis, and attempts by senior Fatah officials to impact voters through a social safety net pale in comparison to Hamas' social services network. Corruption in PA institutions and the chaos on the streets are identified with Fatah and its security forces. Above all, the feeling is widespread that no one is in charge in Fatah. Meanwhile, Hamas is continuing its quiet revolution. Recently 11 Hamas members were appointed to senior posts in the PA Education Ministry, and the number of hours of religious studies has been increased by about 20 percent. Hamas reaches the hearts of the people, and one of the best ways to do this has always been through the mosques. In 2000, there were 100 of them in Ramallah; today there are 190. Without laws to limit it, Hamas has managed to lead a cultural change in Palestinian society. Most women in the territories wear head coverings, including some who do so to avoid public criticism. Fewer restaurants sell alcohol and halls for weddings and other festivities are being asked not to host belly-dancers. Hamas leaders are sounding sure of themselves these days, while working unceasingly to gain new members, and Fatah carries on with its internal struggles. |
|
ISLAMICIZATION OF ANTWERP
Posted by Naomi Ragen, March 17, 2007. |
|
A March 14, 2007 editorial in The Washington Times |
|
The decisive battle against Islamic extremists will not be fought in Iraq, but in Europe. It is not in Baghdad but in cities like Antwerp, Belgium, where the future of the West will be decided. I recently met Marij Uijt den Bogaard, a 49-year-old woman who deserves America's support at least as much as Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki. Ms. Uijt den Bogaard was an Antwerp civil servant in the 1990s, who spent many years working in the immigrant neighborhoods of Antwerp. There she noticed how radical Islamists began to take over. "They work according to a well-defined plan," she says. One of the things Ms. Uijt den Bogaard used to do for the immigrants was to assist them with their administrative paperwork. Quite a few of them came to trust her. About three years ago, young men dressed in black moved into the neighborhoods. They had been trained in Saudi Arabia and Jordan and adhere to Salafism, a radical version of Islam. They set up youth organizations, which gradually took over the local mosques. "The Salafists know how to debate and they know the Qur'an by heart, while the elderly running the mosques do not," she said They also have money. "One of them told me that he gets Saudi funds." Because they are eloquent, the radicals soon became the official spokesmen of the Muslim community, also in dealing with the city authorities. Ms. Uijt den Bogaard witnessed how the latter gave in to Salafist demands, such as the demand for separate swimming hours for Muslim women in the municipal pools. Worried immigrants told Ms. Uijt den Bogaard what was happening. On the basis of their accounts and her own experiences she wrote (confidential) reports for the city authorities about the growing radicalization. This brought her into conflict, both with the Islamists and her bosses in the city. The city warned her that her reports were unacceptable, that they read like "Vlaams Belang tracts" (the Vlaams Belang is Antwerp's anti-immigrant party) and that she had to "change her attitude." The Islamists sensed that she disapproved of them. They might also have been informed, because there are Muslims working in the city administration. One day, when she was accompanied by her superior, she was attacked by a Muslim youth. Her superior refused to interfere. When she questioned him afterward he said that all the animosity toward her was her own fault. In the end she was fired. She is unemployed at the moment and gets turned away whenever she applies for another job as a civil servant. Last week, she learned that city authorities have given the job of integration officer, whose task it is to supervise 25 Antwerp mosques, to one of the radical Salafists. Meanwhile, the latter have threatened her with reprisals if she continues to speak out. After her dismissal Ms. Uijt den Bogaard went to see Monica Deconinck, a Socialist politician who is the head of the Antwerp social department, to tell her about the plight of the Muslim women. Ms. Deconinck said, "You have taken your job too seriously and tried to do it too well," adding that she cannot help, although she sympathizes. Ms. Uijt den Bogaard also went to see Christian Democrat and Liberal politicians. They also refused to help her because they are governing the city in a coalition with the Socialists. The only opposition party in town is the Vlaams Belang. According to Ms. Uijt den Bogaard, the reason why the Socialists, who run the city, allow the Islamists to do as they please is because they want to get the Muslim vote, which is controlled increasingly by the Salafists who are in the process of taking over the mosques. In a letter to city authorities she wrote: "You employ workers to improve social cohesion in the city's neighborhoods. But if you do not want to know what is damaging social cohesion, then you need not bother sending those workers!... Employees who are confronted with this problem [of Muslim radicalization] and investigate are silently removed, losing their income and their reputation. That is censorship in the fashion of political dictatorships. As a former member of your services I am shocked to find myself in this position and to discover after years of service that you have no policy whatever, either political or with regard to your personnel." Sadly, what is happening in Antwerp is not unique. The Salafists employ the same strategy in other European cities. They boasted to Ms. Uijt den Bogaard about their international network and their successes in neighboring countries. While the Americans fight to secure Iraq, Western Europe is becoming a hotbed of Salafism. Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter. |
|
LONG DIVISION
Posted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, March 17, 2007. |
|
This was written by Diana West and it appeared yesterday as an
Op-Ed piece in the Washington Times
|
|
Without attracting much attention, representatives of the Belgian political party Vlaams Belang recently visited Washington, D.C. Frank Vanhecke and Filip Dewinter hoped to meet members of Congress; but Congress was in recess. They hoped to engender some understanding of their program to reverse the Islamization of Belgium; but the media were strip-mining the tinsel life and tawdry times of Anna Nicole Smith. Maybe they should have known that Tabloid America doesn't care about the likely transformation of Europe into an Islamic continent, let alone the fate of a French- and Dutch-speaking country of 10 million people. And while Literary America does write books about the transformation -- "While Europe Slept" by Bruce Bawer, "The War for the West" by Tony Blankley and "America Alone" by Mark Steyn come to mind. Political America has yet to acknowledge or even notice this colossal, epoch-defining shift now taking place. Why don't our leaders face it? This may be one of those questions our children will ask some day. But if such natural curiosity isn't expressed until the next generation, the civilizational struggle for Europe will certainly have been lost. Better to question our politicians now. Better to examine the issue today. Europe, as we may readily observe, is very far along in an accommodation with its still-increasing Muslim immigrant population that is resulting not in the Europeanizing of Islam, but rather the Islamizing of Europe. As Bernard Lewis declared in 2004, Europe will have an Islamic majority by the end of the 21st century at the latest. As Vlaams Belang's Mr. Dewinter recently put it, "We are becoming foreigners in our own land." Such tragic pronouncements turn conversation with Vlaams Belang into a kind of political free verse -- sadly evocative but rooted in a desperate reality that should shake American complacency. That is, "foreigners in our land" is poetry; Mohammed as the most popular boy's name in Brussels for six years running is implacable fact. The idea that "We are living on a dying continent but we are not dead yet," as Mr. Dewinter has explained, is metaphorical. His citation from Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi that "Allah is mobilizing Muslim Turkey to add... 50 million more Muslims" to the European Union augurs world-class revolution. Is such a revolution desirable? After writing nearly incessantly about Islamization since September 11, I won't surprise anyone by saying no -- not if freedom of conscience, religious equality or women's rights are your bag (not to mention the glorious representational artwork Europe's museums are stuffed with). Besides, the strategic implications for the United States are, in a word, bleak. In multiculturally totalitarian Belgium, however, you make such judgments at your own risk. Vlaams Belang, a conservative, free-market party that stands for Flemish secession from the French-speaking part of Belgium and opposes continued immigration, now stands trial in a Belgian court for a comment -- a comment! -- Mr. Dewinter made in 2005 to a New York publication, The Jewish Week. When asked why Belgian Jews should vote for a party that espouses "xenophobia," Mr. Dewinter replied: "Xenophobia is not the word I would use. If [it] absolutely must be a 'phobia,' let it be 'Islamophobia.' Yes, we're afraid of Islam. The Islamization of Europe is a frightening thing." If convicted of the "crime" of "Islamophobia" ("1984," anyone?), the party would lose its state funding. In a country that effectively prohibits private political fund-raising, Vlaams Belang -- the largest party in Belgium -- would ultimately cease to exist. And so, too, would free speech in the center of Europe. Before I met Vlaams Belang's Frank Vanhecke and Filip Dewinter in Washington, I believed Europe's rush to Islamize itself was a stampede, its transformation all but inevitable. Now, I think these men have at least earned Europe the benefit of the doubt. Studying their various statements and interviews, I found no evidence to support the crude slanders to which they are continually subjected in the media for being a right-wing party opposed to the massive Islamic immigration now transforming traditional European culture. Indeed, their statements on Israel are more supportive than any European party I know of. As Mr. Vanhecke put it in a recent speech, "They call us 'intolerant' because we oppose intolerance. They call us 'fascists' because we oppose Islamofascism. They call us 'the children of holocaust perpetrators,' because we oppose Islamists who are preparing a new holocaust against the Jews." (emphasis added) America must start paying attention to Europe. And to Vlaams Belang. Mordechai Ben-Menachem is at Ben-Gurion University. He can be reached by email at quality@computer.org |
|
LANCET'S HORTON LANCES ISRAEL UNJUSTLY
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 17, 2007. |
|
To: Publisher -- Rea S. Hederman 212-757-8070
From: David Meir-Levi, Menlo Park, CA Re: Richard Horton's article on Palestinian health care in the 15 March 2007 edition of the New York Review of Books Date: 2.17.07 Richard Horton is the editor of The Lancet, the UK's best known and most prestigious medical journal. Yet, in Thursday's article he writes palpable nonsense regarding Palestinian health care problems... and you publish it! He writes that "Procurement of medicines is difficult," but fails to inform readers that the Palestinian Authority government turned down an Israeli offer of $11 million dollars worth of medicine that Israel sought to transfer to the Palestinian Authority, and that the Palestinians asked instead for the cash equivalent. (Ynetnews.com, July 6, 2006) It is the Palestinians who are the obstacle to medicine deliveries -- not the Israelis. Reproaching Israel for the delays and difficulties caused by its checkpoints, Horton only in passing mentions the Palestinian terrorism against Israeli civilians that necessitates the security checkpoints. He ignores that the checkpoints have saved countless lives by enabling the Israelis to catch terrorists before they get into Israel to bomb crowded civilian targets. Similarly, he does not mention that Palestinian terrorists have been caught using ambulances to ferry explosives and weapons and terrorists past checkpoints. Both Horton and you fail to ask the obvious, and very painful question: Where do you want the casualties? With the checkpoints and road blocks and ambulance inspections, the casualties are the Palestinians who are delayed and inconvenienced and even some times humiliated. Without these inherently defensive measures, the casualties would be the scores or hundreds or thousands of Israelis burned alive, blown up, shot, stabbed, kidnapped, tortured, or raped... by the terrorists who would have the freedom to reach their targets. Horton speaks disparagingly of the medical care Israeli hospitals provide to Palestinians. He seems not to notice that Israel is providing this care to people whose government is at war with Israel. Despite almost 2,000 Israeli deaths, and more than 7,000 injured or maimed for life, and despite the major security problems arising from the violence instigated by the Palestinians, and despite the Palestinians expressing in their speeches and television shows and textbooks and cartoons and sermons their psychotic desire to genocide Israel's Jews, Israel continues to provide medical services for thousands of Palestinians. Jewish doctors have treated Palestinians in Israeli hospitals, trained Palestinian doctors and nurses, and attempted to provide medicine (but their offer was turned down). And, he just tosses about what he calls facts, without even noticing that in and of themselves they are palpably and demonstrably false. He cites a truly shocking figure: 40% of Gazan children have relatives killed in the 2nd Intifada. But wait a minute...let's do the arithmetic. There are 1,430,000 Arabs in the Gaza Strip. There were just under 2,000 Gazans killed by Israeli action during the 2nd Intifada. That means that only fourteen one-hundredths of one percent of all Gazans were killed by Israel (0.014%, or 0.0014 expressed as a decimal). It is arithmetically impossible for 40% of Gazan children to be related to 0.0014 of Gazan adults. Obviously, Horton did not bother to check his own math...nor did you. The declining health care of the Palestinians today is a product of their own choices, and the choices of their duly and democratically elected government, to pursue an endless, relentless, barbaric and brutal terror war against Israel, despite Israel's repeated attempts to find a negotiated solution to the conflict. The bottom line that both you and Horton choose to ignore is that it is only the terrorism that creates the need for Israel's security measures. Before Arafat's terror war, there were almost no lock-downs or curfews or road blocks or ambulance searches or security barrier. And, before the terror war, the economy of the West Bank and Gaza Strip was booming, the population was increasing, and health care was far better under Israeli sovereignty than it had ever been, and better than it has been since the Palestinian Authority took over. Yet he, and you, blame Israel.
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
DINESH D'SOUZA -- A NEW TAKE ON BLAMING THE WEST FOR ISLAMISM
Posted by Daniel Mandel, March 16, 2007. |
|
Many readers will be aware of the controversy surrounding Dinesh D'Souza's new book The Enemy at Home: The Cultural Left and Its Responsibility for 9/11, and the criticism it has drawn from D'Souza's conservative colleagues. There has been plentiful discussion at National Review Online, and at FrontpageMag.com, which among other things interviewed D'Souza at length and then conducted a discussion with him over some of his most contentious ideas. There are few points that have not already been made by those challenging his book's willful thesis -- that the Western radical left has so repelled Muslims with its secularity, impiety and license that it, rather than gruesome Islamist imperial ambition, is a primary cause of Muslim rage and terror against America. Nonetheless, here are two further considerations: 1. There is a "root causes" school that is endlessly fertile in identifying Western acts and faults which enrage Islamists and seeing to it that these operate as causes for their violence. Until now, this narcissistic preoccupation with personal political agendas has been largely a leftist monopoly, rounding up the usual suspects of Western oil greed, neo-liberal economics, neo-conservative muscle-flexing and of course support for Israel. (Some, like Democratic Senator, Patty Murray, as Jay Nordlinger helpfully pointed out in 2004, actually go one step further and appear to believe the Islamists have been nothing less than munificent philanthropists building day care centres for wretched Muslims). D'Souza has now produced the rightist version. 2. In his eagerness to indict the radical left, D'Souza recently wrote
If traditional Muslims realized that there are millions of Americans who go to church, take care of their families and live by traditional values, they would be less likely to view us or our leaders as the Great Satan, and fewer of them will be tempted to join the camp of the Islamic radicals. Improving our moral reputation is not just a way to look better, it may also be the best long-term strategy to make our country safer. In short, D'Souza thinks of Americans and Muslims as Jimmy Carter's Secretary of State Cyrus Vance once did of the US and the Soviets, namely, that the two sides "have similar dreams and aspirations about the most fundamental issues." D'Souza's solution to Islamist aggression: self-improvement -- this being incidentally a similar delusion, seductively holding out the prospect of control, to the one Israelis have indulged and for which the historian and psychiatrist Kenneth Levin has coined the term "Oslo Syndrome". Contact Daniel Mandel at daniel.mandel@gmail.com |
|
SUPREME COURT: PUNISH ANTI-EXPULSION PROTESTERS TO DETER OTHERS
Posted by Lee Caplan, March 16, 2007. |
| This was written by Ezra HaLevi and it appeared in Arutz Sheva. |
|
Israel's Supreme Court convicted two minors Thursday who took part in anti-expulsion protests prior to the implementation of the Disengagement Plan and the destruction of Jewish towns in Gaza and northern Samaria. The two had taken part in the blocking of the Geha Highway (Highway 4) on August 16th, 2005 -- on the eve of the forced eviction and after Gaza had already been declared closed to Jews. The two used mattresses to block traffic, which they set on fire. The Jerusalem District Court ruled earlier that the two were guilty, but not deserving of punishment beyond court-imposed classes on democracy. The State Prosecution appealed the decision, seeking much harsher punishment. The state argued that a large demographic views road blockings as a legitimate form of protest and must be corrected. The Supreme Court overturned the lower court's decision Thursday, convicting the two teens of endangerment of life on a traffic thoroughfare and instructing the lower court to hand down a harsher sentence. Supreme Court Justice Amnon Rubinstein wrote in his verdict: "We are aware of the basic norms of the defendants and their outstanding contribution on behalf of the public, as well as their expressions of remorse and introspection. But the previous verdict of acquittal was a moderate punishment. Therefore, we decided that in order to fulfill the intent of the lawmaker and in order to deter the public, we are convicting them of this crime...In this regard, the driving ideology heightens the necessity of deterring the public [from engaging in civil disobedience], and there is no need to be verbose in this regard." Rubinstein went on to criticize the "use of minors" in the struggle against the Disengagement and expressed his hope that the conviction would be a deterrent to others who may seek to wage such a struggle again in the future. "It is not a simple decision in that before us we have people who we believe and hope will perform beneficial service in the IDF and become good citizens, while before us we also have the dictate of the lawmaker -- and especially when dealing with minors, with an emphasis on the individual. But in this case, we tend to lean toward conviction specifically because these dangerous illegal action were part of a political and ideological struggle -- and this must be uprooted. Thus it is upon the Supreme Court to contribute to that end." Rubinstein said the verdict was aimed most of all at the "leaders" of the anti-expulsion camp and should not prevent the young people from serving in elite IDF units. The Deputy Head of the Israel Bar Association, Attorney Yariv Levine spoke with Arutz-7 about the ramifications of the convictions. "We are speaking about a very serious verdict that once again positions the Supreme Court on the fringes of Israeli society, further intensifying the public's sweeping lack of faith in the justice system." Levine added that it is "demonstrated again and again that when it comes to the human rights of supporters of the settlement project, the Supreme Court abstains from fulfilling its duties." Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com |
|
ANTISEMITISM MAKES EUROPEANS NUTTIER
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 16, 2007. |
|
ANTISEMITISM MAKES EUROPEANS NUTTIER Conservative British MP Peter Tapsell likened Israel's behavior in Lebanon to the Nazi destruction of the Warsaw Ghetto. Europe did not complain when Sri Lanka killed and wounded a hundred school children, in its defense against Tamil terrorists. Why condemn Israel for fewer casualties and not Sri Lanka? Why not condemn Arabs for mass-murder of Arabs in other Mideast wars? The European media is concerned only about condemning the Jewish state. Hizbullah stated that it wants genocide. When the President of Iran called for the elimination (i.e. annihilation) of Israel no EU government recalled its ambassador from Iran. Major Norwegian newspapers have Nazi-like cartoons. The Danish cartoons about Muhammad led to Muslims attacking and burning down European embassies. Did the EU condemn this violence and uphold freedom of the press in Europe? No. It regretted that Muslims found the cartoons offensive. Muslims see from the weak response that they can get away with such outrages. When an Israeli attack on rockets embedded among civilians accidentally bombed civilians, Europeans immediately and strongly condemned Israel, and did not list Hizbullah as terrorist for illegally risking those civilians. The Europeans failed to suggest how Israel might otherwise fight such an enemy (or whether there is any other way). French TV did not show Hizbullah's bunkers in the midst of civilian housing. It omitted Hizbullah's firing at Israel's civilians. The Foreign Minister of Italy contends that since Hizbullah has Members of Parliament, it cannot be considered terrorist. (There is no logic to that.) There is no such provision in international law. The EU seeks to switch terms from "Islamic terrorism" to "terrorism that abusively invokes Islam." That switch makes a theological judgment (and an incorrect one, at that). In any case, Europeans have honored terrorists such as Arafat. Remember the plot to blow up airplanes between Britain and the US? All the suspects were British-born Muslims. The government is watching thousands of British Muslims. After the arrests, 38 British Muslim organizations and most Muslim MPs told the Prime Minister that British foreign policy on Israel (to which Britain traditionally is hostile) and on Iraq fosters terrorist recruitment. They overlooked major Islamic inciters of terrorism. Israel must learn it cannot depend on European support against dire menace. Unable to solve the grave problems it created for itself, Europe has no credibility when it tells Israel how to solve its problems (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/2006, p.35). All the "reasons" adduced by the EU are pretexts for pre-existing antisemitism fanned by media misrepresentation. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
ONE TINY SPECK OF LAND
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 16, 2007. |
|
If and when a spaceship, operated by intelligent alien researchers, enters a region of space, surrounding a planet called Earth, they would likely notice one speck of land, highly populated by the planet's, they would deduce, dominant species, located within a vast sparsely populated expanse of desert, except for other highly concentrated population centers here and there. Let us presume such a craft does someday land and intelligent sophisticated life forms disembark. Much time would be spent roaming about studying the dynamics of that dominant species. The space voyagers, no doubt, would encounter a strange phenomenon. The speck of land, they had observed from space, is inhabited by two very different tribes called Israelis and Palestinians, controlling forces in each tribe claim sovereignty over that tiny territory, yet no tribal leader appears to grasp the irony of such counterproductive behavior. Indeed, when measured, that highly populated speck is but two tenths of one percent as large in area as its sparsely populated expansive neighborhood. If Earthlings were logical, the intergalactic researchers thus would conclude, those tribes would buy, rent, or even take more land from perhaps one of its neighbors, allowing one tribe to inhabit that newly acquired parcel. Considering land usage to date, Israelis would be favored to remain on the entire speck of territory known as Israel, including the most hotly contested portions popularly labeled the West Bank, Gaza, Jerusalem, and another portion known as the Golan Heights, apparently desired by one imperialist neighbor Syria, unable to quench its desire for territory, as witnessed by its obsession to control the land usage of another neighbor named Lebanon. Quite obviously, the tribe popularly referred to as Palestinian, the space voyagers would note, has demonstrated no ability to govern itself within Israel, as witnessed by a futile attempt to maintain a reasonable social structure in the Gaza region. Furthermore, the intelligent space travelers would wisely deduce, observing that Palestinians encourage a mutated violent form of suicidal behavior, manifesting in one member wrapping him or herself in explosives and detonating, murdering proximate victims, and learning that such Palestinians danced in the streets, celebrating a deranged erstwhile act of hijacked planes smashing into skyscrapers, murdering thousands of people in a land called America, this tribe desperately needs a change of scenery as well as one collective check up from the neck up. Maybe, settling in another location, starting over again in their original homeland, which the studious researchers realize is Jordan, would somehow revitalize the tribe, reprogramming the addled brains of so many of its members. Upon further analysis of reports gathered from various planetary media outlets, the space explorers would reach another startling conclusion. Even the presumably wisest Earthlings, movers and shakers residing in so-called sophisticated first world industrial nations, behave as if they have no clue concerning the true state of affairs in the Middle East, and collectively do not seem to grasp that the tiny speck of land known as Israel, as well as one tribe of mankind called Jewish, associated with that homeland, are the best things since sliced pita (in Middle East vernacular) to happen to the dictators of that volatile region. That's right! If it were not for a consciously manipulated Israeli Palestinian conflict, exploited populations, groveling in hovels, especially within fossil fuel rich Middle East regimes, sharing little of their respective government's wealth extorted from fossil fuel dependent industrial nations, would revolt against their leaders, but instead divert anger and spew venom at Israel and Jewish people, the perennial useful nation and ethnicity, defined in Earthly dictionaries as scapegoats, or shlamazels in some texts. "Possibly", theorizes one space explorer, "those aforementioned first world leaders don't want to upset the flow of fossil fuel to their nations, thus really know what's going on but tend to go with the flow as dictated by the crafty fossil fuel dictators." "Furthermore", he stated, "if labeling the government of Israel, truly forced to deploy soldiers and set up checkpoints to protect its citizens from hostile Palestinians, an occupier sits well with Middle East dictators, so be it in their manipulative minds." A collective sigh of relief issues forth from the mind-boggled space voyagers, now light years away from a dysfunctional planet, heading home towards a distant galaxy, pondering whether their own species eons ago could have been so illogical and so manipulative. "Surely, if that were so, those facts would never have come to light, as such a civilization would have destroyed itself and all associated records, leaving but a few disoriented devolved survivors to start over again from virtual scratch, in an attempt to eventually get it right," asserts one space voyager. "Of course", noted another researcher, "no comprehensive study was possible during such a short visit, so no definitive conclusions are possible concerning Earth's dominant species. Perhaps the Israeli Palestinian conflict is an anomaly, and other Earthlings not directly involved with it have evolved to a higher level. Perhaps illogical behavior and manipulation of facts are uncommon to most other social structures on the planet aside from the Middle East. Perhaps concerted efforts are even being made to wean industrial nations off of fossil fuels." Another voice is heard in the spacecraft, "We will have to come back some other time and see for ourselves. However, I suspect, if we do not come back soon, there may be nothing left to examine. Any species so inclined to disrespect any one tribe implicitly is a species that is deeply disturbed. I would venture to say that illogical behavior and manipulation of facts are likely manifestations of diseased states of mind not confined to but the one sector of the planet we studied. Unless there is an epiphany soon, I am not optimistic as to the fate of the planet." The spaceship continues its journey home, to a distant part of the universe, leaving unstable planet Earth farther and farther behind. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
JEWISH AGENCY CHIEF FAVORS AID TO ISRAELI-ARABS
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 15, 2007. |
|
There's one piece of good news in the report below. If we survive
the coming onslaught of Islam, we will know for sure that it had
NOTHING to do with the so-called Jewish leaders, either in Israel or
abroad. The news item was written by Hillel Fendel, senior news editor
for Arutz-Sheva |
|
Leading British-Jewish communal leaders are looking for ways to increase Jews' charitable donations to Israeli-Arabs. Senior Jewish community leaders taking part in a day-long conference to that end in London last week said that boosting the status and prosperity of the Arabs is vital to Israel's democracy. So reports the EJP (European Jewish Press). Jewish Agency Chairman Ze'ev Bielski and Israeli Education Minister Yuli Tamir sent their blessings to the conference. Charles Keidan, director of the Pears Foundation, a Jewish philanthropic organization that organized the event, said, "If we do not give to these causes [of Arabs in Israel], we create imbalances within Israeli society which only serve to undermine our own aim to create a prosperous, just and stable Israel." Bielski, executive chairman of the World Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency, sent a written blessing to the event: "It is my honor and pleasure to offer my blessings on the occasion of the London symposium on Israeli Arabs." Similarly, Education Minister Tamir, a founder of Peace Now, wrote, "Enlightened and progressive initiatives such as this demonstrate the commitment and concern that many Jewish people around the world share with the inhabitants of the State of Israel to create a just, stable and democratic country." "The aim of the event," Keidan told EJP, "was to create an opportunity where the mainstream of the Jewish community could learn more about, and give more to, the role of Arabs in Israel." A spokesman for the Jewish Agency explained to Arutz-7 that Bielski has long felt that the Arabs of Israel, as full-fledged citizens of the State, must not be discriminated against. "We are not just the Jewish Agency," he said, "but the Jewish Agency of Israel, and this includes all its citizens." Not all of the Jewish Agency board members agree. Danny Danon, elected Chairman of the World Likud last year, said that Bielski's position is "very grave and stands in opposition to the Zionist movement and the Jewish Agency. It is true that Arabs must be treated equally -- but that's for the government to deal with. The Jewish Agency was created by the Nation of Israel for the people of Israel -- but now he's turning it into UNRWA or something. If someone wants money for the Arab sector, he can go to the Waqf or other bodies in Israel." Danon said that Bielsky has introduced a change in Jewish Agency policy without bringing it before the Executive Board and the Zionist Congress for discussion and vote. "If he wants to institute changes," Danon said, "he will find that he is in the minority and that the majority wants the Jewish Agency to concentrate on Jewish problems." Danon said he is still waiting for an answer from Bielsky as to how much money raised during last year's emergency war campaign was diverted to Arab causes. "I asked him how much, and he said it was 'not a lot.' But that could be millions! How can it be that money raised to help Israel during a war is given to Arab municipalities, some of which declared their support for Hizbullah?!" The Jewish Agency was created in 1929 to represent the Jews in the Holy Land, and its mission statement today still specifies goals in keeping with that objective: "Aliyah, Jewish-Zionist Education, and Partnerships with Israel." Within two months of the end of last summer's war, some $320 million had been raised for refurbishing the north. Accusations were raised that up to 30% of the money had been used for Arab causes, while a Jewish Agency source said at the time that it was "only" 3%. Danon explained that donors in the United States could make a difference by informing their local Jewish Federations that they will stop donating money until they hear that all of their money will be used for Jewish causes. "The way it works," explained Danon, "is that 70-80% of money raised by the Federations is used for local causes, and the rest is funneled back to the Jewish Agency in Israel. If some large donors and many smaller donors threaten to stop giving, the Jewish Agency will have to take notice." Click here for a detailed article on this topic by Lori Lowenthal Marcus. Bielski can be emailed at zeevik@jazo.org.il or ask@jafi.org To contact the UJA Federation of New York, send email to contact@ujafedny.org
|
|
FOUNDATION FOR CONSTITUTIONAL DEMOCRACY
Posted by Matthew S. Finberg, March 15, 2007. | |
|
Please learn as much as you can about this extremely important think tank in Israel. Through its efforts led by Professor Eidelberg, Israelis are learning the difference between their old school Israeli democracy and genuine democracy with representative government, a truly independent judiciary, and an effective executive surrounded by a cabinet of his choosing rather than the bastard children conceived in concessions to opponents in order "to form a government," all without compromising Torah. The current executive branch is, by design, condemned to mediocrity at best, and confused ineffectiveness endangering the security of the People. Once Israeli voters understand that they don't have to live with the disintegrating and dysfunctional parliamentary system inherited from a bygone era which cannot lead our People, they will vote the bums out! Many Israeli voters feel hopeless, that they are stuck with corrupt leaders and are being abandoned by the rest of the nations. FCD will show them through newspaper advertisements, pamphlets, and public presentations that this need not be so! If we change the system, the dinosaurs will fall by the wayside and authentic Jewish statesmen will take the lead. We cannot afford to have Messrs. Olmert, Peretz, or even Netanyahu making existential decisions when they have already shown that they cannot handle Hamas, Hizbollah, or Iran, and will negotiate on a land for [a false] peace basis. It's time for the re-Birth of a Nation.
Thank you for your time and support.
| |
Contact matt Finberg at matt@finberglaw.com |
|
THE BIASED BROADCASTING CORPORATION
Posted by Aramy, March 15, 2007. |
|
This was written by Frank H. Steward and it appeared today as an
Op-Ed piece in the New York Times
|
|
Jerusalem LAST summer, the Archbishop of Algeria remarked to this newspaper that when satellite dishes first appeared in Algeria, they were typically positioned to receive French broadcasts. Now the majority receive programming from the Persian Gulf. "If you watch Western television, you live in one universe," said the archbishop, "and if you watch Middle Eastern television, you live in another altogether." The Middle Eastern broadcasts, he added, tended to depict the West in a negative light. Washington is well aware of this problem and has tried to address it. In 2004, the United States established its own Arabic-language satellite television station, Al Hurra. But Al Hurra has not been a success, and stations like Al Jazeera and Al Arabiyya, based in the Gulf states, continue to dominate the region. Those stations will soon face a formidable rival. The BBC World Service plans to start an Arabic television service this fall, and the BBC knows what it is doing. It has been broadcasting in Arabic on the radio for more than 60 years and has a huge audience. This new television station might sound like good news for America. Many of us pick up BBC broadcasts in English, and we respect their quality. But the World Service in English is one thing, and the World Service in Arabic is another entirely. If the BBC's Arabic TV programs resemble its radio programs, then they will be just as anti-Western as anything that comes out of the Gulf, if not more so. They will serve to increase, rather than to diminish, tensions, hostilities and misunderstandings among nations. For example, a 50-minute BBC Arabic Service discussion program about torture discussed only one specific allegation, which came from the head of an organization representing some 90 Saudis imprisoned at Guantánamo. This speaker stated that the prisoners were subject to disgusting and horrible forms of torture and suggested that three inmates reported by the United States to have committed suicide were actually killed. Another participant insisted that the two countries guilty of torturing political prisoners on the largest scale were Israel and the United States. At the same time, the authoritarian regimes and armed militants of the Arab world get sympathetic treatment on BBC Arabic. When Saddam Hussein was in power, he was a great favorite of the service, which reported as straight news his re-election to a seven-year term in 2002, when he got 100 percent of the vote. President Bashar al-Assad of Syria enjoys similar favor. When a State Department representative referred to Syria as a dictatorship, his BBC interviewer immediately interrupted and reprimanded him. The Arabic Service not only shields Arab leaders from criticism but also tends to avoid topics they might find embarrassing: human rights, the role of military and security forces, corruption, discrimination against minorities, censorship, poverty and unemployment. When, from time to time, such topics do arise, they are usually dealt with in the most general terms: there may, for instance, be guarded references to "certain Arab countries." By contrast, the words and deeds of Western leaders, particularly the American president and the British prime minister, are subject to minute analysis, generally on the assumption that behind them lies a hidden and disreputable agenda. Last summer, when the British arrested two dozen people alleged to have been plotting to blow up airplanes crossing the Atlantic, a BBC presenter centered a discussion on the theory that these arrests had taken place because Tony Blair, embarrassed by opposition to Britain's role in the conflict between Hezbollah and Israel, wanted to distract the public while at the same time associating Muslims with terrorism. The British are among our closest and most reliable allies, and it is strange that their government pays for these broadcasts, many of which are produced in Cairo rather than in London. If the BBC models its Arabic television service on its Arabic radio service, yet another anti-Western, antidemocratic channel will find its place on the Arab screen. Contact Aramy by email at aramy964@gmail.com |
|
SPLITTING THE EVANGELICALS FROM ISRAEL
Posted by Michael Travis, March 15, 2007. |
|
This was written by Ed Lasky, who is news editor of American Thinker
|
|
A new strategy seems to be emerging that seeks to weaken American support for Israel. While there has been much attention given to challenges Israel faces on college campuses, in the media, and increasingly in the halls of Congress, the historically solid and vitally important support given by Evangelical Christians towards Israel is now being threatened. How is this happening and who are the actors? Evangelicals support Israel for a variety of reasons, among them a belief that Israel is a fellow democracy with which we share a common Western culture and that we value as a friend. Israel has also been victimized by Islamic terrorism, as have we. Israel is also a strategic ally in the war against Islamic radicalism -- a lone Western outpost in a faraway land that gave birth to two major religions: Judaism and Christianity-the foundation of Western civilization. However, the core reason that Evangelicals have an affection for the Jewish people and a strong desire to protect Israel is found, unsurprisingly, in the Bible. What may surprise people is that the foundation of this support has nothing to do with end-of-days scenarios or the desire to convert the Jews. Instead, there is a belief that God has a covenant with the Jewish people and with Israel. Christians have a religious mandate to support Israel. Throughout the Bible there is language that calls upon Christians to honor and cherish the Jewish people. A key section is found in the very first book of the Bible: Genesis. The promise of Genesis 12:3 regarding the Jewish people is "I will bless those who bless you, and whoever curses you I will curse". The Bible also commands Christians to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6), to speak out for Zion's sake (Isaiah 62:1), and to be watchmen on the walls of Jerusalem (Isaiah 62:6) To people who interpret Israel to mean the Jews -- such as
evangelical Christians -- Genesis becomes an exhortation to both
Zionism and philo-Semitism. (see this Q and A with author David Brog at
Efforts are now underway to erode this base of support. While it is unlikely that there is a concerted effort among the foes of Israel, they do seem to be operating from a common playbook. The tactics seem to rely on a few simple but potentially perilous ideas. One avenue of attack is to question the theology behind the Biblical mandate to "bless the Jews". Another is to portray Israelis as oppressing Christians in an attempt to evoke imagery from the Bible regarding the trials and tribulations of Jesus. In so doing, they are attempting to weaken the sympathy that is one of the hallmarks of Christian Zionism. The theological argument that a bond no longer exists between God and the Jews (and by extension Israel) is known as "replacement" theology. The Jerusalem-based Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, an anti-Israel Palestinian Christian group, has been among those groups most actively promoting this spurious doctrine. Adherents believe that Jews fell from divine favor when they refused to accept Christ and that God chose the Church (Christians) to replace them. Therefore Christians have no religious obligation to support the Jewish people. Sabeel has at times gone beyond this doctrine and has gone to the next "step" and cast Israel as the new "Rome" whose government is a "crucifixion system." The head of Sabeel has called Israelis "Herods" and has linked their behavior to the acts of the Romans that killed Jesus. The Anglican Church in England seems sympathetic to this view. This might be expected since "replacement " theology has taken hold in Europe while it has been rejected so far by most American churches. However, there are disconcerting signs that this favorable state of affairs may be changing. The old "mainline" churches such as the Presbyterians have leaders who support the Palestinian narrative. As Hugh Hewitt has noted about his own Presbyterian Church, whose leadership has been very receptive to proposals to disinvest from companies doing business with Israel, the governing body seems to be heavily influenced by key leaders who are either Palestinian Christians or have close ties to Palestinians. Sabeel periodically gives road shows to propagate this view. The group has had some success: at a recent conference in Chicago, attendees included representatives from a clutch of organizations: Churches for Middle East Peace, American Friends Service Committee (Quakers), the Lutheran Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, and the Wheat Ridge Ministries. Their efforts have begun to transcend trying to spread their "gospel" beyond Church groups to lobbying Congress. An upcoming Sabeel conference will feature Congressman Dennis Kucinich, a former Democrat candidate for President. Jimmy Carter also wants a role in trying to divide Evangelicals. His recent book, Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, is replete with factual errors, misrepresentations, plagiarism, and outright fabrication. Perceptive critics have pointed out that Carter seems to have a barely hidden agenda in writing the book: to weaken Christian support for Israel. What seems to have escaped these critics' grasp (they may be less conversant with Christian theology than Carter -- after all, didn't Carter complain about his "Jewish" book critics) is that Carter is primarily speaking to a Christian audience. His narrative may resonate with them in a way that reviewers may not appreciate. For, in attacking Israel the way he chose to do, he is promoting a view that there is no longer a covenant between Jews and God that Christians are bound to honor. His book, in short, is a brief in support of "replacement theology". How can this be so? In Carter's view, Israel has become a secular nation. No longer being a nation of the Jews, carrying Carterisian (ill) logic to its conclusion, it has broken its covenant with God. Therefore, it can no longer be offered either the support or the blessings of Christians. Rick Richman found Carter using this ploy several times in his relatively small book. In Carter's eyes, Israel fails a "religious test": it is no longer a nation of Jews.. Another perceptive reviewer was of the opinion that Carter wasn't writing for Arabs or Jews, but that "...he was aiming at American Christians, particularly the evangelicals who are among Israel's most ardent supporters." Michael Jacobs, writing in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution echoes Richman is noting that Carter harped upon Israel's secular nature. Michael Jacobs notes that Carter seems to take the same tack as the Sabeel in trying to depict Israelis as oppressors of Christians. He writes that Carter "repeatedly refers to Israeli oppression of Christians, destruction of Christian holy sites and the imprisonment of Bethlehem." Jeffrey Goldberg reviewed Carter's book for the Washington Post and wrote, "A specific agenda appears to be at work here. Carter seems to mean for the book to convince American evangelicals to reconsider their support for Israel. Evangelical Christians have become bedrock supporters of Israel lately, and Carter marshals many arguments, most of them specious, to scare them out of their position". He notes the aforementioned Golda Meir story and states that is was meant to show that Israel is not the God-fearing nation that religious Christians believe it to be. And then there are the accusations, unsupported by actual evidence, that Israel persecutes Christians." Carter, for example, had written that 'it was especially interesting to visit with some of the few surviving Samaritans, who complained to us that their holy sites and culture were not being respected by Israeli authorities-the same complaint heard by Jesus and his disciples almost two thousand years ago". Goldberg notes the absurdity of this remark -- "there are no references to Israeli authorities in the Christian Bible. Only a man who sees Israel as a lineal descendant of the Pharisees could write such a sentence." That phrase alone should be a tip-off that something murky is at work in Carter: he is attempting to demonize Israelis by evoking the painful experience of Jesus 2000 years ago. He again tries to drill this "point" in to his readers when he writes that the security fence (that has saved so many Israeli lives) itself is a crime against Christianity because it "ravages many places along its devious route that are important to Christians". What may be most disconcerting with this type of language is that it conjures up anti-Semitic images and cartoons that are now popular in certain European media outlets and are widespread in the Arab world. Carter rails against Israel by tying its purported mistreatment of Christians (his allegations will be disproved below) to the harrowing experience of Jesus Christ two thousand years ago. This is a hoary anti-Semitic trope. How similar is Carter's verbal treatment to the visual treatment meted out to Israel by, for example, by the Italian newspaper La Stampa a few years ago. There a front-page cartoon ran that is now widely considered anti-Semitic. This cartoon showed a tank emblazoned with a Star of David pointing its gun at the baby Jesus, who tells the attackers, "Surely they don't want to kill me again". Other harsh anti-Israel critics have followed this line of attack in a somewhat less theological way. For example, Professors Walt and Mearsheimer wrote a "working paper" on the so-called "Israel Lobby" that, similar to Carter's book, was roundly criticized as being riddled with errors and bias. However, it has enjoyed a great deal of publicity and will soon be followed by a book on the same topic by the authors. One of the lines of arguments that try to get readers to swallow is that Israel is not deserving of the sympathy that has been a hallmark of Christian support for Israel because of supposed mistreatment of Palestinians (both Christian and Muslim). Similarly, the well-known anti-Israel columnist Robert Novak has a
penchant shared with Carter for demonizing Israel for its supposed
maltreatment of Christians. He has written numerous columns claiming
that Israel's security fence has prevented Christians from exercising
religious freedom and has caused an exodus from the Holy Land (refuted
by Justus Reid Weiner at
Christians are fleeing the Holy Land. Palestinian Christians have a higher rate of emigration than Palestinian Muslims and the Palestinian population has plunged from 20% after World War II to less than 1.7% now. Research demonstrates that the precipitous decline of the Christian population is primarily a result of social, economic and religious discrimination within Palestinian society in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. This should not be surprising. Under the Palestinian Authority Constitution, Islamic law is given primacy over all other sources of law. The Hamas Charter is even harsher when it comes to respecting the Christian religion. As one researcher -- Justus Reid Weiner at From Christian Arabs under the thumb of the PA, I have heard testimony of forced marriages of Christian women to Muslim men, death threats against Christians for distributing the Bible to willing Muslims, and Christian women intimidated into wearing traditional ultra-modest Islamic clothing. Churches have been firebombed (most recently in Nablus, Tubas, and Gaza when the Pope made his controversial remarks) and/or shot up repeatedly. And this is the tip of the iceberg. Under the Palestinian Authority, whose constitution gives Islamic law primacy over all other sources of law, Christian Arabs have found their land expropriated by Muslim thieves and thugs with ties to the PA's land registration office. Christians have been forced to pay bribes to win the freedom of family members jailed on trumped-up charges. And Arabs -- Christians and Muslims alike -- have been selling or abandoning homes and businesses to escape the chaos of the PA and move to Israel, Europe, South America, North America, or wherever they can get a visa. See also the book, Human Rights of Christians in Palestinian Society. Tony Pearce, pastor of the Bridge Christian Fellowship, in contrast notes, "that the Christian Arab population within the pre-1967 borders of Israel has grown from 34,000 in 1948 to 130,000 in 2005. Ironically this is the only part of the Middle East where the Christian population is growing (Editor's note: at the end of the 19th century, 13% of the population of the Middle East was Christian. Today it is 2% and headed down)... The main reason for the departure of Christians from PA administered territories is the religious persecution, murder and land grabs which stems from the increased Islamisation of the region. This is the result of the PA adopting Muslim religious law in the territories in contrast to Israel which safeguards the religious freedom on its citizens." Lest we forget, it was Muslim terrorists who defiled the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem in 2002. While fleeing Israeli Defense Forces, they forced their way into the Church and held clerics hostage. They knew Israel respected religious buildings more than they themselves did, and they were right. Israel eventually agreed to let these terrorists leave the Church and travel to Europe in order to avoid harm to the Church. Regardless of the deal reached with Israelis and church officials, the Church itself had been ransacked and damaged by the terrorists. This history was of course expunged from the Council of National Interest ad that attacked Israel for conditions inside Bethlehem. Oh... and the mayor whose criticism towards Israel was quoted in the ad? CNI neglected to mention that he was elected with the support of Hamas, a terror group that is now the government in the West Bank and Gaza. I wonder how the Bethlehem mayor would respond to this report by Khaled Abu Toameh, a brave Israeli Arab journalist that ran on January 25th of this year. In "Bethlehem Christians fear neighbors" Toameh describes Bethlehem Christians gripped by fear due to the persecution they are suffering as a minority under Muslim rule. They have finally decided to speak up: The move comes as a result of increased attacks on Christians by Muslims over the past few months. The families said they wrote letters to Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, the Vatican, Church leaders and European governments complaining about the attacks, but their appeals have fallen on deaf ears. There have been many other examples of Muslims attacking Palestinian Christians. See the editorial "Christians attacked" involving an attack on a Christian village in the West Bank, setting buildings on fire and destroying a statue of the Virgin Mary; "Christians threatened," where Christians in the Gaza Strip had buildings bombed and warned them to close up missionary buildings or face destruction. An interview with Justus Weiner, "Persecuting the holy Land Christians" gives an even fuller picture of the oppression of Christians in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, giving lie to the claims that Israel harms Christians. Even within Israel's pre-1967 borders, Muslims have been attacking Christians so there can be no claim that Israel's security fence is the cause of the conflict. In Nazareth, the home of Jesus and the site of many Christian shrines, Muslims have held large militant marches through the main street, shouting, "Islam will dominate the world" and exclaiming, "Allah is great". Christians report attacks against Christian shops and told stories of violence against women and men perpetrated by Muslim residents. The city that should be a place of celebration and be filled with the spirit of conciliation and peace has become a city of dread. This pattern of oppression of Christians at the hands of Muslims is part of a widespread Middle Eastern phenomenon and has a long history which people such as Jimmy Carter and Robert Novak ignore. Conversely, Christians have found Israel to be a very comforting and congenial place to live. As former Congressman Jack Kemp wrote in response to a Robert Novak column attempting to criticize Israel for the purported effects of the security fence on Christians, Contrary to the thrust of the Novak column, Israel's Christian population has in fact prospered and quadrupled in size over the last half century, in sharp contrast to the dwindling Christian communities in other countries in the Middle East. The continued dwindling of Christian communities in the Palestinian areas can be directly traced to the constant harassment to which they have been subjected by Islamic extremists. As a Christian, I am extremely troubled, as every American should be, by the implications of the Hamas victory in the recent Palestinian elections for the continued thriving of the Christian heritage in the Holy Land. In contrast, never in history have residents in Jerusalem enjoyed more freedom of access to the holy places as under Israel's sovereignty. Israel's founding ethos, anchored in its declaration of independence, guarantees freedom of religion and conscience while safeguarding the holy places of all religions. Such is the case with every church, monastery and holy site in the country, many of which have been rebuilt and refurbished in recent years by the state of Israel. In planning the route of the barrier, particularly in the vicinity of Jerusalem, where population density, religious and international interests intersect, Israel has demonstrated particular sensitivity to Christian concerns. The route was determined and in several cases altered, after a comprehensive dialogue with representatives of the various Church denominations. The ongoing consultations and effort to accommodate denominational interests put the lie to the notion that Israel supposedly seeks to "destroy" or "shatter" these communities. Nevertheless, this type of research was of little interest to Jimmy Carter, Sabeel supporters, or their allies in trying to turn Christians against Israel. Nor have they been satisfied with mere written and verbal attacks. A new front has been opened in the battle for the hearts and minds of evangelical Christians with the goal of supplanting the leaders of the evangelical community who have been strongly pro-Israel with leaders and groups who are noticeably less supportive of Israel. For example, Jim Wallis seems to have enjoyed a blaze of publicity lately as an Evangelical leader that Democrats in particular have tried to enlist as a supporter. Wallis is clearly on the left-wing of the evangelical movement. He also has a clearly anti-Israel history. He blames America's allegedly unjust support for Israel for our problems with the Arab world. He castigates Israel for an "unjust" level of violence in Lebanon and wrote, "It's time to challenge the theology of Christian Zionism advanced by many of the American Religious Right, who are completely uncritical of Israel's behavior and totally oblivious to the sufferings (or even the existence) of Arab Christians in the Middle East." He writes in an article highly critical of Israel's activity in Lebanon (titled "The Body of Christ in Lebanon" -- it is clearly intended to evoke the sufferings of Christ) of Arab Christians who are "certainly not supportive of the highly disproportionate military response of Israel which now target their own families and fellow Arab Christians." Israel "targets" Christians? Not true. Israel takes great pains to avoid harming civilians. Wallis's silence regarding Hezbollah-Muslim-oppression of these Lebanese Christians is deafening. His magazine, Sojourners, has been a forum for anti-Israel voices: one article was entitled, "Inside Israeli Apartheid". However, the sudden prominence of Wallis is just one indication that forces are at work to shift the allegiance of Evangelicals. Recently, Jimmy Carter (along with Bill Clinton) has announced a new effort to bring together moderate Baptists in a "robust coalition" that would serve as a counterweight to the conservative Southern Baptist Convention (the SBC). This is Carter's brainchild and had its springboard launch at the Carter Center in Atlanta. (The Carter Center is heavily-funded by Arab Muslims: will Arab oil wealth be used to influence evangelicals against Israel?) The invited churches have a combined membership of more than 20 million, outnumbering the Southern Baptist Convention. Clearly, Carter has an agenda in forming such a coalition. Dr. Richard Land, head of the SBC's Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, probably spotted the goal. In noting that there would be areas of disagreement with the group being assembled by Carter and the Southern Baptist Convention, he highlighted one in particular when he stated in a Washington Post article, "...one of the areas where there would be significant disagreement would be our view towards Israel, as highlighted by President Carter's new book". That certainly is a prophetic comment. Is it a coincidence, given the deliberately provocative use of the word "Apartheid" in the title of his book, that many of the church groups behind his coalition are historically black churches (among the fastest-growing evangelical populations in America and the world)? Did Carter hope by charging Israel with "apartheid" to turn African-Americans against Israel? Will he attempt to lobby against Israel among the evangelicals in his new coalition? Why not? He has everywhere else. Clearly, Israel enjoys strong support within the evangelical movement. Groups such as the International Fellowship of Christians and Jews (founded by Rabbi Yechiel Eckstein) have pioneered the way in fostering close ties between the Jewish community, Israel and the evangelicals. Former Presidential candidate Gary Bauer has also been a leader in trying to mobilize evangelicals to support Israel. More recently, Pastor John Hagee, who has been in the forefront among evangelicals in supporting Israel, formed Christians United for Israel to serve as a lobbying group for Israel and has already achieved great success. The superb recent book by Michael Oren, Power, Faith and Fantasy; America in the Middle East 1776 to the Present, illuminates the fact that affection for the Jewish people has a long history in America: it is part of the DNA of America's religious and civic culture, and predates the rise of evangelicals as a powerful voice within America. However, history has taught the Jewish people that complacency is perilous. The belief that there is a covenant between God and the Jews that must be honored by Christians has only recently (when considering the grand scope of Christian history) enjoyed the prominence that it so does now. Efforts to convince Christians that this covenant has been broken will erode Christian support for Jews and for Israel, as will spurious accusations that Israel harms Christians in the Middle East. What can we do to help ensure that the evangelical and Jewish communities remain friends during this time of worldwide anti-Semitism and existential threats to Israel? Friendships need to be appreciated and nurtured. Yet there are still many Jews who are wary of this embrace by Christians. The reasons commonly given for this reluctance are: fear of Christian anti-Semitism, a misunderstanding regarding the motives for Christian support, and differing domestic agendas. In fact, Christian anti-Semitism has been a primarily European phenomenon. Evangelical Christians are probably the most philo-Semitic group in the world today. Evangelicals do not support Israel for end-of-days or for conversionary motives (the aforementioned David Brog book would enlighten many people on this issue). Lastly the differing domestic agendas should not unduly bother American Jews. We are both heirs to a grand Western Judeo-Christian heritage and share many common values. We are both groups under attack from the forces of Islamic extremism. In the words of Pastor Hagee, "...what we have in common is far greater than the differences we have allowed to divide us." Evangelicals have not asked Jews to promote their policies; there is no quid pro quo (or political trading of favors) involved in their support for Israel which, for them, is a biblical mandate that predates the concept of democracy. Perhaps the best prescription to reduce anxiety might be to remember this phrase: be not afraid. Zev Chafets (a Jewish American who made aliyah to Israel years ago)
has written a new book on the relationship between American
Evangelicals, Jews and Israel, A Match Made in Heaven: American
Jews, Christian Zionists and One Man's Exploration of the Weird and
Wonderful Judeo-Evangelical Alliance, reviewed in Commentary
Magazine at His response? So what? In a time of turmoil when Israel faces peril as never before, the affection and support that evangelicals extend to Jews and to Israel should be cherished and appreciated for what it is: a gift from God. Will Jimmy Carter and his allies rend asunder what God hath joined together? Only time will tell. The Bible also commands Christians to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalm 122:6), to speak out for Zion's sake (Isaiah 62:1), and to be watchmen on the walls of Jerusalem (Isaiah 62:6) Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
PRIORITIES IN THE ARAB WORLD PER UNESCO
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 15, 2007. |
|
A bit of insight in to Arab social and governmental priorities: The following are UNESCO figures for the entire Arab world (21 states and the Palestinian Authority): One Trillion One Hundred Billion dollars ($1,100,000,000,000.00) on weapons -- annually. three hundred billion dollars ($300,000,000,000.00) on advertising -- annually five hundred billion dollars ($500,000,000,000.00) on tobacco -- annually. education: too small to accomodate on the charts. Six billion dollars needed ($6,000,000,000.00) annually to eradicate illiteracy. sixty million people are illiterate in the arab world (= 20%) (60,000,000). They would not even need to reduce their weapons budget. So, if they shifted just 1% of what they spend on tobacco (i.e., c. one pack of cigarrettes per person per year, assuming that the average smoker smokes 2 packs per week) and 0.334% of their advertising budget...they would have the $6,000,000,000 they need to teach their kids and illiterate adults to read. The report below does not say this, but I know from other sources that most of that 60,000,000 (= 20%) are women. That is why (I suspect) the UNESCO report avoids creating a mechanism for actually taking action with the fund...too many problems with educating women in the Arab world...but the fund without the mechanism for implementing change at least looks good...looks like they are addressing the problem; and does not threaten the status quo. We see the same pattern with Hamas, on a smaller scale. Plenty of money for weapons, and for anti-Israel propaganda -- but no money for teachers. |
|
"Almost 60 million illiterate in Arab world"
A UNESCO conference on Wednesday proposed the setting up a fund to combat illiteracy which affects almost 60 million inhabitants of the Arab world. The conference in Qatar's capital urged Arab leaders to combat illiteracy in a region "where 58 million people don't know how to read or write, apart from the 6.5 million children not in school." It proposed the creation of a regional fund but without suggesting a mechanism. Basic education needs six billion dollars a year in the Arab world, which according to UN figures has an overall population of almost 300 million people, said Omani Mussa bin Jaffar bin Hassan of the UN's cultural body. This amount is "minimal in a world where more than 1,100 billion dollars (DML: one thousand billion is a trillion) are spent on the military, 300 billion on advertising, and 500 billion on tobacco (industry) each year," he said. Koichiro Matsuura, director general of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, told reporters that Yemen, Sudan and Mauritania were the countries most in need of help to fight illiteracy. "Illiteracy in the Arab world is a disgrace," said Mongi Bousnina, head of the Arab League Education, Science and Culture Organization (ALESCO). David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
DAVID HATUEL HOLDS A BABY GIRL
Posted by Naomi Ragen, March 15, 2007. |
|
Who can forget David Hatuel, the young father from Gush Katif whose beautiful wife Tali and four beautiful daughters were murdered in cold blood by a Palestinan terrorist, who opened fire on the pregnant mother and her four little girls, killing them all as they sat in their car? As we think back on the events of the Intifada, so many horrors, nevertheless this stands out in our minds as the ultimate expression of barbarity from our enemies, and the ultimate challenge to our strength to continue our lives in the land of our forefathers. David, quiet, modest, said that he had two choices: To disintergate and fall, or to live. He chose life. A year ago, he remarried. Today, 37 year-old David holds in his arms another baby girl, born of his second marriage to Limor, an occupational therpist. This is the ultimate answer we Jews have to give our enemies. This is our secret, why we are still here when so many other peoples have become extinct. It is David Hatuel's answer: choose life. Rebuild. May God bless him and his wife and child with every blessing known to mankind. My he and his kind flourish and prosper, and give example to the rest of mankind. And may our enemies, who choose death and destruction, reap what they sow. Naomi Naomi Ragen is an American-born novelist and journalist who lives in Jerusalem. She can be contacted at www.naomiragen.com, where you can subscribe to her newsletter. |
|
ANALYSIS OF KEN ROTH´S DEFENSE OF HRW´S POLICY ON ISRAEL
Posted by NGO Monitor, March 15, 2007. |
|
On December 10, 2006, Ken Roth, Executive Director of Human Rights Watch (HRW), spoke at a conference sponsored by the North American branch of Rabbis for Human Rights.[1] Roth's presentation consisted of a defense of HRW's credibility and agenda, particularly with respect to Israel, following criticism published by NGO Monitor and elsewhere. On March 3, 2007, Tikkun magazine printed an edited version of his comments. The following is an analysis of Roth's claims, including numerous inconsistencies, distortions, and omissions: 1) On the criticism of HRW for failing to distinguish between aggressor (as in the case of Hezbollah in the 2006 war) and defender (Israel), Roth attempts to use international legal claims, acknowledging that "a source of frustration for some people is that the Geneva Conventions do not take sides. They are neutral about the purposes of a war, they do not identify who the defender is and who the aggressor is, they do not say who's right and who's wrong, they look simply at how the war is fought ... We look at jus in bello, the way the war is fought, not jus ad bellum, whether it was right or just to go to war." NGO Monitor's Analysis: This portrayal of international law is selective, incomplete, and self-serving. Under international law, the only legitimate uses of force are for purposes of self-defense or pursuant to Security Council authorization under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Article 51 of the UN Charter, for instance, states: "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defense if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security." Under Article 2(4) of the Charter, states are prohibited from engaging in illegitimate use of force: "All members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations." As international law precedents make clear, militias like Hezbollah, given de facto authority by the government of Lebanon, are bound to follow the legal commitments of the state. Lebanon is a signatory of the UN Charter, and Hezbollah, whose officials are also members of the cabinet, is obligated to abide by Article 2(4) of the UN Charter. Therefore, Hezbollah's attack on Israel was illegal under any interpretation of international law, and there is both a moral and legal basis for distinguishing between aggressor and defender under the laws of war. HRW and Roth selectively chose to ignore these aspects in promoting their political agenda. 2) Responding to the criticism of HRW's credibility ("fact finding"), Roth stated that "after a researcher returns from an investigation and writes up a report it must go through a series of experts: legal experts, policy experts, and people who double-check the fact-finding." NGO Monitor's Analysis: Roth's general response does not attempt to explain the numerous examples of HRW statements that were false or based on unverifiable sources. For example, on August 1, during the Israel-Hezbollah war, after an Israeli strike against Qana in southern Lebanon, HRW immediately issued a press release based entirely on unverifiable "eyewitness claims," labeling the bombing "indiscriminate" and a "war crime" before any such determination could be reasonably made, and declaring that "at least 54 civilians have been killed." The number of Lebanese killed was reduced subsequently and there are conflicting reports on many of the details. HRW, while belatedly revising the casualty estimate to half, did not remove the original statement from its website and repeated the allegations of "war crimes" and the absence of Hezbollah elements (rockets, fighters, etc.), based on claims made by people possibly connected to Hezbollah. Indeed, on December 5, the Center for Special Studies in Israel (C.S.S.) issued a detailed report on "the extensive military infrastructure positioned and hidden by Hezbollah in populated areas." The report documented a significant Hezbollah presence in and around Qana: 3 rockets were fired from within civilian houses, 36 within a 200 meter radius, and 106 within a 500 meter radius of the village.[2] The report also showed an aerial photograph of a weapons storehouse located next to a mosque in Qana.[3] Roth ignores these facts, and enormous impact of such false reports. And as a study published by Harvard University notes, "Most reporters used the higher of the two estimates, some describing the scene as a massacre. It made for more sensational copy."[4] 3) Roth claims that HRW interviews witnesses and victims of human rights abuses with "an enormous dose of skepticism" because of their tendency to lie. NGO Monitor's Analysis: In contrast to Roth's claim, HRW's statements demonstrate that the organization routinely uses such witnesses without any evidence of "skepticism". During the Israel-Hezbollah war, for example, HRW repeatedly relied on "eyewitnesses" from south Lebanon, where Hezbollah is politically and ideologically dominant. In a July 31 op-ed published in The Guardian (UK), Peter Bouckaert, HRW's Emergencies Director, dismissed Israel's statement that Hezbollah used human shields based on testimony from "villagers", labeling the IDF's assertion "a convenient excuse." In HRW's August 3 report entitled "Fatal Strikes: Israel's Indiscriminate Attacks Against Civilians in Lebanon", Hashem Kazan, an HRW witness interviewed regarding a July 15 attack on Bint Jbeil, claimed that "there was no fighting taking place in the village -- there was no one but civilians." In contrast, the CSS report included an aerial photograph of 20 bases and 5 weapons storehouses in the village[5], also documenting 87 rockets fired from within village houses, 109 from within a 200 meter radius, and 136 within a 500 meter radius.[6] Furthermore, when credible evidence is available, HRW often ignores it if it does not support the dominant political position. On May 27, 2006 in a television interview, Hassan Nasaralah boasted '[Hezbollah fighters] live in their houses, in their schools, in their churches, in their fields, in their farms and in their factories...You can't destroy them in the same way you would destroy an army.[7] 4) Roth acknowledges HRW's close relationships with local organizations, and that since "some are more reliable than others," they need to be treated with skepticism. NGO Monitor's Analysis: HRW often relies on highly politicized Palestinian NGOs, and the resulting reports show no evidence of skepticism. For example, on June 9, eight Palestinians were killed on a Gaza beach in disputed circumstances. Amnesty International and several Palestinian NGOs, including Miftah, Al Mezan and the Palestinian Centre for Human Rights issued condemnations of Israel in the days following. On the basis of this concerted campaign, including clearly staged video, HRW dispatched Marc Garlasco, who claims to be a former Pentagon "battle damage expert," to investigate. In a widely publicized press conference in Gaza. Garlasco repeated the claims that "the evidence overwhelmingly supports the allegations that the civilians were killed by artillery shells fired by the IDF" accepting the Palestinian position. He simply ignored the detailed evidence to the contrary, including shrapnel removed from the victims taken to Israel for treatment. (Garlasco was also among the authors of HRW's "Razing Rafah" report of 2004, which contained many unverifiable and disputed claims, and erased the context of terror.) 5) Roth stated that "while there were serious problems," HRW "put to rest" the international allegation of an Israeli "massacre" in Jenin. NGO Monitor's Analysis: The record shows that HRW was disproportionately critical of Israel in its reporting on the events in Jenin, and its statements on the massacre myth were late and incomplete. In May 2002, HRW published a statement headlined "Jenin War Crimes Investigation Needed" followed by a detailed report entitled Jenin: IDF Military Operations, which alleged that "Israeli forces committed serious violations of international humanitarian law, some amounting prima facie to war crimes" adding that "particularly in the Hawashin district, the destruction extended well beyond any conceivable purpose of gaining access to fighters." The report was based on anecdotal and unsubstantiated testimony from what HRW described as "first-hand observers", and erased the context of mass terror attacks on Israelis. [8] Both documents remain on the HRW website. Furthermore, HRW's major report on Palestinian terror, Erased in a Moment: Suicide Bombing attacks against Israeli Civilians -- not published until October 2002, did not, as Roth claims, reveal "who at the top was responsible for ordering these murders." Instead, HRW's report vindicated Yasser Arafat, ignoring the documentary evidence of the PLO leader's direct involvement in terror. 6) Roth continues to claim that "most civilians died [in Lebanon] because, after Israel issued warnings for civilians to flee, the IDF falsely assumed that all civilians had in fact fled," adding that "Israel was firing at virtually anyone who moved." NGO Monitor's Analysis: As noted, the CSS report showed that contrary to HRW's claim to have found "no cases" of human shields, Hezbollah used human shields throughout Lebanon, deliberately endangering civilians. On December 28, 2006, NGO Monitor published a detailed comparison of HRW's claims and the CSS report, revealing that in numerous instances, HRW relied on "eyewitness testimony" that was inconsistent with the available videographic and documentary evidence. 7) Roth chastises others for their "name-calling" adding that it "dishonored the Jewish Tradition". NGO Monitor's Analysis: In a July 31 letter published in The New York Sun, Roth used the term "an eye for an eye", which he termed to be based on "the morality of some more primitive moment." The comment is a fundamental distortion of Jewish tradition, for which Roth has yet to apologize. 8) Omissions: Roth's defense omits reference to positions and political campaigns based on extremely bad judgment. NGO Monitor's Analysis: For example, in 2006, Roth condemned the US and Israel for demanding more changes to the framework for the new UN Human Rights Council, which replaced the discredited UN Commission on Human Rights. He asserted that "The proposed Council has many new elements that will be useful in our work for the promotion and protection of human rights".[9] In fact, the Council is no better than the old Commission, and the objections were well founded. Footnotes 1. On January 23, The Jerusalem Post reported that RHRI (Rabbis for Human Rights Israel) had criticized the highly politicized approach of the North American branch of this organization, particularly the decision to honor the Center for Constitutional Rights, which had sued two Israeli security officials for alleged "war crimes". 2. Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, Center for
Special Studies, "Hezbollah's use of Lebanese civilians as human
shields" Appendix 4, 5 December 2006, at 256
3. Id., Part 1, at 44, Part 2, at 122. 4. Marvin Kalb and Carol Saivetz, "The Israeli-Hezbollah War of
2006: The Media As A Weapon in Asymmetrical Conflict", Research Paper
Series, Joan Shorenstein Center on the Press, Politics and Public
Policy, Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University, February
2007
5. Id., Part 2, at 76. 6. Id., Appendix 4, at 256. 7. Staff Editorial, "Whose War Crimes?" The Wall Street Journal,
December 11, 2006 [Hassan Nasrallah (Al-Manar Television, May 27,
2006), cited in Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, Center
for Special Studies, "Hezbollah's use of Lebanese civilians as human
shields" December 2006, p. 34 8. On July 30, 2002, the UN issued a report on the Israeli incursion into Jenin, concluding that no massacre had taken place. In HRW's August 2 criticism of the report, Hanny Magelly, HRW's Executive Director of Middle East and North Africa Division at the time, declared that the report "exposes the risk of compiling a report without first-hand information." 9. "U.S.: Accept Draft Resolution on Human Rights Council as It
Is", February 24, 2006 Contact the Jerusalem-based NGO Monitor at mail@ngo-monitor.org or go to their website:
The original article is archived at |
|
THE STORY: "THE NEW WORLD ORDER"
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 15, 2007. |
|
Sent to Lou Dobbs on February 24th: Lou Dobbs at LouDobbs.CNN.com See update at end. |
|
Dear Mr. Dobbs, YOU ARE SITTING ON A BIGGER STORY THAN YOU KNOW!: edited & undated 3/15/07 You have done a remarkable job in exposing the assault on our borders, NAFTA, imbalance in trade et al. Sometimes the greatest secrets are hidden in plain sight. Consider the following: During the Presidency of George Herbert Walker Bush, he made a revealing statement about plans of a cabal of unnamed power brokers of what he called the "NEW WORLD ORDER". This sounded like something out of Mein Kampf or Das Capital but, at that time, the specifics had not yet emerged. Those specifics have now emerged as a Doctrine of "Rolling Horizons" in the "NEW WORLD ORDER" with most other nations expecting the U.S. to carry the burden. When taken together, one sees an evolving program to level the playing field globally. That translates into lowering the higher economic and quality standards of the U.S. by shifting our productive standards to off-shore sources, called "OUT-SOURCING". Somehow, America has been selected by the New World Orderists as having too much, while other nations who have less are to be subsidized out of America's accumulation of assets. Keep in mind that there are 6.5 Billion people on our planet Earth and, while we have been designated the world's leading nation, does that mean we are designated to support the rest? In theory, the U.S. Industrial/Commercial base will not suffer, but grow even stronger as U.S. industry is fed by a broad, low-wage, offshore work force. While this New World Order doctrine may produce excess profits for multi-national Industry, our local productive work base diminishes in direct proportion to the offshore gain of nations receiving our "outsourced" industries. Mr. Dobbs, you have been one of the few voices who have incrementally spotlighted certain of these areas but, not as yet identified how they are wired together. Apparently, part of this leveling the global playing field includes using increased Industrial/Commercial profits to pay for our large base of the unemployed or unemployable. Our entitlement obligations have grown exponentially as our pool of unemployment grows. It's not a matter of what has been transferred offshore but, rather what has NOT been transferred. I will mention a few -- like Silicon Valley -- where both products and technology have gone to China and Taiwan, leaving a huge pool of America's best and brightest driving cabs. When Taiwan had an earthquake, microchips and circuit boards stopped being shipped to Micro-soft and Apple. Production of assembly simply stopped. We in America had no redundant tooling to make our own because we shipped it overseas or South -- across America's borders. The toy industry once employed hundreds of thousands. But, under NAFTA, it shifted production to Mexico. China also became virtually our sole source for most of our electronic and passive play items. U.S. factories shut down and the machinery transferred off shore, along with the jobs. Computer based services went to lower hourly costs in India. When you call for service to solve problems with credit card billings or computer glitches, you are calling someone in India who now has access to your most private financial information. The other day, Mr. Dobbs, you spoke about a bill being passed in Congress, allowing Mexican truck drivers to carry loads anywhere in the U.S. Since their rates of pay are much cheaper than American, union-based rates, American truckers cannot compete in transporting loads, either in or out of America to Mexico. Is Canada next? Worse yet, Mexican trucks are notoriously poor in maintenance whereas American truckers must have their rigs meet very strict standards. Be assured that, like other manufacturing jobs, Mexican trucking companies can bid for U.S. loads into Mexico at rates that U.S. trucking companies cannot match. Even military soft and hardware has been contracted to be produced offshore at cheaper rates. Add to that, if there were a conflict, such as a showdown in the Straits of Taiwan with China, vital production would simply stop and spare parts would become scarce. In addition, those U.S. technicians would no longer be employed here in their high level/high paying job and would be reduced to driving cabs or washing dishes. Despite their higher education levels, too many Americans would now become unemployable even as truckers. You have already gone through the Dubai Port Facility fiasco so, please add this to your list. I could go on and, no doubt, your research staff could add quite a bit more. I have not even touched on the protection the Bush Administration has offered to major polluters in coal-generated power plants, strip-mining, with tailings, polluting rivers, streams and aquifers -- all to benefit industry which ships finished product overseas. These industries are, of course, generous contributors to Presidential and Congressional election campaigns for their PC (Politically Correct) votes. Much of our American timber is cut and destined for Japan and China often at subsidized rates which come back as finished products, all with foreign labor. The New World Order of which the Bush family and cohorts are charter members, see the world as a level playing field with the U.S. economy, lost jobs and unemployed former workers paying the price. I realize that the accusation of economic conspiracy can fall flat, even when the "prima facie" evidence is exactly that. When then President George Herbert Walker Bush and Secretary of State James Baker III issued a "waiver" to his entire Cabinet for any business they had been doing with Saddam Hussein before 1991 and the Kuwait invasion, bells should have gone off. The recent discovery of untapped oil reserves in Iraq was NOT recent. I wrote about them (in USA Today), the Bush family and oil multinationals deals with Saddam immediately after he invaded Kuwait. In his famous waiver for his Cabinet, Bush ostensibly pre-pardoned men like Scowcroft and Weinberg before they could be indicted. VP Dick Cheney of Haliburton was up to his eyes in their nefarious deals. The matrix of secret double dealing is so huge it is difficult to describe except to say it's been one unified and successful enterprise, with Americans often paying the price. UPDATE: MARCH 14, 2007 Keep in mind that almost every needy country wishes to transport their unemployed to the United States to generate cash flow back to their families. At this moment in history the U.S. population has reached 300 Million people. There are several Billion needy people world-wide, ready to immigrate into the U.S., anticipating that working Americans will provide the cash to keep them fed, educated, with medical support and schooling. Sounds good but, our American carpenters, plumbers, electricians, farm workers, restaurant workers, household and childcare help cannot work for the wages of Third World nations which have made America the magnet for all the poor, tired, huddled masses -- of the planet Earth, yearning to breathe free in America. IF America is to continue paying out assistance to every South American country, every Middle Eastern country, every European country -- we will go broke, supporting illegal immigrants. What Nigerian, Haitian, Mexican, Russian, Afghani, South American doesn't want to come to America to grab the myth of gold in the streets of America? Making the U.S. a catch-all for the planet's poor, badly run or dictatorship nations is a bad idea. Catering to Mexico and its transfer of population to America may benefit some politicians, pandering for the votes to stay in power but, the quality-of-life of working Americans will sink as our population moves from 300 Million to 500 Million in a few years. Making America equally poor as other Third World nations will insure that our foreign aid programs will simply disappear. Please write to Lou Dobbs at Lou.Dobbs@CNN.com and other Media giants to ask them why they are not on this Big Story. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at winstonmedia@comcast.net |
|
PARTNERS IN SUBVERSION; FOREIGN AID IS LIKE A SLUSH FUND
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 15, 2007. |
|
THE HAMAS-FATAH AGREEMENT In negotiations, the subject of recognizing Israel never even came up. The purpose of the agreement was to superficially sanitize Hamas so that Western aid would continue to finance Hamas' drive to end Western influence in the Mideast (IMRA, 2/19) and organize the Mideast to gain influence over the West. HOPE FOR FRANCE France has the highest rate of intermarriage between Muslims and non-Muslims. (Ah, but which way to the offspring turn?) A Muslim middle class is emerging. (Which way does it turn?) Birth rates of second and third generation Muslims approach that of the French general population. (Don't immigrants keep entering, and with high birth rates?) More promising is the attitude of French Muslims. 42% of French Muslims consider themselves French first, whereas only 7% of British Muslims do. 91% approve of gender equality, and 73% for separation of religion and government. French Muslims did not protest against the Danish cartoons. French anti-terrorist law, however, is severe. Police monitor the mosques. Foreign financing of them has been blocked. France is training "French" imams. On the other hand, Islamists are agitating and labor laws remain restrictive. (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/2006, p.33 from Morton Kaminski, Wall St., J, 10/26). Which type of Muslim is immigrating now? PARTNERS IN SUBVERSION Holland prides itself on its civil liberties. It may have gone too far, and going too far can be its undoing. The Left forged the way with legalistic assaults on police powers. This removed much restraint society had on general ideological conspiracies. Now both leftists and Islamists more often assassinate Dutchmen whose views confront theirs than if the police were allowed more surveillance (MEF News book review, 2/19). NY TIMES SPIN ON GAZA WITHDRAWAL When the Arabs controlled Gaza, nothing much grew there. When Jews returned to it, they figured out how to grow the best crops, in greenhouses. When the farmers were expelled by their own government, Arabs looted and destroyed most of the greenhouses. They did not know how to raise crops in them. Greg Myre of the Times made it seem like Israel's fault, curbing exports for security reasons (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/21). Who is responsible for security problems there? The Muslims. A DIVERSIONARY WAR The Prime Minister and Defense Minister of Israel, in their squabbling way, are preparing to open a new front. This would be the settler front in Judea-Samaria. Never a wise idea but a misguided ideological one that harms national security, intended to harm Zionism and appease the unappeasable Muslims, now is a most inopportune for Israel to open that front. Israel has an active war with the P.A. in Gaza, that Israel is not sufficiently pursuing. It expects the Hizbullah front to heat up soon. Its army needs to catch up major war training that was neglected in favor of waging the previous war on the settlers in Gaza and on terrorists. The 10,000 Gaza settlers still are not resettled decently in Israel. The anticipated uprooting of hundreds of thousands of Jews in Judea-Samaria would inflict psychological trauma, bankruptcy, and national division on a vast scale. It is the kind of disunity most likely to draw the Arabs in for the kill. What morale would be left for resistance in the truncated, anguished Israel? I think that ideology is not the sole explanation for this folly. Another motive is US demands. (The State Dept. is relentless and heartless. For that, US anti-Americans have no rebuke. This shows how mixed up they are.) A third motive is personal and demagogic. The government has much failure and no accomplishment on its record. Many of its leaders are accused of corruption. They are accused of being weak. Here, against fellow Jews, with no criticism coming from the so-called civilized world, they could, with the powers of the dictatorship they have assembled, act strong. Ariel Sharon showed them how. P.A. GOALS & DEMANDS The P.A. has the goal of conquering Israel. It demands that Israel allow more P.A. Arabs in to work and get paid. Wages help finance war. Considering the P.A. goal, why should Israel accommodate its demand? FOREIGN AID NOT ACCOUNTABLE The West and Japan sent billions of dollars to the P.A.. What resulted? Wars, not jobs. A jihadist government is not interested in promoting business but conflict. Donors still send good money after bad. Either their motives are bad or their oversight poor. Why don't they review the results and end the waste? Same for other foreign aid, including much by the UNO. Our governments are too profligate with our money. They have too ready access to it. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
ZIONISM DEFINED
Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 15, 2007. |
|
This letter appeared in the Jewish Journal.
My response is below.
|
|
TO: Ronnie Lampert
Like all other Jewish or pro Israel organizations, StandWithUs is working hard to counteract the on going charges against Jews and Israel. How good the job they do time will tell. The definition of Zionism is: "A movement founded by the Viennese Jewish journalist Theodor Herzl, who, in his 1896 book Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State) argued that the best way of avoiding anti-Semitism in Europe was to create an independent Jewish state in Palestine, Biblically known as Zion-Tzyion. Zionism was named after Mount Zion in Jerusalem, a symbol of the Jewish homeland in Palestine since the Babylonian captivity in the 6th century BC. The movement culminated in the birth of the State of Israel in 1948." I will go farther and simply define Zionism as the return of the, forever persecuted and discriminated, Jews to their home of over 3000 years. I really do not know if one has to justify Zionism. Do Americans justify America, which, to begin with, was never theirs? Does any European country justify its borders that changed and moved again and again as one European nation conquered the other? There are enough evidence -- archeological and ancient or more recent books -- to attach Jews to Israel or the Land of Israel, as we know today and beyond, to Jews. Enough evidence to make the claim that Israel was and is the cradle of Judaism. The land of Israel is not a matter of importance to whom? It is the home Jews were thrown out of and exiled around 2000 years ago. So I see no compelling argument when the word Zionists is used. I do however see total horrific misunderstanding of the word that is now used in the same breath or connotation with the word Nazism! If until the '70s, they -- who ever the 'they' are -- "argued that Zionism is justifiable because the land was far more important to the Jews than to the Arabs because this land was a 'tiny notch' of the Arab greater homeland," then those 'they' were terribly mistaken. The land of Israel was never Arab land. The Arabs appeared in the area to work for Jews or seek life-improving opportunities. The tragedy is that since the Jews were exiled, the land of Israel went through the hands of a chain of conquerors and the land was abused and desolated but belonged to no one. The Jews leaved scattered in the Diaspora, prayed east, dreamt of Israel and their Beit Hamikdash--their Jerusalem and the Temple but no real initiative, not another Ezra and Nechemyia rose to bring the Jews back home. Until Theodor Herzl Jews were too tired of being beaten, oppressed and humiliated to pack up and come back home. The truth to be told is that Jews, in small numbers, always lived in Israel; never left their land. And when the nations of the world legitimized the State of Israel, the book of doubts should have been closed. Israel was reestablished and Jews returned to their home. The time has come to stand up and educate the public of the truth! The time has come to know that Zionism is simply the return of Jews to their home! Side note: When defining Palestine one refers to a region of the eastern Mediterranean coast from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan Valley-Jordan River and from the southern Negev desert to the Galilee lake region in the north. The word itself derives from "Plesheth", a name that appears frequently in the Bible and has come into English as "Philistine". Plesheth, (root palash) was a general term meaning rolling or migratory. This referred to the Philistine's invasion and conquest of the coast from the sea. The Philistines were neither Arabs nor even Semites; they were most closely related to the Greeks originating from Asia Minor and Greek localities. They did not speak Arabic. They had no connection, ethnic, linguistic or historical with Arabia or Arabs. Nurit Greenger
Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
PASTOR JOHN HAGEE SHINES AT AIPAC POLICY CONFERENCE
Posted by Fern Sidman, March 15, 2007. |
|
As the three day 2007 AIPAC policy conference held in Washington, DC came to a close yesterday, the nation's most powerful Israeli lobby sent a clear message to Washington, Iran and the world. "Tighten the screws on Iran" was the call of the day, as the Iranian nuclear buildup dominated the agenda of the 5500 member conference. AIPAC activists from around the country engaged in some 500 meetings with members of Congress of their staffs and pushed for the passage of new legislation tightening US sanctions on Iran in an effort to thwart its nuclear program. The bill, sponsored by House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos of California, would expand the types of investment subject to sanctions, eliminate the president's ability to waive sanctions for foreign oil companies and end all imports from Iran, among other measures. AIPAC members also sought support for two letters -- one circulating among senators to be sent to US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and the other drafted by representatives for EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana -- holding a firm line against the new Palestinian unity government. Both letters call for the continued suspension of aid to the Palestinian Authority so long as the planned Hamas-Fatah government fails to adhere to the three international demands of recognizing Israel, renouncing violence and accepting previous agreements. Vice President Dick Cheney addressed the AIPAC conference in the cavernous halls of the Washington Convention Center and called on American Jewish support for a continued American military presence in Iraq. He intimated that calls on Washington to take an aggressive lead in challenging the bellicose rhetoric directed at Israel by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the buildup of his nuclear arsenal could only be implemented if the pro-Israel lobby threw their complete support behind the Bush administration's policy of remaining militarily engaged in Iraq. Likud leader Benjamin Netanyahu also addressed the conference and called on American companies to divest from Iranian interests. He also warned that Ahmadinejad was preparing the ground for a second genocide of the Jewish people. According to a report by Arutz Sheva news service of 3/13/07, Netanyahu said, "The key is genocide. Do we want to mobilize the world against Iran? The answer is yes, just as we should have mobilized the world against Hitler in the previous century." "We don't need global action," Netanyahu explained to his audience. "It is enough that American money be pulled out of companies doing business with Iran for these companies to start folding their operations. The sanctions could be successful in the short term. Iran needs new investment desperately. Drilling of oil wells there is on a downward curve. American disinvestment from companies active in Iran could bring down." Other Israeli and American official addressed the conference as well and spoke of the Iranian threat, yet the real shining star of AIPAC 2007, was Baptist Evangelical Pastor John Hagee who brought the house down in his fire and brimstone appeal for support for Israel. During the course of his speech, Pastor Hagee received a number of standing ovations as he issued a clear and personal warning to President Ahmadinejad not to threaten America or Israel. He told the audience that 50 million Christian Zionists are stalwart supporters of Israel and would stand behind her. Pastor Hagee was one of the few speakers that actually mentioned G-d and the Bible in his speech and draw Biblical parallels to those who sought to annihilate the Jewish people, but who in the end were destroyed by the hand of G-d. Speaking of Pharaoh in Egypt he said that he "became fish food in the Red Sea" when he attempted to pursue the Jews who had just been liberated from Egypt after hundreds of years of bondage. Pastor Hagee also made reference to Haman in Persia which he said was modern day Iran and how his nefarious plot to have Mordechai hanged on the gallows turned right back around at him and it was Haman who in the end would be hanged. He warned all those enemies of the Jewish people to think twice before attempting to obliterate G-d's chosen people. Despite the fact that Pastor Hagee's speech was met with an enthusiastic reception by the AIPAC membership, when the Pastor said that there is "the Torah way and then the wrong way", that remark only drew a mild and at best luke warm response from the audience. It appears that Pastor Hagee was one of the few people at the conference that actually embraced the teachings of the Torah. He then led the audience in a rousing chant of "Israel Lives" and promised the AIPAC members that Israel and the Jewish people would never be alone. It is clear that Pastor Hagee was the shining star at the AIPAC convention. This is a man who is not afraid to intone the name of G-d, to boldly and courageously call the enemies of the Jewish people evil perpetrators. This is a man who embraces G-d's word and reveres the Torah. The AIPAC membership and the Jewish people can learn a most valuable and important lesson from Pastor Hagee. [Editor's Note: Pastor Hagee's speech shown on UTube can be found on the Atlas
Shrugs website, at Contact Fern Sidman at AriellaH@aol.com |
|
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND SYRIA
Posted by Kaustav Chakrabarti, March 14, 2007. |
|
The EU's attempt to woo Syria does not bode well for peace in the Middle East. Of all the countries, Syria has shown the least interest in mending fences with Israel. It still refers to the latter as the 'Zionist entity' or the at times the 'Zionist enemy'. Syria has always attempted to sabotage the ongoing peace process and has refused to do anything constructive with Israel. Its support for the Palestinian terror groups and the Muslim militia in Lebanon has been anything but constructive. Add to that its complicity in the assassination of the ex-Lebanese Premier Rafik Hariri, and a journalist who had been investigating the incident. The Visiting EU representative's statement that Syria is the most important country in the Middle East tantamounts to giving a clean chit to the Ba'athist regime and its irresponsible behaviour. Its only 'importance' lies in it being a conduit for Iranian arms meant for the Hezbollah that aims at the destruction of Israel. The EU by giving its tacit approval of the current regime in Syria seems to be running with the hare and hunting with the hound. Its soft-pedalling approach towards terror tactics is a reminder of the Appeasement, which the western democracies had pursued to whet Hitler's appetite for more concessions. By doing so, the EU is digging its own grave and that of democracy in general. If Syria is to be given a clean chit without taking cognition of its human rights record, then why not treat Turkey at par that has all the potentialities of a vibrant and stable democracy? This double standard is galling and unacceptable by all international standards. Rather Syria should be told in no uncertain terms to desist from supporting the Hezbollah and initiate freedom and democracy that would guarantee peace in the Middle East. Only then its 'importance' would have some credibility Contact Kaustav Chakrabarti at kaustav12000@yahoo.co.in |
|
WHY DID YOU PICK PALESTINE?
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 14, 2007. |
|
My letter below was in response to this announcement: March 13, 2007 |
|
TO: Leanne Valdes, Residential Life Coordinator, University Housing Services
FROM: David Meir-Levi
RE: Tunnel of Oppression DATE: 3.14.07 Dear Ms. Valdes, I congratulate you, and your organization, for setting up such an exemplary event. Certainly enhancing our sensitivity to the oppression suffered by others is very important. There is, however, one piece of your event that does not make sense to me. In your list of topics... Date Rape/Acquaintance Rape
...you include "occupation Palestine". I cannot help but wonder why you chose "Palestine" as a symbol of oppression. My confusion stems from two sources: 1.) The Arab residents of the West Bank and Gaza Strip suffer tragically, but not because of any Israeli oppression. They suffer because their democratically elected government, led by the self-defined and internationally designated terrorist group Hamas, has been waging a war against Israel for 13 years. In the context of this war, Israel has taken steps of a restrained and defensive nature in order to stop or reduce the terror attacks. These defensive measures have caused much suffering among the Palestinians. But such suffering is not caused by "oppression". It is caused by the terror war that the Palestinian people's duly elected leaders are waging. Absent the terror war, Israel would have no need for its defensive measures; and the Palestinians' suffering would cease. Proof of the accuracy of my statement in the above paragraph is immediately evident if one looks even briefly at the situation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip BEFORE this terror war began. From 1967 (after the 6-day war) until January 1994 (when Yasir Arafat took over the leadership of the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, pursuant to the Oslo Accords), the Arab population's economy in the West Bank and Gaza Strip was booming, under Israeli sovereignty. The Arab population's GDP in these territories averaged from 7% to 13% annual growth, tourism was skyrocketing, foriegn currency was pouring in, seven universities sprung up where none had been before, and the Arab population more than tripled during these 27 years. Thanks to Israeli medicine, the Arab infant mortality plummetted, and Arab life expectancy increased. Thanks to Israel's "mini-Marshall plan", Israelli money and workers (I was one of them) brought the West Bank and Gaza Strip infrastructure (sewerage, sewage treatment, water supply, water treatment, roads, electricity, radio, telephone service) in to the 20th century. Hundreds of millions of dollars (and in those days, that was real money) poured in from Israel to develop these territories...in the expectation that their enjoyment of what we Israelies then called the "peace dividend" would move the Arab population to a willingness to make peace with Israel. And, indeed, it worked for a while. There were no road blocks, no lock downs, no curfews, no "Israelis only" roads, no invasions of IDF soldiers in to villages, and no defensive barrier...because there was no terrorism from within the West Bank or Gaza Strip. Israelis shopped in Ramallah and Arabs shopped in Tel Aviv. And during these years, hundreds of thousands of diaspora Palestinians came back to the West Bank and Gaza Strip to take advantage of the good times and the flourishing economy under Israeli sovereignty. I used to take my students (I taught Archaeology at the Hebrew University) on field trips through the West Bank, in open trucks, with no guards or weapons. We were greeted warmly by the West Bank Arabs. All of this came to a grinding halt in 1994 -- when Arafat took over, and almost immediately began his terror war...with its avowed and unabashed goal of destroying Israel and genociding its Jews. The suffering you see today, which you erroneously attribute to Israeli "oppression", is the product only of that war. Absent the war, the Palestinians of the West Bank and Gaza Strip could enjoy the kind of life they had under Israeli sovereignty from 1967 to 1994. And recall too that since Arafat began his terror war in 1994, the same war that Hamas wages today, Israel has made numerous offers for a peaceful and just resolution -- the most recent of which was its unilateral and unconditional withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in a gesture meant to 'jumpstart the peace process'. And Hamas' reply was: "our terrorism brought us this victory. So we will now continue our terrorism on the West Bank." If the terrorists would lay down their weapons, there would be no more violence.
2.) The world is, tragically, full of examples of real oppression...where captive populations are occupied by enemy forces and suffer death, destruction, dismemberment, gang rape, arson, expulsion, and occupier-induced poverty...and in some extreme cases, bona fide genocide. Why do you not choose from among those real examples, such as: China's conquest and oppression in Tibet since 1950, with its commensurate cultural and linguistic and religious genocide of the Tibetan national identity The Sudanese Arab government's genocide of its own black-skinned citizens in the south (c. 2,000,000 dead since 1983 and nearly 4,000,000 homeless and on the verge of starvation) and in the western Sudanese province of Darfur (c. 800,000 dead and 2,000,000 homeless since 2001) Algeria's 13-year civil war that has rendered 2 million homeless and c. 500,000 dead Mauritania's semi-legalized slavery which has hundreds of thousands of black africans enslaved to Arab overlords Egypt's Muslim oppression of the Christian Copts (whose presence in Egypt dates back to the time of Jesus) Syria's occupation of Lebanon, where Syrian and Palestinian armed groups killed nearly 95,000 Christian Lebanese between 1975 and now The oppression and massacre of Kurdish Muslims in Iraq under Saddam Hussein The oppression and massacre of Shi'ite Muslims in Iraq under Saddam Hussein The oppression of Alawi and Baluchi and Uzbeki and Azeri and Jewish and Assyrian Christian and Chaldean Christian minorities in Iran The oppression and impoverishment and routine massacres of its Shi'ite Muslim minority by Wahhabi Muslim Arabia under the Saudi royal family The world-wide traffic in white female sex slaves by predominantly Muslim Arab countries, foremost of which is Saudi Arabia. The incredible oppression and impoverishment to near starvation of its own people by the North Korean Communist government The brutal and shameful oppression and discrimination and impoverishment of the indigenous populations of south America by several south American countries the list can go on and on...but I'm sure you get the idea. So, in light of these two considerations, I hope you can see why I am confused. Why did you pick "Palestine"? David Meir-Levi David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
IN THE JEWISH STATE, SOME FALASH MURA ARE TURNING TO JESUS
Posted by Sergio Tezza (HaDaR), March 14, 2007. |
|
The Ethiopians did not want the Falashmura, saying that they are Christian missionaries, and even demonstrated against importing them. However, these missionaries were wanted by the ANTI-JEWISH establishment (from Beilin to Netanyahu, through Peres, Lapid, Olmert, Sharon and Lieberman) and the "formerly-Jewish" Agency that needs to justify its employees in Ethiopia, Ukraine, Lithuania, etc. where there are no more Jews so they import goyim le-mehadrin. This is called "Finally in the Jewish state, some Falash Mura are
turning to Jesus" and was written bty Uriel Heilman for the Jewish
Telegraphic Agency. It is archived at |
|
JERUSALEM (JTA) -- When an Ethiopian-born Israeli named Dessie finished his compulsory army service three years ago and made plans to travel to Thailand, India and Vietnam, he was hoping to embark on a spiritual quest. Like many young Israelis, Dessie felt a spiritual void in his life. Though he had studied four years in a religious high school in Jerusalem's East Talpiot neighborhood not long after making aliyah in 1992, he was not very religious. Dessie hoped he might find in East Asia some of the spirituality he felt was missing from a life in Israel consumed by partying and alcohol. "I was thirsty for God. I felt empty inside," Dessie said. "That's when I discovered Jesus." Dessie, 25, now is a devoted member of Shalhevetya, one of a growing number of Protestant churches in Israel that bill themselves as messianic Jewish congregations and cater to Ethiopian Israelis. Some of the congregants are born Jews, others are Christians who have been part of the 15-year-old Falash Mura migration to Israel, and still others are Ethiopians whose Jewish origins are opaque and Jewish literacy virtually nonexistent. Recent Ethiopian olim are easy prey for Christian missionaries. They come to Israel with little knowledge of Judaism; some have Christian roots. Most practiced some form of Christianity in Ethiopia before filing their aliyah petitions and moving to the Ethiopian cities of Gondar and Addis Ababa. Some veteran Ethiopian Israeli leaders are warning that the ongoing Ethiopian aliyah is making matters worse, bringing to Israel many Christians who either are married to Ethiopians of Jewish origin or fraudulently claim to be related to Jews. "Today the aliyah of the Falash Mura has turned into a business," said Rabbi Yitzhak Zagay, an Ethiopian Israeli rabbi in Rehovot and director of the National Committee of Ethiopian Jews, formed recently to combat missionary activity. The term Falash Mura is used to refer to Ethiopians of Jewish origin who converted to Christianity several generations ago to escape social and economic pressures. Initially rebuffed as apostates when Israel decided some 30 years ago to facilitate the aliyah of Ethiopians who had kept their Jewish identity, the Falash Mura began to come to Israel legally after the government changed its policy in the early 1990s. "If they became Christians 150 or 200 years ago, I am in favor of their aliyah," Zagay said of the Falash Mura, echoing the Israeli Chief Rabbinate's position that the Falash Mura are Christians of Jewish origin who are welcome back to the original faith of their forefathers. "But not all those coming are Jews. There are those who buy a Jewish identity, and those who sell a Jewish identity," Zagay said. "The rich children of Addis Ababa prey on the Falash Mura and pay them to marry them, get to Israel, then divorce them and try to bring the rest of their families. "The problem is that after they come here, not only are they not Jews, they are actively missionizing. They are Adventists, Pentecostals and other Protestant groups," he said. Zagay hosted a conference in Rehovot in February to address the problem. Other community leaders, like the Jewish Agency's former director of Ethiopian immigrant absorption, Shlomo Molla, now head of the Department of Zionist Institutes at the World Zionist Organization, say the proselytizers are mostly outsiders, not Ethiopians. "This phenomenon exists in various sectors of the Israeli population," Molla said. "I don't think it's connected to the Falash Mura. Unfortunately, missionaries succeed in penetrating the Ethiopian community. They operate on the periphery. They are not loved. They are not supported." The Jerusalem church Dessie attends is run by Finnish Protestants, he said. It hosts a variety of community services; Sunday night is reserved for Ethiopians. Molla says claims that the Falash Mura are acting as missionaries rather than as the proselytizers' prey are being spread to "cast aspersions on the Falash Mura." His argument is bolstered by the fact that the vast majority of Ethiopian Christians, including any Christians among the Falash Mura olim, are Ethiopian Orthodox rather than from the Protestant sects involved in missionary activity in Israel. Most forms of Christian proselytizing are illegal in Israel. Rav Simcha HaKohen Kook, Rehovot's chief rabbi, says the problem lies with an Israeli educational system that is sorely lacking when it comes to Judaic studies. "Despite the fact that opposition to Christianity is absolute in the Ethiopian community, there is great poverty, indigence and disrespect for elders in the community, and so the Ethiopians are easy prey for the missionaries," Kook said. The missionaries "offer help and give money, and the Ethiopians don't know Judaism, so it's easier to get them," Kook said. "This is a widespread problem with immigrants from many countries. If this does not become a national concern, to combat the missionary activity on a national level among Ethiopians, among Russians and among others, then we risk emptying the State of Israel of all its Jewish content." But Zagay and some other religious leaders here attribute the problem to the Falash Mura themselves. Zagay says those who came in the early 1990s were legitimate Falash Mura -- members of Christian families known to have Jewish roots -- but most coming today are not. This has led to calls within Israel's Ethiopian community to put the brakes on Falash Mura aliyah. Because it's such a sensitive issue, however, few Ethiopian Israeli leaders are willing to speak about it publicly. "This aliyah is causing irreversible damage to the State of Israel," one Ethiopian Israeli leader in Jerusalem told JTA. "These people aren't Jewish. It is tearing apart the Ethiopian and Israeli community. "I want to put an end to this lie," the leader said. "White Israelis are afraid of the charge of racism, so they continue bringing them. But if Israel brings people for humanitarian reasons, I prefer they bring the refugees from Darfur." Even Israeli officials involved in the aliyah acknowledge that some of the Ethiopians arriving in Israel are not Jews, but they say the number is small. As it is virtually impossible for the Falash Mura to prove their Jewish provenance, they enter Israel under the Law of Entry, a humanitarian law designed to enable relatives of Israelis to immigrate, rather than the Law of Return, which is meant for Jews. Once here, the Jewish Agency for Israel oversees their required conversions and teaches the Falash Mura Hebrew and Judaism. The controversy seemed far away on a recent Sunday evening as a few dozen Ethiopian Israelis quietly made their way to the Shalhevetya church near a fervently Orthodox neighborhood of Jerusalem. Inside, congregants swayed to organ music, eyes closed, arms outstretched, Hebrew-language New Testaments on their chairs, singing songs to Jesus. Contact Sergio Tezza (Hadar) at hadar-Israel@verizon.net |
|
IMPORT-EXPORT PALESTINIAN STYLE
Posted by Sergio Tezza (HaDaR), March 14, 2007. |
|
A Mr. Amar Azk, a 37-year old Palestinian, was an excellent customer of one of the main metal tube manufacturing plants in Israel. He bought frequently, and paid promptly. The metal tubes that Mr. Azk imported were intended, according to Mr. Azk's declaration, for the construction of drainage systems in Gaza. Really, however, Mr. Azk was buying these metal tubes in order to "re-export" them to Israel in the form of Qassam rockets, fired daily (to the tune of 1,700 in 2006 alone) from Gaza Strip cities in to Israeli cities near the Gaza border. Finally, Mr. Azk was arrested, and Israel has prohibited the sale of hollow metal tubes of specific internal diameters to Gaza. Naturally, the headlines of certain European newspapers presented this news as follows:
Contact Sergio Tezza (Hadar) at hadar-Israel@verizon.net |
|
THE IMBALANCE OF BALANCE--EXPULSION, NOT "TRANSFER"
Posted by Michael Travis, March 14, 2007. |
|
Hard left Israeli politician Zahava Gal'on has been carrying on a pogrom against news outlet Arutz Sheva, succeeding in getting their radio station closed down. Now she has turned her repressive intentions toward the Arutz Sheva web site, demanding a criminal investigation targeting Flash artist and commentator Gil Ronen: Next Target For Left-Wing: Arutz-7 Internet. (Hat tip: Tamar.) Gal'on has asked Attorney-General Elyakim Rubenstein to open a criminal investigation into the operators of Arutz-7's internet site on suspicion of "incitement to murder and racism." Gal'on honed in on a sentence in an op-ed on Arutz-7's Hebrew site, written by Gil Ronen, a resident of pre-1967 Israel, near Hadera. Gal'on says that his article is a call to "murder hundreds of thousands of Palestinians." Though Arutz-7 does not endorse the opinions it publishes in its op-ed section, it should be noted that the sentence in question was taken out of context, and does not incite to murder. In fact, Ronen writes in the article, "no one will have to take the law into his own hands." To read his entire essay to see how blatantly Gal'on is distorting Ronen's words, which are harsh, but certainly not "a call to murder and racism," click here. The essay below was written by Gil Ronen and it appeared in
|
|
The problem with the current balance of power in the Middle East is that it is too balanced. you all know how hard it is to balance a scale, or a see-saw, so one side doesn't hit the ground and the other one doesn't go up in the air. It's precarious: the slightest movement creates instability. The same holds true for the Middle East. The sides are too balanced, too similar in strength, for peace and stability to be achieved. On one side -- Israel. Technologically super-bright. A nation of geek geniuses. A country that has brought the world wonderful advances in agriculture and science, despite its small size. The place that invented the kibbutz and now, its heir, the "yishuv kehilati." Home to wonderful communities where religious Jews work and pray and live a moral, healthy life. A leader in medicine and emergency rescue. Abode of the Merkava and the best air force pilots in the world. But tiny. Tiny. On the other -- the Arab-Muslim Middle East. A lugubrious mammoth with relatively low abilities in the field of science and invention, other than the buzzing prayer rug of course. An ocean of poverty, spicy souks, misogyny and terrible driving. But also -- a humungous population with great oil wealth and a fierce sense of pride, mortally injured by the Yid's presence and our ability to knock them to the ground in 1948, 1956, 1967, 1973 and 1982. Tens of millions of men in mustaches want us dead, and they are growing crazier and more religious by the minute. This is a balance: a small, talented, high-tech, reasonable Jew versus 20 big low-tech, religiously zealous Arabs. And that is why the Middle East is so unstable. Can a less balanced Middle East emerge? Can there be a decisive victory over the Arab Muslim Middle East? Take a look at the map attached, folks. Imagine a blitz campaign in
which Israel takes all the territory marked in orange, with the help
of allies like India, and perhaps some sub-Saharan African countries
which we train and advise. Is it possible? I guess not. But was the
Six Day War possible? The Entebbe raid? 1948? Imagine us with those
borders, with oil wealth and Jewish genius. And imagine the Arab
Muslims back in Arabia, with little territory to the north of Mecca
and Medina. That would be stable! Maybe not possible, but worth
dreaming about.
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
BEING HUSTLED -- ISRAELI STYLE
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 14, 2007. |
|
What happened to the promised investigation of the failed Israeli response to the launching of 4,000 Katyusha Rockets by Hezb'Allah into Northern Israel from Lebanon? Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's government did everything they could to delay and side-track this investigation. Recently, the Lindenstrauss Comptroller's Report was to release its first findings but, the Olmert government, in collusion with the Leftist Supreme Court, ordered it delayed for months. Other ongoing investigations against Olmert personally are also being dragged out so Olmert can retain his seat as Prime Minister and more. The "More" is what is in question. Clearly, the Israeli Supreme Court is acting like a fully-fledged Leftist political Party in collaboration with Olmert and his Kadima Party to force through several personal agendas. One is to make a pronouncement that it is official government policy to De-Judaize and empty Judea and Samaria (the so-called "west bank") of all Jews as was done in 2005 from Gush Katif/ Gaza. This is wired to on-going pressure from Bush and Rice to accept the phony Saudi Plan of 2002 for Israel to withdraw to the 1967 Armistice lines and allow the so-called 4 to 5 million descendants of the 460,000 Arab Muslims who fled the 1948 War of Independence to move like an uncontrolled mob into the Jewish State of Israel. When all of this is done, the Arab Muslims of Saudi Arabia, Syria, Libya, Egypt, Lebanon, Iraq, Al Qaeda, Hezb'Allah, Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood...and the non-Arab Muslims of Iran, Indonesia, etc., will all swear on a stack of Korans to cease Terrorism and no longer follow Koranic Law to drive the Jews from their Land. Isn't this where Bush, Rice and the Saudis say "Trust Me, We have your best interests at heart!"? Their intended trick is to give it a stamp of Israeli government approval under Olmert so the Arab Muslim Palestinians, whether they be the PLO, Hamas, Al Aksa Martyrs' Brigade, Tanzim, Fatah... or whatever, can move in with the backing of Bush, Rice, Baker, the U.N., the E.U., and Russia, that is, the Quartet. This has been Olmert's and Kadima's declared Party Plank which went underground after the expulsion from Gush Katif/Gaza failed and Olmert needed cover for his corrupt practices now under legal scrutiny. Moreover, it is what Bush, Rice want for their failed Oslo Road Map, knowing that neither Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas), the Palestinian Authority President, nor Ismail Haniya, current Head of Hamas can make or will deliver peace. THE PROPOSED GOLAN HEIGHTS SURRENDER Publically revealing the Quartet's plan to "divest" Israel of the Golan Heights should put a stop to the "almost" secret negotiations with Syria for Israel to surrender the Heights which sits atop and controls Israel's most important water source. To abandon the Golan Heights would also relinquish Israel's high-tech listening and observation posts on Mt. Hermon and Mt. Dov which the Sheba'a Farms protects. The U.S. believes it can cut a "lease" deal with Bashar Assad, President of Syria, allowing a large American ground and air force base to be built as a "gift" for forcing Israel to cede her vital observation stations on the Golan Heights. "EU Foreign Policy Chief Javier Solana said Wednesday March 13th that Europe supported Syria's plans to get back the Golan Heights." Well, now we know why the Secret Syrian Gambit has been hidden. The Europeans are finally saying publically that they join the Bush administration in demanding that Israel turn over the strategically important Golan Heights to the regime of terror-supporter Assad of Syria. Following a meeting with Syrian President Bashar Assad, Solana said at a press conference that "we are interested in working for your country to return to itself the territories that were captured [in the 1967 war]." (2) No doubt, Solana upped the EU's ante when he visited Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on March 12th. SQUELCHING THE LINDENSTRAUSS & WINOGRAD INVESTIGATIONS AGAINST OLMERT You can see why the Leftist Supreme Court has colluded with Olmert to delay releasing the conclusions of Micha Lindenstrauss's investigation to the people. If the report of Olmert's malfeasance and misfeasance in office is released, will he be kicked out of office and thus defeat the Saudi/Bush Plan? Another investigative committee called the Winograd Commission which is also due to deliver its report in mid-April on Olmert and Peretz about why the military was not ready for Hezb'Allah's attack with Iranian Katyusha Rockets, sent through Syria to Hezb'Allah. This investigation has also dragging on for almost six months, particularly since many of its members were appointed by Olmert. As Moshe Arens said in Ha'aretz March 12th, "What is the world is taking them so long? Is it not clear? Is the writing not on the wall? Don't they know what just about everybody in Israel knows, that the war was grossly mishandled by the political and military leadership? That the political leadership -- Olmert and Peretz, reminiscent of Laurel and Hardy -- fell captive to the enticing assumption that the war could be won by air power alone, and they stubbornly stuck to this mindless concept as week after week hundreds of rockets kept falling on the Galilee." (1) Olmert is a sly, tricky lawyer who has just taken another tack. The Israeli military did have a long standing set of plans to deal with Hezb'Allah and Syria should they attack. Olmert and Peretz fumbled and stumbled, generating losses of lives through their incompetence. Now, lo and behold, Olmert has the Chutzpah to claim that those plans of the IDF (Israel Defense Forces) were "somehow" his. He now takes credit for plans he didn't formulate, nor understand and did not allow them to be used in substance or in time to save his young soldiers. That is the height of arrogance. GSS: ISRAELI ARABS ARE EXISTENTIAL DANGER TO ISRAEL (3) An internal Shabak (GSS -- General Secret Service) document says Israel's Arabs are a long-range strategic danger to Israel's character and very existence. The GSS believes them to be a greater threat than Iran and its nuclear threat. This is NOT because of an increasing population bomb (the demographic argument has been demolished by the reports of Yoram Ettinger), but because there is increasing solidarity and identification of Israeli-Arabs with Terrorists elements. In 2006, 21 Israeli-Arab Terror Cells were uncovered. They have been spies, smugglers of weapons, rapists who admitted using rape as anti-Israel Terrorism. (3) But, there is more. The Arab Muslim Palestinians in Gaza, under the advice and guidance of Hezb'Allah, have carved deep bunkers and interconnecting tunnels in Gaza (just as was done in Lebanon by Yassir Arafat under the watch of Ariel Sharon, Olmert and Mofaz for 6 years). These bunkers have been loaded with missiles, explosives and weapons -- all coming in through the Sinai Desert, courtesy of Egypt, into Gaza -- the latest radical Islamic base for Global Terrorism. Olmert has done virtually nothing in defense as Kassam Rockets are being launched almost daily into Sderot and Ashkelon, as well as other towns and villages in southern Israel. If Olmert, Rice and the Supreme Court have their way, the entire length and (narrow) breadth of Judea and Samaria will be lined with Katyusha Rockets, within easy reach of Israel's coastal area, home to 70% of Israel's civilian population and Ben Gurion's International Airport. When we warned the government of Israel of the 12,000 to 20,000 missiles lined up in Lebanon, nothing was done pre-emptively to defend the Jewish State. Israeli Intelligence not only knew of the these missiles but, were deeply concerned many had poison gas or chemical warheads. The Israeli government had no interest in the facts and refused even minimal response. If ever a Government warranted a Nuremberg Tribunal, it is the Sharon-Olmert-Mofaz government which has now morphed into Olmert's Kadima Government -- even worse. What is happening now is a travesty as Olmert uses every trick to stay in power assisted by a corrupt Supreme Court and a dismal failure of the Knesset to simply vote a "No Confidence" motion and close down a Government bent on volunteering the Jewish State into national suicide. If ever a Nuremberg Tribunal Peoples' Court was warranted, replete with a judgement of hanging the perpetrators, now is that time. Everyone seems to have forgotten that the Saudi Plan to divide Jerusalem includes the abandonment of the Jewish Quarter of the Old City of Jerusalem -- with a tunnel for Jews and tourists to go to the Western Wall. The Saudi Plan also plans re-appropriating the Mount of Olives ancient Jewish cemetery which was ravaged and desecrated by King Hussein of Jordan. The Saudis also demand French Hill, Ramot Eshkol, Gilo areas plus all the other Jewish neighborhoods of Jerusalem that were occupied by Jordan from 1948 to 1967. Remember! The Saudi Plan was probably originally designed by the U.S. State Department and delivered to the Saudis by Thomas Friedman and was always intended as the threshold death knell for Israel. WHAT THEN MAY WE CONCLUDE FROM THE EVIDENCE WE CAN SEE? 1. The Bush-Rice regime needs Olmert, Livni and Peres to stay in control of Israeli government policy so they may affix an official U.S. government approval on the Saudi Plan. IF the Israeli subversive wing stays in power, then the U.S. can say: "We support the real government policy in Jerusalem" -- even if a huge majority of Israelis do NOT support this Olmert government's national suicide. 2. This includes, but is not limited to, the evacuation of Judea and Samaria (the so-called "west bank"), dividing Jerusalem -- making the eastern half the seat of government for Fatah, Hamas and all the other Terrorist factions. Add to that dire loss of Israel's sovereignty and security, the surrender of the Golan Heights and the Jordan Valley. 3. The Leftist Supreme Court has agreed to keep Olmert in power until all the above have been de-Judaized and abandoned to the Arab Muslim Palestinians as was done in Gush Katif/Gaza. 4. The Knesset, with encouragement from the Left, refuses to bring down the government, both to keep their own seats and for those of the Left to insure that Olmert will complete the failed terms of the earlier Oslo Accords and the follow-on failed Appeasement Accords. 5. Many have noticed that former PM Binyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu has been almost silent -- with the exception of weak attacks on Olmert and the Kadima government. It seems that he wishes the Bush -- Rice -- Olmert plan of divestment (and disintegration) to be completed before he comes to power. Moreover, he has made statements to the effect that, had he been in power, he too would have negotiated away the same territory that Olmert, Bush and the Saudis call a Peace Plan Road Map...just as he gave way to the Arab Muslims 80% of the Jewish Holy City of Hebron in the Wye Agreement. This is a question that should be put squarely to Netanyahu and NOT allow him to avoid with typical political double-talk. Recall that it was Ariel Sharon who, in his election, ran again Avram Mitznah by pledging to oppose Mitznah's platform of abandoning Judea, Samaria, all of Jerusalem that Jordan occupied from 1948 to 1967, the Golan Heights and the Jordan Valley. After winning the election Sharon, along with Olmert and Peres, et al adopted the Mitznah Oslo platform and organized the brutal Gush Katif/Gaza eviction/expulsion. 6. Bush, having virtually lost the Iraq conflict needs the voluntary sacrifice of most of Israel's strategic Land to the Arab Muslim Palestinians and the Arab and Muslim nations in order to the leave an historic legacy of fictional "Peace in Our Time -- in the Middle East". Sharon was to be the General who initiated the "Judenrein" swap. When he was struck down by crippling strokes, his even weaker replacement, Ehud Olmert, was set up to finish the job. The U.S. State Department, through the Saudis, have floated the "Final Solution of Israel" withdrawing to the pre-1967 Armistice lines which Abba Eban correctly dubbed "The Auschwitz Borders". This then concludes a brief summation of how the U.S., E.U., U.N. and Russia -- The Quartet -- have manipulated the National Suicide of the world's only Jewish State. ### 1. "Waiting for Winograd" by Moshe Arens Ha'aretz March 12, 2007 2. "Solana: EU Backs Returning Golan Heights to Syria" by jpost.com staff The Jerusalem Post March 14, 2007 3. "GSS: Israeli Arabs are Existential Danger to Israel" by Hillel Fendel Arutz Sheva IsraelNationalNews.com March 13, 2007 Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at winstonmedia@comcast.net |
|
LAME DUCKS AND SITTING DUCKS
Posted by Women in Green, March 14, 2007. |
| This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared yesterday in The Jerusalem Post. |
|
Last November 26, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert ordered the IDF to withdraw its forces from Gaza. Sounding oddly triumphant, Olmert announced that he had reached a cease-fire with the Palestinians. The strangeness of his statement became apparent when just hours later Sderot absorbed yet another bombardment of rockets from Gaza. And as the IDF grudgingly withdrew its forces mid-mission, the Palestinians established the rules that they and Olmert have followed ever since. They attack Israel and prepare for war, and Israel helps them by giving them money, negotiating with them and taking no steps to defend itself or its citizens. The strange agreement was announced three days before US President George W. Bush snubbed Olmert when he demurred from either visiting Israel or visiting with Olmert during his trip to Amman, Jordan. In the four months since Olmert forced the IDF to stand down, the IDF, the Shin Bet, and even the media have warned both Olmert and the public that Syrian, Iranian and Lebanese-Hizbullah trainers, engineers, commanders and advanced anti-air and anti-tank missiles have been brought into Gaza. The foreign terror masters and their Palestinian counterparts have used the respite that Olmert provided them to build what Shin Bet Director Yuval Diskin has referred to as "warrens" of tunnels and fortifications along Gaza's borders with Egypt and with Israel. Like Hizbullah in Lebanon, operating from these fortifications, the Palestinians will be able to attack IDF ground forces and aircraft when they are finally permitted to defend southern Israel from attack. So thanks to Olmert's unilateral cease-fire, the Palestinians have upgraded their capabilities. Whereas before Israel withdrew its forces and civilians from Gaza in August and September 2005, the Palestinians operated as low-level terrorist cells, today they field bona fide terror armies that are capable of conducting coordinated, multi-layered operations. YET THE Palestinians' avid preparations for war are apparently irrelevant to all concerned. In the past week alone, we have seen the US, Israel and the Arab world in the throes of a diplomatic frenzy that would make it seem as though the coming war was nothing but a joke. Last Wednesday, Jordan's King Abdullah addressed a joint session of the US Congress. Abdullah came to the US at an interesting moment in the history of his own kingdom. The same day that Abdullah told US lawmakers that Israel is the source of all the misfortunes in the world, or as he put it, "The wellspring of regional division, the source of resentment and frustration far beyond, is the denial of justice and peace in Palestine," his state prosecutor announced the arrest of three al-Qaida terrorists. The men were arrested for plotting to assassinate Bush during his visit to Amman on November 29 and for plotting to bomb the US embassy in Amman. What is interesting about the announcement, coming as it did the day that Abdullah spoke to the Congress and ate a private dinner with the president, is that it shows the mendacity of Abdullah's contention. Israel is not responsible for the fact that Jordan has a huge problem with al-Qaida. Moreover, with a population that is more than 70 percent Palestinian, the monarch of the Hashemite kingdom would do well to look in the mirror before declaring that the lack of Palestinian statehood has anything to do with Israel. ACCORDING to Israel's Channel 2, Abdullah built on his "Blame the Jews" theme to great effect during his private dinner with the president. Bush was reportedly convinced by his Jordanian guest that the world will be a better, safer place if the US abandons its demand that the PA destroy the terror cells and armies operating in its territory before it commences pressure on Israel to surrender Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem to Hamas-Fatah. Abdullah's success has had immediate significance on the ground. Just four days after the monarch's visit to Washington, Olmert announced that he is going to ignore the situation on the ground in the PA and conduct negotiations on Israeli withdrawals from Judea and Samaria with Abbas. At Sunday's cabinet meeting Olmert repeated his praise for the so-called "Saudi plan," or, alternatively, the "Arab peace initiative." That initiative calls for Israeli surrender of Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights and Jerusalem; Israeli acceptance of blame for the Arab world's refusal to accept the right of the Jewish people to national sovereignty; and Israeli acceptance of millions of foreign-born, hostile Arabs within its truncated borders. After Israel makes these suicidal concessions the Arab peace initiative states that the Arab world will be willing to recognize a defunct and defenseless Arab-majority State of Israel. OLMERT AND Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni have repeatedly stated that at its meeting later in the month in Riyadh the Arab League will moderate the plan. But Jordan's Foreign Minister Abdullah Khatib said Sunday that there would be no changes of any kind made in the plan. Hours after Olmert praised the Arab plan for Israel's destruction, he met with PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. Olmert's office tried to put a positive spin on the meeting by loudly repeating Abbas's empty pledge to work to bring about the release of IDF Cpl. Gilad Schalit, who has been held hostage by Palestinian terrorists in Gaza since June. But the fact of the matter is that the content of the Olmert-Abbas meeting represented nothing less than an Israeli diplomatic capitulation to Hamas. This capitulation is no less dangerous to Israel's national security than Olmert's acquiescence to Hamas's military transformation of Gaza into a mini-Lebanon, replete with Iranian and Syrian military advisers. Under orders from Bush, Olmert agreed Sunday to abandon Israel's demand that the PA fight terror and expunge all terror elements from its midst as a necessary precondition for further Israeli concessions. For their part, the Palestinians responded to Olmert's query regarding how they had used the $100 million that Israel gave them by demanding more money. And while Olmert was happy to lie to the public and claim that Abbas had agreed to end the rocket attacks on the Western Negev, he knows full well that he won't. Indeed, the only thing that was announced about the meeting that was true is that Olmert has agreed to negotiate with the Palestinians and the Arabs on the basis of the Arab initiative, which is based on the proposition that Israel essentially has no right to exist. SPEAKING on Israel Radio on Monday morning, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni said that Israel and the US are working in pure harmony in formulating their policies regarding the Palestinians, as well as Syria. And this is no doubt true. Both Israel and the US are pretending that it is possible to make a distinction between Abbas and Hamas, even though in the aftermath of last month's agreement between Fatah and Hamas in Mecca Abbas now acts at the pleasure of Hamas leader Khaled Mashaal. Perhaps the only bright spot for Israeli diplomacy since the onset of the Palestinian jihad in 2000 has been the US and European willingness to make a distinction between the Fatah terror group and the Hamas terror group. It is true that Fatah, which receives at least 40 percent of its finances from Iran and has killed more Israelis over the past seven years than Hamas, is unworthy of the international legitimacy it has enjoyed. But in refusing to directly fund and support Hamas, the US, Israel and Europe were at least agreed that some Palestinian terror groups were beyond the pale. This Israeli diplomatic asset was destroyed by a combination of Arab perfidy and Israeli incompetence in the aftermath of last month's Mecca agreement. In Mecca, Abbas agreed to a Hamas takeover of the PA. He agreed to become a Hamas figurehead whose main task is to restore Western funding of the Hamas-led PA. Rather than point this out and so wrest away Fatah's international legitimacy, Israel has allowed Fatah to do Hamas's bidding and act as a conduit toward the international legitimization of the jihadist movement. PERHAPS what is most interesting about the diplomatic maneuvering taking place today is that all four main actors carrying it out are advancing aims inimical to their national or organizational interests. Israel and the US's security interests, like those of Jordan, are harmed rather than advanced by the empowerment of Hamas. As for Abbas, Fatah's fiduciary interests are harmed by the transfer of power to Hamas. So why are these men behaving as they are? The answer to that apparently is to be found in a characteristic shared by Bush, Olmert, Abdullah and Abbas. All of them lead without the support of their people. All of the men, in engaging in near-manic diplomatic wrangling, are advancing the aims of neither peace nor security. They act as they do not because they believe in what they are doing -- indeed, none of them could possibly believe in what he is doing. Rather, they are doing this because they want us to ignore the fact that in Bush's and Olmert's cases they are lame ducks, and in Abdullah's and Abbas's cases, they are sitting ducks. 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 |
|
THREATENED BY JIHAD
Posted by Michael Travis, March 14, 2007. |
|
This was written by Steven Emerson and it appeared today on Front Page Magazine
|
|
On January 26, 2007, I appeared on Fox News Channel's Hannity and Colmes program to discuss a January 8, 2007 meeting between the Attorney General of the United States and various Muslim and Arab groups, some of which have a long history of supporting terrorist groups and extremist ideologies. In response to a question from Alan Colmes about the importance of "good relations" between Attorney General Gonzales and the Muslim community, I stated, "[b]ut when you say the 'Muslim community' -- [the Attorney General] is anointing them representatives of the Muslim community, when in fact there are many others who support the war on terrorism, who don't tell their members not to cooperate with the FBI, who don't support Hamas and Hezbollah, unlike members of this group. So, in fact, I think it's wrong to confer legitimacy on those very organizations that inhibit cooperation with the FBI, that support Hamas or justify Hezbollah, and who are radical in terms of portraying the war on terrorism as a war against Islam." On February 16, 2007, MPAC's lawyer sent me a letter demanding an apology for my allegedly "[f]alse statements about the Muslim Public Affairs Council on Hannity and Colmes." The letter demands that I "immediately issue a public apology and ... cease and desist from making false statements about MPAC," and that "MPAC is willing to pursue all available legal remedies" should I not comply with MPAC's demands. And what are the allegedly "false statements" MPAC is claiming I made? That "MPAC told its 'members not to cooperate with the FBI,'" and that MPAC "are the ones radicalizing their community." Now let's analyze those charges by looking at MPAC's own words. First, that MPAC has instructed American Muslims not to cooperate with the FBI: MPAC and its lawyers claim this to be untrue. But at a July 1, 2005 ISNA conference in Dallas, MPAC Executive Director Salam Al-Marayati did just that. Al-Marayati, speaking of the FBI's terrorism investigation in Lodi and the use of Muslim informants in that case, California, told the assembled crowd of Muslim-Americans, "[c]ounter-terrorism and counter-violence should be defined by us. We should define how an effective counter-terrorism policy should be pursued in this country. So, number one, we reject any effort, notion, suggestion that Muslims should start spying on one another." Right there, Al-Marayati is instructing Muslim Americans to not even attempt to observe any extremism or terrorist activity in their community, and even if they should observe something troubling, to not inform law enforcement authorities, that the duty owed to the Muslim community by the government is greater than to society at large. And Al-Marayati continued, "Law enforcement is going to come to your mosque. It already has as far as I can tell. Everywhere I go, either somebody tells me that officials have met with them publicly or they tell me that they know who those folks are that are representing law enforcement. So we know they have communicated one way or the other with the Muslim community. The question is how do you deal with it in a healthy, open, transparent manner. That is why we are saying have them come in community forums, in open-dialogues, so they come through the front door and you prevent them having to come from the back door." Here, Al-Marayati is instructing Muslim Americans not to cooperate with the FBI's preferred methods of investigation, and that, as he stated earlier, it is the Muslim community, and its so-called leaders, that should define the terms of the FBI's investigation. That approach can hardly be described as full-fledged cooperation with law enforcement. Far from it, in fact. Al-Marayati used the Lodi case as an excuse to tell Muslim Americans not to deal with the FBI directly. Demanding that the American Muslim community only work with FBI agents and other law enforcement in public forums clearly detracts from the ability of investigators to do their job, which is to protect American citizens from the threat of radical Islamist terrorists. MPAC, and groups like it, are also clearly seeking to intrude into and ultimately to dominate the relationship between the law enforcement and the Muslim community, ensuring that the degree of allowable cooperation is regulated by these self-appointed leaders. And why did Mr. Al-Marayati not urge his listeners in Dallas that they should extend full cooperation to the FBI and law enforcement community at every instance, rather than to demand a specific approach which is debilitating from an investigatory standpoint? Or that law abiding American Muslims need some sort of self-appointed intermediary when working with the FBI? And how can people feel comfortable providing information to law enforcement if they can only do so in an open forum? I will leave that to the reader to decide. But one thing is clear: MPAC is on the record telling American Muslims not to directly cooperate with the FBI, while at the same time advocating an impractical or impossible way for those who actually have information to relay it to law enforcement. Now let's analyze the other alleged "false statement": that MPAC serves to radicalize the American Muslim community: This claim is even easier to demonstrate, as MPAC officials give speeches and quotes to the media that can only serve to alienate and radicalize Muslims who hear them. The constant refrain: a conspiracy theory that the War on Terror is a contrivance of the U.S. government and is really a "War against Islam." Such a conspiracy dismissed legitimate efforts by law enforcement to fight terrorism and terrorist financing perpetrated on U.S. soil. By virtue of the sheer number of times MPAC officials (and, for that matter, officials of other U.S.-based Islamist groups,) have made that claim, it is impossible to include them all here. But here are several instances that easily serve to make the point: · Aslam Abdullah, MPAC Vice Chairman and Editor of the MPAC-linked magazine, the Minaret, in a 2002 online forum entitled, "The Truth behind America's War on Terrorism," wrote, "[t]here are three specific lobbies that are turning the ongoing war on terrorism against Islam. The Christian Evangelicals who want to see Muslims converted, the political Zionists who want to see Muslim [sic] politically obliterated, and the Hindu Extremists who want to see Muslim [sic] humiliated...Mr. Bush and his administration have not been able to challenge these lobbies. Many members of these lobbies are in the administration and in FBI, law enforcement and even Congress." [1] (emphasis added) A recent study conducted by the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) has concluded that the repeated use of "War on Islam" mantra is directly related to the radicalization of the "homegrown" jihadists. [5] Al-Marayati also infamously told an L.A. radio station after 9/11, "[i]f we're going to look at suspects we should look to the groups that benefit the most from these kinds of incidents, and I think we should put the state of Israel on the suspect list," engaging in the very kind of conspiracy theories heard in the most radical quarters around the globe. Additionally, MPAC officials have defended Hezbollah, blasted the U.S. government for actions taken to stop the funding of Hamas by U.S. front organizations, and repeatedly defended convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad operative Sami al-Arian, downplaying his jihadist exhortations and claiming that his prosecution was merely "political." As a well-known analyst of militant Islamist groups in the United States, I have been a target of a vicious smear campaign by organizations which are afraid of having the bright light of day shone on their words and deeds. For example, in December 2004, MPAC, published a "policy" paper titled "Counterproductive Counterterrorism," in which more than 20 of the 48 pages were at their core a personal hit piece against me. And after failing to de-legitimize me through character assassination, MPAC is now threatening to silence me using the court system. Legal action has become a mainstay of radical Islamist organizations seeking to intimidate and silence their critics. In September 2005, journalist Robert King, writing in the Indianapolis Star, outlined the strategy [6]: Sayyid Syeed, the secretary general of ISNA (Islamic Society of North America), a group generally less vocal than CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations), earlier in the weekend said his organization is considering filing defamation lawsuits against some of its sharpest critics. King goes on to write that one of the potential targets frequently cited by America's Muslim leaders is yours truly. And why is that? Because I have spent more than a decade exposing radical Islamists in the United States, many of whom are functioning in leadership capacities in these very groups in question. CAIR by the way, as King noted, has repeatedly taken to the courts, fortunately with very little success, to stifle criticism. Thankfully, the First Amendment protections granted by the U.S. Constitution do not favor this latest tactic employed by the Islamist groups. MPAC cannot stand to have its agenda exposed, especially when it comes in the form of having its own words, and the words of its officials, used against them. In their minds, any such efforts need to be stifled. MPAC's smear tactics have not worked, and as such, their lawyers have now stated that "MPAC is willing to pursue all available legal remedies" to silence me. MPAC's bullying attempt to stifle free speech will not stand. Such tactics should be vigorously opposed, and MPAC, like CAIR before it, must learn that legal threats will not work to stifle legitimate criticism, especially when the facts underlying the criticism are both well documented, and as is often the case, straight out of the horse's mouth, so to speak. Notes: [1] Aslam Abdullah, "The Truth Behind America's War on Terrorism,"
November 30, 2002, [2] Amantha Perera, "US Muslims Fear Second Term for Patriot Act," Inter Press Service, May 7, 2004. [3] "Relief Groups Shut Down," The Minaret, January 2002. [4] H.G. Reza, "FBI Has a Pledge and a Request for Muslims," The Los Angeles Times, March 16, 2003. [5] Stewart Bell, "Jihadization of youth a 'rapid process'; CSIS:
Study Of Extremism," National Post, January 26, 2007. [6] Robert King, "Muslims aim to challenge critics in America;
Convention seminar focuses on best ways for followers to respond when
their faith is attacked," Indianapolis Star, September 5, 2005
|
|
FOUR CHEERS FOR MESHI-ZAHAV!!
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 14, 2007. |
|
I have always had a soft fond spot in my heart for Yehuda Meshi-Zahav. (His last name means golden silk). Years ago he was the bogeyman of the secularist Left, because he ran a group of ultra-Orthodox "Chareidi" radicals, who sometimes got physical with roudy youths in Bnei Barak whose behavior was not what they approved. See http://www.cross-currents.com/archives/2005/11/24/meshi-zahav-from-outcast-to-hero/ But later Meshi-Zahav mellowed and has devoted his life to running ZAKA since 1989. ZAKA as you probably know, is the organization that attends to the victims of terror attacks and accidents. It carefully collects body parts for burial with dignity, and for identification. It does the work that would probably drive most of the rest of us to insanity and it does it as a religious misison. Its members have also served in other countries after disasters (such as the Tsunami) or atrocities. See http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Orgs/zaka.html It should surely be on your Zedaka list. Meshi-Zahav is a fascinating guy. I actually bumped into him once face-to-face at an airport in Europe. He looks mischievous, like a chareidi leprechaun. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/static/pictures/resized/136-106/9/9637.jpg WHich takes me to the event this week in which Meshi-Zahav emerged as one of the great contemporary heroes of Jewry: This is called ZAKA head hits Neturei-Karta rabbi." It was written by
Jerusalem Post Staff I would now like to invite Meshi-Zahav to meet with some Post-Zionist academics. |
|
Yehuda Meshi-Zahav, chairman of ZAKA and former operations officer for the Ultra-Orthodox community, hit the Jewish man who kissed Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, it was reported on Monday. The violent incident occurred last Friday in Poland during a mass visit of Orthodox Jews to the country in order to honor Hassidic Rabbi Elimelech of Lizhensk. When the visitors arrived at Lizhensk on Friday morning, they heard that Moshe Arye Freedman, a member of the fanatic anti-Israel group Neturei Karta, was present as well. Freedman recently made headlines when he was photographed kissing Ahmadinejad during the Holocaust denial conference in Teheran three months ago. Meshi-Zahav, along with another ZAKA member, quickly located Freedman and set upon him, punching the man, kicking him and breaking his glasses. The fight was dispersed when local police arrived at the scene. As an act of appreciation, Meshi-Zahav was called up to read the Torah in synagogue. 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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
JIHAD'S CAMPUS COLLABORATORS
Posted by Evelyn Hayes, March 14, 2007. |
|
This was written by caroline Glick and it appeared February 26,
2007 in the Jerusalem Post
|
|
The general tendency of Westerners is to view global jihad as a foreign policy issue. But today it is clear that it is also a domestic policy issue. Over the weekend The Sunday Telegraph reported that a recently circulated British intelligence report warned: "The terrorist threat facing Britain from home-grown al-Qaida agents is higher than at any time since the September 11 attacks in 2001." After foiling the jihadist plot to down US-bound British passenger aircraft last summer, MI5 director Eliza Manningham-Buller claimed that there are some 1,600 British Muslims actively involved in plotting attacks against Britain. According to the intelligence report cited in the Sunday Telegraph, today that number exceeds 2,000. As one senior British political source told the newspaper, "The Security Services have constantly warned that the task of countering Islamic terrorism is a daunting one. There will be more attacks in Britain." It is not surprising that Britain faces the specter of mass attacks carried out by its own citizens in the name of Allah. Repeated exposes of the goings-on in British mosques and in supposedly "moderate" British Muslim communal organizations have shown unequivocally that they are being used as indoctrination centers for jihad. A poll published last month by Britain's Policy Exchange think tank bore out the poisonous impact this indoctrination has had on young Muslims in the country. Thirty-seven percent of British Muslims between the ages of 16-24 would rather live under Shari'a law than under British Common Law; 36 percent think Muslims should be killed if they convert to another religion; 13 percent admire al-Qaida and similar terror groups; and a whopping 74 percent of young British Muslims believe womenshould wear veils. WHILE IT is true that in the US the danger of home-grown jihadists to national security is lower than it is in Britain, it is also true that there is a growing phenomenon of jihadist violence being perpetrated by Muslim men against American civilians in the name of jihad. Ten days ago, the Investors Business Daily published an editorial enumerating a partial list of acts of terrorism carried out by Muslim men against their fellow Americans since the September 11 attacks. Most recently, Sulejman Talovic entered a shopping mall in Salt Lake City, murdered five and wounded four unsuspecting shoppers before being killed by an off-duty police officer. As was the case when Derrick Shareef, another Muslim male, was arrested in early December for plotting to carry out a similar attack at a shopping mall in Illinois just before Christmas, the media and the law enforcement agencies covering the Salt Lake City massacre have made light of the fact that the perpetrator was a Muslim. While Talovic is dead and so cannot explain his motives to authorities, Shareef was arrested after telling an FBI informant of his plans to murder Jews specifically and Americans in particular for Allah. As Shareef told the informant, "I swear by Allah man, I'm down for it too. I'm down for the cause. I'm down to live for the cause and die for the cause, man." SHAREEF'S protestations of jihadist ardor made little impression on either federal authorities or the media. Upon announcing Shareef's arrest, US Federal Prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald insisted that he was acting on his own and that he had no outside inspiration for his decision to commit mass murder for Allah. As was the case with Talovic and with Naveed Afzal Haq, who murdered one woman and wounded five during his shooting rampage at the Seattle Jewish Federation last July, the media and federal authorities have hushed up and failed to investigate the jihadist motives for the Illinois attacker or link him to any larger phenomenon. The Investors Business Daily editorial ran under the headline "Sudden jihad syndrome." The term, which has been bandied about by law enforcement officials in both the US and Britain in recent months, encapsulates the view that Muslims can be incited and then move to commit acts of murder in the name of Allah and jihad instantaneously. The attractiveness of the "sudden jihad syndrome" explanation for violent Islamic crime is clear. By arguing that the jihadists are acting on their own after being mysteriously inspired by no one, law enforcement officials and the media are relieved of the thankless task of investigating mosques, Muslim advocacy groups and Islamic centers, where the jihadist indoctrination is conducted on a daily basis. IT IS hard to know what to make of this view. Perhaps there is something to it. Perhaps the message of jihad is so strong that young Muslim men can be inspired to shoot pregnant women in office buildings after the notion of murder for Allah enters the transoms of their minds independently of other outside factors -- through vapors or spontaneous generation perhaps. What is clear enough is that since this is the view that is informing policymakers, law enforcement officials and the media in handling a clear trend of jihadist murder, it requires serious empirical study. The obvious place for that research to take place is in the universities. Unfortunately, there can be little hope that universities in the US or in the West in general will devote any serious consideration to this most important sociological, psychological and national security trend. Far from being willing to study the most central issue of our times, universities are leading the charge in either ignoring it, or apologizing for it. On February 15, the Iraqi Ambassador to the UN, Hamid Al Bayati, spoke at New York's Fordham University. During the course of his remarks, Bayati doubted the fact that the Holocaust had occurred. In his words, "I'm not aware of any dictator who used chemical weapons against his own people. Some academics or diplomats would say Hitler used chemical weapons, but I am sure he didn't use them against his own people -- his German people." When pressed by law professor Avi Bell on the fact that several hundred thousand German citizens were gassed to death by Nazi Germany, Bayati still refused to take the point. Fordham University is far from alone in providing a platform for Holocaust deniers. Last Thursday the Dean's office at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology co-sponsored an event on the Arab-Israel conflict called, "Foreign Policy and Social Justice: A Jewish View, a Muslim View." The man invited to provide the Jewish view was Dovid Weiss, a member of the crackpot Neturei Karta sect. Weiss rose to prominence when he traveled to Teheran last December to participate in Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Holocaust denial conference. While MIT and Fordham were hosting Holocaust deniers in the name of intellectual freedom, their fellow universities were hosting "Israel Apartheid Week." As part of their efforts to criminalize the Jewish state, Arab and Jewish speakers at "Israel Apartheid Week" events refer to Israel as "1948 Palestine" and show propaganda films portraying IDF soldiers and Israeli civilians in Judea and Samaria as murderers. The events are generally sponsored by the International Solidarity Movement. In addition to their campus outreach, the ISM sponsors the weekly riots against the security fence in Bil'in and in Hebron, where its protesters throw rocks at IDF soldiers. Given the violent content of their actions in Israel, it should come as no surprise that their events on US campuses also breed violence. At an "Israel Apartheid Week" event at City University of New York, after watching a propaganda film, 19-year old Binyamin Rister rose and politely asked the ISM presenters if they supported terrorism. When he received no reply he politely repeated the question. Rather than wait for an answer, CUNY security guards dragged Rister from the room and then repeatedly banged his head against the wall of an elevator and threw him head first down the stairs. Rister's injuries from the assault by campus security required him to be evacuated by ambulance in a neck brace to the hospital. In an almost identical case at Georgetown last year, Bill Maniaci a 65-year-old retired Jewish American police officer was brutalized by Georgetown security guards after he asked ISM spokesmen if they supported terrorism. He is currently suing Georgetown for $8 million in damages for the assault. According to Lee Kaplan's report of the CUNY event in Frontpage Magazine, there were seven witnesses to the unprovoked attack against Rister. He too has filed a multi-million dollar lawsuit against CUNY. EVEN THOSE propounding the view that jihadist murderers in the US and Britain are inspired to kill after being brought under the spell of the "sudden jihad syndrome" cannot deny that the root of the jihad is ideas. Similarly, it is self-evident that the key to beating the global jihad is victory in the battlefield of ideas. Unfortunately, as the pro-jihadist trend on US and Western campuses, and its impact on idea consumers in law enforcement, the media and policy circles throughout the free world shows, to the extent that those charged with engaging in the battle of ideas are engaged, they fight on the side of the enemy. Contact Evelyn Hayes at haze@rcn.com |
|
ISRAEL'S WAR ON OWN PEOPLE; WHY ISRAEL IS GOING DOWN
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 14, 2007. |
|
IRAN Iran's economy is reeling. It needs foreign aid to survive. Armed dissidents attack its facilities. But the State Dept. refuses to release funds for Iranians to overthrow the regime. US-sponsored broadcasts often toe the Iranian line. The US does now attack Iranian agents helping insurgents in Iraq (but that could be just part of the war effort in Iraq and not intended as a measure against Iran). An EU report secretly admitted that its negotiations did not change Iran nor are further negotiations likely to. Sec. Rice and Pres. Bush still think diplomacy can resolve matters, although Iran is promoting jihad more actively than ever. The US thinks its diplomacy has resolved the nuclear problem with N. Korea. It hasn't. It seems mainly to pay N. Korea for agreeing to consider to suspend some nuclear work temporarily. Besides a payment of fuel, the US would cancel banking sanctions. Those sanctions kept from N. Korea the capital needed to sustain its regime while it exercised nuclear blackmail. N. Korea already has violated the new agreement. The US deals in a similarly futile with the P.A., but fails to admit it doesn't work (Caroline Glick, IMRA, 2/16) contrary to claims. It does work to undermine Israel. ANOTHER DOUBLE STANDARD TOWARDS ISRAEL Terrorists are being arrested all over the world. Security forces use intelligence agents, roadblocks, and bribes to create a network of informants. The international media likes to talk about the lives saved in all the countries except Israel. When Israel uses roadblocks to thwart terrorism, the world complains that it is an oppressor using excessive means (Hillel Halkin, IMRA, 2/24). ISRAEL'S WAR ON ITS OWN PEOPLE Although the losses of the war in Lebanon and Gaza, induced by earlier Israeli withdrawals from there, disgraced the government policy of withdrawal, and PM Olmert said that he no longer was considering such a policy, he secretly has formed task forces to implement just such a policy. In so doing, he has separated the government from the national security interests of Israel. His government well knows that, as was demonstrated in Lebanon and Gaza, any area from which Israel withdraws becomes a terrorist base for further attacks on Israel. His is a government of treason. Why does the government act more in behalf of the Arab enemy than of its own people? Bought by the State Dept. or EU? Blackmailed by prosecutors? Hating their own people? (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/15). Contemporary leftist philosophy considers it a moral duty to put the enemy first. How perverted! JORDAN ON VIENNA CONVENTION Israel suspected Jordanian diplomats of smuggling contraband into Israel. Its border guards stopped the diplomats from entering, unless they would let their cars be inspected. The diplomats refused, and returned to Jordan. Jordan protested the demand as a violation of the Vienna Convention. The Convention permits such inspection. Jordan claimed that Israel had no reason to suspect anything (IMRA, 2/19). That's up to Israel. Time after time, the Arabs exempt themselves from agreements they signed. P.A. VIPs used to smuggle arms that way. (See next, below.) WHO WON THE LEBANON WAR? The head of IDF intelligence told the Knesset that Hizbullah has rearmed and now possesses more firepower than it did before the war. An MK reached the logical conclusion that Israel did not win the war that just months later leaves its foe stronger than before. Israel had set as a condition of ceasefire that Hizbullah would be disarmed. Hizbullah leader Nasrallah confidently asserted that Hizbullah would not disarm (Arutz-7, 2/19). Islam does not believe in keeping agreements with infidels unless it has to. Israel's mistake was in making an agreement with Hizbullah and leaving it to unreliable and hostile foreigners to enforce it. DESECRATION INCREASING AT HEBRON Jewish Psalm books were torn up and strewn about the Sephardic cemetery in Hebron. A week before, religious objects in Hebron at the tombs of Jesse and Ruth, the father and great-grandmother of King David were damaged. Before that, graves were desecrated. Hebron Jews complained that Israeli police do not apprehend criminals against the Jews but pounce on the Jews for imagined trifles (Arutz-7, 2/19). WHY ISRAEL IS GOING DOWN Israel's leftist politicians utter falsehood and nonsense about the jihad against Israel. The major media, some controlled ideologically by the government, back up the politicians and fail to analyze their poor logic and false claims. Academia indoctrinates rather than teaches (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/18). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net |
|
TEFLON TERRORISTS: THE EVIL THAT NO ONE WANTS TO CALL BY ITS NAME
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 13, 2007. |
|
If you, or anyone you know, is still holding on to the dear, desperate, and by now terribly frayed strand of hope that being in political power will 'moderate' Hamas (because they will need to collect the garbage, etc...), be sure to read (or send them) the Reuters article below. From Hassan el-Bana, to Sayyed Qtub, to the Hajj, to Arafat, to Sheikh Yassin, to Rantizi, to Mesha'al, to Haniyeh -- they all say the same thing: "we are going to destroy Israel, and genocide its Jews, even if we must do it one jew at a time." And all but a handful -- and I mean really a handful -- like six or seven out of 1,400,000,000) are silent. Hamas et al versus Israel: This war is not a dispute over borders, territory, freedom, or national self-determination. This is the endless terror assault of a truly evil tyrannical totalitarian triumphalist theocratic culturally retrograde barbaric genocidal force (acting in the name of, and motivated by the teachings of, Islam) against a modern, westernized, democratic, egalitarian state (guided and motivated in its origins and its development by the teachings of Judaism). Some of my interlocutors have chastized me for using the 'invective' of calling Hamas "evil" or totalitarian, or triumphalist, etc.. I stand by my choice of adjectives. As a reminder: the first article below is an essay I wrote last year, explaining why I use the term "evil" to describe Hamas and Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad and the PFLP and the DFLP and the PFLP-GC and the el-Aqsa martyrs' brigade and el-Qaeda and the PLO and el-fatah and the Muslim Brotherhood and el-Gama'a el Islamiyeh and Ansar el-Islam and the thirty or fourty other Arab or Muslim terror organizations that are at war with Israel and/or Western Civilization. |
|
I am continuously puzzled by the fact that so few commentators on the topic of the Middle East conflict turn their attention to what I call the great moral divide. It seems to me that this moral divide should be a really big factor in how westerners look at the dynamics of the conflict. Instead, it is almost never mentioned; and in fact, in my opinion (I do not have statistics, just my impressions based upon my reading and research of the past 6.5 years), many commentators assiduously avoid dealing with it, intentionally obfuscate it, or even lie about it. Such obstructionist behavior by commentators makes me feel that the great moral divide must be really important...otherwise they would not be so reticent to deal with it. As I see it, there are three aspects to the moral divide: 1.) What the Arab terrorists (*) do, say they want to do, and boast about what they have done or are going to do...is all really evil by any standard of western morality. No matter how it is spun by the various pundits and journalists and politicians and academicians and pseudo-statespersons who serve as cheerleaders for the terrorists, the obvious bottom line, based upon the terrorists' own words and deeds, is: genocide, any l of these is just plain evil. And all of these are the defining characteristics of the Arab terrorists and various Moslem and Arab governmental authorities that support and fund and shelter and train and arm the terrorists. Therefore, even if their cause were just (and since the Arab terrorist cause is the only cause in the world, and across all of world history, for which the only defining paradigm is terrorism, and the sole and unique goal is the destruction of a sovereign state and the genocide of its people, it should be obvious that their cause cannot be just -- but even if it were...), their methods are evil, their intentions are evil, their aspirations are evil, their words are evil, and their deeds are evil. They are evil (*). Silence (and obfuscation and justification all the more so) in the face of evil is complicity. They and their cheerleaders are evil. (**) 2.) What many of the leaders(*) of many Arab and some non-Arab Moslem states say and do and teach and preach in support of the Arab terrorists is evil. Openly, knowingly, enthusiastically cheering and supporting evil is evil. Never before, in all of human history, has there been such a massive expenditures of money, resources, human efforts, and energy that many Arab and some Moslem state leaders have made, for over three-quarters of a century, in order to destroy Israel and exterminate its Jews; either with their own forces, or by support of proxy Arab terrorist forces. Even the Nazi campaign to exterminate the Jews of Europe never reached the multi-national dimensions and umpteen billions of dollars of expenditures and endless relentless international propaganda campaigns of Arab leaders and Arab states -- and all for the sole purpose of destroying one small nation and its Jewish citizenry. Where else in the world, and in all of human history, do we find the leaders of so many sovereign states endlessly diverting resources, for decades, from their own people, and neglecting their own people's needs, in order to eradicate one small sovereign state? Where else in the world, and across all of human history, do we see such enormous energy poured into international collaboration for the propagation of the PR and propaganda and revisionist history and political machinations and mendacious mis-information that have characterized the Arab political and propaganda assaults on Israel? And this assault has been going on within the family of nations and at the UN and in the intellectual arenas of the Western world, for decades ...and all with the sole intent to demonize Israel so that it will lose the support of its allies, and thus be easier prey when its Arab enemies are ready to launch their great final jihad? The sheer obscenity of such a heinous endeavor is beyond description; but no one seems willing to comment on the pure evil of such design. Consider too the commitment that these state leaders have made to an education system that systematically demonizes Israel and Israelis (and in some cases Jews and Judaism), in order to create in the minds of their youth (today's sophomore is tomorrow's Senator) the cross-generational trajectory that will keep the evil alive, and will provide justification for those evil expenditures and evil goals. Teaching children to hate is child abuse raised to the level of public policy. Child abuse is evil. And finally, consider the cost of the lost opportunities. What would the Middle East look like today if Arab leaders had been willing to cooperate with the Zionists in the application of western agrarian technology, medicine, epidemiology, industrial technology, and science in general, to the Arab waste lands and to the impoverished peasantry who barely eked out a subsistence living on those waste lands? And how much more so, had neighboring Arab states been willing to make peace with, and work with, and build with, both Israel and the state of "Palestine" which would have come into existence with the UN partition plan of 11/29/1947? Look at the sand dunes 8 miles north of Jaffa in 1911. Then look at Tel Aviv today, built on those sand dunes. Something similar could have happened in the desert south of Damascus, in the waste land north of Amman, in parts of the Sinai desert east of Egypt, on the eastern shores of the Dead Sea, and more, had the Arab leaders been willing to work with Jews, with Zionists. The cold, bitter, implacable, brutal, primitive and baseless hatred that so many in the Arab world bear toward Israel, Israelis, Zionism, Jews and Judaism -- that is evil. And those Arab leaders who have let themselves be run by this hatred, and who have used it to run others, for decades -- they are evil. And evil too are their intellectual collaborators in both Arab and western nations, who try to spin for us a new pseudo-reality in which that hatred has "just cause" and that terrorism is spawned by "real grievances"!. Baseless brutal hatred is evil. And all the more so when it impels the haters toward violence and war and destruction and terrorism and mass murder and genocide. 3.) Judaism is not evil. Zionism is not evil. Israel is not evil. Neither Judaism not Zionism nor Israel preach or teach or do the horrid deeds described above that have become the hallmark of Arab terrorists, terrorism and terrorist states. There are evil people among Jews, Israelis, Zionists, as there are among all groups across the world. Israel as a state, and Zionists as active participants in the creation of that state, have done some bad things, some times, to some people, as have all states at some time. But there is a radical and substantive difference between a state doing some bad things, making some mistakes, harming some people...and a state or group whose core intentions and goals and methods and deeds and official policies are evil. No state is perfect. No society is flawless. And this is certainly true of Israel as a state and as a society. But even if all the lies that Arab PR and propaganda have perpetrated were true (they are not, they are all lies, but even if they were true), the fate that the Arab terrorists, and their state enablers, and their mendacious cheerleaders, all avidly seek for Israel would not be justified. The extermination of an entire people cannot be justified, ever, except in the hearts and minds of truly evil people. No Jewish leader, no Zionist leader, no Israeli leader, ever, during the entire history of Zionism and the State of Israel, ever perpetrated the heinous acts described in #1 and #2 above: acts which are the hallmarks of the Arab terrorists and their enablers; and which are part of the very core of Arab political ideology. Yet, almost no one discusses the sheer evil of the Arab anti-Israel (and anti-Jewish) program. It is as though the Arabs get a free pass to be evil and get away with it. And, not surprisingly, the same is true of their much ballyhooed and state-supported Holocaust denial. Virtually alone among peoples of the world, Arabs appear to have won a free pass when it comes to denying or minimizing the Holocaust. Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah has declared to his supporters that "Jews invented the legend of the Holocaust." Syrian President Bashar al-Assad recently told an interviewer that he doesn't have "any clue how [Jews] were killed or how many were killed." And Hamas's official Web site labels the Nazi effort to exterminate Jews "an alleged and invented story with no basis." Such Arab viewpoints are not exceptional. A respected Holocaust research institution recently reported that Egypt, Qatar and Saudi Arabia all promote Holocaust denial and protect Holocaust deniers. The records of the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum show that only one Arab leader at or near the highest level of government -- a young prince from a Persian Gulf state -- has ever made an official visit to the museum in its 13-year history. Not a single official textbook or educational program on the Holocaust exists in an Arab country. In Arab media, literature and popular culture, Holocaust denial is pervasive and legitimized. (Robert Satloff, "The Holocaust's Arab Heroes", Washington Post, 10.8.06). This denial, criminal in some countries in the West, is standard government policy in many Arab and some Moslem countries.
Read the two essays below, for details of these heinous acts that are par for the course in the Arab war against the West; but which Israelis do not do, and have never done. And consider as well the tragic fact that Israel is the only country in the Middle East where anti-government demonstrations can muster up to 400,000 (June, 1982) proclaiming their opposition to war (in this case it was the Lebanon war), even as the enemy rains terrorist rockets on civilian communities. Has there ever been a demonstration for peace in any Arab country, anywhere, at any time? Israel is the only country in the Middle East where "women in black" can demonstrate outside of the Parliament building against the closure of crossing points in to Gaza (because it makes life harder for the Gazan Arabs), even as Qassam rockets from Gaza rain down on Sederoth. Prof. Hanson ends his essay with the optimistic belief that "...most Americans can see the moral differences in the present struggle." I would like to believe that he is right. But I see little direct evidence of any perception of this moral divide: not in our media, nor our universities, nor among our intelligencia. Most (but not all) of our political leaders seem to be on board with this concept; but so many in the arenas of intellectual, academic, journalistic, and artistic endeavors are clearly not. So...I'm not sure that Hanson is right. (*) Nota Bene! I'm talking ONLY about Arab terrorists, and the state leaders who support them, and the rank-and-file terrorists who join their terrorist groups, and the broader population throughout the world who support them. I am NOT talking about your average Arab/Moslem man-on-the-street, regular person, nice civilian, non-terrorist, non-militant, who (I presume) wants nothing more than to lead a normal life, raise crops and a family, give his kids a good start in life, and leave the world a bit better off than he found it...same as you and I. (**)And the evil is not limited to the Arab-Israeli conflict. Arab attacks on Arab healthcare workers,
-- this evil abounds throughout the Moslem world and has been a characteristic of the Moslem world since the days of the first Caliphs. And the common thread through all of these calamities is the deep-seated religious and racial intolerance that causes Sunni and Shi'a Iraqis to massacre each other in mosques and markets and funerals and weddings, the ethnic cleansing of Darfur that has resulted in deaths and displacement by the hundreds of thousands, and worse in south Sudan that has resulted in the deaths of more than two million, as well as the irrational and psychotic rejection of Israel's right to exist on a small fragment of the Middle East's land. Since 1948 Palestinian Arabs have repeatedly rejected sovereignty if the result is that Israel continues to exist. Even today, the Palestinians' popularly elected Hamas government, along with Hezbollah and others, refuse to consider any solution that includes a permanent Jewish state alongside the region's scores of Islamic countries. Here is a partial list: the savage Shiite-Sunni bloodletting in Iraq;
Clearly, there is no place on the planet where Muslims reside that is in peace from the religion of peace. Spain, France, Holland, England, Thailand and Indonesia have already been attacked, while others, such as Belgium, have been threatened and sanctioned. When Should We No Longer Support Israel?
Victor Davis Hanson is a respected author and senior fellow at the Hoover Institution. His most recent book, Between War and Peace: Lessons in Afghanistan and Iraq, is available from the FrontPage Magazine Bookstore for $13.95. The recent assassination of Sheik Yassin raises among some Americans the question: "at what point should we reconsider our rather blanket support for the Israelis and show a more even-handed attitude toward the Palestinians?" The answer, it seems to me, should be assessed in cultural, economic, political, and social terms. Well, we should no longer support Israel, when: Mr. Sharon suspends all elections and plans a decade of unquestioned rule. Mr. Sharon suspends all investigation about fiscal impropriety as his family members spend millions of Israeli aid money in Paris. All Israeli television and newspapers are censored by the Likud party. Israeli hit teams enter the West Bank with the precise intention of targeting and blowing up Arab women and children. Pre-teen Israeli children are apprehended with bombs under their shirts on their way to the West Bank to murder Palestinian families. Israeli crowds rush into the street to dip their hands into the blood of their dead and march en masse chanting mass murder to the Palestinians. Rabbis give public sermons in which they characterize Palestinians as the children of pigs and monkeys. Israeli school textbooks state that Arabs engage in blood sacrifice and ritual murders. Mainstream Israeli politicians, without public rebuke, call for the destruction of Palestinians on the West Bank and the end to Arab society there. Likud party members routinely lynch and execute their opponents without trial. Jewish fundamentalists execute with impunity women found guilty of adultery on grounds that they are impugning the honor of the family. Israeli mobs with impunity tear apart Palestinian policemen held in detention. Israeli television broadcasts to the tune of patriotic music the last taped messages of Jewish suicide bombers who have slaughtered dozens of Arabs. Jewish marchers parade in the streets with their children dressed up as suicide bombers, replete with plastic suicide-bombing vests. New Yorkers post $25,000 bounties for every Palestinian blown up by Israeli murderers. Israeli militants murder a Jew by accident and then apologize on grounds that they thought he was an Arab, to the silence of Israeli society. Jews enter Arab villages in Israel to machine gun women and children. Israeli public figures routinely threaten the United States with terror attacks. Jewish assassins murder American diplomats and are given de facto sanctuary by Israeli society. Israeli citizens celebrate on news that 3,000 Americans have been murdered. Israeli citizens express support for Saddam Hussein's supporters in Iraq in their efforts to kill Americans. So until then, I think most Americans can see the moral differences in the present struggle. If the Palestinians wish to hold periodic and open elections, establish an independent judiciary, create a free press, arrest murderers, subject their treasury to public scrutiny, eschew suicide murdering, censure religious leaders who call for mass murder, embrace non-violent dissidents, extend equal rights to women, end honor killings, raise funds in the Arab world earmarked only to build water, sewer, transportation, and education infrastructure, and pledge that any Jews who choose to live in the West Bank will enjoy the same rights as Arabs in Israel...then they might find Americans equally divided over questions of land and peace. But all that is a lot of ifs. And so for the present, Palestinian leaders should not be too surprised that Americans increasingly find very little in their society that has much appeal to either our values or sympathy. If they continually assure us publicly that they are furious at Americans, then they should at least pause, reflect, and ask themselves why an overwhelming number of Americans, not Jewish, not residents of New York, not influenced by the media, are growing far more furious with them. Hamas says still seeks Israel's destruction
The Palestinian Islamist group Hamas rejected on Monday criticism by al Qaeda's second-in-command and said it was still committed to Israel's destruction despite a power-sharing deal with the Fatah faction. "We will not betray promises we made to God to continue the path of Jihad and resistance until the liberation of Palestine, all of Palestine," Hamas said in a statement, in a clear reference to Israel as well as to the occupied West Bank. In an audio recording posted on the Internet on Sunday, al Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahri accused Hamas of serving U.S. interests by agreeing to respect past Palestinian peace accords with Israel in a recent Saudi-brokered unity government deal with moderate Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's Fatah. The coalition agreement fell short of meeting demands by the Quartet of peace mediators -- the United States, the European Union, the United Nations and Russia -- to recognize Israel, renounce violence and accept existing interim peace deals. Zawahri said the Mecca accord, which calmed weeks of Hamas-Fatah warfare in which more than 90 Palestinians were killed, was part of an attempt by Washington to offset Muslim anger at what he described as its bias toward Israel. "It is an American scheme to hit the Islamic jihadist resistance against the Crusader-Zionist campaign. America wanted a sham solution to the Palestinian issue to remove the biggest reason for Muslim hatred (of the United States)," he said. SCOLDING Zawahri accused Hamas of abandoning a tradition of suicide bombings for political gains. "They have ditched the movement of martyrdom operations ... for a government that plays with words in palace halls," he said. Hamas killed nearly 300 Israelis in 58 suicide bombings after a Palestinian uprising began in 2000. It last carried out a suicide bombing in Israel in 2004. In its statement Hamas said it continued to be a "movement of resistance, seekers of martyrdom" and that its "principles will never be changed." "Zawahri's recent statements were wrong ... Resistance is our strategy. How and when? This depends on the reality at the time and our corresponding view of things," Hamas said. "So be assured doctor Ayman, and all those who love Palestine like yourself, that Hamas is still the group you knew when it was founded and it will never abandon its path." Hamas said its decision to run in the January 2006 Palestinian election that brought it to power and last month's unity deal with Fatah "came only to preserve the higher interests of the Palestinian people." Hamas leaders have offered a long-term truce with Israel in return for a viable Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The group's 1988 founding chapter calls for the destruction of the Jewish state. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
IN EVERY GENERATION
Posted by Rachel Kapen, March 13, 2007. |
|
On the nights of the 2nd and 3rd of April Jews in the United States and the world over will sit down to the Seder table -- in Israel only the first Seder is celebrated -- in order to celebrate the coming out of slavery in the Land of Egypt into freedom and eventual nationhood in the Land of Israel. However, in spite of the fact that the Seder is rich in scintillating readings and replete with the most beautiful and spirited hymns, the most famous among them: Dahy Dahyeyenu-it would have been enough- to me, the most meaningful utterings we emit at this most meaningful night in our Jewish calendar is when we sing in unison: "In every generation they come upon us to annihilate us but the holy one blessed be he delivers us from them" and later on we say in unison: that "In every generation a person should see himself as if he himself came out of Egypt," and indeed the Egypt we are referring to is not merely the actual one which happened so many years ago but all the other ones which followed. All the other catastrophes which befell the Jewish People throughout the generations including the one in Persia which we celebrated recently in Purim and culminating with the most horrible and unimaginable of all, the Shoah, the Holocaust, a watershed event in Jewish and world history still close enough to our times that there are still people able to testify to it, as well as the numerous wars of compulsion the State of Israel had to fight since its inception in 1948 in order to stay alive. Former Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir of blessed memory once said that the Jews do not have the luxury of being pessimistic. So on that rather optimistic note let us hope and pray that when we sit down this year to the Seder table the ever-growing list of catastrophes, of the "Egypts" which befell us and from which we survived to tell the story, will finally stop growing. We had enough, dahyeynu. And as a matter of fact, now that the entire Western civilization is threatened and victimized by the hatred of radical Islam, we call all good people of the world to join us in that prayer no matter how you call your God. Contact Rachel Kapen at skapen285466MI@comcast.net |
|
2ND-TEMPLE JEWISH TOWN UNCOVERED IN JERUSALEM
Posted by Hillel Fendel, March 13, 2007. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) In the course of preparing tracks for the new light-rail system in Jerusalem, remains of an ancient Jewish community just north of the Holy Temple have been uncovered. Rescue digs, required by law before any major construction work in Jerusalem and environs, have found a major set of remains of a Jewish town from post-Second Temple times. A long strip of land, 400 dunams (100 acres) in size, has been uncovered in which can be seen roads, alleys, houses, public buildings, a mikveh (ritual bath), and more. The community was located east of the old Roman highway leading from Jerusalem to Shechem (Nablus) -- roughly along the same route as today's Shechem Way, or Highway 60. Evidence shows that the community -- the largest from that period yet uncovered in the Jerusalem vicinity -- was inhabited by a well-to-do and religiously observant populace. In addition to the mikveh, many stone utensils were found -- popularly used because they could not become ritually defiled, according to Jewish Law. Many coins were also found, including a rare gold one (pictured above) depicting Trainus Caesar (98-117 CE). Trainus began his reign 30 years after the Second Temple was destroyed. Antiquities Authority dig manager Rachel Bar-Natan said that this was only the second coin of its type found in Israel, and the first one within the Green Line. Nearly 1,000 4th-to-6th graders have visited the site on school trips. The site was first discovered during infrastructure work for the light-rail system being built in Jerusalem by the Moriah Company. In a related item, the National Infrastructures Planning and Construction Committee of the Interior Ministry has made its choice from among five alternatives for the establishment of Jerusalem's fifth water supply line. The project, which will be one of Israel's largest over the coming decade, will involve the placing of an 8-foot wide pipe deep underground, running from south of Rehovot to the western-Jerusalem reservoir in Beit Zayit. The 2-billion shekels project is being planned to meet the water needs of Jerusalem, Ramallah and the Jerusalem Corridor for the years 2015-2065. Hillel Fendel is Senior News Editor for Israel National News.
This is archived at
|
|
DANGEROUS STUPIDITY OF ISRAELI LEADERS
Posted by Will Blesch, March 13, 2007. |
|
I've been speaking with my friend Aaron in Haifa, and there are some important things that leaders in Israel need to consider. In Israel, if you are over the age of 30 you are not required (And they won't take you if you volunteer) to serve in the army. You are also not allowed to buy and own a gun. This is cause for concern if the Israeli army were ever called upon and reserves were strained on different fronts. It would behoove potential olim therefore to take weapons training classes here in the States, or whatever home country you come from, self defense and/or martial arts courses, anti-terrorist courses and any military tactics courses that you may be able to find and attend. I personally plan on doing so. The reason for this, is that if the IDF WERE strained at any point to the point of breaking, there would be need of every man and woman old enough to carry weapons and fight. You can be sure the Arab enemy does the same thing...only their aim is to kill the Jew. The potential for a giant war is on the horizon, with Iran, Syria the terrorist armies of Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Fatah etc. in Gaza right in Israel's back yard...the list goes on. The leaders in Israel are being very stupid in their strategy. Where is the pioneering spirit that fueled the Haganah? There are thousands and thousands of new immigrants who will not have the benefit of Israeli army training because they are "too old." (I would like to remind folks that too old for the U.S. Army to ENLIST is over 35 years of age.) Are these Olim who happen to be over the age of 30 supposed to just rely on the strength of the Israeli army as it stands today? What of protection of the cities should the army be forced to fight on multiple fronts? Shouldn't there be some immigrant units trained and ready to fight if need be...that encompasses men and women up to the age of 50? And even those over the age of 50 could still serve as guards. Does the IDF have any sort of "back-up" plan should the IDF be devastated? Israel needs to wake up, and Olim need to be prepared. It's the Israeli government's responsibility to make sure the people are safe. But we've all seen the poor job Kadima has been doing. Olmert could not be trusted to keep a peanut butter sandwhich safe with his jelly spined willpower when it comes to dealing with Arabs. Personally, I am not leaving MY safety up to Olmert and his ilk...and indeed it's not just his ilk. It's most Israeli leadership these days. It seems to me the spirit of the original pioneers in Israel has been squashed through long years of struggle, and through fear of international opinion. When I make Aliyah I plan on being prepared for any eventuality...despite the stupidity and folly of Israel's bad shepherds. If you are planning on Aliyah, I would urge you to do the same. If you are an Israeli Leader, I urge you to help change the mentality of defeat that permeates the government. Contact Will Blesch at dawntreader3@yahoo.com or go to his website: http://willblesch.blogspot.com |
|
FIGHTING BACK: NEW BOOK ABOUT ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN CONFLICT
Posted by Alan B. Katz, March 13, 2007. |
|
Twenty-five years ago, a NY Times OpEd viciously criticized Israel for attacking the PLO in southern Lebanon. The piece argued that Israel had no right to defend herself across and international border and accused her of war crimes. It was only one of the media pieces that insisted that Israel should do nothing as its northern border was under murderous attack, but It was the straw that "broke the camel's back." One man would no longer sit back silently as Israel was castigated for merely protecting her citizens. Fighting Back -- Letters from the Diaspora by NY attorney Alan B. Katz, tells the story of how the international media have demonized Israel and lionized the Palestinians, who are treated as innocent victimes. The book was written to humanize the Israelis, something sorely lacking in today's literature and discourse. Behind the photographs of the Palestinians, who support terror, there is a real story about how the Israeli people have lived so courageously with a gun at their heads for all these years and how they have had to deal with terrorism. The Israelis are not the faceless brutalizers portrayed in the media, but caring, humane and, also, suffering people. With Israel losing the public relations war, it is necessary to correct the record and bring truth to the "spin" against a people who only wish to be left alone in peace. Fighting Back pulls no punches. All media -- TV, newspapers and radio -- are all called to task for their anti-Israel bias, and the true and important facts are brought to their attention. The New York Times, BBC, Reuters and many others are held to account for their prejudiced reporting. (Particularly interesting are events which never happened and which the media published as "news.") This is a book that shows the sacrifices and pain of the Israelis, the hypocrisy of the media and the true character of the Palestinians. Fighting Back's political commentary is also right on target. In a prescient commentary, "What you Wish For," Mr. Katz predicted the election of Hamas to the Palestinian Authority -- and the disaster that awaited the Bush Doctrine of electoral democracy in the MIddle East -- nine months before the elections were held. Consisting primarily of "Letters to the Editor," this unique format makes it extremely reader friendly. Having just been published, it is remarkably timely. It is available in both hard- and soft-cover, and is available on-line at barnesandnoble.com, borders. com, amazon.com and authorhouse.com as well as Mr. Katz's website: www.fightingbackletters.com. Alan Katz can be contacted by email at tripwire08@cs.com. |
|
ISLAMOSOCIALISM
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 13, 2007. |
|
this was written by Bret Stephens
and appeared today in the Wall Street Journal
|
|
"It is a profound truth," declared the British Socialist Party in a 1911 manifesto, "that Socialism is the natural enemy of religion." Not the least of the oddities in the subsequent history of progressive politics is that today it has become the principal vehicle in the West for Islamist goals and policies. Caroline Lucas, a member of the Green Party faction in the European Parliament, is a longtime activist in anti-nuclear, animal-rights and environmentalist causes, and not someone likely to describe herself as an anti-feminist. Yet in June 2004, she joined British MPs Fiona Mactaggart of Labor and Sarah Teather of the Liberal Democrats for a press conference in the House of Commons organized by the Assembly for the Protection of Hijab. The Assembly, better known as Pro-Hijab, is a pan-European organization formed "to campaign nationally and internationally for the protection of every Muslim woman's right to wear the Hijab in accordance with her beliefs and for the protection of every woman's right to dress as modestly and as comfortably as she pleases." Once upon a time, feminists and socialists alike would have translated that as "subservience to the patriarchy." Now they seem to have rediscovered their roots as civil libertarians, at least when it's politically expedient. Consider the issue of the Armenian genocide. In 1998, the French-speaking wing of Belgium's Socialist Party (PS) co-sponsored legislation to criminalize denial of the Ottoman Empire's murder of an estimated 1.5 million Armenians, much as Holocaust denial is also against the law. Yet for the past several years, the same PS has been blocking the process of criminalization it helped initiate, presumably in the service of free speech. "Additional legal and historical research," says Belgian Deputy Prime Minister Laurette Onkelinx, remains to be done in ascertaining exactly what happened in Anatolia in 1915. Progressives have also been remarkably mindful of civil liberties in matters of immigration. When the German state of Baden-Wittemberg last year required applicants for citizenship to answer a series of questions regarding their personal views, the leader of the German Green Party, Renate K'nast, denounced it as "immoral." "A country governed by law," she argued, "cannot ask questions about moral values." Among the questions: "Where do you stand on the statement that a wife should obey her husband and that he can hit her if she fails to do so?" Curiously, however, Europe's progressives have been somewhat less tolerant on other issues concerning moral values and personal belief. Take "Islamophobia," which progressives often consider akin to racism and have, in some instances, sought to ban by legal means. In Britain last year, Tony Blair's government enacted the Racial and Religious Hatred Act, which criminalized "threatening" comments against religious persons or beliefs. Comedian Rowan Atkinson and author Salman Rushdie, among others, warned that the law undermined basic rights of speech. But for London Mayor Ken Livingstone it was not enough: He defined "Islamophobia" as "discrimination, intolerance or hostility towards Islam and Muslims," and regretted that criminal acts were not more broadly defined by the legislation. Since coming to office nearly seven years ago, Mr. Livingstone has become a symbol of the marriage of the European left and the Islamist right. It's a marriage of mutual convenience and, at least on one side, actual belief. In the Netherlands, a recent study by the University of Amsterdam's Institute for Migration and Ethnic Studies found that 80% of immigrants -- the overwhelming majority of whom are Muslims -- voted for the Labor party in recent elections, while the two main center-right parties received a combined 4% of the immigrant vote. In neighboring Belgium, the left-wing sociologist Jan Hertogen credits immigrants for "[saving] democracy" by voting as a bloc against the secessionist and anti-immigrant Vlaams Belang party. For Muslim voters in Europe, the attractions of the Socialists are several. Socialists have traditionally taken a more accommodating approach to immigrants and asylum-seekers than their conservative rivals. They have championed the welfare state and the benefits it offers poor newcomers. They have promoted a multiculturalist ethos, which in practice has meant respecting Muslim traditions even when they conflict with Western values. In foreign policy, Socialists have often been anti-American and, by extension, hostile to Israel. That hostility has only increased as Muslim candidates have joined the Socialists' electoral slates and as the Muslim vote has become ever more crucial to the Socialists' electoral margin. More mysterious, however, at least as a matter of ideology, has been the dalliance of the progressive left with the (Islamic) political right. Self-styled progressives, after all, have spent the past four decades championing the very freedoms that Islam most opposes: sexual and reproductive freedoms, gay rights, freedom from religion, pornography and various forms of artistic transgression, pacifism and so on. For those who hold this form of politics dear, any long-term alliance with Islamic politics ultimately becomes an ideological, if not a political, suicide pact. One cannot, after all, champion the cause of universal liberation in alliance with a movement that at its core stands for submission. This is not, of course, the first time such a thing has happened in the history of the progressive movement, or in European history. On the contrary, it is the recurring theme. In the early 20th century, the apostles of Fabianism -- George Bernard Shaw among them -- looked to the Soviet Union for inspiration; in the 1960s the model was Mao; in the late 1970s, the great French philosopher Michel Foucault went to Iran to write a paean to Khomeini's revolution. In nearly every case, the progressives were, by later admission, deceived, but not before they had performed their service as "useful idiots" to a totalitarian cause. But the stakes today are different. At question for Europeans is not the prevailing view of a distant country. The question is the shaping of their own. Europe's liberal democrats were able, sometimes with outside help, to preserve their values in the face of an outside threat. Whether they can resist the temptations of Islamosocialism remains to be seen. URL for this article:
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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
WRONG CHANGE TO U.S. FOREIGN. AID; TERRORISTS IN TRAINING
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 13, 2007. |
|
SIGNIFICANCE OF MUSLIM PROTEST OVER TEMPLE MT. More than half a dozen Muslim governments usually called moderate came out against Israel's renovation of a Temple Mt. entrance they knew does no harm to the mosque. This is significant. It means that the Muslims all stick together against Israel, however false the alleged basis. It means that there can be no reconciliation (IMRA, 2/130). ISRAEL ALLOWING P.A. VIOLATIONS OF ROAD MAP The Road Map specified that the P.A. renounce and crush terrorism (and recognize Israel), before negotiating peace with Israel. Nevertheless, Israel is negotiating with the P.A. first. Not only that, the Muslims are making their possible acceptance of a state with temporary boundaries sound as if a concession by them. The implication is that then Israel would owe them a concession (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 2/13). They already plan for it. ALL THAT FOR ONE ISRAELI PRISONER First PM Olmert offers hundreds of terrorist convicts in exchange for one Israeli prisoner of P.A. terrorists. When asked, he said he also would reconsider his opposition to the Hamas-Fatah coalition government, if it released that prisoner. With such an exorbitant ransom for that one Israeli, what would Israel do in exchange for the next one that the Muslims are sure to kidnap? They are sure to kidnap another, since the ransom is so high. This fiasco by leftist Israelis demonstrates the wisdom of Judaism, which rejects excessive ransom. Judaism knows that actions have consequences (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 2/12). The secularists don't seem to be able to think ahead. I, too, would like the soldier released, but it will be a sad day when it happens. U.S. CHANGING FOREIGN AID FORMULA FOR MIDEAST The Bush administration wants to reduce aid to less critical US allies and increase it for those who help in the war against al-Qaeda. "Bahrain, Jordan, Morocco, Oman, Tunisia, Turkey and Yemen would get less. Egypt, Lebanon, and Israel would get more" (IMRA, 2/13). The theory of the change makes sense. Implementation seems to contradict the theory. How those who would enjoy the increase earned it was not explained. Egypt safeguards P.A. terrorists. The Lebanese Army cooperates with Hizbullah. As for Israel, the US has been withholding re-supply of it, and US diplomatic policy promotes the interests of terrorists and higher Israeli casualties. MKS: END DISCRIMINATION AGAINST YESHA JEWRY MKs from the National Union and Shas parties demanded that the Knesset disband its committee dedicated solely to "law enforcement" against the Jews of Hebron. This discrimination amounts to harassment of an embattled community. They want the government to instruct Ministers to adhere to decisions by the Knesset against extra prosecution of Jewish residents of Yesha, in general (IMRA, 2/14). Do they think they can get Israel's government to stop being the most antisemitic non-Muslim one? SAUDI POPULATION PROBLEM S. Arabia has millions of foreign workers and numerous unemployed Saudis. The government supposedly has been trying to shift jobs to citizens, but employers import even more workers. Many Saudi young men don't earn enough to get married until they are not such young men. The brides expect a higher standard of living than most young men can provide. They have to settle for what living their parents can continue to lavish upon them. The number of unmarried Saudi women has mounted until it has become a social problem (IMRA, 2/14). Perhaps instead of polygamy, they should try polyandry. TEMPLE MT. CONSTRUCTION TO BE SEEN ON INTERNET Israel is setting up video cameras, to enable the construction progress to be viewed online (IMRA, 2/14). Israel is doing everything it can to be fair and transparent about this. But Muslim leaders are doing what they can to be unfair and obscure about this. Muslim masses often believe their leaders, who regularly lie to them in order to manipulate them, rather than the Israeli leaders, who are trying to reconcile with them. TERRORISTS IN TRAINING Hundreds of Hamas men are training in Iran, while hundreds of Fatah men are training in Egypt. Israel anticipates the return of thousands of trained troops to Gaza (IMRA, 2/23). Most Will Fight Israelis If Israel retained control over the border, this would not be possible. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@verizon.net. |
|
EVANGELICAL CHRISTIANS PLEAD FOR ISRAEL
Posted by Michael Travis, March 13, 2007. |
|
This comes from BBC News, Washington and was written by Richard Allen Greene.
A week into one of the most severe crises the Middle East has seen in years, Israel is getting an influx of support from an unusual source. More than 3,400 evangelical Christians have arrived in Washington to lobby lawmakers as part of the first annual summit of Christians United for Israel. Delegates have come from all 50 states and have 280 meetings on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, Pastor John Hagee said. Pastor Hagee, the main organiser, said the event was the first of its kind. "For the first time in the history of Christianity in America, Christians will go to the Hill to support Israel as Christians," he said. The event was planned months ago, and is not a direct response to the ongoing violence in the region. John Hagee says 40 million Americans back his views They see God's word being played out on their television sets
But the military conflict "certainly makes our meeting more significant," Pastor Hagee said. The thousands of Christians in Washington -- who came and are staying at their own expense -- will be urging the US government "not to restrain Israel in any way in the pursuit of Hamas and Hezbollah", he said. "We want our Congress to make sure that not one dime of American money goes to support Hamas and Hezbollah or the enemies of Israel." Gift from God John Hagee is the pastor of the 18,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas, and a long-time fervent supporter of Israel. In common with many American evangelicals, he believes that God gave the land to the Jewish people and that Christians have a Biblical duty to support it and the Jews. His latest book Jerusalem Countdown: A Warning to the World interprets the Bible to predict that Russian and Arab armies will invade Israel and be destroyed by God. This will set up a confrontation over Israel between China and the West, led by the anti-Christ, who will be the head of the European Union, Pastor Hagee writes. That final battle between East and West -- at Armageddon, as the actual Israeli location of Meggido is known in English -- will precipitate the second coming of Christ, he concludes. It is not clear how many evangelicals believe literally in those type of prophecies. Research by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life last year found that evangelical Christians were more likely to support Israel than any other religious group in America besides Jews. And there are far more evangelicals in America than Jews -- estimates suggest that they represent about a quarter of the US population. (Jews make up about 2%.) Two in three evangelicals believe that the establishment of the state of Israel fulfils Biblical prophecy, the survey found. And what they see in the news only reinforces their faith, according to Timothy Shah, a scholar at the Pew Forum. "When they see what's going on in the Middle East, a whole range of enemies arrayed against God's people, they see God's word being played out on their television sets," he said. "They see Israel triumphing over its enemies as proof that God's promises remain." 'Huge influence' Evangelical Christian support for Israel is "not a new phenomenon", Mr Shah said, pointing out that there were Christian Zionists lobbying for a homeland for the Jews in Ottoman Palestine in the 19th Century. These groups have much more influence that Aipac or the so-called Israel lobby
Delegates celebrate a musical performance at their summit. (Photo courtesy Christians United For Israel) Delegates believe it is vital to campaign on behalf of Israel What has changed is the movement's level of political involvement, said Nancy Roman, the director of the Council on Foreign Relations' Washington programme. "Part of what is happening is that the evangelical community in the US is becoming more engaged in the political process," she said. "Whereas the church used to counsel people not to engage in politics, many churches are now counselling the opposite. "It's important and it will have a huge influence on foreign policy over time," she added. Backing irredentists Michelle Goldberg is deeply concerned about that influence. She is the author of Kingdom Coming: The Rise of Christian Nationalism, which argues that a significant strain of conservative Christianity is working to undermine fundamental American rights and freedoms. She said the movement was just as dangerous in foreign policy. "Christian Zionism is responsible for American support for some of the most irredentist Israeli positions," she said, such as support for settlement-building. She said evangelical Christians had substantial influence on US Middle East policy -- more so than some better-known names such as Aipac, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee. "The influence of Hagee is to make the American public support the government's completely one-sided, hawkishly pro-Israel stance. These groups have much more influence than Aipac or the so-called Israel lobby." Pastor Hagee himself said his group potentially had more clout than Jewish pro-Israel groups. "When a congressman sees someone from Aipac coming through the door, he knows he represents six million people. We represent 40 million people." One of those people is Rosa Highwater of Biloxi, Mississippi, who heard about the Washington summit through a local pastor. She had no money to attend, she said, but added: "You have to believe and trust in the Lord when he tells you he's going to do something." And in the end, friends paid for her journey to Washington and put her up in nearby Virginia. She said she was not sure which congressman she would be meeting on Wednesday, but she knew her mission was important. "Israel is God's first love," she said. "The Lord told me to come and be an intercessor. I said, 'I got to go. I got to do this.'" Jordan quietly gaining Temple Mount control
JERUSALEM -- Jordan has been quietly purchasing real estate surrounding the Temple Mount in Jerusalem in hopes of gaining more control over the area accessing the holy site, according to Palestinian and Israeli officials. The officials confirmed to WND the Jordanian Kingdom has been using shell companies during the past year to purchase several apartments and shops located at key peripheral sections of the Temple Mount. Temple Mount in Jerusalem The officials said Jordan also set up a commission to use the companies to petition mostly Arab landowners adjacent to eastern sections of the Temple Mount to sell their properties. They said profits from sales at any purchased shops would be reinvested to buy more real estate near the Mount and in eastern Jerusalem neighborhoods. The shell companies at times have presented themselves as acting on behalf of the Waqf, the Muslim custodians of the Temple Mount, WND has learned. Sheik Azzam Khateeb, who was installed last month as the new manager of the Waqf, is known to be close to the Jordanian monarchy. The previous Waqf manager, Sheik Adnon Husseini, was loyal to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah party and had relations with Israel and some Jewish groups. "Khateeb answers directly to Jordan," a Fatah official told WND. The Israeli and Palestinian officials said Jordan recently placed a bid to purchase Jerusalem's Intercontinental Hotel, which is situated on an important road that leads to an ancient cemetery on the Mount of Olives, adjacent to the Temple Mount. Informed sources tell WND the hotel is owned by groups representing the Israeli government and is leased every 10 years to a new company. The last lease was signed in 1997 and expires later this year. It was not immediately clear whether Jordan's bid was accepted. The Mount of Olives is site of many biblical events and is considered important to Judaism and Christianity. Real estate ownership in Jerusalem's Old City is widely considered a sensitive matter. Previous Israeli-Palestinian peace proposals tentatively divided parts of the city based on Jewish or Arab residence. Jordan previously controlled eastern Jerusalem and the Temple Mount from 1948 until Israel liberated the territory in the 1967 Six Day War. During the period of Jordanian control, Jews were barred from the Western Wall and Temple Mount, Judaism's holiest sites, and hundreds of synagogues were destroyed. Jordan constructed a road to the Intercontinental Hotel that stretched across the Mount of Olives, bulldozing hundreds of Jewish gravestones. Jordan the past few months has boosted its public profile on the Temple Mount. The appointment of Khateeb as the new Waqf manager for the Temple Mount was widely seen as a nod to Jordan. In January, Israel granted Jordan permission to replace the main podium in the Al Aqsa Mosque from which Islamic preachers deliver their sermons. The podium is considered one of the most important stands in the Muslim world. Muslims believe it marks the "exact spot" their prophet Muhammad went up to heaven to receive revelations from Allah. The new stand bears the emblem of the Jordanian Kingdom. It replaces a 1,000-year-old podium believed to have been shipped to Jerusalem by the Islamic conqueror Saladin. That stand was destroyed in 1969, when an Australian tourist set fire to the Al Aqsa Mosque. Last month WND first reported Prime Minister Ehud Olmert granted permission to Jordan to construct a large minaret at a site on the Temple Mount where Jewish groups here had petitioned to build a synagogue. A minaret is a tower usually attached to a mosque from which Muslims are called to the five Islamic daily prayers. There are four minarets on the Temple Mount. The new minaret will be the largest one yet. It will be the first built on the Temple Mount in more than 600 years and is slated to tower over the walls of Jerusalem's Old City. It will reside next to the Al-Marwani Mosque, located at the site of Solomon's Stables. A top leader of the Waqf told WND Olmert's granting of permission to build the minaret in the synagogue's place "confirms 100 percent the Haram al-Sharif (Temple Mount) belongs to Muslims." "This proves Jewish conspiracies for a synagogue will never succeed and solidifies our presence here. It will make Muslims worldwide more secure that the Jews will never take over the Haram al-Sharif," the Waqf official said. "Gaza preparing for IDF incursion"
Bunkers built according to Hizbullah standards and pervasive land mines are some of the challenges the IDF will face if it decides to enter the Gaza Strip. The IDF Southern Command has completed drafting plans for a massive incursion, which senior officers predict could be given the green light -- depending on diplomatic developments, including the results of the talks that took place between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas on Sunday. Hamas's preparations, senior defense sources have told The Jerusalem Post, include an array of fortified, underground bunkers similar to those used by Hizbullah to launch attacks during the second Lebanon war last summer. The consensus within the defense establishment is that the terrorist organizations will try to emulate Hizbullah's success in launching Katyusha rockets and fire hundreds of Kassam rockets at communities in the western Negev in the event of an incursion. The IDF Home Front Command has been working with Gaza-belt communities to prepare for such a scenario and has drawn up plans that include the complete evacuation of some of the towns. A high-ranking officer also told the Post that Hamas has laid dozens and possibly hundreds of mines on routes that would be used to enter Gaza. These bombs, as well as advanced antitank missiles recently acquired by the terrorists, could prove deadly to IDF tanks and armored personnel carriers. Hamas has organized its men into a conventional military force and has established four regional brigades in the Strip -- in the north, south, center and Gaza City. Each brigade is divided into battalions, companies and platoons. Some of the commanders recently traveled to Syria and Iran for training. "Everything is organized," said the senior officer. "This is no longer about the IDF against a group of terrorists, but the IDF against an army."
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
'SHOP TILL YOU DROP' MECCA
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 12, 2007. |
|
An incredible transformation is taking place within Islam's holiest city Mecca. The modern Westernized Abraj Al Bait Shopping Center emerges, including upscale shoppes selling of all things lingerie, a Starbucks whose erstwhile CEO Howard Shultz is an active Zionist, a Cartier, a Tiffany, a Body Shop, a Cinnabon, and a host of formerly what Islamic zealots might have considered 'decadent' shoppes, many of which no doubt are owned by corporations wholly or partially controlled by Jews, overlooking the holiest of Islamic sites Kaaba, frequented by millions of Muslim pilgrims, chanting and raising their hands to heaven, perhaps at times day dreaming about expensive trinkets and skimpy night ware, only a relative stones throw away at the 'Abraj'. Maybe an enterprising Israeli or two might seduce the Mall manager, one day, to lease space for 'The Burka', a de rigueur shoppe for Muslim females, featuring among other finery a trendy array of sharia mandated outer ware, silk facial coverings with peek-a-boo eye slits, diamond-studded matching handbags with a special compartment reserved for paperback Korans, and of course offering gift certificates, especially for the thoughtful male to present to his 'honey' on special occasions such as Ramadan. Indeed, it is nice to see Wahhabi-spewing madrassa (a/k/a human bomb factory)-financing chic Saudi sheiks getting with the times, no doubt adhering to their sacred gospel 'The Riyal uber alas'. Perhaps it is no longer a sin for male pilgrims, weary from a day of chanting, to cross the street, munch on cinnabons, suck down Starbuck's lattes, and watch all the girls, some in burkas, some in more revealing garb, go by. Not quite Las Vegas, but who knows, in a couple of years, casino mogul Steve Wynn might be breaking pita with King Abdullah while talking megabucks, planning a joint venture to sprawl across downtown Mecca, featuring the 'The Strip', a line of immense ostentatious multi-billion petrodollar casino/hotels highlighted by shooting musical fountains, running along Islam Boulevard, perhaps even serving liquor, no doubt comped to high rolling Arabs as well as non-Muslims, amidst the ping pinging of slot machines. Talk about surreal! One moment a Muslim prostrates on a prayer rug, emotes Koranic verse, dreams of paradise; the next moment bellies up to a craps table and rolls a pair-of-dice. Only in Saudi Arabia! But lets not get too crazy, we're only at the shopping mall stage. All sarcasm aside, who might have thought Mecca would someday begin to look like an upscale Westernized suburb, with housing and hotel complexes abutting the aforementioned luxurious shopping center, especially with some buildings towering higher than the Grand Mosque? If indeed Saudi Arabia is beginning to enter century twenty-one commercially, apparently not exactly kicking and screaming, would it be presumptuous to envision, some day, an additional quantum leap of social progress, manifesting in a total make-over of an educational system now professing hatred of the infidel, especially the Jewish infidel, as well as extolling the virtues of jihadist martyrdom provided, of course, explosions do not occur in Riyadh, Jeddah, sundry other Saudi towns, and Allah forbid near the regime's heavyweight sprawling investment in upscale shopping. Furthermore, might the House of Saud, some day, reassess its strategy of financing worldwide Wahhabi infected madrassas, especially in Pakistan, perhaps the equivalent of doling out protection money extorted by jihadist gangsters, and strengthen its own security forces instead, maybe even with a bit of advice from the Israeli Mossad on how to protect citizens from exploding lunatics, or is that pushing the envelope a bit too far? Nothing is etched in stone in today's dysfunctional Middle East. Even Jew hating Saudi Arabia, befriended by the U.S. Bush Administration as petrodollar for protection pals i.e. Sauds maintain the primacy of dollars for OPEC oil, and America protects the Royal family's back, can exhibit a change of behavior when it comes to Israel. With Bush or his proxy perhaps acting as a surreal matchmaker, King Abdullah and Prime Minister Olmert could break pita, both more than a little concerned over Persian enemy number one Iran, as well as Jew despising terrorists hating capitalists wearing Armani suits or white robes, and formulate a mutually beneficial survival plan. Indeed, if Mecca can morph to a town where someday even a 'shop till you drop' California valley girl might feel at home, anything is possible! Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
STUDENTS PLAN STRIKE AGAINST GOVERNMENT CORRUPTION
Posted by Lee Caplan, March 12, 2007. |
|
This is from IsraelNN.com. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) An anonymous group of high school students is planning a nationwide strike in protest of government corruption. The group has posted notices online calling for a massive strike, and say they expect hundreds of thousands of their fellow students to join them. In their online announcement, the students explain that the president has been accused of rape, the Prime Minister is being investigated for multiple crimes, the Defense Minister is unqualified, the Minister for Sport has no sports background, the system of education is collapsing, and more. Only a nationwide student strike will shake up the system, they say. They say they plan to strike until the current government loses power, and fear that if the strike fails, in another few years there will be no state left to protest. Beilin: This is a Right Wing, Hareidi Government (IsraelNN.com) Member of Knesset Yossi Beilin (Meretz-Yahad) lashed out at the government on Sunday following the decision to provide funding to Hareidi-religious schools. "This is a right-wing, Hareidi government," he said, "which hurts education." Beilin accused the government of giving in to religious demands. MK Yaakov Margi of Shas responded by saying that the decision to fund Hareidi schools should have been made long ago. He also responded directly to Beilin, saying, "the government is indeed giving in to Jews, and I'm sorry that bothers you." Revolving Door: Freed Terrorist Arrested (IsraelNN.com) Security and military officials have revealed that they arrested three Hamas terrorists last month, including one who was released from jail last December, for planning to kidnap Jews near the Eli junction in Samaria. The targets of the kidnapping were hitchhikers, who evaded the terrorists and called soldiers immediately. The cell intended to use the victims as barter for other jailed terrorists. Hamas Re-Assures Al Qaeda It Wants to Destroy Israel (IsraelNN.com) Hamas officials have reassured Al Qaeda that it wants to destroy Israel. Hamas spokesmen reacted to a statement, made on Sunday by Ayman al-Zawahri, second-in-command in the Al Qaeda terrorist network, accusing Hamas of surrendering to American interests by agreeing to sit with the Fatah in a Palestinian Authority (PA) unity government. "We will not betray promises we made to G-d to continue the path of Jihad and resistance until the liberation of Palestine, all of Palestine," Hamas said in a statement. Al Zawahri charged that the agreement hammered out in Mecca for a unity government was "an American scheme to hit the Islamic jihadist resistance against the Crusader-Zionist campaign." He added that Hamas has "ditched the movement of martyrdom operations ... for a government that plays with words in palace halls." Hamas terrorists have killed approximately 300 Israelis in 58 suicide bombings since the Oslo War broke out in 2000. Hamas replied to Al Qaeda that it continues to be a "movement of resistance, seekers of martyrdom." The statement added, "So be assured doctor Ayman, and all those who love Palestine like yourself, that Hamas is still the group you knew when it was founded and it will never abandon its path." Livni Says 'Trust Abbas' Because of Link with Hamas (IsraelNN.com) Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, speaking from Washington, told Army Radio Monday morning that Israel can trust Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas more than ever because Hamas now is cooperating with him. She made the comment in reference to Abba's promise to Prime Minister Ehud Olmert Sunday that he will help win the release of kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, whom Hamas terrorists abducted in a cross-border raid last June. Two soldiers were killed in the attack, and there has been no sign of the fate or condition of Shalit. Since his abduction, several terrorists as well as Knesset Arab MKs have said he is healthy, but no one has said he has seen the soldier. Vote to Ban Islamic Movement Stopped (IsraelNN.com) More than two-thirds of the Knesset House Committee walked out of a meeting before a bill to ban the Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement could be put to a vote. At least one-third of the twenty-five member committee must be present in order for a vote to be valid. Although committee chairwoman MK Ruchama Avraham had been assured of a majority, coalition chairman Avigdor Itzhaki orchestrated the walk-out to prevent the vote. The bill was proposed by MK Yisrael Katz in the wake of the arrest of movement's leader, Raed Salah, for attacking policemen. Katz expressed fear that Salah could become "Israel's Nasrallah" if left unchecked. Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com |
|
PEACE NOW -- DISASTER LATER
Posted by Mrla, March 12, 2007. |
|
This was written by Dr. Aaron Lerner, director of of IMRA (Independent Media Review and Analysis). It appeared in Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNN.com). |
|
Israel paid the cost in Lebanon for the simplifying working assumption of ceteris paribus. A generation of withdrawal advocates have employed this qualification in grossly understating the dangerous nature of their policy recommendations. But all other things were hardly equal; the Arabs also made moves on the board. Yet, despite this rude awakening, the Olmert team appears to be no more the wiser in its approach towards the ever-worsening situation in the Gaza Strip. Yes. Security officials have warned at every available forum that the Palestinians are exploiting the security hiatus (a.k.a. "ceasefire") to transform the Gaza Strip into a possibly improved version of Hizbullah-controlled southern Lebanon. "Improved" because the sheer size of the Palestinian force being turned into a trained army is considerably larger than what Hizbullah could field in Lebanon. There may not be money to feed hungry mouths in Gaza, but there's no shortage of funds for soldiers, weapons and a massive unprecedented series of Palestinian military construction projects that promise to make Israeli operations much more costly than anything Israel has experienced until now in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank. But policy doesn't reflect this nightmarish reality. Instead of sending a clear message that this security threat is, in and of itself, a clear and present danger -- a causus belli -- the Olmert team seems to be saying that Israel is willing to not only continue with the security hiatus in the Gaza Strip, but also to extend it to the West Bank, if the Palestinians would be so kind as to limit their activities to preparing for war against the Jewish State. As if there is no significance to these ongoing developments. As if nothing is really changing in the basic equation. Ceteris paribus. Sheer madness. The message should not be that we want the Palestinians to stop using their weapons, but instead that they must put down their weapons. Put down their weapons today -- not at some indefinite time in the future. The message should be that the Palestinians have exploited the security hiatus to create a situation on the ground that will require Israel to employ military tactics that, though perfectly legal, won't look good on CNN. Yes, it was foolhardy to think that retreating from Gaza would advance peace. But it is the Palestinians and their supporters who are to blame, nonetheless, for exploiting the retreat and the security hiatus that followed. And after a massive brutal Israeli operation to chop down the monster that grew in "liberated" Gaza? Some things are already clear: an effective Israeli security envelope must be restored, as must conditions for freedom of Israeli security action -- just as there is in the West Bank. This doesn't preclude either economic development or local autonomy. But since freedom can't include the freedom to attack Israel, the Palestinians, by their behavior, have taken sovereignty off the agenda for the foreseeable future. Now, this may not be a message that some of those at Foggy Bottom may want to hear. But it's the truth. And the sooner we face up to reality, share it with the world and deal with it, the better off all of us will be. Contact Mrla at mrla26@aol.com |
|
THE TEN PRINCIPLES OF THE BAAL SHEM TOV
Posted by Avodah, March 12, 2007. |
|
This comes from http://www.baalshemtov.com/ten-principals.htm. Translated by Yaacov Dovid Shulman. |
|
The following is a summary of the principles that the Baal Shem Tov taught his holy students. This precious text was found in the possession of a grandson of the Baal Shem Tov in Hamburg (copied from the holy handwriting of the Admor Moharash). 1. The entire Torah and the entire world contain nothing but the light of the Infinite One (blessed be He) concealed within them. All the verses that speak of this, such as "there is no other than He" and "I fill the heavens and the earth," are to be taken literally. There is no act, word or thought in which the essence of divinity is not constricted and hiding. And so when you look and see with your mind's eye, you will see the inner, life-force aspect of everything, not just its outer, superficial layer. You will see nothing but the divine power inside all things that is giving them life, being and existence at every moment. And when you listen carefully to the inner voice within any physical sound that you hear, you will hear only the voice of God as, at that moment, it is literally giving life and existence to the sound that you are hearing. 2. The "exile of God's Presence" refers to the life-force and divine power that gives a person life and existence even at the moment that he is transgressing God's will. 3. The evil inclination and lust are agents of God. They carry out God's will to mislead a person in order that he will overcome them. From them, you can learn to be as mighty as they are. Just as they never slacken in their work but are trying to destroy you day and night (because a person always desires what his eyes see and what his ears hear), just as they are happy and delighted to carry out God's will, it should be as clear to you that God wants you to overcome them until you will conquer yourself and all your desires will be under your control--until you transform them to good. This idea is alluded to in the verse, "we will take from it [from the flock] to serve God" (Shmot 10:26), meaning that we will take a lesson from the evil inclination to act just as it acts to fulfill God's will. And a word to the wise is sufficient. 4. Having no [divine] source, evil does not come down from heaven. Nevertheless, evil that exists has an inner power giving it life. And this [inner power] is total goodness. So if you look at the inner aspect of evil, you will only see the good in it. 5. A person has to cling to the words that he speaks. Because each word contains a soul and divinity, when you cling to them, you are connected to divinity. 6. Everything that happens in the world, no matter how insignificant, comes from God. And so do not concern yourself with whether or not what has occurred is in accordance with your will. 7. Neither thinking about the day of one's death nor the fear of punishment in hell will arouse a person's heart to serve God. But yearning to cling to the source of life and goodness will do so. And neither fasting nor afflicting oneself will be of any help. But forgetting oneself out of the depth of one's yearning will do so. 8. Every person in his own right is [essentially] a complete spiritual Torah. If he goes in God's path, that [Torah] is absorbed into his being, according to his level. 9. When a person prays for something that he needs, he should pray for the divine life-force hiding within that thing and giving it life, which is now suffering because of whatever it is lacking. And so one should ask God to have pity on His life force that is hidden in that thing. 10. God's Providence extends to all created beings, even to inanimate objects and plants. There is nothing that is not viewed from above in every detail. Everything was made with a particular intent. And a word to the wise is sufficient. Kovetz Eliyahu, p. 14 Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
FIGHT, DON'T NEGOTIATE WITH, PALESTINIANS
Posted by Ayn Rand Institute, March 12, 2007. |
|
Irvine, CA--Israeli and Palestinian leaders recently sat down to discuss a peace deal--but the U.S.-brokered talks were fruitless. Many voices, such as the New York Times, acknowledge that "the biggest single obstacle to peace" is the refusal of Hamas, a member of the Palestinian "unity government," to recognize Israel and renounce violence. But, we are told, if Israel would only make more generous concessions to the Palestinians and bolster their "moderate" leaders, then negotiations can yield peace. "But we must reject the underlying premise of such talks," said Elan Journo, junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. "It is absurd to debate which combination of concessions Israel should offer and to which faction of Palestinians--because the very notion of diplomatically engaging the Palestinians is illegitimate. If there's to be peace, the Israelis must end the threat of Palestinian terrorism by military force. "Israel's goal of peace is impossible to achieve diplomatically, because a legitimate negotiation presupposes that both sides share the goal of peace. But the Palestinians--both the self-righteously militant Hamas and the supposedly moderate Fatah--seek to destroy Israel. There is no way to negotiate with enemies who want to kill you. To engage them in talks is to concede their right to kill you; after that, all that's left to debate is the size of the rewards the murderers will collect and in what installments. "The Palestinian war must end eventually--and either they will
triumph and wipe Israel from the map, or else Israel will protect the
lives of its citizens and defeat the Palestinians. Instead of
pressuring Israel to appease the Palestinians--and thus encouraging
their aggression--the United States should endorse and champion
Israel's moral right to defeat them. If Palestinians learn that their
war against Israel is futile, if their aggression is punished--they
will give up their cause. That is a necessary first step on the road
to peace."
Mr. Journo is a junior fellow at the Ayn Rand Institute. He
specializes in foreign policy and the Middle East. His writings have
appeared in such publications as the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco
Chronicle, Philadelphia Inquirer, Houston Chronicle, The Chicago Sun
Times, and the Globe and Mail of Canada.
|
|
"THE ISRAELI-HIZBULLAH WAR OF 2006: THE MEDIA AS A WEAPON IN ASYMMETRICAL CONFLICT"
Posted by Avodah, March 12, 2007. |
|
www.ksg.harvard.edu/presspol/research_publications/papers/research_papers/R29.pdf was written by veteran reporter, author and broadcaster Marvin Kalb -- it's a must-read for journalists, the military, politicians, spokesmen and news consumers.
Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
DRUMS OF WAR--CONFRONTING THE INEVITABLE
Posted by Michael Travis, March 12, 2007. |
|
As I have noted previously, this U.S. administration is determined to rid the Middle-East of Christians and Jews before the 2008 elections. Israel, who must endure a U.S. led arms embargo, is now facing an enemy that has been trained by the United States, and armed with the most sophisticated weapons in the U.S. arsenal. Egypt, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, and the American armed PLO-HAMAS coalition present a formidable and deadly Islamic Force, prepared and chomping at the bit to finish off the Jewish State. For my Christian friends, I urge you to read John McTernan's book "As America Has Done To Israel " and read it from cover to cover. I also pray that you join the Battalion of Deborah in their fight to preserve the G_d's Covenant and the Jewish people. For my Jewish brothers and sisters I would ask that you find the time [soon] to study the Nazi Holocaust, because your silence in the face of pure evil has paved the way for an even worse Shoah. Benjamin Netanyhu has said that "This is 1936". It is not.
This is 1941 |
|
DEBKAfile Exclusive: Bowing to Washington, Olmert agrees to go
directly and unconditionally to final-status talks with Palestinians
Prime minister Ehud Olmert conceded key Israeli policy points in his talks with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in Jerusalem Sunday, March 11, according to DEBKAfile's Middle East and Washington sources -- contrary to advance statements from his office that the meeting was only a formality. Last week, Bush administration officials notified Olmert's senor aides Yoram Turbovitch and Shalom Turjman in Washington that the wait for the Palestinians to comply with roadmap conditions to recognize Israel and renounce violence was at an end. Whether a Palestinian government was led by Hamas or shared with Fatah, they were told, Israel must now initiate final settlement talks with Abbas. Saudi and Jordanian leaders had won President George W. Bush over on this point as leverage for cooperation on the Iraq and Iranian issues.. At the Sunday cabinet meeting in Jerusalem, the prime minister therefore announced he was seriously considering accepting the 2002 Saudi peace plan. He already knew the Saudis had informed the White House that the plan would not be revised at the coming Arab summit in Riyadh on March 28. This means that Olmert has agreed to rescind the road map's conditions for peace talks in favor of the tough Saudi peace plan. It was left to Abbas to run down for Olmert's benefit the steps expected from Israel, now that the road map's provisions were out of the way: 1. The Israeli government must pledge unconditionally that the IDF will refrain from attacking the Gaza Strip. Abbas called this "a mutual ceasefire" although he offered no guarantee for the Palestinian termination of missile fire or other terrorist attacks emanating form the Gaza Strip. After the Olmert-Abbas talks, Israeli officials spread reports of an Israel military alert in the area around the Gaza Strip in an effort to lay a smokescreen to conceal the prime minister's concession. 2. Abbas said he would do his best to obtain the release of Hamas hostage Gilead Shalit, but offered no promises. 3. The "mutual ceasefire" is the first step to fast-track Israel-Palestinian negotiations on its extension to the West Bank. DEBKAfile reports that Israeli military and intelligence chiefs are trying to impress on the prime minister that the cessation of Israel's intense counter-terror operations on the West Bank will result in an eruption of a fresh wave of Palestinian suicide bombings inside Israel and the transfer of Palestinian missiles and rockets to launching positions opposite central Israel, including its main cities. 4. Security restrictions on Palestinian movements in the West Bank must be further relaxed. 5. In May or June of 2007, Israel will enter into direct negotiations with the Palestinians on a final -status framework. Since the road map was formulated, Abbas has lobbied hard to skip the document's prior condition for an end to Palestinian violence as the sine qua non for talks on a final settlement. Now the Palestinian leader has got is way. 6. Abbas voiced the hope that Israel's flexibility in negotiating with the Palestinians would be rewarded by the willingness of "moderate" Arab and Muslim nations, like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Malaysia and Indonesia, to establish diplomatic and open economic relations with the Jewish state. DEBKAfile's sources note that the Olmert-Abbas conversation did not discuss the role to be played by Hamas in the diplomatic process dictated the Israeli government, when it heads the Palestinian government. Also left up in the air was the framework in which the moderate Arab and Muslim governments would "normalize" their relations with Israel. This would call for amendments of the Saudi peace plan. However, Riyadh has informed Washington that no such amendments would be tabled at the coming Arab summit. "Bush turns to Baker and Bandar to save his ass" By Ted Belman On Feb 19/07 Washington Post published "Can a Saudi Dealmaker Rescue Bush?" For 22 years Prince Bandar bin Sultan wheeled and dealed his way through Washington as Saudi Arabia's ambassador. By his account -- provided expansively to favored journalists -- he had a hand in most of America's major initiatives in the Middle East over a generation. During George W. Bush's presidency, for example, he brokered U.S. rapprochement with Libya and previewed plans for the invasion of Iraq two months before the war. For a while after returning home in the summer of 2005, Bandar kept a low profile. Some speculated he was out of favor with the kingdom's ruler, Abdullah, despite his appointment as national security adviser. Now he's back: Since the beginning of the year the prince has suddenly begun wheeling and dealing his way around the Middle East. In the past month Bandar has held three meetings with the Iranian national security chief, Ali Larijani, most recently last Wednesday in Riyadh. He's met twice with Vladimir Putin, in Moscow and Riyadh, to talk about Middle East affairs; overseen talks between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Hamas leaders; and quietly shuttled to Washington to brief President Bush. He helped broker this month's Palestinian accord on a unity government as well as a Saudi-Iranian understanding to cool political conflict in Lebanon. And he's been talking with the most senior officials of the Iranian and U.S. governments about whether there's a way out of the standoff over Iran's nuclear weapons. Can Bandar bail the United States out of the multiple crises it has stumbled into in the Middle East? Maybe not, but Washington's old friend may be one of the best bets a desperate Bush administration has going at the moment. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has maneuvered herself into a corner by refusing to talk to Syria and Iran and boycotting the Hamas-led Palestinian government. Consequently there's little the United States can do diplomatically to defuse the conflicts in Lebanon and the Palestinian territories, not to mention Iraq. Rice tried calling on Egypt, abruptly dropping the administration's previous urging that its autocratic government "lead the way" in democratizing the Middle East. But Egypt has been unable to deliver: It tried and failed to pry Syria away from its alliance with Iran, and it tried and failed to win concessions from Hamas. Haaretz reports "Israel pushing to improve Saudi peace initiative ahead of Riyadh summit". This worries me. Livni has said the Saudi Plan is worth talking about but there can be no return. And if the Saudis remove the return then what? She said, "Admittedly, the initiative spoke of the 1967 lines, but I only wish we were in a situation in which the conflict was just border dispute," Not a good starting point. It is all going to be discussed at the Riyadh Summit. The Riyadh Summit, which was called by King Abdullah, is slated to take place on March 28 and 29. The agenda includes the Arab peace initiative, the Iranian threat and the communal tensions in Lebanon. Over the last few weeks, Abdullah has tried to mediate on all of these issues, with the goal of promoting regional stability. Thus Bush is standing aside so that Baker's ISG plan can go forward. Baker, Bandar, Bush and Saudi Arabia are one. Previously I raised the possibility that Bush was in on the Mecca Accords. Here's what the WaPo article informs, Bandar's spin and dazzle make it tempting to think he can pull off almost anything. It's also easy to forget that he works in the interests of Saudi Arabia, not the United States. The results can be disappointing. Bush got a reminder of that when Bandar brokered the "Mecca agreement" between Palestinian leaders Abbas and Khaled Meshal of Hamas. Bush administration policy has been to strengthen Abbas at Hamas's expense; the accord undercut that approach and all but ruined Rice's plan to begin developing a "political horizon" at a meeting with Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert today. Posted by Ted Belman @ 9:37 am | "Iran calls the Baghdad regional meeting Saturday a good first step"
Both Iran and Syria said Sunday US forces must withdraw from from Iraq because they are fueling the violence. The conference decided on a follow-up at foreign ministers' level next month in Istanbul. Over the weekend, DEBKAfile's military sources reveal American air contingents from the United States and Europe continued to land at US Persian Gulf air bases. Iran responded by placing its air defense units on a war footing and deploying Revolutionary Guards special forces units around its nuclear installations. Iraqi prime minister Nouri Maliki's appeal was addressed primarily to the latter two. Outgoing US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad again charged Syrian of allowing foreign jihadists and Sunni insurgents to cross into Iraq and weapons shipments from Iran reach Shiite militias. DEBKAfile adds: Quite apart from the upbeat symbolism, not much substance was expected from the encounter of more than 100 diplomats, many of them adversaries, beyond a follow-up at foreign ministers' level. David Satterfield, senior state department adviser on Iraq and ambassador Khalilzad led the US delegation. They faced Iran's deputy foreign minister Abbas Aragchi. DEBKA-Net-Weekly reported last week that the Americans would be coming to Baghdad with three goals scored against Iran in their covert war which continues unabated: 1. The defection of Iranian General Ali Reza Asgari, whose debriefing by US intelligence is underway. It is revealed here that the general flew out of Istanbul on Feb. 7 shortly after arriving from Damascus. He landed in Turkey under one identity and left with another. Involved in his secret flight were the CIA, Turkish military intelligence, the Israeli Mossad and one European intelligence service. For a promise of immunity and asylum for life for him and his family, the Iranian general, a former deputy defense minister, agreed to spill everything he knew about Iran's elite Revolutionary Guards Corps, the internal situation in the Islamic leadership, the clandestine Iranian networks in Iraq, the Persian Gulf and the Middle East, as well as Tehran-Damascus ties, Hizballah, the Palestinian Hamas and Jihad Islami and how far they are controlled from Tehran. The Americans procured enough material -- not just for an edge at the Baghdad meeting, but for an awareness of the weak links in Iran's armor and Tehran's probable modes of retaliation for Washington's coup. 2. With Saudi help, the United States has finally played off Iran against Syria, breaking up the Tehran-Damascus alliance in Lebanon and removing Hizballah from Syrian control. 3. Wednesday, March 7, the Pentagon announced the deployment of an extra 2,100 military police to Baghdad on top of the 24,000 consigned to the Iraqi capital earlier. The US defense department did not release for publication word of the US squadrons airlifted during the week from the States and Europe to US Air Force bases at Udeid, Qatar, and Naama, Bahrain. DEBKA-Net-Weekly's military sources report that Iran responded to these American military movements by three steps. Tuesday, March 6, Tehran announced a nationwide air defense drill. This was camouflage for the mobilization of the air defense brigades' reserve units and their deployment around Tehran and other main towns and national strategic installations, including nuclear and oil facilities. This step placed all of Iran's air defenses on full war footing. The Revolutionary Guards additionally encircled all nuclear facilities with the commando units they had formed as protection against possible raids by American or Israeli special forces. Finally, Tehran stepped up the volume of arms sent to pro-Iranian forces in Iraq. Iran has by and large responded passively thus far to the whipping inflicted by Washington. However, no one responsible there or in Jerusalem expects the Iranians to turn the other cheek for long. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
CIVILIZATION GOING SOFT
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 12, 2007. |
|
RISE OF THE RIGHT, IN EUROPE Right-wing parties in some European countries have broken out of the fringes of political acceptability from within 10% of the vote to a third. The Establishment fails to analyze why, just deplores it. Why the surge? The answer is that the Muslims, with help from the Left, are rising, too. The Left thinks of the Muslims as a new proletariat, as if the Muslims didn't have an agenda of their own, one hostile to everyone else. The Center has capitulated to political correctness (a creature of the Left) and does not oppose this massive change to Western civilization and this great influx of workers and welfare recipients who compete with the European working class. The voters have not turned against democracy. The Muslims exploit it, the Left welcomes the Muslims, and the Center fails to defend democracy from them. Hence the shift to right-wing parties, which at least do oppose the assault on Western civilization (Jewish Political Chronicle, 111/2006, p.25 from Emanuele Ottolenghi, National Rev., 10/19). A year or two ago, I saw the trend forming and the Center's rejection of anti-immigration measures and law-enforcement measures. CIVILIZATION GOING SOFT When civilizations become timid about defending themselves against their adversaries, they fall. Europe didn't defend itself from the Nazis much. Instead it picked on an easier target, the Jews. Europe and the State Dept. and even Israel are failing to confront Islam head on, and seem to be picking on the Jews. It won't work, just as it didn't work. One way the US avoids facing the evil is by defining it narrowly only as terrorism or Islamism rather than a whole culture (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/11). NEW AIRPORT FOR P.A. European concerns are proposing various projects for the P.A.; Japan is proposing to build an airport for the P.A. in Judea-Samaria. Not established was whether Israel or the P.A. would control it (IMRA, 2/12). The P.A. is sure to demand sole effective control. Sounds like another attempt to smuggle in heavy weaponry. Israel is losing the control it needs for self-defense (and for asserting claims to the Jewish patrimony. There is something disgusting about the European concentration on helping such an utterly evil, bellicose people. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com. |
|
PRESERVE AND PROTECT THE TEMPLE MOUNT IN JERUSALEM
Posted by Mike Evans, March 12, 2007. |
|
I just returned from Jerusalem meeting with the leaders of the Nation, and I am terribly upset about the destruction taking place on the Temple Mount. The Waqf (Islamic religious trust) continues to defy calls for the proper handling of artifacts unearthed in the various projects undertaken on the Temple Mount. Muslim religious authorities have for a decade participated in the destruction and elimination of precious Jewish and Christian artifacts on the site of the Temple Mount. Thousands of tons of earth, containing archaeological evidence dating back to the period of the Temple of Solomon, were discarded. Found among the discarded rubble were ancient seals from a priestly family, pottery fragments inscribed in ancient Hebrew, altar screens and broken columns from a fourth century Byzantine Church. The Muslim religious authority -- the Waqf -- has, since the year 2000, blocked all archaeological oversight of the Temple Mount. In light of the Waqf Authority's alarming destruction of the Temple Mount artifacts, the Rabbis in Jerusalem are asking for your help. Please Vote your Opinion today. Please keep this going around the world. I want to present 100,000 votes to President Bush, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and others. I will be returning to Israel in about two weeks, and will be meeting with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. I would like to present your signatures to him at the time of our meeting. Click here to vote.
Mike Evans heads the Jerusalem Prayer Team, an Internet-based initiative to encourage Christian prayer for the State of Israel. |
|
IDF OFFICIAL: 70 PERCENT OF MARCH RECRUITS REQUEST COMBAT SERVICE
Posted by Avodah, March 11, 2007. |
|
This comes from IMRA -- Independent Media Review and Analysis. Their website adress is www.imra.org.il |
|
Hanan Greenberg YNET Published: 03.10.07, 19:43 / Israel News
Almost 70 percent of the IDF recruits in March have requested to serve in combat units, an IDF official said. The Golani Brigade is the most sought after unit that is not an elite unit. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
FORGIVE US, BROTHER JONATHAN
Posted by Justice for Jonathan Pollard, March 11, 2007. |
|
A Poem About Jonathan Pollard by Sarah Gergi From the book " LaShira Nolda" (Saar, 2006) by Sarah Gergi
Translator's note: The original poem is written in a sophisticated Hebrew which includes double entendres and strong references to biblical passages and quotes which simply do not lend themselves to accurate translation in English. The following translation is the literal meaning of the poem |
|
Forgive us, dear brother
Forgive us, dear brother.
While your sorely afflicted body weakens and diminishes
How disgraced and ashamed are we!
Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard by email at justice4jp@gmail.com |
|
THE TEMPLE MOUNT IS IN OUR HANDS
Posted by Helen Freedman, March 11, 2007. |
|
It was May, 1967 when the Israeli army was victorious against the invading Arab armies, and Jerusalem was re-united. In addition, the Jews returned to Gush Etzion, Hebron, the lands of Judea and Samaria, Gaza, the Golan Heights and the Sinai. General Motti Gur proudly proclaimed what Jews had been waiting 1900 years to hear, that the Temple Mount was once again in Jewish hands. This was the location of the First and Second Temples, as well as the site where Abraham was sent to sacrifice Isaac. Despite this ancient history, Arabs are now claiming there is no Jewish connection to the Temple Mount. Americans For a Safe Israel/AFSI, along with the Zionist Organization of America/ZOA, will be in Jerusalem this May 13-21, 2007, to ascend the Temple Mount and reassert Jewish biblical, historical, and political entitlement to the Mount. We will be celebrating Yom Yerushalayim in Jerusalem, will spend Shabbat in Elon Moreh, overlooking Shechem, will visit Gush Etzion and Hebron, as well as the exiled Jews from Gush Katif, now living in the Negev. In addition, the AFSI/ZOA Chizuk mission will meet with many grass-roots leaders throughout the country, as well as Knesset members and important journalists. DON'T MISS OUT ON THIS OPPORTUNITY TO EXPERIENCE THE REAL ISRAEL. CALL BARRY FREEDMAN AT AFSI: 212-828-2424; 1-800-235-3658 TO MAKE YOUR RESERVATION IMMEDIATELY. A $250 DEPOSIT IS REQUIRED. DON'T DELAY. CALL NOW OR WRITE TO: afsi@rcn.com |
|
BRAVO, BRAVE MEN
Posted by Women in Green, March 11, 2007. |
|
This was written by Sarah Honig and was published March 9, 2007 in the Jerusalem Post |
|
It's nice to see one's police crow triumphantly. When our constabulary declares ostensible cause for jubilation, it appears safe to assume that it hasn't messed up -- an uncommonly cheerful circumstance, which in and of itself ought to render us reasonably upbeat, especially post-Zeiler Commission exposures of sleaze. Little wonder then that my confidence in the competence of our law-enforcers soared when a friend deposited in my hands a luxurious 21 cm. by 27 cm., 512-page combination "victory album" and analytical review, published by Israel's (cash-strapped) Finest to commemorate their role in expelling more than 9,000 Jews from the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria. It was enough to erase all sorts of niggling doubts triggered by images of our very own Keystone Kops first losing the country's most notorious serial rapist and then running every which way to recapture him, without being quite certain what they were supposed to do next or how to do it. The slick volume likewise toned down indignation simmering since last year, when anguished Hanania Amram was contemptuously ejected from the Petah Tikva precinct for reporting his young daughter missing. The fact that Inbal was found murdered the next morning couldn't excuse the impudence of disturbing the desk sergeant at an ungodly hour. Also subdued were tiresome insecurities over rampant breaches of that unwritten contract whereby the authorities are duty-bound to protect the life, liberty and possessions of ordinary taxpaying folks. The anarchy and reign of Beduin terror throughout what has come to be dubbed the "Wild South" were eclipsed by the chrome paper and numerous photos of committed cops battling tots and their moms and pulling them "sensitively" from their homes. Their anti-settler zeal foreshadowed the subsequent Amona club-swinging, skull-bashing horseback bravura, where our resolute Mounties thrust galloping hoofs into young faces and inflicted blows even on two MKs in the hallowed name of upholding legality. Perhaps Amona will inspire the next celebratory album. Why not? This one for instance reserves pride of place for police management of the pre-disengagement protest at Kfar Maimon. Yet there's no mention of Negev district commander Nisso Shaham's gutter expletives, uttered swaggeringly and unhesitatingly before TV cameras on that occasion. Clearly seeking to curry favor with the powers-that-be, Shaham ordered his subordinates to beat the congregated masses "with clubs, where it hurts, in the lower parts of the body," adding his wish-cum-opinion that "they should all burn." Equally absent is the reluctant rap on the knuckles Shaham's brothel-brand vulgarities (unfit for repetition here) earned him in the form of a departmental reprimand. In any other state and any other force this would have ended Shaham's career but, judging from all that ensued, his macho posturing, politically ingratiating invective and sordid lewd imagery did him no harm. But that's a trifling matter. Why make a fuss over a few foul phrases hurled at loyal compatriots? After all, there are good and bad obscenities. It's not the cussing which offends but who does it and against whom. YIFAT ALKOBI of Hebron, caught on tape calling an inimical Arab neighbor "tramp," was pilloried by the court of media-hysteria and summoned for police interrogation like public enemy No.1. But Shaham, who incited to very tangible violence against citizens he was sworn to protect, is omitted from the exhaustive, seemingly professional, objective and pseudo-academic text -- garnished galore with acronyms, psycho-babble, diagrams, tables and even, mind-bogglingly, a glossary of officially-imposed, disengagement-mint, PR-oriented Orwellian euphemisms (p. 248). Which leaves us with the bottom-line question regarding this costly production, distributed gratis to officers and other pillars of the establishment (at your exorbitant expense and mine, while the police whine about budgetary constraints): What's there to be proud of? Did uncouth Shaham and his fellow policemen in the end achieve the greater good so touted at the time? Are we better off for what they carried out? Are we so better off as to justify so self-congratulatory a publication? Not according to the real top brass -- the expulsion's ardent promoters and the nation's persistent brainwashers. What Ehud Olmert didn't bring himself to confess to his electorate, he did, alas, admit to the Chinese Xinhua news agency on the eve of his recent junket to Beijing: "A year ago I believed we can withdraw unilaterally, but our experience in Lebanon and Gaza isn't encouraging... We fully retreated to the international border, yet each day they fire Kassam rockets on Israel." Olmert's supercilious foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, put it more succinctly: "Disengagement was a mistake." Of course that doesn't preclude further compulsively recidivist gambling against our survival odds. Our leaders screwed up, muttered something resembling "oops, sorry," yet already again risk our continued existence with spin-off speculative ventures. One thing, however, is clear: They had no idea how their disengagement experiment would go. Their promises to the gullible populace were recklessly and unconscionably baseless. No hint of any of the purported rewards for uprooting thousands of Jews was realized. Gaza's terror, its morale buoyed, thrives, reinforced as never before and armed to the teeth with tacit Egyptian connivance. The international community makes no dispensations to Israel for its sacrifices. Peace seems more unattainable than ever. Pugnacious Gazans are at each other's throats, while thousands of dispossessed settlers remain neglected, hopeless, unemployed and in inadequate temporary shelters, subsisting on pitiful compensation that was supposed to finance permanent housing and new farmsteads -- none of which are remotely in the offing. Thousands of lives are in shambles, but our guardians of law and order shamelessly pat themselves on the back for a job well done. Bravo to the brave men in blue. 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 MASSACRE OF MUSLM WOMEN: A REALITY THAT THEY'D RATHER HIDE
Posted by Sergio Tezza (Hadar), March 11, 2007. |
|
THEIR FAMILY MEMBERS MURDER THEM BY THE TENS OF THOUSANDS EVERY YEAR IN ALL THE MUSLIM WORLD, FROM MAURITANIA TO EGYPT, FROM SUDAN TO NIGERIA, FROM JORDAN TO THE GULF EMIRATES, FROM IRAN TO PAKISTAN AND AFGHANISTAN. EVEN IN ISRAEL, BY THE DOZEN EVERY YEAR. 'This time, we said, enough'
|
|
"This time, we said 'enough.' Every year they murder not one, but two of us. We've had enough." That is what a female member of the Abu-Ghanem family from Ramle said this week to Haaretz. Along with another 20 female relatives, she decided to rebel against tradition. One by one, they reported to police investigators and told what they know about the murder of Hamda Abu-Ghanem, a member of their family, about a month ago. Like the eight women from the family who preceded her during the past six years, Hamda Abu-Ghanem was murdered because of what is called "damaging the family honor." Some of them were murdered after talking on the phone, others because they were seen laughing at a man, or because they turned down a match. These cases were not solved until the murder of Reem Abu-Ghanem about a year ago. An eyewitness then led the police to the murderers, among them the victim's brother, a doctor. The murder of Hamda Abu-Ghanem was solved thanks to the testimony of the women; last week an indictment was served against Hamda's brother, Kamal Rashad Abu-Ghanem. The family member, who agreed to be interviewed only on condition that no details concerning her identification would be revealed, says that many of the women in the family are threatened, including her. "Even before I spoke to the police, I knew that I was in danger," she said. "Recently they came and told me that I was next. They have a list of women, and everyone knows whether or not she's on it. It makes no difference what you do; they'll find a reason to say that you behaved badly. If someone has a cell phone, they'll kill her. If someone talks to someone, they'll kill her. Whatever I do can be dangerous for me. That's how it is in our family. There are some among us who simply hate women." She is very familiar with the process: "It's enough for some man to say something about some woman, and that's it. There is a man who 'heats up' everyone, fills the others' heads [with ideas] against that woman, and then they begin the planning -- what they'll do to her. Sometimes they plan for a year, and the entire time she knows that they're plotting against her, until in the end they murder her. "When a woman knows that they're planning to murder her, she sometimes turns to our leaders and dignitaries, so they'll do something to calm things down. But they don't always help. The problem is that the planners are not afraid of anyone. After they decide how it will happen, they decide who'll do it. There's a list of women, and every woman knows if she's on the list. Just as they told me, they told the others, 'Just wait, your turn will come.' That's why many women leave the neighborhood. Some go to shelters, but there are also many who are afraid to turn to the establishment to ask for help, and they remain in the neighborhood." She says that she is most afraid for the young girls in the family, and just because of that, she added, "I want the little girls to know what I did. I want them to get out of there because they will also be in danger some day." She tells of male relatives her age who played with her as children, but who when they grew up they also began to find fault with the behavior of the women in the family, including her: "Boys grow up here and begin to hate women. They learn from their older brothers. The father and mother have no power, the ones who control our family today are the brothers, and they don't listen to anyone." Forced testimony Hamda Abu-Ghanem, who was 19 years old when she died, knew that her life was in danger. From the age of 16 she lived in a shelter for young women that is run by the welfare department of the Ramle Municipality, after her brother -- who is now accused of her murder -- threatened to harm her. But Hamda was tired of life in the institution, and when she turned 18 she returned to the city's Juarish neighborhood. In July she was attacked by her brother, Kamal Rashad, while she was talking on the phone with her male cousin. He kicked her in the head and legs, shouting: "Do you want me to say that they should kill you?" Hamda filed a complaint with the police and he was arrested that same day. His arrest was extended until the end of legal proceedings, but then he was transferred from detention to house arrest; in October the court allowed him to return home. David Shoham, the Ramle Magistrate's Court judge, released him after inviting Hamda to give testimony. According to the police: "Under pressure of the family, she was forced to come to the court and to say that her relations with her brother were good. The judge didn't doubt her testimony and didn't ask himself what lay behind it, and simply let her brother go on his way." Other family members who testified in favor of the brother said that Hamda suffered from psychological problems. About three months later, in the middle of the day, Hamda Abu-Ghanem was shot while lying in bed at her parents' home. This time the women in the family broke the silence. "After the previous murder [of Reem Abu-Ghanem -- R.S.H.], we wanted to do something and didn't know what," said the woman. "We wanted the dignitaries to intervene on the issue, we wanted to make a fuss about the story. I wanted to talk to someone from Channel 2, and to tell them what's going on here. But nobody wanted to listen, I couldn't get to anyone." In a brave and desperate step they turned to the police. The investigators of the central unit of the Shfela District police are familiar with the streets of Juarish. They are used to being greeted by silence from family members and neighbors every time they are called to investigate yet another murder of a young girl, whose body is found riddled with bullets. This time, according to the police investigator's description published last week in Haaretz, they were surprised to encounter full cooperation on the part of the women of the family: "It was like a women's rebellion. They decided to lift up their heads and talk," said the investigator, Chief Inspector Haim Shreibhand. "I really feel that this is a war of men against women," the woman explained. "The men in the family don't dare to talk -- it's only us, the women, who are confronting them." Over 20 women from the family cooperated with the police and they were all offered the opportunity to leave the neighborhood for safe houses. At first they accepted the offer, but most of them have already returned to the neighborhood. "Not all of them managed outside the neighborhood and the family," explained Shreibhand. Five central witnesses are still in hiding, each in a different place, and they are not in contact with one another. "I'm very afraid and I don't know what will happen next," said the woman. "I hope that the judges will give life sentences to those who deserve them. It would be better if that happened without my having to testify in court. I hope that the police will do more; they know very well not only who fired, but also who planned the murders." Since the women testified, she claimed, the police have increased their presence in Juarish. A few women's organizations called for a demonstration against the murder of women, but it did not take place. 'Out of the cycle' "I don't see any value in such a demonstration," says Samah Salima-Agbaria, a social worker, who heads a fund to develop programs in Arab society in Ramle. "Against whom will we demonstrate? Against the criminals? Against the mayor? A demonstration will not uproot the phenomenon." At present the fund she heads is promoting a comprehensive plan meant to deal with the problem. Salima-Agbaria managed to bring representatives of the large families in the city, public figures and religious leaders to the discussions. She believes that awareness of the issue of murder of women in Arab society is increasing. The police are less optimistic: "Maybe it's happening in other places," said a member of the police force, "but in Ramle, in certain families, the religious mentality is so extreme that the solution won't come so fast there." Salima-Agbaria believes that in Juarish a solution can be reached through an agreed-upon mediator from the neighborhood. "If a woman turns to the police, it's as though she's changed sides. That's why there should be a local shelter operated here in the neighborhood by a mediator, in cooperation with a local sheikh." But due to lack of funding or even a serious witness-protection program, the Abu-Ghanem women are under the exclusive protection of the Shfela District police. Aida Touma-Suleiman, director of the Women Against Violence organization in the Arab sector, fears for their fate: "They are finally breaking out of the cycle of silence and blood, but I'm afraid that they'll be hurt. These women will be abandoned after they testify. They may have been brave, but because of that they have also decreed a death sentence on themselves. The authorities must prepare themselves to take care of them." Contact Sergio Tezza (Hadar) at hadar-Israel@verizon.net |
|
ON RELEASING TERRORIST BARGHOUTI
Posted by Menachem Kovacs, March 11, 2007. |
|
FYI and please ask your elected officials asap to oppose Barghouti's
release.
This was written by Alan Bauer of Jerusalem. |
|
Re "Deal for Gilad Schalit 'all but finished,'"(March 8), which reported that "an agreement has been reached with Hamas over the number of prisoners Israel will release in return for" the kidnapped soldier: Sir, On March 2, 2002, at 4:20 p.m., Muhammad Hasheikah, a 22-year-old Palestinian policeman, blew himself up on King George St. in downtown Jerusalem, murdering three people, including a young father and his pregnant wife. Two screws passed through my arm; our son had a piece of shrapnel pass fully through the right side of his brain. In September 2002 the IDF military prosecutor presented indictments against the terrorists who carried out "our" bombing. One of the planners had met with Marwan Barghouti the day before the bombing and received $600 for the attack. Barghouti's support for our attack stands in stark contrast to the bold statesman, charismatic leader and man of peace described by journalists and politicians. The details in Barghouti's own indictment suggest a quite different person -- a terror leader who personally organized, supported, financed and encouraged attacks that left scores of civilians dead and injured. Barghouti has not shown the slightest inkling of change; he still states that terror attacks are a legitimate means of achieving political goals. The highly-ballyhooed "Prisoners Document" he was instrumental in formulating contains no recognition of Israel's right to exist, and attacks on civilians are considered a holy obligation. Today Barghouti sits in an Israeli jail for five counts of murder. His popularity rests on his continued support for terror attacks against Israeli civilians. Releasing him will not bring peace but turn the clock back to the day of speaking nicely to the West while organizing the Palestinian masses to hate and kill. Alan Bauer
Rabbi Menachem Kovacs is Director of the Jewish Roots Center of Baltimore, an education and research center on Torah and social science topics. He is Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Montgomery College in Maryland. |
|
GOLAN HEIGHTS -- AGAIN!
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 11, 2007. |
|
We all saw photos of Israel's Defense Minister, Amir Peretz, being briefed in the North. Amir Peretz looking through his binoculars with their lens caps on, mumbling and nodding to the briefing officer as if he understood anything. The "problem" is that ALL of the Olmert government has been issued binoculars with permanent lens caps glued on tight. Trusting Olmert's dimwits to negotiate anything with Syria or any other Terrorist-supporting state or organization is like giving four year olds loaded revolvers and telling them to "play nice". When Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's "Gang" tries to "play secret" Oslo negotiations, we assumed that it will all end up the same -- only this time it will be called "The Syrian Scam". Read the following. Know that there is a lot more to this hustle than has yet surfaced. Olmert and Gang are on a short leash to the U.S. Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice to insure that he does his business at the selected curb therefore, one can assume that the Syrian Scam is known to State. Some of the many questions are: Who planned it? Who approved it? Where is James Baker hiding in this operation? He can't be far behind. Note: This is a Brief List of Winston articles about the Golan Heights & America's planned military base there. 1. "Negotiate for U.S. Military Bases in Israel" by Emanuel A. Winston Chicago Sun-Times Jan. 10, 1985 2. "Leaving [Golan Heights] Would Be Suicidal" by Emanuel A. Winston Chicago Jewish News Oct. 21-27, 1994 3. "$5 Billion Bribe for Israel to Abandon the Golan Heights" by Emanuel A. Winston The Midwest Jewish Week January 1995 4. "Barak Quotes U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff on Borders -- with Secret Map" by Gail Winston The Jewish Press Jan. 26, 1996 5. "20 Billion Golan Package" by Emanuel A. Winston Jewish Press Oct. 22 & 29, 1999 6. "Cost of Israeli-Syrian Accord Could Top $80 Billion" by Barbara Opall-Rome U.S. Defense News Nov. 15, 1999 [We underestimated at $5 Billion in January 1995 & $20 Billion in October 1999] |
|
This is JINSA Report #647:Off-Line Israeli Diplomacy There are often reports of back-channel conversations between Israel and Syria. Now a former Israeli official with no current government status claims to have the outline of a "peace deal" negotiated with a Syrian-American under Swiss and Turkish auspices. Here, according to a press report, are the parameters: Israel withdraws to the 1967 border. Syria creates a "demilitarized nature park" in the Golan and guarantees access to Israel. (Is this a concession? Did they first contemplate a militarized nature park?) Syria further promises not to tamper with the water sources in the Golan; to drop its alliance with Iran; to end support for radical Hezbollah and Hamas; and to ask Hamas leader Khaled Mashal to leave Damascus. In exchange for giving up the Golan and accepting various reversible expressions of Syrian good will, Israel will "work to improve ties between Syria and the U.S." Whoa, Nellie!! Never mind that there is no mention of Syria accepting the legitimacy of Israeli sovereignty -- the language UN Res. 242 and the basis of all negotiation. Or that Syria gets to "dangle its feet in the Sea of Galilee," rewarding Syrian encroachment from the 1948 line. What about Syria's official policy on the Palestinian "right of return"? [There are 430,000 Palestinian refugees INSIDE SYRIA in camps of indescribable misery. UNRWA just asked for $26 million in "emergency" funds for the 18,000 residents of Neirab living in a 60-year-old army barracks that was never upgraded.] Will Junior Assad keep them and make them Syrian citizens? Face them and tell them he signed away their "rights"? Never mind. Really, never mind. If the Israeli government, after being briefed on the details, decides to talk to itself about those issues, fine. If not, fine too. Israel is a sovereign country. But in NO WAY should any Israeli negotiator -- official or unofficial -- be talking about Israel making an approach to the U.S. on behalf of the Syrian government. U.S. problems with Syria have nothing to do with nature parks, Palestinians or even the Golan Heights. Syria is a conduit in the east (as well as the west) for irregular forces and military equipment for the purpose of destabilizing its neighbors. American troops are fighting in one of those neighbors and Syria is aiding and abetting our enemies. Syria appears worried that Saudi-Iranian plans for Lebanon will sacrifice Syrian interests. So Syria may be reaching out to Israel in hopes of salvaging something by turning to us. Our thought -- let Syria worry. Let Syria stop doing what it is doing that incurs our ire. Then they can talk directly to us. This is not a job for a third party with its own agenda. The Israeli interlocutor was quoted in a U.S. newspaper saying that the deal would be a politically tough sell in Israel, but "a bigger obstacle during the secret talks was opposition from Washington." Which is as it should be. http://www.jinsa.org/JINSAReports/3727 Access past JINSA Reports at: http://www.jinsa.org/Have a comment on this JINSA Report? Send an email to feedback@jinsa.org to let us know. Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at winstonmedia@comcast.net |
|
BAD, CHRISTIAN ZIONIST, BAD
Posted by Michael Travis, March 10, 2007. |
|
This comes from the Cuanas website: http://cuanas.blogspot.com |
|
I am a Christian Zionist. That means, I am a Christian who supports the idea that the Jews ought to have a homeland. Ooh, that's a scary idea, huh? We Gentiles have done nothing but persecute the Jews throughout history. We have proven that, no matter what, whether the Jews are rich, poor, powerful, or weak, we will hunt them down and kill them. If you look at history honestly, you have to admit that this is the case. We are not to be trusted. Because of this, the Jews must have a homeland of their own, so that they can take care of themselves. Here's an interesting consideration of Christian Zionism by Thomas Ice:
And I will bless those who bless you,
The last couple of years the secular community and some in the religious community have woken up to the fact that most of the American Evangelical community is pro Israel. Guess what? They do not like it one bit. There have been a number of articles in the media about the alleged dangers of the Christian support for Israel. A widely noted article appeared in the May 23, 2002 issue of the Wall Street Journal entitled, "How Israel Became a Favorite Cause of Christian Right." For some, this is horrifying. Current Christian Zionism At the beginning of this article I have quoted Genesis 12:3, which is God' s promise to bless those who bless Abraham and his descendants (i.e., Israel). Does this promise still stand or has it been changed? If the Bible is to be taken literally and still applies to Israel and not the church, it should not be surprising to anyone that such a view leads one, such as myself, to Christian Zionism. Zionism is simply the desire for the Jewish people to occupy the land of Israel. Christian Zionists are Christians who advocate this belief. Back in the spring of 1992, Christianity Today did a cover story on Christian Zionism. The article "For the Love of Zion" (March 9, 1992; pp. 46-50) reflected a generally negative tone toward Christian Zionists, which is normal for Christianity Today. They made the case that evangelical support for Israel is still strong but it has peaked and is declining. Yet, today, over a decade later the consensus appears to be that Christian Zionism is getting stronger, but so are those Christians who oppose it. In February 2003, the Zionist Organization of America released extensive polling results from the polling firm of John McLaughlin and Associates indicating rising support by Americans of the modern state of Israel as against the Arab Palestinian state. 71% of Americans were opposed to creating a Palestinian state and by almost the same margin Americans oppose any support to the Palestinian Arabs. Much of this current support is surely generated by those who are classified as Christian Zionists. Christian Anti-Zionists Probably for the first time ever, an organized effort appears to be on the rise of Christians (many who are Evangelical) who are outspoken Anti-Zionists. Knox Theological Seminary, founded and headed by D. James Kennedy (interestingly Dr. Kennedy did not sign the document) has posted a document on their web site denouncing those who are supportive of the modern state of Israel as engaged in "a serious misreading of Holy Scripture." Oh really! Stephen Sizer is writing a major new book against Christian Zionism. I guess we have gotten so bad that they believe one is necessary. It will be called Christian Zionism: Fueling the Arab-Israeli Conflict, due out in December 2003 from Intervarsity Press. Colin Chapman has written what amounts to an anti-Zionist book in Whose Promised Land? The Continuing Crisis Over Israel and Palestine, Baker, 2002. He attempts throughout his work to refute the biblical teaching about ethnic Israel' s right to the land of Israel. Gary DeMar has for many years exhibited his anti-Zionism in the many incarnations of Last Days Madness (American Vision, 1999). pp. 407-23. In an appendix entitled "'Anti-Semitism' and Eschatology," DeMar quotes from Assembly of God premillennialist, Dwight Wilson's Armageddon Now!, (Baker, 1977) saying that premillennialism fostered anti-Semitism during the Holocaust. Both Wilson and DeMar have made a statement that is ridiculous and cannot be supported from the facts of history. DeMar says, "Wilson maintains that it was the premillennial view of a predicted Jewish persecution prior to the Second Coming that led to a ' hands off' policy when it came to speaking out against virulent ' anti-Semitism.'" [1] Wilson and subsequently DeMar's interpretation of the premillennial record on this matter is simply wrong. Instead, historian David Rausch is correct when he declared: This theory of "Fundamentalist anti-Semitism" is not only biased -- it is totally inaccurate. Fundamentalist Protestants are not historically anti-Semitic, nor are they anti-Semitic at the present time. In fact, Fundamentalism is itself a religious movement which grew out of a millennialism which was Zionist. Fundamentalists are ardent supporters of Israel and the Jewish heritage.[2] Convoluted Calvinism Calvinist DeMar must be desperate in his attempt to label dispensational premillennialists as anti-Semitic, that he would adopt and advocate Wilson's Arminian logic in relationship to the sovereign decrees of God. Wilson's interpretation that the premillennial belief in the certainty of the fulfillment of prophetic decrees from the Bible leads to fatalistic inactivity by its adherents is not only factually wrong, but would be rejected by DeMar as theologically wrong if he had applied his Calvinism to all issues involving the sovereignty of God and human responsibility. DeMar does not believe, nor do I, that because God has decreed who will be saved and who will remain lost that the believer's response should be fatalistic inactivity in regards to evangelism or any decreed fact of history. History shows that Calvinists have led the way in evangelistic concern and activity. History also shows that premillennialists have led the way in their support for the Jewish people and Israel, and have led Christian opposition to anti-Semitism, just as they are doing at the present time. If this were not the case then there would not be all the press about our love and support for Israel. Hands Off Wilson,[3] and therefore DeMar[4], made a number of mistakes in their characterization of premillennialists in regards to anti-Semitism. Wilson quotes a poem written by a premillennialist entitled "Hands Off" relating to anti-Semitism. The poem is saying that those who have persecuted the Jews would be better off keeping their hands off of God's people because God will judge them for their sin. Wilson characterizes the poem as if the author was advocating a hands-off policy of Christians toward helping the downtrodden Jew. The actual viewpoint of the poem was telling people like Hitler to keep their hands off the Jews, not for Christians to be apathetic towards persecution in Europe. Hands On Contrary to the Wilson/DeMar viewpoint, Rausch argues that premillennialists were involved in fighting anti-Semitism and did not sit back and do nothing. Rausch cites example after example of American and European premillennialists warning against anti-Semitism in Europe (especially in Germany and Russia) during the many Prophetic Conferences convened between 1878 and 1918.[5] Rausch notes that American dispensationalist, Arno Gaebelein, a German immigrant, "castigated Gentile Christendom in his lectures and writings for its attacks on the Jew." [6] In 1895, Gaebelein, upon returning to the US from a trip to Germany, sadly stated, It is only too true that Protestant Germany is Jew-hating, and we fear, from what we have seen and heard, that sooner or later there will come another disgraceful outbreak.[7] The fact of the matter is that there were not too many premillennialists in Hitler's Germany since most of Christianity in Germany at that time was of a liberal variety. In my entire life thus far I have never met or heard of a liberal who was premillennial. Much of the Christian resistance to Hitler came from those who also hid Jews and they were often premillennial. Joop Westerville, a leader in the underground was a Plymouth Brethren and has a prominent place in the Israeli memorial to the "Righteous of the Nations." Corrie Ten Boom's family were premillennial and are synonymous in the minds of American evangelicals with activism on behalf of the Jews in WW II. Rausch has noted, "Contrary to popular opinion, this prophetic viewpoint (premillennialism) combated anti-Semitism and sought to reinstate the biblical promises that God had made to the Jewish people through Abraham -- biblical promises that postmillennial Christendom had determined were null and void." [8] Further Wilson Confusion Wilson says that premillennialists like Gaebelein "seemed to provide legitimacy for the Nazi attitude" [9] because, on a few points, they were critical of some Jewish activities and because they did not believe that the anti-Semitic document The Protocols of the Elders of Zion was a forgery. Wilson portrays premillennialists as if belief that the Protocols were not forged was belief that they were true. Premillennialists like Gaebelein thoroughly disagreed with the anti-Semitic agenda of the Protocols, but Wilson does not bring this out. Premillennial criticism could not in any way be interpreted as anti-Semitic attitudes. Rausch, contra Wilson, has observed: "It was premillennial eschatology that led the early Fundamentalist to have a high view of Jewish history and Jewish heritage. Even in negative remarks, there is no malevolence toward the Jewish people because the Proto-Fundamentalist believed that all men were unworthy of God's grace and that even the Proto-Fundamentalist was a sinner." [10] Dispensationalist Love for Zion I believe that it is safe to say that there has not been a group of Christians who have cared more for the Jewish people and their destiny than dispensationalists in the 2,000-year history of the church. Previous to the rise of dispensationalism, Christians did not seem to be able to acknowledge that God had a future plan of glory for national Israel, without at the same time making the church subordinate to Judaism. J. N. Darby, the father of modern dispensationalism, developed his theology in the 1820s and 1830s by saying that God's plan for history included two peoples, Israel and the church. Darby took the Old Testament literally and at face value so that he recognized Israel's future destiny. At the same time, he took the New Testament and the church literally and at face value. Darby did not have to spiritualize either Israel or the church recognizing from the Bible two peoples of God." J. N. Darby has testified that it was his coming to understand that 'there was still an economy to come, of His ordering; a state of things in no way established as yet' which compelled him to formulate his distinction between Israel and the church." [11] Because of the rise of the dispensational viewpoint "premillennialists were able to stress the evangelization of the Jews while at the same time they supported Jewish nationalistic aspirations." [12] In fact, the heightened interest in dispensational evangelization of the Jews has been recently documented in a new study of the history of Jewish evangelism. Yaakov Ariel says, The rise of the movement to evangelize the Jews in America also coincided with the rise of Zionism, the Jewish national movement that aimed at rebuilding Palestine as a Jewish center. The missionary community, like American dispensationalists in general, took a great deal of interest in the developments among the Jewish people... Perhaps not surprisingly, missionaries to the Jews were among the major propagators of the dispensationalist premillennialist belief... They condemned anti-Semitism and discrimination against Jews worldwide.[13] William E. Blackstone Dispensational theology explains why this form of premillennialism has been the most effective in evangelizing Jews, while at the same time standing with Jews in causes like Zionism. In fact, dispensationalists were the earliest advocates of Zionism, even before it began within the Jewish community. "Zionism humanly speaking owes its origin not primarily in the Jewish fold, but in the efforts of a Christian, one whom we all respect, and who has been a great friend of Jewish Missions, William E. Blackstone." [14] Benjamin Netanyahu also recognizes the early rise of Christian Zionism when he declared that it "antedates the modern Zionist movement by at least half a century." [15] Blackstone's contribution was acknowledged by the Jewish community in 1918 by Elisha M. Friedman, secretary of the University Zionist Society of New York, who said, "A well-known Christian layman, William E. Blackstone, antedated Theodor Herzl by five years in his advocacy of the re-establishment of a Jewish state." [16] Contrary to the image presented by DeMar and Wilson, Blackstone provides another example of premillennial "hands on" involvement in combating anti-Semitism. "After traveling to Europe, Egypt, and Palestine in 1888, Blackstone organized in Chicago in 1890 one of the first conferences between Christians and Jews. The Jews of Russia were being persecuted and William Blackstone felt that mere resolutions of sympathy were inadequate." [17] Conclusion In spite of our critics, who unjustly attempt to cast us in a bad light, dispensational premillennialism has always been the best friend the Jewish people have ever had within Christendom. For years many in Israel have recognized this. What is amazing is that in the last few years even the Orthodox community has come to realize that they have friends and supporters within the conservative Christian community. At the same time that we support Zion, dispensational premillennialists have been the leaders in evangelizing the Jewish community during the present church age. I believe that such support of Zion by Christians will continue to be the case from now throughout all eternity. End Notes [1] Gary DeMar, Last Days Madness: Obsession of the Modern Church, (Power Springs, GA: American Vision, 1999), p. 413. [2] David Rausch, Zionism within Early American Fundamentalism, 1878-1918, (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1979), p. 2. [3] Dwight Wilson, Armageddon Now! The Premillenarian Response to Russia and Israel Since 1917 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1977), p. 96. [4] Noted by DeMar, Last Days Madness, p. 413. [5] Rausch, Zionism, pp. 79-133. [6] Rausch, Zionism, p. 243. [7] Rausch, Zionism, p. 241. [8] David Rausch, The Middle East Maze (Chicago: Moody Press, 1991), p. 64 [9] Wilson, Armageddon Now, p. 97. [10] Rausch, Zionism, p. 212. [11] Floyd Elmore, "A Critical Examination of the Doctrine of the Two Peoples of God in John Nelson Darby," Th.D. Dissertation, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1990, p. 77. [12] Timothy Webber, Living In The Shadow Of The Second Coming, (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1983), p. 141. [13] Yaakov Ariel, Evangelizing the Chosen People: Missions to the Jews in America, 1880- 2000 (Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 2000, pp. 12, 13, 14. [14] Elias Newman, cited by Rausch in Zionism, p. 269. [15] Benjamin Netanyahu, A Place Among The Nations: Israel and the World (New York: Bantam, 1993), p 16. [16] Rausch, Middle East Maze, p. 66. [17] Rausch, Middle East Maze, p. 66. Maranatha! Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
UNITED NATIONS CALL FOR THE IMMEDIATE END OF JEWISH NATION...(ARE CHRISTIANS NEXT??)
Posted by Michael Travis, March 10, 2007. |
|
This was written by Yoav Stern, Haaretz Correspondent, and is entitled:
"UN committee: Israel should let Palestinians return to their land."
A United Nations committee has called on Israel to allow Palestinian refugees to return to their property and land in Israel and to ensure that the bodies responsible for distributing property, such as the Jewish National Fund, not discriminate against the Arab population. The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination made the recommendation in its concluding observations released Friday, in response to a report Israel submitted on the matter. Representatives of a number of human rights groups appeared before the committee, including Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel, which presented objections to the official Israeli position. The report recommends that Israel scrutinize its policy in a number of areas. Among them, it recommends that "the state party ensure that the definition of Israel as a Jewish nation state does not result in any systematic distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, color, descent or national or ethnic origin." The committee also said it "would welcome receiving more information on how [Israel] envisions the development of the national identity of all its citizens." The committee's deliberations were made in the framework of overseeing the implementation by various countries of the provisions of the UN's International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination. Israel has been a signatory to the convention since the late 1970s, and should submit a report every two years. However, it has not done so for nine years.
The appearence before the committee of the human rights organizations, which also included B'Tselem (the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories) and Ittijah (the Union of Arab Community Based Organizations in Israel), is part of an increasing
trend to fight Israeli policies in international forums. Adalah said some of the information provided to the committee came from its international advocacy department assigned to UN committees.
<"Members of the Tribe / Mixed feelings about Iran"
The Jewish Council for Public Affairs (JCPA) plenum, which convened last week in Washington, rejected a last-minute proposal to launch a public campaign against Iran's nuclear armament program. The proposal called for mass demonstrations using the slogan "Stop Iran" and for the start of a divestment campaign aimed at companies doing business in Iran. In a highly unusual development, Israeli diplomats appeared at the discussions and lobbied for the resolution's approval, but, as noted, their attempt failed. The JCPA explained afterward that the resolution was voted down for technical reasons, not because of its content. However, it seems indisputable that the issue of Iran's nuclear armament was not the most popular item on the agenda of the JCPA's plenum: The genocide in Darfur was the top-priority international item on that agenda. In the case of Darfur, a divestment resolution was passed by a large majority. The mood at the JCPA conference gives some indication of public opinion on the "Jewish street" in America. The fact is that there has been no massive Jewish mobilization to date for the struggle against a nuclear Iran. The largest mass demonstration, in which tens of thousands of American Jews participated, was held in protest of the genocide in Darfur. Israeli leaders like former prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu and even historians like Benny Morris have declared that Israel is facing the prospect of a second Holocaust; however, Jewish activists in the United States prefer to deal with the genocide of another nation that is taking place right before our eyes. David M. Elcott, who was recently appointed executive director of Israel Policy Forum, believes that American Jews are simply smarter than Israeli politicians. He says that Netanyahu's apocalyptic rhetoric is not acceptable from the standpoint of Jewish theology; the Jews, he notes, have always spoken of hope, and the language of despair is foreign to Jewish tradition. In an unforgettable speech that he delivered of the United Jewish Community's General Assembly in Los Angeles last November, Netanyahu kept repeating the same point -- namely, that it is as if we are in 1938, but instead of Germany, the threat is an Iran that is trying to arm itself with weapons of mass destruction. In Elcott's view, the analogy Netanyahu made between Iran and Nazi Germany has a flip side: It draws an analogy between Israel and European Jewry on the eve of World War II. As Elcott sees it, saying that the Jews in Israel are in the same situation as the Jews of Warsaw or Berlin in 1940 "undermines the Zionist vision of an independent State of Israel." IPF was founded in 1993, during the period of the Oslo Accords, and was active later in the decade against the background of then-prime minister Ehud Barak's frustration with the hawkish stance of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) lobbying organization, and its frosty attitude toward the Middle East peace process. The organization's most significant achievement in recent years was the Senate's approval of a bill that enabled granting aid to the Palestinians despite the Palestinian Authority's Hamas-led government. Today IPF is pushing for the approval of $86 million in aid for the training of the security forces of PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), so far without much success. Even IPF executives, such as its president, Seymour D. Reich, a veteran Jewish leader, admit that their organization is still not a counterbalance to the powerful AIPAC on Capitol Hill. Regarding the Iranian issue, IPF's leaders believe that the option of direct talks with the Iranians has not yet been exhausted. Reich says that, in IPF's view, all the organizations that are shouting "The sky is falling" because of Iran are passing up the opportunity to encourage Washington to establish contact with that country. The background to IPF's position on the Iranian issue is the trauma of the war in Iraq, which close to 80 percent of America's Jews oppose. According to Elcott, the American public wants a dialogue with the Muslim world, not another war. The nightmare scenario that frightens IPF's leaders is not a nuclear-equipped Iran, but rather an American military imbroglio in Iran. IPF is of the opinion that, if Jewish organizations in the U.S. are perceived as being responsible for America's decision to embark on such a military adventure, the consequences could be grave for the status of Jews in the American public. IPF's analysis helps one understand the American Jewish public's mixed feelings regarding Iran. Given the choice between an internal threat and a threat aimed at Israel, many of America's Jews prefer to sit on the fence. It is much simpler and much easier to struggle for the victims of genocide in Darfur. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
FREE RADICAL
Posted by David Nathan, March 10, 2007. |
| This was written by Joseph Rago and appeared today in the Wall Street Journal Opinion Journal. It is an interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali. |
|
NEW YORK--Ayaan Hirsi Ali is untrammeled and unrepentant: "I am supposed to apologize for saying the prophet is a pervert and a tyrant," she declares. "But that is apologizing for the truth." Statements such as these have brought Ms. Hirsi Ali to world-wide attention. Though she recently left her adopted country, Holland--where her friend and intellectual collaborator Theo van Gogh was murdered by a Muslim extremist in 2004--she is still accompanied by armed guards wherever she travels. Ms. Hirsi Ali was born in 1969 in Mogadishu--into, as she puts it, "the Islamic civilization, as far as you can call it a civilization." In 1992, at age 22, her family gave her hand to a distant relative; had the marriage ensued, she says, it would have been "an arranged rape." But as she was shipped to the appointment via Europe, she fled, obtaining asylum in Holland. There, "through observation, through experience, through reading," she acquainted herself with a different world. "The culture that I came to and I live in now is not perfect," Ms. Hirsi Ali says. "But this culture, the West, the product of the Enlightenment, is the best humanity has ever achieved." Unease over Muslim immigration had been rising in the Low Countries for some time. For instance, when the gay right-wing politician Pim Fortuyn--"I am in favor of a cold war with Islam," he said, and believed the borders should be closed to Muslims--was gunned down in 2002, it was widely assumed his killer was an Islamist. There was a strange sense of relief when he turned out to be a mere animal-rights activist. Ms. Hirsi Ali brought integration issues to further attention, exposing domestic abuse and even honor killings in the Dutch-Muslim "dish cities." In 2003, she won a seat in the parliament as a member of the center-right VVD Party, for People's Party for Freedom and Democracy. The next year, she wrote the script for a short film called "Submission." It investigated passages from the Quran that Ms. Hirsi Ali contends authorize violence against women, and did so by projecting those passages onto naked female bodies. In retrospect, she deeply regrets the outcome: "I don't think the film was worth the human life." The life in question was that of Van Gogh, a prominent controversialist and the film's director. At the end of 2004, an Islamist named Mohammed Buyeri shot him as he was bicycling to work in downtown Amsterdam, then almost decapitated him with a curved sword. He left a manifesto impaled to the body: "I know for sure that you, Oh Hirsi Ali, will go down," was its incantation. "I know for sure that you, Oh unbelieving fundamentalist, will go down." The shock was palpable. Holland--which has the second largest per capita population of Muslims in the EU, after France--had always prided itself on its pluralism, in which all groups would be tolerated but not integrated. The killing made clear just how apart its groups were. "Immediately after the murder," Ms. Hirsi Ali says, "we learned Theo's killer had access to education, he had learned the language, he had taken welfare. He made it very clear he knew what democracy meant, he knew what liberalism was, and he consciously rejected it... He said, 'I have an alternative framework. It's Islam. It's the Quran.' " At his sentencing, Mohammed Buyeri said he would have killed his own brother, had he made "Submission" or otherwise insulted the One True Faith. "And why?" Ms. Hirsi Ali asks. "Because he said his god ordered him to do it... We need to see," she continues, "that this isn't something that's caused by special offense, the right, Jews, poverty. It's religion." Ms. Hirsi Ali was forced into living underground; a hard-line VVD minister named Rita Verdonk, cracking down on immigration, canceled her citizenship for misstatements made on her asylum application--which Ms. Hirsi Ali had admitted years before and justified as a means to win quicker admission at a time of great personal vulnerability. The resulting controversy led to the collapse of Holland's coalition government. Ms. Hirsi Ali has since decamped for America--in effect a political refugee from Western Europe--to take up a position with the American Enterprise Institute. But the crisis, she says, is "still simmering underneath and it might erupt--somewhere, anywhere." That partly explains why Ms. Hirsi Ali's new autobiography, "Infidel," is already a best seller. It may also have something to do with the way she scrambles our expectations. In person, she is modest, graceful, enthralling. Intellectually, she is fierce, even predatory: "We know exactly what it is about but we don't have the guts to say it out loud," she says. "We are too weak to take up our role. The West is falling apart. The open society is coming undone." Many liberals loathe her for disrupting an imagined "diversity" consensus: It is absurd, she argues, to pretend that cultures are all equal, or all equally desirable. But conservatives, and others, might be reasonably unnerved by her dim view of religion. She does not believe that Islam has been "hijacked" by fanatics, but that fanaticism is intrinsic in Islam itself: "Islam, even Islam in its nonviolent form, is dangerous." The Muslim faith has many variations, but Ms. Hirsi Ali contends that the unities are of greater significance. "Islam has a very consistent doctrine," she says, "and I define Islam as I was taught to define it: submission to the will of Allah. His will is written in the Quran, and in the hadith and Sunna. What we are all taught is that when you want to make a distinction between right and wrong, you follow the prophet. Muhammad is the model guide for every Muslim through time, throughout history." This supposition justifies, in her view, a withering critique of Islam's most holy human messenger. "You start by scrutinizing the morality of the prophet," and then ask: "Are you prepared to follow the morality of the prophet in a society such as this one?" She draws a connection between Mohammed's taking of child brides in the first century A.D. and modern sexual oppressions--what she calls "this imprisonment of women." She decries the murder of adulteresses and rape victims, the wearing of the veil, arranged marriages, domestic violence, genital mutilation and other contraventions of "the most basic freedoms." These sufferings, she maintains, are traceable to theological imperatives. "People say it is a bad strategy," Ms. Hirsi Ali says forcefully. "I think it is the best strategy... Muslims must choose to follow their rational capacities as humans and to follow reason instead of Quranic commands. At that point Islam will be reformed." This worldview has led certain critics to dismiss Ms. Hirsi Ali as a secular extremist. "I have my ideas and my views," she says, "and I want to argue them. It is our obligation to look at things critically." As to the charges that she is an "Enlightenment fundamentalist," she points out, rightly, that people who live in democratic societies are not supposed to settle their disagreements by killing one another. And yet contemporary democracies, she says, accommodate the incitement of such behavior: "The multiculturalism theology, like all theologies, is cruel, is wrongheaded, and is unarguable because it is an utter dogmatism... Minorities are exempted from the obligations of the rest of society, so they don't improve... With this theory you limit them, you freeze their culture, you keep them in place." The most grievous failing of the West is self-congratulatory passivity: We face "an external enemy that to a degree has become an internal enemy, that has infiltrated the system and wants to destroy it." She believes a more drastic reaction is required: "It's easy," she says, "to weigh liberties against the damage that can be done to society and decide to deny liberties. As it should be. A free society should be prepared to recognize the patterns in front of it, and do something about them." She says the West must begin to think long term about its relationship with Islam--because the Islamists are. Ms. Hirsi Ali notes Muslim birth rates are vastly outstripping those elsewhere (particularly in Western Europe) and believes this is a conscious attempt to extend the faith. Muslims, she says, treat women as "these baby-machines, these son-factories... We need to compete with this," she goes on. "It is a totalitarian method. The Nazis tried it using women as incubators, literally to give birth to soldiers. Islam is now doing it... It is a very effective and very frightening way of dealing with human beings." All of this is profoundly politically incorrect. But for this remarkable woman, ideas are not abstractions. She forces us back to first principles, and she punctures complacencies. These ought to be seen as virtues, even by those who find some of Ms. Hirsi Ali's ideas disturbing or objectionable. Society, after all, sometimes needs to be roused from its slumbers by agitators who go too far so that others will go far enough. Mr. Rago is an editorial page writer for The Wall Street Journal.
Contact David Nathan at davenathan@aol.com
|
|
SUITCASE NUKES
Posted by Michael Travis, March 10, 2007. |
|
I am frankly amazed as I note the commentary on various blogs and blog-radio programmes regarding "suitcase nukes", "American Hiroshima", Adnan El Shukrijumah, Hamid Mir, and Dr. Paul L. Williams. How is it that we have strayed so far from credibility and journalistic ethics that those who read a few World Net Daily articles are christened "experts" on a particular subject...while the informed opinions of genuine investigators and researchers (i.e. Dr. Williams) are ignored? Investigators such as Dr.Williams have endured death threats, lawsuits, and severe financial burdens for their dedication to Faith and Country. Those who appreciate the groundbreaking labours of Dr.Williams and other brave authors should show their appreciation by acknowledging them, and whenever possible, consulting with them. Support Paul Williams in his battle against terror and injustice...you may be next!
|
|
This comes from the Euphoric Reality website:
Last night I appeared on a Fox News show called Heartland with John Kasich. I'd never seen the show before, but I was invited as a guest to participate in what was billed as an "investigative report" on the possibility of suitcase nukes in the hands of terrorists. The producers had seen this article of mine, crossposted at WAR. My part was to be about nuclear proliferation among terror groups. For two days prior to the show, I studiously prepared my facts and figures so that I could engage in an intelligent round-table discussion with John Kasich and another guest, Dean Barnett of Townhall. What I didn't know at the time, was that it really wasn't "investigative" at all, but merely a chance for John Kasich to showcase his ill-considered and monumentally misinformed opinion that the existence of suitcase nukes is nothing more than an urban legend. It was clear that he thinks discussing the probability that terrorists have possession of nukes is nothing more than "scare-mongering". Dean Barnett concurred that suitcase nukes do not exist, but did nothing more than offer an opinion. There was no discussion of facts. I was more nervous about being on TV than I've ever been, but this topic is so important that I was determined to do it justice. I was the lone dissenting voice, but I was eager for a chance to represent some facts to counter their opionions. Unfortunately, I wasn't given that chance, and I wasn't familiar enough with live television -- nor confident enough -- to grab the chance before it was too late. Unfortunately, when I did comment that suitcase nukes do indeed exist, and supported my statement with facts, I was interrupted by Kasich. The segment ended just as I thought we were getting started. I left the studio a little stunned that Kasich would attempt to broach the complex and incredibly critical subject of nuclear terrorism in as little as a few minutes. I honestly thought that more time and consideration would be given to this matter, and was extremely disappointed that Kasich treated it so cavalierly. However, I still have a voice, and I thought I would share with you, our loyal readers, what I didn't get a chance to say last night on Heartland: Suitcase nukes are the stuff of urban legends: I would've said the same thing about rumors of a plot to fly several commercial airline jets into the WTC towers, the White House, the Pentagon, etc. Such a thing could never happen. I might've even said the same thing about a Third World Islamic nation developing its own nuclear weapons arsenal in the wilds of Pakistan. Pffft -- how unlikely. But if you want to know the truth about the threats we face, ask the boots on the ground, and you'll get the truth -- not the politically spun "Pshaw, there is no such thing." Ask any Special Forces soldier or inquire of the Air Force's Counter-Terrorism and Nuclear Proliferation teams. I did. In the 1950 and 60s we developed a small nuke that could easily be carried in a backpack, and we trained teams of Special Forces to deploy them. It's not such a stretch to imagine that 40-50 years later, the technology has advanced since then. Take into consideration the laxity of accountability of nuclear material in the former Soviet Union states and the ready availability of plutonium and weapons grade enriched uranium on the black market. The recent HEU smuggling attempt in Georgia is a case in point. With a sufficient amount of fissile material -- for instance, 50 kg of highly enriched uranium, and quite possibly less, a highly destructive bomb could be constructed. In fact, in a 2006 report, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) confirmed 16 incidents of trafficking in highly enriched uranium or plutonium. In seven cases, the nuclear material was thought to originate in Russia or a former Soviet state. In other words, the material is readily available on the black market for a price. So, do suitcase nukes exist? Yes, they do -- we are far beyond the point of debating their existence, we are now debating their location and their ownership. Who has them and where? The fact that we don't know the answer to these questions in an age of global terrorism and rogue nations is a huge problem. We can't continue to evaluate terrorism's nuclear proliferation by Cold War standards. The rules changed on 9/11. That was our notice that from that day on, all weapons of terror, including nuclear weapons, could and would be used, against us. This is a fight to the death. How have portable nukes gotten into the hands of terrorists? Paul L. Williams, a counter-terrorism consultant to the FBI, says bin Laden's search for nuclear weapons began in 1988 when he hired a team of five nuclear scientists from Turkmenistan. They were former employees at the atomic reactor in Iraq before it was destroyed by Israel. The team's project was the development of a nuclear reactor that could be used "to transform a very small amount of material that could be placed in a package smaller than a backpack." "By 1990 bin Laden had hired hundreds of atomic scientists from the former Soviet Union for $2,000 a month an amount far greater that their wages in the former Soviet republics," Williams writes. "They worked in a highly sophisticated and well-fortified laboratory in Kandahar, Afghanistan." Then again in 1998, Mamdouh Mahmud Salim was arrested in Munich and charged with acting as an al Qaeda agent to purchase highly enriched uranium from a German laboratory. That same year, according to Williams, bin Laden succeeded in buying 20 suitcase nukes from Chechen Mafia figures, including former KGB agents. The $30 million deal was partly cash and partly heroin with a street value of $700 million. The fact that the Chechens possessed the nukes should be no surprise to any reporter or investigator. In 1995, the Chechens under Com. Shamail Basayev planted a radiological bomb in Izmailovsky Park near Moscow. The bomb was made of cesium-137, and, if detonated, would have killed thousands of Russians. This incident represented the first case of a nuke to be deployed as a weapon of terror. Later that same year, Dzokhar Dudayev, the leader of the Chechen Mafia, offered to sell his collection of nuclear weapons to the United States in exchange for U. S. recognition of Chechnya's independence. The Clinton Administration declined and so the weapons were sold to al Qaeda. "After the devices were obtained, they were placed in the hands of Arab nuclear scientists who, federal sources say, 'were probably trained at American universities,'" says Williams. Yossef Bodansky, author of Bin Laden: The Man Who Declared War on America and the U.S. Congress' top terrorism expert, concurs that bin Laden has already succeeded in purchasing suitcase nukes. As well, twenty nuclear scientists and technicians from A.Q. Khan's research laboratories in Pakistan worked with al Qaeda on a regular basis to maintain and modify the weapons that had been purchased and to develop other weapons, including highly portable "bespoke nukes." In 2000, British agents posed as recruits from a London mosque to infiltrate al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan. In Herat, they saw nuclear weapons being manufactured. Similarly, an al-Qaeda operative was near a checkpoint at Ramallah in Israel. In his rusty old Volkswagen van, Mossad discovered a bomb which turned out to be a highly sophisticated plutonium-implosion device with an explosive yield of 10 kilotons. For comparison, the bomb dropped on Hiroshima was 15 kilotons. Why are terrorist nukes as important as rogue nuclear states? Islamists may very well assume that they can launch suicide nuclear attacks against Western targets because 1) Allah will save them from retaliation, 2) that if he does not then their people will be "martyred", 3) that the Western leaders will be too vacillating to actually retaliate as the West will feel guilty to kill innocent women and children 4) a massive retaliation against one Muslim nation is an acceptable sacrifice as it will cause all of the rest of the Muslims to rise up and attack the West. We need to develop a retaliatory response plan NOW. This is complicated by the fact that terrorism knows no borders. During the Cold War, the doctrine of MAD (mutual assured destruction) kept everyone's fingers off the trigger. Prior to the Gulf War, we warned Saddam that any use of WMDs would trigger a massive (read nuclear) response. Have the mullahs gotten a similar message that a suitcase bomb in D.C would result in mushroom clouds over Tehran, Damascus, Mecca and all other Islamic cities not currently occupied by the US Armed Forces? Would such a doctrine even deter Islamists? We need to answer these questions now, and not after a nuclear attack when we are in a dire crisis management mode. Furthermore it is clear that many nations, such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Syria, sponsor Islamic terrorism through proxies (al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and Hamas), knowing that we have not yet formulated a ready response to the shifting targets of terrorism. They are keen to get portable nukes into the hands of small terror cells that are already embedded in the communities they will eventually target to destroy. The main target, after all, is the Great Satan -- America -- and the vast oceans between us and the Middle East cannot protect us from terror cells in our midst. Thus, portable nukes are far more advantageous to Islamist warfare than nuclear missiles. Bin Laden is broke and can't afford to buy nukes, thus al Qaeda does not have them: Far from it. OBL is the world's largest supplier of heroin -- his labs in Afghanistan produce about 5000 metric tons per year. He gets richer with every drug deal made on every street corner. Ironic, wouldn't you say -- that America's junkies are funding our worst enemy? Why haven't they used nukes already? There are three possible reasons I can think of: 1. First and foremost, the planning involved is enormous in scope. It requires not only development and (in some cases) rebuilding of the weapons but also forward deployment, site preparation and precise strategic coordination among scattered cells. We already know that Bin Laden is methodical, meticulous, and patient. After all, his favorite Islamic verse is "I will be patient until Patience is outworn by patience." 2. Bin Laden will not allow the attack to take place unless there is certainty of success. All of his resources (including the gains from his heroin labs in Afghanistan) have been spent on this operation. 3. Terrorist groups the world over are savvy at manipulating public opinion in the West. Bin Laden's ultimate goal is a global caliphate -- he wants to become a hero after such an audacious attack on the West, and he's not going to jeopardize that by preemptively striking without a clearly defined motive. As to motive, it's my opinion that he's waiting for the US to engage Iran. And that unfortunately, might be sooner than later considering our recent build-up in the Persian Gulf to confront a nuclear Iran. Bottom line: Does it make any sense at all to ignore a gathering threat just because our enemy hasn't used nukes YET? Nukes need maintenance, and al Qaeda's not advanced enough to maintain them: Bin Laden can't sit on these weapons for years. They require constant maintenance. To that end he's hired Russian, Iraqi, and Pakistani scientists and technicians to maintain his nuclear arsenal. We already know that Pakistan's top nuclear scientist, Abdul Qadeer Khan, has sold sensitive equipment and nuclear technology to Iran, Libya and North Korea. Dr. Mahmood and Dr. Majeed, two of the leading officials at Khan's facility, confessed to CIA and ISI interrogators that they participated in al Qaeda's nuclear projects. Note: at any given time, a tactical nuke exudes a temperature in excess of 100 degrees Fahrenheit. This means that they are prone to oxidation and rust. Moreover, the triggers that emit large quantities of neutrons at high speeds decay rapidly and have short half-lives -- most would become useless without maintenance in less than six months. The nuclear cores also are subject to decay and over the course of several years would fall below the critical mass threshold. Though the shells that encase the cores are the most durable parts of the weapons, they, too, are subject to contamination. The tritium used to compensate for the required amount of conventional explosives to compress the fissile core within the compact devices is less of an issue since it has a half-life of 12 years. Taking into consideration the degradation schedule of nuclear cores and the rate of contamination of the weapons' components, I would expect an attack within the near future. What do we need to do? It's hard to win a war without realizing that you're in one. We've always known that 9/11 was not the apex al Qaeda's intent -- that they had more far-reaching objectives and the patience to see them through. Our own leaders have sounded a warning. Vice President Cheney, on the campaign trail in 2004, warned that a nuclear attack by al-Qaeda appears imminent. Before leaving office, Attorney General John Ashcroft and Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge both voiced that belief that al-Qaeda's plan to nuke cities throughout the country soon might come to fruition. Warren Buffet, who establishes odds against cataclysmic events for major insurance companies, concluded that an imminent nuclear nightmare within the United States is "virtually a certainty." And Gen. Eugene Habiger, former Executive Chief of Strategic Weapons at the Pentagon, said that an event of nuclear mega-terrorism on U. S. soil is "not a matter of if, but when." Muslim terrorists have proven time and time again that they have no qualms about escalating the violence. If you think that the War on Terror is about foiling the next shoe bomber, or nabbing box cutters at the airport, you are sorely mistaken. We have to stop fighting the Holy War with a Cold War mentality; and stop radical Islam from using our constitutional rights to shield itself. We continue to ignore radical Islam in America at our peril because the demands of political correctness have made us so afraid of being branded racists that we force ourselves to be color blind, identity blind, and gender blind till we end up, quite simply, totally blind. It's time we stopped allowing the whole of Islam's Holy War on America to be described by politicians, journalists, and others familiar with only a small part of it. Experts in the field of nuclear weaponry need to speak out instead of taking cover behind the Government's secrecy. In fact, as far as nuclear terrorism is concerned, I know only of one famous nuclear physicist who has dared to present his views openly: Dr. Sam Cohen, the inventor of the neutron bomb. Americans should be informed, timely and precisely, about real and inevitable threats. It is vital that we minimize our vulnerabilities, specifically our borders and our ports. And lastly, every American needs to realize that we are at war, and every last one of us is a potential intelligence asset for counter-terrorism. Our military and law enforcement have done an outstanding job of protecting us since 9/11. But for this type of catastrophic threat, it's time for all of us to step up to the plate. CONFIRMED: Suitcase Nukes In America
 Author's note: This article has been widely, albeit indirectly, linked and has met with equal parts agreement and skepticism. As I've read comments around the blogosphere, I've noticed that the skeptics fall into several categories which I'd like to address: 1) Al Qaeda doesn't have nukes, or we would've seen them by now. This argument is the same illogic screeched by the libs when we didn't find WMDs in clearly marked stashes in Iraq. It's been refined since then to "explain" why Saddam didn't use WMDs on our troops -- "Well, he must not have had them." This fallacy is what fuels the entire "BUSH LIED" doctrine of those who believe that the Iraq War is immoral and unjustified. We now know from continuously emerging intelligence that that's not true. I don't claim to know why terrorists do what they do; but I do know that it's fallacious to try and impose our Western thought processes on the priorities and motivations of religiously-fueled mass murderers. And I think it'd be a crying shame if we stooped to thinking like moonbats when it comes to nukes on American soil. Does it make any sense at all to ignore a gathering threat just because our enemy hasn't used nukes YET? 2) We've heard rumors of terrorist nukes for years and years -- this is just another rumor. So we have, but I'm sure it's the tip of the iceberg -- there's so much more that we haven't heard. The public doesn't know the half of what's going on -- that's indisputable. But to ignore consistent and credible warnings of our enemies' capabilities falls into the "What we dont know can't hurt us" category. There's 3,000 Americans who would argue otherwise, if they were here. 3) Osama's biographer is trying to sell a book. This is a classic logical fallacy called the ad hominem. Ignore the merits of his case and instead denigrate his personal motives. Yes, Hamid Mir does have a book about Osama coming out and it no doubt will be the most up close and personal look we, the public, will ever get of him. However, Mir has built up a reputation of accuracy concerning Osama bin Laden, so I'm not inclined to dismiss his perspective just yet. Look, the bottom line is that I'm not trying to sell you anything, nor am I going to convince you of something you don't want to believe. I have no vested interest other than this is a subject that I am keenly interested in. At the very least it's a springboard to long overdue discussion of what our response will be to a nuclear attack. We've always known that 9/11 was not al Qaeda's be-all/end-all plan -- that they had more far-reaching objectives and the patience to see them through. Our own leaders have always said, "It's not a matter of "if", but "when". Muslim terrorists have proven time and time again that they have no qualms about escalating the violence. If you think that the War on Terror is about foiling the next shoe bomber, or nabbing box cutters at the airport, you are sorely mistaken. Personally, I see a direct correlation between bin Laden's request and receipt of a nuclear fatwa in 2005, his offer of a truce back in January, and his subsequent pronouncement that "all American civilians are fair game" in April. All of that points to an acceleration of events -- and it's not for a mere shoe bomb at a football stadium, that much is certain. Is a strategic and coordinated nuclear attack impossible? Knowing what we know of the resources and goals of our enemy, I don't think so. *****SIX UPDATES below***** Almost a year ago, last July, I posted the news that Latino gangs had already smuggled suitcase (ie: portable) nukes over the U.S.-Mexico border for al Qaeda. I pointed out that our government was well aware of the situation and while yet refusing to secure the border, they nevertheless ordered the construction of nuclear bunkers for THEMSELVES!! Meanwhile, our borders have remained wide-open and under constant terrorization by Latino gangs who aid terrorists unhindered, and we still don't know where the suitcase nukes are. On Monday, I published a compilation of irrefutable evidence of how terrorists regularly use our unsecured borders as a direct highway into the heart of our country. Now today, there is additional confirmation that al Qaeda indeed has nukes inside our country: Al-Qaida has smuggled tactical nuclear weapons and uranium into the U.S. across the Mexican border and is planning to launch a major terrorist attack using a combination of nukes and dirty nukes, according to an interview with Osama bin Laden's biographer, Hamid Mir, in WorldThreats.com. The information confirms reports previously published in Joseph Farah's G2 Bulletin and in a new book by Paul L. Williams, Dunces of Doomsday. "I came up with this conclusion after eight years of investigation and research in the remote mountain areas of Afghanistan and Pakistan. I traveled to Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Syria, Uzbekistan and Russia and met dozens of people," Mir said. "I interviewed not only al-Qaida operatives but met scientists and top U.S. officials also. I will have the details in my coming book. At least two al-Qaida operatives claimed that the organization smuggled suitcase nukes inside America. But I have no details on who did it. But I do have details about who smuggled uranium inside America and how." Mir claims his information is based not only on what al-Qaida operatives, including bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, told him, but also upon his own independent research as a journalist. Mir says his upcoming book, a biography of bin Laden, will disclose al-Qaida's nuclear attack plans.
Mir said al-Qaida operatives told him that tactical nuclear weapons were smuggled over the Mexican border before Sept. 11, 2001. Mir said again he believes al-Qaida may use its nuclear arsenal after the U.S. attacks Iran in an effort to stop its nuclear weapons program. "This is my opinion," he says. "No al-Qaida leader has ever admitted that they are working with Iran. I also think that, maybe, the Iranians will organize some attacks inside America and you will accuse al-Qaida." Asked why al-Qaida hasn't used nuclear weapons it already possesses, Mir said: "They are waiting for the proper time. They want the U.S. to be involved in a mass killing of Muslims, so that they will have some justification. That is what I was told by a top al-Qaida leader in the Kunar Mountains of Afghanistan." Mir made similar comments in an earlier interview with G2 Bulletin. Hamid Mir's credibility skyrocketed when he accurately predicted in G2 Bulletin last month the imminent release of a new recorded communiqué from bin Laden through al-Jazeera, the Arabic TV network. Two days later, bin Laden's tape was the focus of international news coverage. "If you think that my information and analysis about bin Laden's location is correct," said Mir, "then please don't underestimate my analysis about his nuclear threat also." H/T: Comments By "T" UPDATE 1: Previous reports cited two suitcase nukes already in the U.S. Mir says three and that bin Laden wants six. The Russians say al Qaeda actually has had 20 since 1998. And the former Russian National Security Advisor says that 100 of Russia's known arsenal of 250 suitcase bombs are missing. Unbelievably, there is still a debate raging about suitcase nukes. One side has said that "since we're not dead yet, they must not exist -- al Qaeda would've used them already": A relaxed and smiling [Richard] Miniter assured the crowd that no such thing exists and "you're not going to die."..."Suitcase-sized nuclear bombs remain in the realm of James Bond movies." Just peachy. But they do exist. And they are here, in the hands of sleeper agents of al Qaeda. UDPATE 2: A Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Agents Primer UPDATE 3: Nevermind al Qaeda -- here's a recent discussion of Iranian suitcase nukes. One commenter speculates about China using a deniable Arab pawn to destabilize relations between the West and Islam. Another posits that a suitcase nuke has more terror value as blackmail of the targeted country. Another opines that the Iranian long term goal is primacy of Muslim leadership in world. Interesting discussion, as it relates to suitcase nukes. UPDATE 4: HEZBOLLAH, WMD ATTACKS, INSIDE US CITIES? This article by Patrick Briley is long, full of links to more info -- and an absolute must read. The fact that plutonium is so hard to clean up and is harmful in such small quantities means that numerous small dirty bombs can be built, shielded, transported and detonated in US cities before detection. AlQaeda and Hezbollah may also be collaborating to transport and detonate two plutonium-fueled suitcase nukes obtained by AlQaeda and possibly brought into the US. These suitcase nukes can be detonated by a triggering mechanism activated by a clock or by a call from a cell phone. Intelligence reports based on captured leaders and documents reveal that Al-Qaeda is targeting nine U.S. cities with the highest Jewish populations for attack with suitcase nukes and/or multiple dirty and toxic plutonium type radiological bombs. The FBI has been monitoring radiation levels using CIA developed detection equipment (specifically designed to look for plutonium based nuclear devices) at more than 100 mosques, homes, businesses and other sites in and around at least six of these cities. This is another indication that law enforcement and intelligence agency officials suspect Hezbollah and AlQaeda have brought nuclear or radiological weapons inside the US. Unfortunately, plutonium based dirty radiological bombs can be made transportable and undetectable with shielding and yet powerful enough to be effective especially when multiple ones can be used at the same time. UPDATE 5: Terrorists At the Gates CIA Director George Tenet testified before Congress February 24, 2004 that Hezbollah has an extensive network of operatives on American soil and an "ongoing capability to launch terrorist attacks within the US." This capability would include delivery and use of WMDS in major US cities. According to former Florida Senator Bob Graham of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Hezbollah has 300-400 well-trained and KNOWN terror agents inside the US. Former Deputy Secretary of State Dick Armitage has described Hezbollah as the "A-team" of terrorists, with AlQaeda being on the "B team". UPDATE 6: Osama bin Laden's fatwa to detonate nukes inside the U.S. Bin Laden sought and received a fatwah ruling from Muslim clerics in 2005 for Islamic religious permission to detonate nuclear devices inside the US. The Quran requires bin Laden's offer of a truce before Bin Laden can carry out the fatwah to use nuclear weapons in the US. Remember back in January when we all had a hearty laugh about bin Laden's audio tape offering a truce?
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
A FEW NOTEWORTHY EMAILS ON CALLING THE WHITE HOUSE TO FREE JONATHAN POLLARD
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, March 10, 2007. |
|
1) Goldi Steiner from Toronto writes: Just sharing the following: Of course I call the White House every day.I always ask if there are lots of phone calls about Jonathan, and the operators say: I am not at liberty to disclose that information... But today when I asked, the operator, a very kindly person, at first said the same "I am not at liberty..." then she paused and quickly added, "The phones are very busy, yes!" Which I understood to be the only way she could let me know that there are lots of calls for Jonathan! 2) Eleonora from Jerusalem writes: I told the White House operator that I am calling from Jerusalem, Israel. She responded with a hearty, "Shalom!" She took my message, "Free Jonathan Pollard now!" and promised warmly to relay it to the President. She ended the call by saying, " Todah! L'heetraoht! (Thank you! See you!)" 3) Ron Ander from Canada wrote: I have called the White House several times a day since the campaign started and have never received a busy signal. I find it quicker to call 202-456-1111. Their first question is always "What State are you from". I always say from Ontario, Canada. I have asked the operators if they have received many calls about Jonathan. Some of them have said that they can't give out that information but others have told me that they have received lots of calls. I wrote to Jonathan Pollard many years ago with the knowledge that my letter will be seen by the authorities and kept in his file. I told him that If I were in the position that he was 22 years ago fully I would hope that I would have the courage to do what he did. Some people have heroes like athletes or movie stars. Jonathan Pollard is my real life hero. Please keep calling The White House daily. It is the best thing you can do right now to help our hero. 4) Natania Etienne from Montreal writes: I called and had to wait a few minutes but a woman answered very nicely, she wanted to now what was state I was calling from. I said that I called from Canada that we were following the work of Mr Bush, that we appreciate his support for Israel, I said That we would like to see Jonathan Pollard free, that history will give him the credit he deserves, freeing Pollard will certainly give him a great place in HISTORY.. Gut Shabbes
5) Albert N. asks: The Pollard case is an American version of the Dreyfus case. Dreyfus was released in 7 years. Will Jonathan ever be released? J4JP Responds: Call the White House today! Let the President know how you feel! Dial 202-456-1414 or 202-456-1111 Thanks for writing! Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard by email at justice4jp@gmail.com |
|
UNDERWRITING ONE'S ENEMIES
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 10, 2007. |
|
Ironically, oil dependent civilized industrial nations underwrite oil producing autocratic regimes, some of which pose the greatest threats to those same underwriters. Indeed, terrorist enabling states such as nuclear emerging Iran, Wahhabi madrassa financing Saudi Arabia, gangster led Russia, genocide sanctioning Sudan, and power crazed Venezuela are marquee morally challeged nations, supplying weapons to Islamic radicals, topping that perilous potent short list of threatening regimes. We might indeed deduce civilized industrial oil, not just dependent, but addicted nations are bizarrely the primary financers of those terrorist enabling regimes, to their own detriment? Furthermore, burning fossil fuel no doubt substantially pollutes both Mother Earth and her atmosphere, raises temperatures, melts glaciers affixed to this challenged 'third rock form its sun', thus threatens to substantially disrupt the life of mankind as he knows it. Might we further deduce civilized industrial nations are, in fact, their own worst enemies? Vanquish terrorists, save Mother Earth-stop buying oil! Going cold turkey is not going to happen over night, still, neither is a planetary jihad exponentially magnified with perhaps nuclear weapons, nor the catastrophic consequences of global warming. There is time left, but likely precious little. Most alarmingly, assessing the inevitability of such dire occurrences if the 'cycle of stupidity' is left untreated, while there remains hope for a cure, leads one to contemplate the extent of civilized mankind's death wish, which apparently has overwhelmed his ability to reason. Surely, the logic of prescient action is thwarted by vested interests, especially noticed in the boardrooms of Exxon-Mobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, and sundry kindred spirit corporations with collective bottom lines bereft of moral imperatives. Indeed, leaders of democratically elected civilized governments, mindful of their own political coffers as well as perhaps personal stock options, loathe spearheading necessary initiatives to counteract the deadly cycle of events, unperturbed by constituents mostly enraptured by scandal sheets and sporting events, or Wall Street Journal types, themselves siphoning off a few relative crumbs from their own dark side investments, enabling them to buy mini yachts and mcmansions. Alas, invisible throngs of protestors nurture the status quo. Greed and insanity are pernicious bedfellows, on occasion spurring powerful civilized nations to blithely sacrifice one shlamazel nation, shoving it onto a corrupted alter built of disingenuous rhetoric, to keep pusher regimes happy. A sacrificial lamb of a nation would allow its body to char, pulling the smoldering wool over its citizens' eyes, while a focused lion of a nation would claw itself away from the fire, roaring at those who would divvy up its well done carcass, in no uncertain terms, with those immortal elegant words of wisdom, 'drop dead in a ditch!' What are you Israel? If a roaring lion, unwillingly to cede territories justifiably annexed to your Jewish State in 1967, then you are the kind of nation that could also focus on the 'cycle of shame' now afflicting our dysfunctional species, and force your will on the leaders of 'presumably' civilized industrial nations, yet unwilling to wean their economic engines off of prehistoric carbon compounds. There is no alternative Israel but to support your demand for change by developing an alternative energy source, cheap and efficient, with little or no deleterious effects on this challenged orb's, heretofore, disrespected environment. Jewish brainpower could engineer, aided by an ample budgetary allotment, say a state of the art supercharged battery, a safe fusion reactor, in essence an energy providing mechanism or mechanisms adaptable to century twenty-one needs without the malignant side effects. It's an opportunity for one tiny nation to take one giant step for mankind. Again, Israel, are you up willing to accept this daunting mission? Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
SHIMON PERES IN HIS OWN WORDS
Posted by Sergio Tezza (HaDaR), March 10, 2007. |
|
This article was written by Jason Maoz, Senior Editor of the
Jewish Press and it appeared March 7, 2007 in the Jewish
Press
|
|
A Fool In His Own Words Shimon Peres was in America this week hawking his new biography. Written by veteran Labor-friendly journalist Michael Bar-Zohar, who served as Peres's campaign chairman during the 1981 Knesset elections, the book (imaginatively titled Shimon Peres: The Biography) strives to present its subject as a sadly misunderstood and underappreciated Israeli hero. If slogging your way through 500 pages on the life of Shimon Peres is your idea of time well spent, then by all means go out and pick up a copy. But for the Monitor's money, there's no better way to get to know the mind of Israel's serial political loser (a man who in 2000 couldn't even beat a nonentity like Moshe Katsav for the ceremonial post of Israeli president) than by considering a handful of quotes from an older, much slimmer volume. For the Future of Israel -- essentially a series of interviews with the sympathetic journalist Robert Littell -- was published in 1998 and still makes for morbidly fascinating -- actually, quite frightening -- reading. Take, for example, Peres's attitude toward the late French president François Mitterand. For the longest time Peres simply refused to believe the hard evidence that Mitterand, whom he considered an intimate friend, had ties to the anti-Semitic Vichy regime during World War II and in fact had been a close associate of the very official responsible for deporting tens of thousands of French Jews. Asked by Littell about his relationship with Mitterand, Peres offered a long-winded apologia that sought to portray Mitterand as a philo-Semite who knew the Bible by heart. "Maybe he did have some dark spots in his biography," Peres finally conceded, "[but] that doesn't change my judgment about him." Even more revealing -- and dismaying, given the implications -- is Peres's fraternal feelings for Yasir Arafat. "Arafat," Peres gushed to Littell, "has been at ceremonies all over the world and he knows how to behave and he grasps a bit of French, and so on. I mean, he's quite phenomenal from that point of view." And not only was Arafat something of a continental gentleman in Peres's awestruck eyes -- "he grasps a bit of French, and so on" -- he was a man of faith as well. "He considers himself as coming from the line of the Prophets. He is a very religious man," said Peres admiringly of the man responsible for more dead Jews than anyone since Hitler and Stalin. And get a load of the charming word games Peres liked to play with the PLO leader, as he described them to Littell: "I call [Arafat] different names at different periods -- it depends on the atmosphere of the meeting. He wanted to be called President. And I called him Chairman. And then we agreed that his name would be Ra'is, which in Arabic means both chairman and president. Ra'is is like the Hebrew rosh, which means head. There was a very nice ambiguity." A very nice ambiguity. The reader visualizes Peres at a wine tasting event, sniffing a glass of Bordeaux, pinky ever so delicately extended. And then reality intrudes. It's not fermented grapes Peres is discussing, but his nauseatingly lighthearted attempts at coming up with a mutually agreeable title of respect for the world's master terrorist. But all one needs to know about how a bloody thug like Arafat could play a phony intellectual like Peres for such a fool for so long is revealed in this remarkable soliloquy Peres delivered to Littell: [Arafat] doesn't feel himself obligated by facts -- he can create his own interpretations of facts. He is a master of the facts, not a slave to them... I mean, when it comes to facts, he prefers to become a sort of Chagall -- things can float around. Doesn't feel himself obligated by facts. A sort of Chagall. Things can float around. In other words, in addition to his history as a killer of Jews, he was, in Peres's own telling, a completely untrustworthy man, one unencumbered by such mere inconveniences as facts. But nevertheless a man whom Peres and those who think like Peres were perfectly willing to gamble Israel's future on. Contact Sergio Tezza (HaDaR) at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net |
|
UZI DAYAN: "THE LAND-FOR-PEACE IDEA HAS COLLAPSED." AN ANALYSIS OF THE RAMIFICATIONS
Posted by Martin Sherman, March 10, 2007. |
|
Dear All, I urge you consider the significance of the following: 1. The Collapse of the "Land-for-Peace" Idea. In a recent publication "Israel's Deterrence after the Second Lebanon War", Maj. Gen. (res.) Uzi Dayan, former Head of the National Security Council and deputy Chief of Staff, who is widely recognized a longstanding, mainstream moderate, conceded that the concept of "Land for Peace" was no longer valid. In it, he admitted that: The land for peace idea has now collapsed [sic]. Hardly anybody in Israel really thinks that if we give territories, we will get peace... We have to find another way, and a new concept is urgently needed... www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&LNGID=1&TMID=111&FID=283&PID=449&IID=1497 2. Intensification of the Humanitarian Crisis in the Palestinian Administered Territories. Recent reports indicate that the Humanitarian Crisis in Judea, Samaria and Gaza is reaching unprecedented proportions with initial signs of malnutrition and starvation beginning to appear -- see 'Food insecurity' rampant in West Bank, Gaza http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3368287,00.html (English)
3. Dawning Realization among the Palestinians that Statehood is not for Them There is growing disillusionment among Palestinians themselves as
to whether they are worthy of statehood. see "Palestinians: We don't
deserve a state"
4. Manifest Willingness of Palestinians to Emigrate -- If Given the Opportunity Several recent opinion polls -- including those conducted by major Palestinian universities -- show that significant numbers of Palestinians are willing to emigrate "if given the opportunity" -- see:
Should Israel not seize -- with alacrity -- the opportunity to give them an opportunity?? 5. Palestinian intransigence regarding Israel's Right to Exist A poll recently published by Near East Consulting (NEC), an
institution that conducts regular surveys of Palestinian opinion,
reveals that when asked the question: "Does Israel have the right to
exist?", an overwhelming majority (75%) of the respondents answered
with a resounding "No". Analysis of the results according to the age
of the pollees gives even more cause for concern. -- the younger the
respondents, the greater their tendency to reject Israel's right to
exist. For example, among those aged 18-21, about 90% stated that
Israel had no right to exist. For younger age groups, the refusal to
acknowledge this right was virtually absolute, reaching almost 100%.
Accordingly, there appears little hope that future generations will
be the harbinger of better understanding.
6. The Unavoidable Conclusion In view of all these factors: * The Undeniable Collapse of the Land-for-Peace Concept I once again refer you to the Jerusalem Summit's Humanitarian
Paradigm for the dissipating (rather than solving) the Palestinian
predicament:
This is inevitably emerging as the only cogent, coherent and comprehensive way that will * Alleviate, and even eliminate, the humanitarian plight of individual Palestinians Surely the time has come to place this proposal on the national agenda and to commence serious public debate as to its implementation and ramifications. Dr. Martin Sherman is Academic Director of the Jerusalem Summit. This is Occasional Brief -- #001/2007 from the Jerusalem Summit. |
|
NBC'S LAW AND ORDER PROMOTES ANTI-JEW/ANTI-ISRAEL SENTIMENT
Posted by Michael Travis, March 9, 2007. |
|
This comes from Layla Gonzalez at the Hill Chronicles website
The original article was from CAMERA
|
|
In an absolutely stunning news announcement from E-News the NBC show "Law and Order" is promoting anti-Jewish and anti-Israel sentiments. What is worse they are justifying it. This is completely over the TOP! Damaging misinformation is being conveyed about Israel not just in news stories, but in popular culture items as well, such as Oprah and Vogue magazine, and now a popular NBC police drama. A "Law & Order: Criminal Intent" television episode that aired Tuesday, February 27, 2007, fosters negative stereotypes of Jews as disloyal Americans and Israelis as brutes who demolish Palestinian schools and kill innocent civilians. During this time of escalating anti-Semitism and anti-Israel animus, the show's executives have shown extremely poor judgment to promote such an anti-Jewish, anti-Israel storyline. And these are the highlights of what is being depicted and presented in the show -- THEIR FATWA'S: [1] Israeli bulldozers destroy Palestinian schools. I find it incredulous that NBC would do this. They are promoting hate -- hate of the Jews -- the state of Israel, and enabling every so-called Palestinian to harbor resentment of Israel and the Jews. It is an unfair portrayal of Israel, which has always sought to live in peace. With the President sending money to the universities in so-called Palestine, where the money ends up being given to individuals that perpetrate and war JIHAD -- and it was reported that one of these universities celebrated the "CREATOR OF THE SUICIDE BELT" during a week of festivities! We now have the Main Stream Media painting Israel as the villain. These fools only play right into the terrorists hands, but what is worse, they are so freaking stupid that they do not even realize this. And true to form, they defend this sort of anti-Semitism and actually believe they have done nothing wrong. Isn't Hollywood supposed to be "controlled by the Jews"? Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
FILMMAKER ADMITS HE MISIDENTIFIED TERRORISTS AS EGYPTIAN POWS
Posted by Avodah, March 9, 2007. |
|
This was written by Tovah Lazaroff and it appeared in today's
Jerusalem Post
(www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1173173967582&pagename= JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull). |
|
Ran Edelist, the director of the documentary film about the Shaked Reconnaissance Unit which has provoked a diplomatic uproar between Israel and Egypt, admitted to The Jerusalem Post Thursday that he had erroneously described 250 Palestinian fedayeen killed by the unit at the end of the Six Day War as Egyptians. That error, it appears, is at the root of a wave of Egyptian allegations that Israelis killed Egyptian POWs in this and other wars. However, Edelist insisted that he did not believe that this mistake, and another he acknowledged involving the incorrect usage of archival footage to illustrate the same incident, had detracted from the film's overall message, which he said was meant to show that the unit did not use excessive force in its missions. Edelist said he had based the film, shown on Channel 1 last week, on eyewitness testimony given to him as he set about telling the tale of the unit, which patrolled the southern border from the mid-1950s to the mid-1970s. About 18 minutes into the hour-long film, called Ruach Shaked, there is a description of how the Shaked soldiers pursued an "Egyptian commando" unit, 250 of whose fighters were killed in the ensuing battle. After the film was completed, Edelist admitted on Thursday, he received documents which showed that the commando unit in question -- while technically under the auspices of the Egyptian army -- was actually made up of Palestinian fedayeen. Edelist said that in making the film, he had relied on information from the soldiers who had described the unit as an Egyptian one. Former unit commander and current Infrastructures Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, who had to postpone a visit to Egypt this week when branded a murderer in the Egyptian media, has already released a statement insisting that the incident in question involved Palestinian fedayeen, and that they were killed in battle and not after being taken prisoner. Edelist admitted that, apart from getting the identity of the enemy combatants wrong in the voiceover, a second problem occurred when the wrong photographs were shown on the screen during the description of the engagement between the two forces. According to the film, the commandos were in retreat when they were "eliminated" by the unit. Shaked veteran Yaariv Gershoni described in the film how the unit hunted down the commandos from a helicopter, which relayed information to forces on the ground as to the exact location of the fedayeen. Gershoni said in the film that the enemy commandos in that engagement "were in a pitiful state and very frightened. A number of them hid in holes in the sand and covered themselves up so we wouldn't find them but we found them. Few of them fought back." As he spoke, photos flashed across the screen depicting enemy combatants with their hands up in various stages of surrender; in two snaps, an Israeli soldier stood by them with a gun. Other pictures showed an Israeli soldier with a gun standing over dead bodies. These pictures were in marked contrast to Gershoni's audio description and, Edelist said on Thursday night, he now realized they were inappropriate. The IBA's head of documentary films, Ittay Landsburg Nevo, told the Post that the photos in fact came from a separate incident in the Sinai. In the film, Gershoni said that Ben-Eliezer kept track of the number of dead commandos by making marks on his pants. In retrospect, unit veterans said in the film, they believe excessive force was used in that clash. But on the day of the battle, Gershoni said in the film, the participants did not doubt their actions. Defending the military action, Ben-Eliezer said in the film that the commandos killed that day had repeatedly attacked them. "There was no problem in telling them [the unit] that the commandos are armed and in retreat and to pursue them. They understood the holiness of their mission." Edelist told the Post that he hadn't known the aforementioned pictures would be used with that section of the film, and that their inclusion "was [due to] a mistake by the archives." But he said he didn't think the two mistakes were significant or that they detracted from the overall message of the film, which was designed to show how the Shaked unit effectively guarded the border against Arab infiltrators without the use of excessive force. It was intended to argue that an alternative existed to the famed Reconnaissance Unit 101 under former prime minister Ariel Sharon, which was heavily criticized for the civilian losses that it incurred. Veteran Yehuda Melamed said in the film that Lt.-Col. Amos Yarkoni, who commanded the unit prior to Ben-Eliezer, taught them to respect the enemy's humanity. "Amos taught us that the moment the enemy raised his hand, it was forbidden to touch him. You had to give a cup of coffee and a cigarette," Melamed said. But in the early moments of the film, in describing the unit in the late 1950s, prior to Yarkoni's taking command, one veteran, Nadav Neuman, said that at that time when he caught an infiltrator he would "take him out of the game." "What does that mean?" asked one of the filmmakers. "You know what they did in Shaked," responded Neuman. But the comment was never explained. The film has sparked a diplomatic uproar between Israel and Egypt and inflame passions within the Egyptian public, which evidently falsely believed that the film clearly depicted the killing of 250 Egyptian prisoners of war. Egypt has asked Israel to open an inquiry into the matter. The Egyptian parliament held a heated session earlier this week in which lawmakers called on Israel to be brought before an international court of justice. The Foreign Ministry released a statement on Wednesday in which it refuted the claims that Israeli soldiers killed Egyptian prisoners of war, and sent a copy of the film to Egypt. It said the documentary clearly showed that what occurred was not the "murder of helpless POWs" but rather a battle between Israeli soldiers and Palestinian commandos. The Foreign Ministry added, "It must be remembered that this was a bloody war that cost many lives on both sides." The Israel Broadcasting Authority also issued a sharp condemnation of the charges that the movie spoke of the killing of Egyptian prisoners of war. In describing the commandos that were killed, no one said they were prisoners, IBA said. But the letter did not address the issue of innuendo based on the juxtaposition of the photographs of commandos with their arms raised just at the moment that a veteran described the manner in which Israeli soldiers killed frightened commandos in a battle. Nevo, the head of the IBA's Documentary Department, told the Post he didn't see a problem with the film, which he said showed how the Shaked unit defended Israel at a time when it was highly vulnerable to terrorist attacks and border infiltrations. He defended the description of the Palestinian fedayeen unit as Egyptian commandos, given that technically they were under the auspices of the Egyptian army. Nor did he have a problem with the photographs, which he said show the captives alive and in any event were not taken from that event, but from another incident in the Sinai desert. He added that the commandos in the incident highlighted by the film were killed in battle. The film has reignited Egyptian claims that Israel killed its prisoners of war, a feeling which had been mostly dormant for the last 11 years. The issue made headlines in 1995 when before his death, veteran Arye Biro gave an interview to the media in which he said that he and another officer killed 49 prisoners during the Sinai Campaign in 1956. At that time, in 1995, allegations of killing Egyptian POWs were also leveled at the Shaked unit. The diplomatic crisis with Egypt then was calmed only when Israel launched an investigation into the matter. Neither the Foreign Ministry, the Defense Ministry or the IDF could provide the Post with information about the results of that inquiry. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@yahoo.com |
|
GALL OF THE HASHEMITES
Gall of the Hashemites
Posted by UCI, March 9, 2007. |
| This is a New York Sun Editorial from yesterday. |
|
If one were to distill 110% wrongheadedness and then distill it again a second, third, and fourth time, one couldn't come up with a speech as purely wrongheaded as the one that the Hashemite king, Abdullah II, delivered yesterday to a joint meeting of Congress. The king's aim amounted to blaming Israel for all the world's problems. "The wellspring of regional division, the source of resentment and frustration far beyond, is the denial of justice and peace in Palestine," the king said. "This is the core issue. And this core issue is not only producing severe consequences for our region, it is producing severe consequences for our world." Balderdash is the kindest way to describe it. It doesn't track with the actions of the violent terrorists, and it doesn't track with their statements. If the terrorists are upset about Israel's treatment of the Palestinians, why are they setting off bombs in Indonesia and Spain and Saudi Arabia and Iraq, which are hardly in the vanguard of support for Israel? Given that the terrorists state publicly that their end goal is to make all of Europe and America subject to Islamic law, why should we believe that in fact they have the far more modest goal of merely seizing land belonging to the Jewish state? In a speech on American soil, Abdullah incredibly snubbed his own country and his own family when he referred to "Sixty years of Palestinian dispossession." Why, his family knows all about Palestinian Arab dispossession. The gall of the son of King Hussein, who perpetrated what the Arabs call Black September, fetching up in the Congress to lecture the Americans on Palestinian Arab dispossession is astounding. Abdullah well knows that Jordan controlled the West Bank and eastern Jerusalem between 1948 and 1967. If the Palestinian Arabs were dispossessed during that period it was no one's fault but the Hashemites', who didn't exactly use those decades, or the years after, to race to establish a Palestinian Arab state. Abdullah made reference to a Saudi proposal from 2002 that he described as the "Arab Peace Initiative." That plan would be more accurately described as the Arab Destruction of Israel Initiative. Its aim was to seek to reward the second so-called intifada, which followed the collapse of President Clinton's Camp David II, by giving the Palestinian Arabs half of the Israeli capital of Jerusalem. The Saudis not only sought to divide Israel's capital in Jerusalem but also to force Israel to abandon Jerusalem's Old City, retreat to militarily indefensible borders, and absorb within those borders enough Arab "refugees" so that its character as a Jewish state would be eradicated. No one fell for it save for Thomas Friedman of the New York Times. Abdullah's speech yesterday won negative reviews from many of the Democratic lawmakers who now control Congress. The New York Times' Paris edition quoted Rep. Steve Israel of Long Island as saying, "I was troubled to hear the suggestion that the fact that Sunni and Shia are murdering each other is somehow the fault of the Israelis. This implication is a dangerous one and completely unacceptable." The chairman of the House Foreign Relations Committee, Rep. Thomas Lantos, was quoted by Fox News as saying the speech was "Profoundly disappointing ... a missed opportunity." One of the effects of the Islamist terrorist onslaught of recent years is that more Americans have thought more deeply about these matters. They will not be gulled by a foreign potentate offering up Israel as a scapegoat for troubles that originate with the failings of the Arab and Islamic world and their nondemocratic leaders, Abdullah among them. The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "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 REAL ISSUE ON TEMPLE MOUNT WALL REPAIR?
Posted by Richard Shulman, March 8, 2007. |
|
KING OF JORDAN TAKES A STAND King Abdullah condemned Israeli "violations" that he did not specify. Perhaps he meant what he also condemned. Israeli renovation as an attempt to attack al-Aqsa mosque and "violate its sanctity." He may have been referring to some Israeli police action against Muslim worshippers, but he should have condemned the Muslims, because they threw rocks down at Jews inoffensively praying near the Western Wall (IMRA, 2/9). Since Israel consulted Jordan before starting the renovation, one would expect the King to know that Israel has no designs on the mosque, to which it has deferred much of its own sovereignty and national interests. He should know that the renovation is taking place a couple of hundred feet from the mosque. He knows, but he joins the demagogues to press jihad. He is not moderate. When will the West notice that the preponderant majority of Muslims stick together against the infidels, falsely insisting that the Muslim aggressors or slanderers are the victims? Perhaps his is the true religion, but how decent are his fellow worshippers, who stone the worshippers of another religion? Since the country belongs to the Jews, why do they tolerate the violent Muslim presence? COOPERATION AMONG P.A. TERRORISTS Several terrorist organizations shared in a mortar attack on Israel. Radical organizations worked together on this with Fatah, headed by Abbas, whom the US and Israel call moderate (IMRA, 2/10). He keeps paying Fatah. On the basis of mistaking him for a moderate, the US and Israel are arming his official forces, most of whom are members of Fatah and some of whom belong to Hamas. Misdirected Western policy leads to more terrorism. The State Dept. and Israel make matters worse. HAMAS' POSSIBLE QUESTION "If 'moderate' Mahmoud Abbas is considered the hero of the West and simply a fantastic all around guy even though he calls for turning guns toward Israel and only opposes terror attacks if and when he believes they do not serve Palestinian interests, doesn't this set such a low enough standard for what is considered to be 'respect' for PLO agreements such that anything Haniyeh (head of Hamas Cabinet) does is OK?" (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 2/10). Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com. |
|
TEMPLE DENIAL IN THE HOLY CITY
Posted by Paula Kaufman, March 9, 2007. |
|
A Must Read. This was written by David Hazony and it appeared March
7, 2007 on the New York Sun website |
|
Shall Jerusalem be divided again? Or should Israel remain sovereign over the holy sites of the three great faiths? When the kingdom of Jordan ruled Jerusalem's Old City between 1948 and 1967, Jews were barred from sacred sites, and the famous Hurva and Ramban synagogues were blasted into rubble. But since capturing eastern Jerusalem in the 1967 Six Day War, Israel has ensured Christians and Muslims free access to their holy places. Why? Because from its inception, the Jewish state was a liberal democracy, enshrining religious freedom in its declaration of independence and enforcing it through policy and law. As Dore Gold shows in "The Fight for Jerusalem" (Regnery, 384 pages, $27.95) re-dividing Jerusalem probably would never have been on the international agenda if not for a series of diplomatic blunders by Israeli and American leaders, beginning with the 1993 Oslo Accords which raised the status of Jerusalem for the first time as an issue for negotiations, and culminating in the 2000 Camp David talks, in which Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak, backed by President Clinton, actively proposed handing over control of much of eastern Jerusalem to the Palestinian government of Yasser Arafat. (Arafat's response was to turn them down and go to war.) Mr. Gold is in a position to know: As Israel's former ambassador to the United Nations and head of the prestigious Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, few writers today have the breadth of experience to turn this kind of insight into a powerful argument. Mr. Gold begins his argument with a review of thousands of years of religious history concerning Jerusalem, with separate chapters dedicated to the place Jerusalem holds for Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. The thrust of the book, however, is a riveting -- and terrifying -- account of the forces arrayed against Western religious freedom today and what they would do to Jerusalem if it were it to fall into their hands. The most obvious of these is fundamentalist Islam, which sees alien religious views, even certain Islamic ones, as heretical and a target for violence. The Taliban's destruction of millennia-old Buddhist landmarks; Al Qaeda's bombing of one of Shia Islam's holiest shrines in Samarra, Iraq; and Hamas's attack on the Church of the Nativity in Bethlehem give us a taste of what Palestinian Islamist groups like Hamas and Islamic Jihad would do to the Temple Mount, the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, and the City of David, were they to take control. This possible outcome is why diplomats keep searching for "moderate" Palestinian leaders who seem Western enough to allow us to believe they would handle Jerusalem tolerantly. Mr. Gold shows us the peril of this illusion. Since taking control of territories in the West Bank and Gaza, the governments of Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas have overseen the destruction of ancient Jewish holy sites in Nablus (Joseph's Tomb) and Jericho (the ancient synagogue); the harassment and steady eviction of the Christian population of Bethlehem; and the wanton excavation of the Temple Mount compound, destroying thousands of tons of one of the richest archaeological sites in the world. There has also been destruction at the level of ideas. As Mr. Gold shows, Muslim and Arab leaders in the past recognized that Jerusalem was the location of Solomon's Temple, but today it has become official policy, taught in schools and backed with pseudo research, that the most sacred place in the Jewish imagination -- the Holy Temple in Jerusalem, built by King Solomon and maintained on and off for nearly 1,000 years -- never existed. Echoing the Holocaust denial of their Iranian contemporaries, Palestinian leaders, writers, and scholars have embarked on a campaign of intellectual erasure, which Mr. Gold calls "Temple Denial," aimed at undermining the Jewish claim to any part of the land. Mr. Gold's argument, therefore, comes down to this: Jerusalem cannot be divided without being effectively sacked -- with its Jewish and Christian holy places cut off and even destroyed. The only solution for Jerusalem is to preserve its complete Israeli sovereignty, for this has been the only proven path to the respect for, and access to, holy sites of all faiths. "No other state or international body," he writes, "can truly protect the peace, freedom, and religious pluralism of the Holy City for all mankind." Compellingly argued and deeply researched, "The Fight for Jerusalem" reflects the wisdom of a seasoned diplomat. As a primer for the battles to come, it is dead-on. Still, one wishes for more. The fear for Jerusalem's loss cannot replace the classical love for Jerusalem, expressed in so many ways through the ages, which gave it sacred status in the first place. Mr. Gold tells us all about the sanctity of the city throughout history, but little about why it should be sacred in the future -- for the religious Westerner, but also for the lover of democratic freedom. For us to sacrifice on behalf of Jerusalem, we need to see it as a great city, with a character that is unique and worthy and alive. Jerusalem is not all history. It is the seat of government for perhaps the boldest experiment in conservative democracy: a nation that reveres both tradition and liberty and encourages the free and creative outpouring of our past into our future. It is a symbol not just of religion and preservation, not just of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, but of the possibilities inherent in democratic government. In the past, Jerusalem has been contrasted with Athens and Rome; perhaps the proper opposition today is Brussels: not universalist and secularist like Europe, but delighting in its national and historical identity, its biblical mission, and its Jewish spiritual sensitivity. Unlike the European capitals, it is a city filled with children. Mr. Gold's book must be read and reread, for in the battle for Jerusalem lies the struggle for the soul of the West. If Jerusalem falls in the quest for "peace," who will stop the creeping spread of relativism, institutionalized impotence, and ahistorical angst from making the West's enemies even more emboldened? If we embrace Jerusalem and allow it to flourish, recognize it diplomatically and invest in it economically, that will say a great deal about how Western nations relate to their own past, their glory, and their future. Where Jerusalem goes, so go the rest of us. |
|
FBI MISPORTRAYAL OF POLLARD SMEARS JEWS
Posted by Justice For Jonathan Pollard, March 9, 2007. |
|
Nationwide White House Call-In for Jonathan Pollard
Every call is tallied by subject matter.
|
|
In a Fox TV News Report [3/8/07 9:33am est.] regarding Hassan Abujihaad, the former US Navy sailor recently arrested on charges of espionage and terror, former FBI deputy director Bill Gavin responded, "I have visions of the Jonathan Pollard case." Gavin then proceeded to discuss how seriously Hassan Abujihaad had violated US law. Pollard's case is totally unrelated to the case of Abujihaad. There is no basis whatsoever for linking them. Neither case is, in any way, reminiscent of the other. Gavin's deliberately suggesting that there is some similarity
between Pollard and Abujihadd, a Moslem spy who, [according to CNN
As a former deputy director of the FBI, Gavin cannot claim ignorance. He surely knows that unlike Hassan Abujihaad: * JONATHAN POLLARD DID NOT SPY FOR A TERRORIST ENTITY. Israel is not a terrorist entity. Gavin's remark leads viewers to believe that it is. For 22 years J4JP has repeatedly warned that Jonathan's case is being used as a tool by the US Intelligence community and by those hostile to the US -- Israel special relationship, to call into question Israel's reliability as an ally and the loyalty of the American Jewish community. This is just the latest episode by the FBI attempting to discredit Israel and the Jews by misportraying Jonathan Pollard, the Jewish spy. J4JP's caution went unheeded when the US used Pollard's case as a basis to fabricate the Mega Spy Scandal accusations against Israel. http://www.jonathanpollard.org/megaspy.htm. J4JP's warnings fell on deaf ears when the Pentagon used Pollard's case as a basis for sending out a memo warning that the Israeli Government was "aggressively" trying to steal US military and intelligence secrets and therefore Jewish subcontractors were not to be trusted because of their close ties with Israel, and Israel's status as a "non-traditional adversary." (See Washington Post.) http://www.jonathanpollard.org/1996/013096.htm Now the FBI slings mud at Israel and the Jews by drawing insidious symmetery between the case of Jonathan Pollard and that of jihadi spy terrorist Hassan Abujihaad. It should be noted that while the case of Abujihaad is infinitely more damaging to the US, Abujihaad, if convicted, faces a maximum sentence of 25 years in prison. Not life. Only Pollard, the Jewish spy for the Jewish State, continues to serve a life sentence for his efforts to prevent terrorism and to save Jewish lives. Jewish leaders in the US and in Israel should be deeply concerned about this. As long as Jonathan Pollard is left to languish in his 22nd year of a life sentence with no end in sight, his plight will continue to be exploited to the detriment of all Jews. See related news item: Former U.S. Navy sailor arrested on terror
charges -- CNN
Contact Justice For Jonathan Pollard by email at justice4jp@gmail.com |
|
ISRAELI DIPLOMAT: "ABU MAZEN LIED TO US THRICE"
Posted by Hillel Fendel, March 9, 2007. |
| [Editor's Note: The caption to the picture is NOT part of the original article.] |
|
Chairman Mahmoud Abbas of Fatah has broken three explicit promises he made to Israel regarding diplomatic matters, and "cannot be depended upon." So says a top Israeli government official. Abbas, also known as Abu Mazen, is scheduled to meet with Prime Minister Ehud Olmert this Sunday. Abbas will reportedly ask Olmert to show flexibility on two issues -- regarding both of which he (Abbas) has lied to Israel in the past. Arutz-7's Haggai Huberman, to whom the source spoke on condition of anonymity, reports that the first lie occurred last June, when terrorist prisoners in Israeli jails formulated what became known as the Prisoners Document. The paper's goal was to formulates guidelines for Hamas-Fatah understandings, and called for an Arab state in all of Judea, Samaria and Gaza. It also emphasized no fewer than five times the so-called "right of return" for millions of Arabs to Israel, and encouraged further terrorism. In meetings with Israeli officials, Abbas promised clearly that he would not support the document, which was drawn up under the leadership of arch-terrorist Marwan Barghouti. Not only did he support it, however, he made great efforts to have Hamas support it as well. The second deception of Abu Mazen was just several weeks ago, on the eve of the Hamas-Fatah summit meeting in Mecca. Abu Mazen had promised beforehand that he would not form a unity government with Hamas unless it included the Quartet's pre-conditions: recognition of Israel and agreements signed with it, and renunciation of terrorism. In the end, however, the agreement signed in Mecca for a Hamas-Fatah unity government does not recognize Israel, does not renounce terrorism, and includes only an oblique reference to "respecting" -- not "fulfilling" -- past agreements with Israel. Abu Mazen's third lie was revealed in the Maariv newspaper yesterday (Thursday). The paper reported that tax monies Israel handed over to Abbas, based on a clear understanding that they would not reach the Hamas government, in fact made their way to Hamas. Abbas, viewed as a "moderate" by the United States and the international community, "is not trustworthy," the Israeli diplomat concluded. However, when he meets with Olmert this Sunday, PA sources say he plans to ask the Israeli leader not to torpedo the PA unity government's activities -- even though it was conceived in contrast with Abu Mazen's promise to Israel. He also intends to request of Olmert not to pressure the international community to continue its economic siege on the PA -- despite the fact that previous monies given to PA were given to Hamas. Abbas reportedly plans to say that if Olmert does not come through
on the above requests, the ceasefire in Gaza will be in jeopardy.
Israeli sources say the ceasefire is already all but non-existent, and
that in any event, Hamas is massively building up its arms arsenal for
a confrontation with Israel.
Hillel Fendel is senior news writer for Arutz-Sheva
(www.Israel.NationalNews.com).
|
|
ANTI-ZIONIST DOMINANCE AT YOUTUBE IS MORE THAN A JEWISH/ISRAEL ISSUE
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 8, 2007. | |
|
Someone sent me the following, which is pretty alarming.
My understanding of the process (caveat: I'm not a techie...I'm an insurance broker and investment professional) is that the programs that get the most hits get put highest on the list. So it is not hard if you have a good group of 'foot-soldiers' to put up anti-zionist videos and then have your 'troops' hit on them again and again and again, so that the anti-zionist videos show up first on the list. The same problem exists with Google and Yahoo search engines. The way that some of us have tried re Google and Yahoo is to talk to the highest possible decision-makers and ask them to create filters that keep hate-speech/hate-preach out of that selection-process. I am not in that high-level hi-tech loop, and I don't know what progress has been made. I would advise everyone to send this, [or a reworked in your own words], email around to everyone you know, and ask all of them to send it to everyone that they know, asking for contact with anyone who is in a position to provide access to YouTube's highest level of decision-makers. Also note: ADL's main guy for internet abuse/hate, Bill, sent the following when asked about anti-Israel youtube programs: Simply stated -- inappropriate videos can be flagged -- YouTube makes this very easy for users to do -- I suspect that that high level does not even know that this is happening and would be appalled at the idea that YouTube is being exploited in this way ... i.e., turned in to a propaganda weapon. I also advise that the problem be defined in terms of its generic (i.e., content-neutral) dynamics. This is not just, maybe not even, a Jewish or Zionist or Israel issue. It is an issue regarding the exploitation, propagandization, and politicization of what should be a neutral venue of knowledge and entertainment. This is a problem regarding the subversion of a popular public hi-tech vehicle to the propaganda priorities of a specific highly politicized group whose scrupples are so low that they not only accomodate, but utilize actively, some types of generalizations and definitions that can be best described as hate-speech...and then they exploit the internal dynamics of the vehicle to project their hate-message to as broad an audience as possible. This exploitation of YouTube (and Google and Yahoo) is doing the opposite of the purpose for which these vehicles were invented...and is most probably contrary to, and offensive to, the people who invented them and who run them now. If we can find a way to get to those people at those high levels of decision-making, we may be able to get them to intervene and stop the exploitation, and perhaps even expose and condemn those who are doing the exploitation. I encourage any and all addressees to check youtube for the characteristics listed. If my suggestion makes sense, then please pass this on to anyone
who may be able to help in at very least providing access to youtube
decision-makers.
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli,
currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern
studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director
of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org).
Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com
|
|
THE REAL ISSUE ON TEMPLE MOUNT WALL REPAIR?
Posted by Richard Shulman, March 8, 2007. |
|
HOW WESTERNERS SHOULD NEGOTIATE WITH MUSLIMS In accordance with Islam, Muslim Arabs don't keep agreements with infidels unless forced to. Israel wants peace, and the Muslims want conquest, but pretend to sell peace to Israel, if only Israel makes a down payment that the Muslims take and then demand another. They ask a high price, because (regardless of their propaganda to the contrary), they know that Israelis crave peace. The Arabs sell words, and Israel pays without having seen the product. That is the way a bazaar operates, which is how the Muslims conduct political negotiations. Not knowing how to negotiate, the Israelis, like a novice poker player, show their hand. They present their terms first, letting the Arabs demand more and offer less. Even when an agreement seems to have been concluded, the Arabs demand more. When the Arabs balk, Westerners who don't understand Muslim culture explain it as "sensitivity" and "honor," as if they monopolize them. Muslims try to get away with privileges as being "their custom." Do not be deceived by appearances of friendliness. That's just salesmanship. The only way for Israel to get the Arabs to come to terms is to appear so strong, that the Arabs have no alternative. Israel should not present a plan, it should ask the Arabs for one. When presented, Israel should reject it as unacceptable. Walk out as often as necessary, just as one would from an Arab store until the storekeeper lowers his price sufficiently. Don't immediately make counter-offers. Make them come in with another offer. Be patient. Of course, Israel should have a plan, against which it can weigh the Arabs' offer. (But Israelis would leak their plan.) Don't compromise on the plan to meet the Arabs half-way, for then they would ask to be met half-way, again, which would bring it up to ¾ of the way. Avoid diplomatic vagueness, because the Arabs would distort what was meant. The Arabs would treat major Israeli issues as mere detail. Be precise. (Cover all contingencies). Try to make gains, not take losses (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/2006, p.20 from Moshe Sharon, Jerusalem Post, 10/10/06). THE REAL ISSUE ON TEMPLE MOUNT WALL REPAIR An MK figured out the real goals of Muslim protests to stop Israel from repairing the entrance to the Temple Mount: (1) Get Israel to submit plans to the Muslims on whatever the Muslims claim is sensitive. It would be a transfer of sovereignty; and (2) Let the Mugrabi wall collapse. It is the only one not controlled by the Muslms. With it gone, the waqf could bar Jews (Arutz-7, 2/8). U.S. ABANDONED NON-MILITARY WAY WITH IRAN We hope that the Iranian regime will fall before its nuclear bombs do. To topple the theocracy may require outside assistance. Unfortunately, "The State Department has quietly squirreled away and diverted funding" for Iranian democracy (Michael Rubin, MEF News, 2/8). U.S. NEUTRAL ON TEMPLE MOUNT ENTRANCE REPAIR A reporter asked a State Dept. briefer about the repairs Israel is making to an entrance to the Temple Mount. The official stated correctly what Israel is doing. The US suggests all parties be careful about such a sensitive matter and has asked Israel for clarification about it (IMRA, 2/9). I think that the US knows what Israel is doing. If the State Dept. were decent and fair to Israel, it would have told the reporters that the protests have no merit, because: (1) Israel has let mosques be erected on the Mount in its 40 years of control there, and has demolished none; (2) The repairs are not near the mosque; (3) Repairs are needed and Muslims shouldn't want to be responsible for collapse of part of the Mount; and (4) Being careful, Israel had consulted in advance with Muslim leaders so and so. The US should conclude that it is irresponsible for Muslim demagogues to stir calls for war over a non-existent grievance. That would be the statement of a self-confident and just super-power. The statement made was that of an appeasement-minded, small-minded, enemy that left Israel out to hang. ISRAELI GOVERNMENT UNABLE TO GOVERN Israeli national security is endangered because the Defense Minister and Prime Minister are rival politicians who won't talk to each other and take up matters of defense by press release (IMRA, 2/9 from Haaretz Ed.). THE MAGIC TRANSFORMATION The notion is advanced that if all the terrorist militiamen are recruited into the official police force, they would become good cops. It would work like magic. No, not their transformation. The magic is that after Oslo disproved that theory, it still is advanced by Abbas and is taken seriously by others. It is likelier that the more radical men would set the example of fighting Israel off-duty if not on-duty. The US goal of putting all the P.A. police into a single arm that it arms and trains, and of course we know that Iran also would arm it, would produce an infantry force armed with heavy weapons and larger than Israel's! (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 2/8). It would consider its primary duty to fight Israel. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com. |
|
THE TROUBLE WITH THE APARTHEID ANALOGY
Posted by Daily Alert, March 8, 2007. |
|
This article was written by Joel Pollak and it appeared in
Business Day |
|
IS ISRAEL an apartheid state? Apparently Nelson Mandela thinks so. In a recent letter to New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, Mandela lays out the case against Israel with unusual candour. Mandela's words are now being quoted all over the world. Last month, former US president Jimmy Carter cited the letter in a speech at Brandeis University. And who's going to argue with Madiba? Unfortunately for Israel's critics, the letter is a hoax. It is the creation of a man named Arjan El Fassed, who runs an anti-Israel website called The Electronic Intifada. El-Fassad has admitted that he made the whole thing up, but the Mandela letter has now entered the anti-Israel canon alongside countless other fictions. Yet, much like the Israel-apartheid comparison itself, it is completely spurious. Last week, United Nations (UN) Special Rapporteur John Dugard invoked the Israel-apartheid analogy in his report on human rights in the occupied Palestinian territories. Dugard is not the first person to compare Israel to apartheid SA at the UN. That distinction belongs to the late Idi Amin Dada, the murderous dictator of Uganda, who made the comparison in a speech to the General Assembly in 1975. Shortly thereafter, the Arab states pushed through the infamous UN resolution equating Zionism with racism, which former UN secretary-general Kofi Annan later called "lamentable" and which was rescinded in 1991. The Israel-apartheid fallacy was revived in 2001, in the run-up to the UN World Conference Against Racism in Durban, which collapsed into an orgy of anti-Semitic hatred. At the time, I interviewed Yossi Beilin, leftist Israeli politician and architect of the Oslo peace accords, and asked him what he thought of the Israel-apartheid comparison. "It's really crazy," Beilin told me. "Only ignorant people, or people with malice, can say something like that. The ignorance is either about what apartheid was all about, or about Israel," he said. Yet opponents of Israel have persisted in their use of the analogy. Why? Benjamin Pogrund, former deputy editor of the Rand Daily Mail, provides an answer: "Apartheid ... comes easily to hand: it is a lazy label for the complexities of the Middle East conflict. It is also used because, if it can be made to stick, then Israel can be made to appear to be as vile as was apartheid SA and seeking its destruction can be presented to the world as an equally moral cause." The irony is that it is the Palestinian Authority, and not Israel, which is being treated as a pariah in the world today. Since the election of Hamas last year, the Palestinians have suffered an international aid embargo -- since no one wants to fund a government of terrorists -- and have been cut off from trade and employment opportunities in Israel, which Hamas still seeks to destroy. In his report, Dugard sets out to describe the resulting misery. But his investigation is entirely one-sided. In his introduction he states: "I shall not consider the violation of human rights caused by Palestinian suicide bombers. Nor shall I consider the violation of human rights caused by the political conflict between Fatah and Hamas." That sort of bias taints every page of Dugard's report and destroys the credibility of its conclusions. Consider his description of Israel's security barrier, which he insists on calling a "wall". Dugard illustrates the hardships that the barrier creates for Palestinians, but fails to mention that it has also drastically reduced the number of Jews and Arabs killed by terrorist attacks. Dugard also spins the facts to fit his conclusions. Palestinians and especially Israelis come in all colours, but Dugard describes them as different races to make the apartheid analogy work: "Can it seriously be denied that the purpose (of Israeli actions) is to establish and maintain domination by one racial group (Jews) over another racial group (Palestinians) and systematically oppressing them?" he asks. Well, yes, actually. The continued refusal by Palestinian leaders to stop terrorist attacks on Israeli civilians has created the need for Israel's checkpoints. Security, not domination, is the reason. The situation could have been different had Palestinian leaders chosen to negotiate a final agreement instead of launching a new intifada in 2000. Dugard writes: "In 1994, apartheid came to an end and Palestine became the only developing country in the world under the subjugation of a western-affiliated regime." But what he neglects to mention is that Israelis and Palestinians were by then engaged in the Oslo peace process, which should have led to a comprehensive peace and the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel. Israeli settlement policy is indefensible. But Palestinian terrorism and the civil war between Hamas and Fatah have dealt more harm to human rights and Palestinian aspirations than anything Israel has done in the occupied territories. The Mandela letter is a fraud, but his example is relevant. Shortly after his release in 1990, he suspended the armed struggle, realising violence had to stop if future negotiations were to be conducted in good faith. Had Palestinian leaders followed his example, the world would be celebrating Palestinian independence instead of reading Dugard's reports. And so Dugard is right when he says that the situation in the occupied Palestinian territories is a threat to the very concept of human rights itself. But the danger does not come from Israel or the west, as Dugard contends. Rather, it comes from one-sided investigations and false analogies with apartheid that undermine the credibility of the UN -- and do little to address the real challenges facing the Palestinian people. The Daily Alert is prepared for the Conference of presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). Contact them at daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
RAMALLAH ISN'T WARSAW
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 8, 2007. |
|
This article was written by Eldad Beck and it appeared on the Ynet
News website
|
|
German Church's comparison of Israel to Nazis clear anti-Semitic expression BERLIN: How much chutzpa, insensitivity, and foolishness is there in a person that dares compare the situation of the Palestinians in the Territories to the state of the Jews at the Warsaw Ghetto in World War II? This is even more so when we are talking about the leaders of Germany's Catholic Church. Nobody is attempting to claim the living conditions of Palestinians in the Territories are ideal, but nobody has a right to exaggerate the descriptions of those difficult conditions to the point of comparing the Nazis' systematic imprisonment and murder policy to the strict security measures adopted by Israel in order to protect its citizens. These procedures are at times unacceptable and unbearable, but they are not guided by a deliberate policy of genocide such as the one the Germans pledged allegiance to. When several members of the Bishop committee, the top body of the Catholic Church in Germany, allow themselves, only several hours after visiting the Yad Vashem Holocaust Museum, to associate the horrors of the Holocaust with the situation in the Territories, this gives rise to a question: To what extent are the Catholic Church and German society still tainted by anti-Semitism. We shall recall that according to an explicit definition by the European Union bodies, presenting Israel's acts as comparable to the acts committed by the Nazis is an expression of anti-Semitism. Rewriting history If various polls show that 30 percent of Germans believe Israel's attitude to the Palestinians is identical to the Nazi attitude towards the Jews, then too many Germans have not learned any lesson from the history of their country. What's worse, part of the German elites have contributed to it and are still contributing to the fact that Germany's despicable past is blurred within collective memory and replaced by ancient, sickening ideas. In a most regrettable manner, leading denominations in the Catholic and Protestant Church assist this process of rewriting history. Here we should mention the support offered by several top Church officials to the Nazi Party, not because they were forced to but because of conviction and faith. There were of course Church members who resisted, both in words an deeds, and some even paid for it with their lives. But there were also those who collaborated. And there was also the German Catholic Church mission in the Vatican that assisted in a most active manner to the smuggling of thousands of Nazi criminals to South America and the Middle East. No top Church official has expressed regret to this day. Not any criticism leveled at the Israeli government is a form of anti-Semitism, but there are many in Germany and its churches that allow themselves to express anti-Semitic positions in the guise of such criticism. This, perhaps, is what stands behind the attack of members of the Bishop committee delegation on Israel. The dignified delegation did not see fit to voice even one word of criticism regarding the persecution of Christians in Palestinian Authority areas, which faces members of these communities with one choice: Emigrate from the "Holy Land." The only thing church leaders had to say is that the Israelis treat the Palestinians like animals and that Ramallah looks like the Warsaw Ghetto. So I've changed my mind: This is not about chutzpa, insensitivity, and foolishness; this is about pure anti-Semitism, in the best tradition of the Middle Ages. And if they are telling us that Pope Benedict XVI will not be visiting Israel before resolving the question of Church assets, perhaps Israel is the one that should condition the Pope's visit, and particularly that of a German Pope, on complete rejection of the anti-Semitic filth that is still common among his followers. |
|
ISRAEL'S NEW RELIGION
Posted by Marcel Cousineau, March 8, 2007. |
|
Israel has religiously obeyed their new god in implementing the Road Map for peace. This has taken priority over honoring and obeying the Holy One of Israel. The ruling elite of Israel are all member of this new religion which has swept over Israel. Unless you are a Road Map devotee, you will never become Prime.Minister of Israel. You don't have a chance to go anywhere if you are not a follower of Lord George in Israel. This blind faith continues in spite of the decade of abysmal failure after failure. Israel you have built your future on a house of lies which is about to come tumbling down. God said not to surrender his land, your replacement god George say's you must, and you obey him with religious zeal. You are incapable of saying no to your master. God tells you not to make agreements with those who seek to destroy you and your replacement god George say you must, and you religious prostrate yourself to him and obey him even after so many deaths of innocent Jews and the failure of his Road Map. Your sacrifice to hell for peace devours you and the land. Better separate from your false god and seek the Holy One of Israel while you are able, because your enemies have no intention of peace with you. They only seek your destruction. The U.S. is not so stupid to not understand this truth. They trafficked in and sold you lies and deception and YOU HAVE BEEN SEDUCED BY THEM !!! Can you wake up and break your idolatry this false god, this idol before it destroys you? Contact Marcel Cousineau at his website:
|
|
KILLING MUSLIMS
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, March 8, 2007. |
|
Ralph Peters wrote this article and it appeared today in the New York Post. His latest book is Never Quit the Fight. |
|
IMAGINE the reaction if Western agents slaughtered a hundred Sunni pilgrims on their way to Mecca. The outrage would spark incendiary rhetoric, riots and revenge killings from Peshawar to Paris. But when Sunni suicide bombers murdered 118 Shia pilgrims (and wounded almost 200 more) on Tuesday, Sunnis around the globe looked away: Shias only count as Muslims when America can be blamed for their suffering. Many of those Shia victims of religious totalitarianism were traveling on foot to Karbala to honor Mohammed's grandson Hussein -- who was butchered by the founders of Sunni Islam, to whom power was worth more than the Prophet's family. The hatred goes deep. The Sunni Arab campaign against Shias isn't just a struggle for political advantage: It reflects an impulse to genocide. And it makes a grim joke of claims of Muslim unity. The Tuesday atrocities, followed by smaller-scale attacks on more pilgrims yesterday, were meant to be as outrageous as possible. They not only underscored the hatred Sunni extremists feel toward all Shias, but had the immediate goal of provoking Muqtada al-Sadr's Shia militia to retaliate. The Sunni insurgents and their foreign-terrorist allies are worried. The recent effort by American and Iraqi forces to pacify Baghdad has shown early signs of success. Wary of tangling with our troops again, Sadr's Mahdi Army has been laying low, while the Sunni extremists have taken heavy losses. The Sunnis want the Shias back in the fight. Why? Because they want to disrupt the Baghdad security plan. Because they want to deepen the reawakened hatred between Iraq's religious communities. And because they yearn for a regional conflict that would "put Shias back in their place." So they slaughtered more than a hundred pilgrims -- men, women and children; young and old -- in Allah's name. Where was the outcry? Human-rights groups were too busy applauding European requests for the extradition of CIA operatives (the real enemies of Western civilization, of course). Since this butchery wasn't the fault of Americans or Brits, the Europeans themselves took no interest. American leftists, who raved that Abu Ghraib was another Auschwitz, didn't offer a single word of pity for the Muslim victims of Muslims. All to be expected. But shouldn't Muslims have denounced the attacks on the pilgrims? Shouldn't such an atrocity have sparked Arab anger that transcended Islam's internal divide? After all, those murdered Shias were fellow Arabs, not Persians. Where were the public statements of sympathy by government ministers and mullahs? Where was the noble Arab media? Where are the outraged demonstrations? Not only is Islamic unity a sham, the Middle East's hypocrisy stinks like a shallow grave. Sunnis regard Shias as Untermenschen. No Sunni government wants to see Shias receive a fair deal -- in Iraq or anywhere else. In the short term, the question is whether Shias will take the bait and retaliate against Sunni Arab civilians in Iraq. The Baghdad government is doing its best to calm the furious Shia community. We'll just have to wait and see what happens. But the greater, long-term danger is one this column has highlighted before: The administration's rush back into the arms of the Saudis and other America-hating Sunni Arab governments is a colossal strategic mistake. The moral issues are bad enough: To the Saudi royal family, dead Shias aren't tragedies -- they're trophies. One almost expects those bloated, bigoted princes to organize Shia-hunting safaris the way they slaughter endangered species when vacationing in impoverished African countries (been there, seen that). The strategic catastrophe that would result from a return to our wretched mistakes of the 20th century would cost us dearly. When picking allies in the Middle East, we've been on the wrong side of history for over a half-century. And now the Saudis are waging a propaganda campaign to convince American opinion-makers that they're our best pals in the whole, wide world. It works. An honorable elder statesman I respect recently got suckered during a junket to Saudi Arabia. He left Riyadh convinced he'd been sitting down with our indispensible allies. Well, the view I've seen with my own eyes -- in dozens of Muslim and mixed-faith countries -- is of Saudi money spent lavishly to divide struggling societies, to block social and educational progress for Muslims and to preach deadly hatred toward the West. Until 9/11, the Saudis got away with their extremist filth in this country, too. And Saudi-funded mosques here still seek to prevent Muslims from integrating into American society. The Saudis, not the Iranians, are the worst anti-American hate-mongers in the world today. When our dignitaries visit Prince Bandar and his buddies, they get the (literal) royal treatment. But in the slums of Mombasa or Cairo, in Lahore, Delhi and Istanbul, the Saudis do everything in their power to make Muslims hate us. After the suicide attacks on those pilgrims, did any member of the Saudi royal family visit the kingdom's own oppressed Shias to express sympathy and Muslim solidarity? Our relationship with the Saudis reminds me of the scene in the film "The Shining" when Jack Nicholson's character imagines he's embracing a beautiful woman only to open his eyes and find himself smooching a decomposing corpse. It's time for Washington's Saudi-lovers to open their eyes. By the way: The two suicide bombers who killed those pilgrims were Saudis. The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "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 WILL WE TRANSFER THE ARABS?
Posted by David HaIvri, March 8, 2007. |
|
This was written by Cheesy and it appeared on the Revava Discussion
Board
|
|
The opponents of Expelling the Arabs from Israel always bring up the same foolish question: "how do you plan to get them out". The answer comes from none other than the Arabs themselves. The following picture was taken at the Rafah crossing of Gaza Arabs pouring into Egypt as soon as the gates were opened. There was such a stampede from the 5000 people crowd of Palestinians Arabs trying to get from Gaza into Egypt that one person was killed and several injured. We don't have to expel anyone, it seems all we have to do is provide transportation
Contact David Ha'Ivri at haivri@gmail.com |
|
ISRAEL STATE TV DECLARES WAR ... ON THE STATE OF ISRAEL!!
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 8, 2007. |
|
1. For those still in shock that a professor at Bar Ilan University could invent and proliferate a medieval blood libel about Jews supposedly using gentile children's blood in Passover rituals, count to ten and take a deep breath, because the NEXT blood libel is even more incredible. The new blood libel was not invented by a crackpot academic but rather by the Israel state-owned and state-financed Channel One television station. If you are surprised that the Israeli state-owned TV is being used to smear Israel, that just shows you have not been paying close enough attention! The Israeli state-owned television and radio broadcasting have ALWAYS been under the hegemony of the Far Left, even during periods when the Likud and the "Right" held power. The little clique of leftists running it would be left in peace to run the broadcasts ideologically as their fiefdom. (By the way, cable is not much better, with cable stations also often running anti-Israel propaganda disguised as "documentaries"; an example is a sycophantic report on Uri Avnery's "life work".) I attach below the full report on this new electronic atrocity by the Israel Broadcasting Authority's Channel One. The report by CAMERA is far better than anything I could write. It was written by Alex Safian, Ph.D. and it is called "False Israeli "Massacre" Story Resurrected," It appeared March 4, 2007 at http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=7&x_issue=66&x_article=1291 (see web site for links and photos) |
|
Did Israeli forces massacre hundreds of Egyptian POW's during the Six Day War? According to Israeli press reports a new documentary, "Ruah Shaked," broadcast on Israel's Channel 1 alleges that such a massacre did take place, and attributes the killings to the elite Shaked reconaissance unit, then led by Binyamin Ben-Eliezer, the Labor MK and retired General who heads the National Infrastructures Ministry (for details see Egypt wants probe into 'IDF massacre'.) But this particular massacre charge was first reported and then thoroughly debunked more than 10 years ago. In followup reports, Ran Ederlist, the documentary producer, claims he never charged a massacre. According to Ha'aretz: "He said the dead were not Egyptian POWs, but Palestinian fedayoun fighters, and that they were killed in battle, not executed." The Jerusalem Post quotes him saying: "During this battle, you could say there was excessive use of force, (but) it was all in the context of war -- not prisoners, not prisoner-of-war camps, not people who put their hands up." The facts, in brief, are as follows. After initial stories alleging a massacre ran in 1995, the Jerusalem Post reported that "transcripts of orders from the Six Day War" clearly indicate that the alleged mass murder of Egyptian POWs near El-Arish never occurred. Instead, what actually happened according to the Post was a full-fledged battle between armed combatants: ... several hundred armed Palestinian soldiers, in Egyptian Army uniforms, were trying to escape from the Gaza Strip towards Port Said ... not knowing that the area was already under IDF control ... on the last day of the war [with Egypt]. They exchanged fire with Nahal soldiers and most were later killed by soldiers from the Shaked reconnaissance unit. (August 17, 1995) In addition, Israeli journalist Gabi Bron, who was serving with the IDF near El Arish at the time, and who is sometimes cited in reports as a witness to a massacre, has stated publicly that no massacre took place. Asked about the issue by Israeli historian Michael Oren, Bron replied: The one hundred and fifty POWs were not shot, and there were no mass murders... In fact, we helped prisoners, gave them water, and in most cases just sent them in the direction of the Suez Canal. (New Republic, July 23, 2001) Another supposed source for these massacre stories, according to press reports (including the Ha'aretz article cited above), is Israeli historian Aryeh Yitzhaki. But he too has denied that any such massacre took place; this is how Oren recounted their correspondence: "In no case did Israel initiate massacres," Yitzhaki wrote me. "On the contrary, it did everything it could to prevent them." Yitzhaki admits that hundreds of Palestinian commandos were killed around El Arish. But that was in combat, he says, after they ambushed the IDF supply columns. Supporting these statements by Bron and Yitzhaki is a 1967 account from the New York Times, which reported battles, but no massacres. Datelined El-Arish, June 7, 1967, the Times article reported that: ... pockets of Egyptian troops in Sinai and Palestinian troops in the Gaza Strip continued desperate resistance... Perhaps as important as the corroborating details offered by this account, is the affirmation that in El Arish on June 7th Israeli forces were accompanied by reporters who evidently neither saw nor heard even a hint of any alleged massacre. And not just reporters; photographers also accompanied the Israeli troops throughout their advance into the Sinai. Indeed, an American photographer for Life Magazine, Paul Schutzer, was killed while riding with Israeli troops in a half-track that came under Egyptian attack. Despite the dangers, these news photographers, both Israeli and foreign, filed numerous battle images, as well as photos of the war's immediate aftermath, such as Israeli soldiers dealing with Arab POWs in El Arish during the very time that some now charge an ongoing slaughter: June 7, 1967: Egyptian POWs being rounded up outside El Arish (Shabtai Tal) June 7, 1967: Israeli soldier guards Egyptian POW's at El Arish (Shabtai Tal) The photographers also recorded Israeli doctors tending to wounded POWs. Why the Israelis would bother to provide advanced medical care to POWs while they were at the same time slaughtering them is unclear: June 26, 1967: Wounded POW receives care at the hospital in the Atlit POW compound in Israel. (Moshe Pridan) Some of the wounded Egyptian POWs bade a friendly goodbye as they were being repatriated to Egypt: July 31, 1967: After Israeli treatment wounded Egyptian POWs are carried to a Red Cross ambulance plane for the trip to Cairo. July 31, 1967: In Red Cross ambulance plane a wounded Egyptian POW says goodbye to an Israeli. (For further details on these massacre allegations click here and here.) The bottom line is that charges of Israeli wrongdoing -- such as this alleged massacre -- often take on a life of their own, and no matter how discredited, many are eventually resurrected and reported again, with the facts that disproved them conveniently forgotten, or at least ignored. 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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
POLL: OLMERT SHOULD RESIGN 72%; OLMERT MOST APPROPRIATE TO BE PM 3%
Posted by Avodah, March 7, 2007. |
|
This was written by Aaron Lerner, who is Director of IMRA
(Independent Media Review and Analysis) and it is archived at
|
|
Telephone poll carried out by New Wave of a representative sample of adult
Should elections be held now? Yes 57% No 28% Should Olmert continue to serve as prime minister? Yes 17% No 72% Why should Olmert resign?
Who was correct in the dispute between Olmert and State Comptroller Micha
Who is most appropriate to be prime minister?
Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com
|
|
EVANGELICAL LUTHERAN CHURCH IN AMERICA PROMOTES ISLAM AS "LIKE CHRISTIANITY"
Posted by Michael Travis, March 7, 2007. |
|
[Editor's Note: My favorite remark in this slick mockumentary was, "Islam is not the violent religion we have come to believe because of the news." It takes a lot of faith to ignore bombings, beheadings and honor killings.] |
|
This is amazing! The film is full of factual errors, serious misrepresentations of the cult of Islam. It's called Understanding Islam and it was put out by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (www.elca.org). The ELCA icon reads: Living in God's amazing grace. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
JORDAN'S EXISTENCE A THREAT TO PEACE
Posted by Paul la Demain, March 7, 2007. |
|
The very act of carving the new state of Jordan (est. 1948) from the lands of Jewish Palestine set the stage for today's morass in the Middle East. Instead of trying to foist the scurrilous Saudi "road map" on Israel, the UN must instead study how best to disestablish Jordan, or in the alternative, reduce its lands so that no less than half of Jordan, along with Jerusalem, are restored to the Jews and the Hebrew Peoples ... and then the remainder can be divided between the Hashemite Kingdom and the Arabs who are demanding a state of their own which these interlopers wish to be known as "Palestine." Since by the Arab's own admission, there is no such thing as Arab "people" who are or have ever been "Palestinian" we must revisit the origin of this peculiar but lethal fantasy. Of course such a study might not be welcomed by the US State Department because this might expose how the Saudis acquired so much power and influence over the course of US national interests. It is our considered opinion that the US State Dept. ruined the good name of all Americans when it allowed its bureaucrats to accept financial and political aid from the Saudis. Accepting such monies condoned these acts of self-indulgence many of which were taken at the expense of the dignity of the American people. For instance, X-POTUS Jimmy Carter's NGOs took millions from the Saudis and other oil-rich Arab states, thus it's no wonder he promotes their interests, even now ... even now after the entire world has been made aware that Saudi Arabia is the fountainhead of hatred for Western values. As one Arab wag reportedly said: "American politicians are honest because once you buy them, they stay bought." When the British deceived the Jews who were being slaughtered throughout Europe and cheated them out of their lands and patrimony in 1948, they, too, set the stage for war in the Middle East because British duplicity proved to Abdullah that Brits can be bought off for chump change and oil. Disestablishing Jordan, and restoring Jewish Palestine to the Jews and the Hebrew Peoples, is a step toward peace in the middle East. We are the NON-evangelical Christians for Zion. We stand by the Patriots of Israel who are battling against the forces of Islamic imperialism. Viva Israel! Contact Paul La Demain at lademain@verizon.net |
|
PRAYER OF THE JEWISH SOLDIER. PRAYER FOR THE JEWISH SOLDIER.
Posted by Avodah, March 7, 2007. |
|
The poem was written by Nathan Lopes Cardozo. It and the photo
appeared on the Gates of Shechem website
|
|
Lord of the Universe
Once more, we are asked to defend our
We ask You to have mercy on us and
Let our people have the strength to
Let us not make mistakes
Please,
Remove the evil spirit of these parents
O God,
We are the children of Avraham, your servant, who
So, we beg you
O Lord,
You commanded us to live in a country which
You asked us to live there so as to send
Give the Arab nations
Now,
But once more our dreams of peace
Oh Lord, remove the evil intentions of the
Why do they want to portray us
O, God You know
Please God,
We hate war as nobody else does,
We are the people of the Book
So, deliver us from this anguish
Contact Avodah at avodah15@aol.com |
|
MUSLIMS IN UK FORCE HINDU GIRLS TO CONVERT -- RELIGION OF PEACE?
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 7, 2007. |
|
Now it is no longer "din Muhammed fi-Sayyif" (the law of Muhammed, i.e., Islam, [is advanced] by means of the sword). Now it is blackmail and threats and intimidation and kidnapping that are used by Muslims who seek to gain converts to the "religion of peace," among the most vulnurable of audiences in the UK. It seems to me that these violent and bullying proselytizers are creating a potentially embarrassing self-contradiction by their behavior. If they must resort to such extremes to get converts, then what does that tell the world about the Islamic doctrines themselves? How appealing and convicning can they be if their proponnents must stoop to such barbaric behavior? of course, this oxymoron never seemed to bother the proselytizers-at-the-point-of-the-sword during the 1,000 years that Muslim warriors stormed the ramparts of Western civilization, the Middle East, and India...with their traditional battle cries of "Allah is the greatest", "convert to the religion of peace, or we'll kill you". And it does not seem to bother the hordes that take to the streets today in rent-a-riot frenzy and mob-on-demand violence, committing murder, arson, and other brutal acts, including trampling one another to death, in their fervor to show the world just what happens when you incur the wrath of the saracen by saying that his is not a religion of peace and love and acceptance. Of course, not all Muslims today demonstrate these brutal barbaric behaviors; and many both believe and live their religion as a religion of peace and love and acceptance. But the problem is, it seems to me, that it is the barbaric brutal ones who are in charge. They are calling the shots, they are leading the Jihad...and that vast majority of peaceful, loving, accepting Muslims are merely standing idly by while the tyrannical, totalitarian, theocratic, terrorist, supremacist, triumphalist, Islamofascist leaders march forward with their jihad...against us. More on attempts by Muslims in UK to force Hindu girls to convert 'Hindu girls targeted by extremists' -- Metro -- UK
Muslims accused of blackmail to make student girls convert -- The Times -- UK
Police protect girls forced to convert to Islam -- Daily Mail UK
UK: Muslims accused of blackmail to make Sikh and Hindu girls convert
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
LET FREEDOM WIN
Posted by Jeff Osonitsch, March 7, 2007. |
|
A Roadmap for Victory in the Arab-Israeli Conflict When considering solutions to the vexing conflict between Jews and Arabs in the Levant, the goal that is usually defined by diplomats, academics, and journalists is peace; but as John Ruskin said "You may either win peace or buy it -- win it, by resistance to evil; buy it, by compromise with evil."[i]While peace is certainly a laudable goal, too often, all else is sacrificed to this end and with disastrous consequences. History is replete with examples of a peace, declared prematurely, or defined by a third party, which cannot hold. The current standoff at the 38th parallel between the United States and North Korea is more than a half-century old now, and the cease-fire declared there resolved nothing, while arguably condemning millions to die of starvation and execution at the hands of communist tyrants. The premature cessation of hostilities by the U.S. and its allies in Operation Desert Storm similarly left the dictator Sadaam Hussein (who was strongly supported by Palestinian Arabs) in power to slaughter hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, finance suicide attacks in Israel, and necessitate a large U.S. presence in the Saudi desert, inflaming militant Islamic anger at the west. Peace alone cannot be defined as victory; rather victory is a means through which peace may be achieved. Historical Jewish claim to Judea The ancient Hebrew's, ancestors to today's Jewish race were among the first people to establish permanent settlements on the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea. This area, known variously to history as Judea, Palestine, the Levant, and Israel was the land originally promised by God to the Jewish people through the Prophet Abraham, Patriarch of the great monotheistic western faiths. Since antiquity the Jewish settlers there have been periodically massacred, enslaved, dominated, and driven off their land by the likes of the Philistines, Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Crusaders, and Turks. One such oppressor, the Romans coined the term Palestine, in around 135 A.D. in a vain attempt to extinguish forever the Jews' connection to their land after a revolt against their pagan overlords was crushed in particularly brutal fashion.[ii] However, despite these repeated attempts to exterminate and permanently disperse their people, a core group of Jewish inhabitants have remained there for over 3 millennia. These stewards of the Jewish homeland have, at great personal peril, retained their peoples' claim to the Promised Land ever since. In the late 19th century, a new "Aliyah", or return of the Jewish people to the Holy Land began, which culminated in 1948 with the creation of the modern state of Israel. Among the many reasons for this emigration were the brutal treatment of Jews in Arab lands where they are considered "Dhimmi", or second-class citizens; in fact, many thousands of Jews were forcibly expelled from their homes in Arab lands, most settling in Israel, their property confiscated by their former governments.[iii] In Europe, Jews were subject to discrimination and occasional pogroms, or outbreaks of violence that peaked with the holocaust in the late 1930's. In this mass-liquidation of Jewish civilians, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, leader of Palestine's Muslim community, aided the Nazi-German architects of the final solution. As historian Joan Peters put it "The Grand Mufti...staunch friend of Hitler and coordinator with Germany in the final solution to the Jewish problem-was personally responsible for the concentration camp slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Jews, if not more."[iv] Once these Jewish pilgrims arrived in Palestine they generally purchased land there from largely Arab absentee-landowners. Later, as Zionism, or commitment by the world's Jewry to a return to the land of Zion (or Israel) became a more formal and organized movement, blocks of land were purchased collectively by Jewish organizations. These lands were improved and irrigated and whole communities developed on them. This influx of industrious new Jewish settlers soon drew increasing numbers of poor Arabs to Palestine in hopes of finding work on the newly cultivated lands. This dual Arab-Jewish immigration into the heretofore largely uninhabited region, described by Peters as "under-populated land, its revolving populace perennially depleted in number because of exploitation, reckless plundering, nomadism, endless tribal uprisings, and natural disasters."[v] Would soon flare up into sectarian violence, as both groups would claim the land as their own. Israel's legal claim to its homeland The fall of the Ottoman Empire, which had controlled the Middle East for the previous 400 years to the Allies in WWI, created a power vacuum in the region. To address this, the League of Nations tasked the victors with Mandatory authority, or administrative control in various areas of the region. The intent of the mandate was to create local municipal governments and to eventually transfer sovereignty to the people indigenous to the region. The Jews of Palestine quickly complied, establishing the institutions necessary to administer a modern state. The Palestinian Arabs, consistent with their behavior throughout, refused because, in the words of historians Ian Bickerton and Carla Klausner "The Arabs did not wish to legitimize a situation that they rejected in principle."[vi] The British were given Mandatory authority in Palestine, which, contrary to current understanding of geography, extended well beyond the current borders of Israel. The area defined as Palestine then extended from the Mediterranean Sea to the west, Syria and Lebanon to the North, The Hejaz (or Saudi Arabia) and Iraq to the east, and to the south, Egypt. By virtue of the Balfour Declaration, which formally declared that the British government viewed "with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people"[vii], all of Palestine was designated as the Jewish homeland. The inclusion of this document in the preamble to the Palestine Mandate, by the League of Nations gave this view the force of international law.[viii] Despite this, as Peters puts it "Britain nevertheless quietly gouged out roughly three-fourths of the Palestine territory mandated for the Jewish homeland into an Arab emirate, Transjordan, while the mandate ostensibly remained in force but in violation of its terms."[ix] This act created a de facto Arab state in Palestine, arguably in violation of international law. This state -- Jordan -- still exists today, nullifying Arab complaints of the lack of a homeland in Palestine. The stated basis for this partition was a letter from Sir Henry McMahon, the British high commissioner in Egypt, to Emir Feisal, the son of "Sherif Hussein of Mecca, ruler of the Hejaz, perhaps the Arab figure at that time with the greatest prestige and power."[x] Feisal claimed that in this letter, dated October 24, 1915, the British promised an Arab homeland in Palestine. McMahon, for his part, explicitly denied this claim in 1937 saying "It was not intended by me in giving this pledge to (then) King Hussein to include Palestine in the area in which Arab independence was promised."[xi] Arab sovereignty was promised rather, and granted in the Hejaz, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon. Since Palestine was never intended by any earlier agreements to be an independent Arab homeland, and since 75% of Palestine already is a Palestinian state, the remaining portion of the British Mandate west of the Jordan River is, by any legal definition, the indivisible Jewish homeland guaranteed by the Balfour Declaration, and codified in the League of Nations Mandate -- that is, Israel. Why then, did the British carve out an Arab homeland from its Palestine Mandate, heretofore legally promised to the Jews? Partially to re-pay the Arab leaders, Emirs Hussein and Abdullah (who was promptly named King of Transjordan) for aiding the Allies by leading the Arab revolt against the Ottomans in the First World War; and partly to appease the Arabs who even then were engaged in terrorism. Indeed in 1939, shortly after Chamberlain declared "peace in our time", thus condemning the Polish people, and soon the rest of Europe to Hitler's Wrath, a white paper, or British policy statement was issued, which severely restricted Jewish immigration into Palestine in violation of the Mandate, which had tasked Britain to "facilitate Jewish immigration into Palestine under suitable conditions."[xii] This act of appeasement, which they felt would reduce Arab terror attacks while earning the Arab loyalty they'd need for the coming second world war, condemned many thousands of Jews to their fate under Hitler. And British and U.N. acts of double-dealing, whether self-serving, anti-Semitic, or due to outright incompetence coupled with Arab intransigence and belligerence further stoked the flames of discontent. In 1948, after several attempts to mediate a plan for disposition of the Palestine Mandate agreeable to all parties were met by Arab refusal to compromise or even negotiate, the U.N. proposed to partition the area west of the Jordan into Jewish and Arab sectors, with Jerusalem as a special international zone. The Arabs rejected this sensible compromise and instead, in May of 1948, invaded Israel. This attack marked the beginning of the Arab refugee issue; as Peters puts it "The invading Arab governments were certain of a quick victory; leaders warned the Arabs in Israel to run for their lives." [xiii] With the notable exception of Jordan, these Arab governments have since refused to grant displaced Arabs citizenship, exposing their expressed concern for Palestinian Arab welfare as the self-serving ploy it is. By wars end, with the subsequent annexation of the West Bank by Jordan, Israel was left with barely 17% of the area originally allocated to it by the League of Nations for the Jewish homeland.[xiv] In 1967, after again being attacked by the combined Arab armies of Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, and Syria, Israel took the West Bank from Jordan; the Golan Heights from Syria; and the Gaza strip from Egypt. These conquests, won in a war started by their enemies "provided Israel with strategic depth" and "more defensible borders."[xv] Moreover, these areas are now sovereign Israeli soil, not occupied territories. The Arabs then, have no legal or moral claim to that area of Palestine west of the Jordan River. The Solution For true peace to prevail, in any conflict, a decisive and unambiguous victory must be achieved whereby the vanquished capitulates unconditionally, ceding to the victor the right to define an agreeable and lasting peace. In the Arab-Israeli conflict, premature peace negotiations and agreements, generally imposed upon them by outside powers, have deprived Israel, a western democracy, of total victory over their enemies, who cynically use each peace interval to rearm and regroup in the vain hope of future victory. In this spirit the most just and practical solution to this heretofore-intractable problem is, however painful in the short-term, for Israel to view the recent landslide election victory of Hamas, a terrorist organization whose principal purpose for existence is the destruction of Israel, as a declaration of war. Israel should openly and clearly state this view and demand the clear and irrevocable renunciation of its stated goal by the Hamas leadership. If Hamas fails to do so Israel should use the next major terrorist attack on its soil as a pretext to the resumption of a state of all-out war with the Palestinian Arabs who, through their overwhelming vote margin against the "peacemakers" of the Fatah Party, have themselves functionally declared war on Israel. As a sovereign nation and full member state of the U.N., the Israeli government has a legal right, and a moral obligation to its citizens to defend its borders and quell domestic uprisings. In this new war, Israel should not relent until total victory is achieved even if that means driving the militant Arabs remaining west of the Jordan River over the Allenby Bridge into Jordan; or walling off those areas of the West Bank Israel is willing to cede to the Arabs, leaving them to their fate -- whether annexation by Jordan, which has already granted citizenship to all non-Jewish Palestinian Arabs, or eventual statehood. For Israel to allow a belligerent fifth column of Muslims dedicated to its destruction to remain within its sovereign borders is tantamount to national suicide and is unacceptable as a national policy. The results of such a policy are self-evident not only in Israel but can be seen as well in Indian Kashmir, where a similar minority of Muslim malcontents have been instrumental in inciting three wars between India and Pakistan in the past half-century. When peace is declared before victory, the result is a self-perpetuating standoff or an interlude between violent flare-ups as seen on the Korean peninsula, in Kashmir, and in Israel. The west must stand with Israel, the only Democracy in the area until a lasting peace may be achieved through victory. Endnotes i. H.L. Mencken, ed., A New Dictionary of Quotations on
Historical Principles, from Ancient and Modern Sources (N.Y.: Alfred
A. Knopf, 1991), 897
Jeff Osonitsch has a law enforcement background and writes from his home in New York. Contact him at josonitsch@yahoo.com, This article was published April 1, 2006 on the Intellectual Conservative website (http://www.intellectualconservative.com/2006/04/01/let-freedom-win/). |
|
REMEMBER ZIONISM?
Posted by Saul Goldman, March 7, 2007. |
|
Although there are many local groups that raise funds for various Israeli charities and universities, there is no one central effort devoted to teaching Zionist ideology. There are more Kabbalah lectures than Zionist instruction. Kabbalah has actually taken on cultic characteristics. Originally, kabbalah was a mystical interpretation of Torah. Its most prominent text was a medieval commentary by Moses de Leon (attributed to Shimon Bar Yochai) called the Zohar. But, mysticism usually derives from catastrophe and the Spanish Expulsion was no doubt the catalyst for this psychic retreat. The core of the mystical view, of course, is magical thinking. In other words, to the mystic what we say or believe is more powerful than what we do. A kabbalistic mysticism may have usurped the mitzvah based pragmatism of normative Judaism. One result may be that most people believe that being a Zionist means that you give charity to Israel. So we have a frightful paradox. We have replaced the mitzvah of redeeming the land and people of Israel with a fanciful or mystical theory of redemption.More Jews in this neighborhood are familiar with the teachings of the Rebbe than they are with Gordon, Bialik or Usshikin. The synagogues do include prayers for the redemption of Zion in the liturgy but fail to teach their congregants how to go about the task. Zionism is that prayer for redemption in the form of its deeds. Ironically, in our community we celebrate many of the successes of Zionist effort. Federation sponsors Israel oriented programs such as an Israeli Independence celebration and Jews support many Israeli charities and universities. But, with the passing of time the very idea of Zionism has faded into a historical footnote. People think that the purpose of Zionism was only to establish the Jewish state. Thus, 1948 was for many the date that Zionism was no longer needed. Ironically, scholars within the Jewish state are describing the "post Zionist era". Yoram Hazony, the founder of the Shalem Institute in Jerusalem, recently published The Jewish State. To give you an idea of the focus of his study, Hazony titles his introductory chapter, "the Jewish State doesn't live here anymore". He then goes on to document the Israeli reaction to Judaism as the core value system for Israeli society. In other words, many Israelis don't see western humanistic values as the value system guiding Israeli culture and society. Hence, they have no interest in writing a constitution that is Hebraic or in training an army whose rules of engagement are derived from Biblical values. IDF planners have even toyed with the idea of a professional and all volunteer army that would replace the citizen-soldier (Numbers 1:1). Judaism throughout the centuries of exile never lost its political identity. It was this character that kept Jews together and kept alive the idea of national redemption. Because that redemption impacted negatively upon an indigenous population of people resisting the Jewish claim to the land, modern or post-Zionist ideologues are now suffering from "victory guilt" because we won the war. As a result of that war Arabs inside Israel fled to nearby Arab countries; only to be interned by their own people in the squalor of refugee camps. Actually, many of these Arabs left their homes in anticipation of a vengeful return on the heels of the victorious Arab armies. The clash between our commitment to Zion and their places of residence was indeed one of the sadder aspects of our national redemption return. Conflict always causes pain but not to have endeavored to redeem ourselves would have been disastrous for the Jews. While the vision of Zion enabled Jews to hold on for long centuries, the catastrophe of Auschwitz cast a shadow upon the Jewish soul that only our own land could illuminate. We were, indeed, a nation that survived outside its own borders. We always remained a polity in exile. But, the time had come to go home. The de-Judaization of Israel threatens all of us and affects the future of our children. It is no accident that post-Zionism in Israel parallels the dissolution of American Jewry. Zion is the spine of Israel without which Jews see only their separate humanity rather than their moral and spiritual unity. There are several obvious causes for the decline of American Jewry. The cost of Jewish affiliation and the commercialization of religion have prevented many Jews from belonging. Jewish organizations seem to be about fundraising instead of consciousness raising. I meet people who say that they are not very Jewish when what they really mean is that they are neither conservative nor reform or even theists. Because of the great transformation of synagogues from "houses of prayer" into mega centers of Jewish life that include pre-school, youth groups, sisterhoods and men's clubs, the contemporary temple has become a costly privilege of wealthy Jews. So how does one express one's Jewishness if religion is too expensive or unattractive? Zionism was not only about building a country; it was expressing our national identity. It is important to note that religion is a late idea to Judaism. There is no word for religion in the Bible because Torah was not about a religious cult; it was about building a unique nation. That nation, like every other nation, belonged to a land; a thought that every faithful Jew remembered in his daily prayers. Zionist thinkers accepted the fact that a people without their land are forever handicapped. Ironically, the Arabs have adapted Zionist ideas to their own propaganda about the plight of homeless Palestinians. The very creation of a Palestinian nation was a mental abstraction that gained legitimacy because the Arab League needed a club with which to pound the Jewish state. There is an old Israeli joke about the definition of a Zionist: one Jew who asks a second Jew for money in order to send a third Jew to Israel. But, Zionism is especially important today as we witness the worrisome transformation of America (press 1 for Spanish). The centrifugal social forces pulling America apart pose a threat to Jews. As the American melting pot decomposes into a color war Jews will be particularly vulnerable. Certainly, American support for Israel could conceivably be replaced by a different view of American allegiances. There are new powerful influences. Black, Islamic and Hispanic nationalism dominate the American scene and I wonder where our place might be in these radically new circumstances. The facts of Jewish life in America offer little assurance. Our numbers are diminishing because of zero population growth and assimilation. The large and affluent organizations that routinely solicit our contributions by waving the specter of anti-Semitism or the security of Israel have become undemocratic anonymous entities run by bureaucrats and their wealthiest contributors. Such behavior further depletes the energy of the Jewish community by fostering the false attitude that we are protected and represented while reinforcing the sad truth that we are excluded. When I speak to people about their particular organizations, they lament to me about the Anti Defamation League's indifference to the brutality of Jonathan Pollard's treatment (Pollard and Moussaoui both received life imprisonment with no possibility of parole) or the fact that the American Jewish Committee hosts Kofi Anan at its annual banquet. These facts seem to indicate that these organizations are not in touch with the way Jews see their world. The Republican Jewish Coalition is more republican than Jewish and we realize that there is a deafening silence on behalf of the Jews. Perhaps, some people might argue, American Jews are too diverse to be considered as one entity. This "diversity" while a popular word in politically correct America is actually the failure of our leadership over the past one hundred years. Rabbis and scholars sought vindication for their own theologies and pulled us apart rather than glue us together. We are classified into religiously fragmented or hyphenated people (conservative, reform, orthodox etc) looking at each other with some suspicion and competitiveness. One of the first questions that I am asked is what is my denomination. We are no longer One. Jews support different political parties. But, there is no Jewish political caucus. What can unite us and bring together all Jews? I believe the answer is Zion. Yet, Zion's victories have lulled us into a false sense of security. For years Jews believed Israel was invincible until the devastation of the Yom Kippur War in 1973. Now, Jews might be worried about Iranian nukes or Islamic Jihad, but the greater threat to our well being is the moral abyss caused by post Zionist thinkers who have succeeded in repeating in Hebrew the allegations of Toynbee and the Islamic Jihad. There are Hebrew University professors who compare IDF soldiers to the Nazis. Such ludicrous comments derive from a long tradition of anti-nationalist thinkers. When Jews were offered emancipation by Napoleon, they were forced to renounce their own national aspirations. As one member of the French National Assembly, Clermont-Tonnere put it, "for the Jews as individuals everything, but for the Jews as a nation nothing". As other Jews throughout Europe sought emancipation, they rejected their nationalism in favor of their citizenship. They never questioned the demand that they erase Zion from their consciousness. Hermann Cohen one of the most important disciples of Kant was instrumental in "elevating" Judaism to an ideology of suffering which he claimed is the highest form of morality. This explains why men like Martin Buber and Judah Magnes (founding president of the Hebrew University) were so anti-statehood in the years preceding Israel's independence. Magnes, an American reform rabbi and Buber were influenced by the humanism of Cohen. But when it came to the Jews, as Theodor Herzl understood at the trial of Dreyfus (a 19th century Jonathan Pollard) humanism never worked. Modern political Zionism, then, is the most pragmatic expression of the facts of Jewish life. Jewry was disappointed with European liberalism. Zionism was an acceptance of an ancient Biblical observation that "Israel was a nation that was to dwell apart" (Numbers 23:9). Judaism without a state would forever fulfill Cohen's perverse definition of the Jew as the suffering servant. Not exactly the plan of Moses and certainly an erroneous interpretation of Isaiah. The sad paradox is that Jews in Israel are again suffering. However, they are not suffering because they are weaker than the terrorists. They are suffering because the anti-Zionist culture-makers in Israel believe in the "humanity" of suffering and reject the "immorality" of strength and victory. The success of the terrorists in part is the result of the anti-Zionist leadership attempting to demonstrate that a Jewish state cannot survive and that power, sovereignty and Judaism cannot coexist. If there is a remedy, it must come from a renewal of the Jewish spirit; not the Habad spirit or the Young Israel spirit, or the Conservative movement. The renewal must be derived not from an external form of religiosity but from that deep common spiritual identity. There are some among us who carry the burden of our past as if it were only difficult and sad. It is Zionism that reminds Jews that despite the bad years our history has been glorious. But, Zionism is not antiquarian; it is not solely the celebration of what was that we see in so many Jewish museums. More than that, Zionism is the conviction that the best is yet to come. Contact Saul Goldman at gold7910@bellsouth.net |
|
WORLD BANK: WHERE DID PA SPEND $100 MILLION IN AID?
Posted by Avodah, March 7, 2007. |
|
This is a news item from
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) The World Bank suspects irregularities in $100 million that was sent through the offices of Palestinian Authority (PA) Chairman Mahmoud Abbas last year. Abbas has received more than $250 million in aid from Arab League nations since the American-led boycott was imposed against financing the government after the Hamas terrorist organization won a majority in the legislature last year. Under pressure from the US and the Quartet, Israel recently transferred $100 million in tax revenues to Abbas. A similar amount of money has not been accounted for, and Abbas has refused to provide a list of expenditures. "Anecdotal evidence has raised concerns of a significant reduction in transparency and accountability because of erroneous reporting and a failure to submit financial reports regularly," the World Bank stated. Nevertheless, it recommended that Israel release more tax revenues as well as make more "good will" moves in easing travel restrictions. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
POLICE AND ARABS HARASS ISRAELI JEWS; SHAME ON "HUMANITARIAN" DONORS!
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 7, 2007. |
|
POLICE HARASS JEWS IN ISRAEL A seventeen year old girl had been arrested for protesting against the expulsion of Gaza Jewry. Since the police misplaced her file, they told her to go home and call back in two weeks. She did. They told her they would get in touch with her. They didn't. Some time after that, she was informed by telephone to go outside her school and sign for a delivery. When she did, four policemen grabbed her and shoved her into a car going to the police station where she would be charged with failing to show up for her trial. As she explained to a reporter, the police knew how to contact her. Why not just tell her to come? (IMRA, 2/4.) Israeli police are sub-standard. However, their sting operation seems like a subterfuge for finding another charge against the girl. Is that the way to treat its citizens? It's the way it treats loyal Jews. ARABS HARASS JEWS IN ISRAEL "Jaffa has long been a mixed Jewish and Arab city, but residents of the Jewish neighborhoods have been increasingly complaining of harassment by the Arabs including stone-throwing, threats, spitting, curses and PLO and Hamas flags on doorways and buildings. Several Jewish families have left." The government doesn't enforce the law against Arabs, but young people came in to reinforce the Jews' presence in the synagogues. Some will move into Jaffa. They declared that Jews ought to be safe in their own country (Arutz-7, 2/4). Is that now a radical concept? Where is the vaunted rule of law? What kind of people let political correctness and multi-culturalism be one-sided in favor of genocidal Muslims? Ironically, the Arabs, who complain of discrimination, are safe in Israel. Israeli law enforcement discriminates against Jews. U.S. ALSO IN DENIAL The US has the same denial of reality in the Iraq war as it does about the P.A.. Thus Pres. Bush deferred releasing proof of Iranian arms supply of insurgents, out of concern over Iran's reaction and over follow-up questions about what the US would do about it. A superpower should not worry about an aggressor's reaction to being caught in the act. Bush is afraid to admit that Iran already is waging war against us. He also won't face reality in calling Abbas moderate, just as Abbas called for united military action against Israel. Instead he wants to arm Abbas. Bush acts as if he would rather not know the truth (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/4). HAMAS BUILD-UP UNDER COVER OF CIVIL STRIFE While some Hamas forces contend with Fatah, others, under cover of their civil strife that the Israel is content to let flare, systematically build tunnels and bunkers and import powerful weapons for use against Israel (IMRA, 2/5). Being more clever, the Arabs know how to use public relations to paralyze Israel. Israel lives in fear of bad publicity, which the media is eager to spread. Israel doesn't make its case, much. The government mostly doesn't believe in its case. BRITISH INTERFERENCE IN ISRAELI AFFAIRS Britain gave 10,000 pounds to study the effect of Israel's security fence on Arab towns (so the fence could be protested). Told that it interfered in Israeli defense, Her Majesty's representative replied that it accepts Israel's need for defense, but thinks that the fence should follow the Green Line (IMRA, 2/5). Britain did not say why. Nobody does! Why didn't it pay to study the effect of Israel's security fence on Jewish towns on the non-Israeli side of it, and the value of a fence to Israeli towns? Britain is one-sided. "HUMANITARIAN" DONORS SHOULD BE ASHAMED The foreign donors to the P.A. stipulate that their contributions may not be used for terrorism. Now that the P.A. is getting considerable foreign funding, it is spending considerably more on arming and training for war. It may not divert the funds contributed for that purpose, but those funds enable them to divert other monies (Winston Mid East Analysis, 2/5). There comes a point when this counter-productive humanitarianism is just too stupid to be just stupid. It must be a rationalization for some kind of crazy leftist siding with barbarism. Do they imagine that jihadism is a romantic Third-World movement, and that Israel is not a state of sovereign Jews trying to defend themselves from jihad? This is the same jihad as afflicts the West. Unfortunately, leftist groups don't care. They don't ask what would happen to them, if the jihadists defeat the Israel, Britain, and the US, which they detest. SECRETARY-GENERAL RETURNS TO UNO CUSTOM Secretary-Gen. Ban said that the P.A. should end terrorism and Israel should end all restrictions on Arab movement within the P.A. and withholding of excise taxes. For humanitarian reasons, Israel should thereby revive the P.A. economy, and foreign countries should donate more to the P.A. (IMRA, 2/5). The donations buy arms. Suppose the terrorists don't stop, and can move freely? Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com. |
|
VIEW FROM AMERICA: THE 'PALESTINE' PURIMSPIEL
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 7, 2007. |
|
This was written by Jonathan Tobin and it appeared today in the
Jerusalem Post |
|
In case you missed it, last month college campuses in the United States, Canada and Britain hosted an "Israeli Apartheid Week," in which prominent scholars and artists all got together to agree about the State of Israel's beastliness. That such nonsense is presented at places like Hunter College in New York City, the University of Toronto and even at supposedly more illustrious venues such as Oxford and Cambridge is hardly shocking. But what is curious is the unprecedented growth of Israel-bashing in recent years and not merely at universities, and the increasing role of Jewish opponents of Israel in these events. The inversion of the truth in which the one small Jewish state is now portrayed as the mighty oppressor of the vast Arab and Muslim worlds is an appropriate topic to consider this week as Jews celebrate the holiday of Purim. The holiday commemorates the salvation of the Jews of Persia who -- at the very end of the Babylonian Exile -- were collectively subjected to a sentence of death. The evil plan was foiled, and since then the festival has been celebrated with general silliness, carnivals as well as "Purimspiels" or satiric plays or writings that turn the world upside down and inside out. But while Purimspiels have a short shelf life, the less innocent falsehoods of the anti-Israel crowd are year-round canards whose growing power ought to concern everyone. The "Israeli apartheid" charge, popularized in this country by former president Jimmy Carter's appalling recent book, is, of course, an insult to the sufferings of black South Africans and so divorced from the truth as to render any debate about it to be mere absurdity. Israel is, after all, a democratic country whose Arab minority has the right to vote and is represented in its parliament and even boasts a member of the current cabinet. For the last decade-and-a-half and as part of the policy of several governments, it has been trying to divest itself of rule over parts of the disputed territories it acquired in a war of self-defense in 1967. Palestinians have had autonomy since the Oslo Accords of 1993 and rule Gaza as an independent state in all but name since Israel's unilateral withdrawal in 2005 removed not only a military presence, but every trace of of Jewish life in the area. The Palestinians have turned down peace offers dating back to before the Jews regained sovereignty over part of their historic homeland in 1948. In 2000, their leader Yasser Arafat memorably declined an offer of statehood, control of virtually all of the West Bank, Gaza and part of Jerusalem, and answered with a terror war of attrition. Since then, the Palestinians have enjoyed free elections to determine their own government and chose Hamas, a terror group committed to war against the Jews without end. THUS, EVEN for those Jews who believe ridding Israel of all of the territories is a good idea -- for example the Peace Now crowd -- and those who support the peace process as a general principle, it is understood that the persistence of the conflict simply is not the Jewish state's fault. And yet despite these objective circumstances, the notion of Israel as aggressor and the Palestinians as victims persists. This is the case despite the fact that it is the Palestinian side that continues to reject peace and persists in pursuing war. And the Israel-as-aggressor notion isn't merely the conventional wisdom in the fever swamps of the far-Left and America's ultra-Right, it is the conventional wisdom of a not insignificant segment of enlightened liberal opinion in Europe and among American academics. Sadly, this latter category includes many Jews. THUS, IN this bizarre yet increasingly fashionable inversion of the truth, the Jews get to reverse the verdict of Purim itself. In the Book of Esther, it is not an outside power or even the direct intervention of Providence that saves the day but the Jews themselves, in the person of the valiant Esther, the wise Mordecai and the community as a whole, which rises up to defend itself and slay the murderers. But today, it is often Jews who provide a fig leaf of respectability for such inane events as the "Israeli apartheid" extravaganzas. Let's also specify that we are not discussing mere criticism of Israel's government or policies. Much about the State of Israel is itself something of an ongoing Purimspiel. Its governments are often run by men and women of less than sterling character. And the practices of Israel's leviathan of an official bureaucracy are often so wrongheaded and arrogant so as to make any American state's department of motor vehicles blush. But the "apartheid" Purimspiels are not about Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's reportedly shaky ethics and even more questionable judgment about political and military affairs or those of his even less able colleagues at the cabinet table. What this increasingly vitriolic campaign of delegitimization is about is the right of Israel's people to elect any leaders, be they wise or foolish, and to defend themselves against terror and the threat of annihilation from both Palestinian gunmen and Iranian nuclear mullahs. Those Jews who play a part in this campaign -- be they feckless American intellectuals or extremist Israelis with queasy consciences about the messy business of conducting a long-term war against terrorists -- need to understand that the undermining of Israel is not a game in which they may dabble without a cost that will ultimately be paid in innocent Jewish blood. For the rest of us, including those who think that speaking up for Israel is simply too unpopular a cause to engage in, we must remember that the "apartheid" lies must be fought with the same sort of vigorous in-your-face advocacy that the anti-Zionists have adopted, not mealy-mouthed avowals of good intentions. In another Purim-like twist, it has become the fashion for Israel-haters and anti-Semites to claim that they are being suppressed, even as their voices grow louder. We must defend the right of free speech for all. At the same time, those who support the right of every people to self-determination (and self-defense) except the Jews are simply racists and richly deserve to be labeled and ostracized as such. The lesson of Purim is that no one, no matter how seemingly secure their lives may be, can rest easy while hatred rules. In this spirit must every decent person, be they Jewish or non-Jewish, respond to the anti-Zionist Purimspiel. As it happened with Haman, we must not let these liars get away with murder. |
|
PURIM PARADE/CARNIVAL IN MA'ALEH ADUMIM
Posted by Jacob Richman, March 7, 2007. |
| You will find other pictures of the Purim parade at http://www.jr.co.il/ma/pic/ma129.htm. |
|
On Sunday, March 4, there was a Purim parade/carnival
in Ma'aleh Adumim. The parade (called "Adloyada") started
at 11:00am. The theme of the parade was bible stories.
Over the years, Jacob Richman has recorded history in the making -- Israeli events, rallies and demonstrations. They are preserved on his website. |
|
1ST INTERNATIONAL WOMEN'S SUMMIT ANNOUNCED
Posted by UCI, March 7, 2007. | |
The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "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 TWO EVILS FINALLY MEET...MIDEAST CONFLICT
Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 7, 2007. |
|
The photo comes from
|
|
Email this picture to world leaders. Iran has already set fire to the region through its puppet organization Hezbollah. Now they are embracing Hamas, training Hamas militants and trying to set fire to the region again. Iran is a threat to world peace.
Contact Nurit Greenger by email at 4nuritg@ca.rr.com. Visit her blog:
|
|
MEDIA HEADLINES: SDEROT IGNORED, TRIVIALITIES COVERED
Posted by Noam Bedein, March 7, 2007. |
|
A few days ago, I turned on the TV to channel 10 to catch the day's news. The story was shaking the nation: "[MK Esterina] Tartman doesn't have a master's degree," as opposed to what was listed at her party's website. Seven minutes were dedicated to the report. Seven seconds were dedicated to five rockets fired from Gaza at Sderot and Ashkelon. Since the beginning of the ceasefire on November 26 -- exactly 3 months ago -- over 160 rockets were fired towards Sderot and the Western Negev. Since the Mecca Agreement, the average is 1.8 rocket attacks per day. Last Tuesday, Hamas "Foreign Minister" Khaled Mashaal visited Moscow and promised to cease the Kassam firing. Since then, 7 rockets have been fired from the Gaza Strip towards Israel. Bernard Lewis, a leading expert on Islam, says: "Our situation today is worse than it was in 1940... In 1940 we knew who our enemies were, and we knew who we were... Today, on the other hand, we don't know who our enemies are, and who we are." The main headline of the Ma'ariv newspaper's weekend edition, after last summer's Lebanon war, read: "This war has no symbol." The widespread feeling is that people don't know who they're fighting for, and for what reason. What solution can be given to the Russian Roulette reality, which includes the firing of over 6,000 rockets into Israel for the last 6 years? The country has accepted the fact that rockets are being fired at it, and has to decide what 900 million shekels ($220 million) should be invested in: Should Israel invest the money in protecting the houses of the 8,000 Western Negev residents, or should the money be invested in a anti short-range rocket system, which will take approximately two years to develop? What other western democratic country in the world would have allowed a reality like ours to persist? On February 7, the Sderot Parents Association went to the Supreme Court and demanded the protection of all classrooms, in all 24 educational institutions in the town. The country, for its part, agrees to protect only the first to third grades, claiming that the other classes can settle for protected areas outside, and which children can get to on their own. Is there a parent that can imagine the feeling of sending an 8 year-old boy to study in an unprotected classroom, while an average of 1.8 rockets are fired daily from Gaza towards Sderot and the Western Negev, even during days of "ceasefire"? And on standard days, when approximately 3.2 rockets are fired? No one can expect an 8 year-old boy to run through the school corridors along with 70 other children and reach the safe areas outside in less than 15 seconds, after hearing the tzeva adom (color red) alarm. What should one tell an 8 year-old boy who wants to go back to third grade because the classroom there is protected? As a resident of Sderot, who has lived in this town for the past half year, I realize that it makes no difference whether the rockets hit an open area or the town itself. When the tzeva adom alarm goes off, you realize that you have 15 seconds to take cover. No one takes risks today, and one can't say, "It won't happen to me..." During a visit to the security officer's office in Sderot, I noticed that the town's map was hanging on the wall, and that there were dots marking the rockets' landing points. The security officer explained that he had stopped marking dots on the map two years ago, because if he had continued, it would have been impossible to tell that the map was of Sderot. It is reasonable to conclude that there is no neighborhood, no street, no family, no child in Sderot, who has not experienced a rocket attack somewhere nearby. Over 3,600 trauma cases have been opened, just from the rocket attacks. The media neglects to mention that rockets are being launched at Sderot and Ashkelon from areas in the northern Gaza Strip that Israel evacuated during the Disengagement. The website of Izadeen Al-Qassam Brigades, a branch of Hamas, makes it clear that from its point of view, all Israeli communities are "settlements": "In response to the occupation forces' attack on the Gaza Strip, the Palestinian resistance declared that it fired two rockets towards the Zionist Sderot settlement. Hamas' military wing generously offered to stop firing Kassam rockets in return for the evacuation of Sderot. When the usual report is broadcast over the radio or television, saying, "2 Kassam rockets hit an open area nearby Sderot. No one was injured, there was no damage, a trauma victim was evacuated, and now the weather report," can the meaning of "anxiety" or "trauma" be grasped? The news media dedicate seven seconds to the constant rocket firing towards Israel, and seven minutes to the lies of a Knesset Member. That is the reality that inside the bubble of Israeli radio, TV and newspapers, the bubble in which most Israelis live. In Sderot that bubble has long ago burst. Noam Bedien writes for the Israel Resource News Agency. This was published in IsraelInsider today. |
|
CAN WE BELIEVE THEM?
Posted by Yuval Zaliouk, March 6, 2007. |
|
"So it turns out that the major difference between the extremist
Hamas and the moderate Fatah is that while the former formulates its
aspirations to destroy Israel in religious terms, the latter does so
in more secular terms. But this cannot obscure the fact that both are
immutably committed to erase all remnants of Zionism from the face of
the Earth."
Dear friends, Please answer yourself two simple questions: Do you believe the promises of Arab politicians? Can Israel rely on signed treaties after surrendering lands? I believe the answer to both is a resounding NO. In the last two days we have witnessed a major crisis between Egypt and Israel as result of a documentary on Israeli TV that offended the Egyptians. Egyptian MPs declared that even if the Israeli ambassador to Egypt shows up in the Parliament to apologize, his throat will be slashed on the Parliament's steps. Yes, in this language!!! Assume for a moment the following likely scenario: Members of the Islamic Brotherhood assassinate President Mubarak (remember Sadat?), capture the power and rescind the peace treaty with Israel. Possible? Yes. But Egypt is hundreds of miles away from Israel. Not so Judea and Samaria. A "Palestinian" state in these territories, eight miles from the sea, would be a dagger in the heart of Israel. Now read the following important article by Martin Sherman and
decide for yourself. It is called "Myth of moderation: Fundamentalist
Hamas, secular Fatah have same vision: Israel's destruction" and was
written by Martin Sherman in Ynet News Your Truth Provider,
|
|
Strangely enough, a poll recently published by Near East Consulting (NEC), an institution that conducts monthly surveys of Palestinian public opinion, was given hardly any attention by the Israeli media -- despite its grave and far reaching ramifications. The results of the poll showed that when asked the question: "Does Israel have the right to exist?" an overwhelming majority (75 percent) of the respondents answered with a resounding "No." However, worrying as these findings are, analysis of the results according to the age of those polled gives even more cause for concern. These show that the younger the respondents are, the greater their tendency to reject Israel's right to exist. For example, among those aged 18-21, about 90% stated that Israel had no right to exist. For younger age groups, the refusal to acknowledge this right was virtually absolute, reaching almost 100%. Accordingly, there appears little hope that future generations will be the harbinger of better understanding. In spite of the gravity of these results, they should come as no real surprise to the sober observer of Palestinian society. After all, we should recall that the great majority of the Palestinian public belongs to, supports and/or identifies with, either the Hamas or the Fatah movements. This is reflected in the results of the last election for the Palestinian Legislative Council in January 2006, in which these two organizations won over 90% of the seats in the Council -- 119 out of 132. Just what the intrinsic nature of these groups is, can be easily ascertained from an examination of their founding charters, which reveal the fundamental raison d'etre for their existence and the motivations behind their creation. In the case of Hamas, there is of course little room for doubt. In the opening paragraph of its Charter, one finds the following declaration: "Israel ... will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors." The impossibility of accepting the State of Israel and its right to exist are further underscored in Article 28, which asserts: "Israel, by virtue of its being Jewish and of having a Jewish population, defies Islam and the Muslims." Presumably, the venomous style and content of the Hamas' texts will not come as a great shock to much of the Israeli public. This, however, is not the case when it comes to the Fatah, the organization headed by Mahmoud Abbas, a man invariably portrayed as the epitome of moderation and ardent advocate of peace. Confront leaders with troubling question In the public debate in Israel, the prevailing custom is to strive to differentiate clearly between the implacable enmity of Hamas towards Israel, and the allegedly more restrained Fatah attitude. However, cursory perusal of the Constitution of the organization will quickly dispel this illusion. For it is immediately apparent that it articulates the very same burning hatred of the Jews and very same repudiation of the right of Jews to a state in the Land of Israel. Thus for example, Article (19) proclaims: "Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People's armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated." This sentiment is reinforced in Article (12), which declares that Fatah's goal is the "Complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence." So it turns out that the major difference between the extremist Hamas and the moderate Fatah is that while the former formulates its aspirations to destroy Israel in religious terms, the latter does so in more secular terms. But this cannot obscure the fact that both are immutably committed to erase all remnants of Zionism from the face of the Earth. In light of all this, one might expect the Israeli public to urgently confront those charged with safeguarding its destiny, with a troubling and trenchant question: When the political leadership constantly stresses the need to strengthen "the moderate factions" among the Palestinians, who is it actually referring to? Who is it recommending should be allowed to control the hills overlooking Ben Gurion Airport, to deploy along the length of Highway 6 (the trans-Israel motorway,) to take over vital water sources east of the coastal plain and the approaches to the "strategic installations" around Ashkelon? Those who wish to destroy Israel in the name of Islam; or those who wish to do so in the name of a more secular rationale? One might expect that the democratic duty of the Israeli public would be to force this question onto its leadership and insist on clear, coherent and convincing answers. But will the public take the time to put aside the weekday pressures of mortgage payments and the weekend pleasures of barbeques and beaches to do so? If the past is any criterion to judge by, this would appear doubtful -- and perhaps that is exactly what the political patrons of the myth of moderation are counting on. [Editor's note: One reader -- Terry from Eilat, Israel -- commented: "Moderates Are A Myth. Like unicorns & dragons, they don't really exist. So why are so many people convinced they exist? For one, it's comforting to believe. It's a great way to avoid facing reality. You can have years of make-believe diplomacy, have meetings, & make pretty speeches. You can avoid actually doing anything, always a good option for politicians. Make-believe is so much prettier than ugly reality. But in the end, reality will come knocking at your door & bite you on the ass."] Yuval Zaliouk writes the Truth Provider columns. To subscribe, send an email to ynz@netvision.net.il |
|
WIRED IRAQI MAN TRIGGERS SCARE AT L.A. AIRPORT
Posted by Michael Travis, March 6, 2007. |
|
LOS ANGELES (Reuters) -- An Iraqi national wearing wires and concealing a magnet inside his rectum triggered a security scare at Los Angeles International Airport on Tuesday but officials said he posed no apparent threat. The man, identified by law enforcement officials as Fadhel al-Maliki, 35, set off an alarm during passenger screening at the airport early on Tuesday morning. A police bomb squad was called to examine what was deemed a suspicious item found during a body cavity search of the man. Local media reports said a magnet was found in his rectum. "He was secreting these items in a body cavity and that was a great concern because there were also some electric wires associated with that body cavity," Larry Fetters, security director for the Transportation Security Administration at the airport, told reporters. Maliki, 35, who lives in Atlantic City, New Jersey, was preparing to board a US Airways flight from Los Angeles to Philadelphia. The flight left without Maliki but with his luggage aboard. It made an unscheduled landing in Las Vegas, where the plane was thoroughly searched but nothing was found, officials said. Passengers were not evacuated and no flights were disrupted by the incident at Terminal One at Los Angeles airport. "There never was a threat," Fetter said. He said police and the FBI were called in from "an abundance of caution" because Maliki was "so bizarre in his behavior." Maliki, who had a U.S. green card, was being questioned by immigration officials about his immigration status. http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type= domesticNews&storyid=2007-03-06T233505Z_01_N06439574_ RTRUKOC_0_US-SECURITY-LOSANGELES.xml&src=rss&rpc=22 Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
DIVESTING FROM PEACE
Posted by Fred Taub, March 6, 2007. |
|
Divestment is support for terrorism. The Divest-From-Israel campaign is being pushed on campuses with a promise to bring peace to the Middle East; yet, the Arab leadership of the campaign looks at it differently. In their eyes, the real goal of the campaign is not to foster peace between Arabs and Israelis as claimed, but rather to destroy Israel by collapsing its economy. With roots dating back to 1921, the Arab boycott of Israel was officially declared in 1945, almost four years before Israel was established, to literally starve out the Jews. Hatred of Jews was the unifying factor that resulted in the formation of the Arab League, which runs the boycott as official government policy of its member states, plus the non-state member -- the Palestinian Authority. During the Oslo Accords negotiations for a proposed Palestinian state, Francis Boyle, an American professor from Indiana, was working as a consultant to the Palestinian Authority's negotiating team when he publicly proposed what he termed "a divestment campaign against Israel." As a consultant to Yasser Arafat, Boyle furthered the Arab boycott of Israel by specifically trying to draw students into creating a group of small campaigns on campuses to get universities to not do business with Israel. Boyle suggested that, while a single campus campaign would have little effect, having many campuses adopt the campaign would increase the impact overall. The Arab League has set the goal of the Arab boycott of Israel to be nothing less than the complete destruction of Israel; thus, there is no reason to expect anything less from its subordinate Divest-From-Israel campaign, which is not scheduled to end with the creation of a proposed Palestinian state. The Divest-From-Israel campaign is simply designed as a way to invigorate the Arab boycott of Israel via recruitment of non-Arab peace activists under false pretenses. Promoting warfare, including economic warfare, is, by definition, the antithesis of peace. Like the 1980s campus campaign that successfully created an adult population that accepted the notion of a Palestinian state, the desired results of the Divest-From-Israel campaign is the collapse of Israel's economy. If the Arab League and their supporters accomplish that goal, the next anti-Israel campaign will be the call for the dismantlement of Israel. Divestment's primary advocating body is the International Solidarity Movement/Palestinian Solidarity Movement, which officially recognizes the validity of "armed struggle," as it appears on page 20 of the ISM book Peace Under Fire. "Armed struggle" is what terrorist groups such as Al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hizbullah, Islamic Jihad and the Palestinian Authority's own Fatah and Al-Asqa Martyrs Brigades call terrorism to justify the murder of innocent men, women and children. The Divest-From-Israel campaign cannot, therefore, be separated from murderous terrorism -- the campaign organizers openly support and advocate terrorism. Historically, boycotts have never resulted in peace. Additionally, economic cooperation is fundamental to peace, but divestment proponents will not tell you that. When the US and France had a disagreement over Iraq, it was economic reliance that kept the two nations as friends. The friendship between the US and Canada has only grown because of open trade. Israel and Jordan, too, have peace also completely based on open trade. Divestment would end the growing peace between Israel and Jordan, something neither county can afford. Thus, if the entire Arab world had trade with Israel, no nations in the Middle East could afford to go to war with each other. Divestment is clearly anti-peace. Challenging the Arab boycott of Israel should not be undertaken just to protect Israel. The Divest-From-Israel campaign as an element of the greater and official Arab League boycott of Israel has the goal of imposing the policies of foreign countries on the US. This is precisely the reason the US established anti-boycott laws. In creating the Export Administration Amendments of 1777, the United States Congress stated that no foreign nation may impose their foreign policy on the US; therefore, no US persons may engage in official boycotts of foreign nations aimed at nations friendly to the U.S. Yet, that is exactly what the Divest-From-Israel campaign is -- the Arab League's foreign policy of boycotting Israel being imposed on and in the US. This demonstrates the contempt the Arab Leagues feels toward the Unites States and our Congress. Foreign countries are using Americans as pawns to dictate foreign policy in the US, in the form of the Arab boycott of Israel and its subordinate Divest-From-Israel campaign. Additionally, while the Divest-From-Israel advocates claims they will bring peace, the divestment, boycotts and sanctions they champion will only divide. History has clearly shown that economic cooperation is the pathway to peace; divesting from Israel is actually divesting from peace.
This article was published yesterday on Arutz-Sheva
|
|
D'SOUZA CAUGHT LYING TO TRIFKOVIC!
Posted by Paula Kaufman, March 6, 2007. |
|
Dr. S. Trifkovic is Foreign Affairs Editor of CHRONICLES: A
Magazine of American Culture, |
|
Excerpt from today's live radio debate at
"Hot Talk with Scott Hennen"
[...] TRIFKOVIC: The problem with his book is primarily that Dinesh denounces me and my friend Robert Spencer for writing about Islam the way we do. What is truly remarkable for an intellectual is that he does not do so on the basis of any failure on our part to offer empirical evidence for our fundamental thesis -- which is that Islam is inherently aggressive, racist, violent, and intolerant -- but rather that this shouldn't be allowed to be published, because it undermines the possibility of establishing some mythical alliance with the conservative Muslims. The problem there is that a conservative Muslim is obviously a person inherently opposed to any rationalistic revision of the Kuran or the Sunna, or any reinterpretation of Islam in the way that would enable it to be reformed. What we have is a self-proclaimed "conservative," here in the United States, acting in exactly the same way as... that reminds me of my youth under communism in Tito's Yugoslavia, denouncing a certain approach to a subject purely on the grounds of its alleged ideological unacceptability. He uses the term "Islamophobia" -- which is a classic term invented by the Race Relations Industry, by the very people of the Left that he seeks to denounce. Once you subscribe to the term "Islamophobia" all debates about Islam cease, because the only valid definition of "Islamophobia" is the one offered by those people he blames for 9-11! D'SOUZA: One of the problems here is a little bit of paranoia. These guys, Spencer, Serge, have been running around basically saying I am trying to silence them, whereas all I am doing is disagreeing with them. In my book I say this: we can't win the War on Terror without driving a wedge between the radical Muslims and the traditional Muslims... There are many Muslims who are very different from the stereotypical Muslim that Serge and Spencer feature in their work. My point is simply this: ultimately I think that we have to draw traditional Muslims away from radical Islam, because the radical Muslims are fishing in the pool of traditional Islam. So for this reason I think that these attacks on Islam -- the Koran [sic!] is a gospel of violence, Mohammed [sic!] is the inventor of terrorism -- they are not just tactically foolish, they are historically wrong because Islam has been around for thirteen hundred years, Islam radicalism was invented in the 1920s, and came to power in 1979. How can we blame the Prophet Mohammad for things that Khomeini and Bin Laden are saying, that are very new. Historian Bernard Lewis points out that radical Islam is a radical break with traditional Islam. Never before have Muslim mullahs, or clergymen, ever ruled a Muslim country. All Muslim countries have been ruled by non-clergymen until Khomeini. So I think the flaw we see in this work and in the Islamophobic literature is that it tries to link the early centuries of Islam. It cherry-picks the Koran and finds all the violent passages, leaves out all the peaceful passages, and then basically concedes to Bin Laden that he is the true Muslim, that his reading of the Koran is correct, and it pushes the traditional Muslims towards the radical camp by denouncing their religion. Then we complain all these traditional Muslims [indistinct] ... by denouncing Islam itself. TRIFKOVIC: This is really rich. First of all, to claim that the Kuran is a pacifist tract... D'SOUZA: I didn't say it's a pacifist tract. TRIFKOVIC: Well, you do say that people like Spencer and I pick and choose. Have you actually read the Kuran? Have you ever actually read the Kuran? D'SOUZA: Of course I have. TRIFKOVIC: Do you know how are the Suras arranged? D'SOUZA: They are... er... they are not arranged in any chronological order... er... [pause] and... er... [pause] and so I quote in my book both the violent and... TRIFKOVIC: Just tell me how ARE they arranged. D'SOUZA: The other point... TRIFKOVIC: Can you just tell me how are the Suras arranged? D'SOUZA: ... right. You can't just call... TRIFKOVIC: Why don't you just tell me how are the Suras arranged? HENNEN: OK, one at a time here; your question for Dinesh, Serge, is? TRIFKOVIC: In what order are the Suras arranged in the Kuran? D'SOUZA: [long silence] I really don't know what you mean by that. When you say "in what order" then... err... [pause] there... TRIFKOVIC: ... an interlocutor who tries to pass authoritative judgments on the subject is refusing to tell me how are the Suras and the verses of the Kuran arranged. They happen to be arranged by SIZE, from short to long! [The interview goes on for another 10 minutes or so] |
|
AMERICAN MUSLIMS BELIEVE THEY FOUND A WAY TO ESTABLISH SHARIAH LAW IN THE USA
Posted by Michael Travis, March 6, 2007. |
|
And while our attention is diverted by our clueless leaders and the apologists and appeasers of Islamism, this is what's happening behind our backs. Issa Smith writes in the American Muslim that Native American courts can be used as a precedent for Islamic courts in the US. Although the Muslim community in North America is vastly different from the Indian community, I feel that in developing a plan for the implementation of Muslim family law, we can in some ways imitate the paradigm of the tribal court system and its supporting network. In particular, I recommend that as a first step, supporting organizations dealing with Islamic family law be established immediately. A professional association of Muslims in the law field (of whatever specialty) is a must. A law school students' support group should be formed, and Muslim youth should be encouraged to enter this field. Could they be any more blatant in their plans? It's institutional jihad at its stealthiest. Read the rest at The Gathering Storm
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
MUSLIMS AGAINST JIHAD?
Posted by Walid Phares, March 6, 2007. |
|
A peculiar conference, taking place on the West coast of Florida drew the attention of many observers of the War of ideas: The first Secular Islam Summit. Organized by the Center for Inquiry Transnational and activists, the meeting included two dozens of speakers and about two hundred participants from various backgrounds and nationalities. It took place at the Hilton of St Petersburg, just before and in conjunction with the Intelligence Summit taking place in the same location. But this meeting, unlike many other Muslim intellectual conferences in the West or even worldwide was aimed against Jihadism and for a secular and liberal expression within Islam. It wasn't the first time Muslim authors and critics of the dominant religious and cultural order within their own community, spoke out, wrote about or debated the issues. The History of dissidence within the Muslim world, particularly in modern time is rich and diverse. It is also full of drama and violence, particularly against the dissidents themselves. Since the mid 1920s, after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire and the last Caliphate and with the rise of Salafism, joined in the 1970s by Khomeinism, dozens of intellectuals experienced harsh conditions and met tragic destinies as they rose to oppose fundamentalism and press for reforms. That history has yet to be written thoroughly and taught in the mainstream educational systems. High profile authors and intellectuals have spoken against authoritarianism and Islamism from the sub Indian continent to the sub Saharian desert. Dozens of journalists and academics have called for a global debate on the developments of politics and ideologies within Muslim countries. And with the post 9/11 era, more questions have fused worldwide from Western and non-Western quarters: What went wrong (in the Muslim world) wrote Bernard Lewis? "Why do they hate us" titled the press after the 2001 attacks. And since, many among the public asked without convincing answers: but where are the moderates (within the Muslim world)? The St Petersburg meeting is not the first meeting where Muslim intellectuals (and non-Muslims) met and attempted to answer these difficult questions. Back in 1994, a Coalition for the Defense of Human Rights met in New Jersey to address similar concerns. Dissidents have been meeting in many countries and cities in the last decades. High profile cases of theological and literary rebellion have illustrated the cultural conflict within Islam. In the 1980s, Salman Rushdie of India got his fatwa for the publication of the Satanic Verses. Since then, the dissident author lives in the underground. In the early 1990s, author Mustafa Jeha was assassinated in Beirut for publishing the Crisis of Mind in Islam (Mihnat al Aql fil Islam). Across the Mediterranean and on two continents, other Muslim "revolutionaries" (described as apostates) by their Jihadi enemies have challenged the dominant ideological paradigm. But till lately, they never decided to act collectively, and till the meeting in St Petersburg in Florida, haven't decided to meet. Hence when a few among them (with well known names in the field of dissidence) decided finally to get together and face the world, they have knowingly or not, began to change the world. This was, as I saw it, a first small step in this direction. The opening remarks were given by two famous Western-based Muslim dissidents. The first to speak was Ibn Warraq, the author of several volumes on Secular Islam. Elaborating on a long and sophisticated introduction to the "intellectual movement", he laid out the philosophical basis of full separation between religion and state in the Muslim world. But Ibn Warraq said he already "left" Islam and his call was to reform the "Relationship" between Muslim societies and religious laws. He advocated universal values and a global reform of education. On political grounds, he called for a regime change in many countries, including in Iran, the formation of Human Rights centers, and in an interesting and new twist he asked to "take Mullahs to courts for issuing fatwas." His conclusion was simple: "they hate us because they were taught to do so." The second to address the summit was the "refuznik" Irshad Manji. Born in Africa and raised in Canada, the best selling female author told the audience that the response to Jihad is Ijtihad. In short, reinterpretation of the religious texts (and the Koran), according to Manji would defy the Fundamentalists. Unlike Ibn Warraq, Irshad said she is still a Muslim and she will fight for her "Islam." She argued that there are many verses in the texts that can help a new interpretation defeat the tight reading by the Islamists. In conclusion, Manji invited non-Muslims to take part in the debate along side with reformist Muslim: "If they tell you have no business in Muslim affairs, tell them they have no business meddling in non-Muslim affairs." The first panel included Tawfiq Hakim from Egypt who underlined that the roots of Terrorism are found in the ideology that pretends being a religious doctrine. Nibras Kazimi from Iraq elaborated on the "mind of the Jihadi generals." Other intellectuals, such as Shahriar Kabir from Bengla Desh, Dr Shaker al Nabusli from Jordan and Dr Afshin Ellian a Dutch-based Iranian, addressed the relationship between traditions and Sharia laws. At the end of the first day the last panel, with Salamat Neemat from Jordan, Hasan Mahmoud from Bengla Desh and me discussed international law and politics and the Islamist movement. The following day, Nonie Darwish from Palestine, Wafa Sultan from Syria, Zeino Baran a Turkish American scholar, and Manda Zand Ervin from Iran will address secularism, women terrorism and Islamism. Interestingly enough, and "before" the summit takes place, internet-based attacks were unleashed against the conference by pro-Wahabi, Salafi and Khomeinist web sites and bloggers. Al Jazeera sent a crew to interview the participants and also air "opposing views" from leaders of the local community in the area. In its afternoon shows, the network had a local representative of the advocacy group CAIR and Dr Nabulsi from the conference "cross fire" about the conference. In my presentation I focused on the multiple areas of international relations where Jihadi concepts have to be addressed not only by the dissidents but also by so-called mainstream countries: Jihad, infidels, Caliphate and dar el Harb. These terms from early Islamic history may have been part of the norms of world politics and religious wars at the time, ie, 1300 years ago, but under this international system there is no place for Jihadism and its derivatives. Otherwise, this will reopen the way for a disintegration of international law. In this conference, I argued, and the global reform movement may not agree on all aspects of the crisis, but constitute a Muslim resistance to Jihad. I termed the latter concept so that Muslims, who can make the distinction between religious identity and a specific militant ideology, can initiate a debate and liberate themselves from Jihadism. I also argued that the West has abandoned the anti-Jihadist Muslims for decades and deplored the fact that Western Government and the US included have been advised by Jihadi apologists instead of liberal Muslims for decades. In sum, the Secular Islam Summit may have not been as large as the Wahabi or Khomeinist funded and supported conferences around the world but it certainly gave an example of what could occur if the United States, Europe and the international community would seriously consider supporting the Muslim intellectuals who seek Pluralism, human rights and democracy: a surge in the War of Ideas that could push the War on Terror to conclude faster, and with much better results. Dr Walid Phares is a senior fellow with the Foundation for the
Defense of Democracies and the author of Future Jihad and the
forthcoming War of Ideas. This article is archived at
|
|
SAUDI ARABIA -- AT WAR WITH ISRAEL -- IS CALLED BY U.S. AS MIDEAST MEDIATOR
Posted by Sergio (HaDaR) Tezza, March 6, 2007. |
|
Just in case ANYONE thought that Bush and his gang (Baker, Cheney, etc.) REALLY cared more about Israel than about SAUDI OIL, the last ridiculous proposal by the Bush Administration, besides HIS call for a Palestinian State in early 2001. BESIDES being AT WAR WITH ISRAEL, Saudi Arabia is THE WORST as far as religious persecution, racism, general lack of freedom. YET, miracle of miracles, all the US Governments -- ESPECIALLY Republican Southern Oil Men, BUT NOT ONLY (Johnson was not the last) -- court Saudi Arabia. David Bedein can be reached at Media@actcom.co.il. His Web site is www.IsraelBehindTheNews.com. This article appeared yesterday in the Philadelphia Evening Bulletim. |
|
On May 15, 1948, on the very day that Israel declared its independence from the British empire, the Arab league, comprised of the Arab states in the Middle East, declared a war whose purpose was to exterminate the nascent Jewish state. Of the five Arab League nations that border Israel, four of these countries eventually made interim arrangements of one sort or another to put themselves on a slow path of reconciliation with Israel. Egypt and Jordan made peace treaties with Israel. Lebanon and Syria signed armistice agreements with Israel. However, the fifth Arab nation contiguous to Israel, Saudi Arabia, now the dominant nation in the Arab League, remains in a formal state of war with Israel, having never agreed to any armistice or any semblance of a peace agreement with Israel. Instead, Saudi Arabia has consistently funded all terror groups at war with Israel, from Hamas to the 10 PLO terror factions based in Damascus. Saudi Arabia has earned the distinction as the first nation since the Third Reich which is officially "Judenrein" -- Jew free. By law, no Jew may visit or live in Saudi Arabia. However, with the sudden encouragement of the Bush administration, Saudi Arabia has been thrust into the position of the key mediator in the Middle East conflict. Saudi Arabia was the patron of the Mecca agreement between Fatah and Hamas, which, for the first time in modern history, aligned all Palestinian terrorist factions against the state of Israel. The Saudis reportedly sent over $1 billion in gratuities to Fatah and Hamas to secure this new terror accord. Zalman Shuval, former Israeli ambassador to the U.S., wrote in a leading Israeli newspaper yesterday that the special relationship of the former Saudi Ambassador to the United States, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, with the Bush family was one of the key reasons for the new Saudi relationship with the U.S. government. According to Shuval, Bander's "close relationship with the Bush family was expressed not only in strategic understandings, but also in large arms deals ... Bandar was involved in 'nearly every step that the U.S. took in the Middle East and that ... when the current President Bush started his election campaign, Ambassador Bandar came to him to brief him on Middle East matters." Relying on Israeli security sources, Shuval warned that Saudi Arabia has intentions of its own, "which do not always match Washington's intentions." Shuval warned that although Bush hoped that the Mecca agreement would lead to the "taming" of Hamas and to the forming of a Palestinian government on the basis of the Quartet's conditions, "what happened was exactly the opposite ... Hamas leaders hurried to announce that they would never recognize Israel or its right to exist." Meanwhile, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia received Iranian President Ahmadinejad this past weekend, and welcomed him in an unprecedented state visit, to dissuade any American illusion that the Saudis would form an Arab coalition against Iran. The first practical effect of the Mecca agreement will undoubtedly be felt in Jerusalem. The Arab League, dominated by Saudi influence and Saudi funding, announced this week that it will transfer $150 million to Arab residents in Jerusalem to "aid in their struggle against Israel." Saudi Arabia and the Arab League seem to be unlikely new mediators of peace since The Arab League declaration of war from 1948 remains in tact. Contact Sergio Tezza (HaDaR) at Hadar-Israel@verizon.net |
|
THE MEDIA AS PREDATORS
Posted by Emanuel A. Winston, March 6, 2007. |
|
What journalist, editor, broadcaster, publisher, writer (other than themselves) would consider they were predators? However, like sharks, they can scent blood from miles away and they attack. Journalists have these sayings as knowledgeable insiders on what sells papers: "If it bleeds, it leads." When it doesn't "bleed", they can make it bleed on the theory that their audience will read horrific stories more often than straight, objective reporting. Some call that "spin" or "biased reportage". Older, retired reporters will recall how, during WW2, reporters in Berlin downplayed the round-up of Jews, the railroad lines of cattle cars, the work camps, the death camps, the gas chambers and the crematoria. The New York Times, Chicago Tribune, and other major news out-sources always placed these stories on back pages and managed to describe the reported events of the Holocaust of Jews as "unconfirmed reports" -- despite eyewitnesses by their own reporters. What is it that draws Left Liberals to journalism? Is it their opportunity to vent their personal biases as "news"? All around the globe Islamic "Jihadists" (warriors for Islam) are massacring Jews, Christians or each other as Sunnis and Shiites fight for supremacy over the land in the Middle East and, ultimately, for World Domination for Islam. This religious war is invariably presented as matter-of-fact news -- except when reporting about the Jews of Israel. Then the journalists get creative by emotionally slanting their language so readers want to blame the Jews for the marauding acts of the radical Muslims. In Iraq, whether by Shi'ite or Sunni Muslims, Americans, Iraqi civilians, volunteers and/or contractors from all nations who are helping to re-build Iraq are being killed in massive numbers. Very many are blown up by IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices, i.e., road-side bombs) or EFPs (Iranian-made Explosively Formed Penetrators which "only" killed a small number of American troops -- 170!). (1) The total death count including those by snipers and suicide bombers is staggering. But the reportage is straight forward with sufficient TV and photo coverage to keep it in line with the doctrine of "If it bleeds, it leads." Somehow what Muslims do under the mandate of their religion, Islam, is positioned as if it is to be expected -- even normal -- for their culture. That assumptive thinking is real racism! However, when discussing Israel, Kassam Rocket or Katyusha missiles launched at Israeli civilians, Arab Muslim Terrorists are euphemistically called "militants" to soften the Terrorist concept. Any defensive attack by Israel against those who are launching missiles against Jews is described with loaded words and "spin" -- as if shooting Terrorists/Militants is a "crime against humanity" -- the reverse of truth. How dare the Israelis have road patrols, checkpoints, ID checks to find traveling Terrorist/Militants, explosive-laden cars or trucks. Wire fences and concrete walls to keep Terrorist/Militants out is always characterized as a "great offense" against those "peaceful Arabs" who are simply going about their business, to school, to work -- or to kill? Journalists shouldn't have personal bias against the Jews of Israel -- but they do. Why have so many Journalists anointed themselves judge, jury and hangmen when they deal with Jews? Why have they adopted the Goebbels method of "The greater the lie, the more likely it will be believed as truth" -- again and again with respect to the Jews? Why have journalists and their media outlets joined the side of an emerging, massive Global Terrorist Network against the minuscule Jewish nation of Israel? When you read and listen to their reportage with professional eyes and ears, you will feel their palpably hostile and underlying spin which is always there when their reporting is about Israel, Israelis or Jews from other countries. Whereas even when there are dozens to hundreds of Jews, Christians and other Muslims being murdered by Muslims in Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon, Israel -- and other countries by Global, Organized and un-Organized Islamic Terrorism, the religious aspect of this Global Conflict is treated so casually -- ho hum. The Media allot no extra spin and commentary to the Muslim Credo as stated in the Koran and Hadith, to kill the "Infidels", that is -- all Non-Muslims. The Muslim Credo provokes the radical Islamists to murder, rape, butcher, behead and steal the property of the "Infidels" -- all in the name of Allah. It becomes merely a bland report that "A bomb went off in a marketplace in Iraq and several dozen Iraqi men, women and children are dead". The journalists give no extra analyses of where this viciousness comes from and how to stop it. Muslims following their operative doctrine of Koranic injunctions are treated by the Media as separate and "excused" from their acts of murder. How did the Media become PR field agents for Islamic Terror? Why do they proclaim that, wherever the Muslims committed murder by blowing people up, it must have been the fault of the Jews and of Israel because the Jews are in Israel? What kind of people are reporters, editors, publishers, broadcasters...who so easily discuss bloody facts of other events but invent their own scenarios about Israel? Do they forget to bring their self-proclaimed humanity and journalistic integrity with them when they go to report about Israel? Have they acknowledged that 43 civilians and 120 soldiers were murdered, while 4,262 civilians and 400+ soldiers were wounded in northern Israel by Hezb'Allah rockets in this summer's War from Lebanon? The 2 soldiers captured have not been seen alive since July 12th when the Hezb'Allah attacked their post in Israel, killed 3 soldiers, injured 2 and kidnapped Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev. (2) What has the so-called Media evolved into? Why do they pick a victim -- make them "bleed" for the news -- then justify their "spin" with back-to-back lies and slanted language? Why is the Left Liberal Media making it necessary for the web-loggers (bloggers) to bore into this problem of slanted news and expose the facts? Who wants to rely on painfully twisted stories coming out of the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, the Washington Post, Time, the BBC, NPR, CNN, etc.? Why are the Bloggers able to make the media look foolish and hostile, catch their Faux-photography -- and highlight the mainstream journalists' personal agenda? Once upon a time we could rely on the print media but now they merely send Left Liberal twisters to invent the news. Journalistic ethics have fled the scene. All we have remaining are spin-meisters, wandering the globe and slanting their stories to please their editors. Well, that's how they keep their jobs and get their leaked interviews from nameless sources. Those who ply their trade in the Mideast find Israel their most vulnerable target as victims. As Israel continues to chop off major pieces of her Land to appease the Arab Muslim Terrorists, she becomes even more vulnerable. These journalists are not stupid but they may be lazy. With malice and planning, they target Israel and the Jews while giving a pass to Palestinian Arab Muslim Terrorists. The so-called Journalists are virtual field PR agents for Terror. Who can forget the first 12 year War in Lebanon created by Yassir Arafat's PLO from 1973 to 1982 when 100,000 Muslims and Christians killed each other? Remember how the world's intrepid journalists holed up at the Commodore Hotel in Beirut, taking their press releases from Arafat's brother so they wouldn't have to go out into PLO-terrorist controlled dangerous territory to get the "real" story? Ask Thomas Friedman how they all trembled and feared to walk the streets so they posted twisted stories received from Palestinian Arab Muslim Terrorists -- or else. The journalists of the 1982 Lebanon Civil War weren't embedded with the "soldiers" (real terrorists) in that war. The best thing that happened to today's news was when journalists were embedded with the American soldiers in the Iraq War. Seeing it daily on TV showed us the true benefits of America and her allies attacking Saddam Hussein's dictatorship, destroying it and him. Today the so-called "Insurgency" has made "embedding" civilian journalists more dangerous so the nature of the wars in Iraq, Lebanon and Afghanistan are not readily visible today. When world journalism finally names the "Insurgency": Terrorism and the "Insurgents": Terrorists, then we may begin to see reality. Something has happened to put journalists into a new class. They have now got the ability to carry a message which can kill people and destroy nations. Sometimes they carry the message of the Terrorists as did the journalists holed up in the Commodore Hotel in Beirut awaiting the Terrorists' instructions, euphemistically called "news briefings". Sometimes, on their own, journalists decide what the message ought to be, out of personal bias, gut instinct and anticipatory appeasement of the Terrorists' wishes. They have long ago left the fair, objective observer status behind and have become "players". A "player" has joined sides. They are no longer observers. Now they're movers and shakers. They force things to happen. It is well beyond merely tinkering with politics but now the Media are part of the action. Journalists can be (or may assist) Terrorists (or "Insurgents") merely by going beyond reporting the news, simply by amplifying certain angles or injecting their bias. Slanted photos and videos help that. Goebbels understood this very well and employed every available method of communication to slander the Jewish people in Europe as they conquered her. Radio, leaflets, town meetings with rabble rousing speeches, newspapers, made killing the Jews of Europe acceptable and guiltless. Today's most Goebbels-esque portrayal is that of Mahmoud Abbas/aka Abu Mazen (who was Yassir Arafat's terror advisor) is really a "moderate" and it is Israel's fault for not trusting him, his PLO and the now integrated Hamas. But the Media keeps the pressure on Israel to favor the Terrorists by giving them firing positions with the omni-present slogan "Give Peace a Chance". But, all of these methods needed people, mostly professional journalists and speakers to carry forth the message. Nothing has changed except the addition of the TV media. So when a rabble rouser preaches murder, even genocide, he wants an audience -- preferably larger than merely room full of people but, even that serves a purposes if the message is to provoke murder and genocide. The "Provocateurs" needs broad-based Media to get the message out. He needs TV, coverage and journalists who will send the "Provocateurs" pro-"Jihad" (War for Islam) story back to his accommodating newspaper, magazine or radio station. The "Provocateurs" need willing partners to promote the message, with its full, unedited message to kill, maim and destroy. While the journalists show their willingness to prostitute themselves, it is the doctrine of the corporation which tells them what kind of story they are looking for. Naturally rogue governments will approve of such provocative messages. Al Jazeera has been useful for Muslim and Arab Terrorists and Terrorist nations. Al Ahram Newspaper of Egypt carries an "Itbach el Yehud" (Kill the Jews) message -- as does its local TV stations. We know that the Media of Iran and Syria carry daily stories justifying the hatred of Jews, urging Genocide as a solution to those frustrations. But, we all expect that. Why? Are we so addle-pated? It's when journalists of the Free West pick up the twisted invective without confirmation or source beyond the ubiquitous "highly placed anonymous source" that things get worse, at least for the Jews. When reporters become operational partners with Global Terror, carry their message, not only without question but, seemingly with their approval that the Goebbels phenomenon takes over. Ordinary people in Europe and America hear these horrible stories and pick up the mantra of "Hate the Jews" just as choreographed by Goebbels across Europe. Then we had Hitler as the mad-man, who ordered the "Final Solution for the Jewish Question". Today we have Ahmadinejad, of Iran, who promises to wipe Jews off the face of the earth. Today is Purim (March 4th). Persia's King Ahasuerus (who has the same number of syllables in his name as Ahmadinejad) allowed his PM Haman (his Goebbels) to plan to wipe the Jews out of Persia, (now called Iran). The journalists (Haman's scribes) have become fellow travelers, virtual partners with the likes of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran, Bashar Assad of Syria, and all their proxy representatives, namely Hezb'Allah, Taliban, Hamas etc.,, which includes Wahhabiists of Saudi Arabia and the imams who teach hate in the Madrassah (strict Islamic) schools. But, reporters must be willing to carry the story, and its recommendations to murder, full circle. The media becomes the crucial link in closing the circle. The reporter willing to format the story in a way that masses of readers and listeners will begin to agree with the drumbeat in Arabic of "Itbach al Yehud" (Kill the Jews) and "Destroy Israel" is once again perfectly acceptable. Remember how we said "Never Again". Well, it's all happening now. Again. Some of the leading flagship journals, TV and radio carry these messages like the proverbial Typhoid Mary, spreading the disease wherever she goes. To mention a few, the BBC out of London, the New York Times, the Chicago Tribune, NPR radio, the Guardian, the London Times, Al Jazzera, Al Ahram of Egypt, Ha'aretz (a leading Leftist Hebrew journal out of Israel. Well, you get the idea, I hope. All need a doctrine of visceral hatred and all need their accommodating journalists to spin the stories and spread it around -- like Typhoid Mary. There are some journalists and honest reporting stations such as Fox News and the Washington Times. Their daily reportage proves that honest reporting can be accomplished. If a reporter wishes to become a field soldier and "Agent Provocateur" for Terror Anonymous, it's their choice. However, advocating murder and Genocide is a risky business and should not be undertaken lightly. Honest and ethical reporters deserve the kind of protection one accords to medical personnel and ambulance drivers as untouchable. One must choose which side you wish to serve: terror and Genocide or objective reporting. There is no in-between. Those reporters, journalists, media outlets cannot claim innocence and distance themselves from their words meant to provoke hate and subsequent murder. Predators usually have a price to pay to the people or nations they hunt. Don't you think? ### 1. "The Mullahs' Voice" by Kenneth Timmerman FrontPageMagazine.com Feb. 23, 2007 2. "2006 Israel-Lebanon Conflict: July 12-Aug. 14, 2006" from
Wikipedia Emanuel Winston is a commentator and Middle East analyst. His articles appear often on Think-Israel and Gamla. He is a member of the Board of Directors and a research associate of the Freeman Center For Strategic Studies (http://www.freeman.org/online.htm). Contact him at winstonmedia@comcast.net |
|
AMERICA'S ISLAMIST THREAT
Posted by Michael Travis, March 6, 2007. |
|
This was written by Joe Kaufman and it appeared March 1, 2007 in
|
|
For decades, adherents of the Muslim Brotherhood (al-Ikhwan al-Muslimun) have threatened the existence of their respective governments, considering them to be secular, illegitimate and traitorous. As more and more of this brand of fundamentalist -- and many times fanatic -- Islam reaches our shores, will the same threat for us become reality? State-run regimes have, time and time again, taken extreme measures against the Iquan. These measures include imprisonment, expulsion, execution, and in the case of the Syrian Hama massacre of 1982, mass murder. Life at home for Brothers has never been that brotherly. For this reason, many chose to temporarily forego the quest for regional domination, in hopes of finding acceptance elsewhere. Beginning in the 1950s, Saudi Arabia happily opened its doors to these unwanted travelers. Unlike many Muslim nations, Saudi Arabia was/is ruled by a fundamentalist form of Islam known as Wahhabism. The Islamist movement of the Ikhwan, having a similar religious underpinning, allowed for mutual understanding and acceptance from the royal family. As such, the Brotherhood was the perfect vehicle to spread the Wahhabi philosophy to other parts of the world. Europe and North America, while being the ideological opposite of Islam, were ironically the perfect match for the Brothers, as these continents offered Islamists something they did not have in their native lands -- freedom of religion. Others would embrace more radical surroundings, such as those who went off to fight the Russians alongside Osama bin Laden and his mentor Abdullah Azzam, in Afghanistan during the 80s. Within North America, Brotherhood organizations began to sprout. The same year the newly formed Baathist regime of Syria outlawed the Ikhwan, leaders of the Brotherhood found a new dwelling place in the state of Illinois. In January of 1963, the Muslim Students Association (MSA) was born. Today, MSA chapters number in the hundreds. Out of the MSA came the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), two large umbrella organizations for radical mosques and Islamic centers throughout the U.S. and Canada -- the latter being created to emulate Jamaat-e-Islami, the Brotherhood of Pakistan. As well, from the MSA came the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT), the first ever Muslim financial trust (waqf) company, that holds the titles for the radical mosques and North American children's schools. These organizations form the basis for a physical American Islamist infrastructure. Other groups, like the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the American Muslim Alliance (AMA), the American Muslim Council (AMC), and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) attempt to attach themselves to politicians and law enforcement personnel. Educational facilities, such as the International Institute for Islamic Thought (IIIT), and book companies, like Amana Publications, provide Islamist propaganda to the masses. And charities, such as Islamic Relief (IR) and Life for Relief and Development (LIFE) actively raise money through much of the above for Islamist causes overseas. The groups work in tandem with one another to make sure goals are achieved, and all are charged to protect one another from harm -- even if the wrongdoing is beyond reprehensible. Sami Al-Arian was a co-founder of Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and the organization's North American leader. He was, at least in part, responsible for the brutal murders of over 100 innocent people, including two Americans. He now sits in a U.S. prison, a convicted terrorist. None of this has fazed the Islamist community, as many of the groups mentioned have called for fasting in solidarity with Al-Arian, who has gone on a hunger strike. As well, they have called for their Brother's release. Except for his children's school, which was being used to funnel money to PIJ, Al-Arian's operation in the U.S. was shut down by the government. Many other organizations connected to overseas terror have been shut down as well. However, this has only been a hinderance, as Islamism in America continues to grow, strengthened by the ideologies of the Brotherhood and the never-ending petrodollars they receive from their Wahhabist enablers in the Persian Gulf. What is the Brotherhood doctrine with regard to America? It was spelled out in a book entitled Milestones, authored by Ikhwan leader Sayyid Qutb. In it, he writes, "Even the Western world realizes that Western civilization is unable to present any healthy values for the guidance of mankind... It is essential for mankind to have a new leadership... Islam is the only system which possesses these values and this way of life." Or as Omar Ahmad, former National Chairman of CAIR, put it, "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith but to become dominant. The Koran, the Muslim book of scripture, should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth." Those adherents of the Muslim Brotherhood that are in America have a religious-based political mission. It is no different than that of Osama bin Laden or his second-in-charge, Brother Ayman al-Zawahiri. Only the tactics have changed. While Al-Qaeda looks to establish Islam in America overnight, those Brothers that live here practice patience. They know that the American public is ignorant to their desires, as they slowly bring themselves to power using our hard-earned dollars that we feed into our gas tanks, using our own Constitution against us. If we don't wake up soon, their goals will be achieved. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
THE JEWISH STATE AND GHANA'S 50TH ANNIVERSARY
Posted by Rachel Kapen, March 6, 2007. |
|
As I was drifting to sleep on the night of March 5, as I always do, I listened to the all-night BBC radio program broadcasted by NPR. That particular segment dealt with celebrations honoring the 50th Anniversary of the African country of Ghana, the first of formerly colonized countries to achieve its independence. This inevitably brought back memories of the early 1960's when Israel offered its helping hand to Ghana and to the other newly independent African countries, The sight of African young men clad in their traditional garb became a usual sight in Israeli cities and this was beneficial to Israel who was only too happy to share its knowledge and expertise with these newly independent and developing countries, expecting no more in return but their friendship and to those countries who needed them desperately and preferred to acquire it from Israel rather than from one of the big powers, then in the throes of the Cold War. The newly elected leasers of these countries also came to visit to Jewish State to see in their own eyes what could be achieved in a relatively short time through hard work and dedication and were greatly inspired. It would be worth noting that aside from the priceless know how these young African acquired, they also gained a knowledge of the host country as well as its language which became a sort of lingua franca for them. Unfortunately, though, this honeymoon didn't last long. In the wake of the Six Day War, under Arab pressure, most of them severed diplomatic relations with the State of Israel. These relations were mostly renewed in the intervening years. In this BBC broadcast I also heard an item which left me incredulous. In a poll taken of some 30,000 people all over the world, Israel and Iran vie for first place in countries most harmful to world peace with the United States and North Korea not far behind. What strange bedfellows, Israel and Iran, led by a leader calling for its annihilation together holding on to the dubious honor only one of them really deserve. How did this happen? Only God knows. Contact Rachel Kapen at skapen285466MI@comcast.net |
|
RICE'S BALDFACE LIE; ISRAELI POLITICIANS DON'T DO THE MATH
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 6, 2007. |
|
IRANIANS CONTRADICT THEIR GOVERNMENT More than a hundred Iranians wrote a public repudiation of their government's Holocaust denial. They said that the Holocaust is undeniable fact and deplorable. Their government denies it for its own agenda. This government has much to answer for, such as the execution of thousands of political prisoners in 1988. The said that antisemitism is not part of Iranian history. They hinted that they do not side with Israel in the Arab-Israel conflict (IMRA, 2/4). IRANIAN NUCLEAR SCIENTIST ASSASSINATED The top, prize-winning Iranian nuclear scientist was assassinated. Someone from an American intelligence company has intelligence claiming that Israel did it (IMRA, 2/4). I hope Israel did. I'd like to think it is doing something, though it is rather late to think that this would accomplish much -- can't turn the clock back. Let's see if there are others. Wonder whether the same poison was used as afflicted a visiting US congressman connected with Peres' corruption, a recently assassinated MK, or others. Some of Peres' opponents or rivals get medical malpractice or sudden fatal disease. SEC. RICE: FROM EXAGGERATING TO LYING Abbas rejects violence, said Sec. of State Rice (NY Times, 2/20). He had just the other day emphasized that his Arabs should turn their guns on Israel. He honored some murderers as "martyrs." Rice is lying. ISRAELI MILITARY CENSORSHIP The IDF listed what kinds of reporting it would not allow and why. Basically, since it is at war, reports of ongoing conflict would gather intelligence for the enemy. Thus reporters may not photograph enemy rockets' identification marks nor otherwise give away where they landed or whether they malfunctioned, lest the enemy adjust its aim. Damage to IDF bases is not to be revealed. Reports of high officials' travel within the country would make them targets for terrorists (IMRA, 2/4). Some reporters object to Israeli censorship, but accept Muslim censorship. ISLAMIC WORLD ON WAR The Islamic world is agitated over the civil strife in the P.A.. It mediates to get the factions to stop fighting each other. It does not urge the factions to stop fighting Israel, despite the P.A. having a peace pact with Israel. Meanwhile, it is not giving up on efforts to rouse violence in Jerusalem to stop Israeli renovation near the Temple Mount. It's a frivolous controversy, without supportive logic. The Israeli work is restorative and not by the mosque. That does not stop the agitators from fulminating. One Muslim contended that Israel has been planning to damage the Church since it captured the Mount in 1967. That was 40 years ago, and no damage yet! All the more ridiculous when one considers that in recent years, Israel allowed the Muslims to build several mosques and to be in charge of the Mount. The Muslims also falsely allege that Israel is demolishing two rooms of al-Aqsa mosque. This reminds me of the actual Muslim seizure of two rooms in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a few years ago. First the Muslims built a mosque taller than the Church, alongside it, so as to overshadow it. They built, as an insulting feature, latrines hanging over the Church. Then they broke through the Church wall from their own, and seized two rooms. Israel demanded restitution, which the Muslims did by turning some other property over to the Church. The depth of sinister demagoguery was reached by this Islamic protest, because Israel consulted Muslim authorities about its plans in advance. But once Israel started building, the Muslims started making accusations they knew were false. I have noticed that tactic used before, of pretending not to have been consulted. I would recommend that Israel videotape consultations with Muslim leaders. If that doesn't work, then Israel should, in each dispute, name one or two Muslim leaders, and claim that they were Zionist agents and agreed to Israeli plans. Perhaps it would get the demagogues killed, and deter others. SEN. CLINTON ON ISRAEL & ABBAS Sen. Clinton believes that Abbas cannot make a peace partner, because his administration sponsors antisemitic textbooks. So far, so good. Then she says that Israel should negotiate with him anyway. To what end, with an implacable foe? She described herself as a friend of Israel, because Israel is a sister democracy. She did not give the reasons I would hope for, such as Israel is a valuable ally in defending against a common jihad and is the victim of aggression. Her reason is based upon oft-repeated, false assumptions. Israel is not a democracy. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com. |
|
HOW WILL BELGIAN HISTORIANS RATE WORLD WAR III?
Posted by David Frankfurter, March 6, 2007. |
|
Dear Friends, I have frequently questioned how Western diplomats manage to deceive themselves that they have been funding Palestinian "peace initiatives" and the basis of "good governance". Even more wondrous the self-deception when the money goes specifically toward developing a hate curriculum in schools designed to "educate" young children to Jihad and "martyrdom", reinforcing that peace is neither desirable nor an option. Wiping the Jews out of the Middle East in history, geography, in poetry, grammar, mathematics and, after graduation, by terror, murder and war.The Ministry of Higher Education thanks from the bottom of its heart the international institutes and organisations and the friendly Arab states, and especially the Belgian government, for their monetary support in the curriculum project. My previous essays pointed to copiously documented reports by the Prism Group, the Funding for Peace Coalition and others. The latest new and revised 2006 year 12 textbooks have been analysed by Palestinian Media Watch. While previous negative publicity of the damage created by their funding led many European countries to withdraw from curriculum revision, the latest text books bear the inscription shown in the picture on the right. The Ministry of Higher Education thanks from the bottom of its heart the international institutes and organisations and the friendly Arab states, and especially the Belgian government, for their monetary support in the curriculum project. Signed by "Ministry of Education and Higher Education and the Curriculum Development Center Sept. 2006" So what have the Belgians been funding? Read the report yourself, and see if (like me) you agree with the conclusion: "One of the most meaningful gauges of the ideology and aspirations of a people is the education of its youth. For this reason, the new Palestinian Authority schoolbooks introduced in the end of 2006 by the Palestinian Authority (PA) Ministry of Higher Education apparatus are a continuation of the tragic disappointment of the earlier books. Instead of seizing the opportunity to educate future generations to live in peace with Israel, the new PA schoolbooks teach their children to hate Israel and vilify Israel's existence while they glorify terror. Instead of working to minimize the current hate, the new PA curriculum is ingraining it into the next generation's consciousness, and packaging the war against Israel as existential, mandatory and religious." A breathtaking coincidence is that just before sitting down to write, I read a headline from Sunday's Ha'aretz: How Belgium sacrificed its Jews to the Nazis. The story details a Belgian government appointment committee of historians report on the role of the Belgian authorities in the persecution and deportation of the Jews during World War II. David Frankfurter is a business consultant, corporate executive and writer who frequently comments on the Middle East. To subscribe to his 'Letter from Israel', email him at david.frankfurter@iname.com. Or go to http://www.livejournal.com/users/dfrankfurter/ |
|
ISRAEL´S LOST SENSE OF MISSION
Posted by Steven Shamrak, March 5, 2007. |
|
<>Rabbi Ben Tzion Krasnianski: A person needs a sense of mission like the air he breathes. A clear sense of mission and purpose keeps the soul healthy; without it, we decompose like a body without a backbone that collapses into a meaningless heap of bones. Nations are like people, with a healthy sense of mission they thrive; without it, they flounder and fade away. Israel is floundering. Israel's greatest threat today is not from without, rather it is from within. Its greatest risk comes neither from Yassir Arafat, nor from the bloody Intifada, rather it comes from its lost sense of mission. The Jewish people have survived for 3,800 years only because they had a strong sense of mission. At Mt. Sinai the Jewish people were charged with the mission of being a light onto the nations, volunteering to become a nation of prophets and priests, who will teach the world right from wrong. Even in their darkest moments, they cried out, "Next Year in Jerusalem", never wavering in their commitment. They were proud of and deeply cherished their Jewishness and their sense of being chosen for a unique and special mission. They witnessed the rise and fall of many mighty empires that have been reduced to the footnotes of history, while they never left its front page. It was only the Jews' sense of mission that kept their souls fresh, their minds vigorous and their families alive. With a vibrant and healthy soul, they could survive anything -- Hitler, too. For the first thirty years of its existence, Israel had a clear sense of mission: to create a safe haven, a home for Jews. Israel inspired awe and admiration throughout the world as Jews returned to their Biblical homeland. The readiness of one Jew to go to the limit and beyond in order to save a fellow Jew, as in the spirit of '67, of Entebbe and in Israel´s successful attack on Iraq´s atomic reactor, was the envy of the world. (We need to regain this spirit of purpose. It is vital to our survival!) Desecration of Ancient Mt. Olives Graves. The ancient Jewish cemetery on the Mt. of Olives, overlooking Jerusalem's Old Old City is being frequently vandalised. There is extensive desecration of many graves at the site including graffiti and smashed headstones. "If such vandalism as the smashing of headstones and the desecration of graves had occurred in a Jewish cemetery in Europe, I am convinced that the entire Jewish world would be shocked..." said Knesset Member Zevulun Orlev. Quote of the Week: "There are 5000 ethnic groups in the world that don't have their own state. The difference is that the adversary of the Palestinian Arabs are Jews, so the world has an opportunity to demonize and harass the Jews a little more." -- Israel Zwick. Arabs Support One-state Solution. The overwhelming majority of Palestinians (94%) support the Mecca agreement. 75% of Palestinians do not think that [in principle] Israel has the right to exist. 70% support One State. (So do I, as a Jewish state without our enemies in it!) Islam is the Religion of Peace? (therefinersfire.org Let's face it, most good and god-fearing Muslims would never even THINK about harming other human beings, let alone, condone the heinous deeds of their fanatic brethren! But the world cannot deny the fact that some truly evil people have emerged out of Islam over the years; people who have proven, over and over again, that Islam is NOT a "religion of peace". Dare to criticize Muslims and Islam in the least little bit, and they fly into murderous rages, terrorizing and basically committing full-fledged jihad violence. They won't think twice about criticizing others; but woe unto anyone who dares criticize THEM... · Muslims murder 3,000 innocents in New York and expect no criticism. Steven Shamrak was born in the former Soviet Union (USSR) and participated in the Moscow Zionist "refusenik" movement. For the last 3 years, he has been publishing internet editorial letters on the Arab-Israeli conflict -- independently, not as a member of any organization or political movement. He can be reached by email at StevenShamrak.e@gmail.com |
|
MARION PRITCHARD; PROFILE OF COURAGE
Posted by Michael Travis, March 5, 2007. |
|
This was written by Samantha Levine and it appeared in U.S.News & World Report |
|
Like the angel of death, the Dutch police officer stood at the door. It was 2 o'clock in the morning, and he was hunting for Jews. Someone must have tipped him off to the three Jewish children sheltered in the home of Marion Pritchard. He entered the living room, his back to the bedroom where the youngsters were sleeping. Pritchard's gut told her he would send them to a concentration camp. Within two minutes, she'd decided what to do. She reached up to a shelf and felt for the revolver given to her for emergencies. "It was him or the kids, so I shot him," she says, unflinching. "It was a moment of excitement. I did it! I did it! The kids are safe! Then it was, what do I do with the body?" During World War II, the Nazis murdered millions of Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and others. But thousands of ordinary folks risked their own lives to help the intended victims. Marion Pritchard was one of the rescuers, concealing a Jewish family for nearly three years.
"It was never a question," says Pritchard, now 80 and a practicing psychoanalyst who lives in Vershire, Vt. "For somebody's life, how could you not?" The straightforward woman with the clipped Dutch accent is puzzled by those who don't understand her conviction that hesitating in the face of evil is equal to siding with the enemy. Her brows knit together, she crosses her arms and asks, "What if nobody had done anything?" "To my father, justice was everything," Pritchard says of her dad, a judge. "Not law and order, but justice." His philosophy shaped her idyllic girlhood in Amsterdam."I was never spanked, never hit," Pritchard says. "I got all my questions answered. When you are brought up that way, with complete love, respect, and understanding, that is how you try to treat people when you grow up." When the Dutch government shocked its people by capitulating to the Nazis five days after the Germans invaded in May 1940, Pritchard remained true to her family's values. She aimed to "do whatever I could to get in the way of the Nazis." So when her supervisor asked her and her classmates at social work school to temporarily shelter Jewish children targeted for concentration camps Pritchard agreed. Despite the possibility of prison, or worse, she took a boy into her parents' home. One morning in the spring of 1942, Pritchard watched Nazis load sobbing Jewish children into trucks. When they didn't move fast enough, the Nazis grabbed an arm or leg and threw them in. "I was so shocked I found myself in tears," Pritchard says. "Then I saw two women coming down the street to try to stop them, and the Germans threw them into the trucks, too. I stood frozen on my bicycle. When I saw that, I knew my rescue work was more important than anything else I might be doing." She was 22. That summer, a friend in the Dutch resistance movement secured empty servants' quarters in a rural village as a refuge for a Jewish family. Pritchard volunteered to live with and care for them. "Jews in hiding couldn't be visible," she explains with a hint of annoyance when asked her rationale. "They couldn't just go to the store. So I stayed with them. It was the right thing to do." The Polak family -- Fred and his children, 4-year-old Lex, 2-year-old Tom, and newborn Erica -- stayed with her until the war ended in 1945. (The mother was separated from the family but reunited with them after the war.) There was nowhere to hide other than a tiny compartment under the living room, so Fred spent each day upstairs in a nurse's house across the street and worked on his doctoral dissertation. The children, who passed for gentiles, could play in the yard. Though many of the neighbors knew what she was doing, they were "good Dutchmen, anti-Nazi, and rescuers in their own way," Pritchard says. They sneaked her milk and vegetables to supplement her meager rations. Pritchard struggled to keep house while finding havens for other Jews. By the time the war ended, the Nazis had murdered approximately 110,000 of the Netherlands' 140,000 Jews. Pritchard had helped find hiding places or transport to safe houses for more than 150. "I tried," she says, "but many were only saved temporarily." Pritchard was an exemplary rescuer because she chose to risk her life when she saw Jewish children being hauled away, says Malka Drucker, who coauthored Rescuers: Portraits of Moral Courage in the Holocaust. "She was frozen in fear and indecision, so she decided to become a rescuer." For all her bravery, Pritchard is haunted by that night she shot
the policeman. She was fortunate local authorities did not pursue the
missing man hatred for Nazis and Dutch turncoats
seethed in the village. And she was extremely lucky that friends and
supporters disposed of the body. Karel Poons, a gay Jew who was her
former ballet teacher, risked his life to sneak out after curfew and
persuade the baker to take the body in his horse-drawn cart to the
undertaker, who stashed it in an occupied coffin slated for burial.
Still, Pritchard feared being found out. "I had to go on, to stay
strong for the family," she says. "I wish it hadn't been necessary.
But it was the better of two evils."
Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com
|
|
FORGET THE IMMINENT RIYADH PEACE 'BREAKTHROUGH'
Posted by David Haimson, March 5, 2007. |
|
This was written by Anshel Pfeffer and it appeared
in today's Jerusalem Post
|
|
The hype already surrounding the Arab League summit in Riyadh, three and a half weeks before it is scheduled to take place, is perhaps understandable, given the eagerness in diplomatic circles to see some kind of breakthrough in the peace process. From a realistic point of view however, it makes very little sense. Whatever the Saudi regime's motives for recycling its five-year-old peace initiative, it surely has few illusions that any Israeli government could accept it without significant modification. There seems little chance of that happening. Last month's Mecca summit between the leaderships of Fatah and Hamas might have produced an agreement between the warring Palestinian factions on the formation of a unity government, which has yet to be sworn in, but it failed to deliver on the main point that would have enabled such a government to reenter negotiations with Israel: the need to recognize Israel's right to exist, which is still anathema to Hamas and unconscionable for a PA government with Hamas participation. If the Saudis couldn't make Hamas change even its rhetorical position on Israel, what chance is there of the Palestinian leadership supporting the removal from the initiative of the clause calling for the "right of return" for Palestinian refugees? And with the refugees still in, the proposal is a non-starter from Israel's point of view. But even assuming the Saudis could come up with a vague formulation that would assuage the Palestinians' fears that they are being sold down the river by their Arab brothers and allow Israel to agree to negotiations where it was not being forced to agree in advance to accepting hundreds of thousands of Palestinians within its borders, there is no government today in Israel capable of responding. In conventional terms, Israel today has a stable government. It is based on a wide coalition of five moderately sized parties, all of which have a clear interest in the government's survival and no wish of early elections. Moreover, none of Kadima's partners is large enough to bring the government down single-handedly. This stability has enabled Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to stay in office despite the criticisms over the conduct of the Lebanon war that have already claimed Chief of Staff Dan Halutz and despite the lengthening litany of corruption allegations against him and his associates. But more importantly, the government is maintaining a joint front on the Iranian threat. There might be very little friendship or collegial loyalty within the cabinet, but at least on this crucial issue there has been no sign of discord. Those are the poles of this administration's existence -- surviving the backlash of the Lebanon war while restoring the IDF's deterrence and denying Iran a nuclear bomb. This would be a tall order for any government; for one with such a poor track record it is a Herculean task. So solving the century-old Israeli-Arab conflict as envisaged by the Saudi initiative will just have to wait. The spin put out by the Saudis on Sunday that Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, visiting Riyadh, had expressed support for the initiative -- spin that has since been denied -- was aimed at convincing Israel and the West of the linkage between the Palestinian solution and the Iranian bomb. But the only result for an Israeli government of embracing the Saudi initiative would be that government's certain and swift demise. No Zionist party has ever gone as far as the Saudis propose: the refugees' "right of return" is anathema for all except the left-wing of Meretz; neither is a total pullback to the 1967 borders including relinquishing east Jerusalem, something that any of the coalition's parties, including Labor, have ever agreed to. A government with a degree of public credibility and an uncluttered agenda might, should it so wish, be capable of initiating a gradual change of national policy. Yitzhak Rabin and Shimon Peres tried but the Oslo process was derailed, mainly due to Yasser Arafat's machinations but also because the Israeli side wasn't ready. Ehud Barak's master plan never got off the ground. Ariel Sharon pushed through the disengagement from the Gaza Strip but even he wasn't prepared to touch the heartland. Headlines on quiet negotiations between Prince Bandar and Olmert notwithstanding, this isn't the government that will go further than its predecessors. For now Riyadh is only a side-show to the real business going on in Teheran. Contact David Haimson at DvHaimson@aol.com to receive emails with direct links to articles on Israel that are well-worth reading. |
|
SCHOOL LINKED TO HAMAS GETS U.S.CASH
Posted by UCI, March 5, 2007. |
| This was written by Joel Mowbray and it appeared today in the Washington Times. |
|
Millions of dollars in U.S. foreign aid have been given in the past several years to two Palestinian universities -- one of them controlled by Hamas -- that have participated in the advocacy, support or glorification of terrorism. The funding -- principally in scholarships to individual students -- is being eyed by several members of Congress and their aides, who say it may violate U.S. law. The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has provided more than $140,000 in assistance to the Hamas-controlled Islamic University in Gaza -- including scholarships to 49 of its students -- since Congress changed the law in 2004 to restrict aid to entities or individuals "involved in or advocating terrorist activity." No U.S. assistance was directed to Islamic University last year, but USAID continues to fund multimillion-dollar programs through American Near East Refugee Aid (ANERA), which is building a high-tech facility for the school. U.S. law requires that any recipient of U.S. aid have no association with terrorists. USAID also gave $2.3 million in aid last year to Al-Quds University, which has student groups affiliated with designated terrorist organizations on campus and last month held a weeklong celebration of the man credited with designing and building the first suicide belts more than a decade ago. "It is outrageous that U.S. taxpayer dollars are going toward institutions that support terrorists," said Rep. Gary L. Ackerman, New York Democrat and chairman of the House Foreign Affairs subcommittee on the Middle East and South Asia. "These loopholes must be closed so that taxpayer funds are used for their intended purpose and not to subsidize terrorism and the promotion of hatred toward Israel and the United States." Rep. Nita M. Lowey, New York Democrat and chairwoman of the committee responsible for USAID funding, said, "It goes without saying that U.S. taxpayer dollars should absolutely never be used for advocating or honoring terrorist activity. Support for terrorists and terrorism in any shape or form is unacceptable." USAID adamantly denies that it has violated any laws. "Every grant we give, every bit of assistance we provide, we do in a way that is fully compliant with the law," said a USAID official, who agreed to talk only on the condition of anonymity. In the case of Islamic University, the official said, USAID vetted the school president, the vice president of academic affairs and the dean of the library. It provided $12,000 worth of computers and materials to the school's library. Students are vetted for connections to terrorism before being granted scholarships, the official added, but, "We don't follow every student and track every meeting they go to." Unlike other U.S. aid recipients, the scholarship students have not been required to sign pledges not to participate in terrorism. The latest congressional interest in USAID's funding in the West Bank and Gaza was triggered by a report from Palestinian Media Watch (PMW), a pro-Israel group that monitors the Palestinian press. Included in the report were translations of several Palestinian newspaper articles that discuss the activities of student chapters of Hamas and Islamic Jihad at Al-Quds University and other Palestinian schools assisted by USAID since 2005. Hamas and Islamic Jihad are on the U.S. list of terrorist organizations. The USAID official did not deny that student groups affiliated with terrorist organizations were on campuses of schools assisted by the agency, but stressed that such organizations receive minimal support from the schools and are not part of "the official administrative structure." Aides to several congressmen said they were most troubled by USAID assistance to Islamic University in Gaza City, which is openly controlled by Hamas leaders. The organization held a two-day conference in 2005 on the "martyrdom" of former Hamas spiritual leader and founder Sheik Ahmed Yassin, who was killed in an Israeli air strike in 2004. Sheik Yassin founded the school in 1978. Sheik Yassin and former Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi used Islamic University as a base, as has Ismail Haniyeh, prime minister in the Hamas-led Palestinian government and a member of the school's board of trustees. Sixteen Islamic University lecturers and teachers are elected Hamas members of the Palestinian legislature. In 2005, 78 percent of the student council vote went to Hamas, according to a Palestinian newspaper article provided by Palestinian Media Watch. When challenged by Congress last year on its assistance to the school, USAID noted that the funding was not renewed last year. Nonetheless, the agency is providing millions in grants to ANERA, which is building a high-tech facility in Gaza City for the university. California-based Intel Corp. is underwriting the project. In a document USAID sent to Congress last year, USAID wrote that ANERA "is required to ensure that no assistance is provided to terrorist organizations or individuals associated with terrorist activities, regardless of whether or not the activity involves [U.S. government] funding." Also causing congressional concern is a PMW's report that Al-Quds University last month held a weeklong celebration honoring Yahya Ayyash, the Hamas leader known as "the shahid [martyr] engineer." He is credited with creating the first suicide belts in the mid-1990s and training the next generation of suicide bomb makers. The opening event, as reported by a Palestinian newspaper and found in the PMW report, included a speech by university administrator Yusuf Dhiyab, "who discussed shahids and the mark that the shahids left on the history of the Palestinian nation and how they succeeded in uniting the nation." In September, USAID announced an "extraordinary one-time" issuance of 2,000 scholarships for Palestinian students attending Al-Quds University at a total cost of $2.2 million, according to USAID. Simultaneously, USAID provided $100,000 in "in-kind assistance" to Al-Quds University. In a written statement, USAID said Al-Quds University requested emergency assistance last summer, and the $2.3 million was offered because "strong U.S. support existed for assistance to moderate Palestinian leaders." The statement singled out Al-Quds University President Sari Nusseibeh as "one such prominent and respected figure." But Mr. Nusseibeh appeared on the Al-Jazeera satellite channel in 2002 with Hamas political bureau chief Khalid Mashaal and the mother of a suicide bomber, according to a transcript provided by the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI). "When I hear the words of Umm Nidal, I recall the [Koranic] verse stating that 'Paradise lies under the feet of mothers,' " he said, according to MEMRI. "All respect is due to this mother; it is due to every Palestinian mother and every female Palestinian who is a Jihad fighter on this land." The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "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!" |
|
INDIA-PAKISTAN RELATIONS: THE STORY OF A FRACTURED FRATERNITY
Posted by Dr. TS Girishkumar, March 5, 2007. |
|
Haidavakeralm (www.haindavakeralam.org) had posted the story of the Jewish Hindu summit which was held in New Delhi last month. Please take a look at that. |
|
BOOK REVIEW
For the Hebrews, invasion by outsiders including the Muslims problems was almost as old as the Hebrew Bible itself, and nothing new. For the Hindus, the Muslim problems began with the invasions from beyond the border, comparatively much later than for the Hebrews. But then, Jews were subjected to terrible treatment by the Romans, and were scattered all over the world. Persecuted, tortured, damned and killed. In the mean time, Muslims thrived, conquered, plundered and set up their empires, and India gets the Muslim taste during this time. The religion of Islam can not survive without a state sponsoring that. Their hatred to non Muslims is such, that they can not live with any one else. Any one who venture to go out from the Islamic fold is simply put to death, and any one who dares questioning is brought under 'fatwa's' to be killed. And such a religion needs 'darul-Islam', an Islamic state for continued protection and maintenance of the religion of Islam. The Jews did not have to face Islamic states and their state-sponsored hatred, but the Hindus had to face all these. Muslims established their rule in India and continued for hundreds of years, and indeed that was the greatest test of time that the Hindu religion had to face, and ultimately to survive. Jews also had to face the tough test of time, through first getting scattered and then getting subjected to all kinds of terror and death. Ultimately, both these great traditions came out successfully through the torturing tests of time, and India became independent in 1947, and Israel became established shortly after. But then, the virus of Islam continues for both in newer forms. For Israel it is the Palestinians, and for India it is the Pakistani. Pakistan became a separate nation, by carving out more fertile Indian Territory. It is all not there in the history. History for us was primarily written by the British, and then subsequently by the Communists. But Indian history ought not to be written other than using Indian categories and concepts, which both failed to do, most naturally. India is essentially a spiritual and philosophical land, and Indian Culture is embedded in Indian Philosophy, therefore, to speak about India, ought to be based on the uniqueness with Indian Epistemology and Culture, using concepts and categories exclusive to Indian Culture. With this not being done, no narration of India shall be complete, or near truth. Precisely this is what makes this book unique, and one of its kind. Dr. MP Ajithkumar teaches history in the "Sanantana Dharma College, Alleppey", and he had worked for his PhD on the Philosophy of Rshi Aurabindo. He speaks of many untold truths regarding India-Pakistan relations, with extensive references and authority. He uses Philosophical insights and reflections into historical phenomena as and when it is called for with complete ease and spontaneity. Indeed, this book revisits Indo-Pakistan relations in this new light, under the usage of Indian categories. Any one who wants to read the history of both India and Pakistan ought to read this book, which shall tell you different things from what had been told of old. Students who want to study International Relations can keep this as a reference book to continuously make references to phenomena from a different angle. Undoubtedly, reading this shall give any one an experience which shall be altogether different. Contact Dr. TS Girishkumar at drgirishkumarts@yahoo.com |
|
2nd ANNUAL PURIM DAY PARADE IN WASHINGTON DC
Posted by Carrie Devorah, March 5, 2007. |
|
To see other pictures of the parade, write editor@carrieon.com |
|
Yesterday, Rabbi Herzfield of Ohev Sholom hosted the 2nd annual
Purim Parade in the nation's capitol on Pennsylvania Ave. The parade
was co-sponsored by: the Hebrew Day Institute, JCADA, Kemp Mill
Synagogue, the Melvin J. Berman Academy, Silver Spring Jewish Center,
and Ohev Sholom-The National Synagogue.
Carrie Devorah is a professional photographed based in Washington, D.C. She covers the White House, Congress, national and local politics and local events. |
|
FROM BAD TO UNTHINKABLE: MORT ZUCKERMAN ON THE MECCA ACCORDS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 5, 2007. |
|
Mort Zuckerman's editorial below explains in succinct and easily
comprehendible terms the impasse created by the Mecca Accords, and the
limited choices available to the Quartet regarding any sort of move
toward resolution in the Arab-Israel conflict. It's called "From Bad
to Unthinkable" and appeared in US News & World Report It also explains the rather embarrassing position into which the USA, and especially Condoleeza Rice, are placed by their long-standing and very solid support for Abbas as a moderate, a position now radically undermined by Abbas' capitulation to Hamas. Why did Abdullah bin-Saud do this? Perhaps to keep Iran from taking over the role of leader of the jihad against Israel. With Hezbollah's success in Lebanon, Iran's role as defender of Islam and champion for the Palestinians against Israel came in to high acclaim, and Saudi hegemony in the Arab world is challenged. Then, Hamas leaders began to cozy up to Iran and Hezbollah even though they are Shi'ites and Hamas is Sunni. Now, thanks to the Mecca accords, the Saudis are the mentors of Hamas. Hamas must enjoy having Iran and Arabia fighting over who is going to give them more money (hmmm.. so just how effective will the Quartet's boycott be???) Perhaps Abdullah thinks he can moderate Hamas with his money. Or perhaps, as I have argued in previous emails, neither Abdullah nor Iran nor Egypt nor Syria nor any major Arab nation really wants a resolution to the conflict. It is important to them that the conflict continue...so that they can always blame the Jews, the Zionists, Israel, the "occupation" for all of the ills that beset the Arab world...ills that the Arab leaders themselves create, but for which they do not wish to be held accountable. As long as the conflict continues, there is always the Jew whom they can blame for everything and anything. Of course, if there were to be peace, some compromise, and end to terror, a Palestinian state on some part of the West Bank and Gaza Strip...then the totalitarian tyrannical terrorizing Arab leaders would need to acknowledge an end to the conflict. Egypt and Syria would need to end their 30+ years of "state of emergency" (due to war with Israel), under which they have the legal right to quash all human rights and keep a tight rein on media and internet access, make otherwise illegal arrests and detentions without charges, and violate with impunity their humanitarian and forward looking constitutions. Allah only knows what would happen then to those leaders. But...ironically, even worse is in store for those leaders if Hamas were to win (God forbid!) and bring about an end to the conflict by means of the genocide that they so proudly promise. Because then the most revered and idolized and lionized leaders in the Arab world would be Hamas...and once Hamas got through with Jordan (say goodbye to young Abdullah 2 and his Hashemite kingdom under whom the Jordanians have prospered thanks to his cooperation with Israel) ...well...who knows which inadequately Muslim Arab leader would be next in Hamas' crosshairs. So the Saudis must keep the conflict going...and the best way to do that is to strengthen Hamas...even though it must make Abdullah's 'dear friend' President Bush very embarrassed. |
|
Nobody should underestimate the capacity of Middle East leaders for making bad situations worse. Headlines about the "agreement" in Mecca between President Mahmoud Abbas and the terrorist group Hamas implied that something agreeable had come out of the Saudi initiative to bring them together in a unity government. On the contrary. The terrible result of the weakness of Abbas -- a weakness of character and a weakness of his organization -- is that the conflict with Israel will torment still another generation of Palestinians. The agreement drove a stake through the heart of the two-state dream, because it left no one with whom the Israelis could make a peaceful settlement. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was left looking ill on her first joint meeting with Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, because the "moderate" Abbas had just pulled the rug out from under the United States. Abbas had been committed to disarming Hamas and calling early elections. Those might well have dislodged Hamas, since its obduracy has only increased the misery of ordinary Palestinians. Washington was supporting Abbas in this, but what does he do in Mecca? He agrees to share power with Hamas. As recently as last December, Abbas had rejected a unity government based on the limited concept of a technocratic government under which Hamas would have neither the prime ministership nor control of key government ministries. Yet, under the Mecca terms, Hamas's Ismail Haniyeh will stay on as prime minister and as head of the coalition, and Hamas will hold the majority of the cabinet, with 12 seats, with Fatah holding only six. Yes, the key ministries of finance, foreign affairs, and interior will be headed by independents selected by Abbas, but from a list submitted by Fatah and Hamas! Why did Abbas cave? Quite simply, because, in the recent clashes between Palestinians in Gaza, the Hamas forces were clearly superior to those of Fatah. On the ground, the Mecca accord guarantees only more bloodshed. Hamas's armed men will be incorporated into the Palestinian security forces, with salaries to be paid by the Palestinian Finance Ministry. Haniyeh and the Hamas-nominated interior minister in the Palestinian National Security Council will set military strategy for the Palestinians. Hamas loyalists will be placed in the bureaucracy of the Palestinian Authority and foreign service, again with the PA paying those expenses, rather than Hamas having to cover them from its own budget. Representatives of the quartet -- the United States, the European Union, the United Nations, and Russia, whose "road map" peace plan has now been thoroughly exploded by Mecca -- cannot be unaware of Hamas's using the respected new finance minister, a moderate named Salaam Fayad, to funnel money into the hands of Hamas ministers, including those heading military and security forces. Any financial support post-Mecca will serve only to strengthen the radical forces of Hamas. Black magic. Wait, it gets worse. Hamas had been internationally isolated while the Palestinian Liberation Organization was recognized as the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Under Saudi Arabia's misbegotten maneuver in Mecca, however, Hamas becomes an integral part of the PLO, rescued, as if by magic, from its isolation. Thus Hamas has gained politically, institutionally, and bureaucratically -- and in its relations with the Arab world -- without meeting any of the international conditions for negotiations. Hamas was not made to concede power or ideology. It was not compelled to recognize Israel or renounce terrorism -- nor even to agree to promise to honor previously signed agreements. And yet it now has obtained the unity government it wished for, along with hundreds of millions of dollars from Saudi Arabia to escape its financial crisis, to solidify its rule, and to reach the next Palestinian election with more strength and credibility. Make no mistake: Hamas has not changed its spots. The terrorism it sponsors and advocates is unabated. Hamas continues to fire rockets into Israel and attempts more suicide bombings. Its leaders refuse to release a kidnapped Israeli soldier, and it nourishes mass smuggling of arms into Gaza, including rockets that are longer in range, more accurate, and more lethal, enabling them to threaten larger parts of Israel. We must remember that Hamas remains critically allied with Iran, which provides substantial military aid and training to Hamas members. Tehran is Hamas's most vocal supporter. Iran -- and Hezbollah -- provide military instructors, to the point that Hamas activity in Gaza is approaching that of Hezbollah in Lebanon. The area under Hamas control -- to wit, Gaza -- remains the prime source of terrorism against Israel. Last year, the number of rocket attacks from there increased threefold over 2005. The Hamas leader, Khaled Mashaal, who lives in Syria, continues to assert publicly that he would do anything to destroy the State of Israel. Hamas spokesmen continue to insist that they will not recognize the legitimacy of the "Zionist entity." The head of the Fatah parliamentary bloc, Azam al-Ahmed, says the issue of recognition of Israel never even came up for discussion in Mecca. Hamas can now prevent Palestinians from being able to carry out any commitment that will make any peace process meaningful and important. Israel, to state the obvious, cannot sit down with someone aiming a gun at its head. The effect of the Mecca agreement was to bring Abbas and the PA closer to Hamas instead of bringing Hamas closer to Abbas. In effect, Hamas has radicalized the PA's government and undermined the moderates in the region. The Mecca effect is seen in the reaction of a perceived moderate, Jibril Rajoub, the former head of PA security in the West Bank. He appeared on TV not to say that the agreement threatened prospects for peace but to declare that the Palestinians will win back every inch of land between the river and the sea. And the "moderate" Abbas? Here are his words: "We have a legitimate right to direct our guns against Israeli occupation." Abbas is now the nominal leader of the unified Palestinians but, in fact, the junior partner and mouthpiece of Hamas. He is now effectively yoked to the Hamas objective of eliminating Israel once and for all. Unsurprisingly, as far as the Israelis are concerned, Abbas is toast. He is now incapable of carrying out any agreements that might have been reached with the Israelis, so the quartet's road map to peace has hit a dead end. The tragedy of Abbas's capitulation in Mecca is that the deal he made effectively killed a secret but promising initiative of Jordan's King Abdullah. Abdullah's plan was to reach an agreement on final-status terms through negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians and use that as the basis of a new general election among the Palestinians, led by Abbas, that would topple the Hamas government. The king promised he would make an effort to gain the support of the moderate Arab states for his plan, including Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates, and get them to recognize Israel once the peace settlement was signed. King Abdullah's objective was to produce stability, to lower the level of terrorism and tension in the region, and to stymie the Shiite revolution, led by Iran, that is so balefully expanding its influence across the region. Abbas's Mecca moment has all but blotted out this one chink of light. Murderers. Even the Saudis now understand the significance of the damage Mecca has done. "Progress to peace" is not a term that can be found in the Hamas vocabulary. Its purpose is not to create two peaceful states between the Mediterranean Sea and the Jordan River but to transform the Palestinian national struggle into a fundamentally religious conflict that calls for Israel's destruction in Allah's name. The Hamas prime minister, Haniyeh, has made this clear repeatedly. "We are not," he says, "seekers of office but seekers of martyrdom." Now that Hamas is dominant, it will determine that the secular Palestinian leadership will be subservient in a holy war against Israel that sanctifies bloodshed, glorifies murder, and educates children to die as shahids, or martyrs. Abbas holds no sway over the elected murderers in Hamas and instead has shamefully allowed them additional control over the Fatah faction. Under these circumstances, hardly anyone in Israel thinks that if it decides to give up territory again, it would get peace in return. Tendering olive branches of the kind so often advocated by Israel's critics has borne nothing but bitter fruit. Israel left Lebanon, and Hezbollah gathered weapons, then made war. Israel left Gaza to the Gazans and was rewarded with a more aggressive Hamas and more rocket attacks. Israelis will not become suicidal, as they believe that a religious war against the Jewish state would not end if Israel redeploys, even back to the 1967 armistice line. The land-for-peace concept has, in effect, collapsed. Nobody in Israel believes that the Palestinians under Hamas will be satisfied with a homeland in the West Bank and Gaza, whatever Israel may do, for Hamas does not accept the right of the State of Israel to exist. Israel will not contemplate excruciating concessions on Jerusalem or on the territories to be given to a Palestinian government led by those who refuse to renounce terrorism or to acknowledge its existence. As one Israeli put it: "Would they give in on the issue of Israel's right to exist? Only after they have converted to Judaism." Even worse, Hamas is part of the radical Muslim Brotherhood movement that does nothing to conceal its aspirations of fomenting Islamic revolution across the length and breadth of the Middle East, of toppling the moderate regimes allied with the West, and of working with Iran to expand its role as the leader of political Islam -- all in service of the goal of an Islamic caliphate that would ultimately threaten even Europe. Fortunately, the United States, Israel, and the rest of the quartet have adopted an uncompromising position on the Hamas participation. Rice made it clear that the Hamas government does not meet the international qualifications, nor is there "any evidence that this one will." This is a part of what should be a clear message of Washington and the quartet. Consequently, it would be a terrible mistake to offer any concessions or rewards to this new PA-Hamas government. If the West must now choose between its survival and the survival of radical Islamic forces, we should choose our own survival. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
PALESTINIAN AUTHORITY NEWSPAPER REPORTS RUMOR OF CONVERSION OF TEMPLE MOUNT MOSQUE TO SYNAGOGUE
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 4, 2007. |
|
You can tell that they don't want peace when they keep stretching the limits of western credulity (as best as I can figure, there are no limits to Muslim credulity -- and cf my previous email regarding the double-think in Arab society which we find so difficult to understand) regarding the fiction of Israeli mal-intent regarding the el-Aqsa mosque. This is another case of just making up whatever is needed in order to foment hatred and incite to violence, and then, if it does not work, make up something else. 1929: "El-Aqsa fi-Hadda" (the El-Aqsa mosque is in danger) worked well in 1929, when the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem used the pretext of additional chairs and a movable partition at the Jewish segment of the Western wall as the excuse for a 'battle cry' -- "El-Aqsa is in danger: the Jews are moving in more chairs. Obviously they plan to take over el-Aqsa" (no one seemed to notice or care that the chairs were 150 meters from el-Aqsa, not even on the Temple Mount, and brought in temporarily to accomodate female worshippers at the western wall in the then Jewish Section of the prayer area outside of the Temple Mount). The riots that resulted from that battle cry caused the deaths of hundreds of Jews, injuring hundreds more, and resulted in the complete destruction of the 3000-year old Jewish community in Hebron, with 89 men, women and children hacked or shot or burned or tortured to death by the Muslim men who had been their neighbors for decades. 1969: A Christian Australian tourist to Israel (after the 6-day war of 5/6/1967) tried to set fire to the el-Aqsa mosque. When Israeli police interfered and called the Israeli fire department, Arab crowds on the Temple Mount went wild in demonstrations and attacks against the firemen and police. Suddenly, as though out of nowhere, the shouts rang out: "el-Aqsa fi-hadda"...and the crowd tried to interfere with the Israeli firemen's attempt to douse the flames because someone in the crowd had begun to shout that the Israelis were not pouring water on the flames, but rather gasoline. No one bothered to notice that the liquid from the fire hoses was actually water that was dousing the flames. The army was called in to restore order. 1987: The first intifada started in Gaza City, but soon spread to the West Bank, and was unrelated to the Temple Mount or el-Aqsa mosque. But as soon as Arafat (then still in exile in Tunis) started contacting the leaders of the intifada in Israel, the lie that Israel was trying to destroy el-Aqsa surfaced again. Nothing at all regarding this first intifada or Israel's tragically inept and misguided attempts to quell it were in any way related to the Temple Mount...but that did not matter. Rabble rousers could rouse the rabble, prophets could prophesy, and neighboring Arab states could join the fray with endless rhetoric of annihilation and destruction...because Israel was threatening el-Aqsa. 9/1996: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu opened a 2nd Temple tunnel OUTSIDE of the Temple Mount for archaeological and tourist development. The tunnel was no where near the el-Aqsa mosque. BUT...Arafat needed an excuse for more street violence, so that he could fend off the Palestinian National Council (PNC) and the Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC), both of which were pressuring him to institute democratic rule after his victory in a democratic election earlier that year. So he once again turned to the tried-and-true "el-Aqsa fi hadda"...the tunnel was a Jewish trick to undermine the mosque and have it tumble down in to the Qidron valley. It worked. The "Tunnel Intifada" lasted for weeks, with some deaths and many injured...and the thoroughly cowed and intimidated PNC and PLC into quietly accepting Arafat's "Democracy of the gun". 9/29/2000: As the end of Arafat's five-year rule as the democratically elected President of the Palestinian Authority was drawing to a close, and he was doing nothing to prepare for new elections, the PNC and the PLC began to make noises about how important it was for his next term of office to be properly set up with new elections in 2001...and so he started the 2nd intifada; using the Ariel Sharon visit to the Temple Mount (9/28/2000) as the excuse for the "day of rage" and the violent demonstrations and stone throwing and sniper fire that suddenly began on the day AFTER Sharon's visit. This time the whole theme was "el-Aqsa fi-hadda"...because, after all, did not an Israeli Jew set foot on the Temple Mount with an armed entourage...obviously with the intent to defile the sacred Muslim precinct, humiliate Muslims everywhere, and conquer el-Aqsa and destroy it. The second intifada is known in Palestinian sources as The el-Aqsa intifada. And now...the 2nd intifada has finally fizzled and died, thanks to the IDF and to the courage and resilience of Israeli society. So...time for another one. The excavations at the foot of the ramp to the Mughrabi gate are the perfect excuse...another fictitious assault on el-Aqsa. Riots and violence and stone throwing, and pronouncements from Syrian leaders Syria is ready for war if the sacred mosque is harmed...and Israel sets up 24/7 surveillence cameras feeding live streaming video to the internet so the world can see what it Israel is really doing...and the big lie does not work this time. It is too ridiculously obvious that Israel is in no way threatening the mosque or anything else on or near the Temple Mount. So...the "ramp intifada" fizzles out very quickly, especially when an Israeli Arab religious leader who is the most vociferous in inciting to riot is arrested and exiled from Jerusalem. So... ...the question before the PA authorities is: what to do now? Stop terrorism? Stop incitement? start negotiations? make peace?...NO. now the question is: what new excuse to use to foment violence and rouse hatred and incite to another intifada?... ...and the answer is: more threats to the el-Aqsa mosque...this time one that cannot be so easily disproven...underground secret excavations beneath the temple mount, where no one can see and disprove the accusations...even more horrible Jewish threats...a synagogue to polute the "Noble Precinct" (al-Haram ash-Shariff) and destroy its Muslim uniqueness. ...what do we learn from this? The PA leadership, whether under Hamas or Abbas, is intent on keeping the level of violence and terrorism as high as possible, all the time. It does not matter how outrageous and ridiculous the lie is...if you keep on repeating it...enough will believe it and take to the streets and incite to more riots and more violence and more terrorism. They do not want peace and resolution...they want, as their leaders have said so often: "struggle until victory". and how do they define victory: "Palestine from the river to the sea". That is why it is patently ridiculous to assert that if Israel ceded more of the West Bank to the PA, there would be peace. This is called "Newspaper Reports Falsify A Rumor Of Mosque Being Converted To A Synagogue" and is by David Bedein of Israel Resource News Agency and it appeared February 2, 2007 in the Philadelphia Evening Bulletin. |
|
The official Hayat Al-Jadida newspaper of the Palestinian Authority reported on Thursday that Arab Members of Israel's Knesset parliament and activists from the Islamic movement in Israel have "uncovered an Israeli plan that intends to remove a section of Al-Aksa mosque and turn it into a synagogue" The PA paper quotes Abbas Zakkour from the United List in the Israeli Knesset who said in a press conference held in Ramallah by Arab MKs and representatives of the Islamic movement, that "excavations Israel is conducting on the Mughrabi ascent are nothing but a cover-up for serious digging taking place day and night underneath the mosque," when, in fact Israel's excavations are not taking place anywhere near the mosque. Zakkour said that the goal behind Israel's repair of the Mughrabi ascent to the Temple Mount is to "destroy the Islamic landmarks, endanger the foundations of the Al-Aksa mosque and widen the Western Wall plaza where the Jews pray at the expense of the Islamic landmarks." Sheik Farid Hajj Yahya, the director of Al-Aksa Society inside Israel, stressed that "there is an Israeli conspiracy that aims to take out a section of the mosque to build a Jewish synagogue". He said, "There are more than 31 hi-tech cameras that the Israeli authorities placed in the vicinity of the excavation site, in addition to allocating 68 million shekels for the development and widening of the Buraq plaza." He went on to say that "last year, the Israeli authorities opened a Jewish synagogue under the Sharia court at the Mughrabi ascent and the current digging aims to destroy the court and to add another Jewish synagogue." Such incitement is geared to galvanizing Islamic hatred of Israel throughout the Islamic world. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
THE BEST DEFENSE IS A GOOD OFFENSE FOR ISRAEL!
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 4, 2007. |
|
Israel has been gifted an unprecedented opportunity by an emerging unity government led by like thinkers, Holocaust revisionist Mahmoud Abbas, leader of his Fatah party, and Ismail Haniyah, leader of his Iranian financed Hamas terror organization. Both leaders despise Israel's guts, although the forked tongue Abbas won't admit it but the more candid Haniyah will. More to the point! Now that Israel knows what it is up against, now that Israel knows ceding land will only whet the appetites of that unity government, not to be sated until the Jewish State is no more, Israel must forthwith declare all disputed territories (alas, minus Gaza) secured in 1967; Judea, Samaria, the Golan Heights, and east Jerusalem; intrepidly conquered as a result of vanquishing Arabs intent on annihilating the Jewish State, to be forevermore wholly within Israel's defined borders thus intrinsic regions of sovereign Israel. Period!!! End of conversation!!! Furthermore, all residents of those sovereign Israeli regions, bereft of birthright status, must openly pledge allegiance to the State of Israel, renounce any similar affiliation with any other entity including a so-called unity government, swear to abide by all rules democratically set forth by the Israeli Knesset, before such residents could be considered for citizenship within the State of Israel. Sounds harsh. So what!!! No Jew has the same rights afforded to Muslims within virtually all of the rest of the Middle East. Indeed, the tiny Jewish State of Israel happens to only extend over approximately two tenths of one percent of the landmass that defines the mostly Muslim Middle East. Jews have few rights, certainly no political rights, throughout the Middle East minus Israel. Let the other Muslim nations give full rights to their handful of Jewish residents, including the right to be part of any respective political process, much like Muslim Arab citizens have in today's Israel, and then the Jewish State will rethink its position. Is that not, in fact, a reasonable and fair proposition? The so-called Palestinian State threw down the gauntlet, indeed challenged Israel's right to exist, when it formed a unity government with Hamas, a terrorist outfit that refuses to recognize Israel. Therefore, Israel must respond vigorously and forcefully to this grave insult. If a nation's right to exist is challenged without evoking a forceful response by that challenged nation, one must question that challenged nation's character. Furthermore, when madman Mahmoud AhMADinejad, Presidential mouthpiece of Iran, decided that Israel must be 'wiped off the map', when the Imam-possessed lunatic hosted a Holocaust denial conference, when his kindred spirit Venezuelan ally Hugo Chavez agreed with the Persian anti-Semite, blatantly spewing his own venom at the Jewish State, why didn't Israel fire up its jets and deploy them over Tehran's and Caracas's airspace (Texas and U.S. friendly Aruba airstrips could facilitate the latter mission) as an unambiguous warning that if rhetoric morphs to military action, be it direct or indirect through terrorist proxies, the Jewish State will more than consider erstwhile U.S. President Harry Truman's response to Japanese aggression that virtually ended World War II, a war that subsequently defined the fortitude of America's 'greatest generation'? No doubt, many innocent victims, over perhaps numerous generations, died or were disabled as a consequence of that nuclear action, let us all pray to our own personal God that there will never be a repeat performance, let us however note the deterrent effect of that terrible but necessary choice, and let us also think through the deterrent effect an Israel demonstration of force should have on its enemies. Of course, AhMADinejad as well as perhaps the Mullahs who allow him to rant, are delusional, seem to value an imagined afterlife more than life on Earth, thus on the face may not be deterred from provoking a nuclear inferno. However, saner worldwide leaders, including Vladimir Putin and China's cadre of movers and shakers, should indeed see the writing on the wall, and forthwith put the kabash on Iran's perilously spinning fissile material creating centrifuges. This is serious business! Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
ZIONIST CONSPIRACY CAUSES VANDALISM AND DESTRUCTION OF GAZA SYNAGOGUES
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 4, 2007. |
|
I have from time to time commented on one of the crucial (but almost never discussed) differences between western thought patterns and Arab thought patterns: the ability to consider contradictory statements as equally valid...even though they contradict one another. Western thought cannot countenance such bipolar validity...Arab thought can, and does. My favorite example is: "We all know that really the Mosad did 9/11", but Osama bin-Laden is the most adulated Muslim in the world today because he did 9/11. Other examples are: "There was no Holocaust, it was a Zionist trick; but it is too bad that Hitler did not finish the job". Below, in the NY Sun article, is another example of how Arab thought processes differ from Western thought processes: the issue of 'taking responsibility". When rioting Muslim students at Concordia university in Canada were interviewed by the media, they blamed the police for the riots...why?...because the police tried to stop the rioters before the rioting got too violent and destructive...and that interference goaded them to riot even more...so it was really the fault of the police. This assertion violates the Western concept of cause and effect...cause must come first. Similarly, it is a standard assertion in Arab propaganda that all the terrorism against Israel is caused by the "Occupation"...yet anti-Jewish and anti-Zionist terrorism dates back at least to 1921; and the PLO was created in 1964 with the clearly verbalized intent to destroy Israel via terror attacks and liberate all of "Palestine" from the river to the sea; and it perpetrated scores of terror attacks prior to 6/1967. Israel had not yet occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip...so just what occupied territory were they talking about? Cause and effect...the Arab terrorism came before 'occupation'...so how can 'occupation' cause the terrorism? Obviously it cannot...but by asserting this 'effect before cause' argument, the Arab side avoids responsibility. As we see from the interviewee below, he blames Israel for the Palestinian destruction and vandalizing of the synagogues left standing in Gush Katif (Gaza Strip)...a Zionist plot to discredit and embarrass the Palestinians. "Mr. Abir blamed the Jewish state for the desecration of the Gaza synagogues by Palestinian Arabs, claiming the decision to leave the structures intact was part of an Israeli conspiracy. Israel 'left the synagogues behind so the world would see the Palestinians destroying them,' Mr. Abir said." Those tricky Zionists knew that the Palestinians would not be able to control themselves and would vandalize and destroy the Jewish synagogues (and the hot houses and the manufacturing plants that Israel left at the USA's request so that there would be some infrastructure for the beginnings of a Palestinian economy in the Gaza Strip)...so the Jews left the synagogues (and the hot houses, which Mort Zuckerman and Bill Gates bought from Israel for $14,000,000 and gave as a gift to the Palestinian Authority) for the Palestinians to destroy...just in order to embarrass the Palestinians. Tricky Zionists and nefarioius Israeli conspiracies are the cause of Arab destruction and vandalism of Jewish property. That Arab spokespersons and interviewees make such irrational assertions to the West is not surprizing. That which seems to us'irrational' is part and parcel of the Arab society's thought processes. What is surprizing to me is that so much of the Western media and political and journalistic and academic and religious intellectual leadership just sort of accepts it with a shrug. This is by Aaron Klein. It was published February 27, 2007 in the
New York Sun |
|
TEL AVIV -- The ruins of two large synagogues in evacuated Jewish communities of the Gaza Strip have been transformed into military bases used by Palestinian Arab groups to fire rockets at Israeli cities, according to a senior leader of a Gaza militant group. When Israel withdrew from the Gaza in August, 2005, it left intact 20 synagogues of the Gush Katif Jewish communities following an Israeli Cabinet decision against demolishing the structures. Immediately after the Israeli evacuation was completed, Palestinian Arabs destroyed most of the Gaza synagogues. Speaking to The New York Sun from Gaza, a spokesman for the Popular Resistance Committees, Abu Abir, said the area in which the synagogues once stood is now used to fire rockets at Israel. "We are proud to turn these lands, especially these parts that were for long time the symbol of occupation and injustice, like the synagogue, into a military base and source of fire against the Zionists and the Zionist entity," Mr. Abir said. Mr. Abir blamed the Jewish state for the desecration of the Gaza synagogues by Palestinian Arabs, claiming the decision to leave the structures intact was part of an Israeli conspiracy. Israel "left the synagogues behind so the world would see the Palestinians destroying them," Mr. Abir said. [Editor's Note: This is too good. We should immortalize Mr. Abir's reasoning. How about calling it The Abir Absolve?] David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
THE VOYAGE OF A PEOPLE: THE SHIP, THE ISLAND, AND THE FISH
Posted by Nurit Greenger, March 4, 2007. |
|
This was written by Yosef Y. Jacobson. Summary: Judaism is by far not a quick fix; it is a journey of essence and substance. More than three millennia ago, the Israelites-Hebrew-Jews stood at Mt. Sinai and said, "We will do and we will listen..." the Jewish people have been traveling on a long journey. Their destination is a healed and redeemed world reunified with its Creator. A society cleansed from egocentricity, hatred and bloodshed. A universe permeated with moral and spiritual awareness, filled with in the words of the prophet Isaiah: "the knowledge of the Divine as the waters cover the sea." In a vast and seemingly endless sea, the Jews' courageous voyage blueprint is their Torah and its Mitzvos (good deeds). However the journey has been tumultuous, discouraging, tiring and seems to be rather futile. Unfortunately, when, in the midst of their journey, the Jews observed what seemed to be an island of serenity, an oasis of tranquility, a respite from their miserable fate, all too many of them abandoned the Jewish consciousness and commitment "journey ship" for the perceived blessings of freedom and happiness. The era the Purim story is a classic example of Jews falling off their Judaism wagon. Based on our Jewish organizations and secular as well as religious leadership clear polarization, the time has come to ask ourselves the following question: Is the only thing Jews have in common is that they were and are the victims of hate? Is self-hatred the Jews patriotism? Do we have anything in common with ourselves so we can have something in common with our entire nation? Was/is the 19th century practice of be a man in the street and a Jew at home correct? Is there is any reality to the statement, "If only Jews weren't so Jewish we would have less anti-Semitism?" Why Zionism -- that came about to grant the Jews a State and national identity -- did not cure anti-Semitism for once and for all, as it should have? Why assimilation never cured prejudice? (It did not and never will! Not in 15th century Spain, even when Jews converted to Christianity they still suffered from persecution; not in 20th century Germany where often Jews were "more German" than the Germans; not in the Modern State of Israel constructed as a secular democracy!) The fact: The Holocaust made mockery of Jewish integration and Zionism created the State of Israel that has NO sense of security and perhaps only exacerbated the problems of anti-Semitism. The hope: throughout the Jews most difficult history what has guaranteed us our existence was not forfeiting our identity and surrendering our truth; it was our relationship with G-d and our dedication to His Torah and Mitzvos that allowed us to survive and thrive. This will go on until WE JEWS reach the culmination of the voyage, hopefully speedily in our days. |
|
One of the great Talmudic sages related the following episode: Once, while on a ship, we came to what we assumed was a large island, since we saw on it sand and growing grass. We disembarked the ship, went on to the island, built a fire, and cooked our meal. Yet what we assumed to be an island was really a fish. When the fish felt the heat, he rolled over and we were plunged into the water. Had the ship not been nearby, we would have drowned.--Talmud Bava Basra 73b. What is the meaning behind this absurd Talmudic tale, related by one of its great sages Rabba Bar Bar Chana? According to some of the great Talmudic commentators, this tale captures -- in intriguing metaphor -- one of the most essential truths about Jewish history, particularly one relating to the holiday of Purim. The Journey From the moment they stood at Mt. Sinai more than three millennia ago, the Jewish people have been traveling on a lone journey. Their destination is a world healed, redeemed and reunified with its Creator; a society cleansed from ego-centricity, hatred and bloodshed; a universe permeated with moral and spiritual awareness, filled with "the knowledge of the Divine as the waters cover the sea" (in the words of the prophet Isaiah). The Torah and its Mitzvos serve as their blueprint for this courageous voyage in a vast and seemingly endless sea. Yet the waters have often become increasingly tumultuous and the voyage discouraging, if not apparently futile. So when in the midst of their journey they observed what seemed to be an island of serenity, an oasis of tranquility, a respite from a miserable fate -- all too many of them abandoned the "ship" of Jewish consciousness and commitment for the perceived blessings of freedom and happiness. The era in which the Purim story occurred was a classical example of this pattern. The king was married to a Jewish woman; large segments of Jewish society assimilated into Persian culture; the Jewish establishment played a pivotal role in the economical and political processes of the Persian Empire. The community had been invited to the royal feast and given status as equal citizens. Most importantly: The Jews learned how to "behave"; they did not demand kosher food or kosher wine at the feast, nor did they create any other waves that would disturb the equilibrium and make them stand out as Jews. Seventy years after being expelled from their ancient homeland, their Temple being burnt to the ground, many of them had abandoned the old ship, secure in their belief that they have reached an island of serenity. Identity Crisis Throughout history, the struggle of Jewish identity and our relationships with the world around us has become so challenging, that it often caused us to redefine ourselves from within. Jean-Paul Sartre claimed in his Sur le Question Juif that the only thing Jews had in common was that they were the victims of hate. It is not Jews who create anti-Semitism, he said, but anti-Semitism that creates Jews. Arthur Koestler wrote: " Self-hatred is the Jews patriotism." Franz Kafka said: "What do I have in common with the Jews? I don't even have anything in common with myself." Time and time again we have been lured into the faith that if we abandon the "ship" of Judaism -- of Torah and Mitzvos -- we would gain acceptance among the brotherhood of mankind. "Be a man in the street and a Jew at home," was the 19th century slogan. If only Jews weren't so Jewish we would have less anti-Semitism, so went the theory. The past three centuries have produced a dazzling variety of movements, ideals and solutions to the age-old "Jewish problem," offering islands of home for a people tormented by persecution and targeted for abuse. The Enlightenment (Haskala) came to "civilize" us and allow us free entry into European society; the Marxists and Socialists were determined to create a utopia for us; the Zionists came to grant us a State, a national identity, and thus cure anti-Semitism once and for all; Reform came to make us acceptable to the non-Jewish society and to inculcate us with humanistic values; secularism came to free us from the burdens of tradition and mitzvos which have supposedly hindered our progress and happiness. All of these attempts have been brilliantly captured in that ancient Talmudic tale: Once, while on a ship, we came to what we assumed was a large island, since we saw on it sand and growing grass. We disembarked the ship, went on to the island, built a fire, and cooked our meal. Disillusionment Yet, ironically, the end of the Talmudic tale also came to be: What we assumed to be an island was really a fish. When the fish felt the heat, he rolled over and we were plunged into the water. Had the ship not been nearby, we would have drowned. Each time we came to feel comfortable on the island, and we began at last to live out our latent dreams, the "fish" turned over and threw us back into the raging waters. In the days of Purim, when the Jews felt that they had successfully integrated into mainstream culture, under the very nose of a Jewish queen -- the king was persuaded to issue forth a plan of genocide for the Jewish people. Assimilation never cured prejudice. Not in the days of Purim, nor at any time in the future. It didn't even in 15th century Spain, where Jews converted to Christianity and yet still suffered from persecution under the vicious doctrine of limpieza de sangre ("purity of blood"), the forerunner of modern racial anti-Semitism. It didn't in 20th century Germany where Jews were often "more German" than the Germans. It didn't in the Modern State of Israel constructed as a secular democracy. The historical truth remains that none of the above movements achieved their stated goals. The Holocaust made mockery of Jewish integration in the general humanistic world; Zionism created the State of Israel but has provided it with no sense of security and only exacerbated the problems of anti-Semitism; Stalin cured us of the "paradise" of Marxism and Socialism; the Enlightenment apparently did not sufficiently civilize us; secularism has to constantly attempt to prove that it is not an empty wagon, leaving our youth thirsty for identity and meaning (1). Our Hope "Had the ship not been nearby, we would have drowned," is how the Talmudic sage concludes the episode. What saved us during the time of Purim -- and what has guaranteed our existence throughout our long and difficult history -- was not forfeiting our identity and surrendering our truth; it was our animated relationship with the living G-d, the creator of heaven and earth, and our dedication to His Torah and Mitzvos that has allowed us to survive and thrive, till we reach the culmination of the voyage, speedily in our days (2). ~~~~~~~~~~ Footnotes: 1) Interestingly, the metaphor employed in the Talmudic tale is the fish. What the travelers felt was an island was really a fish waiting to plunge them into the waters. The zodiac sign for the month of Adar is Pisces, fish. As the book of Esther relates, the Persian Minister Haman chose a day in the month of Adar (the 13th) to exterminate the Jewish people (Maharsah to Bava Basra 73b). Conversely, what is unique about fish? They must remain submerged in their natural element of water to survive. So too, the Jewish people must remain in their habitat of Torah and Mitzvos for their continued existence (see Talmud Berechos 61a). 2) This essay is based on the commentary of the Maharsah (Rabbi Shmuel Eliezer Eidels) to Talmud Bava Basra 73b. |
|
SIX MILLION CHRISTIAN CHILDREN TO PRAY FOR ISRAEL ON PURIM
Posted by Michael Travis, March 4, 2007. |
|
G-d love these folks. And a Ziesen Pesach!
This was written by Matthew Wagner and it appeared February 28, 2007 in
the Jerusalem Post
|
|
Inspired by a kabbalist rabbi, an Evangelical leader from Ft. Worth, Texas, plans to enlist the "pure hearted prayers" of six million Christian children worldwide to protect the Jewish people from the Iranian nuclear threat. The prayer rally will take place before Purim, a holiday that commemorates the redemption through divine intervention of the Jewish people from an evil Persian ruler about 2,500 years ago. Purim starts on Saturday evening. Michael D. Evans, best-selling author of The American Prophecies: Ancient Scriptures Reveal Our Nation's Future, said on Monday evening that the inspiration for his idea from a report in The Jerusalem Post. "After reading about Rabbi [David Batzri's] campaign to enlist 10,000 children to pray that God annul [Iranian President Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad's plans for the destruction of the Jewish people, I said to myself, 'Why stop at 10,000?'" Evans said in a telephone interview from his Jerusalem hotel room. Evans, who heads the Jerusalem Prayer Team, an Internet-based initiative to encourage Christian prayer for the State of Israel, said that Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell would undoubtedly join forces to muster the 6 million young prayers. Evans said that there were approximately 1 billion evangelical Christians worldwide. Rabbi Yitzhak Batzri, son of David, welcomed the initiative. "Hopefully, it will awaken the entire world to the Iranian threat," said Batzri. "If the goyim have come to the realization that we are in danger, maybe the Jews in the Diaspora will finally wake up." Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
JEWISH ENEMIES OF ISRAEL
Posted by Jock L. Falkson, March 4, 2007. | |
|
Prompted by the recent Israel Apartheid Week. The Anti-Israel Professors I suppose we'll never know their exact numbers. Nevertheless, many are highly educated academics. Professors who command respect for their primary interests. One of their secondary interests however, campaigning against Israel and for the Palestinians, pains us deeply. While we have some handfuls in Israel itself, most of our Jewish enemies live and work abroad. They don't hesitate to exploit their teaching positions to spread their anti-Israel mission among their students and faculty members. They get strong mainstream media attention because it makes for drama when Jews -- especially the highly educated -- attack other Jews for the practice of apartheid, no less. They Accuse Israel of Apartheid? By now the western world has come to understand that Muslim enmity for Jews and Christians -- and other infidels -- is Koran based and Arab cultured. Consequently Muslim enmity is virtually understood as natural, and expected. But when reputable Jewish Professors of the caliber of Steven and Jacqueline Rose, Noam Chomsky, Norman Finkelstein, Tony Judt, John Mearsheimer, Stephen Walt, Michael Neumann, Marc Ellis, Joel Kovel -- and more than a hundred others -- spew their enmity against Israel, the media can't get enough of this "exotic" Jew vs. Jew performance. Not A Holy Cow Most professors justify their position by insisting that Israel is not a holy cow immune to criticism. Their pro-Palestinian support is demonstrated by anti-Israel apartheid accusations presented in what they believe to is fair and balanced. The professors justify their criticism saying they are not attacking Jews, ergo they are not anti-Semitic. But this is nonsense. For whatever Israel does or does not do, is done by Israelis, the majority of whom are Jews. The state itself cannot think, or do; only people can. Who Are The True Apartheid Sinners? The charge that Israel is carrying out hateful apartheid practices against the Palestinians is particularly cruel. Because Israelis are intrinsically anti-apartheid whereas the Palestinians are theologically and culturally practitioners of apartheid. Items: · Palestinians don't want Jews in their midst. They intend their land to be Jew-free. It should not surprise the professors that a Palestinian state is certain to be Judenrein. If that isn't apartheid professors, what is? How about some righteous anger directed against the Palestinians for racial barbarism? · Arab culture and theology is sated with apartheid philosophy and practice. That's the harsh lesson Jews and Christians have finally learned. It's a case of convert or be killed. Or be thankful they let you live -- provided you pay the dhimmi's Jezya (poll tax) and forever accept your status as second class residents. Never as citizens. · Did you know that the evidence of a Moslem trumps that of a Jew? That Jews are not equal under Shariah law? Should we be surprised that the Jewish academic enemies of Israel have never campaigned for the equal rights of Jews still living in Arab countries? · Did you know that Arab citizens always had equal rights in Israel? That' right. Israel's Arab citizens (now 1.3 million strong) have had equal rights from day one of Israel's existence. It's there for all to see in Israel's democratic founding charter. · Did you know Palestinians have been persecuting Christians in Bethlehem? Here's evidence from a Christian Arab: In his article "Exodus from Bethlehem" in World Net Daily of December 22, 2006, Joseph Farah relates what happened to the once Christian city of Bethlehem. "In I948," he writes, "Bethlehem was more than 90 percent Christian." By 2005 Christians were down to 35 percent. By 2006 it was further denuded to 12% of its population of 60,000 Arab residents. He quotes a Bethlehem Christian community leader: "Since they (the Israelis) left the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority has waged a jihad against the Christian community, raping women, extorting businessmen, lynching "collaborators" and seizing homes." "All this talk about Israel driving Christians out and causing pain is nonsense. You want to know what is at play here, just come throughout the year and see the intimidation from the Muslims." "They have burned down our stores, built mosques in front of our churches, stole our real estate and took away our rights. Women have been raped and abducted. So don't tell me about Israel. It's the Muslims." It's your Palestinian pals, professors, whose openly hostile racial apartheid await your investigation and castigation. Why not talk to the remaining Christians in Bethlehem ...before they're all gone? Allow me also to refer you to my article
"An Apartheid State? Or The Greatest Lie Ever Told?"
Ah! But What About The Apartheid Wall? If your home has been repeatedly burgled, your wife raped and murdered by merciless hooded jihadists, your children brutalized by machine gun toting terrorists ...would you not build a wall around your home to keep these cowardly criminal beasts out? Of course you might not know it since the media only show you images of a wall. But not everything you see is true. For the so called wall you see is actually 95 percent wire fence! The Palestinians' "separation wall" is nothing but lying propaganda. It's a security barrier, designed to keep Palestinian suicide bombers and other terrorists out. And it's doing a hell of a fine job at that, thank goodness. Since year 2000 Israel experienced a wave of Palestinian terrorist atrocities against its citizens. 22 Suicide bombs and over 9,500 violent attacks killed more than 900 innocents. It injured and traumatized thousands, many for life. All attacks were initiated from Palestinian areas, using men, women and children to blow up Jews in Israel. I don't recall the professors ever protesting once. Such is their enmity for Jews in Israel. Such is the depth of their regard for Palestinian terrorists. Israel's anti-terrorist barrier was erected to prevent the murderers continuing their barbaric terrorism. It was absolutely justified: 99 percent of subsequent suicide attackers and other Palestinian terrorists were stopped in their tracks. To compare the saving of Jewish life and limb to the frustrations of Palestinians being late for appointments due to search procedures at crossing points, is ridiculous. To describe these inconveniences as akin to South African apartheid is an inversion of the truth. In any event there never was a separation wall in South Africa because there never was black on white terrorism. Remember that 90 percent of Palestinians have been revealed by recent research to be against the existence of Israel altogether. One consequence of this relentless hatred is that Israel has been forced to employ over 50,000 security guards. Israelis are searched for weaponry at virtually every public entrance every time they enter. Jewish Enemies Target The Jewish State If they were genuinely interested in dismantling regimes which practice apartheid the professors would have no alternative to denouncing the Palestinians who are chain-bound to both racial and sexual apartheid. As is the case in all 22 states of the Arab League. But that is quite unlikely. For the professors have swallowed the Palestinian narrative hook line and sinker. If finally compelled by common sense to drop Israel's alleged apartheid from their hate agenda, there are other issues they will press. For it is the very existence of the Jewish State itself which they can't abide. Irshad Manji is a Canadian Muslim writer. She is author of The Trouble with Islam Today: A Muslim's Call for Reform in Her Faith (Random House Australia). She wrote:
| |
|
IN the past year, a stream of thinkers across the West -- from Australian writer Antony Loewenstein to US academics John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt -- has punctured the usual parameters of debate about Israel. I, for one, welcome any effort to prevent ideas from calcifying into ideologies. As a Muslim refusenik, that's what I do by defying the conventional prejudices of my fellow Muslims. Why would I resent refuseniks of a different kind? It's precisely because I embrace intellectual pluralism that I respectfully challenge Jimmy Carter's recent critique of Israel as an apartheid state. To be sure, I've long admired the former US president. In my book The Trouble with Islam Today I cite him as an example of how religion can be invoked to tap the best of humanity. In no small measure, it was Carter's appreciation of spiritual values that brought together Israeli prime minister Menachem Begin and Egyptian president Anwar Sadat, compelling these former foes to clasp hands over a peace deal. Which is why Carter's new book disappoints so many of us who champion co-existence. Entitled Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid, the book argues that Israel's conduct towards Palestinians mimics South Africa's long-time demonisation of blacks. Of course, certain Israeli politicians have spewed venom at Palestinians, as have some Arab leaders towards Jews, but Israel is far more complex -- and diverse -- than slogans about the occupation would suggest. In a state practising apartheid, would Arab Muslim legislators wield veto power over anything? At only 20 per cent of the population, would Arabs even be eligible for election if they squirmed under the thumb of apartheid? Would an apartheid state extend voting rights to women and the poor in local elections, which Israel didfor the first time in the history of Palestinian Arabs? Would the vast majority of Arab Israeli citizens turn out to vote in national elections, as they've usually done? Would an apartheid state have several Arab political parties, as Israel does? In recent Israeli elections, two Arab parties found themselves disqualified for expressly supporting terrorism against the Jewish state. However, Israel's Supreme Court, exercising its independence, overturned both disqualifications. Under any system of apartheid, would the judiciary be free of political interference? Would an apartheid state award its top literary prize to an Arab? Israel honoured Emile Habibi in 1986, before the intifada might have made such a choice politically shrewd. Would an apartheid state encourage Hebrew-speaking schoolchildren to learn Arabic? Would road signs throughout the land appear in both languages? Even my country, the proudly bilingual Canada, doesn't meet that standard. Would an apartheid state be home to universities where Arabs and Jews mingle at will, or apartment blocks where they live side by side? Would an apartheid state bestow benefits and legal protections on Palestinians who live outside of Israel but work inside its borders? Would human rights organisations operate openly in an apartheid state? They do in Israel. For that matter, military officials go public with their criticisms of government policies. In October 2003, the Israel Defence Forces' chief of staff told the press that road closures in the West Bank and Gaza were feeding Palestinian anger. Two weeks later, four former heads of the Shin Bet security service blasted the occupation and called on Ariel Sharon to withdraw troops unilaterally, which later happened in Gaza. Would an apartheid state stomach so much dissent from those mandated to protect the state? Above all, would media debate the most basic building blocks of the nation? Would a Hebrew newspaper in an apartheid state run an article by an Arab Israeli about why the Zionist adventure has been a total failure? Would it run that article on Israel's independence day? Would an apartheid state ensure conditions for the freest Arabic press in the Middle East, a press so free that it can demonstrably abuse its liberties and keep on rolling? To this day, the East Jerusalem daily Al-Quds hasn't retracted an anti-Israel letter supposedly penned by Nelson Mandela but proven to have been written by an Arab living in The Netherlands. Even the eminence grise of Palestinian nationalism, the late Edward Said, stated flat out that "Israel is not South Africa". How could it be when an Israeli publisher translated Said's seminal work, Orientalism, into Hebrew? I'll cap this point with a question that Said himself asked of Arabs: "Why don't we fight harder for freedom of opinions in our own societies, a freedom, no one needs to be told, that scarcely exists?" I disagree: some people still need to be told that Arab "freedoms" don't compare to those of Israel. The people who need reminding are those who now push the South Africa analogy a step further by equating Israel with Nazi Germany. To them, Zionists are committing hate crimes under the totalitarian nightmare that they dub "Zio-Nazism" (like neo-Nazism). When it comes to granting citizenship, Israel discriminates in the same way as an affirmative action policy, giving the edge to a specific minority that has faced genocidal injustice. Does this amount to Nazism? Spare me. As a Muslim, I could become a citizen of Israel without having to convert. After all, Israel was one of the few countries anywhere to grant shelter, then citizenship, to the Vietnamese boat people who sought political asylum in the late 1970s. I don't have to wonder how Syria compares on that score. Now for the ultimate proof of Israel's flimsy credentials as a bunker of Hitlerian hate: It's the only country in the Middle East to which Arab Christians are voluntarily migrating. And they are also thriving there, notching much higher university attendance rates than the Arab Muslim citizens of Israel, and enjoying better overall health than Jews. The Holy Land is gut-wrenching and complicated. As much as I applaud Israel's efforts to foster pluralism, I condemn its illegal Jewish settlements and less visible crimes such as the diversion of water away from Palestinian towns. These contradictions of the Israeli state should be exposed, discussed, even pilloried. And they are: openly as well as often. So there's little point in deciding whose camp is the paragon of vice or virtue. The better question might be: who's willing to hear what they don't want to hear? That's the test of whether a country is more than black or white. [Editor's note: it's interesting that even someone so knowledgeable as Manji has still swallowed the canard that the Jewish settlements are illegal -- they are not. And Israel has continued to supply the Gazan Arabs with water -- after they mucked up the aquifor they took charge off as part of the Oslo Accords.] Contact Jock Falkson by email at falkson@013.net |
|
HAARETZ BATTLES AGAINST THE THREAT OF DEMOCRACY IN ISRAEL
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 4, 2007. |
|
1. In recent months, a group of anti-Semitic leftist Jews, Arab terrorists, and international anarcho-fascists have been attacking Israeli police and soldiers every day near the town of Bil'in in Palestinian-occupied Jewish land near Modi'in. The hoodlums try to vandalize the security fence and regularly savage security personnel. Israel treats them with kid gloves instead of shooting them. If Israel were to use against its own invasion of anarcho-fascists at least one third of the force that is now being used in Copenhagen against the Danish anarcho-fascists burning down Copenhagen...!! 2. Well, yet another Israeli moonbat "academic" has come out in defense of the blood libel charlatan from Bar Ilan University, Ariel Toaff. The newest defender of the right to claim that Jews murdered Christian childen in Italy in the middle ages to use their blood for Passover rituals is one Yeshayahu Zelink (English spelling?), who signs his name "Professor" Zelink. Well, "Professor" Zelink has a letter in Haaretz today defending Toaff and denouncing those who attack Toaff simply because he is proliferating fraudulent blood libels about Jews. "Professor" Zelink also is a long time signer of petitions by the far-Left anti-Zionists in Israel denouncing Israel (see http://www.notes.co.il/zvi/1866.asp in Hebrew) and making Norman Finkelstein like claims about how Israel just uses the Holocaust as an excuse to oppress poor Palestinians. I could not find any evidence that "Professor" Zelink, who claims to be a historian, has ever been a professor anywhere. He lives in Beer Sheva. 3. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Blogs/Message.aspx/2024 Haaretz is the main Palestinian newspaper printed in Hebrew. It is also a decidedly anti-democratic newspaper. It is about as pluralistic as Pravda was back in the days of Brezhnev. Its post-Zionist political bias infects every page in the paper, from the news to the Op-Eds to the letters to the editor to the book reviews to the entertainment reviews. For every 100 or so far-Left opinion pieces (which are often disguised as news items) it achieves balance by running one non-left piece, often by Moshe Arens. And Haaretz has been one of the main promoters of judicial activism, meaning judicial tyranny, in Israel. Haaretz and others with similar anti-Israel views approve of judicial activism because how else can the Left impose its will on the country? After all, if the Israeli public has any say in the matter, it will oppose just about everything the Far Left wants. So since the Left cannot count on popular support in anything, the best way to achieve hegemony is to get friendly unelected leftist justices to veto and trump the parliament and simply make up what the justices want the laws to say and impose these imaginary laws on a resistant legislature and public. Thes e are judges, by the way, whom the electorate cannot dismiss nor impeach! That, you see, is the highest form of democracy. Democracy is just too important to be left to the voters and their elected representatives! Haaretz columnists have been having noisy conniptions ever since
Olmert appointed as the new Minister of Justice a brilliant
anti-activist academic, Prof. Daniel Friedmann.
Gevalt, scream the Haaretz legal columnists! How can we EVER impose our will on the unenlightened masses THAT way! But the height of Haaretz enlightenment came this past
Friday March 2. And this is NOT a Purim joke. The editorial for the
day, representing the publisher and editor of the Palestinian paper
printed in Hebrew, is entitled "Who will Protect us from the Knesset?"
Yes, civics students, Haaretz demands that "we" be protected from
democracy, by having a system in which unelected judges defend us from
the legislative powers of the elected parliament. Think I am joshing
you? Take a look here:
My guess is that Haaretz will be soon calling for a public burning of the Magna Carta, the US Constitution, and the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Man. After all, these can all serve as precedents for allowing elected representatives of the people to make laws and THAT must never be allowed! 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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
CONNECT WITH THE PRECIOUS PEOPLE
Posted by Professor Eugene Narrett, March 4, 2007. |
|
[Editor's Note: See more on this story below. |
|
You may have read that the Israeli police have begun their electronic weeding out of visitors to Judea and Samaria. This is sold as expediting passage for the residents of the Jewish heartland, enabling them to avoid the lines at the checkpoints necessitated by the daily attempts to murder, to blow to bits Jews in their land. But this is not about convenience but about severing these precious, simple, unassuming and God-fearing people from the rest of the world. The next piece of tracks is easy to discern, even without the precedent of Gush Katif: cut off increasingly from the rest of the world, from Israel, and even from family in other parts of the nation, their communities are being isolated, walled in like ghettos to facilitate their deportation at the orders of the Bush administration and its affiliate, the House of Saud, and to the jeering cheers of most of Europe, Russia and other nations. There are two terrible costs here for us all, -- and then a simple countermeasure to save us. Firstly, the Jews of Judea and Samaria are the true beautiful people for whom the world has been searching since the 1960s, and before. These are lives of gracious hospitality, productivity, simplicity, fertility and groundedness: happy and independent people who ask for nothing and who build nearly everything themselves. Their land is open and singularly beautiful, a fantastic, unique, rapidly varying mix of alpine vistas, chalk crags, basalt bluffs, and red clay spires, domes and blocks of every possible shape, all interlaced by deep narrow valleys. The vistas are vast and soul-nourishing. And the stratagic value to Israel is essential: without these glorious mountain valleys and brave people the nation is indefensible. Such is the malice of the plan of the "Quartet." Secondly, the tagging of citizens for electronic and digital recognition, to pass or to be detained threatens us all and clearly is the plan for the near future. Already they are promoting on local network affiliates implantable computer chips for 'convenience' and so your computer will recognize you: -- and so the authorities will be able to monitor your every move and life transaction. The era of the pyramid returns with a total bondage undreamt by Pharoah. By resisting this plan to electronically and digitally register every car, and then every person, the Jews of Judea and Samaria will not only stave off the nascent World State's plans to ghettoize and expel them but will lead the way for us also to resist slavery in the form of 'security.' What's the other countermeasure? For everyone to realize that to be free in a humane sense they must, as Scripture states, turn to the Children of Israel in their Land, visit them, get to know them, publicize the beauty and courage of their lives, be the vast constituency they deserve and that we need to be. Drink in the milk and wine of their promise and their fields and flocks, their oil and grains and grace; purchase their produce and support the guard dogs that save their lives every night from the marauders who do the dirty work of the powers. Help them purchase a generator, complete a school, and retain the presence that is worth more to American defense than five carrier battle groups and three intelligence agencies -- agencies that actually served rather than undermined America. Their fight is our fight; their abandonment and 'tagging' for fraudulent security is our future, as is their expulsion from their land, eminent domain writ large. Visit them, be blessed by them: those who bless them will be blessed; and while they would not say so, those who do not will be cursed. Professor Eugene Narrett teaches writing and Literature at Boston University. He is the author of hundreds of articles, columns and reviews on politics, American culture and the arts. He is completing a study on Romanticism and the longterm decline of Western Culture. He writes often on subjects relating to Israel and Judaism and is a weekly columnist for the MetroWest Daily News in Framingham, Massachusetts. |
|
SEND ARABS BACK...
Posted by laDemain, March 3, 2007. |
|
Wake up and smell the camel in your tent! Get rid of the stink. Israel must send the Arabs packing back to where they came from! And the Arabs should stuff that sappy fat-ass chiseler, Shimon-Peres, in a sack and haul him away with the garbage. Tell the Arabs: Git back to Egypt. Back to the Sudan. Back to Syria. Back to Yemen. Back to Iran and Iraq. They ain't Palestinians and they never were no matter what Jimmy--the Saudi-bought X-POTUS--Carter says. He's a liar for pay. The slimy liar cheated America the day he took his first hand-out from the Saudis and their dog-devil Hanan Ashwari. Viva Israel from the NON-evangelical Christians for Zion. Restore Jewish Palestine from the ocean to the sea! Contact Lademain by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
A CALL TO YESHA RESIDENTS: DON'T LET THE GOVERNMENT ISOLATE US!
Posted by Bryna Berch, March 3, 2007. | |
|
Olmert's Kadima government, whose popularity rating is within the noise range, has finally figured out how to fight Israel's enemies. Do you think it has decided to stop the missiles from Gaza? No way. Has it decided to stop Hezbollah from rearming in Lebanon? Don't be silly. Is it planning to stop Egypt from developing skill at attacking Israel with advanced weaponry? Come on, now, that's work. Has it decided to stop Iran from going nuclear? No. They are going after the real enemy -- the patriotic citizens of Israel who live in Yesha -- Samaria and Judea. The Olmert Government is starting the push to kick them out by isolating them from the rest of Israel. They perfected some of these stunts back in the summer of 1995 when they kicked out the Jews from Gush Katif, Gaza. And should the Olmert government succeed, where do they expect the Jews to live. Duh? Well, actually, they're planning to have a meeting to decide to have a meeting to talk about that any month now. One thing is for sure. They won't be able to reuse the high-priced, slum-quality trailers they used to house the Jews from Gush Katif. Those trailers are guaranteed to self-destruct within another year and a half. TransJordan started to call Samaria and Judea the West Bank when it attacked Israel and conquered that area in 1948 -- around the time it renamed itself Jordan. There's no denying that Samaria and Judea are on the west bank of the Jordan. But what's wrong with calling them by the names they have had from ancient times? They got their names back when Israel reclaimed the land on the west bank of the Jordan in 1968. If we are going to call Sameria and Judea the West Bank, why don't we call (Trans)Jordan the East Bank. Much more symmetrical. This article was written by Hillel Fendel and it appeared today in Arutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNatonalNews.com). | |
|
The Yesha-based Komemiyut (Uprightness) organization calls upon the pioneering Jewish residents not to cooperate with plans to stop all non-local cars from driving freely to Yesha (Judea and Samaria). A test-run of a new army system to control traffic into and out of Yesha is in place at the Eliyahu Crossing, leading into Karnei Shomron, Tzofim, Alfei Menashe and other areas. Local residents are identified by car-stickers or electronically by their license plates, and are allowed through freely; other vehicles -- such as those of visitors and suppliers -- will have to either wait in line with Arabs, including the potential terrorists who are the reason for the checkpoints, or will be routed through a different line. People will regard our towns as being practically in another country! A recent issue of Komemiyut's weekly journal wrote as follows:
|
|
THE ISRAEL LAND FUND
Posted by Arieh King, March 3, 2007. |
|
The Israel Land Fund is helping to establish new neighborhoods and new villages in the Galil, Negev, Yerushalaim, Yehuda & Shomron, The Golan Heights. The Israel Land Fund is buying land from Arabs Muslims & Christens in all of Israel. We focuses on reclamation of land for expansion of existing communities and preparation of infrastructures for establishment of new communities and individual settlers. The Israel Land Fund is a non-profit, unaffiliated organization. Beyond security concerns, and desirable places for Jews to live, our challenge is to reverse years of neglect and abandonment, and to accelerate growth and development. To do so, we either chose to reinforce small Jewish communities, or building new Jewish communities. Why now? For years The JNF & The Israel land Authority, did not reclaim or purchase any land & property at areas that are important for the Jewish nation, the reasons are political and can not be accepted. The Local Muslims with the help of Muslims philantropists & funds are spending hundreds of millions dollars on creating a Muslim line connecting the border of Israel with Lebanon through the Shomron, Benyamin, East-Jerusalem And Yehuda and ending in The Negev that is the border with Egypt. Akko: The idea in Akko that we are looking forward to is to buy all the houses along the shore of the old city of this coast town. As you can see in the air-photo, the old city is walled city, part of the houses are facing south -- to Haifa gulf, and the rest are facing west -- to the open sea. Today the market (purchase) price is very low, the ILF is working for a two month in order to get as much as possible the maximum buildings and houses without raising prices. We hope to buy the maximum properties and then to do complete renovation of the flats and of the streets.
Today we have the properties below for sale: A) Two floors in one building every floor is a separate apartment (Include penthouse) of 175 sq. Meter *2 = Total 350 sq. Meter. In the house there are 12 rooms. The distance to the seashore is 50 meter. Parking place 20 meter from the house. 380,000USD$ B) A shop in a tourist area. The shop is in a bad condition needs complete renovation, with option to add a gallery since the ceiling is very tall. The shop size is 55 sq. Meter. Asking request price is 38,000USD$ Please call us directly for any question. We will be happy to give you the chance to take part in a reclaiming the Holy Land.
History of Akko: Akko was the north border of the Israeli settlement in the time of Yehoshua. Akko mentioned in the bible and in the Mishna & Gmara (beginning of 'Gittin' and the end of 'Ktuvot'). The Ram"chal (Rabbi Chaim Lutzato zt"l) lived in Akko when he arrived
to Israel and he also died in Akko, The big synagogue in the old city
is 'Ha-Ramchal Synagogue'.
[Editor's note: Why private ventures? Because the JNF is not doing
what it was set up to do. See also
King's article
on Peqi'in.]
|
|
BERNARD LEWIS: IRAN IN APOCALYPTIC MOOD
Posted by Avodah, March 3, 2007. |
|
This was written by Yaakov Lappin and it appeared in Ynet News. |
|
Outdated Cold war concepts, such as mutually assured destruction (M.A.D) are irrelevant when it comes to Iran, because the Iranian president and his circle see such a scenario "as an incentive, not a deterrent," renowned scholar Bernard Lewis said during a lecture Monday evening at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. Addressing a packed hall, Lewis spoke after a screening of the film 'Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West'. "Ahmadinejad and his group clearly believe, and I don't doubt the sincerity of their belief, that we are now entering an apocalyptic age, which will result in the triumph of their messianic figure," Lewis said, referring to the twelfth Imam, Mahdi. "Muslims, like Jews, believe that there are things you can do to hasten the messiah. M.A.D doesn't work with these people." Lewis added that the threat of many Iranians perishing in a war did not deter the Iranian leadership, which believes "it would be doing them a favor, by giving them a free pass to heaven." "Iran is a mortal threat, and one also has to take account of the apocalyptic mood of Ahmadinejad and his circle. Islam, like Judaism and Christianity, has an end of time scenario," the scholar said. "There is only one solution to the Iranian threat, and that can only come from the Iranian people," Lewis said. 'Holy war is part of Islam' During his lecture, Lewis said Islam was neither a religion of complete peace nor a religion of war symbolized by a horseman riding with a Koran and a sword. "The truth is somewhere in the middle," he said. "Holy war is part of the religion, and part of holy law ... according to which it must be declared, and a warning issued. Attacking non-combatants is forbidden," Lewis said. Addressing suicide terrorism, the historian added that "suicide is expressly forbidden by Islamic holy law," noting that the act carried the punishment of "forfeiting heaven and going straight to hell." Lewis also said his acclaimed book, Semites and anti-Semites, which addresses Arab anti-Semitism, will be published in Arabic in Cairo. Contact Avodah at Avodah15@aol.com |
|
ISRAELIS CHOOSE SONG MOCKING GLOBAL JIHAD FOR EUROVISION
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 3, 2007. |
|
It is hard to think of a better example of the EU having sunk to real dhimmitude than this episode in the "eurovision" song contest. The song is against terrorism. the Eurovision judges are against the song. so, are the eurovision judges for terrorism? you can hear both songs at this link.
|
|
TARGET: EVANGELICALS
Posted by Don Feder, March 3, 2007. |
|
Watching Alexandra Pelosi's documentary Friends of God, showing on HBO all this month, brings to mind the carnival attractions of a bygone era. Instead of "See the bearded lady and Jo-Jo the dog-faced boy," it's "See the Christian wrestlers and the Goth Christian teens with their nose rings and fuchsia-colored hair, talking about getting a religious 'high.'" Pelosi takes a diverse and dynamic community (estimated at between 50 million and 80 million) and turns it into a cavalcade of the bizarre. Blue Staters often picture evangelicals as a tribe of shallow and slightly loony fanatics. Pelosi's documentary reinforces these prejudices. With minimal effort, the daughter of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (news, bio, voting record) could have found a few evangelical scientists, stock brokers, dedicated inner-city teachers or counselors at drug rehab centers. Instead, she offers HBO viewers the Christian Wrestling Federation, Christian miniature golf (where players putt through the empty tomb of the resurrected Jesus), a truck-stop prayer group and a Bible theme park, where an actor in robe and sandals dispenses parables. At a drive-through church, those seeking the spiritual equivalent of fast food can pray with a lady behind a plate glass window from the comfort of their car. A camera and an agenda It's the tried-and-true technique of filmmakers with an agenda -- find the most embarrassing and absurd examples of whatever you want to lampoon and get them on camera. Pelosi's piece is like a Bush supporter making a documentary on the anti-war movement by going to rallies and interviewing geriatric Trotskyites, dudes in dirty dreadlocks carrying signs equating Israel to the Third Reich and transgendered Scientologists. A review in The Denver Post notes: "With smug narration and a condescending tone, the filmmaker ... finds plenty to gawk at outside her hip metropolitan comfort zone. Nobody sounds more provincial than a New Yorker set adrift in the heartland." Pelosi follows the trail blazed by Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady's 2006 documentary Jesus Camp, about a Pentecostal summer camp for 7- to 12-year-olds in North Dakota. With thousands of Bible camps across the land to choose from, Ewing and Grady found the most extreme and scary. In Jesus Camp, kids pray with a cardboard cut-out of George Bush. Campers weep uncontrollably as they are told they're "hypocrites" and "phonies" -- in a segment reminiscent of a 1960s Chinese Cultural Revolution self-criticism session. Becky Fischer, founder of the "Kids on Fire" summer camp, comes across as a Pentecostal version of Mullah Omar, the Taliban leader who ran Afghanistan before the 2001 U.S. invasion. "I want to see young people who are as committed to the cause of Jesus Christ as the young people are to the cause of Islam," Fischer confides. "I want to see them as radically laying down their lives for the Gospel, as they are in Palestine, Pakistan and all those different places." As reviewers noted, all that was missing here were the AK-47s and dynamite belts (giving a new twist to Bible Belt). But that's exactly the way cultural elitists view conservative Christians -- as barely literate crackpots who could explode at any moment. As Rosie O'Donnell explained on ABC's The View last year, "Radical Christianity is just as threatening as radical Islam in a country like America where we have separation of church and state." Sneering at Christians is a favorite pastime of the cultural left. HBO's Bill Maher calls politically active Christians "demagogues, con men and scolds." Focus on the oddities Instead of fear and loathing, Pelosi uses the comically absurd to stigmatize evangelicals. Among other oddities, she presents the home-schooling family with 10 children, where the girls are identically attired in calico dresses -- The Stepford Wives meets Little House On ThePrairie. Occasionally, Pelosi gives the game away, as when she asks the Cruisers for Christ, rallying with their classic cars, "So, do you think the Holy Spirit is here in this Burger King parking lot?" Not everyone is treated like an escapee from a Fellini film. As a foil to the evangelicals interviewed in Friends of God, Pelosi chose Mel White, formerly a speechwriter for Jerry Falwell, and now a gay activist. White explains that people such as Falwell aren't evil, but (presumably because they oppose gay marriage) hate people like him. We see White in Falwell's church looking anguished for the congregants who are less enlightened than himself. The HBO website says the film is "driven by (Pelosi's) unflagging curiosity and genuine interest in learning about this increasingly influential community" as she "embarks on a fast-paced cross-country journey, offering snapshots of a cross-section of evangelical America." Pelosi presents not a cross-section, but the fringe. Friends of God is as representative of evangelicals as Ben Stiller's mental-patient parents in Meet The Fockers are of Jews. But at least the latter doesn't try to pass itself off as a documentary. Don Feder is a former syndicated columnist and author of Who's
Afraid of the Religious Right?
This article appeared February 26, 2007 in USA Today
|
|
COME BACK, ALL IS FORGIVEN
Posted by Angela Bertz, March 3, 2007. |
|
Come back, all is forgiven". I wonder if these were the words used by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice when she reportedly called PA Chairman Mahmoud 'Abbas back to the table for yet another mission impossible round of useless negotiations, and every bit as fruitless as a Palestinian farmers olive orchard, whose latest folly in responsibility, is ripping out their own trees and blaming it, not on alien activity, but on an ever tolerant Israel. Maybe she just wanted to give him a few home truths, such as; has there ever been any other (non) people in the world who have missed and squandered every opportunity, that has ever come their way. Even before UN resolution 181, which opened the door for two states, Britain's 1937 Peel Commission, recommended partitioning the land, prompting Arab leader Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi to state "There is no such country as 'Palestine'; 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented! Palestine is alien to us". Less than half a century later PA leader Yasser Arafat, was being courted, pampered and honoured by over indulgent world leaders, always ready to pour a few hundred million dollars his way, and a worlds press mesmerized by the seemingly goliath struggle, and the heartbreaking tales of Hannan Ashrawi having her little swing pulled out of her back garden by the occupation forces. Maybe Condoleezza called Abbas back to suggest that had "the Palestinians" accepted statehood in 1947, they could, had they had the same grit and motivation be celebrating almost 60 years of their own achievements, instead of wasting a whole day every year weeping and wallowing in self pity, where the only highlight on the horizon, comes in the shape of former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan grinning in a cheesy manner in front of some far fetched map which replaces Israel with a Palestinian state. Maybe Condoleezza called Abbas back to suggest that had "The Palestinians" not turned their universities, which were only created after 1967, into hotbeds of terrorism recruitment, but along with such subjects as Law and Electrical Engineering, created an atmosphere of equality and academic excellence, then maybe they could boast, that like Israel, all their higher level education institutions are featured in the worlds top 500. Maybe Condoleezza called Abbas back to suggest that had "the Palestinians" nurtured their children, and like Israel does during this holiday of Purim dress them up as little queens and spidermen, instead of strapping mock suicide belts around a one year olds middle, and allow them to watch the Teletubbies, instead of endless videos featuring mock Israeli soldiers shooting their mothers, and a whining juvenile from Gaza singing his little heart out for revenge, with his blood. Maybe Condoleezza called Abbas back to suggest that had "the Palestinians" had the same ethics and motivation as Israel, they would have had Cisco and Microsoft build their only R&D facilities outside of the US in their country, and Bill Gates would have said; "The level of technological integration in the country is evident. The use of fast speed internet, lap tops and cell phones is advanced here and puts (Palestine) Israel at the cutting edge of world technology". Instead of which the Palestinians seem to put all their hopes for glory and recognition on the worlds stage, in a viscose clad Sue Blackwell, photographed in a breezy Birmingham car park, and looking every bit the clown, in a Palestinian flag outfit, and probably on her way to verbally assault little old ladies, who might dare to emerge from the local supermarket with a Jaffa orange. Maybe Condoleezza called Abbas back to suggest that had "the Palestinians" spent some aid money on their hospitals, there would have been generators, which once prevented Israel on humane grounds from cutting of their electricity, which wouldn't have stopped an ever virulent press from condemning Israel's actions, while totally ignoring the actions which would have lead to it. Possibly during the present internal clashes, they could have taken their injured to their own well maintained, fully equipped hospitals instead of using the overstretched resources of Israel who often treat, sometimes long term, and often for free, any number of Palestinians in their superior medical facilities, with the same virulent press barely making any mention of it. Maybe Condoleezza could have called Abbas back and asked why is it that the Israelis have been able to make the desert bloom and drain the swamps, in a country that Mark Twain once described in his book "The Innocents Abroad" as a place of "barren desolation". With determination and backbreaking work they produced fertile ground, that grows everything from cotton to oranges, yet "the Palestinians" who were given beautiful greenhouses left by bereft families in Gaza, who, for the so called quest for peace, were forced to leave behind a good life and years of their livelihood, were able to do almost nothing with this windfall, except rip them apart piece by piece, and then burn synagogues that could have been used for any number of activities. Maybe Condoleezza could have called Abbas back and possibly touched a raw nerve with this Holocaust denier, by suggesting that had they embraced statehood and thrived for excellence, their most memorable moment in the Olympic arena would have been for winning gold in the men's 4x4 relay, instead of the cold blooded murder of 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. Ankie Spitzer last saw her husband, Andrei, a fencer, alive on television as he was paraded for a few moments on the balcony -- "My husband didn't come with a weapon; he was not a soldier. He came to participate because it was his absolute dream to be a part of it." Abbas, in no small part robbed Andrei of his dream, and as the treasurer of the PLO at the time, is reported to have provided, not only the financing, but his good wishes as well. Abbas has continued to rob people of dreams. This time it's under the disguise of nicely woven pure wool suits, which compared to Arafat's military attire labels him a moderate, with anyone foolish enough to fall for it. For years he was lackey to Arafat, and maybe his words, even in English are more somber, but his actions, or principally lack of, speak volumes. School are allowed to continue denying Israel, there have been no arrests of suspected terrorists and less than a year ago Abbas joined PA officials in applauding a young girl who had the following to say; "Even if all the Jews arrived (in Israel) seeking refuge with the monkeys [as Jews are commonly called]... we will never accept compensation for our land". This puts a rather unbelieving and demonic face on being a moderate. "Come back all is forgiven". Yeah right -- try saying that to the thousands of families in Israel whose lives have been torn apart by Palestinian terrorism and who's loved ones will never come back. For almost two years we have been forced to listen to solemn platitudes, and endless promises coming out of the mouth of this moderate, and worse still watch people who court these words as some sort of gospel truth. Sadly for all concerned this moderate is yet to prove his worth, and maybe the time has simply come to let him go, giving him an opportunity to finally consider the prize of statehood, for which he supposedly strives for, is a reward not handed to all without compromise and hard work. Contact Angela Bertz by email at angela03@netvision.net.il. She lives in Israel. |
|
IF IRAN GETS THE BOMB
Posted by Michael Travis, March 3, 2007. |
|
This was written by Caroline Glick and it appeared March 1, 2007 in
the Jerusalem Post
|
|
With the Bush administration now happily basking in the glory of positive coverage in The New York Times and enjoying the warm embrace of the James Baker/Brent Scowcroft wing of the Republican Party, it is hard to imagine that it will reconsider its decision to abandon the Bush Doctrine. That doctrine, named after President George W. Bush and most forcefully enunciated by him, eschewed appeasement of terror-supporting, weapons of mass destruction-proliferating enemies of the free world. Today, what Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice refers to as a "diplomatic initiative" aimed at appeasing terror-supporting, and weapons of mass destruction-proliferating Iran, and its terror-supporting, and weapons of mass destruction-proliferating Syrian colony is about to take off in Baghdad. So too, this week, the US began normalizing its relations with the terror-supporting, weapons of mass destruction-proliferating Stalinist dictatorship in Pyongyang. Bush's traditional opponents are beside themselves with glee. With regard to North Korea, these opponents are quick to note that there has always been great uncertainty about the level to which Kim Jung Il has advanced in his illicit uranium enrichment program. With regard to Iran, in an interview with the Times, former congressman Lee Hamilton warned that the Bush administration had better not think that the negotiations with the mullahs will lead anywhere quickly. As the co-chairman of the Baker-Hamilton Iraq Study Group which last November called for the president to appease Teheran and Damascus by forcing Israel to surrender the Golan Heights and Judea and Samaria explained, negotiations with the mullahs have to be open-ended. In his words, "You can't expect miracles here. There has to be a sustained effort. Successful diplomacy requires very careful preparation and very extensive follow-through." For his part, Hamilton's partner, former secretary of state James Baker, ecstatically declared on Tuesday night, "America must be prepared to talk to our enemies." What is lacking from both the media's reportage of the Bush administration's strategic about-face, and the administration's traditional detractors' praise for that sudden turn is an analysis of the likely downside of appeasing the mullahs. For instance, on Wednesday the Times ran a report on North Korea under the heading, "US Concedes Uncertainty on North Korean Uranium Effort." The thrust of the article, which was based on interviews with administration sources, was that while North Korea's commitment to acquire nuclear weapons has never been in doubt, at no time has the US had certain knowledge of its actual capabilities. In light of the uncertainty relating to Pyongyang's capabilities, the Bush administration was wrong -- the Times's sources clucked -- to have confronted it over its intentions. By the same token, those who applaud the administration's decision to engage the nuclear weapons-seeking mullahs in Teheran argue that the administration would be wrong to confront Iran for its stated intention to "wipe Israel off the map," and to bring about "a world without America," since US intelligence services are incapable of bringing unequivocal information regarding the state of Iran's nuclear weapons program. Clearly there is something wrong with this analysis. If what is not in doubt is Iran's commitment to acquiring nuclear weapons, rather than base its policies on a best-case-scenario regarding Teheran's unknown capabilities, the US and its allies should be basing their policies on a calculation of the risks a nuclear armed Iran would constitute for global security. BROADLY SPEAKING, there are three possible scenarios of how Iran would likely behave were it to become a nuclear power. In the most optimistic scenario, Iran would not attack Israel or any other country with its atomic arsenal, but would rather use it as an instrument of international and regional influence. In this scenario, Iran would reap economic advantage from its nuclear status by threatening oil shipping in the Persian Gulf and so jack up worldwide oil and gas prices. A massive economic dislocation in the oil consuming countries would no doubt ensue. In this state of affairs, all international economic sanctions against Iran would disappear and states would begin fighting with one another for the right to develop Iran's oil and gas fields and refining capabilities. Operating under Iran's nuclear umbrella, terror groups like Hizbullah and Al-Qaida would feel free to attack at will throughout the world. The rates of terrorism -- of both the organized and lone wolf variety -- would increase exponentially. Regionally, Iran would work to export its Khomeinist Shi'ite revolution. It would increase its interference in both Iraq and Afghanistan and so neutralize and defeat coalition and NATO efforts to stabilize those countries. As to Saudi Arabia, there can be little doubt that Iran would seek to foment an uprising of Saudi Shi'ites who happen to live as a repressed minority on top of the Saudi oil fields. Hizbullah's aim to overthrow the Saniora government in Lebanon would receive unprecedented Iranian assistance that would likely lead to the Shi'ite takeover of the country. So too, under the Iranian nuclear umbrella, Palestinian terrorism against Israel, and Syrian adventurism against Israel would rise steeply. The regimes in Egypt and Jordan as well as Saudi Arabia would be sunk into chaos, insurgency and war as they themselves entered a nuclear arms race the likes of which the world has never seen. In a moderate scenario, not only would all the events that would likely occur in a best-case scenario occur, Iran would also make indirect use of its nuclear arsenal. In this case, Iran would likely use one of its existing terror proxies in Sinai, Gaza or Lebanon, or invent a new terror group in one or all of these areas. Iran would transfer one or more nuclear weapons to its terror group of choice, which would then attack Israel and cause the second Holocaust in 70 years. Iran would deny any connection to the attack, although it would shower high praise on its perpetrators. While Iran's leaders from Ayatollah Ali Khamenei on down have expressed a willingness to endure an Israeli nuclear second-strike, judging from the way in which the Western policy elites are treating Iran today, the Iranians can have every expectation that they can wipe Israel off the map and pay no price for their aggression, either from a destroyed Israel or from the US. The New York Times and its counterparts will likely note that there is no absolute certainty that Iran was behind the attack. Even the skimpiest Iranian denials or vague allegations against countries like Pakistan or Russia or "rogue" scientists from the former Soviet Union or Pakistan will likely be seized upon as a justification for not responding to the attack. Israel, it will be said, had it coming anyway, because it refused to negotiate with the "militants" from Hamas, preferring instead to maintain its "occupation" of the Golan Heights and Jerusalem. In the worst case scenario, not only would Iran implement the best case and the moderate case scenario, it would also widen its network of allies while neutralizing its competitors in the Muslim world in order to expand its exportation of the Khomeinist revolution worldwide. All this it would do in an effort to achieve its longstanding aim of destroying America. Here the Iranians would be operating under the reasonable assumption that Europe will be neutral in the conflict, and Russia and China would likely support them against the US -- at least covertly. In this scenario, the Iranians would strengthen their alliances with America-haters in Latin America like Venezuelan dictator Hugo Chavez, Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega and Cuban dictator Fidel Castro or his heirs. It could openly supply these countries with nuclear bombs or strengthen Hizbullah's foothold in South and North America. In the latter case, Iran could transfer nuclear weapons and delivery systems to its terror proxies and use these networks, which include Hizbullah cells that are already active in the US, to attack the US. Most brazenly, Teheran could collaborate with its ally North Korea in developing intercontinental ballistic missiles capable of attacking US cities with nuclear weapons launched from Iran. At the same time, given the US's large nuclear arsenal and ICBM capabilities, it is less likely that the Iranians would attack the US directly. IN LIGHT of this analysis it seems that in spite of the praise it is reaping from the policy jet-set, the Bush administration would do well to reexamine its new policy toward Iran. It should accept their criticism and revert to basing its policy toward the nuclear-proliferating, terror-supporting rogue state on what is known rather than on what is unknown. Since Iran not only wants nuclear weapons, but has an active nuclear weapons program, the question that should be guiding policymakers is not whether Iran should be negotiated with, but rather, whether the US is willing to accept any of the likely scenarios of what will transpire if Iran does in fact acquire nuclear weapons. If the US is not willing to accept any of those scenarios, then it should be asking itself what must be done to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. While Europe may be willing to sit on the sidelines of this fight, just as it sat on the sidelines of the Cold War, and did little to prevent the Nazi conquest of the continent in World War II, Israel has no such luxury. In light of this, it is deeply disturbing that this week the Olmert-Livni-Peretz government reacted to the US move toward appeasement by claiming that it will have no impact on Israel. Rather than trying to gloss over the dangers, Israel should be actively engaging the many forces in Washington and elsewhere who understand the dangers of a nuclear armed Iran. Together we should be working tirelessly to ratchet up support for a policy based on the understanding that the world cannot abide a nuclear-armed Iran. Contact Michael Travis at michaelmgr@gmail.com |
|
RADICAL ISLAM MUST BE CONFRONTED NOW!
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 3, 2007. |
|
Iranian mouthpiece President Mahmoud AhMADinejad, infamous for asserting the Jewish State of Israel should be "wiped off the map", no less infamous for hosting a Holocaust denial conference, more recently spews anti-Semitic venom to throngs of kindred spirit Muslims in Sudan, a dysfunctional nation ruled by Islamic President Omar al-Bashir, himself responsible for orchestrating genocide against hapless Muslim Black Africans ill fated to reside within the Darfur region of that oil rich regime. Indeed, AhMADinejad suggested to Sudanese Islamic 'scholars', no doubt a true bastardization of the term, in the capital city of Khartoum, that Zionists were the "true manifestation of Satan", among other choice morsels of wisdom. Could there, however, be a maniacal method to the madman's maddening madness? Could wild-eyed Imam-possessed Mahmoud, spokesman for an emerging nuclear power, be verbally goading Israel, attempting to frighten its movers and shakers into attack mode? Is AhMAdinejad, at the behest of Iran's crazed Mullahs, fixing for a fight? Are proxy terrorist arms Hizbullah and Hamas, as well as allied regimes Syria and Sudan, ready to jump into any fray with a suicidal jihadist vengeance? Are the Persian lunatics and their own coalition of fundamentalist forces bizarrely planning to morph a Middle East tinderbox into a full blown turbaned Dante's inferno, setting the stage for that twelfth Imam to descend from Allah heaven, presumably ridding the planet of all infidels, creating an Earthly paradise for a Shiite style misogynist Islam? Some say it couldn't happen here. Some say saner folks need to civilly discuss matters with Syria and Iran, perhaps resolving certain issues, including the stabilization of a currently out of control Iraq. Some say making nice nice with this gang of religious Islamic fundamentalists, not averse to the contemptible concept of homicide/suicide martyrdom, is the way to go. Some do not grasp the possibility that Iran's current rulers and allied cohorts might in fact be 'more than a few bricks shy a load'. Furthermore, such discourse could be worse than useless in the mind's eye of such manipulative psychopaths, inferring a willingness of the infidel to compromise, thus demonstrating weakness. These Muslim leaders, indeed, have twisted the minds of many members of their culture into valuing a delusional afterlife in Allahland more than secular life on Earth, creating many potential martyr crazed homicide/suicide bombers willing to blow themselves asunder along with scores of proximate innocent victims, even other Muslims. It must be noted that once such leaders program the natural survival instinct of vulnerable Muslims to be so overridden, once such leaders demonstrate a willingness to so cheapen human life, once such leaders delude even themselves into believing that jihad at any price is the be all and end all of their being, once such leaders further believe in the coming of an Imam who will slay the worldwide infidel, once such leaders bizarrely embellish that belief by thinking they must set the stage for that Imam by creating chaos in the form of war, how can sane civil realistic members of our species expect to rationally confer with those leaders and reap any worthwhile agreement? There is only one intelligent way to proceed. Give the crazed, indeed mentally ill jihad obsessed manipulators of the Middle East an ultimatum. Before any talks can begin, demand they denounce homicide/suicide bombing in the loudest of terms, clearly swear allegiance to life on Earth far above any imagined frolic, perhaps with compliant virgins, in Allahland, and recognize the right of Israel to exist. Period! There is no compromise on these issues. If such demands are not met, let the jihad junkies know the entire presumed 'infidel' world will forthwith institute economic sanctions, and if necessary deploy its military might, on that entire 'sick' segment of Muslim culture. Included within the alliance of presumed 'infidel' but truly civilized nations will be all Muslim nations intrepid enough to defy those who truly besmirch their Koran. Indeed, the civilized world must unambiguously put the jihadists on notice; if they do not come around as a consequence of economic sanctions, a military struggle for the soul and sanity of mankind's one home in the universe will ensue insuring their demise. No doubt, a prescient first step prior to the launching of an ultimatum will be to effectuate an immediate drop in the per barrel price of oil, thus imperiling the economy of oil rich regimes like Iran and emerging super nemesis Sudan. This will require The House of Saud, America's favorite Muslim kingpin fraternity and OPEC Big Kahuna, to come over from the dark side. King Abdullah, spokesman for that Sunni regime a/k/a Saudi Arabia, much concerned especially over emerging nuclear power Shiite Iran's intentions, must pledge to cease financing worldwide Wahhabi madrassas at once, while substantially increasing fossil fuel output, thus demonstrating good faith to the civilized world. Additionally, Sunni Pakistani strongman President Pervez Musharraf must be told to go beyond rounding up the usual suspects, ala Casablanca's legendary Captain Renau, and seriously go after and indeed capture Al-Quaeda terrorists, slithering about Pakistan's untamed terrain, perhaps even finding and thankfully obliterating the biggest creep of them all Osama bin Laden. Sunni as well as Shiite terrorists, indeed all terrorists with jihad on the brain, must be extracted from caves, hovels, suburban homes, condos, even estates and palaces, or wherever they might park their unseemly carcasses, and put out of commission. None of this will be easy, however, a forceful focused attack now on those intent on destroying civilized rational mankind is ever necessary before Shiite Iran and its kindred spirit regimes and jihadist proxies, as well as Sunni Al-Quaeda and other fanatical Islamic entities, go nuclear. A cold or hot World War III against radical Islam is inevitable. If civilized mankind skillfully and forcefully plays its cards correctly now, perhaps a major military confrontation will be avoided. Later is too late! Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
ONLY ONE THING UNITES THE MOSLEMS
Posted by Marcel Cousineau, March 3, 2007. |
|
I wonder what Amadinejad is discussing with the Saudis? Iran's president Amadinejad is in Saudi Arabia until Sunday for talks with his fellow Moslems. Only One thing Unites the Moslems and that is their hatred of the Jews/Israel continued existence. Amadinejad's behind the scenes talks with the Saudis goes like this: 'We are preparing for war and all moslems must unite against our common Jewish foe.' The Bush peace process has been succesful in deceiving and weakening the Jews, who truly believe that we moslems want peace with them. The U.S.is trapped in the quagmire of Iraq and will be easy enough to neutralize now. You must continue to give your American friends false assurances of loyalty to them. The infidels have all fallen for the myth of the moderate Moslem. They are weak enough now for our final war to drive the Jewish infidel from Dar al Islam. China and Russia have promised us all the help we need and we must attack before the cowboy does. The objective of surprise is to our favor. KIng Abdullah is doing his part in pressing the infidels to let their guard down even more. Are you ready,Saudi brethren? Why yes of course we are, look at how much money we have sent to Hamas and all the Palestinian jihad groups and how we have laid the groundwork for this latest Hamas/Abbas government under this false peace which now squeezes Israel even more than ever. We have already weakened Israel severely with our useful idiot, President Bush and his Road Map. We were very succesful in pressuring the U.S. president to restrain Israel in the Lebaonon war this past summer.The U.S. is a paper tiger and its leaders are greedy fools who sell out their mothers for their worthless dollars. Our oil card does work so well. The time to move is now before the infidel Jews awakens from the trap we have laid for them. Contact Marcel Cousineau at his website:
|
|
EXPERTS DEBATE WHAT DRIVES ISLAMIC TERRORISTS
Posted by Paul la Demain, March 7, 2007. |
|
Did it never occur to these experts that both views "drive" Islamic
imperialism? And that terrorist tactics are but one of the many tools
utilized by Islamic imperialists?
Consider how Abdullah I conquered the Arabian peninsula, seizing lands claimed by competing tribes. He killed them. Every man, woman and child. Then he justified his slaughter by resorting to Islam. But first, he demonized his prey, the same way the Baptist bible-thumper, Jimmy Carter, demonizes Jews while taking huge payments to his NGOs from -- the Saudis and the UAE. This was written by Monisha Bansal, CNSNews.com Staff Writer, and it appeared today on www.CNSNews.com. [Editor's note: See also Meir-Levi's March 8th article.] |
|
(CNSNews.com) -- More than five years after 9/11, experts continue to debate what motivated the attacks on the United States and other violent actions by Islamic extremists against the West. Differing views were aired at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, when Hoover Institution fellow Dinesh D'Souza argued that policies promoted by the radical left had made al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden "strong enough and emboldened enough to carry out attacks." D'Souza said that liberal policies were seen as a "shameless and shocking assault on the values of people who live in very traditional societies, so we've gotten a backlash from that." "We are setting out to have a war with one billion Muslims," he added. But Robert Spencer, director of Jihad Watch, argued that the root cause is religion, noting that "Islamic terrorists use religious texts to justify their actions." "Islamic jihad has always been pursued whenever Muslim states and communities have had the means to pursue it," he said. "The problem is Islamic jihad." "Mohammed advocated warfare against non-believers," noted Spencer. "Islamic jihad is an imperative rooted within the Islamic religion. All the sects that are considered orthodox by Muslims hold to this view. Jihad warfare is an imperative part of mainstream teachings." He added that the reason "Islamic jihad terrorism" was not widespread for many years was because "they have not had the means until the last 25 years in the modern era." Spencer said Saudi oil revenues now provide those means. "Saudis have been extremely successful in funding terror worldwide." D'Souza disagreed. He blamed the left not only for liberal policies that enrage conservative Muslims, but also for the current situation in Iraq. "If you look at our enemies in Iraq, the reason they feel a sense of victory is not because they are capable of defeating the U.S. military, but because they know that in America support for the war hangs in the balance," D'Souza said. "In other words, Iraqi insurgents know that there is an active secular left in this country that is trying to convince the Congress and ultimately the president to get out," he added. "So if they win in Iraq, it will not simply be because of their efforts, but also because of the collaborative help the enemy abroad is getting from the enemy at home," D'Souza said. Contact Paul la Demain by email at lademain@verizon.net |
|
THE SHERBORNE SCHOOL AFFAIR
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, March 2 2007. | |
|
Letter from Anglicans for Israel To the Sherborne School
We of Anglicans for Israel are very concerned to learn of the event taking place at your school [See Gray Inset below]. Please let us know if your school has ever hosted any-pro Israel speakers and, if so, whom and when. It is incredible to us, as faithful Anglicans, that a school chaplain should be promoting blatantly anti Israel propaganda.This is billed as "All welcome", so it is patently NOT part of the syllabus. The mere fact this event is advertised as "The Occupation" is the pointer to it not being balanced. How do your pupils' parents and your governors feel about this? Sharen Green is not "balanced". See the article below and also go to
It is a shame that your School should be a party to demonising the Jewish state-a factor which is increasingly linked to the rise in antisemitic attacks. We urge you to reconsider this invitation, which is so desturctive of Christian-Jewish relations and which seeks to udnermine the Joint Communique signed by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the two Chief Rabbis of Israel. We will pray for you and your pupils, that you and their hearts shall not be hardened against the Apple of our Lord's eye. Yours in Christ,
Statement by Sherborne School The School has received some views from members of the public about the public meeting to be held in the Powell Theatre, Sherborne on 5 March at which the speaker will talk about her experiences in Palenstine, on behalf of a joint project of Christian Aid, Quaker Peace and Social Witness and the World Council of Churches. Sherborne School believes in the value of open debate as part of informing and educating its pupils. The school has previously invited the Chief Rabbi himself to give the annual lecture to commemorate an Old Shirburnian who lost his life in New York on 9 September 2001. Terry Waite has also delivered this lecture at the School. Boys from the School have been to Auschwitz. Holocaust Day is marked at the School each year. Judaism is taught as part of its Religious Education. The School is quite ready in principle to allow the Powell Theatre to be used, at its discretion, for other views on major international questions including the unresolved disputes between Israel and her neighbours in the Middle East. The School, whose Chairman of Governors has been consulted, respects the right of those concerned to make their views known about the 5 March meeting. Equally, it hopes that they in turn will respect the right of the School to facilitate public meetings on major issues of the day, whether or not the views expressed are generally shared by the audience or indeed by the School. Letter from Anglicans for Israel Dear Sir John Weston, Reverend Gray and Mr Eliot
I'm sorry, but all this statement shows is that you don't understand the nature of the speaker you have invited. Under the camouflage of a "humanitarian" organisation she is going to present a nakedly anti-Israel political view. And the 'moral calculus' that you seem to be making is appalling. Sir Jonathan Sacks speaking at a memorial event is hardly political and was not on the subject of the Middle East. The same goes for Auschwitz and Holocaust Memorial -- and how dare you set these tragedies on some kind of moral balancing scales, with this talk on the other side. And what is the relevance of teaching Judaism as part of Religious Studies -- it is in the National Curriculum so you could hardly not! The only correct and moral response will be to hold a meeting soon with someone who can put Israel's case -- not a speaker masquerading as a humanitarian but someone who is prepared to declare their interest in advance. Geoffrey Alderman has offered -- have you accepted? Sincerely
Contact Simon McIlwaine by email at Simon.McIlwaine@ormerods.co.uk
|
|
THE ISRAELI MUST REJECT PALESTINIAN REPUBLIC
Posted by Hafsah Salim, March 2, 2007. |
|
This was written by Ms.Muskitawati. |
|
If the PLO claim their Palestinian land to the area before WWII, that land will be spread from Syria, Libanon, Israel, and Yordan. The fact is that PLO only claim for Israel land, the small land of Israel now is not the Palestinian land as they have claimed. At this time since Hammas group have betrayed the camp David agreement, there is a good reason for Israel to offer a new settlement. They must change the name of Palestinian Republic become Gaza Republic. They may also proclaim their new Government as "The New Egypt Republic". Arab Palestinian are really were not Palestinian, they in fact are Arab who born or who move into the Palestinian land. The Arab is not a Palestinian. The land is different, the language is different, and the religion is also different. What on earth they dare claim themself as Palestinian??? I must give a good example for the same case that happen in Indonesia. There are group of Chinese-Indonesian life in Indonesia for generation, they were not mosleem but christian, buddhist, or others. The Indonesian Government are dominated by the mosleem that treat the Indonesian Chinese as a foreigner. When the economic went down, they rob those Chinese Indonesian as sunnah that they must follow how the prophet Muhammad had treated the Jews. Since there are no known jews live in Indonesia, then the Indonesian-Chinese are the Jews though they are the same Indonesia because they ara not able to speak chinese, and some of them also become mosleem but they receive the same treatment. They rob the Chinese-Indonesian as same as the prophet Muhammad rob the Jews. The Chinese-Indonesian are comparable with the Arab Palestinian, they are not belong to the land. The different is only that the Chinese-Indonesian had been treated as foreigners which they call as "Kufur", on the other hand, the Arab Palestinian have been treated by the world as the owner of the land and the Jews are the colonialist. I wonder, what is the reason of the Indonesian govt to support the Arab Palestinian since they treat bad to their own citizen the Chinese-Indonesian who live this land far before the Indonesian Republic have been existed???? Ms.Muskitawati. Contact Hafsah Salim at muskitawati@yahoo.com |
|
ISRAEL SECURITY AGENCY'S 2006 REPORT: HAMAS TAKES OVER GAZA STRIP WITH HEZBOLLAH AND IRANIAN SUPPORT
Posted by Daily Alert, March 2, 2007. |
|
The Israel Security Agency's 2006 report asserts that Hamas has taken over the Gaza Strip with the support of Hezbollah and Iran |
|
Judea and Samaria The Israel Security Agency's 2006 report asserts that terrorist organizations in Judea and Samaria continued their vigorous activity this year in which they focused their activities on attacking Israeli targets alongside their efforts of building up the various organizations' capabilities. That said, the Gaza Strip maintained its status as a "central producer" of terrorism. There was a 150% increase in terrorist activity overseen by Hezbollah in Judea and Samaria in the first half of 2006 and the organization's presence is felt in terrorist activity in the Gaza Strip as well. Most of the attacks originating from the Gaza Strip are high-trajectory weapons. Hezbollah gathers intelligence on Israel through the use of agents and accomplices working for the organization and from open sources as well. Among others, the organization uses criminal elements, tourists and even Jews and Israelis. During 2006, approximately 5,000 terror activists were arrested in Judea and Samaria. 279 of those arrested were potential suicide bombers compared to 154 potential suicide bombers in 2005 -- an increase of approximately 80%. This significant rise in the amount of potential suicide bombers who were arrested demonstrates the increased motivation to carry out suicide attacks, especially in Samaria. However, despite attempts by terrorist organizations to carry out suicide attacks against Israeli targets, the amount of attacks has gone down in comparison to last year. The barrier region The barrier region makes it difficult for the terrorist organizations to carry out suicide attacks inside Israel. Hence, the terrorist organizations try and initiate attacks from regions in which the fence has not yet been completed. The Judean region, especially the Jerusalem area, serves as a platform for inserting terrorist attackers into Israel. Another means of dealing with the barrier region are the illegal day-laborers, who are experts at finding infiltration routes into Israel. In addition, they are familiar with smugglers and those who drive the day-laborers, who usually operate for financial motives. The day-laborers high level of orientation within Israel enables them to collect a great deal of prior intelligence on possible locations for attacks. The past year has been characterized by an increase in the handling, operation and guidance of terrorist cells in Judea and Samaria, especially in Samaria, by elements from the Gaza Strip, with emphasis on the Hamas. Command centers in the Gaza Strip provided cells with the know-how of how to upgrade their weapons-making capabilities, including high-trajectory weapons. They also guided their terrorist activities and provided them with money in order to fund this activity. Hezbollah directs terrorist activity in Judea and Samaria There was a 150% increase in terrorist activity guided by Hezbollah in Judea and Samaria in the first half of 2006. On the eve of the Second Lebanon War, there were 80 terrorist cells operating in Judea and Samaria under Hezbollah guidance, most of whom are from the Tanzim or Islamic Jihad. In the summer of 2006, Hezbollah tried to spur terrorist cells to carry out terrorist attacks against Israeli targets in order to open another front against Israel. Since the Second Lebanon war ended, Hezbollah has focused its operational activity on the Palestinian arena while enhancing its involvement and support of the various cells and instilling its methods of operation from the Second Lebanon War. Hezbollah activity in the Gaza Strip In light of the opening of the Rafiah Crossing for free movement and Hamas' ascendance to power, Hamas' activity in the Gaza Strip has increased and there are currently 30 terrorist cells operated by Hezbollah. These cells were able to upgrade their activity with Hezbollah's help by training explosives experts, meeting with the heads of the organizations in Lebanon, Syria and other countries, gaining knowledge that helped improve their high-trajectory weapons array, receiving large sums of money and coordinating the transfer of weapons. The Hamas movement On May 17th, 2006, Hamas' Minister of Interior Sayid Siam announced the establishment of the organization's operational force in the Gaza Strip. The establishment of this force served Hamas' interest of maintaining an open, armed and trained military arm that will be able to guard the interests of Hamas and the Hamas government in the Palestinian street and the region. As a result of the power struggles between Hamas and Fattah in the past few months, the Hamas government assented to calls from the organization's senior activists in Judea and Samaria and authorized the establishment of the operational force in Judea and Samaria as well. Indeed, since October of 2006, there has been noticeable recruiting activity, weapons procurement, training and logistical preparations intended to replicate the model of the operational force in Judea and Samaria as well. Islamic Jihad The number of suicide attacks the Islamic jihad was able to carry out in 2006 in Judea and Samaria declined. The organization was only able to carry out 2 suicide attacks compared to 5 attacks in 2005. Over a 1,000 Islamic Jihad activists in Judea and Samaria were arrested, including 96 potential suicide bombers, and several prominent leaders were killed as part of the concentrated effort to strike at the organization's infrastructure in Judea and Samaria. Despite Israeli security forces' activity, Islamic Jihad cells in Judea and Samaria demonstrated quick recovery capabilities and still pose a serious threat, especially in the Northern Samaria. The Gaza Strip The Gaza Strip maintained its status as a central producer of terrorism in 2006. Approximately 53% of the terrorist attacks in 2006 were carried out by activists from the Gaza Strip, which continues to serve as a center for guidance and initiation of terrorist attacks against Israel. In this context, the terrorist organizations are constantly working to upgrade their weapons by smuggling weapons, self-developing and manufacturing. They are also working on developing military doctrine and training activists. Several brutal attacks against Israeli targets were carried out from the Gaza Strip in 2006 as part of the terrorist organizations' attempts to carry out a mass casualty attack and a hostage-taking attack within Israel and near the border with the Gaza Strip, especially following Hamas' open return to carrying out attacks. The majority of the attacks carried out from the Gaza Strip are carried out with high-trajectory weapons. Over the past year, the number of rocket attacks against Israel increased by several hundred percent. The massive overhauling of the organizations' capabilities and the upgrading of weaponry improved the quality of the attacks originating from the Gaza Strip. The rockets' range was increased and in March of this year, the first rocket was fired at Ashkelon, only to be followed by others. Exploiting the "Philadelphi Route" (The Egyptian -- Gaza Strip border) for terrorist activity Following the IDF's withdrawal from the "Philadelphi Route" in September of 2005, it turned into a fast and relatively safe route for smuggling weapons and operatives. The terrorist organizations exploit the "Philadelphi Route" for three central goals: building up capabilities in the Gaza Strip, smuggling in operatives and explosives experts through the "Het Route" (Gaza Strip -- Sinai/Egypt -- Israel), and transferring funds and knowledge to the terrorist organizations. Hamas' rise to power and the anarchy in the Palestinian Authority (PA) Hamas' rise to power in January of 2006 brought about changes in the Palestinian conduct in the Gaza Strip. Alongside Abu-Mazen's rule as Chairman of the PA, Hamas now heads the Palestinian parliament and government. The power struggle between Hamas and Fattah over the control of the street and the security forces and the lack of effective centralized control brought about anarchy and violent conflict between Hamas and Fattah activists. In addition, the difficult financial situation in the Gaza Strip also contributed to the anarchy in the PA. Ties between Hamas and Iran The ties between Hamas and Iran have been improving since Hamas' victory in the elections. The change in the PA's political map provides Iran with a foothold in order to expand its political and operational influence in the Palestinian arena. Hamas' voting into power and Western countries' financial siege of Hamas' government made Iran the primary supporter of the Hamas government by providing large sums of money to senior Palestinian government officials visiting in Tehran. These officials return to the Gaza Strip through the Rafiah Crossing with suitcases full of money. Due to the Second Lebanon War, Hamas has been working in the past few months in order to enhance its activity while adopting Hezbollah's operational patterns from Lebanon. This activity is carried out with the help of Hamas elements from Syria and Iran. Likewise, activists continue to smuggle a great deal of upgraded weapons into the Gaza Strip, especially anti-tank weapons, in addition to building an extensive underground array both for attack and defense. General trends in 2006 The money that fuels terrorism The large sums of money that are transferred to the terrorist organizations continued to fuel terrorism in 2006. The terrorist organizations continue to vigorously work towards developing varied methods of smuggling in from abroad money for terrorism to cells in Judea and Samaria and the Gaza Strip. Many activists involved in smuggling in money from abroad were arrested, money was confiscated and associations and organizations that helped fund terrorists were outlawed as part of the consolidated effort in the fight against terrorism financing. Increased efforts by terrorist organizations to carry out hostage-taking attacks The amount of warnings regarding terrorist organizations' intentions to carry out hostage-taking attacks grew in 2006. Terrorist organizations were able to carry out several hostage-taking attacks during 2006, including the abduction of the soldier Gilad Shalit and the abduction and murder of the student Eliyahu Asheri -- both took place in June of 2006. Global Jihad In 2006, the ideas of global jihad had greater influence on the activists in the various terrorist organizations in Judea and Samaria and especially in the Gaza Strip. The presence of global jihad elements in the Sinai helps this phenomenon grow since access to the region today is almost completely free. Signs of the penetration of global jihad ideas have also been spotted in Judea and Samaria. The internet also facilitates the penetration of global jihad ideas to the Gaza Strip. Websites allow activists to receive varied information ranging from global jihad ideas to instructions on how to produce weapons and explosives and how to carry out complex attacks. Involvement of Israeli Arabs in terrorism The Involvement of Israeli Arabs in terrorism continued in 2006. 21 cells involving 24 Israeli Arabs were exposed in 2006 compared to 17 cells with 22 Israeli Arabs exposed in 2005. Recruitment of Israeli Arabs is usually conducted following prior acquaintance with terrorism activists -- business relations, family ties, etc'. The majority of the activity was directed by the terrorist organizations in Judea and Samaria, especially those in Samaria, who have a difficult time carrying out attacks in Israel due to the barrier fence. Israeli Arabs are also used in order to smuggle high-quality weapons into Judea and Samaria for carrying out attacks. Israeli Arabs' involvement in weapons trading is also very evident in the Negev where they help terrorist organizations from the Gaza Strip with smuggling through the "Het Route". In addition, cells directed by Hezbollah were also uncovered. Approximately 40% of Israeli Arabs involved in terrorism were "family unification" Palestinians who were able to receive a permit to reside in Israel and a 'blue' identity card following their marriage to an Israeli Arab. 10 "family unification" Israeli Arabs were arrested and confessed their involvement in terrorism in 2006. Their involvement included, among other things, attempts at smuggling explosive charges into Israel and transporting weapons. Hezbollah espionage and intelligence gathering activity on Israel Hezbollah has been constantly, and especially in the past two years, gathering intelligence regarding Israel. Hezbollah gathers its information from agents and accomplices working for the organization and from open sources, including the Israeli media. During the Second Lebanon War, Hezbollah gathered information on the locations and impact of the Katyusha rockets, IDF's activity in Lebanon and the IDF and homefront's readiness for the continuation of the fighting. Hezbollah tries to recruit agents with access to civilian and military information who operate for personal motives or have an exploitable weakness and are able to meet abroad. They include drug dealers, criminals, former and current military and police personnel, reporters and businessmen. In addition, Hezbollah aims to recruit Israeli Arab agents or foreign passport holders who can collect intelligence during a visit to Israel. It is also known that Hezbollah tries to recruit Jews. Hezbollah uses this information in order to build a list of targets for rocket fire. It can be assumed that all of the information collected by Hezbollah regarding Israel is also directed by Iran and passed on to the relevant elements in Iran. The Daily Alert is prepared for the Conference of presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). Contact them at daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
A CLASH OF CULTURES
Posted by Daily Alert, March 2, 2007. |
|
This article is an interview with Amnon Rubinstein of the
Interdisciplinary Center in Herzliya. It was written by Ari Shavit and
it appeared in Haaretz |
|
'Clash of cultures' You are describing a worldview that is generally identified with the right wing. Do you also see the conflict in terms of a clash of civilizations? "I see a clash of cultures. In one dimension there is a national confrontation here. There is an Israeli-Palestinian conflict that we have to try to end. But one must also see the broad picture, which the extreme left does not see. There is a clash between a narrative of enlightenment versus a dark narrative. I do not believe in relativity. I see the universal values of the French Revolution as absolute truth. And what I see here is an assault on those values. Islam is not an open society. In the terms of Karl Popper, it is the most closed society conceivable. It is an intolerant society. "A well-known professor said not long ago that we have to adopt the values of the Middle East in which we live. I would like to ask him which values he is talking about. About the humiliation of women? About corporal punishment? About the hanging of a homosexual a month ago in a city square in Iran? About the flogging to death of a young homosexual in Saudi Arabia? About the Nazi propaganda in Egypt? I really want to know. What values are we talking about? After all, there is not one Arab state that upholds the values of freedom of expression, human rights and minority rights. And across the Middle East the Arab Christian minorities are disappearing at an appalling rate. I am not talking about Jews or about Copts or Baha'is. I am talking about Arab Christians. No one talks about that. There is a conspiracy of silence on that subject. Neither the European left nor the Israel left is addressing these phenomena. "And when I address them, I am asked what happened to me. What happened to me? Not a thing. I am simply being faithful to my values. I say that one can come out against fascism even if it comes from the Muslim side. That statement itself is considered a betrayal of the liberal principle, but I believe it is the exact opposite. In my view, those who oppose self-determination for the Jewish people are the enemy. And those who oppose human rights are the enemy. They are the enemy because they force women to marry at the age of 14. They are the enemy because they perpetrate coerced circumcision on women. They are the enemy because they persecute homosexuals. "I am not willing to accept a multicultural approach that says that their culture is like my culture. I do not understand how one can talk about cultural relativism in a generation that saw Nazism and Stalinism. I find it perverse that Jews should advocate such relativism. Is it really possible to say that all the narratives are equal? That the Nazi narrative is equal to the Anglo-Saxon narrative? That the Stalinist narrative is equal to the narrative of the French Revolution?" Do you consider radical Islam a totalitarian movement? Do you really liken it to national socialism? "No. I see political Islam as a movement that poses a danger to civil rights, but I do not liken it to Nazism. Nazism was a liquidationist movement. It wanted to annihilate the 'other.' Islam does not want to annihilate its enemies, only to rule the world." Your remarks will not go down well in Israeli universities. "What happened in our universities is that a small minority seized control of some of the humanities and social sciences departments, and of public discourse. Go to symposia in those departments. Who is represented there? In those discussions the right wing is Meretz. The discourse is from Meretz leftward. But is support for the Palestinians really left wing? Does being left wing mean to support Palestinian nationalism? In my view, that anti-Zionist group is not the left. It is a group that supports the Palestinian narrative and does not always allow the large Zionist minority in the universities to have its say. "The president of a very important university told me that there are circles in which people who espouse a Zionist worldview will not be accepted. And when Yuli Tamir [the present education minister] signed the Kinneret Covenant [which sought to find common ground among different segments of Israeli society] a fatwa was issued against her and there were calls to boycott her. It's an unbelievable phenomenon. It damages academic freedom and it is also against the law. "So I say that something bad is happening in academia here. Something very bad. When some professors sign a petition calling for a boycott of Israeli universities, we have reached the stage of farce. What we have here is an imitation of Europe and America without the balances of Europe and America. There you have a radical pole, but there is also a mainstream and there are conservatives. We don't have that. Even though there is a Zionist majority, the trauma of the settlements and the occupation silenced the Zionist discourse in academia. Even those who are Zionists are unwilling to defend Zionism." Do you never get heretical thoughts -- don't you ever wonder whether Zionism was a mistake? "I do have heretical thoughts. I ask myself whether the tremendous opposition of the Arab and Muslim world is not sabotaging the prospect of realizing the Zionist idea. But immediately I have counter-thoughts. I prefer the dangers that face us in Israel to the humiliation of being a Jewish minority even in the enlightened West. Therefore I feel strong in my Zionist belief. But I see the international move toward delegitimizing the Jewish state. I see that Zionism is under heavy attack. And I am worried. I am very worried." The Daily Alert is prepared for the Conference of presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). Contact them at daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
HAMAS TERRORISTS TRAINING IN SYRIA, IRAN. EU BORDER INSPECTORS FAIL TO STOP PASSAGE OF TERRORISTS
Posted by Daily Alert, March 2, 2007. |
|
This was written by Ronny Sofer and it appeared yesterdayin Ynet News
(http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3371522,00.html). |
|
Senior defense officials warn that hundreds of Hamas members from Gaza escaping to Egypt, from where they travel on to Damascus, Tehran to attend special advanced terror training camps. Israel files official complaint with EU, Egypt, Abbas against European inspectors poor supervision at Rafah border terminal Hundreds of Hamas members are being smuggled across the Rafah border terminal to Egypt to attend advanced terror training camps in Syria and Iran, senior defense officials told Ynet. However, the delegation of European inspectors stationed at Gaza-Egypt border denied the charges and claimed Israel never warned them or filed any complaints regarding the phenomenon. In recent days Israel has filed a complaint with the European Union, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Egypt claiming that the European inspectors at Rafah do not maintain tight enough supervision at the crossing, and fail to stop the stream of terrorists and money used to fund terror in and out of Gaza. Top Israeli defense officials expressed great concern over the increased use of the Rafah crossing for terror purposes. If the EU inspectors don't clamp down on money smuggling and the passage of terrorists, Israel may consider not renewing the agreements on Rafah crossing supervision when they expire in two months, the officials warned. "This issue could be a stumbling block to all future agreements," officials in Jerusalem said. Iran, Syria boost Palestinian terror According to official sources in Jerusalem, some 100 Hamas terrorists crossed the Rafah border terminal in recent weeks. Intelligence information collected by the defense establishment indicates that the terrorists make their way to special training camps in Iran and Syria, founded specially to train and coach Palestinians for terror attacks against Israel should Hamas decide to terminate its ceasefire. Security officials in Israel said this phenomenon was part of the recent trend by which Iran and Syria have shown increasing involvement in developing Palestinian terror infrastructure in the Gaza Strip. Terror operatives from Gaza that train in Tehran and Damascus acquire knowledge and training in the use of advanced weapons. Terrorist elements continue to smuggle more and more advanced weapons into Gaza, including anti-tank missiles, ground-to-ground missiles (SSMs), and surface-to-air missiles (SAMs) that could threaten Israeli Air Force planes that fly over Gaza. The officials said explosives and bombs are also being smuggled, and the security establishment fears that rocket-manufacturing know-how may leak from Gaza into Israel. "Israel is following these terrorists closely," one official said. "Israel turned to the EU, Egypt and the Palestinians in a bid to prevent the return of these terrorists upon the completion of their training in Iran and Syria." Israel is also following the continued smuggling of funds from Egypt to Gaza through the Rafah terminal. It is estimated that after Ismail Haniyeh, prime minister of the Hamas-led government, was caught trying to smuggle $80 million into the Strip, activists are now trying to smuggle smaller sums of money. A spokesman for the EU delegation told Ynet that the Rafah terminal was open for only five days in February. "The delegation does not have any real operational authority; it can only oversee traffic at the crossing," he said. "We have not received a complaint from the Israelis regarding the departure of terrorists or the smuggling of funds (through the crossing.) We check each and every suitcase." The Daily Alert is prepared for the Conference of presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). Contact them at daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
|
A CALL TO YESHA RESIDENTS: PASS THROUGH FREELY!
Posted by Aryeh Zelasko, March 2, 2007. |
|
This is a natural result of the self delusion that dominates the mentality of Yeshah activists. Yeshah, as well as the Golan, are NOT part of the State of Israel. In fact, we are the only piece of real estate in the world that does not belong to any sovereign country. Yeshah is Neverland; the home of the lost little boys of the National Religious Movement. For years these lost boys could do no more than fight amongst themselves over budgets and jobs and ignored the fact that we lived in a fantasy world that would eventually crash down on us. Had they pushed as vigorously for Yeshah annexation to Israel as they did for their perks, we would not have had the Sharon Pogrom or be waiting for the Olmert Pogrom. The news item below comes from Arutz-Sheva
|
|
(IsraelNN.com) The Yesha-based Komemiyut (Uprightness) organization calls upon the pioneering Jewish residents not to cooperate with plans to stop all non-local cars from driving freely to Yesha (Judea and Samaria). A test-run of a new army system to control traffic into and out of Yesha is in place at the Eliyahu Crossing, leading into Karnei Shomron, Tzofim, Alfei Menashe and other areas. Local residents are identified by car-stickers or electronically by their license plates, and are allowed through freely; other vehicles -- such as those of visitors and suppliers -- will have to either wait in line with Arabs, including the potential terrorists who are the reason for the checkpoints, or will be routed through a different line. A recent issue of Komemiyut's weekly journal wrote as follows: In the past few years, the horizons around us are changing, as are our daily lives. The expanses of Samaria, Binyamin and Judea are being sliced and cut through with ugly, broad concrete walls, which have wounded both the landscape and the loyal Jewish heart. 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. |
|
TERRORISM: PERSISTENT ENEMY
Posted by Warren Manison, March 2, 2007. |
|
This is a February 27, 2007 editorial from the Jacksonville
Florida Times-Union
|
|
The Internet, created to foster decentralized communication in a nuclear war and foster communication among academics, has become an essential vehicle for terrorists. As described in the book Jihad Incorporated by Stephen Emerson, it is "cheap, difficult to track and indispensable to the international terror networks." In fact, the hijackers on Sept. 11, 2001, used it to find information on flight training schools and to purchase tickets for the fateful flights. "Terrorist groups use Web sites to laud their own accomplishments, conduct fundraising, threaten their enemies and provide a public organizational face by posting their leaders' biographies as well as their ideology," Emerson writes. He describes a London-based Web site run by a Saudi militant. It calls for attacks in Iraq, offers advice for training, surveillance of targets and even a segment on which knives are best used for beheadings. Posting on Web sites can be spread instantly worldwide by news organizations like al-Jazeera. Hackers could commit an act of terrorism on the U.S. economy by the Internet. It only takes one brilliant evil mind to do it. The terrorists have become more skilled in coded messages, hiding messages in photographs, using icons. The ability of the al-Qaida style groups to educate themselves and wait patiently for attack cannot be overemphasized. The truck bomb attack of the World Trade Center in 1993 was designed to topple one building, having it crash into another and kill 250,000 people, Ramzi Yousef said. Eight years later, a variation on that plot succeeded. Al-Qaida has two tactical objectives: damage the U.S. economy and cause maximum casualties. "In an al-Qaida cave in Afghanistan, U.S. forces discovered a congressional study detailing investigators' success in penetrating two commercial airports, as well as a number of federal buildings, by showing fake IDs created with downloadable software," Emerson writes. That is why it is dangerous to reveal successful U.S. campaigns against terrorist plots, because the terrorists educate themselves. Terrorists use mosques to raise money, charitable groups as a cover, but nothing gives them more power to communicate than the World Wide Web. Open societies are at a disadvantage in fighting terrorism. It is important that Americans recognize the difference between those who pervert the peaceful tenets of Islam and those who use them to wage war. As Emerson writes: "... this zealous strain of Islam will settle for nothing less than our total subjugation or destruction. It couples its zealotry in pursuit of its goals with patience as to achieving them. "An informed American public can confront this threat -- not with anxiety and dread -- but with intelligence, honesty and courage." |
|
NO MASKS: PURIM OBSERVATIONS
Posted by Judy Lash Balint, March 2, 2007. |
|
These are Purim observations by Stuart Pilichowski, who lives in Mevasseret Zion (stupillow@hotmail.com). |
|
It's like a dream come true.
And also the resident of the local absorption center, a native of Ethiopia. In addition to the baby on her back covered by a sheet, she has her 5 year old son accompany her to make sure she gets the right medication and the correct change. The pharmacist is explaining the proper dosage. The Israeli-Arab
pharmacist is taking his time to make sure the Israeli-Ethiopian
immigrant (dontcha just love these hyphenated people?) understands
how to correctly take the medicine. He's using plenty of hand signals
and gestures. It's actually very sweet to watch.
The scene is repeated over and over again everyday. And not just in Mevaseret. Ever go to a hospital in Israel? You'll see the same thing. (Actually, many, many Arabs are here receiving the best care in the world; treatment they would never receive elsewhere.) No labels. No masks. Just good old fashioned TLC. Because you're you.
A Jewish resident of Hebron was interviewed on the radio. It seems his two year old had wandered off on the Shabbat for a few hours. Everyone suspected the worst. Yet she was found safe and sound. With an Arab family. In Hebron. Unbelievable. Forget the politics of the situation. Take it at face value. Who knows? ...Perhaps there is yet hope ...for what and in what form? Only time will tell ...Purim teaches us that the world is and can be topsy-turvy. We must have faith in God that even though world events seem horrific and the outlook is bleak we must persevere and have faith -- not only in God, but also in mankind that we can be better and get better. The list of potential horrors out there awaiting the State of Israel and Jews the world over can be overwhelming. On the flip side the love, kindness and support and comfort we offer one to another can be so wonderfully gladdening and heartening. Enjoy Purim. It's truly a time to celebrate what once was, what is, and what will be. NO MASKS, PART II Optimism is a Jewish obligation.
Last week I wrote an essay that was clearly quite optimistic.
Reality is also a Jewish obligation. Looking through rose-colored glasses is nice and dandy (yoffi-toffi, achla-bachla), but we dare not lose sight of what's happening around us in other parts of the country. Yes, dear friends, there's more to Israel than the Mevaseret Zion mall. Most notably, there's Sderot. I realized the other day as a news report came on the radio about rockets falling "near" Sderot, in an "unpopulated" field, that what caught my attention was not the shelling, but the fact that it was being reported at all. I'm not a professional pollster, but I'll bet my bottom dollar (shekel?) that most Israelis go through their daily routine without a second thought about shelling in Sderot. Am I wrong? I hope so, but I think not. Know anyone living in a "settlement" -- outside the Green Line? Anyone near the Green Line? Here's a short list of "incidents" of a typical (?) week: -- a resident was driving from Yakir to Karnei, when an Arab car was stopped in the middle of the road, blocking traffic. This is only one small area of our dear country. I'm "lucky" that in
Mevaseret Zion my Arab neighbors are civil and even nice. But it
isn't that way everywhere.
Why? Ahhhh ...That, my friends, is a whole other discussion. I'd love to hear your theories. So as we celebrate Purim 5767 keep the faith, be optimistic that God is on our side; we need to do ours and God will do His...but watch out for reality; we're not where we should be yet. And this Purim give some mishloach manot to someone you think will least expect it. The smile alone is worth a million bucks. Guaranteed. Judy Lash Balint is an award-winner investigative journalist and author of Jerusalem Diaries: In Tense Times (Gefen). It is available for purchase from www.israelbooks.com |
|
EGYPT COULD DO MORE
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 2, 2007. |
|
IF PEACE TREATY SIGNED WITH SYRIA Diplomats and idealists are plumping for a peace treaty between Syria and Israel. After its own treaty, Egypt, Egypt was able to replace its old Soviet weaponry with modern US weaponry, spending almost all its US aid for that supposedly now unnecessary purpose. Egypt now reputedly has a navy superior to Israel's. (It remains hostile to Israel.) If Syria signs a treaty, would the US give it a modern army, too? It's an odd logic to arm a country that claims to have made peace. But the US does that. Nobody knows what will happen to Egypt, Jordan, and Syria. (The Islamists are nearing power in Egypt and Jordan.) The Alawites, who rule Syria are a minority, and may be overthrown. Even if incumbents intend peace, they do not speak for their successors. Arming them is risky (Dr. Aaron Lerner, IMRA, 1/31). Treaties by themselves don't produce peace. It is comforting for the time being, but ultimately disastrous. Taking "a chance for peace" risks all-out war. THE FALLACY OF "GIVE 'EM A STATE" Fallacies die hard. Evidence takes longer to dent skulls than water to undermine glaciers. One of the most stubborn fallacies holds that if the Palestinian Arabs get a state in Judea-Samaria and Gaza, they won't feel the need to war on Israel any more. No evidence for that proposition has been advanced. If people gave such nostrums logical thought, they would drop them. Arab states kept attacking Israel, even before Israel controlled those provinces. Obviously the problem is Muslim rejection of an infidel state, not later territorial claims by Palestinian Arabs. Arafat signed an agreement for autonomous rule with the opportunity to negotiate a state. He took the concession but rebuffed Israeli and US negotiators, and made war. Yaakov Lappin (Jewish Political Chronicle, 11/2006, p.15 from Ynet News, 10/31) adds that Abbas' office controls the P.A. media. Many TV programs depict all of Israel as "occupied Palestine." A documentary about Jaffa as an occupied city played almost 20 times in the past half year. It called for the expulsion of all Israelis from all of Israel. The children indoctrinated by such propaganda feel cheated by Israel. They will not accept any treaty their elders sign now. Having such feelings doesn't make the feelings legitimate, but another fallacy is that they do. That is not fair. Remember Arafat's dedication to the phased plan for the conquest of Israel! Any territory vacated by Israel is to be used for making war on Israel, to get the rest. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com. |
|
RIP VAN WINKLE SYNDROME
Posted by Unity Coalition for Israel, March 2, 2007. |
|
Elwood McQuaid is a pastor and a leader of the Christian Zionist movement in the United States. |
|
Remember the story about Rip Van Winkle, the likable fellow of Dutch descent who slipped away from a nagging wife and bedded down for a nap under a shady tree in the Catskills? After 20 years in the arms of Morpheus, old Rip awoke to find himself in a different world -- one he was completely out of touch with. I thought about the Catskill snoozer while reading a story in The Washington Times recently. It concerned the US State Department's unease about what it dubbed the Muslim "nativist surge" in Western Europe. In an article titled "Europe's Muslims Find Ally in US," Nicholas Kralev reported that "Daniel Fried, assistant secretary of state for European and Eurasian affairs, said US embassies and consulates in Britain, France, Germany, the Netherlands, and other countries will decide what exactly they can do" to help Europe solve its problems with disenchanted Muslim immigrants. Fried called Europe's growing Muslim presence "a fascinating issue and one that the American government is just now trying to get its mind around." He said, "It's a huge problem, we are thinking about it seriously, and we've tried to do some intellectual framing up." This appears to be State Department-speak for, "We just noticed that Europe might have a problem with radicals." If this sounds a bit Van Winklish to you, it certainly does in this corner. And just why does this newly discovered Muslim disenchantment exist? In the words of France's ambassador to Washington, Jean-David Levitte, "The unrest that existed in poor neighborhoods had nothing to do with jihad and much to do with social conditions. That's why we have to put the emphasis on improving the social conditions -- schools, better housing -- and hopefully all this will trigger better absorption in the social fabric of France of this minority." Kralev reported that Fried believes a "process of alienation" is occurring between Muslims and their host countries, which Fried said have "no sense of integration." All of which leads to a "nativist surge," causing a sizable number of Muslims to embrace radicalism. And who is ultimately to blame? Why, European host countries, of course. Just what does the American State Department intend to do to change the direction of these "unintegrated masses" that murdered Dutch filmmaker Theo Van Gogh in Amsterdam and are turning to rioting, bombing subways in London, and other jihadist acts? The question seems superfluous because the answer will be what it always is: Give them what they want; buy them off. THERE ARE two issues here, and neither has anything to do with genuine solutions to the problems. First, there's the incomprehensible confession of surprise that this violence is going on. Where have these officials been? In Europe, with its rampant anti-Semitism and Christian bashing, Islamists have been declaring their intent to create a caliphate on the continent for years. It is common knowledge to virtually anyone who cares to notice. Anyone that is, except some American and European bureaucrats who should, of all people, know what's happening. Does their defective analysis prove the thesis -- in the tangle of the war on terror -- that many in places of Western leadership just don't get it? Or perhaps they have chosen to operate under some form of denial, the most devastating aspect of which is the fiction that the war Islamists have forced upon us has nothing to do with religion but everything to do with a lack of material and social resources. Such a view is a prescription for disaster. Then there is the issue of what radical Islamic forces in Europe actually want for themselves and the countries which now have large numbers of Muslim immigrants who, in all fairness, have lived in conditions much worse than those in the countries they have adopted. Do they wish to be integrated into Western democratic lifestyles? Undoubtedly, some do. But from all appearances, they remain purposeful outsiders. Their radical clerics and would-be Islamist mentors make it clear that they have no intentions of integrating into European society. Rather, they intend to transform it into an Islamostate dominated by the trappings of Shari'a law and the ways of Islam. The idea that Western diplomats and politicians can talk or bribe such ideologues out of their plans is not viable. The fundamental issue rests first and foremost on religious commitment, not material or societal disenfranchisement. Those matters are incidental to the overall objective. If Westerners refuse to face reality, they are playing Rip Van Winkle and will suddenly awake in a far different world. The transformation has already begun. The Unity Coalition for Israel (http://www.israelunitycoalition.org) is "the largest worldwide coalition of Jewish and Christian organizations, with more than 200 groups representing millions of people dedicated to Israel. Though we have many different backgrounds, we have one common goal: A Safe and Secure Israel." "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!" |
|
ISRAELIS CHOOSE SDEROT BAND MOCKING GLOBAL JIHAD FOR EUROVISION
Posted by Ezra HaLevi, March 1, 2007. |
|
(IsraelNN.com) Israelis have chosen a song ridiculing Islamic terrorists as their representative entry for the Eurovision song contest. The song, called "Push the Button," was composed by the popular Israeli rock group Teapacks, whose members say that they are proud of using the international platform to convey an important message to the world on behalf of the Jewish state. In English, Hebrew and French, the artists humorously dismiss the global Jihad in a fusion of rap, rock and folk music. "There are some crazy rulers," an English line in the song sung with a thick Israeli accent says, "they hide and try to fool us, with demonic, technological willingness to harm." Teapacks members and their families experience the brunt of Islamic terrorism first hand. The band was formed in 1988 in the Kassam rocket-pocked city of Sderot. Lead singer Kobi Oz said that his group knew that the trilingual song crosses accepted norms, but are heartened by the fact that it was chosen by a majority of Israelis in the recent televised voting. Listen to the song at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_h_rLKTLvs Another Teapacks song that was voted upon is called Salaam Salami. The song uses a tongue-in-cheek allegory of a man and his salami sandwich to represent the Jewish people and their homeland. The sandwich owner's willingness to make peace on the basis of compromise with a fellow who wants his salami sandwich leads to the continuous slicing of the salami and ends with the other fellow throwing him out the window and taking the sandwich. The Israeli choice is particularly significant as past entries have focused exclusively on universalist themes of peace and love. The only past Israeli winner was transsexual singer Dana International, whose song Diva was not at all political. Apparantly, Eurovision's organizers have already begun to consider banning Teapacks from the competition. "It's absolutely clear that this kind of message is not appropriate for the competition," contest organizer Kjell Ekholm said. "We'll have all the delegation leaders here in Helsinki next week, and I'm sure we'll talk about this case within the EBU [European Broadcasting Union] group." Barring a ban, Teapacks will perform the song at the Eurovision finals in Helsinki in May. Ezra HaLevi writes for Zrutz-Sheva (www.IsraelNationalNews.com).
This article is archived at
|
|
CITGO/PETRO EXPRESS
Posted by Lee Caplan, March 1, 2007. |
|
Citgo has changed its name This past week, the President of Iran visited President Chavez of Venezuela. Their main theme at the meetings, 'DESTRUCTION OF AMERICA and KILL ALL JEWS! It is not President Bush they hate, it is you and I! President Chavez is spreading the 'HATE AMERICA' to other South American countries. All American's must stand up and listen to what the two Presidents say. Chavez is using the 'oil to the poor' in this country to undermine our government. Now Citgo is changing their name because of poor sales caused by you and I standing up and not buying Citgo gas. Don't let the name change fool you -- it's still Chavez's gas! CITGO Changing Name To PETRO EXPRESS I had to forward this, because Chavez is starting to feel the loss of revenue from his holdings -- HE OWNS CITGO This is a very important move that everyone should be aware. ANNOUNCED JUST RECENTLY, CITGO, BEING AWARE THAT SALES ARE DOWN DUE TO U.S (CUSTOMERS NOT WANTING TO BUY FROM "CHAVEZ"), HAVE STARTED TO CHANGE THE NAME OF SOME OF THEIR STORES, TO: "PETRO EXPRESS" DO NOT BUY FROM "PETRO EXPRESS"
KEEP THIS MEMO GOING SO EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT IS HAPPENING. Contact Lee Caplan at leescaplan@yahoo.com |
|
BROTHERS IN ARMS: FATAH AND PALESTINIAN ISLAMIC JIHAD
Posted by Elliott Green, March 1, 2007. |
|
Pinhas Inbari is a veteran Palestinian affairs correspondent who formerly reported for Israel Radio and Al Hamishmar newspaper, and currently reports for several foreign media outlets. He is the author of a number of books on the Palestinians including The Palestinians: Between Terrorism and Statehood. This a Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA) publication. It
was published March 1, 2007 as Vol 6, No 21 Jerusalem Issue Brief. It
is archived at |
The Myth of "Secular" Fatah The current political efforts on the Palestinian track are based on the assumption that "moderate" Fatah should be empowered versus "radical Hamas." The internal infighting in the Palestinian arena has also been described as "secular versus religious." Yet while Hamas is religious in nature by definition, a Fatah defined as secular is far from reality. A brief review of its websites reveals frequent Muslim phrases and tenets in its discourse, for example, on the holy duty to liberate Jerusalem and the Al-Aqsa mosque, and the religious terminology of jihad that has an equal footing with the secular term "resistance." Hamas also uses "resistance" and jihad as synonyms, and the term "resistance" is even part of Hamas' official name -- "the Islamic Resistance Movement." While one cannot claim that Fatah is a religious movement, it has strong Muslim features. Its military wing is the "Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade," whose military announcements are heavily laced with Koranic verses identical to those used by Hizbullah, according to which "the weakest on the face of the earth" will become strong and inherit "and become the imams -- the rulers." This is the verse that Fatah leader Yasser Arafat chose to cite when he first entered Gaza in 1994 after the Oslo agreements. Islamic Jihad's Roots in Fatah The similarity in religious discourse between Fatah's Aqsa Martyrs and Hizbullah is not accidental. The most recent terror operation in Eilat was endorsed jointly by Islamic Jihad and the "Army of the Believers," an Aqsa Martyrs affiliate. In fact, both Islamic Jihad and Hizbullah were established with deep Fatah involvement. Originally, Islamic Jihad was actually a purely Fatah offshoot and was a shadow of Fatah for years. Islamic Jihad was born as a result of the Khomeini revolution in Iran, when Fatah was its main supporter in the Arab world. Khomeini saw Fatah as a prime tool to spread his Islamic revolution in the Sunni world. But the Fatah-Shiite honeymoon broke down over Khomeini's demand of Fatah to "convert" to Islam and become what Hamas and Islamic Jihad are today, as well as due to Sunni pressure on Arafat, especially by Saddam Hussein, not to cross those red lines. However, the original founding of Islamic Jihad was as part and parcel of the military apparatus of Arafat's deputy, Abu Jihad. Abu Jihad, as his name may convey, was the major promoter of Islamic features in Fatah, as opposed to Abu Iyyad, Arafat's second deputy, who was closer to the Soviet Union and then to the U.S. The initial appearance of Islamic Jihad was the attack on Beit Hadassah in Hebron in May 1990, killing six Israelis and wounding sixteen. When the members of the cell were captured, they revealed that they were sent by Abu Jihad, who told them that the ultimate goal of establishing Islamic Jihad was to Islamize Fatah. The recognized founder of Islamic Jihad was Fat'hi Shqaqi, a Palestinian Muslim Brotherhood member in Egypt who believed that the Egyptian parent organization was neglecting the Palestinian cause. Once in Israeli prison, Shqaqi told Reuven Paz, an Israeli expert on Muslim radical movements, that he conceived Islamic Jihad as the promoter of an Arab revolution that would revive the Muslim caliphate. In due course, Shqaqi adopted the Shiite religion. Even after Islamic Jihad left the Fatah womb, the special relationship between the Abu Jihad wing in Fatah and the Khomeini revolution was never broken. During the first Lebanon war, Abu Jihad followers helped Iran establish Hizbullah on the ruins of the Fatah infrastructure that Israel had destroyed in the war. Anti-Iranian elements inside Fatah objected to the tight connections between Fatah's military wing and Iran, and in internal clashes Abu Iyyad's followers were defeated by Abu Jihad's followers led by Abu Ali Shaheen, who later became one of Arafat's main supporters in Gaza. After the PLO left Lebanon, the remnants of the pro-Iranian elements left behind in the Palestinian refugee camps became either linked with Hizbullah or later became the core for the al-Qaeda group "Ansar al-Sunna." Islamic Jihad-Fatah Cooperation in the 2000 Intifada More significant was the tight cooperation between Islamic Jihad and Fatah during the second intifada beginning in 2000. While previously there had been significant resistance inside Fatah to links with Iran, this disappeared after the Oslo agreements. The major element opposing Iranian influence on Fatah was Arafat's Praetorian Guard -- Force 17. But when he established his security forces in the Palestinian territories, Arafat left Force 17 commander Abu Tayyib (Mahmud Natur) outside and preferred the pro-Iranian Mahmud Damra, who was engaged in linking the upcoming uprising with Hizbullah and Iran. When the Aqsa Martyrs were established, their commander, the mysterious Abu Mujahid, was later named as Munir Maqdah, the military commander of Fatah forces in Lebanon and the closest Fatah figure to Iran and Hizbullah at the time. Hence, while during the years prior to Oslo a balance was kept within the military echelons of Fatah between pro- and anti-Iranian elements, after Oslo, during the rebuilding of Fatah military forces, Arafat connected both Force 17 and the Aqsa Martyrs. The remnants of the old Force 17 were placed in the negligible "General Command," while the new Force 17 was reshaped in a way to be linked with Iran and Hizbullah. Islamic Jihad, as was apparent during the uprising, was the closest to the Aqsa Martyrs in terms of both operational cooperation and sources of funding, meaning Iran. This was apparent not only on the daily tactical level but, as the case of the Karine A weapons ship revealed, on the strategic level. The joint plan of Fatah and Hizbullah was to surround Israel with terror rocket power from all sides. This master plan still exists, but now after the demise of Arafat, the main role has been given to Hamas. When the initial cooperation between Fatah and Iran began, Hamas did not yet exist and the Muslim Brotherhood was no less anti-Shiite than it is today. But as Hamas became stronger and Fatah weakened, the center of gravity shifted to Hamas. Yet, as far as Fatah and Islamic Jihad are concerned, their bonds are stronger. As a matter of fact, they are brothers. Contact Elliott Green at eil100@zahav.net.il |
|
UK TODAY IS USA IN FIVE TO TEN YEARS
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 1, 2007. |
|
Dear Mr. President, What is happening in London (aka Londonstan) today, is what will be happening in our own country in five to ten years...unless you take action now. Saudi Wahhabi-funded mosques all over the USA are spewing forth the same kind of anti-West and anti-American hatred that London's Finsbury mosque and its spin-offs in the UK are preaching. American Muslim leaders openly preach the need to replace our constitution with the Qur'an and fly the green flag of Mohammed over the white house. Until forced by public complaints to take it down in November, 2003, the Saudi Embassy's website openly espoused the Islamofascist goal of making the Muslim religion supreme over all the world. Saudi-funded delegations are pressuring major American and international textbook publishers to rewrite history and replace facts with lies so that the bloody and bloodthirsty history of Islamic religious imperialism and jihadist triumphalist supremacist conquest will appear benign and user-friendly. As the FBI has belatedly informed us, over the last five years, thousands of Arab and Iranian operatives have crossed in to our country from Mexico, disguised as Mexican "illegal immigrants", and have disappeared in to the pourous and receptive community of millions of American Muslims. They are not here to study, or to build a better life for themselves and their families. Britain today may be the largest exporter of terrorism to the West; but the USA will soon become the largest incubator of Islamofascist terrorist sleeper cells...unless you take action. Any plans? This is from Memri, www.thememriblog.org |
|
Arab Reformist Website (http://www.aafaq.org/): "Britain is the Largest Exporter of Terrorism in the Non-Muslim World" To view this Special Dispatch in HTML, visit:
In a February 8, 2007 article, Omran Salman, editor of the Arab reformist website. www.aafaq.com, wrote, that Britain had become one of the principle exporters of Islamic terrorism in the world. The following are excerpts:(1) "Britain has been a victim of terrorism, but at the same time it is the largest exporter of terrorism in the non-Muslim world. Here is the proof: "On July 7, 2005, four British Muslim followers of Al-Qaeda perpetrated suicide attacks on three underground trains and one bus in London. These attacks killed 56 and wounded hundreds. "On August 10, 2006, the British police announced that it had foiled a plot to blow up 10 commercial planes flying between the U.S. and Britain, and had arrested the 24 Islamist conspirators. "On January 31, 2007, the British police arrested nine Islamists in Birmingham who were planning to kidnap a British Muslim soldier and film his beheading, and then distribute the video on the Internet... "But that is not all: Britain is also one of the world's exporters of terrorism. "In August 2005, the Independent published a story with the headline: 'Intelligence Chiefs Warn Blair of Home-Grown Insurgency.' Raymond Whitaker and Frances Elliott wrote in this report that 'there were more than 100,000 people in Britain from "completely militarized" regions, including Somalia... and Afghanistan... Every one of them knows how to use an AK-47... About 10 per cent can strip and reassemble such a weapon blindfolded, and probably a similar proportion have some knowledge of how to use military explosives.'(2) "The Sunday Times wrote on June 4, 2006 that between 120 and 150 radical Islamists had traveled to Iraq to join the 'British Jihad Brigade,' in answer to Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi's appeal. The paper cited a senior security source as saying that the 'foreign legion,' which is comprised entirely of Westerners, was set up to fight alongside the Iraqi insurgency.(3) "The British journalist Melanie Phillips... cited British government appraisals from one year before the London attacks, to the effect that 16,000 British Muslims were either directly involved in or supported terrorist activities. Three thousand had attended Al-Qaeda training camps abroad, and a few hundred of them were prepared to carry out attacks in the U.K. itself. There were also other British Muslims who traveled abroad to take part in terrorist attacks. "On December 22, 2001, the British-born Muslim Richard Reid was arrested after raising a din on a flight from Paris to Miami. "Reid, who is known as 'the shoe-bomber,' attempted to blow up the plane with explosives hidden in his shoe. In his confession at his trial he said: 'I admit to what I did. I will not apologize for it. I am at war with your country.' In January 2003 he was sentenced to life imprisonment. "On January 23, 2002, Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl disappeared in Pakistan while preparing a report on extremist groups. On February 21, 2002, the U.S. State Department officially announced his death. A videotape showed masked terrorists slaughtering him; it later became known that these were the British-born Ahmed Said Sheikh and three of his assistants. "In 2002, the Egyptian authorities arrested 26 members of Hizb Al-Tahrir Al-Islami. Among them were three British citizens who had resolved to carry out terrorist attacks. The group was convicted in March, 2004, and the British citizens were condemned to five years' imprisonment. "In the recent fighting in Somalia, in which the government forces, with military support from Ethiopia, defeated the forces of the extremist Union of Islamic Courts, there were British Islamists who fought alongside the Islamic Courts. Ethiopian PM Meles Zenawi revealed, in a January 9 press conference, that his country's forces had arrested seven British fighters as they tried to escape Mogadishu together with the Islamist militias. They were arrested together with a number of Canadians and other Westerners, whom he described as 'the international faction'. The news reported that many of them had been killed in battle. "The British Islamists had joined the forces of the Union of Islamic Courts in answer to the call issued by Al-Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, in early January. He had called on Al-Qaeda's supporters in the West to join in the suicide-bombing campaign and guerilla war in Somalia. "The aid coming from Britain to the Islamic Courts was not limited just to fighters, but also included funding. A report issued by a U.N. supervision agency last November stated that 'in recent months Somalis in the U.K. had raised more than $1 million in donations. These funds were sent to the Islamic Courts.' The report added that London had become the primary channel through which monetary aid was passed on to the Islamic Courts. "Last but not least, Britain's Channel 4 broadcast, on Monday, January 13, 2007, a documentary film that was surreptitiously shot in a number of British mosques, the most important of which was the Birmingham Mosque. The results were alarming. The sermons were hostile to 'infidels,' Jews, and Christians, and called for the killing of homosexuals, among others. In addition, they offered Islamic legal justifications for marrying off girls who were still minors to elderly men. "Some of the British mosques offered a live satellite videoconference with the Mufti of Saudi Arabia, who answered the questions and inquiries of those present at the mosque. Some of the mosques carried live Friday sermons and prayers from mosques in Saudi Arabia. "The strange thing is that one of the mosques included in the TV report was considered to be a center of moderate Islam in Britain, and was led by a Muslim leader who worked together with the British government to strengthen the ties between Muslims and non-Muslims! "In another segment, Abu Osama delivers the good tidings of the establishment of the Islamic State, saying that every day Islam showed its strength and its supremacy over its adversaries, and that the Muslims must 'form a state within the state, until we are able to take over and victory will be ours.' In the state that the preacher spoke of, 'a Muslim who tries to leave Islam will be killed,' and 'if the Imam thinks that he should be crucified, then he must be crucified, and left on the post three days to bleed to death.' "Faced with these instances of terrorist activities, one cannot help but place Britain, alongside Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Egypt, Algeria, etc. at the top of the list of countries that regularly export terrorists to the rest of the world. The basic difference is that the Islamists in Britain enjoy the protection of the law and the sympathy of many political figures in Britain -- or at least their activities and their presence do not present any problem for these political figures. "London Mayor Ken Livingstone said, in a conference he hosted on January 20, 2006 under the title 'A World Civilisation or a Clash of Civilisations?': 'We are witnessing the beginning of a true world civilization, and not the clash of civilizations. All of the statistics emphasize London's success as a multicultural city.' "Livingstone's colleague at this conference, Salma Yaqoob, who is a prominent member of the British 'Respect' Party, said that the London bombings were nothing other than a revenge attack for the West's actions. Salma said: 'Everyone talks about Islamic terror, but they studiedly avoid talking about the Western states' terror and its being a factor that fosters extremism.' She added, 'The truth is that these wild, frightful acts [perpetrated by the West]... which are broadcast on TV stations and over the Internet, have a much greater influence in pushing people to extremism than any quantity of religious exhortations.'..." Endnotes: (1) http://www.aafaq.org/report/aa/print2431.htm, February 8, 2007.
David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
SUDDEN JIHAD SYNDROME
Posted by Janet Lehr, March 1, 2007. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
This comes from Rayra Net
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
As mentioned on the Jihadists page, this is an attempt to catalogue and publicize the ever-growing list of muslim terror attacks on US soil, by supposedly moderate muslim members of our society. Daniel Pipes coined a phrase for it in March of 2006 -- "Sudden Jihad Syndrome" -- read his article at www.FrontPageMag.com. In the article, Dr Pipes recounts the repeated occurrence of an apparent 'normal' contributing member of our society suddenly (for all intents) crying 'AllahuAckbar!' and attacking the Americans he has been dwelling amongst. These people are sometimes immigrants, sometimes illegal immigrants, sometimes naturalized US citizens or even 2nd gen born-in-the-USA US citizens -- but they are not Americans. They are people that for whatever reason are set apart, most often by a radicalization or their beliefs. They are of all nationalities / nations of origin, they are of a wide variety of ages (but usually between the ages of 18 and 40) and they quite frequently college graduates, scions of well-off families. The table below is just a first-approximation pass of some high profile attacks on Americans, by muslims. I say 'high profile' but that's only amongst news junkies and folks willing to look -- and even then, some of these will be 'news' to readers. Jihadist apologists will be quick to say, 'so what, they are all just crazy people, not real muslims, and besides there are far more murders committed by 'American' killers. True. But the difference is all of these people murdered (or attempted to murder) in the Name of Allah, in the Name of Islam, specifically choosing to commit their crimes in the name of their religion, against people of other religions (particularly jews), against Infidels. Please peruse the table. If there are others that need to be added, please email me at inquiry@rayra.net. At midnight July 29, 2006, this table is just getting assembled.
Janet Lehr is editor/publisher of a daily e-mail called "Israel Lives." She can be contacted at janetlehr@veredart.com |
|
ISRAEL, TECHNION, 90% OF PALESTINIAN YOUTH, MIDDLE EAST PEACE, AND WORLD PEACE
Posted by David Meir-Levi, March 1, 2007. |
|
I have often promoted to our congressional leaders that "today's sophomore is tomorrow's senator," in the context of my critique of anti-Israel and pro-terrorist education in our high schools and colleges. The poll sumarized below (see url at bottom for details) demonstrates the same concept with a slightly different variation: today's sophomore in the Palestinian Authority territories is tomorrow's terrorist. The pervasive, almost ubiquitous Jew-hatred and Israel-hatred in Palestinian culture, media, religion, politics, entertainment and education are the clearest signs that their leadership (Hamas and PLO and Fatah) do not want peace with Israel. They want the destruction of Israel, and have turned the conflict in to an eternal eschatological cosmic religious war between good (Islam and Allah and Palestine) and evil (Israel and Jews and Christian supporters of Israel). And their campaign is successful. 90% of Palestinian youth are already convinced. Such success, even if the poll is exagerated and only 75% are convinced, almost guaranatees that the conflict will continue down the generations. There can be no resolution to such a conflict by means of Israeli territorial concessions. As we see from the results of the Israeli unilateral and unconditional concession of the Gaza Strip, and from Israel's unconditional and unilateral retreat from Lebanon, the Arab terrorists merely pocket the concessions and continue their terror war with greater ease, now more emboldened and strengthened. The only resolution to such a conflict, rendered unresolvable by peaceful negotiatin due to the Palestinian leadership's religious eschatologizing, and rendered eternal across generations by the Palestinian leadership's education of indoctrination of whole generations of youth in to Jew-hatred, is in the aftermath of a major and comprehensive military victory where either: A.) Palestinian leaders admit defeat and agree to a 12-point rehabilitation program of:
OR B.) Israel is defeated, destroyed utterly, and most of its population slaughtered...an end to Jewish sovereignty on "Muslim lands", just as numerous Arab terrorist leaders have promised. Given the collusion between Muslim terrorists and Russia, China, and some EU nations... ...and...the support for Hamas (and willingness to fund it) that is growing in Russia, China, the UN, the EU and some South American States... ...and...the success of Iran in its quest for WMDs and its diplomacy of nuclear proliferation among some South American countries... ...and...the weakening of the UK and the USA as bastions of support for Israel and for an effective war against Islamofascist terrorist jihad... ...and...the effectiveness of Arab (mostly Saudi funded) anti-Israel propaganda in universities and media and some churches in the USA and UK and EU (our sophomores are next generation's Senators)... ...and...the continued support by some Arab countries for endless Jihad against Israel (as Hanan Ashrawi once quipped to a journalist: yes...our Arab brothers abroad are committed to destroying Israel. They are quite willing to fight till the last Palestinian)... ...and...the continued sympathy and support in Russia, China, and some EU nations for Iran's sacred quest for WMDs... ...B is a far more likely outcome over the next generation or two... ...UNLESS...the Technion soon discovers a clean, efficient, low-cost, renewable source of energy to replace petroleum. This was written by Itamar Marcus and Barbara Crook (Palestinian
Media Watch, 2.28.07) and is entitled, "90 Percent of Palestinian
Youth Deny Israel's Right to Exist."
|
|
A new poll released by Near East Consulting, a Palestinian research institute, asked Palestinians, "Does Israel have the right to exist?" Among young people ages 18-25, those who have been most influenced by PA education, between 84% and 93% denied Israel's right to exist. PA teachings denying Israel's right to exist are endemic throughout PA society and media, which would account for the high levels of denial of Israel's legitimacy throughout PA society. David Meir-Levi is an American-born Israeli, currently living in Palo Alto. His expertise is in Near Eastern studies and the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict. He is Director of Peace and Education at Israel Peace Initiative (www.ipi-usa.org). Contact him at david_meirlevi@hotmail.com |
|
HILLEL REPRESENTATIVE -- WHERE IS YOUR MORALLY CRITICAL VOICE?
Posted by Buddy Macy, March 1, 2007. |
|
Dear Member of Hillel Leadership: Having recently learned of the admission by Rabbi Chaim
Seidler-Feller, director of U.C.L.A. Hillel, of his physical attack on
a female journalist, and of his shameful actions following the
incident Most sincerely,
Contact Buddy Macy at vegibud@gmail.com |
|
ISRAEL'S ILLOGICAL ADVERSARIES
Posted by Lawrence Uniglicht, March 1, 2007. |
|
The State of Israel, according to ex-U.S. President Jimmy Carter, The United Nations (you know, the organization that rewards Omar Al-Bashir's oil rich Sudanese government with a seat on its Human Rights Commission while Al-Bashir supports Arab militants that perpetrate genocide against hapless Black Africans in the Sudanese war torn region of Darfur), and presumably others, is both an occupying power and a state that practices apartheid in the so-called West Bank. Hmmm! It is quite illogical to overlap two mutually exclusive concepts. Never mind the fact that those Jews grudgingly allowed to live in most Middle East Muslim regimes, a relative handful at best, are virtually devoid of many rights allotted to Muslims, indeed apartheid in spades, yet apparently this is not at all a concern of those who falsely accuse Israel of effectuating apartheid practices. Still, getting back to the issue of castigating Israel for being both a military occupier of Palestinian land, land in fact justifiably secured by Israel in 1967 during the course of vanquishing Arabs intent on annihilating the Jewish State, as well as practicing apartheid on those so-called Palestinians residing on that land, we note they are truly incongruous as well as false charges. Apartheid is a term heretofore applicable to the sovereign nation of South Africa's erstwhile policy of racial separation. We must note that the South African government had full control over the nation it governed. Apartheid can only be practiced by a government that so controls a sovereign nation, perpetrated against a particular ethnicity, living within that nation's own territory, thus the charges of apartheid if they were true infer the so-called West Bank, more correctly Judea and Samaria, is land belonging to the presumed practitioner of apartheid Israel. Israel therefore cannot also be a military occupier of Palestinians within its own sovereign territory. Logically, such so-called Palestinians merely reside within the Land of Israel. Furthermore, Palestinian Muslims that honor their Koran do not consider themselves citizens of any nation; indeed they consider themselves citizens of their religious affiliation. No doubt, very few would pledge any allegiance to Israel, ever necessary if they were to be allotted all the rights of true Israeli citizens, especially the right to vote. It should be noted, however, that Israel's IDF, deployed in Judea and Samaria, has two primary functions; to protect peaceful Israeli citizens, who happen to reside there, from their hostile Arab neighbors, as well as protect all of Israel from homicide/suicide bombers originating from those lands. Consequential security measures do not constitute apartheid. The democratically elected government of Hamas, as well as rival Fatah, when they are not shooting at each other, governs the daily lives of all Arab residents. How then can the State of Israel, bereft of such control, be accused of practicing apartheid? Could it be that those who censure Israel for being both occupier and practitioner of apartheid have constructed a new concept? Might they have merged the two, inventing the term occutheir, a nation that practices occutheid? Adversaries of Israel, after all, can be quite inventive when it comes to finding ways to skewer the Jewish State. Logic surely is not a prerequisite, nor is fairness, when bashing Israel. Extreme Jew/Israel haters even compare Israelis to Nazis, having no shame, blithely equating a people and their homeland to the very filth that butchered six million of them. So in comparison, the concept of occutheid is but a mildly slanderous dose of venom, exhibited by those pretending not to be anti-Semitic. Still, in no way is that acceptable. Perhaps such accusers, afflicted by anti-Semitism and illogic, should be labeled with the reptilian sounding term anti-Slogites. After all, reptiles such as snakes slither slowly, some ejecting venomous fangs at perceived vulnerable prey, not unlike Israel's accusers ejecting forked tongues at their perceived easy target. It is critical that those who advocate for Israel recognize the injustice and counterattack. For the Jewish State, the long hard slog towards acceptance and fair treatment continues in a dysfunctional emerging century twenty-one. Lawrence Uniglicht is a career civil servant, working for the Social Security Administration. He advocates for the State of Israel with an American perspective. He writes, "Advocating for the disrespected underdog has been my passion, no doubt Israel falls into that category." Contact him by email at luniglicht@snip.net |
|
ISRAEL'S "GROUNDHOG DAY"
Posted by Sergio Tezza "HaDaR", March 1, 2007. |
|
This was written by Steven Shanok and it appeared today in the
American Thinker
|
|
What would you do if you were stuck in one place, everything is the same, and nothing you did mattered?" This is the lament of TV weatherman Phil (played by actor Bill Murray) in the modern classic movie Groundhog Day. Resentful over his yearly assignment of having to cover the Groundhog Day ceremonies in the small town of Punxsutawney, Pennsylvania, TV Phil is irritable and uncooperative with his news team, and increasingly sarcastic in his reporting. His behavior towards the local town people is condescending and dismissive. He just wants to finish and get out. But fate intervenes, as a snowstorm closes the road back to Pittsburgh and Phil must stay the night. When he awakes in the morning, it is still February 2, Groundhog Day, all over again, and again, and again. He is reliving the same day over and over and tries to tell his TV producer and anyone else who will listen that he has been there and done that, but they think he's loony and ignore his complaints. The Israeli people are experiencing the same nightmarish time warp as TV Phil. Only the stakes are much higher, and the time warp far longer -- the Israelis are reliving not the same day but the same decades over and over. And the reliving is not just a singular experience; the same nightmare is inherited from father and mother to son and daughter -- dor l'dor, generation to generation. Thus, in 1947, some 25 years after Winston Churchill cut away 80% of the Jewish Mandated Palestine gave it to the ousted (Arabian) King Abdullah who renamed it Transjordan, the United Nations Partition Plan confiscated half of the remaining 20% of the land in an effort to appease the Arabs and gain their agreement to live in peace with a Jewish State. Notwithstanding that the Arabs would now possess 90% of the original mandated land, a reluctant David Ben-Gurion, on behalf of the Jewish population, accepted the give away. The die was cast: land for peace; and Arab rejection. Day one of "Groundhog Day." Awaken to July l967. Israel, acting in self-defense from an aggressive war launched in part from the 10% of land previously extorted from the Jews and given to the Arabs (so-called "land for peace" became land for war), repatriated Judea, Samaria and Gaza. As if reliving the era of the imposed Partition Plan, Israeli citizens awoke to the nightmare of Israel Defense Minister Moshe Dayan unilaterally returning the keys of the Temple Mount to the Moslem Waqf, and their Labor Party-led government pronouncing that it was willingly awaiting a "phone call" from the Arabs so that it could voluntarily give them the recently repatriated land. The Arabs did respond to the Labor Party's gift: Arab leaders meeting in Khartoum in November 1967 adopted a formula of three noes: "No peace with Israel, no negotiation with Israel, no recognition of Israel." Once again: land offered for peace, and Arab rejection. Day two of "Groundhog Day." Wake to 1968. The United States elects Richard Nixon to his first term as President. Nixon appoints William Rogers as Secretary of State, who gives birth to the "Rogers Plan," demanding a unilateral withdrawal by Israel to the pre-1967 borders without any corresponding Arab commitment to the peace and security of Israel. But the Arabs cannot stomach being in the same room with an Israeli to even accept Roger's gift of Israeli land -- a real deal killer Day three of "Groundhog Day." Toss and turn and wake to post-Yom Kippur, 1973. A bloodied but victorious Israel rouses itself only to learn of the "Kissinger Disengagement Plan," in which the American Secretary of State declared that the Israelis should return a "few lousy kilometers," including the conquered town of Kuneitra on the Golan Heights to Syria, notwithstanding its unprovoked sneak attack on Israel. This "roadmap" would display Israel's good intentions in allowing Syrian civilians to return to their homes, and might encourage the Palestinian Arabs to take note and then accept land for peace. Israel relented; Syria was allowed to reoccupy Kuneitra on condition that it normalize the town with civilian residents, not soldiers. They never have to this day. The message of Kuneitra is not lost on the Palestinian Arabs: take what you can get, and never give what you promised in return. Day four of "Groundhog Day." Jump to 1979 and Camp David I. For the first time, Israel is governed by a non-Labor Party, the Likud. No matter -- the Israelis are destined to relive the same day once again. President Carter obtains Prime Minister Begin's commitment for "autonomy" for the Palestinian Arabs and a freeze on Israeli "settlements." Land for Peace. Or, as Israelis have already learned, Land for No Peace. Day five of "Groundhog Day." Skip to 1991. The Bush/Baker Madrid Conference, foisted on Israel after the First Gulf War, with Prime Minister Shamir forced to attend under threat of loss of loan guarantees for the resettlement of waves of Russian immigrants. The Conference is an open and unsubtle gift paid with Israeli coinage to the Palestinian Arabs who were resentful over the defeat of their benefactor Saddam Hussein in the first Persian Gulf War. Secretary of State James Baker proposes a unique dual formula to solve the Arab-Israeli problem: freeze all Jewish settlement activity, and land for peace. Day six of "Groundhog Day." Awake in 1993, but Israel finds itself back to square one. The Labor Party and Yitzchak Rabin are again in control. The Oslo Accords and the American movie "Groundhog Day" appear in tandem (perhaps not coincidentally, as noted by columnist Sarah Honig in her Jerusalem Post article of July 18, 2003). The former is far more comical than the latter, with Arafat's unconditional promise to forever reject violence as a solution to the dispute. Day seven of "Groundhog Day." Slumber fitfully to 1998 and awaken to an Israel with Prime Minister Netanyahu but without Shechem (Nablus) and Hevron (Hebron), given by him as succor to Arafat for an end to the very Arab violence previously renounced but actively supported. The comedy continues, as does reliving the same day by another name: the Wye River Memorandum. Day eight of "Groundhog Day." Jarred awake again by Camp David 2000, an eruption known as Ehud Barak gives forth unimagined concessions overflowing like lava from an active volcano in consideration for which Arafat is once again importuned to eschew violence. But the only ones burned are the Israelis: the Arab response causes 781 killed, 5,471 injured, and 17,633 attacks between September 2000 through May 28, 2003. Day nine of "Groundhog Day." Another dawn, another plan, 2002-2003, the "Road Map." The Palestinian Arabs are the invited passengers in the stretch limousine driven by the "Quartet" (the European Union, Russia, the United Nations, and the United States) to a destination known as a "Palestinian State." They will arrive in 2005. They need only to dismantle their terrorist organizations, arrest the murderers, and collect their weapons. PA Prime Minister Abbas refuses, citing the need to avoid a civil war (which is exactly what needs to be fought!). The road trip continues nevertheless. It is abundantly clear to even those who sleep that there is more profit to be made in violation of agreements than in compliance. Day 10 of "Groundhog Day." June 29, 2003, the rooster crows hudna, a temporary cease fire declared by the terrorist organizations. Writing a script only Joseph Heller (author of Catch 22) could love, Prime Minister Sharon, in an effort to prop up Abbas, agrees to release the very type of prisoners from Israeli jails that Abbas is required to arrest and imprison under the terms of the "Road Map." And while Sharon continued to relinquish control of land in Judea and Samaria to the Arabs as good will gestures, there were 180 terrorist attacks during the self-declared "cease fire," resulting in the deaths of 31 Israelis and the wounding of hundreds of others. Land for Pieces of Israelis. Day 11 of "Groundhog Day." December 2003, The Herzliya Conference. The denizens troubled dozing is disrupted by the clamorous sounds of "dismantling and disengaging." Unfortunately, these are not mere hallucinations. They are the stark reality of the "Unilateral Disengagement" plan of Prime Minister Sharon. Thus, in view of the Arab failure to fulfill even one condition of their past agreements, Sharon will show them. He will retreat from Gaza, and in its wake destroy every Jewish home, and expel every Jewish person -- unconditionally. And if that is not enough, he will throw out more Jews and lay waste to a few more towns in Judea and Samaria as well. So take that! Land for Nothing! Day 12 of "Groundhog Day." Is the Jewish State capable of ending its time warp? In the fictional movie "Groundhog Day," TV Phil slowly began to realize that it was his own repeated misbehavior that was denying him his future. His capacity to reevaluate and change his conduct, goals and values uplifted him over and out of the time warp and delivered him to his ultimate redemption. Likewise, it is Israel's repeated acceptance of faulty premises which doom it to repeatedly travel a circular road on which the Palestinian Arabs can drive off at their whim (for acts of violence) and then get right back on at the same point, never having been penalized even the loss of one kilometer for their reckless driving. How long is any civilized society expected to accommodate such conduct? Israel must finally acknowledge the actual Arab motivation in its war against Israel. It is not Arab despair over a poor economy, uneducated youth, or lack of self-determination. The Palestinian Arab economy was flourishing between 1993 and 2000 until Arafat began his latest war against the Jews. Furthermore, data shows that 38 percent of the suicide bombers had university educations, and 47 percent had high school diplomas. Most importantly, the Arabs never had national aspirations before the coming of Zionism. And thereafter, the national Arab movement never focused its aims at a state within Israel, but rather on eliminating the State of Israel itself. The Arabs could have had their state within Israel in 1947 but refused; and from 1948 to 1967, Palestinian Arab nationalism vanished when the territories were in the hands of Jordan and Egypt. In 2000, Palestinian Arab nationalism could have been satisfied with Barak's willingness to concede virtually all of Judea, Samaria, and Gaza. But it is not what they want. None other than British Foreign Minister Ernest Bevin, not exactly known for his affection for the Jews, stated to the British Parliament in 1947: To the Jews, the essential point of principle is the creation of a sovereign Jewish State. To the Arabs, the essential point of principle is to resist to the last the establishment of Jewish sovereignty in any part of Palestine. Arab motivation is defined by its negative nature and is based upon a simple premise: the elimination of Jewish sovereignty over any part of Israel. Nothing else will satisfy. And as long as Israeli political leaders fail to admit this unimpeachable fact, and continue to give credibility to the same failed "plan," albeit wrapped in new clothes with a different name, Israel will be shackled to the interminable misery of everyday as "Groundhog Day." Contact Sergio Tezza (HaDaR) at HaDaR-Israel@verizon.net |
|
M.K. EFRIAM EITAN: ISRAEL IS HERE TO STAY -- AM YISRAEL CHAI
Posted by Ted Belman, March 1, 2007. |
|
Beit Halochem (Disabled Veterans of Israel) hosted an evening tonight in Toronto at which Efriam Eitan MK spoke. I was there. Effie reached the level of Brigadier General in the IDF and is a member of the Israeli parliament's Security and Foreign Affairs Committee. As a result he was in the loop with those who were investigating the failures in the recent war in Lebanon. The Washington Times recently reported on his talk to members of Congress. Here's what he reported tonight. 1. The quality and dedication of the Israeli soldiers was as good as ever. Finally he stressed that, if Israel is to survive for another two thousand years and beyond, it must reaffirm its biblical connection and be a Jewish state. Not a state like all the others. I totally agree. I also want to mention how emotional and uplifting the evening was. Beit Halocheim reminds us that a war is more than its outcome. One disabled veteran from the Lebanese war, an obstetrician doing reserve duty, told his story. He was holed up with 45 others in a house in south Lebanon to spend the night. He tells of the fear and determination prevalent among them. Suddenly they were hit by two anti tank rockets which killed a third of them and injured another third. All hell broke lose. He himself was injured. His arm was almost totally severed near the elbow. He and his arm were evacuated to a hospital where he awoke nine days later. The arm had been reconnected. He reminded us that 141 soldiers were killed in that war along with 350 that were severely injured. They each have a story to tell. They each have siblings, wives children and parents who survived them or are there to support the injured. And behind them stands millions of their country men and millions of Jews and friends around the world. They fought for all of us and we should not forget them. Israel has 50,000 disabled vets. Beit Halocheim exists to rehabilitate them psychologically and physically. Support them financially when you can. Effie has many stories to tell and tell them he did. He was born in Israel in the baby boom after the holocaust. His grandparents in Lithuania were killed by their neighbors simply because they were Jews. His mother was a doctor in the Soviet Army where she worked for five years throughout the war. The stories she can tell. After the war she knew that the only place for her, for a Jew was in Eretz Yisrael. So she made her way there with a detour to Cypress, courtesy of the British. His father was a professor in America who happened to be in China during the war where he was imprisoned by the Japansese for two years in unimaginable conditions. He too made his way to Israel where Efie was born. Effie grew up secular in a kibbutz as did most of his generation. Everyone of his generation has a similar story to tell. He was in the front lines on the Golan when the Yom Kippur War started. He told of the fear in seeing hundreds of tanks bearing down on his outpost and his decision to stay and fight rather than to run and save himself. He talked about the ethos existing in the heart of every soldier to stand his ground in defense of home and family. There was nowhere to run to. He was also part of the Entebbe Rescue Mission and shared his story. He was there in Amona standing side by side with Aryeh Eldad another MK and gave witness to the depths the secular left will go to to defeat religious nationalists. And he was there in Toronto to give a message of hope. And I was there to hear it. Am Yisrael Chai. Ted Belman is a Canadian lawyer and editor of the IsraPundit.com website, an activist pro-Israel website. Contact him at tedbel@rogers.com |
|
PURIM SPECIAL -- JEWBATS FROM SPACE INVADE EARTH
Posted by Steven Plaut, March 1, 2007. |
|
The Unworldly Neturei Karta In one of the most remarkable scientific discoveries of all time, a CD-Rom containing the protocols of a high-level secret meeting of NASA, the American space agency, has just been leaked to the media. The content of that meeting is so dramatic that it is likely to change the entire course of human history. We bring you the highlights of that meeting as a special service to our readers: Commander Nishtikeit, chief of NASA control: I would like to thank all of you senior military officers and scientists for attending this meeting today on such short notice. NASA control center has decided to release to the nation and world information on what may be the most astounding discovery in all of human history. It seems that ironclad evidence has now been uncovered of the presence on earth of humanoid cyborgs, that is, cybernetic robots that look vaguely human but were constructed in a different galaxy and transported here.
Dr. Trombenick, Massachusetts Institute of Technology: But there have been urban legends about such things for years. There were numerous internet reports that the Governor of California and Reverend Al Sharpton are really cyborgs, but these proved baseless. Commander Nishtikeit: Yes, we know all about that. But this time we have absolute proof. It seems a bizarre looking space travel vehicle has carried cyborgs into our galaxy and has deposited two or three hundred of them right here on earth. General Lemeshkeh, US Air Force: What form do these alien contraptions take? Commander Nishtikeit: That is the most bizarre part of the story. It seems the space ship, which looks amazingly like a large flying bagel, had earlier been beaming up earth images in order to design its cyborgs to look like earthlings. Its tele-imaging processor was focused on several neighborhoods on earth, just east of the East River. Yes, all those people looking for signs of aliens in Roswell, New Mexico, had things wrong. The aliens just wanted their cyborgs to look just like earthlings and to be able to pass as humans, so they designed them to look exactly like ultra-Orthodox Jews from Brooklyn. Colonel Muttelmessig, US Navy: Are you serious? This is not something out of an old Woody Allen movie? Commander Nishtikeit: Absolutely serious! The aliens planted these cyborgs on earth dressed like Chareidi ultra-Orthodox Jews, in black coats, with beards and side curls and hats, and called them the Neturei Karta. It seems they picked that name up from listening to broadcast of an earthling in Brooklyn referring to someone as a Notorious Karger, but they botched up the words. Professor Shikker, Caltech: You mean those Neturei Karta people who have been protesting in favor of destroying Israel and who even attended the Holocaust Denial conference in Iran are in reality humanoid cyborgs placed on earth as part of a devious plan of planetary infiltration? Take us to Barry Chamish! Commander Nishtikeit: You have put your finger right on it! In a sense, we all should have realized this much sooner. After all, only a group of space aliens could have thought that Nazis with Payot, dressed outwardly as religious Jews, could pull the wool over the eyes of actual humans. Virtually no Jews on earth even recognize the Neturei Karta as Jews, and until our discovery the Jews regarded them as some sort of pagan cult in religious garb. The Neturei Karta members seem to know virtually nothing about Judaism, other than two or three sentences from the Gemara, which they cite obsessively out of context to prove that Israel must be destroyed. A number of terrestrial Rabbis, including Israel's Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger, have initiated efforts to excommunicate members of this pro-terror anti-Semitic Neturei Karta sect. Israeli Rabbis of the "Save the Nation and Land" group have made a similar call. Former Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yisrael Meir Lau, a child Holocaust survivor who is currently the Chief Rabbi of Tel Aviv declared, "It is something completely insane. Is it conceivable that any Jew, for whatever reason, would support a Holocaust denier in a generation when people with numbers tattooed on their arms are still among us? It is an insanity that has no justification and no explanation.. Even the Eida Hareidit, an anti-Zionist Jerusalem-based council of Hassidic courts and other religious groups which includes the Neturei Karta, was dramatically harsh in its condemnation of the cyborgs who went to Iran to sit beneath the swastikas. Dr. Trombenick: Is that how you caught on to the alien scheme in the first place? Commander Nishtikeit: Well, that was part of it. Now that we know the truth, we are kicking ourselves for not seeing all the indicators earlier, showing that the Neturei Karta are really cyborgs from another galaxy. The Jews on earth quickly realized these were not real Jews, but very few figured out that they are not even mammals. Capyain Shvindeldik: But something here is puzzling. If these space aliens are so technically advanced, how could they have made such a foolish error as constructing robots for placement on earth that look outwardly like religious Jews yet behave like Nazis? Professor Shtiklech, Princeton University: Maybe, in spite of their ability to undertake inter-galactic travel, they are really not that bright after all? After all, why would creatures having an electronic GPS or Galactic Positioning System need to construct all those crop circles in order to navigate around the Midwest? Commander Nishtikeit: Well, that is one possibility. Another may be that their instruments were damaged when the Flying Bagel entered earth's atmosphere. We have some evidence that the original design for the cyborgs was for creatures with 6 arms, but their spaceship commander realized that these would be quickly recognized as frauds because they would not know on which arms to put tefillin. Major Shlumperdik, his deputy: They seem to have made other strategic errors as well. They placed these cyborgs on earth with no visible means of support. So once earthbound, the cyborgs ran to terrorist organizations, neo-nazi groups, and Holocaust Denial conferences in order to raise money to support themselves. One would think that beings from a superior civilization would have figured out a better cover for their robots. Dr. Trombenick: But if they look so much like actual Orthodox Jews, how can they be distinguished from the real thing? Commander Nishtikeit: Well, there are several ways. First, when struck upon the head with a large rolling pin, nothing seems to happen to them. The pin just bounces off. Their heads seem to be constructed from some special space alloy into which nothing can permeate. Second, when looking closely at their scalps, one can see that they used to have three antennae there, which were somehow surgically removed before the machines were deposited on earth. In addition, their mid-sections seem to be built with another special alien alloy. That is why they seem to be the only ones on earth whose digestive systems are unaffected by eating large portions of chulent. General Lemeshkeh: So how should we earthlings communicate or interact with them and try to make friends? Major Shlumperdik: Well, there is always that rolling pin idea I mentioned earlier. But other than that, the best strategy seems to be to make little tinfoil antennae and glue them on to one's head or hat when approaching these aliens. You know, to show them that we have no hostile intentions and want to welcome them on our planet. But then we need to make clicking space static sounds, demand to be taken to their leader, and ask them to take us for a tour of their spaceship. Commander Nishtikeit: I wonder if I can get one of them to teach me how to program my DVD machine. (assembly dismissed)
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.
This appeared today in Arutz-Sheva
|
|
EAGER TO "GIVE AWAY THE STORE"
Posted by Richard H. Shulman, March 1, 2007. |
|
Paranoia moves the Muslims again, this time to decry Israeli construction of a ramp to the Temple Mount, to replace a partly collapsed one. The Muslims claim that the ramp would damage the mosque. The ramp would provide access to tourists and enable police to charge up to put down riots by nice Muslims, who often throw stones down onto the Jews at the Western Wall, below. Turn the Temple Mount over to foreign Arabs, suggests Hillel Halkin, so the paranoids won't suspect the Jews of designs on the mosque. "When it comes to tourists, Israel can certainly let the Waqf, the Muslim religious authority in charge of the Haran al-Sharif (note he uses the Muslim name for the Mount Jews built for their Temple), make up its own mind" whether to let them up. "Israel's only rule in this respect should be that Jews... not be discriminated against." Israeli police should retain the right to quell riots (NY Sun, 2/13, Op-Ed). One can imagine Mr. Halkin starting each article he writes on jihad by calculating how he can find different words for his usual exhortation to surrender rights and land to the Muslim enemy. He still doesn't understand jihad. Appeasement of the Arabs doesn't work. It convinces them that the Jews are cowardly and soon will give up. Halkin's ideology promotes war by creating a power vacuum. Halkin has the Diaspora Jewish mentality of striving to demonstrate to the gentiles that the Jews are nice enough to be tolerated. Self-humiliation doesn't impress antisemites. He deludes himself into thinking that one more partial surrender will impress the Muslims with Israel's reasonableness and decency. They don't respect decency and tolerance, for they are intolerant. They respect only strength. Muslim leaders know that Israel has no designs on the mosque; they promote slanderous rumors in order to promote holy way. Even of they controlled the Mount, they would distort news into a new grievance -- they had rioted over a tunnel exit opening and over Sharon's visit, any pretext will do. Halkin implies as much by recognizing the need for Israeli anti-riot police! The original mistake was to let the waqf have any authority outside the mosque and the Dome of the Rock. From there, the Muslims barred Jewish prayer. They built illegally, but threatened riots if the law were enforced. They destroyed Jewish historical and religious artifacts, which Halkin seems to accept as a Muslim right. Like the cuckoo that shoves the home chicks out of the nest, the waqf has been shoving the Jews off the Mount. To the Muslims, this is all about sovereignty and dominance. If they dominated the Jews' holiest site and could bar Christians, too, they would feel more contempt for the Jews, with justification. More of them would join jihad. The original mistake should be rectified. Israel should reassert tolerance. Halkin should promote Jewish rights, not servility. The Muslims have proved they don't deserve authority on the Mount or in another Palestinian Arab state. They are not fit to live with in the same country. Richard Shulman is a veteran defender of Israel on several web-based forums. His comments and analyses appear often on Think-Israel. He provides cool information and right-on-target overviews. He distributes his essays by email. To subscribe, write him at richardshulman5@aol.com. |
|
AN OUTSTANDING LETTER FROM TOM CAREW. KOL HAKAVOD!
Posted by Simon McIlwaine, March 1, 2007. |
This was received from Tom Carew, who wrote:
|
|
Mr. Simon Eliot,
Dear Simon, I refer to the School event mentioned in the text copied and highlighted below -- the talk by Sharen Green, which is being organised by your School. I also refer to the historically significant and balanced Joint Communique signed recently by the Archbishop of Canterbury and the two Chief Rabbis of Israel. Firstly, I would expect that creative, forward-looking re-conciliation, not just one-sided, backward-looking propaganda, might be the more appropriate focus for such an event, especially in a school with the ethos, 457 year-old tradition, and distinguished standing of Sherborne. Your principal aim, of developing "lively, enquiring minds", is absolutely splendid, but one which fits rarely oddly with the annonced one-sided talk. Secondly, the label "occupation" is being used totally unhistorically. Israel offered, soon after the June 1967 6-Day War, to trade "land for peace". The Arab Summit that Autumn in Khartoum, responded with their notorious "Triple Negative" -- No Negotiations, No Recognition, and No Peace. That stance remains that of Hamas whose own triple agenda is unaltered and quite clear: [a] the end of Israel, [b] an Islamic Republic from the Jordan to the mediterranea, and [c] the achievement of those twin goals by Jihad. Indeed, only Egypt and Jordan have recognised Israel. Will those facts, and the Hamas August 1988 Charter, be made known at this talk? Thirdly, will the undeniable historical fact that Israel's existence was mandated twice by the international community, be recognised? Firstly by the League of Nations and then in Nov 1947 by the UN. And that the Arab League response was immediately to initiate war to wipe out this new, internationally-created State? Fourthly, will the price Israelis paid to defend their very existence be recognised? That 1% of the then population [over 6,000 people] were killed in 1947-49, and that overall over 20,000 Israelis have been killed since 1947? Fifthly, will the fact that Israel totally evacuated the Sinai following recognition by Egypt be mentioned? And that there is peace along the XXmile Egypt-Israel international frontier since that mutul recognition and evacuation? Sixthly, that Jordan no longer claims one inch of the Territories west of the River Jordan which it occupied from 1948 to 1967? And that there is mutual recognition and peace [along their XXmile international frontier] between Jordan and Israel? Seventhly, that since Israel completely evacuated Gaza in August 2005, which is not claimed by any neighbouring state, but internationally recognised as solely for the Palestinian Arabs, there have been continuous rocket and other attacks across the frontier against Israel? Eightly, that the Arab agenda, right from Israel's creation, was never about the precise line of any frontier with Israel, or about border fences, but about the very existence of any Israeli State? Ninthly, will the participants be told that almost 1m Jews lived in the Arab world and Iran in 1947, but now not even 1% are left, and that most of those came to Israel as refugees, with none of their assets? And that their number of around 700,000, equals the number of Palestinian Arab who fled at the same time? But that while Israel, over several years, integrated those 700,000 Jewish refugees, the Arab world continues to cruelly and cynically abandon their Arab refugees in camps? Tenthly, will participants be told that in 1947, when Muslim Pakistan emerged from the previous British India, an equal number of refugees moved in each direction [the present Pakistan President was born in what is now India, and the Indian PM in what is now Pakistan]? And will they be told that no-one, Muslim or Hindu, suggests that those vast 1947 population movements either can, or should be reversed? Or that the similar vast population movements in post-war Europe, in particular of ethnic Germans from what is now Poland or the Czech Republic, can or should be reversed? Finally, will participants be told that the only land in the whole Middle East region where Arab citizens enjoy full civil and political rights, but are also not liable to military conscription, is Israel? That Israel has a Muslim Arab in Cabinet and a Druze Arabic-speaker as their acting President? That Sunni Arab Beduoins [all volunteers] man their own Recce Battalion in the Israeli Defence Forces, which, unlike the UK-comanded British Army Gurkha Regiments, is commanded by a Beduoin Lt-Col? That Arabs citizens in Israel are members of the only free Trade Union in the whole region -- the Histadrut [which joins Jewish and Arab workers]? That the only state in the region to grant full equality to women and gay people, is again Israel? That Arabs sit in the Israeli Parliament, but most vote for mixed parties, in particular for Labour? That Israeli Arabs enjoy a totally free press, have their own TV stations, the right to organise or to protest, and that some Arab parliamentarians were free to publicly support Hezb-ALLAH in the 34-day Lebanon War in 2006? Feel free to use this text to facilitate informed discussion. I would greatly appreciate it if you could also forward this e-mail to Sharen Green in advance of any talk, or else provide her e-mail address so that I may forward it directly to her. I wonder what kind of school policy [in terms of either education or civic responsibility] can provide a school-organised event purely focused on the Palestinian Arabs and their perceived grievances, yet fail to either include a different perspective on the same occasion, or on another occasion? Your school's innovative and independent character, well instanced by your embracing of the International Baccalaureate, surely demands true openness, not unilateral propaganda in analysing complex issues. I would appreciate your considered response to the substantive points I have raised. If I can provide any further information, please do not hesitate to contact me. With best wishes to you and your colleagues,
Tom Carew. Simon McIlwaine is with Anglicans For Israel(www.anglicansforisrael.com) |
|
ISRAEL'S CRITICS: WHEN CHURCH POLITICS GOES HAYWIRE
Posted by Daily Alert, March 1, 2007. |
|
This was written by The Rev. Kent Svendsen is from Forreston and is
an ordained United Methodist minister and an Army Reserve chaplain. He
served for 10 months (May 2004 to March 2005) as the sole chaplain to
the detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. It was published today
at the Telegraph and Daily Gazette website: www.saukvalley.com.
It is archived at
|
|
There are always plenty of religious organizations that have special interests to promote. Among them are a number of organizations which are extremely critical of Israel. These groups, in my opinion, seem to glorify the Palestinians while demonizing the Israelis. For the life of me, I can't understand how they can be so unsympathetic to a nation who is surrounded by enemies who want to "drive them into the sea." Now I'm not unsympathetic toward the Palestinians. The Palestinians are a displaced people who have become permanent refugees and have many hardships to face. But I have a hard time offering them sympathy and support after they voted the "Hamas" party into office. Hamas is an organization that has openly declared as one of their main goals to eliminate the nation of Israel. As a result, it has resulted in a severe reduction of humanitarian and economic aid to Palestinians causing them even more hardships for their people. Now we have the latest chapter coming from the critics of Israel. It seems that the Israel Antiquities Authority has begun salvage excavations in the Jerusalem Archeological Park, with the intention of building a permanent Mugrabi Gate ramp to replace a temporary wooden structure that had been declared hazardous. In response to the excavation, some Palestinians have begun rioting and have thrown rocks at a tour bus and some Israeli soldiers. In reality, the work does not interfere in any way with the sacred mosque or the Dome of the Rock which are both sacred to Muslims. All they are doing is replacing a wooden ramp so it doesn't collapse when pilgrims go to the temple mount. They have even coordinated it with and received permission from Islamic leaders in the city. Just to play it safe, they have even contacted a neighboring nation to get their approval. So why are some Muslims so upset about this work project? One factor I know of is the fact that the ramp is reported to be the only access non-Muslims have to be able to visit the temple mount. No ramp could mean no access. Could it be that what is wanted is to prevent non-Muslims from visiting the sacred site which is sacred for Jews, Christians and Muslims alike? Now here is where church politics goes haywire. There's a group called Churches for Middle East Peace (CMEP) which is a self-described "coalition of 21 public policy offices of national churches and agencies." They claim doing this little repair job violates the sanctity of the holy site and are calling on our U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs to pressure Israel to halt excavations at the site. They claim that otherwise violent protests would break out in Israel. The question I have is this: Doesn't their stand, in fact, encourage those violent protests? In addition, Rev. Dr. Peter Pettit, director of the Institute for Jewish-Christian Understanding, has accused them of "spreading disinformation on the excavation" and "neglecting to call upon the Palestinians to cease rioting." CMEP also seems to stress only the importance of the site to Muslims by specifying the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque (Islam's third holiest sites), but failing to mention that it is also the site of Solomon's Temple, Judaism's holiest site, referring instead merely to "two biblical temples." Dr. Pettit goes on to say: "Shouldn't our role as Christian peacemakers be to restore calm to the situation by explaining the facts and encouraging a peaceful return to a project intended only to provide safety to visitors to a site holy to all three religions?" Those are my sentiments exactly. The Daily Alert is prepared for the Conference of presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs (JCPA). Contact them at daily@www.dailyalert.jcpa.org |
| Home | Featured Stories | Background Information | News On The Web |